SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “human factors 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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 325 records · Page 18

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advancements in Remote Ground Control Station Operator Pilot in Command Training Program for Beyond Visual Line of Sight Flight Operations

The training program for a Remote Ground Control Station Operator Pilot in Command (R-GCSO PIC) at NASA Langley Research Center marks a pivotal evolution in preparing operators for Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) operations. This program, developed within the Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) project High Density Vertiplex (HDV) subproject, was crafted to bridge the gap between traditional Ground Control Station Operators (GCSO) and R-GCSO PICs, focusing on uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS). It encompassed extensive theoretical and practical training, including hands-on experience with advanced simulators and live flight operations, while ensuring a deep understanding of BVLOS complexities. The training leveraged NASA technologies like the MPATH (Measuring Performance for Autonomy Teaming with Humans) ground control station software and incorporated human factors principles to enhance operational readiness. This paper details the program's development, execution, and the critical insights gained, emphasizing the necessity of continuous adaptation in training methodologies to meet the evolving demands of UAS operations in the National Airspace System.

Ground control station operator↗

NASA NTRS1984

Human factors in cockpit automation

The rapid advance in microprocessor technology has made it possible to automate many functions that were previously performed manually. Several research areas have been identified which are basic to the question of the implementation of automation in the cockpit. One of the identified areas deserving further research is warning and alerting systems. Modern transport aircraft have had one after another warning and alerting systems added, and computer-based cockpit systems make it possible to add even more. Three major areas of concern are: input methods (including voice, keyboard, touch panel, etc.), output methods and displays (from traditional instruments to CRTs, to exotic displays including the human voice), and training for automation. Training for operating highly automatic systems requires considerably more attention than it has been given in the past. Training methods have not kept pace with the advent of flight-deck automation.

Wiener, E. L.↗

NASA NTRS2004

EVA Performance Prediction

Astronaut physical performance capabilities in micro gravity EV A or on planetary surfaces when encumbered by a life support suit and debilitated by a long exposure to micro gravity will be less than unencumbered pre flight capabilities. The big question addressed by human factors engineers is: what can the astronaut be expected to do on EVA or when we arrive at a planetary surface? A second question is: what aids to performance will be needed to enhance the human physical capability? These questions are important for a number of reasons. First it is necessary to carry out accurate planning of human physical demands to ensure that time and energy critical tasks can be carried out with confidence. Second it is important that the crew members (and their ground or planetary base monitors) have a realistic picture of their own capabilities, as excessive fatigue can lead to catastrophic failure. Third it is important to design appropriate equipment to enhance human sensory capabilities, locomotion, materials handling and manipulation. The evidence from physiological research points to musculoskeletal, cardiovascular and neurovestibular degradation during long duration exposure to micro gravity . The evidence from the biomechanics laboratory (and the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory) points to a reduction in range of motion, strength and stamina when encumbered by a pressurized suit. The evidence from a long history of EVAs is that crewmembers are indeed restricted in their physical capabilities. There is a wealth of evidence in the literature on the causes and effects of degraded human performance in the laboratory, in sports and athletics, in industry and in other physically demanding jobs. One approach to this challenge is through biomechanical and performance modeling. Such models must be based on thorough task analysis, reliable human performance data from controlled studies, and functional extrapolations validated in analog contexts. The task analyses currently carried out for EVA activities are based more on extensive domain experience than any formal analytic structure. Conversely, physical task analysis for industrial and structured evidence from training and EV A contexts. Again on earth there is considerable evidence of human performance degradation due to encumbrance and fatigue. These industrial models generally take the form of a discounting equation. The development of performance estimates for space operations, such as timeline predictions for EVA is generally based on specific input from training activity, for example in the NBL or KC135. uniformed services tasks on earth are much more formalized. Human performance data in the space context has two sources: first there is the micro analysis of performance in structured tasks by the space physiology community and second there is the less structured evidence from training and EV A contexts.

Peacock, Brian↗

NASA NTRS2018

Research and Development of The Immersive Simulations and Engineering Environment

March of 2018 marked the conclusion of the primary updates to the immersive Simulations and Engineering Environment (iSEE) at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Many of the problems that had arisen during the previous semester have been addressed and rectified. These included the malfunction to one of the lab's primary routers, the inefficiency of the capture environment, and various interface issues in the analysis software, Jack. This semester was primarily research and development oriented with some focus on implementation of the new hardware and software that was received last semester. The new computers and cameras that arrived sometime during the winter were installed, and the lab received its second operation opportunity. The second operation was a major milestone for the lab, both in terms of what the abilities were and what can be learned from its use. The operation performed was a virtual simulation of a critical task that would occur, if it should be needed, in the Multi Payload Processing Facility. It was done to gather human factors data on its safety and process controls. The technicians were able to come to a number of conclusions about how to perform their task as a result of utilizing iSEE. Another key breakthrough this semester was the introduction to Jack Script, a scripting language built into our analysis software that further extend Jack capabilities. In addition to the aforementioned, many preparations were made for family day, an exposition for KSC families to come out and tour the spaceport. Due to family day being moved to the spring, the video made last fall had to be updated with recent environment changes in preparation for the Family Day demonstrations.

Motion Capture↗

NASA NTRS2000

The Exercise and Environmental Physiology of Extravehicular Activity

Over the history of human expansion into space, extravehicular activity (EVA) has become indispensable for both daily living in weightlessness and for further space exploration. The physiological factors involved in the performance of extensive EVA, necessary for construction and maintenance of the International Space Station and during future human interplanetary missions, require further examination. An understanding of the physiological aspects of exercise and thermoregulation in the EVA environment will help to insure the health, safety, and efficiency of working astronauts. To that end, this review will focus on the interaction of the exercise and environmental aspects of EVA, as well as exercise during spaceflight and ground-based simulations such as bed-rest deconditioning. It will examine inflight exercise thermoregulation, and exercise, muscular strength, supine vs. seated exercise, exercise thermoregulation, and exercise in a hypobaric environment. Due to the paucity of data from controlled human research in this area, it is clear that more scientific studies are needed to insure safe and efficient extravehicular activity.

Cowell, S. A.↗

NASA NTRS1988

SARSCEST (human factors)

People interact with the processes and products of contemporary technology. Individuals are affected by these in various ways and individuals shape them. Such interactions come under the label 'human factors'. To expand the understanding of those to whom the term is relatively unfamiliar, its domain includes both an applied science and applications of knowledge. It means both research and development, with implications of research both for basic science and for development. It encompasses not only design and testing but also training and personnel requirements, even though some unwisely try to split these apart both by name and institutionally. The territory includes more than performance at work, though concentration on that aspect, epitomized in the derivation of the term ergonomics, has overshadowed human factors interest in interactions between technology and the home, health, safety, consumers, children and later life, the handicapped, sports and recreation education, and travel. Two aspects of technology considered most significant for work performance, systems and automation, and several approaches to these, are discussed.

Parsons, H. Mcilvaine↗

NASA NTRS2025

Habitability and Human Factors Assessment (iSHORT, SHAQ, and SHU)

BACKGROUND As long-duration off-planet habitats become a reality, a consideration of habitability and human factors (HF) is crucial. The habitat is more than just a place to live and work. It is also the crew’s perception of the space, and the psychological impacts of size, layout, and usage over time; all of which can support or strain behavioral health and performance (BHP). A previous International Space Station (ISS) habitability study used the iSHORT (Space Habitability Observation Reporting Tool) to collect detailed data about habitability and human factors and inform NASA Standards. Of the previous iSHORT study, only one of the six ISS subjects had a duration of one year; all other ISS and ground analog subjects had shorter mission durations from one week to six months. It is necessary to collect new data with a focus on long-duration exploration missions of > 6 months and on planetary surface habitat design. New data is also needed to compare the iSHORT to other habitability measures. One measure, the SHAQ (Subjective Habitability and Acceptability Questionnaire), assesses the intersection of psychology and habitability. Another complementary measure, the Scale for Habitat Usability (SHU), is a brief subjective scale that captures how habitat design impacts perceived usability of the built environment in relation to task performance. OBJECTIVE Our study aims to (1) understand how individual well-being and team dynamics may relate to HF concerns over time, (2) capture how habitability and HF change over time, (3) compare the three habitability measures (iSHORT, SHAQ, SHU), (4) assess habitats to capture HF design concerns and related BHP impacts of a planetary habitat, and (5) inform future standards for HF design. METHOD Data are being collected on crews living and working in long-duration spaceflight analogs. Individual-level data collections are repeated at regular intervals throughout the missions on several habitat areas, activities, and key equipment (i.e., points of interest). These points of interest (POIs) include the kitchen/galley, crew quarters, and other work and living areas. Assessments include evaluations of privacy, comfort, convenience, control, efficiency, and social density through the lens of subsequent outcomes like sleep, individual performance, group activities performance, stress, mood, and social interactions. Pre- and post-mission evaluations will also allow comparison with homes, pre- and post-mission hotels, and a retrospective reflection of living and working in a long-duration analog. INITIAL DATA COLLECTIONS In this poster, we will describe the measures and data yield. Since the research protocol was designed, the study team has collected iSHORT Standalone four times, nine collections of SHAQ, and three collections of iSHORT with SHAQ. Data collection is ongoing. SUMMARY A novel assessment suite has been developed to further aid the comparison and complementary understanding of the habitability and human factors measures, which will allow for efficient deployment of these measures in analogs and/or spaceflight in near-term research as well as support well-being and performance through design.

J C W Miller↗

NASA NTRS2017

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (ORION)

NASA uses two HRA assessment methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is still expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a PRA model that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more problematic. In order to determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana L.↗

DOE OSTI2025

Inferring demographic and selective histories from population genomic data using a 2-step approach in species with coding-sparse genomes: an application to human data

Abstract The demographic history of a population, and the distribution of fitness effects (DFE) of newly arising mutations in functional genomic regions, are fundamental factors dictating both genetic variation and evolutionary trajectories. Although both demographic and DFE inference has been performed extensively in humans, these approaches have generally either been limited to simple demographic models involving a single population, or, where a complex population history has been inferred, without accounting for the potentially confounding effects of selection at linked sites. Taking advantage of the coding-sparse nature of the genome, we propose a 2-step approach in which coalescent simulations are first used to infer a complex multi-population demographic model, utilizing large non-functional regions that are likely free from the effects of background selection. We then use forward-in-time simulations to perform DFE inference in functional regions, conditional on the complex demography inferred and utilizing expected background selection effects in the estimation procedure. Throughout, recombination and mutation rate maps were used to account for the underlying empirical rate heterogeneity across the human genome. Importantly, within this framework it is possible to utilize and fit multiple aspects of the data, and this inference scheme represents a generalized approach for such large-scale inference in species with coding-sparse genomes.

Soni, Vivak (ORCID:0000000294969562)↗

DOE OSTI2021

Incorporating the Role(s) of Human Actors in Complex System Design for Safety and Security

Traditional systems engineering demonstrates the importance of customer needs in scoping and defining design requirements; yet, in practice, other human stakeholders are often absent from early lifecycle phases. Human factors are often omitted in practice when evaluating and down-selecting design options due to constraints such as time, money, access to user populations, or difficulty in proving system robustness through the inclusion of human behaviors. Advances in systems engineering increasingly include non-technical influences into the design, deployment, operations, and maintenance of interacting components to achieve common performance objectives. Furthermore, such advances highlight the need to better account for the various roles of human actors to achieve desired performance outcomes in complex systems. Many of these efforts seek to infuse lessons and concepts from human factors (enhanced decision-making through Crew Resource Management), systems safety (Rasmussen's “drift toward danger”) and organization science (Giddens' recurrent human acts leading to emergent behaviors) into systems engineering to better understand how socio-technical interactions impact emergent system performance. Safety and security are examples of complex system performance outcomes that are directly impacted by varying roles of human actors. Using security performance of high consequence facilities as a representative use case, this article will outline the System Context Lenses to understand how to include various roles of human actors into systems engineering design. Several exemplar applications of this organizing lenses will be summarized and used to highlight more generalized insights for the broader systems engineering community.

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRS2016

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (Orion)

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) uses two human reliability analysis (HRA) methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate or screening value is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more challenging. In order to determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana↗

NASA NTRS2017

Human Reliability Assessments: Using the Past (Shuttle) to Predict the Future (Orion)

NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) uses two human reliability analysis (HRA) methodologies. The first is a simplified method which is based on how much time is available to complete the action, with consideration included for environmental and personal factors that could influence the human's reliability. This method is expected to provide a conservative value or placeholder as a preliminary estimate. This preliminary estimate or screening value is used to determine which placeholder needs a more detailed assessment. The second methodology is used to develop a more detailed human reliability assessment on the performance of critical human actions. This assessment needs to consider more than the time available, this would include factors such as: the importance of the action, the context, environmental factors, potential human stresses, previous experience, training, physical design interfaces, available procedures/checklists and internal human stresses. The more detailed assessment is expected to be more realistic than that based primarily on time available. When performing an HRA on a system or process that has an operational history, we have information specific to the task based on this history and experience. In the case of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) that is based on a new design and has no operational history, providing a "reasonable" assessment of potential crew actions becomes more challenging. To determine what is expected of future operational parameters, the experience from individuals who had relevant experience and were familiar with the system and process previously implemented by NASA was used to provide the "best" available data. Personnel from Flight Operations, Flight Directors, Launch Test Directors, Control Room Console Operators, and Astronauts were all interviewed to provide a comprehensive picture of previous NASA operations. Verification of the assumptions and expectations expressed in the assessments will be needed when the procedures, flight rules, and operational requirements are developed and then finalized.

DeMott, Diana L.↗

NASA NTRS1998

Human and team performance in extreme environments: Antarctica

Analogous experience is often instructive when attempting to understand human behavior in extreme environments. The current paper refers to the experiences of polar explorers and remote duty personnel to help identify the factors that influence individual and team performance when small groups are isolated and confined for long durations. The principal factors discussed include organizational structure, intracrew communications, interpersonal relations, leadership style, personnel selection, and training. Behavioral implications also are addressed for the design of procedures and equipment to facilitate sustained individual and group performance under conditions of isolation and confinement. To be consistent with the theme of the symposium, this paper emphasizes the crew requirements for an international expedition to Mars.

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS2010

Results and Lessons Learned from Performance Testing of Humans in Spacesuits in Simulated Reduced Gravity

The Apollo lunar EVA experience revealed challenges with suit stability and control-likely a combination of mass, mobility, and center of gravity (CG) factors. The EVA Physiology, Systems and Performence (EPSP) Project is systematically working with other NASA projects, labs, and facilities to lead a series of studies to understand the role of suit mass, weight, CG, and other parameters on astronaut performance in partial gravity environments.

Chappell, Steven P.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Deep Space Habitat Team: HEFT Phase 2 Effects

HEFT was a NASA-wide team that performed analyses of architectures for human exploration beyond LEO, evaluating technical, programmatic, and budgetary issues to support decisions at the highest level of the agency in HSF planning. HEFT Phase I (April - September, 2010) and Phase II (September - December, 2010) examined a broad set of Human Exploration of Near Earth Objects (NEOs) Design Reference Missions (DRMs), evaluating such factors as elements, performance, technologies, schedule, and cost. At end of HEFT Phase 1, an architecture concept known as DRM 4a represented the best available option for a full capability NEO mission. Within DRM4a, the habitation system was provided by Deep Space Habitat (DSH), Multi-Mission Space Exploration Vehicle (MMSEV), and Crew Transfer Vehicle (CTV) pressurized elements. HEFT Phase 2 extended DRM4a, resulting in DRM4b. Scrubbed element-level functionality assumptions and mission Concepts of Operations. Habitation Team developed more detailed concepts of the DSH and the DSH/MMSEV/CTV Conops, including functionality and accommodations, mass & volume estimates, technology requirements, and DDT&E costs. DRM 5 represented an effort to reduce cost by scaling back on technologies and eliminating the need for the development of an MMSEV.

Toups, Larry D.↗

NASA NTRS2014

A Historical Analysis of Crane Mishaps at Kennedy Space Center

Cranes and hoists are widely used in many areas. Crane accidents and handling mishaps are responsible for injuries, costly equipment damage, and program delays. Most crane accidents are caused by preventable factors. Understanding these factors is critical when designing cranes and preparing lift plans. Analysis of previous accidents provides insight into current recommendations for crane safety. Cranes and hoists are used throughout Kennedy Space Center to lift everything from machine components to critical flight hardware. Unless they are trained crane operators, most NASA employees and contractors do not need to undergo specialized crane training and may not understand the safety issues surrounding the use of cranes and hoists. A single accident with a crane or hoist can injure or kill people, cause severe equipment damage, and delay or terminate a program. Handling mishaps can also have a significant impact on the program. Simple mistakes like bouncing or jarring a load, or moving the crane down when it should go up, can damage fragile flight hardware and cause major delays in processing. Hazardous commodities (high pressure gas, hypergolic propellants, and solid rocket motors) can cause life safety concerns for the workers performing the lifting operations. Most crane accidents are preventable with the correct training and understanding of potential hazards. Designing the crane with human factors taken into account can prevent many accidents. Engineers are also responsible for preparing lift plans where understanding the safety issues can prevent or mitigate potential accidents. Cranes are widely used across many areas of KSC. Failure of these cranes often leads to injury, high damage costs, and significant delays in program objectives. Following a basic set of principles and procedures during design, fabrication, testing, regular use, and maintenance can significantly minimize many of these failures. As the accident analysis shows, load drops are often caused or influenced by human factors. Therefore, proper training and understanding of crane safety throughout the workforce is critical. It is important that the engineers designing the cranes, lift planners preparing the lift plans, operators performing the lifts, and training officers conducting the operator training all understand the problems that can happen with cranes and how to ensure the safety of the workforce and equipment being lifted.

Materials Handling↗

NASA NTRS2010

Identification and Characterization of Key Human Performance Issues and Research in the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen)

This report identifies key human-performance-related issues associated with Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) research in the NASA NextGen-Airspace Project. Four Research Focus Areas (RFAs) in the NextGen-Airspace Project - namely Separation Assurance (SA), Airspace Super Density Operations (ASDO), Traffic Flow Management (TFM), and Dynamic Airspace Configuration (DAC) - were examined closely. In the course of the research, it was determined that the identified human performance issues needed to be analyzed in the context of NextGen operations rather than through basic human factors research. The main gaps in human factors research in NextGen were found in the need for accurate identification of key human-systems related issues within the context of specific NextGen concepts and better design of the operational requirements for those concepts. By focusing on human-system related issues for individual concepts, key human performance issues for the four RFAs were identified and described in this report. In addition, mixed equipage airspace with components of two RFAs were characterized to illustrate potential human performance issues that arise from the integration of multiple concepts.

Lee, Paul U.↗

NASA NTRS1987

Exploring flight crew behaviour

A programme of research into the determinants of flight crew performance in commercial and military aviation is described, along with limitations and advantages associated with the conduct of research in such settings. Preliminary results indicate significant relationships among personality factors, attitudes regarding flight operations, and crew performance. The potential theoretical and applied utility of the research and directions for further research are discussed.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗