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 793 records · Page 44
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operational Implications from Field Test Results: Sensorimotor Guidelines for Exploration Missions

Two key sensorimotor objectives of the joint NASA-Russian Field Test (FT) study were (1) to quantify functional performance on long duration crewmembers as close to landing as possible, and (2) to develop a recovery timeline back to preflight baseline. The purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of the FT results and discuss the operational implications for future exploration missions. The NASA and Russian teams conducted a total of 48 Field Tests, including 18 using a reduced Pilot FT (PFT) protocol. The combined PFT/FT cohort included 14 first-time fliers, 4F, and nine cosmonauts who repeated FT during a second mission. The mission durations were 185 ± 42 days, mean ± std. Nominally, the initial postflight session was performed in the medical test at the Soyuz landing site or at the nearby airport (R+2.2 ± 1.3 hrs, mean ± std), and then repeated multiple times throughout the postflight recovery. The common tasks performed across PFT and full FT protocols included sit-to-stand, recovery from fall (prone to stand) and tandem walk, performed in that order of increasing difficulty. The full FT protocol also included seated tasks (eccentric gaze, dysmetria finger to nose, eye-hand coordination on a tablet, grip force discrimination), a standing posture test with an upper body perturbation, a timed up and go mobility test with obstacles, and a dynamic visual acuity task during vertical oscillations. While there was considerable variability in the postflight outcome measures across crewmembers, the level of vestibular/cerebellar and sensorimotor impairment was greater than previously observed during shorter spaceflight missions. Most striking was the higher incidence of motion sickness even without constraining the standard medical interventions. Motion sensitivity prevented some crewmembers from attempting and/or completing the early testing. The recovery timeline varied with task complexity, generally taking longer when either the basis of support was limited (e.g., tandem walk) or visual cues were deprived (eyes closed). Based on this evidence, mission planners need to expect a range of response across individuals and tasks following G-transitions. Individual health assessments are recommended along with development of pre-worked, prioritized content and timelines, with the ability to change roles depending on crew readiness. Handholds and balance aids are recommended to help stabilize the crewmembers to perform specific tasks (e.g., touch screen selection) or to allow the crewmember the ability to rest with onset of symptoms. Based on anecdotal reports and performance on computerized dynamic posturography, multiple testing on landing day appeared to be beneficial for some participants, while others may have pushed beyond their motion tolerance limit in an effort to complete more FT objectives. Instead of delaying planetary surface operations to allow for recovery, our results suggest that early mobility may be important. Early active self-administered retraining, individualized based on the level of initial impairment and motion sensitivity, will enable a more efficient motor learning and enhance crew performance.

S J Wood↗
NASA NTRS2009

Implications of Advanced Crew Escape Suit Transpiration for the Orion Program

Human testing was conducted to more fully characterize the integrated performance of the Advanced Crew Escape Suit (ACES) with liquid cooling provide by an Individual Cooling Unit (ICU) across a broad range of environmental conditions and metabolic rates. Together with a correlation for the ACES Liquid Cooling Garment as a function of inlet temperature, metabolic rate, and crew size, a reasonably conservative correlation for core temperature was achieved for the human thermal model applied to the ACES with ICU cooling. A key observation for this correlation was accounting for transpiration of evaporated sweat through the Gortex(Registered TradeMark) liner of the ACES indicated by as much as 0.6 lbm of sweat evaporated over the course of the 1 hour test profile, most of which could not be attributed to respiration or head sweat evaporation of the crew. Historically it has been assumed that transpiration was not an important design feature of the ACES suit. The correlated human thermal model will show transpiration to be highly useful in hot survival situations for the Orion Program when adequate liquid cooling is not available.

Bue, Grant↗
NASA NTRS2007

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-loop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of"pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS. The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (1) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multi-sensor series of trajectories.

Brewster, L.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Multi-Sensor Testing for Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Lab

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as AR&D). The crewed missions may also perform rendezvous and docking operations and may require different levels of automation and/or autonomy, and must provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success ofthe Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the requirements. The relatively low technology readiness level of AR&D relative navigation sensors has been carried as one of the CEV Project's top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce the risk by the testing and analysis of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through hardware-in-the-Ioop testing and simulation. These activities will provide the CEV Project information to assess the relative navigation sensors maturity as well as demonstrate test methods and capabilities. The first year of this project focused on a series of "pathfinder" testing tasks to develop the test plans, test facility requirements, trajectories, math model architecture, simulation platform, and processes that will be used to evaluate the Contractor-proposed sensors. Four candidate sensors were used in the first phase of the testing. The second phase of testing used four sensors simultaneously: two Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Advanced Video Guidance Sensors (AVGS), a laser-based video sensor that uses retroreflectors attached to the target vehicle, and two commercial laser range finders. The multi-sensor testing was conducted at MSFC's Flight Robotics Laboratory (FRL) using the FRL's 6-DOF gantry system, called the Dynamic Overhead Target System (DOTS). The target vehicle for "docking" in the laboratory was a mockup that was representative of the proposed CEV docking system, with added retroreflectors for the AVGS.' The multi-sensor test configuration used 35 open-loop test trajectories covering three major objectives: (l) sensor characterization trajectories designed to test a wide range of performance parameters; (2) CEV-specific trajectories designed to test performance during CEV-like approach and departure profiles; and (3) sensor characterization tests designed for evaluating sensor performance under more extreme conditions as might be induced during a spacecraft failure or during contingency situations. This paper describes the test development, test facility, test preparations, test execution, and test results of the multisensor series oftrajectories

Brewster, Linda L.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Human Factors and Information Operation for a Nuclear Power Space Vehicle

This paper describes human-interactive systems needed for a crewed nuclear-enabled space mission. A synthesis of aircraft engine and nuclear power plant displays, biofeedback of sensory input, virtual control, brain mapping for control process and manipulation, and so forth are becoming viable solutions. These aspects must maintain the crew's situation awareness and performance, which entails a delicate function allocation between crew and automation.

Trujillo, Anna C.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Opportunities for space station assembly operations during crew absence

Prior to Permanently Manned Capability (to be achieved approximately 21 months after the First Element Launch), the Space Station will be manned for less than 10 percent of its total staytime on orbit. The most intensive and critical Station assembly operations will occur during these early flights. Some robotic resources may be available to perform assembly operations while the Station crew is absent; however, the use of robotic devices for assembly operations during unmanned phases has not yet been adopted by the Space Station program. This paper studies the relevant aspects of teleoperated and autonomous assembly activities, and presents candidate assembly operations that could be performed during crew absence. From this analysis, the potential benefits of remote control of robotic resources can be weighed against any associated increase in cost and complexity that would accompany implementation of this capability.

Parrish, Joseph C.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Performance Evaluation of Engineered Structured Sorbents for Atmosphere Revitalization Systems On Board Crewed Space Vehicles and Habitats

Engineered structured (ES) sorbents are being developed to meet the technical challenges of future crewed space exploration missions. ES sorbents offer the inherent performance and safety attributes of zeolite and other physical adsorbents but with greater structural integrity and process control to improve durability and efficiency over packed beds. ES sorbent techniques that are explored include thermally linked and pressure-swing adsorption beds for water-save dehumidification and sorbent-coated metal meshes for residual drying, trace contaminant control, and carbon dioxide control. Results from sub-scale performance evaluations of a thermally linked pressure-swing adsorbent bed and an integrated sub-scale ES sorbent system are discussed.

Howard, David F.↗
NASA NTRS2024

Trade Space Analyses: Balancing Crew and Mission Design Parameters

In 2020, the Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations and the Agency’s Federated Board requested an assessment to develop a methodology for trade space analysis comparing crew size for Mars missions against mission design parameters. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) conducted an assessment to develop a methodology for systematic, repeatable trade space analysis for crew size and developed an initial set of human performance models and a list of candidate crew tasks for NASA’s first mission to Mars. This report contains the results of the NESC assessment.

Humans to Mars↗
NASA NTRS2008

Integrated Docking Simulation and Testing with the Johnson Space Center Six-Degree of Freedom Dynamic Test System

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as Automated Rendezvous and Docking, AR&D). The crewed versions may also perform AR&D, possibly with a different level of automation and/or autonomy, and must also provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Constellation Program; this is carried as one of the CEV Project top risks. The Exploration Technology Development Program (ETDP) AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce this risk by increasing technology maturation of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through testing and simulation. One of the project activities is a series of "pathfinder" testing and simulation activities to integrate relative navigation sensors with the Johnson Space Center Six-Degree-of-Freedom Test System (SDTS). The SDTS will be the primary testing location for the Orion spacecraft s Low Impact Docking System (LIDS). Project team members have integrated the Orion simulation with the SDTS computer system so that real-time closed loop testing can be performed with relative navigation sensors and the docking system in the loop during docking and undocking scenarios. Two relative navigation sensors are being used as part of a "pathfinder" activity in order to pave the way for future testing with the actual Orion sensors. This paper describes the test configuration and test results.

Mitchell, Jennifer D.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Automated Rendezvous and Docking Sensor Testing at the Flight Robotics Laboratory

The Exploration Systems Architecture defines missions that require rendezvous, proximity operations, and docking (RPOD) of two spacecraft both in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO). Uncrewed spacecraft must perform automated and/or autonomous rendezvous, proximity operations and docking operations (commonly known as Automated Rendezvous and Docking, AR&D). The crewed versions may also perform AR&D, possibly with a different level of automation and/or autonomy, and must also provide the crew with relative navigation information for manual piloting. The capabilities of the RPOD sensors are critical to the success of the Exploration Program. NASA has the responsibility to determine whether the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) contractor-proposed relative navigation sensor suite will meet the CEV requirements. The relatively low technology readiness of relative navigation sensors for AR&D has been carried as one of the CEV Projects top risks. The AR&D Sensor Technology Project seeks to reduce this risk by increasing technology maturation of selected relative navigation sensor technologies through testing and simulation, and to allow the CEV Project to assess the relative navigation sensors.

Mitchell, J.↗
NASA NTRS1989

The role of flight planning in aircrew decision performance

The role of flight planning in increasing the safety and decision-making performance of the air transport crews was investigated in a study that involved 48 rated airline crewmembers on a B720 simulator with a model-board-based visual scene and motion cues with three degrees of freedom. The safety performance of the crews was evaluated using videotaped replays of the flight. Based on these evaluations, the crews could be divided into high- and low-safety groups. It was found that, while collecting information before flights, the high-safety crews were more concerned with information about alternative airports, especially the fuel required to get there, and were characterized by making rapid and appropriate decisions during the emergency part of the flight scenario, allowing these crews to make an early diversion to other airports. These results suggest that contingency planning that takes into account alternative courses of action enhances rapid and accurate decision-making under time pressure.

Pepitone, Dave↗
NASA NTRS2012

Self-Cleaning Particulate Prefilter Media

A long-term space mission requires efficient air revitalization performance to sustain the crew. Prefilter and particulate air filter media are susceptible to rapid fouling that adversely affects their performance and can lead to catastrophic failure of the air revitalization system, which may result in mission failure. For a long-term voyage, it is impractical to carry replacement particulate prefilter and filter modules due to the usual limitations in size, volume, and weight. The only solution to this problem is to reagentlessly regenerate prefilter and filter media in place. A method was developed to modify the particulate prefilter media to allow them to regenerate reagentlessly, and in place, by the application of modest thermocycled transverse or reversed airflows. The innovation may allow NASA to close the breathing air loop more efficiently, thereby sustaining the vision for manned space exploration missions of the future. A novel, self-cleaning coatings technology was developed for air filter media surfaces that allows reagentless in-place regeneration of the surface. The technology grafts thermoresponsive and nonspecific adhesion minimizing polymer nanolayer brush coatings from the prefilter media. These polymer nanolayer brush architectures can be triggered to contract and expand to generate a "pushing-off" force by the simple application of modestly thermocycled (i.e. cycling from ambient cabin temperature to 40 C) air streams. The nonspecific adhesion-minimizing properties of the coatings do not allow the particulate foulants to adhere strongly to the filter media, and thermocycled air streams applied to the media allow easy detachment and in-place regeneration of the media with minimal impact in system downtime or astronaut involvement in overseeing the process.

Weber, Olivia↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Supervisory Control with Dual Tasking in Post G-Transition Vehicle Landings

BACKGROUND Landing during exploration spaceflight may consist of both planned automated supervisory control and unplanned crew override. Supervisory control, particularly when performed under cognitive load with additional monitoring tasks, is essential for ensuring overall mission success during landing contingencies. Evaluating performance in a relevant Human Landing System (HLS) supervisory landing task after long-duration microgravity exposure can help identify potential risks from human error and sensorimotor alterations. Adaptive changes in the sensorimotor system can manifest during g-transitions as spatial disorientation. Although training and landing aids facilitate successful landings despite disorientation, these adaptive changes may heighten cognitive demand, which must be considered in the landing strategy. It is important to characterize these effects as soon as possible following the G-transition while the sensorimotor system remains in a state of adaptive flux to inform appropriate countermeasures. METHODS A Multi-attribute Lunar Table Battery (MALTB) task was developed for an iOS tablet device to provide flexible crew testing and training capabilities in-flight and on the ground. Elements of the tablet task were derived from the Multi-Attribute Task Battery (MATB, Cegarra et al. 2020). The task requires crew members to study a map of a planned landing site and memorizing the terrain and surface landmarks to inform potential divert maneuvers during landing. The user will oversee a series of approaches through touchdown simulations on the tablet with an external camera view of the Lunar surface. The primary responsibility of the crew member will be to execute a divert if the guidance recommended site is erroneous (e.g., the guidance projected landing target is not within 10m of the planned landing site center), or the projected landing site is no longer suitable due to surface obstacles. Considering vehicle maneuverability and fuel reserves, the divert capabilities will diminish as the task progresses. In cases where a divert is initiated, a new landing target will need to be designated by the user and will be evaluated for the proximity to the original pre-planned site. A secondary operational monitoring task will challenge the user's cognitive reserve by requiring the user to maintain several gauges within acceptable limits and respond to a visual indicator while completing the landing approach. Outcome measures include distance from the planned landing site to the user-initiate divert landing location, ground slope at the new landing site, time to divert, the ability to accomplish the secondary monitoring tasks, and perceived workload. The tablet task is being evaluated in a ground-based study to determine the learning effect of first-time users. The tablet task will be utilized in a flight study to test performance multiple times postflight. Future potential testing in-flight have been identified for capsules with iOS tablet devices. Multi-attribute Lunar Table Battery Task MALTB comprises video footage of thirty distinct landing conditions. The landing scenarios feature various landing sites (n = 3), hazardous object sizes (n = 6), sun azimuth degrees (n = 4), camera modes (i.e., fixed or gimbaled), and navigation bias (i.e., true or false). Each seventy second trial uses a sixty-degree constant glideslope trajectory. The application architecture and layout include user identification setup and data storing, a guided walkthrough of the task and interface components, practice mode for task familiarization, and a modified Bedford workload scale administered following task completion. The time-based dependent measures are saved locally to the iOS Files application and post-processing scripts have been developed to evaluate the remaining measures of performance. RELEVANCE This project will deliver an operational demonstration of crew monitoring capability following spaceflight and identify potential deficits that may require remediation. Comparison of individual vestibular and cognitive changes with crew performance will help better characterize the landing risks associated with sensorimotor alterations. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This project is funded by NASA’s Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element. REFERENCES Cegarra J, Valery B, Avril E, Calmettes C, Navarro J (2020) OpenMATB: A Multi-Attribute Task Battery promoting task customization, software extensibility and experiment replicability. Behav Res Methods 52:1980-1990 doi: 10.3758/s13428-020-01364-w

Matthew McDonnell↗
NASA NTRS2014

Co-op Essay - Tour 1

The Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) is responsible for the training, planning and performance of all U.S. manned operations in space. Within this directorate all responsibilities are divided up into divisions. The EVA, Robotics & Crew Systems Operations Division performs ground operations and trains astronauts to carry out some of the more "high action" procedures in space. For example they orchestrate procedures like EVAs, or ExtraVehicular Activities (spacewalks), and robotics operations external to the International Space Station (ISS). The robotics branch of this division is responsible for the use of the Mobile Servicing System (MSS). This system is a combination of two robotic mechanisms and a series of equipment used to transport them on the ISS. The MSS is used to capture and position visiting vehicles, transport astronauts during EVAs, and perform external maintenance tasks on the ISS. This branch consists of two groups which are responsible for crew training and flight controlling, respectively. My first co-op tour took place Fall 2013. During this time I was given the opportunity to work in the robotics operations branch of the Mission Operations Directorate at NASA's Johnson Space Center. I was given a variety of tasks that encompassed, at a base level, all the aspects of the branch.

Porter, Derrick↗
NASA NTRS1975

Astronaut activity

Human factors pertinent to the design and operation of spacecraft are considered. The geometric characteristics of spacecraft that define the degree and type of confinement imposed on the crew and the character of equipment management and housekeeping necessary for hygiene, comfort and safety are discussed. The controls and displays of various spacecraft are described to indicate the degree to which crew functions become integral to functions of the total spacecraft. The contributions of the crew to system reliability and performance are summarized and the increasing significance of the crew's role in scientific observation and experimentation is noted.

Loftus, J. P., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Robot hands and extravehicular activity

Extravehicular activity (EVA) is crucial to the success of both current and future space operations. As space operations have evolved in complexity so has the demand placed on the EVA crewman. In addition, some NASA requirements for human capabilities at remote or hazardous sites were identified. One of the keys to performing useful EVA tasks is the ability to manipulate objects accurately, quickly and without early or excessive fatigue. The current suit employs a glove which enables the crewman to perform grasping tasks, use tools, turn switches, and perform other tasks for short periods of time. However, the glove's bulk and resistance to motion ultimately causes fatigue. Due to this limitation it may not be possible to meet the productivity requirements that will be placed on the EVA crewman of the future with the current or developmental Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) hardware. In addition, this hardware will not meet the requirements for remote or hazardous operations. In an effort to develop ways for improving crew productivity, a contract was awarded to develop a prototype anthromorphic robotic hand (ARH) for use with an extravehicular space suit. The first step in this program was to perform a a design study which investigated the basic technology required for the development of an ARH to enhance crew performance and productivity. The design study phase of the contract and some additional development work is summarized.

Marcus, Beth↗
NASA NTRS2014

Aeroacoustics of Space Vehicles

While for airplanes the subject of aeroacoustics is associated with community noise, for space vehicles it is associated with vibro-acoustics and structural dynamics. Surface pressure fluctuations encountered during launch and travel through lower part of the atmosphere create intense vibro-acoustics environment for the payload, electronics, navigational equipment, and a large number of subsystems. All of these components have to be designed and tested for flight-certification. This presentation will cover all three major sources encountered in manned and unmanned space vehicles: launch acoustics, ascent acoustics and abort acoustics. Launch pads employ elaborate acoustic suppression systems to mitigate the ignition pressure waves and rocket plume generated noise during the early part of the liftoff. Recently we have used large microphone arrays to identify the noise sources during liftoff and found that the standard model by Eldred and Jones (NASA SP-8072) to be grossly inadequate. As the vehicle speeds up and reaches transonic speed in relatively denser part of the atmosphere, various shock waves and flow separation events create unsteady pressure fluctuations that can lead to high vibration environment, and occasional coupling with the structural modes, which may lead to buffet. Examples of wind tunnel tests and computational simulations to optimize the outer mold line to quantify and reduce the surface pressure fluctuations will be presented. Finally, a manned space vehicle needs to be designed for crew safety during malfunctioning of the primary rocket vehicle. This brings the subject of acoustic environment during abort. For NASAs Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), abort will be performed by lighting rocket motors atop the crew module. The severe aeroacoustics environments during various abort scenarios were measured for the first time by using hot helium to simulate rocket plumes in the Ames unitary plan wind tunnels. Various considerations used for the helium simulation and the final confirmation from a flight test will be presented.

launch vehicle↗