Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Shoulders”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

How Well Does the Latest Anthropomorphic Test Device Mimic Human Impact Responses?

One of the goals of the NASA Occupant Protection Group is to understand the human tolerance to dynamic loading. This knowledge has to come through indirect approaches such as existing human response databases, anthropometric test devices (ATD), animal testing, post‐mortem human subjects, and models. This study investigated the biofidelity of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's ATD named the THOR (test device for human occupant restraint). If THOR responds comparably to humans, then it could potentially be used as a human surrogate to help validate space vehicle requirements for occupant protection. The THOR responses to frontal and spinal impacts (ranging from 8 to 12 G with rise times of 40, 70, and 100 ms) were measured and compared to human volunteer responses (95 trials in frontal and 58 in spinal) previously collected by the U. S. Air Force on the same horizontal impact accelerator. The impact acceleration profiles tested are within the expected range of multi‐purpose crew vehicle (MPCV) landing dynamics. A correlation score was calculated for each THOR to human comparison using CORA (CORrelation and Analysis) software. A two‐parameter beta distribution model fit was obtained for each dependent variable using maximum likelihood estimation. For frontal impacts, the THOR head x‐acceleration peak response correlated with the human response at 8 and 10‐G 100 ms but not 10‐G 70 ms. The phase lagged the human response. Head z‐acceleration was not correlated. Chest x‐acceleration was in phase, had a higher peak response, and was well correlated with lighter subjects (Cora = 0.8 for 46 kg vs. Cora = 0.4 for 126 kg). Head x‐displacement had a leading phase. Several subjects responded with the same peak displacement but the mean of the group was lower. The shoulder x‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks than the human response. For spinal impacts, the THOR head x‐acceleration was not well correlated. Head and chest z‐acceleration was in phase but had a higher peak response. Chest z‐acceleration was highly correlated with heavier subjects at lower G pulses (Cora = 0.86 for 125 kg at 8 G). The human response was variable in shoulder z‐displacement but the THOR was in phase and was comparable to the mean peak response. Head xand z‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks. Seat pan forces were well correlated, were in phase, but had a larger peak response than most subjects. The THOR does not respond to frontal and spinal impacts exactly the same way that a human does. Some responses are well matched and others are not. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of this ATD is an important first step in determining its usefulness in occupant protection at NASA

Newby, N.↗
NASA NTRS2014

A Better ARED Squat

The 0-G ARED squat under loads the legs relative to the 1g ARED squat. In 1g the knee extensor/flexor muscles are primarily engaged due to the body's center of gravity is behind the knees during the motion of the squat. As body weight does not play a sufficient role 0 G, a crewmember's load exposure is limited by the load delivered by ARED through the exercise bar. Prescription loads for lowerbody resistance exercise in microgravity aim to include 1-G exercise bar load in addition to the crewmember's Earth body weight (BW); however, pressure points from the bar and the 1BW increased load at the shoulders translating to higher loads on the back have been a historical limitation for shoulders, requiring a decrease in exercise load at the start of the mission. Analogous to crewmembers, bed rest subjects report limitations of exercising with high loads on the back while performing squats on the horizontal exercise fixture (HEF), a custom exercise device that serves as an analog to 0-G ARED. Improvements for increasing loads on the HEF squat were suggested by distributing total exercise load between the hips and the bar1. The same is recommended for the 0-G ARED squat, with using current equipment on the ISS, which include the T2 running harness and T2 bungees. Quantification of this improvement has been accessed through computational modeling. The purpose of this study is to characterize joint torque during a squat with a distribution in exercise load on the ARED in 0 G. The analysis used existing models from NASA's Digital Astronaut Project. The biomechanics squat model was integrated with the ARED model and T2 bungees. The spring constant for the bungees were derived from ground testing. Forward dynamic simulation was performed for various conditions including anchor point attachments on the footplate of the ARED, bar load, hip load, and gravitational environment. The model confirms joint torques at knees is lower relative to 1G conditions primarily because the load delivery system is just with the exercise bar in 0 G. By distributing partial loads through use of the bungees to the hips joint-torque profiles were altered during a squat and provided options to enhance targeting lower-body loading in aims as for an improved countermeasure.

Caldwell, E. E.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Active Flow Separation Control on a NACA 0015 Wing Using Fluidic Actuators

Results are presented from a recent set of wind tunnel experiments using sweeping jet actuators to control ow separation on the 30% chord trailing edge ap of a 30 deg. swept wing model with an aspect ratio (AR) of 4.35. Two sweeping jet actuator locations were examined, one on the flap shoulder and one on the trailing edge flap. The parameters that were varied included actuator momentum, freestream velocity, and trailing edge flap deflection (Delta f ) angle. The primary focus of this set of experiments was to determine the mass flow and momentum requirements for controlling separation on the flap, especially at large flap deflection angles which would be characteristic of a high lift system. Surface pressure data, force and moment data, and stereoscopic particle image velocimetry (PIV) data were acquired to evaluate the performance benefits due to applying active flow control. Improvements in lift over the majority of the wing span were obtained using sweeping jet actuator control. High momentum coefficient, Cu, levels were needed when using the actuators on the ap because they were located downstream of separation. Actuators on the flap shoulder performed slightly better but actuator size, orientation, and spacing still need to be optimized.

Melton, Latunia P.↗
NASA NTRS2014

How Well Does the Latest Anthropomorphic Test Device Mimic Human Impact Responses?

One of the goals of the NASA Occupant Protection Group is to understand the human tolerance to dynamic loading. This knowledge has to come through indirect approaches such as existing human response databases, anthropometric test devices (ATD), animal testing, post-­‐mortem human subjects, and models. This study investigated the biofidelity of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's ATD named the THOR (test device for human occupant restraint). If THOR responds comparably to humans, then it could potentially be used as a human surrogate to help validate space vehicle requirements for occupant protection. The THOR responses to frontal and spinal impacts (ranging from 8 to 12 G with rise times of 40, 70, and 100 ms) were measured and compared to human volunteer responses (95 trials in frontal and 58 in spinal) previously collected by the U. S. Air Force on the same horizontal impact accelerator. The impact acceleration profiles tested are within the expected range of multi-­‐purpose crew vehicle (MPCV) landing dynamics. A correlation score was calculated for each THOR to human comparison using CORA (CORrelation and Analysis) software. A two-­‐parameter beta distribution model fit was obtained for each dependent variable using maximum likelihood estimation. For frontal impacts, the THOR head x-­‐acceleration peak response correlated with the human response at 8 and 10-­‐G 100 ms but not 10-­‐G 70 ms. The phase lagged the human response. Head z-­‐acceleration was not correlated. Chest x-­‐acceleration was in phase, had a higher peak response, and was well correlated with lighter subjects (Cora = 0.8 for 46 kg vs. Cora = 0.4 for 126 kg). Head x-­‐displacement had a leading phase. Several subjects responded with the same peak displacement but the mean of the group was lower. The shoulder x-­‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks than the human response. For spinal impacts, the THOR head x-­‐acceleration was not well correlated. Head and chest z-­‐acceleration was in phase but had a higher peak response. Chest z-­‐acceleration was highly correlated with heavier subjects at lower G pulses (Cora = 0.86 for 125 kg at 8 G). The human response was variable in shoulder z-­‐displacement but the THOR was in phase and was comparable to the mean peak response. Head x-­‐ and z-­‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks. Seat pan forces were well correlated, were in phase, but had a larger peak response than most subjects. The THOR does not respond to frontal and spinal impacts exactly the same way that a human does. Some responses are well matched and others are not. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of this ATD is an important first step in determining its usefulness in occupant protection at NASA

Newby, Nate↗
NASA NTRS2014

EMU Suit Performance Simulation

Introduction: Designing a planetary suit is very complex and often requires difficult trade‐offs between performance, cost, mass, and system complexity. To verify that new suit designs meet requirements, full prototypes must be built and tested with human subjects. However, numerous design iterations will occur before the hardware meets those requirements. Traditional draw‐prototype‐test paradigms for research and development are prohibitively expensive with today's shrinking Government budgets. Personnel at NASA are developing modern simulation techniques that focus on a human‐centric design paradigm. These new techniques make use of virtual prototype simulations and fully adjustable physical prototypes of suit hardware. This is extremely advantageous and enables comprehensive design down‐selections to be made early in the design process. Objectives: The primary objective was to test modern simulation techniques for evaluating the human performance component of two EMU suit concepts, pivoted and planar style hard upper torso (HUT). Methods: This project simulated variations in EVA suit shoulder joint design and subject anthropometry and then measured the differences in shoulder mobility caused by the modifications. These estimations were compared to human‐in‐the‐loop test data gathered during past suited testing using four subjects (two large males, two small females). Results: Results demonstrated that EVA suit modeling and simulation are feasible design tools for evaluating and optimizing suit design based on simulated performance. The suit simulation model was found to be advantageous in its ability to visually represent complex motions and volumetric reach zones in three dimensions, giving designers a faster and deeper comprehension of suit component performance vs. human performance. Suit models were able to discern differing movement capabilities between EMU HUT configurations, generic suit fit concerns, and specific suit fit concerns for crewmembers based on individual anthropometry

Cowley, Matthew S.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Analysis of Human-Spacesuit Interaction

Astronauts sustain injuries of various natures such as finger delamination, joint pain, and redness due to their interaction with the space suit. The role of the Anthropometry and Biomechanics Facility is to understand the biomechanics, environmental variables, and ergonomics of the suit. This knowledge is then used to make suggestions for improvement in future iterations of the space suit assembly to prevent injuries while allowing astronauts maneuverability, comfort, and tactility. The projects I was involved in were the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) space suit stiffness study and the glove feasibility study. The EMU project looked at the forces exerted on the shoulder, arm, and wrist when subjects performed kinematic tasks with and without a pressurized suit. The glove study consisted of testing three conditions - the Series 4000 glove, the Phase VI glove, and the no glove condition. With more than forty channels of sensor data total, it was critical to develop programs that could analyze data with basic descriptive statistics and generate relevant graphs to help understand what happens within the space suit and glove. In my project I created a Graphical User Interface (GUI) in MATLAB that would help me visualize what each sensor was doing within a task. The GUI is capable of displaying overlain plots and can be synchronized with video. This was helpful during the stiffness testing to visualize how the forces on the arm acted while the subject performed tasks such as shoulder adduction/abduction and bicep curls. The main project of focus, however, was the glove comparison study. I wrote MATLAB programs which generated movies of the strain vectors during specific tasks. I also generated graphs that summarized the differences between each glove for the strain, shear and FSR sensors. Preliminary results indicate that the Phase VI glove places less strain and shear on the hand. Future work includes continued data analysis of surveys and sensor data. In the end, the ideal glove is one that provides more tactility for the astronauts but lessens injuries. Often times, a more tactile glove transmits forces better to the hand; thus, achieving a balance of both a tactile and safe glove is the main challenge present.

Thomas, Neha↗
NASA NTRS2016

Compiling a Comprehensive EVA Training Dataset for NASA Astronauts

Training for a spacewalk or extravehicular activity (EVA) is considered a hazardous duty for NASA astronauts. This places astronauts at risk for decompression sickness as well as various musculoskeletal disorders from working in the spacesuit. As a result, the operational and research communities over the years have requested access to EVA training data to supplement their studies. The purpose of this paper is to document the comprehensive EVA training data set that was compiled from multiple sources by the Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) epidemiologists to investigate musculoskeletal injuries. The EVA training dataset does not contain any medical data, rather it only documents when EVA training was performed, by whom and other details about the session. The first activities practicing EVA maneuvers in water were performed at the Neutral Buoyancy Simulator (NBS) at the Marshall Spaceflight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. This facility opened in 1967 and was used for EVA training until the early Space Shuttle program days. Although several photographs show astronauts performing EVA training in the NBS, records detailing who performed the training and the frequency of training are unavailable. Paper training records were stored within the NBS after it was designated as a National Historic Landmark in 1985 and closed in 1997, but significant resources would be needed to identify and secure these records, and at this time LSAH has not pursued acquisition of these early training records. Training in the NBS decreased when the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, opened the Weightless Environment Training Facility (WETF) in 1980. Early training records from the WETF consist of 11 hand-written dive logbooks compiled by individual workers that were digitized at the request of LSAH. The WETF was integral in the training for Space Shuttle EVAs until its closure in 1998. The Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) at the Sonny Carter Training Facility near JSC opened in March 1997 and is the current site for US EVA training. Other space agencies also have used water to simulate weightlessness and train for EVAs. Russia has a training facility similar to the NBL named the Hydro Lab. The Hydro Lab began operations at the Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center (GCTC) in 1980 and has been used extensively to the present. Although a majority of training in the Hydro Lab uses the Russian Orlan suit, a small number of sessions have been conducted using a NASA suit. The Japanese Weightlessness Environment Test System (WETS) went into service at the Tsukuba Space Center in 1997 but was closed in 2011 due to extensive earthquake damage. Several sessions were performed using a NASA suit, but these sessions were short and considered "development" runs. LSAH has assembled records from the WETF, NBL and Hydro Lab. Recording of the EVA training data has changed considerably from 1967 to present. The goal of early record keeping was to track use of hardware components, and the person involved was treated as a suited operator, not as a focus of interest. Records from the past two decades are fairly precise with the person, date, suit type and size noted. On occasion the length of the session was listed, but this data is not included on all records. Records were merged from data sources and extensive cleaning of the records was required since the multiple sources frequently overlapped and duplicated records. To date the LSAH EVA training dataset includes over 12,500 EVA training sessions performed by NASA astronauts since 1981. The following variables are included for most records: Name, Sex, Event date, Event name, HUT type, HUT size, Facility, and Estimated run time. For a smaller subset of records, the following variables are available: Actual run time, Time inverted, and the suit components Waist bearing type, Shoulder harness, Shoulder pads, and Teflon inserts. The LSAH dataset is currently the most complete resource for data regarding EVA training sessions performed by NASA astronauts. However, it is not 100 percent complete since the WETS (Japan) and NBS (Marshall) training facility data were not included. This dataset has been compiled by LSAH to study the relationship of EVA training to musculoskeletal injuries but has many other non-medical applications. This dataset can be provided to other groups in order to respond to program and research questions with appropriate board approvals.

Laughlin, M. S.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Z-2 Architecture Description and Requirements Verification Results

The Z-2 Prototype Planetary Extravehicular Space Suit Assembly is a continuation of NASA's Z series of spacesuits. The Z-2 is another step in NASA's technology development roadmap leading to human exploration of the Martian surface. The suit was designed for maximum mobility at 8.3 psid, reduced mass, and to have high fidelity life support interfaces. As Z-2 will be man-tested at full vacuum in NASA JSC's Chamber B, it was manufactured as Class II, making it the most flight-like planetary walking suit produced to date. The Z-2 suit architecture is an evolution of previous EVA suits, namely the ISS EMU, Mark III, Rear Entry I-Suit and Z-1 spacesuits. The suit is a hybrid hard and soft multi-bearing, rear entry spacesuit. The hard upper torso (HUT) is an all-composite structure and includes a 2-bearing rolling convolute shoulder with Vernier sizing mechanism, removable suit port interface plate (SIP), elliptical hemispherical helmet and self-don/doff shoulder harness. The hatch is a hybrid aluminum and composite construction with Apollo style gas connectors, custom water pass-thru, removable hatch cage and interfaces to primary and auxiliary life support feed water bags. The suit includes Z-1 style lower arms with cam brackets for Vernier sizing and government furnished equipment (GFE) Phase VI gloves. The lower torso includes a telescopic waist sizing system, waist bearing, rolling convolute waist joint, hard brief, 2 bearing soft hip thigh, Z-1 style legs with ISS EMU style cam brackets for sizing, and conformal walking boots with ankle bearings. The Z-2 Requirements Verification Plan includes the verification of more than 200 individual requirements. The verification methods include test, analysis, inspection, demonstration or a combination of methods. Examples of unmanned requirements include suit leakage, proof pressure testing, operational life, mass, isometric man-loads, sizing adjustment ranges, internal and external interfaces such as in-suit drink bag, partial pressure relief valve, purge valve, donning stand and ISS Body Restraint Tether (BRT). Examples of manned requirements include verification of anthropometric range, suit self-don/doff, secondary suit exit method, donning stand self-ingress/egress and manned mobility covering eight functional tasks. The eight functional tasks include kneeling with object pick-up, standing toe touch, cross-body reach, walking, reach to the SIP and helmet visor. This paper will provide an overview of the Z-2 design. Z-2 requirements verification testing was performed with NASA at the ILC Houston test facility. This paper will also discuss pre-delivery manned and unmanned test results as well as analysis performed in support of requirements verification.

Graziosi, Dave↗
NASA NTRS2017

Novel Musculoskeletal Loading and Assessment System

Ground based and ISS (International Space Station) exercise research have shown that axial loading via two-point loading at the shoulders and load quality (i.e. consistent load and at least 1:1 concentric to eccentric ratio) are extremely important to optimize musculoskeletal adaptations to resistance exercise. The Advanced Resistance Exercise Device (ARED) is on ISS now and is the "state of the art" for resistance exercise capabilities in microgravity; however, the ARED is far too large and power consuming for exploration vehicles. The single cable exercise device design selected for MPCV (Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle), does not readily allow for the two-point loading at the shoulders.

Downs, Meghan E.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Wind Tunnel Testing of High Efficiency Low Power (HELP) Actuation for Active Flow Control

A High Efficiency Low Power (HELP) methodology has been successfully developed and tested on an active flow control (AFC) version of the 10%-scale high-lift Common Research Model (CRM-HL) at the NASA Langley Research Center 14- by 22-Foot Subsonic Tunnel (14x22). The AFC variant of the CRM-HL, designated as CRM-SHL-AFC, was integrated with modular HELP actuator cartridges on the shoulder of its highly deflected (≥50°) simplehinged flaps. A reference conventional CRM-HL configuration equipped with Fowler flaps and a nacelle chine was chosen to provide the targeted lift enhancement goals and for comparison with the results of the CRM-SHL-AFC. The current data are presented with the Transonic Wall Interference Correction System (TWICS) method applied. The HELP actuators, which use a combination of unsteady sweeping jets and steady discrete jets in tandem, were designed to overcome strong adverse pressure gradients, while minimizing the pneumatic power usage. The power coefficient (C(sub π)), which takes account of both supply air pressure and mass flow usage for the AFC actuators, is a useful parameter for judging the actuators’ performance efficiency and perhaps for scaling-up of the AFC system. Full HELP actuation coverage with a constant spanwise nozzle pressure ratio (NPR) was able to achieve the lift enhancement goals for the entire lift curve and was found to be the most effective AFC case. For the most effective case, mass flow rates greater than ~0.91 lbm/s and NPR values greater than ~1.8 (corresponding to C(sub π) = 0.18) are needed to achieve the lift enhancement goal at α = 9°, whereas mass flow rates greater than ~1.23 lbm/s and NPR values greater than ~2.3 (corresponding to C(sub π) = 0.3) are needed to achieve the lift enhancement goal at α = 17°. Surface pressure distributions indicate that the HELP actuation on the flap shoulder increased the suction pressures (and flow circulation) globally in both the streamwise and the spanwise directions, and thereby enhanced the lift over the entire high-lift system. The CRM-SHLAFC configuration equipped with HELP actuation was able to match or exceed the lift performance of the reference conventional CRM-HL, thus meeting the objective of the research.

John C Lin↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Wearable Protective Technologies

We are currently creating protective garments to be worn during the duration of SPE (solar particle events). Several garment prototypes have been created to protect the body, but nothing has been created for head protection. My focus during this internship was creating headgear designs. Some of the big requirements of an effective headgear design is that the hood design needs to cover the forehead and not have any gaps between the hood and neckline, and the areal density of radiation shielding needs to be at least 1.5 g/cm2. My designs were inspired by many different brands and designers including Nike’s outerwear selection, Moncler’s Fall 20 Genius collaborations with Simone Rocha, Craig Green, and Alyx, Marine Serre F/W 20, and A-Cold-Wall S/S 19. All of these had great examples of hood and vest designs. Many sketches were created from these and many other inspirations. Pattern development began by taking several measurements of the head and neck. I drafted the hood to cover the forehead and cover the neck. After the initial draft, the pattern was modified to accommodate a center panel to contour and shape the hood further. I also created a shoulder drape based on a kimono sleeve to add extra coverage over the neckline of the garment from a basic sloper’s neckline and shoulders. Radiation shielding was a special consideration in my design work. I did extensive research on different materials and ways to incorporate them into garments and found that I was not limited to polypropylene or polyethylene. Many common textiles are hydrogen rich, such as cotton, polyester, and silk, and could be incorporated into designs as radiation shielding. From this research, I am in the process of creating a prototype that uses these materials as shielding. I will be returning for the summer and hope to put more of the ideas I have into production.

Nicole Dugan↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Spacesuit and Mobility Performance Changes

The complex interactions between the human body and spacesuit lead to changes inmovement patterns and mobility performancesof the wearer. In general, factors including the geometric properties, such as shape and size, mechanical properties of the suit, and pressurization of the suit are known to be associated with altered movement patterns as compared to an unsuited human.However, their relative contributions have not been explicitly quantified from the mobility performance perspectives. The goal of this study wasthus to assessthe effects fromthe different types of mobility constraintconditions, namely by wearing either a 3D printed hard upper torso (HUT) assembly orfully pressurized spacesuit. The outcome was also compared against the unsuited motions. For this study, an xEMU (exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit) suitwas considered, which is the next generation spacesuit developed by NASA. In each test condition, the subject was asked to move the arm and hand as prescribedfor different task types, and the corresponding body segment locations were recordedusing a 3D motion capture system. The following three tasks were performedand analyzed: 1) Outward one-handed reaches:the subject in a standing pose made sweeping motions with the extended right arm from the extreme end-to-end positions, including side-to-side at different elevations and top-to-bottom at different azimuths. 2) Outward two-handed reaches:similarto the previous task, howeverthe subject kept the hands together during the motions in order to assessthe areas that can be reached by both hands. 3) Inward one-handed reaches:the subject made right-hand reach motions to the surface of the HUT.The hand traces collected from each task were modeled by a template shape parametrically deformed with a radial basis function. This process enabled foran abstraction of the hand traces into a smooth surface envelope representing the maximally reachable area of the test subject, of which the shapes and sizes were compared across the different test conditions. The preliminary analysis has shown that theoverall size of reachenvelopes decreases in a pressurized suit compared to 3D printed mockup HUT and unsuited conditions. The specific shape of the envelopes, which were determined by the reachable and unreachable zones, alsovary with the testconditions, and the differences werepronounced with the inward reaches to the HUT surface. The latter observation ispotentially relatedto the increased demandfor shoulder and elbow flexions.Overcomingthe resistance from the pressurizedsoft goods and mechanical constraints of the shoulder assemblywas seen to be associated with the difference in motion patterns between the suited and unsuited conditions. Overall, the information quantified from this study is expected to provide structured metrics for spacesuit mobility, which can improve design optimization and human-system integration.

K Han Kim↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned from Aerothermal Flight Data on NASA Mars Entry Vehicles

The NASA Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) and Mars 2020 entry vehicles included temperature measurements inside and direct heat flux on the surface of the thermal protection system (TPS) material. The instrumentation was included to begin addressing predictive capabilities for aerodynamic heating and ablative TPS material response. The MSL aeroshell included temperature measurements at seven heatshield locations, from which total aerodynamic heating was reconstructed. The Mars 2020 instrumentation suite included eleven heatshield measurement locations and new backshell measurements at nine locations: six with temperature sensors, two with sensors to directly measure total heat flux, and one to measure radiative heat flux. Both instrumentation suites returned full sets of data, with all temperature sensors nearest to the surface surviving entry, indicating minimal material recession. Heatshield boundary layer transition (BLT) was observed for both vehicles prior to the time of peak heating, with transition starting near the shoulder and progressing towards the stagnation area. MSL’s higher speed on approach to Mars resulted in higher total heating compared to Mars 2020, with the maximum occurring near the heatshield’s leeside shoulder. The Mars 2020 backshell heating data indicate significant contributions from shock layer radiation. Heating from Navier-Stokes flowfield calculations are in family with reconstructed heating. The paper covers the instrumentation, BLT and reconstructed heating on both heatshields, backshell heating for Mars 2020, TPS performance, and predicted versus reconstructed heat fluxes. Opportunities for improved design approaches for future Mars missions are discussed, especially for the upcoming Mars Sample Return mission.

Mars Science Laboratory↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned from Aerothermal Flight Data on NASA Mars Entry Vehicles

The NASA Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) and Mars 2020 entry vehicles included temperature measurements inside and direct heat flux on the surface of the thermal protection system (TPS) material. The instrumentation was included to begin addressing predictive capabilities for aerodynamic heating and ablative TPS material response. The MSL aeroshell included temperature measurements at seven heatshield locations, from which total aerodynamic heating was reconstructed. The Mars 2020 instrumentation suite included eleven heatshield measurement locations and new backshell measurements at nine locations: six with temperature sensors, two with sensors to directly measure total heat flux, and one to measure radiative heat flux. Both instrumentation suites returned full sets of data, with all temperature sensors nearest to the surface surviving entry, indicating minimal material recession. Heatshield boundary layer transition (BLT) was observed for both vehicles prior to the time of peak heating, with transition starting near the shoulder and progressing towards the stagnation area. MSL’s higher speed on approach to Mars resulted in higher total heating compared to Mars 2020, with the maximum occurring near the heatshield’s leeside shoulder. The Mars 2020 backshell heating data indicate significant contributions from shock layer radiation. Heating from Navier-Stokes flowfield calculations are in family with reconstructed heating. The paper covers the instrumentation, BLT and reconstructed heating on both heatshields, backshell heating for Mars 2020, TPS performance, and predicted versus reconstructed heat fluxes. Opportunities for improved design approaches for future Mars missions are discussed, especially for the upcoming Mars Sample Return mission.

Mars Science Laboratory↗
NASA NTRS2023

Modeling and Simulation of the Angel Upper Limb Offload Device: Branching Into New Methods

BACKGROUND: The Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) provides an analog environment for extravehicular activity (EVA) testing and training. Discomfort has been observed during longer suited test sessions. While the subject’s core is offloaded during surface EVA evaluations, his/her arms experience full Earth gravity and can become overly fatigued, especially during suited tests which involve reaching and prolonged arm extensions. A device (ARGOS Negation of Gravitational Effects on the Limbs: ANGEL) to offload the weight of the arms and suit sleeves is being developed by JSC’s Flight Systems Branch of the Software, Robotics, and Simulation Division. Previously we have shared preliminary modeling of that device and kinematics based on motion capture data. Here we present an alternative approach to determine device kinematics by calculating ANGEL component angles with an OpenSim plugin. We compare calculated angles to inverse kinematics (IK) derived ones with the goal of validating the model. This new method can be further informative for device design and analytically testing different configurations to achieve desired reduced gravity conditions (e.g., lunar gravity (Lg) or Martian gravity (Mg)). We have compared calculated angles with IK-derived angles in tests with a shirt-sleeve subject positioned in a test stand with a Mark-III Hard Upper Torso (HUT) and Portable Life Support System (PLSS) mockup and arm weights to emulate the weight of the suit sleeve as well as a suited subject in ARGOS with a Mark-III suit. A variety of upper body tasks were completed in the former and full-body tasks in the latter. METHODS AND RESULTS: To model the offload device, we augment the OpenSim human model topology with the offload mechanism components and joints, using CAD models to represent the mechanism graphically. The joint angles of the device are calculated in the OpenSim plugin by modeling how the components configure themselves under the offloading spring tension given a particular IK-derived arm position. There are four ANGEL components with a total of 5 degrees of freedom (DOFs), each component has a single DOF except for the cuff which is modeled as 2 DOFs. The sickle/yaw bracket and cuff rotation angles are determined statically based on the assumptions that the sickle will track the attachment point of the cuff and that the cuff will rotate such that the attachment point is at its highest point. The cuff tilt, linker and V-bracket angles are then determined by optimizing their positions to approach a mechanical equilibrium. The calculated linker angle is compared to three different methods of determining the linker line-of-force kinematically (from V-bracket to center-cuff, cuff highest point or marker-derived position). Given the joint angles of the device, the spring force and resulting force on the arm is computed by the plugin and applied as an external load in inverse dynamics (ID) to enable study of overall shoulder joint torques as well as offload achieved. We verify the calculated joint angles by using the inverse kinematic data. The average difference in angles is the smallest for the V-bracket and linker, around 1 to 5 degrees for most trials. The resulting offload and shoulder torque are comparable between calculated and IK-derived angles. In summary, we have developed a method to calculate the joint angles of an exoskeleton-like upper limb offloading device currently in development. We have also developed a custom plugin which will be a valuable tool to optimize device configurations for a desired gravitational environment, probe the offload achieved for motions recorded outside of our test suite, and inform future design improvements.

L B Nilsson↗
NASA NTRS2023

Modeling and Simulation of The Angel Upper Limb Offload Device: Branching into New Methods

BACKGROUND: The Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) provides an analog environment for extravehicular activity (EVA) testing and training. Discomfort has been observed during longer suited test sessions. While the subject’s core is offloaded during surface EVA evaluations, his/her arms experience full Earth gravity and can become overly fatigued, especially during suited tests which involve reaching and prolonged arm extensions. A device (ARGOS Negation of Gravitational Effects on the Limbs: ANGEL) to offload the weight of the arms and suit sleeves is being developed by JSC’s Flight Systems Branch of the Software, Robotics, and Simulation Division. Previously we have shared preliminary modeling of that device and kinematics based on motion capture data. Here we present an alternative approach to determine device kinematics by calculating ANGEL component angles with an OpenSim plugin. We compare calculated angles to inverse kinematics (IK) derived ones with the goal of validating the model. This new method can be further informative for device design and analytically testing different configurations to achieve desired reduced gravity conditions (e.g., lunar gravity (Lg) or Martian gravity (Mg)). We have compared calculated angles with IK-derived angles in tests with a shirt-sleeve subject positioned in a test stand with a Mark-III Hard Upper Torso (HUT) and Portable Life Support System (PLSS) mockup and arm weights to emulate the weight of the suit sleeve as well as a suited subject in ARGOS with a Mark-III suit. A variety of upper body tasks were completed in the former and full-body tasks in the latter. METHODS AND RESULTS: To model the offload device, we augment the OpenSim human model topology with the offload mechanism components and joints, using CAD models to represent the mechanism graphically. The joint angles of the device are calculated in the OpenSim plugin by modeling how the components configure themselves under the offloading spring tension given a particular IK-derived arm position. There are four ANGEL components with a total of 5 degrees of freedom (DOFs), each component has a single DOF except for the cuff which is modeled as 2 DOFs. The sickle/yaw bracket and cuff rotation angles are determined statically based on the assumptions that the sickle will track the attachment point of the cuff and that the cuff will rotate such that the attachment point is at its highest point. The cuff tilt, linker and V-bracket angles are then determined by optimizing their positions to approach a mechanical equilibrium. The calculated linker angle is compared to three different methods of determining the linker line-of-force kinematically (from V-bracket to center-cuff, cuff highest point or marker-derived position). Given the joint angles of the device, the spring force and resulting force on the arm is computed by the plugin and applied as an external load in inverse dynamics (ID) to enable study of overall shoulder joint torques as well as offload achieved. We verify the calculated joint angles by using the inverse kinematic data. The average difference in angles is the smallest for the V-bracket and linker, around 1 to 5 degrees for most trials. The resulting offload and shoulder torque are comparable between calculated and IK-derived angles. In summary, we have developed a method to calculate the joint angles of an exoskeleton-like upper limb offloading device currently in development. We have also developed a custom plugin which will be a valuable tool to optimize device configurations for a desired gravitational environment, probe the offload achieved for motions recorded outside of our test suite, and inform future design improvements.

L B Nilsson↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Numerical Implementation of Source Terms to Evaluate Active Porosity Control using a Transpiration Cooled Thermal Protection System

Transpiration cooling has renewed interest of study as a renewable system of thermal protection for atmospheric entry systems. The presence of coolant within the void space of a porous material changes its effective porosity and theorized to lend the external heatshield as a potential means of porous surface control. Effective porosity is explored in two forms: saturation of void space where exiting coolant creates ‘blowing’ over the surface, and partial evacuation of the void space where withdrawal of the coolant creates ‘suction’ on the surface. Thus this study evaluates using transpiration cooling as a as means of active aerodynamic control. The feasibility of the system is evaluated numerically using Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes based computational fluid dynamics for the aerodynamic assessments by coding source terms of transpiration cooling products at a heat shield surface boundary at the wind side shoulder, creating an asymmetric scheme. Study results show induced moments about the pitch axis incurred following the source terms of a cooling fluid at a near-shoulder location on the heat shield. Lift and drag saw increasing modulation with increase in mass flux rate. Pitch moment was altered a total of 388 N-m between lowest and highest ‘suction’ rates and changed 194 N-m maximum between ‘blowing’ rates.

transpiration cooling↗
DOE OSTI2022

Fuel injector with duct assembly

Methods and systems are provided for a fuel injector of an internal combustion engine. In one example, a fuel injector includes a body having a flange shaped to seat within a shoulder of a passage of a cylinder head. The shoulder is positioned at an inner side of the cylinder head such that the fuel injector is coupled to the cylinder head at the inner side by the flange.

Kurtz, Eric↗