Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Bradley Hoffmann

Publications and source records attributed to Bradley Hoffmann.

15 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2024

Crew State and Risk Model (CSRM) - Medication Impacts on Physiologic Models for Exploration Class EVA Predictive Modeling and Operations

EVA and Environmental Physiology Laboratory (EEPL) wanted to expand upon the previous CSRM Physiologic Map to visually demonstrate the impact of medications on various modeling inputs that map to the seven physiologic models. It is acknowledged various physiologic states present during EVA could impact drug pharmacokinetics (i.e. pressure changes, core body temperature), which could impact pharmacodynamics. However, that is outside the scope of this document. The medications below represent the authors’ assumption of what medications will be available and able to impact an Artemis EVA and do not include the full ISS formulary, a final Artemis medical kit, or additional personal medications for individual crewmember’s chronic medical conditions.

Emma Ives↗
NASA NTRS2024

Core Body Temperature Predictions Using Metabolic Energy Expenditure and Heart Rate During Simulated Extravehicular Activity

Long duration spaceflight missions will require crew to become more autonomous in conducting extravehicular activities (EVA) without direct communication with Mission Control for biomedical support. To enable such autonomy, we are developing a Crew State and Risk Model (CSRM) as a collection of key physiology domains that drive EVA crew capabilities and workloads. One model component of CSRM is human thermal regulation. In this paper, customized development of a baseline model to predict core body temperature is presented using physiology inputs of heart rate and metabolic rate. The model development dataset included a baseline study where participants (n=6, equal male and female) performed a 5-hour EVA in a two-part session while wearing a hybrid space suit simulator (HS3). The first session included an end-to-end EVA traversing 1500 meters to a geology site and traversing back to a habitat conducting geology, payload relocation, and maintenance operations every 500 meters. The second session included standalone tasks of a 2000-meter traverse followed by geology tasks. Thermal measures of core body temperature, local skin temperature, liquid cooling garment temperature, heart rate, and metabolic rate were collected through the test duration. Multiple regression was used to build a linear equation to predict core body temperature from inputs of heart rate and metabolic rate. Heat storage was calculated via predicted core body temperature plus LCG and skin temperatures. The model was tested against a dataset from a pressurized suited test (n=6, equal male and female) in the NASA Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) conducting similar end-to-end EVA and standalone tasks. Predicted error of the model against the raw test cases was 0.2±0.15 °C. The baseline prediction of core body temperature using heart rates and metabolic rates allows for simple real-time tracking from data collected in-flight to monitor crew consumables and thermal flight limits during EVA.

Bradley Hoffmann↗
NASA NTRS2023

Developing a Hybrid Space Suit Simulator as a Research Tool for Assessing Extravehicular Activity Relevant Workload

Suited testing time is limited and hard to come by, expensive, and requires a whole team to operate and monitor the suit; however, pressurized spacesuits are not always necessary for initial developmental efforts or assessment of informatics. The Human Physiology, Performance, Protection & Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) is developing a Hybrid Space Suit Simulator (HS3) to support characterization of human performance during planetary surface exploration analogs. The primary goal of HS3 is to create a low cost, modular, and unpressurized suit simulator for use as a research tool which provides relevant physical and cognitive workload approximations with EVA-like immersion during planetary extravehicular activity (EVA) simulations. HS3 consists of a soft suit, communication, thermal control, gloves, boots, helmet, and integrated bioinformatics/sensors. The modular design of HS3 allows it to be modified to support test objectives as needed. HS3 enables H-3PO and NASA to complete critical human health and performance testing to address open risks and knowledge gaps in a timely, repeatable, and controlled manner. Four engineering runs were completed with HS3 as a baseline for capability. General workload was assessed while traversing on a passive treadmill and conducting geology tasks. Liquid cooling temperature, suit temperature, and metabolic rates were collected during one extended three-hour engineering run. For the duration of the engineering run the suit temperature was 26.6 ± 1.58 °C while suit humidity was 53.7 ± 5.11 %. Helmet temperature was higher than suit temperature at 27.8 ± 1.58 °C. Helmet humidity was lower than average suit humidity at 50.12 ± 11.3 °C. The liquid cooling temperature remained stable at 22.4 ± 1.62 °C. Resting metabolic rate was 597 ± 88 BTU/hr while metabolic rate increased during traverse tasks at 1500 ± 319 BTU/hr and geology tasks at 921 ± 129 BTU/hr. Following the engineering runs, a characterization study will be conducted. The subjects will perform EVA-like scenarios in both a shirtsleeve only and donned HS3, consisting of EVA task circuit focused on traversing, geological rock sampling, and task board manipulation. The characterization study will provide data capability for implementing HS3 in analog EVA testing environments.

Monica Hew↗
NASA NTRS2023

Developing a Hybrid Spacesuit Simulator as a Research Tool for Assessing Extravehicular Activity Relevant Workload

Conducting human tests in a pressurized spacesuit is limited by availability, cost, and manpower; however, pressurized spacesuits are not always needed depending on the objectives of testing, including the development and testing of new informatics capabilities. The Human Physiology, Performance, Protection & Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA is developing a Hybrid Spacesuit Simulator (HS3) to support testing and characterization of human performance during analog planetary exploration extravehicular activities (EVAs). The goal of HS3 is to create a low-cost, modular, and unpressurized spacesuit simulator as a research tool that provides relevant physical and cognitive workload approximations with EVA-like immersion. HS3 consists of a soft outer suit, thermal control, gloves, boots, helmet, and integrated bioinformatics and communications. Baseline HS3 assessments were performed during 3-hour EVA simulations in two different subjects (DEMO1 and DEMO2) that included traverses at variable resistances and geological sampling activities. Liquid cooling garment (LCG) temperature, mean skin temperature, heart rate, motion capture, and metabolic rate were collected during each 3-hour simulated EVA. During DEMO1 and DEMO2, baseline metabolic rates at rest were 836 ± 327 BTU/hr and 869 ± 207 BTU/hr and increased to 2124 ± 548 BTU/hr and 2269 ± 559 BTU/hr, respectively, during 500m traverse. Average inlet LCG temperatures were 29.57 ± 6.62 °C and 25.63 ± 6.48 °C for DEMO1 and DEMO2 with increased outlet LCG temperatures of 33.53 ± 6.62 °C and 29.21 ± 4.79 °C, respectively. Overall, HS3 will enable future studies to characterize EVA tasks, human performance, and test future EVA capabilities in analog test environments without the need for pressurized suited environments.

Monica Hew↗
NASA NTRS2021

Chapter 6: Evaluation of Cardiothermal Model Prediction of Simulated Lunar Extravehicular Activity

Fewer than 20 extravehicular activities were completed during the Apollo program. The lunar environment has consistent unknowns to address particularly that of suited performance in partial gravity. The moon has altered gravity that is 1/6th that of Earth’s. This study is focused to investigate validation of the regression techniques identified in subsequent chapters and look to improve predictive outcomes during simulated lunar EVA tasks. Heart rate predictions of metabolic energy expenditure are investigated to predict workload throughout simulated lunar EVA conducted in the active response gravity offload system (ARGOS) with in the NASA Mark III space suit. Heart rate variability metrics are utilized to identify periods of high workload. Continually, the lunar offload capacity is further characterized to aid in improving the cardiothermal prediction models including predictions of core temperature, skin temperature and heat storage using heart rate, metabolic rates and suit thermal data during the simulated EVA. The outcome of this model provides an application for future use in contingency predictions of energy expenditure during Lunar EVAs and provide a suite of instrumentation to predict workload during training scenarios.

Simulated EVA↗
NASA NTRS2021

Chapter 5: Extravehicular Activity Metabolic Rate Model: Metabolic Rate Estimated from Heart Rate

In-flight monitoring of crew metabolic rates during extravehicular activity (EVA) provides crucial information in mitigating injury. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of crewmember heart rate (HR) and metabolic rate (MR) during EVA operations to develop a predictive linear model. HR and MR data was collected from 132 EVAs from Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) missions. MR was collected every 2-min from portable life support system delta oxygen decay, while HR was collected every 20-sec via electrocardiogram. HR was down sampled to every 2-min to match MR during EVA for evaluation. Further, a new metric was observed from direct relations between metabolic rate with HR over EVA time (MR/HR) measured as a BTU/beat. A range of BTU/beat was collected as a conversion scale between MR and HR at different EVA workloads categorized by increased MR. Both HR and MR values were observed to decrease through the duration of EVA. Similarly, HR and MR slopes decreased at start of EVA compared to end of EVA. MR/HR values were used to predict MR from HR over the entire duration of EVA with root mean square error less than 200 BTU/Hr. Additionally, MR was predicted based on HR values during EVA via a calculated simple linear regression. A regression equation was found for each EVA drawing relations between HR and MR (F (2923.84) and P<0.0001) with an R(sup 2) value of 0.402. Individual crew regressions improved prediction and R(sup 2) to greater than 0.82. Two models are presented to determine metabolic rate from heart rate during EVA. Results draw correlations for heart rate and metabolic rate fluctuations during EVA for individualized crew predictions during future operations. The linear models correlate to Apollo prediction data during historic EVAs.

Metabolic rate predictions↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Thermal Assessment of Traverse and Geology Task Iterations During Simulated Lunar Extravehicular Activity

Spacewalks or extravehicular activities (EVA) in microgravity are mentally and physically demanding. Current microgravity EVAs are predominantly focused on upper body tasks on engineered surfaces; however, the introduction of gravity means that crew members during future lunar EVAs will be required to perform tasks that generate full body workloads such as navigating natural lunar terrain while conducting geological sampling. To date, only 12 people have walked on the surface of the Moon resulting in limited knowledge of suited thermal regulation under lunar-relevant physical workloads. To address this gap, a study is underway to focus on spacesuit operations with simulated lunar EVA workloads. This study presents methodology for collecting standard thermal measures during suit testing. In this pilot study, two suited subjects underwent simulated lunar EVAs using the NASA Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) to simulate the effects of partial gravity. Each lunar EVA, lasting three to five hours, included various metabolically demanding EVA tasks. Subjects donned the NASA Mark III (MK III) space suit and were offloaded to 1/6th G (lunar gravity). A subset task circuit from one of these simulations replicated an EVA traverse to a lunar crater, taking a geological sample, and returning to base. The suited subject walked one 1500 m (0% grade) and three 500 m traverses at three different grades (10, 20, 30%). Between each traverse, subjects performed geology sampling tasks (0 and 10% grade). Thermal measurements included core and skin temperature, liquid cooling garment (LCG) inlet and outlet temperature, and spacesuit gas inlet and outlet temperature and humidity. Compared to baseline core temperature (S1 = 37.07±0.32 °C, S2 = 37.27±0.01 °C) and mean skin temperature (S1 = 32.38±0.34 °C, S2 = 33.62±0.03 °C), after a 1500 m traverse, each suited subject showed an increased core temperature (S1 = 37.23±0.12 °C, S2 = 37.41±0.11°C) and decreased mean skin temperature (S1 = 32.16±0.17 °C, S2 = 31.53±1.15 °C) at a delta LCG temperature (S1 = 1.86±0.24 °C, S2 = 2.20±0.76 °C) and delta suit humidity (S1 = 9.66±1.49 %, S2 = 11.50±1.58 %). Core temperature continued to increase from compounding traverse and geology tasks (S1 = 38.04±0.03 °C, S2 = 38.1±0.02 °C) accompanied by an increase in delta LCG temperature (S1 = 2.24±0.13 °C, S2 = 2.67±0.12 °C) and delta suit humidity (S1 = 28±2.42 %, S2 = 31±2.13 %). Conversely, as the circuit progressed, mean skin temperature continued to decrease due to sustained LCG heat rejection (S1 = 30.08±0.15 °C, S2 = 30.28±0.07 °C). During the simulated EVA circuit core temperature increased to elevated values and remained elevated as heat was retained while mean skin temperature decreased due to peripheral heat offloaded to the LCG. The thermal measures collected during this study provided critical heat loading dynamics during lunar EVA tasks. Including core and skin temperatures along with suited thermal measures provides a standard data collection scheme for human thermal metrics during EVA task management. Data collected in this configuration can be used to build future lunar EVA task circuits and human thermal predictions.

Bradley Hoffmann↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing A Hybrid Spacesuit Simulator as A Research Tool for Assessing Extravehicular Activity Relevant Workload

Conducting human tests in a pressurized spacesuit is limited by availability, cost, and manpower; however, pressurized spacesuits are not always needed depending on the objectives of testing, including the development and testing of new informatics capabilities. The Human Physiology, Performance, Protection & Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA is developing a Hybrid Spacesuit Simulator (HS3) to support testing and characterization of human performance during analog planetary exploration extravehicular activities (EVAs). The goal of HS3 is to create a low-cost, modular, and unpressurized spacesuit simulator as a research tool that provides relevant physical and cognitive workload approximations with EVA-like immersion. HS3 consists of a soft outer suit, thermal control, gloves, boots, helmet, and integrated bioinformatics and communications. Baseline HS3 assessments were performed during 3-hour EVA simulations in two different subjects (DEMO1 and DEMO2) that included traverses at variable resistances and geological sampling activities. Liquid cooling garment (LCG) temperature, mean skin temperature, heart rate, motion capture, and metabolic rate were collected during each 3-hour simulated EVA. During DEMO1 and DEMO2, baseline metabolic rates at rest were 836 ± 327 BTU/hr and 869 ± 207 BTU/hr and increased to 2124 ± 548 BTU/hr and 2269 ± 559 BTU/hr, respectively, during 500m traverse. Average inlet LCG temperatures were 29.57 ± 6.62 °C and 25.63 ± 6.48 °C for DEMO1 and DEMO2 with increased outlet LCG temperatures of 33.53 ± 6.62 °C and 29.21 ± 4.79 °C, respectively. Overall, HS3 will enable future studies to characterize EVA tasks, human performance, and test future EVA capabilities in analog test environments without the need for pressurized suited environments.

Suit simulator↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison of Physical Workload Across Eva-Simulation Analog Environments: Hybrid Space Suit Simulator and Pressurized Suit Testing

NASA conducts research, testing, and training across a variety of analog environments to support characterization of human performance during Extravehicular Activities (EVAs). Time utilizing pressurized suits in an offloaded environment is both limited and expensive, making it challenging to carry out extensive research with these suits. The Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations (H-3PO) Laboratory at NASA Johnson Space Center designed a Hybrid Space Suit Simulator (HS3) as a low-cost, workload approximator and easy access research tool to provide relevant physical and cognitive workloads during simulated EVAs. A pilot study was conducted in a 1g analog environment where six healthy subjects (3 male, 3 female) underwent simulated 5-hour EVAs in the HS3. This study used a COSMED K5 portable metabolic analyzer and a Polar H10 heart rate monitor to evaluate physical workload during the EVAs. For direct comparison, EVA tasks and timelines were modeled after a similar study conducted in pressurized suits (Mark-III spacesuit, n=3 male; small xPGS spacesuit, n=3 female) at NASA’s Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) offloaded to Lunar gravity (1/6 g). The 1g HS3 data demonstrated increased metabolic rate when compared to pressurized, Lunar-offloaded suited simulated EVAs for certain tasks including the kneeling scoop (HS3: 1194±199 BTU/hr, ARGOS: 860±170 BTU/hr, p < 0.05) and 20 lb object relocation (HS3: 1651±136 BTU/hr, ARGOS: 1048±252.8 BTU/hr, p < 0.05), but it did not demonstrate any significant differences in heart rate (p > 0.05). Other simulated EVA tasks, such as a 500 m traverse (HS3: 1431±177 BTU/hr, ARGOS: 1212±294 BTU/hr, p > 0.05), showed similar workload profiles with no significant workload differences between HS3 and ARGOS. The HS3 is a useful research tool for increasing workloads in EVA research without pressurized suits, though it may overestimate workload during certain EVA tasks when used in 1g environments.

Zachary Wusk↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

EVA Planning: Using Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) Training to Predict in-Flight Energy Expenditure

Metabolic rate (“met rate”) is the amount of energy expended over a period of time and is influenced by many factors including body composition, level of physical activity, resting metabolic rate, sex, age, and food intake. Met rate is measured during Extravehicular Activity (EVA) training at the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) and during in-flight EVAs through indirect calorimetry, calculating energy expenditure from respiratory measurements of O 2 consumption and/or CO 2 production. During Extravehicular Activity (EVA) planning, metabolic cost is important to consider and is used to inform EVA duration based on spacesuit consumables associated with life support systems. Currently, NBL and previous ISS EVA met rate data for specified crewmembers are utilized to predict in-flight EVA metabolic costs based on a proposed EVA timeline. Timeline data collected during training is used to relate met rates to specific EVA activities, which are in turn assigned to more generalized EVA task categories, categorizing by both task type and restraint type. EVA task categories include EVA Setup/Cleanup, Worksite Setup/Cleanup, Cable Routing, Bolts, Fluid Connectors, Electrical Connectors, R&R Work, Miscellaneous Work, Incapacitated Crew Rescue (being rescued or performing), Assisted Crew Rescue (being assisted or performing), and Translation. Restraint types consist of Free-Float, Body Restraint Tether (BRT), Articulating Portable Foot Restraint (APFR), and Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS). From a crewmember’s historical data, individualized 10th, 50th and 90th percentile met rate estimates are generated for each task category and used to estimate the proposed EVA timeline metabolic cost. In-flight metabolic data (“As-Executed”) from recent ISS US EVAs 85-88 (totaling eight EVA crewmember met rates) was compared with their predicted metabolic cost (“As-Planned”) to evaluate the accuracy of the current met rate estimation method. Across the four EVAs, As-Executed Cumulative EVA Total Metabolic Cost (M = 5893.78 BTU, SD = 816.60) was not significantly different compared to As-Planned Cumulative EVA Total Metabolic Cost (M = 6106.60 BTU, SD = 826.62; t(7) = 0.751 , p = .477). Though not a significant difference, generally, As-Planned total estimates were slightly higher than As-Executed total metabolic cost. Relative Error for Cumulative EVA Total Metabolic Cost ranged from -33% to 14.7%, depending on the crewmember and EVA. When comparing As-Planned to A-Executed EVA task categories for Bolts, Electrical Connectors, EVA Cleanup, EVA Setup, Miscellaneous Work, Translation, Worksite Cleanup, and Worksite Setup during these EVAs, no significant differences were observed, however, there was a significant difference in As-Planned (M = 783.71 BTU, SD = 408.88) compared to As-Executed (M = 608.87 BTU, SD = 425.29) metabolic cost for the task category of Repair-and-Replace (R&R) Work (t(17) = 3.21 , p = .005). Looking closer within the R&R Work task category, As-Executed R&R Work with Free-Float restraint type (M = 706.17 BTU, SD = 352.18) was significantly less than As-Planned R&R Work with Free-Float restraint type (M= 887.96 BTU, SD = 381.42; t(12) = 2.59, p < .024). As-Executed R&R Work with SSRMS Restraint type (M = 355.89 BTU, SD = 534.65) was not significantly different from As-Planned values (M = 512.69 BTU, SD = 383.34; t(4) = 1.88, p = 0.132). These findings suggest that the energy expended performing R&R Work (Free-Float) is lower in flight than predicted. Accurate predictions of the metabolic cost of EVA are essential for planning and executing successful ISS EVAs. Overall, the current met rate prediction method is similar to actual in-flight values, slightly erring on the side of overestimation. Future work includes analysis of more historical in-flight EVA data to increase the power of the analysis, evaluating the NBL-ISS met rate conversion factor between NBL and ISS tasks, as well as exploring methods of substitution when crewmembers are missing prior task category data.

Lauren Cox↗