DOCSLIB.ORG

Minimum Functionality Lunar Habitation Element

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Minimum Functionality Lunar Habitation Element by The University of Maryland Space Systems Laboratory Dr. David L. Akin Massimiliano Di Capua Adam D. Mirvis Omar W. Medina William Cannan Kevin Davis July 2009 ABSTRACT Title: MINIMUM FUNCTIONALITY LUNAR HABITATION ELEMENT Dr. David L. Akin, Massimiliano Di Capua, Adam D. Mirvis, Omar W. Medina, William Cannan, Kevin Davis University of Maryland - Space Systems Laboratory February 2009 NASA’s vision for the future of space exploration includes the establishment of a permanent human presence on the Moon through the Constellation program. Under the auspices of the NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, the University of Mary- land Space Systems Laboratory has investigated, through literature reviews, a survey, and rigorous statistical methods, the definition of Minimal Functionality Habitation Element for medium duration lunar missions. By deploying a survey and making use of the Analyt- ical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Quality Function Deployment (QFD) methods, the study team determined a list of functions and their relative importance, as well as their impact on systems design/implementation. Based on the past literature and the survey results, four habitat concepts were proposed, focusing on interior space layout and prelim- inary systems sizing. Those concepts were then evaluated for habitability through virtual reality (VR) techniques and merged into a single design. Trade studies were conducted and the final design was defined. A full-scale functional mockup of the final concept was also implemented to enable more realistic human factors studies and to validate the VR techniques used previously. This study was funded by the NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD). BAA: NNJ08ZBT002, Topic 2. This is the final report for NASA Grant NNJ08TA89C. Acknowledgments The University of Maryland Space Systems Laboratory wishes to thank all who participated in our survey, especially the American and Italian Navies, whose extensive cooperation allowed us to acquire important data for our study. We also wish to thank Heather Bradshaw for all her help in setting up and conducting the data acquisition session at the Mars Society - Mars Desert Research Station (MDRS). We also wish to thank MDRS Crew 73 for participating in our study. Finally, special thanks go to the all the SSL personnel whose help, particularly in creating a full-scale habitat mockup outdoors in the coldest January in recent memory, was priceless. This study was funded by the NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD), under BAA NNJ08ZBT002, Topic 2. We would like to acknowledge and thank Larry Toups, NASA COTR, supported by Marianne Rudisill and Kriss Kennedy, along with Chris Culbert (ESMD Surface Systems lead) and his deputy, Matt Leonard, for all of their help and support. Finally, we would also like to express our appreciation for all of the NASA and contractor personnel who participated in design reviews and the final briefing, for their excellent questions and even better advice and support. ii Contents List of Abbreviations xiii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background . 1 1.2 Research Approach . 2 1.3 Milestones and Deliverables . 3 2 Review of Relevant Literature and Research 4 2.1 Regions for Possible Landings . 4 2.2 Lunar Temperature Range . 7 2.3 Ionizing Radiation . 8 2.4 Micrometeoroid Impact . 8 2.5 Habitability in Confined and Austere Environments . 9 2.6 Past Designs . 15 3 Data Acquisition 18 3.1 Use of the Analytical Hierarchy Process . 18 3.2 AHP Implementation . 19 3.3 AHP Data . 22 3.4 AHP Analysis and Conclusions . 22 3.4.1 AHP Data Analysis . 22 3.4.2 Importance Value Conclusions . 28 3.5 Statistical Analysis . 28 3.5.1 Fidelity of Analogue Environments . 30 3.6 Quality Function Deployment . 30 3.7 Lessons Learned . 33 4 Preliminary Concepts 35 4.1 General Requirements from BAA . 35 4.1.1 General Requirements List . 35 4.1.2 Contract Deliverables . 36 4.2 Concept Development Approach . 36 4.3 Initial Concept . 37 4.3.1 EVA Support . 37 4.3.2 Structure . 38 4.3.3 Radiation Shielding . 38 4.3.4 Life Support . 38 4.4 Concept 1 : The Lunar Pup-Tent . 42 4.4.1 Operational Scenario . 42 iii 4.4.2 System Concept . 42 4.4.3 Interior Layout . 43 4.4.4 Life Support . 43 4.4.5 Avionics, Power, Thermal, and Communications . 44 4.4.6 Structure and Storage . 45 4.5 Concept 2 : The Winnebago . 46 4.5.1 Operational Scenario . 46 4.5.2 Design Concept . 46 4.5.3 Pressurization and Furnishing . 46 4.5.4 Interior Layout and SPE Shelter . 47 4.5.5 Life Support . 48 4.5.6 Avionics, Power and Thermal . 49 4.5.7 Exterior Layout and EVA . 49 4.6 Concept 3 : The Igloo . 50 4.6.1 Operational Scenario . 50 4.6.2 System Concept . 50 4.6.3 Habitat Layout . 51 4.6.4 Structure . 52 4.6.5 Life Support . 52 4.6.6 Power . 53 4.6.7 Avionics . 53 4.6.8 Additional Equipment . 53 4.6.9 Summary . 53 4.7 Virtual Reality Testing and Evaluation . 54 4.7.1 Equipment . 54 4.7.2 Lessons Learned . 55 5 Configuration Trade Studies 57 5.1 Analytical Modeling . 57 5.2 Trade Studies . 60 6 Mockup Design Construction and Testing 65 6.1 Design and Construction . 65 6.2 ECLIPSE Crew I: Mission Report . 70 6.3 Lessons Learned . 72 7 Final Design: ECLIPSE 77 7.1 Configuration . 77 7.1.1 Exterior Configuration . 77 7.1.2 Interior Layouts . 82 7.1.3 Configuration Growth Options . 83 7.2 Life Support Systems . 84 7.2.1 Basic Assumptions . 84 7.2.2 EVA Support Requirements . 85 7.2.3 Air Circulation . 86 7.2.4 CO2 Capture . 87 7.2.5 Air Revitalization . 89 7.2.6 Air Replenishment . 90 7.2.7 Water Reclamation . 90 iv 7.2.8 Food Storage and Preparation . 91 7.2.9 Waste Management . 91 7.2.10 Logistics and Storage . 91 7.2.11 Lighting . 92 7.3 Power Budgets . 93 7.4 Thermal Control . 93 7.5 Mass Budgets . 95 8 Conclusions and Future Work 99 8.1 Conclusions . 99 8.2 Future Work . 99 8.2.1 Mars Society Crew 73 Data Acquisition Preview . 99 8.2.2 Potential Future Analytical Studies . 100 8.2.3 Future Mockup Development and Testing . 100 A Web Survey Screenshots 104 B ANOVA tables 114 C Renovated ECLIPSE Interior Configuration 126 C.1 Lower Level . 126 C.2 Upper Level . 127 C.3 Exterior Views . 128 D Partial Gravity Simulations of Habitat Habitability Issues 129 D.1 Underwater Simulation of Partial Gravity . 129 D.2 Upper Berth Ingress/Egress Study . 129 D.3 Intralevel Motion Study . 130 E Alternative ECLIPSE Interior Configurations - Academic Leverage of ESMD Study 133 E.1 Team Alpha . 133 E.2 Team Beta . ..
Recommended publications
  • Domi Inter Astra

    Domi Inter Astra

    Team members Alice Sueko Müller | Anshoo Mehra | Chaitnya Chopra | Ekaterina Seltikova Isabel Alonso Serrano | James Xie | Jay Kamdar | Julie Pradel | Kunal Kulkarni Matej Poliaček | Myles Harris | Nitya Jagadam | Richal Abhang | Ruvimbo Samanga | Sagarika Rao Valluri Sanket Kalambe | Sejal Budholiya | Selene Cannelli Space Generation Advisory Council Team 1 Contents Society and Culture 3 Tourist Attractions 3 Astronaut and Tourist Selection 3 Architecture 4 Module 1: Greenhouse, Guest Amenities, Medicine, and Environmental Control 5 Module 2: Social Space and Greenhouse 5 Module 3: Kitchen, Fitness, Hygiene, and Social 6 Module 3: Sky-view 6 Module 4: Crew Bedrooms and Private Social Space 6 Module 5: Workspace 6 Management and Politics 7 Governance, Ownership, and Intellectual Property 7 Crew Operations 7 Base Management System 8 Safety & Emergency Planning 8 Engineering 9 Landing & Settlement Site 9 Settlement Structure 10 Robotics and Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) 10 Construction Timeline 11 Communications System 12 Critical Life Support (Air & Water) Systems 12 Thermal System 13 Food & Human Waste Recycling 14 Other Waste 14 Technical Floor Plan 14 Power Generation & Storage 14 Economy 16 Capital & Operating Costs 16 Revenue Generation 17 Tourism & Outreach 17 Commercial Activities 18 Lunar Manufacturing 18 References 20 ntariksha, aptly meaning ‘the universe’ in to be a giant leap for all the young girls around the Sanskrit, is an avid stargazer fascinated world, and she knew something incredible is waiting by the blanket of splurging stars she saw to be known. from her village in North East India. To- day, her joy knew no bounds upon learn- “Each civilization must become space-faring or ex- ingA that she would get a chance to visit Domi Inter tinct”.
  • Space Colonies & Lunar Bases

    Space Colonies & Lunar Bases

    Space Colonies & Why Build Colonies? Lunar Bases ! It isn’t so expensive – US military is many 100’s of billions $ a year ! Fewer casualties than war – 17 astronauts in 45 years of space Karen J. Meech, flight were lost Astronomer ! Humans have an “expansionist” spirit – Much more real estate! ! Valuable resources could be brought to Earth. Institute for Astronomy ! Enough solar energy to rid the world of oil dependency could be brought to Earth for less than the cost of the Iraq war ! Profitable: e.g. 1 Metallic NEO $20 trillion, 3He as a fuel . ! Maybe the time has not yet come, but someday we will need what space can provide Space Habitat Design Shielding – Radiation Protection Considerations ! Shielding characterization ! Aereal density, d [gm/cm2] ! Physiological Needs ! Total amount of material matters ! Shielding ! Type of material: secondary ! Ionizing radiation & particles 3 2 ! Meteoritic impact ! 1 Earth Atmosphere: 10 gm/cm ! Atmospheric containment ! ! = mass / volume ! What pressure needed? ! ! = mass / (area ! thickness) ! Psychological Needs ! What mix of gasses? ! ! = m/(ax) = d / x ! Environment stress ! Gravitational acceleration ! x = thickness = d / ! ! Isolation ! Why it is needed 3 ! Personal space ! How to do it Substance ! [gm/cm ] d / !" x [cm] x [m] ! Illumination / Energy 3 ! Entertainment Lead 8 10 /8 125 1.25 ! ! Aesthetics Food / Water Styrofoam 0.01 103/10-2 105 103 ! Space Requirements Water 1 103/1 103 10 Shielding Types – Active Shielding Types – Passive ! Enough matter between us & radiation ! Examples
  • Glossary Glossary

    Glossary Glossary

    Glossary Glossary Albedo A measure of an object’s reflectivity. A pure white reflecting surface has an albedo of 1.0 (100%). A pitch-black, nonreflecting surface has an albedo of 0.0. The Moon is a fairly dark object with a combined albedo of 0.07 (reflecting 7% of the sunlight that falls upon it). The albedo range of the lunar maria is between 0.05 and 0.08. The brighter highlands have an albedo range from 0.09 to 0.15. Anorthosite Rocks rich in the mineral feldspar, making up much of the Moon’s bright highland regions. Aperture The diameter of a telescope’s objective lens or primary mirror. Apogee The point in the Moon’s orbit where it is furthest from the Earth. At apogee, the Moon can reach a maximum distance of 406,700 km from the Earth. Apollo The manned lunar program of the United States. Between July 1969 and December 1972, six Apollo missions landed on the Moon, allowing a total of 12 astronauts to explore its surface. Asteroid A minor planet. A large solid body of rock in orbit around the Sun. Banded crater A crater that displays dusky linear tracts on its inner walls and/or floor. 250 Basalt A dark, fine-grained volcanic rock, low in silicon, with a low viscosity. Basaltic material fills many of the Moon’s major basins, especially on the near side. Glossary Basin A very large circular impact structure (usually comprising multiple concentric rings) that usually displays some degree of flooding with lava. The largest and most conspicuous lava- flooded basins on the Moon are found on the near side, and most are filled to their outer edges with mare basalts.
  • Project Selene: AIAA Lunar Base Camp

    Project Selene: AIAA Lunar Base Camp

    Project Selene: AIAA Lunar Base Camp AIAA Space Mission System 2019-2020 Virginia Tech Aerospace Engineering Faculty Advisor : Dr. Kevin Shinpaugh Team Members : Olivia Arthur, Bobby Aselford, Michel Becker, Patrick Crandall, Heidi Engebreth, Maedini Jayaprakash, Logan Lark, Nico Ortiz, Matthew Pieczynski, Brendan Ventura Member AIAA Number Member AIAA Number And Signature And Signature Faculty Advisor 25807 Dr. Kevin Shinpaugh Brendan Ventura 1109196 Matthew Pieczynski 936900 Team Lead/Operations Logan Lark 902106 Heidi Engebreth 1109232 Structures & Environment Patrick Crandall 1109193 Olivia Arthur 999589 Power & Thermal Maedini Jayaprakash 1085663 Robert Aselford 1109195 CCDH/Operations Michel Becker 1109194 Nico Ortiz 1109533 Attitude, Trajectory, Orbits and Launch Vehicles Contents 1 Symbols and Acronyms 8 2 Executive Summary 9 3 Preface and Introduction 13 3.1 Project Management . 13 3.2 Problem Definition . 14 3.2.1 Background and Motivation . 14 3.2.2 RFP and Description . 14 3.2.3 Project Scope . 15 3.2.4 Disciplines . 15 3.2.5 Societal Sectors . 15 3.2.6 Assumptions . 16 3.2.7 Relevant Capital and Resources . 16 4 Value System Design 17 4.1 Introduction . 17 4.2 Analytical Hierarchical Process . 17 4.2.1 Longevity . 18 4.2.2 Expandability . 19 4.2.3 Scientific Return . 19 4.2.4 Risk . 20 4.2.5 Cost . 21 5 Initial Concept of Operations 21 5.1 Orbital Analysis . 22 5.2 Launch Vehicles . 22 6 Habitat Location 25 6.1 Introduction . 25 6.2 Region Selection . 25 6.3 Locations of Interest . 26 6.4 Eliminated Locations . 26 6.5 Remaining Locations . 27 6.6 Chosen Location .
  • History of Human Space Exploration and Habitat Design

    History of Human Space Exploration and Habitat Design

    EVALUATION AND AUTOMATION OF SPACE HABITAT INTERIOR LAYOUTS A Dissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty by Matthew Simon In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in Aerospace Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology May 2016 Copyright 2015 U.S. Government, as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. No copyright is claimed in the United States under Title 17, U.S.C. All other rights reserved i EVALUATION AND AUTOMATION OF HABITAT INTERIOR LAYOUTS Approved by: Dr. Alan W. Wilhite, Chairman Dr. Jesse Hester School of Aerospace Engineering Georgia Tech Research Institute Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Marianne R. Bobskill Dr. Brian German Space Mission Analysis Branch School of Aerospace Engineering NASA Langley Research Center Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Daniel P. Schrage School of Aerospace Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Date Approved: November 15, 2015 This document is dedicated to my family who provided constant support and encouragement throughout the many years of my education, and to Nate who taught me the meaning of life. 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge and thank the following persons for their advice and participation in the preparation of this thesis: Dr. Alan Wilhite Dr. Marianne Bobskill Larry Toups Dr. Robert Howard Kriss Kennedy Dr. Dale Arney iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .....................................................................................................................
  • Lunar Programs

    Lunar Programs

    LUNAR PROGRAMS NASA is leading a sustainable return to the Moon Aerospace is partnered with NASA to with commercial and international partners to return humans to the Moon in every expand human presence in space and gather phase and journey, including the: new knowledge and opportunities. In 2017, Space › Planning and supporting the Policy Directive-1 called for a renewed emphasis on first lifecycle review of the commercial and international partnerships, return Gateway Initiative of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization followed by human missions to Mars. › Design, systems engineering and Aerospace is partnered with NASA in this endeavor integration, and operational concepts and is involved in every phase and journey. of the EVA system Artist’s conception of a gateway habitat. Image credit: NASA Humans must return to the moon for long-term › Ground testing of the NEXTStep deep exploration and utilization of deep space, but lunar space habitat module prototypes exploration is more than a stepping stone to Mars missions. The phased plan includes › Design and test of the Orion sending missions to the moon and cislunar space for exploration and study, and the capsule avionics construction of the Deep Space Gateway, a space station intended to orbit the moon. Aerospace provides support to these missions in areas such as systems engineering and integration, program management, and various subsystem expertise. Current Lunar Programs GATEWAY INITIATIVE NASA’s Gateway is conceived to be an exploration and science outpost in orbit around the moon that will enable human crewed missions to both cislunar space and the moon’s surface, meet scientific discovery and exploration objectives, and demonstrate and prove enabling technologies through commercial and international partnerships.
  • Natural Design Habitat on the Moon Lunar Zen Garden

    Natural Design Habitat on the Moon Lunar Zen Garden

    NATURAL DESIGN HABITAT ON THE MOON (SCHLACHT) - LUNAR ZEN GARDEN (ONO) Natural Design Habitat on the Moon Irene Lia Schlacht Lunar Zen Garden Ayako Ono 9th ILEWG International Conference on Exploration and Utilization of the Moon (ICEUM9-ILC2007) 22-26 October, 2007, Sorrento, Italy NATURAL DESIGN HABITAT ON THE MOON (SCHLACHT) - LUNAR ZEN GARDEN (ONO) From the research group: Extreme - Design www.Extreme-Design.eu Ma.Des. Irene Schlacht [email protected] (Technische Universität Berlin) Ma. ArtAyako Ono [email protected] (Artist in Residence atSA) (SpaceLand) www.Extreme-Design.eu NATURAL DESIGN HABITAT ON THE MOON (SCHLACHT) - LUNAR ZEN GARDEN (ONO) CONTENT - Space Habitability - Natural Design - Variation and Variability - Lunar Zen Garden - Conclusion NATURAL DESIGN HABITAT ON THE MOON (SCHLACHT) - LUNAR ZEN GARDEN (ONO) Space Habitability NATURAL DESIGN HABITAT ON THE MOON (SCHLACHT) - LUNAR ZEN GARDEN (ONO) Space Habitability Space habitats are completely artificial ecosystems created to allow humans to survive in the outer space environment with a maximum of self- sufficiency. NATURAL DESIGN HABITAT ON THE MOON (SCHLACHT) - LUNAR ZEN GARDEN (ONO) Space Habitability The User Needs have to be considered 10 astronauts Evaluation 13 people working in the space habitat projects Need Not space stimuli quiet familiarity order privacy Interview of 23 subjects realized between 2005 -07 (Schlacht, Thales Alenia Space) NATURAL DESIGN HABITAT ON THE MOON (SCHLACHT) - LUNAR ZEN GARDEN (ONO) Space Habitability Difference of gravity, absence of natural terrestrial stimuli, isolation in a limited space, radiation, etc. modify psycho-physiological factors such as human biorhythm and sensory perception. Factors that have to be consider (Robinson et al.
  • Project Horizon Report

    Project Horizon Report

    Volume I · SUMMARY AND SUPPORTING CONSIDERATIONS UNITED STATES · ARMY CRD/I ( S) Proposal t c• Establish a Lunar Outpost (C) Chief of Ordnance ·cRD 20 Mar 1 95 9 1. (U) Reference letter to Chief of Ordnance from Chief of Research and Devel opment, subject as above. 2. (C) Subsequent t o approval by t he Chief of Staff of reference, repre­ sentatives of the Army Ballistic ~tissiles Agency indicat e d that supplementar y guidance would· be r equired concerning the scope of the preliminary investigation s pecified in the reference. In particular these r epresentatives requested guidance concerning the source of funds required to conduct the investigation. 3. (S) I envision expeditious development o! the proposal to establish a lunar outpost to be of critical innportance t o the p. S . Army of the future. This eva luation i s appar ently shar ed by the Chief of Staff in view of his expeditious a pproval and enthusiastic endorsement of initiation of the study. Therefore, the detail to be covered by the investigation and the subs equent plan should be as com­ plete a s is feas ible in the tin1e limits a llowed and within the funds currently a vailable within t he office of t he Chief of Ordnance. I n this time of limited budget , additional monies are unavailable. Current. programs have been scrutinized r igidly and identifiable "fat'' trimmed awa y. Thus high study costs are prohibitive at this time , 4. (C) I leave it to your discretion t o determine the source and the amount of money to be devoted to this purpose.
  • Commercial Lunar Propellant Architecture a Collaborative Study of Lunar Propellant Production

    Commercial Lunar Propellant Architecture a Collaborative Study of Lunar Propellant Production

    Commercial Lunar Propellant Architecture A Collaborative Study of Lunar Propellant Production 1 To the Memory of: Dr. Paul D. Spudis (1952–2018) Dr. Spudis earned his master’s degree from Brown University and his Ph.D. from Arizona State University in Geology with a focus on the Moon. His career included work at the US Geological Survey, NASA, John Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, and the Lunar and Planetary Institute advocating for the exploration and the utilization of lunar resources. His work will continue to inspire and guide us all on our journey to the Moon. “By going to the Moon we can learn how to extract what we need in space from what we find in space. Fundamentally that is a skill that any spacefaring civilization has to master. If you can learn to do that, you’ve got a skill that will allow you to go to Mars and beyond.” ii Authors David Kornuta, United Launch Alliance, CisLunar Project Lead1 Angel Abbud-Madrid, Colorado School of Mines, Professor of Space Resources Jared Atkinson, Honeybee Robotics, Senior Geophysical Engineer Jonathan Barr, United Launch Alliance, Program Manager Gary Barnhard, Xtraordinary Innovative Space Partnership, CEO Dallas Bienhoff, Cislunar Space Development Company LLC, Founder Brad Blair, NewSpace Analytics, Managing Partner Vanessa Clark, Atomos Nuclear and Space, Chief Executive and Technology Officer Justin Cyrus, Lunar Outpost, CEO Blair DeWitt, Lunar Station Corporation, CEO and Co-Founder Chris Dreyer, Colorado School of Mines, Professor of Space Resources Barry Finger, Paragon
  • Location #1: Peary/Whipple Crater

    Location #1: Peary/Whipple Crater

    Location, Location, Location A Lunar Investment Strategy Hoyt Davidson Near Earth LLC June 2017 ISU's International Institute of Space Commerce Lunar Economic Action Plan (LEAP) Space and Questions from 1960 Still Relevant Today Economic Development • How can we utilize our dynamic system of competitive private enterprise in space, as on earth, to make newly discovered resources useful to man? • How can private enterprise and private capital make their maximum contribution? Philosophy and Policy The ultimate goal is not to impress others, or merely to explore our planetary system, but to use accessible space for the benefit of humankind. It is a goal that is not confined to a decade or a century. Nor is it confined to a single nearby destination, or to a fleeting dash to plant a flag. The idea is to begin preparing now for a future in which the material trapped in the Sun's vicinity is available for incorporation into our way of life. Dr. John Marburger, Head of the Office of Science and Technology Policy 2006 3 The Investment Premise • Just as on Earth, lunar real estate “value” is driven by location, location, location Rank Location Why Valuable 1 Peary Crater Best 1st industrial base and settlement 2 Sinus Medii Good cargo port & space elevator site 3 Largest skylights / lava tubes Best large scale settlements 4 Tsiolkovskiy crater, dark side Prime radio astronomy site 5 High helium-3 concentrations Potential high value mining 6 Lipsky Crater Space elevator site for Earth-Moon L2 7 Aristillus High Thorium concentrations • Lunar real
  • Mobile Lunar and Planetary Base Architectures

    Mobile Lunar and Planetary Base Architectures

    Space 2003 AIAA 2003-6280 23 - 25 September 2003, Long Beach, California Mobile Lunar and Planetary Bases Marc M. Cohen, Arch.D. Advanced Projects Branch, Mail Stop 244-14, NASA-Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000 TEL 650 604-0068 FAX 650 604-0673 [email protected] ABSTRACT This paper presents a review of design concepts over three decades for developing mobile lunar and planetary bases. The idea of the mobile base addresses several key challenges for extraterrestrial surface bases. These challenges include moving the landed assets a safe distance away from the landing zone; deploying and assembling the base remotely by automation and robotics; moving the base from one location of scientific or technical interest to another; and providing sufficient redundancy, reliability and safety for crew roving expeditions. The objective of the mobile base is to make the best use of the landed resources by moving them to where they will be most useful to support the crew, carry out exploration and conduct research. This review covers a range of surface mobility concepts that address the mobility issue in a variety of ways. These concepts include the Rockwell Lunar Sortie Vehicle (1971), Cintala’s Lunar Traverse caravan, 1984, First Lunar Outpost (1992), Frassanito’s Lunar Rover Base (1993), Thangavelu’s Nomad Explorer (1993), Kozlov and Shevchenko’s Mobile Lunar Base (1995), and the most recent evolution, John Mankins’ “Habot” (2000-present). The review compares the several mobile base approaches, then focuses on the Habot approach as the most germane to current and future exploration plans.
  • Template for Two-Page Abstracts in Word 97 (PC)

    Template for Two-Page Abstracts in Word 97 (PC)

    SAMPLE CURATION AT A LUNAR OUTPOST. C. C. Allen 1, G. E. Lofgren1, A. H. Treiman2, and M. L. Lindstrom3 1NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058 USA [email protected] [email protected] 2Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston, TX 77058 USA [email protected] 3NASA Headquarters, Washing- ton, DC 20546 USA [email protected] Introduction: The six Apollo surface missions re- particularly iron-rich pyroclastic glass and ilmenite- turned 2,196 individual rock and soil samples, with a bearing material. Ice-rich deposits have been pre- total mass of 381.6 kg [1]. Samples were collected dicted in permanently-shadowed locations, and the based on visual examination by the astronauts and con- verification of such deposits is an import goal for lunar sultation with geologists in the science “back room” in exploration. Other volatiles, derived from volcanic Houston. The samples were photographed during col- emissions or implanted by the solar wind, may also lection, packaged in uniquely-identified containers, prove valuable resources. and transported to the Lunar Module. All samples Lunar Outpost Curation Studies: Concepts for collected on the Moon were returned to Earth. the collection of samples at lunar outposts were stud- NASA’s upcoming return to the Moon will be dif- ied intensively in the years following Apollo. The ferent. Astronauts will have extended stays at an out- 1988 “Geoscience at a Lunar Base” workshop [2] care- post and will collect more samples than they will re- fully considered the curation and analysis of samples turn. They will need curation and analysis facilities on on the Moon’s surface.