SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “interview”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 379 records · Page 21

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2011

U.S. Spacesuit Knowledge Capture Status and Initiatives

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), other organizations and individuals have been performing United States (U.S.) spacesuit knowledge capture since the beginning of space exploration via publication of reports, conference presentations, specialized seminars, and classes instructed by veterans in the field. Recently, the effort has been more concentrated and formalized whereby a new avenue of spacesuit knowledge capture has been added to the archives through which videotaping occurs, engaging both current and retired specialists in the field presenting technical scope specifically for education and preservation of knowledge or being interviewed to archive their significance to NASA s history. Now with video archiving, all these avenues of learning are brought to life with the real experts presenting their wealth of knowledge on screen for future learners to enjoy. U.S. spacesuit knowledge capture topics have included lessons learned in spacesuit technology, experience from the Gemini, Apollo, Skylab and Shuttle programs, hardware certification, design, development and other program components, spacesuit evolution and experience, failure analysis and resolution, aspects of program management, and personal interviews. These archives of actual spacesuit legacy now reflect its rich history and will provide a wealth of knowledge which will greatly enhance the chances for the success of future and more ambitious spacesuit system programs. In this paper, NASA s formal spacesuit knowledge capture efforts will be reviewed and a status will be provided to reveal initiatives and accomplishments since the inception of the more formal U.S. spacesuit knowledge program. A detail itemization of the actual archives will be addressed along with topics that are now available to the general NASA community and the public. Additionally, the latest developments in the archival relationship with the Smithsonian will be discussed.

Chullen, Cinda↗

NASA NTRS2012

Subjective Sleep Experience During Shuttle Missions

It is now known that for many astronauts, sleep is reduced in spaceflight. Given that sleep is intimately tied to performance, safety, health, and well being, it is important to characterize factors that hinder sleep in space, so countermeasures can be implemented. Lessons learned from current spaceflight can be used to inform the development of space habitats and mitigation strategies for future exploration missions. The purpose of this study was to implement a survey and one-on-one interviews to capture Shuttle flyers' subjective assessment of the factors that interfered with a "good nights sleep" during their missions. Strategies that crewmembers reported using to improve their sleep quality during spaceflight were also discussed. Highlights from the interview data are presented here.

Whitmire, Alexandra↗

NASA NTRS2012

U.S. Spacesuit Knowledge Capture Status and Initiatives

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), other organizations and individuals have been performing United States (U.S.) spacesuit knowledge capture since the beginning of space exploration via publication of reports, conference presentations, specialized seminars, and classes instructed by veterans in the field. Recently, the effort has been more concentrated and formalized whereby a new avenue of spacesuit knowledge capture has been added to the archives through which videotaping occurs, engaging both current and retired specialists in the field presenting technical scope specifically for education and preservation of knowledge or being interviewed to archive their significance to NASA's history. Now with video archiving, all these avenues of learning are brought to life with the real experts presenting their wealth of knowledge on screen for future learners to enjoy. U.S. spacesuit knowledge capture topics have included lessons learned in spacesuit technology, experience from the Gemini, Apollo, Skylab and Shuttle programs, hardware certification, design, development and other program components, spacesuit evolution and experience, failure analysis and resolution, aspects of program management, and personal interviews. These archives of actual spacesuit legacy now reflect its rich history and will provide a wealth of knowledge which will greatly enhance the chances for the success of future and more ambitious spacesuit system programs. In this paper, NASA s formal spacesuit knowledge capture efforts will be reviewed and a status will be provided to reveal initiatives and accomplishments since the inception of the more formal U.S. spacesuit knowledge program. A detail itemization of the actual archives will be addressed along with topics that are now available to the general NASA community and the public. Additionally, the latest developments in the archival relationship with the Smithsonian will be discussed.

Chullen, Cinda↗

NASA NTRS2013

Explanation of Change (EoC) Study: Considerations and Implementation Challenges

This paper discusses the implementation of considerations resulting from a study investigating the cost change experienced by historical NASA science missions. The study investigated historical milestone and monthly status report documentation followed by interviews with key project personnel. The reasons for cost change were binned as being external to NASA, external to the project and internal to the project relative to the project's planning and execution. Based on the results of the binning process and the synthesis of project meetings and interviews, ten considerations were made with the objective to decrease the potential for cost change in future missions. Although no one magic bullet consideration was discovered, the considerations taken as a whole should help reduce cost and schedule change in future NASA missions.

Bitten, Robert E.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Rapid Turnaround of Costing/Designing of Space Missions Operations

The Ground Segment Team (GST), at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, provides high-level mission operations concepts and cost estimates for projects that are in the formulation phase. GST has developed a tool to track costs, assumptions, and mission requirements, and to rapidly turnaround estimates for mission operations, ground data systems, and tracking for deep space and near Earth missions. Estimates that would often take several weeks to generate are now generated in minutes through the use of an integrated suite of cost models. The models were developed through interviews with domain experts in areas of Mission Operations, including but not limited to: systems engineering, payload operations, tracking resources, mission planning, navigation, telemetry and command, and ground network infrastructure. Data collected during interviews were converted into parametric cost models and integrated into one tool suite. The tool has been used on a wide range of missions from small Earth orbiters, to flagship missions like Cassini. The tool is an aid to project managers and mission planners as they consider different scenarios during the proposal and early development stages of their missions. The tool is also used for gathering cost related requirements and assumptions and for conducting integrated analysis of multiple missions.

Cost estimation↗

NASA NTRS2016

Sleep Environment Recommendations for Future Spaceflight Vehicles

Current evidence demonstrates that astronauts experience sleep loss and circadian desynchronization during spaceflight. Ground-based evidence demonstrates that these conditions lead to reduced performance, increased risk of injuries and accidents, and short and long-term health consequences. Many of the factors contributing to these conditions relate to the habitability of the sleep environment. Noise, inadequate temperature and airflow, and inappropriate lighting and light pollution have each been associated with sleep loss and circadian misalignment during spaceflight operations and on Earth. As NASA prepares to send astronauts on long-duration, deep space missions, it is critical that the habitability of the sleep environment provide adequate mitigations for potential sleep disruptors. We conducted a comprehensive literature review summarizing optimal sleep hygiene parameters for lighting, temperature, airflow, humidity, comfort, intermittent and erratic sounds, and privacy and security in the sleep environment. We reviewed the design and use of sleep environments in a wide range of cohorts including among aquanauts, expeditioners, pilots, military personnel and ship operators. We also reviewed the specifications and sleep quality data arising from every NASA spaceflight mission, beginning with Gemini. Finally, we conducted structured interviews with individuals experienced sleeping in non-traditional spaces including oil rig workers, Navy personnel, astronauts, and expeditioners. We also interviewed the engineers responsible for the design of the sleeping quarters presently deployed on the International Space Station. We found that the optimal sleep environment is cool, dark, quiet, and is perceived as safe and private. There are wide individual differences in the preferred sleep environment; therefore modifiable sleeping compartments are necessary to ensure all crewmembers are able to select personalized configurations for optimal sleep. A sub-optimal sleep environment is tolerable for only a limited time, therefore individual sleeping quarters should be designed for long-duration missions. In a confined space, the sleep environment serves a dual purpose as a place to sleep, but also as a place for storing personal items and as a place for privacy during non-sleep times. This need for privacy during sleep and wake appears to be critically important to the psychological well-being of crewmembers on long-duration missions.

Flynn-Evans, Erin E.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Model Based Mission Assurance in a Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Framework: State-of-the-Art Assessment

This report explores the current state of the art of Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) in projects that have shifted towards Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). Its goal is to provide insight into how NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) should respond to this shift. In MBSE, systems engineering information is organized and represented in models: rigorous computer-based representations, which collectively make many activities easier to perform, less error prone, and scalable. S&MA practices must shift accordingly. The “Objective Structure Hierarchies” recently developed by OSMA provide the framework for understanding this shift. Although the objectives themselves will remain constant, S&MA practices (activities, processes, tools) to achieve them are subject to change. This report presents insights derived from literature studies and interviews. The literature studies gleaned assurance implications from reports of space-related applications of MBSE. The interviews with knowledgeable S&MA and MBSE personnel discovered concerns and ideas for how assurance may adapt. Preliminary findings and observations are presented on the state of practice of S&MA with respect to MBSE, how it is already changing, and how it is likely to change further. Finally, recommendations are provided on how to foster the evolution of S&MA to best fit with MBSE.

Aerospace engineering↗

NASA NTRS2016

Sleep Environment Recommendations for Future Spaceflight Vehicles

We conducted a comprehensive literature review summarizing optimal sleep hygiene parameters for lighting, temperature, airflow, humidity, comfort, intermittent and erratic sounds, and privacy and security in the sleep environment. We reviewed the design and use of sleep environments in a wide range of cohorts including among aquanauts, expeditioners, pilots, military personnel and ship operators. We also reviewed the specifications and sleep quality data arising from every NASA spaceflight mission, beginning with Gemini. Finally, we conducted structured interviews with individuals experienced in sleeping in non-traditional spaces including oilrig workers, Navy personnel, astronauts, and expeditioners. We also interviewed the engineers responsible for the design of the sleeping quarters presently deployed on the International Space Station. We found that the optimal sleep environment is cool, dark, quiet, and is perceived as safe and private. There are wide individual differences in the preferred sleep environment; therefore modifiable sleeping compartments are necessary to ensure all crewmembers are able to select personalized configurations for optimal sleep. It is possible to utilize lessons learned from prior spaceflight missions and from other industries in order to guide the design of an optimal sleep space suitable for long-duration spaceflight.

spaceflight↗

NASA NTRS2020

X-HAB 2020: AR Field Treks Summary and Conclusions

As part of the FY20 X-Hab Challenge, BLiSS sought to create an Augmented Reality (AR) toolkit to help with analog field trek operations under the supervision of the Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute (SSERVI). These treks are operational and technical demonstrations at space-like destinations on Earth to test current extra-vehicular activity (EVA) techniques. While BLiSS as an organization has experience studying operational tasks such as this, it has never developed AR software at this scale. For that reason, another team at the University was brought on to work in parallel. The Collaborative Lab for Advancing Work in Space (CLAWS) is a veteran group of the NASA Spacesuit User Interface Technologies for Students (SUITS) challenge in which Hololens displays for astronauts are created within a year. The operational and technological pairing was ideally suited for tackling this problem. The team divided its responsibilities so that BLiSS would handle the research required to shape the project. As this deliverable had an end user, it was decided that interviewing these field geologists and operations specialists would provide the best insight. These interviews paired with literature review would reveal niche applications for AR that remained within feasible bounds. These science-driven EVAs in unknown terrain require more flexible tools than the current generation of EVA assistants. Rather than focus on sequential instructions, there instead needs to be a broad toolkit that's only called upon in specific instances. This AR Toolkit for Lunar Astronauts and Scientists (ATLAS) became the development goal of the project: create a non-intrusive assembly of tools that could be accessed in AR on the field. The current ATLAS design makes use of a geospatially and temporally annotated eld note system called GeoNotes. This allows for data to be collected and coordinated in a way that's synchronized across time, space, and different users. A Mission Control Center (MCC) and Mobile Support Equipment (MSE) were all needed to transport the AR headset into the field with the user. A network infrastructure was designed and set up within the University to enable this functionality. The software is based on a Protocol-Module structure that allows for modular development of each capability. A Protocol Manager coordinates different protocols that make use of modules. Each module tackles a different individual task while the protocol puts each one to use. The protocol manager coordinates when these are called to be used. This software is hosted on a head-mounted display (HMD) with the MCC acting as support from afar. While the software would be unit-tested at each level and each hardware component verified, a final demonstration would serve to prove the system's capabilities: an analog field trek. The team would prepare to support a user in a remote location from the MCC back at the University. A local area near campus would be tested before going out to do sample field geology further away. This unfortunately became impossible with the arrival of COVID-19. Access to all of the facilities to complete the project as planned were shut down. Our team was scattered across the globe and forced to complete the rest virtually. Adjustments were made to produce a small virtual concept in Adobe XD in the meantime. Even digital surveys were created based on the NASA task-load index (TLX) originally intended for testing actual users. The goal shifted towards completing software and getting feedback on the user interfaces (UI) and user experiences (UX). This team has reformed in response to COVID and its focus has shifted to what can be done remotely. There is still an intention to finish the original deliverable described in this report. The work has been expanded beyond the original X-Hab challenge and has instead become its own research e ort to be continued afterwards. This report collects the processes and knowledge gained from a year of studying and working at this problem with two teams. It should preserve it for the time until the world returns to normal and work can resume. CLAWS will be taking over full responsibility from that point forward, eventually surpassing the original needs of the project. While this document captures the work done towards an eventual end, the CLAWS team has written their own proposal alongside it. It outlines a new future for ATLAS beyond X-Hab, BLiSS, and hopefully beyond COVID-19. This project began as a vague goal hoping to place a new technology into the unique setting of exploration science. The project has since comfortably taken root and will hopefully bloom over the next year.

Alex Sena↗

NASA NTRS2020

Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Vertiport Automation Trade Study

The NASA Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Vertiport Automation Trade Study seeks to understand the barriers to scaling AAM takeoff and landing facilities, described in this study as vertiplaces. This trade study provides an overview of AAM, vertiplaces, and insight into the gaps in capability, regulatory certainty, and knowledge needed to sufficiently manage the volume of expected traffic anticipated for vertiplaces. The study also outlines potential mitigations to those gaps based on research conducted by the project team and interviews with 23 individuals in government and industry. In this report, the elements that make up a vertiport are discussed. The study then defines a vertiplace and introduces a concept for vertiplace categorization based on capability. Capability gaps and mitigations to increasing scale and automation of vertiplaces are then discussed based around four cross-cutting themes the research of our project team found in the interviews and research: Technology, Physical Infrastructure, Policy, and Community Acceptance. The study then concludes by discussing topics requiring further research that were identified by interviewees.

Vertiport↗

NASA NTRS2021

Commercial Hypersonic Transportation Market Study

At the request of NASA, Deloitte conducted an independent market study to provide an independent assessment on the economic viability of hypersonic and supersonic air transportation to inform ongoing strategic planning of research areas within the government and industry and to focus on the areas for technology development and vehicle design requirements. The Study was organized into three primary areas of investigation: Defining the Market appetite for high speed air transport, Defining the business cases; and Assessing Barriers in the environment. The market demand was assessed across a range of Mach numbers from Mach 2 to Mach 6 and ticket price elasticity was determined by surveying potential customers, literature reviews and stakeholder and expert interviews for passenger aircraft, private aircraft and cargo markets. The business case analyses assessed potential business cases across a three-dimensional trade space: flight speed (Mach 2-6), passenger capacity (20-200 passengers) and design range (2500-7500 nmi.). By using the SpaceWorks Rosetta model, we were able to assess each combination in the trade space and to determine the steady state Internal Rate of Return (IRR or profit) was our primary figure of merit and allowed us to rank order the business cases to understand the trends and draw conclusions from the complex trade space. Lastly, we assessed other potential barriers to high speed flight. These were determined through literature review and stakeholder/expert interviews. Once these were compiled, we developed an objective scoring system to allow us to determine overall significance and challenge to aspiring market entrants. The majority of the research was conducted between July and December of 2020 and the results compiled and communicated to NASA in the first quarter of calendar year 2021. This report, along with the companion briefing deck, document the summation of our research and serve as a data repository for use by future researchers in government and industry.

hypersonic aircraft↗

NASA NTRS2021

TO36 Hypersonic Study

Commercial Hypersonic Transportation Market Study. At the request of NASA, Deloitte conducted an independent market study to provide an independent assessment on the economic viability of hypersonic and supersonic air transportation to inform ongoing strategic planning of research areas within the government and industry and to focus on the areas for technology development and vehicle design requirements. The Study was organized into three primary areas of investigation: Defining the Market appetite for high speed air transport, Defining the business cases; and Assessing Barriers in the environment. The market demand was assessed across a range of Mach numbers from Mach 2 to Mach 6 and ticket price elasticity was determined by surveying potential customers, literature reviews and stakeholder and expert interviews for passenger aircraft, private aircraft and cargo markets. The business case analyses assessed potential business cases across a three-dimensional trade space: flight speed (Mach 2-6), passenger capacity (20-200 passengers) and design range (2500-7500 nmi.). By using the SpaceWorks Rosetta model, we were able to assess each combination in the trade space and to determine the steady state Internal Rate of Return (IRR or profit) was our primary figure of merit and allowed us to rank order the business cases to understand the trends and draw conclusions from the complex trade space. Lastly, we assessed other potential barriers to high speed flight. These were determined through literature review and stakeholder/expert interviews. Once these were compiled, we developed an objective scoring system to allow us to determine overall significance and challenge to aspiring market entrants. The majority of the research was conducted between July and December of 2020 and the results compiled and communicated to NASA in the first quarter of calendar year 2021. This report, along with the companion briefing deck, document the summation of our research and serve as a data repository for use by future researchers in government and industry.

hypersonic aircraft↗

NASA NTRS2022

Bringing Planetary Science Mission Outreach to the Deaf and Blind Communities

Introduction: Technology for enhancing outreach, like 3D printing, and science communication products, such as videos and podcasts, can be utilized within the planetary science community, especially for the engagement and excitement of current or upcoming planetary exploration missions. However, these communication products can also be further enhanced for the benefit of the blind and deaf communities. While such products may already be readily available, such projects are not easily accessible to blind and/or deaf certified educators, which often rely on making their own resources or do not have the funds to provide such resources (e.g., cost of 3D printers or cost of braille books). The planetary science community can have better practices to reach these broader audiences. Best practices can include transcripts from podcasts, transcripts in videos, and large-font captions. Images on websites and social media accounts should also include alt-text descriptive captions. 3D printing can also enhance planetary science for the blind community, through tactile posters, maps, and pamphlets. Planetary data can also be augmented by providing different tactile geological maps (e.g., topography or various datasets), and audio-visual videos freely available for educators. Visual Engagement: Visual engagement consists of several avenues to consider, the three main themes includes: 1) swag; 2) videos; 3) interactive exploration. Swag can include the fun visual take-home materials, such as stickers, posters, bookmarks, etc. Videos can include educational-specific videos (available freely via YouTube or by other educational-specific streaming avenues, such as Nebula or Curiosity Stream), provided they have Closed Captioning (CC). The use of QR codes to such videos or websites can also benefit to being added on swag. Interactive exploration can also be sub-divided by different types of engagement. A popular and still fairly new technology for public engagement is the use of virtual reality (VR). While this has been mainly for martian and lunar surface exploration [1], the deaf communities can benefit from VR through a more extensive look at our solar system and beyond (for example, a VR experience of the flight path, or visual map of the heliosphere/dynamics of our Sun). Audio Engagement: Audio tools can also be a useful avenue of communication, especially for the blind communities. Audio archiving can certainly be transcripts from the video engagements, but also the use of podcasts can also be a benefit. Podcasting can take on two forms: 1) interview engagement; and 2) update engagement. For interviews, scientists can communicate with STEM-specific podcast platforms to make other listener-bases aware of what is going on with a specific mission. For update-type communication, missions may opt to have an archived podcast of news, updates, and the teams involved. The most important aspect of such podcasts would be for the need of complimentary transcripts (including descriptive transcripts if sounds are included), and the limited use of jargon. Research Engagement: There have been several examples of involving the blind and low-vision communities in citizen science, such as through the NASA Heliophysics division. Examples include the NASA PUNCH (Polarimeter to Unify the Corona and Heliosphere) mission led by the Southwest Research Institute [2], which include blind and visually-impaired citizens to assist in the Sun’s coronal rhythms.” Another example is the Eclipse Soundscapes: Citizen Science Project (ES:CSP), which documents observations of acoustical changes of nature and ecosystems during solar eclipse events [3]. Inclusivity: A major theme that is necessary for public engagement is inclusivity and the awareness of reaching broader audiences. Outreach to include hearing/seeing impaired communities are still lacking in the sciences. There are several opportunities that the planetary sciences could take. Other projects that have emerged from the space sciences include adding transcripts to visual engagement [4], and the use of 3D printing for the visually-impaired [5]. References: [1] Olgin, J. (2020) 51st LPSC, Abstract 2137. [2] https://scitechdaily.com/outreach-for-nasa-punch-mission-embraces-ancient-and-modern-sun-watching-theme/ [3] https://science.nasa.gov/science-activation-team/eclipse-soundscapes [4] NASA International Observe the Moon Night (Blind and Deaf Accessible), Youtube Video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neHCfg0S3-Q) [5] Richardson, J., et al. (2018) AGU Fall Meeting, Abstract ED23F-0963.

C J Ahrens↗

NASA NTRS2023

The NASA Astrobiology Program’s Professional Advancement Workshop Series: Next Steps

Introduction: In the modern-day competitive job search, it is not enough for a candidate to have an excellent academic resume. Candidates must also present themselves well in various styles of interviews, have managerial skills, and be capable of engaging in complex interpersonal relationships and team building. The NASA Astrobiology Program’s Professional Advancement Workshop Series (PAWS) addresses the need for professional skills development that is not traditionally taught in graduate programs. PAWS is designed to supplement academic teachings by providing a space where early career scientists can learn new skills to help them explore, interview for, and be hired in the jobs and careers they want. This is especially true for jobs that are outside of the traditional academic “pipeline” (the path of student to postdoc to tenure-track professor). PAWS embraces the braided river model of career development [1], which emphasizes flexibility as a scientist’s needs change throughout their life. PAWS also presents an opportunity for other early career scientists to meet and network with each other outside of conferences and other formal events. This is especially important as the world emerges from the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, PAWS creates an informative space full of resources available to everyone, which lowers institutional barriers regarding knowledge of opportunities and potentially provides mentorship to those in need. Both items are identified as supportive of a more diverse and inclusive future workforce [2–4]. PAWS began in August 2021 and was originally intended to last until the Astrobiology Science Conference in May 2022. The NASA Astrobiology Program initially sponsored PAWS, allowing the PAWS Leadership to bring in expert speakers from outside of NASA. These external speakers exposed the event attendees to new techniques and perspectives. PAWS has been able to continue beyond May 2022 because of many people volunteering their time for panels and a good balance between panels and expert-led workshops. Here, we share how PAWS works, what the results have been so far, and the future plans for PAWS.

Worshop↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Creating Portfolio Management Concepts for Highly Agile and Innovative Government Research Programs Using Design Thinking and Lean Startup Methodologies

Managing a research and development (R&D) portfolio presents numerous challenges, such as prioritizing research areas, remaining agile, strategic workforce planning, and measuring return on investment, impact, and innovation. One government R&D program is charged with producing a high degree of innovative, transformational breakthroughs in aviation technology. A practical, structured methodology for strategically prioritizing emerging aviation R&D in such an environment is lacking. The existing multi-criteria decision aid tools are primarily utilized at an enterprise level, take months to set up and collect data, require large teams of experts, are used on an infrequent basis, and are not conducive to a highly innovative, high-risk portfolio. Prior to audaciously creating a new portfolio prioritization process, the exact challenges with portfolio management for R&D projects were identified using the design thinking and lean start-up methods. A key part of this discovery process was interviewing stakeholders, as well as other managers of organizations charged with producing innovative portfolios. These interviews, as well as additional techniques, were used to develop a deeper understanding of the challenges and, subsequently, lay the foundation for development of an effective portfolio prioritization process. Four potential concepts that represent key findings emerged: carefully selected criteria for portfolio assessment and selection, targeted portfolio turnover rate, dynamic portfolio prioritization framework, and streamlined transition or commercialization of R&D. Acting on any one of the resulting portfolio management concepts will increase the transparency and confidence in portfolio decisions and, ideally, result in a greater degree of transformational breakthroughs in aviation technology.

project portfolio management↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Ensuring Safe Decision-Making on the Moon and Mars: Cognitive Performance Assessment for Exploration Class Mission EVA

Extravehicular activity (EVA) is one of the most dangerous and cognitively demanding actions that astronauts can execute, and the cognitive demands associated with future partial gravity EVAs on the Moon and Mars are expected to be higher compared to microgravity EVAs currently conducted from the International Space Station. Decrements in cognitive performance present an important risk to crew safety during exploration mission class EVA. Yet there is currently insufficient data to characterize cognitive performance prior to, during, and following EVA. Furthermore, it is still unclear which cognitive domains are most important for conducting mission critical decisions with crew safety implications. To address this gap, we conducted a cognitive task analysis (CTA) of EVA to characterize the procedures, the cognitive demands required, and the critical safety decisions associated with decrements in cognitive performance. We conducted a cognitive task analysis with 15 astronauts and subject matter experts in EVA operations and research. Interviews focused on surface exploration EVA and elicited feedback from experts on the cognitive skills required for specific EVA tasks, including cognitive strategies, critical cues, and decision-making strategies. A cognitive demands table was assembled to consolidate and synthesize the information from all interviews. The information from this cognitive task analysis informs ongoing exploration EVA for Moon to Mars. This work identifies the specific cognitive challenges that astronauts are likely to encounter during surface exploration EVA, and provides the foundation for: (1) prioritized and targeted cognitive performance measurement and functional performance tests, (2) EVA simulation design at varying levels of cognitive workload, and (3) the development of training and other technologies that can improve safe decision-making and inform EVA planning on future spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars.

Steven R Anderson↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Genesis Solar Wind – Capture, Return, Curate and Analyze: Looking Backward and Creating a Timeline

Introduction: In 1997 NASA’S Discovery Program selected the Genesis mission proposal to return solar wind samples to Earth for laboratory analyses. Principal Investigator Donald S. Burnett and the science team defined the purity of collector materials and ability to analyze solar wind composition to the precision required for planetary science. As a small mission, focused on a well-defined science goal, yet needing careful attention to engineering details, the communication among scientists and engineers, nurtured by Don Burnett, was exceptional. Genesis Mission and Curation Legacy: Genesis, as the first U. S. spacecraft to return astromaterial samples since Apollo, not only integrated the mission planning and flight teams, but also the science and sample curation teams during the mission development period. Since Genesis is a sample return mission, the Science Team was essential in certifying the collectors (sample containers for solar atoms). From inception, Genesis established mission funding for returned sample curation. JSC was lead in contamination control during mission preparation, including establishment of an ISO 4 cleanroom facility and use of ultrapure water (UPW) for cleaning flight hardware (and, as it turned out, for cleaning collectors after the mishap). Reliable, fast communication among scientists, engineers and curators at the hands-on level established deep respect among team members and efficient decision-making. JSC’s 50-years of astromaterial sample curation provided experienced sample processors onsite during recovery in Utah (a deep bench for emergency response). Post-recovery curation included iterative collaboration with science sample users to clean or verify cleanliness of samples. The science legacy from Genesis is addressed by Burnett and Jurewicz, this volume. In The Beginning: After Apollo sample return, Burnett and Marcia Neugebauer at JPL began discussing a solar wind sample return, with Neugebauer arguing that separate collection of solar wind regimes was essential science. By 1992 a solar wind sample return mission was presented at a workshop, and by 1994 a mission was proposed named Suess-Urey. The mission was re-proposed under a new name GENESIS and selected in 1997. Susan Niebur captured the Genesis mission history and stories, from high level management documents and from many interviews with participants [2]. Her account lets readers glimpse personality of participants in quotations from interviews. Need and Scope for Detailed Technical Timeline: A timeline constructed from lower level task documents has been initiated to document the resources and skills actually used, as well as task sequence or concurrency. Timelines for high level mission events are captured in two documents [1] [2] and for detailed re-entry events in [3]. A detailed technical timeline for Genesis mission and curation activities will provide data points for lower level tasks, such as ISO 4 curation facility construction time, preparation for nominal sample field recovery, mishap recovery, and UPW expansion. Changes in technology context 1990-2024: Semiconductor technologies were easily accessible in the U.S.A. (1990-1999), and the Genesis team used those resources for cleanroom design and UPW system expansion. Image documentation was changing from film to digital during cleanroom construction and payload cleaning (1997-2001). Engineering design was done using computer aided design proprietary software, making more difficult the archiving of payload configuration and materials. Email of documents, tracked delivery service and virtual meeting capability greatly improved communication efficiency. Information sources – Pre-launch mission preparation: Examples of mission science, engineering and contamination control are collector purity testing, payload design/fabrication and ISO 4 cleanroom construction. Information on timing of these activities comes from facility readiness reviews, management reviews, shipping documents, procurement documents, test reports, travel documents, laboratory logs, Quality Assurance documents, dates on images, participant notebooks and emails. Information sources – Sample return re-entry and field recovery activities: Information comes from event timelines produced by Mid-Air Recovery team, Lockheed team lead notes and from chase video, JPL Quality Assurance. Information also comes from images and logbooks from UTTR cleanroom operations and from curatorial documents. Information sources – Resulting science and sample cleaning processes: Agendas from the annual gatherings of the science team initially trace testing for collector purity/cleanliness, and after sample recovery, include collector cleaning and cleanliness assessment. Post-recovery documents include curatorial orders and procedures, sample allocation documents and LPSC abstracts. Timeline Objectives: A simple spreadsheet timeline with headers DATE, EVENT, PEOPLE, COMMENT, INFORMATION SOURCE has been initiated and currently has over 90 entries. While this is not definitive historical research, it is a quick look at the evolution of Genesis curation with pointers to documents or people with information. Engineers for future missions may find useful points of comparison for development of facilities. References:[1] Genesis Mission Reference Document, (2011) JPL D-62382.[2] Niebur S. M., edited by Brown D. W. (2023) NASA’s Discovery Program: The First 20 Years of Competitive Planetary Exploration, NASA-SP-2023-4238.[3] Genesis Mishap Investigation Board Report, Vol. 1 (July 2005).

solar wind↗

DOE OSTI2020

Assessment of Survey Results from Advanced Reactor Industry Domain Experts on Nonlinear Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis Software Verification and Validation

The seismic load case has a significant impact on the design and cost of nuclear power plants. Given the need to substantially reduce cost, advanced reactor designers are looking to leverage numerical tools that enable seismic analysis of an integrated vessel/support/structure/soil system. Modern nonlinear analysis tools provide a solution, capturing dynamic coupling between components (including soil-structure interaction (SSI)) concurrent with nonlinear behavior in one or more parts of the system. Although these methods have a rich history of technical development and implementation, software quality assurance (SQA) following nuclear industry standards remains a significant burden for those wishing to adopt such methods for advanced reactor design and licensing. To reduce the SQA burden, this project will develop the guidance for SQA verification and validation (V&V) of coupled nonlinear SSI analysis tools, to include a test matrix of software features and test problems to support commercial grade dedication (CGD). The guidance is intended to be technology-neutral: supporting designers of all advanced reactors. To maximize the value of the project to reactor designers, the project team performed focused surveys of and interviews with advanced reactor designers. Additionally, the project surveyed members of the broader industry involved in reactor design and licensing. The aggregated industry feedback consists of written survey responses, live polling responses, focused interviews, and informal feedback provided after outreach presentations, collectively referred to as “survey results”. Herein, the survey results are reported, reviewed, and assessed to inform follow-on project activities. The survey results confirmed the familiarity of the industry with the coupled nonlinear SSI analysis. They also affirm the project need based upon the expressed intent to (1) incorporate nonlinear features and (2) pursue the coupled nonlinear SSI analysis to reduce seismic demands and construction costs. All reactor designers indicated their intent to incorporate two or more nonlinear features, and all reactor designer respondents opined that the coupled nonlinear SSI analysis would allow for the optimization of the reactor design and construction. However, the programmatic challenges, whether real or perceived, present a significant barrier to reactor designers. The barrier most commonly identified by the reactor designer population was regulatory risk, with 70% citing this as a reason not to pursue the approach. The perceived regulatory risk identified by the reactor designers underscores the importance of regulator engagement and dialogue in this project. Additionally, half of the reactor designers identified cost and lack of guidance as a deterrent. The survey results also provide insights to tailor specific aspects of the guidance document and test matrix. The project plans to prepare both a formal referenceable guidance document and a collaborative, web-based test matrix and problem set. The project will focus on more complete test problem definitions for the prioritized nonlinear features over shallower problem descriptions for a larger set of features. The nonlinearities prioritized as high based upon survey feedback include fluid-structure interaction and seismic isolation and energy dissipation devices. The nonlinearities prioritized as intermediate include nonlinear geomaterials, nonlinear concrete, nonlinear steel, and interface/contact nonlinearity. Deep embedment and the associated nonlinear phenomena are assigned the lowest priority based upon survey feedback.

42 ENGINEERING↗