SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “considerations”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 433 records · Page 24

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

How Environment and Operational Considerations Guide Requirements Development for Clinical Decision Support Beyond Low Earth Orbit

The Aerospace Medical community is acutely aware of the need for automated cognitive systems to support astronauts in responding to and making critical decisions about assessing – and treating - medical conditions and assuring wellness during exploration spaceflight missions. Such systems will be critically important to mission success as we venture farther from terrestrial settings (particularly low-earth orbit platforms) and encounter increasingly Earth-independent medical decision-making scenarios and requirements. This need would likely be met through the development of a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) that assimilates information from various sources (e.g., vehicle environmental control system, blood pressure cuff, and heart rate monitor) integrated with medical and wellness data to provide detailed guidance tailored to individual crew member needs. This presentation will address some of the fundamental considerations and their implications that must be fully understood by CDSS requirement developers early in the system lifecycle.

B Burian↗

NASA NTRS2022

Moon to Mars (M2M) Habitation Considerations: A Snap Shot As of January 2022

The following NASA Technical Memorandum (TM) is intended to provide a snapshot in time of NASA’s current considerations (ground rules and assumptions, functional allocations, logistics) for habitation systems for the lunar surface (non-roving) and Mars transits. As NASA continues to refine the reference designs to meet the needs of an evolving architecture, it is expected that this information will also be updated as a result. Where appropriate, relevant publicly released documents will be referenced to provide further detail. NASA’s human lunar exploration plan under the Artemis program calls for achieving the goal of sending the first woman and first person of color to the surface of the Moon in the mid- 2020s and working toward sustainable exploration by the end of the decade. Working with both commercial and international partners, NASA will establish a permanent human presence on the Moon to uncover new scientific discoveries and lay the foundation for private companies to build a lunar economy. Longer duration missions on the lunar surface and in lunar orbit will also serve as a test bed for technologies to support future Mars exploration campaigns. The agency will use what we learn on the Moon to prepare for humanity's next giant leap – sending astronauts to Mars. NASA intends to establish a sustained lunar presence with the development of the Artemis Base Camp to prove technologies and capabilities that will one day enable humans to live and work on Mars, beginning with core elements including the Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV), the Pressurized Rover (PR), the lunar Surface Habitat (SH), power systems, and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) systems. For in space operations and eventual transport of humans to Mars, NASA will utilize a Mars Transit Habitat (TH). Following deployment, the TH will complete a series of longer duration missions and shakedown testing while docked at Gateway, leveraging Gateway’s habitation redundancy for safety measures. Proposed Gateway-TH missions will far exceed the longest duration cislunar human missions to date. They will be the first operational readiness tests of our long-duration deep space systems, and of the split crew (two crew on the surface, two crew in space) operations that are vital to the approach for the first human Mars mission. Both the SH and TH are major architectural elements of NASA’s Moon to Mars (M2M) approach, each with very different concepts of operation. The SH is intended for use on the lunar surface as a home for astronauts, surface operations base, science facility, hub for communications, extravehicular activity (EVA) equipment repair site, waste processing facility, and supply hub. It serves as an enabler for a sustained surface presence and preparation for partial gravity operations during Mars missions. The SH will be designed to be self-sufficient for operations on the lunar surface. The SH will independently provide several functions, including its own power generation, energy storage capability, sleep quarters, hygiene areas, work areas, and dining areas. It will be capable of communicating with surface assets, orbital assets, and directly with Earth ground stations. It is planned to operate with two crew in the habitat for ~28- day stays with crew swap-outs in which the PR crew of two trades places with the habitat crew. During the swap-out, the habitat will nominally support four crew for a short period of time. For contingency scenarios, the habitat must also be capable of supporting four crew for up to 7 days. The TH will be designed to be capable of up to ~1,200-day Mars missions with the ability to carry all food and supplies needed to support a crew of four for this duration. An assumed Mars mission profile for the TH is to carry crew and supplies for ~850-day roundtrips between Earth and Mars orbit that allows 30-day stays on the Martian surface. To test the systems for this long journey, the TH will be used to extend the duration of missions at Gateway, enabling the orbiting outpost to be used as a Mars analog. These analog missions will be accomplished by attaching the TH to Gateway and conducting lunar surface operations from the TH. The TH may also need to perform free-flying shakedown missions to test out all systems prior to leaving for Mars. The habitat provides many critical functions including: a contingency airlock, crew quarters, galley, hygiene areas, safe haven capability, and science equipment. It can receive docked items from either axial end or on a radial port.

Habitat↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Design Considerations for Low Lunar Orbit to Near Rectilinear Halo Orbit Transfers

NASA’s Artemis program plans to use a Near-Rectilinear Halo Orbit (NRHO) to stage assets for a lunar exploration campaign. While the proximity operations in the NRHO are simple and very similar to flat-space dynamics, the far-field ren-dezvous has considerations that are non-intuitive, especially to those that may be steeped in the dynamics of rendezvous in Keplerian orbits. This paper will discuss some key drivers to the delta-V performance of far-field rendezvous from Low Lunar Orbit to the Gateway space station in its 9:2 resonant south-ward NRHO.

NRHO↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Considerations for Radiator Design in Multi-Megawatt Nuclear Electric Propulsion Applications

A key performance parameter determining the feasibility and performance of a multi-megawatt nuclear electric vehicle is the power systems specific mass (mass per unit of electric power output). The specific mass of the main radiators is the largest single element within the power system and can be greatly affected by numerous assumptions and design considerations. Among these are the number of parallel fluid loops, the overall geometry and view factor of the radiator, and for high temperature systems the method for accommodating the temperature limit of water heat pipes. Analyses are performed to develop an understanding of this trade space to enable a more accurate mass estimate and to help guide technology development efforts.

NEP↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Considerations for Radiator Design in Multi-Megawatt Nuclear Electric Propulsion Applications

A key performance parameter determining the feasibility and performance of a multimegawatt nuclear electric vehicle is the power systems specific mass (mass per unit of electric power output). The specific mass of the main radiators is the largest single element within the power system and can be greatly affected by numerous assumptions and design considerations. Among these are the number of parallel fluid loops, the overall geometry and view factor of the radiator, and for high temperature systems the method for accommodating the temperature limit of water heat pipes. Analyses are performed to develop an understanding of this trade space to enable a more accurate mass estimate and to help guide technology development efforts.

NEP↗

NASA NTRS2023

NASA Engineering and Safety Center Technical Bulletin No. 23-02: Safety Considerations when Repurposing Commercially Available Flight Termination Systems from Uncrewed to Crewed Launch Vehicles

Both uncrewed and crewed launch vehicles (LV) require Flight Termination Systems (FTS) for Range Safety to protect the public and ground assets in the event of a LV failure. Flight crew safety in this context is an added consideration for human spaceflight. The FTS is an electroexplosive system that activates destruct charges to rupture propellant tanks and shutdown engines during flight termination. Commercially available FTS units have been developed for uncrewed applications and are now being repurposed to crewed applications. A consequence of using these systems is that they are designed for public and ground crew safety, though inadequate for flight crew safety. Missing are Human Space Flight (HSF) design controls for inadvertent activation during crewed ascent and protection for crew emergency abort.

Flight Termination Systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ISRU Evaluation of Artemis Campaign Sites: Considerations and Methodology

The Artemis campaign has stated goals of ‘sustainable exploration’ [1] which includes In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU). The selection of the lunar polar region for Artemis was in part due to the identification of water in permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) which is of both scientific and exploration interest. The potential use of this water (as is, or as oxygen/hydrogen) for NASA and commercial applications, such as refueling vehicles, for power systems, or supplying life support consumables, is reflected in NASA’s Moon to Mars objectives (LI-7) [2]. These objectives also specify the need to locate and characterize the lunar water such that a water ‘reserve’ can be identified (AS-3). While infusion of ISRU capabilities is not planned for Artemis III, it is an opportunity to collect information to identify water reserves for later Artemis and commercial use. Selection of an Artemis III site with ISRU consideration will help advance the infusion of ISRU into later missions.

In situ resource utilization↗

NASA NTRS2008

EVA Hand Tool Design Considerations, Development, and General Requirements Interpretation: A Junior Engineer’s Guide

This paper serves as a guide to developing hand tools for use by crewmembers during extravehicular activity (EVA) in outer space. It outlines the fundamentals of EVAs and related provisions, providing a starting point and perspective for engineers unfamiliar with designing equipment to be used during manned spaceflight. Common EVA hardware constraints, which are often unclear, are interpreted and traced back to a source or justification because, as in any design field, fully understanding the basis and intent of a design requirement is needed to properly satisfy it. Lastly, miscellaneous design considerations and lessons learned in tool development are discussed. The information found within is drawn from commonly cited NASA and EVA related documents as well as from professional experiences.

EVA↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Regulatory Considerations for Future Regional Air Mobility Aircraft

Regional Air Mobility (RAM) is a term that is used to describe equitable, economical, and environmentally friendly access to air commerce at local airports. The term “regional” can imply a wide range of aircraft payload and/or number of passengers carried, types of airports served, distances between aircraft origin/destination pairs, crew requirements, runways lengths, required energy reserves, and much more. This paper describes the regulations and other considerations that apply to RAM operations in the conterminous United States and defines a notional set of requirements to apply to a planned NASA study on RAM aircraft sizing. These notional requirements include: (1) a payload sufficient to carry up to nine passengers or equivalent cargo, (2) nominal distances between the origin and destination of at least 100 miles, with 300 miles desired, (3) ability to operate from a runway that is no more than 3,364 ft in length at a density altitude of 3,100 ft, with a desire for a 2,665 ft runway at 4,100 ft density altitude, and (4) energy reserves at least sufficient for 45 minutes of operation at normal cruise power, with a desire for energy reserves that also include diversion to an alternate airport at least 50 nautical miles away. Aircraft that meet these desired capabilities will be able to provide commercial access to at least 2,507 airports in the conterminous United States without revision to airworthiness, operating, or security regulations.

Nicholas K Borer↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Regulatory Considerations for Future Regional Air Mobility Aircraft

Nicholas K Borer↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Shielding Considerations for CubeSat Structures During Solar Maximum

The purpose of this lessons learned is to communicate the utility of shielding in small spacecraft planning for the support of mission assurance and reliability. Numerous SmallSats have been flying in polar low earth orbit for scientific, communications, technology demonstrations, and imaging with academic, commercial, and government interests. Shielding has been part of mission assurance and reliability from the advent of long duration spacecraft missions. The Shields-1 CubeSat has been operating in polar low earth orbit since 16 December 2018 with atomic number (Z)-grade radiation shielding and demonstrates shielding effectiveness. Shields-1 has collected a representative example of solar minimum data in 2019 with 8 Teledyne dosimeters over varying shielding effectiveness. It serves as current experimental data and has been compared with NOVICE Shielding estimates using the AP8 –AE8 trapped radiation model with the Shields-1 CAD and generic CubeSat 3 unit (U) models. Using NOVICE model radiation analysis coding, the shielding effectiveness's, based on a generic CubeSat 3U structure with 4 electronic boards, were estimated for aluminum wall thicknesses ranging from 0.204 cmto4.44 cm (0.550 g/cm2–12.0 g/cm2) thick aluminum. For modeled polar orbiting spacecraft, solar maximum total ionizing dose (TID)increases by nearly a magnitude for thin-walled aluminum 0.550g/cm2-0.686 g/cm2(0.204 cm –0.254 cm) typical CubeSat structures. The shielding effectiveness by NOVICE Sigma estimates, which is a shielding sphere approximation around a detector, showed a linear relationship with wall thickness, which increased over the wall thickness by a ratio of 1.43 determined by linear regression analysis. Using NOVICE Adjoint Monte-Carlo Modeling of solar minimum and solar maximum with the inclusion of a worst-case solar particle event over a one year mission without geomagnetic shielding, the TID for minimum and maximum conditions for a generic 3U with a wall thickness of 0.254 cm is 158 RAD and 1540 RAD, respectively. The modeled total solar maximum TID is over estimated, because at low orbital latitudes a spacecraft will have shielding from Earth's magnetic field. However, TID will still be significant at high latitudes over the poles, where a spacecraft is exposed in a solar particle event. In contrast, to a thin walled generic 3U CubeSat, Shields-1 electronics enclosure has a shielding effectiveness of 21.3 g/cm2from NOVICE Sigma modeling and is expected to show reduced total ionizing dose increases during the present active Solar Cycle 25 period. Because solar particle events during solar maximum increase TID on electronic parts with thin-walled shielding in short periods of time, it is a mission assurance and reliability consideration on the spacecraft’s mission value versus adding shielding for risk reduction of premature spacecraft or instrument payload loss. Since the volumes of many instruments and system electronics have reduced with small spacecraft, shielding material costs and weight penalties have diminished. A small spacecraft project budget and schedule may limit traditional radiation-hardened part use and radiation testing requirements, where shielding can contribute to mission assurance and reliability with reduced costs.

Shields-1↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Shielding Considerations for CubeSat Structures During Solar Maximum

The purpose of this lessons learned paper is to communicate the utility of shielding in small spacecraft planning for the support of mission assurance and reliability. Numerous SmallSats have been flying in polar low Earth orbit for science, communications, technology demonstrations, and imaging with academic, commercial, and government interests. Shielding has been part of mission assurance and reliability from the advent of long duration spacecraft missions. The Shields-1 CubeSat has been operating in polar low Earth orbit since 16 December 2018 with atomic number (Z)-grade radiation shielding and demonstrates shielding effectiveness. Shields-1 has collected a representative example of solar minimum data in 2019 with eight Teledyne µDosimeters over varying shielding effectivenesses. It serves as current experimental data and has been compared with NOVICE Shielding estimates using the AP8 – AE8 trapped radiation model with the Shields-1 CAD and generic CubeSat three unit (3U) models. Using NOVICE model radiation analysis coding, the shielding effectivenesses, based on a generic CubeSat 3U structure with four electronic boards, were estimated for aluminum wall thicknesses ranging from 0.204 cm to 4.44 cm (0.550 g/cm 2 to 12.0 g/cm 2 ). For modeled polar orbiting spacecraft, solar maximum total ionizing dose (TID) increases by nearly a magnitude for thin-walled aluminum 0.550-g/cm 2 - 0.686-g/cm 2 (0.204-cm – 0.254-cm) typical CubeSat structures. The shielding effectiveness estimated by NOVICE Sigma, which is a shielding sphere approximation around a detector, showed a linear relationship with wall thickness, which increased over the wall thickness by a ratio of 1.43 determined by linear regression analysis. Using NOVICE Adjoint Monte-Carlo Modeling of solar minimum and solar maximum with the inclusion of a worst-case solar particle event over a one-year mission without geomagnetic shielding, the TID for minimum and maximum conditions for a generic 3U with a wall thickness of 0.254 cm is 158 RAD and 1540 RAD, respectively. The modeled total solar maximum TID is over estimated, because at low orbital latitudes a spacecraft will have shielding from the Earth’s magnetic field. However, TID will still be significant at high latitudes over the poles, where a spacecraft is exposed in a solar particle event. In contrast to a thin-walled generic 3U CubeSat, the Shields-1 electronics enclosure has a shielding effectiveness of 21.3 g/cm 2 from NOVICE Sigma modeling and is expected to show reduced total ionizing dose increases during the present active Solar Cycle 25 period. Because solar particle events during solar maximum increase TID on electronic parts with thin-walled shielding in short periods of time, it is a mission assurance and reliability consideration on the mission value of the spacecraft versus adding shielding for risk reduction of premature spacecraft or instrument payload loss. Since the volumes of many instruments and system electronics have reduced with small spacecraft, shielding material costs and weight penalties have diminished. A small spacecraft project budget and schedule may limit traditional radiation-hardened part use and radiation testing requirements, where shielding can contribute to mission assurance and reliability with reduced costs.

Shields-1↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Near-Term Policy Considerations for Lunar Missions

Near-Term Policy Considerations for Lunar Missions. Therese Jones1, Gabriel Swiney,1 and Katie McBrayer,2 1NASA HQ, 300 Hidden Figures Way SW, Washington, D.C. 20546, 2NASA Langley Re-search Center, 1 NASA Drive, Hampton, VA, 23666. (Contact: therese.m.jones@nasa.gov) Introduction: More than two dozen lunar missions are planned prior to the Artemis III crewed lunar landing, from Russian, Chinese, Indian, Japanese and U.S. government orbiters and landers to Commercial Lunar Payload Ser-vices missions to commercial crewed flybys. While the Artemis Accords have established an international consortium of countries seeking to mitigate interference between operations on the Moon, a number of unaddressed policy issues remain that may be critical to lunar operations. In this lightning talk, we build upon NASA’s Of-fice of Technology, Policy, and Strategy’s Sep-tember 2022 Report “Lunar Landing and Oper-ations Policy Analysis” [1], to give an overview of policy questions that remain open, including: whether to prioritize certain landing locations or avoid certain scientifically valuable locations, design and coordination of safety zones, notifi-cation of other actors of potential dangers posed by landing, whether to avoid placing equipment in operationally valuable locations, and end-of-life disposal. We will also discuss how these policy implications could apply to planned missions.. References: [1] Swiney, G., and Hernandez, A. Lunar Landing and Operations Policy Analy-sis, NASA Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy, September 30, 2022 https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa-otps-lunar-landing-and-operations-policy-analysis-final-report_2.pdf

Therese Jones↗

NASA NTRS2023

Considerations for Software Fault Prevention and Tolerance

Mission or safety-critical spaceflight systems should be developed to both reduce the likelihood of software faults pre-flight and to detect/mitigate the effects of software errors should they occur in-flight. New data is available that categorizes software errors from significant historic spaceflight software incidents with implications and considerations to better develop and design software to both minimize and tolerate these most likely software failures.

Avionics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Considerations for Health and Performance During Surface Extravehicular Activities

BACKGROUND: NASA’s objectives for expanding human presence beyond low Earth orbit will require Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) on lunar and planetary surfaces. Given the physiological and functional demands of conducting surface EVAs in a pressurized spacesuit in reduced gravity environments, there is a possibility that crew injury and compromised physiological and/or functional performance may present. OVERVIEW: Many human health and performance knowledge gaps exist in regards to exploration EVA that require characterization to ensure safety, reliability, and mission success. To address knowledge gaps, EVA simulations in Earth-based analog environments and/or spacesuit simulators can be utilized to provide valuable insights into task-based physiologic and metabolic costs, cognitive loads, and associated operational limitations to inform future mission concepts. Physical workloads approaching 60% of maximum metabolic rates and 85% age-predicted heart rate maxima; core body temperatures approaching 100o F; and subjective responses indicating limited spare cognitive capacity via Bedford scale have been observed during ground-based exploration EVA simulations in the NASA Active Response Gravity Offload Simulator (ARGOS) and Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) during simulated planetary EVAs in pressurized suits. Further, ground-based EVA analogs vary in their ability to simulate planetary EVA and resulting physical workloads. DISCUSSION: Metabolic costs, thermal burdens, functional strength, and cognitive impacts have been and must continue to be assessed in ground-based analogs to fully characterize operational demands and crew readiness levels for exploration EVA. Considerations should be given to enabling a new concept of high-tempo surface EVA operations and associated work-rest intervals, understanding human health and performance impacts of evolving commercial suit designs and capabilities, and predictive modeling and decision support capabilities to enable safe and successful EVA operations.

EVA↗

NASA NTRS2024

Considerations in Range of Motion Testing for Characterizing Spacesuit Mobility Capabilities

Mobility is a critical aspect for spacesuits as it directly influences how astronauts can perform tasks safely and efficiently, while wearing the pressurized suit. Spacesuit motion is dissimilar to human movement and consists of unique movement patterns as result of pressurization and the complex mechanical joint configurations. Thus, it is important to quantify the variations in suited movement patterns and the resulting performance of the wearer for the evaluation of the spacesuit itself and hardware interfaces such as payloads and tools. Traditionally, an individual body joint is assessed for the segment-wise range of motion. For example, the knee is measured through an isolated maneuvering of the joint between the max-to-max positions (e.g., flexion/extension), and the outcome represents the mobility capabilities. These measurements are often conducted using optical motion capture system with respect to anatomical planes. However, there are several considerations for range of motion assessments that are unique to the spacesuit. The purpose of this paper is to describe and provide examples of these additional challenges in representing spacesuit mobility capabilities. Specifically, joint mobility and the variations in suit movement patterns were investigated and compared between functional tasks and isolated range of motion measurements. Motion capture data from the next-gen spacesuit design verification testing was evaluated to compare isolated range of motion tasks to functional tasks, such as one-knee kneeling and squatting. The trajectories from the upper and lower body joint centers with respect to the spacesuit hardware were also calculated. Additionally, the joint trajectories for various functional tasks are presented and compared against the isolated range of motion measurements. In general, range of motion differs between isolated and functional tasks, where functional tasks may even induce greater joint angle excursions. Additionally, there is a large variation in joint range of motion across functional tasks. Combined with several relevant factors (spacesuit fit, physical strength, simulation facility, etc.), spacesuit mobility characterization efforts will need to incorporate the specific contexts, such as task demands and movement mechanisms, when evaluating range of motion assessments.

Linh Q Vu↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Optimization Considerations for Annular Linear Electromagnetic Pumps for Space Nuclear Power and Propulsion

The Need for High Performance Liquid Metal Pumps Testing Power and Efficiency Considerations Liquid metal cooled reactors is one option for space nuclear power for settlements and electric propulsion vehicles (Snap 10 A, SP100, Soviet Topaz reactors) • High heat capacity • High boiling point (NaK~1200K) • Simplified heat transfer loop • Good neutronics Liquid metal EM pumps are desired over conventional pumps owing to lack of seals, bearings elimination of cavitation issues, lower mass and eliminates mechanical impeller • Conduction pumps (typically DC-high current, low voltage; ~5% efficiency) • Induction pumps (typically AC, high efficiency ~40%) Annular linear induction pump is an EM pump with no moving parts and of cylindrical/tubular geometry which makes it straightforward to integrate in conventional piping architectures • Higher inherent reliability • Invented by Einstein and Szilard

ALIP↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Considerations For Aerospace Vehicle Design: Systems, Structures And Materials

The speaker will provide an overview and some perspective on the systems engineering and conceptual design of launch vehicles and other aerospace systems. The strong interactions and relationships between systems requirements, cost, schedule, performance, risk, reliability and margins are explored in the context of vehicle design. Systems-level considerations for selection of structures and materials are also presented and discussed. Relevant examples from aerospace history are used to illustrate key concepts.

systems engineering↗