Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Crew”

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 595 records · Page 33
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Commercial Crew Program and the Safety Technical Review Board

The Commercial Crew Program (CCP) is unique to any other program office at NASA. After the agency suffered devastating budget cuts and the Shuttle Program retired, the U.S. gave up its human spaceflight capabilities. Since 2011 the U.S. has been dependent on Russia to transport American astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station (ISS) and back. NASA adapted and formed CCP, which gives private, domestic, aerospace companies unprecedented reign over America's next ride to space. The program began back in 2010 with 5 companies and is now in the final phase of certification with 2 commercial partners. The Commercial Crew Program is made up of 7 divisions, each working rigorously with the commercial providers to complete the certification phase. One of these 7 divisions is Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I) which is partly comprised of the Safety Technical Review Board (STRB). The STRB is primarily concerned with mitigating improbable, but catastrophic hazards. It does this by identifying, managing, and tracking these hazards in reports. With the STRB being in SE&I, it significantly contributes to the overall certification of the partners' vehicles. After the partners receive agency certification approval, they will have the capability to provide the U.S. with a reliable, safe, and cost-effective means of human spaceflight and cargo transport to the ISS and back.

crew transportation system↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of A Crew Health and Performance System Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool: Proof-of-Concept Approach

The crew health and performance (CHP) system represents the span of technological interventions and tested processes and procedures that in combination address the human risk to space flight. The Human Research Program (HRP) mental model of the CHP system breaks the capabilities needed to meet NASA human flight systems standards into specific categories (i.e., countermeasures, behavioral health, medical intervention). These categories are further broken down into specific sub-groups generally associated with the human system risks that these capabilities seek to mitigate. Like the approach used to develop the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) and the Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Analysis Tool (MEDPRAT), HRP tasked NASA GRC’s Cross-Cutting Computational Modeling Project with developing a CHP probabilistic risk assessment tool, the CHP-PRA. The CHP-PRA model seeks to quantify and relatively assess the human risk state within the crew health and performance domain, using a combination of knowledge about human system risks and technology and practices likely to be applied during space flight missions. This modeling system will incorporate customer and stakeholder feedback and be flexible enough to address multiple different questions about important low-level mission-specific parameters. This presentation will introduce the initial concept and development timeline for this tool and demonstrate proof-of-concept through an application addressing a specific human risk question posed within the Artemis program.

Risk analysis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mapping Mitigation Risk Consequence for Crew Needing Assistance or Rescue on the Lunar Surface

Extravehicular activity (EVA) on the lunar surface presents unique risks to crew with possibility for injury. Without appropriate assistance or rescue capability, inability to nominally ambulate and return to a lander, especially during early Artemis missions, could have catastrophic consequences. Mapping likelihood and consequence safety risk associated with identified injury scenarios establishes a baseline from which to assess potential mitigation solutions to ensure crew health and safety.

lunar surface↗
NASA NTRS2024

Humans to Mars, But How Many? A Historical Review of Crew Size Determinations for Mars Missions

Three-quarters of a century have passed since the first engineering study of a human mission to Mars in 1948. During that time, dozens of study teams at NASA, its contractors, and other organizations in the U.S. and abroad have confronted what NASA mission architect John Connolly and his colleagues have called “the ultimate systems challenge.” This historical review of those studies focuses on the question of crew size and its relationship to crew workload.

Human Mars Missions↗
NASA NTRS2016

The NASA Commercial Crew Program (CCP) Mission Assurance Process

In 2010, NASA established the Commercial Crew Program in order to provide human access to the International Space Station and low earth orbit via the commercial (non-governmental) sector. A particular challenge to NASA has been how to determine the commercial providers transportation system complies with Programmatic safety requirements. The process used in this determination is the Safety Technical Review Board which reviews and approves provider submitted Hazard Reports. One significant product of the review is a set of hazard control verifications. In past NASA programs, 100 percent of these safety critical verifications were typically confirmed by NASA. The traditional Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) model does not support the nature of the Commercial Crew Program. To that end, NASA SMA is implementing a Risk Based Assurance (RBA) process to determine which hazard control verifications require NASA authentication. Additionally, a Shared Assurance Model is also being developed to efficiently use the available resources to execute the verifications. This paper will describe the evolution of the CCP Mission Assurance process from the beginning of the Program to its current incarnation. Topics to be covered include a short history of the CCP; the development of the Programmatic mission assurance requirements; the current safety review process; a description of the RBA process and its products and ending with a description of the Shared Assurance Model.

Commercial Crew Program↗
NASA NTRS2017

Reduced Crew Operations Research at NASA Ames Research Center

In 2012, NASA began exploring the feasibility of single pilot reduced crew operations (SPORCO) in the context of scheduled passenger air carrier operations (i.e., Parts 121 and 135). This research was spurred by two trends in aviation research: the trend toward reducing costs and a shortage of pilots. A series of simulations were conducted to develop tools and a concept of operations to support RCO. This slide deck is a summary of the NASA Ames RCO research prepared for an R T team at Airbus. Airbus is considering moving forward with reducing crew during the cruise phase of flight with long-haul flights and is interested in the work we have completed.

reduced crew operations↗
NASA NTRS2018

Increasing Human Spaceflight Capabilities: Demonstration of Crew Autonomy Through Self-Scheduling Onboard International Space Station

For the first time in a spaceflight operational environment, our team enabled an ISS (International Space Station) crewmember to plan, reschedule, and execute their activities in real-time while abiding by flight and scheduling constraints. The Crew Autonomous Scheduling Test (CAST) investigated the novel concept of operations: allowing crew to manage their own timeline.

crew autonomy↗
NASA NTRS2022

Treatment of Launch Vehicle Flight Control Stability Margin Reductions for Crewed Missions with Emphasis on Slosh Dynamics

NESC’s perspective for crewed spaceflight: Acceptance of flight control gain/phase stability margin reductions from industry standards should be accompanied by an adequately extensive technical treatment, including: •Analyzing the fundamental physics involved, with applicable simulation tool verification (particularly if results are dissimilar among rules of thumb, linear tools, nonlinear analysis, and flight data) •Conducting sensitivity studies in time and frequency domains to analyze effects of possible parameter and system variations •Studying the effects of the consequence of instability associated with offending modes by running stressing cases in time domain •Assessing alternative flight control designs to demonstrate that present design appropriately balances overall vehicle risk (i.e., quantitatively delineate chosen tradeoffs between various stability margins and vehicle performance in the context of risk/consequence) Work presented here represents an example summary of expected engineering work to flight-certify crewed missions with unstable slosh modes and reduced stability margins

Launch Vehicle Flight Control↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Performance Measures to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Systems and Crew Health and Performance Technology Decisions

Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring multiple capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for future exploration architectures is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap may be closed with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is very important. KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are hard to define but critical. Outside of technical considerations, the programmatic factors of the estimated time to develop the technology and how the technology validation objectives are matured are strong considerations in which technologies should be pursued and how they should leverage earlier mission elements. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) and Crew Health and Performance (CHP) capability areas are decomposed to high level gaps. While KPPs should be technology agnostic, they can be used to both compare technologies and measure progress of technology development over time. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Proposed technology improvements to enhance a capability should balance improved KPPs and against investments in other capabilities that are not yet closed. A selection of gaps, KPPs, and validation objectives and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cabin Crew Alertness and Performance During Long-Haul Flights

INTRODUCTION: -Sleep loss and circadian disruption pose a significant risk in aviation. -Previous literature has shown that inflight rest facilities influence alertness and performance among pilots, but few studies have evaluated cabin crew. -The aim of this research was to assess alertness and performance among cabin crew members sleeping in different rest locations during a long-haul out-and-back trip. METHODS: -Twenty-nine cabin crewmembers flew the same long-haul route (outbound and inbound). -Participants were randomly assigned to fly on an aircraft with a bunk in both directions or to fly an aircraft with a bunk in one direction and with a high comfort jump seat (HCJS) in the other direction. -Throughout the study they completed a Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) and a 5-minute Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) at the beginning and at the end of each flight. RESULTS: -A series of mixed-effects models were performed to assess the changes in KSS and PVT when crewmembers slept in the bunk during both directions of flight (bunk-only) compared to when sleep was obtained in the HCJS during one direction and bunk in the other (bunk + HCJS). -There was no significant difference in KSS alertness between the two conditions. - There were no significant differences in PVT response speed or lapses between the two conditions. CONCLUSIONS: -Limitations: small number of participants. Our study stopped abruptly because of the COVID-19 pandemic which limited our sample size. -Further research is needed to understand how other factors such as duty start time and workload might influence the sleep of cabin crewmembers during long-haul flights.

long-haul↗
DOE OSTI2020

A look back 75 years at Little Boy, the crew, the plane and the Lab’s first mission

Hours before the sun would rise over Tinian island on the morning of August 6, 1945, a B- 29 airplane was positioned above a specially built bomb-loading pit, as crews readied it with cargo unlike anything the world had ever known. Preparations on the tiny Pacific island—nearly 6,600 miles from Los Alamos and about 1,500 miles from its intended target in Japan—had begun months before on April 3. And months before that, pilot Paul Tibbets Jr. and his crew had practiced dropping dummy concrete bombs on targets in Utah. Even years before that, development of this cargo destined for Japan began in secrecy under the direction of a physicist and an Army general in the mountains of Northern New Mexico. It was all leading to one day that would help end years of bloodshed and change the world forever.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
NASA NTRS1971

Crew interface specification development study for in-flight maintenance and stowage functions

The need and potential solutions for an orderly systems engineering approach to the definition, management and documentation requirements for in-flight maintenance, assembly, servicing, and stowage process activities of the flight crews of future spacecraft were investigated. These processes were analyzed and described using a new technique (mass/function flow diagramming), developed during the study, to give visibility to crew functions and supporting requirements, including data products. This technique is usable by NASA for specification baselines and can assist the designer in identifying both upper and lower level requirements associated with these processes. These diagrams provide increased visibility into the relationships between functions and related equipments being utilized and managed and can serve as a common communicating vehicle between the designer, program management, and the operational planner. The information and data product requirements to support the above processes were identified along with optimum formats and contents of these products. The resulting data product concepts are presented to support these in-flight maintenance and stowage processes.

Carl, J. G.↗
NASA NTRS1972

Crew interface specifications preparation for in-flight maintenance and stowage functions

The findings and data products developed during the Phase 2 crew interface specification study are presented. Five new NASA general specifications were prepared: operations location coding system for crew interfaces; loose equipment and stowage management requirements; loose equipment and stowage data base information requirements; spacecraft loose equipment stowage drawing requirements; and inflight stowage management data requirements. Additional data was developed defining inflight maintenance processes and related data concepts for inflight troubleshooting, remove/repair/replace and scheduled maintenance activities. The process of maintenance task and equipment definition during spacecraft design and development was also defined and related data concepts were identified for futher development into formal NASA specifications during future follow-on study phases of the contract.

Parker, F. W.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Effects of certain control-system nonlinearities on stability and pointing of an attached double-gimbal experiment package in presence of random crew-motion disturbances

The effects of two types of control-system nonlinearities, sensor deadband and actuator breakout torque, on the pointing capability of a Apollo Telescope Mount (ATM) double-gimbal experiment isolation and control system are investigated. A composite structural model of a flexible experiment package connected through frictionless double gimbals to a flexible carrier vehicle is used for this investigation. Contributions of the primary carrier control system to experiment pointing are neglected. Pointing errors onboard the experiment package due to random crew-motion input into the carrier vehicle are computed. A stability investigation is performed to verify control-system stability with nominal nonlinearities and gains. Indications are that there is no stability problem due to the nonlinearities. A nonlinearity sensitivity study is carried out to determine the effects on pointing accuracy. Its results indicate that nominal ATM control system nonlinearities limit the pointing accuracy to approximately 0.4 arc second in the presence of crew motion. Methods of reducing the error to less than 0.1 arc second are discussed.

Shaughnessy, J. D.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Neutral buoyancy testing of a shuttle orbiter crew compartment

The architectural and man-machine aspects of a shuttle orbiter crew compartment were examined. All phases of the Orbiter's flight mode from launch through zero gravity, reentry, and ferry flight are considered. The data provides an initial design criteria that treats the crew compartment as a total system and provides data that has a direct contribution to the development of flight hardware. Primary interest was centered on the design of the galley, hygiene facility, passenger couches, airlock, work station, and flight deck access. The man-machine interface emphasis was placed on identifying and developing solutions for problems in mobility/restraint, ingress/egress, accessibility, and volume utilization.

Rosener, A. A.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Skylab medical experiments altitude test crew observations.

The paper deals with the crew's observations during training and the SMEAT 56-day test. Topics covered include the crew's adaptation to the SMEAT environment and medical experiments protocol. Personal observations are made of daily activities surrounding the medical experiments hardware, Skylab clothing, supplementary activities, recreational equipment, food, and waste management. An assessment of these items and their contributions to the Skylab flight program is made.

Bobko, K. J.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Crew report

A 56-day chamber simulation of Skylab was successfully completed. The atmosphere (5 psi, 70 percent oxygen, 30 percent nitrogen, 5 mm carbon dioxide) and medical features including a 21-day pre- and 18-day post-test medical protocols were closely simulated. No apparent crew health problems were induced by the atmosphere, semiclosed environment, or other test features; and no appreciable crew degradation appeared over this period. The chamber and associated systems performed without major problems.

Bobko, K. J.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Crew interface specifications development functions, phase 3A

The findings and data products developed during the crew interface specification study for inflight maintenance and stowage functions are presented. Guidelines are provided for improving the present progress of defining, controlling, and managing the flight crew requirements. The following data products were developed: (1) description of inflight maintenance management process, (2) specifications for inflight maintenance management requirements, and (3) suggested inflight maintenance data processing reports for logistics management.

Carl, J. G.↗