SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “interview”
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.
Field Evaluations of Sampling, Interviewing, and Flight Tracking of NASA's Low Boom Flight Demonstrator Aircraft
The first year’s effort identified sampling and interviewing as the principal risks to assessment of prompt reactions to overflights producing low-amplitude sonic booms. It also 1) established the utility of geo-information system-based route planning for LBFD flight missions, 2) developed and demonstrated a prototype of a geographically-distributed, Internet-enabled instrumentation system capable of wide-area tracking of LBFD aircraft in near-real time. The latter system permits synchronizing the conduct of interviews in multiple overflown communities with arrival times of shock waves at interviewing sites; and of measuring, archiving, and processing their acoustic signatures. Means were also recommended for constructing representative, telephone-based samples of eligible respondents living in households within carpet boom corridors adjacent to LBFD flight tracks, and for conducting interviews with cross-sectional (independent) samples of such respondents about their prompt reactions to exposure to low-amplitude sonic booms. A detailed study design was prepared and accepted by NASA for a set of single-contact attempt telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of households. The study design focused on testing automated and live agent interview completion rates obtainable without callbacks. A minimal (two monitoring station) version of the aircraft tracking system was built and installed near a civil airport in a successful demonstration of the system’s ability to detect and track aircraft movements. The field exercise also demonstrated the ability of the system to capture the acoustic emissions of departing aircraft, and to serve aircraft position and sound level information to remote, geographically-distributed analysts in near-real time. Upon approval of OMB and IRB of the detailed study plan, a stratified, nationally representative sample of landline and wireless telephone-subscribing households was constructed. A total of 12,734 telephone interview contact attempts of the sort required by a straightforward cross-sectional study design were then made. These contact attempts demonstrated the impracticality of conducting a time-critical, cross-sectional study of prompt community response to low-amplitude sonic booms by means of “independent” (single contact attempt per respondent for each LBFD flight mission) telephone samples of respondents. The observed interview completion rates for these single telephone contact attempts were so low (~ 1% to 3% for automated and live agent interviews, respectively) that: 1) the representativeness of collected opinions would be susceptible to intuitive challenge as inadequate, even absent conclusive evidence of non-representativeness. Refuting challenges to representativeness would have to demonstrate that the composition of the actual sample did not differ from that of the target population, a task that is tantamount to proving a negative; 2) the information required to refute allegations of non-representativeness would require a questionnaire considerably lengthier than that required simply to determine the prevalence of boom-induced startle and annoyance. Such a questionnaire would have to inquire about potentially sensitive and intrusive matters, including respondents’ age, gender, education, employment, home ownership, income, ethnicity, family size, and other demographic factors; and 3) unreasonable numbers of attempts would be required to re-contact households with unsuccessful initial contact attempts, given the limited time available for doing so. For example, if about 500 completed interviews were desired in a supersonically overflown community, approximately 50,000 automated interview attempts would have to be made within ten to fifteen minutes of each LBFD overflight. Such large numbers of contact attempts could well exceed the numbers of households available for interview in areas of similar boom exposure levels in some communities near LBFD flight tracks. Such large numbers of interviews could be cost-effectively undertaken only by means of automated (i.e., outgoing interactive voice response) interviewing, a data collection method ill-suited for complex and sensitive questionnaire items. The infeasibility of independent sampling for evaluating prompt responses to LBFD overflights in a cross-sectional study is due in large part to simple non-response: that is, potential respondents – particularly those contacted on wireless telephones – refusing to answer calls with unfamiliar caller IDs. It is also due in part, however, to 1) the lack of time to attempt to contact the same respondent more than once within a few minutes after the arrival of a shock wave at the respondent’s location; and 2) the need to place calls during weekday/daytime hours, when response rates are notably lower than during evenings and weekends. Despite the poor interview completion rates achieved under the above constraints, cross sectional assessments of delayed reactions to LBFD overflights could still be feasible, if multiple attempts could be made to contact respondents during evening and weekend time periods, over extended time periods. Detailed plans for a longitudinal (panel) sample were developed as an alternative to a cross sectional sample design.
Using A Guided Interview to Create an Individual Exposure Profile for The Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH)
BACKGROUND To support NASA’s Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) project, Individual Exposure Profiles (IEPs) were developed to record an astronaut’s pre-, in-, and post-NASA exposures. NASA astronauts were invited to participate in a one-time guided interview to review known hazard exposures and medical history documented in NASA records and to add new information not otherwise reported. The purpose of the IEP project was to determine if any significant information was gained from these interviews and identify potential trends in long-term health. METHODOLOGY The pre-filled exposure profile data was extracted from several sources including medical records, biographies, and LSAH records. The information that was pre-filled before the interview included occupational exposures prior to selection to the Astronaut Corps, during active astronaut career (e.g., EVA and ground-based training, on-orbit exposures), and after active career. The IEPs also contained relevant medical history (e.g., audiometry, illnesses, injuries) and significant non-occupational exposures. 189 interviews were conducted from 2012-2014. A Microsoft Access database was created to store the information collected in the IEPs before and after the interviews. The database houses the information from the IEPs to track the updates made to the original data. By analyzing which astronauts supplied additional information and which kinds of data were consistently added, potential gaps and trends in missing data may be identified. In designing the database, an efficient structure was implemented for ease of inputting data and to create variables that would generate quantifiable data. Creating standardized variables within the structure helped ease the process of inputting, organizing data, and analyzing data. Additional updates/data were denoted and were categorized by type of update. The categories identified were “Confirmed”, “Confirmed & Supplemented”, “Supplemented”, “Denied”, “Denied & Supplemented”, and “Other”. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND RESULTS To assess frequency of exposure updates, descriptive statistics will be generated and stratified by relevant factors such as astronaut selection decade, age at selection, and program/era. Hypothesis testing will be performed to understand the associations between updates to exposure information and population characteristics.
Private Astronaut Post-Mission Debrief Interviews Study
BACKGROUND The commercialization of space will increasingly include individuals that are not rigorously-selected, highly-trained professional astronauts. Private astronaut missions (PAMs), such as Axiom-1 in 2022, will continue to travel to the International Space Station in the coming years, but the risk of integrating private astronauts with NASA astronauts has not been clearly quantified nor mitigated. An earlier internal NASA operations assessment, which consisted of a comprehensive literature review and interviews of current NASA experts, found that PAMs are likely to increase the risk to NASA astronauts during integrated missions (Landon, Whiting, Russell, Schorn, Passmore, & Roma, 2022). There are ongoing efforts at NASA to mitigate concerns from a medical, psychological, and technical perspective. NASA experts are working closely with PAM providers to offer recommendations and best practices beyond the limits of requirements to ensure crew health and safety. However, efforts are siloed between groups to some extent, and with the rate of PAMs likely to increase, a more comprehensive and integrated process is needed to reduce the burden on NASA resources. AIMS The purpose of this project is to understand private astronauts’ motivations for journeying to space, their pre-mission preparation period, and their experiences in space. Data will be collected via private astronaut post-mission debrief interviews. This data will inform training needs and in-mission support needed for missions that include private astronauts; the preparation NASA astronauts and mission support personnel will need to work with these integrated crews; and gaps in knowledge to guide research and countermeasure development. Our study aims to (1) Characterize risks posed by commercialization and private astronaut crew integration in spaceflight operations, as it relates to Team, Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA), and Behavioral Medicine (BMed) Risks, (2) Recommend potential countermeasures and identify gaps in current research. Countermeasures may be related to crew selection and composition, training, crew support systems (e.g., medical/psychological support, support from Mission Control, on-board resources), and habitability and human factors design. METHOD The BHP Lab will conduct 30-minute interviews with up to eight (8) private astronaut mission (PAM) astronauts (e.g., Axiom) and spaceflight participants (e.g., SFPs or “free flyers” on Polaris Dawn) per year from 2024-2030 to discuss knowledge gaps and needs related to selection and assessment, crew composition, training, crew support systems (e.g., medical/psychological support, support from Mission Control, onboard resources), and habitability and human factors design, which may influence the risk to NASA astronauts. Interviews will then be coded using thematic analysis and interpreted with the assistance of lexical analysis software (e.g., LIWC). As of the end of 2024, we have collected data from one PAM crew. At the conclusion of data collection in 2030, a final report will be prepared integrating all data collected by 2031. SUMMARY Post-return interviews of private astronauts are being conducted to understand their experiences and inform training and countermeasures to ensure the safety of all who journey to the ISS.
Sensor Impacts Evaluation and Verification: Expert Interview Responses
The sensor configuration/deployment method has critical impacts on energy efficient building control and thermal comfort. However, traditional sensor techniques for building operation and fault detection and diagnostics (FDD) are not necessarily optimal in terms of energy efficiency and thermal comfort, and their global effects are not thoroughly investigated. In an effort to address and overcome this limitation, a multilaboratory and multiyear project, “Sensor Impact Evaluation and Verification,” was proposed. Its purpose is to develop a framework to investigate the impacts of sensor deployment and configuration on building energy optimization, FDD, occupant thermal comfort, and potentially grid efficiency. The first project task was a literature review to establish a solid knowledge of and a background related to sensor technologies and placement. To accomplish this task, an extensive review of previous research literature was performed. A series of expert interviews were conducted to augment the findings of the literature review. This report summarizes the interview design and interview results and findings. The interview was designed and performed to (1) investigate the current status and limitations of sensor configuration, (2) identify the research gaps and expectations for potential improvements in sensor configuration and deployment, and (3) integrate expert (e.g., researcher, building operation practitioner) knowledge and experience to develop use-case scenarios.
Assessment of Existing OpenStudio Measures: Reviews, Interviews, and Future Developments
OpenStudio Measure development is continuously in progress and greatly propelled by the collaborative efforts within the building energy modeling community. To ensure the widespread adoption and benefit of OpenStudio Measures, developers must understand the current status of Measure development and the needs of OpenStudio Measure users. The first step involves a comprehensive review of existing content to prevent redundancy and gain insights into how OpenStudio Measures are used in the building energy modeling community. This knowledge can then be integrated into the Measure development process, and the expertise of practitioners and OpenStudio Measure users can be leveraged to shape future Measures. Numerous OpenStudio Measures have been created and shared on the Building Component Library (BCL). The BCL is an open-source repository housing various OpenStudio-related resources, including building component blocks, descriptive metadata, and Measures describing modifications to building energy models. The OpenStudio Measures in BCL encompass a wide range of energy conservation Measures from basic lighting power reduction to complex HVAC model transformation. They also enable users to generate customized reports and facilitate the integration of energy simulation with other analytical processes. This report presents review of 272 currently available OpenStudio Measures in BCL. The OpenStudio Measures were reviewed by category and subcategory. These Measures are summarized by their functionalities and keywords. To gain insights into how OpenStudio Measures are used in building energy modeling community, interviews were conducted. A total of 12 interview responses were collected from 6 individuals in the industry and 6 individuals in academia. The knowledge acquired from reviewing the existing Measures and interview results will be integrated into the Measure development process, and the expertise of practitioners and OpenStudio Measure users will be leveraged to shape future Measures.
Evaluation of the Trajectory Operations Applications Software Task (TOAST). Volume 2: Interview transcripts
The Trajectory Operations Applications Software Task (TOAST) is a software development project whose purpose is to provide trajectory operation pre-mission and real-time support for the Space Shuttle. The purpose of the evaluation was to evaluate TOAST as an Application Manager - to assess current and planned capabilities, compare capabilities to commercially-available off the shelf (COTS) software, and analyze requirements of MCC and Flight Analysis Design System (FADS) for TOAST implementation. As a major part of the data gathering for the evaluation, interviews were conducted with NASA and contractor personnel. Real-time and flight design users, orbit navigation users, the TOAST developers, and management were interviewed. Code reviews and demonstrations were also held. Each of these interviews was videotaped and transcribed as appropriate. Transcripts were edited and are presented chronologically.
Interviews with the Apollo lunar surface astronauts in support of planning for EVA systems design
Focused interviews were conducted with the Apollo astronauts who landed on the moon. The purpose of these interviews was to help define extravehicular activity (EVA) system requirements for future lunar and planetary missions. Information from the interviews was examined with particular attention to identifying areas of consensus, since some commonality of experience is necessary to aid in the design of advanced systems. Results are presented under the following categories: mission approach; mission structure; suits; portable life support systems; dust control; gloves; automation; information, displays, and controls; rovers and remotes; tools; operations; training; and general comments. Research recommendations are offered, along with supporting information.
STS-103 Crew Interviews: Jean-Francois Clervoy
Live footage of a preflight interview with Mission Specialist Jean-Francois Clervoy is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Clervoy became an astronaut, what were the events that led to his interest. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is an explanation of the why this required mission to service the Hubble Space Telescope must take place at such an early date, replacement of the gyroscopes, transistors and computers. Also discussed is an explanation of the ESA (European Space Agency) involvement in this mission, and a brief touch on Clervoy's responsibility during any of the given four space walks scheduled for this mission.
STS-103 Crew Interviews: Curtis Brown
Live footage of a preflight interview with Commander Curtis L. Brown is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Brown became an astronaut, the events that led to his interest, any role models that he had, and his inspiration. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is an explanation of the why this required mission to service the Hubble Space Telescope must take place at such an early date, replacement of the gyroscopes, transistors, and computers. Also discussed is Brown's responsibility during any of the planned space walks scheduled for this mission.
STS-103 Crew Interviews: Scott Kelly
Live footage of a preflight interview with Pilot Scott J. Kelly is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Kelly became an astronaut, the events that led to his interest, any role models that he had, and his inspiration. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is an explanation of the why this required mission to service the Hubble Space Telescope must take place at such an early date, replacement of the gyroscopes, transistors, and computers. Also discussed are the Chandra X Ray Astrophysics Facility, and a brief touch on Kelly's responsibility during any of the given four space walks scheduled for this mission.
STS-103 Crew Interviews: John Grunsfeld
Live footage of a preflight interview with Mission Specialist John M. Grunsfeld is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Grunsfeld became an astronaut, and the events that led to his interest. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is an explanation of the why this required mission to service the Hubble Space Telescope must take place at such an early date, and a brief touch on Grunsfeld's responsibility during any of the four space walks scheduled for this mission.
STS-103 Crew Interviews: Claude Nicollier
Live footage of a preflight interview with Mission Specialist Claude Nicollier is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Nicollier became an astronaut, the events that led to his interest, any role models that he had, and his inspiration. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is an explanation of the why this required mission to service the Hubble Space Telescope must take place at such an early date, replacement of the gyroscopes, transistors, and computers. Also discussed are the Chandra X-Ray Astrophysics Facility, and a brief touch on Nicollier's responsibility during any of the given four space walks scheduled for this mission.
STS-103 Crew Interviews: Mike Foale
Live footage of a preflight interview with Mission Specialist C. Michael Foale is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Foale became an astronaut, what were the events that led to his interest. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is an explanation of the why this required mission to service the Hubble Space Telescope must take place at such an early date, and a brief touch on Foale's responsibility during any of the four space walks scheduled for this mission.
STS-103 Crew Interviews: Steven Smith
Live footage of a preflight interview with Mission Specialist Steven L. Smith is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Brown became an astronaut, the events that led to his interest, any role models that he had, and his inspiration. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is an explanation of the why this required mission to service the Hubble Space Telescope must take place at such an early date, replacement of the gyroscopes, transistors, and computers. Also discussed is Smith's responsibility during any of the planned space walks scheduled for this mission.
STS-99 Crew Interviews: Kevin R. Kregel
Live footage of a preflight interview with Mission Commander Kevin R. Kregel is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Kregel became an astronaut, the events that led to his interest, his career path through the Air Force and later the Navy, and then finally, his selection by NASA as an astronaut. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is the purpose for the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM), with specific focus placed on why this SRTM flight is important, and what we will learn from the 3D topographic map of the Earth. The two antennas that will be taking the pictures, the involvement of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA), EARTHCAM, a student-controlled camera on the Endeavour Orbiter, and Kregel's responsibility during this 24 hour mission are also discussed.
STS-99 Crew Interviews: Mamoru Mohri
Live footage of a preflight interview with Mission Specialists Mamoru Mohri is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Mohri became an astronaut, the events that led to his interest, his career path, and then finally, his selection by NASDA as an astronaut. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is the purpose for the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM). Specific interest is on the importance of this SRTM flight, the knowledge that we will gain from the 3D topographic map of the Earth, and the reason why this 3D data is being recorded instead of down-linked. The two antennas that will be taking the pictures, the involvement of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA), and EARTHCAM, a student-controlled camera on the Endeavour Orbiter, Mohri's responsibility during this 24 hour mission, and his secondary experiments with high definition TV cameras are also discussed.
STS-99 Crew Interviews: Gorie
Live footage of a preflight interview with Pilot Dominic L. Pudwell Gorie is seen. The interview addresses many different questions including why Gorie became an astronaut, the events that led to his interest, and his career path. Other interesting information that this one-on-one interview discusses is the purpose for the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM). The main interest is on the importance of this SRTM flight, the knowledge we will learn gain from the 3D topographic map of the Earth, and the possible similarity to the tethered Satellite System Flight. The two antennas that will be taking the pictures, the involvement of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA), mass deployment and retraction, gravity gradient force, flight cast maneuvers, EARTHCAM, a student-controlled camera on the Endeavour Orbiter, and Gorie's responsibility during this 24 hour mission.