Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Linh Q Vu

Publications and source records attributed to Linh Q Vu.

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↗

Shoulder Postures in EVA Training in Reduced Gravity Analogues

Shoulder Postures in EVA Training in Reduced Gravity Analogues K. Guhl1, L. Vu2, H. Kim3, S. Rajulu4 1KBR Inc., Houston, TX, 2Aegis Aerospace Inc., Houston, TX, 3Leidos Innovations, Houston, TX, 4NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX. During extravehicular activities (EVAs) and EVA training in both the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) and at the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS), crewmembers perform a variety of hand-intensive tasks with frequent arm/shoulder repositioning while wearing a pressurized spacesuit. As a result, crewmembers may experience ergonomic stressors such as awkward shoulder postures. The ergonomic shoulder risk is also compounded by limited or restricted shoulder mobility of the spacesuit, extreme work positions such as overhead tasks, and tasks with heavy tools and repetitive motions. Prolonged or frequent shoulder elevation and overhead work, in particular, can lead to excessive stresses and musculoskeletal injuries of the shoulder joints. Future EVA missions, specifically lunar surface EVAs, will also be longer in duration and thus increase the exposure to awkward shoulder postures. In this study, we aimed to assess the ergonomic risk of awkward shoulder postures in simulated lunar surface EVAs by quantifying when and how long the arms are raised above the chest level. We assessed video recordings of pilot lunar EVA simulations (3 lunar trials each in the NBL and at ARGOS and 2 microgravity EVA trials in the NBL). These runs consisted of both training and engineering test objectives. Actual demands for shoulder use varied for different EVA types and analogues, but many EVA runs have common tasks and require similar motion components. A video observation and event logging software was used to document the duration and occurrence of the subject’s arms being raised throughout the video recordings of each EVA run. An arm raised instance was classified as the arm being at 90 degrees or above with relation to gravity for lunar EVA training events and with relation to the body for microgravity EVA training events. Such events included EVA hardware maintenance or heavy geology sampling tool operations. Events where the arm load was partially supported by external objects, like climbing a ladder or leaning against a surface were separately identified and excluded. Statistical analysis was performed to summarize the timing, frequency, and durations of the arm raise events and compared across the different EVA tasks and analogue types. Preliminary observations indicated that the total duration and number of arm raised instances were surprisingly smaller for lunar surface EVA training as compared to microgravity EVA training. The observed difference may be attributed to differing task demands and unique environmental characteristics found in lunar EVAs in comparison to microgravity EVAs. A detailed statistical analysis will be performed between lunar surface EVA training events and microgravity EVA training events in the final submission. Overall, this analysis is expected to provide insight into how ergonomic recommendations can be refined for lunar EVA training with pressurized suits. It may also inform task design and influence suit padding design to better protect crewmembers during future lunar training.

Kaitlyn Lea Guhl↗

Initial Testing of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) in Lunar Environment Simulation at the Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Tasked by the new Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program(EHP), a team of stakeholders from engineering and flight operations worked together to test the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility (xEMU) in the Neutral Buoyancy Lab(NBL) simulating the lunar environment. The NBL is a pool in which astronauts are typically trained to complete simulated International Space Station (ISS) EVA tasks in a neutral weigh-out. The overall focus for this test series was evaluating how well the NBL could be used as an effective simulated environment for Artemis lunar EVAs. New NBL support hardware was manufactured to support this test series and update the interfaces to be more representative of xEMU hardware such as a new NBL Portable Life Support System(PLSS)mock-up and umbilical, lights and cameras, and display and control unit (DCU).To simulate the 1/6th-gravity (1/6-g) environment, extra weights were added around the suit to create an accurate center of gravity representation. The Partial Gravity Weigh-out Stand (PGWS) predicted where and how much weight would be required for the 1/6th-G simulation and predicted the center of gravity placement. After the weigh-out attempt was completed, the suited participant would complete a set of directed tasks such as kneeling, object pick-up, and walking to evaluate the weigh-out. To create the lunar environment, sand, boulders, and ramps were added to the pool floor. If time allowed after weigh-out was determined acceptable, the flight operations team would direct the suited participants to complete simulated Artemis EVA tasks using flight-like tools and tool cart. The team also evaluated turning out the overhead lights in the NBL for a portion of some of the test runs and using a solar simulator to create amore realistic lunar south pole lighting environment. The test series completed one unmanned test and nine manned tests. With four of the tests, dual xEMU suited operations were completed with subjects in both the small and large xEMU sizes. Overall, the NBL was able to create an acceptable lunar landscape and ability to have two subjects work side by side in pressurized xEMUs which currently cannot be achieved in other test environments. Achieving a stable 1/6th-G lunar weigh-out and clear, consistent dual suit communications was a challenge for this series. Future work is planned to continue to improve this simulation environment.

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↗

Investigation of Hardware and Instrumentation to Measure Hand Grasp Activity with the Spacesuit Gloves

Introduction: During the 2022 suited injury summit, it was hypothesized that there will be concerns for hand and glove injuries for future exploration space missions, especially given the fact that the “total number of Extravehicular activity (EVA) hours and frequency” for lunar surface missions is expected to vastly increase [1]. It has been reported that the hands experienced the greatest “absolute numbers” of reported injuries and far exceeds other injuries during EVA [1, 2]. It was reported that the most fatiguing part of the surface EVA was the repetitive gripping tasks [3]. It was recommended that a “glove sub-team” be created to look at possible injury mechanism and mitigation strategies. Some of the recommendations that were suggested [1] are as follows: examine hand fatigue, utilize motion capture, examine the duration and frequency of hand movements, and identify frequent hand motions. We started assessing hardware and instrumentation to measure hand grasp activity in the pressurized glove environment. The purpose of this test was to perform a hardware evaluation for motion capture (MoCap) gloves obtained from StretchSense (Auckland, New Zealand). The specific gloves used were the Pro Fidelity and SuperSplay to determine the repeatability, reliability, feasibility, and useability inside of a pressurized gloved environment. Methods: The MoCap gloves were customized (e.g., battery/Bluetooth pack relocated to upper arm) to better suit the pressurized testing environment and protect the subject from unintentional injury (Fig. 1). Fourteen total subjects from different demographics (i.e., gender and pressurized glove experience level) participated in this test series. Testing included one session each of a baseline data collection (NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) building 21) and a spacesuit glove box (Fig. 2 at JSC building 7 room 2027) data collection (under vacuum down to 4.3 psid), where each session lasted 3-5 hours. Controlled and reproducible tasks to systematically evaluate the repeatability and reliability of the hardware were performed during baseline data collection. Additionally, subjects performed simulated EVA-like tasks in a pressurized gloved environment. For all sessions, MoCap gloves were placed on each of the subjects’ hands and the signal from it, or the raw capacitance (Fig. 3), was analysed. The raw capacitance was used to estimate the open and closed hand states between the testing conditions and allow us to provide an offset caused by the pressurized environment. Results & Discussion: Initial observation with the bare hands (baseline) condition showed that the MoCap gloves appeared to track grasping and releasing of the fingers (opening and closing fist) with both high- and low-speed conditions, while adduction and abduction of the fingers were not relatively tracked. A hardware evaluation was done outside of the glove box to assess the reliability and repeatability of the MoCap glove. In one task, a point force was applied to various locations on the back of the hand. When the point force was applied to the space between the 1st digit and the pointer finger, there was a noticeable distortion to the MoCap data. Another task examining an increasing force from a 10 lb. sandbag applied to the back of the hand while lying flat on a table, showed a constant flat line with only a distortion when the weight was increased or added to the back of the hand. Fig. 3 shows an object relocation task where you can see when each individual finger “opened” and “closed” (changed position) when picking up and setting down the dumbbell. When the fingers were stationary, the signal remained relatively flat compared to the peaks and valleys that can be observed in Fig. 3. This study showed promising results and imperative input into an attempt to discriminate between hand states across various functional tasks and should be evaluated with context to the repeatability and reliability outcomes. Depending on the task done inside of the pressurized glove box environment and outside, the results appear to be affected by many different factors (i.e., drift, pressure, hand size, etc.). Significance: If this hardware proves to be reliable and repeatable in determining the open and closed hand states then this may provide critical insight into assisting in the characterization of the pressurized gloved environment and the effect on crew member exertion level. Ultimately, this tool will provide useful data for quantifying the repetitive nature of EVA training and tasks. Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge the NASA Mars Campaign Office for providing funding for this research. Lastly, thanks to all the engineers and technicians at NASA JSC who helped with this data collection. References: [1] Reiber, et al. (2022), NASA/TM-20220007605; [2] Scheuring, et al. (2009), Av., Sp., and Envir. Med. 80(2). [3] Scheuring, et al. (2007), NASA/TM–2007–214755.

Rachel L Thompson↗

Considerations for Range of Motion Testing During Spacesuit Mobility Characterization

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↗