Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Crew Performance”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

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

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. Tasked by the new Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program(EHP), a team of stakeholders from engineering, flight operations, human health and performance, astromaterials and science, and the crew office worked together to perform EVAs in 3 simulated lunar environments. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into 3 distinct tests titled after the EHP integrated test team: Joint EVA Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1was conducted near Kilbourne Holeby El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept operations(con-ops), risks and technology.JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission with a simulated Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Excon mockup space suit. The Excon mockup suit is a light-weight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU)simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗
NASA NTRS1992

Psychological training of NASA astronauts for extended missions

The success of operational teams working in remote and hostile environments rests in large part on adequate preparation of those teams prior to emplacement in field settings. Psychological training, directed at the maintenance of crew health and performance becomes increasingly important as space missions grow in duration and complexity. Methods: Topics to be discussed include: the conceptual framework of psychological training; needs analysis; content and delivery options; methods of assessing training efficacy; use of testbeds and analogies and the relationship of training to crew selection and real-time support activities. Results and Conclusions: This paper will discuss the psychological training approach being developed at the NASA/JSC Behavior and Performance Laboratory. This approach will be compared and contrasted with those underway in the U.S. Department of Defense and in other space agencies.

Holland, A. W.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The SRP believes strongly that regularly performed in-flight crew assessments are needed in order to identify a change in health status before a medical condition becomes clinically apparent. It is this early recognition in change that constitutes the foundation of the "occupational health model" expounded in the HRP Requirements Document as a key component of the HRP risk mitigation strategy that will enable its objective of "prevention and mitigation of human health and performance risks". A regular crew status examination of physiological and clinical performance is needed. This can be accomplished through instrumented monitoring of routine embedded tasks. The SRP recommends addition of a new gap to address this action under Category 3.0 Mitigate the Risk. This new gap is closely associated with Task 4.19 which addresses the lack of adequate biomedical monitoring capabilities for performing periodic clinical status evaluations and contingency medical monitoring. A corollary to these gaps is the critical emphasis on preventive medicine, not only during pre- and post-flight phases of a mission as is the current practice, but continued into the in-flight phases of exploration class missions.

Cintron, Nitza↗
NASA NTRS1982

Space Shuttle Wireless Crew Communications

The design, development, and performance characteristics of the Space Shuttle's Wireless Crew Communications System are discussed. This system allows Space Shuttle crews to interface with the onboard audio distribution system without the need for communications umbilicals, and has been designed through the adaptation of commercially available hardware in order to minimize development time. Testing aboard the Space Shuttle Orbiter Columbia has revealed no failures or design deficiencies.

Armstrong, R. W.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Bringing the Flight Surgeon Console Into the Artemis Era: Constructing A Quick Reference Guide for the Orion Vehicle

BACKGROUND: Historically, NASA flight surgeons working on control console have had access to a quick reference guide that provides tailored clinical information for a variety of medical conditions, symptoms, and events that crew members may experience on the International Space Station (ISS). With the development of the Orion vehicle and its new medical system intended for the Artemis missions, a new quick reference guide is required to reflect the capabilities of this new medical system. OVERVIEW: The Flight Surgeon Quick Reference Guide(FSQRG)offers a variety of information to flight surgeons. For each condition/symptom/event, the guide describes what actions and procedures crew members will perform either automatically or at the instruction of the flight surgeon. The guide describes what further information should be collected, lists potential diagnoses, and further actions available to be taken by the Flight Surgeon or crew. The guide also describes what medications are available to the crew, common clinical decision-making tools, and other terrestrial practices. Due to the significant differences between the ISS and the Orion vehicle in both structure and mission scope, Orion’s medical system is significantly smaller than the ISS’s. When constructing the new guide for the Orion vehicle we began with the ISS version of the guide as a template. We then replaced ISS crew procedure references with their Orion counterpart if one existed. We also added new Orion crew procedure references where clinically appropriate. Reductions or additions to the medical equipment/medication references were made until they were consistent with resources available on Orion. Finally, we constructed a resource matrix that allows flight surgeons to easily identify the location of medications and equipment required for crew procedures. DISCUSSION: The information provided in the updated FSQRG allows flight surgeons to make quick and clinically accurate decisions that can be accomplished within the scope of the Orion vehicle medical system. This timely and accurate decision making becomes more important as missions go beyond low earth orbit and communication becomes more delayed. Such quick reference guides also have the potential to reflect medical systems on future vehicles, missions, and partner vehicles.

Anderson carter↗
NASA NTRS2014

Human Research Program Opportunities

The goal of HRP is to provide human health and performance countermeasures, knowledge, technologies, and tools to enable safe, reliable, and productive human space exploration. The Human Research Program was designed to meet the needs of human space exploration, and understand and reduce the risk to crew health and performance in exploration missions.

Kundrot, Craig E.↗
NASA NTRS2004

The Art of Space Flight Exercise Hardware: Design and Implementation

The design of space flight exercise hardware depends on experience with crew health maintenance in a microgravity environment, history in development of flight-quality exercise hardware, and a foundation for certifying proper project management and design methodology. Developed over the past 40 years, the expertise in designing exercise countermeasures hardware at the Johnson Space Center stems from these three aspects of design. The medical community has steadily pursued an understanding of physiological changes in humans in a weightless environment and methods of counteracting negative effects on the cardiovascular and musculoskeletal system. The effects of weightlessness extend to the pulmonary and neurovestibular system as well with conditions ranging from motion sickness to loss of bone density. Results have shown losses in water weight and muscle mass in antigravity muscle groups. With the support of university-based research groups and partner space agencies, NASA has identified exercise to be the primary countermeasure for long-duration space flight. The history of exercise hardware began during the Apollo Era and leads directly to the present hardware on the International Space Station. Under the classifications of aerobic and resistive exercise, there is a clear line of development from the early devices to the countermeasures hardware used today. In support of all engineering projects, the engineering directorate has created a structured framework for project management. Engineers have identified standards and "best practices" to promote efficient and elegant design of space exercise hardware. The quality of space exercise hardware depends on how well hardware requirements are justified by exercise performance guidelines and crew health indicators. When considering the microgravity environment of the device, designers must consider performance of hardware separately from the combined human-in-hardware system. Astronauts are the caretakers of the hardware while it is deployed and conduct all sanitization, calibration, and maintenance for the devices. Thus, hardware designs must account for these issues with a goal of minimizing crew time on orbit required to complete these tasks. In the future, humans will venture to Mars and exercise countermeasures will play a critical role in allowing us to continue in our spirit of exploration. NASA will benefit from further experimentation on Earth, through the International Space Station, and with advanced biomechanical models to quantify how each device counteracts specific symptoms of weightlessness. With the continued support of international space agencies and the academic research community, we will usher the next frontier in human space exploration.

Beyene, Nahom M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Veggie on Ice: The Effects of Plant Production on Human Behavioral Health Long-Duration Antarctic Overwintering Missions

Exploration class missions pose an increased risk of adverse crew behavioral health and psychiatric conditions. Identifying and developing effective and efficient countermeasure strategies are necessary to maintain crew health and performance. Previous studies (VEG-04A and VEG-04B) in the Veggie vegetable-production system on the International Space Station have evaluated the behavioral health effects of caring for plants as a potential countermeasure for crew stresses in spaceflight. The presence of plants can augment sensory stimulation (visual, tactile, and olfactory), provide a psychological link to Earth, reduce stress, and increase happiness. However, further research is needed to understand this strategy for longer-duration missions in isolated, confined, extreme (ICE) environments. The Neumayer III Station in Antarctica is one such environment that hosts a small crew for fourteen-month missions, of which eight to nine months are the remote overwintering phase. Neumayer III also features EDEN ISS, a greenhouse facility with 12.5 m2 plant cultivation space that, like Veggie, currently supplements the crew diet with a variety of fresh produce. Up to nine crew members of the 2021 overwintering mission will complete behavioral health surveys that are designed to capture enjoyment and time spent conducting various plant-related activities, sensory stimulation, and active and passive psychological effects of having live plants and available fresh food in an ICE environment. Data will be collected once pre-mission, up to ten times in-mission at monthly increments, and once post-mission. This study aims to quantify the impact of plant care as a countermeasure strategy for human spaceflight and Antarctic exploration missions.

J M Bunchek↗
NASA NTRS2005

International Space Station Crew Restraint Design

With permanent human presence onboard the International Space Station (ISS), crews will be living and working in microgravity, dealing with the challenges of a weightless environment. In addition, the confined nature of the spacecraft environment results in ergonomic challenges such as limited visibility and access to the activity areas, as well as prolonged periods of unnatural postures. Without optimum restraints, crewmembers may be handicapped for performing some of the on-orbit tasks. Currently, many of the tasks on ISS are performed with the crew restrained merely by hooking their arms or toes around handrails to steady themselves. This is adequate for some tasks, but not all. There have been some reports of discomfort/calluses on the top of the toes. In addition, this type of restraint is simply insufficient for tasks that require a large degree of stability. Glovebox design is a good example of a confined workstation concept requiring stability for successful use. They are widely used in industry, university, and government laboratories, as well as in the space environment, and are known to cause postural limitations and visual restrictions. Although there are numerous guidelines pertaining to ventilation, seals, and glove attachment, most of the data have been gathered in a 1-g environment, or are from studies that were conducted prior to the early 1980 s. Little is known about how best to restrain a crewmember using a glovebox in microgravity. In 2004, The Usability Testing and Analysis Facility (UTAF) at the NASA Johnson Space Center completed development/evaluation of several design concepts for crew restraints to meet the various needs outlined above. Restraints were designed for general purpose use, for teleoperation (Robonaut) and for use with the Life Sciences Glovebox. All design efforts followed a human factors engineering design lifecycle, beginning with identification of requirements followed by an iterative prototype/test cycle. Anthropometric modeling was completed for the 5th percentile Asian female and the 95th percentile American male for all restraints. A series of three evaluations was performed onboard NASA's reduced gravity aircraft (KC-135). For all evaluations, participants performed representative tasks while being videotaped, and then completed a questionnaire following each flight day. The questionnaire included ratings scales and free format questions to assess topics such as comfort, stability provided, flexibility provided, etc. Results from the three flight evaluations are being used to develop the human factors design requirements for crew restraint concepts for 1) general purpose restraints, 2) teleoperation restraints and 3) glovebox restraints. The poster presentation will describe the detailed methodology used, results from each of the three evaluations, and the resulting human factors recommendations for the design of these restraints.

Whitmore, M.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Strategic considerations for support of humans in space and Moon/Mars exploration missions. Life sciences research and technology programs, volume 1

During the next several decades, our nation will embark on human exploration in space. In the microgravity environment we will learn how human physiology responds to the absence of gravity and what procedures and systems are required to maintain health and performance. As the human experience is extended for longer periods in low Earth orbit, we will also be exploring space robotically. Robotic precursor missions, to learn more about the lunar and Martian environments will be conducted so that we can send crews to these planetary surfaces to further explore and conduct scientific investigations that include examining the very processes of life itself. Human exploration in space requires the ability to maintain crew health and performance in spacecraft, during extravehicular activities, on planetary surfaces, and upon return to Earth. This goal can only be achieved through focused research and technological developments. This report provides the basis for setting research priorities and making decisions to enable human exploration missions.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

Lessons from cross-fleet/cross-airline observations - Evaluating the impact of CRM/LOFT training

A review is presented of the crew resource management/line oriented flight training (CRM/LOFT) program to help determine the level of standardization across fleets and airlines in the critical area of evaluating crew behavior and performance. One of the goals of the project is to verify that check airmen and LOFT instructors within organizations are evaluating CRM issues consistently and that differences observed between fleets are not a function of idiosyncracies on the part of observers. Attention is given to the research tools for crew evaluation.

Butler, Roy E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Long Duration Medical System Foundation for Lunar Orbital and Lunar Surface Exploration Missions

For long-duration lunar orbital and lunar surface (LDLOS) exploration missions, the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element has developed a medical system foundation through which clinical considerations may be represented via a systems engineering-based model. Components of the Long Duration Medical System Foundation model include a concept of operations (ConOps), functional decomposition, medical conditions to be addressed, clinical capabilities and resources, technical requirements, and traces of requirements to NASA standards documents and parent-level (Program- and Vehicle habitat system-level) requirements. The Foundation model offers the means to present information in a readily accessible format that is understandable across all clinical, engineering, scientific, and managerial disciplines. Collectively, these components constitute a foundation that serves future programs with similar long duration mission profiles as a starting point for medical system design. The Foundation was developed by a multidisciplinary team of systems engineers, scientists, and clinicians across NASA. The process started with ConOps development, subsequently decomposed into the functionalities needed to diagnose, treat, and prevent medical conditions. The clinical team identified medical conditions most likely needed to be diagnosed and treated during a long-duration lunar exploration mission. Through these approaches, requirements were codified for the LDLOS medical system. These requirements were then traced to NASA standards, medical conditions, medical capabilities, and medical resources, facilitating stakeholders’ use of the Foundation model to analyze traces and to identify medical system interfaces with other vehicle systems or subsystems. In addition, the Foundation may be used as a basis for performing risk trades on medical system mass and volume allocation. This discussion will focus on the processes through which the LDLOS Medical System Foundation was developed, how the Foundation builds a bridge between the medical and engineering domains, and how these processes may be applied more broadly to a crew health and performance system and other system domains.

Jay Lemery↗
NASA NTRS2008

Spaceflight-induced Bone Loss: Is there a Risk for Accelerated Osteoporosis after Return?

The evidence-to to-date suggests that the rapid rate of site-specific bone loss in space, due to the unbalanced stimulation of bone resorption, may predispose crew members to irreversible changes in bone structure and microarchitecture. No analyses conducted in the postflight period to assess microarchitectural changes. There is no complete analysis of skeletal recovery in the postflight period to evaluate the structural changes that accompany increases in DXA aBMD. Postflight analyses based upon QCT scans performed on limited crew members indicate reductions in hip bone strength and incomplete recovery at 1 year. No recovery of trabecular vBMD after 1 year return (HRP IWG). Time course of bone loss in space unknown.

Sibonga, Jean↗
NASA NTRS2006

Crew Restraint Design for the International Space Station

With permanent human presence onboard the International Space Station (ISS), crews will be living and working in microgravity, dealing with the challenges of a weightless environment. In addition, the confined nature of the spacecraft environment results in ergonomic challenges such as limited visibility and access to the activity areas, as well as prolonged periods of unnatural postures. Without optimum restraints, crewmembers may be handicapped for performing some of the on-orbit tasks. Currently, many of the tasks on ISS are performed with the crew restrained merely by hooking their arms or toes around handrails to steady themselves. This is adequate for some tasks, but not all. There have been some reports of discomfort/calluses on the top of the toes. In addition, this type of restraint is simply insufficient for tasks that require a large degree of stability. Glovebox design is a good example of a confined workstation concept requiring stability for successful use. They are widely used in industry, university, and government laboratories, as well as in the space environment, and are known to cause postural limitations and visual restrictions. Although there are numerous guidelines pertaining to ventilation, seals, and glove attachment, most of the data have been gathered in a 1-g environment, or are from studies that were conducted prior to the early 1980 s. Little is known about how best to restrain a crewmember using a glovebox in microgravity. Another ISS task that requires special consideration with respect to restraints is robotic teleoperation. The Robot Systems Technology Branch at the NASA Johnson Space Center is developing a humanoid robot astronaut, or Robonaut. It is being designed to perform extravehicular activities (EVAs) in the hazardous environment of space. An astronaut located inside the ISS will remotely operate Robonaut through a telepresence control system. Essentially, the robot mimics every move the operator makes. This requires the operator to be stable enough to prevent inadvertent movements, while allowing the flexibility to accomplish the controlled movements of the robot. Some type of special purpose restraint will be required to operate Robonaut and similar devices.

Norris, Lena↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Sensorimotor Countermeasures

Exploration class missions will include multiple transitions between gravitational environments, sometimes after long periods in microgravity, which will impact the neurovestibular system and sensorimotor capabilities. New countermeasures and assessment tools are needed to enhance preflight disorientation training, maintain inflight physical performance, and accelerate recovery following transitions between gravity environments so that crew are enabled to perform critical exploration mission tasks. The Sensorimotor Countermeasures capability area encompasses three projects. 1) The Upright Proprioception Retention via Inflight Training and Evaluation (UPRITE) system is being developed as an in-flight countermeasure that will mitigate the degradation of balance control mechanisms, which will improve post-flight postural stability. The development of such a countermeasure is not simply a matter of adapting a ground-based training program for spaceflight. The way that we control balance in a gravitational environment cannot be duplicated in 0g. Therefore, the UPRITE system challenges proprioception and tactile function using a 0g configuration. The steps to develop the countermeasure have been broken into seven phases: training type, controllable board factors, protocol development, 0g hardware test, training efficacy, ISS hardware demonstration, and countermeasure verification. 2) Unobtrusive Monitoring Tools and Operational Assessments (aka Head/Body Assessments) are being developed to quantify crew member sensorimotor adaptation following gravitational transitions. Three areas are needed in this development 1) explore, develop, and validate unobtrusive monitoring tools, 2) define sensorimotor performance metrics, and 3) explore capabilities to enhance sensorimotor assessment tasks for operational use and validate assessment tasks via high-fidelity analogs. 3) The Spatial Disorientation Trainer is being developed as a portable training capability to simulate the performance of landing and recovery type tasks while experiencing vertigo due to post-flight vestibular alterations. These simulations can be used 1) across research studies investigating the impacts of vestibular disruption on operational performance/assessments, 2) to train astronauts for upcoming spaceflight missions, and 3) to educate space medicine and operational personnel prior to providing post-flight support.

Scott Jonathan Wood↗
NASA NTRS2004

Preliminary Analysis of ISS Maintenance History and Implications for Supportability of Future Missions

The International Space Station (ISS) enables the study of supportability issues associated with long-duration human spaceflight. The ISS is a large, complex spacecraft that must be maintained by its crew. In contrast to the Space Shuttle Orbiter vehicle, but similar to spacecraft that will be component elements of future missions beyond low-Earth orbit, ISS does not return to the ground for servicing and provisioning of spares is severely constrained by transportation limits. Although significant technical support is provided by ground personnel, all hands-on maintenance tasks are performed by the crew. It is expected that future missions to distant destinations will be further limited by lack of resupply opportunities and will, eventually, become largely independent of ground support. ISS provides an opportunity to begin learning lessons that will enable future missions to be successful. Data accumulated over the first several years of ISS operations have been analyzed to gain a better understanding of maintenance-related workload. This analysis addresses both preventive and corrective maintenance and includes all U.S segment core systems. Systems and tasks that are major contributors to workload are identified. As further experience accrues, lessons will be learned that will influence future system designs so that they require less maintenance and, when maintenance is required, it can be performed more efficiently. By heeding the lessons of ISS it will be possible to identify system designs that should be more robust and point towards advances in both technology and design that will offer the greatest return on investment.

Watson, Kevin J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Medical System Foundation Overview for Long-Duration Lunar Orbit and Surface Operations Missions

The Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element has developed a Medical System Foundation for Level of Care IV, as defined by NASA’s space flight human-system standards, for long-duration lunar orbit and surface operation missions by employing a systems engineering approach using model-based systems engineering tools. This Foundation model includes a concept of operations; functional decomposition; clinical content (medical conditions, capabilities, and resources); associated functional, interface and non-functional technical requirements; and traces to the current versions of NASA standards documents and parent-level (Program- and Vehicle habitat system level) requirements. Collectively, these components constitute a foundation that serves as a starting point for a medical system that meets the Level of Care IV requirement. The Foundation was developed by a multidisciplinary team consisting of systems engineers, scientists, and clinicians across NASA, and information is presented in an easily accessible format that is understandable across disciplines. Stakeholders can use the Foundation to analyze the traces between medical capabilities, medical conditions, medical resources, and requirements and to identify medical system interfaces with other vehicle systems/subsystems. It can also be used as a basis for performing trades on risks vs. medical system mass and volume allocation. This discussion will focus on the processes through which the Medical System Foundation was developed, how the Foundation builds a bridge between the medical and engineering domains and facilitates communication between these communities, and how these processes can be applied more broadly to a crew health and performance system and other system domains. The presentation also discusses Foundation modifications based on the recently updated versions of the NASA 3001 Standards.

S. Lumpkins↗
NASA NTRS1996

Challenger Anniversary Resource Tape

This commemorative video marks the tenth anniversary, January 28, 1986, of the ninth Challenger flight and the seven astronauts onboard who died when the Challenger exploded 73 seconds into flight. The flight crew was comprised of Cmdr. Francis R. Scobee, Pilot Michael J. Smith, and Mission Specialists Judith A. Resnik, Ellison S. Onizuka, Ronald E. McNair, Gregory Jarvis (Hughes Aircraft representative), and S. Christie McAuliffe (teacher). The flight crew is shown performing preflight training, physiological tests, environmental tests, press conferences, prelaunch activities, and launch activities. The Challenger explosion is shown from both the launch site and from the control center. Various rescue operations, news coverage, and shots of the wreckage after salvage are also presented. President Ronald Reagan is shown giving a tribute at the memorial service for the flight crew. The video ends with a flyby salute and pictures of each of the members of the Challenger.

Source record↗