Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “SPACE”

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 1,567 records · Page 87
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2004

Oh! I Slipped the Surly Bounds of Earth....and Ran into Space Weather!

Over the past decade the concept of space weather has been introduced and matured in both the scientific community and popular press. Likewise the concept of space climatology recently also is being advanced. Closely linked to these concepts are their impacts on ground- and space-based technological systems; one such system commonly mentioned is manned space flight exemplified by the Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS). From a manned space flight perspective, space weather and space climatology have significant effects on the amount of radiation exposure received by humans in space from the ambient high-energy charged particles present in interplanetary space and trapped in the geomagnetosphere. Whereas the impact of space weather for most technological systems is usually discrete and well correlated in time, the principle impact of space weather and space climatology is to increase the probability of latent cancer formation in thetraveler cohort. In this regard, while space weather may be the dominating factor for a given mission, over the life of a long-term program such as the Space Shuttle or ISS space climatology is the controlling factor of latent cancer risk. Human radiation exposure enhancements associated with space weather disturbances has been a concern among scientist and mission controllers since the inception of manned spaceflight nearly forty years ago. This led NASA to develop, in conjunction with the Environmental Science Services Administration s Space Disturbance Forecast Center and the USAF/AWS, the Solar Particle Alert Network (SPAN)-the foundation of an initial U.S. space weather monitoring and forecasting service. Since Apollo, routine space flight operations have evolved to include the use of space weather and climatology data provided through a world-wide network of operational space weather data services to predict and recommend actions to minimize astronaut radiation exposures. NASA Space Radiation Analysis Group (SRAG) flight controllers use real-time space weather data to detect and assess the impact of solar particle events, outer electron belt enhancements, the formation of pseudo-stable additional trapped radiation belts, and the solar cycle modulation of trapped radiation belts and galactic cosmic rays. Energetic particle data from GOES spacecraft are automatically ingested from NOAA Space Environment Center data servers and used to drive a model for the estimating the exposure to astronauts from solar particle events. While adequate for current manned space flight support, the existing operational space weather support system requires improvements to address the anticipated evolution in both the character of manned missions as well as space flight operations management. Necessary space weather data improvements include: reliably available (near) real-time space weather data on a fixed schedule via redundant access methods that support autonomous data acquisition by computer systems behind enterprise firewalls; and rapid transition of promising research sensors into operational systems.

Golightly, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Space Resources

Space resources must be used to support life on the Moon and exploration of Mars. Just as the pioneers applied the tools they brought with them to resources they found along the way rather than trying to haul all their needs over a long supply line, so too must space travelers apply their high technology tools to local resources. The pioneers refilled their water barrels at each river they forded; moonbase inhabitants may use chemical reactors to combine hydrogen brought from Earth with oxygen found in lunar soil to make their water. The pioneers sought temporary shelter under trees or in the lee of a cliff and built sod houses as their first homes on the new land; settlers of the Moon may seek out lava tubes for their shelter or cover space station modules with lunar regolith for radiation protection. The pioneers moved further west from their first settlements, using wagons they had built from local wood and pack animals they had raised; space explorers may use propellant made at a lunar base to take them on to Mars. The concept for this report was developed at a NASA-sponsored summer study in 1984. The program was held on the Scripps campus of the University of California at San Diego (UCSD), under the auspices of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE). It was jointly managed under the California Space Inst. and the NASA Johnson Space Center, under the direction of the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST) at NASA Headquarters. The study participants (listed in the addendum) included a group of 18 university teachers and researchers (faculty fellows) who were present for the entire 10-week period and a larger group of attendees from universities, Government, and industry who came for a series of four 1-week workshops. The organization of this report follows that of the summer study. Space Resources consists of a brief overview and four detailed technical volumes: (1) Scenarios; (2) Energy, Power, and Transport; (3) Materials; (4) Social Concerns. Although many of the included papers got their impetus from workshop discussions, most have been written since then, thus allowing the authors to base new applications on established information and tested technology. All these papers have been updated to include the authors' current work. This overview, drafted by faculty fellow Jim Burke, describes the findings of the summer study, as participants explored the use of space resources in the development of future space activities and defined the necessary research and development that must precede the practical utilization of these resources. Space resources considered included lunar soil, oxygen derived from lunar soil, material retrieved from near-Earth asteroids, abundant sunlight, low gravity, and high vacuum. The study participants analyzed the direct use of these resources, the potential demand for products from them, the techniques for retrieving and processing space resources, the necessary infrastructure, and the economic tradeoffs. This is certainly not the first report to urge the utilization of space resources in the development of space activities. In fact, Space Resources may be seen as the third of a trilogy of NASA Special Publications reporting such ideas arising from similar studies. It has been preceded by Space Settlements: A Design Study (NASA SP-413) and Space Resources and Space Settlements (NASA SP-428). And other, contemporaneous reports have responded to the same themes. The National Commission on Space, led by Thomas Paine, in Pioneering the Space Frontier, and the NASA task force led by astronaut Sally Ride, in Leadership and America's Future in Space, also emphasize expansion of the space Infrastructure; more detailed exploration of the Moon, Mars, and asteroids; an early start on the development of the technology necessary for using space resources; and systematic development of the skills necessary for long-term human presence in space. Our report does not represent any Government-authorized view or official NASA policy. NASA's official response to these challenging opportunities must be found in the reports of its Office of Exploration, which was established in 1987. That office's report, released in November 1989, of a 90-day study of possible plans for human exploration of the Moon and Mars is NASA's response to the new initiative proposed by President Bush on July 20, 1989, the 20th anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing on the Moon: "First, for the coming decade, for the 1990s, Space Station Freedom, our critical next step in all our space endeavors. And next, for the new century, back to the Moon, back to the future, and this time, back to stay. And then a journey into tomorrow, a journey to another planet, a manned mission to Mars." This report, Space Resources, offers substantiation for NASA's bid to carry out that new initiative.

McKay, Mary Fae↗
NASA NTRS1998

General Public Space Travel and Tourism: Executive Summary - Volume 1

Travel and tourism is one of the world's largest businesses. Its gross revenues exceed $400 billion per year in the U.S. alone, and it is our second largest employer. U.S. private sector business revenues in the space information area now approximate $10 billion per year, and are increasing rapidly. Not so in the human spaceflight area. After spending $100s of billions (1998 dollars) in public funds thereon, and continuing to spend over $5 billion per year, the government is still the only customer for human spaceflight goods and services. Serious and detailed consideration was first given to the possibility of space being opened up to trips by the general public three decades ago, and some initial attempts to do so were made a dozen years ago. But the difficulties were great and the Challenger disaster put an end to them. In recent years professional space tourism studies have been conducted in the United Kingdom, Germany and, especially, Japan. In the U.S., technological progress has been pronounced; we have had nearly a decade's experience in seeing our astronauts travel to-from low Earth orbit (LEO) safely, and we expect to commence assembly of a LEO space station housing a half-dozen people this year. Too, NASA and our space industry now have new and promising space transportation development programs underway, especially the X-33 and X-34 programs, and some related, further generation, basic technology development programs. And five private companies are also working on the design of new surface - LEO vehicles. The first professional space tourism market studies have been conducted in several countries in the past few years, especially in Japan and here. The U.S. study makes it clear that, conceptually, tens of millions of us would like to take a trip to space if we could do so with reasonable safety, comfort and reliability, and at an acceptable price. Initial businesses will address the desires of those willing to pay a greater price and accept a greater risk. A two-year cooperative Space Act agreement study has been conducted by our National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Space Transportation Association. It was conducted by NASA and STA study leaders drawing upon the competence, experience and hard-nosed imagination of a national Steering Group and scores of attendees at a multi-day Workshop. The study has involved scores of professionals and business people from various areas: astronauts; space booster technology and operations professionals; a hotel architect and a hotel operator; an airline planner; insurance underwriters; space sickness experts; space theme park designers; space and travel and tourism association and business executives; a space-related financier; university tourism and space policy experts; present and former space-responsible government officials; space entrepreneurs; space writers; This study concludes that serious national attention should now be given to activities that would enable the expansion of today's terrestrial space tourism businesses, and the creation of in-space travel and tourism businesses. Indeed, it concludes that, in time, it should become a very important part of our Country's overall commercial and civil space business-program structure.

ONeil, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS1992

Utilization of Space Station Freedom for technology research

Space Station Freedom presents a unique opportunity for technology developers to conduct research in the space environment. Research can be conducted in the pressurized volume of the Space Station's laboratories or attached to the Space Station truss in the vacuum of space. Technology developers, represented by the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST), will have 12 percent of the available Space Station resources (volume, power, data, crew, etc.) to use for their research. Most technologies can benefit from research on Space Station Freedom and all these technologies are represented in the OAST proposed traffic model. This traffic model consists of experiments that have been proposed by technology developers but not necessarily selected for flight. Experiments to be flown in space will be selected through an Announcement of Opportunity (A.O.) process. The A.O. is expected to be released in August, 1992. Experiments will generally fall into one of the 3 following categories: (1) Individual technology experiments; (2) Instrumented Space Station; and (3) Guest investigator program. The individual technology experiments are those that do not instrument the Space Station nor directly relate to the development of technologies for evolution of Space Station or development of advanced space platforms. The Instrumented Space Station category is similar to the Orbiter Experiments Program and allows the technology developer to instrument subsystems on the Station or develop instrumentation packages that measure products or processes of the Space Station for the advancement of space platform technologies. The guest investigator program allows the user to request data from Space Station or other experiments for independent research. When developing an experiment, a developer should consider all the resources and infrastructure that Space Station Freedom can provide and take advantage of these to the maximum extent possible. Things like environment, accommodations, carriers, and integration should all be taken into account. In developing experiments at Langley Research Center, an iterative approach is proving useful. This approach uses Space Station utilization and subsystem experts to advise and critique experiment designs to take advantage of everything the Space Station has to offer. Also, solid object modeling and animation computer tools are used to fully visualize the experiment and its processes. This process is very useful for attached payloads and allows problems to be detected early in the experiment design phase.

Avery, Don E.↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Antarctic Search for Meteorites: A Model for Deep Space Exploration

In an era of shrinking buying power and reduced flight opportunities, NASA must extract the greatest possible value from all sources of insight into the future of human space exploration. Antarctica is one such source. The history of Antarctic exploration has many political and technical parallels with the development of space, and Antarctica's remoteness and harsh climate make it an excellent proxy for space (e.g., [1,2]). Links between exploration of space and of the Antarctic date back to the International Geophysical Year of 1957-1958, which saw both the launch of Sputnik 1 and the establishment of a station at the South Pole. The Antarctic Search for Meteorites (ANSMET) is an annual expedition to the south polar plateau to collect meteorites. Although its intent is not to simulate a space mission, the handful of astronauts who have participated in ANSMET agree that it is very similar to a long-duration space flight. Independently, NASA and other space agencies have simulated deep space exploration missions in "analog" activities at remote field sites on Earth (e.g., [3]). These include NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) [4,5], Desert Research And Technology Studies (Desert RATS) [6,7], and the Pavilion Lake Research Project (PLRP or simply Pavilion Lake) [8]. This report focuses on NEEMO, Desert RATS, and PLRP because of the author's firsthand experience with them. Other noteworthy analogs, such as the arctic Haughton Mars Project and the European Space Agency's underground Cooperative Adventure for Valuing and Exercising human behavior and performance Skills (CAVES), are not treated here. NASA analogs often include fully staffed control centers, astronauts serving as crew, and realistic mission timelines lasting one to two weeks. Analogs have provided key insights into system architectures and operational concepts for the future human exploration of deep space. They have pioneered techniques for human communication with significant speed-of-light delays, for conducting spacewalks on natural objects with negligible surface gravity, and for empowering exploration crews to work with reduced dependence on a ground control center. They have field-tested dozens of emerging technologies including spacewalking tools and full-scale prototype vehicles and habitats. They have provided valuable experience for astronauts preparing for their first space flight, and for flown crewmembers who will take command roles on later flights. Some analogs, especially PLRP, have connected observers in the field with science teams in remotely located control centers to produce high-quality, publishable scientific results. The analogs have accomplished all of this at a tiny fraction of the cost of an actual space flight. This report treats ANSMET as space flight analog. The chapter following this introduction describes ANSMET in depth. The report then presents data on logistics and crew considerations that may be useful for developers of future human space exploration missions. It offers detailed comparisons between ANSMET and past, present, and future space flights on the Space Shuttle, the International Space Station (ISS), and a proposed Mars mission. Those comparisons are intended to complement the work of Eppler [2], who compares ANSMET to the Apollo moon flights. This report also compares ANSMET with the Desert RATS, NEEMO, and PLRP analogs. It then presents observations and makes recommendations related to ANSMET's value as a simulated space mission. The report ends with a short conclusion. The remainder of this introductory chapter provides background material to help readers interpret the rest of the report. It gives brief overviews of Space Shuttle and ISS missions along with information on a notional future human flight to Mars. It also presents the general features of three of NASA's space flight "analog" projects. With those points of reference in place, the chapter concludes with an overview of ANSMET.

Love, Stanley G.↗