Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Training Time”

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 1,027 records · Page 57
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1991

The real-time operations of the Space Shuttle Orbiter during rendezvous and proximity operations

The Space Shuttle Orbiter is the only U.S. spacecraft in operation today that routinely performs an orbital rendezvous with another spacecraft. The trajectory planning and training of both flight crews and ground operations personnel required to achieve a 100 percent success rate is considerable. The preflight planning and training can be reduced through very simple design considerations of a new space vehicle.

Dougherty, Andrew↗
NASA NTRS1979

Salyut-6--Soyuz-29: Our commentary, the crew and the station

A newspaper article written by an assistant flight director which stresses the importance of cosmonaut training is presented. The preliminary stage of training is discussed, and the training of a crewmaker on a real spacecraft is briefly covered. The success in training foreign cosmonauts by Soviets is also discussed. The author feels that training is even more important today than it was seven or eight years ago because of the increased complexity of the experiments and the length of time a cosmonaut spends in space now.

Kravets, V.↗
NASA NTRS1981

A study of ASRS reports involving general aviation and weather encounters

Consideration is given to the nature and characteristics of problems involving dissemination of weather information, use of this information by pilots, its adequacy for the purpose intended, the ability of the air traffic control system to cope with weather related incidents, and the various aspects of pilot behavior, aircraft equipment, and NAVAIDS affecting flights in which weather figures. It is concluded from the study that skill and training deficiencies of general aviation pilots are not major factors in weather related occurrences, nor is lack of aircraft equipment. Major problem causes are identified with timely and easily interpreted weather information, judgement and attitude factors of pilots, and the functioning of the air traffic control system.

Rockwell, T. H.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Automating the process of estimating spacecraft mass

To help prevent the problem of mass reduction late in a spacecraft development program, the process of estimating spacecraft mass has been formulated in algorithmic form and incorporated in software that will allow trained users to interface with the integral design parameters data base interactively. The software will use historical data to extrapolate future values of a given time-dependent parameter and be manipulated by a dynamic graphics configuration builder. Future expansions of this work promise to automate the entire conceptual mission design process.

Skinner, D. L.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Development of LANDSAT Derived Forest Cover Information for Integration into Adirondack Park GIS

Based upon observed changes in timber harvest practices partially attributable to forest biomass removable for energy supply purposes, the Adirondack Park Agency began in 1979 a multi-year project to implement a digital geographic information system (GIS). An initial developmental task was an inventory of forest cover information and analysis of forest resource change and availability. While developing the GIS, a pilot project was undertaken to evaluate the usefulness of LANDSAT derived land cover information for this purpose, and to explore the integration of LANDSAT data into the GIS. The prototype LANDSAT analysis project involved: (1) the use of both recent and historic data to derive land cover information for two dates; and (2) comparison of land cover over time to determine quantitative and geographic changes. The "recent data," 1978 full foliage data over portions of four LANDSAT scenes, was classified, using ground truth derived training samples in various forested and non-forested categories. Forested categories include the following: northern hardwoods, pine, spruce-fir, and pine plantation, while nonforested categories include wet-conifer, pasture, grassland, urban, exposed soil, agriculture, and water.

Curran, R. P.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Controller evaluations of the descent advisor automation aid

An automation aid to assist air traffic controllers in efficiently spacing traffic and meeting arrival times at a fix has been developed at NASA Ames Research Center. The automation aid, referred to as the descent advisor (DA), is based on accurate models of aircraft performance and weather conditions. The DA generates suggested clearances, including both top-of-descent point and speed profile data, for one or more aircraft in order to achieve specific time or distance separation objectives. The DA algorithm is interfaced with a mouse-based, menu-driven controller display that allows the air traffic controller to interactively use its accurate predictive capability to resolve conflicts and issue advisories to arrival aircraft. This paper focuses on operational issues concerning the utilization of the DA, specifically, how the DA can be used for prediction, intrail spacing, and metering. In order to evaluate the DA, a real time simulation was conducted using both current and retired controller subjects. Controllers operated in teams of two, as they do in the present environment; issues of training and team interaction will be discussed. Evaluations by controllers indicated considerable enthusiasm for the DA aid, and provided specific recommendations for using the tool effectively.

Tobias, Leonard↗
NASA NTRS1989

Controller evaluations of the descent advisor automation aid

An automation aid to assist air traffic controllers in efficiently spacing traffic and meeting arrival times at a fix has been developed at NASA Ames Research Center. The automation aid, referred to as the descent advisor (DA), is based on accurate models of aircraft performance and weather conditions. The DA generates suggested clearances, including both top-of-descent point and speed profile data, for one or more aircraft in order to achieve specific time or distance separation objectives. The DA algorithm is interfaced with a mouse-based, menu-driven controller display that allows the air traffic controller to interactively use its accurate predictive capability to resolve conflicts and issue advisories to arrival aircraft. This paper focuses on operational issues concerning the utilization of the DA, specifically, how the DA can be used for prediction, intrail spacing, and metering. In order to evaluate the DA, a real time simulation was conducted using both current and retired controller subjects. Controllers operated in teams of two, as they do in the present environment; issues of training and team interaction will be discussed. Evaluations by controllers indicated considerable enthusiasm for the DA aid, and provided specific recommendations for using the tool effectively.

Tobias, Leonard↗
NASA NTRS2009

Use of DSC and DMA to Study Rubber Crystallization as a Possible Cause for a Tear in a Neoprene Glove Used in a Space Shuttle Pressurized Astronaut Suit

The Advanced Crew Escape Suit (ACES) is a pressurized suit normally worn by astronauts during launch and landing phases of Space Shuttle operations. In 2008, a large tear (0.5 -1 in. long, between the pinky and ring finger) in the ACES left-hand glove made of neoprene latex rubber was found during training for Shuttle flight STS-124. An investigation to help determine the cause(s) of the glove tear was headed by the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas. Efforts at JSC to reproduce the actual glove tear pattern by cutting/tearing or rupturing were unsuccessful. Chemical and material property data from JSC such as GC-MS, FTIR, DSC and TGA mostly showed little differences between samples from the torn and control gloves. One possible cause for the glove tear could be a wedding ring/band worn by a male astronaut. Even with a smooth edge, such a ring could scratch the material and initiate the tear observed in the left-hand glove. A decision was later made by JSC to not allow the wearing of such a ring during training or actual flight. Another possible cause for the ACES glove tear is crystallinity induced by strain in the neoprene rubber over a long period of time and use. Neoprene is one several elastomeric materials known to be susceptible to crystallization, and such a process is accelerated with exposure of the material to cold temperatures plus strain. When the temperature is lowered below room temperature, researchers have shown that neoprene crystallization may be maintained at temperatures as high as 45-50 F, with a maximum crystallization rate near 20-25 F (1). A convenient conditioning temperature for inducing neoprene crystallization is a typical freezer that is held near 0 F. For work at the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), samples were cut from several areas/locations (pinky/ring finger crotch, index finger and palm) on each of two pairs of unstrained ACES gloves for DSC and DMA thermal analysis testing. The samples were conditioned in a freezer for various times up to about 14 days. Some rectangular conditioned samples were unstrained, while most were subjected to strains up to 250% with the aid of two slotted aluminum blocks and two aluminum clamps per sample. Trends were observed to correlate DSC data (heat of fusion) and DMA data (linear CTE and stress for iso-strain testing) with: (a) sample location on each glove; and (b) level of strain during conditioning. Control samples cut as is from each glove location were also tested by DSC and DMA.

Wingard, Doug↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA's Space Launch System: Affordability for Sustainability

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Space Launch System (SLS) Program, managed at the Marshall Space Flight Center, is charged with delivering a new capability for human exploration beyond Earth orbit in an austere economic climate. But the SLS value is clear and codified in United States (U.S.) budget law. The SLS Program knows that affordability is the key to sustainability and will provide an overview of initiatives designed to fit within the funding guidelines by using existing engine assets and hardware now in testing to meet a first launch by 2017 within the projected budget. It also has a long-range plan to keep the budget flat, yet evolve the 70-tonne (t) initial lift capability to 130-t lift capability after the first two flights. To achieve the evolved configuration, advanced technologies must offer appropriate return on investment to be selected through the competitive process. For context, the SLS will be larger than the Saturn V that took 12 men on 6 trips for a total of 11 days on the lunar surface some 40 years ago. Astronauts train for long-duration voyages on platforms such as the International Space Station, but have not had transportation to go beyond Earth orbit in modern times, until now. To arrive at the launch vehicle concept, the SLS Program conducted internal engineering and business studies that have been externally validated by industry and reviewed by independent assessment panels. In parallel with SLS concept studies, NASA is now refining its mission manifest, guided by U.S. space policy and the Global Exploration Roadmap, which reflects the mutual goals of a dozen member nations. This mission planning will converge with a flexible heavy-lift rocket that can carry international crews and the air, water, food, and equipment they need for extended trips to asteroids and Mars. In addition, the SLS capability will accommodate very large science instruments and other payloads, using a series of modular fairings and adapters to configure the rocket for the mission. The SLS affordability plan includes streamlining interfaces, applying risk-based insight into contracted work, centralizing systems engineering and integration, and nurturing a learning culture where the question Why? is often asked and the answer "Because we've always done it that way" is rarely heard. The SLS Program will deliver affordable space transportation solutions for the Orion Multi-Purpose Cargo Vehicle s first autonomous certification flight in 2017, followed by a crewed flight in 2021. As this briefing will show, the SLS will offer a global infrastructure asset for robotic and human scouts of all nations.

May, Todd A.↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Saturn System Through the Eyes of Cassini

More than 400 years ago, Galileo Galilei trained his homemade telescope on the night sky and observed that Saturn had two objects closely related to the planet extending on either side. At the time, in 1610, Galileo declared them to be moons. A few decades later, Saturn moon science accelerated at a dizzying pace. Christiaan Huygens first observed Saturn's largest moon Titan in 1655 and was the first to describe the extended moon-like features at Saturn as a disk of material sounding the planet. From 1671 to 1674, Giovanni Cassini discovered the moons lapetus, Rhea, Dione and Tethys. In 1675, Cassini discovered the gap in Saturn's rings that we now know as the Cassini Division. In the space age, before the Cassini-Huygens mission, we had only hints of the discoveries awaiting us at Saturn. Pioneer 11 and Voyagers 1 and 2 conducted flybys decades ago. But these quick encounters didn't allow time for more extensive research. NASA and the European Space Agency created a partnership to orbit a Saturn orbiter (Cassini) and a lander (Huygens) on Titan. Like its namesakes, the Cassini-Huygens mission not only discovered previously unknown moons, but it also helped us understand the science behind their formation, their interactions with the rings, and how truly diverse they are. The Cassini-Huygens mission revolutionized what we know about the Saturn system. The rings of Saturn, the moons, and the planet itself offer irresistible and inexhaustible subjects for intense study, and Cassini-Huygens did not disappoint. The Saturnian system proved to be a rich ground for science exploration and discoveries, and Cassini has been nothing short of a discovery machine. At the time Cassini plunged into Saturn at the end of its mission, it had observed the planet for a little less than half of a Saturn year. But it also orbited the gas giant 293 times, forever changing our understanding of the Saturn system and yielding tremendous insight for understanding the entire Solar System.

Green, James↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assumption Generation for the Verification of Learning-Enabled Autonomous Systems

Providing safety guarantees for autonomous systems is difficultas these systems operate in complex environments that require the use of learning-enabled components, such as deep neural networks (DNNs) for visual perception. DNNs are hard to analyze due to their size (they can have thousands or millions of parameters), lack of formal specifications (DNNs are typically learnt from labeled data, in the absence of any formal or informal requirements), and sensitivity to small changes in the environment. We present an assume-guarantee style compositional approach for the formal verification of system-level safety properties of such autonomous systems. Our insight is that we can analyze the system in the absence of the DNN perception components by automatically synthesizing assumptions on the DNN behaviour that guarantee the satisfaction of the required safety properties. The synthesized assumptions are the weakest in the sense that they characterize the output sequences of all the possible DNNs that, plugged into the autonomous system, guarantee the required safety properties. The assumptions can be leveraged as run-time monitors over a deployed DNN to guarantee the safety of the overall system; they can also be mined to extract local specifications for use during training and testing of DNNs. We illustrate our approach on a case study taken from the autonomous airplanes domain that uses a complex DNN for perception

Autonomous systems↗
NASA NTRS2009

Enhancing Team Performance for Long-Duration Space Missions

Success of exploration missions will depend on skilled performance by a distributed team that includes both the astronauts in space and Mission Control personnel. Coordinated and collaborative teamwork will be required to cope with challenging complex problems in a hostile environment. While thorough preflight training and procedures will equip creW'S to address technical problems that can be anticipated, preparing them to solve novel problems is much more challenging. This presentation will review components of effective team performance, challenges to effective teamwork, and strategies for ensuring effective team performance. Teamwork skills essential for successful team performance include the behaviors involved in developing shared mental models, team situation awareness, collaborative decision making, adaptive coordination behaviors, effective team communication, and team cohesion. Challenges to teamwork include both chronic and acute stressors. Chronic stressors are associated with the isolated and confined environment and include monotony, noise, temperatures, weightlessness, poor sleep and circadian disruptions. Acute stressors include high workload, time pressure, imminent danger, and specific task-related stressors. Of particular concern are social and organizational stressors that can disrupt individual resilience and effective mission performance. Effective team performance can be developed by training teamwork skills, techniques for coping with team conflict, intracrew and intercrew communication, and working in a multicultural team; leadership and teamwork skills can be fostered through outdoor survival training exercises. The presentation will conclude with an evaluation of the special requirements associated with preparing crews to function autonomously in long-duration missions.

Orasanu, Judith M.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Proceedings of the First NASA Ada Users' Symposium

Ada has the potential to be a part of the most significant change in software engineering technology within NASA in the last twenty years. Thus, it is particularly important that all NASA centers be aware of Ada experience and plans at other centers. Ada activity across NASA are covered, with presenters representing five of the nine major NASA centers and the Space Station Freedom Program Office. Projects discussed included - Space Station Freedom Program Office: the implications of Ada on training, reuse, management and the software support environment; Johnson Space Center (JSC): early experience with the use of Ada, software engineering and Ada training and the evaluation of Ada compilers; Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC): university research with Ada and the application of Ada to Space Station Freedom, the Orbital Maneuvering Vehicle, the Aero-Assist Flight Experiment and the Secure Shuttle Data System; Lewis Research Center (LeRC): the evolution of Ada software to support the Space Station Power Management and Distribution System; Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL): the creation of a centralized Ada development laboratory and current applications of Ada including the Real-time Weather Processor for the FAA; and Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC): experiences with Ada in the Flight Dynamics Division and the Extreme Ultraviolet Explorer (EUVE) project and the implications of GSFC experience for Ada use in NASA. Despite the diversity of the presentations, several common themes emerged from the program: Methodology - NASA experience in general indicates that the effective use of Ada requires modern software engineering methodologies; Training - It is the software engineering principles and methods that surround Ada, rather than Ada itself, which requires the major training effort; Reuse - Due to training and transition costs, the use of Ada may initially actually decrease productivity, as was clearly found at GSFC; and real-time work at LeRC, JPL and GSFC shows that it is possible to use Ada for real-time applications.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2006

Leadership Challenges in ISS Operations: Lessons Learned from Junior and Senior Mission Control Personnel

The International Space Station (ISS) is operated by a multi-national, multi-organizational team that is dispersed across multiple locations, time zones, and work schedules. At NASA, both junior and senior mission control personnel have had to find ways to address the leadership challenges inherent in such work, but neither have had systematic training in how to do so. The goals of this study were to examine the major leadership challenges faced by ISS mission control personnel and to highlight the approaches that they have found most effective to surmount them. We pay particular attention to the approaches successfully employed by the senior personnel and to the training needs identified by the junior personnel. We also evaluate the extent to which responses are consistent across the junior and senior samples. Further, we compare the issues identified by our interview survey to those identified by a standardized questionnaire survey of mission control personnel and a contrasting group of space station crewmembers. We studied a sample of 14 senior ISS flight controllers and a contrasting sample of 12 more junior ISS controllers. Data were collected using a semi-structured qualitative interview and content analyzed using an iterative process with multiple coders and consensus meetings to resolve discrepancies. To further explore the meaning of the interview findings, we also conducted new analyses of data from a previous questionnaire study of 13 American astronauts, 17 Russian cosmonauts, and 150 U.S. and 36 Russian mission control personnel supporting the ISS or Mir space stations. The interview data showed that the survey respondents had substantial consensus on several leadership challenges and on key strategies for dealing with them, and they offered a wide range of specific tactics for implementing these strategies. Interview data from the junior respondents will be presented for the first time at the meeting. The questionnaire data showed that the US mission control sample reported a level of support from their management that compared favorably to national norms. American mission control personnel and Russian crewmembers reported higher supervisor support than American crewmembers and Russian mission control personnel. We will present the specific issues underlying these findings and compare and contrast the results from the two datasets. Although specific to space station personnel, our results are consistent with recent management, cultural, and aerospace research. We aim to use our results to improve training for current and future mission control personnel.

Clement, James L.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Exploring the Science Trade Space with the JPL Innovation Foundry A-Team

The JPL Innovation Foundry has established a new approach for exploring, developing, and evaluating early concepts with a group called the Architecture Team (A-Team). The A-Team combines innovative collaborative methods and facilitated sessions with subject matter experts and analysis tools to help mature mission concepts. Science, implementation, and programmatic elements are all considered during an ATeam study. In these studies, Concept Maturity Levels (CML) are used to group methods. These levels include idea generation and capture (CML 1), initial feasibility assessment (CML 2), and trade space exploration (CML 3). Methods used for exploring the science objectives, feasibility, and scope will be described including use of a new technique for understanding the most compelling science, called a Science Return Diagram (SRD). In the process of developing the SRD, gradients in the science trade space are uncovered along with their implications for implementation and mission architecture. Special attention is paid towards developing complete investigations, establishing a series of logical claims that lead to the natural selection of a measurement approach. Over 20 science-focused A-Team studies have used these techniques to help science teams refine their mission objectives, make implementation decisions and reveal the mission concept’s most compelling science. This paper will describe the A-Team process for exploring the mission concept's science trade space and the Science Return Diagram technique.In June of 2011 a new collaborative engineering approach forearly concept formulation began in the JPL InnovationFoundry [1], six months later becoming the “A-Team” [2].Responding to a need for exploring mission architecturelevel trades [3], the A-Team precedes Team X [4,5] in asequence of concurrent engineering teams at JPL that can beused to mature a concept from a “cocktail napkin” level ideato a complete mission point design. The A-Team efficientlyexplores the science, implementation, and programmatictrade space in early concept formulation. Small, facilitatedgroups of experts generate innovative ideas, quantitativelyassess feasibility, and discover key sensitivities in the tradespace through collaborative analysis and use of advancedmethods and tools. The A-Team process builds off theexperience within JPL and other recent approaches to earlyconcept formulation [6] including best practices of the JPLInnovation Foundry, Project Systems Engineering &Formulation Section, Team Eureka and the Rapid MissionArchitecture Team[7].The A-Team is a focal point for innovative formulationapproaches and people within JPL. It relies on a largebackground of study resources, creative thinkers and “greybeard” scrutinizers, advanced tools, and subject matterexperts with both breadth and depth in experience andexpertise that are all available at JPL. The A-Team isdesigned to be a rapid and efficient process takingapproximately 6 weeks (the entire process can be as short asjust a few days or as long as up to three months) and costingthe equivalent of a work-month of a full-time employee orless. Studies begin with detailed planning and client reviewfollowed by study sessions, analysis work, and reporting.The staffing on each study is customized to the study goalsand objectives, and it is addressed early in the A-Teamprocess. Sessions are generally half-day or whole-day eventsand conducted over a series of days with focused agendas thatare moderated by a trained facilitator. Preliminary results andknowledge capture are available within hours of each session,and a final report is generally available two weeks later.One of the biggest challenges facing early conceptdevelopment is understanding the gradient in science returnversus various available mission scenarios and payload options. Often times, major areas of scientific inquiry havealready been prioritized by science groups, including throughthe National Research Council’s Decadal Studies inAstronomy, Planetary, and Earth Science. Yet science teamscontinue to struggle, especially in competitive missionsolicitations, to capture the right amount of scope that’sachievable within the cost constraints of the opportunity.Often the desire to completely and comprehensively study ascience area in just one mission (after all, true missionopportunities are rare) drives teams to take on too much,providing requirements that are unachievable within theresources of the opportunity without inducing unacceptableimplementation risk. Alternatively, science teams can seekto reduce risk by using an established instrument, but havenot thought through the traceability and key aspects of thescience question to justify its use. Both scenarios lead to badassumptions at the beginning of the concept development thatcan then ripple through implementation option choices,potentially preventing what would have been a good scienceinvestigation from being selected.The purpose of this paper is first to provide some additionalbackground and summary of the A-Team process, tools,people, and facilities. We then focus on the A-Teammethodology for overcoming the barriers of defining thescience scope well at the early concept development stage.This includes understanding the science story andtraceability, and then examining the gradient in science returnversus key characteristics of observables, developing theright payload and mission requirement specification throughexamining the science and implementation trade space.

Ziemer, John K.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Cultural Challenges Faced by American Mission Control Personnel Working with International Partners

Operating the International Space Station (ISS) involves an indefinite, continuous series of long-duration international missions, and this requires an unprecedented degree of cooperation across multiple sites, organizations, and nations. Both junior and senior mission control personnel have had to find ways to address the cultural challenges inherent in such work, but neither have had systematic training in how to do so. The goals of this study were to identify and evaluate the major cultural challenges faced by ISS mission control personnel and to highlight the approaches that they have found most effective to surmount these challenges. We pay particular attention to the approaches successfully employed by the senior personnel and the training needs identified by the junior personnel. We also evaluate the extent to which the identified approaches and needs are consistent across the two samples. METHODS: Participants included a sample of 14 senior ISS flight controllers and a contrasting sample of 12 more junior controllers. All participants were mission operations specialists chosen on the basis of having worked extensively with international partners. Data were collected using a semi-structured qualitative interview and content analyzed using an iterative process with multiple coders and consensus meetings to resolve discrepancies. RESULTS: The senior respondents had substantial consensus on several cultural challenges and on key strategies for dealing with them, and they offered a wide range of specific tactics for implementing these strategies. Data from the junior respondents will be presented for the first time at the meeting. DISCUSSION: Although specific to American ISS personnel, our results are consistent with recent management, cultural, and aerospace research on other populations. We aim to use our results to improve training for current and future mission control personnel working in international or multicultural mission operations teams.

Clement, J. L.↗
NASA NTRS2017

One Giant Leap to Protect All Mankind: An Overview of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory

Motivation. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy charged the nation "to land a man on the moon and return him safely to Earth." Eight years later, the Apollo 11 astronauts splashed down in the Pacific Ocean after this first 8-day journey to the moon. As humans had never ventured to another extraterrestrial body, the U.S. government noted the great uncertainty associated with the unknown exposures related to this historic mission. Overview. With this uncertainty in mind, a newly formed Interagency Committee on Back Contamination (ICBC) was established to review the potential for lunar contaminants and establish the prevention of their escape into the biosphere during crew and sample recovery operations from the floating command module to the mobile quarantine facility on the recovery ship and return to the Johnson Space Center. Significance. As a result of the ICBC recommendations, in 1966 NASA planned and built the Lunar Receiving Laboratory (LRL) at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. The LRL served a great role in service of human space exploration to quarantine Apollo crewmembers, their space vehicles, and the lunar samples collected. Almost an afterthought in the space race to the Moon, the 83,000-square-foot LRL was designed and completed in 1967 for $7.8 million. The core purpose of the LRL was "to protect the public's health, agriculture, and other living resources; to provide lunar sample distribution to approved scientific investigators; and to preserve the scientific integrity of the lunar samples at all times." Its layout was comprised of three major zones: a quarantined Crew Area, a separate but also quarantined Sample Operations Area, and a Support and Administration Area outside the controlled biological barrier. This facility required trained personnel to live and perform within it for several weeks post-flight, to include astronaut crewmembers, flight surgeons, scientists, and vehicle recovery engineers. The LRL holds memories of these historic events but has since been repurposed for NASA's medical and environmental sciences activities, in what is now known as Building 37. As we approach its 50th anniversary, the LRL story will end in demolition as NASA advances its facilities for the next steps in human exploration of space. Learning Objectives: 1. To capture the historical relevance of the NASA Lunar Receiving Laboratory 2. To understand the requirements of receiving crew and samples from the moon for the first time 3. To describe the facility capabilities in protection of public health.

Hayes, Judith↗