Results for “Cabin” — Page 2

NASA NTRS1987

Treated cabin acoustic prediction using statistical energy analysis

The application of statistical energy analysis (SEA) to the modeling and design of helicopter cabin interior noise control treatment is demonstrated. The information presented here is obtained from work sponsored at NASA Langley for the development of analytic modeling techniques and the basic understanding of cabin noise. Utility and executive interior models are developed directly from existing S-76 aircraft designs. The relative importance of panel transmission loss (TL), acoustic leakage, and absorption to the control of cabin noise is shown using the SEA modeling parameters. It is shown that the major cabin noise improvement below 1000 Hz comes from increased panel TL, while above 1000 Hz it comes from reduced acoustic leakage and increased absorption in the cabin and overhead cavities.

Yoerkie, Charles A.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Cabin fuselage structural design with engine installation and control system

Design requirements for the cabin, cabin system, flight controls, engine installation, and wing-fuselage interface that provide adequate interior volume for occupant seating, cabin ingress and egress, and safety are presented. The fuselage structure must be sufficient to meet the loadings specified in the appropriate sections of Federal Aviation Regulation Part 23. The critical structure must provide a safe life of 10(exp 6) load cycles and 10,000 operational mission cycles. The cabin seating and controls must provide adjustment to account for various pilot physiques and to aid in maintenance and operation of the aircraft. Seats and doors shall not bind or lockup under normal operation. Cabin systems such as heating and ventilation, electrical, lighting, intercom, and avionics must be included in the design. The control system will consist of ailerons, elevator, and rudders. The system must provide required deflections with a combination of push rods, bell cranks, pulleys, and linkages. The system will be free from slack and provide smooth operation without binding. Environmental considerations include variations in temperature and atmospheric pressure, protection against sand, dust, rain, humidity, ice, snow, salt/fog atmosphere, wind and gusts, and shock and vibration. The following design goals were set to meet the requirements of the statement of work: safety, performance, manufacturing and cost. To prevent the engine from penetrating the passenger area in the event of a crash was the primary safety concern. Weight and the fuselage aerodynamics were the primary performance concerns. Commonality and ease of manufacturing were major considerations to reduce cost.

Balakrishnan, Tanapaal↗

NASA NTRS2003

Secure Cabin Exercise Briefing

This viewgraph presentation provides an overview of a simulation exercise designed to determine the estimated time required to configure a commercial aircraft cabin for safe transit of atmospheric turbulence. Simulations are to be carried out in a number of wide-body and narrow-body aircraft cabins using professional cabin crews and paid passenger subjects. A number of variables are considered including passenger load, flight attendant compliment, cabin class and cabin activities. Various scenarios are also being played out in the exercises.

Bogue, Rod↗

NASA NTRS2006

A Comprehensive Assessment of Biologicals Contained Within Commercial Airliner Cabin Air

Both culture-based and culture-independent, biomarker-targeted microbial enumeration and identification technologies were employed to estimate total microbial and viral burden and diversity within the cabin air of commercial airliners. Samples from each of twenty flights spanning three commercial carriers were collected via air-impingement. When the total viable microbial population was estimated by assaying relative concentrations of the universal energy carrier ATP, values ranged from below detection limits (BDL) to 4.1 x 106 cells/cubic m of air. The total viable microbial population was extremely low in both of Airline A (approximately 10% samples) and C (approximately 18% samples) compared to the samples collected aboard flights on Airline A and B (approximately 70% samples). When samples were collected as a function of time over the course of flights, a gradual accumulation of microbes was observed from the time of passenger boarding through mid-flight, followed by a sharp decline in microbial abundance and viability from the initiation of descent through landing. It is concluded in this study that only 10% of the viable microbes of the cabin air were cultivable and suggested a need to employ state-of-the art molecular assay that measures both cultivable and viable-but-non-cultivable microbes. Among the cultivable bacteria, colonies of Acinetobacter sp. were by far the most profuse in Phase I, and Gram-positive bacteria of the genera Staphylococcus and Bacillus were the most abundant during Phase II. The isolation of the human pathogens Acinetobacter johnsonii, A. calcoaceticus, Janibacter melonis, Microbacterium trichotecenolyticum, Massilia timonae, Staphylococcus saprophyticus, Corynebacterium lipophiloflavum is concerning, as these bacteria can cause meningitis, septicemia, and a handful of sometimes fatal diseases and infections. Molecular microbial community analyses exhibited presence of the alpha-, beta-, gamma-, and delta- proteobacteria, as well as Gram-positive bacteria, Fusobacteria, Cyanobacteria, Deinococci, Bacterioidetes, Spirochetes, and Planctomyces in varying abundance. Neisseria meningitidis rDNA sequences were retrieved in great abundance from Airline A followed by Streptococcus oralis/mitis sequences. Pseudomonas synxantha sequences dominated Airline B clone libraries, followed by those of N. meningitidis and S. oralis/mitis. In Phase II, Airline C, sequences representative of more than 113 species, enveloping 12 classes of bacteria, were retrieved. Proteobacterial sequences were retrieved in greatest frequency (58% of all clone sequences), followed in short order by those stemming from Gram-positives bacteria (31% of all clone sequences). As for overall phylogenetic breadth, Gram-positive and alpha-proteobacteria seem to have a higher affinity for international flights, whereas beta-and gamma-proteobacteria are far more common about domestic cabin air parcels in Airline C samples. Ultimately, the majority of microbial species circulating throughout the cabin airs of commercial airliners are commensal, infrequently pathogenic normal flora of the human nasopharynx and respiratory system. Many of these microbes likely originate from the oral and nasal cavities, and lungs of passengers and flight crew and are disseminated unknowingly via routine conversation, coughing, sneezing, and stochastic passing of fomites. The data documented in this study will be useful to generate a baseline microbial population database and can be utilized to develop biosensor instrumentation for monitoring microbial quality of cabin or urban air.

microbial diversity↗

NASA NTRS2011

Impacts of an Ammonia Leak on the Cabin Atmosphere of the International Space Station

Toxic chemical release into the cabin atmosphere is one of the three major emergency scenarios identified on the International Space Station (ISS). The release of anhydrous ammonia, the coolant used in the U.S. On-orbit Segment (USOS) External Active Thermal Control Subsystem (EATCS), into the ISS cabin atmosphere is one of the most serious toxic chemical release cases identified on board ISS. The USOS Thermal Control System (TCS) includes an Internal Thermal Control Subsystem (ITCS) water loop and an EATCS ammonia loop that transfer heat at the interface heat exchanger (IFHX). Failure modes exist that could cause a breach within the IFHX. This breach would result in high pressure ammonia from the EATCS flowing into the lower pressure ITCS water loop. As the pressure builds in the ITCS loop, it is likely that the gas trap, which has the lowest maximum design pressure within the ITCS, would burst and cause ammonia to enter the ISS atmosphere. It is crucial to first characterize the release of ammonia into the ISS atmosphere in order to develop methods to properly mitigate the environmental risk. This paper will document the methods used to characterize an ammonia leak into the ISS cabin atmosphere. A mathematical model of the leak was first developed in order to define the flow of ammonia into the ISS cabin atmosphere based on a series of IFHX rupture cases. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) methods were then used to model the dispersion of the ammonia throughout the ISS cabin and determine localized effects and ventilation effects on the dispersion of ammonia. Lastly, the capabilities of the current on-orbit systems to remove ammonia were reviewed and scrubbing rates of the ISS systems were defined based on the ammonia release models. With this full characterization of the release of ammonia from the USOS TCS, an appropriate mitigation strategy that includes crew and system emergency response procedures, personal protection equipment use, and atmosphere monitoring and scrubbing hardware can be established.

Duchesne, Stephanie M.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Impacts of an Ammonia Leak on the Cabin Atmosphere of the International Space Station

Toxic chemical release into the cabin atmosphere is one of the three major emergency scenarios identified on the International Space Station (ISS). The release of anhydrous ammonia, the coolant used in the U.S. On-orbit Segment (USOS) External Active Thermal Control Subsystem (EATCS), into the ISS cabin atmosphere is one of the most serious toxic chemical release cases identified on board ISS. The USOS Thermal Control System (TCS) includes an Internal Thermal Control Subsystem (ITCS) water loop and an EATCS ammonia loop that transfer heat at the interface heat exchanger (IFHX). Failure modes exist that could cause a breach within the IFHX. This breach would result in high pressure ammonia from the EATCS flowing into the lower pressure ITCS water loop. As the pressure builds in the ITCS loop, it is likely that the gas trap, which has the lowest maximum design pressure within the ITCS, would burst and cause ammonia to enter the ISS atmosphere. It is crucial to first characterize the release of ammonia into the ISS atmosphere in order to develop methods to properly mitigate the environmental risk. This paper will document the methods used to characterize an ammonia leak into the ISS cabin atmosphere. A mathematical model of the leak was first developed in order to define the flow of ammonia into the ISS cabin atmosphere based on a series of IFHX rupture cases. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) methods were then used to model the dispersion of the ammonia throughout the ISS cabin and determine localized effects and ventilation effects on the dispersion of ammonia. Lastly, the capabilities of the current on-orbit systems to remove ammonia were reviewed and scrubbing rates of the ISS systems were defined based on the ammonia release models. With this full characterization of the release of ammonia from the USOS TCS, an appropriate mitigation strategy that includes crew and system emergency response procedures, personal protection equipment use, and atmosphere monitoring and scrubbing hardware can be established.

Duchesne, Stephanie M.↗

NASA NTRS2019

The Impacts of Cabin Atmosphere Quality Standards and Control Loads on Atmosphere Revitalization Process Design

Maintaining the cabin atmosphere’s pressure, composition, and quality within specified parameters is a necessity for successful crewed space exploration missions. A properly maintained environment minimizes health impacts on the occupants and maximizes their comfort. The challenge is to accomplish this outcome economically. The insight gained during the International Space Station’s (ISS) operational lifetime is driving toward more challenging cabin atmospheric quality standards for future exploration missions. At the same time, the metabolic loads are increasing to accommodate a broader crew body size range and more rigorous exercise protocols to mitigate health effects associated with long duration microgravity exposure. Compounding this situation is new process equipment for handling trash and waste that may vent contaminants into the cabin. The limits placed on the cabin atmospheric quality parameters combined with the contaminant load define the design space for the atmosphere revitalization (AR) subsystem technologies to be deployed aboard the spacecraft. The impacts of changes to cabin atmospheric quality standards and contamination loads are evaluated and implications to future crewed exploration missions are explored.

Perry, Jay L.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Compartment Fire Modeling of a Crew Cabin in 1-g and Lunar-g

A fire inside a spacecraft poses one of the greatest dangers to the crew and mission success. As missions become more complex and longer in duration, the risk of a fire becomes more probable and catastrophic. A greater understanding of the effects of a fire inside a crewed vehicle at potential exploration atmospheres is needed. These exploration atmospheres, such as those being proposed for upcoming Lunar missions, include higher oxygen concentrations and lower pressures, also known as Normoxic conditions. Full scale fire testing, such as those performed during previous space programs, is the most straightforward way to obtain this understanding. These tests are difficult to implement in 1-g and even more challenging to attempt in Lunar-g. Modeling can help inform experiments aimed at determining flammability properties of common materials at exploration atmospheres, as well as determine the effect a fire has inside a spacecraft. A model can also be easily simulated in Lunar-g to predict the effect of gravity on fire propagation. This work focuses on a model of a theoretical partial crew cabin, with potential fire sources being a laptop and a Nomex sleeping bag. A simulation of the crew cabin during a high Heat Release Rate (HRR) fire and low HRR fire at 1-g was compared to simulations at Lunar-g. It was found that in both the low and high HRR cases, the temperature in the cabin was higher in the Lunar-g case than in the 1-g case. This is likely due to the hot products moving out the door of the crew cabin faster in the 1-g case. Modeling case studies like these will help guide future full-scale flammability experiments on Earth and allow for the prediction of fire spread in a Lunar gravity environment in order to design a safer crew cabin.

Fire Safety↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Sleep Obtained by Cabin Crewmembers during a Long-haul Flight

Sleep loss and circadian disruption pose a significant risk in safety-sensitive occupations. In aviation, many studies have demonstrated how inflight rest locations influence alertness and performance among pilots, but few studies have evaluated cabin crew. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate sleep outcomes among cabin crewmembers sleeping in a bunk compared to a jump seat during one long-haul route. Thirty-one (6 male) cabin crewmembers (age M = 30, SD = +/-13) flew the same long-haul route (outbound and return) with a flight duration of 10:41 (± 0:14) hours. Participants were randomly assigned to fly on an aircraft with a bunk or a jump seat for their sleep opportunity. Participants wore an Actiwatch (Phillips-Respironics Spectrum) throughout the entire study and completed a sleep diary at bedtime and upon waking. During flight they completed a nap diary entering the start time of the inflight sleep (if any) and the duration. Sixty-five flights (32 outbound and 33 return) were included in the analyses. Seventy-seven percent of the flights had a bunk and 23% had a jump seat. Crewmembers obtained M = 146.46 (± 67.20) minutes of rest out of which they slept M = 125.33 (± 64.91) minutes in the bunk. While using the jump seat, crewmembers obtained M = 169.53 (± 133.30) minutes of rest out of which they slept M = 142.92 (± 149.72) minutes. When crewmembers slept in the bunk, sleep latency was shorter (M = 13.69 ± 12.64 minutes) and efficiency was better (M = 76.16 ± 16.09 %) compared to the jump seat (sleep onset: M = 16.77 ± 13.89 minutes; sleep efficiency: M = 60.64 ± 17.42 %). We found that cabin crewmembers slept for longer time when they used the jump seat. They fell asleep faster and their sleep efficiency was better when using the bunk compared to the jump seat. Further research is needed to understand how sleep quality and subsequent performance are influenced by sleep opportunity in a bunk compared to a jump seat.

cabin crew↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Sleep Obtained by Cabin Crewmembers during a Long-haul Flight

Sleep loss and circadian disruption pose a significant risk in safety-sensitive occupations. In aviation, many studies have demonstrated how inflight rest locations influence alertness and performance among pilots, but few studies have evaluated cabin crew. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate sleep outcomes among cabin crewmembers sleeping in a bunk compared to a jump seat during one long-haul route. Thirty-one (6 male) cabin crewmembers (age M = 30, SD = +/-13) flew the same long-haul route (outbound and return) with a flight duration of 10:41 (± 0:14) hours. Participants were randomly assigned to fly on an aircraft with a bunk or a jump seat for their sleep opportunity. Participants wore an Actiwatch (Phillips-Respironics Spectrum) throughout the entire study and completed a sleep diary at bedtime and upon waking. During flight they completed a nap diary entering the start time of the inflight sleep (if any) and the duration. Sixty-five flights (32 outbound and 33 return) were included in the analyses. Seventy-seven percent of the flights had a bunk and 23% had a jump seat. Crewmembers obtained M = 146.46 (± 67.20) minutes of rest out of which they slept M = 125.33 (± 64.91) minutes in the bunk. While using the jump seat, crewmembers obtained M = 169.53 (± 133.30) minutes of rest out of which they slept M = 142.92 (± 149.72) minutes. When crewmembers slept in the bunk, sleep latency was shorter (M = 13.69 ± 12.64 minutes) and efficiency was better (M = 76.16 ± 16.09 %) compared to the jump seat (sleep onset: M = 16.77 ± 13.89 minutes; sleep efficiency: M = 60.64 ± 17.42 %). We found that cabin crewmembers slept for longer time when they used the jump seat. They fell asleep faster and their sleep efficiency was better when using the bunk compared to the jump seat. Further research is needed to understand how sleep quality and subsequent performance are influenced by sleep opportunity in a bunk compared to a jump seat.

cabin crewmembers↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Where and How Well Do Cabin Crew Sleep During Long-Haul Flights?

INTRODUCTION: Sleep loss and circadian disruption pose a significant risk in aviation. Many studies have shown that inflight rest locations influence alertness and performance among pilots, but few studies have evaluated cabin crew. The aim of this research was to assess sleep outcomes among cabin crewmembers sleeping in a bunk during both outbound and inbound compared to alternating sleep in a bunk or a jump seat during one long-haul route. METHODS: Twenty-nine (5 male) cabin crewmembers (Mage = 30.61, SD = 2.91) flew the same long-haul route (outbound and inbound) with a flight duration of 10:41 (± 0:14) hours. Participants were randomly assigned to fly on an aircraft with a bunk in both directions or to fly an aircraft with a bunk in one direction and with a high comfort jump seat (HCJS) in the other direction for their sleep opportunity. They wore an Actiwatch throughout the entire study and completed a sleep diary at bedtime and upon waking for each sleep opportunity. Seventy-seven percent of the flights had a bunk and 23% had a HCJS. A series of mixed-effects models were performed to assess the differences in several sleep parameters when crewmembers slept in the bunk during both directions of the flight (bunk-only) compared to sleep obtained in the HCJS during one direction and bunk in the other (bunk+HCJS). RESULTS: Fifty-seven flights were included in the analyses. There were significant differences between sleep time (b = 22.56, SE = 9.07, p = .02, Hedges’ g = -0.65) and sleep efficiency (b = 16.75, SE = 4.49, p = .001, Hedges’ g = -1.07) obtained in bunk-only vs. bunk+HCJS. Crewmembers obtained more sleep and had better sleep efficiency when they slept only in the bunk compared to bunk+HCJS. DISCUSSION: Our results showed that cabin crewmembers slept longer and had better sleep efficiency when they used the bunk. Further research is needed to understand how subjective sleepiness and subsequent performance are influenced by sleep opportunity in a bunk-only compared to bunk+HCJS.

long-haul↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Cabin Crew Alertness and Performance During Long-Haul Flights

INTRODUCTION: -Sleep loss and circadian disruption pose a significant risk in aviation. -Previous literature has shown that inflight rest facilities influence alertness and performance among pilots, but few studies have evaluated cabin crew. -The aim of this research was to assess alertness and performance among cabin crew members sleeping in different rest locations during a long-haul out-and-back trip. METHODS: -Twenty-nine cabin crewmembers flew the same long-haul route (outbound and inbound). -Participants were randomly assigned to fly on an aircraft with a bunk in both directions or to fly an aircraft with a bunk in one direction and with a high comfort jump seat (HCJS) in the other direction. -Throughout the study they completed a Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) and a 5-minute Psychomotor Vigilance Task (PVT) at the beginning and at the end of each flight. RESULTS: -A series of mixed-effects models were performed to assess the changes in KSS and PVT when crewmembers slept in the bunk during both directions of flight (bunk-only) compared to when sleep was obtained in the HCJS during one direction and bunk in the other (bunk + HCJS). -There was no significant difference in KSS alertness between the two conditions. - There were no significant differences in PVT response speed or lapses between the two conditions. CONCLUSIONS: -Limitations: small number of participants. Our study stopped abruptly because of the COVID-19 pandemic which limited our sample size. -Further research is needed to understand how other factors such as duty start time and workload might influence the sleep of cabin crewmembers during long-haul flights.

long-haul↗

NASA NTRS1964

Space-Cabin Atmospheres: Part II - Fire and Blast Hazards. A Literature Review

The rapid evolution of aircraft and, lately, space vehicles has brought with it the ever-increasing difficulty of designing for prevention of fires and explosions. The present-day sealed cabin with its limited work space, unusual atmospheric constituents, and lack of flexibility in emergency situations has brought new and ill-defined hazards into the picture. In the past, numerous data have been compiled on the fire and explosion characteristics of all things combustible. Unfortunately, much of the material is not pertinent to the actual operational problems in space. The confusion and controversy arising from attempts to evaluate the space-cabin fire problem appear to stem from past failure to compile the scattered data and to expose it to critical review and selection. In the compilation that follows, an attempt has been made to review the best available data that was deemed actually pertinent to the present problem. The effects of unusual atmospheres have been emphasized, but, as will soon be evident, other physical parameters also play a major role in determining the nature of the problem. Chapter 1 contains a discussion of pertinent definitions and theory. This is detailed only to the point of anticipating some of the problems of interpretation that may arise in other chapters of the report. Included in this chapter is speculation on the impact of unusual environmental conditions such as aerodynamic heating, reduced gravitational acceleration, and low ambient pressures. Chapter 2 covers flammable fabrics and carbonaceous solids; Chapter 3, specific fire hazards involving flammable liquids, vapors, and gases; and Chapter 4, electrical fires. Chapter 5 covers the fire, blast, and flash hazards from meteoroid penetration; and Chapter 6, the problems of fire prevention and extinguishment in space cabins. Chapter 7 reviews the factors of fire and blast hazards in selection of a space-cabin atmosphere.

Roth, Emanuel M.↗

NASA NTRS1979

Procedures for estimating the frequency of commercial airline flights encountering high cabin ozone levels

Three analytical problems in estimating the frequency at which commercial airline flights will encounter high cabin ozone levels are formulated and solved: namely, estimating flight-segment mean levels, estimating maximum-per-flight levels, and estimating the maximum average level over a specified flight interval. For each problem, solution procedures are given for different levels of input information - from complete cabin ozone data, which provides a direct solution, to limited ozone information, such as ambient ozone means and standard deviations, with which several assumptions are necessary to obtain the required estimates. Each procedure is illustrated by an example case calculation that uses simultaneous cabin and ambient ozone data obtained by the NASA Global Atmospheric Sampling Program. Critical assumptions are discussed and evaluated, and the several solutions for each problem are compared. Example calculations are also performed to illustrate how variations in lattitude, altitude, season, retention ratio, flight duration, and cabin ozone limits affect the estimated probabilities.

Holdeman, J. D.↗

NASA NTRS1980

Measurements of cabin and ambient ozone on B747 airplanes

In response to recent concerns over possibly high ozone levels in the cabins of aircraft flying in the stratosphere, simultaneous measurements of the cabin and ambient ozone levels have been made as part of the NASA Global Atmospheric Sampling Program. Examples of the data taken on commercially operated Boeing 747-100 and 747SP airplanes are given for selected flights, together with summary statistics of over 5600 observations. Cabin ozone levels vary with the ambient level and, for unmodified aircraft, are higher on the 747SP than on the 747-100. Modifications to the ventilation system of the 747SP reduced cabin ozone levels by varying amounts up to a factor of 14.

Nastrom, G. D.↗

NASA NTRS1991

Laboratory test and acoustic analysis of cabin treatment for propfan test assessment aircraft

An aircraft cabin acoustic enclosure, built in support of the Propfan Test Assessment (PTA) program, is described. Helmholtz resonators were attached to the cabin trim panels to increase the sidewall transmission loss (TL). Resonators (448) were located between the trim panels and fuselage shell. In addition, 152 resonators were placed between the enclosure and aircraft floors. The 600 resonators were each tuned to a 235 Hz resonance frequency. After flight testing on the PTA aircraft, the enclosure was tested in the Kelly Johnson R and D Center Acoustics Lab. Laboratory noise reduction (NR) test results are discussed. The enclosure was placed in a Gulfstream 2 fuselage section. Broadband (138 dB overall SPL) and tonal (149 dB overall SPL) excitations were used in the lab. Tonal excitation simulated the propfan flight test excitation. The fundamental tone was stepped in 2 Hz intervals from 225 through 245 Hz. The resonators increase the NR of the cabin walls around the resonance frequency of the resonator array. The effects of flanking, sidewall absorption, cabin adsorption, resonator loading of trim panels, and panel vibrations are presented. Increases in NR of up to 11 dB were measured.

Kuntz, H. L.↗

NASA NTRS1990

Laboratory testing of a high transmission loss aircraft cabin structure

Laboratory tests have been performed to obtain transmission loss data for an aircraft cabin with Helmholtz resonators installed in the sidewalls, ceiling, and cabin floor, and to determine the effectiveness of resonator installation. It is shown that resonators installed within the sidewalls of an aircraft cabin can significantly reduce SPL values of the fundamental propfan blade passage frequency within the cabin. Resonator performance can be improved by maximizing resonator nozzle to sidewall spacing, and by avoiding noise flanking paths within the sidewall trim design.

Kuntz, Herbert L.↗

NASA NTRS1931

The variation in pressure in the cabin of an airplane in flight

The pressure in the cabin of a Fairchild cabin monoplane wa surveyed in flight, and was found to decrease with increased air speed over the fuselage and to vary with the number and location of openings in the cabin. The maximum depression of 2.2 inches of water (equivalent pressure altitude at sea level of 152 feet) occurred at the high speed of the airplane in level flight with the cabin closed.

Gough, Melvin N↗