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 865 records · Page 48
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2005

Reactions of Air Transport Flight Crews to Displays of Weather During Simulated Flight

Display of information in the cockpit has long been a challenge for aircraft designers. Given the limited space in which to present information, designers have had to be extremely selective about the types and amount of flight related information to present to pilots. The general goal of cockpit display design and implementation is to ensure that displays present information that is timely, useful, and helpful. This suggests that displays should facilitate the management of perceived workload, and should allow maximal situation awareness. The formatting of current and projected weather displays represents a unique challenge. As technologies have been developed to increase the variety and capabilities of weather information available to flight crews, factors such as conflicting weather representations and increased decision importance have increased the likelihood for errors. However, if formatted optimally, it is possible that next generation weather displays could allow for clearer indications of weather trends such as developing or decaying weather patterns. Important issues to address include the integration of weather information sources, flight crew trust of displayed weather information, and the teamed reactivity of flight crews to displays of weather. Past studies of weather display reactivity and formatting have not adequately addressed these issues; in part because experimental stimuli have not approximated the complexity of modern weather displays, and in part because they have not used realistic experimental tasks or participants. The goal of the research reported here was to investigate the influence of onboard and NEXRAD agreement, range to the simulated potential weather event, and the pilot flying on flight crew deviation decisions, perceived workload, and perceived situation awareness. Fifteen pilot-copilot teams were required to fly a simulated route while reacting to weather events presented in two graphical formats on a separate visual display. Measures of flight crew reactions included performance-based measures such as deviation decision accuracy, and judgment-based measures such as perceived decision confidence, workload, situation awareness, and display trust. Results demonstrated that pilots adopted a conservative reaction strategy, often choosing to deviate from weather rather than ride through it. When onboard and NEXRAD displays did not agree, flight crews reacted in a complex manner, trusting the onboard system more but using the NEXRAD system to augment their situation awareness. Distance to weather reduced situation awareness and heightened workload levels. Overall, flight crews tended to adopt a participative leadership style marked by open communication. These results suggest that future weather displays should exploit the existing benefits of NEXRAD presentation for situation awareness while retaining the display structure and logic inherent in the onboard system.

Bliss, James P.↗
NASA NTRS1990

OMS FDIR: Initial prototyping

The Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP) Operations Management System (OMS) will automate major management functions which coordinate the operations of onboard systems, elements and payloads. The objectives of OMS are to improve safety, reliability and productivity while reducing maintenance and operations cost. This will be accomplished by using advanced automation techniques to automate much of the activity currently performed by the flight crew and ground personnel. OMS requirements have been organized into five task groups: (1) Planning, Execution and Replanning; (2) Data Gathering, Preprocessing and Storage; (3) Testing and Training; (4) Resource Management; and (5) Caution and Warning and Fault Management for onboard subsystems. The scope of this prototyping effort falls within the Fault Management requirements group. The prototyping will be performed in two phases. Phase 1 is the development of an onboard communications network fault detection, isolation, and reconfiguration (FDIR) system. Phase 2 will incorporate global FDIR for onboard systems. Research into the applicability of expert systems, object-oriented programming, fuzzy sets, neural networks and other advanced techniques will be conducted. The goals and technical approach for this new SSFP research project are discussed here.

Taylor, Eric W.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Decision rules for spaceborne operations planning

Recent study of Space Station Freedom requirements for extravehicular activity (EVA) to perform external maintenance tasks emphasize an oversubscription of resources for performing on-orbit tasks. Extravehicular robotics (EVR) and cooperative EVA combined with EVR (using crew and robots synergistically to perform tasks) have been suggested as a part of the solution to reduce EVA. The question remains however, 'Under what conditions is it cost-effective to use the EVA and/or EVR resource.' The answer to such a question also has implications for the Space Station Freedom and its external maintenance as well as the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) where the issue of work-system allocation is magnified by the long distances and scope of EVA work. This paper describes a simple technique of interest to operational planners and robot technology planners for determining in an economic context whether to use EVA alone, EVR alone, or Cooperative EVA. It is also shown that given: (1) the task times for these alternatives; and (2) the marginal costs of EVA, EVR, and IVA, the appropriate work system for performing the task can be identified. The paper illustrates how the work system choice is based on the ratio of costs. An example using Space Station Freedom data is presented to illustrate the trade-offs among alternative work-systems.

Smith, Jeffrey H.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Crew systems: integrating human and technical subsystems for the exploration of space

Space exploration missions will require combining human and technical subsystems into overall "crew systems" capable of performing under the rigorous conditions of outer space. This report describes substantive and conceptual relationships among humans, intelligent machines, and communication systems, and explores how these components may be combined to complement and strengthen one another. We identify key research issues in the combination of humans and technology and examine the role of individual differences, group processes, and environmental conditions. We conclude that a crew system is, in effect, a social cyborg, a living system consisting of multiple individuals whose capabilities are extended by advanced technology.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗
NASA NTRS2014

Human Integration Design Processes (HIDP)

The purpose of the Human Integration Design Processes (HIDP) document is to provide human-systems integration design processes, including methodologies and best practices that NASA has used to meet human systems and human rating requirements for developing crewed spacecraft. HIDP content is framed around human-centered design methodologies and processes in support of human-system integration requirements and human rating. NASA-STD-3001, Space Flight Human-System Standard, is a two-volume set of National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Agency-level standards established by the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer, directed at minimizing health and performance risks for flight crews in human space flight programs. Volume 1 of NASA-STD-3001, Crew Health, sets standards for fitness for duty, space flight permissible exposure limits, permissible outcome limits, levels of medical care, medical diagnosis, intervention, treatment and care, and countermeasures. Volume 2 of NASASTD- 3001, Human Factors, Habitability, and Environmental Health, focuses on human physical and cognitive capabilities and limitations and defines standards for spacecraft (including orbiters, habitats, and suits), internal environments, facilities, payloads, and related equipment, hardware, and software with which the crew interfaces during space operations. The NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 8705.2B, Human-Rating Requirements for Space Systems, specifies the Agency's human-rating processes, procedures, and requirements. The HIDP was written to share NASA's knowledge of processes directed toward achieving human certification of a spacecraft through implementation of human-systems integration requirements. Although the HIDP speaks directly to implementation of NASA-STD-3001 and NPR 8705.2B requirements, the human-centered design, evaluation, and design processes described in this document can be applied to any set of human-systems requirements and are independent of reference missions. The HIDP is a reference document that is intended to be used during the development of crewed space systems and operations to guide human-systems development process activities.

Boyer, Jennifer↗
NASA NTRS2016

Hydrogen Purification and Recycling for an Integrated Oxygen Recovery System Architecture

The United States Atmosphere Revitalization life support system on the International Space Station (ISS) performs several services for the crew including oxygen generation, trace contaminant control, carbon dioxide (CO2) removal, and oxygen recovery. Oxygen recovery is performed using a Sabatier reactor developed by Hamilton Sundstrand, wherein CO2 is reduced with hydrogen in a catalytic reactor to produce methane and water. The water product is purified in the Water Purification Assembly and recycled to the Oxygen Generation Assembly (OGA) to provide O2 to the crew. This architecture results in a theoretical maximum oxygen recovery from CO2 of approx.54% due to the loss of reactant hydrogen in Sabatier-produced methane that is currently vented outside of ISS. Plasma Pyrolysis Assembly (PPA) technology, developed by Umpqua Research Company, provides the capability to further close the Atmosphere Revitalization oxygen loop by recovering hydrogen from Sabatier-produced methane. A key aspect of this technology approach is the need to purify the hydrogen from the PPA product stream which includes acetylene, unreacted methane and byproduct water and carbon monoxide. In 2015, four sub-scale hydrogen separation systems were delivered to NASA for evaluation. These included two electrolysis single-cell hydrogen purification cell stacks developed by Sustainable Innovations, LLC, a sorbent-based hydrogen purification unit using microwave power for sorbent regeneration developed by Umpqua Research Company, and a LaNi4.6Sn0.4 metal hydride produced by Hydrogen Consultants, Inc. Here we report the results of these evaluations to-date, discuss potential architecture options, and propose future work.

Abney, Morgan B.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Hydrogen Purification and Recycling for an Integrated Oxygen Recovery System Architecture

The United States Atmosphere Revitalization life support system on the International Space Station (ISS) performs several services for the crew including oxygen generation, trace contaminant control, carbon dioxide (CO2) removal, and oxygen recovery. Oxygen recovery is performed using a Sabatier reactor developed by Hamilton Sundstrand, wherein CO2 is reduced with hydrogen in a catalytic reactor to produce methane and water. The water product is purified in the Water Purification Assembly and recycled to the Oxygen Generation Assembly (OGA) to provide O2 to the crew. This architecture results in a theoretical maximum oxygen recovery from CO2 of approximately 54% due to the loss of reactant hydrogen in Sabatier-produced methane that is currently vented outside of ISS. Plasma Methane Pyrolysis technology (PPA), developed by Umpqua Research Company, provides the capability to further close the Atmosphere Revitalization oxygen loop by recovering hydrogen from Sabatier-produced methane. A key aspect of this technology approach is to purify the hydrogen from the PPA product stream which includes acetylene, unreacted methane and byproduct water and carbon monoxide. In 2015, four sub-scale hydrogen separation systems were delivered to NASA for evaluation. These included two electrolysis single-cell hydrogen purification cell stacks developed by Sustainable Innovations, LLC, a sorbent-based hydrogen purification unit using microwave power for sorbent regeneration developed by Umpqua Research Company, and a LaNi4.6Sn0.4 metal hydride produced by Hydrogen Consultants, Inc. Here we report the results of these evaluations, discuss potential architecture options, and propose future work.

Abney, Morgan B.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Carbon Dioxide Washout Testing Using Various Inlet Vent Configurations in the Mark-III Space Suit

Requirements for using a space suit during ground testing include providing adequate carbon dioxide (CO2) washout for the suited subject. Acute CO2 exposure can lead to symptoms including headache, dyspnea, lethargy, and eventually unconsciousness or even death. Symptoms depend on several factors including inspired partial pressure of CO2 (ppCO2), duration of exposure, metabolic rate of the subject, and physiological differences between subjects. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis has predicted that the configuration of the suit inlet vent has a significant effect on oronasal CO2 concentrations. The main objective of this test was to characterize inspired oronasal ppCO2 for a variety of inlet vent configurations in the Mark-III suit across a range of workload and flow rates. Data and trends observed during testing along with refined CFD models will be used to help design an inlet vent configuration for the Z-2 space suit. The testing methodology used in this test builds upon past CO2 washout testing performed on the Z-1 suit, Rear Entry I-Suit, and the Enhanced Mobility Advanced Crew Escape Suit. Three subjects performed two test sessions each in the Mark-III suit to allow for comparison between tests. Six different helmet inlet vent configurations were evaluated during each test session. Suit pressure was maintained at 4.3 psid. Suited test subjects walked on a treadmill to generate metabolic workloads of approximately 2000 and 3000 BTU/hr. Supply airflow rates of 6 and 4 actual cubic feet per minute were tested at each workload. Subjects wore an oronasal mask with an open port in front of the mouth and were allowed to breathe freely. Oronasal ppCO2 was monitored real-time via gas analyzers with sampling tubes connected to the oronasal mask. Metabolic rate was calculated from the CO2 production measured by an additional gas analyzer at the air outlet from the suit. Real-time metabolic rate measurements were used to adjust the treadmill workload to meet target metabolic rates. This paper provides detailed descriptions of the test hardware, methodology and results, as well as implications for future inlet vent designs and ground testing.

Korona, F. Adam↗
NASA NTRS1993

Functional categories for future flight deck designs

With the addition of each new system on the flight deck, the danger of increasing overall operator workload while reducing crew understanding of critical mission information exists. The introduction of more powerful onboard computers, larger databases, and the increased use of electronic display media may lead to a situation of flight deck 'sophistication' at the expense of losses in flight crew capabilities and situational awareness. To counter this potentially negative impact of new technology, research activities are underway to reassess the flight deck design process. The fundamental premise of these activities is that a human-centered, systems-oriented approach to the development of advanced civil aircraft flight decks will be required for future designs to remain ergonomically sound and economically competitive. One of the initial steps in an integrated flight deck process is to define the primary flight deck functions needed to support the mission goals of the vehicle. This would allow the design team to evaluate candidate concepts in relation to their effectiveness in meeting the functional requirements. In addition, this would provide a framework to aid in categorizing and bookkeeping all of the activities that are required to be performed on the flight deck, not just activities of the crew or of a specific system. This could then allow for a better understanding and allocation of activities in the design, an understanding of the impact of a specific system on overall system performance, and an awareness of the total crew performance requirements for the design. One candidate set of functional categories that could be used to guide an advanced flight deck design are described.

Abbott, Terence S.↗
NASA NTRS2001

STS-102 Mission Highlight Resource Tape, Tape 1 of 4

This video gives an overview of the first four flight days of the STS-102 mission through a compilation of footage from each day. The crew of STS-102 (Commander James Wetherbee, Pilot James Kelly, and Mission Specialists Andrew Thomas and Paul Richards) and the Expedition 2 crew (Commander Yuriy Usachev and Flight Engineers James Voss and Susan Helms) are seen during the ceremonial breakfast, suitup, and as they board Discovery. The orbiter's launch is seen from several different viewpoints, and various in-flight activities are shown, such as the opening of Discovery's payload bay doors, Helms preparing for the 'H-Reflex Experiment: Effects of Microgravity on the Spine', the rendezvous and docking of Discovery with the International Space Station (ISS), and Helms and Voss preparing for and performing their spacewalks. The crew of STS-102 and both Expedition crews (E1 crew William Shepherd, Yuri Gidzenko, and Sergei Krikalev) are seen in the Destiny Laboratory Module. Activities for flight day five can be seen on 'STS-102 Mission Highlight Resource Tape, Part 1 of 2, Tape 2 of 2' (internal ID 2001096941). Flight days 6-14 activities can be seen on 'STS-102 Mission Highlight Resource Tape, Part 2 of 2, Tape 1 of 2' (internal ID 2001096943) and 'STS-102 Mission Highlight Resource Tape, Part 2 of 2, Tape 2 of 2' (internal ID 2001096940).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2010

Space Flight Resource Management for ISS Operations

Although the astronaut training flow for the International Space Station (ISS) spans 2 years, each astronaut or cosmonaut often spends most of their training alone. Rarely is it operationally feasible for all six ISS crewmembers to train together, even more unlikely that crewmembers can practice living together before launch. Likewise, ISS Flight Controller training spans 18 months of learning to manage incredibly complex systems remotely in plug-and-play ground teams that have little to no exposure to crewmembers before a mission. How then do all of these people quickly become a team - a team that must respond flexibly yet decisively to a variety of situations? The answer implemented at NASA is Space Flight Resource Management (SFRM), the so-called "soft skills" or team performance skills. Based on Crew Resource Management, SFRM was developed first for shuttle astronauts and focused on managing human errors during time-critical events (Rogers, et al. 2002). Given the nature of life on ISS, the scope of SFRM for ISS broadened to include teamwork during prolonged and routine operations (O'Keefe, 2008). The ISS SFRM model resembles a star with one competency for each point: Communication, Cross-Culture, Teamwork, Decision Making, Team Care, Leadership/Followership, Conflict Management, and Situation Awareness. These eight competencies were developed with international participation by the Human Behavior and Performance Training Working Group. Over the last two years, these competencies have been used to build a multi-modal SFRM training flow for astronaut candidates and flight controllers that integrates team performance skills into the practice of technical skills. Preliminary results show trainee skill increases as the flow progresses; and participants find the training invaluable to performing well and staying healthy during ISS operations. Future development of SFRM training will aim to help support indirect handovers as ISS operations evolve further with the retirement of the Space Shuttle Program.

Schmidt, Lacey L.↗
NASA NTRS1992

STS-45 Space Shuttle mission report

The STS-45 Space Shuttle Program Mission Report contains a summary of the vehicle subsystem operations during the forty-sixth flight of the Space Shuttle Program and the eleventh flight of the Orbiter Vehicle Atlantis (OV-104). In addition to the Atlantis vehicle, the flight vehicle consisted of the following: an External Tank (ET) designated as ET-44 (LWT-37); three Space Shuttle main engines (SSME's), which were serial numbers 2024, 2012, and 2028 in positions 1, 2, and 3, respectively; and two Solid Rocket Boosters (SRB's) designated as BI-049. The lightweight redesigned Solid Rocket Motors (RSRM's) installed in each of the SRB's were designated as 360L021A for the left SRM and 360W021B for the right SRM. The primary objective of this mission was to successfully perform the planned operations of the Atmospheric Laboratory for Applications and Science-1 (ATLAS-1) and the Shuttle Solar Backscatter Ultraviolet Instrument (SSBUV) payloads. The secondary objectives were to successfully perform all operations necessary to support the requirements of the following: the Space Tissue Loss-01 (STL-01) experiment; the Radiation Monitoring Equipment-3 (RME-3) experiment; the Visual Function Tester-2 (VFT-2) experiment; the Cloud Logic to Optimize use of Defense System (CLOUDS-1A) experiment; the Shuttle Amateur Radio Experiment 2 (SAREX-2) Configuration B; the Investigation into Polymer Membranes Processing experiment; and the Get-Away Special (GAS) payload G-229. The Ultraviolet Plume Instrument (UVPI) was a payload of opportunity that required no special maneuvers. In addition to the primary and secondary objectives, the crew was tasked to perform as many as 10 Development Test Objectives (DTO'S) and 14 Detailed Supplementary Objectives (DSO's).

Fricke, Robert W.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Influence of the helicopter environment on patient care capabilities: flight crew perceptions

INTRODUCTION: Flight crew perceptions of the effect of the rotary-wing environment on patient-care capabilities have not been subject to statistical analysis. We hypothesized that flight crew members perceived significant difficulties in performing patient-care tasks during air medical transport. METHODS: A survey was distributed to a convenience sample of flight crew members from 20 flight programs. Respondents were asked to compare the difficulty of performing patient-care tasks in rotary-wing and standard (emergency department or intensive care unit) settings. Demographic data collected on respondents included years of flight experience, flights per month, crew duty position and primary aircraft in which the respondent worked. Statistical analysis was performed as appropriate using Student's t-test, type III sum of squares, and analysis of variance. Alpha was defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: Fifty-five percent of programs (90 individuals) responded. All tasks were significantly rated more difficult in the rotary-wing environment. Ratings were not significantly correlated with flight experience, duty position, flights per month or aircraft used. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the performance of patient-care tasks are perceived by air medical flight crew to be significantly more difficult during rotary-wing air medical transport than in hospital settings.

Noise, Transportation/adverse effects↗
NASA NTRS1991

Perception of linear acceleration in weightlessness

Tests of the perception and use of linear acceleration sensory information were performed on the science crews of the Spacelab 1 (SL-1) and D-1 missions using linear 'sleds' in-flight (D-1) and pre-post flight. The time delay between the acceleration step stimulus and the subjective response was consistently reduced during weightlessness, but was neither statistically significant nor of functional importance. Increased variability of responses when going from one environment to the other was apparent from measurements on the first day of the mission and in the first days post-flight. Subjective reports of perceived motion during sinusoidal oscillation in weightlessness were qualitatively similar to reports on earth. In a closed-loop motion nulling task, enhanced performance was observed post-flight in all crewmembers tested in the Y or Z axes.

Arrott, Anthony P.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Perception of linear acceleration in weightlessness

Tests of the perception and use of linear acceleration sensory information were performed on the science crews of the Spacelab 1 (SL-1) and D-1 missions using linear "sleds" in-flight (D-1) and pre-post flight. The time delay between the acceleration step stimulus and the subjective response was consistently reduced during weightlessness, but was neither statistically significant nor of functional importance. Increased variability of responses when going from one environment to the other was apparent from measurements on the first day of the mission and in the first days post-flight. Subjective reports of perceived motion during sinusoidal oscillation in weightlessness were qualitatively similar to reports on earth. In a closed-loop motion nulling task, enhanced performance was observed post-flight in all crewmembers tested in the Y or Z axes.

NASA Discipline Number 16-10↗
NASA NTRS2015

Electrical Pressurization Concept for the Orion MPCV European Service Module Propulsion System

The paper presents the design of the pressurization system of the European Service Module (ESM) of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). Being part of the propulsion subsystem, an electrical pressurization concept is implemented to condition propellants according to the engine needs via a bang-bang regulation system. Separate pressurization for the oxidizer and the fuel tank permits mixture ratio adjustments and prevents vapor mixing of the two hypergolic propellants during nominal operation. In case of loss of pressurization capability of a single side, the system can be converted into a common pressurization system. The regulation concept is based on evaluation of a set of tank pressure sensors and according activation of regulation valves, based on a single-failure tolerant weighting of three pressure signals. While regulation is performed on ESM level, commanding of regulation parameters as well as failure detection, isolation and recovery is performed from within the Crew Module, developed by Lockheed Martin Space System Company. The overall design and development maturity presented is post Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and reflects the current status of the MPCV ESM pressurization system.

Helium↗
NASA NTRS1999

Situation Awareness and Workload Measures for SAFOR

The present research was conducted in support of the NASA Safe All-Weather Flight Operations for Rotorcraft (SAFOR) program. The purpose of the work was to investigate the utility of two measurement tools developed by the British Defense Evaluation Research Agency. These tools were a subjective workload assessment scale, the DRA Workload Scale (DRAWS), and a situation awareness measurement tool in which the crews self-evaluation of performance is compared against actual performance. These two measurement tools were evaluated in the context of a test of an innovative approach to alerting the crew by way of a helmet mounted display. The DRAWS was found to be usable, but it offered no advantages over extant scales, and it had only limited resolution. The performance self-evaluation metric of situation awareness was found to be highly effective.

DeMaio, Joe↗
NASA NTRS2010

The Importance of HRA in Human Space Flight: Understanding the Risks

Human performance is critical to crew safety during space missions. Humans interact with hardware and software during ground processing, normal flight, and in response to events. Human interactions with hardware and software can cause Loss of Crew and/or Vehicle (LOCV) through improper actions, or may prevent LOCV through recovery and control actions. Humans have the ability to deal with complex situations and system interactions beyond the capability of machines. Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) is a method used to qualitatively and quantitatively assess the occurrence of human failures that affect availability and reliability of complex systems. Modeling human actions with their corresponding failure probabilities in a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) provides a more complete picture of system risks and risk contributions. A high-quality HRA can provide valuable information on potential areas for improvement, including training, procedures, human interfaces design, and the need for automation. Modeling human error has always been a challenge in part because performance data is not always readily available. For spaceflight, the challenge is amplified not only because of the small number of participants and limited amount of performance data available, but also due to the lack of definition of the unique factors influencing human performance in space. These factors, called performance shaping factors in HRA terminology, are used in HRA techniques to modify basic human error probabilities in order to capture the context of an analyzed task. Many of the human error modeling techniques were developed within the context of nuclear power plants and therefore the methodologies do not address spaceflight factors such as the effects of microgravity and longer duration missions. This presentation will describe the types of human error risks which have shown up as risk drivers in the Shuttle PRA which may be applicable to commercial space flight. As with other large PRAs of complex machines, human error in the Shuttle PRA proved to be an important contributor (~12 percent) to LOCV. An existing HRA technique was adapted for use in the Shuttle PRA, but additional guidance and improvements are needed to make the HRA task in space-related PRAs easier and more accurate. Therefore, this presentation will also outline plans for expanding current HRA methodology to more explicitly cover spaceflight performance shaping factors.

Hamlin, Teri↗