Addressing Design Challenges in Mechanical Counterpressure Spacesuit Design and Space-Inspired Informal Education Policy by Allison P.Anderson
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Addressing Design Challenges in Mechanical Counterpressure Spacesuit Design and Space-Inspired Informal Education Policy by Allison P.Anderson B. S. in Astronautics Engineering University of Southern California, 2007 Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics and the Engineering Systems Division in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees of Master of Science in Aeronautics and Astronautics and ARCHNIVES MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE Master of Science in Technology and Policy OF TECHNOLOGY at the FEB 2 5 2011 MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY LBRARIES February 2011 @2011 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All Rights Reserved. Author ................................ ........... ........ Department of Aeronautics &Astronautics and Engineering Systems Division January 14, 2011 Ce rtifie d by ............................. ............................... Dava J. Newman, Ph.D. Professor, MacVicar Faculty Fellow, HST Affiliate Department of Aeronautics &Astronautics and Engineering Systems Division Thesis Supervisor Accepted by Dava J. Newman, Ph.D. Professor of Aeronautics and As onautics and Engineering Systems Director, Technology and Policy Program A cce pte d by .................................................................. --- hfvtan H. Modiano, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Aero autics and Astronautics, Chair, Graduate Program Committee 2 Addressing Design Challenges in Mechanical Counterpressure Spacesuit Design and Space-Inspired Informal Education Policy Allison P.Anderson Submitted on January 19, 2011 to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics and the Engineering Systems Division in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees of Master of Science in Aeronautics and Astronautics and Master of Science in Technology and Policy ABSTRACT Extravehicular activity (EVA), or spacewalks allows astronauts to accomplish some of the most important endeavors in space history. The importance of EVA will continue to increase as people venture further into our solar system. The spacesuit, used to protect the astronaut during EVA, is an anthropomorphic spacecraft that provides the physical environment a person needs to survive in the harsh environment of space. Although the suits are safe and effective, the pressurized suit becomes rigid in the vacuum of space, causing the astronaut to waste energy. Mechanical counterpressure (MCP) suits offer an alternative to gas pressurized suits by using elastic garments to provide pressure against the skin. Despite their many advantages, MCP suits are very difficult to put on, or don, making them infeasible for use today. A network of gas pressurized tubes is proposed as a solution to the donning problem. When pressurized, the tubes expand to become rigid, opening the MCP garment in the process. The system was modeled and a functional prototype was developed using a novel construction process. The model can be used as a design tool for future designs and the prototype serves as a proof-of-concept for this solution to the donning problem. The spectacular feats accomplish through spacewalks and space exploration inspire students to pursue an interest and career in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). Since its inception, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has been dedicated to educating the public about its compelling mission, fascinating discoveries, and the complicated technologies it develops. However, as the United States slips in indicators of student performance in STEM subjects, many look toward informal education, or education that occurs outside the classroom, to spur interest in STEM subjects. To maximize educational outcomes, NASA has developed a strategic framework to guide its educational programs. This framework is analyzed in the context of strategic management literature and suggests that the framework could be more easily implemented if NASA were to refine its education structure using the strengths of each of its directorates. The proposed framework was implemented in an informal education project and evaluated to determine if a projects implemented under the framework achieves the intended learning objectives. Students showed an increased understanding of NASA's mission and the complicated nature of space exploration. Suggestions to improve future projects are also given. Thesis Supervisor: Dava Newman Title: Professor, MacVicar Faculty Fellow, HST Affiliate, Department of Aeronautics & Astronautics, and Engineering Systems Division The material contained in this paper is based upon work supported by NASA grant Number NNX09AL79G under the Competitive Program for Science Museums and Planetariums. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The interview protocols used in this study were approved by the Committee On the Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects under application number 1003003766. TABLE OF CONTENTS List o f Fig u re s ............................................................................................... 8 List o f Ta b le s .............................................................................................. 9 A cknow ledgem ents .................................................................................... 11 1. Intro du ctio n .......................................................................................... 13 1.1. Problem Statement .............................................................. 13 1.2. Research Objectives ............................. 16 1.2 .1. O ve rview ............................................................................. 17 1.2 .2. Specific A im s ........................................................................ 18 1.2.2.1. Specific Aim 1: Modeling..................................... ......... 18 1.2.2.2. Specific Aim 2: Prototyping ................................................... 18 1.2.2.3. Specific Aim 3: Framework Development ............................. 18 1.2.2.4. Specific Aim 4: Evaluation ..................................................... 18 1.3. Research Approach .............................................................. 18 2 . Literature Review ................................................................................. 2 1 2.1. Current State of Spacesuit Design ....................................... 21 2.1.1. Extravehicular Activity .......................................................... 21 2.1.1.1. History of Spacesuit Design ........................ 22 2.1.1.2. Currently Flown Spacesuits ................................................. 26 2.1.1.3. Future of EVA ........................................................................ 30 2.1.2. Need for Pressurized Garments in Space Environment..... 30 2.2. Mechanical Counterpressure ............................................... 33 2.2.1. Space Activity Suit ................................................................ 34 2.2.2. Advances in MCP Glove Technology....................................35 2.2.3. Full Body MCP and Donning Studies of the BioSuit T M Project .39 2.2.3.1. BioSuit T M Concept............................................................... 39 2.2.3.2. Donning/Doffing work ........................................................... 40 2.2.4. Challenges in MCP Design ................................................... 44 2.3. STEM Education in the United States .................................. 44 2.3.1. Informal Education as a Supplement to Formal Education.......46 2.3.2. Role of Federal Agencies in STEM Education ............ 47 2.3.2.1. Federal Agencies - NSF, NOAA, NASA ............................... 47 2.3.2.2. Strategic Management in Agency Programs ........................ 49 2.4. NASA's Education Mission ................................................... 53 2.4 .1. Histo ry ................................................................................ .. 54 2.4.2. Structure and Funding ......................................................... 54 2.4.3. NASA Education Framework ................................................ 56 3. Metho ds ............................................................................................. 61 3.1. MCP Donning/Doffing System Development........................61 3.1.1. Donning Concept ................................................................... 61 3.1.2. Systems Approach ................................................................ 62 3.1.3. Requirements and Assumptions .......................................... 63 3.1.4. Dainese Partnership ............................................................ 65 3.1.5. Glove Development .............................................................. 66 3.1.6. Tube Concept Identification ................................................... 66 3.1.6.1. Elongation Method ............................................................... 66 3.1.6.2. Piston Method ....................................................................... 68 3.1.6.3. Snake Method ...................................................................... 69 3.1.6.4. Fabric Tube Method .............................................................. 70 3.1.6.5. Torus Method ...................................................................... 73 3.1.7. Modeling Methodology .......................................................... 74 3.1.8. Testing and Analysis ............................................................