Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Human 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 883 records · Page 49
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures Harmonized Across HERA, NEK, and ISS: Teams Risk

BACKGROUNDThe Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures to assess behavioral health and performance risk related to future exploration class missions, and to support reduction of the Human Research Program’s (HRP) Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Team, Sleep, and Human Systems Integration Architecture risks. HFBP-EM were collected during Human Exploration Research Analogs (HERA) campaigns 4 (C4) and 5 (C5), and during SIRIUS 17 and 19 missions in the Russian Ground Based Experiment Complex, NEK, to document the feasibility, flexibility, and acceptability of these measures in analogsof the spaceflight environment. A subset of the HFBP-EM suite was collected during spaceflight as part HRP’s Standard Measures in Spaceflight Project. Whenever possible, the HFBP-EM protocol and measures are kept the same across studies, however, differences across research settings (e.g., experimental manipulations, mission scenarios, mission length) and implementation of the measures require the data are harmonized to ensure comparable views across missions. The purpose of our project is to develop a harmonized database of HFBP-EM data from different settings, and to summarize the trajectory of behavioral health and performance within and between research settings. In this presentation, we will summarize the harmonized dataset and the trajectory of measures related to the Team Risk, including team performance, team cohesion, team processes, and psychological safety, over time and between and within settings.METHODSWe followed best practices for data harmonization. Characteristics of each research setting were assessed for harmonization potential, and we deemed NEK-SIRIUS 17 as inappropriate due to study aims, length, and data quality. Common variables of interest were identified. Study characteristics and key variables with which datafiles could be merged were defined as “meta-data.” HFBP-EM data from all settings were processed under a common format. We then created a harmonized team-level database designed to facilitate analyses that address HRP research gaps related to HRP’s Team risk. In this database, team cohesion, processes, performance, psychological safety, and group living were operationalized as the team mean of the crew responses for each data collection (e.g., on mission day 7). Data collected on the International Space Station (ISS) included a subset of scale items administered to participants. Data collected from ISS team members within +/- 7 days of the first data collection and every following 30 +/-4 days were aggregated to the team level. We generated figures that display the mean and variability of team constructs across research settings. We also generated plots of changes in team constructs with mission day and with percentage of the mission completed. Where possible, we compared data from spaceflight analogs with data from astronauts aboard the ISS. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThe team-level harmonized database was structured such that each row represents data for a team on a specific mission day. Team constructs (e.g., team cohesion) were included as columns (i.e., wide format) with repeated measures across mission days given in rows (i.e., long format). The database included data from 18 crews: five, 4-person American crews in HERA C4, four 4-person American crews in HERA C5, one 6-person multinational crew in NEK-SIRIUS 19, and eight, 2–11-person multinational crews aboard the ISS. Results provide insights into mission and campaign differences in team functioning and performance. For example, between campaign differences were observed for team processes—the interdependent team actions that orchestrate taskwork in pursuit of the team’s goals [1]. Greater between-team variability on team processes was detected during HERA C4 than during C5, and a downward trend was observed over the duration of C4, but not C5 or SIRIUS 19. This may be due to the campaign-level differences such as the sleep deprivation implemented during C4. Responses on the subset of team process items administered on the ISS indicate between-crew variability more like those observed in C4 than C5 and NEK, with some, but not all ISS crews demonstrating a downward trend over time. Additional findings will be presented. REFERENCESMarks, M. A., et al (2001) Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356-376.

S T Bell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures Harmonized Across HERA, NEK, and ISS Teams Risk

The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures to assess behavioral health and performance risk related to future exploration class missions, and to support reduction of the Human Research Program’s (HRP) Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Team, Sleep, and Human Systems Integration Architecture risks. HFBP-EM were collected during Human Exploration Research Analogs (HERA) campaigns 4 (C4) and 5 (C5), and during SIRIUS 17 and 19 missions in the Russian Ground Based Experiment Complex, NEK, to document the feasibility, flexibility, and acceptability of these measures in analogs of the spaceflight environment. A subset of the HFBP-EM suite was collected during spaceflight as part HRP’s Standard Measures in Spaceflight Project. Whenever possible, the HFBP-EM protocol and measures are kept the same across studies, however, differences across research settings (e.g., experimental manipulations, mission scenarios, mission length) and implementation of the measures require the data are harmonized to ensure comparable views across missions. The purpose of our project is to develop a harmonized database of HFBP-EM data from different settings, and to summarize the trajectory of behavioral health and performance within and between research settings. In this presentation, we will summarize the harmonized dataset and the trajectory of measures related to the Team Risk, including team performance, team cohesion, team processes, and psychological safety, over time and between and within settings.

S T Bell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Research Program: Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Research to Enable Artemis

This discussion provides an overview of the human research program (HRP), the Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element (HFBP), and outlines currently documented research using AR/VR or Hybrid Reality to maintain or improve human behavior for long duration exploration mission environments. Different analog environments are also discussed in this presentation (ISS and HERA).

Human Research Program↗
NASA NTRS2013

Telerobotics for Human Exploration: Enhancing Crew Capabilities in Deep Space

Future space missions in Earth orbit, to the Moon, and to other distant destinations offer many new opportunities for exploration. But, astronaut time will always be limited and some work will not be feasible or efficient for humans to perform manually. Telerobots, however, can complement human explorers, performing work under remote control from Earth, orbit or nearby habitats. A central challenge, therefore, is to understand how humans and remotely operated robots can be jointly employed to maximize mission performance and success. This presentation provides an overview of the key issues with using telerobots for human exploration.

telerobotics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures Harmonized Across HERA, NEK, And ISS: Behavioral Medicine Risk

The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures used to assess behavioral health and performance risks related to future exploration class space missions. The HFBP-EM addresses the Human Research Program’s (HRP) Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Team, Sleep, and Human Systems Integration Architecture risks. HFBP-EM were collected during Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) campaigns 4 and 5, and during SIRIUS 17 and 19 missions in the Russian Ground Based Experiment Complex, NEK, to document the feasibility, flexibility, and acceptability of these measures in analogs of spaceflight environments. A subset of the HFBP-EM suite was collected in spaceflight as part of the HRP Standard Measures in Spaceflight Project. Whenever possible, the HFBP-EM protocol and measures are the same across studies, differences across research settings (e.g., experimental manipulations, mission scenarios, and mission length) and implementation of the measures require that the data are harmonized to ensure comparable views across missions. The purpose of our project was to develop a harmonized database of analyzable HFBP-EM data from spaceflight and analog settings, and to summarize the trajectory of behavioral health and performance outcomes within and between mission settings. In this presentation, we will summarize the harmonized dataset and the trajectory of BMed related measures including depression, neurobehavioral function, mood, cognition, and operationally relevant individual performance over time and by campaign and mission.

S T Bell↗
NASA NTRS2009

Human Factors Assessment of Vibration Effects on Visual Performance During Launch

The Human Factors Assessment of Vibration Effects on Visual Performance During Launch (Visual Performance) investigation will determine visual performance limits during operational vibration and g-loads on the Space Shuttle, specifically through the determination of minimum readable font size during ascent using planned Orion display formats. Research Summary: The aim of the Human Factors Assessment of Vibration Effects on Visual Performance during Launch (Visual Performance) investigation is to provide supplementary data to that collected by the Thrust Oscillation Seat Detailed Technical Objective (DTO) 695 (Crew Seat DTO) which will measure seat acceleration and vibration from one flight deck and two middeck seats during ascent. While the Crew Seat DTO data alone are important in terms of providing a measure of vibration and g-loading, human performance data are required to fully interpret the operational consequences of the vibration values collected during Space Shuttle ascent. During launch, crewmembers will be requested to view placards with varying font sizes and indicate the minimum readable size. In combination with the Crew Seat DTO, the Visual Performance investigation will: Provide flight-validated evidence that will be used to establish vibration limits for visual performance during combined vibration and linear g-loading. o Provide flight data as inputs to ongoing ground-based simulations, which will further validate crew visual performance under vibration loading in a controlled environment. o Provide vibration and performance metrics to help validate procedures for ground tests and analyses of seats, suits, displays and controls, and human-in-the-loop performance.

Kritina Holden↗
NASA NTRS2021

Exploration Mission Tasks: A Technical Manual

This technical manual is an abridgement of the Generalizable Skills and Knowledge for Exploration Missions (NASA/CR-2018-22045) report (Stuster et al., 2019), describing research conducted under Cooperative Agreement 80NSSC18K0042 for the Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element, Human Research Program, located at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Johnson Space Center. The research identified tasks that will be conducted by human crew during an expedition to Mars, and the abilities, skills, and knowledge that will be required of crew members. The 3-year study uses research methods that were developed to analyze the work performed by a variety of civilian and military occupational specialties and is consistent with Human Factors methods. The work began by developing a comprehensive inventory of 1,125 tasks that are likely to be performed during the 12 phases of the first human expeditions to Mars, from launch to landing 30 months later. Sixty subject matter experts (SMEs) rated expedition tasks in terms of (likely) frequency of performance, difficulty to learn, and importance to mission success; a fourth metric (criticality), was derived by summing the mean ratings of the three dimensions. Seventy-two SMEs placed the physical, cognitive, and social abilities necessary to perform the tasks in order of importance for specialist domains identified by the task analysis. The research team then identified: 1) Abilities, skills, and knowledge that can be retained and generalized across tasks and 2) Implications for crew size and composition. Study results also led to recommendations concerning equipment, habitats, and procedures for exploration-class space missions. Note: The full-mission task inventory was developed during a comprehensive review of documentation and concepts of operations. It was understood by the study team that the tasks were based on currently available information, and that the tools, equipment, propulsion methods, and/or other aspects of actual human expeditions to Mars might be different from those described here, as a consequence of technological development and evolving Mars Design Reference Missions. The purpose and scope of this technical manual is to present the core, actionable information that resulted from this research. The abridged format is intended to address the needs of development and research teams to quickly access, discern, and use the information in the course of their exploration-related work.

Brandin Munson↗
NASA NTRS2019

Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Challenges for Lunar Surface Exploration

As the agency focuses on lunar missions, it is important to revisit the human factors and behavioral performance (HFBP) challenges for long duration exploration missions. We outline the important factors from the Apollo program, the long duration experience gained onboard International Space Station (ISS), and HFBP research applicable to exploration-class missions.

human factors performance↗
DOE OSTI2019

Exploring the Psychometrics of Common Post-Scenario Human Factors Questionnaires of Workload, Situation Awareness, and Perceived Difficulty

Abstract: The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) program has the primary mission of sustaining operation of the existing commercial nuclear power plants (NPPs) through a multi-pathway approach in conducting research and development (R&D). In this effort, the role of human factors engineering (HFE) has been an integral in ensuring new digital upgrades that are part of the overall main control room modernization strategy for various U.S. NPPs optimize human-system performance and do not introduce new human failure modes. In this process, testing and evaluation of concept (i.e., prototype) human machine interfaces (HMIs) are done in operator-in-the-loop studies at various stages of the HFE modification process, such as during design and verification and validation (V&V) [1]. During these studies, licensed operators go through select scenarios using a testbed, such as a full-scale simulator or at a NPP’s training simulator, to identify potential usability issues and provide general design feedback regarding the new digital HMIs. Human-system performance is measured and evaluated through a range of objective and self-report measures that capture aspects of plant performance, task performance, workload, situation awareness, and anthropometric and ergonomic concerns [2]. The use of post-scenario questionnaires is an acceptable method for gathering measures of workload and situation awareness. To this end, the NASA-Task Load Index (TLX) [e.g., 3, 4, & 5] and Situation Awareness Rating Technique (SART) [e.g., 6 & 7] are common standardized questionnaires used for evaluating workload and situation awareness, respectively. When combined, these questionnaires consist of a total of 15 questions, each using a different rating scale. Debriefs are also done through interviews with operators to gather design insight after each scenario. Since operator- and training simulator-time is limited, a concern during this post-scenario period of operator-in-the-loop studies is the limited time available to run scenarios, administer post-scenario questionnaires, and debrief within the allotted simulator time. To address this potential problem, this paper explores the psychometric characteristics of NASA-TLX, SART, and a common one-question post-scenario usability questionnaire (i.e., the single ease question – SEQ [8]) in effort to inform future development of a condensed questionnaire that captures aspects of workload and situation awareness. This exploratory work uses data from four different operator-in-the-loop studies completed under prior LWRS operator-in-the-loop studies. Findings from this paper should support future development of a consolidated questionnaire that may be used in operator-in-the-loop studies, when time is compressed, that conforms to the HFE scientific and regulatory requirements set for NPP control room modernization.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS2003

Predicting and Managing Lighting and Visibility for Human Operations in Space

Lighting is critical to human visual performance. On earth this problem is well understood and solutions are well defined and executed. Because the sun rises and sets on average every 45 minutes during Earth orbit, humans working in space must cope with ~ extremely dynamic lighting conditions varying from very low light conditions to severe glare and contrast conditions. For critical operations, it is essential that lighting conditions be predictable and manageable. Mission planners need to detelmine whether low-light video cameras are required or whether additional luminaires, or lamps, need to be flown . Crew and flight directors need to have up to date daylight orbit time lines showing the best and worst viewing conditions for sunlight and shadowing. Where applicable and possible, lighting conditions need to be part of crew training. In addition, it is desirable to optimize the quantity and quality of light because of the potential impacts on crew safety, delivery costs, electrical power and equipment maintainability for both exterior and interior conditions. Addressing these issues, an illumination modeling system has been developed in the Space Human Factors Laboratory at ASA Johnson Space Center. The system is the integration of a physically based ray-tracing package ("Radiance"), developed at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories, a human factors oriented geometric modeling system developed by NASA and an extensive database of humans and their work environments. Measured and published data has been collected for exterior and interior surface reflectivity; luminaire beam spread distribution, color and intensity and video camera light sensitivity and has been associated with their corresponding geometric models. Selecting an eye-point and one or more light sources, including sun and earthshine, a ~ snapshot of the light energy reaching the surfaces or reaching the eye point is computed. This energy map is then used to extract the required information needed for useful predictions. Using a validated, comprehensive illumination model integrated with empirically derived data, predictions of lighting and viewing conditions have been successfully used for Shuttle and Space Station planning and assembly operations. It has successfully balanced the needs for adequate human performance with the utili zation of resources. Keywords: Modeling, ray tracing, luminaires, refl ectivity, luminance, illuminance.

Maida, James C.↗
DOE OSTI2015

Proof-of-Concept Demonstrations for Computation-Based Human Reliability Analysis. Modeling Operator Performance During Flooding Scenarios

The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) program has the overall objective to help sustain the existing commercial nuclear power plants (NPPs). To accomplish this program objective, there are multiple LWRS “pathways,” or research and development (R&D) focus areas. One LWRS focus area is called the Risk-Informed Safety Margin and Characterization (RISMC) pathway. Initial efforts under this pathway to combine probabilistic and plant multi-physics models to quantify safety margins and support business decisions also included HRA, but in a somewhat simplified manner. HRA experts at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) have been collaborating with other experts to develop a computational HRA approach, called the Human Unimodel for Nuclear Technology to Enhance Reliability (HUNTER), for inclusion into the RISMC framework. The basic premise of this research is to leverage applicable computational techniques, namely simulation and modeling, to develop and then, using RAVEN as a controller, seamlessly integrate virtual operator models (HUNTER) with 1) the dynamic computational MOOSE runtime environment that includes a full-scope plant model, and 2) the RISMC framework PRA models already in use. The HUNTER computational HRA approach is a hybrid approach that leverages past work from cognitive psychology, human performance modeling, and HRA, but it is also a significant departure from existing static and even dynamic HRA methods. This report is divided into five chapters that cover the development of an external flooding event test case and associated statistical modeling considerations.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
NASA NTRS2019

Generalizable Skills and Knowledge for Exploration Missions

This report describes research conducted under Cooperative Agreement 80NSSC18K0042 for the Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element, Human Research Program, located at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Johnson Space Center. The research addresses the Risk of Inadequate Mission, Process, and Task Design and the Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies during exploration-class space missions by identifying the tasks that will be conducted by human crew during an expedition to Mars and the abilities, skills, and knowledge that will be required of crew members. By focusing on an expedition to Mars, we have considered the extremes of what is possible for human space exploration during the first half of the 21st Century and accommodated the human requirements for missions to asteroids, Cis-Lunar orbit, and a return to the Moon.

Stuster, Jack↗
NASA NTRS2008

The Application of the Human Engineering Modeling and Performance Laboratory for Space Vehicle Ground Processing Tasks at Kennedy Space Center

The introduction of United Space Alliance's Human Engineering Modeling and Performance Laboratory began in early 2007 in an attempt to address the problematic workspace design issues that the Space Shuttle has imposed on technicians performing maintenance and inspection operations. The Space Shuttle was not expected to require the extensive maintenance it undergoes between flights. As a result, extensive, costly resources have been expended on workarounds and modifications to accommodate ground processing personnel. Consideration of basic human factors principles for design of maintenance is essential during the design phase of future space vehicles, facilities, and equipment. Simulation will be needed to test and validate designs before implementation.

Woodbury, Sarah K.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Overview of the PLEXIL Plan Execution Technology and its Applications in Autonomous Piloting Projects at NASA

Automated planning is a key Artificial Intelligence technology enabling Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) and the eminent reality of Urban Air Mobility (UAM). It produces plans, which formalize procedures often performed by humans. Plans differ from other kinds of computer programs in their ability to react and interact with a dynamically changing environment. Aviation plans must encode the procedural knowledge, reasoning capability, and capacity for multi-tasking held by competent human pilots. Correct execution of these plans (performed by software called an executive) in the dynamic airspace environment is vital to the success of each automated flight, and the safety of the vehicle and all things in its path. In the early 2000s NASA developed a plan representation language and executive called PLEXIL (Plan Execution Interchange Language) that has successfully been applied in several NASA aviation and UAS projects. Autonomy Operating System (AOS), Cockpit Hierarchical Automated Planning and Execution (CHAP-E), and ICAROUS are all projects that have used PLEXIL to help encode and automatically execute flight procedures, some normally performed by human pilots. AOS also automates a subset of pilot/Air Traffic Control communication towards enabling UAS entry into the National Airspace. PLEXIL has been open-source software since 2008 and has seen usage in a wide range of prototypical autonomy applications in academia, government, and industry. In this presentation, we describe PLEXIL and highlight its significant accomplishments in the aviation domain.

Dalal, Michael↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Systems Engineering to Develop an Integrated Crew Health and Performance System to Mitigate Risk for Human Exploration Missions

New space exploration missions are currently being designed to take humanity beyond Low EarthOrbit (LEO) to cis-lunar space, the lunar surface, and eventually to Mars. These missions carryincreased risks due to a number of factors, including distance from Earth, exposure to deep spacehazards, reduced capacity and ability to resupply and evacuate, and increased communication delays.As distance from Earth grows and mission length increases, a growing proportion of overall missionrisk can be attributed to the “human system.” Almost twenty years ago, the Institute of Medicine in theUnited States recommended the early and complete integration of the human system into thespacecraft and mission design process to mitigate this increased risk inherent in exploration missions.Exploration missions will require increasing levels of crew self-sufficiency that will challenge thecurrent operational paradigms established in LEO. Enabling progressive Earth independence requiresmanagement of the increasingly complex interactions among spacecraft systems and integration of allthe data and functions that affect human health and performance into one coordinated system – theCrew Health and Performance (CHP) system. This system is a critical spacecraft system that isanalogous to other systems such as propulsion, guidance and navigation, or avionics. Design andintegration of the CHP system requires the evidence-based merger of typically disparate disciplinessuch as medicine, human factors, and physiological support system design, using systems engineering(SE) practices. The approach described here enables spacecraft and mission designers to align thescope of a CHP system with mission specific requirements, decrease risk to the crew, and increase theprobability of mission success.

Kerry Mcguire↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Systems Engineering to Develop an Integrated Crew Health and Performance System to Mitigate Risk for Human Exploration Missions

New space exploration missions are currently being designed to take humanity beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) to cis-lunar space, the lunar surface, and eventually to Mars. These missions carry increased risks due to a number of factors, including distance from Earth, exposure to deep space hazards, reduced capacity and ability to resupply and evacuate, and increased communication delays. As distance from Earth grows and mission length increases, a growing proportion of mission risk can be attributed to the “human system.” Almost twenty years ago, the Institute of Medicine in the United States recommended the early and complete integration of the human system into the spacecraft and mission design process to mitigate this increased risk inherent in exploration missions. Exploration missions will require increasing levels of crew self-sufficiency that will challenge the current operational paradigms established in LEO. Enabling progressive Earth independence requires management of the increasingly complex interactions among spacecraft systems and integration of all the data and functions that affect human health and performance into one coordinated system –the Crew Health and Performance (CHP) system. This system is a critical spacecraft system that is analogous to other systems such as propulsion, guidance and navigation, or avionics. Design and integration of the CHP system requires the evidence-based merger of typically disparate disciplines such as medicine, human factors, and life support system design, using systems engineering (SE) practices. SE provides traceability of spacecraft requirements and enables reliable and repeatable trade space analysis of the many competing options for hardware and software to be included in the mission architecture. The approach described here enables spacecraft and mission designers to align the scope of a CHP system with mission specific requirements, decrease risk to the crew, and increase the probability of mission success.

Kerry McGuire↗