SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
A historical overview of the discovery and development of photography, related sciences, and remote sensing technology is presented. The role of education to date in the development of remote sensing is discussed. The probable future and potential of remote sensing and training is described.
The United States is in trouble in space. The costs of the proposed Space Station Freedom have grown beyond reach, and the present design is obsolete. The trouble has come from imagining that there are only two alternatives: manned vs. unmanned. Both choices have led us into designs that do not appear to be practical. On one side, the United States simply does not possess the robotic technology needed to operate or assemble a sophisticated unmanned space station. On the other side, the manned designs that are now under way seem far too costly and dangerous, with all of its thousands of extravehicular activity (EVA) hours. More would be accomplished at far less cost by proceeding in a different way. The design of a space station made of modular, Erector Set-like parts is proposed which is to be assembled using earth-based remotely-controlled binary-tree telerobots. Earth-based workers could be trained to build the station in space using simulators. A small preassembled spacecraft would be launched with a few telerobots, and then, telerobots could be ferried into orbit along with stocks of additional parts. Trained terrestrial workers would remotely assemble a larger station, and materials for additional power and life support systems could be launched. Finally, human scientists and explorers could be sent to the space station. Other aspects of such a space station program are discussed.
Focused interviews were conducted with the Apollo astronauts who landed on the moon. The purpose of these interviews was to help define extravehicular activity (EVA) system requirements for future lunar and planetary missions. Information from the interviews was examined with particular attention to identifying areas of consensus, since some commonality of experience is necessary to aid in the design of advanced systems. Results are presented under the following categories: mission approach; mission structure; suits; portable life support systems; dust control; gloves; automation; information, displays, and controls; rovers and remotes; tools; operations; training; and general comments. Research recommendations are offered, along with supporting information.
Footage shows the crew of STS-102, Commander James D. Wetherbee, Pilot James M. Kelly, and Mission Specialists Andrew S. W. Thomas and Paul Richards, during various parts of their training. Scenes include: (1) neutral buoyancy lab training; (2) undocking/fly-around training in the GNS (Navigation Simulator); (3) crew equipment interface test; (4) Remote Manipulator System (RMS) training in the GNS; and (5) docking training in the GNS.
Augmented reality is a technique whereby computer generated images are superimposed on live images for visual enhancement. Augmented reality can also be characterized as dynamic overlays when computer generated images are registered with moving objects in a live image. This technique has been successfully implemented, with low to medium levels of registration precision, in an NRA funded project entitled, "Improving Human Task Performance with Luminance Images and Dynamic Overlays". Future research is already being planned to also utilize a laboratory-based system where more extensive subject testing can be performed. However successful this might be, the problem will still be whether such a technology can be used with flight hardware. To answer this question, the Canadian Space Vision System (SVS) will be tested as an augmented reality system capable of improving human performance where the operation requires indirect viewing. This system has already been certified for flight and is currently flown on each shuttle mission for station assembly. Successful development and utilization of this system in a ground-based experiment will expand its utilization for on-orbit mission operations. Current research and development regarding the use of augmented reality technology is being simulated using ground-based equipment. This is an appropriate approach for development of symbology (graphics and annotation) optimal for human performance and for development of optimal image registration techniques. It is anticipated that this technology will become more pervasive as it matures. Because we know what and where almost everything is on ISS, this reduces the registration problem and improves the computer model of that reality, making augmented reality an attractive tool, provided we know how to use it. This is the basis for current research in this area. However, there is a missing element to this process. It is the link from this research to the current ISS video system and to flight hardware capable of utilizing this technology. This is the basis for this proposed Space Human Factors Engineering project, the determination of the display symbology within the performance limits of the Space Vision System that will objectively improve human performance. This utilization of existing flight hardware will greatly reduce the costs of implementation for flight. Besides being used onboard shuttle and space station and as a ground-based system for mission operational support, it also has great potential for science and medical training and diagnostics, remote learning, team learning, video/media conferencing, and educational outreach.
Throughout the history of human spaceflight, crewmembers have experienced various in-flight medical conditions including illness and injury. Planned missions to the Moon and Mars will require capabilities to maintain the health of future space travelers. Mass, power, and volume available in the vehicles and habitats for these missions will be severely constrained; resupply of resources will be limited or non-existent, as will opportunities for evacuation to Earth. Furthermore, ground-based support will be hampered by communication latencies and blackouts. These vehicle and mission constraints will necessitate a medical system that has been efficiently planned, providing on-board procedural guidance in addition to a variety of medical devices and consumable resources. Medical capabilities required for the diagnosis and treatment of potential medical conditions during future spaceflight missions may include real-time health monitoring, medical imaging, and biomarker analyses ( e.g., blood or urine). Terrestrial medicine shares these needs, thus many of these medical capabilities could likely be satisfied by Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) devices and methodologies; however, in some cases the unique space environment and increased mission duration will drive the need to modify technologies and the way care is provided. NASA’s Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element and Mars Campaign Office’s Exploration Medical Integrated Product Team (XMIPT) are working together to decrease medical risk during exploration missions. Flight-tested medical diagnostic and treatment technologies are necessary to effectively manage medical conditions relevant to exploration missions while meeting vehicle constraints, integrating with medical decision-support tools, and enabling increasingly Earth-independent operations. Several projects have leveraged the ISS as a testbed for exploration, including 1) i n- situ blood analysis, 2) medical inventory, 3) intravenous fluid generation, and 4) autonomous medical procedure guidance. Management of several in-flight medical conditions, such as bacterial and viral infections and acute radiation syndrome, is dramatically improved with ability to assess blood cell populations, electrolytes, and metabolites. I n December 2020 and January 2021 ExMC performed an ISS technology demonstration (Tech Demo) of the HemoCue® WBC DIFF analyzer (HemoCue, Brea, CA), a COTS device that was modified to enable functionality in a spaceflight environment. This Tech Demo marked the first time that hematology measurements were successfully performed real-time in microgravity. Also modified and demonstrated was the reusable Handheld Electrolytes and Lab Technology for Humans (rHEALTH) ONE analyzer (rHEALTH, Bedford, MA), which uses flow cytometry and sheath-based hydrodynamic focusing methodologies. The rHEALTH ONE ISS Tech Demo in May 2022 demonstrated test results obtained in-flight matched those on the ground. NASA currently relies on crew self-reporting to manage and maintain medical inventory on ISS.The ability to maintain an accurate inventory becomes more critical during long duration missions since the crew will need to be increasingly autonomous in finding and utilizing medical items, including those scenarios when alternative treatments need to be considered due to limited or no resupply. HRP’s Medical Consumables Tracking (MCT) project was developed by ZIN Technologies, Inc. (Cleveland, OH), and demonstrated real-time tracking of medical supplies aboard the ISS between December 2016 and July 2018. The MCT system design utilized Radio Frequency Identification Device (RFID) technology to perform automated inventory and was installed in the Crew Health Care System (CHeCS) Resupply Stowage Rack (RSR). The challenge of limited shelf life, exacerbated by the lack of resupply opportunities, affects a plethora of medical system components including consumables, pharmaceuticals, and intravenous (IV) fluid. In 2010, ExMC funded ZIN Technologies, Inc. (Cleveland, OH), to develop the Intravenous Fluid Generation (IVGEN) system. IV fluids were successfully generated with IVGEN using the potable water supply on ISS during ISS Expedition 23. The XMIPT is in the process of developing a miniaturized version of the original IVGEN hardware for a future Tech Demo aboard the ISS. Current ISS medical operations rely heavily on preflight training and real-time remote guidance, both of which become impractical or impossible for exploration missions. The primary goal of the Autonomous Medical Officer Support (AMOS) Software Tech Demos on ISS was to confirm telemedical proof-of-concept for autonomous medical imaging in an operational setting. This novel software tool shifts emphasis from preflight training and real-time remote guidance to in-flight just-in-time instruction, a new and necessary paradigm for crew medical autonomy. AMOS introduces a novel, streamlined skill management concept for exploration missions featuring comprehensive training and guidance modules for ultrasound examinations using the ISS Ultrasound 2 (a modified GE Vivid-q™; General Electric HealthCare, Chicago, IL). With no prior crew training or remote guidance, two Tech Demos on the ISS (April 2020 and June 2022) resulted in high quality, clinically useful image sets. We will provide a review of historical, current, and planned medical devices and technologies considered for inclusion within future spaceflight medical systems and summarize hardware development activities and medical device tech demos conducted on the ISS.
Computer-controlled simulator for training technicians to operate remote robots provides both visual and kinesthetic virtual reality. Used during initial stage of training; saves time and expense, increases operational safety, and prevents damage to robots by inexperienced operators. Computes virtual contact forces and torques of compliant robot in real time, providing operator with feel of forces experienced by manipulator as well as view in any of three modes: single view, two split views, or stereoscopic view. From keyboard, user specifies force-reflection gain and stiffness of manipulator hand for three translational and three rotational axes. System offers two simulated telerobotic tasks: insertion of peg in hole in three dimensions, and removal and insertion of drawer.
Direct involvement of educational institutions in the transfer of remote sensing technology must be increased so that the training component of the Western Regional Applications Program can be expanded within the various states. The implications of essential goals in remote sensing education and training are considered in relation to the functions of the NASA University Affairs program.
Requirements for a basic course in remote sensing to accommodate the needs of the graduate level and professional geologist are described. The course should stress the general topics of basic remote sensing theory, the theory and data types relating to different remote sensing systems, an introduction to the basic concepts of computer image processing and analysis, the characteristics of different data types, the development of methods for geological interpretations, the integration of all scales and data types of remote sensing in a given study, the integration of other data bases (geophysical and geochemical) into a remote sensing study, and geological remote sensing applications. The laboratories should stress hands on experience to reinforce the concepts and procedures presented in the lecture. The geologist should then be encouraged to pursue a second course in computer image processing and analysis of remotely sensed data.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
A syllabus and training materials prepared and used in a series of one-day workshops to introduce modern remote sensing technology to selected groups of professional personnel in Vermont are described. Success in using computer compatible tapes, LANDSAT imagery and aerial photographs is reported for the following applications: (1) mapping defoliation of hardwood forests by tent caterpillar and gypsy moth; (2) differentiating conifer species; (3) mapping ground cover of major lake and pond watersheds; (4) inventorying and locating artificially regenerated conifer forest stands; (5) mapping water quality; (6) ascertaining the boat population to quantify recreational activity on lakes and waterways; and (7) identifying potential aquaculture sites.
Convolutional neural networks (CNN) provide state-of-the-art performance in many computer vision tasks, including those related to remote-sensing image analysis. Successfully training a CNN to generalize well to unseen data, however, requires training on samples that represent the full distribution of variation of both the target classes and their surrounding contexts. With remote sensing data, acquiring a sufficiently representative training set is a challenge due to both the inherent multi-modal variability of satellite or aerial imagery and the general high cost of labeling data. To address this challenge, we have developed ISOSCELES, an Iterative Self-Organizing SCEne LEvel Sampling method for hierarchical sampling of large image sets. Using affinity propagation, ISOSCELES automates the selection of highly representative training images. Compared to random sampling or using available reference data, the distribution of the training is principally data driven, reducing the chance of oversampling uninformative areas or undersampling informative ones. In comparison to manual sample selection by an analyst, ISOSCELES exploits descriptive features, spectral and/or textural, and eliminates human bias in sample selection. Using a hierarchical sampling approach, ISOSCELES can obtain a training set that reflects both between-scene variability, such as in viewing angle and time of day, and within-scene variability at the level of individual training samples. We verify the method by demonstrating its superiority to stratified random sampling in the challenging task of adapting a pre-trained model to a new image and spatial domain for country-scale building extraction. Using a pair of hand-labeled training sets comprising 1,987 sample image chips, a total of 496,000,000 individually labeled pixels, we show, across three distinct model architectures, an increase in accuracy, as measured by F1-score, of 2.2–4.2%.
A self-contained and portable device which permits clinical electroencephalography (EEG) to be conducted in remote locations by minimally trained, nontechnical personnel was developed and tested. The unit accomplishes semiautomatic acquisition of EEG data from the patient, simultaneous transmission of eight data channels to a central hospital facility over conventional telephone equipment, and automatic printing (at the remote site) of the EEG report generated at the central location. Consequently, this system enables the delivery of high-quality EEG diagnostic services in a geographically remote site with the accuracy and speed formerly possible only in certain large medical centers. Beside obvious potential clinical applications, this system serves as an initial prototype of a unit which could provide inflight EEG during future space missions.
“No”- “not”- “can’t do it” – these words don’t fly in M2020 Mission Operations. The M2020 Surface Mission Operations Team trained for landing the Perseverance Rover under COVID-19 remote work/mandatory stay-at-home conditions. Training activities included presenting Flight Schools to the team via video conferencing, training COVID personal safety requirements to on-premises staff, and constantly updating and communicating COVID restrictions to the team as safety requirements changed. This paper explores the impact of COVID on the Mission System Training for M2020 Mission Operations. The layers of COVID, aptly named the “COVID Tax” by team management, affected project roles, communications, personnel interactions, operations facility usage and training exercises practiced by the team. Flight Schools and Operational Readiness Tests (ORTs) are driving forces behind the surface mission operations training. These activities work hand-in-hand to prepare the team for landing day, surface operations that transition from cruise to nominal operations, and nominal operations. Under normal training conditions, Flight Schools and ORTs are only concerned with tactical operations for the Uplink (Command) Downlink (Analysis) and Campaign Implementation (Planning) Teams of scientists and system engineers. Due to COVID, and the necessity to maintain physical distance between people, training for the landing team needed to include the new category of COVID personal safety. COVID also necessitated remote teams and video conferencing of the entirety of Flight Schools. This reliance on distance learning had not been done on previous missions. We will explore the advantages and disadvantages of video conferencing as a training platform; training effectiveness in communicating and practicing the multiple changes to the COVID safety protocols; and the timing in which we received and responded to COVID directives. Additionally, this paper will review the practical measures taken by the on-premises team and how the team adapted during the readiness tests, landing, and early mission operations, as well as how the team responded to the post-vaccine ramping down of COVID Protocols. The M2020 Surface Mission Operations Team responded very well to the challenges of COVID. All pre-landing operational and COVID-related training was completed. Post-landing COVID Training was provided as needed to new on-premises personnel. Training presented on COVID for the first operational readiness test (ORT) consisted of 2.5 hours of training. Each ORT had COVID Training. A person who had participated in all of the ORTs from September 2020 – February 2021 would have received over 7 hours of COVID Training. By ORT-12 (approximately 8 weeks after the first ORT), the Training team consolidated the original COVID training to a one-hour COVID Basic Training course, with additional recommended training. The Basic training course was updated after landing, as vaccines became available. COVID Training had multiple Flight Schools in the self-directed Blackboard Learning system, as well as a Quick Reference Wiki for Onboarding of new on-premises personnel and keeping on-premises personnel up-to-date. COVID Training covered many topics including practical methods of 6-foot distancing, how to interact with an IT professional when help was needed at a workstation, and challenging indoor meal-eating protocols. COVID Training continued to be updated, as the lab and the project respond to the virus variants and federal, state and local ordinances.
Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km. Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 1–1.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “firstlook” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.
Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. NASA conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km (distances relevant to LTV-SYS071 and -029 requirements). Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 11.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “first-look” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.
A comparative study is made of the training practices used for Space Shuttle crews and those projected for the NASA Space Station Freedom, with a view to the relative advantages anticipated for these methods in the fields of long-duration flights, on-orbit construction techniques, on-orbit maintenance requirements, medical expertise, and remote manipulator operations. A Training Operations Subpanel has been established by NASA for the coordination of training method developments across the various elements and phases of the program.
Many envisioned technological and conceptual innovations focus on allocating more functions to automation, relegating the human as an afterthought if not a nuisance. Yet, until complete autonomy is realized, the human will remain “in the loop”. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is supporting research for the development and maturation of automated technologies and architectures for the future of advanced air mobility. Standing up a remote operations center used to control, manage, and monitor multiple highly automated vehicles is an important step towards realizing the advanced air mobility vision. At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Langley Research Center, a remote operation center exists and has been tested using humans piloting simulated vehicles. In this paper, we explore the human element within live flight operations that rely on increasingly automated technologies. Four ground control station operators performed multiple live flight operations. We employed a naturalistic approach and relied on qualitative data such as interviews and discussions with subject matter experts to help facilitate discovery. The present work evaluates the functions that the human and the automation had during the live operations, lists psychological constructs that may have promoted or reduced task performance, and provides recommendations on design of the remote operations environment and training of future ground control station operators.