Phillip M. CunioArthur N. Guest
Young Lunar Explorers ConferenceFlorida Institute of Technology
October 27, 2008
Outline
Who we areWays to get involved
RASC-ALMDRS
A few words on…Working hardReaching outInspiration
Who are we?Graduate students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Studying Space Systems and Space System ArchitectureFocus on program and mission analysis for human spaceflight to the Moon and Mars
Phillip CunioFrom Titusville, Florida, USAUndergraduate in Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering @ University of FloridaMasters in Aeronautics and Astronautics @ Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Arthur GuestFrom Vancouver, BC, CanadaUndergraduate in Mechanical Engineering @ University of British ColumbiaMasters of Science in Space Studies @ International Space University
How to get involvedParticipate in contests
GLXP○ We hardly need to discuss this
moreRevolutionary Aerospace Systems Concepts – Academic Linkage ○ RASC-AL○ More in a bitPacific International Space Center for Exploration Systems (PISCES)○ http://pisces.uhh.hawaii.edu○ Building a center of excellence
for analogue tests for human lunar missions
Moontasks○ http://moontasks.larc.nasa.gov/○ Design a tool to help astronauts
explore the MoonSign up for email news updates from NASA HQ to be apprised of new contests
Take a trip to an analog siteMars Desert Research Station (MDRS)○ More in a bitFlashline Mars Analog Research Station○ Operated by the Mars Society○ Located on Devon Island,
CanadaHaughton Mars Project (HMP)○ www.marsonearth.com○ Located on Devon Island,
CanadaJoin a society or group
SEDSMars SocietyMars Gravity BiosatelliteYoung Lunar ExplorersAnd many more
Living on the lunar surface – A Minimalist Approach
What is RASC-AL?Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concepts - Academic Linkage
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/rascal/A design program targeted at university-level engineering students developed by the Universities Space Research Association (USRA) and sponsored by NASA
Commences in September each year with the announcement of programmatic themes and culminates with the design project competition at the annual forum in June
Student teams, guided by a faculty advisor, work for one or two semesters designing solutions to real NASA engineering challenges.Teams are required to address the issues that a working NASA engineer would encounter, including Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) and realistic assessment of project cost and scheduleAdditionally, teams are required to do education and public outreach (EPO)during the processThe top abstracts submitted are invited to travel to the annual RASC-AL Forum and present their work. Participating teams are asked to submit a written report, prepare a poster, and give an oral presentation. These elements, including a team’s EPO efforts, contribute to the scoring used to determine the winner of the RASC-AL Forum
NASA’s Planned Lunar OutpostUses crewed and cargo Altair Landers to deliver modules
HabitatLaboratoryPressurized Logistics Modules
Modules are offloaded, transported, & assembled in-situ
Maneuvering large elements over lunar surface is on critical pathATHLETE Mobility System is key
Hyb
rid a
rchi
tect
ure
as p
rese
nted
at 3
rdE
xplo
ratio
n C
onfe
renc
e
The Non-Connected ArchitectureKey Concept
Instead of connecting the major elements, the crew and cargo transit between each elementElements remain on the Altair descent stage
Revolutionary ImpactSimplifies campaign by eliminating need for assembly infrastructure○ Reduces program cost○ Reduces program risk○ Reduces operational risk
Distances between landers larger than shown
Operational ConceptTwo key components
Pressurized Tunnels○ Used to access to pressurized
elements from the lunar surface○ Allows SPR to dock to
pressurized elements on the lunar surface
Crew uses SPRs to transit between modules○ Allows for a “shirt-sleeve
transit”
Habitat
LaboratoryPLM
Logistical Resupply Transits
Habitat / Laboratory
Transit
Note:All major elements are
1-2 km apart.
Source: NASA. Space 2007 Conference
Architecture Mass Comparison
Component(s) / element(s)
Connected architecture
Non-connected architecture
ATHLETE 2 x 1500 kg 0 kg
Structural components of ICP 7 x 500 kg 0 kg
Additional airlock 0 kg 945 kg
Berthing adapters 8 x 250 kg 0 kg
Tunnels with berthing adapters 0 kg 7 x 400 kg
Total mass [kg] 8500 kg 3745 kg
The following changes occur when going from the connected to non-connected architecture:Eliminate requirement for ATHLETE mobility systemEliminate structural components of Integrated Consumable PlatformsAddition of tunnels for each pressurized elementFindings:
Non-connected architecture results in a mass savings of approximately 5 mtSavings spread over two cargo flights○ Flight 4 & 8 in NASA campaign
To offset time lost, extra consumables could be delivered to the lunar surface– Approximately 1.5 mt of logistics would be required.– Net mass savings is still over 3 mt (~150 surface days)
Analog SitesAnalog sites
A site on Earth that shares important geological or other characteristics with the surface of the Moon or Mars
Apollo training sitesIcelandHawaiiMeteor Crater, Arizona
Sites with habitatsMDRS (currently accepting applications)Devon Island (FMARS and HMP)Aquarius Lab
Work to do on-siteMany groups try to make as much use as possible of such facilitiesIndependent research projects are encouraged○ Human factors○ Biological sampling○ Extravehicular operations
What do Analog Sites Look Like?
Mars Desert Research Station
Simulates living and working on Mars
Located in the Utah desert5 hrs south of Salt Lake City
Examples of Work Done at MDRSLogistics project research
Tested Smart Small Logistics Container – tracks and updates logistics situation on siteThanks to the MIT Space Logistics Project (spacelogistics.mit.edu)
Attempted new solution to simsuit helmet issue: silica gel packetsResults inconclusive – some effect noticedStill shows potential as cheap solution
Educational outreachConnections made via Skype to schools around North America for live “lectures from Mars”Educational outreach blog maintained; questions answered
“Untitled Mars” projectConducted interviews, wrote transcripts, gathered material
Crew living conditions experimentCrew member went two weeks without showeringSubstituted chemical cleaning products with minimal water use for actual showersResults extremely positive – crewmember not evicted
A few words on working hard…
Clearly, effort is requiredWe never sleep and rarely waste time eating
Work in many domains is usefulNo space system was ever designed and operated by one personEven subsystems require varied knowledgeSample fields: human-software interaction, life support systems (chemistry, biology, ecology), structures, public relations (necessary for funding)
Takeaway: one needn’t be a rocket scientist to do rocket science
But detailed knowledge of something and a good work ethic are required
A few words on reaching out…
1/5 of the population of the world watched the live transmission of the first Apollo moonwalkMars Society membership = 10,000 +AIAA membership = 31,000 +Number of aerospace engineers in US = 90,000
Takeaway: there’s a lot of people willing to join inWays to reach out: blogs, clubs, conferences
A few words on inspiration…
Range: 15.67 miles
My house
Pad 39A
Questions?
Lunar Outposts w/ In-Situ Assembly
Source: NASA. Space 2007 Conference.
Source: NASA. 3rd
Exploration Conference.
Source: NASA. 3rd
Exploration Conference.
λ Difficulties with in-situ offloading and assembly:ν Added operational risk
for complex operations foroffloading and assembly
ν Added development cost for assembly systems
ν Added development riskfor low TRL elements that are hard to test on Earth
ν Successful offloading and assembly is on the critical path to re-supply, lab access
λ Question is: what is the capability of architectures without in-situ assembly?
Key Existing Element: Small Pressurized RoversSmall Pressurized Rovers (SPRs) are used for extended-range exploration from the lunar outpostKey Characteristics
Piloted by 2 crew500 kg of cargo5-10 km/hr average driving speed
Allows for “shirt-sleeve transits”
Source: NASA. 3rd Exploration Conference
Source: NASA. Space 2007 Conference
Crew Time Requirements for Transits
There are two major types of transits:Habitat-laboratory transit (“office commute”)○ Beginning with the third crew on the lunar surfaceLogistical re-supply transit (“grocery shopping”)○ Transit from habitat to PLM and back○ Only required for the 180-day duration missions
Crew-time assumptions:4 crew members1442 cumulative surfacedays in campaign○ Based on NASA’s current plansProductive time○ 8 hours a day○ 6 days a week Source: NASA. 3rd Exploration Conference
Crew Time and Mass TradeSummary
Approximately 5% of productive crew-time is lost from the transits.○ Equivalent to approximately 72 surface days with four crew
To offset time lost, extra consumables could be delivered to the lunar surface
Approximately 1.5 mt of logistics would be required.Delivered on fourth or eight flight in place of ATHLETENet mass savings is still over 3 mt (~150 surface days)
Habitat-Laboratory Transit
Activity description Time required [hr]Enter rover from hab 0.25
Transit to lab 0.4Dock to lab & enter 0.25Enter rover from lab 0.25
Transit to hab 0.4Dock to hab & enter 0.25
Round trip lab transit 1.8
Crew transits to the laboratory in teamsof 2 astronautsEach team visits the laboratory once a weekFindings:
Time required for office commute is 3.6% of total productive time1426 crew-hours total over campaign
Logistical Re-supply Transit
Activity description Time required [hr]Enter rover 0.25
Transit to PLM 0.4Dock to PLM, load supplies, &
undock 2
Transit to hab 0.4Dock to hab and unload supplies 2
Logistic Resupply Trip 5.05
Two crew use one SPR to transit to the PLMLoads SPR with 500 kg of logistics (~5 CTBEs)One trip is required every 22.5 daysFindings:
Time required for transit is only 1.4% of total productive time566 crew-hours total
Element DesignTo ensure feasibility of the non-connected architecture, the design of the major elements were analyzedEach major element wasrequired to fit on a cargoAltair Lander
(i.e., less than 16 mt)The design effort focusedon the subsystems mostimpacted by the architecture change
ECLSSCrew SystemsStructures & Layout
Other subsystems were sized parametrically
Source: NASA. 3rd
Exploration Conference
Subsystem Design
Power & ThermalParametrically sized based on NASA’s First Lunar Outpost○ Power System: 20 W/kg○ Thermal System: 11 W/kg
Avionics & Communications
Sized for one International Standard Payload Rack per pressurized module
Sour
ce:
http
://en
.wik
iped
ia.o
rg/w
iki/I
nter
natio
nal
_Sta
ndar
d_Pa
yloa
d_R
ack
Source: NASA. First Lunar Outpost
Habitat Crew Systems & Element Layout
Crew Systems sized based on two productive days & seven nights a week per crew member
Food PrepHygieneSleeping
ConsumablesAssumed to be delivered separately
Layout2-floor design with loft and trunk
Overall mass15 mtIncludes 1 mt of “science”
Laboratory Crew Systems & Layout
LaboratoryScience equipmentMedical equipmentToilet
Consumables Assumed to be delivered separately
Layout
Single-floor version of the habitatCommon structures
Overall mass14.5 mtIncludes 2 mt of “science”
Pressurized Logistics Module
Structure made common with laboratory to reduce development costs
Usable volume40 m3
Cargo density250 kg/m3
Cargo delivered6.7 mt
Total mass12.5 mt
Summary & Conclusions
The non-connected architecture is preferred for lunar outposts over the currently planned connected architecture
SPRs used for transiting cargo and crew in a shirt-sleeve environment
The mass savings can be used to deliver additional consumables to offset the required crew-time losses
5% of productive crew time over the entire campaign
Major elements can be designed to optimize their shape and layout
Split ECLSS architecture required
From a program-level assessment, the non-connected architecture can provide similar capabilities with reduced cost and risk
Split ECLSS Architecture
HabLab
Sabatier HSWPA
Waste H2O
PumpN2
Solid waste
VCDOGA
4BMSCHX
TCC
N2
Pump
CO2
H2O
H2OO2
CO2
H2O
4BMSCHX
TCC
Pump
Solid wasteH2
HabitatWater Regeneration
LaboratoryCO2 Reduction
SPRs used to transit consumables between habitat and laboratory
During routine laboratory visits
ECLSS TransitsItems are shipped in tanks approximately once a monthTo laboratory
Carbon dioxide (for reduction)Water (for drinking & electrolysis)
To habitatOxygen (for breathing)Waste water (for processing)
Mass [kg]
Volume [m3]
Direction
CO2 tank 167 0.018- Hab to Lab
O2 tank 141 0.015 - Lab to Hab
Drinking H2O tank
82 0.082 - Hab to Lab
Waste H2O tank
82 0.082- Lab to Hab
Regen H2O tank
79 0.079
- Lab to Hab- Hab to Lab
Program-Level MetricsProgram-level metric Impact of moving from an architecture with in-situ assembly to a
non-connected architecturePerformance
Cumulative lunar surface duration [d]Same
Duration (1442 days) or morePerformance
Human surface exploration radius [km]Same
~450 kmPerformance
In-situ science capabilitySame
Laboratory module is available in both casesPerformance
Mars preparation relevanceSame
Surface duration, mobility, & science capabilities are unaffected
CostOperations
Approximately equalMore SPR driving & docking operations
No offloading, transportation, & assembly of major elements
CostTotal Life-cycle
Reduced by approximately $ 1 bn(based on NASA-JSC Spacecraft/Vehicle Level Cost Model)Elimination of assembly infrastructure development & prod.
Program schedule Life-cycle cost savings translate into somewhat accelerated development and utilization schedule
RiskDevelopment
Reduced TRL4 / 5 technologies is no longer required for program success
RiskOperational
ReducedNo high-risk offloading, translation and assembly maneuvers of
high-value elements required
Habitat – Subsystem Breakdown
Subsystem Mass [kg] Press. Volume [m3] Power [W] Heat Gen. [W]
Structures 6390 1 0 0
ECLSS 845 2.8 1721 1721
Crew Systems 622 9.8 5540 5540
Avionics 552 1.5 2000 2000
Comm 252 0.5 1000 1000
Thermal 1218 1 500 500
Power 670 1 638 638
Science 1000 5 2000 2000
TOTALS 11549 23 13399 13399
With 30% Design Margin 15014 29 17419 17419
Laboratory – Subsystem Breakdown
Subsystem Mass [kg] Press Vol [m3] Power [W] Heat Gen [W]
Structures 5282 1 0 0
ECLSS 539 2.2 1500 1500
Crew Systems 545 5.8 1545 1545
Avionics 552 1.5 2000 2000
Comm 252 0.5 1000 1000
Thermal 1197 1 500 500
Power 659 1 627 627
Science 2000 5 6000 6000
TOTALS 11026 18 13172 13172
With 30% Design Margin 14334 23 17124 17124
PLM – Subsystem Breakdown
Subsystem Mass [kg] Press Vol [m3] Power [W] Heat Gen [W]
Structures 2992 1 0 0
ECLSS 200 1 500 500
Crew Systems 0 0 0 0
Avionics 552 1.5 500 500
Comm 252 0.5 1000 1000
Thermal 239 1 500 500
Power 131 1 125 125
Science 0 0 0 0
TOTALS 4366 6 2625 2625
With 30% Design Margin 5675 8 3413 3413
Habitat
Lab / PLM
Cost Estimation
Assumption Development Cost[$ Mn]
Production Cost[$ Mn]
#[# of units]
Life-cycle cost [$ Mn]
Un-mannedvehicle 761 213 2 973
Mannedvehicle 1131 137 2 1268
Based on JSC Spacecraft / Vehicle Cost Model Life-cycle cost of developing ATHLETE mobility systems is ~$1 billion.
Estimate of Daily Logistics Requirements