Results for “Task Performance and Analysis” — Page 40

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

IMPACTing Medical System Design with a Risk Analysis Tool

Background: Following the success of Artemis I, NASA is preparing for human extended duration missions. Ongoing efforts are focused on mitigating mission-related risks, including those affecting crew health and performance. Communication latency, logistics of resupply and time frame of medical evacuation are barriers to provision of healthcare for these missions, especially with respect to constraints in mass, volume, and crew training. An in-depth assessment of medical risks, capabilities and resources for a specific mission design is necessary to determine an optimal balance that maximizes likelihood of mission success. Overview: IMPACT (Informed Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a dynamic tool designed to estimate medical risk and outcomes for a specific mission design. In its current iteration, a list of medical conditions selected based on likelihood of occurrence and/or consequence was linked to a set of clinical capabilities and resources necessary for diagnosis and management. A probabilistic risk analysis tool was then used to identify and estimate the likelihood and consequence of risks through the following outcome metrics: loss of crew life (inflight mortality due to medical conditions), need for medical evacuation (return to definitive care), and crew disability (task time affected based on how medical conditions influence the ability to perform specific exploration mission crew tasks). Finally, the model’s optimization algorithm provides recommendations for medical capabilities that maximize risk mitigation relative to mass and volume constraints. In the Spring of 2023, IMPACT was utilized to estimate outcome metrics for a design reference mission that would be representative of an extended duration Artemis mission. Notional data generated were then used to determine a recommended set of medical capabilities and resources relative to user-defined mass and volume constraints. A multidisciplinary team has also been updating IMPACT to strengthen the model’s fidelity. Figure 1 shows how updates to outcome metric inputs for the conditions resulted in different capability and resource allocation recommendations. Discussion: This presentation will discuss the IMPACT tool and share the latest data generated for a representative extended duration Artemis mission. Efforts to improve the fidelity of data generated by the model’s algorithm will also be discussed.

K A Shair↗

NASA NTRS2011

Evaluating Suit Fit Using Performance Degradation

The Mark III suit has multiple sizes of suit components (arm, leg, and gloves) as well as sizing inserts to tailor the fit of the suit to an individual. This study sought to determine a way to identify the point an ideal suit fit transforms into a bad fit and how to quantify this breakdown using mobility-based physical performance data. This study examined the changes in human physical performance via degradation of the elbow and wrist range of motion of the planetary suit prototype (Mark III) with respect to changes in sizing and as well as how to apply that knowledge to suit sizing options and improvements in suit fit. The methods implemented in this study focused on changes in elbow and wrist mobility due to incremental suit sizing modifications. This incremental sizing was within a range that included both optimum and poor fit. Suited range of motion data was collected using a motion analysis system for nine isolated and functional tasks encompassing the elbow and wrist joints. A total of four subjects were tested with motions involving both arms simultaneously as well as the right arm only. The results were then compared across sizing configurations. The results of this study indicate that range of motion may be used as a viable parameter to quantify at what stage suit sizing causes a detriment in performance; however the human performance decrement appeared to be based on the interaction of multiple joints along a limb, not a single joint angle. The study was able to identify a preliminary method to quantify the impact of size on performance and to develop a means to gauge tolerances around optimal size. More work is needed to improve the assessment of optimal fit and to compensate for multiple joint interactions.

Margerum, Sarah E.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research: Phase 2: Hybrid Electric Design Exploration - Volume 2

This report summarizes the hybrid electric concept design, analysis, and modeling work accomplished by the Boeing Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research (SUGAR) team, consisting of Boeing Research and Technology, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, General Electric, and Georgia Tech.Performance and sizing tasks were conducted for hybrid electric versions of a conventional tube-and-wing aircraft and a hybrid wing body. The high wing Truss Braced Wing (TBW) SUGAR Volt was updated based on results from the TBW work (documented separately) and new engine performance models. Energy cost and acoustic analyses were conducted and technology roadmaps were updated for hybrid electric and battery technology. NOx emissions were calculated for landing and takeoff (LTO) and cruise. NPSS models were developed for hybrid electric components and tested using an integrated analysis of superconducting and non-superconducting hybrid electric engines. The hybrid electric SUGAR Volt was shown to produce significant emissions and fuel burn reductions beyond those achieved by the conventionally powered SUGAR High and was able to meet the NASA goals for fuel burn. Total energy utilization was not decreased but reduced energy cost can be achieved for some scenarios. The team was not able to identify a technology development path to meet NASA's noise goals

Bradley, Marty K.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Performance analysis of a robotic system for space-based assembly

A dual arm system for space-based assembly has been under development and experimentation at the Center of Intelligent Robotic Systems for Space Exploration. This paper will describe the components of this system and will then focus on the specific problem of predicting response time of the integrated system. This hierarchical system consists of a task representation and planning level, a coordination level, and an execution level to carry out the desired assembly task. A common modeling methodology based on Petri nets was used to model the various subtasks throughout the levels of the hierarchy. The Petri net model can then be analyzed for liveness and boundedness that, in turn, are used to detect the existence of deadlock or conflict in the system. The model can also be used to calculate the time it will take to complete an assembly task once an operator issues a command. These modeling results are compared with the actual experimental results obtained from carrying out the assembly task.

Desrochers, Alan↗

NASA NTRS2002

Examining the Pilot and Controller Performance Data When in a Free Flight with Weather Phenomenon

The present study investigated effects of weather related factors on the performance of pilots under free flight. A weather scenario was defined by a combination of precipitation factors (light rain, moderate rain, and heavy rain or snow), visibility (1,4,8 miles), wind conditions (light, medium, or heavy), cloud ceiling (800ft. below, 1800ft above, and 4000ft horizontal). The performance of the aircraft self-separation was evaluated in terms of detection accuracy and detection times for student- and commercial (expert) pilots. Overall, the results obtained from a behavioral analysis showed that in general, the ability to recognize intruder aircraft conflict incidents, followed by the ability to acquire the spatial location of the intruder aircraft relative to ownership aircraft were judged to be the major cognitive tasks as perceived by the participants during self-separation. Further, the participants rarely used cockpit display of traffic information (CDTI) during conflict management related to aircraft separation, but used CDTI highly during decision-making tasks. In all weather scenarios, there were remarkable differences between expert and student pilots in detection times. In summary, weather scenarios were observed to affect intruder aircraft detection performance accuracies. There was interaction effects between weather Scenario-1 and Scenario-2 for climbing task data generated by both expert- and student- pilots at high traffic density. Scenario-3 weather condition provided an opportunity for poor detection accuracy as well as detection time increase. This may be attributed to low visibility. The intruder aircraft detection times were not affected by the weather conditions during climbing and descending tasks. The decision of pilots to fly into certain weather condition was dependent in part on the warning distance to the location of the weather. When pilots were warned of the weather conditions, they were more likely to fly their aircraft into it, but mostly when the warning was not close to the weather location.

Nituen, Celestine A.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Analysis of Human-Spacesuit Interaction

Astronauts sustain injuries of various natures such as finger delamination, joint pain, and redness due to their interaction with the space suit. The role of the Anthropometry and Biomechanics Facility is to understand the biomechanics, environmental variables, and ergonomics of the suit. This knowledge is then used to make suggestions for improvement in future iterations of the space suit assembly to prevent injuries while allowing astronauts maneuverability, comfort, and tactility. The projects I was involved in were the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) space suit stiffness study and the glove feasibility study. The EMU project looked at the forces exerted on the shoulder, arm, and wrist when subjects performed kinematic tasks with and without a pressurized suit. The glove study consisted of testing three conditions - the Series 4000 glove, the Phase VI glove, and the no glove condition. With more than forty channels of sensor data total, it was critical to develop programs that could analyze data with basic descriptive statistics and generate relevant graphs to help understand what happens within the space suit and glove. In my project I created a Graphical User Interface (GUI) in MATLAB that would help me visualize what each sensor was doing within a task. The GUI is capable of displaying overlain plots and can be synchronized with video. This was helpful during the stiffness testing to visualize how the forces on the arm acted while the subject performed tasks such as shoulder adduction/abduction and bicep curls. The main project of focus, however, was the glove comparison study. I wrote MATLAB programs which generated movies of the strain vectors during specific tasks. I also generated graphs that summarized the differences between each glove for the strain, shear and FSR sensors. Preliminary results indicate that the Phase VI glove places less strain and shear on the hand. Future work includes continued data analysis of surveys and sensor data. In the end, the ideal glove is one that provides more tactility for the astronauts but lessens injuries. Often times, a more tactile glove transmits forces better to the hand; thus, achieving a balance of both a tactile and safe glove is the main challenge present.

Thomas, Neha↗

NASA NTRS1987

Definition of a space transportation systems cargo element (Shuttle-C). Orientation

The Martin Marietta Shuttle-C project organization has been tailored to fit the tasks required for the Phase B study. Lead responsibilities have been assigned for Program Control, Safety, Reliability, and Quality Assurance (SR and QA); Systems Engineering and Integration (SE and I); Design and Analysis; Production and Test; and Operations. Details of the Performance Review and Orientation Program of November 1987 are given.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1992

Solar prediction analysis

Solar Activity prediction is essential to definition of orbital design and operational environments for space flight. This task provides the necessary research to better understand solar predictions being generated by the solar community and to develop improved solar prediction models. The contractor shall provide the necessary manpower and facilities to perform the following tasks: (1) review, evaluate, and assess the time evolution of the solar cycle to provide probable limits of solar cycle behavior near maximum end during the decline of solar cycle 22, and the forecasts being provided by the solar community and the techniques being used to generate these forecasts; and (2) develop and refine prediction techniques for short-term solar behavior flare prediction within solar active regions, with special emphasis on the correlation of magnetic shear with flare occurrence.

Smith, Jesse B.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Criteria for assessing problem solving and decision making in complex environments

Training crews to cope with unanticipated problems in high-risk, high-stress environments requires models of effective problem solving and decision making. Existing decision theories use the criteria of logical consistency and mathematical optimality to evaluate decision quality. While these approaches are useful under some circumstances, the assumptions underlying these models frequently are not met in dynamic time-pressured operational environments. Also, applying formal decision models is both labor and time intensive, a luxury often lacking in operational environments. Alternate approaches and criteria are needed. Given that operational problem solving and decision making are embedded in ongoing tasks, evaluation criteria must address the relation between those activities and satisfaction of broader task goals. Effectiveness and efficiency become relevant for judging reasoning performance in operational environments. New questions must be addressed: What is the relation between the quality of decisions and overall performance by crews engaged in critical high risk tasks? Are different strategies most effective for different types of decisions? How can various decision types be characterized? A preliminary model of decision types found in air transport environments will be described along with a preliminary performance model based on an analysis of 30 flight crews. The performance analysis examined behaviors that distinguish more and less effective crews (based on performance errors). Implications for training and system design will be discussed.

Orasanu, Judith↗

NASA NTRS2017

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Landing Site Reconnaissance Capability

The Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) entered into orbit about Mars on March 10, 2006. After a series of aerobraking and propulsive maneuvers, the spacecraft has been in its sun-synchronous primary science orbit since September 2006 performing both scientific and Mars programmatic support roles. In addition to MRO’s scientific investigations of Mars, NASA has tasked MRO to provide reconnaissance of potential landing sites for ongoing and future Mars missions. This paper covers the mission design and analysis process to characterize MRO’s landing site coverage capability for all global locations, with special focus on potential sites for future missions: Gale Crater, Mawrth Vallis, and Noachis Human Exploration Zone.

Johnston, M. Daniel↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

Cameron J. Hines↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boil Off Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling and Simulation of Tank Pressure Control using Zero-Boiloff Active Thermal Control for LOXSAT Technology Demonstration Mission

To-date, research and modeling of cryogenic fluid management technologies (CFM) for spaceflight has been limited to ground tests, short-duration zero-g simulations (e.g. drop towers), and small-scale experiments on-orbit. There has not been a large-scale flight demonstration of a flight-like system. As future NASA missions to take humans further from Earth will require large, in-space cryogenic propulsion vehicles, it is imperative to begin collecting flight data for these systems to accurately model and design future vehicles. To meet this goal, NASA awarded tipping point technology demonstration awards to Eta Space, Lockheed Martin, Space Exploration Technologies (SpaceX), and United Launch Alliance (ULA) to demonstrate on-orbit storage and transfer of cryogenic propellant. For its award, Eta Space is developing LOXSAT-1. It is a small satellite that will be launched on a Rocket Lab Electron rocket. The spacecraft consists of a Rocket Lab Photon spacecraft bus with a primary payload of a spherical liquid oxygen (LOX) storage tank with thermodynamic control systems. The primary objective of the mission is to demonstrate zero-boil-off storage of liquid oxygen. To accomplish this objective, the payload is equipped with an active thermal control system fluid loop that consists of propellant management device (PMD), positive-displacement pump, heat exchanger connected to a cryocooler, and a spray bar mixing injector. When the fluid loop is operating, fluid is drawn from the tank by the PMD and pumped through the heat exchanger, lowering the fluid temperature below the fluid temperature in the tank. This subcooled liquid is then injected back into the tank through the spray bar. The subcooled injected liquid has two effects. If it is sprayed into the ullage space, the injected liquid will form into jets or droplets and exchange heat with the ullage gas. This will cool and condense the gas, reducing the pressure in the tank. Additionally, the liquid that is not sprayed through the ullage, as well as any remaining liquid spray from the ullage, will rejoin the liquid mass of the tank, lowering the bulk temperature of the liquid. These combines effects provide for zero-boil off pressure control by lowering the tank pressure and the liquid saturation pressure simultaneously, ensuring the liquid stays subcooled. To model these complex mechanics and predict the performance of the active thermal control system, NASA is providing Eta Space with 3 parallel models of the tank. The approach of providing 3 different models allows for cross-checking and comparisons between the three to better understand how different modeling assumptions and selection semi-empirical factors affects the modeling result. Additionally, developing 3 models provides three different schemes for numerical simulation, providing confidence that results depict real physical phenomenon and not numerical quirks of the program. Within the tank thermodynamics, there are two primary areas of heat transfer we concern ourselves with: the heat transfer between the ullage space and the droplet spray, and between the ullage space and bulk liquid. For the droplet heat transfer, there are multiple sets of assumptions that can be made and correlations that can be used. Currently, two working models - the TankSIM model and Easy5 model – provide for an overview of the different approaches available. The TankSIM model and Easy5 model use two different models for droplet heating and evaporation that illustrate how the models use different types of mechanisms to arrive at the same answer. For the TankSIM model, droplets are treated as spheres of constant radius. Heat is transferred from the ullage to the droplet and warms the droplet until it reaches saturation, then the droplet begins evaporating and reducing its radius and mass. To calculate the heat transfer coefficient between the droplet and ullage, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. To determine the number of droplets in the ullage, a resident mass approach is used. This approach averages the number of droplets such that residuals at the start-up and shut-off of the spray bar cancel out. This same approach is used in the Easy5 model. The GFSSP model implements a linked list to track individual droplet “nodes” within the model. For the Easy5 model, the droplet is assumed to have an interface at a temperature equal to the saturation temperature corresponding to the pressure of the gas phase. The heat transfer from the gas to the interface and the interface to the droplet bulk is then calculated, and the net mass transfer between the droplet and interface is determined by performing an energy balance across the interface. For the gas side of the interface, the Ranz-Marshall correlation is used. For the liquid side of the interface, a variety of correlations were tried, including Kronig and Brink (1950) and effective conductivity models. As a result of these assumptions, the Easy5 model currently predicts faster depressurization, as at saturated vapor conditions, the heat transfer coeffect on the liquid side for the Easy5 model is greater than the heat transfer coefficient predicted by Ranz-Marshall used in the TankSIM code. This greater heat flux translates into faster condensation of the saturated ullage gas. At the bulk liquid to ullage interface, the models are in much closer agreement. Both models model the ullage as a sphere centered within the bulk liquid in the tank, and both use the energy-jumping boundary condition to model heat and mass transfer across the interface. There are slight differences in how the interface temperature is calculated, however. The Easy5 model assumes the temperature of the interface is equal to the saturation temperature associated with the pressure of the gas phase. The TankSIM model calculates this temperature with Alabovskii’s equation, which provides a correction factor for interface temperatures. Analysis tasks are focused on determining rates of depressurization within the tank during active cooling operation. To maintain net positive suction head at the pump inlet, the tank pressure cannot fall faster than the saturation pressure associated with the temperature of the bulk liquid. Additionally, there is interest in analyzing the performance of the loop at different pump speeds and cryocooler input powers. Adjusting the flowrate affects both the performance of the heat exchanger between the cryocooler and pumped liquid, and the heat transfer between the droplet spray and the ullage. Ideally, a pump speed and cryocooler power can be selected that will allow the tank to operate in zero-boil-off mode with a very narrow range of storage pressure.

zero boil-off↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison of Artemis 2 and Artemis 5 Model Outcomes Using the Impact Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool

BACKGROUND The Artemis campaign is a Moon exploration program with a series of six planned missions, five of which will be crewed. These five crewed missions will contain a single mission segment (space flight), or multiple mission segments involving space flight (Orion), lunar landing (LTV) and/or space habitat (Gateway). Each crewed segment faces the risk of unique medical conditions, necessitating medical sets/kits tailored to those specificities. To support and enable a data-driven and evidence-based decision-making process through out a mission’s life cycle, a software tool called IMPACT was developed. Using probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) methodologies, IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a novel tool built for analyzing the possibility of encountering complex medical risks during space flight, and for identifying the medical resources and capabilities needed to treat those potential at-risk medical conditions. This presentation will seek to compare IMPACT’s computational results upon potential complex space medical conditions (e.g., sprain/strain back or sleep disturbance) using IMPACT’s risk metrics and the associated optimized medical sets/kits between two Artemis missions: single segment Artemis 2 and multi-segmented Artemis 5. OVERVIEW By identifying potential medical conditions in space using input criteria such as crew quantity and composition, certain crew physical characteristics, mission duration and mission activities, IMPACT can produce analyses on the type of medical resources and capabilities needed to produce an optimized medical set/kit to address those medical conditions. IMPACT achieves this by performing hundreds of thousands of Monte Carlo simulations of missions to build aggregate pictures of medical risk. IMPACT’s risk metrics include loss of crew life (LOCL) – a measure of crew mortality due to medical conditions in space, return to definitive care (RTDC) – the need to perform crew evacuation, and task time lost (TTL) – a measure of the inability to perform activities due to crew disability. These risk metrics are applied to every medical condition identified by IMPACT’s computation analyses for every segment of the mission. Medical sets/kits are optimized to address these medical conditions but must fit within the stated Artemis Design Reference Mission (DRM) request for mass and volume physical size constraints. ANTICIPATED ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION Using two Artemis missions, Artemis 2 and Artemis 5, IMPACT will provide the analyses for comparison of medical set/kit contents based upon mass and/or volume requirements and identify the at-risk medical conditions within both missions. This paper serves as an initial exploration of probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) medical risk calculations between two crewed Artemis missions and is not intended to be deemed the official medical response for the Artemis campaign.

probabilistic risk assessment↗

NASA NTRS1997

A Human Factors Analysis of EVA Time Requirements

Human Factors Engineering (HFE) is a discipline whose goal is to engineer a safer, more efficient interface between humans and machines. HFE makes use of a wide range of tools and techniques to fulfill this goal. One of these tools is known as motion and time study, a technique used to develop time standards for given tasks. During the summer of 1995, a human factors motion and time study was initiated with the goals of developing a database of EVA task times and developing a method of utilizing the database to predict how long an EVA should take. Initial development relied on the EVA activities performed during the STS-61 (Hubble) mission. The first step of the study was to become familiar with EVA's, the previous task-time studies, and documents produced on EVA's. After reviewing these documents, an initial set of task primitives and task-time modifiers was developed. Data was collected from videotaped footage of two entire STS-61 EVA missions and portions of several others, each with two EVA astronauts. Feedback from the analysis of the data was used to further refine the primitives and modifiers used. The project was continued during the summer of 1996, during which data on human errors was also collected and analyzed. Additional data from the STS-71 mission was also collected. Analysis of variance techniques for categorical data was used to determine which factors may affect the primitive times and how much of an effect they have. Probability distributions for the various task were also generated. Further analysis of the modifiers and interactions is planned.

Pate, Dennis W.↗

NASA NTRS2014

A Novel Method for Characterizing Spacesuit Mobility through Metabolic Cost

Spacesuit mobility has historically been defined and characterized by a combination of range of motion and joint torque of the individual anatomical joints when performing isolated motions meant to drive that joint only in a given orthogonal plane. While this has been the standard approach for several decades, there are numerous shortcomings that suit designers and engineers would like to see rectified. First, the lack of a standardized method for collecting both range of motion and joint torque translates to many different test setups, procedures and methods of data analysis. Second, all of these previously used methods for data collection lack some degree of repeatability, even within the same test setup and the same conductor; in addition, attempts at higher fidelity data collection techniques require high overhead and cost with minimal improvement. Lastly, isolated motions in standard anatomical planes are not representative of real‐world tasks that a crewmember would be performing during an EVA, be it microgravity or surface exploration based. To address these shortcomings, options are being explored within the Space Suit and Crew Survival Systems Branch to ascertain the feasibility of an alternative approach to defining mobility - one that is more repeatable, lower overhead, and more tied to functional EVA tasks. This paper serves to document the first attempt at such an alternative option - one that looks at the metabolic energy‐cost of a spacesuit. In other words, can we objectively compare the mobility of a spacesuit by evaluating the metabolic cost of that suit to the wearer while performing a battery of functional EVA tasks?

McFarland, Shane↗

NASA NTRS1989

Parallel eigenanalysis of finite element models in a completely connected architecture

A parallel algorithm is presented for the solution of the generalized eigenproblem in linear elastic finite element analysis, (K)(phi) = (M)(phi)(omega), where (K) and (M) are of order N, and (omega) is order of q. The concurrent solution of the eigenproblem is based on the multifrontal/modified subspace method and is achieved in a completely connected parallel architecture in which each processor is allowed to communicate with all other processors. The algorithm was successfully implemented on a tightly coupled multiple-instruction multiple-data parallel processing machine, Cray X-MP. A finite element model is divided into m domains each of which is assumed to process n elements. Each domain is then assigned to a processor or to a logical processor (task) if the number of domains exceeds the number of physical processors. The macrotasking library routines are used in mapping each domain to a user task. Computational speed-up and efficiency are used to determine the effectiveness of the algorithm. The effect of the number of domains, the number of degrees-of-freedom located along the global fronts and the dimension of the subspace on the performance of the algorithm are investigated. A parallel finite element dynamic analysis program, p-feda, is documented and the performance of its subroutines in parallel environment is analyzed.

Akl, F. A.↗