SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “PERSONNEL”

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 487 records · Page 27

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

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

In the Hot Seat: STS-115 Lightning Strike Stand Down Debate - NASA Case Study

There is no way the PIC's could have seen any current' was the gist of Mike Griffin's assessment. Griffin was the NASA Administrator at the time. The buck stopped at his desk. Holding a napkin out to Pat Lampton, Griffin showed Lampton the calculations he'd made over dinner that predicted that the Pyrotechnic Initiator Controllers (PIC's) at the base of the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) were fine. A lightning strike the day before, the worst ever experienced with a Space Shuttle on the launch pad, caused a halt to the launch count down as technicians, engineers, and managers scrambled identify any damage to the launch system. SRB technicians and engineers assessed the data against their Lightning Strike Re-Test Requirements, determining that all but one of the requirements could be checked if they resumed the countdown. For the one remaining requirement, testing the integrity of the PIC's would require 96 hours to set up, test, and reassemble. The engineers were convinced that there was no way to do calculations to show the PIC's were okay. The only option was to stand down. It was SRB Deputy Project Manager (PM) Pat Lampton's responsibility to decide what the SRB project position needed to be to certify that their hardware was safe to fly. He had to communicate that decision to the Mission Management Team (MMT) as a Go or No Go position to resume the count down. If the answer was Go they could still meet a delayed, but acceptable launch schedule. If the answer was No Go, rescheduling the launch would be a grueling shuffling of hardware, personnel, and mission timelines to accommodate Russian missions to the Space Station, supplies for the launch, and personnel manning launch operations. On top of that, Hurricane Ernesto was spinning off the coast of Florida, threatening the need for the Shuttle to roll back to the hangar if they waited too long.

Kummer, Lizette↗

NASA NTRS2016

Teamwork Training Needs Analysis for Long-Duration Exploration Missions

The success of future long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) will be determined largely by the extent to which mission-critical personnel possess and effectively exercise essential teamwork competencies throughout the entire mission lifecycle (e.g., Galarza & Holland, 1999; Hysong, Galarza, & Holland, 2007; Noe, Dachner, Saxton, & Keeton, 2011). To ensure that such personnel develop and exercise these necessary teamwork competencies prior to and over the full course of future LDEMs, it is essential that a teamwork training curriculum be developed and put into place at NASA that is both 1) comprehensive, in that it targets all teamwork competencies critical for mission success and 2) structured around empirically-based best practices for enhancing teamwork training effectiveness. In response to this demand, the current teamwork-oriented training needs analysis (TNA) was initiated to 1) identify the teamwork training needs (i.e., essential teamwork-related competencies) of future LDEM crews, 2) identify critical gaps within NASA’s current and future teamwork training curriculum (i.e., gaps in the competencies targeted and in the training practices utilized) that threaten to impact the success of future LDEMs, and to 3) identify a broad set of practical nonprescriptive recommendations for enhancing the effectiveness of NASA’s teamwork training curriculum in order to increase the probability of future LDEM success.

Smith-Jentsch, Kimberly A.↗

NASA NTRS2017

NASA Weather Support 2017

In the mid to late 1980's, as NASA was studying ways to improve weather forecasting capabilities to reduce excessive weather launch delays and to reduce excessive weather Launch Commit Criteria (LCC) waivers, the Challenger Accident occurred and the AC-67 Mishap occurred.[1] NASA and USAF weather personnel had advance knowledge of extremely high levels of weather hazards that ultimately caused or contributed to both of these accidents. In both cases, key knowledge of the risks posed by violations of weather LCC was not in the possession of final decision makers on the launch teams. In addition to convening the mishap boards for these two lost missions, NASA convened expert meteorological boards focusing on weather support. These meteorological boards recommended the development of a dedicated organization with the highest levels of weather expertise and influence to support all of American spaceflight. NASA immediately established the Weather Support Office (WSO) in the Office of Space Flight (OSF), and in coordination with the United Stated Air Force (USAF), initiated an overhaul of the organization and an improvement in technology used for weather support as recommended. Soon after, the USAF established a senior civilian Launch Weather Officer (LWO) position to provide meteorological support and continuity of weather expertise and knowledge over time. The Applied Meteorology Unit (AMU) was established by NASA, USAF, and the National Weather Service to support initiatives to place new tools and methods into an operational status. At the end of the Shuttle Program, after several weather office reorganizations, the WSO function had been assigned to a weather branch at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). This branch was dismantled in steps due to further reorganization, loss of key personnel, and loss of budget line authority. NASA is facing the loss of sufficient expertise and leadership required to provide current levels of weather support. The recommendation proposed herein is to re-establish the WSO under a high level office, with funding set at about the same levels as today, with a revitalized charter and focus to allow for the WSO to operate as originally intended.

lessons learned↗

NASA NTRS2018

UTM and D-NET: NASA and JAXA's Collaborative Research on Integrating Small UAS with Disaster Response Efforts

Natural disasters, such as flooding, wildfire, hurricane, tornadoes, earthquakes and tsunamis, pose challenges in preserving human life and minimizing the damages to a region. During catastrophic events, timely response of disaster relief personnel, an efficient deployment of resources in the recovery effort, and coordinated information sharing amongst different relief agencies can make a substantial difference in responding to those impacted by the disaster. Many relief activities currently utilize both ground personnel and manned airborne assets during different phases of the disaster response. Typically, multiple organizations support relief activities and this often creates logistics coordination challenges between agencies which can result in wasted time or resources. The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has been developing an "Integrated aircraft operation system for disaster relief (D-NET)", which assists collection and sharing of disaster information through the integrated operation of aircraft such as helicopters, aircraft, and satellites, for efficient and safe rescue operations by disaster relief aircraft. Due to the advancement in unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) technologies, public safety organizations have started incorporating small UAS (sUAS) as an asset in their disasters response activities. To address the airspace integration challenges of the influx of sUAS in the United States the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), under the UAS Traffic Management (UTM) project, has been engaged in research to enable large-scale commercial applications of sUAS operating in low altitude airspace. This paper presents the integration of D-NET, which incorporate sUAS in the planning, information sharing, and operation support of disasters response activities, and UTM, which provides airspace management to enable large scale high density operations. The integration of the DNET and UTM systems enables coordination, data sharing, and airspace management to improve the timeliness of the disaster response, enable relief organization to reduce cost and overhead by using UAS assets and still maintain airspace safety during the relief activities.

UTM↗

NASA NTRS2018

Flight Awareness Collaboration Tool

FACT is a software program that provides important information about winter weather operations to airline dispatchers and airport personnel. FACT has a "quad" design and shows various maps, text, and tabular information. It also has a team messaging capability. It is meant to be used by airline dispatchers and airport personnel to manage winter storms. This slide set provides a description of FACT that will be released to airline and airport partners who are helping to evaluate FACT. It was most recently presented at a Southwest Airlines meeting at NASA Ames on April 3, 2018.

airline operations center↗

NASA NTRS2018

Flight Awareness Collaboration Tool

dispatcher↗

NASA NTRS2018

Establishing and Monitoring an Aseptic Workspace

When are aseptic operations necessary? In order to meet certain bioburden requirements, some components must undergo dry heat microbial reduction (DHMR) or other sterilizing procedures. If sensitive surfaces must be re-exposed after DHMR, this could compromise the bioburden levels. Recontaminating sterilized surfaces could be costly both in time by requiring repeated DHMR and risk to the hardware, which may not be compatible with repeated high temperature bakes. In order to prevent recontamination of the sensitive surfaces, an aseptic environment and sterile technique must be employed. Aseptic environments mean working in a space with almost no detectable bioburden in the air or on surfaces. Ideally, DHMR happens as late as possible to avoid requiring aseptic operations, as it can be considered a high-risk operations. Preparing the cleanroom for aseptic operations Establishing an ISO (International Organization for Standardization) class 5 space to minimize airborne particles. Maintain low bioburden in the cleanroom by using biocidal cleaners. Using multiple biocidal techniques decreases the likelihood of selecting for resistant microorganisms. 70% Isopropyl Alcohol (IPA) denatures the proteins in a microorganism (note: 70% IPA is better at killing microorganisms than 100% IPA) 7% hydrogen peroxide: damages DNA and proteins through oxygen radical damage. Ultraviolet-C (UV-C) lamps: causes crosslinking in DNA which prevents replication. Monitor cleanroom regularly for bioburden trending: Standard bioassay: Swab or wipe samples of cleanroom surfaces processed for colony forming unity (viable or spore selected); Rapid bioassay: Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) or Limulus amebocyte lysate (LAL) for a bioburden snapshot. High levels can signal an immediate re-cleaning before standard bioassay samples are taken. Airborne monitoring: Active (pulling air through a filter) or passive (particle fallout) for bioburden. Verify bioburden levels just before aseptic operation. Test hardware and cleanroom surfaces and air 3 days before the planned aseptic operation. Rapid bioburden just before aseptic operation to ensure room was not re-contaminated. Preparing personnel and tools: Personnel training. Everyone in the cleanroom: Standard cleanroom certification Everyone on the team: 1 day Planetary Protection overview. Aseptic operators only: Half-day aseptic operations training. Covers sterile garmenting/gloves, Sterile handling with a focus on contact transfer risk, tool/GSE preparation, and two-operator system for opening sterilized tools/components. Tool sterilization: All tools to be used during an aseptic operation need to be identified. Compatible tools are sterilized by DHMR or Autoclave. Double wrapped so that the exterior bag can be handled by a non-sterile operator, and the sterile. Tools that are not compatible with high heat do not come in contact with sensitive surfaces: either substitutes are found, or tools are isolated by wrapping in sterile foil. During an aseptic operation. Pre-task to make sure everyone understands the operations, who is handling what, and when the most critical surfaces will be exposed. Monitoring during the operation. Bioburden: active and passive airborne bioburden sampling, glove-tip dabs onto a plate after completion of operation (3 days for results). Particles: real time particle counter constantly running, with alarm for exceeding ISO 5 conditions.

aseptic processing↗

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 NTRS2019

Structural Framework for Flight I: NASA’s Role in Development of Advanced Composite Materials for Aircraft and Space Structures

This monograph is organized to look at: the successful application of composites on aircraft and space launch vehicles, the role of NASA in enabling these applications for each different class of flight vehicles, and a discussion of the major advancements made in discipline areas of research. In each section, key personnel and selected references are included. These references are intended to provide additional information for technical specialists and others who desire a more in-depth discussion of the contributions. Also in each section, lessons learned and future challenges are highlighted to help guide technical personnel either in the conduct or management of current and future research projects related to advanced composite materials.

Tenney, Darrel R.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Structural Framework for Flight II: NASA’s Role in Development of Advanced Composite Materials for Aircraft and Space Structures

This monograph is organized to highlight the successful application of light alloys on aircraft and space launch vehicles, the role of NASA in enabling these applications for each different class of flight vehicles, and a discussion of the major advancements made in discipline areas of research. In each section, key personnel and selected references are included. These references are intended to provide additional information for technical specialists and others who desire a more in-depth discussion of the contributions. Also in each section, lessons learned and future challenges are highlighted to help guide technical personnel either in the conduct or management of current and future research projects related to light-weighting advanced air and space vehicles.

Tenney, Darrel R.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Program Management for Concurrent University Satellite Programs, Including Propellant Feed System Design Elements

Propulsion options for CubeSats are limited but are necessary for the CubeSat industry to continue future growth. Challenges to CubeSat propulsion include volume/mass constraints, availability of sufficiently small and certified hardware, secondary payload status, safe storage of high energy, and power requirements. A multi-mode (chemical and electric) thruster was developed by at the Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T) to enable CubeSat propulsion missions. Two satellite buses, a 3U and 6U, are being developed by the M-SAT satellite research team at Missouri S&T to demonstrate the multi-mode thruster's capabilities. Two key challenges related to these missions are the development of the feed system to support the thruster and management of the two programs' personnel, resources, timelines, and budgets. The feed system was designed to support the unique needs of the thruster including material compatibility with the custom ionic liquid, variable flow rate, high pressurization, and high voltage within the constraints and budget of a student-designed propulsion system. The feed system was also designed to minimize risk as a secondary payload. This resulted in the development of a unique method to pressurize propellant stored in the feed system tubing. Within the expected operating pressure range, the method was experimentally shown to provide sufficient pressure and propellant volume to the thruster to meet mission success criteria. The 3U and 6U CubeSat buses were designed concurrently with complimentary payloads, hardware, objectives, and team structures. Resources such as personnel, lab space, and time had to be carefully balanced between the two teams. With proper management, the two programs have been able to support one another, providing valuable insight and collaboration between the two teams. Lessons learned include experience with design, testing, and assembly of hardware, team training/mentoring and motivation, improved documentation practices, and risk management.

Withrow, Shannah Nichole↗

NASA NTRS2015

Science Training History of the Apollo Astronauts

Following President Kennedy’s initiation of Project Apollo, NASA underwent substantial changes in personnel, organization, and programs and faced a major question: what to do on the Moon after landing. Once a decision that science activities, particularly geoscience, should be pursued, considerable debate ensued over how to accomplish this. Questions arose over instruments and tools required, samples and photos to be returned, landing site selection, and crew composition. Answers to these questions required major efforts for planning traverses on the Moon and training the astronauts in the extensive procedures necessary in low gravity to use tools, set up instruments, take adequate photos, collect and document samples, and provide proper descriptions. In addition to astronauts on the surface, an astronaut in lunar orbit managed additional instruments, photography and verbal descriptions. Training for these activities averaged nearly one hundred hours per month for over a year for each crew. There were many problems as the training progressed: adjusting groups and backgrounds of the training personnel for the best combination of personalities and skills, overcoming logistical troubles, revising awkward procedures, determining optimum means of communications between all involved groups, and devising contingency procedures for real-time problems. By the last mission these problems were overcome.

Phinney, William C.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Future Surface Decision Support Overview

This presentation presents the capabilities of the Airspace Technology Demonstration 2 (ATD-2) Integrated Arrival, Departure, and Surface (IADS) system as a surface decision support tool for users, including Air Traffic Control (ATC) personnel working at the tower and Center facilities and airline Ramp personnel. The ATD-2 IADS capabilities include data exchange and integration, modeling and scheduling, surface metering, and departure scheduling for overhead stream insertion of constrained flights.

Surface Decision Support↗

NASA NTRS2019

Human Systems Integration (HSI) for Safety- Critical Range Operations at Wallops Flight Facility (WFF)

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) Human Factors (HF) Technical Discipline Team (TDT) funded a preliminary study in 2017 that was narrowly focused within the Range Data Display System (RDDS) scope of display design requirements based on schedule and resources. Wallops Flight Facility (WFF) personnel involved in the previous study asked for a broader Human Systems Integration (HSI) involvement that would span both the RDDS and Flight Termination System (FTS) projects and assist with identifying HSI best practices, via appropriate standards and guidelines, that if properly implemented should result in a more effective and efficient Range Safety Operations. WFF Range Safety Operations has expressed a need to assess the roles, responsibilities, and functions of the various personnel on console during launches to identify existing and potential efficiencies and incorporate them in the new system design. This assessment addresses that need.

Cynthia H Null↗

NASA NTRS2019

Flight Awareness Collaboration Tool

Mogford, Richard↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Obtaining Public Opinion about sUAS Activity in an Urban Environment

The Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) research project has been developing and testing concept ideas for enabling small UAS (sUAS) operations in low altitude airspace (ground to 400 feet). To do this, a series of flight test demonstrations were organized over five years at seven test sites. Technology Capability Level-4 (TCL4), the most complex flight tests, were conducted in Texas, USA, during August 2019. This testing resulted in over 400 data collection flights using eight live rotorcraft, with nine flight crews flying pre-planned scenarios in the urban downtown and waterfront areas of Corpus Christi, Texas. Test scenarios were designed to include a variety of elements, including live and simulated vehicles, and personnel in many different roles, including flight crews and mission personnel. One group of people who did not have a role in the flight tests but will be affected by UAS operations as they become more ubiquitous, are the general public. What do the public think about sUAS operations in urban areas? In order to obtain a reference point that noted the public's view of the operations in the TCL4 demonstration, a short survey was developed and offered to members of the public who wished to comment on the sUAS activities they saw in their city during two weeks in August, 2019.Forty five people completed the online public opinion survey. Participants volunteered to take it, creating a self-selected sample. The survey included eleven questions that asked participants about their level of comfort and concerns with UAS activity; their knowledge of UAS operations; and, whether a traffic management system like UTM would increase their confidence in urban UAS activity. The general public in Corpus Christi showed a good level of knowledge of sUAS regulations, with almost half of their responses to the knowledge portion of the survey being correct. They expressed a moderate level of concern (x = 4.7 out of 7) at urban sUAS activity and, of those who cited a concern, the majority reported this was about privacy (54%), which are all responses in line with those reported in earlier research on public opinion. Views on UTM were mixed, with respondents indicating they thought the introduction of UTM will improve safety somewhat (5.2 out of 7) but it will also increase their concern a little (4.6 out of 7). This would indicate there needs to be more information and educational material about the UTM concept made available to the public with the aim to reduce public concerns about the system.

Caterina Grossi↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Obtaining Public Opinion About sUAS Activity in an Urban Environment

The Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) research project has been developing and testing concept ideas for enabling small UAS (sUAS) operations in low altitude airspace (ground to 400 feet). To do this, a series of flight test demonstrations were organized over five years at seven test sites. Technology Capability Level-4 (TCL4), the most complex flight tests, were conducted in Texas, USA, during August 2019. This testing resulted in over 400 data collection flights using eight live rotorcraft, with nine flight crews flying pre-planned scenarios in the urban downtown and waterfront areas of Corpus Christi, Texas. Test scenarios were designed to include a variety of elements, including live and simulated vehicles, and personnel in many different roles, including flight crews and mission personnel. One group of people who did not have a role in the flight tests but will be affected by UAS operations as they become more ubiquitous, are the general public. What do the public think about sUAS operations in urban areas? In order to obtain a reference point that noted the public’s view of the operations in the TCL4 demonstration, a short survey was developed and offered to members of the public who wished to comment on the sUAS activities they saw in their city during two weeks in August, 2019. Forty five people completed the online public opinion survey. Participants volunteered to take it, creating a self-selected sample. The survey included eleven questions that asked participants about their level of comfort and concerns with UAS activity; their knowledge of UAS operations; and, whether a traffic management system like UTM would increase their confidence in urban UAS activity. The general public in Corpus Christi showed a good level of knowledge of sUAS regulations, with almost half of their responses to the knowledge portion of the survey being correct. They expressed a moderate level of concern (x = 4.7 out of 7) at urban sUAS activity and, of those who cited a concern, the majority reported this was about privacy (54%), which are all responses in line with those reported in earlier research on public opinion. Views on UTM were mixed, with respondents indicating they thought the introduction of UTM will improve safety somewhat (5.2 out of 7) but it will also increase their concern a little (4.6 out of 7). This would indicate there needs to be more information and educational material about the UTM concept made available to the public with the aim to reduce public concerns about the system.

UTM↗