Comparison of Exploration Oxygen Recovery Technology Options Using ESM and LSMAC

Simple item page
dc.creatorAbney, Morgan
dc.creatorGatens, Robyn
dc.creatorLange, Kevin
dc.creatorBrown, Brittany
dc.creatorWetzel, John
dc.creatorMorrow, Robert
dc.creatorSchneider, Walter
dc.creatorStanley, Christine
dc.date.accessioned2020-07-30T00:30:07Z
dc.date.available2020-07-30T00:30:07Z
dc.date.issued2020-07-31
dc.descriptionMorgan Abney, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), USA
dc.descriptionRobyn Gatens, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), USA
dc.descriptionKevin Lange, Jacobs Technology, USA
dc.descriptionBrittany Brown, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), USA
dc.descriptionJohn Wetzel, Sierra Nevada Corporation, USA
dc.descriptionRobert Morrow, Sierra Nevada Corporation, USA
dc.descriptionWalter Schneider, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), USA
dc.descriptionChristine Stanley, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), USA
dc.descriptionICES302: Physio-chemical Life Support- Air Revitalization Systems -Technology and Process Development
dc.descriptionThe proceedings for the 2020 International Conference on Environmental Systems were published from July 31, 2020. The technical papers were not presented in person due to the inability to hold the event as scheduled in Lisbon, Portugal because of the COVID-19 global pandemic.en_US
dc.description.abstractIn preparation for long duration manned space flight, numerous technology development efforts are ongoing in the area of environmental control and life support (ECLS). In cooperation with international, industry, and academic partners, NASA seeks to leverage the International Space Station as a testbed for technologies targeted for Exploration-class missions. In recent years, Equivalent Systems Mass (ESM) analyses have been conducted to evaluate the relative breakeven points and to compare technologies as part of ECLS architectural trades. While these studies have provided important data pertaining to key engineering metrics, additional considerations are important to more fully understand the potential impacts and costs associated with selecting a specific architecture. A tool, called the Life Support Multi-Dimensional Assessment Criteria (LSMAC), was recently proposed by Sierra Nevada Corporation in an attempt to incorporate influences of these additional considerations including Maintainability, Risk Analysis, Technology Readiness Level, Radiation Impacts, Manufacturing Costs, Reliability, Human Factors, and Un-Crewed Operations. As a first step toward evaluating and implementing this tool, LSMAC was used to revisit the ISS oxygen recovery trade from the 1990’s wherein Sabatier was selected over Bosch technology. Second, the tool was used to compare oxygen recovery developmental technologies currently in work. The results of these studies as well as a comparison with standalone ESM analyses are reported. Further, a discussion of the potential application of the tool across the ECLS portfolio and its potential use in future technology selection for ISS flight demonstrations is provided.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.otherICES_2020_108
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2346/86428
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisher2020 International Conference on Environmental Systems
dc.subjectOxygen Recovery
dc.subjectLife Support
dc.subjectTrade Study
dc.subjectESM Architecture
dc.titleComparison of Exploration Oxygen Recovery Technology Options Using ESM and LSMACen_US
dc.typePresentation

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
ICES-2020-108.pdf
Size:
654.14 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.57 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

International Conference on Environmental Systems