Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Crew 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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis III and IV Crew Health and Performance System Model Development

To maintain Crew Health and Performance (CHP) during an Artemis mission, the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) and Exploration Medical Capabilities (ExMC) element recognize the challenge that many different vehicles, habitats, and operational groups must come together to develop and implement cross program capabilities. To address this challenge, the ExMC team created the prototype 2023 Artemis CHP System Model to analyze how human system requirements are implemented throughout an Artemis mission and help understand the effects of changing an individual vehicle or habitat requirement on a full mission. Since presenting this work at the 2024 HRP Investigators’ Workshop, ExMC has continued this effort, now called the Artemis III and IV CHP System Model, to better support its operational end users within the NASA Human Health and Performance Directorate (HHPD) workforce. In this presentation, we will recapitulate how visualizing requirements and their relationships using a Model-Based Systems Engineering approach (MBSE) serves to improve understanding of an Artemis mission’s CHP capabilities along with discussion on updates made to the model to increase accessibility for users within HHPD so that it may be used in the development of cross program CHP capabilities at NASA.

Crew Health and Performance↗
NASA NTRS2009

NASA Exercise Physiology and Countermeasures Project Overview

Efficient exercise countermeasures are necessary to offset or minimize spaceflight-induced deconditioning and to maximize crew performance of mission tasks. These countermeasure protocols should use the fewest crew and vehicle resources. NASA s Exercise Physiology and Countermeasures (ExPC) Project works to identify, collect, interpret, and summarize evidence that results in effective exercise countermeasure protocols which protect crew health and performance during International Space Station (ISS) and future exploration-class missions. The ExPC and NASA s Human Research Program are sponsoring multiple studies to evaluate and improve the efficacy of spaceflight exercise countermeasures. First, the Project will measure maximal aerobic capacity (VO2max) during cycle ergometry before, during, and after ISS missions. Second, the Project is sponsoring an evaluation of a new prototype harness that offers improved comfort and increased loading during treadmill operations. Third, the Functional Tasks Test protocol will map performance of anticipated lunar mission tasks with physiologic systems before and after short and long-duration spaceflight, to target system contributions and the tailoring of exercise protocols to maximize performance. In addition to these studies that are actively enrolling crewmember participants, the ExPC is planning new studies that include an evaluation of a higher-intensity/lower-volume exercise countermeasure protocol aboard the ISS using the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device and second-generation treadmill, studies that evaluate bone loading during spaceflight exercise, and ground-based studies that focus on fitness for duty standards required to complete lunar mission tasks and for which exercise protocols need to protect. Summaries of these current and future studies and strategies will be provided to international colleagues for knowledge sharing and possible collaboration.

Loerch, Linda↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗
NASA NTRS2018

Human-Automation Allocations for Current Robotic Space Operations

Within the Human Research Program, one risk delineates the uncertainty surrounding crew working with automation and robotics in spaceflight. The Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration (HARI) is concerned with the detrimental effects on crew performance due to ineffective user interfaces, system designs and/or functional task allocation, potentially compromising mission success and safety. Risk arises because we have limited experience with complex automation and robotics. One key gap within HARI, is the gap related to functional allocation. The gap states: We need to evaluate, develop, and validate methods and guidelines for identifying human-automation/robot task information needs, function allocation, and team composition for future long duration, long distance space missions. Allocations determine the human-system performance as it identifies the functions and performance levels required by the automation/robotic system, and in turn, what work the crew is expected to perform and the necessary human performance requirements. Allocations must take into account each of the human, automation, and robotic systems capabilities and limitations. Some functions may be intuitively assigned to the human versus the robot, but to optimize efficiency and effectiveness, purposeful role assignments will be required. The role of automation and robotics will significantly change in future exploration missions, particularly as crew becomes more autonomous from ground controllers. Thus, we must understand the suitability of existing function allocation methods within NASA as well as the existing allocations established by the few robotic systems that are operational in spaceflight. In order to evaluate future methods of robotic allocations, we must first benchmark the allocations and allocation methods that have been used. We will present 1) documentation of human-automation-robotic allocations in existing, operational spaceflight systems; and 2) To gather existing lessons learned and best practices in these role assignments, from spaceflight operational experience of crew and ground teams that may be used to guide development for future systems. NASA and other space agencies have operational spaceflight experience with two key Human-Automation-Robotic (HAR) systems: heavy lift robotic arms and planetary robotic explorers. Additionally, NASA has invested in high-fidelity rover systems that can carry crew, building beyond Apollo's lunar rover. The heavy lift robotic arms reviewed are: Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS), Japanese Remote Manipulator System (JEMRMS), and the European Robotic Arm (ERA, designed but not deployed in space). The robotic rover systems reviewed are: Mars Exploration Rovers, Mars Science Laboratory rover, and the high-fidelity K10 rovers. Much of the design and operational feedback for these systems have been communicated to flight controllers and robotic design teams. As part of the mitigating the HARI risk for future human spaceflight operations, we must document function allocations between robots and humans that have worked well in practice.

robotic allocation↗
NASA NTRS1981

Group 2: Real time LOFT operations

All LOFT scenarios should be constructed so as to provide the highest degree of realism that is economically, technically, and operationally feasible. The more realistic the situation, the faster the crew will adjust their thinking and provide reactions which would be typical of a line-flight orientation. The goal is to produce crew performance which would be typical of a crew on an actual line flight, given the same set of circumstances that were developed during the scenario. The briefing which is provided to the crew before entering the simulator for LOFT, the trip papers, the communications throughout the flight, the role played by the instructor, and so on, are important factors, crucial to the establishment and maintenance of a high degree of realism. Crews should have all manuals and other required equipment for a normal line-flight.

Cavanagh, D.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Power Management for Space Advanced Life Support

Space power systems include the power source, storage, and management subsystems. In current crewed spacecraft, solar cells are the power source, batteries provide storage, and the crew performs any required load scheduling. For future crewed planetary surface systems using Advanced Life Support, we assume that plants will be grown to produce much of the crew's food and that nuclear power will be employed. Battery storage is much more costly than nuclear power capacity and so is not likely to be used. We investigate the scheduling of power demands by the crew or automatic control, to reduce the peak power load and the required generating capacity. The peak to average power ratio is a good measure of power use efficiency. We can easily schedule power demands to reduce the peak power from its maximum, but simple scheduling approaches may not find the lowest possible peak to average power ratio. An initial power scheduling example was simple enough for a human to solve, but a more complex example with many intermittent load demands required automatic scheduling. Excess power is a free resource and can be used even for minor benefits.

Jones, Harry↗
NASA NTRS2024

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗
NASA NTRS1990

Terminal weather information management

Since the mid-1960's, microburst/windshear events have caused at least 30 aircraft accidents and incidents and have killed more than 600 people in the United States alone. This study evaluated alternative means of alerting an airline crew to the presence of microburst/windshear events in the terminal area. Of particular interest was the relative effectiveness of conventional and data link ground-to-air transmissions of ground-based radar and low-level windshear sensing information on microburst/windshear avoidance. The Advanced Concepts Flight Simulator located at Ames Research Center was employed in a line oriented simulation of a scheduled round-trip airline flight from Salt Lake City to Denver Stapleton Airport. Actual weather en route and in the terminal area was simulated using recorded data. The microburst/windshear incident of July 11, 1988 was re-created for the Denver area operations. Six experienced airline crews currently flying scheduled routes were employed as test subjects for each of three groups: (1) A baseline group which received alerts via conventional air traffic control (ATC) tower transmissions; (2) An experimental group which received alerts/events displayed visually and aurally in the cockpit six miles (approx. 2 min.) from the microburst event; and (3) An additional experimental group received displayed alerts/events 23 linear miles (approx. 7 min.) from the microburst event. Analyses of crew communications and decision times showed a marked improvement in both situation awareness and decision-making with visually displayed ground-based radar information. Substantial reductions in the variability of decision times among crews in the visual display groups were also found. These findings suggest that crew performance will be enhanced and individual differences among crews due to differences in training and prior experience are significantly reduced by providing real-time, graphic display of terminal weather hazards.

Lee, Alfred T.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Coordination strategies of crew management

An exploratory study that describes and contrasts two three-person flight crews performing in a B-727 simulator is presented. This study specifically attempts to delineate crew communication patterns accounting for measured differences in performance across routine and nonroutine flight patterns. The communication patterns in the two crews evaluated indicated different modes of coordination, i.e., standardization in the less effective crew and planning/mutual adjustment in the more effective crew.

Conley, Sharon↗
NASA NTRS2004

Human Space Flight

The first human space flight, in the early 1960s, was aimed primarily at determining whether humans could indeed survive and function in micro-gravity. Would eating and sleeping be possible? What mental and physical tasks could be performed? Subsequent programs increased the complexity of the tasks the crew performed. Table 1 summarizes the history of U.S. space flight, showing the projects, their dates, crew sizes, and mission durations. With over forty years of experience with human space flight, the emphasis now is on how to design space vehicles, habitats, and missions to produce the greatest returns to human knowledge. What are the roles of the humans in space flight in low earth orbit, on the moon, and in exploring Mars?

Woolford, Barbara↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Strategy for Risk Quantification of Spaceflight Crew Health and Performance Using Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment

At NASA, the Crew Health and Performance (CHP) system represents the span of countermeasures, capabilities, interventions, and tested processes and procedures that in combination work to mitigate the human component of spaceflight mission risk. Across the varying NASA mental models of the CHP system, the different functionalities needed to meet human flight systems standards can be broken down into specific categories (i.e. medical capability, environmental health, behavioral health). These categories can be further broken down into specific subgroups generally associated with the CHP functionalities meant to mitigate or buy down individual human system risks. Taking a similar development approach we seek to leverage dynamic probabilistic risk assessment as a means to quantify and relatively assess the human risk state within the crew health and performance domain. By utilizing existing tools as integrators, we propose a rapid development strategy for incorporating research and operational data that represent the influence of the CHP system functionalities, in order to provide order of magnitudes estimates of the influence on most human system risks outcomes. The model system utilizes a modest cumulative risk approach and that limits the scope to primary paths of influence between the CHP functionalities and human system risks, thus enabling quick prototypes of the integrative effects of CHP functional combinations to solicit valuable feedback from stakeholders and customers on the data, relationship, and structure of the integration.

Drayton Munster↗
NASA NTRS2017

Evaluation of a Head-Worn Display System as an Equivalent Head-Up Display for Low Visibility Commercial Operations

Research, development, test, and evaluation of fight deck interface technologies is being conducted by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to proactively identify, develop, and mature tools, methods, and technologies for improving overall aircraft safety of new and legacy vehicles operating in the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). One specific area of research was the use of small Head-Worn Displays (HWDs) to serve as a possible equivalent to a Head-Up Display (HUD). A simulation experiment and a fight test were conducted to evaluate if the HWD can provide an equivalent level of performance to a HUD. For the simulation experiment, airline crews conducted simulated approach and landing, taxi, and departure operations during low visibility operations. In a follow-on fight test, highly experienced test pilots evaluated the same HWD during approach and surface operations. The results for both the simulation and fight tests showed that there were no statistical differences in the crews' performance in terms of approach, touchdown and takeoff; but, there are still technical hurdles to be overcome for complete display equivalence including, most notably, the end-to-end latency of the HWD system.

Arthur, Jarvis (Trey) J., III↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Performance Measures to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Systems and Crew Health and Performance Technology Decisions

Human spaceflight is a complex endeavor requiring multiple capabilities for transportation, crew health, scientific goals, and safe return to Earth. The difference between spaceflight proven capabilities and those needed for future exploration architectures is defined as a capability gap. Capability gaps are not technology specific. Each capability gap may be closed with a wide array of technologies that have unique benefits and challenges. Determining what a capability’s relevant and distinguishing key performance parameters (KPPs) are for a mission is critical. Mass, power, and volume are always constrained and important, but defining these in a way normalized by performance is very important. KPP definition for reliability, dormancy, and integration needs are hard to define but critical. Outside of technical considerations, the programmatic factors of the estimated time to develop the technology and how the technology validation objectives are matured are strong considerations in which technologies should be pursued and how they should leverage earlier mission elements. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) and Crew Health and Performance (CHP) capability areas are decomposed to high level gaps. While KPPs should be technology agnostic, they can be used to both compare technologies and measure progress of technology development over time. KPPs help define when the gap is closed, and the core mission objectives can be accomplished. Proposed technology improvements to enhance a capability should balance improved KPPs and against investments in other capabilities that are not yet closed. A selection of gaps, KPPs, and validation objectives and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of A Crew Health and Performance System Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool: Proof-of-Concept Approach

The crew health and performance (CHP) system represents the span of technological interventions and tested processes and procedures that in combination address the human risk to space flight. The Human Research Program (HRP) mental model of the CHP system breaks the capabilities needed to meet NASA human flight systems standards into specific categories (i.e., countermeasures, behavioral health, medical intervention). These categories are further broken down into specific sub-groups generally associated with the human system risks that these capabilities seek to mitigate. Like the approach used to develop the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) and the Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Analysis Tool (MEDPRAT), HRP tasked NASA GRC’s Cross-Cutting Computational Modeling Project with developing a CHP probabilistic risk assessment tool, the CHP-PRA. The CHP-PRA model seeks to quantify and relatively assess the human risk state within the crew health and performance domain, using a combination of knowledge about human system risks and technology and practices likely to be applied during space flight missions. This modeling system will incorporate customer and stakeholder feedback and be flexible enough to address multiple different questions about important low-level mission-specific parameters. This presentation will introduce the initial concept and development timeline for this tool and demonstrate proof-of-concept through an application addressing a specific human risk question posed within the Artemis program.

Risk analysis↗
NASA NTRS2024

Crew Health and Performance Integrated Data Architecture (CHP-IDA) TechPort May 2024

Future exploration missions to Mars will have increased need for crew autonomy. Crew Health & Performance (CHP) related data on the ISS is currently, manually downlinked and in disparate locations, which limits crew autonomy for future missions. The CHP-IDA project is developing a backend data system platform that grants the ability to seamlessly collect, store, process, and display CHP-related data for exploration missions. This platform allows for integration of data and advanced analytics that offer crew and ground teams better insight into the crew’s health and performance. It also enables applications that can improve the crew’s ability to provide more autonomous medical care during exploration missions. Data will be collected automatically to reduce crew and ground team time and effort and will synchronize across all in-mission vehicles, habitats, and ground as communication delay permits. The Human Research Program’s (HRP) Medical Data Architecture (MDA) project focused on this backend data architecture but for medical data only. The CHP-IDA project, a joint effort between HRP’s Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element and the Exploration Medical Integrated Product Team (XMIPT), expands this capability to all relevant CHP-related data. The additional inputs from nutrition, environment, exercise, radiation, and any other relevant sources will give more insight into crew’s health and performance. Currently, the Human Systems Engineering and Integration Division at Johnson Space Center (JSC) is designing the system. The team completed a system requirements review (SRR) in FY22 and now the focus is on core software development, testbed buildup, and use case scenario demonstration. An end-to-end demonstration with multiple data sources across CHP domains is schedule for the end of FY24 where all three focus areas will be displayed. Following this ground demo, the software will be completed, tested, and validated for flight.

Courtney M Schkurko↗
NASA NTRS2016

Wearable Biosensor Monitor to Support Autonomous Crew Health and Performance

During future human exploration missions, spaceflight crews will encounter adverse health outcomes and decrements in performance during the missions and for long term health. The Psychophysiological Research Lab is currently conducting a technology demonstration of a prototype wearable biosensor system (Astroskin) on astronaut surrogates during 30 day missions within NASAs Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA). HERA, located at Johnson Spaceflight Center, represents a flight analog for simulation of isolation, confinement and remote conditions of mission exploration scenarios. Astroskin, an autonomous medical monitoring system, consists of an intelligent garment for the upper body and a headband fitted with sensors, and associated software and hardware that can measure, transmit and store vital signs (ECG, respiration, blood pressure, etc.), sleep quality and activity level of the wearer. One of the main goals of the technology demonstration is to evaluate the performance of the Astroskin system (i.e., data quality), crew usability and comfort. To validate the Astroskin as a viable option for use during future spaceflight missions, crew data from HERA are sent to Ames researchers for processing and analyses. Crew surveys on usability and comfort will also be evaluated. This work supports the Exploration Medical Capabilities element within NASAs Human Research Program.

space analog↗
NASA NTRS1989

Communication variations and aircrew performance

Crew-related communication variations and their effects on performance are examined. The communication analysis involves evaluating the performance of 18 pilots to a high-fidelity full-mission simulation. Initiating speech consists of four categories: commands, questions, observations, and dysfluencies. Response speech is coded as: reply, acknowledgements, and zero response. A standard form of communication has been adopted which should aid in the coordination process and enhance crew performance.

Kanki, Barbara G.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Aerospace vehicle water-waste management

The collection and disposal of human wastes, such as urine and feces, in a spacecraft environment are performed in an aesthetic and reliable manner to prevent degradation of crew performance. The waste management system controls, transfers, and processes materials such as feces, emesis, food residues, used expendables, and other wastes. The requirements, collection, transport, and waste processing are described.

Pecoraro, J. N.↗