Results for “Crew Performance” — Page 99

NASA NTRS1996

STS-80 Flight Day 1

This first day of the STS-80 mission, begins with the flight crew, Cmdr. Kenneth D. Cockrell, Pilot Kent V. Rominger, Mission Specialists, Tamara E. Jernigan, Thomas D. Jones, and F. Story Musgrave, performing pre-launch activities such as eating the traditional breakfast, being suited-up, and riding out to the launch pad. Also, included are various panoramic views of the shuttle on the pad. The crew is readied in the 'white room' for their mission. After the closing of the hatch and arm retraction, launch activities are shown including the countdown, engine ignition, and launch. The film ends with the separation of the Solid Rocket Boosters (SRB) from the shuttle.

Source record↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Crowd Sourcing Medical Data Collection Using Medical Students

OBJECTIVE We undertook an upgrade of the Evidence Library database of NASA HRP’s Integrated Medical Model, assessing 120 medical conditions which integrate with a novel probabilistic risk assessment (IMPACT) tool of medical risk and resource utilization for long duration exploration human spaceflight. This data collection process included a selection of these conditions crowd sourced over one year via three 4-week medical student electives at the University of Colorado School of Medicine (IDPT 8059 Space Medicine: Human Spaceflight Factors & Medical Risk Assessment). Students undertook a rapid systematic review of each medical condition, under close preceptors with backgrounds in clinical medicine, library science, epidemiology, biostatistics, and evidence-based medicine. As part of the elective, students also received instruction in core space medicine concepts, evidence based medicine and problem based learning sessions as a flight surgeon supporting a simulated Mars mission. METHODS The list of 120 medical conditions includes both common, terrestrial illness/injury (epistaxis, diverticulitis) as well as spaceflight-specific ones (space adaptation conditions, EVA-related injuries). A rapid systematic review process was developed that would allow students to find the data for determining disease incidence/prevalence, return to definitive care (often a surrogate such as hospitalization rates), loss of crew life, and treatment duration. Each data point required a tailored, specialized search process using different databases and corresponding specialized search filters. Databases were selected on their ability to provide high quality literature in an efficient manner and prioritized by their ability to provide graded evidence via a set rubrics specific to human spaceflight. Students were responsible for performing all literature searches and identifying the highest quality available evidence for each data point. Completed student data sheets underwent initial review by faculty preceptors followed by a secondary editing review by the ExMC Clinical Science Team. RESULTS Over the course of three electives, approximately 105 medical conditions were researched by students using spreadsheets with pre-crafted search strategies. Overall, this process was successful in allowing students to perform the preponderance of work to update incidence, treatment duration, return to definitive care, and loss of crew life data points. Students were successful in running searches, identifying the necessary data points within the literature, and determining the types of terrestrial data that most aligns with the astronaut population for successful completion of their tasks. Limitations included variable student experience with search methodologies [PubMed], differing values of evidence grading [best practice evidence based medicine vs. relevant to spaceflight], and students’ unfamiliarity with spaceflight specific conditions. CONCLUSION Finding the relevant literature for medical conditions in spaceflight within terrestrial databases in a systematic method is time consuming and not intuitive. However, the stepwise process that balanced sensitivity with specificity allowed for students to be highly successful in a short amount of time. Additionally, as the process was refined over the course of three electives, preceptors were better able to anticipate where students were likely to encounter barriers, which allowed the course to be adjusted to account for certain data points needing more time for completion. This replicable process may be an efficient way to accomplish rapid systematic reviews for a large volume of data in a short amount of time.

J Lemery↗

DOE OSTI2018

Lessons Learned from Performing a Human Factors Engineering Validation of an Upgraded Digital Control System in a Nuclear Power Plant Control Room

The United States' fleet of nuclear power plants (NPPs) have exceeded their original 40-year licenses and many are seeking license renewals to continue operations into the future. To support continued operation the Department of Energy's (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program (LWRS) provides support for utilities to maintain and upgrade their power production capabilities. Control room modernization is one focus area, which aims to modernization the analog control rooms with digital controls and human-system interfaces (HSIs). The Turbine Control System (TCS) is a non-safety related system undergoing modernization efforts at multiple plants and utilities. Considerable human factors research efforts, comprised of expert reviews and operator in the loop studies were performed to develop human factors compliant and usable TCS. This report documents the final phase of the human factors engineering program used to design and validate the new digital TCS. According to the NUREG-0711 review guide, one of the last steps of human factors engineering program prior to implementation is human factors validation. This report details the method, results and conclusions from the human factors validation study of a collaborating utilities TCS slated to be implemented in one of their plants. One control room team consisting of two control room supervisors and two reactor operators participated in the validation. All team members had participated in the BNP TCS training program foregoing the TCS validation. Performance measures included task performance, situation awareness and workload, expert observation of any negative influences of human-system interface features on control room team performance, and interviews with the participating operators. Performance criteria were based on the performance scores and the topics identified by interviews and expert observations. The results showed that the crew using the new TCS clearly could achieve their overall objectives in the test scenarios with sufficient situation awareness. The new TCS compared to the old system provided clear improvements of the control room work regarding shell and chest warming and regarding valve and other system testing. However, a number of Human Engineering Discrepancies (HEDs) were identified. HEDs were prioritized (level 1, 2 or 3) according to potential safety, plant availability, operability or personnel performance consequences. Since no priority 1 HEDs were identified there is no HFE reason not to continue implementation of the TCS. The TCS upgrade is acceptable if the Priority 2 HEDs are resolved and dispositioned in a satisfactory way. Priority 3 HEDs should be noted and considered for future modifications.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Gaps and Key Performance Parameters to Inform NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Capability 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 vs when a mission element is also a strong consideration in which technologies should be pursued. The Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) capability areas include: life support, environmental monitoring, fire safety, and logistics. These 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 ECLSS gaps and KPPs and their formulation, current state, and how they inform capability roadmap planning are discussed.

Life Support↗

NASA NTRS2008

The Use of a Vehicle Acceleration Exposure Limit Model and a Finite Element Crash Test Dummy Model to Evaluate the Risk of Injuries During Orion Crew Module Landings

A review of astronaut whole body impact tolerance is discussed for land or water landings of the next generation manned space capsule named Orion. LS-DYNA simulations of Orion capsule landings are performed to produce a low, moderate, and high probability of injury. The paper evaluates finite element (FE) seat and occupant simulations for assessing injury risk for the Orion crew and compares these simulations to whole body injury models commonly referred to as the Brinkley criteria. The FE seat and crash dummy models allow for varying the occupant restraint systems, cushion materials, side constraints, flailing of limbs, and detailed seat/occupant interactions to minimize landing injuries to the crew. The FE crash test dummies used in conjunction with the Brinkley criteria provides a useful set of tools for predicting potential crew injuries during vehicle landings.

Lawrence, Charles↗

NASA NTRS2015

Air Traffic Management Technology Demostration: 1 Research and Procedural Testing of Routes

NASA's Air Traffic Management Technology Demonstration-1 (ATD-1) will operationally demonstrate the feasibility of efficient arrival operations combining ground-based and airborne NASA technologies. The ATD-1 integrated system consists of the Traffic Management Advisor with Terminal Metering which generates precise time-based schedules to the runway and merge points; Controller Managed Spacing decision support tools which provide controllers with speed advisories and other information needed to meet the schedule; and Flight deck-based Interval Management avionics and procedures which allow flight crews to adjust their speed to achieve precise relative spacing. Initial studies identified air-ground challenges related to the integration of these three scheduling and spacing technologies, and NASA's airborne spacing algorithm was modified to address some of these challenges. The Research and Procedural Testing of Routes human-in-the-loop experiment was then conducted to assess the performance of the new spacing algorithm. The results of this experiment indicate that the algorithm performed as designed, and the pilot participants found the airborne spacing concept, air-ground procedures, and crew interface to be acceptable. However, the researchers concluded that the data revealed issues with the frequency of speed changes and speed reversals.

Wilson, Sara R.↗

NASA NTRS2023

Robotic and Crewed Mars Missions Increasing the Demand for Planetary Protection Technology Needs

Planetary protection (PP) policy seeks to avoid harmful contamination by limiting biological and relevant organic contamination from spacecraft as well as preventing adverse changes to Earth’s biosphere when extraterrestial samples are brought back to Earth. The PP policy at NASA was updated in 2021 (NPR 8715.24) and 2022 (NASA-STD-8719.27) to enable missions by expanding the decades old prescriptive requirements to allow for an option of adopting performance-based requirements that are objectivesdriven, risk-informed and case-assured. In parallel, the final PP knowledge gap workshop was completed representing the international consensus on the key areas to be considered in developing crew PP policy. These knowledge gaps focused on key technology development areas in 1) microbial and human health monitoring, 2) technical and operations needed for contamination control and 3) natural transport of contamination on Mars. As robotic missions start to implement performance-based approaches and research and technology efforts commence to inform crew policy the demand for data quality driven verification and validation in relevant space environments. Examples of the types of testing that is envisioned includes test as you fly validation and verification of decontamination systems in a relevant on-orbit and Mars environment, developing lethality curves of terrestrial organisms to further our understanding of the biocidal impacts of Mars and the space environment, and particle transport model validation and verification. Thus, the PP discipline has identified the need for groundbased space environments to perform preliminary testing as validation and verification of flight systems and to advance the technology readiness level prior to further testing on-orbit or lunar environments to prepare for Mars.

J. Nick Benardini↗

NASA NTRS1980

A ranking algorithm for spacelab crew and experiment scheduling

The problem of obtaining an optimal or near optimal schedule for scientific experiments to be performed on Spacelab missions is addressed. The current capabilities in this regard are examined and a method of ranking experiments in order of difficulty is developed to support the existing software. Experimental data is obtained from applying this method to the sets of experiments corresponding to Spacelab mission 1, 2, and 3. Finally, suggestions are made concerning desirable modifications and features of second generation software being developed for this problem.

Grone, R. D.↗

NASA NTRS2004

DAG-TM Concept Element 11 CNS Performance Assessment: ADS-B Performance in the TRACON

Distributed Air/Ground (DAG) Traffic Management (TM) is an integrated operational concept in which flight deck crews, air traffic service providers and aeronautical operational control personnel use distributed decision-making to enable user preferences and increase system capacity, while meeting air traffic management (ATM) safety requirements. It is a possible operational mode under the Free Flight concept outlined by the RTCA Task Force 3. The goal of DAG-TM is to enhance user flexibility/efficiency and increase system capacity, without adversely affecting system safety or restricting user accessibility to the National Airspace System (NAS). DAG-TM will be accomplished with a human-centered operational paradigm enabled by procedural and technological innovations. These innovations include automation aids, information sharing and Communication, Navigation, and Surveillance (CNS) / ATM technologies. The DAG-TM concept is intended to eliminate static restrictions to the maximum extent possible. In this paradigm, users may plan and operate according to their preferences - as the rule rather than the exception - with deviations occurring only as necessary. The DAG-TM concept elements aim to mitigate the extent and impact of dynamic NAS constraints, while maximizing the flexibility of airspace operations

Raghavan, Rajesh S.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Progress on the Organic and Inorganic Modules of the Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor, a Next Generation Complete Water Analysis System for Crewed Vehicles

The Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor (SWIM) is a joint collaboration to develop an instrument platform that will perform in-flight measurements and deliver a more complete picture of water quality to decision makers. For exploration missions, returned water samples will not be an option, so spacecraft and habitats will need to be equipped with advanced water monitoring capabilities. Eventually, missions to the moon, Mars, and beyond should be equipped with analytical capabilities roughly analogous to those found in terrestrial labs. Based on what we know about current and future spacecraft environments, SWIM will seek to provide enhanced analytical capability that enables NASA to confidently send astronauts on distant missions without the possibility of returned water samples. The SWIM architecture can be broken down in an Organic Water Module (OWM) and an Inorganic Water Module (IWM), independent of each other but can be flown together if desired; an integrated system may share some commonality, e.g., single sample injection, sampling consumables, waste, etc. Each of these main modules can be broken down further into separation (if required) and detection modules. And, each separation module can be paired with one or more detection module depending on mission, spacecraft, customer needs, and size/mass/power constraints. This paper discusses the research and development progress toward the goal of a total water analysis system. For OWM, one of the analysis technologies that the SWIM team have been developing is a liquid-injection gas chromatograph mass spectrometer system; these systems are the workhorses of analytical chemistry laboratories world-wide. For IWM, the team is exploring a number of technologies ranging from traditional liquid chromatography technologies (e.g. ion chromatography, capillary electrophoresis) to flight-heritage technology such as ion-specific electrodes.

Stuart J Pensinger↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Progress on the Organic and Inorganic Modules of the Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor, a Next Generation Complete Water Analysis System for Crewed Vehicles

The Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor (SWIM) is a joint collaboration to develop an instrument platform that will perform in-flight measurements and deliver a more complete picture of water quality to decision makers. For exploration missions, returned water samples will not be an option, so spacecraft and habitats will need to be equipped with advanced water monitoring capabilities. Eventually, missions to the moon, Mars, and beyond should be equipped with analytical capabilities roughly analogous to those found in terrestrial labs. Based on what we know about current and future spacecraft environments, SWIM will seek to provide enhanced analytical capability that enables NASA to confidently send astronauts on distant missions without the possibility of returned water samples. The SWIM architecture can be broken down in an Organic Water Module (OWM) and an Inorganic Water Module (IWM), independent of each other but can be flown together if desired; an integrated system may share some commonality, e.g., single sample injection, sampling consumables, waste, etc. Each of these main modules can be broken down further into separation (if required) and detection modules. And, each separation module can be paired with one or more detection module depending on mission, spacecraft, customer needs, and size/mass/power constraints. This paper discusses the research and development progress toward the goal of a total water analysis system. For OWM, one of the analysis technologies that the SWIM team have been developing is a liquid-injection gas chromatograph mass spectrometer system; these systems are the workhorses of analytical chemistry laboratories world-wide. For IWM, the team is exploring a number of technologies ranging from traditional liquid chromatography technologies (e.g. ion chromatography, capillary electrophoresis) to flight-heritage technology such as ion-specific electrodes.

Stuart J. Pensinger↗

NASA NTRS2023

Progress on the Organic and Inorganic Modules of the Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor, a Next Generation Complete Water Analysis System for Crewed Vehicles

The Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor (SWIM) is a joint collaboration to develop an instrument platform that will perform in-flight measurements and deliver a more complete picture of water quality to decision makers. For exploration missions, returned water samples will not be an option, so spacecraft and habitats will need to be equipped with advanced water monitoring capabilities. Eventually, missions to the moon, Mars, and beyond should be equipped with analytical capabilities roughly analogous to those found in terrestrial labs. Based on what we know about current and future spacecraft environments, SWIM will seek to provide enhanced analytical capability that enables NASA to confidently send astronauts on distant missions without the possibility of returned water samples. The SWIM architecture can be broken down in an Organic Water Module (OWM) and an Inorganic Water Module (IWM), independent of each other but can be flown together if desired; an integrated system may share some commonality, e.g., single sample injection, sampling consumables, waste, etc. Each of these main modules can be broken down further into separation (if required) and detection modules. And, each separation module can be paired with one or more detection module depending on mission, spacecraft, customer needs, and size/mass/power constraints. This paper discusses the research and development progress toward the goal of a total water analysis system. For OWM, one of the analysis technologies that the SWIM team have been developing is a liquid-injection gas chromatograph mass spectrometer system; these systems are the workhorses of analytical chemistry laboratories world-wide. For IWM, the team is exploring a number of technologies ranging from traditional liquid chromatography technologies (e.g. ion chromatography, capillary electrophoresis) to flight-heritage technology such as ion-specific electrodes.

Stuart J Pensinger↗

NASA NTRS2023

Progress on the Organic and Inorganic Modules of the Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor, a Next Generation Complete Water Analysis System for Crewed Vehicles

The Spacecraft Water Impurity Monitor (SWIM) is a joint collaboration to develop an instrument platform that will perform in-flight measurements and deliver a more complete picture of water quality to decision makers. For exploration missions, returned water samples will not be an option, so spacecraft and habitats will need to be equipped with advanced water monitoring capabilities. Eventually, missions to the moon, Mars, and beyond should be equipped with analytical capabilities roughly analogous to those found in terrestrial labs. Based on what we know about current and future spacecraft environments, SWIM will seek to provide enhanced analytical capability that enables NASA to confidently send astronauts on distant missions without the possibility of returned water samples. The SWIM architecture can be broken down in an Organic Water Module (OWM) and an Inorganic Water Module (IWM), independent of each other but can be flown together if desired; an integrated system may share some commonality, e.g., single sample injection, sampling consumables, waste, etc. Each of these main modules can be broken down further into separation (if required) and detection modules. And, each separation module can be paired with one or more detection module depending on mission, spacecraft, customer needs, and size/mass/power constraints. This paper discusses the research and development progress toward the goal of a total water analysis system. For OWM, one of the analysis technologies that the SWIM team have been developing is a liquid-injection gas chromatograph mass spectrometer system; these systems are the workhorses of analytical chemistry laboratories world-wide. For IWM, the team is exploring a number of technologies ranging from traditional liquid chromatography technologies (e.g. ion chromatography, capillary electrophoresis) to flight-heritage technology such as ion-specific electrodes.

Stuart Pensinger↗

NASA NTRS2003

Robonaut: a robot designed to work with humans in space

The Robotics Technology Branch at the NASA Johnson Space Center is developing robotic systems to assist astronauts in space. One such system, Robonaut, is a humanoid robot with the dexterity approaching that of a suited astronaut. Robonaut currently has two dexterous arms and hands, a three degree-of-freedom articulating waist, and a two degree-of-freedom neck used as a camera and sensor platform. In contrast to other space manipulator systems, Robonaut is designed to work within existing corridors and use the same tools as space walking astronauts. Robonaut is envisioned as working with astronauts, both autonomously and by teleoperation, performing a variety of tasks including, routine maintenance, setting up and breaking down worksites, assisting crew members while outside of spacecraft, and serving in a rapid response capacity.

Man-Machine Systems↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated Software for Crewed Spacecraft - Bridging the Gap from Sci Fi to Reality

With a voice command or a few taps on the console, the spacecraft pivots on a dime at high velocity and gently docks to an orbiting space platform. This is the image most people have of the complex software computations and integrated hardware performance necessary for a spacecraft to successfully perform an automated launch, rendezvous, and docking. Today’s reality is that while computer operations are advancing rapidly, science fiction over-simplifies and over-sells current capabilities. This paper discusses the integration of spacecraft computer automation into the operation of one of the United States’ new Commercial Crew vehicles - the Boeing CST-100 Starliner. Lessons learned by the Boeing Mission Operations team, a private-public partnership with NASA, from conceptual design through real-time operation of the first test flight will be discussed. Focus will center on how operations has learned to use the automated software to their advantage while also knowing how to adjust the automation in response to spacecraft or mission anomalies. One goal of advanced spacecraft automation is the ability to reduce both the crew workload and the ground control footprint while at the same time increasing spacecraft and mission flexibility. Historically, crewed spacecraft required a large number of operators on the ground to use a plethora of tools to compute nominal and contingency mission trajectories. Moving those sophisticated software tools to being onboard the vehicle can reduce the need for such complex ground support. Given that today’s spacecraft software is not yet as capable or as flexible in all circumstances as the computers depicted in movies, there is usually a trade-off between software automation cost and the flexibility of that software resulting in a trade-off between what is performed on the spacecraft and what is left to onboard crew or ground control. For missions that go beyond the Moon, software that autonomously controls nearly every aspect of a crewed mission will become a necessity given the long time delays between the spacecraft and Earth’s ground control teams. The lessons learned by Boeing and its Mission Operations team, through the design and implementation of Starliner’s hardware and software automation, will be able to inform future public and private spacecraft design. As the technologies and capabilities evolve, incorporating lessons learned in successful low Earth orbit commercial crew vehicle missions, spacecraft designs will continue to improve and be able to better enable safe execution of human missions to the Moon and beyond.

Robert C Dempsey↗

NASA NTRS2005

STS-114: Discovery TCDT Flight Crew Test Media Event at Pad 39-B

The STS-114 Space Shuttle Discovery Terminal Countdown Demonstration Test (TCDT) flight crew is shown at Pad 39-B. Eileen Collins, Commander introduces the astronauts. Andrew Thomas, mission specialist talks about his primary responsibility of performing boom inspections, Wendy Lawrence, Mission Specialist 4 (MS4) describes her role as the robotic arm operator supporting Extravehicular Activities (EVA), Stephen Robinson, Mission Specialist 3 (MS3) talks about his role as flight engineer, Charlie Camarda, Mission Specialist 5 (MS5) says that his duties are to perform boom operations, transfer operations from the space shuttle to the International Space Station and spacecraft rendezvous. Soichi Noguchi, Mission Specialist 1 (MS1) from JAXA, introduces himself as Extravehicular Activity 1 (EVA1), and Jim Kelley, Pilot will operate the robotic arm and perform pilot duties. Questions from the news media about the safety of the external tank, going to the International Space Station and returning, EVA training, and thoughts about the Space Shuttle Columbia crew are answered.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2017

Moon Age and Regolith Explorer (MARE) Mission Design and Performance

On December 11, 1972, Apollo 17 marked the last controlled U.S. lunar landing and was followed by an absence of methodical in-situ investigation of the lunar surface. The Moon Age and Regolith Explorer (MARE) proposal provides scientific measurement of the age and composition of a relatively young portion of the lunar surface near Aristarchus Plateau and the first post-Apollo U.S. soft lunar landing. It includes the first demonstration of a crew survivability-enhancing autonomous hazard detection and avoidance system. This report focuses on the mission design and performance associated with the MARE robotic lunar landing subject to mission and trajectory constraints.

Condon, Gerald L.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Meeting human needs

Manned space flight can be viewed as an interaction of three general elements: the human crewmember, spacecraft systems, and the environment. While the human crewmember is a crucial element in the system, certain physiological, psychological, environ- mental and spacecraft systems factors can compromise human performance in space. These factors include atmospheric pressure, physiology, uncertainties associated with space radiation, the potential for exposure to toxic materials in the closed environment, and spacecraft habitability. Health protection in space, for current and future missions, relies on a philosophy of risk reduction, which in the space program is achieved in four ways-through health maintenance, health care, design criteria, an selection and training. Emphasis is place upon prevention, through selection criteria and careful screening. Spacecraft health care systems must be absolutely reliable, and they will be automated and computerized to the maximum extent possible, but still designed with the human crewmember's capabilities in mind. The autonomy and technological sophistication of future missions will require a greater emphasis on high-level interaction between the human operator and automated systems, with effective allocation of tasks between humans and machines. Performance in space will include complex tasks during extravehicular activity (EVA) and on planetary surfaces, and knowledge of crewmembers' capability and limitations during such operations will be critical to mission success. Psychological support will become increasingly important on space missions, as crews spend long periods in remote and potentially hazardous environments. The success of future missions will depend on both individual psychological health and group cohesion and productivity, particularly as crew profiles become more heterogeneous. Thus, further human factors are needed in the area of small-group dynamics and performance.

Nicogossian, Arnauld E.↗