Space Suit Mobility Evaluations in Lunar/Mars Gravity Environments

Kosmo, Joseph J.; Ross, Amy

doi:10.4271/981627

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The waist joint features instability and the most significant forces (to retain bending position) in comparison with other joints. For example, waist joint instability has been reported for the rolling convolute waist joint on the Mark III space suit, ( [9], see section "Results", paragraph "Mk III Hybrid Suit" where it is noted: "The subject also reported instability in the waist rolling convolute feature"). Space suit joint/human joint alignment is achieved by sizing the space suit enclosure to the crewmember by varying the enclosure length between joints.…”

Section: Determination Of the Pss/lta Joints/bearings Listmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The mobility of hip joints of the Apollo space suit was less than desired [3,8,9]. This shortcoming can be eliminated in a next-generation PSS.…”

Section: Hip Jointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The PSS enclosure construction must allow the suited crewmember to rise/stand up after falling. Tests performed both in Russia [6] and the USA [8,9] show that prior to rising/standing on a level surface, the suited crewmember must take a prone position. When tested at the Zvezda test facility (1/6g), the suited crewmember was able to stand up by proceeding through the following motions: pushing off with his hands and moving his torso backward to a kneeling position and rising from the kneeling to the standing position by any of several techniques.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Concept of Space Suit Enclosure for Planetary Exploration

Abramov¹,

Moiseyev²,

Stoklitsky³

2001

SAE Technical Paper Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At present advanced projects of the early XXI century are beginning to develop. These projects include lunar base development and manned missions to Mars. The space suit is one of the basic requirements for successful implementation of future programs. The space suit enclosure enables mobility of crewmembers wearing pressurized space suits which will be required to complete these missions. Requirements on Planetary Space Suit (PSS) enclosure design, especially for elements providing mobility of the lower torso assembly will be different from these on orbital space suit enclosure design, intended for zero gravity conditions. The PSS enclosure provides cosmonaut/astronaut movement on planetary exploration surfaces, ascent/descent of the Landing Module ladder, suited crewmember's bending etc. Thus this PSS component will play a considerable role in successful fulfillment of extra-vehicular activity (EVA) tasks on planetary surfaces. The paper comprises the following: n Analysis of the specific environmental conditions and EVA characteristics on the Moon and Mars n Major PSS enclosure requirements n PSS enclosure design concepts analysis n PSS lower torso assembly concept for the Moon and Mars

show abstract

Section: Determination Of the Pss/lta Joints/bearings Listmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The mobility of hip joints of the Apollo space suit was less than desired [3,8,9]. This shortcoming can be eliminated in a next-generation PSS.…”

Section: Hip Jointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Concept of Space Suit Enclosure for Planetary Exploration

Abramov¹,

Moiseyev²,

Stoklitsky³

2001

SAE Technical Paper Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The EMU components come in discrete sizes to accommodate a wider range of astronauts but has consequently led to spacesuits that do not optimally fit the entire astronaut population 4 – 7 . The combination of poor fit and gas pressurization creates a suit environment that is difficult to move in 2 , 6 , 8 , 9 , causes injuries 7 , 10 – 14 , and limits range of motion during extravehicular activity (EVA) 15 – 20 . The next-generation spacesuit built for planetary exploration is the xEMU, which is capable of pressurizing up to 8.2 psia (56.5 kPa) 21 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting decompression sickness risk and mobility in the context of the SmartSuit, a hybrid planetary spacesuit

Kluis

Diaz‐Artiles

2021

npj Microgravity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gas pressurized spacesuits are cumbersome, cause injuries, and are metabolically expensive. Decreasing the gas pressure of the spacesuit is an effective method for improving mobility, but reduction in the total spacesuit pressure also results in a higher risk for decompression sickness (DCS). The risk of DCS is currently mitigated by breathing pure oxygen before the extravehicular activity (EVA) for up to 4 h to remove inert gases from body tissues, but this has a negative operational impact due to the time needed to perform the prebreathe. In this paper, we review and quantify these important trade-offs between spacesuit pressure, mobility, prebreathe time (or risk of DCS), and space habitat/station atmospheric conditions in the context of future planetary EVAs. In addition, we explore these trade-offs in the context of the SmartSuit architecture, a hybrid spacesuit with a soft-robotic layer that, not only increases mobility with assistive actuators in the lower body, but it also applies some level of mechanical counterpressure (MCP). The additional MCP in hybrid spacesuits can be used to supplement the gas pressure (i.e., increasing the total spacesuit pressure), therefore reducing the risk of DCS (or reduce prebreathe time). Alternatively, the MCP can be used to reduce the gas pressure (i.e., maintaining the same total spacesuit pressure), therefore increasing mobility. Finally, we propose a variable pressure concept of operations for the SmartSuit spacesuit. Our framework quantifies critical spacesuit and habitat trade-offs for future planetary exploration and contributes to the assessment of human health and performance during future planetary EVAs.

show abstract

“…The EMU components come in discrete sizes to accommodate a wider range of astronauts but has consequently led to spacesuits that do not optimally fit the entire astronaut population [4][5][6][7] . The combination of poor fit and gas pressurization creates a suit environment that is difficult to move in 2,6,8,9 , causes injuries 7,[10][11][12][13][14] , and limits range of motion during extravehicular activity (EVA) [15][16][17][18][19][20] . The next generation spacesuit built for planetary exploration is the xEMU, which is capable of pressurizing up to 8.2 psia (56.5 kPa) 21 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting Decompression Sickness Risk and Mobility in the Context of the SmartSuit, a Hybrid Planetary Spacesuit

Kluis

Diaz‐Artiles

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gas pressurized spacesuits are cumbersome, cause injuries, and make completing tasks efficiently difficult. Decreasing the gas pressure of the spacesuit is an effective method of improving mobility, but reduction in the total spacesuit pressure also results in a higher risk for decompression sickness (DCS). The risk of DCS is currently mitigated by breathing pure oxygen before the Extravehicular Activity (EVA) for up to 4 hours to remove inert gases from body tissues, but this has a negative operational impact due to the time needed to perform the prebreathe. In this paper, we review and quantify these important trade-offs between spacesuit pressure, mobility, and prebreathe time (or risk of DCS) in the context of future planetary EVAs. These trade-offs are highly dependent on the atmospheric conditions used in the space habitat or space station, and therefore, these conditions are also important considerations for future planetary exploration activities. In our analysis, we include three habitat scenarios (International Space Station: 14.7 psia, 21% O2, Adjusted Space Shuttle: 10.2 psia, 26.5% O2, and Exploration: 8.2 psia, 34% O2) to further quantify these differences. In addition, we explore these trade-offs in the context of the SmartSuit spacesuit architecture, a hybrid spacesuit with a soft robotic layer that, not only increases mobility with assistive actuators in the lower body, but it also applies 1 psia of mechanical counterpressure (MCP). The additional MCP in hybrid spacesuits can be used to supplement the gas pressure (i.e., increasing the total spacesuit pressure), therefore reducing the risk of DCS (or reduce prebreathe time). Alternatively, the MCP can be used to reduce the gas pressure (i.e., maintaining the same total spacesuit pressure), therefore increasing mobility. Finally, we propose a variable pressure concept of operations for the SmartSuit spacesuit architecture, where these two MCP applications are effectively combined during the same EVA to maximize the benefits of both configurations. Our framework quantifies critical spacesuit and habitat trade-offs for future planetary exploration, and contributes to the assessment of human health and performance during future planetary EVAs.

show abstract

Space Suit Mobility Evaluations in Lunar/Mars Gravity Environments

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Concept of Space Suit Enclosure for Planetary Exploration

Concept of Space Suit Enclosure for Planetary Exploration

Revisiting decompression sickness risk and mobility in the context of the SmartSuit, a hybrid planetary spacesuit

Revisiting Decompression Sickness Risk and Mobility in the Context of the SmartSuit, a Hybrid Planetary Spacesuit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About