Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “human performance”

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

Measuring Astronaut Performance in Microgravity: Loads and Modeling

Quantitative analysis of human performance in microgravity is important for both scientific investigations and spacecraft engineering design. By collecting and evaluating the kinematics and kinetics data of astronauts in space, it becomes possible to characterize human motor strategies, postural behavior in weightlessness, improve the design of orbital modules, help maintain a quiescent microgravity for acceleration-sensitive material science and life science experiments (NASA JSC, 1996), and optimize the human operative capabilities during long-duration space missions. Hence, there is a need for a precise measurement of the forces and moments exerted by the astronauts on the space station and their postures and movements.

Newman, D.↗

Implications of Safety and Operational Features of Small, Advanced Reactors for the Evaluation of Important Human Actions

The design and operational characteristics of non-light water reactors are likely to change the role of human actions in safety function management and the types of human actions that are deemed important. The objectives of this report are to: • Identify the implications of small, advanced reactor design characteristics on human performance and the changing role of human actions in the management of safety functions. • Identify the methods that may be used to identify important human actions. • Identify how HFE safety reviewers can help ensure that the methods adequately model human actions to identify those that are important to safety. We identified the implications of small, advanced reactor characteristics on the role of personnel in safety function management. Then we addressed how designers can identify which human actions are important to safety using both probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) and deterministic analyses. PRA identifies important human actions using risk-importance criteria. Deterministically identified important human actions include those identified by analyses of situations such as transients and accidents and defense in depth. In all cases, the acceptability of the analyses is dependent on the modeling, quantification, and criterion selection to determine which human actions are important. How well the designers address these processes determines the acceptability of their methodology.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

NASA's Telerobotics R & D Program - Status and future directions

NASA's telerobotics technology program is described as well as the process for the transfer of this technology to the Space Station, and some of the implications of the technology for station design and operations, including those for international cooperation. A diagram is presented of the NASREM control heirarchy with the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology telerobot testbed architecture superimposed. In telerobotics, the following areas were identified as possible subjects for developing data to support international standards: (1) task boards, (2) system performance measures on task boards, (3) human performance measures on task boards with teleoperation, and (4) autonomous-telerobotic-teleoperated performance comparisons.

Pivirotto, Donna Shirley↗

Towards a Mars base - Critical steps for life support on the moon and beyond

In providing crew life support for future exploration missions, overall exploration objectives will drive the life support solutions selected. Crew size, mission tasking, and exploration strategy will determine the performance required from life support systems. Human performance requirements, for example, may be offset by the availability of robotic assistance. Once established, exploration requirements for life support will be weighed against the financial and technical risks of developing new technologies and systems. Other considerations will include the demands that a particular life support strategy will make on planetary surface site selection, and the availability of precursor mission data to support EVA and in situ resource recovery planning. As space exploration progresses, the diversity of life support solutions that are implemented is bound to increase.

Rummel, John D.↗

Mars Transit/Surface Habitat Commonality Studies

- Perform fundamental research into biomechanics and human performance at variable gravities using the unique capabilities of underwater simulation - Microgravity - Lunar - Mars - Create limited habitat simulation with various task simulators which can be adapted across different gravities - Tie into detailed design of variable gravity habitat by leveraging senior capstone course

David Akin↗

Perceptual learning through optimization of attentional weighting: human versus optimal Bayesian learner

Human performance in visual detection, discrimination, identification, and search tasks typically improves with practice. Psychophysical studies suggest that perceptual learning is mediated by an enhancement in the coding of the signal, and physiological studies suggest that it might be related to the plasticity in the weighting or selection of sensory units coding task relevant information (learning through attention optimization). We propose an experimental paradigm (optimal perceptual learning paradigm) to systematically study the dynamics of perceptual learning in humans by allowing comparisons to that of an optimal Bayesian algorithm and a number of suboptimal learning models. We measured improvement in human localization (eight-alternative forced-choice with feedback) performance of a target randomly sampled from four elongated Gaussian targets with different orientations and polarities and kept as a target for a block of four trials. The results suggest that the human perceptual learning can occur within a lapse of four trials (<1 min) but that human learning is slower and incomplete with respect to the optimal algorithm (23.3% reduction in human efficiency from the 1st-to-4th learning trials). The greatest improvement in human performance, occurring from the 1st-to-2nd learning trial, was also present in the optimal observer, and, thus reflects a property inherent to the visual task and not a property particular to the human perceptual learning mechanism. One notable source of human inefficiency is that, unlike the ideal observer, human learning relies more heavily on previous decisions than on the provided feedback, resulting in no human learning on trials following a previous incorrect localization decision. Finally, the proposed theory and paradigm provide a flexible framework for future studies to evaluate the optimality of human learning of other visual cues and/or sensory modalities.

Non-NASA Center↗

BIOASTRONAUTICS

Bioastronautics - space environment, human performance

PHYSIOLOGY↗

International Space Station Human Behavior and Performance Competency Model: Volume I

This document defines Human Behavior and Performance (HBP) competencies that are recommended to be included as requirements to participate in international long duration missions. They were developed in response to the Multilateral Crew Operations Panel (MMOP) request to develop HBP training requirements for the International Space Station (ISS). The competency model presented here was developed by the ITCB HBPT WG and forms the basis for determining the HBP training curriculum for long duration crewmembers. This document lists specific HBP competencies and behaviors required of astronauts/cosmonauts who participate in ISS expedition and other international longduration missions. Please note that this model does not encompass all competencies required. For example, outside the scope of this document are cognitive skills and abilities, including but not limited to concentration, memorization, perception, imagination, and thinking. It is assumed that these skills, which are crucial in terms of human behavior and performance, are considered during selection phase since such professionally significant qualities of the operator should be taken into consideration in order to ensure sufficient baseline levels that can be further improved during general astronaut training. Also, technical competencies, even though critical for crewmembers, are beyond the scope of this document. It should also be noted that the competencies in this model (and subsequent objectives) are not intended to limit the internal activities or training programs of any international partner.

Schmidt, Lacey↗

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↗

Circadian rhythms of performance: new trends

This brief review is concerned with how human performance efficiency changes as a function of time of day. It presents an overview of some of the research paradigms and conceptual models that have been used to investigate circadian performance rhythms. The influence of homeostatic and circadian processes on performance regulation is discussed. The review also briefly presents recent mathematical models of alertness that have been used to predict cognitive performance. Related topics such as interindividual differences and the postlunch dip are presented.

Review, Tutorial↗

Comparison of Physical Workload Across Eva-Simulation Analog Environments: Hybrid Space Suit Simulator and Pressurized Suit Testing

NASA conducts research, testing, and training across a variety of analog environments to support characterization of human performance during Extravehicular Activities (EVAs). Time utilizing pressurized suits in an offloaded environment is both limited and expensive, making it challenging to carry out extensive research with these suits. The Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations (H-3PO) Laboratory at NASA Johnson Space Center designed a Hybrid Space Suit Simulator (HS3) as a low-cost, workload approximator and easy access research tool to provide relevant physical and cognitive workloads during simulated EVAs. A pilot study was conducted in a 1g analog environment where six healthy subjects (3 male, 3 female) underwent simulated 5-hour EVAs in the HS3. This study used a COSMED K5 portable metabolic analyzer and a Polar H10 heart rate monitor to evaluate physical workload during the EVAs. For direct comparison, EVA tasks and timelines were modeled after a similar study conducted in pressurized suits (Mark-III spacesuit, n=3 male; small xPGS spacesuit, n=3 female) at NASA’s Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) offloaded to Lunar gravity (1/6 g). The 1g HS3 data demonstrated increased metabolic rate when compared to pressurized, Lunar-offloaded suited simulated EVAs for certain tasks including the kneeling scoop (HS3: 1194±199 BTU/hr, ARGOS: 860±170 BTU/hr, p < 0.05) and 20 lb object relocation (HS3: 1651±136 BTU/hr, ARGOS: 1048±252.8 BTU/hr, p < 0.05), but it did not demonstrate any significant differences in heart rate (p > 0.05). Other simulated EVA tasks, such as a 500 m traverse (HS3: 1431±177 BTU/hr, ARGOS: 1212±294 BTU/hr, p > 0.05), showed similar workload profiles with no significant workload differences between HS3 and ARGOS. The HS3 is a useful research tool for increasing workloads in EVA research without pressurized suits, though it may overestimate workload during certain EVA tasks when used in 1g environments.

Zachary Wusk↗

Memory monitoring by animals and humans

The authors asked whether animals and humans would use similarly an uncertain response to escape indeterminate memories. Monkeys and humans performed serial probe recognition tasks that produced differential memory difficulty across serial positions (e.g., primacy and recency effects). Participants were given an escape option that let them avoid any trials they wished and receive a hint to the trial's answer. Across species, across tasks, and even across conspecifics with sharper or duller memories, monkeys and humans used the escape option selectively when more indeterminate memory traces were probed. Their pattern of escaping always mirrored the pattern of their primary memory performance across serial positions. Signal-detection analyses confirm the similarity of the animals' and humans' performances. Optimality analyses assess their efficiency. Several aspects of monkeys' performance suggest the cognitive sophistication of their decisions to escape.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗

The Unintended Consequences of Focusing on Human Error (And How You Can Help)

The literature on human performance is rich with findings of cognitive failures and methods to identify, label, and measure them. In many real-world contexts, however, outcomes are driven far more by successful than failed cognition. Designers of systems intended for human use, in an effort to be “data driven,” rely upon findings from the cognitive performance literature to inform their system designs. When most available data are about human error, data-driven designs focus on the human primarily as a source of failure. Designs intended to support or replace humans often fail to acknowledge or understand the capabilities that humans routinely contribute to successful performance. Consequently, designs intended to “protect” the system from “error-prone” humans can design-out the capability for the human to effectively intervene or adapt. The development of paradigms to study successful human performance represents a significant and largely untapped opportunity for research in cognition.

Jon Holbrook↗