SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “offloading”

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

DOE OSTI2023

Enabling Fortran Standard Parallelism in GAMESS for Accelerated Quantum Chemistry Calculations

The performance of Fortran 2008 DO CONCURRENT (DC) relative to OpenACC and OpenMP target offloading (OTO) with different compilers is studied for the GAMESS quantum chemistry application. Specifically, DC and OTO are used to offload the Fock build, which is a computational bottleneck in most quantum chemistry codes, to GPUs. The DC Fock build performance is studied on NVIDIA A100 and V100 accelerators and compared with the OTO versions compiled by the NVIDIA HPC, IBM XL, and Cray Fortran compilers. The results show that DC can speed up the Fock build by 3.0× compared with that of the OTO model. Finally, with similar offloading efforts, DC is a compelling programming model for offloading Fortran applications to GPUs.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

DOE OSTI2022

A Path Toward Understanding the Performance Capabilities of SmartNIC Devices [Slides]

SmartNICs, accelerator devices integrated with a network, have conventionally been utilized to offload low-level networking functionality. However, newer SmartNIC variants, which incorporate a system-on-chip (SoC) with traditional designs, are challenging this precedent. Leveraging significantly augmented resources, these new devices offer increased versatility and the potential to more effectively complement a given architecture’s CPU. Naturally, there is performance overhead associated with offloading tasks from a host CPU to a SmartNIC. As SmartNICs become more versatile and are used for a wider range of computational tasks, it is critical to understand how well the SmartNICs perform those respective tasks in order to determine whether the cost of offloading is worthwhile. In this work, we lay out a path to understand the important question of when and when not to offload to SmartNIC devices by way of a series of microbenchmarks.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Instrumented Walking and Turning Test to Evaluate Suited Gait Dynamics and Performance in Extravehicular Activity Training Environments

Background and aims: Walking will be required for many exploration tasks on the Moon during the Artemis program. Walking in a straight line on the confined floorspace of a testing area, and repetitive treadmill walking that requires no change in direction may not adequately reflect the balance and coordination required during ambulation. Also, performance of turning maneuvers may be affected differently in different extravehicular activity (EVA) training facilities that simulate partial gravity. For example, the Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) simulates lunar gravity by adding weight to underwater subjects to alter buoyancy and achieve the equivalent ground reaction force of 1/6 of Earth’s gravity (1/6G), whereas the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) uses a computer controlled overhead suspension system programmed to continuously offload a percentage of a subject’s weight to simulate 1/6G. The degree to which dynamic movements such as turning are comparable across these EVA training facilities has not yet been evaluated. The instrumented gait test helps NASA scientists and engineers evaluate gait dynamics and performance in suited conditions, and this test demonstrates the unique characteristics and limitations of EVA training facilities. We developed an instrumented walking and turning test using inertial measurement units (IMUs) and conducted the test at NASA’s EVA training facilities. Results were used to compare suited walking and turning characteristics in the ARGOS and the NBL. Methods: Subjects donned the Mark III space suit during offloading with the ARGOS spreader bar gimbal and donned the Z2.5 space suit while underwater in the NBL with weights and floatation added to achieve realistic suit center of gravity. The test team securely attached three Opal (APDM, OR, USA) wireless IMUs on the space suit for each test run: one on the middle of the hard upper torso, and one on the left and on the right ankle bearings. During the NBL tests, the IMUs were encased in a waterproof housing (GoPro) with foam added to create a tighter fit. At both testing facilities, 6.3 m x 1.0 m (LxW) walking lines were marked, and a cone for turning or walking around was located at the end of the walking path with another line on the other side of the cone to indicate the stopping point after walking around the cone. Under simulated 1/6G, subjects began by standing at the marked line with their arms folded across the chest, they then walked at a preferred speed along the straight walking path until they reached the end, turned 180 degrees around the cone, and finally stopped at the marked stopping point. All IMU data recorded during testing were automatically saved to the internal memory. Then, raw IMU signals were processed using custom MATLAB (Mathworks, MA, USA) code to compare gait parameters during both the walking and the turning components of the task. These parameters included time (s), speed (m/s for walking and rad/s for turning), step number (n) and walk:turn time ratio (% time spent straight walking versus turning). Results: Less time, faster gait, fewer steps, and higher walk:turn ratio during both walking and turning components were exhibited during tests performed at the ARGOS versus those performed at the NBL. During the NBL tests, the slower walking speed continued at the same rate throughout a U-shape turn. During the ARGOS tests, the subjects performed shorter and tighter turns at 4 times the speed of the NBL turns because they walked 30% faster and the vertical offloading system gave them more support. Conclusion: Our data show that the differences in walking and turning parameters during the NBL tests may be due to the high viscosity in the water environment where the motion of the lower limbs was slow and did not reach full flexion and extension. These tests improve the current knowledge of testing environments in preparation for EVAs on the lunar surface.

Kyoung Jae Kim↗

NASA NTRS2023

NASA Space Environment Analog for Training, Engineering, Science, and Technology (SEATEST) 6 Detailed Final Report

After more than 50 years since the last crewed lunar landing, plans for more missions to the moon are in development. For these missions, efficient and sustainable logistics will be critical. Additionally, innovative methods of cargo transfer to and from a lunar outpost should be considered for successfully establishing a permanent presence on the moon. SEATEST (Space Environment Analog for Training, Engineering, Science, and Technology) is an immersive mission-analogous operational atmosphere where buoyancy effects and supplemental weights can simulate partial gravity conditions similar to those astronauts will experience on the moon. SEATEST 6 took place at the University of Southern California (USC) Wrigley Marine Science Center on Santa Catalina Island from July 18-30, 2023. The analog was used to collect preliminary logistics data on two different offloading conceptual methods (a davit and a zipline) during a simulated lunar mission. Pre-test analysis indicated for a crew of two on a 14-day mission, approximately three Medium Pressurized Logistics Containers (MPLC) sized logistics containers (or a total of 37.5 single Cargo Transfer Bag Equivalents (CTBE)) would be needed to support a mission. A Computer-Aided Design (CAD) analysis was employed on the SEATEST airlock mockup to determine how many logistic containers would fit with two suited crewmembers, don/doff stands, and hatch operations. It was determined that for SEATEST, a total of 15 1.0 Small Pressurized Logistics Containers (SPLCs) and 8 2.0 SPLCs would adequately fit into the approximate 9.5 cubic meter airlock volume. This does not fully represent a complete 14-day logistic supply; however, it does provide a preliminary estimate to initiate design conversations between logistics teams and crew at this early stage of development. Data were collected in eight logistics transfer scenarios over two days with four scenarios per day. Five test subject crew participated in scenarios as pairs. Scenarios included two sizes of logistics containers – 1.0 SPLC (equivalent to a single Cargo Transfer Bag (CTB) and 2.0 SPLC (equivalent to two CTBs). Planed evaluations included the use of a logistics port compared to transfer through an Airlock hatch, offloading methods based on either a davit or a zipline system, choreography of cargo in the airlock to permit ingress and suit doffing, and dust removal protocols for an understanding of the overall impact to transfer ops. Data collected included objective data (task times for conducting overall tasks and subtasks, full audio/video of test activities, and inadvertent “dings” on hardware) and subjective data (crew consensus of: task acceptability and capability assessment ratings related to best practices, considerations, and constraints for EVA-driven logistics transfer ConOps, sim quality of the test environment, and more general debrief comments). The two logistic offloading transfer concepts (davit, zipline) presented both advantages and limitations. The davit’s flexibility in allowing the crew to pick up the containers without physical interaction was well regarded by the crew. Some limitations of select davit hardware components were noted, but the overall concept was acceptable. The zipline system proved to be the most efficient way of moving logistics from the lander to the airlock and eliminated the need for dust operations. However, extended and repetitive lifting of containers to the line could be fatiguing. In conclusion, logistics transfer could hypothetically be achieved without an offloading method; however, the time requirement for such operations would be prohibitive. Results of crew subjective feedback proposed a combined or hybrid davit/zipline method to increase efficiency.

Logistics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison of Physical Workload Across Eva-Simulation Analog Environments: Hybrid Space Suit Simulator and Pressurized Suit Testing

NASA conducts research, testing, and training across a variety of analog environments to support characterization of human performance during Extravehicular Activities (EVAs). Time utilizing pressurized suits in an offloaded environment is both limited and expensive, making it challenging to carry out extensive research with these suits. The Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations (H-3PO) Laboratory at NASA Johnson Space Center designed a Hybrid Space Suit Simulator (HS3) as a low-cost, workload approximator and easy access research tool to provide relevant physical and cognitive workloads during simulated EVAs. A pilot study was conducted in a 1g analog environment where six healthy subjects (3 male, 3 female) underwent simulated 5-hour EVAs in the HS3. This study used a COSMED K5 portable metabolic analyzer and a Polar H10 heart rate monitor to evaluate physical workload during the EVAs. For direct comparison, EVA tasks and timelines were modeled after a similar study conducted in pressurized suits (Mark-III spacesuit, n=3 male; small xPGS spacesuit, n=3 female) at NASA’s Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) offloaded to Lunar gravity (1/6 g). The 1g HS3 data demonstrated increased metabolic rate when compared to pressurized, Lunar-offloaded suited simulated EVAs for certain tasks including the kneeling scoop (HS3: 1194±199 BTU/hr, ARGOS: 860±170 BTU/hr, p < 0.05) and 20 lb object relocation (HS3: 1651±136 BTU/hr, ARGOS: 1048±252.8 BTU/hr, p < 0.05), but it did not demonstrate any significant differences in heart rate (p > 0.05). Other simulated EVA tasks, such as a 500 m traverse (HS3: 1431±177 BTU/hr, ARGOS: 1212±294 BTU/hr, p > 0.05), showed similar workload profiles with no significant workload differences between HS3 and ARGOS. The HS3 is a useful research tool for increasing workloads in EVA research without pressurized suits, though it may overestimate workload during certain EVA tasks when used in 1g environments.

Zachary Wusk↗

DOE OSTI2021

Performance Characteristics of the BlueField-2 SmartNIC

High-performance computing (HPC) researchers have long envisioned scenarios where application workflows could be improved through the use of programmable processing elements embedded in the network fabric. Recently, vendors have introduced programmable Smart Network Interface Cards (SmartNICs) that enable computations to be offloaded to the edge of the network. There is great interest in both the HPC and high-performance data analytics (HPDA) communities in understanding the roles these devices may play in the data paths of upcoming systems. This paper focuses on characterizing both the networking and computing aspects of NVIDIA’s new BlueField-2 SmartNIC when used in a 100Gb/s Ethernet environment. For the networking evaluation we conducted multiple transfer experiments between processors located at the host, the SmartNIC, and a remote host. These tests illuminate how much effort is required to saturate the network and help estimate the processing headroom available on the SmartNIC during transfers. For the computing evaluation we used the stress-ng benchmark to compare the BlueField-2 to other servers and place realistic bounds on the types of offload operations that are appropriate for the hardware. Our findings from this work indicate that while the BlueField-2 provides a flexible means of processing data at the network’s edge, great care must be taken to not overwhelm the hardware. While the host can easily saturate the network link, the SmartNIC’s embedded processors may not have enough computing resources to sustain more than half the expected bandwidth when using kernel-space packet processing. From a computational perspective, encryption operations, memory operations under contention, and on-card IPC operations on the SmartNIC perform significantly better than the general-purpose servers used for comparisons in our experiments. Therefore, applications that mainly focus on these operations may be good candidates for offloading to the SmartNIC.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Clacc: OpenACC for C/C++ in Clang

The Clacc project has developed OpenACC compiler, runtime, and profiling interface support for C/C++ by extending Clang and LLVM. A key Clacc design feature is that it translates OpenACC to OpenMP to leverage the OpenMP offloading support that is actively being developed for Clang and LLVM. A benefit of this design is support for two compilation modes: traditional compilation mode produces a binary, and source-to-source mode produces OpenMP source. Clacc has been deployed on Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL’s) Frontier, on which Clacc is the only OpenACC implementation for C/C++. Clacc supports x86_64, POWER9, AMD GPUs, and NVIDIA GPUs. Clacc’s OpenACC profiling interface support has been integrated with TAU, which is also deployed on Frontier. While Clacc has always supported C as a base language, Clacc also has increasing C++ support, including support for Kokkos’s OpenACC back end. Clacc itself is hosted publicly on GitHub. In this paper, we describe Clacc’s design and mapping from OpenACC directives to OpenMP. We also present a performance evaluation on ORNL’s Frontier (AMD MI250x GPU offload) and Argonne National Laboratory’s (ANL’s) Polaris (NVIDIA A100 GPU offload) for various SPEC ACCEL and Kokkos OpenACC back end benchmarks.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2021

Exploring OpenSNAPI Use Cases and Evolving Requirements [Slides]

Emerging system architectures are rapidly transforming in order to meet shifting requirements. Motivated by expanding data volumes, energy efficiency concerns, and the omnipresent need to improve performance, architectures are increasingly adopting a data-centric approach. At the core of this concept is the goal of minimizing data motion and instead processing data in-situ to the greatest degree possible. Therefore, data-centric designs, in contrast to conventional CPU-centric models, typically distribute compute capabilities throughout the architecture. As part of this paradigm shift, a novel class of devices known as data processing units (DPUs), alongside CPUs and GPUs, are quickly forming a third pillar of data-centric systems. These devices, which include smart network adapters and switches, seek to offload computation on data at the network edge as well as in-flight within the network fabric. The Open Smart Network API (OpenSNAPI) project seeks to develop a unified API for DPU devices. In our previous talks, we introduced the OpenSNAPI project and detailed our investigations regarding the viability of offloading compute intensive kernels to BlueField DPUs. In contrast, in this talk we detail our efforts to offload application-level file I/O to the DPU. We also discuss plans and early efforts to explore in-network compute capabilities. Finally, we describe our observations with respect to the evolving design of OpenSNAPI.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS1982

Design and feasibility study for a portable oil recovery turbopump

A portable oil recovery turbopump concept, using the Firefly module as primer mover, for the offloading of distressed tank vessels is examined. The demands to be met both in terms of the type of petroleum to be offloaded, as well as the operational requirements placed on the pump, are studied with respect to the capability of different pump configurations. Two configurations, one a centrifugal type and the other a screw type pump, are developed and evaluated. While the centrifugal configuration is found to be effective in a large proportion of tank vessel offloading situations, the screw type will be required where high viscosity cargoes are involved. The feasibility of the turbopump concept, with the Firefly module as prime mover, is established.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1991

Acquisition and production of skilled behavior in dynamic decision-making tasks: Modeling strategic behavior in human-automation interaction: Why and aid can (and should) go unused

Advances in computer and control technology offer the opportunity for task-offload aiding in human-machine systems. A task-offload aid (e.g., an autopilot, an intelligent assistant) can be selectively engaged by the human operator to dynamically delegate tasks to an automated system. Successful design and performance prediction in such systems requires knowledge of the factors influencing the strategy the operator develops and uses for managing interaction with the task-offload aid. A model is presented that shows how such strategies can be predicted as a function of three task context properties (frequency and duration of secondary tasks and costs of delaying secondary tasks) and three aid design properties (aid engagement and disengagement times, aid performance relative to human performance). Sensitivity analysis indicates how each of these contextual and design factors affect the optimal aid aid usage strategy and attainable system performance. The model is applied to understanding human-automation interaction in laboratory experiments on human supervisory control behavior. The laboratory task allowed subjects freedom to determine strategies for using an autopilot in a dynamic, multi-task environment. Modeling results suggested that many subjects may indeed have been acting appropriately by not using the autopilot in the way its designers intended. Although autopilot function was technically sound, this aid was not designed with due regard to the overall task context in which it was placed. These results demonstrate the need for additional research on how people may strategically manage their own resources, as well as those provided by automation, in an effort to keep workload and performance at acceptable levels.

Kirlik, Alex↗

NASA NTRS1993

Modeling strategic behavior in human-automation interaction - Why an 'aid' can (and should) go unused

Task-offload aids (e.g., an autopilot, an 'intelligent' assistant) can be selectively engaged by the human operator to dynamically delegate tasks to automation. Introducing such aids eliminates some task demands but creates new ones associated with programming, engaging, and disengaging the aiding device via an interface. The burdens associated with managing automation can sometimes outweigh the potential benefits of automation to improved system performance. Aid design parameters and features of the overall multitask context combine to determine whether or not a task-offload aid will effectively support the operator. A modeling and sensitivity analysis approach is presented that identifies effective strategies for human-automation interaction as a function of three task-context parameters and three aid design parameters. The analysis and modeling approaches provide resources for predicting how a well-adapted operator will use a given task-offload aid, and for specifying aid design features that ensure that automation will provide effective operator support in a multitask environment.

Kirlik, Alex↗

NASA NTRS2014

Use of Semi-Autonomous Tools for ISS Commanding and Monitoring

As the International Space Station (ISS) has moved into a utilization phase, operations have shifted to become more ground-based with fewer mission control personnel monitoring and commanding multiple ISS systems. This shift to fewer people monitoring more systems has prompted use of semi-autonomous console tools in the ISS Mission Control Center (MCC) to help flight controllers command and monitor the ISS. These console tools perform routine operational procedures while keeping the human operator "in the loop" to monitor and intervene when off-nominal events arise. Two such tools, the Pre-positioned Load (PPL) Loader and Automatic Operators Recorder Manager (AutoORM), are used by the ISS Communications RF Onboard Networks Utilization Specialist (CRONUS) flight control position. CRONUS is responsible for simultaneously commanding and monitoring the ISS Command & Data Handling (C&DH) and Communications and Tracking (C&T) systems. PPL Loader is used to uplink small pieces of frequently changed software data tables, called PPLs, to ISS computers to support different ISS operations. In order to uplink a PPL, a data load command must be built that contains multiple user-input fields. Next, a multiple step commanding and verification procedure must be performed to enable an onboard computer for software uplink, uplink the PPL, verify the PPL has incorporated correctly, and disable the computer for software uplink. PPL Loader provides different levels of automation in both building and uplinking these commands. In its manual mode, PPL Loader automatically builds the PPL data load commands but allows the flight controller to verify and save the commands for future uplink. In its auto mode, PPL Loader automatically builds the PPL data load commands for flight controller verification, but automatically performs the PPL uplink procedure by sending commands and performing verification checks while notifying CRONUS of procedure step completion. If an off-nominal condition occurs during procedure execution, PPL Loader notifies CRONUS through popup messages, allowing CRONUS to examine the situation and choose an option of how PPL loader should proceed with the procedure. The use of PPL Loader to perform frequent, routine PPL uplinks offloads CRONUS to better monitor two ISS systems. It also reduces procedure performance time and decreases risk of command errors. AutoORM identifies ISS communication outage periods and builds commands to lock, playback, and unlock ISS Operations Recorder files. Operation Recorder files are circular buffer files of continually recorded ISS telemetry data. Sections of these files can be locked from further writing, be played back to capture telemetry data that occurred during an ISS loss of signal (LOS) period, and then be unlocked for future recording use. Downlinked Operation Recorder files are used by mission support teams for data analysis, especially if failures occur during LOS. The commands to lock, playback, and unlock Operations Recorder files are encompassed in three different operational procedures and contain multiple user-input fields. AutoORM provides different levels of automation for building and uplinking the commands to lock, playback, and unlock Operations Recorder files. In its automatic mode, AutoORM automatically detects ISS LOS periods, then generates and uplinks the commands to lock, playback, and unlock Operations Recorder files when MCC regains signal with ISS. AutoORM also features semi-autonomous and manual modes which integrate CRONUS more into the command verification and uplink process. AutoORMs ability to automatically detect ISS LOS periods and build the necessary commands to preserve, playback, and release recorded telemetry data greatly offloads CRONUS to perform more high-level cognitive tasks, such as mission planning and anomaly troubleshooting. Additionally, since Operations Recorder commands contain numerical time input fields which are tedious for a human to manually build, AutoORM's ability to automatically build commands reduces operational command errors. PPL Loader and AutoORM demonstrate principles of semi-autonomous operational tools that will benefit future space mission operations. Both tools employ different levels of automation to perform simple and routine procedures, thereby offloading human operators to perform higher-level cognitive tasks. Because both tools provide procedure execution status and highlight off-nominal indications, the flight controller is able to intervene during procedure execution if needed. Semi-autonomous tools and systems that can perform routine procedures, yet keep human operators informed of execution, will be essential in future long-duration missions where the onboard crew will be solely responsible for spacecraft monitoring and control.

Brzezinski, Amy S.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Generating a Reduced Gravity Environment on Earth

The Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) is designed to simulate reduced gravity environments, such as Lunar, Martian, or microgravity using a vertical lifting hoist and horizontal motion system. Three directions of motion are provided over a 41 ft x 24 ft x 25 ft tall area. ARGOS supplies a continuous offload of a portion of a person's weight during dynamic motions such as walking, running, and jumping. The ARGOS system tracks the person's motion in the horizontal directions to maintain a vertical offload force directly above the person or payload by measuring the deflection of the cable and adjusting accordingly.

Dungan, L. K.↗

NASA NTRS2010

ATHLETE: Lunar Cargo Handling for International Lunar Exploration

As part of the Human-Robot Systems Project within the NASA Exploration Technology Development Program, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory is developing a vehicle called ATHLETE: the All-Terrain Hex-Limbed Extra-Terrestrial Explorer. The basic idea of ATHLETE is to have six relatively small wheels on the ends of legs. The small wheels and associated drive actuators are much less massive than the larger wheels and gears needed for an "all terrain" vehicle that cannot "walk" out of extreme terrain. The mass savings for the wheels and wheel actuators is greater than the mass penalty of the legs, for a net mass savings. Starting in 2009, NASA became engaged in detailed architectural studies for international discussions with the European Space Agency (ESA), the Japanese Space Agency (JAXA), and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) under the auspices of the International Architecture Working Group (IAWG). ATHLETE is considered in most of the campaign options considered, providing a way to offload cargo from large Altair-class landers (having a cargo deck 6+ meters above the surface) as well as offloading international landers launched on Ariane-5 or H-2 launch vehicles. These international landers would carry provisions as well as scientific instruments and/or small rovers that would be used by international astronauts as part of an international effort to explore the moon.Work described in this paper includes architectural studies in support of the international missions as well as field testing of a half-scale ATHLETE prototype performing cargo offloading from a lander mockup, along with multi-kilometer traverse, climbing over greater than 1 m rocks, tool use, etc.

International Collaboration in Space↗

NASA NTRS2021

Analysis of Exercise Loads to Inform Vibration Isolation System Design

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted with the primary interest of providing data that would inform Vibration Isolation and Stabilization (VIS) system design and performance for the European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D). In preparation for the International Space Station (ISS) in-flight demonstration, a list of critical Human Health Countermeasures (HHC) exercises was compiled [1]. The goal of this study was to assess the ground reaction forces and moments imposed by an exercising subject in each of the six VIS Degrees of Freedom (DOFs) during a comprehensive set of these critical exercises performed on the E4D. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ISS in-flight demonstration list of critical exercises included seated aerobic rowing, bent-over rowing, cycling, front squats, back squats, conventional deadlifts, Romanian deadlifts, heel raises, overhead presses, reverse chops, and power clean presses. At the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) Prototype Immersive Technology (PIT) laboratory, motion capture data were collected on critical E4D exercises for six subjects. At the NASA JSC Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) facility, additional motion capture and load cell data were collected on offloaded trials for four subjects. Select data were extrapolated to represent a 5th percentile female subject and a 95th percentile male subject. A previous investigation comparing the forces obtained from the load cell and from motion capture based data found a satisfactory level of agreement between the two measurements [2]. The motion capture based data were analyzed for this study since it is driven by the subject’s trajectory alone, automatically excluding any forces exerted on the subject by the ARGOS offloading harness. The OpenSim [3, 4] biomechanical simulation inverse kinematics tool was used to calculate the joint angles based on the locations of motion capture markers placed at key positions on the subject’s body. An OpenSim plugin was then used to obtain the forces and moments generated by the subject during each trial, with the moments computed relative to the equilibrium location of the subject’s feet [5]. The force of gravity was also removed to simulate the loads generated by the exercise when performed in microgravity. The load plots for each trial were generated and visually analyzed to obtain the magnitudes of the peak loads for each exercise in each DOF. The typical period of exercise for each trial was also estimated and used to calculate the frequency for each trial. The exercise loads data was then organized in multiple ways to capture different aspects of the data. As a result of this study, we present a summary of the load magnitudes observed during these critical exercises utilizing the E4D.

C A Bell↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of an Inertial Sensor-based Methodology for Spacesuited Geology Task Assessments during Simulated Lunar Extravehicular Activities

Lunar surface exploration during Artemis missions will require the specific skill set of geology sampling. Apollo astronauts had extensive training and used specialized tools to collect lunar rocks, core samples, pebbles, sand, and dust. The inflexibility of the pressurized Apollo spacesuits forced sampling to be taken at a standstill posture. However, new exploration spacesuits are expected to incorporate advanced materials and joint bearings, allowing for greater mobility and a wider range of functional postures. Thus, science and exploration during Artemis missions will likely involve a variety of standing, squatting, and kneeling postures. In preparation for future lunar exploration missions, NASA provides geologic training to astronauts and other mission personnel. This professional training with a spacesuit in simulated lunar environments will enhance performance and reduce risk of injury to astronauts on the lunar surface. However, anecdotally, untrained or newly trained people wearing prototype planetary spacesuits have been observed to performing motions differently than a trained geologist would when conducting the same geology sampling tasks. Therefore, a tool for evaluating geology postures at extravehicular activity (EVA) training facilities becomes required. In this paper, we introduce a novel inertial measurement unit (IMU)-based method of geology task assessments in spacesuited conditions during simulated lunar EVAs. As a case study, two subjects (one geologist and one non-geologist) participated and donned the Mark III prototype planetary spacesuit during offloading with the spreader bar gimbal in NASA’s Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS). For automated geology task assessments, the spacesuit was instrumented with three wireless IMUs (APDM Opal, OR, USA): one on the chest and one each on the left and right ankle bearings. Then subjects performed geology tasks using various tools (rake, trench, hammer chisel, scoop, and drive tube) for 45 minutes each. The chest IMU measured the torso tilt angle in the sagittal plane. We used an ensemble learning method with the ankle IMUs to discriminate between standing and kneeling activities. IMU data were processed using custom MATLAB (Mathworks, MA, USA) software. In our case study, the developed method was able to discriminate differences in standing and kneeling activity levels between subjects who were all highly experienced with spacesuited testing. Our preliminary data showed one subject maintained the constant and lower range of the upper body tilt angle while both standing and kneeling, while the other subject showed more variation of the upper body tilt angle and preferred bending the upper body rather than changing from standing to kneeling posture and vice versa. While geology experience may be a factor, these results need further investigation as suit sizing and ARGOS offloading configurations have been proven to have a significant influence on suited ARGOS tasks. Also, more subjects will be needed to complete these tasks for validation. IMU-based geology task assessments can provide useful information for geology training programs. Additionally, our IMU-based posture analysis can provide new insights into how to evaluate spacesuited geology task characteristics of astronauts during simulated lunar EVAs.

Kyoung Jae Kim↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Thermal Assessment of Traverse and Geology Task Iterations During Simulated Lunar Extravehicular Activity

Spacewalks or extravehicular activities (EVA) in microgravity are mentally and physically demanding. Current microgravity EVAs are predominantly focused on upper body tasks on engineered surfaces; however, the introduction of gravity means that crew members during future lunar EVAs will be required to perform tasks that generate full body workloads such as navigating natural lunar terrain while conducting geological sampling. To date, only 12 people have walked on the surface of the Moon resulting in limited knowledge of suited thermal regulation under lunar-relevant physical workloads. To address this gap, a study is underway to focus on spacesuit operations with simulated lunar EVA workloads. This study presents methodology for collecting standard thermal measures during suit testing. In this pilot study, two suited subjects underwent simulated lunar EVAs using the NASA Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) to simulate the effects of partial gravity. Each lunar EVA, lasting three to five hours, included various metabolically demanding EVA tasks. Subjects donned the NASA Mark III (MK III) space suit and were offloaded to 1/6th G (lunar gravity). A subset task circuit from one of these simulations replicated an EVA traverse to a lunar crater, taking a geological sample, and returning to base. The suited subject walked one 1500 m (0% grade) and three 500 m traverses at three different grades (10, 20, 30%). Between each traverse, subjects performed geology sampling tasks (0 and 10% grade). Thermal measurements included core and skin temperature, liquid cooling garment (LCG) inlet and outlet temperature, and spacesuit gas inlet and outlet temperature and humidity. Compared to baseline core temperature (S1 = 37.07±0.32 °C, S2 = 37.27±0.01 °C) and mean skin temperature (S1 = 32.38±0.34 °C, S2 = 33.62±0.03 °C), after a 1500 m traverse, each suited subject showed an increased core temperature (S1 = 37.23±0.12 °C, S2 = 37.41±0.11°C) and decreased mean skin temperature (S1 = 32.16±0.17 °C, S2 = 31.53±1.15 °C) at a delta LCG temperature (S1 = 1.86±0.24 °C, S2 = 2.20±0.76 °C) and delta suit humidity (S1 = 9.66±1.49 %, S2 = 11.50±1.58 %). Core temperature continued to increase from compounding traverse and geology tasks (S1 = 38.04±0.03 °C, S2 = 38.1±0.02 °C) accompanied by an increase in delta LCG temperature (S1 = 2.24±0.13 °C, S2 = 2.67±0.12 °C) and delta suit humidity (S1 = 28±2.42 %, S2 = 31±2.13 %). Conversely, as the circuit progressed, mean skin temperature continued to decrease due to sustained LCG heat rejection (S1 = 30.08±0.15 °C, S2 = 30.28±0.07 °C). During the simulated EVA circuit core temperature increased to elevated values and remained elevated as heat was retained while mean skin temperature decreased due to peripheral heat offloaded to the LCG. The thermal measures collected during this study provided critical heat loading dynamics during lunar EVA tasks. Including core and skin temperatures along with suited thermal measures provides a standard data collection scheme for human thermal metrics during EVA task management. Data collected in this configuration can be used to build future lunar EVA task circuits and human thermal predictions.

Bradley Hoffmann↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Surface Transportation of the Common Habitat from Lander to Habitation Zone

The Common Habitat Architecture is a feasibility study surrounding the use of an SLS core stage liquid oxygen tank as the pressure vessel for a long-duration habitat intended for use in multiple gravity environments. The Common Habitat is used within this study as the primary habitation element in both Moon and Mars surface base camps. The Common Habitat Architecture offloads the Common Habitat from its lander and transports it to a Habitation Zone instead of leaving the habitat integrated with the lander. In this study, the Landing Zone is assumed to be approximately 3.5 kilometers from the Habitation Zone. Given the physical size and estimated 90-ton mass of the Common Habitat, a four-week trade study encompassing Moon and Mars lander identification, offloading, surface transport, and emplacement was conducted in February 2021 to assess whether there are any credible options for landing the Common Habitat on the Moon or Mars and deliver it to its intended point of use. Constrained to use only public data, the study applied subject matter expert opinion to each component of the study. The surface transportation component of the trade study assumes the habitat has been successfully offloaded from its lander and is at a point of handover to the surface transportation system. It is assumed that there are no crew present, and all human operations are performed remotely by Mission Control personnel. Three core cargo handling elements from prior NASA studies were used as the basis from which to derive surface transportation options – the Chariot, the All-Terrain Hex-Limbed Extra-Terrestrial Explorer, and the Lightweight Surface Manipulator System. Variations and hybrid combinations of these elements were used to develop transportation options for the Moon and Mars, given different habitat masses. Ultimately, several potentially feasible solutions were identified, and a solution was recommended that is common to both the Moon and Mars, with the potential to use a dissimilar system as a backup during lunar Common Habitat delivery. Next steps for sizing and additional development and analysis of the recommended surface transportation system are included as forward work.

Surface Mobility↗