Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Astronaut training”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

Field Camp for Astronauts: NASA's Geoscience Training Program for Planetary Exploration

Fifty years ago Apollo astronauts walked on the Moon to explore the geology and collect samples for Earth return. Several authors have discussed the strategic planning and training that enabled the Apollo successes, and assembled recommendations regarding today’s lunar science objectives and astronaut training required to achieve those science goals. Since the 1980s, geoscience training for astronauts focused on observing the Earth from orbit. Today, we are building a geoscience training program to support informed Earth observations as well as the exploration culture for future human missions to the Moon and Mars. Our team partnered with JSC’s crew training and astronaut offices to develop our 4-week geoscience program for the 2017 astronaut class. Because the astronauts have a variety of professional backgrounds, we provide a broad introduction to Earth and planetary sciences. But our prime focus is 2 weeks of intensive field work, a methodology introduced with the 2013 astronaut class. We completed the first half of the training – a field trip to observe hurricane deposits along Galveston Bay; keynotes by Apollo colleagues highlighting Apollo experiences; a tightly-integrated week of introductory geology in the classroom followed by a week of fieldwork in the Rio Grande del Norte National Monument. The classroom included interactive map exercises that allowed the students to progressively build a base map of the field area that they used as a starting point for their week-long mapping exercise. We divided the class into small mapping groups to conduct their observations, mapping and interpretation of the geology. In addition to learning geological field work, our field training provided the platform for practicing expeditionary leadership, a key skill set valued by NASA for astronaut crews. Next summer the capstone fieldwork for the 2017 astronauts will include both mapping and rock sampling. Throughout the mapping, the class will collect additional data to help inform field and sampling decisions using diagnostic field instruments that are being tested in analog settings for their operational efficacy for future planetary exploration.

Evans, Cynthia A.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Assessing the Effect of Spaceflight on the Propensity for Astronauts to Develop Disk Herniation

BACKGROUND: A previous study [1] reported that the instantaneous risk of developing a Herniated Nucleus Pulposus (HNP) was higher in astronauts who had flown at least one mission, as compared with those in the corps who had not yet flown. However, the study only analyzed time to HNP after the first mission (if any) and did not account for the possible effects of multiple missions. While many HNP's occurred well into astronauts' careers or in some cases years after retirement, the higher incidence of HNPs relatively soon after completion of space missions appears to indicate that spaceflight may lead to an increased risk of HNP. The purpose of this study was to support the Human System Risk Board assessment of back pain, evaluate the risk of injury due to dynamic loads, and update the previous dataset which contained events up to December 31, 2006. METHODS: Data was queried from the electronic medical record and provided by the Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health. The data included all 330 United States astronauts from 1959 through February 2014. Cases were confirmed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Computerized Tomography, Myelography, operative findings, or through clinical confirmation with a neurologist or neurosurgeon. In this analysis, astronauts who had an HNP at selection into the corps or had an HNP diagnosis prior to their first flight were excluded. The statistical challenges in using the available data to separate effects of spaceflight from those associated with general astronaut training and lifestyle on propensity to develop HNPs are many. The primary outcome is reported date of first HNP (if any), which at best is only an approximation to the actual time of occurrence. To properly analyze this data with a survival analysis model, one must also know the "exposure" time - i.e. how long each astronaut has been at risk for developing an HNP. If an HNP is reported soon after a mission, is it mission caused or general? If the former, exposure time should be counted from the time of landing (assuming the risk of HNP occurring during a mission is zero). If the latter, exposure time should be counted from the time of selection; however we can't directly know which one to use. In our analysis we take both of these possibilities into account with a competing risks model, wherein two distinct stochastic processes are going on: TG = time to HNP (general) and TS = time to HNP (spaceflight). Under this type of model, whichever of these occurs first is what we observe; in other words we don't observe TG or TS, only min(TG, TS). Here, we parameterized the model in terms of separate Weibull hazard functions for each process and estimated all parameters using maximum likelihood. In addition, we allowed for a "cured fraction" - i.e. the possibility that some astronauts may never develop an HNP. RESULTS: Results will include a depiction of the competing hazard functions as well as a probability curve for the relative likelihood that an HNP reported at a given time after a mission is actually mission caused. Other factors, such as dwell time in microgravity and vehicle landing environment will be explored. An overall assessment as to whether spaceflight truly exacerbates HNP risk will be made.

Feiveson, A. H.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Jake Garn Mission Simulator and Training Facility, Building 5, Historical Documentation

In response to President George W. Bush's announcement in January 2004 that the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) would end in 2010, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) completed a nation-wide historical survey and evaluation of NASA-owned facilities and properties (real property assets) at all its Centers and component facilities. The buildings and structures which supported the SSP were inventoried and assessed as per the criteria of eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in the context of this program. This study was performed in compliance with Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (Public Law 89-665), as amended; the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (Public Law 91-190); Executive Order (EO) 11593: Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment; EO 13287, Preserve America, and other relevant legislation. As part of this nation-wide study, in September 2006, historical survey and evaluation of NASA-owned and managed facilities at was conducted by NASA's Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas. The results of this study are presented in a report entitled, "Survey and Evaluation of NASA-owned Historic Facilities and Properties in the Context of the U.S. Space Shuttle Program, Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas," prepared in November 2007 by NASA JSC's contractor, Archaeological Consultants, Inc. As a result of this survey, the Jake Gam Mission Simulator and Training Facility (Building 5) was determined eligible for listing in the NRHP, with concurrence by the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). The survey concluded that Building 5 is eligible for the NRHP under Criteria A and C in the context of the U.S. Space Shuttle program (1969-2010). Because it has achieved significance within the past 50 years, Criteria Consideration G applies. At the time of this documentation, Building 5 was still used to support the SSP as an astronaut training facility. This documentation package precedes any undertaking as defined by Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, and implemented in 36 CFR Part 800, as NASA JSC has decided to proactively pursue efforts to mitigate the potential adverse affects of any future modifications to the facility. It includes a historical summary of the Space Shuttle program; the history of JSC in relation to the SSP; a narrative of the history of Building 5 and how it supported the SSP; and a physical description of the structure. In addition, photographs documenting the construction and historical use of Building 5 in support of the SSP, as well as photographs of the facility documenting the existing conditions, special technological features, and engineering details, are included. A contact sheet printed on archival paper, and an electronic copy of the work product on CD, are also provided.

Slovinac, Trish↗
NASA NTRS2017

Space Science Investigation: NASA ISS Stowage Simulator

During this internship the opportunity was granted to work with the Integrated, Graphics, Operations and Analysis Laboratory (IGOAL) team. The main assignment was to create 12 achievement patches for the Space Station training simulator called the "NASA ISS Stowage Training Game." This project was built using previous IGOAL developed software. To accomplish this task, Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator were used to craft the badges and other elements required. Blender, a 3D modeling software, was used to make the required 3D elements. Blender was a useful tool to make things such as a CTB bag for the "No More Bob" patch which shows a gentleman kicking a CTB bag into the distance. It was also used to pose characters to the positions that was optimal for their patches as in the "Station Sanitation" patch which portrays and astronaut waving on a U.S module on a truck. Adobe Illustrator was the main piece of software for this task. It was used to craft the badges and upload them when they were completed. The style of the badges were flat, meaning that they shouldn't look three dimensional in any way, shape or form. Adobe Photoshop was used when any pictures need brightening and was where the texture for the CTB bag was made. In order for the patches to be ready for the game's next major release, they have to go under some critical reviewing, revising and re-editing to make sure the other artists and the rest of the staff are satisfied with the final products. Many patches were created and revamped to meet the flat setting and incorporate suggestions from the IGOAL team. After the three processes were completed, the badges were implemented into the game (reference fig1 for badges). After a month of designing badges, the finished products were placed into the final game build via the programmers. The art was the final piece in showcasing the latest build to the public for testing. Comments from the testers were often exceptional and the feedback on the badges were outstanding. The latest build will also be tested by astronauts to determine if the product could potentially be incorporated into the astronaut training program. This experience has provided the opportunity to experience the feeling of working with research and development organization. The art skills and programming skills received at the internship will provide and maintain and strong foundation for a career in computer programming and digital media.

Crawford, Gary↗
NASA NTRS2008

Constellation Training Facility Support

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is developing the next set of vehicles that will take men back to the moon under the Constellation Program. The Constellation Training Facility (CxTF) is a project in development that will be used to train astronauts, instructors, and flight controllers on the operation of Constellation Program vehicles. It will also be used for procedure verification and validation of flight software and console tools. The CxTF will have simulations for the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), Crew Module (CM), CEV Service Module (SM), Launch Abort System (LAS), Spacecraft Adapter (SA), Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV), Pressurized Cargo Variant CM, Pressurized Cargo Variant SM, Cargo Launch Vehicle, Earth Departure Stage (EDS), and the Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM). The Facility will consist of part-task and full-task trainers, each with a specific set of mission training capabilities. Part task trainers will be used for focused training on a single vehicle system or set of related systems. Full task trainers will be used for training on complete vehicles and all of its subsystems. Support was provided in both software development and project planning areas of the CxTF project. Simulation software was developed for the hydraulic system of the Thrust Vector Control (TVC) of the ARES I launch vehicle. The TVC system is in charge of the actuation of the nozzle gimbals for navigation control of the upper stage of the ARES I rocket. Also, software was developed using C standards to send and receive data to and from hand controllers to be used in CxTF cockpit simulations. The hand controllers provided movement in all six rotational and translational axes. Under Project Planning & Control, support was provided to the development and maintenance of integrated schedules for both the Constellation Training Facility and Missions Operations Facilities Division. These schedules maintain communication between projects in different levels. The CxTF support provided is one that requires continuous maintenance since the project is still on initial development phases.

Flores, Jose M.↗
NASA NTRS2008

International Space Station Human Behavior and Performance Competency Model: Volume I

This document defines Human Behavior and Performance (HBP) competencies that are recommended to be included as requirements to participate in international long duration missions. They were developed in response to the Multilateral Crew Operations Panel (MMOP) request to develop HBP training requirements for the International Space Station (ISS). The competency model presented here was developed by the ITCB HBPT WG and forms the basis for determining the HBP training curriculum for long duration crewmembers. This document lists specific HBP competencies and behaviors required of astronauts/cosmonauts who participate in ISS expedition and other international longduration missions. Please note that this model does not encompass all competencies required. For example, outside the scope of this document are cognitive skills and abilities, including but not limited to concentration, memorization, perception, imagination, and thinking. It is assumed that these skills, which are crucial in terms of human behavior and performance, are considered during selection phase since such professionally significant qualities of the operator should be taken into consideration in order to ensure sufficient baseline levels that can be further improved during general astronaut training. Also, technical competencies, even though critical for crewmembers, are beyond the scope of this document. It should also be noted that the competencies in this model (and subsequent objectives) are not intended to limit the internal activities or training programs of any international partner.

Schmidt, Lacey↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Volcanic Field Sites for Artemis Testing and Training

The Artemis Program will reestablish human presence on the Moon and lead to a new era of scientific discovery and exploration. Led by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Artemis Program is a collaboration of space agencies and companies around the world. An integrated effort between various disciplines of science, engineering, and mission operations is currently developing methods, facilities, and analog field locations to train astronauts and test hardware and concepts of operations. These efforts aim to best prepare for the next steps of human exploration on the lunar surface and beyond. Numerous terrestrial volcanic field sites were evaluated and selected for their unique roles in helping to prepare for the lunar surface mission phases. This effort heavily leveraged the comprehensive academic research conducted at these field sites, as well as the tremendous Apollo heritage. The currently selected volcanic field sites include the San Francisco Volcanic Field in Northern Arizona, the Potrillo Volcanic Field in southern New Mexico, the highlands of Iceland, and the Southwestern Nevada Volcanic Field. Within each of these volcanic field sites numerous specific testing and training locations are being further developed utilizing the analogous terrain and unique features in these regions. Recent Artemis testing and training events have been conducted at a number of these volcanic field sites by both a dedicated Artemis Geology Training Team and a Joint Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) Testing Team. This presentation will highlight the selected sites as well as the objectives and accomplishments of some of the recent field-testing events and training courses. Additionally, we continually strive to pursue additional sites, locations, data sets, collaborations, and partnerships in this endeavor and welcome knowledge transfer and community input.

Trevor Graff↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing a Motion-Based System for Lunar Vehicle Handling Qualities Testing

— Motion and visual cue influences are critical in any simulator system, as they impact multiple aspects of the human’s neurovestibular and visual systems. Cues of real motion proceeds to the brain before cues of visual change. It is important therefore for simulator motion cues to exist and to match those realistically with those of the real vehicle to provide transferable training of the activity for operations. The United Kingdom’s Royal Air Force Institute of Aviation Medicine (1989)[1] stated that motion platforms are the only simulation devices capable of fully stimulating the body motion sensors. They confirmed that motion platforms can impart accelerations to the whole body and therefore exercise the automatic motion feedback-loop that operators are used to. With both visual and motion cues handling the vehicle becomes more realistic. Strachan (2019)[1] confirms motion cueing from a well set-up motion platform has been found to be important especially in conditions such as night or reduced visibility where motion cues may be more relied upon. As of this writing, the only lunar rover motion simulator is housed at the General Motors (GM) Milford Proving Ground, which only simulates the motions of a traditional car. A NASA Test Team proposed to complete a motion-based simulation system for NASA’s Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) which resides at Johnson Space Center’s Systems Engineering Simulator facility. This activity integrated existing fixed base simulation capabilities with a newly procured six-degree of freedom motion base platform for the design, development, evaluation, and training associated with the LTV project. This would incorporate a South Pole Lunar virtual reality simulation using Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter 5m/pixel high-resolution imagery and Unreal 5.2 Virtual Shadow Maps, combined with a virtual reality (VR) headset, integrated within a rover cockpit on a Mikrolar Motion Platform for evaluating human performance and vehicle handling qualities for concept roving vehicle designs. The motion-based system received its Human Rating Certification on March 2023. To begin testing the new facility, a preliminary handling qualities study was conducted. The objectives were to determine if there is a correlation amongst three handling quality methods of performance for a lunar vehicle and to understand the effects of a simulated 1/6-g loads and visuals with a motion platform on the operator while in a 1-g physical environment. The capability this system provides directly benefits the NASA’s Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program and NASA’s Flight Operations Directorate in evaluating the driving qualities of vehicle concepts, human performance related to the operating of a lunar surface vehicle, and assessment of suit related driving impacts. It would also provide direct operational benefit by providing a first-in class and unique simulation platform for the lunar astronaut training curriculum. The empirical knowledge of rover and human performance on this scale is paramount as there is currently no other lunar surface simulator with these capabilities. The result of this study ensures a broadly applicable method of testing for shirtsleeve, unpressurized and pressurized suited rover handling qualities.

Test Track↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO)

Introduction: NASA is preparing to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon within the next decade, and ensuring the success of these missions will depend on our preparation on the ground in multiple ground-based lunar environment analogs. To achieve this, NASA has used full mission class analogs, of which NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) is the longest continuously running example. Discussion: NEEMO is NASA’s long-standing undersea high-fidelity spaceflight mission analog. It focuses on exploration science, EVA techniques and tools, and maturing ISS IVA flight hardware and operations concepts. NEEMO crews are composed of groups of US and International Partner (IP) astronauts, engineers and scientists who live, work and explore in a challenging environment analogous to the environment experienced currently on ISS and what is expected for future deep space exploration destinations. NEEMO missions are conducted at Aquarius Reef Base (ARB), which includes a shore base in Tavernier, FL, and the world's only undersea research station, the Aquarius habitat, which is located 5.4 miles (9 kilometers) off Key Largo in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. ARB is owned and operated by Florida International University (FIU). Aquarius was selected due to its remote and extreme location and its ability to provide the unique isolation and risk factors that spaceflight presents. NEEMO missions allow for evaluations of end-to-end EVA and Science exploration concepts of operations with a crew that is in situ in a true extreme environment. They also allow for evaluations of flight hardware and ops tools that are either pondered or destined for ISS or Gateway in the near future. NEEMO missions feature flight-like interactions between the crew and a Mission Control Center (MCC )and Science Team, which in turn allows evaluation of mission and science operations decision making and communications techniques. One reason NEEMO missions are of such high fidelity is that so many of the participants are experienced human space flight end operators. The majority of crewmembers are trained astronauts, and many of the MCC operators have credentials as current or former certified ISS MCC operators (e.g., CapCom, EVA Officer, etc.). Mission products are generated daily by the ground team and are modeled on ISS products (but modified as needed). A planning team manages the constantly evolving mission timelines in response to the ever-changing constraints and opportunities. During NEEMO missions, suited EVA crewmembers (using diving helmets) have clear voice communications with each other, the habitat, and the MCC and Science Team back on shore. Each EVA crewmember also sends helmet cam video to the habitat and MCC and Science Teams. Appropriate communications latencies are inserted for the destination being simulated as well. NEEMO missions are made possible by a broad collaboration of participants. Astronauts from all of the ISS partner agencies are eligible for crew assignment. Often the crew includes a NASA scientist, doctor or engineer with a particular skill to contribute. Sometimes crewmembers come from external entities–generally institutes or universities. Objectives come from a wide variety of sources as well, from within NASA, IPs, government agencies, academia, commercial companies and research institutes. A typical NEEMO mission is a collaboration between at least 5 NASA centers. To date, 23 NEEMO missions have been conducted since 2001, and NEEMO 24 is planned for 2022. Conclusion: NEEMO is a high-fidelity mission analog conducted in an extreme subsea environment. It features experienced end-operators in human spaceflight, from the astronaut crewmembers to key personnel staffing Mission Control. Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank FIU and NASA’s HEO SEI/Strategic Analysis and Exploration Integration and Science Directorate organizations for the continued support that makes the NEEMO Project possible.

M L Reagan↗
NASA NTRS2011

Cybersickness Following Repeated Exposure to DOME and HMD Virtual Environments

Virtual environments (VE) offer unique training opportunities, including training astronauts to preadapt them to the novel sensory conditions of microgravity. However, one unresolved issue with VE use is the occurrence of cybersickness during and following exposure to VE systems. Most individuals adapt and become less ill with repeated interaction with VEs. The goal of this investigation was to compare motion sickness symptoms (MSS) produced by dome and head-mounted (HMD) displays and to examine the effects of repeated exposures on MSS. Sixty-one subjects participated in the study. Three experimental sessions were performed each separated by one day. The subjects performed a navigation and pick and place task in either a dome or HMD VE. MSS were measured using a Simulator Sickness Questionnaire before, immediately after, and at 1, 2, 4 and 6 hours following exposure to the VEs. MSS data were normalized by calculating the natural log of each score and an analysis of variance was performed. We observed significant main effects for day and time and a significant day by time interaction for total sickness and for each of the subscales, nausea, oculomotor and disorientation. However, there was no significant main effect for device. In conclusion, subjects reported a large increase in MSS immediately following exposure to both the HMD and dome, followed by a rapid recovery across time. Sickness severity also decreased over days, which suggests that subjects become dual-adapted over time making VE training a viable pre-flight countermeasure for space motion sickness.

Taylor, Laura C.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of ARGOS Offloading Assessments and Methodology for Lunar EVA Simulations

The Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) is an analog environment that can offload pressurized suited subjects at various gravity levels. The suit is suspended from a robotic overhead crane by a cable connected to the suit via a gimbal with an adjustable pivot point. There has been increased interest in providing lunar pressurized suited training at ARGOS in preparation for lunar missions. Determination of the appropriate gimbal pivot point location for a given subject is vital for a high-fidelity and functional lunar simulation. Interactions between the pivot point location and center of gravity (CG) can result in righting moments that may lead to artificially stable or unrealistically challenging configurations. Changing the pivot point location is time consuming and repeated adjustment can result in significant loss of valuable pressurized suited time. This paper aims to share the knowledge obtained from the offloading characterization efforts during pressurized suited testing at ARGOS and document the ongoing process to define an appropriate pivot point location through iterative quantitative and qualitative assessments. The human-spacesuit CG locations for the ARGOS lunar simulation were estimated using a 3D body scan and density model combined with spacesuit hardware CAD and specifications. Early pilot testing of the gimbal revealed that setting the pivot point coincident with the modeled CG location was not always possible due to the current gimbal design, and small shifts forward and aft had noticeable effects on subject stability. Fifteen subjects performed a series of CG-related tasks in the xEMU spacesuit to assess simulation acceptability. Through iterative testing, this task list evolved to streamline the process needed to efficiently identify a suitable pivot point for a given subject. The developed methodology will be critical to determine pivot point selection for astronaut training in the xEMU ARGOS environment.

Sarah L. Jarvis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of ARGOS (Active Response Gravity Offload System) Offloading Assessments and Methodology for Lunar EVA Simulations

The Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) is an analog environment that can offload pressurized suited subjects for various reduced gravity simulations. The suit is suspended from a robotic overhead crane by a cable connected to the suit via a gimbal with an adjustable pivot point (i.e. offload attachment). There has been increased interest in providing planetary pressurized suited training at ARGOS in preparation for lunar missions. Determination of the appropriate gimbal pivot point location for a given subject is vital for a high-fidelity functional lunar simulation. Interactions between the pivot point location and human-spacesuit center of gravity (CG) can result in righting moments that may lead to artificially stable or unrealistically challenging configurations. Changing the pivot point location is time consuming and repeated adjustment can result in loss of valuable pressurized suited time. This paper aims to share knowledge obtained from the offloading characterization efforts during pressurized suited testing at ARGOS and document the ongoing process to define an appropriate pivot point location through iterative quantitative and qualitative assessments. Human-spacesuit CG locations for the ARGOS lunar simulation were estimated using a 3D body scan and density model combined with spacesuit hardware CAD and specifications. Early pilot testing of the gimbal revealed that setting the pivot point coincident with the modeled CG location was not always possible due to the current gimbal design, and small pivot point shifts had noticeable effects on subject stability. Fourteen subjects performed a series of CG-related tasks in the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) to assess simulation characteristics. Through iterative testing, this task list evolved to streamline the process needed to efficiently identify a suitable pivot point for a given subject. The developed methodology will be critical for pivot point selection during astronaut training in the ARGOS environment.

Sarah L. Jarvis↗
NASA NTRS2016

Hybrid Reality Lab Capabilities - Video 2

Our Hybrid Reality and Advanced Operations Lab is developing incredibly realistic and immersive systems that could be used to provide training, support engineering analysis, and augment data collection for various human performance metrics at NASA. To get a better understanding of what Hybrid Reality is, let's go through the two most commonly known types of immersive realities: Virtual Reality, and Augmented Reality. Virtual Reality creates immersive scenes that are completely made up of digital information. This technology has been used to train astronauts at NASA, used during teleoperation of remote assets (arms, rovers, robots, etc.) and other activities. One challenge with Virtual Reality is that if you are using it for real time-applications (like landing an airplane) then the information used to create the virtual scenes can be old (i.e. visualized long after physical objects moved in the scene) and not accurate enough to land the airplane safely. This is where Augmented Reality comes in. Augmented Reality takes real-time environment information (from a camera, or see through window, and places digitally created information into the scene so that it matches with the video/glass information). Augmented Reality enhances real environment information collected with a live sensor or viewport (e.g. camera, window, etc.) with the information-rich visualization provided by Virtual Reality. Hybrid Reality takes Augmented Reality even further, by creating a higher level of immersion where interactivity can take place. Hybrid Reality takes Virtual Reality objects and a trackable, physical representation of those objects, places them in the same coordinate system, and allows people to interact with both objects' representations (virtual and physical) simultaneously. After a short period of adjustment, the individuals begin to interact with all the objects in the scene as if they were real-life objects. The ability to physically touch and interact with digitally created objects that have the same shape, size, location to their physical object counterpart in virtual reality environment can be a game changer when it comes to training, planning, engineering analysis, science, entertainment, etc. Our Project is developing such capabilities for various types of environments. The video outlined with this abstract is a representation of an ISS Hybrid Reality experience. In the video you can see various Hybrid Reality elements that provide immersion beyond just standard Virtual Reality or Augmented Reality.

Delgado, Francisco J.↗
NASA NTRS1965

Report of geology working group

Lunar geological explorations to determine evolution, composition, structure, and processes of moon - training of astronauts for mission

LUNAR EXPLORATION↗
NASA NTRS1967

NASA Astronauts

Biographical sketches of astronauts, training notes, and NASA manned space flight summary

Source record↗