Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Christine Flaspohler

Publications and source records attributed to Christine Flaspohler.

Considerations in Range of Motion Testing for Characterizing Spacesuit Mobility Capabilities

Mobility is a critical aspect for spacesuits as it directly influences how astronauts can perform tasks safely and efficiently, while wearing the pressurized suit. Spacesuit motion is dissimilar to human movement and consists of unique movement patterns as result of pressurization and the complex mechanical joint configurations. Thus, it is important to quantify the variations in suited movement patterns and the resulting performance of the wearer for the evaluation of the spacesuit itself and hardware interfaces such as payloads and tools. Traditionally, an individual body joint is assessed for the segment-wise range of motion. For example, the knee is measured through an isolated maneuvering of the joint between the max-to-max positions (e.g., flexion/extension), and the outcome represents the mobility capabilities. These measurements are often conducted using optical motion capture system with respect to anatomical planes. However, there are several considerations for range of motion assessments that are unique to the spacesuit. The purpose of this paper is to describe and provide examples of these additional challenges in representing spacesuit mobility capabilities. Specifically, joint mobility and the variations in suit movement patterns were investigated and compared between functional tasks and isolated range of motion measurements. Motion capture data from the next-gen spacesuit design verification testing was evaluated to compare isolated range of motion tasks to functional tasks, such as one-knee kneeling and squatting. The trajectories from the upper and lower body joint centers with respect to the spacesuit hardware were also calculated. Additionally, the joint trajectories for various functional tasks are presented and compared against the isolated range of motion measurements. In general, range of motion differs between isolated and functional tasks, where functional tasks may even induce greater joint angle excursions. Additionally, there is a large variation in joint range of motion across functional tasks. Combined with several relevant factors (spacesuit fit, physical strength, simulation facility, etc.), spacesuit mobility characterization efforts will need to incorporate the specific contexts, such as task demands and movement mechanisms, when evaluating range of motion assessments.

Linh Q Vu↗

Development of Weighout Process and Evaluations for Underwater Partial Gravity EVA Simulations

For the upcoming Artemis lunar missions, astronauts will needto train in a spacesuit where partial gravity can be simulated such as NASA Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL). At the NBL, dive weights and foam can be added around the spacesuit to attaina satisfactory center of buoyancy (CB) and center of gravity (CG) location to simulate the lunar gravity (1/6thG) effects. If CG and CB are not co-located properly, incorrect righting moments can be introduced, and both simulation quality and EVA task performance can be impaired. Based on the findings from the initial testingusing xEMU spacesuits, it was observed that the weigh-out method (i.e., determination of the weights and foam quantities and position) needed further development to improve the simulation quality, especially for the subjects who experienced excessive instability. This paper aims to present the on-going effort to improve the weigh-out process for enabling NBL lunar EVA simulations. For this effort, a human-suit model was created to use suit CAD and 3D human body scansto estimate both CB and CG location for each suited subject. NBL weigh-out testing was performed to characterize the effects of CG and CB positioning, in which the 3D human-suit model was used to determine optimal weigh-out combinations of weights and foam. Postural, balance, and subjective feedback were gathered for each weigh-out configuration. The results indicated that, as the CB was shifted higher and the CB and CG located closer to each other, the subject tended to be more stable and their EVA performance improved. A high CB location was then prioritized across 4 additional subjects in both small and large size spacesuits. When compared to the initial xEMU test series, improved performance was observed across all subjects as the CB moved higher and aligned closer to the system CG.

Seyed Pouyan Sabahi↗

Development of Weigh-out Process and Evaluations for Underwater Partial Gravity Simulations

For the upcoming Artemis lunar missions, astronauts will need to train in a spacesuit where partial gravity can be simulated such as the NASA Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL). At the NBL, dive weights and foam can be added around the spacesuit to attain a satisfactory center of buoyancy (CB) and center of gravity (CG) location to simulate the lunar gravity (1/6thG) effects. If CG and CB are not co-located properly, incorrect righting moments can be introduced, and both simulation quality and EVA task performance can be impaired. Based on the findings from the initial testing using xEMU spacesuits, it was observed that the weigh-out method (i.e., determination of the weights and foam quantities and position) needed further development to improve the simulation quality, especially for the subjects who experienced excessive instability. This paper aims to present the on-going effort to improve the weigh-out process for enabling NBL lunar EVA simulations. For this effort, a human-suit model was created to use suit CAD and 3D human body scans to estimate both CB and CG location for each suited subject. NBL weigh-out testing was performed to characterize the effects of CG and CB positioning, in which the 3D human-suit model was used to determine optimal weigh-out combinations of weights and foam. Postural, balance, and subjective feedback were gathered for each weigh-out configuration. The results indicated that, as the CB was shifted higher and the CB and CG located closer to each other, the subject tended to be more stable and their EVA performance improved. A high CB location was then prioritized across 4 additional subjects in both small and large size spacesuits. When compared to the initial xEMU test series, improved performance was observed across all subjects as the CB moved higher and aligned closer to the system CG.

Pouyan Sabahi↗

Development of Weigh-out Process and Evaluations for Underwater Partial Gravity Simulations

For the upcoming Artemis lunar missions, astronauts will need to train in a spacesuit where partial gravity can be simulated such as the NASA Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL). At the NBL, dive weights and foam can be added around the spacesuit to attain a satisfactory center of buoyancy (CB) and center of gravity (CG) location to simulate the lunar gravity (1/6thG) effects. If CG and CB are not co-located properly, incorrect righting moments can be introduced, and both simulation quality and EVA task performance can be impaired. Based on the findings from the initial testing using xEMU spacesuits, it was observed that the weigh-out method (i.e., determination of the weights and foam quantities and position) needed further development to improve the simulation quality, especially for the subjects who experienced excessive instability. This paper aims to present the on-going effort to improve the weigh-out process for enabling NBL lunar EVA simulations. For this effort, a human-suit model was created to use suit CAD and 3D human body scans to estimate both CB and CG location for each suited subject. NBL weigh-out testing was performed to characterize the effects of CG and CB positioning, in which the 3D human-suit model was used to determine optimal weigh-out combinations of weights and foam. Postural, balance, and subjective feedback were gathered for each weigh-out configuration. The results indicated that, as the CB was shifted higher and the CB and CG located closer to each other, the subject tended to be more stable and their EVA performance improved. A high CB location was then prioritized across 4 additional subjects in both small and large size spacesuits. When compared to the initial xEMU test series, improved performance was observed across all subjects as the CB moved higher and aligned closer to the system CG.

Pouyan Sabahi↗

Testing the Exploration Conops (Excon) Mockup Suit in Lunar Analog Environments in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. Tasked by the new Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program(EHP), a team of stakeholders from engineering, flight operations, human health and performance, astromaterials and science, and the crew office worked together to perform EVAs in 3 simulated lunar environments. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into 3 distinct tests titled after the EHP integrated test team: Joint EVA Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1was conducted near Kilbourne Holeby El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept operations(con-ops), risks and technology.JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission with a simulated Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Excon mockup space suit. The Excon mockup suit is a light-weight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU)simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗

Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) Pressure Garment System (PGS) Cycle Testing Overview and Results

With the development of NASA’s next generation spacesuit, the hardware life expectations for the new spacesuit required evaluation. The xPGS team designed and performed a test series to assess the new hardware against the life requirements. The EMU on the International Space Station (ISS) today tests the life of the suit and new components by performing isometric individual joint cycle motions with the requirements based on previously performed Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVAs). The xPGS includes new designs for suit components to provide increased mobility for performance of lunar operations, thus the requirements for the life cycle of the suit had to be developed and tested with these new operations in mind. Cycle requirements shifted to cycles of functional tasks in lieu of isometric cycles to better understand the life of the suit. Manned cycle testing of the xPGS was conducted by performing repetitions of a series of tasks that reflect predicted Lunar EVA operations. The test series utilized a gravity offload system to simulate Lunar gravity environment. Cycle testing concluded after 30 test days in October of 2022 with lessons learned that will be critical for future spacesuit design. Specific lessons learned with regards to suit performance and test methodology will be provided.

spacesuit↗

Testing the Exploration ConOps (ExCon) Mockup Suit in Lunar Analog Environments in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into three distinct tests titled after the EVA & Human Surface Mobility (HSM) Program (EHP) integrated test team: Joint EVA & HSM Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1 was conducted near Kilbourne Hole by El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept of operations (con-ops), risks and technology. JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff, Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission including a Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Exploration Concept of Operations (ExCon) mockup space suit. The ExCon mockup suit is a lightweight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗

In-Depth Analysis of Subject Functional Performance and Subjective Feedback Data for Evaluating Argos Simulation Quality

Mechanical offloading systems such as the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) are used to simulate various partial gravity environments. ARGOS offloads pressurized suited subjects through a gimbaling pivot point system attached to a volumetric Portable Life Support System (PLSS). The pivot point can be configured to multiple locations with respect to the human-suit system center of gravity (CG). Previous work has tested and documented the interaction between different pivot point locations and measured CG. Observations indicated that small changes in pivot point location substantially affect the stability and functional performance (simulation quality) of a subject. This led to the development of a standardized gimbal assessment protocol to assess the functional performance of a pressurized suited subject as a function of the pivot point location, using the data obtained from a variety of planetary suit mobility tasks. As a result, an expansive repository of CG-related task metrics was generated from numerous ARGOS spacesuit test events, for different gimbal configurations and different test subjects. Based on the evaluation metrics and observed trends, several pivot point locations were iteratively identified to determine an “appropriate/optimal” configuration. This study thus describes the in-depth analysis of the CG evaluation metrics to better quantify trends and determine if specific factors are strongly associated with appropriate/optimal configurations. Quantitative and qualitative variables relating to subject task performance, subjective feedback, and anthropometry will be evaluated via probabilistic methods. The results from this study are expected to improve our understanding of optimal ARGOS gimbal settings, which will better inform the gimbal configuration identification process and improve simulation quality for extravehicular activity (EVA) training.

Joseph Yao↗