Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Holland, A..
Behavioral Health and Performance (BHP) is an operational group under medical sciences at NASA/Johnson Space Center. Astronaut applicant screening and assessment is one function of this group, along with psychological training, inflight behavioral support and family services. Direct BHP assessment spans 6-7 months of a 17-month overall selection process.
Prior to the Columbia STS 107 disaster in 2003, the Johnson Space Center s Behavioral Health and Performance Group (BHP) became involved in Space Shuttle Operations on an as needed basis, occasionally acting as a consultant and primarily addressing crew-crew personality conflicts. The BHP group also assisted with astronaut selection at every selection cycle beginning in 1991. Following STS 107, an event that spawned an increased need of behavioral health support to STS crew members and their dependents, BHP services to the Space Shuttle Program were enhanced beginning with the STS 114 Return to Flight mission in 2005. These services included the presence of BHP personnel at STS launches and landings for contingency support, a BHP briefing to the entire STS crew at L-11 months, a private preflight meeting with the STS Commander at L-9 months, and the presence of a BHP consultant at the L-1.5 month Family Support Office briefing to crew and family members. The later development of an annual behavioral health assessment of all active astronauts also augmented BHP s Space Shuttle Program specific services, allowing for private meetings with all STS crew members before and after each mission. The components of each facet of these BHP Space Shuttle Program support services will be presented, along with valuable lessons learned, and with recommendations for BHP involvement in future short duration space missions
Psychological factors critical to the success of short and long-duration missions have been identified in previous research; however, evaluation for such critical factors in astronaut applicants leaves much room for human interpretation. Thus, an evaluator training session was designed to standardize the interpretation of critical factors, as well as the structure of the select-in interview across evaluators. The purpose of this evaluative study was to determine the effectiveness of the evaluator training sessions and their potential impact on evaluator ratings.
In the Balloon Ozone Intercomparison Campaign (BOIC), several in situ UV absorption photometers, two solar UV absorption photometers, electrochemical sondes, and a mass spectrometer were intercompared in three flight missions. Concurrent data from Umkehr and satellite observations are also intercompared. The National Bureau of Standards provided a 'standard' ozone source for intercomparing the in situ instruments and ground pressure. Preliminary findings indicate that the standard deviation of the sensitivities among 17 instruments against the NBS reference was about 11 percent. These differences appear in flight at the lower levels and change at higher altitudes, indicating height-dependent errors. The difference among five in-situ UV photometers flown together ranged by plus or minus 8 percent during ascent to about 41 km. During float at 42 km, the difference nearly doubled. During descent, the difference decreased to about 4 percent, which is much closer to the expected accuracy of these instruments. Results from UV solar radiometers have been systematically higher than those from UV photometers by 15 to 20 percent - a very important disagreement that needs to be resolved.
A calibration procedure for nephelometers which is based on the method developed by Pritchard and Elliott (1960) is outlined. Basically, the method consists of comparing the intensity of the light scattered from the particles in the common volume with the intensity reflected from a calibration standard. A proof of the calibration method is given.