Oval Port Gloves Detach Twice from Glovebox Glove Port
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OPEX share, Oval glove ports↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Glovebox”
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.
Unexpected Glovebox Events, Lessons Learned
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Conley, Wendy Ann↗
In-glovebox container
A container having two different closing mechanism designs including an upright strike-less latch design and a Buttress thread design.
Oka, Jude M.↗
Evaluation Of Elbow Exoskeleton in Glovebox Operations To Minimize Injuries – 25704
In nuclear facilities across the DOE, ergonomic injuries pose a significant occupational hazard for GB workers. Recent studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) have revealed concerning trends in worker health, with approximately 50% of GB workers reporting musculoskeletal symptoms after 25 years of service [1]. The current GB design, largely unchanged since the 1960s, presents several ergonomic challenges including inappropriate finger lengths, nonexistent joint angles, and incorrect thumb placement. These design flaws directly contribute to conditions such as lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow) and De Quervain's tenosynovitis which causes pain and inflammation in the tendons at the base of the thumb. These are examples of conditions caused by workers performing repetitive precision tasks [2].
Ramon, Rodrigo N. [Savannah River National Laborat↗
Geolab 2010: Desert Rats Field Demonstration
In 2010, Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATS), NASA's annual field exercise designed to test spacesuit and rover technologies, will include a first generation lunar habitat facility, the Habitat Demonstration Unit (HDU). The habitat will participate in joint operations in northern Arizona with the Lunar Electric Rover (LER) and will be used as a multi-use laboratory and working space. A Geology Laboratory or GeoLab is included in the HDU design. Historically, science participation in Desert RATS exercises has supported the technology demonstrations with geological traverse activities that are consistent with preliminary concepts for lunar surface science Extravehicular Activities (EVAs). Next year s HDU demonstration is a starting point to guide the development of requirements for the Lunar Surface Systems Program and test initial operational concepts for an early lunar excursion habitat that would follow geological traverses along with the LER. For the GeoLab, these objectives are specifically applied to support future geological surface science activities. The goal of our GeoLab is to enhance geological science returns with the infrastructure that supports preliminary examination, early analytical characterization of key samples, and high-grading lunar samples for return to Earth [1, 2] . Figure 1: Inside view schematic of the GeoLab a 1/8 section of the HDU, including a glovebox for handling and examining geological samples. Other outfitting facilities are not depicted in this figure. GeoLab Description: The centerpiece of the GeoLab is a glovebox, allowing for samples to be brought into the habitat in a protected environment for preliminary examination (see Fig. 1). The glovebox will be attached to the habitat bulkhead and contain three sample pass-through antechambers that would allow direct transfer of samples from outside the HDU to inside the glovebox. We will evaluate the need for redundant chambers, and other uses for the glovebox antechambers, such as a staging area for additional tools or samples. The sides of the glovebox are designed with instrument ports and additional smaller ports for cable pass-through, imagery feeds and environmental monitoring. This first glovebox version will be equipped with basic tools for manipulating, viewing, and early analysis of samples. The GeoLab was also designed for testing additional analytical instruments in a field setting.
Evans, Cindy A.↗
Design and Development of a Robotic Exoskeleton Device for use in Glove Boxes - 20374
Glovebox operators in nuclear facilities often operate under radioactive environment and typically perform monotonous, dull and repetitive work. This can result in muscle fatigue leading to increased levels of accidents. Current research work aims in assisting the glovebox operators by designing a novel upper limb exoskeleton device to reduce injuries and increase worker efficiency. Almost none of the commercially available hand and upper body exoskeletons are directly suitable for use in gloveboxes. This explains the novelty of the present work in developing a wearable powered robotic exoskeleton device. The device consists of electronics, motors and spring systems mounted on adjustable plates and is supported by a stationary frame behind the worker. The device is intended to be portable and adjustable according to the operator height. The elbow has a flexion movement assisted with motor control by way of a Bowden cable system. The system is floated on a spring and pulley combination that allows for extra safety and smoothness of operation. The end points are fixed near the pivot points to help minimize unwanted movement/torque. The extension movement of the upper and lower arm are assisted by gravity and a counter spring. The shoulder and upper arm movement are held in a neutral position with a spring system for counter balance allowing small movements within the glovebox. This initial concept considers only the vertical movement of the arm. The abduction and adduction movement will not be assisted or impeded by the over shoulder plate or at the forearm plate allowing for full range of motion. Several glovebox aspects such as the level of task assistance, ergonomic design, minimum hindrance in dexterity/operator movements and tear resistance for hazardous safety reasons will be considered in the design of the exoskeleton. Computer models will be simulated to test the load levels and stress conditions on the exoskeleton to enhance the designs. The exoskeleton focusses on major muscular involvement reduction through weight offset and active assistance with minimal parts and hence the device is derived with several joint links and contains both passive and active joints. The paper details the various stages in the design development and prototype testing of the exoskeleton device. Upon successful prototype device development, human testing will be conducted in a replica of the SRS-235F hot cell facility constructed at FIU-ARC. The final stage of the project will be potential testing/deployment of the exoskeleton device in one of the glovebox facilities in Savannah River Nuclear Waste site. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Reducing Organic Contamination in NASA JSC Astromaterial Curation Facility
Future robotic and human spaceflight missions to the Moon, Mars, asteroids and comets will require handling and storing astromaterial samples with minimal inorganic and organic contamination to preserve the scientific integrity of each sample. Much was learned from the rigorous attempts to minimize and monitor organic contamination during Apollo, but it was not adequate for current analytical requirements; thus [1]. OSIRIS-REx, Hayabusa-2, and future Mars sample return will require better protocols for reducing organic contamination. Future isolation con-tainment systems for astromaterials, possibly nitrogen enriched gloveboxes, must be able to reduce organic and inorganic cross-contamination. In 2012, a baseline study established the current state of organic cleanliness in gloveboxes used by NASA JSC astromaterials curation labs that could be used as a benchmark for future mission designs [2, 3]. After standard ultra-pure water (UPW) cleaning, the majority of organic contaminates found were hydrocarbons, plasticizers, silicones, and solvents. Hydro-carbons loads (> C7) ranged from 1.9 to 11.8 ng/cm2 for TD-GC-MS wafer exposure analyses and 5.0 to 19.5 ng/L for TD-GC-MS adsorbent tube exposure. Plasticizers included < 0.6 ng/cm2 of DBP, DEP, TXIB, and DIBP. Silicones included < 0.5 ng/cm2 of cyclo(Me2SiO)x (x = 6, 8, 9, 10) and siloxane. Solvents included < 1.0 ng/cm2 of 2-cyclohexen-1-one, 3,5,5-trimethyl- (Isopho-rone), N-formylpiperidine, and 2-(2-butoxyethoxy) ethanol. In addition, DBF, rubber/polymer additive was found at < 0.2 ng/cm2 and caprolactam, nylon-6 at < 0.6 ng/cm2. Reducing Organics: The Apollo program was the last sam-ple return mission to place high-level organic requirements and biological containment protocols on a curation facility. The high vacuum complex F-201 glovebox in the Lunar Receiving Labora-tory used ethyl alcohol (190 proof), 3:1 benzene/methanol (nano grade solution), and heat sterilization at 130degC for 48 hours to reduce organic contamination. In addition, both heat sterilization and peracetic acid sterilization were used in the atmospheric de-contamination (R) cabinets. Later, Lunar curation gloveboxes were degreased with a pressurized Freon 113 wash. Today, UPW has replaced Freon as the standard cleaning procedure, but does not have the degreasing solvency power of Freon. Future Cleaning Studies: Cleaning experiments are cur-rently being orchestrated to study how to degrease and reduce organics in a JSC curation glovebox lower than the established baseline. Several new chemicals in the industry have replaced traditional degreasing solvents such as Freon and others that are now federally restricted. However, these new suites of chemicals remain untested for lowering organics in curation gloveboxes. 3M's HFE-7100DL and DuPont's Vertrel XF are currently being tested as a replacement for Freon 113 as a degreaser at JSC cura-tion facilities. In addition, the use of UPW as a final rinse is be-ing tested, which presumably can maintain a lower total organic carbon load than the filtered purity of chemical solutions. References: [1] Allton J.H. et al. (2012) LPS XLIII, 2439; [2] Calaway M.
Calaway, M. J.↗
Implementation of a System of Gamma Imagers for Measuring Plutonium Holdup
The Surplus Plutonium Disposition (SPD) project is an effort to dilute and dispose of many tonsof weapons grade plutonium. This work will take place in a shielded glovebox to protect workers fromradiological dose. Accurate measurements of the holdup, or material left behind, in the gloveboxes is im-portant for Nuclear Material Control and Accountancy, worker dose minimization, criticality safety, andprocess monitoring. Shielding around the gloveboxes presents an obstacle for the traditional GeneralizedGamma Holdup (GGH) method. The uncertainties associated with that method, at around 28%, arealso detrimental since the amount of holdup must be kept below an established limit with a high level ofconfidence.Passive gamma-ray imaging provides a more complete depiction of the distribution of radioactivematerials. Recent refinement of the method has demonstrated that quantitative information can beextracted from the images with a well-characterized system. A permanently installed system of gamma-ray imagers is currently being developed to measure plutonium holdup in the SPD gloveboxes. Thispaper will report on progress with the development of this system.This application requires that the features of current commercially available instruments from H3Dand PHDS, optimized for measurement performance in a mobile application, be translated into theconstraints of the operational environment with fixed installations. The interaction between facilityconstraints and measurement capabilities will be addressed.A series of measurements with plutonium sources in a mocked-up glovebox geometry with imagersmounted above the ceiling of the glovebox have been taken. Imager performance with respect to angularresolution, minimum measurement time for quantification, and signal-to-noise ratio with a multitudeof sources will be evaluated for those measurements. A series of prototypes of user interfaces will bepresented for display of the data to its various consumers for the purposes of Nuclear Material Controland Accountancy, worker dose minimization, criticality safety, and process monitoring.
Schmitt, Kyle↗
Custom Equipment Development for Processing of Surplus Plutonium
The Strategic Laboratory Assessment (SLA), a collaborative team of SRNL and ORNL personnel, has been established to advance the objectives of the Surplus Plutonium Disposition (SPD) Project, by identifying and developing technologies to accelerate disposition, reduce life cycle costs, minimize worker radiation exposure, improve worker safety, and minimize Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program risks. [1] The SLA team has identified can cutting and plutonium (Pu) oxide size reduction as two glovebox processes where technology enhancements would be valuable. The DOESTD-3013 package currently in use for Pu downblending requires cutting two nested cans before the inner convenience can that holds the Pu oxide may be accessed for further processing. A rotary tubing-style cutter is used for opening the 3013 packages within the glovebox. Collet changeouts are required between cutting of the outer and inner cans. The SLA team is currently developing and testing an adjustable-clamp can cutter design that eliminates collet changeouts and allows cutting of the outer and inner can at the same time, resulting in significant reduction of radiological dose and process time, as well as improved ergonomics. To meet the Pu oxide particle size requirement, size reduction of Pu oxide agglomerations must be performed within the process gloveboxes. The SLA team has identified jaw crushing technology as an alternative to the currently employed rotary mill. Jaw crusher advantages include reduced dust within the glovebox, increased batch sizes, and easier integration with other glovebox processes due to the flow-through nature of jaw crushing. Commercially manufactured jaw crushers are either too large and/or too heavy for implementation in the SPD gloveboxes, so the SLA team is developing and testing a custom jaw crusher to meet the needs of the SPD Project.
Krementz, Daniel [Savannah River National Laborato↗
Evaluation of Detritiation Strategies for Mitigating Tritium Releases
Tritium confinement is performed using different barriers to minimize releases to the environment. Primary confinement is usually performed by process piping and components, secondary confinement typically by inerted gloveboxes connected to a continuously operating tritium stripper system. Some facility designs employ tertiary tritium confinement by using process room confinement with a tritium stripper system activated after an accident to further mitigate tritium releases to the environment. Secondary confinement of some tritium systems such as radiation-hardened or shielded-cell enclosures are not easily achieved using designs for inerted glovebox. These enclosures can be challenging to seal for secondary tritium confinement due to heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) needs for temperature control, as well as feedthroughs for equipment and instrumentation, are potential pathways for tritium leaks or loses. Additional tritium leak paths can be created in secondary confinement enclosures due to a Design Basis Accident (DBA) seismic event. These new, larger tritium leak rates from the DBA event are usually not part of the stripper system design basis so all tritium released to the secondary confinement enclosure is assumed released to the environment. Detritiation strategies for shielded enclosures and/or gloveboxes with significant leak rates are necessary to minimize off-site radiological dose consequences. To address this, the relationship between the confinement system leak rate and stripper system (recirculating) flow rate was evaluated to meet prescribed maximum allowable environmental tritium emissions from the event. The simple analysis described assumes a constant leak rate from the confinement system (i.e. shielded enclosure or glovebox) while a recirculating stripper system strips tritium from the system– a competition between tritium release and tritium recovery. At a high level, the resulting expression summarizes the relationship between system leak rate (F L ) and stripper flow rate (F S ) relative to allowable tritium release (Q A ) and initial tritium release (Q 0 ): $\frac{F_L}{F_s}$ ≈ $\frac{Q_A}{Q_0}$. This report derives the relationship between these parameters, examines the impact of finite stripping times followed by purging of the stripped volume. The analysis provides example results for up to 30 gram tritium releases: the maximum tritium inventory of a Hazard Category III (Department of Energy) Nuclear Facility. The detritiation model presented represents a high-level analysis of tritium recovery versus losses for “leaky” confinement enclosures such as shielded cells after large tritium releases. Key parameters for doing the analyses are the system leak rate, stripper flow rate, initial tritium release, and allowable tritium release values. The analyses show a proportional decrease in releases with reduction in initial tritium release but a non-linear increase in tritium recovery with increased stripper flow rate or reduced leak-rate. The analyses also apply to glovebox confinement systems which could have significant increases in leak rates after a DBA. The analysis recognizes but does not include tritium absorption followed by re-emission from the walls of the confinement volume – an analysis which could be pursued in future studies.
11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
GeoLab in NASA's Pressurized Excursion Module: First Results from the 2010 Field Trials
Before humans explore other planets, NASA must develop advanced techniques for collection, preservation and return of unique extraterrestrial samples. To help evaluate hardware requirements and operational concepts for future sample-return missions, we designed and built GeoLab our first generation lab for geological samples into NASA s Habitat Demonstration Unit in the Pressurized Excursion Module (HDU1-PEM). The center of GeoLab is a glovebox for the examination of samples in a shirt-sleeve environment. As part of a deployable habitat, GeoLab can participate in NASA s analog missions that simulate planetary exploration activities and support the testing of relevant technologies for collecting and handling geological samples. Over time, these tests will evaluate sample handling environments (field and lab), sampling tools and analytical instruments, and different scenarios involving both robotic and human procedures. The GeoLab design supports evolving tests and configurations. The glovebox is mounted on the habitat bulkhead, with three sample pass-though chambers that allow for direct sample transfer into the glovebox from the outside. The glovebox design and construction (low-particle shedding, minimally off-gassing materials) provides a clean environment to reduce sample contamination; in the future, we will integrate a positive pressure, enriched nitrogen atmosphere. The glovebox is equipped with configurable instrument ports. The 2010 test included a mass balance, a stereomicroscope with a HD camera for detailed imaging of samples, and a handheld XRF analyzer for preliminary geochemical characterization of samples. Network cameras provided context imagery and sample handling activities. We present early results from the initial field trial of GeoLab during the 2010 Desert Research and Technology Studies (D-RATS) planetary analog test near Flagstaff AZ. The 2010 D-RATS mission involved two rovers, the habitat with GeoLab, four crew members, and a team of scientists and flight controllers. The crewed rovers conducted geological traverses and collected samples on the planetary surface. Selected samples were transferred into GeoLab for detailed examination and initial analysis, providing critical data to the science team for evaluation and prioritization of samples.
Evans, Cynthia A.↗
GeoLab: A Geological Workstation for Future Missions
The GeoLab glovebox was, until November 2012, fully integrated into NASA's Deep Space Habitat (DSH) Analog Testbed. The conceptual design for GeoLab came from several sources, including current research instruments (Microgravity Science Glovebox) used on the International Space Station, existing Astromaterials Curation Laboratory hardware and clean room procedures, and mission scenarios developed for earlier programs. GeoLab allowed NASA scientists to test science operations related to contained sample examination during simulated exploration missions. The team demonstrated science operations that enhance theThe GeoLab glovebox was, until November 2012, fully integrated into NASA's Deep Space Habitat (DSH) Analog Testbed. The conceptual design for GeoLab came from several sources, including current research instruments (Microgravity Science Glovebox) used on the International Space Station, existing Astromaterials Curation Laboratory hardware and clean room procedures, and mission scenarios developed for earlier programs. GeoLab allowed NASA scientists to test science operations related to contained sample examination during simulated exploration missions. The team demonstrated science operations that enhance the early scientific returns from future missions and ensure that the best samples are selected for Earth return. The facility was also designed to foster the development of instrument technology. Since 2009, when GeoLab design and construction began, the GeoLab team [a group of scientists from the Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office within the Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES) Directorate at JSC] has progressively developed and reconfigured the GeoLab hardware and software interfaces and developed test objectives, which were to 1) determine requirements and strategies for sample handling and prioritization for geological operations on other planetary surfaces, 2) assess the scientific contribution of selective in-situ sample characterization for mission planning, operations, and sample prioritization, 3) evaluate analytical instruments and tools for providing efficient and meaningful data in advance of sample return and 4) identify science operations that leverage human presence with robotic tools. In the first year of tests (2010), GeoLab examined basic glovebox operations performed by one and two crewmembers and science operations performed by a remote science team. The 2010 tests also examined the efficacy of basic sample characterization [descriptions, microscopic imagery, X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analyses] and feedback to the science team. In year 2 (2011), the GeoLab team tested enhanced software and interfaces for the crew and science team (including Web-based and mobile device displays) and demonstrated laboratory configurability with a new diagnostic instrument (the Multispectral Microscopic Imager from the JPL and Arizona State University). In year 3 (2012), the GeoLab team installed and tested a robotic sample manipulator and evaluated robotic-human interfaces for science operations.
Evans, Cynthia↗
A Simple, Revolutionary Approach to Waste Packaging Utilizing Proven Technology - 20201
Historically, removing hazardous waste from gloveboxes involves the use of bags as the primary containment method. This method can prove tedious, repetitive, and time consuming to ensure the process follows all safeguards required to contain the waste and mitigate any breach of containment. Layers of bags, yards of tape, and multiple filters are added to the waste stream in order to transfer the hazardous waste from the glovebox safely into the drum package. Then, finally, it can be shipped and disposed of. The process to cut, tie, and tape each bag for disposal involves manual effort by multiple operators. Following Administrative Safety Controls, good operators are able to safely perform those tasks; but, since the bag is the only confinement layer, incidents can occur. Operators, in some cases, are also at close proximity to this waste which may increase the risk of radiation exposure. Once the waste is transferred out through these bags, it is nearly impossible to remove packaged waste that may contain higher dosage levels, thus increasing drum disposal costs incurred by the facility. Exceeding the allowable radiation levels, and drums not fully filled, both contribute significantly to excess disposal costs. Central Research Laboratories (CRL), based in Red Wing Minnesota, has developed the Waste Drum Transfer System (WDTS) building upon the proven technology and containment of the Rapid Transfer Port (RTP) as an alternate, more efficient method of waste transfer. This solution consists of an RTP Alpha port mounted inside a glovebox and Beta assembly unit composed of a drum liner fitted inside a standard 55 gallon drum. The use of the Beta drum liner bypasses the typical use of bags, sleeves or tape to provide leak tight containment. The process to connect and disconnect a drum from the glovebox is achieved by the self-docking and rotating system controls of the RTP Alpha, all done with only one operator standing in an upright ergonomic position. This system also allows for greater flexibility in available Beta connection options, expanding the overall functionality of the system. This system can be disconnected and reconnected multiple times to maximize volume containment. This will minimize drum disposal costs and reduce the overall volume of waste output by more efficiently filling the drums. Radiation levels inside each drum can be monitored and adjusted more efficiently by operators utilizing the reconnect option. Minimal As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) levels are also achievable with this system. This paper will show how highly efficient packaging and disposal of hazardous waste can be accomplished in a cost-effective manner utilizing the proven RTP technology. Maximized operator productivity and safety, as well as minimized radiation dose exposure, are all attainable through the system's engineered controls. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Tritiated Sulfur Hexafluoride Disposition Strategies
Tritium (T 2 ) is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen that is produced in nuclear fission reactions and is often used in nuclear fusion reactions and accelerator-based applications for medical isotope production. As a hydrogen isotope, tritium can readily bind to hydroxyl radicals (OH), forming tritiated water (HTO or T 2 0), and to carbon atoms. Tritium decays to helium-3 ( 3 He) via beta-decay with max decay energy of 18.6 keV. While it is not an external radiation hazard, it can be an internal radiation hazard if tritium is inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through the skin. In applications where tritium is handled, tritium confinement is performed using different barriers to minimize releases to the environment. For gaseous (elemental), liquid (oxide), and metal (hydride) tritium, process piping and components provide the primary confinement function. Secondary tritium confinement is typically provided by inert (i.e. non-flammable gases such as nitrogen, argon, or helium) gloveboxes which are connected to a tritium stripper system. Primary tritium confinement barriers typically produce low volumes of high tritium concentrations of tritiated methane from carbon in steels or organic materials along with tritiated water/tritium oxide (e.g. HTO) and tritiated ammonia from reactions with oxygen and nitrogen. Tritium escaping primary confinement into secondary confinement atmospheres (e.g. gloveboxes) produce higher volumes of lower activity contamination than found in process piping. Tritium contamination also occurs by leaks or tritium permeation/diffusion through confinement materials. Tritium from inside primary confinement barriers will diffuse or leak out of the primary confinement barrier and usually into the air, if the system is inside an air hood or ventilated hot cell, or into the secondary confinement (e.g. glovebox) atmosphere which is either exhausted or stripped based on the function of the secondary confinement (glovebox) system. Accelerator based processes for medical isotope production represent an atypical tritium contamination challenge. In medical isotope production, deuterium supply gas is ionized and accelerated to a tritium gas target to produce neutrons that are then used to produce the medical isotopes through additional nuclear fission reactions. To create large voltage differentials for accelerator operations, an electrical insulation medium is needed to prevent or rapidly quench electric discharges. A common electrical insulation medium utilized in accelerator applications is sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6 ) gas. SF 6 has a high dielectric strength and allows for the construction of smaller accelerator systems compared to other electrical insulation mediums such as air or dry nitrogen. Due to tritium permeation/diffusion through accelerator process and confinement materials, there is the possibility that tritium can contaminate the electrical insulation medium of the accelerator. Tritium contaminated SF 6 creates a material without any obvious processes for managing the contamination, reuse, or disposal of the used SF 6 . This document will discuss possible management strategies for tritium contaminated SF 6 for accelerator-based processes for Molybdenum-99 (Mo-99) production.
07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
Presentation to International Space University Students on g-LIMIT and STABLE-ATD Projects and Related Microgravity Vibration Isolation Topics
Vibration isolation is a necessity in the development of science in space and especially those experiments destined for operation on the International Space Station (ISS). The premise of microgravity scientific research is that in space, disturbances are minimized and experiments can be conducted in the absence of gravity. Although microgravity conditions exist in space, disturbances are still present in various forms and can be detrimental to the success of a microgravity experiment. Due to the plethora of disturbances and the various types that will occur on the space station, the microgravity community has elected to incorporate various means of isolating scientific payloads from these unwanted vibrations. Designing these vibration isolators is a crucial task to achieve true microgravity science. Since conventional methods of isolating payloads can achieve only limited isolation, new technologies are being developed to achieve the goal of designing a generic vibration isolation system. One such system being developed for the Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) is called g-LIMIT which stands for Glovebox Integrated Microgravity Isolation Technology. The g-LIMIT system is a miniaturized active vibration isolator for glovebox experiments. Although the system is initially developed for glovebox experiments, the g-LIMIT technology is designed to be upwardly scaleable to provide isolation for a broad range of users. The g-LIMIT system is scheduled to be flown on the UF-2 mission in August of the year 2000 and will be tested shortly thereafter. Once the system has been fully qualified, the hardware will become available for other researchers and will provide a platform upon which the goal of microgravity science can be achieved.
Alhorn, Dean↗
International Space Station Crew Restraint Design
With permanent human presence onboard the International Space Station (ISS), crews will be living and working in microgravity, dealing with the challenges of a weightless environment. In addition, the confined nature of the spacecraft environment results in ergonomic challenges such as limited visibility and access to the activity areas, as well as prolonged periods of unnatural postures. Without optimum restraints, crewmembers may be handicapped for performing some of the on-orbit tasks. Currently, many of the tasks on ISS are performed with the crew restrained merely by hooking their arms or toes around handrails to steady themselves. This is adequate for some tasks, but not all. There have been some reports of discomfort/calluses on the top of the toes. In addition, this type of restraint is simply insufficient for tasks that require a large degree of stability. Glovebox design is a good example of a confined workstation concept requiring stability for successful use. They are widely used in industry, university, and government laboratories, as well as in the space environment, and are known to cause postural limitations and visual restrictions. Although there are numerous guidelines pertaining to ventilation, seals, and glove attachment, most of the data have been gathered in a 1-g environment, or are from studies that were conducted prior to the early 1980 s. Little is known about how best to restrain a crewmember using a glovebox in microgravity. In 2004, The Usability Testing and Analysis Facility (UTAF) at the NASA Johnson Space Center completed development/evaluation of several design concepts for crew restraints to meet the various needs outlined above. Restraints were designed for general purpose use, for teleoperation (Robonaut) and for use with the Life Sciences Glovebox. All design efforts followed a human factors engineering design lifecycle, beginning with identification of requirements followed by an iterative prototype/test cycle. Anthropometric modeling was completed for the 5th percentile Asian female and the 95th percentile American male for all restraints. A series of three evaluations was performed onboard NASA's reduced gravity aircraft (KC-135). For all evaluations, participants performed representative tasks while being videotaped, and then completed a questionnaire following each flight day. The questionnaire included ratings scales and free format questions to assess topics such as comfort, stability provided, flexibility provided, etc. Results from the three flight evaluations are being used to develop the human factors design requirements for crew restraint concepts for 1) general purpose restraints, 2) teleoperation restraints and 3) glovebox restraints. The poster presentation will describe the detailed methodology used, results from each of the three evaluations, and the resulting human factors recommendations for the design of these restraints.
Whitmore, M.↗
A METHOD TO REDUCE BIOBURDEN IN ASTROMATERIALS CURATION FACILITIES WITHOUT INTRODUCING UNWANTED CONTAMINATION
Introduction: NASA curates its Astromaterials collections in cleanrooms that are carefully monitored for particulate, inorganic and trace metal contamination. Current sample collections are not particularly susceptible to organic contamination or biological alteration. However, new collections like those from the OSIRIS-REx and Hayabusa2 missions will have organic contamination requirements and are susceptible to biodegradation. It will be necessary sterilize or at least disinfect curation labs, as well as tools and equipment in a manner that does not introduce additional contamination and does not affect the samples 1. Current curation cleaning procedures utilize isopropyl alcohol which offers some bioburden reduction, but is not effective against spore-forming bacteria or fungal spores 2. We present a modified disinfection method that uses ultrapure hydrogen peroxide to reduce bioburden inside curation labs and glove boxes without introducing contamination or damaging curation equipment. We tested this method in the meteorite processing lab as well as on a glovebox being cleaned for use in processing ANGSA (Apollo Next Generation Sample Analysis) samples and present the results of those tests. We discuss the limitations of this method and describe potential situations in which it will not be applicable. The CDC guidelines for disinfection andsterilization in healthcare facilities discusses over 15different methods for reducing bioburden in hospitalsettings 3. The most common method, steamsterilization, is well suited to sterilizing curationprocessing tools but cannot easily be used to sterilizecleanroom surfaces or large equipment likegloveboxes. Chemical sterilization with bleach(NaOCl) is also a common strategy in healthcare andpharmaceutical settings that presents materialcompatibility issues as well as serious inorganiccontamination concerns for curation facilities.Introducing a new source of Na and Cl into curationlabs is not acceptable. Other chemical methods likeethylene oxide, formaldehyde, iodophors andquaternary ammonium compounds could introduceorganic and inorganic contamination. We chose tofocus on hydrogen peroxide because it is generallycompatible with commonly used curation materialslike stainless steel, aluminum and Teflon and becauseit decomposes to oxygen and water. The CDCguidelines for hydrogen peroxide specify using a 7.5wt% solution at 25 ̊C with a contact time of 30 minutesfor high level disinfection and 6 hours for sterilization.High level disinfection is defined as a technique thatwill kill all microorganisms except large numbers ofbacterial spores 3. Methods: We prepared a solution of 7.5 wt%hydrogen peroxide from a stock solution of ultrapure30 wt% peroxide (JT Baker) and curation gradeultrapure water. This ultrapure water is already used incuration cleaning procedures and thus is not consideredand additional source of contamination. We conducteda materials compatibility test by exposing unanodizedand anodized 6061 T6 Al alloy to the peroxide solutionfor up to six hours and periodically inspecting thesurfaces for visible defects. We used this peroxide todisinfect the floor of the meteorite processing lab andthe interior of a curation glovebox by exposing thesesurfaces to the peroxide solution for 30 min. Thesurfaces were swabbed with a dry macrofoam swabbefore (Puritan Brand 2518051PFRNDFD) and afterperoxide treatment to collect microbes present on thesurfaces. Microbes were extracted by sonication fromthe swab into 15 ml of PBS (phosphate buffered saline)and inoculated onto the following media: TSA (trypticsoy agar) BA (blood agar), R2A (Reasoners 2 agar),Potato Dextrose Agar, Saboraud Dextrose Agar andSaboraud Dextrose Agar with 0.1 mg/ mlchloramphenicol. Four TSA plates and two BA plateswere inoculated with 0.1 ml of PBS each andincubated at 35 and 37 for 48 hours. Two R2A°C°Cplates (0.1 ml of PBS each) were incubated at 25 .°CThe remaining plates were inoculated with 0.2ml ofPBS and incubated at 30 ̊C for seven days. Afterincubation bacterial and fungal isolates were countedand transferred to new plates for identification usingthe VITEK24 automated system or by sequencing aportion of the barcode gene (16S rRNA for bacteria,small subunit gene for fungi) on an ABI 3500 Sangersequencer. Negative controls consisted of swabs thatwere opened in the sampling environment andanalyzed alongside the experimental samples.Results: A 6 hour exposure to hydrogen peroxideresulted in visible pitting on un-anodized 6061 Al, butnot on anodized surfaces. No visible pitting occurredafter a 30 minute exposure. Therefore, we decided tolimit our experimental tests to 30 min. exposures. 17bacterial CFU (colony forming units) representing 4distinct organisms were isolated from the meteorite processing lab floor prior to hydrogen peroxidetreatment. We were unable culture any organisms afterperoxide treatment. In the glovebox we were able toculture three bacterial CFU representing three distinctspecies, including a spore forming bacterium prior todisinfection with peroxide. After the peroxidetreatment we were unable to culture any organisms.Routine monitoring of the meteorite processing lab andthe glovebox did not indicate any increase in unwantedinorganic contamination after these peroxidetreatments. Discussion: A 30 minute treatment with 7.5 wt%peroxide appears to be an effective method forreducing bioburden on typical cleanroom surfaces. Themethod does not introduce unwanted organic orinorganic contamination and is compatible withcommonly used curation materials like stainless steel,Teflon and anodized aluminum alloys. Special careshould be taken with un-anodized aluminum.Prolonged exposure to hydrogen peroxide can causepitting on this material. We recommend using thismethod to disinfect curation labs and equipment whenbiological alteration is a concern. This method iseffective at room temperature and cannot be used todisinfect labs and equipment where the ambienttemperature is < 0 ̊C. Astromaterials samples shouldbe removed from the area where disinfection is tooccur. Hydrogen peroxide is a powerful oxidizingagent and will react with any organic carbon present inthe sample. References: [1.] Mccubbin, F. M. et al.Sp. Sci Rev(2019) doi:10.1007/s11214-019-0615-9. [2.] Mogul, R.et al.Astrobiology 18, ast.2017.1814 (2018). [3.]Rutala, W. A. & Weber, D. J. Guideline for Disinfection and Sterilization in Healthcare Facilities, 2008. [4.] Pincus, D. H. in Encyclopedia of Rapid Microbiological Methods (2005).
A. B. Regberg↗
In-situ gloveport glove leak tester
The invention provides a system for detecting leaks in glovebox gloves, the system having a first seal within a glovebox aperture; a second seal contacting exterior surfaces of a glovebox, wherein the exterior surfaces define a periphery of the aperture; a first fluid supply for circumferentially expanding the first seal against center facing surfaces of the aperture to a first pressure; a second fluid supply for inflating the glove to a second pressure; and a pressure gauge for detecting a pressure decrease of the second pressure. Also provided is an in situ method for detecting leaks in glove box gloves, the method having the steps of applying a radially directed force to inside surfaces of cuffs of the gloves to hermetically seal the gloves from the exterior of the glovebox, thereby establishing a seal; inflating the gloves to a pressure; and monitoring the pressure for any decrease in pressure.
42 ENGINEERING↗