Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Crew”

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 883 records · Page 49
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

Commercial Crew Vehicle Ascent Abort Simulation and Analysis

SpaceX and Boeing have been selected to develop and operate crew vehicles to transport astronauts to and from the International Space Station. Their design work is to be analyzed to ensure that they are meeting all of the safety and operational requirements put forth by NASA. Throughout my time here, I worked familiarized myself with the SpaceX Dragon Abort system, as well as the NASA Human-Systems Integration Requirements (HSIR). This included understanding the different abort scenarios, and how each one could potentially impact the astronaut crew. In addition, I familiarized myself with the simulation developed my NASA to test and analyze the Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) systems developed by SpaceX and Boeing.

Gnam, Christopher↗
NASA NTRS2014

AVCOAT Density Characterization for Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle

The Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) will transport four crew members to and from lunar-class orbital destinations. The first orbital Exploration Flight Test (EFT-1) is scheduled for December 2014 and will provide valuable data on several systems, including the heat shield. The heat shield material is AvcoatTM, a mid-density ablator. Specifically, the heat shield contains a fiberglass-phenolic honeycomb structure filled with an ablative epoxy novolac resin. Post-flight characterization of the EFT-1 thermal protection system will be conducted in order to study the material response and measure the char front of the material. Avcoat density profiling will be conducted to study three critical material zones: char, pyrolysis, and virgin states as a function of material depth. As part of a ground test campaign, Avcoat coupons are tested at the NASA Ames Research Center Arc Jet Complex. The test campaign is set forth to study material response based on environments, perform Avcoat material density characterization, and compare the char depths from the HEAT sensor and density profiling studies. These investigations will then be compared to flight data in order to improve upon TPS material response models.

AVCOAT↗
NASA NTRS2019

A Comparison of ARTEMIS Data with the Lunar Plasma Design Environment for NASA Crewed Missions

NASA’s Gateway will provide the capability for sustaining a human presence in cis-lunar space. Operations of the Gateway will include spacecraft dockings, extra vehicular activities (EVA), and high-power solar arrays. NASA’s experience with the International Space Station highlighted the importance of evaluating spacecraft charging effects for such operations. For crewed spacecraft, which tend to employ the use of dielectric surfaces in this dynamic plasma environment, reliance on spacecraft charging simulation packages, such as the NASA/Air Force Spacecraft Charging Analyzer Program (Nascap-2k) [Mandell et al., 2006] and Spacecraft Plasma Interaction System (SPIS) [Roussel et al., 2008], is required to understand the risks to hardware and humans. The variability in the lunar plasma environment as the Moon revolves around the Earth, lunar wake effects, and a strong dependency on photoemission and secondary electron emission creates challenges for spacecraft charging analysis. The Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) [NASA, MSFC] is the primary resource for space environments affecting NASA’s crewed missions, and the DSNE provides plasma environments in a standard form for input into simulation packages. NASA developed the existing lunar plasma environment using data from Geotail [Nishida, 1994] along with published lunar plasma wake models [Halekas et al., 2005] based on Lunar Prospector. Since 2011, NASA’s twin Acceleration Reconnection Turbulence & Electrodynamics of Moon’s Interaction with the Sun (ARTEMIS) satellites [Angelopoulos, 2010] have been collecting high resolution plasma and fields observations within the lunar plasma environment providing a much larger dataset of the plasma properties in cislunar space. This research compares the existing lunar plasma environment definition with ARTEMIS data and makes recommendations on the refinement of the environment definition for future lunar missions.

ARTEMIS mission↗
NASA NTRS2019

Demonstration Testing for Ground Servicing of the Commercial Crew Vehicle Emergency Breathing Air Assembly

The new Commercial crew vehicle (CCV) Breathing Air Assembly (CEBAA) is a Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel (COPV) filled with high-pressure air, which is designed to provide portable emergency breathing air for up to five crew in the event of an ammonia leak aboard the International Space Station (ISS). Industrially, several common methods of delivering breathing air exist; however, ground processing constraints and flight requirements necessitate the more unusual approach of servicing a COPV with high purity gaseous nitrogen and oxygen serially to achieve a specific mixture of breathing air at approximately 4000 PSIA. A dwell period allows the gases to mix before sampling for composition verification. The novelty of this approach led to concerns about acceptable gas mixing and the ability to deliver accurate gas compositions. Tests examining mixing rate over a series of post-servicing dwell periods were conducted to determine the optimal time for achieving a homogeneous mixture. Further testing was conducted to examine process accuracy using temperature-pressure load criteria to target a specific concentration of oxygen and nitrogen. Test results show that while some stratification of nitrogen and oxygen was observed, a seven-day dwell is adequate time to achieve an acceptable level of mixing, and that existing ground support equipment can accurately service CEBAA COPVs to the required temperature, pressure and composition for flight.

Active Thermal↗
NASA NTRS2019

Demonstration Testing for Ground Servicing of the Commercial Crew Vehicle Emergency Breathing Air Assembly

The new Commercial crew vehicle (CCV) Emergency Breathing Air Assembly (CEBAA) is a Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel (COPV) filled with high-pressure air, which is designed to provide portable emergency breathing air for up to five crew in the event of an ammonia leak aboard the International Space Station (ISS). Industrially, several common methods of delivering breathing air exist; however, ground processing constraints and flight requirements necessitate the more unusual approach of servicing a COPV with high purity gaseous nitrogen and oxygen serially to achieve a specific mixture of breathing air at approximately 4000 PSIA. A dwell period allows the gases to mix before sampling for composition verification. The novelty of this approach led to concerns about acceptable gas mixing and the ability to deliver accurate gas compositions. Tests examining mixing rate over a series of post-servicing dwell periods were conducted to determine the optimal time for achieving a homogeneous mixture. Further testing was conducted to examine process accuracy using temperature-pressure load criteria to target a specific concentration of oxygen and nitrogen. Test results show that while some stratification of nitrogen and oxygen was observed, a seven-day dwell is adequate time to achieve an acceptable level of mixing, and that existing ground support equipment can accurately service CEBAA COPVs to the required temperature, pressure and composition for flight.

Active Thermal↗
NASA NTRS2019

Development of a Novel Helmet Support Assembly for NASA Orion Crew Survival Suit

Orion Spacecraft water landing environments have necessitated the design and testing of a novel Helmet Support Assembly (HSA) as part of the NASA Orion Crew Survival Systems (OCSS) launch and re-entry spacesuit. A series of development sled tests using 5 th female, 50th male, and 95th male Hybrid III Anthropometric Test Devices (ATDs) simulated worst case water landings and identified the need for an integrated suit countermeasure to control the helmet during dynamic loading. Initial prototype countermeasures rigidly restrained the helmet keeping the helmet in place as desired, but led to large force and moment transmission to the upper neck. Further development led to a flexible HSA which used high-strength steel wire contoured to the size-matched ATD thorax and attached to both the front and rear of the neck ring. The selected wire diameter and contoured shape provided some ability to flex under the expected worst-case dynamic loads. The existing shoulder harness was used to restrain the helmet motion during “eyeballs out/down” loading while also attempting to prevent head-to-helmet contact in “eyeballs down” spinal-axis loading. A new small prototype helmet was also developed and tested for the 5th and 50th ATDs with both HSA devices. Dynamic impact tests were conducted on the HIA (Horizontal Impulse Accelerator) at Wright Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB) under simulated off-nominal landing conditions using a representative Orion seat and 5-point harness. For each ATD size, peak Neck Injury Criteria (Nij) were compared to equivalent sled tests with an unsuited ATD configuration. Adding a helmet without attempting to control motion increased peak Nij values for all ATD sizes. The use of the rigid countermeasure showed decreased peak Nij results for the 5th female, but increased peak Nij values for both 50th configurations and the 95th male ATDs. By comparison, the flexible HSA showed reduced peak Nij values for all ATD sizes. Overall, this series of dynamic impact tests identified a risk of increased crew neck loading when under- or over-restraining the helmet during simulated Orion water landings and also demonstrated an effective strategy to mitigate those loads with a compliant HSA design.

Safety↗
NASA NTRS2019

Integrated Research Plan to Assess the Combined Effects of Space Radiation, Altered Gravity, and Isolation and Confinement on Crew Health and Performance: Problem Statement

Future crewed exploration missions to Mars could last up to three years and will expose astronauts to unprecedented environmental challenges. Challenges to the nervous system during these missions will include factors of: space radiation that can damage sensitive neurons in the central nervous system (CNS); isolation and confinement can affect cognition and behavior; and altered gravity that will change the astronauts’ perception of their environment and their spatial orientation, and will affect their coordination, balance, and locomotion. In the past, effects of spaceflight stressors have been characterized individually. However, long-term, simultaneous exposure to multiple stressors will produce a range of interrelated behavioral and biological effects that have the potential to adversely affect operationally relevant crew performance. These complex environmental challenges might interact synergistically and increase the overall risk to the health and performance of the astronaut. Therefore, NASA’s Human Research Program (HRP) has directed an integrated approach to characterize and mitigate the risk to the CNS from simultaneous exposure to these multiple spaceflight factors. The proposed research strategy focuses on systematically evaluating the relationships among three existing research risks associated with spaceflight: Risk of Acute (In-flight) and Late Central Nervous System Effects from Radiation (CNS), Risk of Adverse Cognitive or Behavioral Conditions and Psychiatric Disorders (BMed), and Risk of Impaired Control of Spacecraft/Associated Systems and Decreased Mobility Due to Vestibular/Sensorimotor Alterations Associated with Spaceflight (SM). NASA’s HRP approach is intended to identify the magnitude and types of interactions as they affect behavior, especially as it relates to operationally relevant performance (e.g., performance that depends on reaction time, procedural memory, etc.). In order to appropriately characterize this risk of multiple spaceflight environmental stressors, there is a recognition of the need to leverage research approaches using appropriate animal models and behavioral constructs. Very little has been documented on the combined effects of altered gravity, space radiation, and other psychological and cognitive stressors on the CNS. Preliminary evidence from rodents suggest that a combination of a minimum of exposures to even two of three stressors of: simulated space radiation, simulated microgravity, and simulated isolation and confinement, have produced different and more pronounced biological and performance effects than exposure to these same stressors individually. Structural and functional changes to the CNS of rodents exposed to transdisciplinary combined stressors indicate that important processes related to information processing are likely altered including impairment of exploratory and risk taking behaviors, as well as executive function including learning, memory, and cognitive flexibility — all of which may be linked to changes in related operational relevant performance. The fully integrated research plan outlines approaches to evaluate how combined, potentially synergistic, impacts of simultaneous exposures to spaceflight hazards will affect an astronaut’s CNS and their operationally relevant performance during future exploration missions, including missions to the Moon and Mars. The ultimate goals are to derive risk estimates for the combined, potentially synergistic, effects of the three major spaceflight hazards that will establish acceptable maximum decrement or change in a physiological or behavioral parameters during or after spaceflight, the acceptable limit of exposure to a spaceflight factor, and to evaluate strategies to mitigate any associated decrements in operationally relevant performance.

Steinberg, Susan L.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Entry, Descent, and Landing technological barriers and crewed MARSvehicle performance analysis

Mars has been explored historically only by robotic crafts, but a crewed mission encompasses several new engineering challenges – high ballistic coefficient entry, hypersonic decelerators, guided entry for reaching intended destinations within acceptable margins for error in the landing ellipse, and payload mass are all critical factors for evaluation. A comprehensive EDL parametric analysis has been conducted in support of a high mass landing architecture by evaluating three types of vehicles −70° Sphere Cone, Ellipsled and SpaceX hybrid architecture called Red Dragon as potential candidate options for crewed entry vehicles. Aerocapture at the Martian orbit of about 400 km and subsequent Entry-from-orbit scenarios were investigated at velocities of 6.75 km/s and 4 km/s respectively. A study on aerocapture corridor over a range of entry velocities (6–9 km/s) suggests that a hypersonic L/D of 0.3 is sufficient for a Martian aerocapture. Parametric studies conducted by varying aeroshell diameters from 10 m to 15 m for several entry masses up to 150 mt are summarized and results reveal that vehicles with entry masses in the range of about 40–80 mt are capable of delivering cargo with a mass on the order of 5–20 mt. For vehicles with an entry mass of 20 mt to 80 mt, probabilistic Monte Carlo analysis of 5000 cases for each vehicle were run to determine the final landing ellipse and to quantify the statistical uncertainties associated with the trajectory and attitude conditions during atmospheric entry. Strategies and current technological challenges for a human rated Entry, Descent, and Landing to the Martian surface are presented in this study.

Prabhakar Subrahmanyam↗
NASA NTRS2020

Effective Crewed Surface Science near the Lunar South Pole: Some Illumination Considerations

Exploration near the lunar South Pole has substantial scientific promise for expanding our understanding of the Moon beyond what has been accomplished by Apollo and other lunar missions. An obvious difference from the Apollo experience is that the polar location for Artemis will guarantee the Sun is going to be low above the horizon. A great deal of excellent work has been, and is being, done on the availability of light (“yes/no”) for exploration purposes [e.g., 1-4]. However, we raise the additional consideration of the qualitative effects of low solar elevation on crew traverses, crew observations, and other science measurements [see also 5, though ground rules of that study presumed higher Sun]. We emphasize that our view is that these issues are unlikely to be mission objective-threatening, particularly if adequately considered in advance.

C. I. Fassett↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Open Innovation in Reducing Risk to Crews

In the exploration of destinations outside of Earth's neighborhood, specifically Mars, scientific and engineering inquiries have occurred by two means; observations from satellites and observations by landed spacecraft. Satellite observations (Mariner, MRO, Mars Odyssey, provide global-scale spatial and temporal data while landed spacecraft (Viking, Mars Pathfinder, Spirit, Opportunity, Phoenix Mars Lander) investigate highly localized areas of the surface of the planet. In preparation for human exploration, extensive knowledge of the surface and atmospheric environments should be known before the first human leaves Earth. The primary goal of performing reconnaissance on Mars on a sub-global scale is to know as much as possible about the environment to which crews will be subjected. At the current rate of launching and landing probes to Mars, it will take a very long time to understand the surface and atmospheric conditions associated with the regions where prospective crews may land. Meanwhile electronics and electrical systems are rapidly getting smaller. One can argue that to acquire the knowledge of the region, one must take hundreds, maybe thousands of measurements simultaneously. One means to perform such a task is to deploy a swarm of sensors. Such a swarm would perform an in-situ assessment of the region. Imagine a close flyby mission to Mars for example, where mini- to micro-sensors are deposited into the atmosphere over half an orbit or more. The sensors, captured by the atmospheric drag and Martian gravity slowly descend buffeted about by Martian winds and weather until they settle on the surface a great time later (think of how long dust takes to settle). As they descend they communicate a vast array of data; temperature, chemistry, pressure, radiation dose, electric or magnetic properties from a region of the planet and an individual sensor need not measure the same quantity as its neighbors. Initially, they could move at the whim of the environment but later versions could have locomotion or propulsion mechanisms. Humans wouldn't need to decide where the sensors go, the sensors do that for themselves. This is a key strength of a sensor swarm. The intelligence relies on the group not on a decision maker on earth. Real time sensor inputs direct what the swarm considers most interesting to investigate resulting in emergent behavior. We issued a $20,000 challenge to the global innovators to provide solutions as to how such a swarm could be initialized and by what protocols and methodologies by which they operate. Over 400 innovators from 49 countries took a look at the problem, with three receiving partial awards for solutions.

Mel Ferebee↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Elevated CO2 Could Undermine an Exploration Crew's Ability to Independently Respond to Unanticipated, Time- and Safety-Critical Anomalies

Safety and mission critical anomalies are inevitable on NASA exploration missions. Delays and interruptions in communication with Earth-experts drives the requirement that crew resolve some time- and safety-critical anomalies on their own. The HRP, HFBP, Human-System Integration Architecture (HSIA) risk refers to the possibility that, during communication blackouts and thus the absence of vast ground expertise, a small crew may not be able to independently respond to unanticipated, time-critical malfunctions or to detect safety critical procedure errors.

carbon dioxide↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Systems Engineering to Develop an Integrated Crew Health and Performance System to Mitigate Risk for Human Exploration Missions

New space exploration missions are currently being designed to take humanity beyond Low EarthOrbit (LEO) to cis-lunar space, the lunar surface, and eventually to Mars. These missions carryincreased risks due to a number of factors, including distance from Earth, exposure to deep spacehazards, reduced capacity and ability to resupply and evacuate, and increased communication delays.As distance from Earth grows and mission length increases, a growing proportion of overall missionrisk can be attributed to the “human system.” Almost twenty years ago, the Institute of Medicine in theUnited States recommended the early and complete integration of the human system into thespacecraft and mission design process to mitigate this increased risk inherent in exploration missions.Exploration missions will require increasing levels of crew self-sufficiency that will challenge thecurrent operational paradigms established in LEO. Enabling progressive Earth independence requiresmanagement of the increasingly complex interactions among spacecraft systems and integration of allthe data and functions that affect human health and performance into one coordinated system – theCrew Health and Performance (CHP) system. This system is a critical spacecraft system that isanalogous to other systems such as propulsion, guidance and navigation, or avionics. Design andintegration of the CHP system requires the evidence-based merger of typically disparate disciplinessuch as medicine, human factors, and physiological support system design, using systems engineering(SE) practices. The approach described here enables spacecraft and mission designers to align thescope of a CHP system with mission specific requirements, decrease risk to the crew, and increase theprobability of mission success.

Kerry Mcguire↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evaluating the Use of High-Fidelity Simulator Research Methods to Study Airline Flight Crew Resilience

As it evolves, aviation will continue to require integration of a wide range of safety systems and practices, some of which are already in place and others that are yet to be developed. New concepts in system safety thinking have emerged to consider not only what may go wrong, but also what can be learned when things go right during commercial flight operations. Taken together, these complementary perspectives form a more comprehensive approach to systemsafety thinking that can help to recognize and preserve the resilient performance capabilities currently provided by humans. A need exists, however, for research methods to enable better understanding of the human contributions to aviation safety. NASA’s System-Wide Safety Project supports research on using flight simulation methods to study operator resilience and safety-producing behaviors. Building on prior NASA efforts investigating procedural non-adherences during area navigation standard terminal route arrivals, a high-fidelity commercial aviation line operational simulation (LOS) experiment has been designed to study how flight crews anticipate, monitor for, respond to, and learn from expected and unexpected disturbances during these operations. A diverse set of LOS scenarios were developed to simulate highly realistic, complex, but routinely encountered operational situations. Each scenario provided multiple opportunities to collect data on how flight crews manage threats and errors, as well as novel opportunities to observe resilient and safety-producing behaviors. The experimental design, implications for the study of safety-producing behaviors using simulation, and considerations for airline pilot training will be discussed.

Chad L Stephens↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Hybrid NEP-Chemical Vehicle and Propulsion Technology Study for Crewed Mars Missions

Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) is a suite of technologies with the potential to enable crewed opposition-class missions to Mars. Each subsystem comprising an NEP system has multiple technology options that present tradeoffs in vehicle sizing and technology development risk. Multiple vehicle concepts have been studied in the past and are currently being studied at NASA. Three models have been developed to illustrate the impact of key technology parameters on overall sizing for a crewed Mars transportation vehicle. Vehicle mass required to close the mission as a function of NEP system alpha (kWe/kg) and specific impulse (Isp) is estimated with a detailed trajectory model. A power system mass model estimates alpha as a function of power and radiator mass assumption. A power conversion system thermodynamic model predicts the radiator area required to close a Brayton cycle power conversion system. Combined with the architecture mass required for mission closure, the radiator area and alpha model provide insight into how technology development may impact the mission. Our focus is on parametric sweeps of the whole design space rather than any particular point design. Results from the mission model comparing electric propulsion technology (Hall, Ion, Magnetoplasmadynamic) and both 2039 and 2042 opposition-class mission launch windows are included. The results of the study illustrate the technology parameters that can result in mission closure and illustrate where the architecture is sensitive to variations in technology performance or requirements.

Matthew Duchek↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Crewed Mars Mission Analysis, Part II: The Trajectory Strikes Back

Crewed missions to Mars present a challenging problem involving strong interactions between a variety of spacecraft systems. Design and architecture decisions made by one system can have powerful implications for another. Siloed subsystem development and optimization efforts are unlikely to generate optimal results for the integrated system and may lead to counterproductive investments at the mission and system level. Mismatched assumptions between different subsystems can also negatively impact the final result. Integrated systems analysis, trade studies, and sensitivity analysis are a critical element of successful Mars mission design. Previous work examined the linkages between Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) loop closure, food water content, spares Probability of Sufficiency (POS), and other factors by performing an integrated mass and cost assessment of a variety of Mars habitat and transportation system designs. This paper expands upon that work by evaluating the impact of mission duration, trajectory, and propulsion technology alongside key habitat variables. Transportation system and trajectory design decisions have enormous impacts on overall system mass, and the impacts of those decisions are themselves sensitive to the mass of the habitat that is being transported. This paper examines a variety of mission cases and evaluates total departure mass for each case. An estimate of relative costs for specific cases is also provided. The results are discussed, with an emphasis on the sensitivity of mass, cost, and other figures of merit to key parameters. Interactions and dependencies between various decisions, particularly those that relate to technology investments, are also highlighted. Overall, the various elements, systems, and subsystems required to support human spaceflight should not be optimized and evaluated in isolation, but instead should be analyzed as part of an integrated system. This paper demonstrates how integrated analysis can improve system understanding and lead to more optimal and effective crewed exploration systems.

Human Spaceflight↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrated Crewed Mars Mission Analysis, Part II: The Trajectory Strikes Back

Crewed missions to Mars present a challenging problem involving strong interactions between a variety of spacecraft systems. Design and architecture decisions made by one system can have powerful implications for another. Siloed subsystem development and optimization efforts are unlikely to generate optimal results for the integrated system and may lead to counterproductive investments at the mission and system level. Mismatched assumptions between different subsystems can also negatively impact the final result. Integrated systems analysis, trade studies, and sensitivity analysis are a critical element of successful Mars mission design. Previous work examined the linkages between Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) loop closure, food water content, spares Probability of Sufficiency (POS), and other factors by performing an integrated mass and cost assessment of a variety of Mars habitat and transportation system designs. This paper expands upon that work by evaluating the impact of mission duration, trajectory, and propulsion technology alongside key habitat variables. Transportation system and trajectory design decisions have enormous impacts on overall system mass, and the impacts of those decisions are themselves sensitive to the mass of the habitat that is being transported. This paper examines a variety of mission cases and evaluates total departure mass for each case. An estimate of relative costs for specific cases is also provided. The results are discussed, with an emphasis on the sensitivity of mass, cost, and other figures of merit to key parameters. Interactions and dependencies between various decisions, particularly those that relate to technology investments, are also highlighted. Overall, the various elements, systems, and subsystems required to support human spaceflight should not be optimized and evaluated in isolation, but instead should be analyzed as part of an integrated system. This paper demonstrates how integrated analysis can improve system understanding and lead to more optimal and effective crewed exploration systems.

Human Spaceflight↗
NASA NTRS2022

Apollo Crew Loads Data Mining

INTRODUCTION Human exposure data to dynamic loads in spaceflight are sparse not only because very few crewmembers have flown in space, but also because much of the historic data is no longer readily available. Earth and Moon landings of the Apollo missions are unique and valuable for understanding human tolerance in water landing conditions for both short-duration and long-duration crewmembers as well as informing crew tolerance in standing postures during planetary landings. The goal of this task was to find relevant Apollo data to better understand human tolerance in these scenarios, in order to apply this knowledge to future missions. METHODS The goal of this task was to recover time history data from dynamic phases of flight from crewed Apollo missions. The first phase of the task was to search available records at JSC and other centers to locate the appropriate records at the National Archives in Fort Worth, TX. Once the possible data locations were located, it was planned that one researcher would travel to the National Archives in Fort Worth, TX to collect the relevant Apollo data. Once the data was retrieved, they would be digitized for future use and evaluation, and archived within the Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations (H-3PO) laboratory within the Human Health and Performance Directorate. These data would be used to assess the feasibility and acceptability of current standards and vehicle design requirements for lunar and Mars missions. Additionally, any medical monitoring required, or physiological changes noted in crewmembers based on dynamic loads would be documented for future use. RESULTS Relevant records were found at Ft. Worth, TX and College Park, MD using the National Archives Online Catalog. In addition to the online catalog, an Archives staff member was able to share an additional inventory list of NASA JSC records held in Ft. Worth, TX. Due to COVID-19, NASA has only recently allowed non-mission essential travel. In addition, the National Archives has also been closed to the public since March 2020. Because of this, travel to the National Archives to search records there has not been possible. CONCLUSION The findings include collections at the National Archives at both Ft. Worth, TX and College Park, MD that could possibly hold the data we are looking for. Unfortunately, the descriptions of each collection are very broad. Though we are hopeful that relevant data is stored in one of these collections, we cannot be sure that we will find what we are looking for. At this time, it is not clear when the Archives will reopen to the public or when NASA will allow travel. Travel to the Archives has been postponed, and will be reassessed at a future date.

T Reiber↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Crew Health & Performance Capability Development for Exploration: 2021 to 2022 Overview

Radiation, reduced gravity, distance from earth, isolation and confinement, and habitation within artificially created and controlled life support environments are hazards that present risk to human space explorers. In many cases, research is required to characterize those risks and help identify risk mitigation strategies. Where new capabilities are necessary to maintain crew health and performance (CHP) during exploration missions, a multi-step process is followed: 1) a Capability Gap is defined; 2) a plan or “roadmap” to develop that capability is established based on agency priorities and anticipated mission development timelines; and 3) work defined on the roadmap is then initiated as resources allow, with the objective that the capability will be available in time to support the future mission. Over the past year, significant progress has occurred in CHP technology development, ground testbed development, ground-based testing, and in preparations for ISS technology demonstrations. This paper provides a development update in the following capability areas: crew health countermeasures, EVA physiology and performance, food and nutrition, exploration medical capabilities, and radiation. Project overviews will include descriptions of CHP development activities over the past year, the human system risks and capability gaps being targeted, as well as planned follow-on activities and anticipated program infusion points.

Andrew F J Abercromby↗