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 361 records · Page 20
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1973

Evaluation of human operator visual performance capability for teleoperator missions.

Investigation of the human operator visual performance demands of teleoperator system applications to earth-orbital missions involving visual system requirements for satellite retrieval and satellite servicing functions. The first phase of an experimental program implementing this investigation is described in terms of the overall test apparatus and procedures used, the specific tests performed, and the test results obtained.

Huggins, C. T.↗
NASA NTRS1989

An evaluative model of system performance in manned teleoperational systems

Manned teleoperational systems are used in aerospace operations in which humans must interact with machines remotely. Manual guidance of remotely piloted vehicles, controling a wind tunnel, carrying out a scientific procedure remotely are examples of teleoperations. A four input parameter throughput (Tp) model is presented which can be used to evaluate complex, manned, teleoperations-based systems and make critical comparisons among candidate control systems. The first two parameters of this model deal with nominal (A) and off-nominal (B) predicted events while the last two focus on measured events of two types, human performance (C) and system performance (D). Digital simulations showed that the expression A(1-B)/C+D) produced the greatest homogeneity of variance and distribution symmetry. Results from a recently completed manned life science telescience experiment will be used to further validate the model. Complex, interacting teleoperational systems may be systematically evaluated using this expression much like a computer benchmark is used.

Haines, Richard F.↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA as a Convener: Government, Academic and Industry Collaborations Through the NASA Human Health and Performance Center

On October 18, 2010, the NASA Human Health and Performance center (NHHPC) was opened to enable collaboration among government, academic and industry members. Membership rapidly grew to 60 members (http://nhhpc.nasa.gov ) and members began identifying collaborative projects as detailed below. In addition, a first workshop in open collaboration and innovation was conducted on January 19, 2011 by the NHHPC resulting in additional challenges and projects for further development. This first workshop was a result of the SLSD successes in running open innovation challenges over the past two years. In 2008, the NASA Johnson Space Center, Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) began pilot projects in open innovation (crowd sourcing) to determine if these new internet-based platforms could indeed find solutions to difficult technical problems. From 2008 to 2010, the SLSD issued 34 challenges, 14 externally and 20 internally. The 14 external challenges were conducted through three different vendors: InnoCentive, Yet2.com and TopCoder. The 20 internal challenges were conducted using the InnoCentive platform, customized to NASA use, and promoted as NASA@Work. The results from the 34 challenges involved not only technical solutions that were reported previously at the 61st IAC, but also the formation of new collaborative relationships. For example, the TopCoder pilot was expanded by the NASA Space Operations Mission Directorate to the NASA Tournament Lab in collaboration with Harvard Business School and TopCoder. Building on these initial successes, the NHHPC workshop in January of 2011, and ongoing NHHPC member discussions, several important collaborations are in development: Space Act Agreement between NASA and GE for collaborative projects, NASA and academia for a Visual Impairment / Intracranial Hypertension summit (February 2011), NASA and the DoD through the Defense Venture Catalyst Initiative (DeVenCI) for a technical needs workshop (June 2011), NASA and the San Diego Zoo in Biomimicry, NASA and the FAA Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Flight for collaborative projects, NASA and the FDA concerning automatic external defibrillators, and NASA and Tufts University for an education pilot. These and other collaborations will be detailed in the paper demonstrating that a government-sponsored convening entity (the NHHPC) can facilitate industry, academic, and non-profit collaborations for products of mutual benefit.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Eva Physiology, Systems, and Performance (EPSP) Project Overview

Extravehicular activity (EVA) is any activity performed by astronauts outside their space vehicle or habitat. EVA may be performed on orbit, such as outside the Space Shuttle or the International Space Station, or on a planetary surface such as Mars or on the moon. Astronauts wear a pressurized suit that provides environmental protection, mobility, life support, and communications while they work in the harsh conditions of a microgravity environment. Exploration missions to the moon and Mars may last many days and will include many types of EVAs; exploration, science, construction and maintenance. The effectiveness and success of these EVA-filled missions is dependent on the ability to perform tasks efficiently. The EVA Physiology, Systems and Performance (EPSP) project will conduct a number of studies to understand human performance during EVA, from a molecular level to full-scale equipment and suit design aspects, with the aim of developing safe and efficient systems for Exploration missions and the Constellation Program. The EPSP project will 1) develop Exploration Mission EVA suit requirements for metabolic and thermal loading, optional center of gravity location, biomedical sensors, hydration, nutrition, and human biomedical interactions; 2) develop validated EVA prebreathe protocols that meet medical, vehicle, and habitat constraints while minimizing crew time and thus increasing EVA work efficiency; and 3) define exploration decompression sickness (DCS) risks, policy, and mission success statistics and develop a DCS risk definition report.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Human-Robot Interaction in High Vulnerability Domains

Future NASA missions will require successful integration of the human with highly complex systems. Highly complex systems are likely to involve humans, automation, and some level of robotic assistance. The complex environments will require successful integration of the human with automation, with robots, and with human-automation-robot teams to accomplish mission critical goals. Many challenges exist for the human performing in these types of operational environments with these kinds of systems. Systems must be designed to optimally integrate various levels of inputs and outputs based on the roles and responsibilities of the human, the automation, and the robots; from direct manual control, shared human-robotic control, or no active human control (i.e. human supervisory control). It is assumed that the human will remain involved at some level. Technologies that vary based on contextual demands and on operator characteristics (workload, situation awareness) will be needed when the human integrates into these systems. Predictive models that estimate the impact of the technologies on the system performance and the on the human operator are also needed to meet the challenges associated with such future complex human-automation-robot systems in extreme environments.

workload↗
NASA NTRS1994

Teleoperator performance with varying force and visual feedback

An experimental study was conducted to determine the effects of various forms of visual and force feedback on human performance for several 'peg-in-hole'-type telemanipulation tasks. Each of six human test subjects used a master/slave manipulator during two experimental sessions. In one session the subjects performed the tasks with direct vision, where subtended visual angle, force feedback, task difficulty, and the interaction of subtended visual angle and force feedback made signigicant differences in task completion times. During the other session the tasks were performed using a video monitor for visual feedback, and video frame rate, force feedback, task difficulty and the interaction of frame rate and force feedback were found to make significant differences in task times. An analysis between the direct and video viewing environments showed that apart from subtended visual angle and reduced frame rate, the video medium itself did not significantly affect task times relative to direct viewing.

Massimino, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Novel Classifier of Neural Impairment

The proposed research aligns with Ames Core Competency within the area of Intelligent/Adaptive Systems under Human Systems Integration. This will serve as a robust, efficient, and user-friendly human performance assessment tool that could provide immediate neural status of crewmembers in low-orbit and deep space missions. The human operator is a critical element of crew safety and should be evaluated consistently to mitigate potential off-nominal situations propagated from human error. Flagged deficits in oculomotor performance could act as an alert signal for crewmembers to opt out of cognitively demanding tasks or to prevent irreversible compromise in crewmember health.

impairment↗
NASA NTRS1987

Lunar hand tools

Tools useful for operations and maintenance tasks on the lunar surface were determined and designed. Primary constraints are the lunar environment, the astronaut's space suit and the strength limits of the astronaut on the moon. A multipurpose rotary motion tool and a collapsible tool carrier were designed. For the rotary tool, a brushless motor and controls were specified, a material for the housing was chosen, bearings and lubrication were recommended and a planetary reduction gear attachment was designed. The tool carrier was designed primarily for ease of access to the tools and fasteners. A material was selected and structural analysis was performed on the carrier. Recommendations were made about the limitations of human performance and about possible attachments to the torque driver.

Bentz, Karl F.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Army-NASA aircrew/aircraft integration program (A3I) software detailed design document, phase 3

The capabilities and design approach of the MIDAS (Man-machine Integration Design and Analysis System) computer-aided engineering (CAE) workstation under development by the Army-NASA Aircrew/Aircraft Integration Program is detailed. This workstation uses graphic, symbolic, and numeric prototyping tools and human performance models as part of an integrated design/analysis environment for crewstation human engineering. Developed incrementally, the requirements and design for Phase 3 (Dec. 1987 to Jun. 1989) are described. Software tools/models developed or significantly modified during this phase included: an interactive 3-D graphic cockpit design editor; multiple-perspective graphic views to observe simulation scenarios; symbolic methods to model the mission decomposition, equipment functions, pilot tasking and loading, as well as control the simulation; a 3-D dynamic anthropometric model; an intermachine communications package; and a training assessment component. These components were successfully used during Phase 3 to demonstrate the complex interactions and human engineering findings involved with a proposed cockpit communications design change in a simulated AH-64A Apache helicopter/mission that maps to empirical data from a similar study and AH-1 Cobra flight test.

Banda, Carolyn↗
NASA NTRS2001

A Synthetic Vision Preliminary Integrated Safety Analysis

This report documents efforts to analyze a sample of aviation safety programs, using the LMI-developed integrated safety analysis tool to determine the change in system risk resulting from Aviation Safety Program (AvSP) technology implementation. Specifically, we have worked to modify existing system safety tools to address the safety impact of synthetic vision (SV) technology. Safety metrics include reliability, availability, and resultant hazard. This analysis of SV technology is intended to be part of a larger effort to develop a model that is capable of "providing further support to the product design and development team as additional information becomes available". The reliability analysis portion of the effort is complete and is fully documented in this report. The simulation analysis is still underway; it will be documented in a subsequent report. The specific goal of this effort is to apply the integrated safety analysis to SV technology. This report also contains a brief discussion of data necessary to expand the human performance capability of the model, as well as a discussion of human behavior and its implications for system risk assessment in this modeling environment.

Hemm, Robert↗
NASA NTRS2005

New Integrated Modeling Capabilities: MIDAS' Recent Behavioral Enhancements

The Man-machine Integration Design and Analysis System (MIDAS) is an integrated human performance modeling software tool that is based on mechanisms that underlie and cause human behavior. A PC-Windows version of MIDAS has been created that integrates the anthropometric character "Jack (TM)" with MIDAS' validated perceptual and attention mechanisms. MIDAS now models multiple simulated humans engaging in goal-related behaviors. New capabilities include the ability to predict situations in which errors and/or performance decrements are likely due to a variety of factors including concurrent workload and performance influencing factors (PIFs). This paper describes a new model that predicts the effects of microgravity on a mission specialist's performance, and its first application to simulating the task of conducting a Life Sciences experiment in space according to a sequential or parallel schedule of performance.

Gore, Brian F.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Research opportunities in human behavior and performance

Extant information on the subject of psychological aspects of manned space flight are reviewed; NASA's psychology research program is examined; significant gaps in knowledge are identified; and suggestions are offered for future research program planning. Issues of human behavior and performance related to the United States space station, to the space shuttle program, and to both near and long term problems of a generic nature in applicable disciplines of psychology are considered. Topics covered include: (1) human performance requirements for a 90 day mission; (2) human perceptual, cognitive, and motor capabilities and limitations in space; (3) crew composition, individual competencies, crew competencies, selection criteria, and special training; (4) environmental factors influencing behavior; (5) psychosocial aspects of multiperson space crews in long term missions; (6) career determinants in NASA; (7) investigational methodology and equipment; and (8) psychological support.

Christensen, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS2008

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

This document further defines the behavioral markers identified in the document "Human Behavior and Performance Competency Model" Vol. I. The Human Behavior and Performance (HBP) competencies were recommended as requirements to participate in international long duration missions, and form the basis for determining the HBP training curriculum for long duration crewmembers. This document provides details, examples, knowledge areas, and affective skills to support the use of the HBP competencies in training and evaluation. This document lists examples and details specific to HBP competencies required of astronauts/cosmonauts who participate in ISS expedition and other international long-duration missions. Please note that this model does not encompass all competencies required. While technical competencies are critical for crewmembers, they are beyond the scope of this document. Additionally, 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↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Program Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program’s objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, more onboard systems autonomy and functionality will be needed to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with-audio, video, lighting, and crew controls. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program-especially crew controls which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error-especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA’s approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that embraces NASA’s Human-Rating Requirements-ensuring human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering, and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

Human-Rating↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Campaign Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the Moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program's objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, the crew will need more onboard systems autonomy and functionality to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft to ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with: audio, video, lighting, and crew controls subsystems. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program--especially crew controls, which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable enough to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error--especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA's approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls, is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that focuses on incorporating NASA's Human-Rating Requirements-that ensures human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

artemis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Campaign Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the Moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program's objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, the crew will need more onboard systems autonomy and functionality to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft to ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with: audio, video, lighting, and crew controls subsystems. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program--especially crew controls, which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable enough to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error--especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA's approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls, is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that focuses on incorporating NASA's Human-Rating Requirements-that ensures human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

artemis↗
NASA NTRS1975

Analysis of pilot-aircraft performance and reliability via the application of man-machine models

The present approach to analytic modeling, which utilizes human response theory together with modern control theory, is discussed. Analytic modeling of human performance has progressed to the point where it can be used with some confidence in the design and performance analysis of man-machine systems. An example of its use in helping design a flight director for the hover control of a VTOL vehicle is described. How the method could be used for analysis of human response to system failure is sketched.

Kleinman, D. L.↗