Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human Interfaces”

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 469 records · Page 26

A Prevalent Focused Human Antibody Response to the Influenza Virus Hemagglutinin Head Interface

Novel animal influenza viruses emerge, initiate pandemics, and become endemic seasonal variants that have evolved to escape from prevalent herd immunity. These processes often outpace vaccine-elicited protection. Focusing immune responses on conserved epitopes may impart durable immunity. We describe a focused, protective antibody response, abundant in memory and serum repertoires, to a conserved region at the influenza virus hemagglutinin (HA) head interface. Structures of 11 examples, 8 reported here, from seven human donors demonstrate the convergence of responses on a single epitope. The 11 are genetically diverse, with one class having a common, IGκV1-39, light chain. All of the antibodies bind HAs from multiple serotypes. The lack of apparent genetic restriction and potential for elicitation by more than one serotype may explain their abundance. We define the head interface as a major target of broadly protective antibodies with the potential to influence the outcomes of influenza virus infection.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

Acute Radiation Risk and BRYNTRN Organ Dose Projection Graphical User Interface

The integration of human space applications risk projection models of organ dose and acute radiation risk has been a key problem. NASA has developed an organ dose projection model using the BRYNTRN with SUM DOSE computer codes, and a probabilistic model of Acute Radiation Risk (ARR). The codes BRYNTRN and SUM DOSE are a Baryon transport code and an output data processing code, respectively. The risk projection models of organ doses and ARR take the output from BRYNTRN as an input to their calculations. With a graphical user interface (GUI) to handle input and output for BRYNTRN, the response models can be connected easily and correctly to BRYNTRN. A GUI for the ARR and BRYNTRN Organ Dose (ARRBOD) projection code provides seamless integration of input and output manipulations, which are required for operations of the ARRBOD modules. The ARRBOD GUI is intended for mission planners, radiation shield designers, space operations in the mission operations directorate (MOD), and space biophysics researchers. BRYNTRN code operation requires extensive input preparation. Only a graphical user interface (GUI) can handle input and output for BRYNTRN to the response models easily and correctly. The purpose of the GUI development for ARRBOD is to provide seamless integration of input and output manipulations for the operations of projection modules (BRYNTRN, SLMDOSE, and the ARR probabilistic response model) in assessing the acute risk and the organ doses of significant Solar Particle Events (SPEs). The assessment of astronauts radiation risk from SPE is in support of mission design and operational planning to manage radiation risks in future space missions. The ARRBOD GUI can identify the proper shielding solutions using the gender-specific organ dose assessments in order to avoid ARR symptoms, and to stay within the current NASA short-term dose limits. The quantified evaluation of ARR severities based on any given shielding configuration and a specified EVA or other mission scenario can be made to guide alternative solutions for attaining determined objectives set by mission planners. The ARRBOD GUI estimates the whole-body effective dose, organ doses, and acute radiation sickness symptoms for astronauts, by which operational strategies and capabilities can be made for the protection of astronauts from SPEs in the planning of future lunar surface scenarios, exploration of near-Earth objects, and missions to Mars.

Cucinotta, Francis A.↗

The human power amplifier technology at the University of California, Berkeley

A human's ability to perform physical tasks is limited by physical strength, not by intelligence. We define "extenders" as a class of robot manipulators worn by humans to augment human mechanical strength, while the wearer's intellect remains the central control system for manipulating the extender. Our research objective is to determine the ground rules for the design and control of robotic systems worn by humans through the design, construction, and control of several prototype experimental direct-drive/non-direct-drive multi-degree-of-freedom hydraulic/electric extenders. The design of extenders is different from the design of conventional robots because the extender interfaces with the human on a physical level. Two sets of force sensors measure the forces imposed on the extender by the human and by the environment (i.e., the load). The extender's compliances in response to such contact forces were designed by selecting appropriate force compensators. This paper gives a summary of some of the selected research efforts related to Extender Technology, carried out during 1980s. The references, at the end of this article, give detailed description of the research efforts.

NASA Discipline Space Human Factors↗

Space Station Human Factors Research Review. Volume 1: EVA Research and Development

An overview is presented of extravehicular activity (EVA) research and development activities at Ames. The majority of the program was devoted to presentations by the three contractors working in parallel on the EVA System Phase A Study, focusing on Implications for Man-Systems Design. Overhead visuals are included for a mission results summary, space station EVA requirements and interface accommodations summary, human productivity study cross-task coordination, and advanced EVAS Phase A study implications for man-systems design. Articles are also included on subsea approach to work systems development and advanced EVA system design requirements.

Cohen, Marc M.↗

Aerospace Ground Equipment for model 4080 sequence programmer. A standard computer terminal is adapted to provide convenient operator to device interface

The Aerospace Ground Equipment (AGE) provides an interface between a human operator and a complete spaceborne sequence timing device with a memory storage program. The AGE provides a means for composing, editing, syntax checking, and storing timing device programs. The AGE is implemented with a standard Hewlett-Packard 2649A terminal system and a minimum of special hardware. The terminal's dual tape interface is used to store timing device programs and to read in special AGE operating system software. To compose a new program for the timing device the keyboard is used to fill in a form displayed on the screen.

Nissley, L. E.↗

Exploration Medical Capability Medical Scenarios

Medical systems supporting exploration class missions to cislunar space, the lunar surface, and the vicinity of Mars require an evolution in medical capability beyond that available for today’s low Earth orbit centric paradigm. Progress in developing more capable medical systems will be driven by the requirements of prolonged mission duration, increasing distance from Earth, and the realities of orbital mechanics, all necessitating a concomitant need for progressively Earth independent medical decision-making capabilities. These medical systems (which include the crewmembers) are expected to be capable of evaluating, diagnosing, treating and managing a defined list of medical conditions as well as addressing unanticipated medical conditions that may arise. The prioritized medical capabilities and associated resources needed to treat these medical conditions and support anticipated inflight medical events provide robust content that informs system designers and allows for a more complete evaluation of both medical and overall mission risk. Communication of these medical capabilities to system, vehicle, and mission designers can be enhanced using scenarios that characterize the system’s operations. Carefully considered scenarios provide the context needed to explore expected human and system interfaces, roles of ground and inflight crew (including periods of interrupted or delayed communications), identify training needs, assess data needs, etc. Mission-based scenario content varies dependent upon the needs, medical capabilities, conditions and context they are intended to illustrate. This document explicitly seeks to capture and codify those scenarios that have been useful to the Exploration Medical Capability Element of the Human Research Program in defining the enhanced medical systems required for future space exploration. It is expected that this document will continue to evolve through the refinement and characterization of current and future scenarios, respectively, as our knowledge grows, and requirements increasingly focus on Earth independent spaceflight operations.

Derek M Nusbaum↗

Developing and Testing Two Interfaces for Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP) Tools to Support UAS Traffic Management (UTM)

Researchers conducted a usability study using two graphical user interfaces (GUIs) to explore how individuals interpret and interact with different preflight information displays, and to inform the development of Uncrewed Aircraft System (UAS) preflight planning predictive support tools to assess and mitigate flight hazards and risks. A series of preflight risk-assessment tasks were developed to evaluate participant performance using the Supplemental Data Service Provider-Consolidated Dashboard (SDSP-CD) and the Human Automation Team Interface System (HATIS) GUIs. Participants were trained to use both interfaces and their performance was evaluated. These evaluations focused on participants’ preflight planning activities. Objective data on performance tasks across different scenarios involving multi-UASs, as well as self-reports of interactions and subjective experiences using the GUIs were collected. Scores on the system usability scale (SUS) and on a simple task set were examined, as well as user feedback on open-ended questions, to inform development and identify potential improvements to the interfaces.

sUAAV interfaces↗

Developing and Testing Two Interfaces for Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP) Tools to Support UAS Traffic Management (UTM)

Researchers conducted a usability study using two graphical user interfaces (GUIs) to explore how individuals interpret and interact with different preflight information displays, and to inform the development of Uncrewed Aircraft System (UAS) preflight planning predictive support tools to assess and mitigate flight hazards and risks. A series of preflight risk-assessment tasks were developed to evaluate participant performance using the Supplemental Data Service Provider-Consolidated Dashboard (SDSP-CD) and the Human Automation Team Interface System (HATIS) GUIs. Participants were trained to use both interfaces and their performance was evaluated. These evaluations focused on participants’ preflight planning activities. Objective data on performance tasks across different scenarios involving multi-UASs, as well as self-reports of interactions and subjective experiences using the GUIs were collected. Scores on the system usability scale (SUS) and on a simple task set were examined, as well as user feedback on open-ended questions, to inform development and identify potential improvements to the interfaces.

sUAAV interfaces↗

Generating Control Commands From Gestures Sensed by EMG

An effort is under way to develop noninvasive neuro-electric interfaces through which human operators could control systems as diverse as simple mechanical devices, computers, aircraft, and even spacecraft. The basic idea is to use electrodes on the surface of the skin to acquire electromyographic (EMG) signals associated with gestures, digitize and process the EMG signals to recognize the gestures, and generate digital commands to perform the actions signified by the gestures. In an experimental prototype of such an interface, the EMG signals associated with hand gestures are acquired by use of several pairs of electrodes mounted in sleeves on a subject s forearm (see figure). The EMG signals are sampled and digitized. The resulting time-series data are fed as input to pattern-recognition software that has been trained to distinguish gestures from a given gesture set. The software implements, among other things, hidden Markov models, which are used to recognize the gestures as they are being performed in real time. Thus far, two experiments have been performed on the prototype interface to demonstrate feasibility: an experiment in synthesizing the output of a joystick and an experiment in synthesizing the output of a computer or typewriter keyboard. In the joystick experiment, the EMG signals were processed into joystick commands for a realistic flight simulator for an airplane. The acting pilot reached out into the air, grabbed an imaginary joystick, and pretended to manipulate the joystick to achieve left and right banks and up and down pitches of the simulated airplane. In the keyboard experiment, the subject pretended to type on a numerical keypad, and the EMG signals were processed into keystrokes. The results of the experiments demonstrate the basic feasibility of this method while indicating the need for further research to reduce the incidence of errors (including confusion among gestures). Topics that must be addressed include the numbers and arrangements of electrodes needed to acquire sufficient data; refinements in the acquisition, filtering, and digitization of EMG signals; and methods of training the pattern- recognition software. The joystick and keyboard simulations were chosen for the initial experiments because they are familiar to many computer users. It is anticipated that, ultimately, interfaces would utilize EMG signals associated with movements more nearly natural than those associated with joysticks or keyboards. Future versions of the pattern-recognition software are planned to be capable of adapting to the preferences and day-today variations in EMG outputs of individual users; this capability for adaptation would also make it possible to select gestures that, to a given user, feel the most nearly natural for generating control signals for a given task (provided that there are enough properly positioned electrodes to acquire the EMG signals from the muscles involved in the gestures).

Wheeler, Kevin R.↗

Programmable display pushbuttons on the Space Station's telerobot control panel

The Man-Systems Telerobotics Laboratory at NASA's Johnson Space Center and supported by Lockheed, is working to ensure that the Flight Telerobotic Servicer (FTS) to be used on the Space Shuttle (Orbiter) and the Space Station has a well designed user interface from a Human Factors perspective. The FTS, which is a project led by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, will be a telerobot used for Space Station construction, maintenance, and satellite repair. It will be directly controlled from workstations on the Orbiter and the Space Station and monitored from a ground workstation. The FTS will eventually evolve into a more autonomous system, but in the short-term the system will be manually operated (teleoperated) for many tasks. This emphasizes the importance of the human/telerobot interface on this system. This phase of the FTS workstation evaluation covers a preliminary study of programmable display pushbuttons (PDP's). The PDP is constructed of a matrix of directly addressable electroluminescent (EL) pixels which can be used to form dot-matrix characters. PDP's can be used to display more than one message and to control more than one function. Since the PDP's have these features, then a single PDP may possibly replace the use of many single-function pushbuttons, rotary switches, and toggle switches, thus using less panel space. It is of interest to determine if PDP's can be used to adequately perform complex hierarchically structured task sequences. The objective of this investigation was to compare the performance of experienced and inexperienced Remote Manipulator System (RMS) operators while performing an RMS like task on simulated PDP and non-PDP computer prototypes so that guidelines governing the use of programmable display pushbuttons on the FTS workstation could be created. The functionality of the RMS on the Orbiter was used as a model for this evaluation since the functionality of the FTS at the time of this writing has not been solidified.

Stuart, Mark A.↗

Usability of Pre-Flight Planning Interfaces for Supplemental Data Service Provider Tools to Support Uncrewed Aircraft System Traffic Management

Small uncrewed aircraft systems (sUASs) operate in low-altitude, uncontrolled airspace – where support services for their operators (UASOs) are not currently provided. NASA’s System-Wide Safety (SWS) project is identifying the potential risks and hazards to sUAS operations to provide, inform, and improve the designs of In-time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS). The IASMS will include a suite of data-driven tools that compile and analyze data collected from aviation systems and environmental sources to predict hazards, and provide information to allow operators to mitigate these risks (Young et al., 2020). These risk and hazard services can be run and displayed to operators on graphical user interfaces (GUIs), as they relate to a vehicle(s)’ route of flight. These interfaces offer both a means to present hazard service output and offer an opportunity to test user understanding of the information, user decision making, and the best ways to present such data to an operator. Based on these future technologies and intended missions, it is important to investigate interface requirements and evaluate how operators might use these tools. Presenting salient and meaningful risk assessment information to operators is necessary to increase situation awareness and ultimately safety. Building on previous research (Feldman et al., 2022), a usability study comparing two GUIs was conducted to explore how individuals interacted with different styles of information displays. A series of pre-flight hazard and risk-assessment tasks were developed to evaluate participant performance using the Supplemental Data Service Provider Consolidated Dashboard and the Human Automation Team Interface System interfaces. Participants were trained to use both GUIs and their performance was analysed across different scenarios involving multiple sUASs. Performance on simple tasks and the System Usability Scale scores were reported by Feldman et al., 2023. Additional analyses and evaluations on more complex tasks (e.g., risk assessment, prioritization), workload and response times are examined in this paper.

sUAV interfaces↗

Usability of Pre-flight Planning Interfaces for Supplemental Data Service Provider Tools to Support Uncrewed Aircraft System Traffic Management

Small uncrewed aircraft systems (sUASs) operate in low-altitude, uncontrolled airspace – where support services for their operators (UASOs) are not currently provided. NASA’s System-Wide Safety (SWS) project is identifying the potential risks and hazards to sUAS operations to provide, inform, and improve the designs of In-time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS). The IASMS will include a suite of data-driven tools that compile and analyze data collected from aviation systems and environmental sources to predict hazards, and provide information to allow operators to mitigate these risks (Young et al., 2020). These risk and hazard services can be run and displayed to operators on graphical user interfaces (GUIs), as they relate to a vehicle(s)’ route of flight. These interfaces offer both a means to present hazard service output and offer an opportunity to test user understanding of the information, user decision making, and the best ways to present such data to an operator. Based on these future technologies and intended missions, it is important to investigate interface requirements and evaluate how operators might use these tools. Presenting salient and meaningful risk assessment information to operators is necessary to increase situation awareness and ultimately safety. Building on previous research (Feldman et al., 2022), a usability study comparing two GUIs was conducted to explore how individuals interacted with different styles of information displays. A series of pre-flight hazard and risk-assessment tasks were developed to evaluate participant performance using the Supplemental Data Service Provider Consolidated Dashboard and the Human Automation Team Interface System interfaces. Participants were trained to use both GUIs and their performance was analysed across different scenarios involving multiple sUASs. Performance on simple tasks and the System Usability Scale scores were reported by Feldman et al., 2023. Additional analyses and evaluations on more complex tasks (e.g., risk assessment, prioritization), workload and response times are examined in this paper.

sUAV interfaces↗

Step 1: Human System Integration (HSI) FY05 Pilot-Technology Interface Requirements for Contingency Management

This document involves definition of technology interface requirements for Contingency Management. This was performed through a review of Contingency Management-related, HSI requirements documents, standards, and recommended practices. Technology concepts in use by the Contingency Management Work Package were considered. Beginning with HSI high-level functional requirements for Contingency Management, and Contingency Management technology elements, HSI requirements for the interface to the pilot were identified. Results of the analysis describe (1) the information required by the pilot to have knowledge of system failures and associated contingency procedures, and (2) the control capability needed by the pilot to obtain system status and procedure information. Fundamentally, these requirements provide the candidate Contingency Management technology concepts with the necessary human-related elements to make them compatible with human capabilities and limitations. The results of the analysis describe how Contingency Management operations and functions should interface with the pilot to provide the necessary Contingency Management functionality to the UA-pilot system. Requirements and guidelines for Contingency Management are partitioned into four categories: (1) Health and Status and (2) Contingency Management. Each requirement is stated and is supported with a rationale and associated reference(s).

Source record↗

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.↗

ISS Payload Human Factors

The ISS Payload Human Factors Implementation Team (HFIT) is the Payload Developer's resource for Human Factors. HFIT is the interface between Payload Developers and ISS Payload Human Factors requirements in SSP 57000.  HFIT provides recommendations on how to meet the Human Factors requirements and guidelines early in the design process. HFIT coordinates with the Payload Developer and Astronaut Office to find low cost solutions to Human Factors challenges for hardware operability issues.

Ellenberger, Richard↗

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↗

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.↗