Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

McFarland, Shane

Publications and source records attributed to McFarland, Shane.

12 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2019

NASA Advanced Space Suit Pressure Garment System Status and Development Priorities 2019

This paper discusses the current focus of NASA's Advanced Space Suit Pressure Garment Technology Development team's efforts, the status of that work, and a summary of longer term technology development priorities and activities. The Exploration Extra-vehicular Activity Unit (xEMU) project's International Space Station Demonstration Suit (xEMU Demo) project continues to be the team's primary customer and effort. In 2018 the team was engaged in addressing hardware design changes identified in the Z-2 pressure garment prototype Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) test results. These changes will be discussed. Additionally components whose first iterations were produced in 2018 will be discussed. A full pressure garment prototype, termed Z-2.5, was assembled that is composed of updated and first prototype iteration hardware. Z-2.5 NBL testing, performed from October 2018 through April 2019 will inform final design iterations in preparation for the xEMU Demo preliminary design review planned to occur in the third quarter of government fiscal year 2019. A primary objective of the Z-2.5 NBL testing is to validate changes made to the hard upper torso geometry, which depart from the planetary walking suit upper torso geometry that has been used over the last 30 years. The team continues to work technology development, with GFY2018 work being used to supplement and feed the gaps left by the scope defined for the xEMU Demo. Specifically, a Phase IIx Small Business Innovative Research Grant to mature durable bearings that are compatible with a dust environment and a grant funded by the Science Technology Mission Directorate, Lightweight and Robust Exploration Space Suit (LARESS) project, to mature planetary impact requirements and hardware will be described. Finally, a brief review of longer-term pressure garment challenges and technology gaps will be presented to provide an understanding of the advanced pressure garment team's technology investment priorities and needs.

Ross, Amy↗
NASA NTRS2016

Advanced Sensor Platform to Evaluate Manloads For Exploration Suit Architectures

Space suit manloads are defined as the outer bounds of force that the human occupant of a suit is able to exert onto the suit during motion. They are defined on a suit-component basis as a unit of maximum force that the suit component in question must withstand without failure. Existing legacy manloads requirements are specific to the suit architecture of the EMU and were developed in an iterative fashion; however, future exploration needs dictate a new suit architecture with bearings, load paths, and entry capability not previously used in any flight suit. No capability currently exists to easily evaluate manloads imparted by a suited occupant, which would be required to develop requirements for a flight-rated design. However, sensor technology has now progressed to the point where an easily-deployable, repeatable and flexible manloads measuring technique could be developed leveraging recent advances in sensor technology. INNOVATION: This development positively impacts schedule, cost and safety risk associated with new suit exploration architectures. For a final flight design, a comprehensive and accurate man loads requirements set must be communicated to the contractor; failing that, a suit design which does not meet necessary manloads limits is prone to failure during testing or worse, during an EVA, which could cause catastrophic failure of the pressure garment posing risk to the crew. This work facilitates a viable means of developing manloads requirements using a range of human sizes & strengths. OUTCOME / RESULTS: Performed sensor market research. Highlighted three viable options (primary, secondary, and flexible packaging option). Designed/fabricated custom bracket to evaluate primary option on a single suit axial. Manned suited manload testing completed and general approach verified.

McFarland, Shane↗
NASA NTRS2016

Analysis of Potential Glove-Induced Hand Injury Metrics During Typical Neutral Buoyancy Training Operations

Injuries to the hands are common among astronauts who train for extravehicular activity. When the gloves are pressurized, they restrict movement and create pressure points during tasks, sometimes resulting in pain, muscle fatigue, abrasions, and occasionally more severe injuries such as onycholysis. A brief review of NASA's Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health's injury database reveals that 76 percent of astronaut hand and arm injuries from training between 1993 and 2010 occurred either to the fingernail, finger crotch, metacarpophalangeal joint, or fingertip. The purpose of this study was to assess the potential of using small sensors to measure forces acting on the fingers and hand within pressurized gloves and other variables such as skin temperature, humidity, and fingernail strain of a NASA crewmember during typical NBL (Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory) training activity. During the 5-hour exercise, the crewmember seemed to exhibit very large forces on some fingers, resulting in higher strain than seen in previous glove-box testing. In addition, vital information was collected on the glove cavity environment with respect to temperature and humidity. All of this information gathered during testing will be carried forward into future testing, potentially in glove-box- or 1G- (1 gravitational force) or NBL-suited environments, to better characterize and understand the possible causes of hand injury amongst NASA crew.

McFarland, Shane↗
NASA NTRS2015

Monitoring Human Performance During Suited Operations: A Technology Feasibility Study Using EMU Gloves

Mobility tracking of human subjects while conducting suited operations still remains focused on the external movement of the suit and little is known about the human movement within it. For this study, accelerometers and bend sensitive resistors were integrated into a custom carrier glove to quantify range of motion and dexterity from within the pressurized glove environment as a first stage feasibility study of sensor hardware, integration, and reporting capabilities. Sensors were also placed on the exterior of the pressurized glove to determine if it was possible to compare a glove joint angle to the anatomical joint angle of the subject during tasks. Quantifying human movement within the suit was feasible, with accelerometers clearly detecting movements in the wrist and reporting expected joint angles at maximum flexion or extension postures with repeatability of plus or minus 5 degrees between trials. Bend sensors placed on the proximal interphalangeal and distal interphalangeal joints performed less well. It was not possible to accurately determine the actual joint angle using these bend sensors, but these sensors could be used to determine when the joint was flexed to its maximum and provide a general range of mobility needed to complete a task. Further work includes additional testing with accelerometers and the possible inclusion of hardware such as magnetometers or gyroscopes to more precisely locate the joint in 3D space. We hope to eventually expand beyond the hand and glove and develop a more comprehensive suit sensor suite to characterize motion across more joints (knee, elbow, shoulder, etc.) and fully monitor the human body operating within the suit environment.

Bekdash, Omar↗
NASA NTRS2014

The Potential of Wearable Sensor Technology for EVA Glove Ergonomic Evaluation

Injuries to the hands are common among astronauts who train for extravehicular activity (EVA). Many of these injuries refer to the gloves worn during EVA as the root cause. While pressurized, the bladder and outer material of these gloves restrict movement and create pressure points while performing tasks, sometimes resulting in pain, muscle fatigue, abrasions, and occasionally a more severe injury, onycholysis (fingernail delamination). The most common injury causes are glove contact (pressure point/rubbing), ill-fitting gloves, and/or performing EVA tasks in pressurized gloves. A brief review of the Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health's injury database reveals over 57% of the total injuries to the upper extremities during EVA training occurred either to the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint, fingernail, or the fingertip. Twenty-five of these injuries resulted in a diagnosis of onycholysis

Reid, Christopher R.↗
NASA NTRS2014

FY13 High Performance EVA Glove (HPEG) Collaboration: Glove Injury Data Mining Effort - Training Data Overview

From the time hand-intensive tasks were first created for EVAs, discomforts and injuries have been noted.. There have been numerous versions of EVA gloves for US crew over the past 50 years, yet pain and injuries persist. The investigation team was tasked with assisting in a glove injury assessment for the High Performance EVA Glove (HPEG) project.center dot To aid in this assessment, the team was asked to complete the following objectives: - First, to develop the best current understanding of what glove-related injuries have occurred to date, and when possible, identify the specific mechanisms that caused those injuries - Second, to create a standardized method for comparison of glove injury potential from one glove to another. center dot The overall goal of the gloved hand injury assessment is to utilize ergonomics in understanding how these glove injuries are occurring, and to propose mitigations to current designs or design changes in the next generation of EVA gloves.

Reid, Christopher↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Novel Method for Characterizing Spacesuit Mobility through Metabolic Cost

Spacesuit mobility has historically been defined and characterized by a combination of range of motion and joint torque of the individual anatomical joints when performing isolated motions meant to drive that joint only in a given orthogonal plane. While this has been the standard approach for several decades, there are numerous shortcomings that suit designers and engineers would like to see rectified. First, the lack of a standardized method for collecting both range of motion and joint torque translates to many different test setups, procedures and methods of data analysis. Second, all of these previously used methods for data collection lack some degree of repeatability, even within the same test setup and the same conductor; in addition, attempts at higher fidelity data collection techniques require high overhead and cost with minimal improvement. Lastly, isolated motions in standard anatomical planes are not representative of real‐world tasks that a crewmember would be performing during an EVA, be it microgravity or surface exploration based. To address these shortcomings, options are being explored within the Space Suit and Crew Survival Systems Branch to ascertain the feasibility of an alternative approach to defining mobility - one that is more repeatable, lower overhead, and more tied to functional EVA tasks. This paper serves to document the first attempt at such an alternative option - one that looks at the metabolic energy‐cost of a spacesuit. In other words, can we objectively compare the mobility of a spacesuit by evaluating the metabolic cost of that suit to the wearer while performing a battery of functional EVA tasks?

McFarland, Shane↗
NASA NTRS2012

Breaking the Pressure Barrier: A History of the Spacesuit Injection Patch

The space suit assembly has a fascinating and complicated history dating back to the early 1930s. Much has been written on this history from an assembly, and to a lesser extent, component perspective. However, little has been written or preserved specifically on smaller, lesser ]known aspects of pressure suit design. One example of this is the injection patch . a small 2 h diameter disk on the leg of the Apollo suit that facilitated a medical injection when pressurized ] and the only known implementation of such a feature on any suit. While many people are aware this feature existed, very little is known of its origin, its design, its use, and the fact that the Apollo flight suit was not the only time such a feature was implemented. This paper serves to tell the story of this seemingly "afterthought" of a feature, as well as the design considerations heeded during initial development of later suits.

McFarland, Shane↗
NASA NTRS2012

Exploration Space Suit Architecture and Destination Environmental-Based Technology Development

This paper continues forward where EVA Space Suit Architecture: Low Earth Orbit Vs. Moon Vs. Mars [1] left off in the development of a space suit architecture that is modular in design and could be reconfigured prior to launch or during any given mission depending on the tasks or destination. This paper will address the space suit system architecture and technologies required based upon human exploration extravehicular activity (EVA) destinations, and describe how they should evolve to meet the future exploration EVA needs of the US human space flight program.1, 2, 3 In looking forward to future US space exploration to a space suit architecture with maximum reuse of technology and functionality across a range of mission profiles and destinations, a series of exercises and analyses have provided a strong indication that the Constellation Program (CxP) space suit architecture is postured to provide a viable solution for future exploration missions4. The destination environmental analysis presented in this paper demonstrates that the modular architecture approach could provide the lowest mass and mission cost for the protection of the crew given any human mission outside of low-Earth orbit (LEO). Additionally, some of the high-level trades presented here provide a review of the environmental and non-environmental design drivers that will become increasingly important the farther away from Earth humans venture. This paper demonstrates a logical clustering of destination design environments that allows a focused approach to technology prioritization, development, and design that will maximize the return on investment, independent of any particular program, and provide architecture and design solutions for space suit systems in time or ahead of need dates for any particular crewed flight program in the future. The approach to space suit design and interface definition discussion will show how the architecture is very adaptable to programmatic and funding changes with minimal redesign effort such that the modular architecture can be quickly and efficiently honed into a specific mission point solution if required. Additionally, the modular system will allow for specific technology incorporation and upgrade as required with minimal redesign of the system.

Hill, Terry R.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Benchmarking Evaluation Results for Prototype Extravehicular Activity Gloves

The Space Suit Assembly (SSA) Development Team at NASA Johnson Space Center has invested heavily in the advancement of rear-entry planetary exploration suit design but largely deferred development of extravehicular activity (EVA) glove designs, and accepted the risk of using the current flight gloves, Phase VI, for unique mission scenarios outside the Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) Program realm of experience. However, as design reference missions mature, the risks of using heritage hardware have highlighted the need for developing robust new glove technologies. To address the technology gap, the NASA Game-Changing Technology group provided start-up funding for the High Performance EVA Glove (HPEG) Project in the spring of 2012. The overarching goal of the HPEG Project is to develop a robust glove design that increases human performance during EVA and creates pathway for future implementation of emergent technologies, with specific aims of increasing pressurized mobility to 60% of barehanded capability, increasing the durability by 100%, and decreasing the potential of gloves to cause injury during use. The HPEG Project focused initial efforts on identifying potential new technologies and benchmarking the performance of current state of the art gloves to identify trends in design and fit leading to establish standards and metrics against which emerging technologies can be assessed at both the component and assembly levels. The first of the benchmarking tests evaluated the quantitative mobility performance and subjective fit of four prototype gloves developed by Flagsuit LLC, Final Frontier Designs, LLC Dover, and David Clark Company as compared to the Phase VI. All of the companies were asked to design and fabricate gloves to the same set of NASA provided hand measurements (which corresponded to a single size of Phase Vi glove) and focus their efforts on improving mobility in the metacarpal phalangeal and carpometacarpal joints. Four test subjects representing the design ]to hand anthropometry completed range of motion, grip/pinch strength, dexterity, and fit evaluations for each glove design in both the unpressurized and pressurized conditions. This paper provides a comparison of the test results along with a detailed description of hardware and test methodologies used.

Aitchison, Lindsay↗
NASA NTRS2009

Defining Constellation Suit Helmet Field of View Requirements Employing a Mission Segment Based Reduction Process

Field of view has always been a design feature paramount to helmets, and in particular space suits, where the helmet must provide an adequate field of view for a large range of activities, environments, and body positions. For Project Constellation, a different approach to helmet requirement maturation was utilized; one that was less a direct function of body position and suit pressure and more a function of the mission segment in which the field of view will be required. Through taxonimization of various parameters that affect suited field of view, as well as consideration for possible nominal and contingency operations during that mission segment, a reduction process was employed to condense the large number of possible outcomes to only six unique field of view angle requirements that still captured all necessary variables while sacrificing minimal fidelity.

McFarland, Shane↗