Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Lauren Cox

Publications and source records attributed to Lauren Cox.

8 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
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

Helmet-Mounted Display Technology for Eva Training in NASA's Neutral Buoyancy Lab

Currently, during extravehicular activity (EVA) on the International Space Station (ISS), astronauts are in constant communication with mission control; however, this paradigm will significantly change during future NASA exploration missions due to limited and time-delayed communications. As exploration missions will thereby require an increase in crew autonomy, it is hypothesized that heads-up display (HUD) technology can supplement communications with mission control. Before introducing novel display technology to EVA operations, it must first be demonstrated and evaluated in an EVA training environment. The UC Davis Center for Spaceflight Research, in collaboration with NASA Johnson Space Center’s Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations (H-3PO) Lab has developed a low-cost and rapid development helmet-mounted display (HMD) for EVA training at NASA’s Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL). The first two phases of HMD testing (Phase I and II) at the NBL focused on technology and capability development and demonstration. Crew member feedback was obtained that evaluated aspects of HMD including its user satisfaction, visibility, readability, and usefulness. Overall, feedback indicated HMD was readable, un-obtrusive, and the available display modes had potential to be useful and enhance EVA training. HMD display modes currently available include: real-time biofeedback (metabolic rate), phase elapsed time (PET), ability to set timers, task procedural aids (e.g. Pistol Grip Tool settings) and custom messages. The goal for Phase III, which is currently underway, is to evaluate the effects that access to bioinformatics through HMD has on astronaut training and performance at the NBL. For this phase of testing, crewmembers will be asked to perform a go/no-go task while wearing HMD throughout the NBL run to characterize crew member state of situational awareness with respect to HMD. This information could be used to inform how best to display relatively important or supplemental, but not critical, data in the future.

Heads up display↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Preliminary Assessment of Physical Demand During Simulated Lunar Surface Extravehicular Activities

Future Artemis missions will require more advanced spacesuits to support exploration and science activities on the Lunar surface. Preparing for these missions requires an understanding of the physical and cognitive demand of performing common surface extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks in a suited partial-gravity environment. This study aims to characterize physical demand during exploration EVA tasks in the Artificial Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) as a function of the task and operational environment itself. Two subjects completed two days of EVA simulations at ARGOS in the Mark III spacesuit offloaded to Lunar gravity (1/6G). Metabolic rate (MR) and heart rate (HR) were continuously recorded while subjects completed an end-to-end EVA as well as standalone tasks. Understanding the physical demand to complete exploration EVA tasks will be instrumental to the future success of exploration spacesuit designs and missions. Further work in this study will be needed to characterize MR during exploration EVA tasks, including expanding the subject pool and testing new suit designs.

Taylor E Schlotman↗
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↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

CIPHER: Egress Fitness

The transition between gravity environments will involve one of the most complex, high-risk phases of exploration missions. The reduced functional capacity caused by physiological deconditioning adaptations in microgravity coupled with the stressors of re-entry into partial gravity environments will increase risks to crew, even with rigorous adherence to inflight countermeasures. Specifically, two high-risk scenarios may be required to be performed soon after gravity transitions: 1) nominal and/or emergency unassisted capsule egress task after return to Earth, and 2) planetary extravehicular activity (EVA) soon after landing on Mars or the Moon. Quantification of crewmember’s functional performance after long-duration spaceflight is necessary to inform concepts of operations for future exploration missions. The overarching aim of this study is to quantify post-landing functional performance with deconditioning after long-duration ISS missions. This study is broken down into two phases. Phase 1 includes a pilot study to assess the overall feasibility and demonstrate the capability to perform mission-like tasks shortly after landing. Phase 2, the Egress Fitness study, which is part of the Complement of Integrated Protocols for Human Exploration Research (CIPHER), uses a task-based approach to characterize functional performance in long-duration ISS crewmembers before flight and shortly after return to Earth. The pilot and full Egress Fitness study includes pre-flight and post-flight testing of simulated emergency egress out of a functional capsule mockup and a Mars gravity EVA simulation at the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) facility. The EVA simulation tasks include suit donning, hatch egress, ladder descent, task board cable operations, baggage transfer over sand/rocky regolith, alignment with a rear entry port, and suit egress. The post-flight simulated capsule egress test occurs 1–4 h after landing and the planetary EVA simulation occurs 18–36 h after landing. The full CIPHER Egress Fitness study has additional pre-flight sessions, longer EVA tasks that include traverse and geology sampling, and post-flight sessions on R+1, 4, and 8 to characterize the timeframe of recovery. Pilot Egress Fitness has completed baseline and post-flight testing on four crewmembers. That study remains open. Originally this was to cover the Boeing CFT mission, but now also includes private astronauts on commercial spaceflights. CIPHER study data collection is ongoing with 2 subjects completed and 4 additional subjects consented. This study will quantify post-landing functional performance in operationally relevant simulations to help inform fitness for duty standards and future planetary concepts of operations shortly after landing.

Jason Norcross↗