Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Life support systems”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 757 records · Page 42
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Going Beyond Reliability to Robustness and Resilience in Space Life Support Systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environment is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to unanticipated damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes can invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging conditions. These three qualities are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from unanticipated disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness requires dealing with known problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. The need for robustness and resilience has been stated for decades but little has been done. Systems designers often assume that they understand everything they need to know. The potential failures caused by changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns can be ignored. Such overconfidence can lead to neglect of reliability, robustness, and resilience.

Harry W. Jones↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Going Beyond Reliability to Robustness and Resilience in Space Life Support Systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environment is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to unanticipated damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes can invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging conditions. These three qualities are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from unanticipated disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness requires dealing with known problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. The need for robustness and resilience has been stated for decades but little has been done. Systems designers often assume that they understand everything they need to know. The potential failures caused by changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns can be ignored. Such overconfidence can lead to neglect of reliability, robustness, and resilience.

Harry W. Jones↗
NASA NTRS2017

Developing Reliable Life Support for Mars

A human mission to Mars will require highly reliable life support systems. Mars life support systems may recycle water and oxygen using systems similar to those on the International Space Station (ISS). However, achieving sufficient reliability is less difficult for ISS than it will be for Mars. If an ISS system has a serious failure, it is possible to provide spare parts, or directly supply water or oxygen, or if necessary bring the crew back to Earth. Life support for Mars must be designed, tested, and improved as needed to achieve high demonstrated reliability. A quantitative reliability goal should be established and used to guide development t. The designers should select reliable components and minimize interface and integration problems. In theory a system can achieve the component-limited reliability, but testing often reveal unexpected failures due to design mistakes or flawed components. Testing should extend long enough to detect any unexpected failure modes and to verify the expected reliability. Iterated redesign and retest may be required to achieve the reliability goal. If the reliability is less than required, it may be improved by providing spare components or redundant systems. The number of spares required to achieve a given reliability goal depends on the component failure rate. If the failure rate is under estimated, the number of spares will be insufficient and the system may fail. If the design is likely to have undiscovered design or component problems, it is advisable to use dissimilar redundancy, even though this multiplies the design and development cost. In the ideal case, a human tended closed system operational test should be conducted to gain confidence in operations, maintenance, and repair. The difficulty in achieving high reliability in unproven complex systems may require the use of simpler, more mature, intrinsically higher reliability systems. The limitations of budget, schedule, and technology may suggest accepting lower and less certain expected reliability. A plan to develop reliable life support is needed to achieve the best possible reliability.

life support↗
NASA NTRS2018

Solid State Air Purification System

Life support systems in spacecraft are designed to provide a safe, habitable environment for the astronauts, and one of the most significant challenges is managing acceptable air quality. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is respired normally by humans at concentrations that are toxic if inhaled directly, and as a result cabin air must be tightly managed. The Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly (CDRA) currently on board the ISS is the best functioning technology for manned space cabins, but has two significant drawbacks:1. The CDRA requires that air be dried prior to CO2 capture, and this costs energy _ in fact, the system spends 4X more energy drying the air than in actually capturing and releasing carbon dioxide. 2. The CDRA works in batch mode, while downstream CO2 processing systems require a continuous stream of CO2. This adds unnecessary complexity, as well as a second parasitic energy loss.An ideal system would process CO2 continuously without any need for drying of the air, and without any moving parts. Such a system would require a fraction of the size and weight of the CDRA while dropping the cost of CO2 capture by 5X or more. Such a technology would be enabling for future long term manned flight missions, such as a mission to Mars. eSionic is developing a new electrochemical membrane technology using its patented innovations in electrolyte materials. In Phase I of this program eSionic has demonstrated continuous gas separation using only electricity to drive the separation, with no moving parts or pressure drops. In Phase II, eSionic will demonstrate long-term operation of the membranes consistent with the needs of NASA for this development program.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRS1986

Atmosphere stabilization and element recycle in an experimental mouse-algal system

Life support systems based on bioregeneration rely on the control and manipulation of organisms. Experiments conducted with a gas-closed mouse-algal system designed to investigate principles of photosynthetic gas exchange focus primarily on observing gas exchange phenomena under varying algal environmental conditions and secondarily on studying element cycling through compartments of the experimental system. Inherent instabilities exit between the uptake and release of carbon dioxide CO2 and oxygen O2 by the mouse and algae. Variations in light intensity and cell density alter the photosynthetic rate of the algae and enable maintenance of physiologic concentrations of CO2 and O2. Different nitrogen sources (urea and nitrate) result in different algal assimilatory quotients (AQ). Combinations of photosynthetic rate and AQ ratio manipulations have been examined for their potential in stabilizing atmospheric gas concentrations in the gas-closed algal-mouse system. Elemental mass balances through the experimental systems compartments are being studied with the concurrent development of a mathematical simulation model. Element cycling experiments include quantification of elemental flows through system compartments and wet oxidation of system waste materials for use as an algal nutrient source. Oxidized waste products demonstrate inhibitory properties although dilution has been shown to allow normal growth.

Smernoff, David T.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Multi-Agent Diagnosis and Control of an Air Revitalization System for Life Support in Space

An architecture of interoperating agents has been developed to provide control and fault management for advanced life support systems in space. In this adjustable autonomy architecture, software agents coordinate with human agents and provide support in novel fault management situations. This architecture combines the Livingstone model-based mode identification and reconfiguration (MIR) system with the 3T architecture for autonomous flexible command and control. The MIR software agent performs model-based state identification and diagnosis. MIR identifies novel recovery configurations and the set of commands required for the recovery. The AZT procedural executive and the human operator use the diagnoses and recovery recommendations, and provide command sequencing. User interface extensions have been developed to support human monitoring of both AZT and MIR data and activities. This architecture has been demonstrated performing control and fault management for an oxygen production system for air revitalization in space. The software operates in a dynamic simulation testbed.

Malin, Jane T.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Synthetic Biologic Membrane

The International Space Station (ISS) is a test bed for the technologies that will be used to travel to Mars and beyond. The lessons learned from operating the ISS provide valuable direction to future research and technology development programs. One of the most critical and complicated subsystems on ISS is the life support system. The life support system keeps the crew alive by recycling both air and water. The ISS water recycling system has been operating since 2009 and one of the main lessons learned is that reliability is a key technology performance metric. In the long run reliability is a key cost driver and is a critical factor in insuring crew safety. For long duration missions such as the exploration of Mars, where resupply of spare parts from Earth is difficult if not impossible, reliability is even more important. This presentation will cover research into improving the reliability of ISS systems. It will discuss research into the development of a biomimetic membrane materials that provides self-regeneration capabilities for water recycling systems. It will also cover research into past failures of the ISS water recycling system caused by astronaut bone loss and the build-up of trace contaminates in the cabin.

Biology↗
NASA NTRS2021

Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) Systems

Environmental control and life support (ECLS)systems provide the conditions necessary to maintain astronaut's health during a mission. They have been a part of every human-rated vehicle from Mercury onward, from carbon dioxide scrubbers and drink bags, to sophisticated air and water recovery technologies. In order to enable human exploration beyond low Earth orbit for an extended time, such as a mission to Mars, closed-loop life support, the continuous use, reuse, and recycling of air, water, and waste will be necessary. This chapter provides a brief history of air revitalization, wastewater, and solid waste recovery systems from the early spaceflight era to the present, potential technologies in development to facilitate further loop closure, and considerations for future life support system development in support of exploration

Life support↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developmental Efforts of an Electrochemical Oxygen Recovery System for Advanced Life Support

The current State of Art (SOA) Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) oxygen recovery system onboard the International Space Station (ISS) is a complex, heavy, and power consuming system that recovers approximately 50% of the oxygen (O2) from metabolic carbon dioxide (CO2). For future long-duration missions, O2recovery systems will need to be highly reliable, efficient, and recover maximum metabolic CO2. Investigations into various technologies to help meet these requirements for exploration are ongoing; however, most of these proposed technologies ultimately result in a more complex system. A Macrofluidic Electrochemical Reactor (MFECR) is one proposed technology development effort currently underway at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) that has the potential to significantly reduce the complexity of ECLSSO2recovery system. The MFECR operates at standard conditions, giving it an advantage over other technologies being investigated, which require high temperatures resulting in heavy reactors and high power consumption. The MFECR would replace three pieces of hardware for future ECLSS architectures: the current Carbon Dioxide Reduction Assembly (Sabatier reactor), the Plasma Pyrolysis Assembly (PPA), and the Oxygen Generation Assembly(OGA). It is designed to interface directly with the Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly (CDRA) and the Water Processor Assembly (WPA). This allows for a less complex system and higher reliability than the current SOA as well as reduced power, weight and H2Oconsumption of ECLSS. Here, we will discuss the current development efforts of the MFECR and how this technology may aide in the advancement of future long-duration life support systems.

Brittany R Brown↗
NASA NTRS2020

Developmental Efforts of an Electrochemical Oxygen Recovery System for Advanced Life Support

The current State of Art (SOA) Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) oxygen recovery system onboard the International Space Station (ISS) is complex, heavy, and power consuming system that recovers approximately 50% of the oxygen (O2) from metabolic carbon dioxide (CO2). For future long-duration missions, O2 recovery systems will need to be highly reliable, efficient, and recover maximum metabolic CO2. A minimum of 75% O2 recovery is required for future O2 recovery systems. Investigations into various technologies to help meet these requirements for exploration are ongoing; however, most of these proposed technologies ultimately result in a more complex system. A Macrofluidic Electrochemical Reactor (MFECR) is one proposed technology development effort currently underway at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) that has the potential to significantly reduce the complexity of ECLSS O2 recovery system. The MFECR operates at standard conditions, giving it an advantage over other technologies being investigated, which require high temperatures resulting in heavy reactors and high power consumption. The MFECR would replace three pieces of hardware for future ECLSS architectures: the current Carbon Dioxide Reduction Assembly (Sabatier reactor), the Plasma Pyrolysis Assembly (PPA), and the Oxygen Generation Assembly (OGA). It is designed to interface directly with the Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly (CDRA) and the Water Processor Assembly (WPA). This allows for a less complex system and higher reliability than the current SOA as well as reduced power, weight and H2O consumption of ECLSS. Here, we will discuss the current technology development efforts of the MFECR and how this technology may aide in the advancement of future long-duration life support systems.

Brown, Brittany R.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Model implementation for dynamic computation of system cost for advanced life support

Life support system designs for long-duration space missions have a multitude of requirements drivers, such as mission objectives, political considerations, cost, crew wellness, inherent mission attributes, as well as many other influences. Evaluation of requirements satisfaction can be difficult, particularly at an early stage of mission design. Because launch cost is a critical factor and relatively easy to quantify, it is a point of focus in early mission design. The method used to determine launch cost influences the accuracy of the estimate. This paper discusses the appropriateness of dynamic mission simulation in estimating the launch cost of a life support system. This paper also provides an abbreviated example of a dynamic simulation life support model and possible ways in which such a model might be utilized for design improvement. c2004 COSPAR. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

NASA Discipline Life Support Systems↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA's Plans for Developing Life Support and Environmental Monitoring and Control Systems

Life Support and Monitoring have recently been reworked in response to the Vision for Space Exploration. The Exploration Life Support (ELS) Project has replaced the former Advanced Life Support Element of the Human Systems Research and Technology Office. Major differences between the two efforts include: the separation of thermal systems into a new stand alone thermal project, deferral of all work in the plant biological systems, relocation of food systems to another organization, an addition of a new project called habitation systems, and overall reduction in the number of technology options due to lower funding. The Advanced Environmental Monitoring and Control (AEMC) Element is retaining its name but changing its focus. The work planned in the ELS and AEMC projects is organized around the three major phases of the Exploration Program. The first phase is the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV). The ELS and AEMC projects will develop hardware for this short duration orbital and trans-lunar vehicle. The second phase is sortie landings on the moon. Life support hardware for lunar surface access vehicles including upgrades of the CEV equipment and technologies which could not be pursued in the first phase due to limited time and budget will be developed. Monitoring needs will address lunar dust issues, not applicable to orbital needs. The ELS and AEMC equipment is of short duration, but has different environmental considerations. The third phase will be a longer duration lunar outpost. This will consist of a new set of hardware developments better suited for long duration life support and associated monitoring needs on the lunar surface. The presentation will show the planned activities and technologies that are expected to be developed by the ELS and AEMC projects for these program phases.

Lawson, B. Michael↗
NASA NTRS1975

Air regenerating and conditioning

Various physicochemical methods of regenerating and conditioning air for spacecraft are described with emphasis on conditions which affect efficiency of the system. Life support systems used in closed, hermetically sealed environments are discussed with references to actual application in the Soviet Soyuz and Voskhod manned spacecraft. Temperature and humidity control, removal of carbon dioxide, oxygen regeneration, and removal of bacteria and viruses are among the factors considered.

Grishayenkov, B. G.↗