Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “habitation”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

Environmental Signatures for Habitability: What to Measure and How to Rank the Habitability Potential of Mars

The environmental signatures for habitability are not necessarily biosignatures, even though on Earth, they are definitive proof of habitability. It is the constant overprint of the chemical signatures of life that makes it difficult to recognize the chemical and physical properties of a potentially habitable environment as distinct from an inhabited one. Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) will soon embark on a mission to Mars to assess its past or present habitability, so it is useful to examine how we measure habitability on Earth and prepare for how that approach may differ for Mars. This exercise includes: (a) articulation of fundamental assumptions about habitability, (b) an inventory of factors that affect habitability, (c) development of metrics, measurement approach and implementation, and (d) a new classification scheme for planetary habitability that goes beyond the binary "yes" or "no." There may be dozens of factors that affect habitability and they can be weighted as a function of specific environment. However a robotic, in situ investigation even on Earth has constraints that prevent the measurement of every environmental factor, so metrics must be reduced to the most relevant subset, given available time, cost, technical feasibility and scientific importance. Many of the factors could be measured with a combination of orbital data and the MSL payload. We propose that, at a minimum, a designation of high habitability potential requires the following conditions be met: (a) thermally stable with respect to extremes and frequency of fluctuation, (b) has more than one energy source, (c) sufficient chemical diversity to make compounds with covalent and hydrogen bonding, (d) can moderate ionizing radiation enough to allow a stable or evolving pool of organic molecules, (e) must have water or other high quality polar solvent, (f) must be able to renew chemical resources (e.g., plate tectonics, volcanism or something else we haven't envisioned). A measurement approach we have taken to measure habitability on Earth is : 1. Study remote sensing data, maps, etc. 2. Decide how big an area to measure. 3. Determine the spatial sampling rate. 4. Determine the temporal sampling rate. 5. Determine the order of measurements 6. Decide where to begin measurements 7. Select locations at field site and proceed While science drives each of the steps, there are additional constraints, e.g., technical, time, cost, safety (risk). This approach is also executable on Mars. Measurement of past habitability is more challenging both for Earth and Mars where access to the past means subsurface access and confrontation with unknowns about preservation of the martian past. Some environments preserve evidence of past habitability better than others, and this is where selection of the landing site to maximize the preservation potential of habitability indicators will be key. Mars presents an opportunity to discover transitional states between habitable or not, and we offer a ranking scale for planetary habitability with Mars as the second test subject: CLASS ONE Uninhabitable and likely has never been so CLASS TWO Has a high potential but no confirmed observation of life (as defined above) CLASS THREE Inhabited (we find life) 3-A Globally inhabited 3-B Primitive life; early in its evolution, but not yet globally established 3-C Exists only in refugia -- planet heading toward class four CLASS FOUR Post-habitable (there once was life, but now it's gone) MSL provides an opportunity to carefully investigate the habitability of at least one site on Mars and it will reveal much about the possible states of planetary habitability

Conrad, Pamela G.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Factors Impacting Habitable Volume Requirements: Results from the 2011 Habitable Volume Workshop

This report documents the results of the Habitable Volume Workshop held April 18-21, 2011 in Houston, TX at the Center for Advanced Space Studies-Universities Space Research Association. The workshop was convened by NASA to examine the factors that feed into understanding minimum habitable volume requirements for long duration space missions. While there have been confinement studies and analogs that have provided the basis for the guidance found in current habitability standards, determining the adequacy of the volume for future long duration exploration missions is a more complicated endeavor. It was determined that an improved understanding of the relationship between behavioral and psychosocial stressors, available habitable and net habitable volume, and interior layouts was needed to judge the adequacy of long duration habitat designs. The workshop brought together a multi-disciplinary group of experts from the medical and behavioral sciences, spaceflight, human habitability disciplines and design professionals. These subject matter experts identified the most salient design-related stressors anticipated for a long duration exploration mission. The selected stressors were based on scientific evidence, as well as personal experiences from spaceflight and analogs. They were organized into eight major categories: allocation of space; workspace; general and individual control of environment; sensory deprivation; social monotony; crew composition; physical and medical issues; and contingency readiness. Mitigation strategies for the identified stressors and their subsequent impact to habitat design were identified. Recommendations for future research to address the stressors and mitigating design impacts are presented.

Simon, M.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Habitability as a Tier One Criterion in Exploration Mission and Vehicle Design: Habitability - Part 1

Habitability and human factors are necessary criteria to include in the iterative process of Tier I mission design. Bringing these criteria in at the first, conceptual stage of design for exploration and other human-rated missions can greatly reduce mission development costs, raise the level of efficiency and viability, and improve the chances of success. In offering a rationale for this argument, the authors give an example of how the habitability expert can contribute to early mission and vehicle architecture by defining the formal implications of a habitable vehicle, assessing the viability of units already proposed for exploration missions on the basis of these criteria, and finally, by offering an optimal set of solutions for an example mission. In this, the first of three papers, we summarize the basic factors associated with habitability, delineate their formal implications for crew accommodations in a long-duration environment, and show examples of how these principles have been applied in two projects at NASA's Johnson Space Center: the BIO-Plex test facility, and TransHab.

Adams, Constance M.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Habitable Moist Atmospheres on Terrestrial Planets near the Inner Edge of the Habitable Zone Around M Dwarfs

Terrestrial planets in the habitable zones (HZs) of low-mass stars and cool dwarfs have received significant scrutiny recently. Transit spectroscopy of such planets with the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) represents our best shot at obtaining the spectrum of a habitable planet within the next decade. As these planets are likely tidally locked, improved 3D numerical simulations of such planetary atmospheres are needed to guide target selection. Here we use a 3D climate system model, updated with new water-vapor absorption coefficients derived from the HITRAN 2012 database, to study ocean-covered planets at the inner edge of the HZ around late M to mid- K stars (2600 K less than or equal to T(sub eff) less than or equal to 4500 K). Our results indicate that these updated water-vapor coefficients result in significant warming compared to previous studies, so the inner HZ around M dwarfs is not as close as suggested by earlier work. Assuming synchronously rotating Earth-sized and Earth-mass planets with background 1 bar N2 atmospheres, we find that planets at the inner HZ of stars with T(sub eff) greater than 3000 K undergo the classical ''moist greenhouse'' (H2O mixing ratio greater than 10(exp -3) in the stratosphere) at significantly lower surface temperature (approx. 280 K) in our 3D model compared with 1D climate models (approx. 340 K). This implies that some planets around low-mass stars can simultaneously undergo water loss and remain habitable. However, for stars with T(sub eff) less than or equal to 3000 K, planets at the inner HZ may directly transition to a runaway state, while bypassing the moist greenhouse water loss entirely. We analyze transmission spectra of planets in a moist greenhouse regime and find that there are several prominent H2O features, including a broad feature between 5 and 8 micron, within JWST MIRI instrument range. Thus, relying only on standard Earth-analog spectra with 24 hr rotation period around M dwarfs for habitability studies will miss the strong H2O features that one would expect to see on synchronously rotating planets around M dwarf stars, with JWST.

Kopparapu, Ravi kumar↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Continuous Habitable Zones: Pairing a GCM and Bayesian Framework to Predict Habitable Zone Evolution

In the near-future, new space telescopes like JWST, LUVOIR, and HabEx will begin attempting to explore the properties of atmospheres of potentially habitable planets. This will require a significant amount of time and resources for even a single planet, which makes it essential to prioritize observations by those most-likely to have detectable life. Here we present a statistical method to estimate the probabilities that specific exoplanets have been continuously in the habitable zone of their host stars for more than 2 billion years, the approximate time it took life on Earth to significantly increase the oxygen content of the atmosphere. We introduce the use of statistics of an ensemble of 3D planetary general circulation models to estimate these probabilities, replacing prior 1D model estimates.

habitable planets↗
NASA NTRS2000

Habitability in Advanced Space Mission Design: Evaluation of Habitation Elements - Part 2

Habitability is a fundamental component of any long-duration human habitat. Due to the pressures on the crew and the criticality of their performance, this is particularly true of habitats or vehicles proposed for use in any human space mission of duration over 30 days. This paper, the second of three on this subject, will focus on evaluating all the vehicles currently under consideration for the Mars Design Reference Mission through application of metrics for habitability (proposed in a previous paper, see references Adams/McCurdy 1999).

Adams, Constance M.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Enhanced Habitability on High Obliquity Bodies Near the Outer Edge of the Habitable Zone of Sun-Like Stars

High obliquity planets represent potentially extreme limits of terrestrial climate, as they exhibit large seasonality, a reversed annual-mean pole-to-equator gradient of stellar heating, and novel cryospheres. A suite of 3-D global climate model simulations with a dynamic ocean is performed with Earthlike atmospheres for low and high obliquity planets with various stellar fluxes, CO2 concentrations, and initial conditions to explore the propensity for high obliquity climates approaching the outer edge of the Habitable Zone to undergo global glaciation. We also simulate planets with thick CO2 or H2 atmospheres, such as those expected to develop near or beyond the outer edge of the Habitable Zone. We show that high obliquity planets are hotter than their low obliquity counterparts due to ice-albedo feedbacks for cold climates, and water vapor in warm climates. We suggest that the water vapor greenhouse trapping is greater on high obliquity bodies due to the different dynamical regimes that occur between the two states. While equatorial ice-belts are stable at high obliquity in some climate regimes, it is harder to achieve global glaciation than for a low obliquity planet. Temperate polar conditions can be present at high obliquity at forcings for which low obliquity planets would be in a hard snowball state. We suggest the conditions on high obliquity planets are likely to be more favorable for a robust biosphere to develop approaching the outer edge of the HZ. However, the influence of obliquity diminishes for dense atmospheres, in agreement with calculations from 1-D Energy Balance Models.

planets and satellites: atmospheres↗
NASA NTRS2019

Enhanced Habitability on High Obliquity Bodies near the Outer Edge of the Habitable Zone of Sun-Like Stars

High obliquity planets represent potentially extreme limits of terrestrial climate, as they exhibit large seasonality, a reversed annual-mean pole-to-equator gradient of stellar heating, and novel cryospheres. A suite of 3D global climate model simulations is performed for low and high obliquity planets with various stellar fluxes, CO2 concentrations, and initial conditions to explore the propensity for high obliquity climates to undergo global glaciation. We also simulate planets with thick CO2 or H2 atmospheres, such as those expected to develop near or beyond the outer edge of the habitable zone. We show that high obliquity planets are hotter than their low obliquity counterparts due to ice-albedo feedbacks for cold climates, and water vapor in warm climates. We suggest that the water vapor greenhouse trapping is greater on high obliquity bodies for a given global-mean temperature due to the different dynamical regimes that occur between the two states. While equatorial ice belts are stable at high obliquity in some climate regimes, it is substantially harder to achieve global glaciation than for a low obliquity planet. Temperate polar conditions can be present at high obliquity at forcings for which low obliquity planets would be in a hard snowball state. Furthermore, open ocean can persist even in the winter hemisphere and when global-mean temperatures are well below freezing. However, the influence of obliquity diminishes for dense atmospheres, in agreement with calculations from 1D energy balance models.

Planet and satellite atmospheres↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships [1]. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach [2]. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface [3], is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration [4]. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life [5]. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface [6]. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission [5]. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. Table 1 Notional ECLSS consumables per mission use for SH and TH [5]. SH (28-day) Open Loop: Water (kg) 288 | Oxygen (kg) 30 TH (1110-day) Closed-Loop: Water (kg) 182 | Oxygen (kg) 123 In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project [7]. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface, is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
NASA NTRS2021

Habitability Models for Astrobiology

Habitability has been generally defined as the capability of an environment to support life. Ecologists have beenusing Habitat Suitability Models (HSMs) for more than four decades to study the habitability of Earth fromlocal to global scales. Astrobiologists have been proposing different habitability models for some time, with lit-tle integration and consistency among them, being different in function to those used by ecologists. Habitabilitymodels are not only used to determine whether environments are habitable, but they also are used to charac-terize what key factors are responsible for the gradual transition from low to high habitability states. Here wereview and compare some of the different models used by ecologists and astrobiologists and suggest how theycould be integrated into new habitability standards. Such standards will help improve the comparison and charac-terization of potentially habitable environments, prioritize target selections, and study correlations between habit-ability and biosignatures. Habitability models are the foundation of planetary habitability science, and the synergybetween ecologists and astrobiologists is necessary to expand our understanding of the habitability of Earth,the Solar System, and extrasolar planets.

Habitability↗
NASA NTRS2025

Habitability and Human Factors Assessment (iSHORT, SHAQ, and SHU)

BACKGROUND As long-duration off-planet habitats become a reality, a consideration of habitability and human factors (HF) is crucial. The habitat is more than just a place to live and work. It is also the crew’s perception of the space, and the psychological impacts of size, layout, and usage over time; all of which can support or strain behavioral health and performance (BHP). A previous International Space Station (ISS) habitability study used the iSHORT (Space Habitability Observation Reporting Tool) to collect detailed data about habitability and human factors and inform NASA Standards. Of the previous iSHORT study, only one of the six ISS subjects had a duration of one year; all other ISS and ground analog subjects had shorter mission durations from one week to six months. It is necessary to collect new data with a focus on long-duration exploration missions of > 6 months and on planetary surface habitat design. New data is also needed to compare the iSHORT to other habitability measures. One measure, the SHAQ (Subjective Habitability and Acceptability Questionnaire), assesses the intersection of psychology and habitability. Another complementary measure, the Scale for Habitat Usability (SHU), is a brief subjective scale that captures how habitat design impacts perceived usability of the built environment in relation to task performance. OBJECTIVE Our study aims to (1) understand how individual well-being and team dynamics may relate to HF concerns over time, (2) capture how habitability and HF change over time, (3) compare the three habitability measures (iSHORT, SHAQ, SHU), (4) assess habitats to capture HF design concerns and related BHP impacts of a planetary habitat, and (5) inform future standards for HF design. METHOD Data are being collected on crews living and working in long-duration spaceflight analogs. Individual-level data collections are repeated at regular intervals throughout the missions on several habitat areas, activities, and key equipment (i.e., points of interest). These points of interest (POIs) include the kitchen/galley, crew quarters, and other work and living areas. Assessments include evaluations of privacy, comfort, convenience, control, efficiency, and social density through the lens of subsequent outcomes like sleep, individual performance, group activities performance, stress, mood, and social interactions. Pre- and post-mission evaluations will also allow comparison with homes, pre- and post-mission hotels, and a retrospective reflection of living and working in a long-duration analog. INITIAL DATA COLLECTIONS In this poster, we will describe the measures and data yield. Since the research protocol was designed, the study team has collected iSHORT Standalone four times, nine collections of SHAQ, and three collections of iSHORT with SHAQ. Data collection is ongoing. SUMMARY A novel assessment suite has been developed to further aid the comparison and complementary understanding of the habitability and human factors measures, which will allow for efficient deployment of these measures in analogs and/or spaceflight in near-term research as well as support well-being and performance through design.

J C W Miller↗
NASA NTRS2024

Multiple Habitable Phases on Outer Exosolar Worlds

As stars evolve to higher luminosities during first ascension of the giant branch, previously frozen terrestrial worlds may thaw and host liquid water on their surfaces. Eventually these outer worlds again become uninhabitable due to receiving too much incident light and their water inventory evaporating. Solar-mass stars experience a sudden decrease in luminosity entering the horizontal branch, which could result in a secondary habitable phase for their outer worlds. The outer worlds' time with habitable surface climates is key in evaluating the possibility of extraterrestrial life arising. The times inside the habitable zone (TIHZ) are calculated for outer worlds orbiting between 5 and 45 au around a Sun-like star. By comparing the TIHZ to time estimates for life to arise on Earth, we evaluate whether such outer worlds are promising candidates in the search for extraterrestrial life. We use two different solar evolution models (PARSEC and Dartmouth) and both optimistic and conservative habitable zone (HZ) definitions. Multiple habitable phases are found for each outer world. Outer worlds with orbits as large as Saturn are found to have a secondary habitable phase which exceeds the first in duration. Generally, the time inside the HZ is found to decrease almost monotonically with orbiting distance. Water loss is calculated after the first habitable phase to determine whether a secondary habitable phase is possible. For all orbiting distances the water loss is insufficient to deplete a water inventory equivalent to that of many moons in the outer solar system.

Astrobiology↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Results for the Subjective Habitability Acceptability Questionnaire From HERA C5 and C6

BACKGROUND The impact of habitability on psychological and performance outcomes is recognized as an important factor in habitat and vehicle design—especially as missions increase in length. Formal evaluation of habitability’s impact is possible using the Spaceflight Habitability Acceptability Questionnaire (SHAQ), which was psychometrically validated by Roma et al. in 2022 [1]. The SHAQ survey systematically quantifies the relationships between habitat areas (e.g., bedroom, kitchen, hygiene area, office, etc.) and behavioral health and performance (BHP) outcomes (i.e., individual and team performance, mood, stress, sleep, social interaction), and considers the moderating effects of key habitability aspects (i.e., privacy, control, convenience, efficiency, comfort, social density) on that relationship. METHOD Respondents were HERA participants from Campaign 5 and 6 (n = 32). Data from three environments were used in our SHAQ analyses: SHAQ in HERA (in-mission), SHAQ at Home (pre-mission), and SHAQ in Hotel (pre- and post-mission for C6, just pre-mission for C5). For each habitat area, respondents are asked how that area layout impacts six BHP outcomes on a 201-point visual analog scale with the anchors: impairs, has no effect, and facilitates. They also had the option to respond “Not Applicable”. Follow up questions asked why six key habitability aspects (e.g., privacy) influenced the way the habitat area affected a given outcome. Participants indicated whether a habitat area’s habitability aspects were inadequate (low score) to adequate (midpoint) to ideal (high score), using a 201-point visual analog scale as well but were binned to a 7-point scale for analyses. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION When comparing across environments, ratings of BHP outcomes were worse in HERA compared to home and pre-mission hotel, but rebounded for the post-mission hotel such that post-mission hotel rating were often higher than all previous ratings. Within HERA, ratings of how a habitat area impacted an outcome skewed towards facilitation with communal areas (i.e., galley and office) rated most facilitating. The follow up questions about why six key aspects related to habitability moderated outcomes indicated that most habitat areas were rated as having “adequate” habitability characteristics. Privacy was the only moderator with average scores below adequate for all habitat areas. The office had the most moderators scoring above adequate for all habitat areas. Ratings indicated small to moderate effects of layouts on BHP outcomes: with facilitating layouts averaging between 4 and 5, and impairing layouts averaging between 2 and 4. The sleeping module layout facilitated sleep, with ratings indicating adequate comfort but inadequate privacy. The galley layout facilitated social interaction and mood, with ratings indicating adequate efficiency and convenience. The office layout facilitated social interaction, team and individual performance, with ratings similarly indicating adequate efficiency and convenience. The hygiene module worsened individual performance, mood and stress, with ratings indicating less than adequate privacy and social density. Our findings suggest there is value in having dedicated team and individual spaces. REFERENCES [1] Roma, P. G., Landon, L.B., Spencer, C. A., Whitmire, A. M., & Williams, T. J. (2022). SHAQ: Development and Validation. Human Factors: Special Issue on Spaceflight, 65(6), 1074-1104. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was funded by the NASA Human Research Program directed task Human Factors and Behavioral Performance in HERA (PI = S. Bell) to the BHP Lab. KBR Inc. and JES Tech authors were supported by KBR’s Human Health and Performance Contract NNJ15HK11B with NASA.

behavioral health↗