Space Station Engineering Design Issues Report of a Workshop (1989) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Issues Related to Utilization and Operations Requirements for the Space Station
3 Issues Related to Utilization and Operations Requirements for the Space Station
Pages 19-30
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 19... ...
It also will accommodate externally attached scientific payloads to a limited extent. The evolution of the Space Station beyond Phase 1 could move in any of a number of directions, including development into a transportation node for manned lunar and/or planetary missions, an assembly facility for the construction of large spacecraft or other in-space infrastructure, a depot for servicing space assets, or perhaps even a dedicated life sciences or materials science laboratory.
|
From page 20... ...
Only when and if requirements for the assembly and launch of planetary or lunar base missions are defined can the appropriate Space Station evolutionary path to support them also be defined. However, continued care must be taken during the Phase 1 Space Station design process so as not to preclude
|
From page 21... ...
Issues include those associated with Design Reference Missions, which illuminate the implications of user and operator requirements for Station design, assembly phase requirements, mature utilization and operations requirements, and evolutionary phase requirements. DESIGN REFERENCE MISSIONS In order to guide the requirements generation process and to check the adequacy of the current Space Station design, some reasonable operational scenarios along with representative experiments to be conducted are required.
|
From page 22... ...
Premature Flight Telerobotic Servicer Launch The objective of advancing automation and robotics to improve scientific utilization of the Space Station as well as to increase the efficiency of operations is laudable and should, in the long run, provide significant productivity benefits. However, a premature demonstration flight of the FTS concept and early manifesting of the FTS in the Space Station assembly sequence unfortunately is likely to have just the
|
From page 23... ...
As noted earlier, the committee believes that the assembly sequence is over constrained, leading to a long-term penalty in terms of laboratory outfitting, utilization, and Station operations. For example, the life science experiments in basic gravitational biology and in preparation for extended manned missions require extensive use of several large facilities on the Space Station.
|
From page 24... ...
A particularly sensitive issue to both the Space Station life science and materials science users is the production, transmission, and absorption of vibrations at frequencies that could damage the microgravity processes under study. Until the Space Station program tackles the vibration transmission issue squarely (including provision of structural damping within and between modules)
|
From page 25... ...
While the committee did not have time to examine in detail the trade-offs involved with continuous reboost, it feels that the concept has sufficient merit to warrant evaluation by the Space Station program. Crew Utilization On-orbit crew time will be a scarce resource, given all the conflicting demands made on it.
|
From page 26... ...
means to provide remote experiment monitoring and command of experiments. Another means of increasing the effectiveness of crew utilization in support of user activities is to get Space Station scientists assigned to specific user experiment payloads as early as possible.
|
From page 27... ...
Furthermore, the committee believes there is merit in having the career Space Station scientists assigned and evaluated by appropriate user organizations, since the scientists' prime duty is the support of payload operations. Commonality The science users of the Space Station all desire standardization, and where possible, commonality of equipment both across disciplines and across modules.
|
From page 28... ...
The committee also feels that NASA should continue to examine how much trash will be returned from the Space Station by the Shuttle versus disposal by controlled burn-up of trash canisters during reentry into the atmosphere. Finally, the committee notes that the current design has no life-support provisions for animal and plant specimens during ascent to the holding facilities in the Space Station laboratory or during return to earth.
|
From page 29... ...
EVOLUTIONARY PHASE REQUIREMENTS The Space Station program properly and commendably provides accommodations for future software and hardware (~hooks and sparse) to permit ready modifications and growth as the Station evolves.
|
From page 30... ...
The committee cautions that the incorporation of heroic evolutionary capabilities should not be permitted to add excessive complexity, increase costs, or extend the deployment schedule of the current Space Station, and supports NASA's continued vigilance in this regard.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.