Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Rescue Work”

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.

85 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Surface Navigation Using Optimized Waypoints and Particle Swarm Optimization

The design priority for manned space exploration missions is almost always placed on human safety. Proposed manned surface exploration tasks (lunar, asteroid sample returns, Mars) have the possibility of astronauts traveling several kilometers away from a home base. Deviations from preplanned paths are expected while exploring. In a time-critical emergency situation, there is a need to develop an optimal home base return path. The return path may or may not be similar to the outbound path, and what defines optimal may change with, and even within, each mission. A novel path planning algorithm and prototype program was developed using biologically inspired particle swarm optimization (PSO) that generates an optimal path of traversal while avoiding obstacles. Applications include emergency path planning on lunar, Martian, and/or asteroid surfaces, generating multiple scenarios for outbound missions, Earth-based search and rescue, as well as human manual traversal and/or path integration into robotic control systems. The strategy allows for a changing environment, and can be re-tasked at will and run in real-time situations. Given a random extraterrestrial planetary or small body surface position, the goal was to find the fastest (or shortest) path to an arbitrary position such as a safe zone or geographic objective, subject to possibly varying constraints. The problem requires a workable solution 100% of the time, though it does not require the absolute theoretical optimum. Obstacles should be avoided, but if they cannot be, then the algorithm needs to be smart enough to recognize this and deal with it. With some modifications, it works with non-stationary error topologies as well.

Birge, Brian↗
NASA NTRS2013

Next-Generation Maneuvering System with Control-Moment Gyroscopes for Extravehicular Activities Near Low-Gravity Objects

Looking ahead to the human exploration of Mars, NASA is planning for exploration of near-Earth asteroids and the Martian moons. Performing tasks near the surface of such low-gravity objects will likely require the use of an updated version of the Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU) since the surface gravity is not high enough to allow astronauts to walk, or have sufficient resistance to counter reaction forces and torques during movements. The extravehicular activity (EVA) Jetpack device currently under development is based on the Simplified Aid for EVA Rescue (SAFER) unit and has maneuvering capabilities to assist EVA astronauts with their tasks. This maneuvering unit has gas thrusters for attitude control and translation. When EVA astronauts are performing tasks that require ne motor control such as sample collection and equipment placement, the current control system will re thrusters to compensate for the resulting changes in center-of-mass location and moments of inertia, adversely affecting task performance. The proposed design of a next-generation maneuvering and stability system incorporates control concepts optimized to support astronaut tasks and adds control-moment gyroscopes (CMGs) to the current Jetpack system. This design aims to reduce fuel consumption, as well as improve task performance for astronauts by providing a sti er work platform. The high-level control architecture for an EVA maneuvering system using both thrusters and CMGs considers an initial assessment of tasks to be performed by an astronaut and an evaluation of the corresponding human-system dynamics. For a scenario in which the astronaut orbits an asteroid, simulation results from the current EVA maneuvering system are compared to those from a simulation of the same system augmented with CMGs, demonstrating that the forces and torques on an astronaut can be significantly reduced with the new control system actuation while conserving onboard fuel.

Carpenter, Michele↗
NASA NTRS2009

Apollo-Era Life Rafts Save Hundreds of Sailors

The space shuttle is unique among spacecraft in that it glides back to Earth and lands like an airplane, usually touching ground near where it launched at Kennedy Space Center, but sometimes, in poor weather, gliding into the back-up landing site at Dryden Flight Research Center and then catching a ride back to the Cape on the back of a modified Boeing 747. Before NASA began flying the shuttle, though, astronauts had a longer, more involved trip back to base after a mission. Their capsule, called the command module, would plunge through the atmosphere before releasing a series of parachutes that would slow the craft enough for it to land on the water without too significant of an impact. Called a splashdown, this type of landing put the astronauts out in the ocean, where a specially designated U.S. Navy ship would then deploy a helicopter to retrieve the space travelers. Waiting for the rescue, the astronauts would release a highly visible marker dye into the water, then leave the command module and climb aboard a life raft. These early space pioneers had traveled thousands of miles and then landed safely back on Earth. The journey s end was in sight, but they had one more obstacle. The rotor downdraft from the helicopter coming to retrieve them, reaching sometimes as much as 100 knots per hour, was enough to flip a typical flat-bottomed life raft. Not willing to be thwarted after coming so far, NASA engineers began devising a solution. They knew they needed a highly stable inflatable raft capable of riding out the rough winds, and the solution was to make use of the most abundant resource available: water. Engineers at NASA s Johnson Space Center went to work designing and patenting a hydrodynamically stabilized ballast system that would prevent a life raft from tipping in choppy seas and fierce winds.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2017

Personal Rotorcraft Design and Performance with Electric Hybridization

Recent and projected improvements for more or all-electric aviation propulsion systems can enable greater personal mobility, while also reducing environmental impact (noise and emissions). However, all-electric energy storage capability is significantly less than present, hydrocarbon-fueled systems. A system study was performed exploring design and performance assuming hybrid propulsion ranging from traditional hydrocarbon-fueled cycles (gasoline Otto and diesel) to all-electric systems using electric motors generators, with batteries for energy storage and load leveling. Study vehicles were a conventional, single-main rotor (SMR) helicopter and an advanced vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft. Vehicle capability was limited to two or three people (including pilot or crew); the design range for the VTOL aircraft was set to 150 miles (about one hour total flight). Search and rescue (SAR), loiter, and cruise-dominated missions were chosen to illustrate each vehicle and degree of hybrid propulsion strengths and weaknesses. The traditional, SMR helicopter is a hover-optimized design; electric hybridization was performed assuming a parallel hybrid approach by varying degree of hybridization. Many of the helicopter hybrid propulsion combinations have some mission capabilities that might be effective for short range or on-demand mobility missions. However, even for 30 year technology electrical components, all hybrid propulsion systems studied result in less available fuel, lower maximum range, and reduced hover and loiter duration than the baseline vehicle. Results for the VTOL aircraft were more encouraging. Series hybrid combinations reflective of near-term systems could improve range and loiter duration by 30. Advanced, higher performing series hybrid combinations could double or almost triple the VTOL aircrafts range and loiter duration. Additional details on the study assumptions and work performed are given, as well as suggestions for future study effort.

electric motors↗
NASA NTRS2012

Information Systems Coordinate Emergency Management

The rescue crews have been searching for the woman for nearly a week. Hurricane Katrina devastated Hancock County, the southernmost point in Mississippi, and the woman had stayed through the storm in her beach house. There is little hope of finding her alive; the search teams know she is gone because the house is gone. Late at night in the art classroom of the school that is serving as the county s emergency operations center, Craig Harvey is discussing the search with the center s commander. Harvey is the Chief Operating Officer of a unique company called NVision Solutions Inc., based at NASA s Stennis Space Center in Bay St. Louis, only a couple of miles away. He and his entire staff have set up a volunteer operation in the art room, supporting the emergency management efforts using technology and capabilities the company developed through its NASA partnerships. As he talks to the commander, Harvey feels an idea taking shape that might lead them to the woman s location. Working with surface elevation data and hydrological principles, Harvey creates a map showing how the floodwaters from the storm would have flowed along the topography of the region around the woman s former home. Using the map, search crews find the woman s body in 15 minutes. Recovering individuals who have been lost is a sad reality of emergency management in the wake of a disaster like Hurricane Katrina in 2005. But the sooner answers can be provided, the sooner a community s overall recovery can take place. When damage is extensive, resources are scattered, and people are in dire need of food, shelter, and medical assistance, the speed and efficiency of emergency operations can be the key to limiting the impact of a disaster and speeding the process of recovery. And a key to quick and effective emergency planning and response is geographic information. With a host of Earth-observing satellites orbiting the globe at all times, NASA generates an unmatched wealth of data about our ever-changing planet. This information can be captured, analyzed, and visualized by geographic information systems (GIS) to produce maps, charts, and other tools that can reveal information essential to a wide variety of applications including emergency management. Knowing precise, real-time information about the size, location, environmental conditions, and resulting damage of an event like a flood or wildfire as well as the location and numbers of emergency responders and other resources contributes directly to the effectiveness of disaster mitigation. The need for such information is also evident when responding to homeland security threats, such as a terrorist attack. Recognizing the value of its geospatial information resources for this and other purposes, in 1998 Stennis and the state of Mississippi partnered to form what became the Enterprise for Innovative Geospatial Solutions (EIGS) industry cluster, supporting the growth of remote sensing and GIS-based research and business. As part of EIGS, several companies partnered with NASA through dual use and Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) contracts. Among those was NVision.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A New Control Paradigm: Multiple Aircraft Controlled by Multiple Operators

Remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) are becoming more and more prevalent in the aerospace operations. This is true in a number of diverse domains; urban air mobility, medical product delivery, infrastructure inspection, high altitude pseudo-satellites, search and rescue, auto cargo and several other applications. One aspect that all of these share in common is the need for scalability to be viable and continue to grow. The Association of Uncrewed Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) develops an annual economic report. They project that in the first three years of integration more than 70,000 jobs will be created in the US alone, with an economic impact of more than $13.6 billion. This benefit will grow through 2025 when we foresee more than 100,000 jobs created and economic impact of $82 billion. For many of these domains to reach these levels and have the scalability needed, they will require a remote pilot to control multiple aircraft (1:N) or the extension of that, multiple pilots controlling multiple aircraft (m:N). This is a new control paradigm that raises multiple issues in various areas. The issues include regulatory, technical, safety, community acceptance and Human Factors. Human factors issues include displays, pilot workload, pilot situation awareness just to name a few. This panel brings together researchers, developers and operators that have been working in the area of m:N. They will discuss the need, the issues and some potential solutions.

multi-vehicle control↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Preliminary Assessment of Cognition and Fatigue During Simulated Lunar Surface Extravehicular Activities

Introduction: Artemis astronauts will be required to complete more rigorous Extravehicular Activity (EVA) schedules than during ever before. While new spacesuits are designed to sustain high physical workloads during exploration EVAs (xEVA), crewmembers must also sustain cognitive performance throughout xEVA timelines. It is therefore necessary to characterize the effects of surface xEVA tasks and timelines on cognition and fatigue. Methods: This study utilized NASA Johnson Space Center’s Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) to simulate lunar gravity and assess xEVA tasks and cognitive performance. Two subjects completed two ~5-hour EVAs in a pressurized Mark III spacesuit, completing simulated lander operations, cable routing, crew rescue, geology, payload relocation, and traverses. Subjects completed two cognitive assessments (Digit-Symbol Substitution Task (DSST) and Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT)) before the first and after the second simulated EVA to assess effects of xEVA tasks on processing speed and vigilant attention. Additionally, sleep (e.g., quality, duration, and efficiency) was monitored (Oura Ring) for ≥7 days prior to the simulated EVAs, as well as between each EVA, to account for possible effects of sleep decrements on cognitive metrics. Results: Cognitive performance changed minimally from pre to post EVA for both DSST (response time (RT): S1 Δ129.1ms, S2 Δ40.7ms; Accuracy: S1 preEVA = 1.0, S1 postEVA = 0.98, S2 preEVA = 1.0, S2 postEVA = 1.0) and PVT (S1 PVT RT Δ17.7 ms, S2 PVT RT Δ-2.7 ms). Subjects’ sleep duration immediately prior to EVA showed minimal deviation from baseline (Δhrs; S1 preEVA1= + 0.67, S1 preEVA2 = -.03, S2 preEVA1 = - 1.1, S2 preEVA2 = -1.39) and efficiency (Δ%; S1 preEVA1 = 0.09, S1 preEVA2 = 9.54, S2 preEVA1 = 0, S2 preEVA2= 12). Notably, sleep waketime shifted earlier for one subject by ~1 hr which may have impacted performance. Conclusion: Understanding the impacts of xEVA workloads on cognitive performance will be instrumental to future exploration mission planning and success. Future work will expand the subject pool and test new spacesuit designs to better characterize cognitive performance and impacts of sleep during simulated xEVA and inform modeling and prediction capabilities for future Artemis xEVA planning.

Taylor E. Schlotman↗
NASA NTRS1992

Assured crew return vehicle post landing configuration design and test

The 1991-1992 senior Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Design class continued work on the post landing configurations for the Assured Crew Return Vehicle (ACRV) and the Emergency Egress Couch (EEC). The ACRV will be permanently docked to Space Station Freedom, fulfilling NASA's commitment of Assured Crew Return Capability in the event of an accident or illness aboard Space Station Freedom. The EEC provides medical support and a transportation surface for an incapacitated crew member. The objective of the projects was to give the ACRV Project Office data to feed into their feasibility studies. Four design teams were given the task of developing models with dynamically and geometrically scaled characteristics. Groups one and two combined effort to design a one-fifth scale model of the Apollo Command Module derivative, an on-board flotation system, and a lift attachment point system. This model was designed to test the feasibility of a rigid flotation and stabilization system and to determine the dynamics associated with lifting the vehicle during retrieval. However, due to priorities, it was not built. Group three designed a one-fifth scale model of the Johnson Space Center (JSC) benchmark configuration, the Station Crew Return Alternative Module (SCRAM) with a lift attachment point system. This model helped to determine the flotation and lifting characteristics of the SCRAM configuration. Group four designed a full scale EEC with changeable geometric and dynamic characteristics. This model provided data on the geometric characteristics of the EEC and on the placement of the CG and moment of inertia. It also gave the helicopter rescue personnel direct input to the feasibility study.

Anderson, Loren A.↗
NASA NTRS1962

VISUAL CONTROL OF RENDEZVOUS

Space rendezvous involving human occupants will be required in many phases of space flight. In order that rendezvous capability be concurrent with other phases of manned space flight to insure that such tasks as the rotation and addition of crews for manned space station, supply of stations and launching complexes for deep-space probes, and the emergency rescue of personnel may be carried out, it is desirable to determine the ability of a human pilot to control the rendezvous maneuver. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has conducted a study program to determine vehicle requirements and control techniques for a number of proposed methods for performing piloted space rendezvous. The final step in each phase of the rendezvous study program has been a simulation of the man-machine combination to test its feasibility. Initially, an analytical study was conducted to determine a range of conditions that would exist at the beginning of the terminal phase of rendezvous (ref. 1). Piloted systems were investigated for rendezvous control using these initial conditions. One such study of piloted rendezvous in which all the required control information was displayed to the simulator pilot on instruments is presented in reference 2. While the control of the rendezvous maneuver by use of the instrument display was shown to be feasible, the sufficiently accurate measurement of the necessary information to operate the instrument was realized to be a difficult problem. Consideration was therefore given to the possibility of maneuvering range and range rate required for the control of the rendezvous from visual sightings made during the initial control application. To provide this capability, an analytical study was made. This analytical study, presented in reference 3, derived three techniques for obtaining range and range rate visually and conducted a simplified preliminary situation to test the three analytical techniques. The study reported herein is a continuation of the simulation work begun in reference 3, and is aimed at determining the ability of a pilot to use visual information to reduce or eliminate the need for some or all of the data that would normally be displayed on instruments.

Rendezvous↗
NASA NTRS2018

Small Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Flight Testing of Enabling Vehicle Technologies for the UAS Traffic Management Project

Small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) have been studied and results indicate that there is a large array of highly-beneficial applications. These applications are too numerous to list, but include search and rescue, fire spotting, precision agriculture, etc. to name a few. Typically sUAS vehicles weigh less than 55 pounds and will be performing flight operations in the presence of manned aircraft and other sUAS. Certain sUAS applications, such as package delivery, will include operations in the close proximity of the general public. The full benefit from sUAS is contingent upon the resolution of several technological areas to enable free and widespread use of these vehicles. Technological areas in question include, but are not limited to: autonomous sense and avoid and deconfliction of sUAS from other sUAS and manned aircraft, communications and interfaces between the vehicle and human operators, and high-reliability autonomous systems. The NASA UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project is endeavoring to develop a traffic management system and concept of operations for these types of vehicles. An extensive sUAS flight test effort was performed to partially address vehicle-related technological areas and to shape an understanding of future developmental and test efforts for vehicles intended to use the UTM traffic management system. The flight testing described herein had the following objectives: 1) Install and test Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) systems developed for the automotive industry for potential sense and avoid sUAS applications; 2) Evaluate the use of cellular 4G systems to provide vehicle control; 3) Obtain high-resolution video imagery in support of image-based optical detection sense and avoid systems; 4) Acquire data in fixed-wing flight to support validation and maturation of an autonomous range containment system known as Safeguard in fixed-wing flight. A total of 53 flights were performed over 12 operational days at Beaver Dam Airpark in Elberon, VA. This work was sponsored by the UTM project that is part of the Aviation Operations and Safety Program (AOSP) at NASA.

Glaab, Louis J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Preliminary Assessment of Physical Demand during Simulated Lunar Surface Extravehicular Activities

Returning to the moon requires many advances in current space technology. One major aspect of this development is a new exploration spacesuit (xEMU). Taking lessons learned from Apollo era suitsand the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) used on the International Space Station (ISS), xEMU will have increased mobility, dust mitigation, headspace, glove fit, and life support capabilities. Artemis astronauts in xEMU will complete a far more rigorous Extravehicular Activity (EVA) schedule than Apolloand ISS. Notably, metabolic rates during Apollo lunar EVA tasks were observed to be up to 50% lower than similar tasks performed in a ground analog environment under simulated partial gravity with newer suits. Therefore, understanding the physical demands of lunar surface exploration operations is criticalto ensuring best outcomes operating within the constraints of xEMU and planning for exploration EVA activities. This study utilized the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) to simulate the lunar environment and continuously offload subjects to lunar gravity. Two male subjects completed two days of EVAs wearing the pressurized Mark III spacesuit, completing suit fit and mobility checks, as well as simulated lander operations, cable routing, crew rescue, geology, payload relocation, and traverse tasks in an end-to-end EVA (E2E) task block and standalone (SA) task blocks. We recorded continuous values of metabolic rate (MR) and heart rate (HR) to assess physical demand. During the E2E task block, subjects did not rest between tasks to simulate continuous effort from task to task, as in real EVAs. In comparison, subjects had a 5-minute break after each SA task block to allow for the metabolic rate and heart rate to return to baseline.MR values were categorized as low (≤ 700 BTU/hr), medium (700-1000 BTU/HR), and high (≥ 1000 BTU/hr), while HR values were categorized as low (≤150) and high (>150). During the 16 tasks in the E2E block, subjects averaged low MR in 6% of tasks, medium MR in 47% of tasks, and high MR in 47% of tasks. While MR was consistent between subjects, Subject 1 averaged low HR for 100% of these tasks, while Subject 2 averaged low HR in 44% of tasks. During the 23 tasks in the SA task blocks, subjects averaged low MR in 26% of tasks, medium MR in 52% of tasks, and high MR in 22% of tasks. Again, HR was different between subjects, with subject 1 averaging low HR in 100% of these tasks while subject 2 averaged low HR in 70%. Across all tasks in this study, subjects reached maximum MR and HR values during a 500m traverse at 30% grade in the E2E block (subject 1: 1747 BTU/hr, 150 BPM; subject 2: 1656 BTU/hr, 177 BPM).Understanding the physical demand to complete exploration EVA tasks will be instrumental to the future success of exploration spacesuit designs and missions. Further work in this study will be needed to characterize MR during exploration EVA tasks, including expanding the subject pool and testing new suit designs.

Taylor E Schlotman↗
NASA NTRS2005

Down-to-Earth Benefits of Space Exploration: Past, Present, Future

A ventricular device that helps a weakened heart keep pumping while awaiting a transplant. A rescue tool for extracting victims from dangerous situations such as car wrecks. A video analysis tool used to investigate the bombing at the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta. A sound-differentiation tool for safer air traffic control. A refrigerator that run without electricity or batteries. These are just a few of the spin-offs of NASA technology that have benefited society in recent years. Now, as NASA sets its vision on space exploration, particularly of the moon and Mars, even more benefits to society are possible. This expansion of societal benefits is tied to a new emphasis on technology infusion or spin-in. NASA is seeking partners with industry, universities, and other government laboratories to help the Agency address its specific space exploration needs in five areas: (1) advanced studies, concepts, and tools; (2) advanced materials; (3) communications, computing, electronics, and imaging; (4) software, intelligent systems, and modeling; and (5) power, propulsion, and chemical systems. These spin-in partnerships will offer benefits to U.S. economic development as well as new products for the global market. As a complement to these spin-in benefits, NASA also is examining the possible future spin-outs of the innovations related to its new space exploration mission. A matrix that charts NASA's needs against various business sectors is being developed to fully understand the implications for society and industry of spin-in and spin-out. This matrix already has been used to help guide NASA s efforts to secure spin-in partnerships. This paper presents examples of NASA spin-offs, discusses NASA s present spin-in/spin-out projects for pursuing partnerships, and considers some of the future societal benefits to be reaped from these partnerships. This paper will complement the proposed paper by Frank Schowengerdt on the Innovative Partnerships Program structure and how to work with the PP.

Neumann, Benjamin↗
NASA NTRS1972

Apollo 16 Press Kit

The Apollo 16 spacecraft is scheduled for launch on Apr. 16, 1972 from Complex 39A at the Kennedy Space Center, Florida by the Saturn V launch vehicle. Crewmen are mission commander John W. Young, command module pilot Thomas K. Mattingly II and lunar module pilot Charles M. Duke Jr. Objectives of the mission, to last up to 12 days, as outlined by NASA: to perform selenological inspection, survey and sampling of materials in a preselected region of Descartes using a lunar roving' vehicle; deploy and activate Apollo surface experiments; develop man's capability to work in the lunar environment; obtain photographs of candidate exploration sites; and toconduct inflight experiments and photographic tasks in lunar orbit. Following launch, the spacecraft will reach Earth Parking Orbit and remain in orbit for about two and one-half revolutions prior to Translunar Injection. Next, the Command and Service Module docks with the Lunar Module and the spacecraft "coasts" to the moon. In orbit around the moon, the Command and Service Module/Lunar Module combination will descend to within 50,000 feet of the lunar surface before undocking. The Lunar Module will continue to descend while the Command and Service Module returns to an orbit approximately 60 miles high. Stay time on the lunar surface is scheduled for approximately 73 hours. The ascent stage of the Lunar Module then lifts the astronauts back into lunar orbit where they will dock with the Command/Service Module. The Lunar Module is jettisoned and Transearth Injection follows. Just prior to reentry into the earth's atmosphere, the Service Module is jettisoned, and the astronauts in the Command Module splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. The target point for end-of-mission splashdown is at 05 degrees 0 minutes north latitude and 158 degrees 40 minutes west longitude or approximately 985 nautical miles south of Honolulu, Hawaii. Splashdown is scheduled for Apr. 28, 1972 at 10:30 a.m. Hawaiian Standard Time (2:30 p.m. CST). Recovery forces for Apollo 16, stationed in both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, will consist of three ships, nine aircraft and nearly 1,700 personnel. CTF-130 (Manned Spacecraft Recovery Force, Pacific) forces will be stationed south of Hawaii. Three ships, eight helicopters and three Air Force HC-130H aircraft, and nearly 1,100 personnel, will take part. Task Force 140 (Manned Spacecraft Recovery Force, Atlantic), comprising one ship, six HC-130H aircraft, three helicopters and approximately 300 personnel, will be positioned for possible launch abort operations. Two ships in the Atlantic will also be used for acoustical testing. Other forces, primarily aircraft and personnel of the Air Force Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Service will be on alert around the world for contingency recovery support.

Source record↗