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 1,513 records · Page 84
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
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.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Capabilities Assessments for Autonomous Missions: A Multi-Team Research Effort to Reduce Risk in the Human-System Integration Architecture for Future Deep-Space Missions

In future exploration missions beyond low earth-orbit, crew will have to execute complex operations and respond to off-nominal events, without real-time support from Mission Control. It is anticipated that increased reliance on automated systems, including human-centric vehicle and information architecture, will need to be designed to support the crew; increased risk to performance, health, and safety may occur if these are not implemented appropriately. The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element (HFBP) in the NASA Human Research Program supports research to characterize and mitigate such human health and performance risks, including the Risk of Adverse Outcome Due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA). The HSIA risk addresses the integration of onboard capability and the crew roles and responsibilities necessary to enable the crew to respond effectively and efficiently in the increasingly autonomous mission operations environment. In 2017, HFBP released the “Human Capabilities Assessments for Autonomous Missions” (HCAAM) research topic to address HSIA related questions. HCAAM is a major NASA research effort that has assembled a multidisciplinary team from seven institutions to work closely with design and engineering efforts on research towards developing and refining human performance standards, guidelines and automation tools. The scientific focus is on quantitative assessment of human capabilities relevant to future deep-space missions during which earth/spacecraft communication is so delayed and intermittent that the crew must be able to function autonomously. The integrated strategy of the HCAAM project characterizes human capabilities and limitations related to potential performance decrements during long duration exploration mission spaceflight as relevant to both routine and complex task performance; defines system characteristics that reduce the likelihood or impact of potential decrements in human performance capabilities; performs integrated assessment of intelligent system responses within the context of an operational environment with relevant NASA tools, systems, and data structures in order to determine positive or negative interactions and validate recommended approaches; and proposes specific updates to existing standards and guidelines for inclusion in NASA handbooks for the design of future spacecraft intelligent systems that provide crew performance assessment/feedback, and to also serve as decision-support aids for the onboard crew (i.e., NASA-STD-3001, and NASA/SP-Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH)). The scientific research vectors being addressed by the seven HCAAM teams include: - crew task performance (accuracy, efficiency) (crew + automation) - crew performance (accuracy, efficiency) - crew Situation Awareness - procedure design and multi-modal enhancement - concurrent tasking (mixed manual + some level of autonomy) - task handover - crew self-planning and time-lining - task design - trust in automation, real-time calibration - human multi-sensory feedback and guidance - human trust in on-board software-based intelligent assistants - virtual assistants The presentation will highlight plans and progress made in each of these research areas as well as the methods by which surrogate astronaut crews in the NASA JSC HERA spaceflight analog facility will function as human test subjects for all of the HCAAM research projects.

HCAAM VNSCOR↗
NASA NTRS2024

Biomedical Research for Human Spaceflight

This invited presentation will offer an overview of the biomedical research – both from a biomedical sciences and engineering perspective – of human physiology and performance during spaceflight. Focused on the unique expertise within the Biomedical Sciences Branch, NASA Johnson Space Center, the talk will elucidate the critical role of biomedical laboratories in synergistic activities in clinical sciences, space physiology, applied research, technology development, and operational support for human space exploration. Together, the efforts within this branch play a crucial role in supporting astronauts' health, performance, and safety. The branch Scientists, Researchers, and Engineers conduct biomedical research in flight on board the International Space Station and on-earth space environment analogs. This dual approach allows for a nuanced understanding of the effects of micro- and planetary gravitation fields on human physiology and the assessment of potential clinical and biomedical interventions (countermeasures) to mitigate astronaut clinical and performance decrements. The talk aims to underscore the synergistic collaborative efforts of biomedical engineers, physiologists, clinicians, and computational researchers, emphasizing these experts' pivotal role in advancing human spaceflight's frontiers.

Biomedical Research↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance Risk Model Validation with Operationally Relevant Tasks

Human Research Program aims to develop methods to support astronauts’ health and productivity during spaceflight. The Crew Health and Performance Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CHP-PRA) team uses powerful computational methods to predict mission risk in both domains: medical and performance. Here, we show how CHP-PRA uses the Performance Risk Model (PRisM) to quantify the performance risk and show an application of the model on operationally relevant tasks. There are various metrics adopted across performance researchers that PRisM can accommodate. For data analysis, interpretation, and integration, we use a method of unifying data from multiple sources by converting each to a single metric. We consult subject matter experts prior to integrating the converted data into PRisM. The method we use is inspired by the Cooper-Harper rating scale [1]. Using this unified metric, we can easily combine data from various tests and lab groups. We explain our conversion method in detail and show how it pertains to the process of testing and validation of PRisM on operational tasks. We conducted an initial validation in collaboration with the Behavioral Health and Performance (BHP) lab. We test PRisM using data on their operationally relevant task ROBoT-r, a track-and-capture task for grappling incoming resupply vehicles [2]. Several other labs at NASA Johnson Space Center worked together to design 7 Functional Task Tests (FTTs) in pursuit of simulating the tasks required after landing on a planetary surface and after return to Earth [3]. Here we use the results from both ROBoT-r and the 7 FTTs and compare their experiment data to PRisM’s computational output to demonstrate how PRisM can support operations by predicting crew performance on future missions.

performance modeling↗
NASA NTRS2012

Solar Electric Propulsion Vehicle Demonstration to Support Future Space Exploration Missions

Human and robotic exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) will require enabling capabilities that are efficient, affordable, and reliable. Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP) is highly advantageous because of its favorable in-space mass transfer efficiency compared to traditional chemical propulsion systems. The NASA studies have demonstrated that this advantage becomes highly significant as missions progress beyond Earth orbit. Recent studies of human exploration missions and architectures evaluated the capabilities needed to perform a variety of human exploration missions including missions to Near Earth Objects (NEOs). The studies demonstrated that SEP stages have potential to be the most cost effective solution to perform beyond LEO transfers of high mass cargoes for human missions. Recognizing that these missions require power levels more than 10X greater than current electric propulsion systems, NASA embarked upon a progressive pathway to identify critical technologies needed and a plan for an incremental demonstration mission. The NASA studies identified a 30kW class demonstration mission that can serve as a meaningful demonstration of the technologies, operational challenges, and provide the appropriate scaling and modularity required. This paper describes the planning options for a representative demonstration 30kW class SEP mission.

Smith, Bryan K.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Robotics for Human Exploration

Robots can do a variety of work to increase the productivity of human explorers. Robots can perform tasks that are tedious, highly repetitive or long-duration. Robots can perform precursor tasks, such as reconnaissance, which help prepare for future human activity. Robots can work in support of astronauts, assisting or performing tasks in parallel. Robots can also perform "follow-up" work, completing tasks designated or started by humans. In this paper, we summarize the development and testing of robots designed to improve future human exploration of space.

human-robot interaction↗
NASA NTRS1987

Telerobotics: A simulation facility for university research

An experimental telerobotics (TR) simulation suitable for studying human operator (H.O.) performance is described. Simple manipulator pick-and-place and tracking tasks allowed quantitative comparison of a number of calligraphic display viewing conditions. A number of control modes could be compared in this TR simulation, including displacement, rate and acceleratory control using position and force joysticks. A homeomorphic controller turned out to be no better than joysticks; the adaptive properties of the H.O. can apparently permit quite good control over a variety of controller configurations and control modes. Training by optimal control example seemed helpful in preliminary experiments. An introduced communication delay was found to produce decrease in performance. In considerable part, this difficulty could be compensated for by preview control information. That neurological control of normal human movement contains a data period of 0.2 second may relate to this robustness of H.O. control to delay. The Ames-Berkeley enhanced perspective display was utilized in conjunction with an experimental helmet mounted display system (HMD) that provided stereoscopic enhanced views.

Stark, L.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Quantitative assessment of human motion using video motion analysis

In the study of the dynamics and kinematics of the human body, a wide variety of technologies was developed. Photogrammetric techniques are well documented and are known to provide reliable positional data from recorded images. Often these techniques are used in conjunction with cinematography and videography for analysis of planar motion, and to a lesser degree three-dimensional motion. Cinematography has been the most widely used medium for movement analysis. Excessive operating costs and the lag time required for film development coupled with recent advances in video technology have allowed video based motion analysis systems to emerge as a cost effective method of collecting and analyzing human movement. The Anthropometric and Biomechanics Lab at Johnson Space Center utilizes the video based Ariel Performance Analysis System to develop data on shirt-sleeved and space-suited human performance in order to plan efficient on orbit intravehicular and extravehicular activities. The system is described.

Probe, John D.↗