Search Results

After several decades of human spaceflight, the community of space-faring nations has accumulated a diverse and sometimes harrowing history of toxicological events that have plagued human space endeavors almost from the very beginning. Some lessons have been learned in ground-based test beds and others were discovered the hard way - when human lives were at stake in space. From such lessons one can build a risk-management framework for toxicological events to minimize the probability of a harmful exposure, while recognizing that we cannot predict all possible events. Space toxicologists have learned that relatively harmless compounds can be converted by air revitalization systems into compounds that cause serious harm to the crew.

During an ExtraVehicular Activity (EVA), both the heat generated by the astronaut's metabolism and that produced by the Portable Life Support System (PLSS) must be rejected to space. The heat sources include the heat of adsorption of metabolic CO2, the heat of condensation of water, the heat removed from the body by the liquid cooling garment, the load from the electrical components and incident radiation. Although the sublimator hardware to reject this load weighs only 1.58 kg (3.48 lbm), an additional 3.6 kg (8 lbm) of water are loaded into the unit, most of which is sublimated and lost to space, thus becoming the single largest expendable during an eight-hour EVA. Using a radiator to reject heat from the astronaut during an EVA can reduce the amount of expendable water consumed in the sublimator. Radiators have no moving parts and are thus simple and highly reliable. However, past freezable radiators have been too heavy.

A system performance study on a portable life support system being developed for use in the Weightless Environment Training Facility (WETF) and the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) has been completed. The Neutral Buoyancy Portable Life Support System (NBPLSS) will provide life support to suited astronauts training for extravehicular activity (EVA) under water without the use of umbilicals. The basic configuration is characterized by the use of medium pressure (200 - 300 psi) cryogen (liquid nitrogen/oxygen mixture) which provides cooling within the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU), the momentum which enables flow in the vent loop, and oxygen for breathing. NBPLSS performance was analyzed by using a modified Metabolic Man program to compare competing configurations. Maximum sustainable steady state metabolic rates and transient performance based on a typical WETF metabolic rate profile were determined and compared.

The NASA-wide CEV Smart Buyer Team (SBT) was assembled in January 2006 and was tasked with the development of a NASA in-house design for the CEV Crew Module (CM), Service Module (SM), and Launch Abort System (LAS). This effort drew upon over 250 engineers from all of the 10 NASA Centers. In 6 weeks, this in-house design was developed. The Thermal Systems Team was responsible for the definition of the active and passive design architecture. The SBT effort for Thermal Systems can be best characterized as a design architecting activity. Proof-of-concepts were assessed through system-level trade studies and analyses using simplified modeling. This nimble design approach permitted definition of a point design and assessing its design robustness in a timely fashion. This paper will describe the architecting process and present trade studies and proposed thermal designs

In preparation for the contract award of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) produced two design reference missions for the vehicle. The design references used teams of engineers across the agency to come up with two configurations. This process helped NASA understand the conflicts and limitations in the CEV design, and investigate options to solve them.

An EVA simulation with a medical contingency scenario was conducted in 2006 with the NASA Haughton-Mars and EVA Physiology System and Performance Projects, to develop medical contingency management and evacuation techniques for planetary surface exploration. A rescue/evacuation system to allow two rescuer astronauts to evacuate one incapacitated astronaut was evaluated. The rescue system was utilized effectively to extract an injured astronaut up a slope of15-25° and into a surface mobility rover for transport to a simulated habitat for advanced medical care. Further research is recommended to evaluate the effects of reduced gravity and to develop synergies with other surface systems for carrying out the contingency procedures.

Spacecraft radiators reject heat to their surroundings. Radiators can be deployable or mounted on the body of the spacecraft. NASA's Crew Exploration Vehicle is to use body mounted radiators. Coatings play an important role in heat rejection. The coatings provide the radiator surface with the desired optical properties of low solar absorptance and high infrared emittance. These specialized surfaces are applied to the radiator panel in a number of ways, including conventional spraying, plasma spraying, or as an appliqué. Not specifically designed for a weathering environment, little is known about the durability of conventional paints, coatings, and appliqués upon exposure to weathering and subsequent exposure to solar wind and ultraviolet radiation exposure. In addition to maintaining their desired optical properties, the coatings must also continue to adhere to the underlying radiator panel.

During an ExtraVehicular Activity (EVA), both the heat generated by the astronaut's metabolism and that produced by the Portable Life Support System (PLSS) must be rejected to space. The heat sources include the heat of adsorption of metabolic CO2, the heat of condensation of water, the heat removed from the body by the liquid cooling garment and the load from the electrical components. Although the sublimator hardware to reject this load weighs only 1.58 kg (3.48 lbm), an additional 3.6 kg (8 lbm) of water are loaded into the unit, most of which is sublimated and lost to space, thus becoming the single largest expendable during an eight-hour EVA. Using a radiator to reject heat from the astronaut during an EVA can reduce the amount of expendable water consumed in the sublimator. Last year we reported on the design and initial operational assessment tests of a novel radiator designated the Radiator And Freeze Tolerant heat eXchanger (RAFT-X).

Carbon dioxide (CO2) removal technology development for portable life support systems (PLSS) has traditionally concentrated in the areas of solid and liquid chemical sorbents and semi-permeable membranes. Most of these systems are too heavy in gravity environments, require prohibitive amounts of consumables for operation on long term planetary missions, or are inoperable on the surface of Mars due to the presence of a CO2 atmosphere. This paper describes the effort performed to mature an innovative CO2 removal technology that meets NASA's planetary mission needs while adhering to the important guiding principles of simplicity, reliability, and operability. A breadboard cryogenic carbon dioxide scrubber for an ejector-based cryogenic PLSS was developed, designed, and tested. The scrubber freezes CO2 and other trace contaminants out of expired ventilation loop gas using cooling available from a liquid oxygen (LOX) based PLSS.

Providing water necessary to maintain life support has been accomplished in spacecraft vehicles for over forty years. This paper will investigate how previous U.S. space vehicles provided potable water. The water source for the spacecraft, biocide used to preserve the water on-orbit, water stowage methodology, materials, pumping mechanisms, on-orbit water requirements, and water temperature requirements will be discussed. Where available, the hardware used to provide the water and the general function of that hardware will also be detailed. The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV or Orion) water systems will be generically discussed to provide a glimpse of how similar they are to water systems in previous vehicles. Conclusions, questions, and recommendations on strategies that could be applied to CEV based on previous spacecraft water system lessons learned will be made.

As part of preparing for the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) worked on developing the requirements to manage the fire risk. The new CEV poses unique challenges to current fire protection systems. The size and configuration of the vehicle resembles the Apollo capsule instead of the current Space Shuttle or the International Space Station. The smaller free air volume and fully cold plated avionic bays of the CEV requires a different approach in fire protection than the ones currently utilized. The fire protection approach discussed in this paper incorporates historical lessons learned and fire detection and suppression system design philosophy spanning from Apollo to the International Space Station.

This project investigates methods to capture an astronaut's exhaled carbon dioxide (CO2) before it becomes diluted with the high volumetric oxygen flow present within a space suit. Typical expired breath contains CO2 partial pressures (pCO2) in the range of 20-35 mm Hg (.0226-.046 atm). This research investigates methods to capture the concentrated CO2 gas stream prior to its dilution with the low pCO2 ventilation flow. Specifically this research is looking at potential designs for a collection cup for use inside the space suit helmet. The collection cup concept is not the same as a breathing mask typical of that worn by firefighters and pilots. It is well known that most members of the astronaut corps view a mask as a serious deficiency in any space suit helmet design. Instead, the collection cup is a non-contact device that will be designed using a detailed Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) analysis of the ventilation flow environment within the helmet.

An effort was initiated by NASA/JSC in 2001 to develop an Extravehicular Activity System Sizing Analysis Tool (EVAS_SAT) for the sizing of Extravehicular Activity System (EVAS) architecture and studies. Its intent was to support space suit development efforts and to aid in conceptual designs for future human exploration missions. Its basis was the Life Support Options Performance Program (LSOPP), a spacesuit and portable life support system (PLSS) sizing program developed for NASA/JSC circa 1990. EVAS_SAT estimates the mass, power, and volume characteristics for user-defined EVAS architectures, including Suit Systems, Airlock Systems, Tools and Translation Aids, and Vehicle Support equipment. The tool has undergone annual changes and has been updated as new data have become available. Certain sizing algorithms have been developed based on industry standards, while others are based on the LSOPP sizing routines.

Protecting astronauts from space radiation exposure is an important challenge for mission design and operations for future exploration-class and long-duration missions. Crew members are exposed to sporadic solar particle events (SPEs) as well as to the continuous galactic cosmic radiation (GCR). If sufficient protection is not provided the radiation risk to crew members from SPEs could be significant. To improve exposure risk estimates and radiation protection from SPEs, detailed evaluations of radiation shielding properties are required. A model using a modern CAD tool ProE™, which is the leading engineering design platform at NASA, has been developed for this purpose. For the calculation of radiation exposure at a specific site, the cosine distribution was implemented to replicate the omnidirectional characteristic of the 4π particle flux on a surface.

Similar to finding a home on Earth, location is important when selecting where to set up an exploration outpost. Essential considerations for comparing potential lunar outpost locations include: (1) areas nearby that would be useful for In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) oxygen extraction from regolith for crew breathing oxygen as well as other potential uses; (2) proximity to a suitable landing site; (3) availability of sunlight; (4) capability for line-of-sight communications with Earth; (5) proximity to permanently-shadowed areas for potential in-situ water ice; and (6) scientific interest. The Mons Malapert1 (Malapert Mountain) area (85.5°S, 0°E) has been compared to these criteria, and appears to be a suitable location for a lunar outpost.

As planetary suit and planetary life support systems develop, specific design inputs for each system relate to a presently unanswered question concerning operational concepts: What distance can be considered a safe walking distance for a suited crew member exploring the surface of the Moon to ‘walkback’ to the habitat in the event of a rover breakdown, taking into consideration the planned extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks as well as the possible traverse back to the habitat? It has been assumed, based on Apollo program experience, that 10 kilometers (6.2 mi) will be the maximum EVA excursion distance from the lander or habitat to ensure the crew member's safe return to the habitat in the event of a rover failure. To investigate the feasibility of performing a suited 10 km walkback, NASA-JSC assembled a multi-disciplinary team to design and implement the ‘Lunar Walkback Test’.

Long duration NASA-Mir program missions, and the planned International Space Station missions, have given impetus for NASA to implement an operational program of psychological preparation, monitoring, and support for its crews. For exploration missions measured in years, the importance of psychological issues increases exponentially beyond what is currently done. Psychologists' role should begin during the vehicle design and crew selection phases. Extensive preflight preparation must focus on individual and team adaptation, and leadership. Factors such as lack of resupply options and communication delays will alter in-flight monitoring and support capabilities, and require a more self-sufficient crew. Involvement in postflight recovery will also be necessry to ensure appropriate reintegration to the family and job.

Scientists and engineers at NASA are currently developing flight instruments which will demonstrate oxygen production on the Moon and Mars. REGA will extract oxygen from the lunar regolith, measure implanted solar wind and indigenous gases, and monitor the lunar atmosphere. MIP will demonstrate oxygen production on Mars, along with key supporting technologies including filtration, atmospheric acquisition and compression, thermal management, solar cell performance, and dust removal.

The importance of being able to determine the usage rate of life support subsystem consumables was recognized well before the first Apollo Extravehicular Activity (EVA). Since that time, metabolic activity levels have been evaluated and recorded for each EVA crew member. Throughout the history of the United States space program, EVA metabolic rates have been shown to be variable depending upon the mission scenario and the equipment used. Knowing this historic information is invaluable for current EVA planning activities, as well as for the design of future Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) systems. This paper presents an overview of historic metabolic expenditures for Apollo, Skylab, and Shuttle missions, along with a discussion of the types of EVA crew member activities which lead to various metabolic rate levels, and a discussion on how this data is being used to develop advanced EMU systems.

The recovery of potable water from waste water produced by humans in regenerative life support systems is essential for success of long-duration space missions. The Lunar-Mars Life Support Test Project (LMLSTP) Phase II test was performed to validate candidate technologies to support these missions. The test was conducted in the Crew and Thermal Systems Division (CTSD) Life Support Systems Integration Facility (LSSIF) at Johnson Space Center (JSC). Discussed in this paper are the water recovery system (WRS) results of this test. A crew of 4-persons participated in the test and lived in the LSSIF chamber for a duration of 30-days from June 12 to July 12, 1996. The crew had accommodations for personal hygiene, the air was regenerated for reuse, and the waste water was processed to potable and hygiene quality for reuse by the crew during this period. The waste water consisted of shower, laundry, handwash, urine and humidity condensate.