DRAFT HUMAN HEALTH, LIFE SUPPORT AND HABITATION SYSTEMS - NOVEMBER 2010 - NASA
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
DRAFT Human Health, Life Support and
Habitation Systems
Technology Area 06
Kathryn Hurlbert, Chair
Bob Bagdigian
Carol Carroll
Antony Jeevarajan
Mark Kliss
Bhim Singh
November • 2010
DRAFT
This page is intentionally left blank
DRAFT
Table of Contents
Foreword
Executive Summary TA06-1
1. General Overview TA06-2
1.1. Technical Approach TA06-2
1.2. Benefits TA06-2
1.3. Applicability/Traceability to NASA Strategic Goals, AMPM, DRMs, DRAs TA06-2
1.4. Top Technical Challenges TA06-5
2. Detailed Portfolio Discussion TA06-6
2.1. Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) and Habitation Systems TA06-7
2.1.1. Approach and Major Challenges TA06-7
2.2. Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) Systems TA06-10
2.2.1. Approach and Major Challenges TA06-11
2.3. Human Health and Performance (HHP) TA06-12
2.3.1. Approach and Major Challenges TA06-14
2.4. Environmental Monitoring, Safety, and Emergency Response (EMSER) TA06-16
2.4.1. Approach and Major Challenges TA06-17
2.5. Radiation TA06-17
2.5.1. Major Approach and Challenges TA06-19
3. Interdependency with Other Technology Areas TA06-21
4. Possible Benefits to Other National Needs TA06-21
Acronyms TA06-24
Acknowledgements TA06-24
DRAFT
Foreword
NASA’s integrated technology roadmap, including both technology pull and technology push strategies,
considers a wide range of pathways to advance the nation’s current capabilities. The present state of this effort
is documented in NASA’s DRAFT Space Technology Roadmap, an integrated set of fourteen technology
area roadmaps, recommending the overall technology investment strategy and prioritization of NASA’s
space technology activities. This document presents the DRAFT Technology Area 06 input: Human Health,
Life Support and Habitation Systems. NASA developed this DRAFT Space Technology Roadmap for use by
the National Research Council (NRC) as an initial point of departure. Through an open process of community
engagement, the NRC will gather input, integrate it within the Space Technology Roadmap and provide NASA
with recommendations on potential future technology investments. Because it is difficult to predict the wide
range of future advances possible in these areas, NASA plans updates to its integrated technology roadmap on
a regular basis.
DRAFTExecutive Summary lieve that each activity or milestone represented in
This roadmap provides a summary of key capa- the TASR does indeed have a technology solution
bilities in the domain of TA06, Human Health, to pursue at the present time, or will have within
Life Support and Habitation Systems (HLHS), the timeframe shown. Each sub-TA portion of the
necessary to achieve national and agency goals in roadmap is detailed in Section 2, providing fur-
human space exploration over the next few de- ther explanation of the sub-TA as well as a sum-
cades. As an example, crewed missions venturing mary table of the priority technologies and/or sys-
beyond Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) will require tech- tem functional areas of interest, the current SOA,
nologies with improved reliability, reduced mass, the major challenges for advancement, and the
self-sufficiency, and minimal logistical needs as an recommended milestones/activities to advance to
emergency or quick-return option will not be fea- a TRL-6 or beyond (i.e., demonstration in a rele-
sible. The sub-technology areas (sub-TAs) includ- vant mission environment or simulation thereof ),
ed in the roadmap are Environmental Control which correlates with the TASR content. Section
and Life Support Systems (ECLSS) and Habita- 2 also provides some example technological solu-
tion Systems; Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) Sys- tions, but these should not be considered all-in-
tems; Human Health and Performance (HHP); clusive or decisive without rigorous survey of SOA
Environmental Monitoring, Safety, and Emergen- and proposed technologies and further review/
cy Response (EMSER); and Radiation. study. Some major technical challenges identified
Shown on the next page is an overview road- for each sub-TA are presented in Section 1.4, for
map (called the Technology Area Strategic Road- periods spanning the next two decades.
map (TASR)), which includes planned, predict- As can be seen in the TASR, milestones are
ed, and new proposed missions and milestones aligned to minimize the number of necessary
at the top. Examples of the planned and predict- flights to progress the technologies and maximize
ed missions are human missions to LEO (e.g., In- the use of integrated ground tests/demonstrations
ternational Space Station (ISS)) and Near-Earth of new technologies for reduced risk. The ‘flight
Objects (NEOs). More detail on these “pull” mis- campaigns’ serve as validation beacons to project
sions and milestones is given in Section 1.3. In managers of future missions. It is recognized that
addition, new “push” missions and milestones are validation to TRL-6 should occur by the Prelim-
proposed, and represent key events that would ad- inary Design Reviews (PDRs) of these missions;
vance or validate technologies to a point where PDR is targeted for no later than three years be-
they would be available to implement into future fore launch readiness, and more often desired five
missions at low risk. An example “push” mission is to six years before human missions.
the extension of ISS operations beyond 2020, to The primary benefit of investment in technolo-
allow for continued and sustained testing and ad- gy development for the HLHS domain is the abil-
vancements related to space-environment effects ity to successfully achieve human space missions
on humans. to LEO and well beyond, as described in Section
The lower portion of the TASR is populated 1.2. At the same time, significant potential exists
with technology milestones and activities for each for improvements in the quality of life here on
of the sub-TAs, as recommended to allow signif- Earth and for benefits of national and global inter-
icant advancements to support the missions and est. Section 4 provides an extensive description of
milestones identified. The icons are designated how investment in HLHS can provide technolo-
in the legend at the bottom, and distinguish be- gies for climate change mitigation, emergency re-
tween “pull” that directly tie to a mission, activity sponse, defense operations, human health, biolog-
or milestone, versus “push” where there is no di- ical breakthroughs, and more.
rect link but a recommendation/path to support The OCT Roadmapping activity is intended to
future needs. Also, distinction is made for ground identify overlaps across TAs, and for the topical
versus flight activities, and cross-cutting technol- areas of TA06, HLHS, many such overlaps exist.
ogies are identified. Notably, some technologies Notably, the greatest overlap occurs with TA07,
in the roadmap are currently at a low Technology Human Exploration and Development of Space
Readiness Level (TRL), but could provide signifi- (HEDS). Delineation exists in that the focus of
cant advancement in the current State-of-the-Art HLHS is specific to the human element, includ-
(SOA) and/or drive new approaches or techniques ing technologies that directly affect crew needs for
in accomplishing mission implementation. The survival, human consumption, crew health and
subject matter experts authoring this roadmap be- well-being, and the environment and/or interfaces
DRAFT TA06-1to which the crew is exposed. Alternately, HEDS proposed technologies as well as associated mile-
focuses on the global architecture and overall in- stones and missions correlating to the TASR.
frastructure capabilities to enable a sustained hu- Also, the TASR milestones are aligned to mini-
man presence for exploration destinations. More mize the number of necessary flights to progress
detail on HLHS relationships to the other TAs is the technologies and maximize the use of integrat-
included in Sections 2.0 and 3.0. ed ground tests/demonstrations for reduced risk.
The ‘flight campaigns’ serve as validation beacons
1. General Overview to project managers of future missions. It is rec-
ognized that validation to TRL-6 should occur by
1.1. Technical Approach the Preliminary Design Reviews of these missions;
This roadmap provides a summary of key ca- PDR is targeted for no later than three years be-
pabilities, including game-changing or break- fore launch readiness, and more often desired five
through items, within the domain of TA06, to six years before human missions.
HLHS, necessary to achieve predicted national
and agency goals in space over the next few de- 1.2. Benefits
cades. As an example, crewed missions venturing The primary benefit of significant technology
beyond LEO will require technologies for high re- development for the HLHS domain is the abili-
liability, reduced mass, self-sufficiency, and min- ty to successfully achieve affordable human space
imal logistical needs, as an emergency or quick- missions to LEO and well beyond. Continued ISS
return option will not be feasible. Human space operation and missions will directly contribute to
missions include other critical elements such as the knowledge base and advancements in HLHS
1) EVA systems to provide crew members protec- in the coming decade, as a unique human-tended
tion from exposure to the space environment dur- test platform within the space environment. Ei-
ing planned and contingency/emergency opera- ther extension of ISS operations, or using an al-
tions; 2) crew health care to address physiological, ternative permanent or semi-permanent in-space
psychological, performance and other needs in-si- facility would facilitate sustained research/testing
tu; 3) monitoring, safety, and emergency response and associated advancements into the following
systems such as fire protection and recovery, envi- decade as well, in preparation for missions beyond
ronmental monitoring sensors, and environmen- LEO. In-space test beds will be crucial to the de-
tal remediation technologies; and 4) systems to velopment and validation of technologies needed
address radiation health and performance risks, for those bold space missions, such as a NEO, cur-
and shielding and other mitigations. rently under consideration.
The TASR provides a top-level overview of the The proposed roadmap includes many suggest-
roadmap content herein. The missions shown in- ed in-flight and ground test activities for pre-flight
clude those to LEO (e.g., ISS) and other poten- evaluation and augmented research/testing of rec-
tial destinations beyond (e.g., NEO). In addition, ommended technologies, which will regularly and
“push” missions and milestones are recommended efficiently provide advancements during the de-
for consideration, which represent key events for velopment phases. More details on the benefits
advancement or validation of technologies and/ for each entry are defined in subsequent sub-TA
or a point where the technologies could be avail- sections. Additionally, Section 4 provides an ex-
able to implement for future missions. An exam- tensive description of how investment in HLHS
ple “push” mission is the extension of ISS oper- technologies can lead to improvements in the
ations beyond 2020 to allow for continued and quality of life here on Earth and create benefits
sustained testing and advancements related to of national and global interest. Examples include,
space-environment effects on humans. Notably, but are not limited to, technologies related to cli-
some technologies in the roadmap are currently at mate change mitigation, emergency response, mil-
a low TRL, but could provide significant advance- itary operations, human health, and biological sci-
ment in the SOA and/or drive new approaches or ence breakthroughs.
techniques in accomplishing mission implemen- 1.3. Applicability/Traceability to NASA
tation. Strategic Goals, AMPM, DRMs, DRAs
The HLHS sub-TAs detailed in the roadmap The process to develop the TASR included 1)
content herein are ECLSS and Habitation Sys- initial consideration of the overall agency goals,
tems; EVA Systems; HHP; EMSER; and Radi- outcomes, and objectives as “pull” missions for the
ation. Section 2 details each sub-TA, including technology content and milestones; and 2) incor-
TA06-2 DRAFTFigure 1: Human Health, Life Support and Habitation Systems Roadmap
DRAFT TA06–3/4This page is intentionally left blank
poration of the NASA Mission Directorate and this technology area (TA) exists; however, the dis-
NASA Centers needs and focus within the sub- tinction is that TA06, HLHS, is specific to the
TAs. While the strategic plan for the agency, and human element, including technologies that di-
therefore its strategic goals, specific missions, etc., rectly affect crew needs for survival, human con-
is currently being finalized, the top portion of the sumption, crew health and well-being, and the en-
roadmap does include the proposed agency-level vironment and/or interfaces to which the crew is
major missions and milestones derived from the exposed. For the TA06, HLHS, drafted roadmap
drafted FY11 Agency Mission Planning Manifest herein, some “push” missions and milestones are
(AMPM) ; an example is the planned ISS opera-
1
also recommended for consideration, like extend-
tions through 2020. In addition, some content re- ed operation of the ISS. It should be noted that
lated to Design Reference Missions (DRMs) were alternative platforms might serve this purpose as
based on Design Reference Architectures (DRAs) well, such as commercial or joint space stations/
evaluated as a part of the Human Exploration vehicles, if available and appropriate for the pro-
Framework Team (HEFT) activity ; an exam- 2
posed technologies.
ple is the assumed human missions beyond LEO, The proposed roadmap provides time phasing
such as the mission to a NEO/Near-Earth Aster- that would allow infusion of technologies or ca-
oid (NEA), within the 2025 timeframe. An at- pabilities to support planned, predicted, and new
tempt was also made to consider the relevant mis- proposed agency missions and/or milestones.
sions and milestones included on TA07, Human Once the agency direction and authorization for
Exploration and Development of Space (HEDS), FY11 and beyond is finalized, the roadmap should
Roadmap, as considerable potential overlap with be re-evaluated.
1 Agency Mission Planning Manifest. Draft internal NASA 1.4. Top Technical Challenges
document. 2011.
2 Human Exploration Framework Team (HEFT) DRM Re-
The table below summarizes some major techni-
view - Phase 1 Closeout, September 2, 2010. cal challenges that will be faced in the continua-
Table 1. Major Technical Challenges
Present – 2016
Integrate fundamental research results on radiation environment biological effects, and including other effects from space exposure, into damage/risk
model(s) and consolidate and interpret databases of major signaling pathways causative of cancer from space exposure and other damage
Stabilize liquid and solid wastes to recover water and to control pathogens, biological growth and gas/odor production
Achieve high reliability and reduce dependence on expendables over existing SOA systems that recover O2 from CO2 and H2O from humidity condensate
and urine
Develop advanced screening technologies, to detect and/or predict subclinical malignancies, subclinical cataracts, individual susceptibility levels to space
exposure (e.g., radiation) and carbon dioxide exposures, osteoporosis, oxidative stress, renal stone formation, anxiety, and depression
Demonstrate EVA technologies that could be used to extend EVA capability on ISS beyond 2020. These technologies include advances for on-back regener-
able CO2 and humidity control, advanced suit materials, and more capable avionics
Demonstrate real time airborne particle monitoring on the ISS
2017 – 2022
Develop radiation risk model(s) as a predictive systems biology model approach for space radiation, including development of experimental methods/
techniques and models to verify integrated risk and understand synergistic effects of other spaceflight stressors (microgravity, reduced immune system
response, etc.) combined with radiation
Validate physiological and psychological countermeasures for long-duration missions, which can include any combination of exercise, non-exercise (e.g.,
pharmacological) and/or advanced techniques (e.g., Virtual Reality technologies such as a “Holodeck”, artificial gravity)
Close high-reliability ECLSS more fully, with >95% O2 and H2O recovery from an integrated mission perspective
Implement bulk food processing in-flight and augmentation of food supply with plants
Advanced EVA technologies to enable missions to NEOs, which includes suits that incorporate advanced materials and component demonstrations of life
support technologies that reduce consumables
Complete development of a distributed hybrid fire-detection system for space missions
2023 – 2028
Demonstrate hybrid physical/chemical and biological ECLSS with >95% recovery of O2 and H2O with bulk food production
Develop and validate a non-ionizing, full body, dynamic, 3-D imaging with in-situ diagnosis and treatment capabilities (e.g., renal stone ablation)
Validate real-time monitoring and forecasting space weather model(s), to include prediction of onset and evolution of Solar Particle Events (SPEs) as well as
all clear periods
Flight demonstration of an advanced EVA system, including suits that utilize multifunctional materials, a portable life-support system (PLSS) with no con-
sumables, on-suit power generation, and avionics that enable the crew to operate autonomously
Complete integrated system testing of portable, non-solvent-based microbial remediation on ISS
DRAFT TA06-5tion and progression of human spaceflight, espe- 2. Detailed Portfolio
cially for crewed missions beyond LEO. The listing Discussion
was determined by reviewing the recommended This document provides a summary of key ca-
content for each sub-TA for the time period spec- pabilities in the TA06, HLHS, domain, recom-
ified, and selecting one or two technologies and/ mended to achieve predicted national and agen-
or priority system functions within that domain cy goals in space over the next few decades. The
for a balanced representation of HLHS. The table sub-TAs, illustrated in Figure 2, are described in
specifies technologies that are a low TRL and re- more detail in subsequent sections. Notably, for
quire extended development time to be ready for TA06, HLHS, the greatest TA interdependen-
future missions, those that may significantly im- cy is with TA07, HEDS. Substantial delineation
pact mission implementation (e.g., high reliabil- between the two TA scopes does exist. HLHS
ity, reduced logistics, decreased mass, high effi- concentrates specifically on the human element,
ciency power systems, etc.), and/or those that are whereas HEDS focuses on the global architecture
critical to human safety and well-being. An exam- and overall infrastructure capabilities to enable a
ple is that top priorities for ECLSS include matur- sustained human presence for exploration desti-
ing technologies for high reliability and reduced nations. The HLHS domain includes technol-
logistics, as supported by the recent HEFT activ- ogies that directly affect crew needs for survival,
ity . The recommended activities and milestones
3
human consumption, crew health and well-being,
related to the challenges listed below, and those in and the environment and/or interfaces to which
the Section 2 tables for each sub-TA, are direct- the crew is exposed. An example is water technol-
ly correlated to the TASR content. The TASR also ogies, which are needed for direct human water
shows when the milestones and activities related intake, but also for hygiene and humidity control.
to the challenges are intended to be met. This is distinguished from HEDS, for which the
water focus is on extraction from in-situ materials
3 Ibid. for use in vehicle systems, or optimal placement
of storage tanks to maximize radiation shielding
Figure 2. Technology Area Breakdown Structure (TABS)
TA06-6 DRAFTwithout affecting the functional architecture. An- venting or de-orbiting in spent resupply vehicles.
other example is that for HLHS, the EVA systems Longer-duration missions demand that reusable
are those that directly interface to the human and water be recovered from wastewater in order to
provide the life support, such as the suit itself and reduce or eliminate the need for Earth-based re-
the support systems. Conversely, in HEDS, for supply. Short- and long-duration missions typical-
the EVA systems include the mobility technolo- ly also require some degree of wastewater stabili-
gies needed to interface to the vehicles/systems at zation to protect equipment and facilitate potable
the exploration site(s) and to the components, in water disinfection for storage.
order to conduct human mission operations; ex- Waste Management – The objective of this el-
amples include a suitport and/or suitlocks, rovers, ement is to safeguard crew health, increase safety
tools and translation aids. Another area of poten- and performance, recover resources, and protect
tial overlap for both TAs is food preparation and planetary surfaces, all while decreasing mission
production, but this too has been resolved: for costs. Key technology gaps to be addressed for
HLHS, food is a critical consumable for humans future missions include waste/trash volume re-
and provides a future interface to the life support duction and stabilization, water recovery from
system for carbon dioxide scrubbing. For HEDS, wastes, and ultimately a high-percentage recovery
the primary concentration is on production and of H2O, O2, N2, CO2, and minerals. Additional
preservation of food for in-transit space and desti- technology gaps include waste collection, disposal
nations, to minimize human-specific logistics and, and containment technologies, and source odor/
therefore, support self-sufficiency for remote mis- contaminant control.
sions beyond LEO. Overlaps with other TAs are Habitation – This area focuses on habitation
described briefly in Section 3. functions that closely interface with life support
2.1. Environmental Control and Life systems, including food preparation and produc-
Support Systems (ECLSS) and tion, hygiene, metabolic waste collection, cloth-
Habitation Systems ing/laundry, and the conversion of logistics trash
The main objective of spacecraft life support and to resources. Other habitation functions such as
habitation systems is to maintain an environment deployable crew volumes, habitation analogs,
suitable for sustaining human life throughout the lighting, housekeeping tools, and noise mitigation
duration of a mission. The ECLSS and Habitation are addressed in TA07, HEDS.
System includes four functions, each of which is 2.1.1. Approach and Major Challenges
described below. The basic human metabolic spacecraft require-
Air Revitalization – The overarching function ments of oxygen, water, and food have been well
of this element is to maintain a safe and habitable characterized, and these requirements have largely
atmosphere within a spacecraft, surface vehicle, been met for short-duration missions (from Proj-
or habitat. This is achieved through the remov- ect Mercury to the Space Shuttle) with open-loop
al of carbon dioxide, trace volatile organic com- life support systems using expendables.
pounds, and particulates that are released into the For the ISS, continual operational costs of a
atmosphere from crew member and vehicle sourc- conventional open-loop system are prohibitive.
es. Oxygen and nitrogen are added to the atmo- Accordingly, the ISS life support systems process
sphere in controlled manners to maintain cabin condensate and urine into potable water. An up-
pressures and composition, and to make-up for coming technology demonstration will also enable
metabolic consumption and loss. Ventilation mix- recovery of half of the oxygen available in carbon
es atmospheric constituents and transports sensi- dioxide. This approach is a significant advance
ble and latent heat loads to rejection devices. In over previous systems, but many of the technical
long-duration missions, oxygen and carbon can be solutions to human life support for the ISS de-
recovered from carbon dioxide and recycled to re- pend upon reliable system operation and timely
duce mission life-cycle costs and upmass. logistical support from Earth.
Water Recovery and Management – This ele- As NASA looks toward human missions be-
ment provides a safe and reliable supply of pota- yond LEO, two key distinctions exist from all
ble water to meet crew consumption and opera- crewed space missions to date: 1) human beings
tional needs. Short-duration missions often can be will spend significantly longer periods of time far-
executed by using launched water supplies com- ther from reliable logistics depots, and 2) an emer-
bined with disposing wastewater via overboard gency quick-return option will not be feasible.
DRAFT TA06-7Accordingly, to sustain life on long-duration mis- pabilities with the optimal combination of mass,
sions beyond LEO, high reliability will become an size, reliability, logistics, and loop closure charac-
increasingly dominant design driver. Therefore, teristics that will best support the given mission
the ECLSS and Habitation Systems technical area scenario.
must develop and mature technologies that em- In maturing these technologies, life support and
phasize 1) high-reliability processes and integrated habitation systems for missions beyond LEO will
systems that employ autonomous monitoring and need to address both the technological shortcom-
control systems and that are easily maintained by ings and the functional integration inefficiencies
the crew; 2) increased self-sufficiency, enabled by of existing systems. Further reduction of life-cy-
highly reliable means of recovering life-supporting cle costs and closure of life support systems is par-
commodities such as oxygen, water, and food; and amount, including focus on the key challenges
3) minimized logistics supply to diminish overall summarized in Table 2.
mass of spares, maintenance equipment, clothing, Air revitalization is typically achieved by the
food containers, and other items requiring stow- combined operation of many individual equip-
age mass and volume. ment items, each optimized to perform one or two
Reliability, logistics, and loop closure all con- functions . Utilization of multifunctional materi-
4
tribute to overall mission life-cycle costs. As ca- als and processes can reduce system size and oper-
pabilities to recover and produce life support con- ational complexity, regardless of mission duration.
sumables (O2, H2O, food) are added to a launch Such multifunctional systems must be developed
vehicle, initial mass may be increased for addition- to avoid burdensome maintenance or repair. Al-
al system hardware, spare parts, and expendable though air revitalization life-cycle costs for long-
supplies. Depending on the mission duration and duration missions are dominated by the degree
operations concept, these initial penalties need to of oxygen recovery, system reliability and utiliza-
be justified by the resultant long-term consum- tion of expendables also contribute substantially
ables savings. Architectural trades uncover which to mission economics and probability of success.
combinations of capabilities yield the lowest life- Reliability drivers include dynamic electrome-
cycle cost for a given mission duration and con- chanical devices (valves and valve position indi-
cept. A representative break-even comparison of cators, compressors, etc.) as well as components
this type is shown in Figure 3. The goal of life sup- often considered “static” due to material attrition
port and habitation architecture is to select the ca- and loss of critical properties over time (sorbents,
heat exchanger coatings, membranes, etc.). Oper-
ating equipment and airflows produce substantial
acoustic emissions that dominate the cabin envi-
ronment and require system size increases to ac-
commodate marginally-effective acoustic treat-
ments. Overboard venting of process gases as well
as residual atmosphere constituents during airlock
operations may require substantially greater con-
trols on planetary surfaces than has been histori-
cally required in LEO in order to meet planetary
protection requirements. Mission concepts that
require the recharge of oxygen accumulators drive
the need to reliably generate or compress gaseous
oxygen to high pressures or liquefy it to achieve
high storage densities.
Similar to air revitalization, life-cycle costs for
water recovery and management are dominated
by the degree of water recovery, system reliabili-
ty, and utilization of expendables. As in air revi-
talization, reliability drivers include both dynamic
Figure 3. Representative Comparison of Life-Cycle 4 Perry, J., Bagdigian, R., and Carrasquillo, R., 2010, “Trade
Mass Predictions, Candidate ECLSS Architec- Spaces in Crewed Spacecraft Atmosphere Revitalization System Devel-
opment.” Paper presented at 40th International Conference on Environ-
tural Approaches mental Systems, Barcelona, Spain, July 11-15.
TA06-8 DRAFTTable 2. ECLS and Habitation Technical Area Details
Function Current SOA/Practice Major Challenge(s) Milestones/Activities to Ad-
vance to TRL-6 or beyond
Air Revitalization CO2 removal via expendable lithium hydroxide Attain high reliability 2011-14: 75% O2 recovery
and regenerable molecular sieves [TRL-9] and
amines [TRL-6] Reduce utilization of expendables 2011-14: Variable cabin pressure
control
O2 supply via compressed gas delivery, scav- Reduce power and equipment mass and
enging of cryogenic fuel cell reactant boil-off, volume 2015-19: 100% O2 recovery
consumption of expendable perchlorate
candles, and water electrolysis Increase recovery of O2 from CO2 2020-24: O2 recovery augmented
by crop systems and life-support-
50% O2 recovery from CO2 [Sabatier TRL-7] Reduce acoustic emissions ing materials
Trace contaminant removal via catalytic oxida- Control environmental mass exchanges to 2025-29: O2 recovery principally
tion and expendable sorbents ensure planetary protection provided by crop systems and life
supporting materials
Particulate filtration System impacts of cabin atmospheres with
reduced total pressures and elevated oxygen
Ducted fans concentrations
Air/liquid heat exchangers (condensing, non- Develop and validate complex models and
condensing) simulations (e.g., Computational Fluid Dynam-
ics (CFD), human metabolic models, chemical
and microbial processes)
Water Recovery H2O recovery from humidity condensate and Attain high reliability 2011-14: 40-55% H2O recovery
and Manage- urine only (representing only 15-20% of the (condensate, urine, hygiene)
ment anticipated wastewater load for exploration Reduce utilization of expendables
missions) 2015-19: 98% H2O recovery (con-
Reduce power and equipment mass and densate, urine, hygiene, laundry,
volume waste)
Reduce acoustic emissions 2020-24: 98% H2O recovery
augmented by biological systems
Recover water from additional sources, includ- (condensate, urine, hygiene,
ing hygiene and laundry laundry, waste, In-Situ Resource
Utilization (ISRU)-derived)
Increase overall water recovery percentage
2025-29: 98% H2O recovery
Stabilize wastewater from multiple sources in principally provided by biological
manners that are compatible with processing systems
systems
Disinfect and maintain microbial control of po-
table water by means that protect crew health
and provide reliable monitoring
Waste Manage- Single-use supplies and return of all wastes to Attain high reliability 2011-14: Waste stabilization and
ment Earth for disposal volume reduction
Reduce utilization of expendables
2015-19: H2O recovery from
Reduce power and equipment mass and wastes
volume
2020-24: Waste mineralization
Stabilize wastes to control pathogens, biologi-
cal growth, and gas/odor production 2025-29: >95% waste resource
recovery
Resource Recovery – recover H2O and other re-
sources (O2, CO2, N2, minerals, clothing radiation
shielding, and fuel)
Planetary Protection compatibility
Habitation Limited clothing reuse prior to disposal (0.38 Odor/microbial control for multiple uses – limit- 2011-14: Long-wear clothing; 50%
kg/crew-day) – no in-flight laundry capability ing impact on wastewater processor less food packaging
All ISS food requires ground resupply – zero-g
plant growth demonstrated Simplified bulk food preparation and continu- 2015-19: Reusable clothing; fresh
ous low-energy and low-volume food produc- food augmentation
tion
2020-24: Bulk food processing
Laundry systems
2025-29: Bulk food production
systems
2025-29: Biological engineering
for food production
electromechanical devices (valves, pumps, centrif- gaseous contaminant release (e.g., ammonia). Re-
ugal gas/liquid separators, etc.) and “static” ma- covered potable water must be disinfected to en-
terials (sorbents, catalysts, membranes, etc). The sure safe storage with biocides that don’t pose
physical, chemical, and microbiological complex- long-term crew member health risks. The capa-
ity and variability of wastewaters necessitate that bility to recover water from a wider range of po-
they be stabilized to protect equipment from bi- tential wastewater sources can contribute to low-
ological and chemical fouling-induced failure and er life-cycle costs, particularly by enabling clothes
DRAFT TA06-9laundering and reducing dependence on expend- food packaging via new materials, bulk food prep- able wipes for crew hygiene. aration, and on-orbit food production capabilities Solid waste management systems for missions to is also required for future missions. Advances in date have been limited to a “cradle-to-grave” ap- biology have the potential to revolutionize food proach, consisting of a one-time use of supplies production in space through genetic engineering followed by storage and return to Earth. Beyond of plants to increase harvest index, protein and vi- hand compression of trash prior to containment, tamin content, and growth rate, and create short- no processing is conducted. Biological growth and er, more volume-efficient crops. A key challenge concomitant odor production continue during for food production will be developing energy-ef- storage, and are managed using closed or vented ficient lighting technologies, including electrical- storage containment. While this strategy has suf- ly driven devices such as Light-Emitting Diodes ficed for past missions, including frequent down- (LEDs) or the use of captured solar light. mass return to Earth, it will not satisfy the require- Hygiene systems include partial-body cleaning ments of future long-duration missions. (hand washing, wipes), full-body cleansing (show- Enabling long-duration missions will require es- ers), and metabolic waste collection interfaces (fe- tablishing an integrated “cradle-to-cradle” strat- cal, urine, menstrual, emesis). Urine pretreatment egy that employs resource retrieval and reuse via and hygiene cleansers/chemicals must be com- water recovery, air revitalization, and other sub- patible with water recovery technologies, and the systems. Further gains can be realized by deliber- human waste collection interface must facilitate ate selection of mission consumables, packaging processing and stabilization of feces. Necessary plastics, and spacecraft materials that facilitate di- housekeeping improvements include trash/de- rect reuse or serve as feedstock for in-situ man- bris collection, surface cleaning systems, advanced ufacturing of valuable products such as radiation consumables stowage (packaging material devel- protection, spares and fuel. Such processing will, opment), antimicrobial/antiseptic recovery con- by default, 1) provide mass and volume savings; trol, and post-fire cleanup. 2) enhance mission sustainability; and 3) reduce Deep-space missions will require the ability to the amount of waste that requires safe handling, launder clothing in space. Both body hygiene and storage and disposal. Extensive waste reuse also laundry typically utilize water and a cleaning sur- decreases the amount of waste that requires pro- factant to remove salts, body oils, and dander. Re- cessing to satisfy potentially restrictive planetary covery of this high Total Organic Carbon (TOC) protection requirements. Widespread use of spe- wastewater is important to closing the water bal- cifically-designed biodegradable materials, includ- ance. A laundry system that requires minimal sur- ing bioplastics, can dramatically increase resource factants to clean clothing is desirable. Addition- recovery and reduce residue proportions. al key challenges include developing light-weight, Habitation engineering is a distinct TA directly quick-dry fabrics for crew clothing and repeated- applicable to vehicle success, but an area that his- use antimicrobial wipes that require only negligi- torically has been inadequately addressed in initial ble cleaning. vehicle system design. Current habitation capabil- Re-purposing of stowage containers has been ities were designed for LEO missions and are not proposed to minimize mass and allow reuse via optimized for resupply, reliability, mass, volume, conversion into crew items and acoustic/radiation and autonomy requirements which will be design blankets. Alternate approaches include reduction drivers for deep-space missions. in volume for disposal, or conversion to solid plas- Habitation cleaning, clothing, and consumables tic bricks by heat melt compaction for use as radi- are currently all open-loop systems, and portions ation shielding. of the loops must be closed for long-duration mis- The major challenges of each sub-element, as sions beyond LEO. Several habitation systems well as efforts required to overcome the challeng- have considerable interface with Air Revitaliza- es to develop and demonstrate the technology to tion, Waste Management, and Water Recovery TRL-6, are listed in Table 2. systems, and require improved capabilities as stat- 2.2. Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) ed in the paragraphs below. Other habitation sys- Systems tems are detailed in TA07, HEDS. EVA systems are critical to every foreseeable hu- Improved means of food preparation, rehydra- man exploration mission for in-space microgravity tion, water dispensing, and galley architecture EVA and for planetary surface exploration. In ad- concepts are needed. A significant reduction of TA06-10 DRAFT
dition, a Launch, Entry and Abort (LEA) suit sys- tems to supply data to enable crew members to
tem is needed to protect the crew during launch, perform their tasks with more autonomy and ef-
landing and cabin contamination/depressuriza- ficiency.
tion events. An EVA system includes software and 2.2.1. Approach and Major Challenges
hardware that spans multiple assets in a given mis- The current suit development process is ham-
sion architecture and interfaces with many vehicle pered by a lack of analytical modeling to predict
systems, such as life support, power, communica- combined body-suit dynamics, effects of body pa-
tions, avionics, robotics, materials, pressure sys- rameters, and suit size. A high-fidelity integrat-
tems, and thermal systems. AIAA publications , 5,6,7
ed model will allow computer simulations lead-
provide further details of the current SOA of the ing to decreased development time and cost while
EVA technology and challenges necessary to ad- providing better-performing suits. This capability
vance this TA to conduct NASA’s planned mis- could also potentially lead to preventing crew in-
sions safely, affordably, and sustainably. The com- jury during mission phases that require suited op-
plete EVA system includes three functions, each of erations.
which is described below. Extending these capabilities to include the abili-
Pressure Garment – The suit, or pressure gar- ty to model the LEA suit-seat interface and predict
ment, is the set of components a crew member crew injuries during vehicle landing will enhance
wears and uses. It includes the torso, arms, legs, crew safety and survivability. New suit materi-
gloves, joint bearings, helmet, and boots. The suit als could potentially perform multiple functions
employs a complex system of soft-goods mobility that may include power generation, heat rejec-
elements in the shoulders, arms, hips, legs, torso, tion, communication, dust protection, injury pro-
boots, and gloves to optimize performance while tection, reduced risk of electrical shock hazards
pressurized without inhibiting unpressurized op- (e.g., due to plasma charging), radiation protec-
erations. The LEA suit also contains provisions to tion, and enhanced crew survivability. New mate-
protect the crew member from both the nominal rials should continually be identified, evaluated in
and off-nominal environments (e.g., gravitational, coupon-level testing, and then integrated into suit
sound, chemical) encountered during launch, en- components. Once they have been proven as a via-
try and landing. ble, effective suit component via a pressurized suit
Portable Life Support System (PLSS) – The test in a relevant environment, they will be con-
PLSS performs functions required to keep a crew sidered TRL-6. Advanced suit tests in the Neu-
member alive during an EVA. These functions in- tral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) at JSC are an ap-
clude maintaining thermal control of the astro- propriate environment for microgravity mobility
naut, providing a pressurized oxygen environ- evaluations. Other reduced-gravity testing simula-
ment, and removing products of metabolic output tors exist and can be used when appropriate. Vac-
such as CO2 and H2O. uum chamber tests may also be relevant environ-
Power, Avionics, and Software (PAS) – The ments for suit demonstrations of concepts that use
PAS system is responsible for power supply and advanced materials. These innovations should lead
distribution for the EVA system, collecting and to game-changing suit configurations and archi-
transferring several types of data to and from oth- tectures with decreased mass, improved mobility,
er mission assets, providing avionics hardware to self-sizing capabilities, and/or increased life. Im-
perform numerous data display and in-suit pro- proved materials may also lead to advances in mo-
cessing functions, and furnishing information sys- bility elements such as gloves, shoulders, bearings,
5 Chullen, C., and Westheimer, David T., 2010, “Extravehic- and other joints.
ular Activity Technology Needs.” Paper presented at AIAA Space 2010 LEA suits could benefit from many of these
Conference, Anaheim, California, August 30-September 2. types of advances in suit materials. They could
6 Conger, B., Chullen, C., Barnes, B., Leavitt, G., 2010, be donned extremely quickly in the event of an
“Proposed Schematic for an Advanced Development Lunar Portable emergency, which could provide crew protection
Life Support System (AIAA-2010-6038).” Paper presented at 40th In- for more vehicle failure scenarios. Integrated crew-
ternational Conference on Environmental Systems, Barcelona, Spain,
July 11-15.
escape or crew-survival hardware would be benefi-
7 Malarik, D., Carek, D., Manzo, M., Camperchioli, W., cial as well. New designs that better integrate the
Hunter, G., Lichter, M. and Downey, A., 2006, “Concepts for Ad- suit, restraints, supports, and the vehicle seat could
vanced Extravehicular Activity Systems to Support NASA's Vision for greatly increase the safety of crew members. Tech-
Space Exploration (AIAA-2006-348).” Paper presented at 44th AIAA nology solutions to enable long-duration suited
Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, January 9-12.
DRAFT TA06-11operations, as in the case of a cabin depressuriza- of an integrated PLSS on ISS provides the ulti- tion event, could resolve technical challenges as- mate validation of a microgravity suit. sociated with long-duration waste management, PAS has significant opportunities to realize dra- provision of food and water, and administering matic increases in capabilities over the current medication. Emergency breathing systems incor- SOA. Key hardware constraints include mass, porating oxygen generation, rebreathers, or filtra- power, volume, and performance of existing ra- tion systems would be beneficial for emergency diation-hardened electronics. As such, there are scenarios with smoke or the release of toxic chem- many dependencies on other TASRs. For example, icals. significantly increased bandwidth and processing The PLSS is a prime candidate for infusion of requirements will exist for communications sys- new technologies to significantly reduce consum- tems. These will include a radio with networking ables, improve reliability, and increase crew per- capabilities and data rates that support the trans- formance. Regenerable technologies for removing mission of high-definition (HD) video. Integrat- moisture and CO2 from the suit lead to reduced ing speakers and microphones into the suit will consumables and mass requirements. Amine swing improve crew comfort and the reliability of the bed technology, currently being developed, can be communications system. Information systems and proven via a test on ISS in the 2016 timeframe. displays have tremendous possibilities for greatly Additional advances could include the ability to improving crew autonomy and efficiency, and ad- capture CO2 and moisture from the suit, and de- vancing the SOA. The future caution and warning liver them back to the vehicle without incurring system will have to obtain, process, and visually significant mass, volume, or power penalties. This display the affected crew member’s individual cau- would help close the loop for water and oxygen tion and warning telemetry, and that of other crew on a mission level. These advances could be made members. An integrated sensor suite including with technologies such as zeolites, nano-porous crew health diagnostics, coupled with advanced beds, or wash-coated foams. The crew member informatics, speech recognition, voice command- is cooled using a water loop that passes through ing, computing and display systems, can offer a a liquid cooling garment and also an evaporative wealth of information on crew state, external en- cooling device that vents to a space vacuum. Inno- vironment, mission tasks, and other mission-crit- vations to make this water loop robust to chem- ical information to maximize crew performance ical, particulate, or microbial contamination are and safety. Also, dramatic increases in the specif- critical to providing reliable, long-lasting systems. ic energy of future power systems are needed. PAS In addition, non-venting heat rejection technol- system demonstrations should be performed to ogies would lead to significant reduction in mis- mature selected technologies. An initial demon- sion consumables. Compact, low-mass, reliable, stration needs to be performed around 2016 to and efficient technologies need to be developed support EVA flight demonstrations and validate that can reject heat to the spectrum of thermal the maturity of technologies that could be used environments of expected exploration missions. A to support future ISS EVA activities. Additional variable set-point oxygen pressure regulator would demonstrations on ISS in the 2020-25 timeframe provide new capabilities to decrease pre-breathe need to be performed to show that technologies time, treat in-suit decompression sickness, and in- can provide the crew with the autonomy needed terface with a wide number of vehicles that may to perform missions farther and farther away from operate at different atmospheric pressures. Opti- Earth. mization of inhalation/exhalation/ventilation ar- The major technical challenges for each sub-el- chitecture could provide potential benefits for ement, as well as efforts required to overcome the umbilical-based EVA scenarios. Because the PLSS challenges to develop and demonstrate the tech- is such a highly integrated system, it is necessary nology to TRL-6, are listed in the following text to perform system demonstrations to evaluate the and summarized in Table 3. combined performance of advanced technolo- 2.3. Human Health and Performance gies. A PLSS human vacuum chamber test will be (HHP) needed to bring technologies to a maturity level The main objective of the HHP technologies is that allows for a flight demonstration in the 2016 to maintain the health of the crew and support time frame. Another PLSS vacuum chamber test optimal and sustained performance throughout should be performed to evaluate the technologies the duration of a mission. The HHP domain in- developed to reduce PLSS consumables. Testing TA06-12 DRAFT
Table 3. EVA Systems Technical Area Details
Technology Current SOA/Practice Major Challenge(s) Recommended Milestones/
Element
Activities to Advance to
TRL-6 or beyond
Sub-
Multifunctional suit Suits comprised of multiple layers of Materials that can serve multiple functions 2013: coupon-level demo
materials development materials that independently provide including eliminating suit-induced injury,
functions such as structural support, protecting from electric shock, saving mass, 2020: suit-level capability
thermal insulation, or atmosphere and improving suit mobility
containment 2025: multifunctional materi-
als with increased capabilities
Suit modeling tool No integrated modeling capability Optimize suit design using combined body 2013: initial capability
development exists to evaluate suit sizing, mobility, and suit modeling to predict dynamic inter-
or human-suit kinetics actions between the limbs and the suit 2018: validated model
Tests with human subjects and their Provide capability to evaluate multiple suit
qualitative assessment is used architectures prior to finalizing design and
fabrication
Pressure Garment
Improved suit-seat Crew members are restrained in their Develop options for restraining and protect- 2015: Integrated suit-seat
interface design seats with a harness that is applied ing crew members during violently dynamic demo
over the suit mission events
Personal aviation and auto racing
industry advances have not yet been
incorporated into space applications
On-back regener- Suits use Lithium Hydroxide (LiOH), In–situ regenerable technologies that will 2014: TRL-6 component
able CO2 and humidity which is not regenerable, or Metal allow on-back regeneration and enable demo
control sustained EVA
Oxides, which are heavy and require a 2020: CO2/H2O capture for
power intensive bake-out in-vehicle recovery
Closed-loop heat rejec- Water evaporation is vented to space Heat rejection systems with no consumables 2020: component ground
tion system with zero – for missions with many EVAs this is to eliminate water loss for cooling and demo
consumables a significant impact to the vehicle life decrease total mission mass
support system 2025: PLSS demo
Variable Set-point Oxy- Suit pressure regulators have two Capability to treat decompression sickness 2015: component ground
gen Pressure Regulator mechanically-controlled set points in the suit, allow for rapid vehicle egress, demo
and provide flexibility for interfacing the suit
PLSS
with multiple vehicles that may operate at
different pressures
Miniaturized Electronic Suits use limited electronics New techniques to miniaturize electronics 2015: subsystem capability
Components Demon- that enable decreased on-back mass while
strated increasing the performance of suit avionics 2020: system capability demo
Components need to be radiation-hardened
or radiation-tolerant and cost-effective to
produce
Advanced Displays and Laminated data sheets and voice com- Enhanced on-suit displays, tactile data entry, 2020: helmet display
Enhanced Information munications from the ground or IVA voice commanding, integrated sensors suite,
Systems crew members and on-suit systems to optimize crew perfor- 2025: information system
mance, mission planning, and system control
based on telemetry
On-suit Power Systems The silver-zinc battery provides ap- Low-mass, high-capacity energy storage to 2016: battery demo
proximately 70 Wh/kg meet EVA power and mass budgets (1,100
Wh with less than 5 kg of mass ( > 220 Wh/ 2025: advanced power
PAS
kg)) system
cludes four functional focus areas as shown below. Behavioral Health and Performance – The ob-
Medical Diagnosis/Prognosis – The objective jective in this topical area is to provide technol-
of this functional area is to provide advanced med- ogies to reduce the risk associated with extend-
ical screening technologies for individuals select- ed space travel and return to Earth. Technology
ed to the astronaut corps and prior to crew selec- advancements are needed for assessment, over-
tions for specific missions; this is a primary and all prevention, and treatment to preclude and/or
resource-effective means to ensure crew health. manage deleterious outcomes as mission duration
Long-Duration Health – The focus here is pro- extends beyond six months.
viding validated technologies for medical practice Human Factors and Performance – This el-
to address the effects of the space environment on ement focuses on technologies to support the
human systems. Critical elements include research crew’s ability to effectively, reliably and safely in-
and testing, including innovative use of test plat- teract within the mission environments. Elements
forms such as Biosentinels and micro and nano here include user interfaces, physical and cogni-
satellites, and the development of countermea- tive augmentation, training, and Human-Systems
sures for many body systems. Integration (HSI) tools, metrics, methods and
standards.
DRAFT TA06-132.3.1. Approach and Major Challenges and nano satellites (Edison) and Commercial or Future human spaceflight exploration objectives International collaborative missions such as Bions. will present significant new challenges to crew Missions beyond LEO will pose significant chal- health, including hazards created by traversing the lenges to astronauts’ psychological health, includ- terrain of planetary surfaces during exploration ing confined living quarters with a small crew, and the physiological effects of variable gravity delayed communications, no view of Earth, and environments. The limited communications with separation from loved ones. Potential deleteri- ground-based personnel for diagnosis and con- ous outcomes associated with these risk factors sultation of medical events will create addition- increase as mission duration extends beyond six al challenges. Providing healthcare capabilities for months; nonetheless, some missions may last up exploration missions will require definition of new to three years. Additional technologies are need- medical requirements and development of tech- ed to identify, characterize, and prevent or reduce nologies; these capabilities will help to ensure Ex- BHP risks associated with space travel, explora- ploration mission safety and success before, dur- tion, and return to terrestrial life. These technol- ing, and after flight. ogies include 1) prevention technologies like reli- Medical systems for Exploration missions will able, unobtrusive tools that detect biomarkers of be pursued based on spaceflight medical evidence vulnerabilities and/or resiliencies to help inform generated to date, as well as research and analog selection recommendations; 2) assessment tech- populations. For each Exploration DRM, a list of nologies for in-flight conditions such as high CO2 medical conditions that have high likelihood and/ levels, high air pressure, noise, microgravity, and or high crew health consequences to mission suc- radiation that may exacerbate risk; and 3) counter- cess will be generated. Astronauts currently un- measures aimed to prevent behavioral health dec- dergo medical screening before they are selected rements, psychosocial maladaptation, and sleep to the astronaut corps and before they are chosen and performance decrements; also, countermea- for specific missions. This is currently the prima- sures aimed to treat if decrements are manifested. ry, and most resource-effective, means to ensure A successful human spaceflight program heavily crew health. depends on the crew’s ability to effectively, reliably The on-going progress made in the field of ge- and safely interact with their environments. HFP nomics, proteomics (protein), metabolomics (me- represents a commitment to effective, efficient, us- tabolites), imaging, advanced computing and in- able, adaptable, and evolvable systems to achieve terfaces, microfluidics, intracellular Nanobots for mission success, based on fundamental advances diagnosis and treatment, materials, and other rel- in understanding human performance (percep- evant technologies will significantly enhance ad- tion, cognition, action) and human capabilities dressing the medical needs of the human system. and constraints in context. The most critical el- Maintenance of HHP will require research be- ements of the HFP roadmap are 1) user interfac- fore and during flight. A number of proposed es such as multimodal interfaces and advanced vi- technologies align with today’s Medical Progno- sualization technologies; 2) physical and cognitive sis Team items and can be transitioned to medi- augmentation such as adaptive automation based cal practice once they have been fully validated. on in-situ monitoring of work activity; 3) training Other cross-cutting technologies provide signifi- methods/interfaces; and 4) Human-Systems Inte- cant value to other discipline teams – one exam- gration (HSI) tools, metrics, methods and stan- ple is artificial gravity, which is seen as a poten- dards, such as those being developed by other gov- tial game-changing technology. Aside from being ernment agencies, NASA HSI assessment tools, a promising countermeasure for many body sys- and human performance tools such as the devel- tems, development would require a new approach opment of human readiness level and related con- to vehicle design and potentially revolutionize the cepts for fitness-for-duty. way we explore space. The effect of microgravi- Table 4 identifies the essential function/technol- ty and radiation on human systems will be ascer- ogy relevant to the four sub-elements identified, tained using model systems (Biosentinels) such as current SOA/practice for the near-term planned cells, 3D-tissue, micro-organisms and small ani- missions, major challenges to mature the technol- mals and these model systems will be evaluated ogy and the potential development activity need- using robotic precursor missions with platforms ed for future missions and the time-line to elevate (including altered-gravity capabilities) planned at the potential technology, as envisioned today, to ISS, free-flyer-hosted payloads including micro TRL-6. TA06-14 DRAFT
You can also read
