Search NASASearch

Engineering topics

Nathaniel Newby

Publications and source records attributed to Nathaniel Newby.

32 records · Page 2

Toward an IMU-based Space Suit Motion Capture System

Spacesuits are complex engineering systems that sustain human health and enable performance outside of Earth-like environments. These systems must support human mobility and physical workload demands while minimizing injury risk during extravehicular activity (EVA). Future EVA on the lunar surface during the Artemis program is expected to be more frequent and require higher physical workloads than previous EVAs during the ISS, Shuttle, or Apollo programs. Hence it is important to optimize future as well as current spacesuits to be efficient and comfortable for the success of space and planetary missions. To enable this, an efficient method is needed to test these spacesuits on the ground.When testing spacesuits in ground environments, it is often necessary to understand the kinematics of the suit to validate the design against relevant requirements or characterize the physical workload necessary to operate the suit. This is a challenging task for traditional optical motion capture (OMC) approaches: suit-mounted OMC markers are easily occluded by the subject or environment and may become detached during testing. Controlling lighting and reflectivity of objects in the motion capture volume is also difficult. Fixed-position OMC cameras also constrain testing to a small and contrived laboratory environment, disallowing kinematics capture in field environments.One promising alternative is the use of suit-mounted inertial measurement units (IMUs). These sensors are small, unobtrusive, and portable, but come at the cost of increased sensor noise and complexity of the software and mathematics to analyze the collected data. To this end, engineers at NASA are developing the Augmented Suit Inverse Kinematics (ASIK) system, a complete motion capture methodand inverse kinematics solver which relies solely on a network of wireless IMUs attached to the major kinematic segments of the spacesuit. The ASIK modeling language allows for the simple inclusion of probabilistic priors such as suit size and shape or IMU positions and rotations. Furthermore, to increase accuracy and reduce operational overhead to use this motion capture approach, the developed inverse kinematics solver exploits so-called self-calibratingalgorithmic techniques, which reduce the need for precise alignment of the sensors on the segments or scripted functional calibration procedures. The ASIK system was tested in a 7-subject pilot study. Each subject donned NASA’s new prototype exploration spacesuit in the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) facility at the NASA Johnson Space Center. The subjects were outfitted with a set of 14 APDM (Portland, OR, USA) Opal IMUs, 12 of which were used in the ASIK model to estimate lower body and trunk kinematics. The subjects were also outfitted with a set of reflective OMC markers and traditional OMC data was collected and processed. Presented results will include characterization of ASIK-derived suit joint angles accuracy against an optical motion capture datum. Discussion of these results, as well as discussion of system calibration and nuances of mathematical observability, will be included.If successful, IMU-based motion capture will enable testing and validation of spacesuits more frequently, with less overhead, in more extreme environments. Future work will apply these techniques to common spacesuit testing tasks, such as gait, mobility, and balance assessment, physical workload characterization, and ergonomics evaluations.

Timothy Mcgrath

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.

Teresa Reiber

Development of an Inertial Sensor-Based Methodology for Spacesuited Lunar Geology Task Assessments

Inertial sensor-based task assessment while in a suited configuration can provide useful information for geology training programs and actual planetary Extravehicular Activities (EVAs). The purpose of this pilot study was to assess suited Lunar geology tasks from the postural perspective using inertial sensors and to gain a better understanding of the movements required during planetary EVAs and of the possible relationships with injury mechanisms. Professional geologist and non-geologist subjects participated in a suited geology task test, and preliminary analysis showed kinematic differences indicating a potential risk factor for lower back injury during future planetary EVAs.

Kyoung Jae Kim

Toward an IMU-Based Space Suit Motion Capture System

Spacesuits are complex engineering systems that sustain human health and enable performance outside Earth-like environments. These systems must support human mobility and physical workload demands while minimizing injury risk during extravehicular activity (EVA). Future EVA operations on the Lunar surface are expected to be more frequent and require higher physical workloads than previously during the ISS, Shuttle, and Apollo programs. To characterize the workloads and ergonomics needs a suit must support, the kinematics of the space suit must be measured during operationally-relevant tasks in ground analog environments. Kinematics capture of the suit is challenging for traditional optical motion capture (OMC) approaches due to marker occlusion, harsh lighting or environmental conditions, and tests with suit surrogates in outdoor field environments. To this end, engineers at NASA are developing the Augmented Suit Inverse Kinematics (ASIK) system, a complete motion capture method and inverse kinematics solver which relies solely on a network of wireless inertial measurement units (IMUs) attached to the major kinematic segments of the spacesuit. The ASIK modeling language allows for the simple inclusion of probabilistic priors such as suit size and shape or IMU poses. The ASIK system was tested in a 7-subject pilot study. Each subject donned NASA’s new prototype exploration spacesuit in the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) facility at Johnson Space Center in Houston, TX. The suits were outfitted with 12 IMUs to estimate lower body and trunk kinematics. The suits were also outfitted with a set of reflective OMC markers, and traditional OMC data was collected and processed. Characterization of the ASIK-derived suit joint angles’ accuracy against an optical motion capture datum will be presented. Discussion of these results, as well as discussion of system calibration and nuances of mathematical observability, will be included.

IMU

Mapping Mitigation Risk Consequence for Crew Needing Assistance or Rescue on the Lunar Surface

Extravehicular activity (EVA) on the lunar surface presents unique risks to crew with possibility for injury. Without appropriate assistance or rescue capability, inability to nominally ambulate and return to a lander, especially during early Artemis missions, could have catastrophic consequences. Mapping likelihood and consequence safety risk associated with identified injury scenarios establishes a baseline from which to assess potential mitigation solutions to ensure crew health and safety.

lunar surface

Comparison of Anthropomorphic Test Device and human Volunteer Responses in Landing Impact Tests of U.S. Space Vehicles

United States (U.S.) crewed vehicles are being designed to support the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) human spaceflight programs. Vehicles must be designed to meet NASA’s occupant protection requirements including landing injury assessment with anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) and analytical models. However, these tools are limited in capturing all injuries that might occur during spacecraft landings. A NASA study of injuries during Soyuz vehicle landings has shown that analytical models are underpredicting occupant injury. Because of the inherent limitations with our analytical tools, human volunteer impact testing was employed to validate the safety of U.S. crewed vehicles. A total of 84 human volunteer tests in 11 different test orientations and g-levels were completed as part of this effort in collaboration with the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and the vehicle development companies. Human subjects were tested at various realistic landing loads and in the highest fidelity seat and suit components that were available at the time of testing for two U.S. vehicles. Matched-pair ATD tests in the same test conditions were also conducted with small female and midsized male Hybrid III ATDs. ATDs were fully instrumented. Head accelerations and subjective responses were recorded in human subjects. In some cases, chest accelerations were captured. Responses of the ATDs and humans in matched-pair tests were compared. No ATD tests showed evidence for risk of injury based on NASA occupant protection requirements. Human subjects reported 17 cases of discomfort or pain, 1 human subject was diagnosed with a minor injury that was not evident in the ATD tests. These results provide evidence that ATDs do not capture all potential injury risks, namely lower severity injuries, discomfort, pain, and fit issues. Overall, human testing is beneficial to understanding the true risk of injury to crewmembers during Earth landings.

Teresa Reiber

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

Comparison of Anthropomorphic Test Device and Human Volunteer Responses in Simulated Landing Impact Tests of U.S. Space Vehicles

United States (U.S.) crewed vehicles are being designed to support the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) human spaceflight programs. Vehicles must be designed to meet NASA’s occupant protection requirements including landing injury assessment with anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) and analytical models. However, these tools are limited in capturing all injuries that might occur during spacecraft landings. A NASA study of injuries during Soyuz vehicle landings has shown that analytical models are underpredicting occupant injury. Because of the inherent limitations with our analytical tools, human volunteer impact testing was employed to assess flight-like landing conditions of U.S. crewed vehicles. A total of 84 human volunteer tests in 11 different test orientations and g-levels were completed as part of this effort in collaboration with the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and U.S. vehicle development companies. Human subjects were tested at various realistic landing loads and in the highest fidelity seat and suit components that were available at the time of testing for two U.S. vehicles. Matched-pair ATD tests in the same test conditions were also conducted with small female and midsized male Hybrid III ATDs. ATDs were fully instrumented. Head accelerations and subjective responses were recorded for human subjects. In some cases, chest accelerations were captured. Responses of the ATDs and humans in matched-pair tests were compared. No ATD tests showed evidence for risk of injury based on NASA occupant protection requirements. Human subjects reported 17 cases of discomfort or pain, and 1 human subject was diagnosed with a minor injury that was not evident in the ATD tests. These results provide evidence that ATDs do not capture all potential injury risks, namely lower severity injuries, discomfort, pain, and fit issues. Overall, human testing is beneficial to understanding the true risk of injury to crewmembers during Earth landings.

Teresa M Reiber

Spacesuit Sizing by Multivariate Simulation: Case Study for Liquid Cooling and Ventilation Garment

A technique was developed to assess the fit of spacesuit garment liquid cooling and ventilation garment (LCVG). A fit scoring scheme was built from the spacesuit sizing requirements and guidelines, and the accommodated proportion of the wearer population was estimated from statistically synthesized pseudo population data. The method evaluated different scenarios of LCVG sizing systems including 1) baseline 7-size system, 2) 7-sizes with target body dimensions iteratively adjusted for maximum fit, and 3) 9-sizes with iterative adjustments. Overall, the baseline sizing system showed 81% accommodation rate, while the hypothetical new systems in-tegrating iterative adjustments for 7- and 9-sizes predictively indicated that accommodation could improve up to 92 and 97%. The proposed method provided a structured metric to quantify fit performance of a garment sizing system, which can be further applied to different spacesuit component, PPE and garment designs.

Han Kim

Accommodation of Posture Variations in Lower Head for Maxillofacial Protective Equipment Design

In order to optimize maxillofacial protective equipment design for Soldiers, the face shape and size were analyzed for changes from a baseline neutral pose to functional poses or jaw motions. A dynamic 3D scanner captured the head and face shapes in several different poses, for example, pronouncing vowel sounds or mimicking yawning or chewing. The face landmarks showed unique excursion patterns, not represented in “static” anthropometry, for example, a 49 mm downward chin motion when yawning. A design demo was simulated to show the mandible shield size required to accommodate the different poses.

Han Kim