SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “EVA”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

EVA SPACESUIT INCIDENCE TRACKING

INTRODUCTION: Extravehicular Activity (EVA)suit-related injuries to crew during training and inflight operations are not uncommon. Systematic tracking of these issues has waxed and waned throughout NASA’s history. Given two new EVA suits in development and an increase in EVA training, the need for dutiful recording of this data is critical. The Suited User Incident Tracking System (SUITS) was developed in the last decade to track all suited exposures, recording exposure details and any related issues, pains, or injuries that arise. METHODS: SUITS data collected from 2017 to 2022 was analyzed for issue frequency and severity for each body location and plotted to visualize where issues were occurring. Clustering techniques using a k-modes approach were also applied to the data set to generate profiles of populations that experienced issues in the suit, and populations that did not. RESULTS:A key finding from SUITS is that discomfort and pain observed in the new planetary spacesuits are occurring in new body locations than those experienced in the microgravity space suit (Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU)).To date, the lower body and torso regions account for most pain reports in planetary spacesuits whereas most reports in EMU were shoulders and hands. DISCUSSION:SUITS will continue to be used to capture exposures for all suit types. As training suit availability improves and training cadence increases in preparation for planetary missions, it is critical to capture and assess all suit incidences. Further, a Suited Anomaly Assessment Team (SAAT) consisting of a broad range of EVA stakeholders was formed to share and act on SUITS data with the goal of developing robust solutions to issues/injuries as they arise. Understanding the types and locations of injuries that occur during suited operations will help inform future work related to EVA fitness training requirements, suit design, and modeling efforts to avoid injury. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: 1. Systematic tracking of suited exposures and issues is critical for understanding the complex interaction between the human and the EVA spacesuit. 2. As EVA suit issues/injuries arise it is important to share that data with a broad group to ensure robust strategies are developed.

N Newby↗

NASA NTRS1988

Extravehicular activities limitations study. Volume 2: Establishment of physiological and performance criteria for EVA gloves

One of the major probelms faced in Extravehicular Activity (EVA) glove development has been the absence of concise and reliable methods to measure the effects of EVA gloves on human hand capabilities. This report describes the development of a standardized set of tests designed to assess EVA-gloved hand capabilities in six measurement domains: Range of Motion, Strength, Tactile Perception, Dexterity, Fatigue, and Comfort. Based on an assessment of general human hand functioning and EVA task requirements several tests within each measurement domain were developed to provide a comprehensive evaluation. All tests were designed to be conducted in a glove box with the bare hand as a baseline and the EVA glove at operating pressure. A test program was conducted to evaluate the tests using a representative EVA glove. Eleven test subjects participated in a repeated-measures design. The report presents the results of the tests in each capability domain.

Ohara, John M.↗

NASA NTRS1989

The Space Station Freedom evolution-phase - Crew-EVA demand for robotic substitution by task primitive

Space Station Freedom represents a significant demand for automation and robotics services as substitutes for crew EVAs. Results are reported from a study aimed at identifying the demand for crew EVA and the crew-task primitive distributions derived for input to future robotic substitution studies. Generic EVA tasks are developed from historical EVA mission timelines, and a set of 70 task primitives defined. The generic task activities are partitioned into task setup, kernel, and tear-down, with standardized task times and frequencies. These standardized times are coupled with inputs from numerous mission data bases in a probabilistic simulation to obtain estimates of total crew-EVA task time demand by crew task primitive. The use of probabilistic model is found to be crucial for understanding, isolating, and addressing the large uncertainties in the EVA task kernels.

Smith, Jeffrey H.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Potential roles for EVA and telerobotics in a unified worksite

Although telerobotics and extravehicular activity (EVA) are often portrayed as competitive approaches to space operations, ongoing research in the Space Systems Laboratory (SSL) has demonstrated the utility of cooperative roles in an integrated EVA/telerobotic work site. Working in the neutral buoyancy simulation environment, tests were performed on interactive roles or EVA subjects and telerobots in structural assembly and satellite servicing tasks. In the most elaborate of these tests to date, EVA subjects were assisted by the SSL's Beam Assembly Teleoperator (BAT) in several servicing tasks planned for Hubble Space Telescope, using the high-fidelity crew training article in the NASA Marshall Neutral Buoyancy Simulator. These tests revealed several shortcomings in the design of BAT for satellite servicing and demonstrated the utility of a free-flying or RMS-mounted telerobot for providing EVA crew assistance. This paper documents the past tests, including the use of free-flying telerobots to effect the rescue of a simulated incapacitated EVA subject, and details planned future efforts in this area, including the testing of a new telerobotic system optimized for the satellite servicing role, the development of dedicated telerobotic devices designed specifically for assisting EVA crew, and conceptual approaches to advanced EVA/telerobotic operations such as the Astronaut Operations Vehicle.

Akin, David↗

NASA NTRS1995

Dynamic analysis of astronaut motions in microgravity: Applications for Extravehicular Activity (EVA)

Simulations of astronaut motions during extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks were performed using computational multibody dynamics methods. The application of computational dynamic simulation to EVA was prompted by the realization that physical microgravity simulators have inherent limitations: viscosity in neutral buoyancy tanks; friction in air bearing floors; short duration for parabolic aircraft; and inertia and friction in suspension mechanisms. These limitations can mask critical dynamic effects that later cause problems during actual EVA's performed in space. Methods of formulating dynamic equations of motion for multibody systems are discussed with emphasis on Kane's method, which forms the basis of the simulations presented herein. Formulation of the equations of motion for a two degree of freedom arm is presented as an explicit example. The four basic steps in creating the computational simulations were: system description, in which the geometry, mass properties, and interconnection of system bodies are input to the computer; equation formulation based on the system description; inverse kinematics, in which the angles, velocities, and accelerations of joints are calculated for prescribed motion of the endpoint (hand) of the arm; and inverse dynamics, in which joint torques are calculated for a prescribed motion. A graphical animation and data plotting program, EVADS (EVA Dynamics Simulation), was developed and used to analyze the results of the simulations that were performed on a Silicon Graphics Indigo2 computer. EVA tasks involving manipulation of the Spartan 204 free flying astronomy payload, as performed during Space Shuttle mission STS-63 (February 1995), served as the subject for two dynamic simulations. An EVA crewmember was modeled as a seven segment system with an eighth segment representing the massive payload attached to the hand. For both simulations, the initial configuration of the lower body (trunk, upper leg, and lower leg) was a neutral microgravity posture. In the first simulation, the payload was manipulated around a circular trajectory of 0.15 m radius in 10 seconds. It was found that the wrist joint theoretically exceeded its ulnal deviation limit by as much as 49. 8 deg and was required to exert torques as high as 26 N-m to accomplish the task, well in excess of the wrist physiological limit of 12 N-m. The largest torque in the first simulation, 52 N-m, occurred in the ankle joint. To avoid these problems, the second simulation placed the arm in a more comfortable initial position and the radius and speed of the circular trajectory were reduced by half. As a result, the joint angles and torques were reduced to values well within their physiological limits. In particular, the maximum wrist torque for the second simulation was only 3 N-m and the maximum ankle torque was only 6 N-m.

Newman, Dava J.↗

NASA NTRS1999

An EVA Suit Fatigue, Strength, and Reach Model

The number of Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVAs) performed will increase dramatically with the upcoming Space Station assembly missions. It is estimated that up to 900 EVA hours may be required to assemble the Space Station with an additional 200 hours per year for maintenance requirements. Efficient modeling tools will be essential to assist in planning these EVAS. Important components include strength and fatigue parameters, multi-body dynamics and kinematics. This project is focused on building a model of the EVA crew member encompassing all these capabilities. Phase 1, which is currently underway, involves collecting EMU suited and unsuited fatigue, strength and range of motion data, for all major joints of the body. Phase 2 involves processing the data for model input, formulating comparisons between the EMU suits and deriving generalized relationships between suited and unsuited data. Phase 3 will be formulation of a multi-body dynamics model of the EMU capable of predicting mass handling properties and integration of empirical data into the model. Phase 4 will be validation of the model with collected EMU data from the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory at NASA/JSC. Engineers and designers will use tie EVA suit database to better understand the capabilities of the suited individuals. This knowledge will lead to better design of tools and planned operations. Mission planners can use the modeling system and view the animations and the visualizations of the various parameters, such as overall fatigue, motion, timelines, reach, and strength to streamline the timing, duration, task arrangement, personnel and overall efficiency of the EVA tasks. Suit designers can use quantifiable data at common biomechanical structure points to better analyze and compare suit performance.

Maida, James C.↗

NASA NTRS2004

Results from an Investigation into Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) Training Related Shoulder Injuries

The number and complexity of extravehicular activities (EVAs) required for the completion and maintenance of the International Space Station (ISS) is unprecedented. The training required to successfully complete this magnitude of space walks presents a real risk of overuse musculoskeletal injuries to the EVA crew population. There was mounting evidence raised by crewmembers, trainers, and physicians at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) between 1999 and 2002 that suggested a link between training in the Neutral - Buoyancy Lab (NBL) and the several reported cases of shoulder injuries. The short- and long-term health consequences of shoulder injury to astronauts in training as well as the potential mission impact associated with surgical intervention to assigned EVA crew point to this as a critical problem that must be mitigated. Thus, a multi-directorate tiger team was formed in December of 2002 led by the EVA Office and Astronaut Office at the JSC. The primary objectives of this Tiger Team were to evaluate the prevalence of these injuries and substantiate the relationship to training in the NBL with the crew person operating in the EVA Mobility Unit (EMU). Between December 2002 and June of 2003 the team collected data, surveyed crewmembers, consulted with a variety of physicians, and performed tests. The results of this effort were combined with the vast knowledge and experience of the Tiger Team members to formulate several findings and over fifty recommendations. This paper summarizes those findings and recommendations as well as the process by which these were determined. The Tiger Team concluded that training in the NBL was directly linked to several major and minor shoulder injuries that had occurred. With the assistance of JSC flight surgeons, outside consultants, and the lead crewmember/physician on the team, the mechanisms of injury were determined. These mechanisms were then linked to specific aspects of the hardware design, operational techniques, and the training environment. During the 1999 to 2003 time frame many variables converged to make it impossible to determine with any accuracy which one or two root causes were primarily involved. Therefore a broad range of recommendations was established to prevent future injury to crewmembers training in the NBL in the near term. Many of these recommendations are lessons learned that are essentially timeless and therefore should be passed on to future EVA endeavors to ensure that hardware designs and operational techniques utilized in the future consider the demands of training on the human body here on earth.

Johnson, Brian J.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Creating a Lunar EVA Work Envelope

A work envelope has been defined for weightless Extravehicular Activity (EVA) based on the Space Shuttle Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU), but there is no equivalent for planetary operations. The weightless work envelope is essential for planning all EVA tasks because it determines the location of removable parts, making sure they are within reach and visibility of the suited crew member. In addition, using the envelope positions the structural hard points for foot restraints that allow placing both hands on the job and provides a load path for reacting forces. EVA operations are always constrained by time. Tasks are carefully planned to ensure the crew has enough breathing oxygen, cooling water, and battery power. Planning first involves computers using a virtual work envelope to model tasks, next suited crew members in a simulated environment refine the tasks. For weightless operations, this process is well developed, but planetary EVA is different and no work envelope has been defined. The primary difference between weightless and planetary work envelopes is gravity. It influences anthropometry, horizontal and vertical mobility, and reaction load paths and introduces effort into doing "overhead" work. Additionally, the use of spacesuits other than the EMU, and their impacts on range of motion, must be taken into account. This paper presents the analysis leading to a concept for a planetary EVA work envelope with emphasis on lunar operations. There is some urgency in creating this concept because NASA has begun building and testing development hardware for the lunar surface, including rovers, habitats and cargo off-loading equipment. Just as with microgravity operations, a lunar EVA work envelope is needed to guide designers in the formative stages of the program with the objective of avoiding difficult and costly rework.

Griffin, Brand N.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Risk Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Risk Standing Review Panel (SRP) was favorably impressed by the operational risk management approach taken by the Human Research Program (HRP) Integrated Research Plan (IRP) to address the stated life sciences issues. The life sciences community at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) seems to be focused on operational risk management. This approach is more likely to provide risk managers with the information they need at the time they need it. Concerning the information provided to the SRP by the EVA Physiology, Systems, and Performance Project (EPSP), it is obvious that a great deal of productive activity is under way. Evaluation of this information was hampered by the fact that it often was not organized in a fashion that reflects the "Gaps and Tasks" approach of the overall Human Health Countermeasures (HHC) effort, and that a substantial proportion of the briefing concerned subjects that, while interesting, are not part of the HHC Element (e.g., the pressurized rover presentation). Additionally, no information was provided on several of the tasks or how they related to work underway or already accomplished. This situation left the SRP having to guess at the efforts and relationship to other elements, and made it hard to easily map the EVA Project efforts currently underway, and the data collected thus far, to the gaps and tasks in the IRP. It seems that integration of the EPSP project into the HHC Element could be improved. Along these lines, we were concerned that our SRP was split off from the other participating SRPs at an early stage in the overall agenda for the meeting. In reality, the concerns of EPSP and other projects share much common ground. For example, the commonality of the concerns of the EVA and exercise physiology groups is obvious, both in terms of what reduced exercise capacity can do to EVA capability, and how the exercise performed during an EVA could contribute to an overall exercise countermeasure prescription.

Norfleet, William↗

NASA NTRS2011

Crosscutting Development- EVA Tools and Geology Sample Acquisition

Exploration to all destinations has at one time or another involved the acquisition and return of samples and context data. Gathered at the summit of the highest mountain, the floor of the deepest sea, or the ice of a polar surface, samples and their value (both scientific and symbolic) have been a mainstay of Earthly exploration. In manned spaceflight exploration, the gathering of samples and their contextual information has continued. With the extension of collecting activities to spaceflight destinations comes the need for geology tools and equipment uniquely designed for use by suited crew members in radically different environments from conventional field geology. Beginning with the first Apollo Lunar Surface Extravehicular Activity (EVA), EVA Geology Tools were successfully used to enable the exploration and scientific sample gathering objectives of the lunar crew members. These early designs were a step in the evolution of Field Geology equipment, and the evolution continues today. Contemporary efforts seek to build upon and extend the knowledge gained in not only the Apollo program but a wealth of terrestrial field geology methods and hardware that have continued to evolve since the last lunar surface EVA. This paper is presented with intentional focus on documenting the continuing evolution and growing body of knowledge for both engineering and science team members seeking to further the development of EVA Geology. Recent engineering development and field testing efforts of EVA Geology equipment for surface EVA applications are presented, including the 2010 Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATs) field trial. An executive summary of findings will also be presented, detailing efforts recommended for exotic sample acquisition and pre-return curation development regardless of planetary or microgravity destination.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2011

Shoulder Injuries in US Astronauts Related to EVA Suit Design

Introduction: For every one hour spent performing extravehicular activity (EVA) in space, astronauts in the US space program spend approximately six to ten hours training in the EVA spacesuit at NASA-Johnson Space Center's Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL). In 1997, NASA introduced the planar hard upper torso (HUT) EVA spacesuit which subsequently replaced the existing pivoted HUT. An extra joint in the pivoted shoulder allows increased mobility but also increased complexity. Over the next decade a number of astronauts developed shoulder problems requiring surgical intervention, many of whom performed EVA training in the NBL. This study investigated whether changing HUT designs led to shoulder injuries requiring surgical repair. Methods: US astronaut EVA training data and spacesuit design employed were analyzed from the NBL data. Shoulder surgery data was acquired from the medical record database, and causal mechanisms were obtained from personal interviews Analysis of the individual HUT designs was performed as it related to normal shoulder biomechanics. Results: To date, 23 US astronauts have required 25 shoulder surgeries. Approximately 48% (11/23) directly attributed their injury to training in the planar HUT, whereas none attributed their injury to training in the pivoted HUT. The planar HUT design limits shoulder abduction to 90 degrees compared to approximately 120 degrees in the pivoted HUT. The planar HUT also forces the shoulder into a forward flexed position requiring active retraction and extension to increase abduction beyond 90 degrees. Discussion: Multiple factors are associated with mechanisms leading to shoulder injury requiring surgical repair. Limitations to normal shoulder mechanics, suit fit, donning/doffing, body position, pre-existing injury, tool weight and configuration, age, in-suit activity, and HUT design have all been identified as potential sources of injury. Conclusion: Crewmembers with pre-existing or current shoulder injuries or certain anthropometric body types should conduct NBL EVA training in the pivoted HUT.

Scheuring, R. A.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Miniature EVA Software Defined Radio

As NASA embarks upon developing the Next-Generation Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) Radio for deep space exploration, the demands on EVA battery life will substantially increase. The number of modes and frequency bands required will continue to grow in order to enable efficient and complex multi-mode operations including communications, navigation, and tracking applications. Whether conducting astronaut excursions, communicating to soldiers, or first responders responding to emergency hazards, NASA has developed an innovative, affordable, miniaturized, power-efficient software defined radio that offers unprecedented power-efficient flexibility. This lightweight, programmable, S-band, multi-service, frequency- agile EVA software defined radio (SDR) supports data, telemetry, voice, and both standard and high-definition video. Features include a modular design, an easily scalable architecture, and the EVA SDR allows for both stationary and mobile battery powered handheld operations. Currently, the radio is equipped with an S-band RF section. However, its scalable architecture can accommodate multiple RF sections simultaneously to cover multiple frequency bands. The EVA SDR also supports multiple network protocols. It currently implements a Hybrid Mesh Network based on the 802.11s open standard protocol. The radio targets RF channel data rates up to 20 Mbps and can be equipped with a real-time operating system (RTOS) that can be switched off for power-aware applications. The EVA SDR's modular design permits implementation of the same hardware at all Network Nodes concept. This approach assures the portability of the same software into any radio in the system. It also brings several benefits to the entire system including reducing system maintenance, system complexity, and development cost.

Pozhidaev, Aleksey↗

NASA NTRS2016

EVA-Compatible Microbial Swab Tool

When we send humans to search for life on Mars, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed spacecraft meet planetary protection requirements—and to protect our science from human contamination—we'll need to know whether micro-organisms are leaking/venting from our ships and spacesuits. This is easily done by swabbing external vents and suit surfaces for analysis, but requires a specialized tool for the job. Engineers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed an Extravehicular Activity (EVA)-compatible swab tool that can be used to sample current space suits and life support systems. Data collected now will influence Mars life support and EVA hardware early in the planning process, before design changes become difficult and expensive.NASA’s EVA swab tool pairs a Space Shuttle-era tool handle with a commercially available swab tip mounted into a custom-designed end effector. A glove-compatible release mechanism allows the handle to quickly switch between swab tips, much like a shaving razor handle can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. Swab tips are stowed inside individual sterile containers, each fitted with a microbial filter that allows the container to equalize atmospheric pressure, but prevents cabin contaminants from rushing into the container when passing from the EVA environment into a pressurized cabin. A bank of containers arrayed inside a tool caddy allows up to six individual samples to be collected during a given spacewalk.NASA plans to use the tool in 2016 to collect samples from various spacesuits during ground testing to determine what (if any) human-borne microbial contamination leaks from the suit under simulated thermal vacuum conditions. Next, the tool will be used on board the International Space Station to assess the types of microbial contaminants found on external environmental control and life support system vents. Data will support advanced EVA and life support system maturation studies, helping to answer questions such as “how close can an EVA-suited crew member approach an area of scientific interest without compromising the science?”

Rucker, Michelle A.↗

NASA NTRS2016

EVA Health and Human Performance Benchmarking Study

Multiple HRP Risks and Gaps require detailed characterization of human health and performance during exploration extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks; however, a rigorous and comprehensive methodology for characterizing and comparing the health and human performance implications of current and future EVA spacesuit designs does not exist. This study will identify and implement functional tasks and metrics, both objective and subjective, that are relevant to health and human performance, such as metabolic expenditure, suit fit, discomfort, suited postural stability, cognitive performance, and potentially biochemical responses for humans working inside different EVA suits doing functional tasks under the appropriate simulated reduced gravity environments. This study will provide health and human performance benchmark data for humans working in current EVA suits (EMU, Mark III, and Z2) as well as shirtsleeves using a standard set of tasks and metrics with quantified reliability. Results and methodologies developed during this test will provide benchmark data against which future EVA suits, and different suit configurations (eg, varied pressure, mass, CG) may be reliably compared in subsequent tests. Results will also inform fitness for duty standards as well as design requirements and operations concepts for future EVA suits and other exploration systems.

Abercromby, A. F.↗

NASA NTRS2026

SERFE Ground Unit EVA Series After Three Year Spacesuit Stowage Period

NASA’s spacesuit government reference design for returning to the Moon is called the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU). The xEMU subassembly that provides life support, such as oxygen and thermal control, is the Portable Life Support System (PLSS). Inside the PLSS is a new technology that NASA wanted to test to provide cooling to the crew during EVAs (ExtraVehicular Activity). This technology is called the Spacesuit Water Membrane Evaporator (SWME). In order to test SWME in an improved thermal control loop (TCL) both on Earth and in Space, the Spacesuit Evaporation Rejection Flight Experiment (SERFE) was created. The Ground unit, or testbed at Johnson Space Center (JSC), tested the cooling technology in Earth’s gravity, while the Flight unit, or payload on the International Space Station (ISS), tested the cooling technology in micro-gravity. Since fluids flow differently in micro-gravity, testing in both environments would provide important data for improving cooling performance during EVAs. Both units completed 25 simulated EVAs with the same settings so SWME performance on the ground could be compared to the ISS. The Flight unit was completed first and performed EVAs on the ISS between 2020 and 2022. The Ground unit performed EVAs between 2021 and 2022. When the Flight unit came back from the ISS, it was taken apart for analysis. This analysis looked at how well SWME was able to maintain its heat rejection capability after various dwell times, such as a 90 day Airlock Coolant Loop Recovery (ALCLR) cycle, when the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) currently on the ISS would normally need maintenance. After a three year simulated spacesuit dwell, the Ground unit performed another EVA series in 2025 to test SWME’s shelf life. The results from this test series will inform mission planning as NASA plans to go back to the Moon and beyond.

Michael Lewandowski↗

NASA NTRS2026

SERFE Ground Unit EVA Series After Three Year Spacesuit Stowage Period

SWME↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Helmet-Mounted Display Technology for Eva Training in NASA's Neutral Buoyancy Lab

Currently, during extravehicular activity (EVA) on the International Space Station (ISS), astronauts are in constant communication with mission control; however, this paradigm will significantly change during future NASA exploration missions due to limited and time-delayed communications. As exploration missions will thereby require an increase in crew autonomy, it is hypothesized that heads-up display (HUD) technology can supplement communications with mission control. Before introducing novel display technology to EVA operations, it must first be demonstrated and evaluated in an EVA training environment. The UC Davis Center for Spaceflight Research, in collaboration with NASA Johnson Space Center’s Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations (H-3PO) Lab has developed a low-cost and rapid development helmet-mounted display (HMD) for EVA training at NASA’s Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL). The first two phases of HMD testing (Phase I and II) at the NBL focused on technology and capability development and demonstration. Crew member feedback was obtained that evaluated aspects of HMD including its user satisfaction, visibility, readability, and usefulness. Overall, feedback indicated HMD was readable, un-obtrusive, and the available display modes had potential to be useful and enhance EVA training. HMD display modes currently available include: real-time biofeedback (metabolic rate), phase elapsed time (PET), ability to set timers, task procedural aids (e.g. Pistol Grip Tool settings) and custom messages. The goal for Phase III, which is currently underway, is to evaluate the effects that access to bioinformatics through HMD has on astronaut training and performance at the NBL. For this phase of testing, crewmembers will be asked to perform a go/no-go task while wearing HMD throughout the NBL run to characterize crew member state of situational awareness with respect to HMD. This information could be used to inform how best to display relatively important or supplemental, but not critical, data in the future.

Heads up display↗

NASA NTRS2024

Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP) Exploration EVA (xEVA) System Compatibility Standards

Extravehicular Activity (EVA) is a significant capability for Artemis Systems which includes Gateway Program (modules), Human Landing System (HLS) Program (Integrated Lander and Human Class Delivery Lander), Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV), Pressurized Rover (PR), Payloads, and any other future lunar surface assets that will be utilized for exploration or science. The EVA and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP) will provide the following: Exploration EVA (xEVA) suits, xEVA tools and crew aids along with vehicle integration/support hardware, LTV, and PR. Being a distributed and dynamic capability (moving components), xEVA System hardware will interface with almost all elements of the Artemis architecture. As such, it is important to document a singular set of EVA compatibility standards at the programmatic level to articulate “how to interface with xEVA suit hardware” and “how to design hardware that EVA crewmembers will access and manipulate.”

Exploration↗