This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
The Cost and Equivalent System Mass of Space Crew Time
Technical Paper
2001-01-2359
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
In “Theory and Application of the Equivalent System Mass Metric,” Levri, Vaccari, and Drysdale computed the Equivalent System Mass (ESM) of crew time. ESM is a cost-type metric based on allocated mass that is often used in life support systems. The previous paper suggested that the cost per hour of crew time should be equal to the ESM of the life support system, divided by the number of available crew work hours. We suggest here that the mass cost for additional crew time may be as large as the total mission mass or as small as the added mass of consumables, depending on how much more crew time is needed. If the increased mission work load requires flying additional crewmembers, the total mass and cost of the mission increases roughly proportionally to crew size. But if the needed work can be done merely by extending the mission duration, the required additional mass is only that of the food and supplies to be consumed during the time extension. The resulting upper and lower bounds on cost per hour of crew time are within an order of magnitude and can help resolve design decisions even when the total demand for crew time is unknown. However, the cost of crew time used in mission planning should not always be the actual cost to provide that time. The cost should be set at a level that ensures that the crew is neither under or overloaded. If little work is needed, we should set the price of crew time low or at zero to encourage more tasks. If the crew time demand is excessive, the cost should be set high to reduce the task requests. Imposing a low cost for low total demand and high for high will help guide the sum of crew time requests to converge to the desired workload.
Authors
Topic
Citation
Jones, H., "The Cost and Equivalent System Mass of Space Crew Time," SAE Technical Paper 2001-01-2359, 2001, https://doi.org/10.4271/2001-01-2359.Also In
References
- Guerra, L. Shishko R. “Estimating the Cost of Crewed Space Systems,” 941 Larson W. K. Pranke L. K. Human Spaceflight: Mission Analysis and Design McGraw-Hill New York 2000
- Doll, S. Eckart P. “Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS),” 565 6 Larson W. K. Pranke L. K. Human Spaceflight: Mission Analysis and Design McGraw-Hill New York 2000
- Levri Julie A. Vaccari David A. Drysdale Alan E. “Theory and Application of the Equivalent System Mass Metric,” SAE Paper No. 2000-01-2395 , 30 th International Conference on Environmental Systems July 10–13 2000
- Hogan John Kang Sukwon Cavazzoni Jim Levri Julie Finn Cory “A Simulation Study Comparing Incineration and Composting in a Mars-Based Advanced Life Support System,” presentation MA 87, 4 th International Conference on Life Support and Biosphere Science Baltimore, Maryland August 6–9 2000
- Stilwell, D. Boutros R. Connolly J. H. “Crew Accomodations,” Larson W. K. Pranke L. K. Human Spaceflight: Mission Analysis and Design McGraw-Hill New York 2000
- Connolly, J. F. “Mars Design Example,” Larson W. K. Pranke L. K. Human Spaceflight: Mission Analysis and Design McGraw-Hill New York 2000
- Pearson, A. O. Grana, D. C. Preliminary Results from an Operational 90-Day Manned Test of a Regenerative Life Support System 366 372 381 1971
- Connors, Mary M. Harrison Albert A. Akins Faren R. Living Aloft: Human Requirements for Extended Spaceflight 119 123 124 126 128 131 172 290 323 1985
- Freeman, Marsha Challenges of Human Space Exploration 8 9 12 180 188 220 Springer London 2000