Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Extravehicular Activity”

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 307 records · Page 17
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2002

STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape: Flight Days 8 - 10 - Part 3 of 4

An overview of the STS-111 Endeavour mission is given through footage of each flight day. Scenes from flight days 8 through 10 show activities such as extravehicular activity (EVA) preparation, EVA activity to replace the wrist roll joint on the International Space Station's (ISS) robotic arm, logistics transfer operation, space suit check-out and loading of the Leonardo Multi-Purpose Logistics Module onto the Endeavour's cargo bay. Individual shots of Africa, Italy, Hispaniola, Mexico and the Strait of Gilbraltar are shown. For mission footage from flight days 1 to 7 and 11-14, see also, 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 1', 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 2' and 'STS-111 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 4'.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2017

Tracking Historical NASA EVA Training: Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) Development of the EVA Suit Exposure Tracker (EVA SET)

During a spacewalk, designated as extravehicular activity (EVA), an astronaut ventures from the protective environment of the spacecraft into the vacuum of space. EVAs are among the most challenging tasks during a mission, as they are complex and place the astronaut in a highly stressful environment dependent on the spacesuit for survival. Due to the complexity of EVA, NASA has conducted various training programs on Earth to mimic the environment of space and to practice maneuvers in a more controlled and forgiving environment. However, rewards offset the risks of EVA, as some of the greatest accomplishments in the space program were accomplished during EVA, such as the Apollo moonwalks and the Hubble Space Telescope repair missions. Water has become the environment of choice for EVA training on Earth, using neutral buoyancy as a substitute for microgravity. During EVA training, an astronaut wears a modified version of the spacesuit adapted for working in water. This high fidelity suit allows the astronaut to move in the water while performing tasks on full-sized mockups of space vehicles, telescopes, and satellites. During the early Gemini missions, several EVA objectives were much more difficult than planned and required additional time. Later missions demonstrated that "complex (EVA) tasks were feasible when restraints maintained body position and underwater simulation training ensured a high success probability".1,2 EVA training has evolved from controlling body positioning to perform basic tasks to complex maintenance of the Hubble Space Telescope and construction of the International Space Station (ISS). Today, preparation is centered at special facilities built specifically for EVA training, such as the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) at NASA's Johnson Space Center ([JSC], Houston) and the Hydrolab at the Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Centre ([GCTC], Star City, outside Moscow). Underwater training for an EVA is also considered hazardous duty for NASA astronauts. This activity places astronauts at risk for decompression sickness and barotrauma as well as various musculoskeletal disorders from working in the spacesuit. The medical, operational and research communities over the years have requested access to EVA training data to better understand the risks. As a result of these requests, epidemiologists within the Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) team have compiled records from numerous EVA training venues to quantify the exposure to EVA training. The EVA Suit Exposure Tracker (EVA SET) dataset is a compilation of ground-based training activities using the extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) in neutrally buoyant pools to enhance EVA performance on orbit. These data can be used by the current ISS program and future exploration missions by informing physicians, researchers, and operational personnel on the risks of EVA training in order that future suit and mission designs incorporate greater safety. The purpose of this technical report is to document briefly the various facilities where NASA astronauts have performed EVA training while describing in detail the EVA training records used to generate the EVA SET dataset.

Laughlin, Mitzi S.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing Mission Segment-Specific Clinical Data for Impact

Space exploration missions represent a significant future objective for NASA’s human spaceflight operations for the near and long term. By operating missions during longer periods and over further distances, NASA’s mission planning models, hardware systems, and medical capabilities will be stretched beyond their original design constraints. The necessity of medical training and medical supply manifesting for such missions is likely to become incredibly intricate as trade-space analysis is performed over varying mission profiles. For this purpose, IMPACT was created to extend and improve the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) which is used for International Space Station (ISS) medical predications and consists of a probabilistic risk assessment tool that simulates missions to calculate risks given the constraints on crew complement, mission duration and activity (such as Extravehicular Activities), power, communication, mass, volume, and evacuation consideration as well as to predict mission outcomes. Currently, the medical evidence used to support IMPACT remains static, addressing risks of a medical condition and the impacts of the condition during spaceflight only, but is only calculated for a small number of mission parameters. Extended missions will consist of new and varied living environments, changing gravitational loads, and dynamic working requirements. Medical risks are not typically constant but will change depending upon the physical and physiological environment of the body during all phases of a mission. Risks are likely to shift during different mission segments, and understanding how components of a mission profile change risks will assist mission planners to increase chances for mission success.

Christopher Zahner↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

EVA Planning: Using Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) Training to Predict in-Flight Energy Expenditure

Metabolic rate (“met rate”) is the amount of energy expended over a period of time and is influenced by many factors including body composition, level of physical activity, resting metabolic rate, sex, age, and food intake. Met rate is measured during Extravehicular Activity (EVA) training at the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) and during in-flight EVAs through indirect calorimetry, calculating energy expenditure from respiratory measurements of O 2 consumption and/or CO 2 production. During Extravehicular Activity (EVA) planning, metabolic cost is important to consider and is used to inform EVA duration based on spacesuit consumables associated with life support systems. Currently, NBL and previous ISS EVA met rate data for specified crewmembers are utilized to predict in-flight EVA metabolic costs based on a proposed EVA timeline. Timeline data collected during training is used to relate met rates to specific EVA activities, which are in turn assigned to more generalized EVA task categories, categorizing by both task type and restraint type. EVA task categories include EVA Setup/Cleanup, Worksite Setup/Cleanup, Cable Routing, Bolts, Fluid Connectors, Electrical Connectors, R&R Work, Miscellaneous Work, Incapacitated Crew Rescue (being rescued or performing), Assisted Crew Rescue (being assisted or performing), and Translation. Restraint types consist of Free-Float, Body Restraint Tether (BRT), Articulating Portable Foot Restraint (APFR), and Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS). From a crewmember’s historical data, individualized 10th, 50th and 90th percentile met rate estimates are generated for each task category and used to estimate the proposed EVA timeline metabolic cost. In-flight metabolic data (“As-Executed”) from recent ISS US EVAs 85-88 (totaling eight EVA crewmember met rates) was compared with their predicted metabolic cost (“As-Planned”) to evaluate the accuracy of the current met rate estimation method. Across the four EVAs, As-Executed Cumulative EVA Total Metabolic Cost (M = 5893.78 BTU, SD = 816.60) was not significantly different compared to As-Planned Cumulative EVA Total Metabolic Cost (M = 6106.60 BTU, SD = 826.62; t(7) = 0.751 , p = .477). Though not a significant difference, generally, As-Planned total estimates were slightly higher than As-Executed total metabolic cost. Relative Error for Cumulative EVA Total Metabolic Cost ranged from -33% to 14.7%, depending on the crewmember and EVA. When comparing As-Planned to A-Executed EVA task categories for Bolts, Electrical Connectors, EVA Cleanup, EVA Setup, Miscellaneous Work, Translation, Worksite Cleanup, and Worksite Setup during these EVAs, no significant differences were observed, however, there was a significant difference in As-Planned (M = 783.71 BTU, SD = 408.88) compared to As-Executed (M = 608.87 BTU, SD = 425.29) metabolic cost for the task category of Repair-and-Replace (R&R) Work (t(17) = 3.21 , p = .005). Looking closer within the R&R Work task category, As-Executed R&R Work with Free-Float restraint type (M = 706.17 BTU, SD = 352.18) was significantly less than As-Planned R&R Work with Free-Float restraint type (M= 887.96 BTU, SD = 381.42; t(12) = 2.59, p < .024). As-Executed R&R Work with SSRMS Restraint type (M = 355.89 BTU, SD = 534.65) was not significantly different from As-Planned values (M = 512.69 BTU, SD = 383.34; t(4) = 1.88, p = 0.132). These findings suggest that the energy expended performing R&R Work (Free-Float) is lower in flight than predicted. Accurate predictions of the metabolic cost of EVA are essential for planning and executing successful ISS EVAs. Overall, the current met rate prediction method is similar to actual in-flight values, slightly erring on the side of overestimation. Future work includes analysis of more historical in-flight EVA data to increase the power of the analysis, evaluating the NBL-ISS met rate conversion factor between NBL and ISS tasks, as well as exploring methods of substitution when crewmembers are missing prior task category data.

Lauren Cox↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dual Glovebox Thermal Vacuum Chamber: Testing Capabilities for Spacesuit Arms and Gloves

The development of Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits and hand mobility EVA tasks are complex, high risk, and difficult to test in a simulated space environment. During the early assembly of the International Space Station, the Crew and Thermal Systems Division at NASA JSC was tasked to design a chamber that could use two Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) arms in a simulated space environment versus testing with a full suit. The Dual Glove Box (DGB) Chamber was built and served to help develop EVA tools and operations to assist with Return to Flight for the Space Shuttle after the Columbia accident. With the recent development of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) and new commercial suits through the Extravehicular Activities Services (xEVAS) contract, the DGB can support the need to do suit component testing at thermal extremes and EVA operations without the cost of full suit testing. The DGB can simulate realistic delta pressures, vacuum down to 10^-5 Torr with roughing and cryogenic pumps, and a wide range of shroud temperatures achieved via a combination of Liquid Nitrogen (LN2), conditioned Gaseous Nitrogen (GN2), Infrared (IR) lamps, and heater plates. Recent developmental work has verified operational status of the chamber and expanded the capabilities of the DGB to include thermal contact testing of suit gloves through the development of 2 temperature-controlled grab bars. This paper will discuss the history and capabilities of the DGB, and the chamber’s future role in the development of new spacesuit systems.

Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits↗
NASA NTRS2024

Dual Glovebox Thermal Vacuum Chamber: Testing Capabilities for Spacesuit Arms and Gloves

The development of Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits and hand mobility EVA tasks are complex, high risk, and difficult to test in a simulated space environment. During the early assembly of the International Space Station (ISS), the Crew and Thermal Systems Division (CTSD) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) was tasked to design a chamber that could use two Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) arms and gloves in a simulated space environment versus testing with a full suit. The Dual Glovebox (DGB) Chamber was built and served to help develop EVA tools and operations to assist with Return to Flight for the Space Shuttle after the Columbia accident. With the recent development of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) and new commercial suits through the Extravehicular Activities Services (xEVAS) contract, the DGB can support the need to do suit component testing at thermal extremes and EVA operations without the cost of full suit testing. The DGB can simulate realistic delta pressures, vacuum down to 5x10-4 Torr (0.066 Pa) with roughing and cryogenic pumps, and a wide range of temperatures achieved via a combination of Liquid Nitrogen (LN2), conditioned Gaseous Nitrogen (GN2), Infrared (IR) lamps, and heater cables. Recent developmental work has verified operational status of the chamber and expanded the capabilities of the DGB to include thermal contact testing of suit gloves through two temperature-controlled grab bars. This paper will discuss the history and capabilities of the DGB, and the chamber’s future role in the development of new spacesuit systems.

Extravehicular Activity (EVA)↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dual Glovebox Thermal Vacuum Chamber: Testing Capabilities for Spacesuit Arms and Gloves

The development of Extravehicular Activity (EVA) suits and hand mobility EVA tasks are complex, high risk, and difficult to test in a simulated space environment. During the early assembly of the International Space Station (ISS), the Crew and Thermal Systems Division (CTSD) at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) was tasked to design a chamber that could use two Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) arms and gloves in a simulated space environment versus testing with a full suit. The Dual Glovebox (DGB) Chamber was built and served to help develop EVA tools and operations to assist with Return to Flight for the Space Shuttle after the Columbia accident. With the recent development of the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) and new commercial suits through the Extravehicular Activities Services (xEVAS) contract, the DGB can support the need to do suit component testing at thermal extremes and EVA operations without the cost of full suit testing. The DGB can simulate realistic delta pressures, vacuum down to 5x10-4 Torr (0.066 Pa) with roughing and cryogenic pumps, and a wide range of temperatures achieved via a combination of Liquid Nitrogen (LN2), conditioned Gaseous Nitrogen (GN2), Infrared (IR) lamps, and heater cables. Recent developmental work has verified operational status of the chamber and expanded the capabilities of the DGB to include thermal contact testing of suit gloves through two temperature-controlled grab bars. This paper will discuss the history and capabilities of the DGB, and the chamber’s future role in the development of new spacesuit systems.

Extravehicular Activity (EVA)↗
NASA NTRS1986

Advanced EVA system design requirements study

Design requirements and criteria for the Space Station Advanced Extravehicular Activity System (EVAS) including crew enclosures, portable life support systems, maneuvering propulsion systems, and related extravehicular activity (EVA) support equipment were defined and established. The EVA mission requirements, environments, and medical and physiological requirements, as well as opertional, procedures, and training issues were considered.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2015

Failure Analysis Results and Corrective Actions Implemented for the EMU 3011 Water in the Helmet Mishap

During EVA (Extravehicular Activity) No. 23 aboard the ISS (International Space Station) on 07/16/2013 water entered the EMU (Extravehicular Mobility Unit) helmet resulting in the termination of the EVA (Extravehicular Activity) approximately 1-hour after it began. It was estimated that 1.5-L of water had migrated up the ventilation loop into the helmet, adversely impacting the astronauts hearing, vision and verbal communication. Subsequent on-board testing and ground-based TT and E (Test, Tear-down and Evaluation) of the affected EMU hardware components led to the determination that the proximate cause of the mishap was blockage of all water separator drum holes with a mixture of silica and silicates. The blockages caused a failure of the water separator function which resulted in EMU cooling water spilling into the ventilation loop, around the circulating fan, and ultimately pushing into the helmet. The root cause of the failure was determined to be ground-processing short-comings of the ALCLR (Airlock Cooling Loop Recovery) Ion Filter Beds which led to various levels of contaminants being introduced into the Filters before they left the ground. Those contaminants were thereafter introduced into the EMU hardware on-orbit during ALCLR scrubbing operations. This paper summarizes the failure analysis results along with identified process, hardware and operational corrective actions that were implemented as a result of findings from this investigation.

Steele, John↗
NASA NTRS1998

Expedition 1 Crew Resource Reel

This video shows footage of the Expedition 1 crew, William Shepherd, Yuri Gidzenko, and Sergei Krikalev, training for their stay on the International Space Station. Shepherd is seen training in the Soyuz spacecraft and inspecting the Service Module and Node 1. The three crewmembers are seen training for winter survival and extravehicular activity (in the Neutral Buoyancy Lab). They are taught how to use the fire extinguishers and extravehicular activity tools. Scenes show Gidzenko training in the crew compartment trainer and on the Mir Space Station and Krikalev on the STS-60 mission. A computer animation shows the Soyuz spacecraft docking with the Service Module.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2016

Redesign of the Extravehicular Mobility Unit Airlock Cooling Loop Recovery Assembly

During EVA (Extravehicular Activity) 23 aboard the ISS (International Space Station) on 07/16/2013 an episode of water in the EMU (Extravehicular Mobility Unit) helmet occurred, necessitating a termination of the EVA (Extravehicular Activity) shortly after it began. The root cause of the failure was determined to be ground-processing short-comings of the ALCLR (Airlock Cooling Loop Recovery) Ion Beds which led to various levels of contaminants being introduced into the Ion Beds before they left the ground. The Ion Beds were thereafter used to scrub the failed EMU cooling water loop on-orbit during routine scrubbing operations. The root cause investigation identified several areas for improvement of the ALCLR Assembly which have since been initiated. Enhanced washing techniques for the ALCLR Ion Bed have been developed and implemented. On-orbit cooling water conductivity and pH analysis capability to allow the astronauts to monitor proper operation of the ALCLR Ion Bed during scrubbing operation is being investigation. A simplified means to acquire on-orbit EMU cooling water samples have been designed. Finally, an inherently cleaner organic adsorbent to replace the current lignite-based activated carbon, and a non-separable replacement for the separable mixed ion exchange resin are undergoing evaluation. These efforts are undertaken to enhance the performance and reduce the risk associated with operations to ensure the long-term health of the EMU cooling water circuit.

Steele, John↗
NASA NTRS2016

Redesign of the Extravehicular Mobility Unit Airlock Cooling Loop Recovery Assembly

During EVA (Extravehicular Activity) 23 aboard the ISS (International Space Station) on 07/16/2013 an episode of water in the EMU (Extravehicular Mobility Unit) helmet occurred, necessitating a termination of the EVA (Extravehicular Activity) shortly after it began. The root cause of the failure was determined to be ground-processing short-comings of the ALCLR (Airlock Cooling Loop Recovery) Ion Beds which led to various levels of contaminants being introduced into the Ion Beds before they left the ground. The Ion Beds were thereafter used to scrub the failed EMU cooling water loop on-orbit during routine scrubbing operations. The root cause investigation identified several areas for improvement of the ALCLR Assembly which have since been initiated. Enhanced washing techniques for the ALCLR Ion Bed have been developed and implemented. On-orbit cooling water conductivity and pH analysis capability to allow the astronauts to monitor proper operation of the ALCLR Ion Bed during scrubbing operation is being investigated. A simplified means to acquire on-orbit EMU cooling water samples has been designed. Finally, an inherently cleaner organic adsorbent to replace the current lignite-based activated carbon, and a non-separable replacement for the separable mixed ion exchange resin are undergoing evaluation. These efforts are undertaken to enhance the performance and reduce the risk associated with operations to ensure the long-term health of the EMU cooling water circuit.

Steele, John↗
NASA NTRS2017

Status of the Redesign of the Extravehicular Mobility Unit Airlock Cooling Loop Recovery Assembly

During EVA (Extravehicular Activity) 23 aboard the ISS (International Space Station) on 07/16/2013 an episode of water in the EMU (Extravehicular Mobility Unit) helmet occurred, necessitating a termination of the EVA (Extravehicular Activity) shortly after it began. The root cause of the failure was determined to be ground-processing short-comings of the ALCLR Ion Beds which led to various levels of contaminants being introduced into the Ion Beds before they left the ground. The Ion Beds were thereafter used to perform on-orbit routine scrubbing operations for the EMU cooling water loop which led to the failure. The root cause investigation identified several areas for improvement of the ALCLR Assembly which have since been initiated. Enhanced washing techniques for the ALCLR Ion Bed have been developed and implemented. On-orbit cooling water conductivity and pH analysis capability to allow the astronauts to monitor proper operation of the ALCLR Ion Bed during scrubbing operation have been investigated and are being incorporated. A simplified means to acquire on-orbit EMU cooling water samples has been designed as well. Finally, an inherently cleaner organic adsorbent to replace the current lignite-based activated carbon, and a non-separable replacement for the separable mixed ion exchange resin have been selected. These efforts are being undertaken to enhance the performance and reduce the risk associated with operations to ensure the long-term health of the EMU cooling water circuit. The intent of this paper is to provide an update of the effort to re-design the ALCLR (Airlock Cooling Loop Recovery) hardware. Last year, this effort was in the early stages of concept development and test which was reported in ICES Paper ICES-2016-221. Those phases are now complete and the final outcomes, as well as plans to build and field the hardware, are being reported on.

Steele, John↗
NASA NTRS1975

Apollo experience report: Assessment of metabolic expenditures

A significant effort was made to assess the metabolic expenditure for extravehicular activity on the lunar surface. After evaluation of the real-time data available to the flight controller during extravehicular activity, three independent methods of metabolic assessment were chosen based on the relationship between heart rate and metabolic production, between oxygen consumption and metabolic production, and between the thermodynamics of the liquid-cooled garment and metabolic production. The metabolic assessment procedure is analyzed and discussed. Real-time use of this information by the Apollo flight surgeon is discussed. Results and analyses of the Apollo missions and comments concerning future applications are included.

Waligora, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Evaluation of a Hybrid Elastic EVA Glove

The hybrid elastic design is based upon an American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) glove designed by at the Space Systems Laboratory (SSL) in 1985. This design uses an elastic restraint layer instead of convolute joints to achieve greater dexterity and mobility during EVA (extravehicular activity). Two pilot studies and a main study were conducted using the hybrid elastic glove and 4000-series EMU (extravehicular activity unit) glove. Data on dexterity performance, joint range of motion, grip strength and perceived exertion was assessed for the EMU and hybrid elastic gloves with correlations to a barehanded condition. During this study, 30 test subjects performed multiple test sessions using a hybrid elastic glove and a 4000- series shuttle glove in a 4.3psid pressure environment. Test results to date indicate that the hybrid elastic glove performance is approximately similar to the performance of the 4000-series glove.

Korona, F. Adam↗
NASA NTRS2014

Ionosphere Plasma State Determination in Low Earth Orbit from International Space Station Plasma Monitor

A plasma diagnostic package is deployed on the International Space Station (ISS). The system - a Floating Potential Measurement Unit (FPMU) - is used by NASA to monitor the electrical floating potential of the vehicle to assure astronaut safety during extravehicular activity. However, data from the unit also reflects the ionosphere state and seems to represent an unutilized scientific resource in the form of an archive of scientific plasma state data. The unit comprises a Floating Potential probe and two Langmuir probes. There is also an unused but active plasma impedance probe. The data, at one second cadence, are collected, typically for a two week period surrounding extravehicular activity events. Data is also collected any time a visiting vehicle docks with ISS and also when any large solar events occur. The telemetry system is unusual because the package is mounted on a television camera stanchion and its data is impressed on a video signal that is transmitted to the ground and streamed by internet to two off center laboratory locations. The data quality has in the past been challenged by weaknesses in the integrated ground station and distribution systems. These issues, since mid‐2010, have been largely resolved and the ground stations have been upgraded. Downstream data reduction has been developed using physics based modeling of the electron and ion collecting character in the plasma. Recursive algorithms determine plasma density and temperature from the raw Langmuir probe current voltage sweeps and this is made available in real time for situational awareness. The purpose of this paper is to describe and record the algorithm for data reduction and to show that the Floating probe and Langmuir probes are capable of providing long term plasma state measurement in the ionosphere. Geophysical features such as the Appleton anomaly and high latitude modulation at the edge of the Auroral zones are regularly observed in the nearly circular, 51 deg inclined, 400 km altitude ISS orbit. Evidence of waves in the ion collection current data is seen in geographic zones known to exhibit the spread‐F phenomenon. An anomaly in the current collection characteristic of the cylindrical probe appears also too be organized by the geomagnetic field.

Kramer, Leonard↗
NASA NTRS1973

EVA crew workstation provisions for Skylab and Space Shuttle missions

A synopsis of scheduled extravehicular activities (EVA) for a nominal Skylab mission is presented with an overview of EV workstation equipment developed for the program. Also included are the unprogrammed extravehicular activities and supporting equipment that was quickly developed and retrofitted in a series of successful operations to salvage the crippled Skylab Cluster during the Skylab 1 Mission. Because EVA appears to be a requirement for the Space Shuttle Program, candidate EV workstations are discussed in terms of effective and economical Shuttle payload servicing and maintenance. Several such concepts, which could provide a versatile, portable EV support system, are presented.

Brown, N. E.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Studies Relating to EVA

In this session, Session JA1, the discussion focuses on the following topics: The Staged Decompression to the Hypobaric Atmosphere as a Prophylactic Measure Against Decompression Sickness During Repetitive EVA; A New Preoxygenation Procedure for Extravehicular Activity (EVA); Metabolic Assessments During Extra-Vehicular Activity; Evaluation of Safety of Hypobaric Decompressions and EVA From Positions of Probabilistic Theory; Fatty Acid Composition of Plasma Lipids and Erythrocyte Membranes During Simulation of Extravehicular Activity; Biomedical Studies Relating to Decompression Stress with Simulated EVA, Overview; The Joint Angle and Muscle Signature (JAMS) System - Current Uses and Future Applications; and Experimental Investigation of Cooperative Human-Robotic Roles in an EVA Work Site.

Source record↗