ON-ORBIT METROLOGY AND 0 CALIBRATION REQUIREMENTS FOR 

L 'iPACE STATION ACTIVITIES DEFINITION 

STUDY 

FINAL REPORT 

BY 

G.M.COTTY, B.N.RANGANATHAN AND A.L.SORRELL 

APRIL 1989 

PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT NAS14-303 

BY 

MARTIN MARIETTA MANNED SPACE SYSTEMS 

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 70189 

FOR 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE 

ADMINISTRATION 

SPACE STATION FREEDOM PROGRAM OFFICE 

RESTON, VIRGINIA 

~ 

k (NASA-CR-165621) ON-ORBIT METROLOGY AND NB9-29466 

CALIdRATI3N REQUIREMENTS FUR SPACE STATION 

ACTIVITIES nEFINITION STUDY Final Report (Martin Marietta Corp.) 202 p CSCL 228 uncl dS 

G3/10 0224520 
FOREWORD 

The work described in this report was conducted by Martin Marietta 

Manned Space Systems, New Orleans, Louisiana 701 89 for the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Space Station 

Freedom Program Office, Reston, Virginia in accordance with the 

requirements of Contract NAS 14-303. The objective of this program 

was to evaluate the on-orbit metrology and calibration requirements 

for the Space Station. The period of performance for this contract was 

November 1, 1988 to April 30, 1989. 

Technical assistance provided by Bob Polen of Martin Marietta 

Manned Space Systems is gratefully acknowledged. Review of this 

report by Dave Fischer and Gerry White of Martin Marietta Manned 

Space Systems, and Dave Workman of Martin Marietta Astronautics 

Group (Denver, CO) is greatly appreciated. Support and 

encouragement provided by Joe McElwee and Dave Austin of NASA 

Space Station Freedom Program Office, and Felix Crommie of NASA 

Headquarters is also gratefully acknowledged. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE 

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................ i 

LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ u 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. rn 

1 . INTRODUCIlON ........................................................................................................ 1 

2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................. 5 

Task 1, Literature Review ...................................................................... 6 

Task 2, On-Orbit Calibration Techniques ...................................... 23 

Task 3, Sensor Calibration Requirements ...................................... 80 

Task 4, Calibration Equipment Requirements ............................ 99 

Task 5, Traceability Requirements ............................................... 120 

Task 6, Technology Development Plans ...................................... 133 

3 . CONCLUSIONS .......... .. ..... .. ............. ....... .. .. .................. ............. ...................... ... .155 

4 . RECOMMENDATIONS.. ..... .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. .. . .. . . . .. .. ... .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . . . .. .. . .. .. . . . .. -157 

5 . BIBLIOGRAPHY. ........ .. . . .. .... . .... .. ... . ... . . .. . .. . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. ..... .. ..... ... . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . .... ... .. .. .. 160 

.. 

... 

2.A 

2.B 

2.C 

2.D 

2.E 

2.F 
FIGURE 

1 

2 

3 

LIST OF FIGURES 

PAGE 

Overall approach .................................................................................. 3 

Short term traceability ................................................................ 123 

Long term (potential) traceability .......................................... 132 

.. 

i 
TABLE 

1 

3 

4 

LIST OF TABLES 

PAGE 

Task 1, Calibration requirements for Space 

Station ....................................................................................................... 9 

Task 2, Assessment of calibration techniques for 

on-orbit use ......................................................................................... 26 

Task 3, Space Station sensor calibration 

requirements ..................................................................................... .8 2 

Task 4, Assessment of available calibration 

equipment. ........................................................................................ 1 0 1 

ii 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is in the process 

of initiating an operational Space Station during the 1990s. The Space 

Station is the focal point for the commercial development of space. 

The long term routine operation of the Space Station and the conduct 

of future commercial activities suggests the need for in-space 

metrology capabilities analogous when possible to those on-earth. 

The ability to perform periodic calibrations and measurements with 

proper traceability is imperative for the routine operation of the 

Space Station. An initial review, however, indicated a paucity of data 

related to metrology and calibration requirements for in-space 

operations. This condition probably exists because of the highly 

developmental aspect of space activities to-date, their short duration, 

and nonroutine nature. 

The primary objective of this study was to understand and assess the 

on-orbit metrology and calibration needs of the Space Station. In 

order to achieve this goal, the following specific tasks were 

performed. 

Task 1, Performance of Up-To-Date Literature Review; 

Task 2, Identification of On-Orbit Calibration Techniques; 

Task 3, Identification of Sensor Calibration Requirements; 

Task 4, Identification of Calibration Equipment Requirements; 

Task 5, Definition of Traceability Requirements; 

Task 6, Preparation of Technology Development Plans; and 

Task 7, Preparation of Final Report. 

In the following paragraphs of this section, significant information 

and major highlights pertaining to each of the tasks is separately 

presented. In addition, some general (generic) conclusions/ 

observations and recommendations that are pertinent to the overall 

in-space metrology and calibration activities are presented in the 

final paragraphs of this section. 

iii 
Task 1, Literature Review 

A large number of documents were reviewed as a part of this task. A 

majority of these documents included various NASA publications, 

Space Station RFP work packages, technical papers and publications 

available in the open literature (public domain), and equipment 

manufacturers' data books. Based on this literature review and 

discussions with Space Station prime contractors, generic 

measurement and calibration requirements were identified for the 

purpose of this study. These requirements could change as more 

details of the Space Station design are developed and become 

available. 

Primary c onc lu si on s : 

ECLSS, EVA, and EPS are examples of the systems where major 

calibration activities will be required. 

Certain similar calibrations (for example, voltage) are 

required in several of the systems/subsystems. 

Review of Soviet work (available in the open literature) 

provided very limited definitive data. 

Primary rec o mmen da t i on s : 

Complete definitive identification of specific measurement 

Develop integrated (common) measurement requirements 

Prepare an on-orbit metrology design guide. 

requirements as detailed designs become available. 

that incorporate all work packages. 

Task 2, On-Orbit Calibration Techniques 

From the generic measurement requirements identified in Task 1, 

specific measurement parameters (potential range and accuracy) for 

each category were derived from pertinent, available NASA 

documents. In cases where this information was not available, other 

related publications tvere utilized. Based on this information, 

identification of measurement/calibration techniques and an 

assessment of their on-orbit applicability were performed. State-ofthe-art as well as some emerging techniques were included in this 

evaluation . 

iv 
Primary conclusions: 

Calibration techniques for several measurement categories are 

currently available, though not in a completely optimized 

condition. 

Calibration techniques for some measurement categories (for 

example, mass, micro-g) are either not currently suitable or 

need to be developed 

Primary re com men da ti on s : 

Conduct detailed evaluation of current calibration techniques. 

Improve accuracy and extend calibration life through enhanced 

techniques. 

Task 3, Sensor Calibration Requirements 

An assessment of sensors that could potentially be used for various 

on-orbit measurements is a primary output of this task. Data on 

specific sensors (for example, platinum resistance thermometer, 

quartz thermometer) were included for each measurement category 

(for example, temperature). Comments on advantages and limitations 

for each sensor were given, which could assist in evaluating potential 

sensors for specific applications. Inputs for this task were derived 

from results of Task 2, manufacturers' data books, and related 

metrology documents. 

Primary conclusions: 

Several hundred sensors could be used aboard the Space 

Station; pressure, flow, and temperature sensors could be the 

most abundant. 

Accuracy of sensor measurements are affected by various 

extraneous conditions (for example, electromagnetic 

interference). 

Effects of on-orbit natural environment on sensor 

measurement accuracy are not completely understood. 

V 
Primary recommendations: 

Calibration techniques should include verification of sensors' 

primary function (for example, pressure to voltage conversion). 

Sensor applications must provide for calibration access and 

interfaces. 

Task 4, Calibration Equipment Requirements 

An assessment of available calibration equipment was conducted. 

Results of Tasks 1, 2 and 3 provided the inputs for this task. In 

addition, information obtained from equipment manufacturers' data 

books, metrology documents, and discussions with equipment 

manufacturers was utilized in this assessment. Results included the 

identification of calibration equipment needed for each type of 

measurement and their description, and an evaluation of equipment 

compatibility for on-orbit application. 

Primary conclusions: 

Vast majority of available calibration equipment will need at 

least some redesigning and repackaging to reduce weight or 

size. 

Additional design modifications may be required to minimize 

redundancies (for example, separate power supplies for each 

equipment). 

Deficiencies that are equipment-specific need to be addressed 

in design activities (for example, gravity dependence, 

sensitivity to natural environment). 

Primary recommendations: 

Identify in detail the calibration equipment required for 

sustained operation. 

Develop an equipment commonality list to aid in the 

integration process. 

Task 5, Traceability Requiremepts 

Evaluation of traceability requirements was conducted based on the 

information developed in Tasks 1, 2, 3 and 4. In addition, 

information obtained from metrology literature as well as discussions 

vi 
with metrologists in industry and government was included in this 

evaluation. Both the near term and the long term scenarios for 

traceability were developed. 

Primary conclusions : 

Traceability for initial operation will be provided by the use of 

on-ground precalibrated instrumentation. 

Near term traceability can be provided by secondary standards 

transported between the station and the earth. 

Long term traceability will require the development of on-orbit 

primary standards to reduce the cost of repeated 

transportation of secondary standards. 

Primary recommendations : 

Develop detailed traceability approaches for near term 

Develop techniques for providing resident (on-board) primary 

Investigate methods for better utilizing the in-space natural 

operation. 

reference standards. 

environment as primary reference standards. 

Task 6, Technology Development Plans 

The performance of Tasks 2, 3, 4 and 5 identified on-orbit 

deficiencies in calibration technology that cannot be satisfied using 

ground-based methods. The deficiencies represent technology 

development needs for in-space operations. Technology Development 

Plans were prepared for major categories. Information presented 

here is intended for enhancements and long term reliability of onorbit measurements. It appears that for most part the initial safe 

operation can be accomplished through the use of existing 

technologies. 

Primary conclusions: 

Major technology gap exists in gravity dependent measurement 

techniques (for example, mass). 

Additionally, technology gap exists in those techniques that are 

sensitive to in-space natural environment (micro-g 

measurements in micro-g background). 

vii 
Primary recommendations: 

Develop gravity independent techniques. 

Develop more complete understanding of the effects of in-space 

natural environment on measurement techniques. 

Consider immediate initiation of crucial R&D efforts. 

The general conclusions/observations of this study are: 

Only limited awareness currently exists for on-orbit metrology 

requirements. 

Involvement of metrologists in the design process is essential; 

To-date, it appears to be minimal. 

Innovativeness and inventiveness, needed in solving some 

of the fundamental problems associated with in-space 

conditions, will require an interdisciplinary approach; 

metrologists alone cannot solve all of the problems. 

Minimal attention appears to have been paid to-date in 

selecting specific measurement and calibration equipment. 

The general recommendations (near term and long term) are: 

Near Term 

Recommend that metrology and calibration personnel get 

involved in the design process at the earliest of stages; this 

could provide significant cost avoidance. 

Prepare an On-Orbit Metrology Design Guide to aid in 

the selection/assessment of instrumentation for on-orbit 

use. This would be a valuable tool in preparing preliminary 

design requirements for the Preliminary Design Review 

(PDR). 

appropriate personnel (U. S. government and industry, 

international partners) to heighten the understanding, 

awareness and need for incorporating on-orbit metrology 

requirements. This would provide an international check 

and also challenge for future contributions to the Space 

Station operation. 

Conduct an On-Orbit Metrology Workshop for 

? viii 
Generate and implement detailed Technology 

Development Plans to facilitate early identification of 

solutions for bridging the technology gaps. Then the 

candidate solutions can be evaluated and appropriate 

methods developed. 

Long Term 

Conduct preliminary design study for an on-orbit 

metrology system. Study results should yield an 

integrated system design and methods of operation. 

Develop final design and fabricate the on-orbit metrology 

system. The effort shall include test and checkout of the 

system. 

This report has attempted to emphasize the vital role played by onorbit metrology in assuring reliable, long term, and routine operation 

of the Space Station. Satisfying on-orbit metrology needs, poses many 

unique and difficult challenges. However, these can be overcome 

with a systematic, cooperative and interdisciplinary effort. A detailed 

review of this report should provide at least some of the essential 

data needed towards implementing on-orbit metrology and 

calibration requirements. 

ix 
1. INTRODUCTION 

The commercial development of space is a national commitment that 

is being actively pursued by the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). The focal point for these activities is the 

development of a manned Space Station (SS) which will ultimately 

provide the basis for potential space related commercial enterprises. 

A forerunner of these commercial activities involves research and 

development (R&D) in a number of disciplines, such as: 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Space power; 

Space propulsion; 

Fluid behavior and management; 

Glass and ceramics; 

Automation and robotics; 

Earth and ocean observation; 

Communication and data systems; 

Life sciences and human factors; 

Space materials and structures; and 

Controls and guidance. 

The installation, operation and maintenance of the SS for these 

activities requires calibration traceable to universal standards to 

assure accurate measurements. Moreover, calibration requirements 

must satisfy in-space functional objectives in a cost effective manner. 

The successful operation and maintenance of experimental payloads, 

orbiting platforms and satellites will depend on the adequacy of onorbit metrology capabilities. 

The daily operation of the SS presents some unique challenges in 

adapting current Earth-based metrology to the in-space 

environment. Lack of gravity, elevated radiation levels, broad 

temperature ranges, a 30 year use cycle, and the remoteness of space 

are some of the factors that create demands for new calibration 

equipment and methods. 

Metrology, the regular calibration of measuring and testing 

equipment, is devoted towards an accurate and uniform system of 

measurement. This system is accomplished by using the seven basic 

and two supplementary units of measurement of the International 

System (SI) of units. Measurement traceability to the SI units is 

1 
manifested by the ability to ultimately trace the calibration of 

equipment and reference standards to the basic units of 

measurement which are maintained by a national laboratory, e.g., the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Preparing 

guidelines and establishing requirements for subsequent on-orbit 

calibration of measurements is necessary to assure proper 

functioning of equipment and the acquisition of valid data. 

Approaches for ensuring long term traceability of calibration of 

appropriate reference standards should be established. 

An initial review indicated that a paucity of data related to 

metrology requirements for in-space operations exists. The objective 

of this definition study was the identification, quantification, and 

analysis of SS operational data to better understand on-orbit 

metrology requirements for future routine in-space operations. The 

detailed scope of work involved in this study is given below and the 

overall approach is shown in Figure 1. 

Task 1 -- Performance of up-to-date literature review 

Review and analysis of select documents to identify on-orbit 

metrology/calibration needs of major systems/elements of the 

Space Station. 

Task 2 -- Identification of on-orbit calibration techniques 

Assessment of state-of-the-art calibration techniques based on 

the measurement parameters identified in Task 1. 

Task 3 -- Identification of sensor calibration requirements 

Evaluation of potential on-orbit sensor calibration techniques. 

Task 4 -- Identification of calibration equipment requirements 

Assessment of state-of-the-art calibration equipment for 

compatibility with on-orbit environment. 

Task 5 -- Definition of traceability requirements 

Definition of potential long term traceability approaches with 

appropriate reference standards. 

*2 
TASK 1 

UP-TO-DATE 

LITERATURE 

REVIEW + 4 GENERATE LIST OF PARAMETERS I 

TASK 2 

CALIBRATION 

TECHNIQUE 

REQUIREMENTS 

EARTH METHOD 

ACCEPTABLE 

ON-ORBIT 

TASK 3 

r IDENTIFJ 

-r 

ON-ORBIT 

UNIQUE I METHODS 

TASK 6 NEW EQUIPMENT PREPARE 

TECHNOLOGY 

DEVELOPMENT 

PLANS 

SENSOR 

CALIBRATION DEVELOPMENT -b 

EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES I REQ~JIREMENTS I 

I + I EXISTING CALIBRATION 1 

1, EQUIPMENT I T 

IUSE AS IS 

TASK 7 

FINAL 

TASK 5 + 

DEFINE TRACEABILITY 

REQUIREMENTS - 

I 

Figure 1. Overall approach. 

3 
Task 6 -- Preparation of technology development plans 

Identification of deficiencies for on-orbit metrology that cannot 

be satisfied using ground based methods. 

Task 7 -- Preparation of final report 

Documentation of results and findings of the study for each of 

the above tasks. 
2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

The Results and Discussion section consists of six subsections. Each 

subsection deals separately with the first six tasks of this study. 

These tasks are: 

0 Task 1, Performance of up-to-date literature review; 

0 Task 2, Identification of on-orbit calibration techniques; 

0 Task 3, Identification of sensor calibration requirements; 

0 Task 4, Identification of calibration equipment 

requirements; 

0 Task 5, Definition of traceability requirements; and 

Task 6, Preparation of technology development plans. 

The data generated during the course of this study are presented in a 

tabular form for the majority of the tasks to provide clarity, 

readability and easy cross-referencing between the various tasks. In 

addition, the writeup for various tasks is organized in such a way 

that continuity is maintained as much as possible without detracting 

from the technical content of this report. 

5 
2.A Task 1, Literature Review I 

A large number of documents were reviewed for this study and 

these are listed in the Bibliography section. As a part of this activity 

several computer data bases were searched which included RECON, 

DIALOG, Engineering Meeting (EIM), Inspec, Engineering Index, 

USG/NTIS, NASA and GIDEP. Initially over 1000 references were 

identified. Final selection of references for review was based on their 

relevancy and value to this study. Only those references included in 

the final selection are listed in the Bibliography section. 

The results presented here are based on the data obtained from: 

Various Space Station related documents (Architectural 

Control 

Documents, Johnson Space Center documents); 

Documents, Space Station Program Office 

Space Station RFP Work Packages #1, 2, 3 and 4; 

Discussions with NASA Space Station Prime Contractors 

(Boeing - Work Package #1, McDonnell Douglas - Work 

Package #2, General Electric - Work Package #3, 

Rocketdyne - Work Package #4); 

0 Consultations with NASA Centers (Marshall Space Flight 

Center - Work Package #1, Johnson Space Center - Work 

Package #2, Goddard Space Flight Center - Work Package 

#3, Lewis Research Center - Work Package #4); 

Technical papers/publications available in the open 

literature relating to Space Station, Shuttle, submarines 

and work done by USSR; and 

0 General metrology and calibration information 

(equipment manufacturers, technical data sheets, 

conference proceedings). 

6 
This review has yielded generic calibration/metrology requirements 

for the Space Station. They are presented in Table 1.1 through Table 

1.13 and are organized individually for each of the following 13 

major s y s tems/elemen ts : 

0 Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS); 

0 Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) System; 

0 Scientific Experiments; 

0 Electrical Power System (EPS); 

0 Data Management System (DMS); 

0 Mechanical Systems; 

0 Fluid Management Systems; 

0 Propulsion System; 

0 Servicing System; 

0 Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) System; 

0 Communication and Tracking (C&T) System; 

e Thermal Control System (TCS); and 

0 Manned Systems (Hab and Lab Modules). 

Primary conclusions are: 

0 Majority of the calibration activities appear to be 

primarily concentrated in only some of the major 

systems, such as, ECLSS, EVA, EPS. 

e Certain similar calibration requirements, for example, 

voltage, appear to be widely distributed throughout the 

station. 

7 
Primary recommendations are: 

0 Complete definitive identification of specific 

requirements throughout the station. 

0 Develop integrated (commonality) measurement 

requirements that incorporate all work packages. 

i 
Table 1. 1 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: ECLSS 

SYSTEM 

FUNCT I ON 

Atmosphere 

Revitalization 

(AR) 

Atmosphere 

Control and Supply 

(ACS) 

Fire Detection and 

Suppression (FDS) 

Air Temperature 

and Humidity 

Control (THO 

Water Recovery 

and Management 

(WRM) 

Waste management 

EVA support 

Safe Haven 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Carbon dioxide content 

Oxygen content 

Trace contaminants 

02. N2 supply and flow 

Cabin pressure 

Fire detection 

Temperature 

Humidity 

Ventilation 

Temperature 

Water quality 

Quantity 

Resource supplies 

(02, N2, Water) 

Waste collection (C02) 

CO2 content 

02,NZ supply 

Trace contaminants 

Humidity 

Water quality 

Waste quantity 

Fire detection 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Concentration (% 1 

Concentration ( x 

Trace concentration (ppmlppb 

Pressure, Flow rate 

Absolute and partial pressure 

Heat, Radiation, Temperature, 

Combustion by-products 

Temperature 

Relative humidity 

Flow rate 

Temperature 

pH, Conductivity, Ion concentration, Particulate content, 

Total organic carbon (TOO 

~ 

Volume (mass) 

Flow rate, Pressure 

Pressure 

Concentration (X 1 

Pressure, Flow rate 

Trace concentration 

(PPrn/PPb 1 

Relative humidity 

pH, Conductivity, Ion, 

Particulate, TOC 

Mass, Volume 

Heat, Temperature, Radiation 

9 
Table 1. 2 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: EVA 

SYSTEM 

FUNCTION 

EVA life support 

Reservicing 

subsystem 

Decontamination 

and detection 

subsystems 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Oxygen content 

Oxygen reserve 

Nitrogen 

Carbon dioxide content 

Humidity 

Ventilation 

Pressure (internal 

atmosphere) 

Temperature (internal 

environment) 

Electrical power (reserve) 

Battery and power supply 

performance checkout 

Oxygen resupply module 

Heat rejection module 

regeneration 

Carbon dioxide module 

regeneration 

Humidity module regeneration 

EMU drying 

Performance trend data 

Nitrogen supply 

EMU pressure integrity 

Performance of pumps/fans 

Performance of caution/ 

warning devices 

Cooling loop gas separator 

performance 

Pressure/flow regulators 

EMU sensors calibration 

Con t a minan t s identification 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Concentration ( x 1 

Pressure 

Pressure, flow 

Concentration ( X) 

Relative humidity 

Flow rate 

Pressure 

Temperature 

Current 

Voltage, Current, Storage 

efficiency 

Pressure, Leak rate 

Fluid temperature, Fluid flow 

rate, Fluid leak rate 

CO2 removal rate 

H20 removal rate 

Moisture content 

A to D conversion 

Pressure, Leak rate 

Pressure, Leak rate 

Flow rate, Mechanical 

pressure, Voltage, Current, 

Electrical frequency 

Temperature, Pressure, Flow 

rate, Voltage and other 

safety related sensors 

Temperature, Flow rate, 

Pressure 

Pressure, Flow rate 

Suit temperature, Suit pressure, C02 sensor checkout, 

Vent flow sensor, Primary/ 

secondary 02 supply sensors 

Species identification 

10 

\ 
Table 1. 2 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: EVA (Continued) ~ ~ 

SYSTEM 

FUNCT I ON 

System interfaces 

- Hyperbaric 

air lock 

- ECLSS 

- Electrical power 

system 

- Thermal control 

system 

-Fluid system 

- Crew tracking 

- Proximity 

- Docking 

- Electrical hazard 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Pressure 

Trace contaminants 

Fluid Quantity 

Gas quantity 

Power consumed and rate 

Heat input 

Fluid quantity 

Crew member position 

Range 

Range 

Residual charge 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Absolute pressure, Rate of 

pressurization and 

depressurization 

Trace concentration 

(ppm/ppb 1 

Flow rate, Volume, Mass 

Flow rate, Pressure 

Voltage, Current 

Fluid flow rate, Fluid 

temperature 

Flow rate, Volume, Pressure 

Distance. Position 

Distance, Rate 

Distance. Rate 

Voltage 

11 
Table 1. 3 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: Scientific Ex p er i men t s 

SYSTEM 

FUNCTION 

Life sciences 

Materials 

processing 

Earth Sciences 

Natural 

environment 

~~ 

MEASUREMENT 

REQU I REM ENTS ~ 

Animal physiological research 

Animal ECLSS 

Botanical research 

Processing parameters and 

material properties 

Atmospheric, oceonographic, 

geological and natural 

resources 

Space environmental research 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Mass, Chemical composition, 

Temperature, Micro-g, Optical, 

pH, Electromagnetic dosimetry, 

Voltage, Current, Flow rate 

Gas concentration, 

Temperature, Humidity, 

Pressure, Contaminants 

Liquid quantity, Flow rate, 

Mass, Temperature, Pressure, 

Humidity, Gas composition, 

Optical, Contaminants 

Micro-g, Chemical composition, Temperature, Pressure, 

Flow, Electrical conductivity, 

Hardness, Dimensions, Mass, 

Voltage, Flux density, Contaminants, Optical, Radiation 

Wind velocity and direction, 

Temperature mapping, 

Contour mapping, Terrestrial 

radiation and irradiance 

Radiation, Pressure, 

Temperature, Micro-g, 

Magnetic fields, Composition 

12 
~~ 

Table 1. 4 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: Electrical Power System 

SYSTEM 

FUNCTION 

Power generation 

(DC) 

Energy storage 

Power distribution 

(AC) 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

~ ~~ 

Output power 

Module conversion efficiency 

Array pointing accuracy 

Temperature 

State of charge 

Battery pressure 

Battery temperature 

User voltage 

User current 

Frequency 

Waveform 

Circuit fault detection 

Continuity 

Insula tion 

NSTS power transfer 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS ~~ 

Voltage, Current 

Solar radiation intensity 

Angle 

Temperature 

Reserve power 

Pressure 

Temperature 

V ol ta ge 

Current 

Frequency accuracy 

Phase angle, Distortion 

Current 

Resistance 

Resistance 

Power (KW) 

13 
Table 1. 5 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: Data Management System (DMS) ~ 

SYSTEM 

FUNCT I ON 

Optical data 

distribution 

(fiber optics) 

Time and 

frequency 

reference 

A to D and D to A 

conversion 

Signal 

conditioning 

Interfacing 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Transmission reliability 

Time/frequency stability 

Conversion accuracy 

Function accuracy 

Data com munication rates: 

Time and frequency accuracy 

Orbital position data 

Attitude data 

Data integrity 

Bit error rate (electronic) 

Bandwidth (SSIS support) 

Data acquisition and 

distribution 

Telemetry 

MDM (A to D and D to A) 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Frequency, Power, 

Attenuation, Bandwidth, 

SIN ratio 

Drift rate 

Full scale, Zero stability, Linearity 

Gain/attenuation, SIN ratio, 

Bandwidth 

Signal timing 

14 
Table 1. 6 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: Mechanical Syste ms 

SYSTEM 

FUNCTION 

Alpha axis 

transverse boom 

rotary joint 

Central radiator 

rotary joint 

Umbilical 

mechanisms 

(remote operation) 

Assembly 

mechanisms 

and tools 

End effector 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Pointing accuracy 

Stability 

Jitter 

Search rate 

Rotational accuracy 

3-D position accuracy 

Electrical continuity 

Leakage (gas, liquid) 

Integrity of assembly 

Mechanical functions 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Degrees 

Degrees 

Degrees 

Degree/second 

Degrees 

3-D coordinates 

Resistance 

Leak rate, pressure 

Torque, Stress, Strain, 

Tension, Straightness 

Tactile force, Rotational 

accuracy, Torque 

15 
Table 1. 7 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: Fluid Management Systems 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Nitrogen quantity 

Water quantity 

Water quality 

Waste fluid quantity 

Waste fluid composition 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Pressure, Flow rate, Leak rate, 

Temperature 

Flow rate, Level, Pressure, 

Leak rate 

pH, TOC, Conductivity, Ion, 

Particulate 

Pressure, Flow rate, Level, 

Leak rate 

Com position 

16 
Table 1. 8 Task 1. Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: Propulsion Syste m 

SYSTEM 

FUNCTION 

Orbital position 

and attitude 

reorientation 

Propellant reserve 

Electrolysis unit 

DMS interfacing 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Thruster performance 

Quantity gaging 

Electrical 

Generation rate 

Performance data 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Force, Flow rate, Pressure, 

Temperature, Electrical power 

Pressure, Temperature 

Voltage, Current, Conductivity, 

Temperature, Pressure 

Sensor and A to D accuracy 

17 
Table 1. 9 Task 1. Calibration Requirements for S p a c e S t a t i o n 

SYSTEM: Servicing System 

SYSTEM 

FUNCTION 

Utilities 

Maintenance (work 

stations and portable equipment) 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Utilities usage data 

Operational performance 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Fluid flow, Thermal load, 

Electrical power 

__________~ 

Voltage, Current, Resistance, 

Impedance, Frequency, RF 

Power/attenuation, Distortion, 

Temperature, Pressure, Flow 

rate, Force, Dimensional, 

Optical 

18 
Table 1. 10 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for S p a c e S t a t i o n 

SYSTEM: Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN6rC) 

SYSTEM 

FUNCTION 

Orbital attitude and 

position control of 

station, payload, 

and platforms 

Collision avoidance 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Orbital position/attitude 

Distance and approach 

deter mination 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Latitude, Longitude, Attitude, 

Altitude 

Distance 

19 
Table 1. 1 1 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: Com munications & Tracking System (CdrT) 

SYSTEM 

FUNCT I ON 

Microwave 

subsystems 

Signal processing 

subsystems 

Proximity 

deter mination 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Performance characteristics 

Signal characteristics 

Position/range accuracy 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

CarrierAF frequencies, 

Receiver sensitivity, 

Transmitted power 

S/S+N ratio 

Range, Velocity, Angle 

20 
Table 1. 12 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: Thermal Control System (TCS) 

SYSTEM 

FUNCTION 

Waste heat 

acquisition, 

transport and 

rejection 

MEASUREMENT 

REQUIREMENTS 

Heat load 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Heat flow rate, Liquid flow, 

Pressure, Emissivity 

(Note: Additional requirements 

will depend on final design) 

21 
Table 1. 13 Task 1, Calibration Requirements for Space Station 

SYSTEM: Manned Systems (Hab & Lab Modules) 

CALIBRATION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Leak rate 

Stress, Strain, Elongation, 

Deflection 

Acoustics/ultrasonics 

Acoustics 

Spectral, Energy levels 

Data aquisition 

Test and Diagnostic 

instruments (Refer to Table 

1.9, Maintenance, Page 18) 

i 22 

\ 
2.B Task 2, On-Orbit Calibration Techniques 

Information pertaining to Task 2 is presented in Table 2.1 through 

Table 2.13 for each of the 13 systems/elements and their respective 

measurement requirements identified in Task 1. The majority of the 

Range/Accuracy information was derived from the review of 

literature listed in the Bibliography section. In some cases these are 

best estimate values based on available information and are by no 

means intended to be firm or conclusive. This is believed not to 

affect the validity of the rest of the information presented for a 

specific measurement requirement. Generally, the Measurement and 

Calibration Techniques presented represent the state-of-the-art in 

measurement science for on-ground calibrations. However, some 

emerging techniques are also included with a view for potential onorbit use. 

The types of measurement and calibration equipment used for each 

technique and applicability for on-orbit use are assessed and 

presented. Approximate calibration intervals were estimated based 

on the range/accuracy requirements, current on-ground calibration 

practices, and a limited understanding of the effects of on-orbit 

natural environment on measurement accuracies. Shorter intervals 

may be required for higher accuracy applications. Calibration 

intervals are not provided for techniques that are not presently 

suitable for on-orbit use. 

Primary conclusions are: 

0 Calibration techniques for several measurement 

categories are currently available for on-orbit use. 

However, many of these may not be totally optimized and 

in addition satisfy only a limited number of measurement 

criteria for each category. Some examples are given 

below. 

- Direct comparisons to more accurate sensors used 

as transfer standards (pressure sensor, flow meter, 

load cell), 

- Replacement of sensors with precalibrated spares 

(humidity, photometry), 

23 
i 

- Existing on-orbit satellite practices (telemetry, 

frequency /t ime) , 

- Use of natural environment and stellar bodies 

(orbital position and attitude, pointing angles 

and stability), 

- Use of stable Standard Reference Materials (pure 

substances, material property standards). 

0 Calibration techniques that are not currently suitable or 

need to be developed were identified for the following 

measurement categories. 

- Chemical composition (limited range and stability 

for many applications), 

- Spec trophotometry/radiometry (errors due to 

out-of-band responses of sensors), 

- Temperature (inaccuracies of high temperature 

pyrometric measurements), 

- Dimensional (lack of automation), 

- Electrical/electronic (errors induced by the natural 

environment), 

- Mass and derived categories such as pressure, flow 

and force (need for gravity independent 

techniques), 

- Magnetic flux (interferences from variations in 

magnetic field due to the periodic orbiting of the 

station), 

- Micro-g (need to establish validity through 

substantial on-orbit experimentation). 

Primary recommendations are: 

0 Conduct additional evaluation of current calibration 

techniques. 

24 
Improve accuracy and extend calibration life through 

enhanced techniques. 

Develop solutions for voids in calibration techniques. 

25 
v, 

v, 

I4 

V 

w 

.. 

a 

z 

P, 

c, 

v, 

L 

u 

u 

0 

0 

c 

a 

c) 

E! 

e 

E c) 

0 

u 

a 

v, 

L 

Y) 

0 

c 

0 

g 

.e 

3 

u 

a 

v) 

N 

0 

V 

00 N X 

.e 

v) 

0 

a 

E! 

8 

I .r( 

B 

m 

c 

c) 

8 

x E! =! 

m 

z 

1 

v) 

v) 

0, 

L 

a z 
L 

v) 

0 

c 

% 

0 

L 

3 

v) 

v) 

Z 

a 

L 

v) 

v) 

3 

2 

e 

c 

m 

V 

.r( 

n 
f 

CI 

co 

N 
I 1 I 

I 

I I I 

I I 

I 

I I I I 
L. 

LI 

0 

(1 

0 .-.I 

4 

.- e 

v) 

.e 

cn 

EO 

mm 

0 

rc, 
t 

I 

x 

.d 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

M .- L 

z L 

P W 

e 

v) c 0, m c) 

00 

u 

L 

3 

v) 

W 

L 

a e 

I 

I I 

I 

I I 

VI 

0 

N E 

&g e 

&E! VI 

0 &c;!L bt 

-0d cc, a 

I 

I 

I 

I I c) L 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

Ip: 

a 

WJ 

I 

I, i$ L 

Ik 

5 

c) 

.- v) 

a 

I 

Io 

LL 

00 

65 

c( 

I 

It8 

IC! 

IA 

I 

1% 

I 

E I 

I 3 

(P 

c) 

I I' 

r 

c 

ai 

L 

L 

I 

c 

0 

0 

0000 

M 

M 
L 

v) 

0 

9 

v) 

9) 

L 

S 

v) 

v) 

E 

a 

.4 

z 

";' 

0 

0 

0 

.-( , 

X 

w 

2! 

E 

U 

0 

v\ 

z 

L 

9) 

m 

X 

m 

0, 

e4 

c1 

L 

I 

I 

I 
rn 
I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

L 

e) 0, 

L 

5 

8 

n 

c: 

0 

4 

d 

I 

* 

00 

z* 

IU 

m 

a 

5 

V 

v, 

0 

y\ 

0 

0 

0 

v;5 

Ox ZN 
1 

L 

c) W 

c 

3 

8 

8 

d 

C 

w 

0,. 

c 23 

4% 

I 

IS 

I4 

I 

I 
e 

e 

I I II I 

I I I1 I 

I I I1 I 

I I I1 I 

I I I1 I 

I I II I 

I I 

I I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

1, 

Ib 

1% la 1, 0- 

Ini 

0) 
I 

I 1, I .a 

I I I 

I I 

I 

"""A 

v) 

00- 

000 

I I 

I 00 

4 

z 

I 

7 

OM -In I 

I 

I 

I I 

I 
n 

'El 

9) 

3 

c 

.M 

c, 

c 

-ui 

vu 

u I I 

I I I 

x 
Gw 

00, 

d3 .rl 

I I 1 

I 

I I 

I I 

I 

6 

C 

?! 

b 

3 

u 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

u 

u 

a 

0 

u 

5. 

- 

b 

n 

'CI 

0, 

0 

W 

u 

u 

C 

v) 

u 

3 

CT 

d 

u 

d 

.M 

9 

e 

? 

d 

d 

.e 

C 

0 

La 

la 

c. 

x 
I I 

I 
I 'e 

t 

I I I 

I m 

a 

I I I a 

I 

I I 

I I, b I 

Io r) 0 

a 

L 

iz 

I I I' 
I 1 

d 

C 

; 

Z 

5 

a 

0 

0 

U 

L 

e 

L 

4 

m 

U 

0, 

- 

3 

s I 1 

I I I 

C 

m c) 

v) 

r 

d 

e 

I 

c 

0 

m 

I 

la! 

I 

I 

I 
A 

-a 

9) 

c 

F: 

0 

v 

m 

rl 

a 

.- 

c, 

Y 

c, 

iii 

.rl 

c 

0, 

a 

W 

w 

.. 

B 

9) 

cr 

E 

v) 

I 1 

I 

I I I 

m 

-. 

I c.u 

E 
I 

I 1 I I I 

rt 

kvr Rfs 

I I 

I I I 

I 
I I I 

I I I 

I I I 

I I I 

I!? 

I 

I I 12 I IS 
FIW 

OP, 

d3 .w 

c. 

I 11 

E I 'E 

3 IX 'e nr Io 

4 

X 

I 

I I 

I 

0 ln 
,,1 

i 

E 

0 

.d 9) 

@3 

RIG 

Ut- 

@ 

E 

&IC: 

818 

I 

I L 

aJ 

L 

@ 9) 

9) 

H @ 

0;;; a 

9 &%u - E 

v) 

U 
I- II- % a 

a 

m Im 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I- lk 

IZ a 

a 

VI' 

0 

ow 

4 

+ 

c 

mi 

TJ8 

I 

i hm 

100 2m 
d 

0 .- I 

I 

C 

.- 0 

d 

z 

I 

I 

___$____ 

I 

L 

W 

C 

3 

* 

8 

8. 

C 

W 

3 

v 

W 

cr, 

L 

a 

0 

0 

'0 

9) 

4 

a 4 

B 

m 

c 

a 

I 

2% 

0- 

NO 

6 

C 

9) 

3 

9) 

L 

cr, 
I 'I 

IZ 

1: w I& 

m 

e, 

C 

e, 

L 

WI 

I 

81 

0 

I I 

cc, 

4 

0 

0 

0- 

3w 

h 

I- 

&; 

zE2 
T 

c, 

c 

0 

Ll 

h 'c 0 

0 rt n 0 

OC 

-0 E: 
e 

e 

3 

4 .- 

e 

0 

t: 

0 

L, 

0 

c, 

I I 
L 

d 

u 

C 

3 

8 

> 

oat 

-w 

89 

00 

0 

4 

0 

& 

CI 

Y 
'2 P 

c9 

I- II- 
a 

a1 

e 

W I 

I I I 

I I I 

I I 

I I In 

In 

I I I I 

In 

In 

I 

\ 

49) 

ow rc, 

+ ob 

OW 2 
d 

0 

.r( 9) 

43 E .z 

33 

-0 

ma3 

Ub 

1 

I v) 

al 

m 

W 

d al 

m 

L. 

c) 

P 

c) 

n ." - 

m 

V I 

I I 

U I 

L. 

L. 

0) 

g 

v) 

4 
I 

I 

I 

e, 

00 

m 

06 

.d 

c 

z 

4 

WI 

22 

klI2 8 

I 

lk k 

I 

1 I 

I, 

I I 

I I 

I I 

I, I 

I I 

I, I 
z 

3 

c, 

.r( 

I I I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I. I I 

I I I 

I I I 

'0 I I I 

I I 1 

I. I I 

I I:, 

I 1, I I, I I 

I 

I 

L. 

0 

L. 2 I 

s IS 

I I 

I I 

I I 

8 

t- 
a 

I 1 

Is d I 
.p 0 r,v 

aI 

Y) 

C 

m 

, L. 

'L. 

cc 

Ze 

bg 

V4 

ai 

c) 

0 

U 

U 

C 

m 

0 

.e 

s 

0 

$. 

P 

id 

0 

4 

n 

& 

.* 

v) 

a 

0 

0 

o* 

ON 

3s 

I 

z 

T 

L 

z 

c 

0, 

v) 

9) 

L 

f 

v) 

v) 

9) 

a" 

m 

a 

...4 

v) 

0 

0 

23 

Ok 

z 

2 

z 

v) 

R 

I 

00 
B 

u 

0 

-x 

AS 

d 

C 

u 

L 

L 

3 

e 

V 

c 

m 

c 

u 

G 

m 

d 

.* 

R 

3 

5 

h4 

0 

-x 

AS 
I 

I 

I 

12 2 la 

I' 

0 

b 
0 

0 

rr) 

0 

r 

I I 

I I 
- 

C 

I 

n 

y! 

W 

0 

I 

I 

I 

nI 

3 

hi1 

# 

0 

0 

r) 

d 

0 

# 

4 
e, 

3 3 

.r( 

Id SI 

I- 

& 

a 

v, 

I- 

& 

a 

0 0 r4 

In 

N r4 

ob 

0 

2 

c( 

I 

I 

I 

II- IZ 

= 

L 

1 

r) 

L 

w 

a 

a 

a 

0, 

c. ig! 

I r4b 
? 

8 

z 

U 

m 

0 

m 

U 

c 

m 

v) 

c 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I+ 

im 

22 ma 

urn 

; 

0 

0 

am 

c 

J=G 

a2 

e 

0 

c 

8- a% 

.z g cv, 

c 

4 

4 

N 

9) 

U 

cd 

cc 

4 

I 

I 

I I L 

u 

c 

3 

0 

V 

L. 

6 

2 

c 

0 

3 

c7 

Lr, 
e 
I- 

& 

a 

v, 

v) 

ti 

@ 

.e 

v) 

E 

L 

0, 

c 

ILL 

0 lilo In1 

L 

a 

I 

v) 

0, 

& 

4 
& ." 

-", 

? 

8 

c 

0 

4 

' 

C 

; 

5 

a 

0 

W 

v 

- 

X 

W 

a - 

'3, 

9 

a 

v 

& 

cn 

C 

0 ." 

v) 

v) 

.e 

e 

u 

V 

.4 & 

(0 

3 

4 

8 

." ' 

2 

e 

8 

c 

0 

4 

& 

C 

; 

2 

a 

0 

u 

v 

w 

n 

ctr 

Iv) 

v) 

m 

v 

C 

'3, 

a 

w 

0 

z 

' 

v) 

c 

0 

0 

u 

0) 

0 

.- 

& 

& 

% 

z 

V 

.e 

' 

e 

? 

8 

C 

0 

4 

& 

C 

; 

a 

0 

u 

v 

4 

5 

53 

I8 

II 

V 

0) 

0 

W 

4 

I .- 

C 

z 
2.C Task 3, Sensor Calibration Requirements 

The results and discussion for this task are presented in Table 3. Data 

on specific types of sensors, their measurement applications, 

principles involved in calibrating these sensors, and comments 

concerning their advantages and limitations are included in the table. 

The specific sensors (for example, platinum resistance thermometer, 

quartz thermometer) included for each measurement category (for 

example, temperature) are candidate sensors that could be 

potentially used on-orbit (based on the specific application 

requirements). The information given in the comments column could 

be an aid in determining the applicability of a specific sensor for a 

particular application. Inputs were derived from the results of Task 

1 and sensors used on earth and NSTS. Additional inputs were 

obtained from manufacturers' data books, metrology documents, etc. 

There will be several hundreds of sensors aboard the Space Station 

with pressure, flow, and temperature sensors probably being used in 

the largest quantity. 

major concern aboard the Space Station with sensor data being used 

to determine usage rates and reserves. 

impending malfunctions, sensors must be as accurate as possible. 

Intercomparison of multiple sensors may be beneficial in evaluating 

the operation of various systems. However, the requirement for 

failure isolation of subsystem elements will limit the degree of 

correlation possible between data obtained from different sensory 

inputs. 

Resource and energy conservation will be a 

To allow detection of 

Sensor drift is inevitable; therefore, some method must be provided 

to recalibrate the basic function of each sensor, which is to convert a 

measured condition into an useable output. 

some form of analog electrical output, such as, proportional voltage, 

current, resistance, or frequency. This output may require additional 

conditioning before being converted into a digital format. 

sensor calibration methods simulate the function of the sensor 

electrically and determine the errors of only the output and 

conditioning circuitry. To accurately characterize the performance of 

a sensor a direct comparison to an appropriate reference condition or 

a standard sensor of better accuracy must be performed. 

Most sensors provide 

Some 

The sensor may be tested in-situ; however, calibration over the full 

range of the sensor may be possible only if the sensor is removed 

80 
and operated in a separate calibration/test fixture. 

replacement with another calibrated sensor may be necessary when 

practical on-orbit calibration methods do not exist or to improve 

calibration efficiency. 

Sensor 

Primary conclusions are: 

0 Most types of sensors investigated exhibit some 

undesirable properties, such as, sensitivity to 

electromagnetic interference, response to ambient 

environmental conditions, and accuracy deterioration due 

to aging. Compensations for these properties, whether 

performed at the sensor element with additional circuitry 

or in the form of software constants or algorithms, must 

be repeatedly determined. 

0 Effects of on-orbit natural environment on the 

accuracy of many types of sensors have not been 

completely understood. 

Primary recommendations are: 

Long term stability should be considered as one of the 

primary selection criteria for on-orbit sensors. 

0 Calibration techniques for sensors must include 

verification of primary function (such as pressure to 

voltage conversion) as well as a determination of all 

major compensation constants (temperature and aging 

coefficients). 

0 Sensor applications must provide for necessary 

calibration access and interfaces. 

81 
I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

A 

z I A 

z 
I 
0 u IC UlO v Wlob 
I 1 I 

I I 

I I 

n 

D 

I I I I 
1 I I I I I 

I I I I I I 

t 
I 
'0 I I 1 

I I I 

I I I 

I 

't I00 0 

01 

2 a 

In 

0 

- I 

2 

2 

.e 

U 

a 

c 

0 

X 

0 

'" 
I 

C 

., 

m 00 0 

v, 

- 

08 * 00 - -N 0 

0- bt 

3s 0- 
I 
- 

VJ + 

B 

B 

0 

V 

I I I I I. 

m 

N 

X 

a 

a 

0 

0 

0 

e 

';J 

N 

cl 

W 

a 

a 

0 

0 

e 

c( 

I 

W 

E 

la 

s 

2 

4 

0 

# 

9 

d 

00 

E 

U 

la 

.r( 

2 

4 

0 

# 

9 

4 
I 
I 

v) 

m 

0) 

B 

e 

n 

T 

U 

0 

0 

X c. 

72 
I 

i 
2.D Task 4, Calibration Equipment Requirements 

The Task 4 results pertaining to the assessment of available 

calibration equipment are presented in Table 4. The major 

measurement categories (temperature, pressure, etc.), description of 

pertinent available calibration equipment for each measurement 

category, and their on-orbit compatibility and deficiencies are 

included. Results of Tasks 1, 2, and 3 provided the inputs for this 

task. In addition, information obtained from equipment 

manufacturers' data books, metrology documents, discussions with 

equipment manufacturers, etc. was included in this assessment. 

Most commercially available (on-ground) calibration equipment are 

not suitable for on-orbit use due to the minimal attention paid 

(during design and fabrication) to weight, size and power 

requirements. Some instruments, for example, a 100 ampere 

transconductance amplifier used for calibration of high current 

shunts and meters, are necessarily large and heavy. The volume 

efficiency (space utilized within the case) for many instruments is 

40% or less. Common circuitry (such as, power supplies, displays, 

control panels, automation interfaces) of specialized, single purpose 

instruments usually account for up to 70% of the total weight. 

Some examples of additional design deficiencies in currently 

available commercial equipment include the following. The internal 

thermal stability of many electronic instruments depends on thermal 

convection, which is absent in micro-g environment. This would 

severely impact the design of many high accuracy instruments which 

typically have a temperature specification of +/- 1 degree C. Further, 

transporting some delicate instruments may be difficult due to the 

sensitive mechanical components that may be present in these 

instruments. Many instruments are only moderately shielded against 

electromagnetic interference (EMI) and cannot be operated in close 

proximity to radiating equipment. A shielded enclosure or room 

(functioning as a Farraday cage) must be used to isolate some 

calibrations from outside interference. The shielding provided by the 

Space Station will perform the opposite by containing interference 

sources within the small interior volume of the modules. 

99 
Primary conclusions are: 

e Vast majority of available calibration equipment cannot 

be used on-orbit without some redesigning and 

repackaging to reduce excess weight, size or volume. 

e Redundant circuitry of individual equipment could be 

minimized or eliminated to achieve compactness, 

commonality, integration and weight savings by reducing 

the need for separate power supplies, displays, control 

panels, etc. for each equipment. 

e Additional deficiencies (for example, instability, gravity 

dependence, sensitivity to natural environment) that are 

specific to a particular equipment were identified. 

Primary recommendations are: 

e Identify in detail the type of calibration 

equipment required for sustained operation. 

0 Develop an equipment commonality list to aid in the 

integration process. 

e Investigate the innovative design features required for 

long term stability. 

e Develop approaches for space qualification of calibration 

equipment. 

100 
w 

0: 

3 

w 

5 

w 

c. 
m 

N 

0 

4 


U 

h 

c: 

Y 

8 

.. 

v, 

3 w 

p: 

a X 

a 

\ 
e 

52, 
v) 

E 
I 

0 

m 

~ 

M 

ai 

OD 

c: 

m 

L. 
a) 
I 

L. 

m 


e 

E 

Iz 

n 

rn 
2.E Task 5, Traceability Requirements 

Some of the inputs for this task were derived from the results of 

Tasks 1 through 4. Additional inputs were obtained from metrology 

literature, and discussions with metrologists in industry and 

government. Details of the results and discussion are included in the 

later paragraphs of this section. The primary conclusions and 

recommendations are presented first. 

Primary conclusions are: 

0 Traceability for initial operation will be provided by the 

use of on-ground precalibrated instrumentation. 

0 Near term traceability for subsequent calibrations can be 

provided through the use of secondary transfer standards 

transported between the station and the earth. 

0 Long term traceability will require development of 

on-orbit primary standards to reduce the burden of 

repeatedly transporting the secondary standards into 

space. 

0 The in-space natural environment could potentially be 

better utilized to provide calibration standards. 

Primary recommendations are: 

0 Develop detailed traceability approaches for near term 

operation. 

0 Determine feasibility and develop techniques for 

providing resident (on-board) primary reference 

standards. 

0 Research and develop methods for better utilizing the inspace natural environment as primary reference 

standards. 

0 Perform drift trending of appropriate data (with known 

uncertainties) to improve confidence in calibration. 

120 
Constancy of measurement accuracy over time is only possible 

through the use of highly stable reference standards, and a well 

defined and traceable path between the measured value and the 

value of the standard. Traceability of measurement data is 

necessary to assure that hardware specifications, operational 

performance and scientific experimentation meet design 

requirements. On Earth, traceability is accomplished through the 

direct comparison of measurement apparatus to standards of better 

accuracy and proven traceability to accepted national standards such 

as those maintained by the National Institute for Standards and 

Technology (NIST). Several levels of standards are used, with each 

level being compared to next higher level, since it is not practical to 

compare all measuring instruments directly to the national standards 

at NIST. Any discrepancies in accuracy detected during this process 

(calibration) are documented or eliminated (by adjustment). 

Accepted values of natural constants are also used to provide 

traceability (through definition) for some measurements. Examples 

of these include atomic resonance (unit of time-second), wavelength 

of light (the meter), and various properties of pure chemical 

substances. 

standard is not practical for a particular application. 

A transfer device is necessary when the use of a natural 

Initial (first time) calibration of a measuring instrument does not 

provide long term traceability unless the tendency of the instrument 

to drift over time is determined and quantified. Since all measuring 

instruments can be expected to exhibit some degree of drift, 

confidence in measurement accuracy always deteriorates with time. 

Drift rates are seldom linear and must be recomputed periodically 

over the life of the measurement instrument. The initial calibration 

uncertainties (sum of all possible sources of error), the measured 

rate of drift, and the criticality of the measurement application 

(confidence requirements) limit the maximum interval between 

calibrations. 

Measurement traceability for the Space Station will be an even 

greater challenge than it is on Earth. 

based on universally accepted standards. Although the International 

System (SI) of measurements will be used to define values of all 

primary standards, differences in techniques and apparatus for the 

practical realization of these standards may create small 

disagreements among the international partners. Discrepancies 

caused by misalignment of the respective standards of each 

international partner will be difficult to resolve in space. 

All traceability paths must be 

The 'm 

121 
remoteness of space, effects of the natural environment, and the 

constraints of weight, volume, and power placed on all payloads will 

make providing continuous traceability to the Space Station a 

substantial task. 

Very few techniques exist that can provide accurate measurement 

capabilities (without periodic recalibration or replacement) for the 

thirty year life of the Space Station. 

measurement/calibration categories required for long term operation 

in space. 

calibration technology) only a few of these requirements. 

standards for some categories currently exhibit long term (greater 

than ten years) stability and would require infrequent renewal (with 

minor engineering or design adjustments for on-orbit application). 

These categories are shown as semi-permanent capabilities aboard 

the Space Station. Telemetry (Space Station to Earth) will be useful 

for the analysis of measurement data and detecting trends in 

operational performance which may indicate system malfunctions. 

With the exception of measurements based only on frequency (or 

time), telemetry cannot provide the necessary traceability for the 

measurement of physical parameters or the subsequent conversion 

of analog information into a digital format. These must be verified 

by comparison to appropriate reference conditions. Traceability for 

most categories, however, will require that calibration transfer 

standards be transported to the Space Station or that on board 

equipment be replaced (ORU's) and returned to earth at regular 

intervals. Approaches to providing traceability for each of the 

measurement categories identified in Figure 2 are described in the 

following paragraphs. 

Figure 2 shows the major 

The natural environment can satisfy (with current 

Reference 

MASS 

Mass artifact standards (weights) maintained on board the 

Space Station can be expected to remain stable for many years, 

if protected from exposure to environmental factors that could 

cause a loss of mass (corrosion) or a mass gain (contamination). 

Intercomparison of individual weights within a set or visual 

inspection for damage can be used to extend confidence in 

mass standards indefinitely for limited accuracy applications 

(for example, using a highly polished class "S" set for a class "F' 

application). Techniques and apparatus for mass measurement 

in space need to be developed and also the material, shape, and 

coating requirements for on-orbit mass standards needs to be 

122 
VACUUM & 

VACUUM 

RADIATION 

(LIMITED) LJ OPTICAL 

(LIMITED) 

LOGISTICS 

MODULE 

\ NATURAL ENVIRONMENT \ EARTH 

ELECl 

TEMPE1 

'RICAL 

3ATURE 

PRESSURE 

MICRO-G MAGNETIC FLUX 

RAD I AT1 0 N 

FLOW OPTICAL 

CHEMISTRY 

Figure 2. Short term traceability 

123 
developed. 

(voltage) or physical (length) standards may be necessary for 

interpolation between fixed values to reduce the number of 

required standards. Mass standards can also be used to 

provide traceability for related measurements, such as, force, 

pressure, and quantity. 

Ratio calibration techniques based on electrical 

Traceability for force measurement is derived from the unit of 

mass (kilogram). 

force measuring instruments (load cells) are not practical for 

use aboard the Space Station. For most on-orbit calibrations a 

transfer standard load cell, initially calibrated on earth, should 

satisfy traceability requirements provided the accuracy of the 

transfer device exceeds the requirements of the measurement 

application. An alternative method could be the replacement 

of measurement load cells, within a reliable calibration 

interval, with spare load cells kept on-board or sent from the 

ground. Current designs (load cells) would allow calibration 

intervals of 1 to 2 years for frequent use, and 2 to 3 years for 

limited use (such as a transfer standard). Spares could be 

stored for 2 to 3 years before initial use. 

"Dead Weight" calibration techniques for 

PRESSURE 

On Earth, traceability for pressure measurement is based on 

the kilogram. 

transducers are available that can serve as on-orbit transfer 

standards. Instability (long term) of these devices will require 

replacement (possibly every one to three years), but because of 

their small size they should not be a substantial burden to the 

logistics resupply plan. A transfer standard pressure sensor 

could be utilized for on-orbit calibration and for reducing the 

quantity of replacement sensors needed. 

Small, light weight, and accurate pressure 

FLOW 

Traceability for flow measurements (liquid and gas in terms of 

volume or mass per unit time) must be derived from multiple 

reference standards. Several compensation factors (pressure, 

temperature, density, etc.) must also be considered, since most 

gases and liquids exhibit less than ideal behavior. Flow 

124 
calibration accuracies are thus limited by the accumulation of 

many sources of uncertainties. The use of transfer standards 

on-orbit (a 'standard' flow meter) will limit accuracy even 

further and may be useful only for lower accuracy calibrations. 

Suitable flow calibration equipment must be developed if 

accuracy requirements better than several tenths of a percent 

are anticipated. Calibration intervals will depend on accuracy 

requirement, type of flow meter selected, and the frequency of 

use. Continuous use applications may require recalibration as 

often as 1 to 2 years. 

TEMPERATURE 

Platinum resistance thermometers (PRTs) and fixed 

temperature points (melting/boiling points of elements such as 

gold, zinc, germanium, and oxygen) can easily provide 

traceability for most temperature measurements. Unless 

repeatedly subjected to high temperature, the PRT exhibits 

very good accuracy and stability, and is acceptable as a 

primary transfer standard for temperatures to greater than 

600 degrees centigrade. 

be used for applications requiring extreme conditions. 

Quantities of these pre-calibrated standards can be stored for 5 

to 10 years. Calibration requirements (resistance) for a PRT 

are within the expected capabilities for on-orbit electrical 

calibrations. The type "S" thermocouple can be substituted for 

the PRT in high temperature applications (but with less 

accuracy). Temperatures much above 1000 degrees centigrade 

must be calibrated using optical pyrometer/blackbody 

measurement techniques. This equipment may require some 

design/engineering modifications for practical use on the Space 

Station. 

Small replaceable PRT elements can 

HUMIDITY (MOISTURE CONTENT) 

The Optical Dewpointer (chilled mirror type) can be used for 

measurement/calibration of moisture (relative humidity and 

trace moisture) measurements from parts-per-million 

concentrations to nearly saturation levels in air and other gases 

through traceable temperature measurements. Saturated salt 

solutions can be used to generate very accurate humidity levels 

for the calibration of moisture sensors. 

and disposal of exhausted solutions may be an issue. 

Storage, preparation, 

The 

125 
response time and sensitivity of this method may be affected 

by the lack of thermal convection in space. Semiconductor 

humidity sensors, because of their small size and weight could 

be used as a consumable transfer standard (replaced at 1 year 

intervals). Hermetically sealed sensors can be stored for up to a 

year before initial use. 

MICRO-G (ACCELERATION) 

The on-orbit calibration of sensitive instrumentation to 

measure very small gravitational, acceleration, and vibrational 

forces will require further development of techniques and 

equipment. Calibration of some instruments on earth in the 

presence of a one-g background may not be valid for use in 

space. 

OPTICAL (POWER AND SPECTRUM) 

Traceable optical power measurements are limited mainly by 

uncertainties of the equipment and techniques used to 

represent theoretical values. The resolution of relative power 

measurements can be many times the accuracy of absolute 

measurements; the latter can be a problem if long term trends 

must be established. Calibrated semiconductor sensors in 

conjunction with calibrated filters can be used as transfer 

standards and returned to earth for recalibration at one to two 

year intervals. 

may generate sensor currents and could result in errors. 

Several types of analytical instruments (chemistry) utilize 

spectrometric properties for material composition analysis. 

Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) with the desired optical 

properties must be available for the calibration of these 

instruments. Replenishment of these SRMs will be necessary 

due to shelf life limitations. The use of natural illumination for 

calibration purposes is limited but should be investigated for 

the future. 

Out-of-band radiation (such as short x-rays) 

MAGNETICFLUX 

A source of magnetic flux (magnet) or a sensor (flux probe) are 

acceptable methods for calibrating magnetic field measuring 

instrumentation. Two standards will be required, one for weak 

fields and the other for strong fields. The magnetic and 

126 
electrical variations that will be experienced on-orbit will 

generate errors in sensitive measurements and may (over long 

periods of exposure) cause changes in reference standards 

requiring replacement every 1 to 2 years. The Earth's 

magnetic field is sufficiently well known for calibrating some 

instruments on the ground, but cannot presently be used onorbit as a calibration standard. 

RADIATION 

Radiation sensors (semiconductor, ion chamber, film, etc.) do 

not have sufficient long term stability to be used as calibration 

standards. Integrating sensors (such as a film badge) must be 

frequently resupplied (every 90 days) and will probably be 

returned to the ground for processing. 

available as SRMs (from NIST) that are predictable over many 

years. Adequate shielding must be used to protect personnel. 

The background radiation in space is not presently useful in 

providing measurement traceability. 

Radiation sources are 

MATERIAL PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 

Traceability for the measurement of material properties such 

as hardness and conductivity is provided through SRMs. 

calibration intervals can be five to ten years if protected from 

environmental factors. 

Useful 

DIMENSIONAL MEASUREMENTS 

Dimensional standards such as gauge blocks, internal and 

external diameter gauges, sine blocks and line standards can be 

designed for specific or generic calibration applications. 

Thermal coefficients of the standard can either be matched to 

the application or fixed at any practical value (nonmetallic 

standards cm be made with very low coefficients). 

proper care these standards can be expected to remain stable 

for several years (10 years or more). Laser interferometry can 

be used as a self-traceable calibration standard for manual and 

automated measurements from micro-meters to several 

hundred meters, and can also be configured for angular and 

velocity measurements. The predictable position of natural 

stellar bodies provide permanent traceability for the 

measurement of angles, angular rates, and attitude stability. 

With 

127 
CHEMICAL PROPERTIES 

I 

The quantitative and qualitative analysis of resources, 

contaminants, and wastes will require many chemical Standard 

Reference Materials. 

sources (such as NIST) for many of the requirements. Some of 

these standards exhibit only short term stability and will need 

to be replenished frequently. 

flammable, or even toxic. 

sediments may react differently in a low "g" environment than 

on Earth. 

liquid mixtures of known concentrations) for calibration uses in 

space need to be developed. 

These can be provided from approved 

Some may be highly corrosive, 

Solutions, liquid suspensions, and 

Proportional mixing apparatus (to prepare gas and 

ELECTRICAL 

The traceability of almost every on-orbit measurement and 

calibration will be at least partially dependent on accurate 

electrical measurements. Conversion of several hundred 

channels of analog data into digital format for analysis, storage 

or transmission to Earth will be accomplished with electronic 

conditioning and conversion circuitry that must be periodically 

calibrated to assure the reliability of all data collected. 

Verification of sensor accuracy, stability of excitation sources, 

output amplifiers, interconnecting wiring, and analog to digital 

converter accuracy are usually based on the measurement of 

several electrical parameters which in turn are based on the 

value of the volt, the ohm, and the ampere. Traceability for 

electrical measurements will require on-board standards for 

these and other secondary parameters. 

VOLTAGE, D.C. 

The Zener Diode whm operated properly is an acceptable 

transfer standard for voltage with an accuracy slightly better 

than one part per million per year. This device exhibits a 

hysteresis with changes in operating conditions such as 

junction temperature and current. A loss of power may cause a 

permanent shift in the operating point. Additional circuit 

components are necessary to compensate for large temperature 

and current coefficients (several parts per million). Zener drift 

(aging) is presently thought to be linear and can be predicted 

128 
i 

fairly accurately for a few years. Additional evaluation will be 

necessary before the long term (five years or longer) effects of 

aging can be reliably determined. Applications without rigid 

temperature controls, compensation, and backup power 

capability may require recalibration every two or three years. 

The Josephson Array is a recent development in calibration 

technology that may prove useful in providing long term 

traceability (ten years or more) when it can be made more 

practical for on-orbit use. 

To establish traceability for a large range of voltages (from 

microvolts to thousands of volts) requires the use of precise 

ratio requirement to allow comparison to a fixed reference 

voltage. 

to the total uncertainty at voltages different than the reference 

voltage. 

measurement capabilities for resistance and current. The 

Current Comparator Bridge, another recent development, 

exhibits better long term stability than resistive type dividers. 

This should be compatible with on-orbit use with some minor 

engineering. 

The accuracy of the ratio device used will contribute 

A ratio standard is also useful in extending 

RESISTANCE 

Special alloys with very low thermal coefficients and high 

stability are used in the construction of high precision wire 

wound standard resistors, which must be aged for several 

years before the final drift rate can be determined. 

Semiconductor (thick film) technology has improved to the 

point that resistors with thermal coefficients and aging rates 

almost as good as wire wound resistors can be made. 

or electrical abuse can permanently change any precision 

resistor, with the semiconductor type being somewhat more 

sensitive. 

resistance variations that can be detected for years if proper 

techniques are not used to prevent excessive strain to the 

resistance element. With proper design and protection from 

damage, standard resistors can remain stable for many years, 

possibly up to thirty years. 

Physical 

Soldering of attachKent leads can often cause 

A Quantum Hall Effect resistance standard has recently been 

developed that is based on a naturally occurring constant. This 

129 
standard is not presently practical for on-orbit use due to the 

large amount of support apparatus presently required for 

operation. Further development is necessary even before this 

technology can be utilized in various calibration laboratories on 

Earth. 

CURRENT 

A current shunt (resistor) is the most common standard for DC 

current calibration. 

measurements (over 10 amps) is limited by the power and 

temperature coefficients of the shunt used. Accelerated aging 

can be caused by repeated electrical heating. 

per year for a 100 amp shunt can be obtained, if high current 

use is limited to short durations. 

The accuracy of high current 

Accuracy of 0.1% 

A current transformer is used as a ratio device to divide a high 

AC current to a more easily measured value. 

the current transformer can be used for many years without 

recalibration. 

Unless damaged, 

VOLTAGE, A.C. 

The calibration of AC voltage (and current) is usually done using 

a thermal (RMS responding) converter with a known difference 

in response between a DC voltage and an equal AC voltage. 

Traceability is through this known difference and a DC voltage 

standard. 

stable but is extremely sensitive to abuse. 

ranging resistors are required to cover a large measurement 

range. With proper care, the AC/DC transfer standard can be 

used for up to five years. 

for RF voltage, current, and power measurement. Digital 

waveform sampling is a recent development that can also be 

used to provide traceability to DC voltage. This technique is 

better suited for automation than thermal methods. 

The AC/DC difference of the thermal element is very 

Low reactance 

Thermal converters are also available 

The method used to provide traceability for frequency 

measurements depends on the accuracy desired. The highest 

possible accuracy will be obtained with an on-board Cesium 

(atomic) frequency standard; currently used in spacecrafts to 

130 
provide a time and frequency reference accurate to better 

than one part in ten billion. 

less accurate requirements. Temperature and aging 

compensation can be used to provide accuracy to one or two 

parts per million per year. 

signal propagation variations will limit the accuracy. 

Cumulative errors are not a factor with telemetry as 

recalibration can be frequently performed. 

Quartz oscillators can be used for 

Telemetry can also be used but 

The typical standards (using existing technology and practices) to 

provide basic traceability for on-orbit measurements have been 

presented in this section. Sending a reference standard for use in 

space does not guarantee that the performance of that standard will 

be the same as on earth. The effects of the natural environment, or 

the practicality of using these standards has not been fully 

addressed. 

ratio, and distribute the appropriate values to all measurement 

systems. 

to keep weight, size, and power requirements at a minimum. 

Mechanical and thermal isolations are necessary to assure highly 

stable operating characteristics of most standards. 

Potential methods to satisfy many of the traceability requirements of 

the Space Station may exist within the unique properties of the 

natural environment in space. Utilization of background fields, 

radiation levels, and spectra of various forms of energy as on-orbit 

calibration standards can greatly reduce the burden of furnishing 

traceability from the ground. The vast expanse of space and isolation 

from man induced factors may be an advantage in developing future 

standards that are presently limited by the environment on earth. A 

comparison of Figures 2 and 3 demonstrates this potential for self 

sustained on-orbit traceability. It is quite likely that calibrations 

performed in earth-bound laboratories will eventually look to onorbit standards for traceability. 

Equipment will need to be developed that can transfer, 

Most calibration equipment was not designed with a need 

131 
ELECTRICAL 

NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 

CHEMISTRY 

ANGLE 

VACUUM 

RADIATION 

OPTICAL 

PRESSURE 

MICRO-G 

Figure 3. Long term (potential) traceability 

132 
2.F Task 6, Technology Development Plans 

The calibration/measurement development areas for equipment, 

technology, methodologies, etc. are included in the results for this 

task. Technology Development Plans (TDPs) for some of the key items 

are presented. These items are: micro-g, mass, pressure/flow/force, 

electrical, optical/radiation, magnetic, contamination monitoring, gas 

sensors, temperature, and dimensional. Some of the minor areas, 

such as humidity, requiring very limited enhancements are not 

included. Each TDP consists of: Technology Item, Required Effort, 

Deficiencies, Technology Plan, Resource Requirements, Test Program, 

Schedule, Risk Assessment, and Benefits Assessment. The Required 

Effort for each plan is categorized as major, medium or minor, and 

this could allow prioritization of these TDPs. The results of Tasks 2 

through 5 provided the inputs for the performance of this task. 

The information presented here is intended for enhancements and 

long term reliability of Space Station operation. In a majority of the 

cases the initial safe operation of the station can be accomplished 

through the use of existing technologies. 

Primary conclusions are: 

e Micro-g, mass, and pressure/flow/force measurements 

could be major efforts. 

e Electrical, magnetic, optical/radiation, and contamination 

measurements could be medium efforts. 

0 Gas sensors, temperature, and dimensional measurements 

could be minor efforts. 

e Major technology gaps exist in gravity dependent 

measurement techniques and those that are sensitive to 

in-space natural environment conditions. 

133 
Primary recommendations are: 

Continue to focus efforts for developing appropriate 

technologies that are gravity independent. 

0 Develop more complete understanding of the effects of 

in-space natural environment. 

134 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #1 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: MICRO-G (ACCELERATION) 

MEASUREMENTS 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Major 

(Theoretical and experimental research, 

equipment development and validation) 

DEFICIENCIES: 

a Limitations in sensitive micro-g measurements 

a Incompatibility of calibration techniques for on-orbit 

a on-ground (1 -g background) calibration may not be valid 

applications 

for on-orbit application 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

a Need to develop on-orbit measurement and calibration 

methods 

- Methods for improved accuracy 

- Qualify methods for on-orbit use 

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

a Mechanical Engineer 

TEST PROGRAM: 

0 On-ground 

- Experiment design and verification plan 

- Fabricate experimental systems 

a Preliminary experiments (KC-135) a Confirmation of results (Shuttle flight) 

135 
lo TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #1 

(CONTINUED) 

SCHEDULE: 

0 3-5 years 

- On-ground testing of concepts 

- Final verification of experiments using Shuttle 

- Preliminary validation of systems using KC-135 

flights 

flights 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

0 Lack of or less accurate micro-g measurement 

capabilities 0 Long lead time for technique development 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

0 Accurate micro-g measurements 

0 Aid in Space Station operation 

136 
TECHlr 3LOGY DEVELOPMEP T PLAN #2 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: MASS MEASUREMENTS 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Major 

(Methods Development and 

Qualification) 

DEFICIENCIES: 

0 Lack of accurate measurement methods 

Measurement technique needs to be applicationspecific 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

e Need to develop on-orbit measurement techniques 

- Non-rigid objects 

- Inhomogeneous materials 

- Complex, irregular shapes 

e RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

e Metrologist 

0 Mechanical Engineer 

TEST PROGRAM: 

0 On-ground 

- Develop measurement concepts for various 

- Conduct preliminary experiments applic a ti on s 

0 Perform final verification (KC- 135) 

137 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #2 

(CONTINUED) 

SCHEDULE: 

3-5 years 

- Verification of application-specific concepts (on- 

- Final validation to confirm candidate techniques 

ground) 

(KC- 135) 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

0 Lack of optimum methodologies 

0 Precision Mass Measurements must be performed on 

0 Lack of or less accurate measurements 

ground 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

0 Availability of precision on-orbit measurement capability 

138 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #3 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: PRESSURE/FLO W/FORCE 

(these are derived measurements from 

the unit of mass) 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Major 

(primary standards development) 

DEFICIENCIES: 

e Current primary standards are gravity dependant 

Use of secondary standards limits accuracy and 

calibration intervals 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

0 Develop practical methods for on-orbit use 

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

0 Mechanical Engineer 

e Metrologist 

TEST PROGRAM: 

0 On-ground 

- Develop and evaluate design 

- Assess gravity substitution methods 

e Preliminary experiments (KC-135) 

Final validation of concepts (Shuttle) e 

SCHEDULE: 

0 3-5 years 

- Develop concepts 

- Conduct experiments 

- Fabrication and testing of prototype 

‘0 

139 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #3 

(CONTINUED) 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

0 Accuracy and calibration life limitations 

e Potential unsafe conditions 

0 Inefficient control of resources 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

e Optimization of systems performance 

0 Efficient use of resources 

0 Improved personnel and Space Station safety factors 

140 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #4 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: ELECTRICAL MEASUREMENTS 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Medium 

(Natural environment evaluation and 

equipment application engineering) 

DEFICIENCIES: 

0 Effects of natural environment on accuracy of 

Currently available equipment may not be compatible 

measurements are not fully understood 

with mission requirements 

throughout the station; need access for calibration 

0 

0 Multitude of electrical measurements widely distributed 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

0 Study the effects of space environment 0 Develop approaches for automated measurements/ 

0 Develop appropriate long term standards 

0 Evaluate approaches for centralized and distributed 

calibrations 

calibration reference standards 

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

0 Metrologist 

0 Electrical Engineer 

e Physicist 

TEST PROGRAM: 

0 On-ground 

- Research available data on the effects of space 

Design and test multifunction electrical 

measurement/calibration system 

environment 

- Obtain and assess specific electrical requirements 

- 

141 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #4 

(CONTINUED) 

SCHEDULE: 

e 2-3 years 

- Define system design based on effects of natural 

Qualify system design for use in space 

environment 

- 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

e Unknown measurement errors due to space environment 

e Reduced reliability 

e Frequent calibrations necessary for sustained reliability 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

e Enhanced reliability through reduced measurement 

e Improved long term stability of equipment performance 

errors 

142 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #5 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: OPTICAL/RADIATION 

MEASUREMENTS 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Medium 

(Sensor and natural environment 

evaluation) 

DEFICIENCIES: 

0 Measurement methods do not provide sufficient spectral 

0 Out-of-band response of spectrally sensitive sensors 

0 Associated electronics may be affected by background 

information on radiation levels 

generate errors 

radiation 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

0 Evaluation and selection of suitable sensors (including 

recent semiconductor technology) 

as reference standards 

0 Further characterization of natural environment for use 

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

0 Physicist 

TEST PROGRAM: 

0 On-ground 

- Perform spectral characterization of available 

- Devise techniques for using natural environment 

sensors 

(background radiation) as reference standards 0 Verify results with on-orbit tests (Shuttle) 

143 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #5 

(CONTINUED) 

SCHEDULE: 

0 1-2 years 

- Sensor evaluation 

- Natural environment evaluation 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

0 Less accurate spectral information 

0 Potential hazard to humans and animals 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

0 Improved understanding of natural environment 

0 Enhanced exposure monitoring 

0 Potential for early warning of natural radiation events 

(solar activity) 

144 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #6 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: MAGNETIC MEASUREMENTS 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Medium 

(Probe and technique development, and 

validation) 

DEFICIENCIES: 

0 Interference of varying background magnetic fields limits 

0 Electromagnetic interference (EMI) will affect 

accuracy of magnetic flux measurements 

instrumentation 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

0 Evaluate improvements in probe technology (including 

Assess the long term (multiple orbit) stability of 

magnetic Hall effect sensors) 

earth's magnetic field for use as an on-orbit reference 

standard 

e 

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

0 Physicist 

0 Electrical Engineer 

0 Metrologist 

TEST PROGRAM: 

0 On-ground 

- Evaluate improved design for probes 

- Devise methods for beneficial use of natural 

magnetic fields 

145 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #6 

(CONTINUED) 

SCHEDULE: 

0 2-3 years 

- Design and test probes 

- Validate design concepts (Shu 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

0 Less accurate magnetic measurements 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

0 Improved accuracy of scientific experiments and earth 

science research 

146 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN w7 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: CONTAMINATION MONITORING 

(trace quantities) 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Medium 

(sensor development and 

methodologies) 

DEFICIENCIES: 

0 Sensor specificity and sensitivity limitations 

e Limited definition of species and detectability 

e Instability and lack of appropriate standards 

requirements 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

0 Identification of species and measurement requirements 

0 Selection and/or evaluation of sensors 

0 Development of stable standards 

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

0 Chemist 

0 Electrical Engineer 

TEST PROGRAM: 

0 On-ground 

- Evaluation of sensors 

- Development of measurement methodologies 

- Verification and qualification of methods 

SCHEDULE: 

0 2-3 years 

- Evaluation of available equipment 

- Development of new methods 

- Validation of methods 

147 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #7 

(CONTINUED) 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

0 Insufficient monitoring of environment 

0 Potentially unsafe conditions for personnel 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

0 Safer environmental conditions 

148 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN # 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: GAS SENSORS 

(For major constituents such as oxygen, 

carbon dioxide, nitrogen, etc. in a 

sample medium) 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Minor 

(Sensor material selection and 

application testing) 

DEFICIENCIES: 

0 Short calibration life 

0 Short operating and shelf life 0 Interference from nonrelevant gases present in the 

medium 0 Contamination of sensors 

0 Instability of Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) for 

specific gases (for example, carbon monoxide) 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

0 Identify essential gases that need to be detected and 

0 Investigate materials/chemistry for long life sensors 

Conduct experiments to establish long life sensor 

0 Develop and test prototype sensors 

quantified 

0 

characteristics 

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

0 Analytical chemist 

0 Material scientist 

0 Instrumentation engineer 

0 Prototyping facility 

149 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #8 

(CONTINUED) 

TEST PROGRAM: 

e On-ground 

- Selection of appropriate gases and atmospheres 

- Statistical validation 

SCHEDULE: 

e 1-2 years 

- Sensor material selection 

- Evaluation of chemical responses 

- Laboratory testing 

- Evaluation of prototype 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

0 Premature sensor failures 

rep1 ace men t/rec a1 0 Potential unsafe atmospheric 

e Ex c e s s iv e 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

brat on 

conditions 

0 Sensors with longer life 

0 Reduced operating costs 

0 Increased reliability 0 Improved safety 

150 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #9 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Minor 

(Equipment application engineering) 

DEFICIENCIES: 

e Calibration accuracy of optical pyrometers 

e Multitude of contact type sensors distributed throughout 

the station may not be accessible 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

e Improved calibration of optical pyrometers 

e Miniaturization/packaging of contact type temperature 

measurement system 

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

e Physicist 

e Electrical Engineer 

0 Metrologist 

TEST PROGRAM: 

e On-ground 

- Validation of optical pyrometry standards 

- Designing and testing of temperature measurement 

system 

SCHEDULE: 

1 year 

- Optical pyrometry standards development/ 

- Prototyping/testing of temperature measurement 

validation 

system 

151 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #9 

(CONTINUED) 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

0 Less efficient use of resources (electrical, thermal, power) 0 Less accurate temperature measurements 

Space and weight penalties (equipment) 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

0 Thermal control system optimization 

0 Energy conservation 

0 Reduced calibration effort 

152 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #10 

TECHNOLOGY ITEM: DIMENSIONAL MEASUREMENTS 

REQUIRED EFFORT: Minor 

(Equipment application engineering) 

DEFICIENCIES: 0 Majority of measurements are manual 

0 Inaccuracies of extremely large and small dimensional 

0 Wide variety of measurement requirements 

measurements 

TECHNICAL PLAN: 

0 Investigate methods for measurement automation 

- Laser interferometry 

- Optical measurement 

- Image recognition 

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS: 

0 Physicist (optics) 

0 Computer Scientist 

TEST PROGRAM: 

0 On-ground 

- Modify existing equipment designs 

- Develop and test prototype equipment 

SCHEDULE: 

0 1-2 years 

- Equipment redesign 

- Prototype fabrication and testing 

153 
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PLAN #10 

(CONTINUED) 

RISK ASSESSMENT: 

e Limited measurement accuracies 

e Equipment space and weight penalties 

BENEFITS ASSESSMENT: 

e Self-traceable dimensional measurements 

e Universal (automated) dimensional measurement system 
3. CONCLUSIONS 

Primary conclusions for individual tasks were presented in 

Subsections 2.A through 2.F, respectively. These conclusions are 

given below in a consolidated form. 

Task 

e 

e 

e 

e 

Task 

e 

e 

Task 

e 

e 

Task 

e 

e 

e 

1, Literature Review 

Maximum calibration activities appear to be in ECLSS, EVA, and 

EPS . Some similar calibration needs (for example, voltage) are 

widely distributed across the station. 

ECLSS information on submarines could be valuable for the 

station. 

Information on Soviet work that is available in the open 

literature provided no definitive data. 

2, On-Orbit Calibration Techniques 

Several calibration techniques are currently available (though 

not fully optimized) for on-orbit use. 

Calibration techniques for mass and micro-g are not currently 

suitable and may have to be developed. 

3, Sensor Calibration Requirements 

Majority of the sensors exhibit some undesirable properties 

(for example, sensitivity to electromagnetic interference). 

Effects of in-space natural environment on sensor 

measurements are not completely understood. 

4, Calibration Equipment Requirements 

Most equipment will require some redesigning and/or 

repackaging to reduce weight and size. 

Redundancies (for example, separate power supplies for each 

equipment) in various instruments could be minimized by 

redesign 

Some equipment could be influenced by micro-g and other inspace natural ambient conditions. 

155 
Task 5, Traceability Requirements 

Use of precalibrated instruments could provide traceability for 

Transporting of secondary standards could provide traceability 

On-board, long term, primary standards need to be developed. 

In-space natural environment could be better utilized to 

initial operation. 

for near term operation. 

provide some of the primary standards. 

Task 6, Technology Development Plans 

Conduct select experiments in simulated in-space environments 

Major efforts may be required in the areas of mass, micro-g, 

and pressure/flow/force measurements. 

Medium efforts may be required in the areas of electrical, 

magnetic, optical/radiation, and contamination measurements. 

Minor efforts are anticipated in the areas of gas sensors, 

temperature, and dimensional measurements. 

(KC-135) and also on the Shuttle. 

156 
4. RECOMMENDATIONS 

The primary recommendations given below are a consolidation of 

those that were presented in Subsections 2.A through 2.F, 

respectively, for the individual tasks. In addition, some general 

recommendations (near term and long term) are also presented. 

Task 

e 

e 

e 

e 

Task 

e 

e 

e 

Task 

e 

e 

e 

Task 

b 

1, Literature Review 

Develop definitive measurement requirements for all 

systems as more design details become available. 

Generate integrated measurement requirements 

incorporating all the work packages to aid in assessing the 

commonality needs. 

Conduct a detailed analysis of submarine ECLSS information for 

potential use in Space Station. 

Assess the information on Soviet work that is available in 

the classified literature. 

2, On-Orbit Calibration Techniques 

Conduct a detailed evaluation of state-of-the-art and emerging 

calibration techniques for potential on-orbit use. 

Develop improved techniques to increase accuracy and extend 

calibration life. 

Define and develop solutions for voids in calibration 

techniques (for example, mass). 

3, Sensor Calibration Requirements 

Include long term stability of sensors as an important 

selection criterion. 

Assure that sensor calibration techniques verify its primary 

function as well as compensation factors. 

Insure that calibration access and interfaces are incorporated 

in the design. 

4, Calibration Equipment Requirements 

Identify calibration equipment required for sustained 

operation. 

157 
Develop an equipment commonality list. 

Prepare space qualification procedures for calibration 

Consider innovative and inventive approaches in equipment 

design for long term stability. 

equipment. 

Task 5, Traceability Requirements 

Develop traceability approaches for near term operation. 

Develop on-board, long term primary standards. 

Evaluate methods for better utilizing the in-space natural 

environment as primary standards. 

Apply procedures for drift trending of appropriate data to 

improve confidence in calibration. 

Task 6, Technology Development Plans 

Evaluate appropriate methods for developing gravity 

independent techniques. 

Develop a complete understanding of the effects of in-space 

natural environment. 

General short term recommendations are: 

Prepare an on-orbit metrology design guide as an aid to 

instrumentation and other design engineers. The guide should 

include as a minimum: 

environment, potential calibration techniques and procedures, 

reliability considerations (uncertainties), traceability, and 

design checklist. 

design considerations, effect of space 

Generate detailed technology development plans which shall 

include, but not be limited to, the following: detailed 

analysis of technology gaps and their impacts, potential 

solutions, trade studies and prioritization, selection and 

optimization of concepts, and detailed approaches for 

technology development. 

General long term recommendations are: ' 

Conduct preliminary design study for an on-orbit metrology 

system. Study results should yield an integrated system design, 

method of operation, logistics and maintenance requirements, 

158 
and life cycle costs. 

Develop final design and fabricate the on-orbit metrology 

system. This effort shall also include test and checkout of the 

system. Provisions shall be implemented for the logistics, 

maintenance, operating procedures and manpower required for 

routine operation of the system in Space Station environment. 

159 
5. BIBLIOGRAPHY 

This section contains a complete listing of all documents, publications, 

and technical papers used in the performance of this study. Those 

that were considered to be significant and important are indicated by 

an asterisk (*) adjacent to the document number. NASA documents, 

such as, Space Station RFP Work Packages 1 through 4, Architectural 

Control Documents, Configuration Control Documents, and Operation 

and Maintenance Plans were used to determine the on-orbit 

measurement requirements (Task l), from which the results of all 

successive tasks (2 through 6) were developed. In cases where 

specific requirements were expressed as TBD, related technical 

reports, papers, workshop/conference proceedings, etc were utilized 

to derive the best estimate requirements. 

Several papers dealing with environmental and contamination 

monitoring systems for submarines provided important information 

because of the similarity of its mission (remote, self-sustained 

operation) to that of the Space Station. The Space Station 

Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) will be 

expected to perform many of the same functions as a submarine 

ECLSS. Detection of trace contaminants and rapid recovery from outof-tolerance conditions are critical for both space and sub-oceanic life 

support. Long term operation in space as opposed to the average 90 

day mission of a submarine does not allow operating contingencies 

such as surfacing, in-port repair and maintenance or practically 

unlimited logistic support. 

A limited amount of Soviet space program information available in 

the open literature was obtained and reviewed. Several of their 

problems and experiences were noted in this review, however, 

technical details were generally omitted. It appeared that system 

reliability has been a major concern for the Soviets. Further, it 

appeared that only very limited capabilities existed for measuring 

and monitoring the system functions. This could have permitted the 

system malfunctions to proceed to nearly total failure. These 

conditions at least in part could be attributable to deficiencies in onorbit measurement and calibration capabilities. Some of the pertinent 

findings are: a) Repeated (undetected) contamination of the station's 

internal atmosphere and the lack of appropriate on-board analytical 

instrumentation capabilities; b) Frequent failures of electronic 

* 160 
equipment; c) Excessive use of manual 

automation; d) Deterioration of optical 

cumulative effects of radiation; and e) 

equipment could not be performed us 

operations and lack of 

equipment due to the 

Repair or maintenance of some 

ng on-board capabilities. 

The primary conclusions and recommendations based on the general 

review of all the listed documents are given below. 

Primary conclusions are: 

0 Detailed specifications in some areas of the station were 

not completely identifiable. 

0 Data on submarine ECLSS could be valuable for Space 

Station. 

0 Information on Russian work available in the open 

literature provided very limited amount of definitive 

data, and it appeared that their use of advanced 

technology (for example, automation) was minimal. 

Primary recommendations are: 

0 Conduct detailed evaluation of submarine ECLS S 

technology for use in Space Station. 

0 Research information on Russian work that may be 

available in the classified (non-public) domain. 

161 i 
BIBLIOGRAPHY LIST 

(NOTE: Significant and important documents are indicated by 

placing an asterisk* adjacent to the document number) 

1 .* NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center, Space Station Work 

Package #l , 1987. 

2.* NASA, Johnson Space Center, Space Station Work Package 

#2, 1987. 

3 .* NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center, Space Station Work 

Package #3, 1987. 

4.* NASA Lewis Research Center, Space Station Work Package 

#4, 1987. 

5 .* NASA, Johnson Space Center, Space Station Projects 

Requirement Document, JSC 3 1000 Rev. C, March 6, 1987. 

NASA, Johnson Space Center, Space Station Operations 

Plan, JSC 30201 Fourth Draft, January 15, 1987. 

6. 

7. NASA, Johnson Space Center, Space Station Requirements 

for Materials and Processes, JSC 30233, May 30, 1986. 

8 .* NASA, Johnson Space Center, Space Station Natural 

Environment Definition for Design, JSC 30425, January 10, 

1987. 

9 .* NASA, Johnson Space Center, Space Station Reference 

Configuration Description, JSC 19989, August 10, 1984. 

1 o.* NASA, Johnson Space Center, Architectural Control 

Document Extravehicular Activity System, JSC 30256, 

January 15, 1987. 

1 l.* NASA, Johnson Space Center, Architectural Control 

Document Space Station Servicing System, JSC 3050 1 , 

January 15, 1987. 

162 
12. 

13. 

14. 

15. 

16. 

17.* 

18. 

19. 

20.* 

21. 

22.* 

D. A. Brewer and J. B. Hall, Jr., Effects of Varying 

Environmental Parameters on Trace Contaminant 

Concentrations in the NASA Space Station Reference 

Configuration, SAE Paper No. 8609 16, July 1986. 

M. R. Schwartz and S. I. Oldmark, Analysis and 

Composition of a Model Trace Gaseous Mixture for a 

Spacecraft, SAE Paper No. 8609 17, July 1986. 

R. B. Boyda and S. P. Hendrix, EDC Development and 

Testing for the Space Station Program, SAE Paper No. 

8609 18, July 1986. 

A. Kutschker, R. M. Taylor, and R. J. Cusick, Design of an 

Oxygen Sensor with Automatic Self-Testing and 

Calibration Capability, SAE Paper No. 8609 19, July 1986. 

W. T. Harvey, S. M. Farrell, J. Albert Howard, Jr., and F. 

Pearlman, Space Station Health Maintenance Facility, SAE 

Paper No. 860922, July 1986. 

P. D. McCormack, Radiation Dose Prediction for Space 

Station, SAE Paper No. 860924, July 1986. 

G. Johnson, H. L. Wolbers, Jr., and W. L. Miles, Habitation 

Module for Space Station, SAE Paper No. 860928, July 

1986. 

J. Frassanito, Conceptual Sketches for Space Station 

Module Outfitting, SAE Paper No. 860929, July 1986. 

M. Junge, A Maintenance Work Station for Space Station, 

SAE Paper No. 860933, July 1986. 

U. Laux, K. Beckman, and R. Lawson, System Aspects of 

COLUMBUS Thermal Control, SAE Paper No. 860938, July 

1986. 

W. R. Humphries, J. L. Reuter, and R. G. Schunk, Space 

Station Environmental Control and Life Support System 

Distribution and Loop Closure Studies, SAE Paper No. 

860942, July 1986. 

163 
23. 

2 4. 

25.* 

26. 

27.* 

28. 

29. 

30. 

31. 

32.* 

C. D. Ray and W. R. Humphries, Status of Space Station 

Environmental Control and Life Support System Design 

Concept, SAE Paper No. 860943, July 1986. 

C. W. Miller and L. C. Kovach, Environmental Control Life 

Support for the Space Station, SAE Paper No. 860944, July 

1986. 

R. N. Rossier, Nuclear Powered Submarines and the Space 

Station: A Comparison of ECLSS Requirements, SAE Paper 

No. 860945, July 1986. 

M. Moffatt and F. Abeles, The Development of an EVA 

Universal Work Station, SAE Paper No. 860952, July 

1986. 

J. D. Hilchey, R. D. Arno, E. Gustan, and C. E. Rudiger, 

Science and Payload Options for Animal and Plant 

Research Accommodations Aboard The Early Space 

Station, SAE Paper No. 860953, July 1986. 

C. E. Rudiger, C. J. Harris, and P. C. Dolkas, Special 

Considerations in Outfitting a Space Station Module for 

Scientific Use, SAE Paper No. 860956, July 1986. 

J. A. Giannovario, J. D. Schelkopf, K. Massey, and M. Solly, 

Science Research Facilities: Versatility for Space Station, 

SAE Paper No. 860958, July 1986. 

H. R. Loser, Life Support Subsystem Concepts for Botanical 

Experiments of Long Duration, SAE Paper No. 860967, 

July 1986. 

D. N. Rasmussen, Life Sciences Research Facility 

Automation Requirements and Concepts for the Space 

Station, SAE Paper No. 860970, July 1986. 

J. Levy, R. Whitman, T. A. LaVigna, and J. E. Oberright, 

Servicing of User Payload Equipment in the Space Station 

Pressurized Environment, SAE Paper No. 860973, July 

1986. 

164 
33. R. E. Olsen and A. Quinn, Advanced Orbital Servicing 

Capabilities Development, SAE Paper No. 860992, July 

1986. 

3 4. F. T. Powell, R. A. Wynveen, and C. Lin, Environmental 

Control and Life Support Technologies for Advanced 

Manned Space Missions, SAE Paper No. 860994, July 

1986. 

35. J. B. Hall, G. T. Colwell, and J. G. Hartley, Evaluation of 

Space Station Thermal Control Techniques, SAE Paper No. 

860998, July 1986. 

36.* D. B. Heppner, J. M. Khoury, and J. D. Powell, 

Contr ol/Monitor I nstr u mentation for Environmental 

Control and Life Support Systems Aboard the Space 

Station, SAE Paper No. 86 1007, July 1986. 

37. W. E. Thornton, H. Whitmore, and W. W. Lofland, Jr., An 

Improved Waste Collection System for Space Flight, SAE 

Paper No. 861014, July 1986. 

S. Bruzzi, New Approaches to Calibration and Validation, 

Proceedings of the European Symposium on Polar 

Platform Opportunities and Instrumentation for Remote 

Sensing (ESPOIR), European Space Agency, June 1986. 

38.* 

39. Orbital Space Station Study, Volume I11 - Test Operations 

Plan, Appendix I I, Test Equipment Description Formats, 

Technical Documentary Report No. SSD-TDR-64-2 13, 

Headquarters, Space Systems Division, Air Force Systems 

Command, United States Air Force. 

40. 

41. 

F. A. Pull0 and A. C. Beardsley, COSM: A Space Station 

EVAS Test Challenge, Proceedings of the International 

Automatic Testing Conference, San Francisco, November 

1987. 

H. H. Stover, An Approach to Space Station ATE, 

Proceedings of AUTOTESTCON '83 Conference, Fort Worth, 

Texas, November 1983. 
42. 

43." 

44." 

45. 

46. 

47. 

48. 

49. 

50. 

E. S. Chevers, Space Station Integration and Verification 

Concepts, Proceedings of IEEEIAIAA 7th Digital Avionics 

Systems Conference, Fort Worth, Texas, October 1986. 

U. K. Veismann, R. J. Room, and 0. A. Avaste, Remote 

Sensing of the Atmosphere from Scientific Stations 

"SALYUT," Adv. Space Res., Vol. 4, No. 6, 1984. 

L. R. Greenwood, The Role of Space Station in Earth 

Sciences, Space Station: Policy, Planning and Utilization, 

Proceedings of the Symposium, Arlington, Virginia, July 

1983. 

T. L. Labus and T. H. Cochran, Space Station Electrical 

Power System, NASAILewis Research Center, NASA 

Technical Memorandum TM-100140, 1987. 

J. Y. Read, T. P. Howland, and W. A. Perkins, Use of 

Communicating Expert Systems in Fault Diagnosis for 

Space Station Applications, SPIE, Vol. 729, Space Station 

Automation 11, 1986. 

J. A. Nuth, G. Corso, D. DeVincenzi, A. Duba, J. Freeman, R. 

Lopez, J. Stephens, 1. Strong, and J. Wolfe, Report on 

0 p por tunitie s and /or Techniques for High -Calib er 

Experimental Research (OTHER) Proposals for SSPEX, 

NASA, Washington, DC, NASA Document No. NAS 17-90 

86N27140. 

H. Green, Data Management in Electrical Power Systems 

for Space Applications, Proceedings of the 9th 

Intern ation a1 Telecom m unications Energy Conference , 

Stockholm, Sweden, June 1987. 

H. Siemann, G. Hirzinger, and E. Schmidt, Man Tended 

Free Flyer Interior Equipment for Manned and 

Automated Operation, 3 8 th International Aerospace 

Congress, Brighton, England, October 1987. 

B. Elmann-Larsen, ESA's Facility for Research in Human 

Physiology in Space - ANTHRORACK, Proceedings of the 

3rd European Symposium on Life Sciences Research in 

Space, ESA, Nordwijk, Netherlands, September 1987. 

166 
51. 

52. 

53. 

5 4. 

55." 

56. 

57. 

58. 

59. 

'a *' 

W. W. Guy, Space Station Technology - Environmental 

Control and Life Support - Partially Closed System Will 

Save Big Money, Astronautics and Aeronautics, P. 50, 

March 1983. 

A. M. Boehm and A. F. Behrend, Space Station 

Environmental Control and Life Support System 

Architecture: Centralized Versus Distributed, SAE Paper 

No. 840961, July 1984. 

J. A. Mason and P. C. Johnson, Jr., Space Station Medical 

Sciences Concepts, SAE Paper No. 840928, July 1984. 

H. Stoewer, COLUMBUS Technology Status and Plans, 

International Symposium - Towards COLUMBUS and 

Space Station, DGLR Symposium, Bonn-Bad Godesberg, 

October 1 9 8 5. 

R. E. Breeding and P. G. Tremblay, Space Station Safety - 

Design and Operational Considerations, in Space Safety 

and Rescue 1984-1 985, San Diego, California, Univelt 

Inc., 1986, pp. 207- 218. 

R. DeMeis, Space - Safety in the Space Station, Aerospace 

America, P. 26, May 1986. 

A. F. Behrend, Jr., Space Station Environmental Control 

and Life Support Systems Test Bed Program - An 

Overview, 36 th Congress of the International 

Astronautical Federation, Stock holm, Sweden, October 

1985. 

S. Kanda, H. Fujimori, A. Hattori, T. Shimizu, and H. 

Matsumiya, Life Support System Study of Japanese 

Experiment Module of Space Station, 36th Congress of 

the International Astronautical Fe der ation, Stock holm, 

Sweden, October 1985. 

Calibration in Air Monitoring, A Symposium Presented at 

the University of Colorado at Boulder, Colorado, August 

1975, American Society for Testing and Materials, ASTM 

Special Technical Publication 598. 

167 
60. 

61. 

62.* 

63. 

6 4. 

65.' 

66. 

67. 

E. Rodgers, The Ecology of Microorganisms in a Small 

Closed System: Potential Benefits and Problems for Space 

Station, NASA Technical Memorandum, NASA TM-86563, 

Marshall Space Flight Center, October 1986. 

F. H. Schubert, T. M. Hallick, and R. R. Woods, 

Preprototype Independent Air Revitalization Subsystem, 

Final Report, April 1982, Prepared Under Contract NAS9- 

15218 by Life Systems, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio 44122 for 

Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center. 

R. D. Marshall, G. S. Ellis, F. H. Schubert, and R. A. 

Wynveen, Extended Duration Orbiter Study: C02 Removal 

and Water Recovery, Final Report, May 1979, Prepared 

Under Contract NAS9-152 18 by Life Systems, Inc., 

Cleveland, Ohio 44 122 for Lyndon B. Johnson Space 

Center. 

W. W. Vaughn and C. E. Green, Natural Environment 

Design Criteria for the Space Station Definition and 

Preliminary Design (Second Revision), NASA Technical 

Memorandum, NASA TM- 86498, Marshall Space Flight 

Center, March 1985. 

J. T. Larkins, R. C. Wagner, and M. L. Gopikanth, A Space 

Station Utility - Static Feed Electrolyzer, SAE Paper No. 

860920, July 1986. 

Proceedings of the Sub marine Atmosphere Contaminant 

Workshop held at Naval Submarine Medical Research 

Laboratory, Submarine Base, Groton, Conn., September 

1983. 

G. R. Woodcock, Systems/Operations Technology, Space 

Station Technology Workshop, Williamsburg, Virginia, 

March 1983. 

S. D. Rosenberg, Auxiliary Propulsion, Space Station 

Technology Work shop, Willia msburg, Virginia, March 

1983. 

i 

168 
68. 

69. 

70. 

71. 

72. 

73. 

74. 

75. 

76. 

77.* 

78. 

79. 

G. J. Bonnelle, Com munications, Space Station Technology 

Workshop, Williamsburg, Virginia, March 1983. 

B. Haslett, Thermal Control, Space Station Technology 

Workshop, Williamsburg, Virginia, March 1983. 

W. Augerson, Human Capabilities, Space Station 

Technology Work shop, William sburg, Virginia, March 

1983. 

R. Corbett, Power, Space Station Technology Workshop, 

Williamsburg, Virginia, March 1983. 

G. Love, Data Management, Space Station Technology 

Workshop, Williamsburg, Virginia, March 1983. 

D. Purdy, Structures and Mechanisms, Space Station 

Technology Work shop, William sb ur g, Virginia, March 

1983. 

B. G. Morais, Attitude, Control, and Stabilization, Space 

Station Technology Workshop, Williamsburg, Virginia, 

March 1983. 

D. Fester, Fluid Management, Space Station Technology 

Workshop, Williamsburg, Virginia, March 1983. 

G. Drake, Crew and Life Support: ECLSS, Space Station 

Technology Work shop, Williams b urg , Virginia, March 

1983. 

V. G. Bobkov, et al., Radiation Safety During Space Flights, 

NASA Technical Translation, NASA TT F-356, May 1966. 

M. Model1 and J. M. Spurlock, Closed-Ecology Life Support 

Systems (CELSS) for Long- Duration, Manned Missions, 

American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Intersociety 

Conference on Environmental Systems, 9th, San Francisco, 

California, July 1979. 

D. Andreescu, Unmanned Stations on the Moon, Stiinta Si 

Technica (Rumanian), No. 3, 1963, Translated in to English 

169 
by Foreign Technology Division, Air Force Systems 

Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. 

80.* A. Yefremov, Yu. Zaytsev, and V. Mikhaylov, Space 

Observations: Science Pushes Back Its Horizons, Pravda 

(Russian) October 1969, Translated in to English by 

Foreign Technology Division, Air Force Systems 

Command, Wright- Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. 

8 1. Stability and Control Study for a Manned Orbital Research 

Laboratory, Progress Report, April 1963, MinneapolisHoneywell Regulator Company, Aeronautical Division, 

Minneapolis, Minnesota. 

82. 

83. 

8 4. 

85. 

86. 

87. 

MOL Laboratory Measurement List, Sequence Number 

B360, April 1969, McDonnell Douglas Astronautics 

Com p any. 

H. L. Richter, Jr., Editor, Space Measurement Survey - 

Instruments and Spacecraft, NASA SP-3028, 1966, 

Prepared for NASA by Electro-Optical Systems, Inc. 

J. Y. Read, T. P. Howland, and W. A. Perkins, Complex 

System Monitoring and Fault Diagnosis Using 

Communicating Expert Systems, IEEE EASCON '86: 19th 

Annual Electronics and Aerospace Systems Conference, 

New York, September 1986. 

H. Biglari, J. O'Neill, B. Purves, R. Williams, and J. 

Sztipanovits, Automated Testing and Integration of 

Heterogeneous Systems, Proceedings of the 22nd 

Inter society Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, 

Philadelphia, PA, August 1987.. 

A. L. Toussaint and M. E. McFall, Spacecraft Application of 

Expert Systems, IEEE Aerospace Electron. Syst. Mag., Vol. 

1, No. 5, pp. 2-5, May 1986. 

F. H. Samonski, Jr., The Development Status of Candidate 

Life Support Technology for a Space Station, 35th 

International Aerospace Congress, Lausanne, 

Switzerland, October 1984. 

170 
88. 

89. 

90. 

91. 

92. 

93. 

9 4. 

95.* 

96.* 

97." 

98." 

W. W. Billings, D. A. Fox, and R. G. Wagoner, Power 

Management Equipment for Space Applications, SAE 

Paper No. 861621, 1986. 

J. E. Swider, Jr., and R. Galluccio, Space Shuttle 

Environmental and Life Support System (ECLSS), SAE 

Paper No., 82 1420, 1982. 

C. W. Miller, D. B. Heppner, F. H. Schubert, and M. J. 

Dahlhausen, Environmental Control Life Support System 

for Space Station, Earth-Orient. Applic. Space Technol., 

Vol. 6, No. 2, P. 2 13, 1986. 

ECLSS for HERMES Examined, Aerospace Engineering, p. 9, 

January 1988. 

W. R. Humphries and R. G. Sosnay, Growth Evolution of 

the Space Station ECLSS, Presented at AIAA Space 

Station in the Twenty-First Century, Reno, Nevada, 

September 1986. 

Space Station WP3 APAE User Handbook (Draft), DRUID02, August 1988, Prepared by GE Astro-Space 

Division, Valley Forge, PA Under Contract NAS5-32000 to 

Goddard Space Flight Center. 

S. Spang, CALIBRATION - Philosophy in Practice, John 

Fluke Mfg. Co., Ltd. 

B. C. Belanger, Traceability: An Evolving Concept, ASTM 

Standardization News, Vol. 8, No. 1, January 1980. 

National Conference of Standards Laboratories, 

Recommended Practice - Establishment and Adjustment 

of Calibration Intervals, RP #1 , August 197-0. 

National Conference of Stand ar d s Lab or ator ie s, 

Recommended Practice - Calibration System 

Specification, RP #4, August 197 1. 

K. D. Mielenz, Intrinsic Standards for Spectrophotometry, 

NCSL 1987 Workshop and Symposium, Denver, CO, July 

1987. 

17 1 
99. 

loo.* 

101.* 

102. 

103. 

104.* 

1 OS. 

106. 

107. 

108. 

W. F. Quigley, A General Purpose Automated Instrument 

Calibration System, NCSL 1987 Workshop and 

Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

J. L. Grangaard, Black Bodies as Intrinsic Standards in the 

Infrared, NCSL 1987 Workshop and Symposium, Denver, 

CO, July 1987. 

D. R. Workman, Methods for Calibration of Vibration 

Measurement Reference Standards, NCSL 1987 Workshop 

and Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

R. B. Roy and J. DiLiddo, State of the Art Instrument for 

Automated Chemical Analysis, NCSL 1987 Workshop and 

Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

R. E. Groom, et al., Calibration - More Than Metrology, 

NCSL 1987 Workshop and Symposium, Denver, CO, July 

1987. 

P. D. Levine, et al., Intrinsic Temperature Standards 

Below 90 Degrees Kelvin, NCSL 1987 Workshop and 

Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

B. W. Mangum, Standard Reference Materials for Use in 

Precision Thermometry, NCSL 1987 Workshop and 

Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

N. M. Oldham and M. E. Parker, NBS Calibration System 

for AC Voltage, NCSL 1987 Workshop and Symposium, 

Denver, CO, July 1987. 

J. G. Armstrong and J. T. Rushin, Vacuum Gauge 

Calibration for Process Applications, NCSL 1 987 

Workshop and Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

B. Bennewitz, Frost-Point Generation and Calibration 

System, NCSL 1987. Workshop and Symposium, Denver, 

CO, July 1987. 

172 
109. 

1 lo.* 

11 1. 

112. 

113.* 

114. 

115.* 

116. 

117 

118. 

119.' 

M. L. Ramalingam, Measurement of the Electro-Optical 

Properties of Thermionic Materials, NCSL 1987 Workshop 

and Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

H. P. Layer, Laser Length Metrology, NCSL 1987 

Workshop and Symposium, NCSL 1987 Workshop and 

Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

R. C. Pepe, Fiber Optic Calibration Considerations, NCSL 

1987 Workshop and Symposium, NCSL 1987 Workshop 

and Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

H. Seperant, Automatic PRT and RTD Probe Calibration, 

NCSL 1987 Workshop and Symposium, Denver, CO, July 

1987. 

U. Quereshi, Calibration with Predicted Performance, NCSL 

1987 Workshop and Symposium, Denver, CO, July 1987. 

T. L. Harper, Automated Thermocouple Calibration 200 to 

1000 Degree F, NCSL 1988 Workshop and Symposium, 

Washington, DC, August 1988. 

C. D. Ehrlich, Present Status of the NBS Leak Standards 

Program - 1988, NCSL 1988 Workshop and Symposium, 

Washington, DC, August 1988. 

W. Goeke, Technical Requirements of Self/Auto 

Calibration Techniques, NCSL 1988 Workshop and 

Symposium, Washington, DC, August 1988. 

J. McIntosh, A History of Flowmeter Calibration, NCSL 

1988 Workshop and Symposium, Washington, DC, August 

1988. 

K. K. Clarke and D. T. Hess, A Comparison of Phase Angle 

Measurement Methods, NCSL 1988 Workshop and 

Symposium, Washington, DC, August 1988. 

C. Ford-Livene and T. Mukaihata, Reduction of 

Measurement Uncertainty in Metrology via the Kalman 

Filter, NCSL 1988 Workshop and Symposium, 

Washington, DC, August 1988. 
120.' 

121 

122. 

123.' 

124. 

125.* 

126.* 

127.' 

128.* 

129.* 

130. 

G. E. Mattingly, Gas Flowrate Metrology, NCSL 1988 

Workshop and Symposium, Washington, DC, August 

1988. 

R. J. Esselberth, Precise Frequency Measurement 

Calibration, NCSL 1988 Workshop and Symposium, 

Washington, DC, August 1988. 

R. Swerlein, Precision AC Measurements Using Digitizing 

Techniques, NCSL 1988 Workshop and Symposium, 

Washington, DC, August 1988. 

G. R. Peacock, Calibration of Radiation Thermometers, 

NCSL 1988 Workshop and Symposium, Washington, DC, 

August 1988. 

S. Dittmann, High Vacuum Standards at the NBS, NCSL 

1988 Workshop and Symposium, Washington, DC, August 

1988. 

J. J. DeCorpo, J. R. Wyatt and F. E. Saalfeld, Atmospheric 

Monitoring in Submersibles, Paper No. 80-ENAs-3 1, 

Inter socie ty Environmental Sy ste m s Conf er ence, S an 

Diego, California, July 1980. 

B. J. Bluth and M. Helppie, Soviet Space Stations as 

Analogs, NASA Headquarters, August 1986, Updated May 

1987. 

USSR Report - Space, JPRS-USP-84-004, Foreign Broadcast 

Information Service, August 1984. 

USSR Report - Space, No. 2 1, JPRS 83430, Foreign 

Broadcast Information Service, May 1983. 

USSR Report, Space Biology and Aerospace Medicine, Vol. 

20, No. 2, March-April 1986, JPRS-USB-86-004 (July 

19 86 1, Foreign Broadcast Infor mation Service. 

Space and Sea, Colloquium Jointly Organized by AAAF, 

ATMA and SAE, Marseille, France, November 1987, 

Published by ESA. 

174 
131. 

132. 

133 

134.* 

135. 

136.* 

137.* 

138.* 

139.' 

D. R. Knight and K. R. Bondi, Proceedings of The Third 

Tripartite Conference on Sub marine Medicine, Naval 

Sub marine Medical Research Laboratory, Naval 

Sub marine Base, New London, Groton, Connecticut, USA, 

May 1983. 

J. W. Stuster (Anacapa Sciences, Inc., Santa Barbara, 

Calif or nia 1, Space Station H abit ability Reco m menda tions 

Based on a Systematic Cooperative Analysis of Analogous 

Conditions, Prepared for NASA Ames Research Center 

under Contract NAS2-11690, September 1986. 

Aerospace Guidance and Metrology Center, AFLC, 

Acquisition Plan for Measurement Standards and 

Equipment, Fourth Edition, Newark Air Force Base, 

Newark, Ohio, December 1988. 

J. E. Rice and B. A. Pilon, Atmospheric Monitoring for 

Sub marine Applications, Inter socie ty Environmental 

Systems Conference, San Diego, California, July 12980. 

Proceedings of the Seminar on Space Station Human 

Productivity, Compiled by M. Cohen and Erika Rosenberg, 

NASA Technical Memorandum 86673, March 1985. 

Man Systems, Architectural Control Document, NASA, 

Space Station Program Office, Reston, Virginia, SSP 30257, 

Rev. B, June 15, 1988. 

Assembly and Maintenance, Architectural Control 

Document, NASA, Space Station Program Office, Reston, 

Virginia, SSP 30502, Rev. A, February 26, 1988. 

Thermal Control System, Architectural Control Document, 

NASA, Space Station Program Office, Reston, Virginia, SSP 

30258, Rev. C, July 15, 1988. 

Guidance, Navigation, and Control System, Architectural 

Control Document, NASA, Space Station Program Office, 

Reston, Virginia, SSP 30259, Rev. B, February 12, 1988. 

175 
140.* 

141.* 

la.* 

143.* 

144.* 

145. 

146.* 

147.* 

148. 

149. 

150. 

Corn munications and Tracking System, Architectural 

Control Document, NASA, Space Station Program Office, 

SSP 30260, Rev. A, February 5, 1988. 

Data Management System, Architectural Control 

Document, NASA, Space Station Program Office, Reston, 

Virginia, SSP 3026 1 , Rev. B, February 19, 1988. 

Environmental Control and Life Support System, 

Architectural Control Document, NASA, Space Station 

Program Office, Reston, Virginia, SSP 30262, Rev. B, July 

30, 1988. 

Electrical Power System, Architectural Control Document, 

NASA, Space Station Program Office, Reston, Virginia, SSP 

30263, Rev. B, February 19, 1988. 

Space Station Servicing System, Architectural Control 

Document, NASA, Space Station Program Office, Reston, 

Virginia, SSP 3050 1, Rev. A, February 19, 1988. 

Manned Space Vehicle Battery Safety Handbook, NASA, 

JSC, JSC-20793, September 1985. 

Space Station On-Orbit Maintenance Operations Plan, 

NASA, JSC/Space Station Program Office, JSC 30203, 

January 15, 1987. 

Fluid Management Systems, Architectural Control 

Document, NASA, Space Station Program Office, Reston, 

Virginia, SSP 30264, Rev. B, February 5, 1988. 

NBS, Electricity and Electronics, Precision Measurement 

and Calibration Handbook 77, Volume I, 196 1. 

NBS, Heat and Mechanics, Precision Measurement and 

Calibration Handbook 77, Volume 11, 196 1. 

NBS, Optics, Metrology, and Radiation, Precision 

Measurement and Calibration Handbook 77, Volume 111, 

1961. 

176 
1s1.* 

152.* 

153.* 

154.* 

155. 

156. 

157.* 

158.' 

159. 

160. 

161. 

162. 

163. 

NBS, Statistical Concepts and Procedures, Precision 

Measurement and Calibration Special Publication 300, 

Volume I, 1969. 

NBS, Temperature, Precision Measurement and 

Calibration Special Publication 300, Volume 11, 1968. 

NBS, Electricity - Low Frequency, Precision Measurement 

and Calibration Special Publication 300, Volume 111, 

1968. 

NBS, Electricity - Radio Frequency, Precision 

Measurement and Calibration Special Publication 300, 

Volume IV, 1970. 

NBS, Frequency and Time, Precision Measurement and 

Calibration Special Publication 300, Volume V, 1972. 

NBS, Heat, Precision Measurement and Calibration Special 

Publication 300, Volume VI, 1970. 

NBS, Radiometry and Photometry, Precision Measurement 

and Calibration Special Publication 300, Volume VII, 

1971. 

NBS, Mechanics, Precision Measurement and Calibration 

Special Publication 300, Volume VIII, 1972. 

NBS, Colorimetry, Precision Measurement and Calibration 

Special Publication 300, Volume IX, 1972. 

ASTM, Water, Atmospheric Analysis, ASTM Standards, 

Part 23, 1969. 

R. C. Weast and M. J. Astle, CRC Handbook of Chemistry 

and Physics, 62nd Edition, 1982. 

R. S. Dessy, The Electronic Laboratory, 1985. 

ASTM, Manual on the Use of Thermocouples in 

Temperature Measurement, Special Publication 470B, 

1981. 

177 
164. F. T. Farago, Handbook of Dimensional Measurement, 

1982. 

165.* R. P. Benedict, Fundamentals of Temperature, Pressure, 

and Flow Measurements, 1984. 

166.* J. P. DeCarlo, Fundamentals of Flow Measurement, 1983. 

167.* W. G. Driscoll and W. Vaughn, Handbook of Optics, 1978. 

168.* C. M. Vest, Holographic Interferometry, 1979. 

(NOTE: Only the abstracts for the following documents were 

reviewed) 

Al. R. E. Smylie and R. R. Stephens, The NASA Data Systems 

Standardization Program - Rationale and Scope -- 

Telemetry for Support of Space Missions, Proceedings of 

the International Telemetering Conference, San Diego, 

California, October 1983. 

A2. Proceedings of the 7th Aerospace Testing Seminar, Los 

Angeles, CA, October 1982. 

A3. J. S. Albus, H. G. McCain, and R. Lumia, NASA/NBS 

Standard Reference Model (NASREM) Architecture for 

the Space Station Telerobot Control System, NASA 

Technical Memorandum, NASA-TM-89726, July 1987. 

A4. D. L. Pierson and H. D. Brown, Inflight Microbial Analysis 

Technology, SAE Paper No. 87 1493, 17th Intersociety 

Conference on Environmental Systems, Seattle, WA, July 

1987. 

AS. R. F. Carlisle and M. Nolan, Application of Advanced 

Technology to a permanently Manned Space Station, IAF, 

International Astronautical Congress, 37th, Innsbruck, 

Austria, October 1986. 

A6. J. T. Malin and N. Lance, Feasibility of Expert Systems to 

a Enhance Space Station Subsystem Controllers, in Space 

178 
A7. 

A8. 

A9. 

A10. 

A1 1. 

A12. 

A13. 

A14. 

Station Automation, Proceedings of the Meeting, 

Cambridge, MA, September 1985, Society of PhotoOptical I ns tr u menta tion Engineer s. 

J. K. Davies, Astronomy from the Space Station, British 

Interplanetary Society, Space Station Applications 

Symposium, London, England, September 1985; British 

Interplanetary Society, Journal (Space Stations), Vol. 39, 

February 1986, pp. 5 1-56. 

J. H. Disher, Skylab, in Space Stations and Space Platforms 

- Concepts, Design, Infrastructure and Uses, New York, 

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 

1985, pp. 11-38. 

L. E. Powell and E. E. Beam, Commonality Analysis for the 

NASA Space Station Common Module, IAF, International 

Aeronautical Congress, 36th, Stockholm, Sweden, October 

1985. 

W. E. Ellis, Space Station Active Thermal Control Technical 

Considerations, in New Opportunities in Space, 

Proceedings of the Twenty-First Space Congress, Cocoa 

Beach, Florida, April 1984, pp. 5-9 to 5-24. 

T. Baer, Space Station Thermal Control - An Interview 

with Robert Haslett, Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 106, 

December 1984, pp. 22-23. 

L. Hsu and J. E. Oppenheim, Comparative Analysis of 

Energy Storage Systems for Space Stations, in IECEC '83, 

Proceedings of the Eighteenth Intersociety Energy 

Conversion Engineering Conference, Orlando, Florida, 

August 1983. 

M. C. Dalton, Habitability Design Elements for a Space 

Station, in Space Manufacturing 1983, Proceedings of the 

Sixth Conference, Princeton, NJ, May 1983. 

G. L. Glish and S. A. McCluckey, Evaluation of the Ion Trap 

Mass Spectrometer for Potential Application in the Space 

Station, Report No. DE88-008940, Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory, Tenn., 19 8 8. 

179 
A15. 

A16. 

A17. 

A18. 

A19. 

AZO. 

A21. 

A22. 

R. A. Yost, J. V. Johnson, and C. I. Wong, lonitoring of 

Space Station Life Support Systems with Miniature Mass 

Spectrometry and Artificial Intelligence, NASAIMarshall 

Space Flight Center, Third Conference on Artificial 

Intelligence for Space Applications, Part 1, Page 87, 

1987. 

L. Leger, H. Ehlers, and S. Jacobs, Space Station 

Contamination Considerations, NASA/Goddard Space 

Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, Fourteenth Space 

Simulation Conference: Testing for Permanent Presence 

in Space, Page 34 1, 1986. 

E. L. Morgan, R. C. Young, M. D. Smith, and K. W. Eagleson, 

Rapid Toxicity Detection in Water Quality Control 

Utilizing Automated M ultispecies Biomonitoring for 

Permanent Space Stations, NASAIGoddard Space Flight 

Center, Greenbelt, MD, Fourteenth Space Simulation 

Conference: Testing for a Permanent Presence in Space, 

Page 227, 1986. 

C. Flugel, Maintenance Evaluation for Space Station Liquid 

Systems, NASAILewis Research Center Microgravity Fluid 

Management Symposium, pp. 171-187, 1987. 

J. Butler, Space Station Utilization and Commonality, 

NASA/Marshall Space Flight Center Manned Mars 

Mission, Working Group Papers, Vol. 2, Sec. 5, pp.10 18- 

1034, May 1986. 

P. L. Sheridan, Telerobotic Truss Assembly, NASA, 

Houston, TX, First Annual Workshop on Space Operations 

Automation and Robotics (SOAR '871, August 1987. 

J. L. McLucas, Communications for the Space Station, 

Advances in the Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 56, pp. 11- 

119, 1986. 

P. J. Otterstedt, J. Hussey, and J. P. Alario, Space 

Constructible Radiator On-Orbit Assembly, AIAA 20th 

Thermophysics Conference, Williamsburg, VA, June 

1985. 

180 
A23. 

A24. 

A25. 

A26. 

A27. 

A28. 

A29. 

A30. 

A31. 

G. D. Qualls and M. J. Ferebee, Jr., Advanced Satellite 

Servicing Facility Studies, AIAA Space Programs and 

Technologies Conference, Houston, TX, June 1988. 

C. R. Konkel and C. F. Miller, Telerobotics and Orbital 

Laboratories - An End-to-End Analysis and 

Demonstration, IAF, International Aeronautical Congress, 

38th, Brighton, England, October 1987. 

K. Nishioka, J. D. Scargle, and J. J. Givens, An Astometric 

Facility for Planetary Detection on the Space Station, 

International Symposium on Optical and Optoelectronic 

Applied Science Engineering, 4th, The Hague, 

Netherlands, March 1987. 

J. J. Thompson, K. S. Brossel, and B. W. Webbon, An 

Evaluation of Options to Satisfy Space Station EVA 

Re q uir e ment s, Aerospace Envir on mental S y s te m s, 

Proceedings of the Sixteenth Intersociety Conference on 

Environmental Systems, San Diego, CA, July 1986. 

C. B. Wiltsee and L. A. Manning, Servicing Operations for 

the SIRTF Observatory at the Space Station, AIAA, 

Aerospace Sciences Meeting, ZSth, Reno, NV, January 

1987. 

M. M. Sokoloski, F. Allario, and R. R. Nelms, Technology for 

Active Laser Remote Sensing from Space, IAF, 

Inter na tion a1 Aeronautical Congress, 3 7 th, I nns b r uck , 

Austria, October 1986. 

T. Saito, High Energy Cosmic Ray Observatory, Workshop 

on Cosmic Ray and High Energy Gamma Ray Experiments 

for the Space Station Era, Baton Rouge, LA, October 1984. 

W. L. Barnes, Scientific Requirements for a ModerateResolution Imaging Spectrometer (MODIS) for EOS, AIAA, 

Earth Observing Systems: EOS - A Subset of Space Station 

Conference, Virginia Beach, VA, October 1985. 

W. F. Rector, I11 and 0. Steinbronn, Launch Retrieval and 

Stage Assembly Operations on a Space Station, IAF, 

181 
A32. 

A33. 

A34. 

A35. 

A36. 

A37. 

A38. 

A39. 

A40. 

International Aeronautical Congress, 36th, Stockholm, 

Sweden, October 1985. 

M. Collins, An Astronaut's Look at Commercial Space 

Opportunities, Commercial Space, Vol. 1, Spring 1985, pp. 

24- 26. 

M. R. Carruth, Jr. and C. K. Purvis, Space Test Program of 

High- Voltage Solar Array-Space Plasma Interactions, 

NASAIMarshall Space Flight Center, NASA Document No. 

NAS 13-44 85N22519, 1985. 

J. R. Ramler, Application fo a Space Station to 

Com munications Satellites, American Astronautical 

Society, Goddard Memorial Symposium, 2 1 st, Greenbelt, 

MD, March 1983. 

Chronology of SOYUZ T-3 Mission, NASA Document No. 

NAS 19- 12 81N281 16, Joint Publications Research 

Service, Arlington, VA, 198 1. 

C. Peebles, The Manned Orbiting Laboratory, 11, 

Spaceflight, Vol. 22, June 1980, pp. 248-253. 

S. I. Babichenko, et al., Equipment for Measuring X-Ray 

Emission of Extraterrestrial Sources, Space Science 

Instrumentation, Vol. 3, November 1977, pp. 3 1 1-323. 

S. I. Babichenko, et al., Some Results of Investigations of 

Cosmic X-Radiation on Board the SALYUT-4, 

Kosmicheskie Issledovaniia, Vol. 14, November 1976, pp. 

878-89 1. 

S. I. Babichenko, et al., X-Ray Telescope-Spectrometer, 

Installed On Board the Space Station 'SALYUT-4', 

International Astronautical Federation, International 

Astronautical Congress, 27th, Anaheim, California, 

October 1976. 

la. L. Ziman, et al., Photogrammetric Calibration of 

Photographic Systems Using a Translationally Movable 

Theodolite, Geodesy, Mapping and Photogram metry, Vol. 

15, NO. 2, 1973, pp. 70-73. 

182 
A41. 

A42. 

A43. 

A44. 

A45. 

A46. 

A47. 

A48. 

A49. 

J. Collet, ESRO and the Spacelab Programme, Industries 

Atomiques Et Spatiales, Vol. 17, July 1973, pp. 72-76. 

G. A. Madrid, The Tracking System Analytic Calibration 

Activity for Mariner Mars 1971: Its Function and Scope, 

NASA Document No. NAS 08-1 1 74A16980, Jet 

Propulsion Lab., California Inst. of Tech., Pasadena, 

California, 1974. 

G. A. Gurzadyan, Energy Calibration of the Orion 

Spectrograph, NASA Document No. NAS 08-1 4 

74A17186, Air Force Systems Command, WrightPatterson AFB, Ohio, 1974. 

R. J. Priem, Study of Industry Requirements That Can Be 

Fulfilled By Combustion Experimentation Aboard Space 

Station, Priem Consultants, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, NASA 

Contract No. NAS3-24105, Report No. NAS 1.26:180854, 

March 1988. 

C. A. Tatro, Photovoltaic Power Modules for NASA's 

Manned Space Station, NASA/Lewis Research Center, 

Report No. NAS 1.15:100229, 1987. 

I. G. Hansen, EMC and Power Quality Standards for 20- 

KHz Power Distribution, NASA/Lewis Research Center, 

NASA Report No. NAS 1.15:89925, 1987. 

TDAS: The Thermal Expert System (TEXSYS) Data 

Acquisition System, NASA/Johnson Space Center, First 

Annual Workshop on Space Operations Automation and 

Robotics (SOAR 871, pp. 375-382, 1987. 

J. T. Farmer, et al., System Impacts of Solar Dynamic and 

Growth Power Systems on Space Station, NASAILangley 

Research Center, NASA Technical Memorandum No. TM87667, July 1986. 

Automation Study for Space Station Subsystems and 

Mission Ground Support, Hughes Aircraft Company, 

Culver City, California, Sponsored by NASAIJSC, Final 

Report, 1985. 

I 6- 3 183 
A50. 

AS1. 

A52. 

A53. 

A54. 

A55. 

AS6. 

A57. 

A58. 

Conceptual Design and Evaluation of Selected Space 

Station Concepts, Volume 2, NASAIJSC,, Report No. NAS 

1.1 587384, December 1983. 

M. S. Imamura, et al., Power Subsystem Automation 

Study, NASA Contract No. NAS8-34938, Performed by 

Martin Marietta Aerospace, Denver, CO, Final Report, 

November 1983. 

Space Station Needs, Attributes and Architectural Options 

Study, Volume 1: Program Options Architecture and 

Technology, NASA Contract No. NASW-3683, Performed 

by Rockwell International, Downey, California, Final 

Report, April 1983. 

E. R. Miller, STS-2, -3, -4 Induced Environment 

Contamination Monitor (ICEM), NASAIMSFC, Summary 

Report, NASA Report NO. NAS 1.15:82524, February 

1983. 

G. J. Steines, Environmental Control and Life Support 

System: Analysis of STS- 1, NASAIJSC, NASA Report No. 

TM-81032, July 1980. 

E. R. Miller and R. Dechner, An Induced Environment 

Contamination Monitor for the Space Shuttle, 

NASAIMSFC, Report No. NASA-TM-78 193, August 1978. 

G. G. Sadler, Simulation Test Beds for the Space Station 

Electrical Power System, NASAILeRC, Report No. NASATM- 100786. 

W. P. Foth and H. Loeser, Design and Development of the 

Life Support Subsystem of a Laboratory Model of the 

Botany Facility, SAE, Intersociety Conference on 

Environmental Systems, 17th, Seattle, WA, July 1987. 

F. T. Herrman, Advanced Protein Crystal Growth Flight 

Hardware for the Space Station, AIAA, Aerospace 

Sciences Meeting, 26th, Reno, NV, January 1988. 

184 
A59. 

0 

A60. 

A61. 

A62. 

A63. 

A64. 

A65. 

A66. 

A67. 

R. K. Browning and J. C. Gervin, Space Station 

Accommodation of Attached Payloads, IAF, International 

Aeronautical Congress, 38th, Brighton, England, October 

1987. 

W. H. Allen, et al., Application of Advanced Automation 

Techniques in the Space Station Electrical Power System, 

IECEC ‘87, Proceedings of the Twenty-Second 

Inter society Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, 

Philadelphia, PA, August 1987. 

B. Walls, Expert System for Fault Detection and Recovery 

for a Space Based Power Management and Distribution 

System, IECEC ‘87, Proceedings of the Twenty-Second 

Inter society Energy Conversion Engineering Conference, 

Philadelphia, PA, August 1987. 

D. Leinweber, Expert Systems in Space, IEEE Expert, Vol. 

2, Spring 1987, pp. 26-36. 

M. P. Kang and J. Winnick, Concentration of Carbon 

Dioxide by a High-Temperature Electrochemical 

Membrane Cell, Journal of Applied Electrochemistry, Vol. 

15, 1985, pp. 431-439. 

G. M. Reppucci and A. A. Sorensen, Space Station Power 

System Challenges, Intersociety Energy Conversion 

Engineering Conference, 20th, Miami Beach, Florida, 

August 1985. 

J. T. Malin and N. Lance, Jr., An Expert System Approach 

to Automated Fault Management in a Regenerative Life 

Support Subsystem, AIAA, Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 

24th, Reno, NV, January 1986. 

H. Stoewer, A European Initiative for In-Orbit 

Demonstration of Technology Developments, IAF, 

International Astronautical Congress, 36th, Stockholm, 

Sweden, October 1985. 

J. Masson and E. G. Suppa, Space Calibration of Solar Cells 

- The Results from Two European Experiments on the 

Space Shuttle, ESA Bulletin, No. 42, May 1985, pp. 54-57. 

185 
A68. 

A69. 

A70. 

A71. 

A72. 

A73. 

A74. 

A75. 

A76. 

V. Pishchik, Innovations in Cosmonaut Medical 

Monitoring, Joint Publications Research Service, 

Arlington, VA, Translated from Med. Gazeta (Moscow), 

April 1984. 

C. R. Maag, Spacecraft Contamination Environment, 

Meeting Sponsored by SPIE - The International Society 

for Optical Engineering, Bellingham, WA, 1983. 

P. H. Stakem, The Shuttle Environmental Monitoring 

System - A Service for Commercial Payloads, Shuttle 

Environment and Operations Meeting, Washington, DC, 

October 1983. 

J. Triola, et al., Results from a ‘Small Box’ Realtime 

Moleculer Contamination Monitor on STS-3, AIAA, 

Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 2 1 st, Reno, NV, January 

1983. 

J. J. Walleshauser, et al., Shuttle Orbiter Atmospheric 

Revitalization Pressure Control Subsystem, Inter society 

Conference on Environmental Systems, 1 Zth, San Diego , 

CA, July 1982. 

N. Kidger, SALYUT Mission Report, British Interplanetary 

Society, Journal (Space Chronicle), Vol. 36, April 1983, pp. 

163- 165. 

Instrumentation in the Aerospace Industry, Volume 26; 

Advances in Test Measurement, Volume 17; Proceedings 

of the International Instrumentation Symposium, 26th, 

Seattle, WA, May 1980. 

K. Thoermer, et al., Advanced Life Support and Thermal 

Control Technologies for the Space Station, Advances in 

the Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 56, pp. 135-1 5 1. 

Robotics and Expert Systems - 1985, Proceedings of 

ROBEXS ‘85, The First Annual Workshop, Houston, Texas, 

June 1985. 

186 
A77. 

A78. 

A79. 

A80. 

A81. 

A82. 

A83. 

A84. 

A85. 

A86. 

E. M. Ejzak and D. F. Price, Practical Analysis Systems for 

Recovered Spacecraft Water, Proceedings of the 4th 

IAWPRC Workshop, Houston, TX, April 1983. 

R. F. Block, et al., Automated Subsystems Control 

Development, SAE Paper No. 8s 1379, July 198s. 

E. L. Cook and D. J. Miel, Control and Data Acquisition 

Aspects of Microgravity Research and Processing, 

Published by Division of Polymer Chemistry Inc., 

Newark, NJ, p. 452, Volume 28, Number 2, August 

W. G. Crosier and W. H. Palski, Development of Life 

Sciences Spacelab Experiments, Proceedings of the 

1987. 

Eighth 

Annual Conference of the IEEE/Engineering in Medicine 

and Biology Society, Fort Worth, Texas, November 1986. 

T. L. Adams, G. L Orr, and C. J. Tollander, Artificial 

Approach to Coordinated Fault Diagnosis, Control and 

Planning for the Space Station Electrical Power System, 

AIAA Space Systems Technology Conference, San Diego, 

CA, June 1986. 

R. Arno and J. Hilchey, Space Station Life Sciences 

Guidelines for Nonhuman Experiment Accommodation, 

SAE Paper Number 851370, 198s. 

J. W. Brown, Using Computer Graphics to Enhance 

Astronaut and System Safety, Acta Astronaut (GB), 

Volume 12, Number 2, pp. 107-20, February 198s. 

Yu. A. Akatov, etc al., Thermoluminescent Dose 

Measurements On-Board Salyut Type Orbital Stations, 

Adv. Space Res. (GB), Volume 4, Number 10, pp. 77-8 1, 

1984. 

L. G. Napolitano (Ed.), Space 2000, Selection of Papers 

Presented at the Congress of the International 

Astronautical Federation, 33rd, Paris, France, 1982. 

P. H. Bolger, Space Rescue and Safety, Am. Astronaut SOC. 

Sci. Technol. Ser., Volume 37, 1975. 

187 
A87. 

A88. 

A89. 

A90. 

A91. 

A92. 

A93. 

A94. 

A95. 

A96. 

A97. 

J. W, Stuster, Space Station Habitability Recommendations 

Based on a Systematic Comparative Analysis of Analogous 

Conditions, Report No. NAS 1.26:3943, September 1986. 

Assessment of Clinical Chemical Sensing Technology for 

Potential Use in Space Station Health Maintenance 

Facility, Report No. NAS 1.26:172013, August 1987. 

Guidelines for Noise and Vibration Levels for the Space 

Station, Report No. NAS 1.26:1783 10, June 1987. 

M. E. Coleman, Toxicological Safeguards in the Manned 

Mars Missions, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center 

Manned Mars Mission Working Group Papers, Volume 2, 

Sect. 5, pp. 706-712, May 1986. 

I. Kasyan and V. Turchaninova, Rheography in 

Weightlessness, Report No. NASA-TM-76439, October 

1980. 

N. Zhelenov, The Space Watch in Salyut as on the Earth, 

Report No. NASA-TT-F- 16468, July 1975. 

Electron-Proton Spectrometer Summary for Critical 

Design Review, Report No. NASA-CR-1288 14, 1972. 

PH. P. Arbeille, et al., Cardiovascular Adaptation to Zero-G 

During a Long Term Flight (237 Days) On Board Salyut 7 

Soviet Space Station, Institute of Biomedical Problems, 

Moscow, USSR. 

S. Legrand, Access Control for a Safety Critical Distributed 

System Interface Set, Applying Technology to Systems; 

Aerospace Computer Security Conference, 3rd, Orlando, 

Florida, December 1987. 

D. G. Koch, P. Goret, and M. Nein, A Telescope for High 

Energy Gamma-Ray Measurements in the Space Station 

Era, AIAA, Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 26th, Reno, NV, 

January 1988. 

D. R. Sloggett, Robots - Autonomous Space Workers, Space, 

Volume 3, November 1987, pp. 6-10. 

188 
A98. G. V. Fogleman, J. M. Rigsby, and R. L. Curtis, Habitability 

Issues for the Science Laboratory Module, Aerospace 

Environmental Systems; Proceedings of the Sixteenth 

Inter society Conference on Environmental Systems, San 

Diego, CAI July 1986. 

A99. M. Vieillefosse, Utilization of Space Stations in the Field of 

Life Sciences, IAF, International Astronautical Congress, 

36th, Stockholm, Sweden, October 1985. 

A100. F. X. Kane, System Safety is an Inherent Function of the 

In-Line Disciplines and Cannot be Separated From Them, 

IAF, International Astronautical Congress, 36th, 

Stockholm, Sweden, October 1985. 

A101. A. A. Pollock and S. Hsu, Leak Detection Using Acoustic 

Emission, Journal of Acoustic Emission, Volume 1 , October 

1982, pp. 237-243. 

A102. G. Birnbaum, H. Berger, and D. G. Eitzen, Traceable NDE 

Standards, Symposium on Nondestructive Evaluation, 

13th, San Antonio, Texas, April 198 1. 

A103. T. M. Trumble, A Smoke Detection System for Manned 

Spacecraft Applications, Air Force Aero Propulsion Lab., 

Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, June 1975. 

a 

189