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 1,459 records · Page 81
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2015

On the benefit of using both hand calculation methods and computer experiments algorithms to solve complex nuclear criticality safety problems - 14299

A companion paper shows the 'anomalies', and even the safety issues, that may be raised by the very usual problem of making safe a fissile mass inside a controlled geometry. These anomalies mainly come from the solving of such problems which belong to the mathematical family of 'robust inversion' including two inversion parameters (the fissile mass and the geometry) and one nuisance parameter (the moderation ratio of the fissile material). Since a 'brute force' method of resolution requires a lot of calculations and since a 'smart' method of resolution requires a lot of engineer time, it is tempting to solve these problems by a 'custom made' approach rather than to achieve a 'whole' resolution. The present paper shows how one can use a hand calculation method (derivation of the one-speed diffusion theory) to perform the whole resolution of such kind of problems with a minimum calculations and human efforts. The powerful capability of predicting the 'anomalies' highlighted in the companion paper is shown. Then the limitations of such a method are discussed: limitation in the geometry of the problem and bias in absolute values prediction. Finally, new algorithms of computer experiments design, dedicated to solve robust inversion problems and based on Kriging surrogates, are tested to solve these problems with limiting calculations and human efforts. The performance of these new algorithms may supplement the one-speed diffusion theory limitations. (authors)

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-G-204-01: BEST IN PHYSICS (IMAGING): Effect of Image Processing Parameters On Nodule Detectability in Chest Radiography

Purpose: To investigate the effect of varying system image processing parameters on lung nodule detectability in digital radiography. Methods: An anthropomorphic chest phantom was imaged in the posterior-anterior position using a GE Discovery XR656 digital radiography system. To simulate lung nodules, a polystyrene board with 6.35mm diameter PMMA spheres was placed adjacent to the phantom (into the x-ray path). Due to magnification, the projected simulated nodules had a diameter in the radiographs of approximately 7.5 mm. The images were processed using one of GE’s default chest settings (Factory3) and reprocessed by varying the “Edge” and “Tissue Contrast” processing parameters, which were the two user-configurable parameters for a single edge and contrast enhancement algorithm. For each parameter setting, the nodule signals were calculated by subtracting the chest-only image from the image with simulated nodules. Twenty nodule signals were averaged, Gaussian filtered, and radially averaged in order to generate an approximately noiseless signal. For each processing parameter setting, this noise-free signal and 180 background samples from across the lung were used to estimate ideal observer performance in a signal-known-exactly detection task. Performance was estimated using a channelized Hotelling observer with 10 Laguerre-Gauss channel functions. Results: The “Edge” and “Tissue Contrast” parameters each had an effect on the detectability as calculated by the model observer. The CHO-estimated signal detectability ranged from 2.36 to 2.93 and was highest for “Edge” = 4 and “Tissue Contrast” = −0.15. In general, detectability tended to decrease as “Edge” was increased and as “Tissue Contrast” was increased. A human observer study should be performed to validate the relation to human detection performance. Conclusion: Image processing parameters can affect lung nodule detection performance in radiography. While validation with a human observer study is needed, model observer detectability for common tasks could provide a means for optimizing image processing parameters.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
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 NTRS1989

Helmet-mounted pilot night vision systems: Human factors issues

Helmet-mounted displays of infrared imagery (forward-looking infrared (FLIR)) allow helicopter pilots to perform low level missions at night and in low visibility. However, pilots experience high visual and cognitive workload during these missions, and their performance capabilities may be reduced. Human factors problems inherent in existing systems stem from three primary sources: the nature of thermal imagery; the characteristics of specific FLIR systems; and the difficulty of using FLIR system for flying and/or visually acquiring and tracking objects in the environment. The pilot night vision system (PNVS) in the Apache AH-64 provides a monochrome, 30 by 40 deg helmet-mounted display of infrared imagery. Thermal imagery is inferior to television imagery in both resolution and contrast ratio. Gray shades represent temperatures differences rather than brightness variability, and images undergo significant changes over time. The limited field of view, displacement of the sensor from the pilot's eye position, and monocular presentation of a bright FLIR image (while the other eye remains dark-adapted) are all potential sources of disorientation, limitations in depth and distance estimation, sensations of apparent motion, and difficulties in target and obstacle detection. Insufficient information about human perceptual and performance limitations restrains the ability of human factors specialists to provide significantly improved specifications, training programs, or alternative designs. Additional research is required to determine the most critical problem areas and to propose solutions that consider the human as well as the development of technology.

Hart, Sandra G.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Modeling human decision making behavior in supervisory control

An optimal decision control model was developed, which is based primarily on a dynamic programming algorithm which looks at all the available task possibilities, charts an optimal trajectory, and commits itself to do the first step (i.e., follow the optimal trajectory during the next time period), and then iterates the calculation. A Bayesian estimator was included which estimates the tasks which might occur in the immediate future and provides this information to the dynamic programming routine. Preliminary trials comparing the human subject's performance to that of the optimal model show a great similarity, but indicate that the human skips certain movements which require quick change in strategy.

Tulga, M. K.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Cockpit Adaptive Automation and Pilot Performance

The introduction of high-level automated systems in the aircraft cockpit has provided several benefits, e.g., new capabilities, enhanced operational efficiency, and reduced crew workload. At the same time, conventional 'static' automation has sometimes degraded human operator monitoring performance, increased workload, and reduced situation awareness. Adaptive automation represents an alternative to static automation. In this approach, task allocation between human operators and computer systems is flexible and context-dependent rather than static. Adaptive automation, or adaptive task allocation, is thought to provide for regulation of operator workload and performance, while preserving the benefits of static automation. In previous research we have reported beneficial effects of adaptive automation on the performance of both pilots and non-pilots of flight-related tasks. For adaptive systems to be viable, however, such benefits need to be examined jointly in the context of a single set of tasks. The studies carried out under this project evaluated a systematic method for combining different forms of adaptive automation. A model for effective combination of different forms of adaptive automation, based on matching adaptation to operator workload was proposed and tested. The model was evaluated in studies using IFR-rated pilots flying a general-aviation simulator. Performance, subjective, and physiological (heart rate variability, eye scan-paths) measures of workload were recorded. The studies compared workload-based adaptation to to non-adaptive control conditions and found evidence for systematic benefits of adaptive automation. The research provides an empirical basis for evaluating the effectiveness of adaptive automation in the cockpit. The results contribute to the development of design principles and guidelines for the implementation of adaptive automation in the cockpit, particularly in general aviation, and in other human-machine systems. Project goals were met or exceeded. The results of the research extended knowledge of automation-related performance decrements in pilots and demonstrated the positive effects of adaptive task allocation. In addition, several practical implications for cockpit automation design were drawn from the research conducted. A total of 12 articles deriving from the project were published.

Parasuraman, Raja↗
NASA NTRS2013

HRA Aerospace Challenges

Compared to equipment designed to perform the same function over and over, humans are just not as reliable. Computers and machines perform the same action in the same way repeatedly getting the same result, unless equipment fails or a human interferes. Humans who are supposed to perform the same actions repeatedly often perform them incorrectly due to a variety of issues including: stress, fatigue, illness, lack of training, distraction, acting at the wrong time, not acting when they should, not following procedures, misinterpreting information or inattention to detail. Why not use robots and automatic controls exclusively if human error is so common? In an emergency or off normal situation that the computer, robotic element, or automatic control system is not designed to respond to, the result is failure unless a human can intervene. The human in the loop may be more likely to cause an error, but is also more likely to catch the error and correct it. When it comes to unexpected situations, or performing multiple tasks outside the defined mission parameters, humans are the only viable alternative. Human Reliability Assessments (HRA) identifies ways to improve human performance and reliability and can lead to improvements in systems designed to interact with humans. Understanding the context of the situation that can lead to human errors, which include taking the wrong action, no action or making bad decisions provides additional information to mitigate risks. With improved human reliability comes reduced risk for the overall operation or project.

DeMott, Diana↗
NASA NTRS2011

Long Duration Space Missions: Human Subsystem Risks and Requirements

This viewgraph presentation reviews the human health and performance risks associated with long duration space flight beyond low earth orbit. The contents include: 1) Human Research Program; 2) Human Subsystem Risks; 3) Human Exploration Framework Team (HEFT) Architecture Elements; 4) Potentially Unacceptable Risks -1; 5) Potentially Unacceptable Risks-2; and 6) Major Mission Drivers of Risk.

Kundrot, Criag E.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Evidence Report: Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies

The Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies is identified by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Human Research Program (HRP) as a recognized risk to human health and performance in space. The HRP Program Requirements Document (PRD) defines these risks. This Evidence Report provides a summary of the evidence that has been used to identify and characterize this risk. Given that training content, timing, intervals, and delivery methods must support crew task performance, and given that training paradigms will be different for long-duration missions with increased crew autonomy, there is a risk that operators will lack the skills or knowledge necessary to complete critical tasks, resulting in flight and ground crew errors and inefficiencies, failed mission and program objectives, and an increase in crew injuries.

Barshi, Immanuel↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Demonstration of Fluid Dynamics for Plant Growing Systems in Varied Gravity Environments Through Scaled Capillary Models

A key aspect to the success of human health and performance is having a reliable and nutritious food supply. Dating back to the early days of human exploration, food was often one of the determining factors of whether a mission was successful. As humans begin to explore space, keeping astronauts well-nourished and satisfied through their meals will ensure that they are able to conduct research and push the bounds of the human presence of our universe. Currently, food supplies for shorter mission durations rely solely on pre-packaged foods and resupplies. While reliance on this type of food delivery is not an issue for short human space missions to Low Earth Orbit (LEO), once humans begin long-term missions to explore the lunar surface and beyond, a more sustainable and self-reliant food supply will be needed.

Capillary↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Combinatorial Reasoning: Selecting Reasons in Generative AI Pipelines via Combinatorial Optimization

Recent Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities at tasks that require human intelligence and are a significant step towards human-like artificial intelligence (AI). Yet the performance of LLMs at reasoning tasks have been subpar and the reasoning capability of LLMs is a matter of significant debate. While it has been shown that the choice of the prompting technique to the LLM can alter its performance on a multitude of tasks, including reasoning, the best performing techniques require human-made prompts with the knowledge of the tasks at hand. We introduce a framework for what we call Combinatorial Reasoning (CR), a fully-automated prompting method, where reasons are sampled from an LLM pipeline and mapped into a Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO) problem. The framework investigates whether QUBO solutions can be profitably used to select a useful subset of the reasons to construct a Chain-of-Thought style prompt. We explore the acceleration of CR with specialized solvers. We also investigate the performance of simpler zero-shot strategies such as linear majority rule or random selection of reasons. Our preliminary study indicates that coupling a combinatorial solver to generative AI pipelines is an interesting avenue for AI reasoning and elucidates design principles for future CR methods.

combinatorial reasoning↗
NASA NTRS2015

Evidence Report: Risk of Hypobaric Hypoxia from the Exploration Atmosphere

Extravehicular activity (EVA) is at the core of a manned space exploration program. Some elements of exploration may be safely and effectively performed by robots, but certain critical elements will require the trained, assertive, and reasoning mind of a human crewmember. To effectively use these skills, NASA needs a safe, effective, and efficient EVA component integrated into the human exploration program. The EVA preparation time should be minimized and the suit pressure should be low to accommodate EVA tasks without causing undue fatigue, physical discomfort, or suit-related trauma. Commissioned in 2005, the Exploration Atmospheres Working Group (EAWG) had the primary goal of recommending to NASA an internal environment that allowed efficient and repetitive EVAs for missions that were to be enabled by the former Constellation Program. At the conclusion of the EAWG meeting, the 8.0 psia and 32% oxygen (O2) environment were recommended for EVA-intensive phases of missions. After re-evaluation in 2012, the 8/32 environment was altered to 8.2 psia and 34% O2 to reduce the hypoxic stress to a crewmember. These two small changes increase alveolar O2 pressure by 11 mmHg, which is expected to significantly benefit crewmembers. The 8.2/34 environment (inspired O2 pressure = 128 mmHg) is also physiologically equivalent to the staged decompression atmosphere of 10.2 psia / 26.5% O2 (inspired O2 pressure = 127 mmHg) used on 34 different shuttle missions for approximately a week each flight. As a result of selecting this internal environment, NASA gains the capability for efficient EVA with low risk of decompression sickness (DCS), but not without incurring the additional negative stimulus of hypobaric hypoxia to the already physiologically challenging spaceflight environment. This report provides a review of the human health and performance risks associated with the use of the 8.2 psia / 34% O2 environment during spaceflight. Of most concern are the potential effects on the central nervous system (CNS), including increased intracranial pressure, visual impairment, sensorimotor dysfunction, and oxidative damage. Other areas of focus include validation of the DCS mitigation strategy, incidence and treatment of transient acute mountain sickness (AMS), development of new exercise countermeasure protocols, effective food preparation at 8.2 psia, assurance of quality sleep, and prevention of suit-induced injury. Although missions proposing to use an 8.2/34 environment are still years away, it is recommended that these studies begin early enough to ensure that the correct decisions pertaining to vehicle design, mission operational concepts, and human health countermeasures are appropriately informed.

Norcross, Jason R.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Optoelectronic Apparatus Measures Glucose Noninvasively

An optoelectronic apparatus has been invented as a noninvasive means of measuring the concentration of glucose in the human body. The apparatus performs polarimetric and interferometric measurements of the human eye to acquire data from which the concentration of glucose in the aqueous humor can be computed. Because of the importance of the concentration of glucose in human health, there could be a large potential market for instruments based on this apparatus.

Ansari, Rafat R.↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Human System Risk Assessment Process

NASA utilizes an evidence based system to perform risk assessments for the human system for spaceflight missions. The center of this process is the multi-disciplinary Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The HSRB is chartered from the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) at NASA Headquarters. The HSRB reviews all human system risks via an established comprehensive risk and configuration management plan based on a project management approach. The HSRB facilitates the integration of human research (terrestrial and spaceflight), medical operations, occupational surveillance, systems engineering and many other disciplines in a comprehensive review of human system risks. The HSRB considers all factors that influence human risk. These factors include pre-mission considerations such as screening criteria, training, age, sex, and physiological condition. In mission factors such as available countermeasures, mission duration and location and post mission factors such as time to return to baseline (reconditioning), post mission health screening, and available treatments. All of the factors influence the total risk assessment for each human risk. The HSRB performed a comprehensive review of all potential inflight medical conditions and events and over the course of several reviews consolidated the number of human system risks to 30, where the greatest emphasis is placed for investing program dollars for risk mitigation. The HSRB considers all available evidence from human research and, medical operations and occupational surveillance in assessing the risks for appropriate mitigation and future work. All applicable DRMs (low earth orbit for 6 and 12 months, deep space for 30 days and 1 year, a lunar mission for 1 year, and a planetary mission for 3 years) are considered as human system risks are modified by the hazards associated with space flight such as microgravity, exposure to radiation, distance from the earth, isolation and a closed environment. Each risk has a summary two-page assessment representing the state of knowledge/evidence of that risk, available risk mitigations, traceability to the Space Flight Human System Standards (SFHSS) and program requirements, and future work required. These data then can drive coordinated budgets across the Human Research Program, the International Space Station, Crew Health and Safety and Advanced Exploration System budgets to provide the most economical and timely mitigations. The risk assessments were completed for the 6 DRMs and serve as the baseline for which subsequent research and technology development and crew health care portfolios can be assessed. The HSRB reviews each risk at least annually or when new evidence/information is available that adds to the body of evidence. The current status of each risk can be reported to program management for operations, budget reviews and general oversight of the human system risk management program.

Francisco, D.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Oculometric Standard to Assess the Performance of the Ocular System for Long Duration Spaceflight

Changes in the human brain, due to spaceflight, have been a challenge to the space program since its inception; a challenge that is becoming more acute as extended International Space Station (ISS) missions become routine, a return to crewed lunar exploration is about to begin, and a multi-year crewed trip to Mars is being planned. Determining the extent to which neurophysiological adaptations may adversely impact performance in operational tasks, assessing the full-time course of these changes, and identifying/mitigating any potential long-term health consequences are crucial steps required to enable safe crew-autonomous, long-duration, deep-space missions. Vision is the predominant perceptual sense used to guide cognition and motor control in humans. Thus, it is critical for the success of any future, long-duration mission to understand how long-term exposure to microgravity and to other stressors of spaceflight and their interactions, impact visual function. This is an especially challenging task given the small and disparate samples from which we have been and will be able to collect human performance data. NASA has recently been carefully tracking spaceflight-induced ophthalmic changes, driven in large part by the fluid shifts related to microgravity. In particular, a recent study of Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) postflight measures revealed that more than two-thirds of US crew members experience significant increases in retinal thickness after 6month or longer ISS missions. Space Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome (SANS) also includes visual acuity decrements and other ocular structural changes that could adversely impact in-flight performance as missions become longer. However, the impact of spaceflight on the visual system is not limited to the retina. Recent comparisons of pre-and post-flight brain images have revealed structural changes throughout the brain that implicate visual, visuomotor, and visual-cognitive pathways, consistent with observed functional impacts (e.g., decreased speed/accuracy/timing of fine goal-oriented movements). Current limitations on inflight testing make it very difficult to determine when and under what conditions SANS and other disruptions of human neurological subsystems arise. Currently, one cannot anticipate the time course and extent of impairment and recovery. This study addresses this knowledge gap by creating an integrated framework of the relevant existing literature on visual and oculomotor function during spaceflight with an eye towards complementing current structural measures of visuomotor impairment with new oculometric standard measures. Using eye-movement based visual function assessment and diagnostics would provide a valuable enhancement of crew health and performance monitoring in support of deepspace exploration.

Vision↗
NASA NTRS2010

Space Flight Resource Management for ISS Operations

Although the astronaut training flow for the International Space Station (ISS) spans 2 years, each astronaut or cosmonaut often spends most of their training alone. Rarely is it operationally feasible for all six ISS crewmembers to train together, even more unlikely that crewmembers can practice living together before launch. Likewise, ISS Flight Controller training spans 18 months of learning to manage incredibly complex systems remotely in plug-and-play ground teams that have little to no exposure to crewmembers before a mission. How then do all of these people quickly become a team - a team that must respond flexibly yet decisively to a variety of situations? The answer implemented at NASA is Space Flight Resource Management (SFRM), the so-called "soft skills" or team performance skills. Based on Crew Resource Management, SFRM was developed first for shuttle astronauts and focused on managing human errors during time-critical events (Rogers, et al. 2002). Given the nature of life on ISS, the scope of SFRM for ISS broadened to include teamwork during prolonged and routine operations (O'Keefe, 2008). The ISS SFRM model resembles a star with one competency for each point: Communication, Cross-Culture, Teamwork, Decision Making, Team Care, Leadership/Followership, Conflict Management, and Situation Awareness. These eight competencies were developed with international participation by the Human Behavior and Performance Training Working Group. Over the last two years, these competencies have been used to build a multi-modal SFRM training flow for astronaut candidates and flight controllers that integrates team performance skills into the practice of technical skills. Preliminary results show trainee skill increases as the flow progresses; and participants find the training invaluable to performing well and staying healthy during ISS operations. Future development of SFRM training will aim to help support indirect handovers as ISS operations evolve further with the retirement of the Space Shuttle Program.

Schmidt, Lacey L.↗
NASA NTRS2017

EVA Systems Technology Gaps and Priorities 2017

Performance of Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) has been and will continue to be a critical capability for human space flight. Human exploration missions beyond LEO will require EVA capability for either contingency or nominal activities to support mission objectives and reduce mission risk. EVA systems encompass a wide array of products across pressure suits, life support systems, EVA tools and unique spacecraft interface hardware (i.e. EVA Translation Paths and EVA Worksites). In a fiscally limited environment with evolving transportation and habitation options, it is paramount that the EVA community's strategic planning and architecture integration products be reviewed and vetted for traceability between the mission needs far into the future to the known technology and knowledge gaps to the current investments across EVA systems. To ascertain EVA technology and knowledge gaps many things need to be brought together, assessed and analyzed. This includes an understanding of the destination environments, various mission concept of operations, current state of the art of EVA systems, EVA operational lessons learned, and reference advanced capabilities. A combined assessment of these inputs should result in well-defined list of gaps. This list can then be prioritized depending on the mission need dates and time scale of the technology or knowledge gap closure plan. This paper will summarize the current state of EVA related technology and knowledge gaps derived from NASA's Exploration EVA Reference Architecture and Operations Concept products. By linking these products and articulating NASA's approach to strategic development for EVA across all credible destinations an EVA could be done in, the identification of these gaps is then used to illustrate the tactical and strategic planning for the EVA technology development portfolio. Finally, this paper illustrates the various "touch points" with other human exploration risk identification areas including human health and performance.

Johnson, Brian J.↗