Survey of Past, Present and Planned Human Space Mission Simulators
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228348828 Survey of Past, Present and Planned Human Space Mission Simulators Article in SAE Technical Papers · June 2008 DOI: 10.4271/2008-01-2020 CITATIONS READS 6 304 5 authors, including: Susmita Mohanty Sue Fairburn Earthos Institute Kwantlen Polytechnic University 20 PUBLICATIONS 39 CITATIONS 39 PUBLICATIONS 158 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Barbara Imhof Andreas Vogler Universität für angewandte Kunst Wien Andreas Vogler Studio 75 PUBLICATIONS 145 CITATIONS 17 PUBLICATIONS 29 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Moonwalk - astronaut robot collaboration in simulated environments View project Design for Extremes and Unfamiliars View project All content following this page was uploaded by Barbara Imhof on 05 June 2014. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. 2008-01-2020 Survey of Past, Present and Planned Human Space Mission Simulators Susmita Mohanty Doctoral Candidate, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden Sue Fairburn Principal, Fibre Design Inc., 52 Gladstone Place, Woodside, Aberdeen AB24 2RU, UK Barbara Imhof Principal, Liquifer Systems Group (LSG), Obere Donaustraße 97-99/1/62, 1020 Vienna, Austria Stephen Ransom Consultant, Liquifer Systems Group (LSG), Obere Donaustraße 97-99/1/62, 1020 Vienna, Austria Andreas Vogler Architect-Director, Architecture & Vision, Hohenstaufenstrasse 10, D-80801, Munich, Germany Copyright © 2008 SAE International ABSTRACT key technical data, (3) scientific and medical research functions, and (4) technology test and development In light of the renewed international interest in lunar functions. It is beyond the scope of this paper to provide exploration, including plans for setting up a permanent details for all twenty-seven simulators surveyed. human outpost on the Moon, the need for next Therefore, the paper presents selected summaries of generation earth-based human space mission simulators three sets of relatively recent simulation campaigns, one has become inevitable and urgent. These simulators European, one American and the other Russian- have been shown to be of great value for medical, International. The paper concludes with excerpts of physiological, psychological, biological and exobiological lessons learned from these campaigns. research, and for subsystem test and development, particularly closed-loop life support systems. INTRODUCTION The paper presents a summary of a survey of past, The international space community is contemplating present and future human space mission simulators. In human missions to the Moon in the coming decade and 2006, the Vienna based company Liquifer Systems future human missions to Mars. The cumulatively aim at Group (LSG) conducted an in-depth survey, for a further human exploration of the Moon in the 2020-2025 European Space Agency (ESA) commissioned Phase-A timeframe. The Americans, Russians, Chinese, Indians, contract involving a Design Study for a Facility for Europeans and Japanese have all individually Integrated Planetary Exploration Simulation (FIPES). announced intentions to set up a human base on the The survey data served as reference material for Moon. development of the FIPES architecture and, more importantly the application of the data ensured that the When preparing for long-duration space missions Systems Requirements reviewed and amended as part beyond the 3 to 6 month range currently used on the of the FIPES Study fully reflected the design, International Space Station (ISS), medical and experience, and lessons learned from the use of such psychological aspects become an issue of major facilities. importance. The isolated and confined nature of spaceflight, in particular when considering missions The paper addresses a hitherto unfulfilled need: a beyond Lower Earth Orbit (LEO) to the Moon and Mars, comprehensive, comparative survey of most, if not all, along with its potential hazards, poses challenges and simulators to date. It is a condensed and updated great risks related to human performance. These risks version of the detailed ESA Technical Report produced may be influenced by boredom, crew autonomy and for the FIPES Study. It presents a comparative analysis increased reliance on each other, crowding, duration of of simulator characteristics and consolidated summaries flight, interpersonal tensions, mechanical breakdowns, for each simulator classified into (1) site and purpose, (2) poor communications, scheduling constraints and Present Simulators requirements and sleep disturbances. To prepare for 1. Flashline Mars Arctic Research Station crewed exploratory missions to Moon and Mars; study of (FMARS) these aspects in a simulated ground-based environment 2. Mars Desert Research Station (MDRS) is therefore regarded as an important step to minimizing 3. Bioregenerative Planetary Life Support Systems known risks. Test Complex (BIO-Plex) 4. BIOS-3 In this regard, human space mission simulators play an 5. Aquarius and NASA Extreme Environment important role in developing and testing hardware and Mission Operations (NEEMO) software technologies required for such missions. 6. Concordia Simulators also provide an ideal platform to conduct 7. Closed Ecology Experiment Facilities (CEEF) research in psychology, physiology, medicine, mission operations, human factors and habitability. These Virtual Simulators research areas are critical in ensuring crew well-being 1. Interactive Mars Habitat and performance. Planned Simulators In 2006, an in-depth survey was conducted by the 1. Integrated Human Exploration Mission Vienna based Liquifer Systems Group (LSG) as part of a Simulation Facility (INTEGRITY) European Space Agency (ESA) Phase-A contract 2. Environmental Habitat (EnviHab) involving a Design Study for a Facility for Integrated 3. European Mars Analog Research Station Planetary Exploration Simulation (FIPES). This paper (EuroMARS) represents the starting point for the planning and 4. Australian Mars Analog Research Station development of the FIPES architecture. It summarizes (MARS-Oz) the survey of past, present and future simulation facilities 5. Integrated Planetary Simulator Studies worldwide, conducted as part of the FIPES Study. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SIMULATORS The paper addresses a hitherto unfulfilled need, a comprehensive, comparative survey of most, if not all, The LSG team carried out a comparative analysis of the simulators to date. It is a condensed and updated various simulators that is presented via a set of four version of the detailed ESA Technical Report produced tabulations. The simulator examples cited were chosen for the FIPES Study. The simulators surveyed by LSG on the basis that technical information was available for are listed below: the following: - Purpose and mode of use, Early Simulators - Development and adaptation for extended 1. Regenerative Life Support Study use, 2. Apollo Ground-based Tests - an indication of cost, 3. Skylab Medical Experiments Altitude Test - method of funding and operation, (SMEAT) - Public interfaces (key word: outreach) 4. Skylab Mobile Laboratory (SML) - Crew size and length of simulated missions 5. BIOS-1 and BIOS-2 - Size of facility, and 6. Ben Franklin Underwater Research Laboratory - Facility power requirements 7. Tektite-I and II Underwater Research Laboratory The first table provides basic summary information about Recent Simulators the simulators surveyed for the FIPES Study. The 1. Isolation Study of European Manned Space second table summarizes the research functions of the Infrastructure (ISEMSI-90) simulators surveyed. The third table summarizes the 2. EXperimental campaign for European Manned technological tests and developments of the simulators Space Infrastructure (EXEMSI-92) surveyed. The fourth table allows for further comparative 3. Lunar Mars Life Support Test Project (LMLSTP) analysis and synthesis of information into new 4. Biosphere-2 architectural and environmental categories including 5. Canadian Astronaut Program Space Unit Life pressurized volume, habitable volume, private volume, Simulation (CAPSULS) atmosphere, temperature, noise level, number of airlock 6. HUman Behavior in Extended Spaceflight and number of viewports, among other key technical (HUBES-94) variables identified by the LSG team as innovative and 7. Simulation of Flight of INternational Crew on valuable factors for assessing simulator conditions. Space Station (SFINCSS-99) Table 1. Summary of past, present and planned terrestrial-based space simulators Name Agency Site Purpose Ref. Early simulators Regenerative Life Support NASA Mc Donnell Douglas, Manned, 60 and 90 day closed environment test [1] Study Huntington Beach, of ECLS systems (4 crew: Male) stationary, surface Apollo Ground-Based Tests NASA NASA, stationary, Apollo mission flight preparation in realistic [2] surface environment (3 crew: Male) Skylab Medical Experiments NASA NASA JSC, 56-day, bio-medical flight preparatory tests for [3-7] Altitude Test (SMEAT) transportable/mobile, Skylab missions (3 crew: Male) surface, seaborne Skylab Mobile Laboratory NASA Mobile, transportable Facility to obtain data on Skylab crewmen 30 [8] (SML) by Lockheed C-5A days before lift-off, within 1 hour after recovery, Galaxy and until pre-flight physiological baselines was retained. BIOS-1 and BIOS-2 Russia Russia Facility to assess the bio-regenerative abilities of [9] algae and long-term closed-system