Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “EXTRAVEHICULAR OPERATION”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 289 records · Page 16

Three months in space

The third Skylab mission lasted from Nov. 16, 1973 until Feb. 8, 1974. The human and subjective aspects of long-term space flight are emphasized. Physiological questions are considered, taking into account the adaptation to zero-G and biological factors. Psychological problems are also investigated, giving attention to adaptation and adjustment, aspects of rest and recreation, and subjective factors and trivia. Working in zero-G was related to interior activities, observations regarding work station design, and extravehicular activity. A description is given of the various on-orbit operations on Skylab.

Pogue, W. R.↗

Mechanism for Retrieving Satellites From Orbit

Pair of documents describe mechanism allowing astronaut to capture in extravehicular activity small artificial satellite for retrieval and return to Earth. Mechanism operates by insertion of probe in nozzle of rocket motor on satellite, followed by expansion of inserted probe end to grasp motor inside nozzle and thereby capture satellite. Designed for specific satellite, but operating principle adapted to almost any satellite equipped with rocket motor or possibly used in retrieval of hollow-shaped objects in marine and other salvage operations.

Harwell, W. D.↗

NASA Johnson Space Center Mini AERCam texting with the GSS6560

GPS based programs at NASA-JSC are enumerated on page 1: Several Detailed Test Objectives (DTOs) flown on STS missions featuring GPS are the primary focus of the DTO: GANE on STS-77, RGPS RME on STS-80, ARPK on STS-84 & STS-86, SIGI DTOs on STS-88, STS-101 (SOAR and STS-108 (CRV); Shuttle program switching to GPS receivers for navigation sensor; International Space Station baselined with GPS based navigation and attitude determination. Operational since 2002; Crew return vehicle features GPS based navigation; Mini Autonomous Extravehicular Robotic Camera (AERCam) relies on precise real-time relative GPS for relative navigation. Shuttle GPS testing is narrated in page 2.

Cryan, Scott P.↗

The Skylab Medical Operations Project: Recommendations to Improve Crew Health and Performance for Future Exploration Missions

From May 1973 to February 1974, NASA conducted a series of three human missions to the Skylab space station, which was a voluminous vehicle largely descendant of Apollo hardware and the first U.S. space station. Crew members of these missions spent record-breaking durations of time in microgravity (28, 59, and 84 days, respectively) and gave the U.S. space program its first experiences with long-duration space flight. The program overcame a number of obstacles to conduct a lauded scientific program that encompassed life sciences, astronomy, solar physics, materials sciences, and Earth observation. Yet Skylab has more to offer than the results of these scientific efforts. The operations that were conducted by the crews and ground personnel represent a rich legacy of operational experience. As we plan a return to the moon and subsequent human exploration of Mars, it is essential to use the experiences and insights of those who were involved in previous programs. Skylab and Skylab Medical Experiments Altitude Test personnel possess unique insight into operations that are being planned for the Constellation Program, such as umbilical extravehicular activity and water landing/recovery of long-duration crew members. The Skylab Program was also well known for its habitability and extensive medical suite.

Scheuring, Richard A.↗

Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Technology Development Status and Forecast

Beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, Extravehicular activity (EVA) technology development became a technology foundational domain under a new program Enabling Technology Development and Demonstration. The goal of the EVA technology effort is to further develop technologies that will be used to demonstrate a robust EVA system that has application for a variety of future missions including microgravity and surface EVA. Overall the objectives will be reduce system mass, reduce consumables and maintenance, increase EVA hardware robustness and life, increase crew member efficiency and autonomy, and enable rapid vehicle egress and ingress. Over the past several years, NASA realized a tremendous increase in EVA system development as part of the Exploration Technology Development Program and the Constellation Program. The evident demand for efficient and reliable EVA technologies, particularly regenerable technologies was apparent under these former programs and will continue to be needed as future mission opportunities arise. The technological need for EVA in space has been realized over the last several decades by the Gemini, Apollo, Skylab, Space Shuttle, and the International Space Station (ISS) programs. EVAs were critical to the success of these programs. Now with the ISS extension to 2028 in conjunction with a current forecasted need of at least eight EVAs per year, the EVA technology life and limited availability of the EMUs will become a critical issue eventually. The current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) has vastly served EVA demands by performing critical operations to assemble the ISS and provide repairs of satellites such as the Hubble Space Telescope. However, as the life of ISS and the vision for future mission opportunities are realized, a new EVA systems capability could be an option for the future mission applications building off of the technology development over the last several years. Besides ISS, potential mission applications include EVAs for missions to Near Earth Objects (NEO), Phobos, or future surface missions. Surface missions could include either exploration of the Moon or Mars. Providing an EVA capability for these types of missions enables in-space construction of complex vehicles or satellites, hands on exploration of new parts of our solar system, and engages the public through the inspiration of knowing that humans are exploring places that they have never been before. This paper offers insight into what is currently being developed and what the potential opportunities are in the forecast

Chullen, Cinda↗

Battery and Fuel Cell Development for NASA's Exploration Missions

NASA's return to the moon will require advanced battery, fuel cell and regenerative fuel cell energy storage systems. This paper will provide an overview of the planned energy storage systems for the Orion Spacecraft and the Aries rockets that will be used in the return journey to the Moon. Technology development goals and approaches to provide batteries and fuel cells for the Altair Lunar Lander, the new space suit under development for extravehicular activities (EVA) on the Lunar surface, and the Lunar Surface Systems operations will also be discussed.

Manzo, Michelle A.↗

NASA Glenn Research Center Battery Activities Overview

This paper will provide an overview of the planned energy storage systems for the Orion Spacecraft and the Aries rockets that will be used in the return journey to the Moon and GRC's involvement in their development. Technology development goals and approaches to provide batteries and fuel cells for the Altair Lunar Lander, the new space suit under development for extravehicular activities (EVA) on the Lunar surface, and the Lunar Surface Systems operations will also be discussed.

Manzo, Michelle A.↗

Developing a Hybrid Space Suit Simulator as a Research Tool for Assessing Extravehicular Activity Relevant Workload

Suited testing time is limited and hard to come by, expensive, and requires a whole team to operate and monitor the suit; however, pressurized spacesuits are not always necessary for initial developmental efforts or assessment of informatics. The Human Physiology, Performance, Protection & Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) is developing a Hybrid Space Suit Simulator (HS3) to support characterization of human performance during planetary surface exploration analogs. The primary goal of HS3 is to create a low cost, modular, and unpressurized suit simulator for use as a research tool which provides relevant physical and cognitive workload approximations with EVA-like immersion during planetary extravehicular activity (EVA) simulations. HS3 consists of a soft suit, communication, thermal control, gloves, boots, helmet, and integrated bioinformatics/sensors. The modular design of HS3 allows it to be modified to support test objectives as needed. HS3 enables H-3PO and NASA to complete critical human health and performance testing to address open risks and knowledge gaps in a timely, repeatable, and controlled manner. Four engineering runs were completed with HS3 as a baseline for capability. General workload was assessed while traversing on a passive treadmill and conducting geology tasks. Liquid cooling temperature, suit temperature, and metabolic rates were collected during one extended three-hour engineering run. For the duration of the engineering run the suit temperature was 26.6 ± 1.58 °C while suit humidity was 53.7 ± 5.11 %. Helmet temperature was higher than suit temperature at 27.8 ± 1.58 °C. Helmet humidity was lower than average suit humidity at 50.12 ± 11.3 °C. The liquid cooling temperature remained stable at 22.4 ± 1.62 °C. Resting metabolic rate was 597 ± 88 BTU/hr while metabolic rate increased during traverse tasks at 1500 ± 319 BTU/hr and geology tasks at 921 ± 129 BTU/hr. Following the engineering runs, a characterization study will be conducted. The subjects will perform EVA-like scenarios in both a shirtsleeve only and donned HS3, consisting of EVA task circuit focused on traversing, geological rock sampling, and task board manipulation. The characterization study will provide data capability for implementing HS3 in analog EVA testing environments.

Monica Hew↗

Testing the Exploration ConOps (ExCon) Mockup Suit in Lunar Analog Environments in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into three distinct tests titled after the EVA & Human Surface Mobility (HSM) Program (EHP) integrated test team: Joint EVA & HSM Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1 was conducted near Kilbourne Hole by El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept of operations (con-ops), risks and technology. JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff, Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission including a Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Exploration Concept of Operations (ExCon) mockup space suit. The ExCon mockup suit is a lightweight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗

Testing the Exploration Conops (Excon) Mockup Suit in Lunar Analog Environments in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into three distinct tests titled after the EVA & Human Surface Mobility (HSM) Program (EHP) integrated test team: Joint EVA & HSM Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1 was conducted near Kilbourne Hole by El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept of operations (con-ops), risks and technology. JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff, Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission including a Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Exploration Concept of Operations (ExCon) mockup space suit. The ExCon mockup suit is a lightweight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗

The Skylab results; Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Meeting, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif., August 20-22, 1974. Parts 1 & 2

A comprehensive series of papers on the Skylab program, covering integration and testing, operations support, living and working in space, Skylab technology, the role of the Kennedy Space Center in Skylab, the Earth Resources Experiment Package (EREP), the student science program, Apollo Telescope Mount experiments, corollary experiments, and life-sciences data. The topics include: Skylab contamination control; management and control of the missions; extravehicular activity; the repair of major systems elements on Skylab; crew motion disturbances; the design and operation of the Skylab attitude and pointing control system; the performance of solar shields; Comet Kohoutek observations from Skylab; the Skylab food system; and an evaluation of life in Skylab from a medical viewpoint. Individual items are announced in this issue.

Schneider, W. C.↗

Recommendations for Exploration Space Medicine from the Apollo Medical Operations Project

Introduction: A study was requested in December, 2005 by the Space Medicine Division at the NASA-Johnson Space Center (JSC) to identify Apollo mission issues relevant to medical operations that had impact to crew health and/or performance. The objective was to use this new information to develop medical requirements for the future Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM), Lunar Habitat, and Advanced Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits that are currently being developed within the exploration architecture. Methods: Available resources pertaining to medical operations on the Apollo 7 through 17 missions were reviewed. Ten categories of hardware, systems, or crew factors were identified in the background research, generating 655 data records in a database. A review of the records resulted in 280 questions that were then posed to surviving Apollo crewmembers by mail, face-to-face meetings, or online interaction. Response analysis to these questions formed the basis of recommendations to items in each of the categories. Results: Thirteen of 22 surviving Apollo astronauts (59%) participated in the project. Approximately 236 pages of responses to the questions were captured, resulting in 107 recommendations offered for medical consideration in the design of future vehicles and EVA suits based on the Apollo experience. Discussion: The goals of this project included: 1) Develop or modify medical requirements for new vehicles; 2) create a centralized database for future access; and 3) take this new knowledge and educate the various directorates at NASA-JSC who are participating in the exploration effort. To date, the Apollo Medical Operations recommendations are being incorporated into the exploration mission architecture at various levels and a centralized database has been developed. The Apollo crewmembers input has proved to be an invaluable resource, prompting ongoing collaboration as the requirements for the future exploration missions continue to evolve and be refined.

Scheuring, R. a.↗

Extravehicular Activity (EVA) & Human Surface Mobility (HSM) Program (EHP) Joint EVA & HSM Test Team (JETT) Field Test 3 (JETT3) Report

The purpose of this field test and corresponding report is to evolve the lunar surface EVA concept of operations and hardware via developmental testing. This report compiles and summarizes the goals, infrastructure, test configuration, conclusions, and recommendations from the JETT3 field test. These insights are intended to inform future integrated testing efforts and broader Artemis campaign development activities.

NASA↗

Extravehicular activities guidelines and design criteria

A listing of astronaut EVA support systems and equipment, and the physical, operational, and performance characteristics of each major system are presented. An overview of the major ground based support operations necessary in the development and verification of orbital EVA systems is included. The performance and biomedical characteristics of man in the orbital EV environment are discussed. Major factors affecting astronaut EV work performance are identified and delineated as they relate to EV support systems design. Data concerning the medical and physiological aspects of spaceflight on man are included. The document concludes with an extensive bibliography, and a series of appendices which expand on some of the information presented in the main body.

Brown, N. E.↗

Lunar Surface Operations Modeling Using Digital Astronaut Simulation

During Apollo, crew members experienced a number of falls while engaging in extravehicular activity. The Digital Astronaut Simulation (DAS) expanded human biomechanics modeling tools to begin investigating this prospective mission safety and success challenge for the Artemis program. A core capability was developed to detect if a motion is dynamically feasible in a given gravitational environment. Fed by motion capture and mass properties data, this technology enables observation of whether tasks performed in 1G can be performed the same way in lunar gravity or if they require modifications.

Long Duration Health↗

Evaluation of Dual Pressurized Rover Operations During Simulated Planetary Surface Exploration

Introduction: A pair of small pressurized rovers (Space Exploration Vehicles, or SEVs) is at the center of the Global Point-of-Departure architecture for future human planetary exploration. Simultaneous operation of multiple crewed surface assets should maximize productive crew time, minimize overhead, and preserve contingency return paths. Methods: A 14-day mission simulation was conducted in the Arizona desert as part of NASA?s 2010 Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS). The simulation involved two SEV concept vehicles performing geological exploration under varied operational modes affecting both the extent to which the SEVs must maintain real-time communications with mission control ("Continuous" vs. "Twice-a-Day") and their proximity to each other ("Lead-and-Follow" vs. "Divide-and-Conquer"). As part of a minimalist lunar architecture, no communications relay satellites were assumed. Two-person crews consisting of an astronaut and a field geologist operated each SEV, day and night, throughout the entire 14-day mission, only leaving via the suit ports to perform simulated extravehicular activities. Standard metrics enabled quantification of the habitability and usability of all aspects of the SEV concept vehicles throughout the mission, as well as comparison of the extent to which the operating modes affected crew productivity and performance. Practically significant differences in the relevant metrics were prospectively defined for the testing of all hypotheses. Results and Discussion: Data showed a significant 14% increase in available science time (AST) during Lead-and-Follow mode compared with Divide-and-Conquer, primarily because of the minimal overhead required to maintain communications during Lead-and-Follow. In Lead-and-Follow mode, there was a non-significant 2% increase in AST during Twice-a-Day vs. Continuous communications. Situational awareness of the other vehicle?s location, activities, and contingency return constraints were enhanced during Lead-and-Follow and Twice-a-Day communications modes due to line-of-sight and direct SEV-to-SEV communication. Preliminary analysis of Scientific Data Quality and Observation Quality metrics showed no significant differences between modes.

Abercromby, Andrew F. J.↗

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis↗

Assessments of Physiology and Cognition in Hybrid-Reality Environments (APACHE) – A VR “Sandbox” for Planetary Spacewalk Research

NASA is planning to return to the Moon in the mid-2020s as a steppingstone to Mars missions in the 2030s. Spacewalks, or extravehicular activities (EVAs), performed on the Moon and Mars will differ in a variety of ways from those that have been performed in decades past. NASA has identified multiple risks to human health and performance associated with a crewed mission to Mars, especially those associated with exploration EVAs which are expected to be a primary mission activity. Crew may be expected to conduct up to 24 hours of EVA per person per week, where the likelihood of injury and/or mental mistakes are increased compared to ground-based training or current microgravity EVAs and the consequences of which can be catastrophic. Current test environments for exploration EVA research and technology development are large, costly facilities that are limited in their availability or capabilities. Spacesuit testing in a reduced gravity environment such as NASA’s Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory, while a good representation of the crew’s physical workload during exploration EVAs, typically has small datasets and is difficult to integrate physiological sensors or other types of crew performance measures. Meanwhile, scientific field-based testing such as NASA’s Desert Research and Technology Studies offers an operationally relevant environment for exploration EVAs, particularly for cognitive workload, but is also limited by small datasets, lack of a pressurized spacesuit, and obtrusive measures. The limitations of current analogs for exploration EVAs identify a need for a new test environment that can approximate both the physical and cognitive demands associated with exploration EVAs to enable rapid, controlled, and repeatable evaluations of human health and performance risks of exploration missions. In response, the Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA Johnson Space Center has developed a hybrid reality exploration EVA analog named the Assessments of Physiology And Cognition in Hybrid-reality Environments (APACHE)[ to address these limitations using a combination of virtual, physical, and hybrid reality techniques. The APACHE facility resides at NASA Johnson Space Center and serves as a large “sandbox” for EVA research and simulation. At its center is a roughly 15x20ft space surrounded by a 14” tall sandbox partially filled with lunar regolith simulant to emulate the physical feeling of walking on a planetary surface and to allow for simulated geology operations. Nearby, a curved passive treadmill (Skillmill Connect, Technogym, Fairfield, NJ) and an omnidirectional treadmill (Infinadeck, Infinadeck, Rocklin, CA) are included to enable exploration of these large virtual environments while also imposing the physical demands, representative timelines, and cognitive burdens required to navigate and traverse these distances during exploration EVA. A 6DOF motion platform is used to simulate rover operations and supports various human performance evaluations and associated risks. Lastly, APACHE can support two extravehicular (EV) crewmembers working in tandem. A computer workstation is located nearby and also supports an intravehicular (IV) crewmember as part of a full mission simulation. The IV crewmember has direct video and audio communication with the EV crew in VR to provide operational and procedural support.

Human Performance↗