SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
To enable investigations on planetary exploration strategies, Playbook has collaborated and supported various analogs. Previous work is summarized in relation to analog work in spaceflight-like operational workflows and EVAs.
Relation between Antarctica and lunar exploration, environment, and missions
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
No abstract available
No abstract available
We suggest that the International Space Station be used to examine the application and validation of low-latency telepresence for surface exploration from space as an alternative, precursor, or potentially as an adjunct to astronaut "boots on the ground." To this end, controlled experiments that build upon and complement ground-based analog field studies will be critical for assessing the effects of different latencies (0 to 500 milliseconds), task complexity, and alternate forms of feedback to the operator. These experiments serve as an example of a pathfinder for NASA's roadmap of missions to Mars with low-latency telerobotic exploration as a precursor to astronaut's landing on the surface to conduct geological tasks.
Potential approaches to the use of the Antarctic as an analog to the lunar and Mars planetary surface segments of the SEI are reviewed. It is concluded that a well-planned and sustained program of ground-based research and testing in environments analogous to the moon and Mars is a rational method for reducing the risks associated with human space missions. Antarctica may provide an ideal setting for testing critical technologies (habitat design, life support, and advanced scientific instrumentation), studying human factors and physiology, and conducting basic scientific research similar to and directly relevant to that planned for the SEI.
Crewed space exploration missions are extremely logistics dependent, as cargo requirements shape numerous program elements such as vehicle and habitat size. Logistics mass is the mass of items like food and clothing that are not a part of the vehicle or habitat, yet are required by the crew to complete the mission. Numerous studies, such as the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) and the Human Exploration Spacecraft Testbed for Integration and Advancement (HESTIA) 20-foot chamber analog, have been conceived to research the rates at which crews consume logistics mass. These analogs can simulate many aspects of life in space, including confinement, isolation, limited supplies, and, in certain experiments, the habitat pressure. However, some aspects of space exploration, such as the effects of low gravity and the use of space-based amenities, cannot currently be tested on the ground. In this paper, International Space Station (ISS) manifest data obtained through the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) Mission Integration Database Application System (MIDAS) portal is used as a precursor to space-based analogs. The objective of the analysis is determining the breakdown of logistics mass used in space exploration. This identifies potential areas of improvement and highlights the rates at which significant items are supplied, aiding in the weighing of alternative options such as utilizing in space manufacturing for supplies vs. manifesting spares, or cleaning clothing in flight vs. discarding it. Official flight manifests ranging a span of 878 days, just short of the three-year length of a potential human mission to Mars, were analyzed to find the rates at which astronauts consumed various logistics supplies. From this analysis we have found that contrary to our own hypothesis, ‘food’ was not the largest portion of the supplied mass. Instead, ‘Environmental Control and Life Support Systems’ (ECLSS) contributed 34% of the overall supplied mass, followed by ‘Science and Outfitting,’ which contributed 29%. Food totaled less than a quarter (21% of the resupplied mass, while other items of focus in mass reduction efforts such as ‘Hygiene’ (6%), ‘Clothing’ (3%), and ‘Operational Supplies’ (4%) each contributed less than a tenth of the supplied mass. This data suggests that by categorizing and analyzing the data based on an alternative taxonomy and analyzing the full supply manifests rather than handpicked items, we have revealed unexpectedly significant items which had not been previously tracked by exploration logistics efforts. For example, toilet hardware made up 4% of ECLSS mass, and laptop hardware and multi-tools each made up 10% of operational supplies mass. Additionally, the ‘Specialized Clothing’ subcategory containing fire protective equipment, coveralls, and penguin suits made up 15% of the overall clothing mass. By identifying these newly found significant items, we can create more realistic mass estimates for exploration missions and direct mass reduction efforts to new areas, potentially leading to lower future mission masses.
INTRODUCTION Exploration class missions will require a new level of crew autonomy to self-assess and treat their sensorimotor dysfunction around periods of gravitational transition, where sensorimotor disturbances are at their highest. There is a need to define sensorimotor assessment thresholds that indicate when performance in early extravehicular activities (EVAs) might be impacted or unsafe. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a set of assessment tasks using sensorimotor spaceflight analogs including the Sensorimotor Disorientation Analog (SDA) and +3G x sustained centrifugation. METHODS For the SDA, forty-one healthy non-astronaut subjects (21 males, 20 females; Mean ± SD, Age: 34.0 ± 7.8 years) volunteered to participate in this study. Subjects attended two testing sessions: 1) familiarization to the tasks and baseline data collection, and 2) tasks completed under two levels of sensorimotor disorientation. Subjects performed a series of seven sensorimotor assessment tasks followed by two operationally relevant EVA analog tasks. The sensorimotor assessments tasks, ordered from least to most provocative of the sensorimotor system, included: postural stability, step test, prone/supine recovery from fall (RFF), four-square-step-test, obstacle negotiation with turns (OTT), kneel-and-reach, and augmented reality full-body coordination. The operational analog tasks included a top-hatch capsule egress and a 5-minute EVA traversal. Disorientation was applied via the SDA which utilized galvanic vestibular stimulation and weighted trunk, wrists, and ankles to target the vestibular and proprioceptive systems such that performance while wearing the SDA mimicked astronaut postflight performance at R+0 and R+1. Sixteen healthy non-astronaut subjects (10 males, 6 females; Age: 35.0 ± 9.5 years) completed +3G x 60-minute sustained centrifugation as an established spaceflight analog replicating the vestibular disruptions seen postflight. Subjects completed a pre-session which included familiarization to the tasks and a 5-minute centrifuge spin. The data collection session included, in order, a baseline data collection, 60-minute centrifuge spin, immediate post-centrifuge data collection, 45-minute seated recovery, and a final data collection. The same assessment and operational analog tasks were conducted as described above. RESULTS Pearsons’ correlation r-values were calculated between assessment and operational analog tasks. The two assessment tasks with the strongest correlations to the operational analog tasks were the RFF (SDA: r≥ 0.57, Centrifuge: r ≥0.55) and OTT (SDA: r≥ 0.66, Centrifuge: r ≥ 0.49). For brevity, repeated measures ANOVA with follow-up paired t-tests are discussed for these two assessment tasks. The SDA found significant differences between all three levels of disorientation for both RFF and OTT (p < 0.001). Significant differences were also found between baseline and immediate post centrifuge testing for both the RFF (p≤ 0.011) and OTT (p = 0.001). Additional results are forthcoming for both disorientation paradigms. DISCUSSION These validation studies provide evidence for down-selection of the assessment tasks that were able to distinguish between levels of sensorimotor disorientation and correlate to performance in operationally relevant tasks for use in upcoming Artemis missions.
NASA is preparing to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon within the next decade and establish a permanent sustainable human presence before sending humans onto Mars. To ensure the success of these missions, NASA has performed operational testing in terrestrial, aquatic, and laboratory analog environments that simulate Lunar and Martian environmental characteristics to evaluate exploration concepts of operations (ConOps), engineering design requirements, science support needs, mission operations techniques, and crew training. Terrestrial analogs include Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS), Biologic Analog Science Associated with Lava Terrains (BASALT), and Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP)Habitat Ground Testing. Aquatic analogs include NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) and Pavilion Lake Research Project (PLRP).Laboratory analogs include the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL), Active Response Gravity Offload System(ARGOS), rock yards, and virtual and hybrid reality simulation environments. While no single Earth-based analog environment is perfect for simulating all characteristics of other planetary surfaces, testing across multiple locations leverages the strengths of each to provide an integrated understanding of how to best conduct real spaceflight surface exploration missions.
Exploration mission designers and planners have costing models used to assess the affordability of given missions - but very little data exists on the relative science return produced by different ways of exploring a given region. Doing cost-benefit analyses for future missions requires a way to compare the relative field science productivity of spacesuited humans vs. virtual presence/teleoperation from a nearby habitat or orbital station, vs. traditional terrestrial-controlled rover operations. The goal of this study was to define science-return metrics for comparing human and robotic fieldwork, and then obtain quantifiable science-return performance comparisons between teleoperated rovers and spacesuited humans. Test runs with a simulated 2015-class rover and with spacesuited geologists were conducted at Haughton Crater in the Canadian Arctic in July 2002. Early results imply that humans will be 1-2 orders of magnitude more productive per unit time in exploration than future terrestrially-controlled robots.
Missions looking for signs of life on other worlds can often only take a few samples once they arrive. Making sense of these "few and far between" observations is easier if we know what a "normal" level of variation for that kind of planet is. Recent eruption sites in Iceland are good places to learn about this, because they have very little life present and the same types of rocks as many places on Mars. We have visited several of these sites in Iceland and tested many different kinds of measurements: the energy available for life, the amount of DNA (an important biological molecule) present, the relative amounts of different kinds of micro-organisms, and the specific minerals that make up the rocks and ground. In addition to recommendations for future expeditions, we have also shown that using early on-site measurements to choose later on-site sample sites is very helpful in reducing the number of sample sites needed.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Deep space exploration missions face the challenge of communication transmission latencies between ground stations and astronaut crews due to increasing distance between the Earth and spacecraft in transit. To address this, research at NASA has aimed toward supporting crew autonomy by enabling astronauts to schedule their own timelines with minimal oversight from Mission Control. While self-scheduling has been shown to be feasible, it is yet to be studied as an integral part of autonomous crew operations. The current paper reviews the operationalization of self-scheduling and a number of related objectives during Campaign 6 of HERA, a Human Exploration Research Analog. Research objectives include studying the effects of phasic autonomy over the course of a 45-day mission, evaluating differences in scheduling performance produced by software interface aids, and deploying a novel measure of crew attitudes toward self-scheduling and plan execution.
Deep space exploration missions face the challenge of communication transmission latencies between ground stations and astronaut crews due to increasing distance between the Earth and spacecraft in transit. To address this, research at NASA has aimed toward supporting crew autonomy by enabling astronauts to schedule their own timelines with minimal oversight from Mission Control. While self-scheduling has been shown to be feasible, it is yet to be studied as an integral part of autonomous crew operations. The current paper reviews the operationalization of self-scheduling and a number of related objectives during Campaign 6 of HERA, a Human Exploration Research Analog. Research objectives include studying the effects of phasic autonomy over the course of a 45-day mission, evaluating differences in scheduling performance produced by software interface aids, and deploying a novel measure of crew attitudes toward self-scheduling and plan execution.
NASA is preparing to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon within the next decade and establishing a permanent sustainable human presence before sending humans onto Mars. To ensure the success of these missions, NASA has performed operational testing in terrestrial, aquatic, and laboratory analog environments that simulate Lunar and Martian environmental characteristics to evaluate exploration concepts of operations (ConOps), engineering design requirements, science support needs, mission operations techniques, and crew training.
NASA is planning to return to the Moon in the mid-2020s as a steppingstone to Mars missions in the 2030s. Spacewalks, or extravehicular activities (EVAs), performed on the Moon and Mars will differ in a variety of ways from those that have been performed in decades past. NASA has identified multiple risks to human health and performance associated with a crewed mission to Mars, especially those associated with exploration EVAs which are expected to be a primary mission activity. Crew may be expected to conduct up to 24 hours of EVA per person per week, where the likelihood of injury and/or mental mistakes are increased compared to ground-based training or current microgravity EVAs and the consequences of which can be catastrophic. Current test environments for exploration EVA research and technology development are large, costly facilities that are limited in their availability or capabilities. Spacesuit testing in a reduced gravity environment such as NASA’s Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory, while a good representation of the crew’s physical workload during exploration EVAs, typically has small datasets and is difficult to integrate physiological sensors or other types of crew performance measures. Meanwhile, scientific field-based testing such as NASA’s Desert Research and Technology Studies offers an operationally relevant environment for exploration EVAs, particularly for cognitive workload, but is also limited by small datasets, lack of a pressurized spacesuit, and obtrusive measures. The limitations of current analogs for exploration EVAs identify a need for a new test environment that can approximate both the physical and cognitive demands associated with exploration EVAs to enable rapid, controlled, and repeatable evaluations of human health and performance risks of exploration missions. In response, the Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA Johnson Space Center has developed a hybrid reality exploration EVA analog named the Assessments of Physiology And Cognition in Hybrid-reality Environments (APACHE)[ to address these limitations using a combination of virtual, physical, and hybrid reality techniques. The APACHE facility resides at NASA Johnson Space Center and serves as a large “sandbox” for EVA research and simulation. At its center is a roughly 15x20ft space surrounded by a 14” tall sandbox partially filled with lunar regolith simulant to emulate the physical feeling of walking on a planetary surface and to allow for simulated geology operations. Nearby, a curved passive treadmill (Skillmill Connect, Technogym, Fairfield, NJ) and an omnidirectional treadmill (Infinadeck, Infinadeck, Rocklin, CA) are included to enable exploration of these large virtual environments while also imposing the physical demands, representative timelines, and cognitive burdens required to navigate and traverse these distances during exploration EVA. A 6DOF motion platform is used to simulate rover operations and supports various human performance evaluations and associated risks. Lastly, APACHE can support two extravehicular (EV) crewmembers working in tandem. A computer workstation is located nearby and also supports an intravehicular (IV) crewmember as part of a full mission simulation. The IV crewmember has direct video and audio communication with the EV crew in VR to provide operational and procedural support.
NASA is planning to return to the Moon in the mid-2020s as a stepping stone to Mars missions in the 2030s. Spacewalks, or extravehicular activities (EVAs), performed on the Moon and Mars will differ in a variety of ways from those that have been performed in decades past. NASA has identified multiple risks to human health and performance associated with a crewed mission to Mars, especially those associated with exploration EVAs which are expected to be a primary mission activity. Crew may be expected to conduct up to 24 hours of EVA per person per week, where the likelihood of injury and/or mental mistakes are increased compared to ground-based training or current microgravity EVAs and the consequences of which can be catastrophic. Current test environments for exploration EVA research and technology development are large, costly facilities that are limited in their availability or capabilities. Spacesuit testing in a reduced gravity environment such as NASA’s Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory, while a good representation of the crew’s physical workload during exploration EVAs, typically has small datasets and is difficult to integrate physiological sensors or other types of crew performance measures. Meanwhile, scientific field-based testing such as NASA’s Desert Research and Technology Studies offers an operationally relevant environment for exploration EVAs, particularly for cognitive workload, but is also limited by small datasets, lack of a pressurized spacesuit, and obtrusive measures. The limitations of current analogs for exploration EVAs identify a need for a new test environment that can approximate both the physical and cognitive demands associated with exploration EVAs to enable rapid, controlled, and repeatable evaluations of human health and performance risks of exploration missions. In response, the Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA Johnson Space Center has developed a hybrid reality exploration EVA analog named the Assessments of Physiology And Cognition in Hybrid-reality Environments (APACHE) to address these limitations using a combination of virtual, physical, and hybrid reality techniques. The APACHE facility resides at NASA Johnson Space Center and serves as a large “sandbox” for EVA research and simulation. At its center is a roughly 15x20ft space surrounded by a 14” tall sandbox partially filled with lunar regolith simulant to emulate the physical feeling of walking on a planetary surface and to allow for simulated geology operations. Nearby, a curved passive treadmill (Skillmill Connect, Technogym, Fairfield, NJ) and an omnidirectional treadmill (Infinadeck, Infinadeck, Rocklin, CA) are included to enable exploration of these large virtual environments while also imposing the physical demands, representative timelines, and cognitive burdens required to navigate and traverse these distances during exploration EVA. A 6DOF motion platform is used to simulate rover operations and supports various human performance evaluations and associated risks. Lastly, APACHE can support two extravehicular (EV) crewmembers working in tandem. A computer workstation is located nearby and also supports an intravehicular (IV) crewmember as part of a full mission simulation. The IV crewmember has direct video and audio communication with the EV crew in VR to provide operational and procedural support. The software used in APACHE was created by the JSC Engineering Directorate, in partnership with Buendea, powered by a custom Unreal Engine 5 (UE5.3, Epic Games) project. APACHE currently utilizes the HTC Vive Pro Eye in a wireless configuration for VR simulations. There are two virtual environments that subjects can explore within APACHE, a Lunar and Martian surface. The virtual Lunar surface was created from LIDAR data of the Lunar South Pole to create roughly 16 sq km of explorable terrain. The virtual Martian surface contains roughly 400 sq km of explorable terrain derived from Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter LIDAR data of the Jezero Crater. The immersion and related cognitive burdens of conducting a planetary EVA is simulated through a series of EVA-relevant tasks performed in the VR environment, using these high-fidelity visual representations. Additionally, APACHE includes biosensor driven informatics, such as real-time heart rate monitoring and/or derived values from model simulations, for active monitoring by the EV crew and added cognitive demand. A “Wizard of Oz” control panel enables test operators to activate contingency events such as simulated spacesuit malfunctions, loss of communications, and/or limited visibility. Embedded performance measures such as accuracy, completeness, and execution time have been developed for various exploration tasks to objectively quantify crew performance during an EVA and compare impacts to performance when different environmental stressors, both physical and cognitive, are added to or removed from the simulation. Additionally, validated cognitive and operational performance measures such as the Digit Symbol Substitution Task have been recreated and embedded in VR for direct and relatively unobtrusive measurement of motor perception. The APACHE environment currently supports multiple research studies at NASA. Examples include the CHAPEA project, a series of simulated year-long missions on Mars by a 4-person crew; and the CO2 Contingency Walk Back Study, an investigation of elevated CO2 exposure on crew performance during a contingency EVA scenario. APACHE also provides a test environment to support the development of the Crew State and Risk Model, which is a collection of individualized, mathematical models of crew physical and cognitive state; and the Personalized EVA Informatics and Decision Support system, an operational tool for flight controllers, and eventually a self-reliant Martian crew, to make biomedically-informed decisions in real-time to optimize the EVA planning and execution with respect to crew health and performance. Some technical challenges associated with developing the APACHE environment, as well as current limitations, include VR limitless natural walking with a hybrid spacesuit simulator, optimizing performance for wireless PC VR streaming while maintaining a high degree of visual fidelity, and the integration of various physiological (metabolic masks) and psychometric (eye tracking) sensors with the VR headset.