Harry Jones

Equivalent Mass versus Life Cycle Cost for Life Support Technology Selection

The decision to develop a particular life support technology or to select it for flight usually depends on the cost to develop and fly it. Other criteria such as performance, safety, reliability, crew time, and technical and schedule risk are considered, but cost is always an important factor. Because launch cost would account for much of the cost of a future planetary mission, and because launch cost is directly proportional to the mass launched, equivalent mass has been used instead of cost to select advanced life support technology. The equivalent mass of a life support system includes the estimated mass of the hardware and of the spacecraft pressurized volume, power supply, and cooling system that the hardware requires. The equivalent mass of a system is defined as the total payload launch mass needed to provide and support the system. An extension of equivalent mass, Equivalent System Mass (ESM), has been established for use in the Advanced Life Support project. ESM adds a mass-equivalent of crew time and possibly other cost factors to equivalent mass. Traditional equivalent mass is strictly based on flown mass and reflects only the launch cost. ESM includes other important cost factors, but it complicates the simple flown mass definition of equivalent mass by adding a non-physical mass penalty for crew time that may exceed the actual flown mass. Equivalent mass is used only in life support analysis. Life Cycle Cost (LCC) is much more commonly used. LCC includes DDT&E, launch, and operations costs. For Earth orbit rather than planetary missions, the launch cost is less than the cost of Design, Development, Test, and Evaluation (DDTBE). LCC is a more inclusive cost estimator than equivalent mass. The relative costs of development, launch, and operations vary depending on the mission destination and duration. Since DDTBE or operations may cost more than launch, LCC gives a more accurate relative cost ranking than equivalent mass. To select the lowest cost technology for a particular application we should use LCC rather than equivalent mass.

Spacesuit Cooling on the Moon and Mars

NASA is planning to return to the moon and then explore Mars. A permanent base at the south pole of the moon will be the test bed for Mars. At the moon base, two crewmembers are expected to conduct Extravehicular Activity (EVA) six days every week. Current spacesuits are cooled by the sublimation of water ice into vacuum. A single 7 hour EVA near the lunar equator in daylight can expend up to 5 kilograms of water. Because of the high cost of transporting spacesuit cooling water to the moon, the water for one EVA could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. The lunar south pole and Mars have low surface temperatures that make cooling much easier than at the lunar equator. Alternate cooling methods and keeping to cool environments can reduce or eliminate the loss of water for spacesuit cooling. If cooling water is not needed, a recycling life support system can provide all the required crew water and oxygen without transporting additional water from Earth.

Air and Water System (AWS) Design and Technology Selection for the Vision for Space Exploration

This paper considers technology selection for the crew air and water recycling systems to be used in long duration human space exploration. The specific objectives are to identify the most probable air and water technologies for the vision for space exploration and to identify the alternate technologies that might be developed. The approach is to conduct a preliminary first cut systems engineering analysis, beginning with the Air and Water System (AWS) requirements and the system mass balance, and then define the functional architecture, review the International Space Station (ISS) technologies, and discuss alternate technologies. The life support requirements for air and water are well known. The results of the mass flow and mass balance analysis help define the system architectural concept. The AWS includes five subsystems: Oxygen Supply, Condensate Purification, Urine Purification, Hygiene Water Purification, and Clothes Wash Purification. AWS technologies have been evaluated in the life support design for ISS node 3, and in earlier space station design studies, in proposals for the upgrade or evolution of the space station, and in studies of potential lunar or Mars missions. The leading candidate technologies for the vision for space exploration are those planned for Node 3 of the ISS. The ISS life support was designed to utilize Space Station Freedom (SSF) hardware to the maximum extent possible. The SSF final technology selection process, criteria, and results are discussed. Would it be cost-effective for the vision for space exploration to develop alternate technology? This paper will examine this and other questions associated with AWS design and technology selection.

The Cost and Equivalent System Mass of Space Crew Time

In “Theory and Application of the Equivalent System Mass Metric,” Levri, Vaccari, and Drysdale computed the Equivalent System Mass (ESM) of crew time. ESM is a cost-type metric based on allocated mass that is often used in life support systems. The previous paper suggested that the cost per hour of crew time should be equal to the ESM of the life support system, divided by the number of available crew work hours. We suggest here that the mass cost for additional crew time may be as large as the total mission mass or as small as the added mass of consumables, depending on how much more crew time is needed. If the increased mission work load requires flying additional crewmembers, the total mass and cost of the mission increases roughly proportionally to crew size. But if the needed work can be done merely by extending the mission duration, the required additional mass is only that of the food and supplies to be consumed during the time extension. The resulting upper and lower bounds on cost per hour of crew time are within an order of magnitude and can help resolve design decisions even when the total demand for crew time is unknown. However, the cost of crew time used in mission planning should not always be the actual cost to provide that time. The cost should be set at a level that ensures that the crew is neither under or overloaded. If little work is needed, we should set the price of crew time low or at zero to encourage more tasks. If the crew time demand is excessive, the cost should be set high to reduce the task requests. Imposing a low cost for low total demand and high for high will help guide the sum of crew time requests to converge to the desired workload.

Matching Crew Diet and Crop Food Production in BIO-Plex

This paper matches the BIO-Plex crop food production to the crew diet requirements. The expected average calorie requirement for BIO-Plex is 2,975 Calories per crewmember per day, for a randomly selected crew with a typical level of physical activity. The range of 2,550 to 3,400 Calories will cover about two-thirds of all crews. The exact calorie requirement will depend on the gender composition, individual weights, exercise, and work effort of the selected crew. The expected average crewmember calorie requirement can be met by 430 grams of carbohydrate, 100 grams of fat, and 90 grams of protein per crewmember per day, for a total of 620 grams. Some fat can replaced by carbohydrate. Each crewmember requires only 2 grams of vitamins and minerals per day. Only unusually restricted diets may lack essential nutrients. The Advanced Life Support (ALS) consensus is that BIO-Plex should grow wheat, potato, and soybean, and maybe sweet potato or peanut, and maybe lettuce and tomato. The BIO-Plex Biomass Production System food production and the external food supply must be matched to the crew diet requirement for calories and nutritional balance. The crop production and external supply specifications can each be varied as long as their sum matches the required diet specification. We have wide flexibility in choosing the crops and resupply. We can easily grow one-half the crew calories in one BIO-Plex Biomass Production Chamber (BPC) if we grow only the most productive crops (wheat, potato, and sweet potato) and it we achieve nominal crop productivity. If we assume higher productivity we can grow a wider variety of crops. If we grow one-half of the crew calories, externally supplied foods can easily provide the other half of the calories and balance the diet. We can not grow 95 percent of the crew calories in two BPCs at nominal productivity while growing a balanced diet. We produce maximum calories by growing wheat, potato, and peanut.

Managing Spacecraft Waste Using the Heat Melt Compactor (HMC)

Waste is a universal problem, on Earth, in spacecraft, and for any closed ecological system. Waste must be processed and is often recycled to recover resources. Many different approaches and technologies are used. Spacecraft waste is derived from the spacecraft logistics supplies, the materials provided for use by the crew. The composition of spacecraft logistics and the resulting waste depend on the mission and its duration and use of recycling. Spacecraft waste is a more serious problem on long duration missions because of the large logistics supplies consumed and the difficulty of storing or disposing of waste. The quantity and composition of waste can vary and may require flexible management. Most missions will produce about two kilograms per crewmember per day of trash, consisting of food waste, plastic, paper, packaging, hygiene wipes and many other supplies used and discarded by the crew. The waste is bulky, messy and difficult to store since the wet waste can decompose and produce odors and an accumulation of pathogenic bacteria. The Heat Melt Compactor (HMC) compresses and heats waste and, if it contains the usual large portion of plastic, bonds the compressed waste into a solid plastic encapsulated block. This allows the sterilized spacecraft waste to be easily handled, stored, and disposed of. The HMC can recover water from the waste and even from the brine produced by water processing. The compressed waste blocks can be used for radiation protection. The HMC is an effective and adaptable waste processing technology that will be useful on any long duration human space mission.

Modeling Separate and Combined Atmospheres in BIO-Plex

We modeled BIO-Plex designs with separate or combined atmospheres and then simulated controlling the atmosphere composition. The BIO-Plex is the Bioregenerative Planetary Life Support Systems Test Complex, a large regenerative life support test facility under development at NASA Johnson Space Center. Although plants grow better at above-normal carbon dioxide levels, humans can tolerate even higher carbon dioxide levels. incinerator exhaust has very high levels of carbon dioxide. An elaborate BIO-Plex design would maintain different atmospheres in the crew and plant chambers and isolate the incinerator exhaust in the airlock. This design easily controls the crew and plant carbon dioxide levels but it uses many gas processors, buffers, and controllers. If all the crews food is grown inside BIO-Plex, all the carbon dioxide required by the plants is supplied by crew respiration and the incineration of plant and food waste. Because the oxygen mass flow must balance in a closed loop, the plants supply all the oxygen required by the crew and the incinerator. Using plants for air revitalization allows using fewer gas processors, buffers, and controllers. In the simplest design, a single combined atmosphere was used for the crew, the plant chamber, and the incinerator. All gas processors, buffers, and controllers were eliminated. The carbon dioxide levels were necessarily similar for the crew and plants. If most of the food is grown, carbon dioxide can be controlled at the desired level by scheduling incineration. An intermediate design uses one atmosphere for the crew and incinerator chambers and a second for the plant chamber. This allows different carbon dioxide levels for the crew and plants. Better control of the atmosphere is obtained by varying the incineration rate. Less gas processing, storage, and control is needed if more food is grown.

Developing an Advanced Life Support System for the Flexible Path into Deep Space

Long duration human missions beyond low Earth orbit, such as a permanent lunar base, an asteroid rendezvous, or exploring Mars, will use recycling life support systems to preclude supplying large amounts of metabolic consumables. The International Space Station (ISS) life support design provides a historic guiding basis for future systems, but both its system architecture and the subsystem technologies should be reconsidered. Different technologies for the functional subsystems have been investigated and some past alternates appear better for flexible path destinations beyond low Earth orbit. There is a need to develop more capable technologies that provide lower mass, increased closure, and higher reliability. A major objective of redesigning the life support system for the flexible path is achieving the maintainability and ultra-reliability necessary for deep space operations.

The Effect of Mission Location on Mission Costs and Equivalent System Mass

Equivalent System Mass (ESM) is used by the Advanced Life Support (ALS) community to quantify mission costs of technologies for space applications (Drysdale et al, 1999, Levri et al, 2000). Mass is used as a cost measure because the mass of an object determines propulsion (acceleration) cost (i.e. amount of fuel needed), and costs relating to propulsion dominate mission cost. Mission location drives mission cost because acceleration is typically required to initiate and complete a change in location. Total mission costs may be reduced by minimizing the mass of materials that must be propelled to each distinct location. In order to minimize fuel requirements for missions beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO), the hardware and astronauts may not all go to the same location. For example, on a Lunar or Mars mission, some of the hardware or astronauts may stay in orbit while the rest of the hardware and astronauts descend to the planetary surface. In addition, there may be disposal of waste or used hardware at various mission locations to avoid propulsion of mass that is no longer needed in the mission. This paper demonstrates how using location factors in the calculation of ESM can account for the effects of various acceleration events and can improve the accuracy and value of the ESM metric to mission planners. Even a mission with one location can benefit from location factor analysis if the alternative technologies under consideration consume resources at different rates. For example, a mission that regenerates resources will have a relatively constant mass compared to one that uses consumables and vents/discards mass along the way. This paper shows examples of how location factors can affect ESM calculations and how the inclusion of location factors can change the relative value of technologies being considered for development.

Conditional Replenishment Using Motion Prediction

Conditional Replenishment is an interframe video compression method that uses correlation in time to reduce video transmission rates. This method works by detecting and sending only the changing portions of the image and by having the receiver use the video data from the previous frame for the non-changing portion. The amount of compression that can be achieved through this technique depends to a large extent on the rate of change within the image, and can vary from 10 to 1 to less than 2 to 1. An additional 3 to 1 reduction in rate is obtained by the intraframe coding of data blocks using a 2-dimensional variable rate Hadamard transform coder. A further additional 2 to 1 rate reduction is achieved by using motion prediction. Motion prediction works by measuring the relative displacements of a subpicture from one frame to the next. The subpicture can then be transmitted by sending only the value of the 2-dimensional displacement. Computer simulations have demonstrated that data rates of 2 to 4 Mega-bits/second can be achieved while still retaining good fidelity in the image.