Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Nate Newby

Publications and source records attributed to Nate Newby.

16 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2024

Population Accommodation for NASA Spacesuit and Hardware

The goal of this work is to review the population accommodation principles and methodologies NASA Johnson Space Center has developed for the spacesuit, vehicle hardware, and habitats. NASA has defined the target population characteristics in the Human-System Integration Requirements based on the US Army Anthropometric Survey (ANSUR) database. However, the data was screened to select the cases of 30-50 year old subjects, given the historical characteristics of the crew. Further, accommodation ranges were defined for critical body measurements, as NASA aims to accommodate 1st percentile female to 99th percentile male of the crew-like population. The historical truncation thresholds of 5-95th percentiles were not used. This ensured that the accommodation range was not limited and accounted for the current astronaut population. A simulation study also showed that less than 68% of the population may have remained after multiple measurement truncations due to the anthropometry covariance patterns if the narrower range was retained. The ranges were also adjusted for long-term trends of body shape changes as predicted by the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Overall, the requirements were deemed critical to ensure the fit and accommodation of the new suit and space hardware. The requirements have specifically defined boundary cases for verifications and validations, of which the details have proven useful as standards across the different space programs. The specific use and benefits will be further discussed through case studies at the presentation.

Han Kim↗
NASA NTRS2022

Evidence Report: Risk of Injury and Compromised Performance due to EVA Operations

During future missions to the Moon and Mars, each crewmember will most likely perform up to 24 hours a week of extravehicular activity (EVA) in support of exploration, science, construction, and maintenance tasks. Achieving mission objectives will require EVA systems and operations concepts that maximize human performance and efficiency while minimizing health and safety risks for crewmembers. Currently, over 450 EVAs have been performed in microgravity using the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU). The EMU space suit has enabled the successful assembly and maintenance of the International Space Station (ISS) for over 20 years, as well as deployment of payload experiments, solar arrays, satellite launches and repairs. This EVA work was accomplished at a slower cadence than is expected for Moon and Mars, with ISS crewmembers performing no more than 7 EVAs during a single mission and without any back-to-back EVAs. Despite their success, ISS EVAs have resulted in more injury to EVA crewmembers than may be acceptable for long-duration exploration missions. The Apollo astronauts completed EVA tasks in suits that were designed for their short-duration lunar missions, although suit mobility problems were evident. The more frequent EVAs and more varied EVA tasks that are anticipated during the future longer-duration exploration missions will require EVA suits and systems that are better oriented to human health and performance than those used during the Apollo Program. Many of the problems that were encountered with the Apollo EVA suits (e.g., limited mobility and dexterity, high and aft center of gravity, and other features requiring significant crew compensation) will need to be corrected or mitigated to optimize EVA objectives of exploration missions. It is critical that we understand how EVA system design variables such as suit pressure, weight/mass, center-of-gravity location, joint ranges of motion, and biomedical monitoring, affects the ability of astronauts to perform safe, efficient, and effective EVAs. To achieve this understanding, EVA researchers will need to develop and execute an integrated human testing program across multiple environments. The research will provide objective data that will enable informed design decisions and crewmember standards, thereby ensuring EVA systems that optimize crewmember health, safety, efficiency, and performance. This report describes the risks to crew health, safety, performance, and efficiency caused by EVA operations, and it provides the evidence base to substantiate the importance of the risk.

EVA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a THOR Anthropometric Test Device Lumbar Spine Injury Risk Function

Currently, the Brinkley Dynamic Response Criteria (BDRC) is used to assess the risk of thoraco-lumbar spinal injury for astronauts. The BDRC has been validated for predicting injury in military aircraft ejections (Brinkley, 1968; Brinkley and Schaffer, 1971). The objective of this study was to use the injurious data behind the BDRC and subinjurious human-volunteer data to develop an injury risk function for the Test device for Human Occupant Restraint (THOR) to predict probability of thoraco-lumbar spine injury during space vehicle landings.

Jessica Wells↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Reconstructions

Introduction: Recent data show a landing-attributed injury rate among Soyuz crew members to be higher than predicted in original certification analysis. New vehicles being developed for NASA are being certified using analytical tools to quantify injury risk. This assessment will provide data to allow the Agency to evaluate whether these tools are able to capture true injury risk and allow a comparison between Soyuz landings and upcoming vehicles. Methods: A finite element model (FEM) of the Soyuz descent module (DM) and its landing environment were developed to recreate Soyuz landing conditions. Occupant breakout models composed of the Soyuz seat and Sokol helmet were then developed to evaluate occupant response. These models included both anthropomorphic test device (ATD) and human body model (HBM) surrogates in three anthropometric sizes. A generalized distribution analysis of the Soyuz landing environment was performed using landing variable distributions from available literature. Results were used to identify trends in vehicle landing acceleration with landing conditions and to compare landing model injury risk predictions with those estimated in vehicle certification analysis. Next, historic Soyuz landings identified as inducing occupant injury during were reconstructed using the developed landing model and estimated landing conditions. Results and Discussion: This assessment demonstrated the capability of certification metrics, which include a combination of vehicle- and occupant-level injury risk analysis, to identify elevated injury risk landing conditions. However, the developed landing load predictions were limited by available vehicle and landing condition data. Additional data, particularly landing acceleration data specific to historic Soyuz landing conditions, would greatly enhance this assessment’s findings.

Preston Greenhalgh↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of the Suited Injury Modes and Effects Analysis for Identification of Top Injury Risks in Lunar Missions and Training

A new Exploration Extravehicular Activity Suit (xEVAS) is being designed to replace the current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) Artemis program to return astronauts to the lunar surface. This new suit will allow for increased range of motion compared the current EMU and Apollo era suits and will have additional features that will enhance the health and safety of exploration. With the design of lunar missions and the xEVAS progressing, it is important to consider possible injuries and injury mechanisms that could occur in the suit. To address these concerns, the suited Injury Modes and Effects Analysis (IMEA) was developed to outline suited injury scenarios and rank them based on risk score. The IMEA documents possible scenarios and underlying mechanisms of injury while wearing an extravehicular activity (EVA) suit. Tasks during lunar surface EVA as well as training events to prepare for lunar missions were considered as history has shown that more suit injuries occur during training than in flight. Each scenario is ranked with a consequence and likelihood scoring based on our current understanding of the suit and Artemis design reference missions to identify high-risk cases that will drive further work in suited injury. Injuries, mechanisms of injury, and mitigation strategies are evaluated within each scenario. The Suited Injury Summit was held on January 5, 2022, to vet the IMEA with external experts. This was an all-day virtual meeting with the suited injury team, ergonomists, suit engineers, safety engineers, the flight operations directorate, flight doctors, astronauts, astronaut strength, conditioning, and rehabilitation specialists (ASCRS), and external subject matter experts (SMEs). External SMEs consisted of surgeons with varying specialties. The intent of this meeting was to walk through the top injury risks identified in the analysis, identify any gaps that were not captured, and discuss mitigations. With participation from all groups, countless lessons-learned came from the Summit meeting. Using the lessons-learned and discussion from the Summit, the top 10 risks have been identified: neutral buoyancy laboratory training, hand/glove injuries, poor suit fit, field training, specific EVA tasks/design of task, boots/ankle injuries, falls from heights, background radiation, repetitive contact, and ambulation/long-distance ambulation. Mitigation steps have also been determined for each of the top risks. The IMEA and documentation of top risks is a living document. Yearly meetings are planned to update the analysis and reevaluate top risks and mitigations. The IMEA is being used to drive work in suited injury, and this work will continue to evolve with IMEA and lunar mission updates.

Tessa Reiber↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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↗