Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Astronaut training”

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 577 records · Page 32
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2009

Human Factors in Training

Future space missions will be significantly longer than current shuttle missions and new systems will be more complex than current systems. Increasing communication delays between crews and Earth-based support means that astronauts need to be prepared to handle the unexpected on their own. As crews become more autonomous, their potential span of control and required expertise must grow to match their autonomy. It is not possible to train for every eventuality ahead of time on the ground, or to maintain trained skills across long intervals of disuse. To adequately prepare NASA personnel for these challenges, new training approaches, methodologies, and tools are required. This research project aims at developing these training capabilities. By researching established training principles, examining future needs, and by using current practices in space flight training as test beds, both in Flight Controller and Crew Medical domains, this research project is mitigating program risks and generating templates and requirements to meet future training needs. Training efforts in Fiscal Year 08 (FY08) strongly focused on crew medical training, but also began exploring how Space Flight Resource Management training for Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) Flight Controllers could be integrated with systems training for optimal Mission Control Center (MCC) operations. The Training Task addresses Program risks that lie at the intersection of the following three risks identified by the Project: (1) Risk associated with poor task design (2) Risk of error due to inadequate information (3) Risk associated with reduced safety and efficiency due to poor human factors design

Barshi, Immanuel↗
NASA NTRS2010

Human Factors in Training

Future space missions will be significantly longer than current shuttle missions and new systems will be more complex than current systems. Increasing communication delays between crews and Earth-based support means that astronauts need to be prepared to handle the unexpected on their own. As crews become more autonomous, their potential span of control and required expertise must grow to match their autonomy. It is not possible to train for every eventuality ahead of time on the ground, or to maintain trained skills across long intervals of disuse. To adequately prepare NASA personnel for these challenges, new training approaches, methodologies, and tools are required. This research project aims at developing these training capabilities. By researching established training principles, examining future needs, and by using current practices in space flight training as test beds, both in Flight Controller and Crew Medical domains, this research project is mitigating program risks and generating templates and requirements to meet future training needs. Training efforts in Fiscal Year 09 (FY09) strongly focused on crew medical training, but also began exploring how Space Flight Resource Management training for Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) Flight Controllers could be integrated with systems training for optimal Mission Control Center (MCC) operations. The Training Task addresses Program risks that lie at the intersection of the following three risks identified by the Project: 1) Risk associated with poor task design; 2) Risk of error due to inadequate information; and 3) Risk associated with reduced safety and efficiency due to poor human factors design.

Barshi, Immanuel↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Humans to Mars, but How Many? Using Training Requirements Modeling to Inform Crew Size

Missions to Mars will differ from previous human spaceflight missions in that the onboard crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to the long communication delays. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, that crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise of the Mission Control Central (MCC) team NASA currently relies upon. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is developing a methodology for assessing the trade space of factors that affect the number of crew for future missions. This methodology includes the consideration of results from three human performance models developed using the Improved Performance Research and Integration Tool (IMPRINT) modeling platform as well as a custom-built model on expertise trained within the crew. The IMPRINT results will be presented in the modeling and simulation sub-tag. Here we present results of a model based on NASA’s crew qualification and responsibility matrix (CQRM), a tool used to identify the crew qualifications for each area of responsibility (operation, system, and payload) for a mission. The model outputs an optimized allocation of training assignments along with a flight-assigned CQRM that can be used to consider the expertise that can be trained within a crew of a given size. We discuss the CQRM model result implications on the trade space for Mars mission crew size.

Mars↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Humans to Mars, but How Many? Using Training Requirements Modeling to Inform Crew Size

Missions to Mars will differ from previous human spaceflight missions in that the onboard crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to the long communication delays. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, that crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise of the Mission Control Central (MCC) team NASA currently relies upon. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is developing a methodology for assessing the trade space of factors that affect the number of crew for future missions. This methodology includes the consideration of results from three human performance models developed using the Improved Performance Research and Integration Tool (IMPRINT) modeling platform as well as a custom-built model on expertise trained within the crew. The IMPRINT results will be presented in the modeling and simulation sub-tag. Here we present results of a model based on NASA’s crew qualification and responsibility matrix (CQRM), a tool used to identify the crew qualifications for each area of responsibility (operation, system, and payload) for a mission. The model outputs an optimized allocation of training assignments along with a flight-assigned CQRM that can be used to consider the expertise that can be trained within a crew of a given size. We discuss the CQRM model result implications on the trade space for Mars mission crew size.

Mars↗
NASA NTRS1975

Man in space - A time for perspective

Factors affecting crew performances in long-term space flights are examined with emphasis on the Space Shuttle-Spacelab program. Biomedical investigations carried out during four Skylab missions indicate that initially rapid changes in certain physiological parameters, notably in cardiovascular response and red-blood-cell levels, lead to an adapted condition. Calcium loss remains a potential problem. Space Shuttle environmental control and life-support systems are described together with technology facilitating performance of mission objectives in a weightless environment. It is concluded that crew requirements are within the physical and psychological capability of astronauts, but the extent to which nonastronaut personnel will be able to participate without extensive training and pre-conditioning remains to be determined.

Winter, D. L.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Sensory substitution for space gloves and for space robots

Sensory substitution systems for space applications are described. Physical sensors replace missing human receptors and feed information to the interpretive centers of a different sense. The brain is plastic enough so that, with training, the subject localizes the input as if it were received through the missing receptors. Astronauts have difficulty feeling objects through space suit gloves because of their thickness and because of the 4.3 psi pressure difference. Miniature force sensors on the glove palm drive an electrotactile belt around the waist, thus augmenting the missing tactile sensation. A proposed teleoperator system with telepresence for a space robot would incorporate teleproprioception and a force sensor/electrotactile belt sensory substitution system for teletouch.

Bach-Y-rita, P.↗
NASA NTRS1989

STS-33 Carter and Thornton During WETF Activities

Astronauts Carter and Thornton are shown suiting up for work in the WETF (Weightless Environment Training Facility). (The payload mockup shown is not related to the STS-33 mission. It is a mockup of the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (UARS), which is scheduled to fly in the early 1990's.)

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2017

One Giant Leap to Protect All Mankind: An Overview of the Lunar Receiving Laboratory

Motivation. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy charged the nation "to land a man on the moon and return him safely to Earth." Eight years later, the Apollo 11 astronauts splashed down in the Pacific Ocean after this first 8-day journey to the moon. As humans had never ventured to another extraterrestrial body, the U.S. government noted the great uncertainty associated with the unknown exposures related to this historic mission. Overview. With this uncertainty in mind, a newly formed Interagency Committee on Back Contamination (ICBC) was established to review the potential for lunar contaminants and establish the prevention of their escape into the biosphere during crew and sample recovery operations from the floating command module to the mobile quarantine facility on the recovery ship and return to the Johnson Space Center. Significance. As a result of the ICBC recommendations, in 1966 NASA planned and built the Lunar Receiving Laboratory (LRL) at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. The LRL served a great role in service of human space exploration to quarantine Apollo crewmembers, their space vehicles, and the lunar samples collected. Almost an afterthought in the space race to the Moon, the 83,000-square-foot LRL was designed and completed in 1967 for $7.8 million. The core purpose of the LRL was "to protect the public's health, agriculture, and other living resources; to provide lunar sample distribution to approved scientific investigators; and to preserve the scientific integrity of the lunar samples at all times." Its layout was comprised of three major zones: a quarantined Crew Area, a separate but also quarantined Sample Operations Area, and a Support and Administration Area outside the controlled biological barrier. This facility required trained personnel to live and perform within it for several weeks post-flight, to include astronaut crewmembers, flight surgeons, scientists, and vehicle recovery engineers. The LRL holds memories of these historic events but has since been repurposed for NASA's medical and environmental sciences activities, in what is now known as Building 37. As we approach its 50th anniversary, the LRL story will end in demolition as NASA advances its facilities for the next steps in human exploration of space. Learning Objectives: 1. To capture the historical relevance of the NASA Lunar Receiving Laboratory 2. To understand the requirements of receiving crew and samples from the moon for the first time 3. To describe the facility capabilities in protection of public health.

Hayes, Judith↗
NASA NTRS2003

Expedition 8 Crew Interviews: C. Michael Foale - CDR

C. Michael Foale, Commander of the Expedition 8 crew to the International Space Station (ISS), answers interview questions in this video. The questions cover: 1) The goals of the Expedition; 2) How his Mir experience prepared him for long-duration spaceflight; 3) The reaction the Columbia accident where he was training in Star City, Russia; 4) Why the rewards of spaceflight are worth the risks; 5) Why he wanted to become an astronaut; 6) His career path; 7) His influences; 8) His path of study; 9) His responsibilities on a mission; 10) What a Soyuz capsule is like; 11) What the oncoming and offgoing ISS crews will do together; 12) How the ISS science mission will be advanced during his stay; 13) Training and plans for extravehicular activity (EVA); 14) Return to Flight of Shuttle; 15) What is needed to make his mission a success; 16) The most valuable contribution of the ISS.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1972

Apollo 16 time and motion study

A time and motion study is presented of astronaut lunar surface activity on Apollo 16 which consists of five distinct analyses: an evaluation of lunar mobility, a comparison of task performance in 1-g training and lunar EVA, a study of metabolic costs and adaptation, a discussion of falls, and retrieval of fallen objects. Two basic mobility patterns, the hop or canter and the traditional walking gait, were consistently utilized in longer traverses. The metabolic rates associated with these two mobility types, each used by a different astronaut, were relatively equivalent. The time to perform tasks on the lunar surface was significantly longer (on the order of 70%) than the time to perform the same tasks during the last 1-g training session. These results corroborated the findings on Apollo 15 and were not significantly different from them. There was general improvement in lunar EVA performance upon repetition of tasks. Metabolic rate (BTU/hr.) and metabolic cost (BTU) decreased over successive EVAs. Specifically, the metabolic rate associated with riding the lunar roving vehicle (LRV) decreased by approximately 18% from EVA 1 to EVA 2 and by 15% from EVA 2 to EVA 3.

Kubis, J. F.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Patch Plate Materials Compatibility Assessment

Lunar dust proved to be a greater problem during the Apollo missions than was originally anticipated. The highly angular, charged dust particles stuck to seals, radiators, and visors; clogged mechanisms; and abraded space suits. As reported by Apollo 12 astronaut Pete Conrad "We must have had more than a hundred hours suited work with the same equipment, and the wear was not as bad on the training suits as it is on these flight suits in just the eight hours we were out.". Dust clinging to surfaces was also transport-ed into habitable spaces leading to lung and eye irritation of the astronauts. The Apollo astronauts were on the Lunar surface less than 24 hours and experienced many dust related problems. With the Artemis program, we are planning longer stays on the surface, with more activities that have the potential to put the astronauts and equipment in contact with greater quantities of Lunar dust. The success of these missions will depend on our understanding of material interactions with Lunar dust and the development of ways to mitigate dust effects in cases where exposure to dust will lead to failure of components, unacceptable loss of power or thermal control, unacceptable loss of visibility, or health issues. Through the Lunar Surface In-novation Initiative (LSII), we are initiating a Patch Plate Materials Compatibility Assessment project. The overall goal of the three year project is to develop passive approaches to mitigate Lunar dust adhesion to surfaces for technologies that are currently at TRL levels 2-3 to bring them to TRL level 5 through ground-based assessment, culminating in a demonstration flight experiment on a Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) lander in 2022-2023. This paper discusses the detailed technical objectives and approach for this project. References: Gaier, J.R. "The Effects of Lunar Dust on EVA Systems During the Apollo Missions," NASA/TM-2005-213610/REV1, (2005), Apollo 12 Technical Crew Debriefing, December 1, 1969, pp. 10-54.

Miller, S. K. R.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Retrospective Analysis of Inflight Exercise Loading and Physiological Outcomes

Astronauts perform exercise throughout their missions to counter the health declines that occur as a result of long-term exposure to weightlessness. Although all astronauts perform exercise during their missions, the specific prescriptions, and thus the mechanical loading, differs among individuals. For example, inflight ground reaction force data indicate that subject-specific differences exist in foot forces created when exercising on the second-generation treadmill (T2) [1]. The current exercise devices allow astronauts to complete prescriptions at higher intensities, resulting in greater benefits with increased efficiency. Although physiological outcomes have improved, the specific factors related to the increased benefits are unknown. In-flight exercise hardware collect data that allows for exploratory analyses to determine if specific performance factors relate to physiological outcomes. These analyses are vital for understanding which components of exercise are most critical for optimal human health and performance. The relationship between exercise performance variables and physiological changes during flight has yet to be fully investigated. Identifying the critical performance variables that relate to improved physiological outcomes is vital for creating current and future exercise prescriptions to optimize astronaut health. The specific aims of this project are: 1) To quantify the exercise-related mechanical loading experienced by crewmembers on T2 and ARED during their mission on ISS; 2) To explore relationships between exercise loading variables, bone, and muscle health changes during the mission; 3) To determine if specific mechanical loading variables are more critical than others in protecting physiology; 4) To develop methodology for operational use in monitoring accumulated training loads during crew exercise programs. This retrospective analysis, which is currently in progress, is being conducted using data from astronauts that have flown long-duration missions onboard the ISS and have had access to exercise on the T2 and the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED). The specific exercise prescriptions vary for each astronaut. General exercise summary metrics will be developed to quantify exercise intensities, volumes, and durations for each subject. Where available, ground reaction force data will be used to quantify mechanical loading experienced by each astronaut. These inflight exercise metrics will be investigated relative to changes in pre- to post-flight bone and muscle health to identify which specific variables are related with improved or degraded physiological outcomes. The information generated from this analysis will fill gaps related to typical bone loading characterization, exercise performance capability, exercise volume and efficiency, and importance of exercise hardware. In addition, methods for quantification of exercise loading for use in monitoring the exercise programs during future space missions will be explored with the intent to inform exercise scientists and trainers as to the critical aspects of inflight exercise prescriptions.

Ploutz-Snyder, L. L.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Stereometric body volume measurement

The following studies are reported: (1) effects of extended space flight on body form of Skylab astronauts using biostereometrics; (2) comparison of body volume determinations using hydrostatic weighing and biostereometrics; and (3) training of technicians in biostereometric principles and procedures.

Herron, R. E.↗
NASA NTRS1990

STS-41 Ulysses TCDT Activities

Live footage shows the crewmembers of STS-41, Commander Richard N. Richards, Pilot Robert D. Cabana, Mission Specialists William M. Shepherd, Bruce E. Melnick, and Thomas D. Akers, participating in Terminal Countdown Demonstration Tests (TCDT). The astronauts are seen participating in many different activities including the traditional breakfast, suit-up, simulated training in the crew module, and a dry run of launch and emergency egress training.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2002

STS-107 Crew Interviews: Rick D. Husband, Commander

STS-107 Commander Rick Husband is seen during this preflight interview, where he gives a quick overview of the mission before answering questions about his inspiration to become an astronaut and his career path. Husband outlines what his role in the mission will be, what training the crew received, what crew member responsibilities will be, particularly during launch and reentry, what day to day life will be like on an extended duration mission, and what science experiments are going to be conducted onboard. He discusses the following science experiments and instruments in detail: MEIDEX (Mediterranean Israeli Dust Experiment), SOLSE (Shuttle Ozone Limb Sounding Experiment, FREESTAR (Fast Reaction Enabling Science Technology and Research) and various student projects. Husband also touches on the importance of space research, the value of international cooperation, the reason for dual crew shifts on the mission and the role of crew members as research subjects.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

Cognitive Functioning in Space Exploration Missions: A Human Requirement

Solving cognitive issues in the exploration missions will require implementing results from both Human Behavior and Performance, and Space Human Factors Engineering. Operational and research cognitive requirements need to reflect a coordinated management approach with appropriate oversight and guidance from NASA headquarters. First, this paper will discuss one proposed management method that would combine the resources of Space Medicine and Space Human Factors Engineering at JSC, other NASA agencies, the National Space Biomedical Research Institute, Wyle Labs, and other academic or industrial partners. The proposed management is based on a Human Centered Design that advocates full acceptance of the human as a system equal to other systems. Like other systems, the human is a system with many subsystems, each of which has strengths and limitations. Second, this paper will suggest ways to inform exploration policy about what is needed for optimal cognitive functioning of the astronaut crew, as well as requirements to ensure necessary assessment and intervention strategies for the human system if human limitations are reached. Assessment strategies will include clinical evaluation and fitness-to-perform evaluations. Clinical intervention tools and procedures will be available to the astronaut and space flight physician. Cognitive performance will be supported through systematic function allocation, task design, training, and scheduling. Human factors requirements and guidelines will lead to well-designed information displays and retrieval systems that reduce crew time and errors. Means of capturing process, design, and operational requirements to ensure crew performance will be discussed. Third, this paper will describe the current plan of action, and future challenges to be resolved before a lunar or Mars expedition. The presentation will include a proposed management plan for research, involvement of various organizations, and a timetable of deliverables.

Fiedler, Edan↗
NASA NTRS2006

Comparison of Bystander Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (BCPR) Performance in the Absence and Presence of Timing Devices for Coordinating Delivery of Ventilatory Breaths and Cardiac Compressions in a Model of Adult Cardiopulmonary Arrest

Astronaut crew medical officers (CMO) aboard the International Space Station (ISS) receive 40 hours of medical training during the 18 months preceding each mission. Part of this training ilncludes twoperson cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) per training guidelines from the American Heart Association (AHA). Recent studies concluded that the use of metronomic tones improves the coordination of CPR by trained clinicians. Similar data for bystander or "trained lay people" (e.g. CMO) performance of CPR (BCPR) have been limited. The purpose of this study was to evailuate whether use of timing devices, such as audible metronomic tones, would improve BCPR perfomance by trained bystanders. Twenty pairs of bystanders trained in two-person BCPR performled BCPR for 4 minutes on a simulated cardiopulmonary arrest patient using three interventions: 1) BCPR with no timing devices, 2) BCPR plus metronomic tones for coordinating compression rate only, 3) BCPR with a timing device and metronome for coordinating ventilation and compression rates, respectively. Bystanders were evaluated on their ability to meet international and AHA CPR guidelines. Bystanders failed to provide the recommended number of breaths and number of compressions in the absence of a timing device and in the presence of audible metronomic tones for only coordinating compression rate. Bystanders using timing devices to coordinate both components of BCPR provided the reco number of breaths and were closer to providing the recommended number of compressions compared with the other interventions. Survey results indicated that bystanders preferred to use a metronome for delivery of compressions during BCPR. BCPR performance is improved by timing devices that coordinate both compressions and breaths.

Hurst, Victor, IV↗
NASA NTRS2001

ISS Microgravity Research Payload Training Methodology

The NASA Microgravity Research Discipline has multiple categories of science payloads that are being planned and currently under development to operate on various ISS on-orbit increments. The current program includes six subdisciplines; Materials Science, Fluids Physics, Combustion Science, Fundamental Physics, Cellular Biology and Macromolecular Biotechnology. All of these experiment payloads will require the astronaut various degrees of crew interaction and science observation. With the current programs planning to build various facility class science racks, the crew will need to be trained on basic core operations as well as science background. In addition, many disciplines will use the Express Rack and the Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) to utilize the accommodations provided by these facilities for smaller and less complex type hardware. The Microgravity disciplines will be responsible to have a training program designed to maximize the experiment and hardware throughput as well as being prepared for various contingencies both with anomalies as well as unexpected experiment observations. The crewmembers will need various levels of training from simple tasks as power on and activate to extensive training on hardware mode change out to observing the cell growth of various types of tissue cultures. Sample replacement will be required for furnaces and combustion type modules. The Fundamental Physics program will need crew EVA support to provide module change out of experiment. Training will take place various research centers and hardware development locations. It is expected that onboard training through various methods and video/digital technology as well as limited telecommunication interaction. Since hardware will be designed to operate from a few weeks to multiple research increments, flexibility must be planned in the training approach and procedure skills to optimize the output as well as the equipment maintainability. Early increment lessons learned will be addressed.

Schlagheck, Ronald↗