Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Human Performance”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 1,045 records · Page 58
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Fall 2015 NASA Internship, and Space Radiation Health Project

This fall, I was fortunate enough to have been able to participate in an internship at NASA's Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center. I was placed into the Human Health & Performance Directorate, where I was specifically tasked to work with Dr. Zarana Patel, researching the impacts of cosmic level radiation on human cells. Using different laboratory techniques, we were able to examine the cells to see if any damage had been done due to radiation exposure, and if so, how much damage was done. Cell culture samples were exposed at different doses, and fixed at different time points so that we could accumulate a large pool of quantifiable data. After examining quantifiable results relative to the impacts of space radiation on the human body at the cellular and chromosomal level, researchers can defer to different areas of the space program that have to do with astronaut safety, and research and development (extravehicular mobility unit construction, vehicle design and construction, etc.). This experience has been very eye-opening, and I was able to learn quite a bit. I learned some new laboratory techniques, and I did my best to try and learn new ways to balance such a hectic work and school schedule. I also learned some very intimate thing about working at NASA; I learned that far more people want to watch you succeed, rather than watch you fail, and I also learned that this is a place that is alive with innovators and explorers - people who have a sole purpose of exploring space for the betterment of humanity, and not for any other reason. It's truly inspiring. All of these experiences during my internship have impacted me in a really profound way, so much that my educational and career goals are completely different than when I started. I started out as a biotechnology major, and I discovered recently toward the end of the internship, that I don't want to work in a lab, nor was I as enthralled by biological life sciences as a believed myself to be. Taking that all into consideration, I've actually changed my major to mechanical engineering. I discovered that I enjoy building things, and I enjoy learning about materials and interactions between different things. And I quickly became obsessed with rocket and aerospace engineering, so I've decided that after a mechanical engineering degree, I will be pursuing an advanced degree in aerospace engineering. One final way that I was effected by this internship, is that I discovered that I don't want to have a career at NASA. I love this agency with all of my heart, but I refuse to allow my innovation to be bound by a scientifically illiterate congress. As such, I have decided to pursue commercial aerospace companies, such as Space, XCOR, Masten Space Systems, Orbital ATK, and many, many, more. Maybe one day I'll end up back here. I believe in what this agency is doing with my whole heart, and it's unfortunate to see them curtailed in some capacities as a result of budgetary constraints, brought on by people who don't fully understand the effort behind putting people in to space. All in all, this experience has been the best experience of my life - literally a childhood dream came true during this experience - and I cannot adequately explain how grateful I am to have been here for the past sixteen weeks.

Patience, Luke↗
NASA NTRS2013

Robotic Technology Development at Ames: The Intelligent Robotics Group and Surface Telerobotics

Future human missions to the Moon, Mars, and other destinations offer many new opportunities for exploration. But, astronaut time will always be limited and some work will not be feasible for humans to do manually. Robots, however, can complement human explorers, performing work autonomously or under remote supervision from Earth. Since 2004, the Intelligent Robotics Group has been working to make human-robot interaction efficient and effective for space exploration. A central focus of our research has been to develop and field test robots that benefit human exploration. Our approach is inspired by lessons learned from the Mars Exploration Rovers, as well as human spaceflight programs, including Apollo, the Space Shuttle, and the International Space Station. We conduct applied research in computer vision, geospatial data systems, human-robot interaction, planetary mapping and robot software. In planning for future exploration missions, architecture and study teams have made numerous assumptions about how crew can be telepresent on a planetary surface by remotely operating surface robots from space (i.e. from a flight vehicle or deep space habitat). These assumptions include estimates of technology maturity, existing technology gaps, and likely operational and functional risks. These assumptions, however, are not grounded by actual experimental data. Moreover, no crew-controlled surface telerobotic system has yet been fully tested, or rigorously validated, through flight testing. During Summer 2013, we conducted a series of tests to examine how astronauts in the International Space Station (ISS) can remotely operate a planetary rover across short time delays. The tests simulated portions of a proposed human-robotic Lunar Waypoint mission, in which astronauts in lunar orbit remotely operate a planetary rover on the lunar Farside to deploy a radio telescope array. We used these tests to obtain baseline-engineering data.

robotics↗
DOE OSTI2019

Assessment of HRA method predictions against operating crew performance: Part II: Overall simulator data, HRA method predictions, and intra-method comparisons

This is the third in a series of four papers documenting two large-scale human reliability analysis (HRA) empirical studies – the International HRA Empirical Study and the US HRA Empirical Study. Here, the goal of the two studies was to develop an empirically-based understanding of the performance, strengths, and weaknesses of HRA methods by comparing HRA method predictions against actual operator performance in simulated accident scenarios on nuclear power plant (NPP) simulators. However, since in most cases only a single HRA team applied a given method in the International study, it was often difficult to separate analyst effects from variability in results related to the methods themselves. Since at least two HRA teams used each of the HRA methods in the US Study, intra-method comparisons were performed to identify method strengths and weaknesses independent of analyst specific effects where possible. This paper first summarizes the intra-method comparison results from the U.S. Study. Then, it discusses the reasons for the observed HRA predictive differences and the underlying methodological and guidance limitations that permitted the differences to arise. In the fourth paper, this information is combined wit h the results of the comparisons of method predictions to the actual crew data, from both the International and U.S. Studies, to develop the final conclusions about overall strengths and weaknesses of HRA methods.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS1989

Tele-autonomous systems: New methods for projecting and coordinating intelligent action at a distance

There is a growing need for humans to perform complex remote operations and to extend the intelligence and experience of experts to distant applications. It is asserted that a blending of human intelligence, modern information technology, remote control, and intelligent autonomous systems is required, and have coined the term tele-autonomous technology, or tele-automation, for methods producing intelligent action at a distance. Tele-automation goes beyond autonomous control by blending in human intelligence. It goes beyond tele-operation by incorporating as much autonomy as possible and/or reasonable. A new approach is discussed for solving one of the fundamental problems facing tele-autonomous systems: The need to overcome time delays due to telemetry and signal propagation. New concepts are introduced called time and position clutches, that allow the time and position frames between the local user control and the remote device being controlled, to be desynchronized respectively. The design and implementation of these mechanisms are described in detail. It is demonstrated that these mechanisms lead to substantial telemanipulation performance improvements, including the result of improvements even in the absence of time delays. The new controls also yield a simple protocol for control handoffs of manipulation tasks between local operators and remote systems.

Conway, Lynn↗
NASA NTRS2016

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (Orion)

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) uses two human reliability analysis (HRA) methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate or screening value is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more challenging. In order to determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana↗
NASA NTRS2017

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (Orion)

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) uses two human reliability analysis (HRA) methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate or screening value is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more challenging. To determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators, and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules, and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana L.↗
NASA NTRS2004

An Evolved Antenna for Deployment on NASA's Space Technology 5 Mission

We present an evolved X - band antenna design and flight prototype currently on schedule to be deployed on NASA's Space Technology 5(ST5) spacecraft. Current methods of designing and optimizing antennas by hand are time and labor intensive, limit complexity and require significant expertise and experience. Evolutionary design techniques can overcome these limitations by searching the design space and automatically finding effective solutions that would ordinarily not be found. The ST5 antenna was evolved to meet a challenging set of mission requirements, most notably the combination of wide beamwidth for a circularly-polarized wave and wide bandwidth.Two evolutionary algorithms were used: one used a genetic algorithm style representation that did not allow branching in the antenna arms: the second used a genetic programming style tree-structured representation that allowed branching in the antenna arms. The highest performance antennas from both algorithms were fabricated and tested and both yielded similar performance. Both were comparable in performance to a hand-designed antenna produced by a contractor for the mission, and so we consider them examples of human-competitive performance by evolutionary algorithms. One of the evolved antenna prototypes is undergoing flight qualification testing.

Lohn, Jason D.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Evidence Report: Risk of Acute and Late Central Nervous System Effects from Radiation Exposure

Possible acute and late risks to the central nervous system (CNS) from galactic cosmic rays (GCR) and solar particle events (SPE) are a documented concern for human exploration of space. Acute CNS risks include: altered cognitive function, reduced motor function, and behavioral changes, all of which may affect performance and human health. Late CNS risks include neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), dementia and premature aging. Although detrimental CNS changes are observed in humans treated with high-dose radiation (e.g., gamma rays and protons) for cancer and are supported by experimental evidence showing neurocognitive and behavioral effects in animal models, the significance of these results on the morbidity to astronauts has not been elucidated. There is a lack of human epidemiology data on which to base CNS risk estimates; therefore, risk projection based on scaling to human data, as done for cancer risk, is not possible for CNS risks. Research specific to the spaceflight environment using animal and cell models must be compiled to quantify the magnitude of CNS changes in order to estimate this risk and to establish validity of the current permissible exposure limits (PELs). In addition, the impact of radiation exposure in combination with individual sensitivity or other space flight factors, as well as assessment of the need for biological/pharmaceutical countermeasures, will be considered after further definition of CNS risk occurs.

Nelson, Gregory A.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (ORION)

NASA uses two HRA assessment methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is still expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a PRA model that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more problematic. In order to determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana L.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Marshall Space Flight Center's Virtual Reality Applications Program 1993

A Virtual Reality (VR) applications program has been under development at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) since 1989. Other NASA Centers, most notably Ames Research Center (ARC), have contributed to the development of the VR enabling technologies and VR systems. This VR technology development has now reached a level of maturity where specific applications of VR as a tool can be considered. The objectives of the MSFC VR Applications Program are to develop, validate, and utilize VR as a Human Factors design and operations analysis tool and to assess and evaluate VR as a tool in other applications (e.g., training, operations development, mission support, teleoperations planning, etc.). The long-term goals of this technology program is to enable specialized Human Factors analyses earlier in the hardware and operations development process and develop more effective training and mission support systems. The capability to perform specialized Human Factors analyses earlier in the hardware and operations development process is required to better refine and validate requirements during the requirements definition phase. This leads to a more efficient design process where perturbations caused by late-occurring requirements changes are minimized. A validated set of VR analytical tools must be developed to enable a more efficient process for the design and development of space systems and operations. Similarly, training and mission support systems must exploit state-of-the-art computer-based technologies to maximize training effectiveness and enhance mission support. The approach of the VR Applications Program is to develop and validate appropriate virtual environments and associated object kinematic and behavior attributes for specific classes of applications. These application-specific environments and associated simulations will be validated, where possible, through empirical comparisons with existing, accepted tools and methodologies. These validated VR analytical tools will then be available for use in the design and development of space systems and operations and in training and mission support systems.

Hale, Joseph P., II↗
NASA NTRS2016

Evidence Report: Risk of Acute and Late Central Nervous System Effects from Radiation Exposure

Possible acute and late risks to the central nervous system (CNS) from galactic cosmic rays (GCR) and solar particle events (SPE) are concerns for human exploration of space. Acute CNS risks may include: altered cognitive function, reduced motor function, and behavioral changes, all of which may affect performance and human health. Late CNS risks may include neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), dementia and premature aging. Although detrimental CNS changes are observed in humans treated with high-dose radiation (e.g., gamma rays and 9 protons) for cancer and are supported by experimental evidence showing neurocognitive and behavioral effects in animal models, the significance of these results on the morbidity to astronauts has not been elucidated. There is a lack of human epidemiology data on which to base CNS risk estimates; therefore, risk projection based on scaling to human data, as done for cancer risk, is not possible for CNS risks. Research specific to the spaceflight environment using animal and cell models must be compiled to quantify the magnitude of CNS changes in order to estimate this risk and to establish validity of the current permissible exposure limits (PELs). In addition, the impact of radiation exposure in combination with individual sensitivity or other space flight factors, as well as assessment of the need for biological/pharmaceutical countermeasures, will be considered after further definition of CNS risk occurs.

Nelson, Gregory A.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Space human factors discipline science plan

The purpose of this Discipline Science Plan is to provide a conceptual strategy for NASA's Life Sciences Division research and development activities in the comprehensive areas of behavior, performance, and human factors. This document summarizes the current status of the program, outlines available knowledge, establishes goals and objectives, defines critical questions in the subdiscipline areas, and identifies technological priorities. It covers the significant research areas critical to NASA's programmatic requirements for the Extended Duration Orbiter, Space Station Freedom, and Exploration mission science activities. These science activities include ground-based and flight; basic, applied and operational; and animal and human research and development. This document contains a general plan that will be used by both NASA Headquarters program offices and the field centers to review and plan basic, applied, and operational research and development activities, both intramural and extramural, in this area.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

Effect of contrast on the active control of a moving line

In many passive visual tasks, human perceptual judgments are contrast dependent. To explore whether these contrast dependencies of visual perception also affect closed-loop manual control tasks, we examined visuomotor performance as humans actively controlled a moving luminance-defined line over a range of contrasts. Four subjects were asked to use a joystick to keep a horizontal line centered on a display as its vertical position was perturbed by a sum of sinusoids under two control regimes. The total root mean square (RMS) position error decreased quasi-linearly with increasing log contrast across the tested range (mean slope across subjects: -8.0 and -7.7% per log2 contrast, for the two control regimes, respectively). Frequency-response (Bode) plots showed a systematic increase in open-loop gain (mean slope: 1.44 and 1.30 dB per log2 contrast, respectively), and decrease in phase lag with increasing contrast, which can be accounted for by a decrease in response time delay (mean slope: 32 and 40 ms per log2 contrast, respectively). The performance data are well fit by a Crossover Model proposed by McRuer and Krendel, which allowed us to identify both visual position and motion cues driving performance. This analysis revealed that the position and motion cues used to support manual control under both control regimes appear equally sensitive to changes in stimulus contrast. In conclusion, our data show that active control of a moving visual stimulus is as dependent on contrast as passive perception and suggest that this effect is attributed to a shared contrast sensitivity early in the visual pathway, before any specialization for motion processing.

Contrast Sensitivity/physiology↗
NASA NTRS2011

Application of Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) Patterns to Reduce Crew Operations (RCO)

Unmanned aerial systems, advanced cockpits, and air traffic management are all seeing dramatic increases in automation. However, while automation may take on some tasks previously performed by humans, humans will still be required to remain in the system for the foreseeable future. The collaboration between humans and these increasingly autonomous systems will begin to resemble cooperation between teammates, rather than simple task allocation. It is critical to understand this human-autonomy teaming (HAT) to optimize these systems in the future. One methodology to understand HAT is by identifying recurring patterns of HAT that have similar characteristics and solutions. This paper applies a methodology for identifying HAT patterns to an advanced cockpit project.

design patterns↗
NASA NTRS2016

Review of NASA's Evidence Reports on Human Health Risks

NASA has requested a study from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to provide an independent review of more than 30 evidence reports on human health risks for long duration and exploration spaceflight. The evidence reports, which are publicly available, are categorized into five broad categories: (1) behavioral health and performance; (2) human health countermeasures (with a focus on bone metabolism and orthopedics, nutrition, immunology, and cardiac and pulmonary physiology); (3) radiation; (4) human factors issues; and (5) exploration medical capabilities. The reports are revised on an ongoing basis to incorporate new scientific information. In conducting this study, an IOM ad hoc committee will build on the 2008 IOM report Review of NASA's Human Research Program Evidence Books. That report provided an assessment of the process used for developing the evidence reports and provided an initial review of the evidence reports that had been completed at that time. Each year, NASA staff will identify a set of evidence reports for committee review. Over the course of the study all evidence reports will be reviewed. The committee will hold an annual scientific workshop to receive input on the evidence reports it is reviewing that year and an update on the recent literature. The committee will issue an annual letter report that addresses the following questions relevant to each evidence report: 1. Does the evidence report provide sufficient evidence, as well as sufficient risk context, that the risk is of concern for long-term space missions? 2. Does the evidence report make the case for the research gaps presented? 3. Are there any additional gaps in knowledge or areas of fundamental research that should be considered to enhance the basic understanding of this specific risk? 4. Does the evidence report address relevant interactions among risks? 5. Is input from additional disciplines needed? 6. Is the breadth of the cited literature sufficient? 7. What is the overall readability and quality? 8. Is the expertise of the authors sufficient to fully cover the scope of the given risk? 9. Has the evidence report addressed previous recommendations made by the IOM in the 2008 letter report?

Scott-Conner, Carol E. H.↗