Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Null modeling”

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.

489 records · Page 28
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2024

Comparison of Anthropomorphic Test Device and Human Volunteer Responses in Simulated Landing Impact Tests of U.S. Space Vehicles

United States (U.S.) crewed vehicles are being designed to support the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) human spaceflight programs. Vehicles must be designed to meet NASA’s occupant protection requirements including landing injury assessment with anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) and analytical models. However, these tools are limited in capturing all injuries that might occur during spacecraft landings. A NASA study of injuries during Soyuz vehicle landings has shown that analytical models are underpredicting occupant injury. Because of the inherent limitations with our analytical tools, human volunteer impact testing was employed to assess flight-like landing conditions of U.S. crewed vehicles. A total of 84 human volunteer tests in 11 different test orientations and g-levels were completed as part of this effort in collaboration with the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and U.S. vehicle development companies. Human subjects were tested at various realistic landing loads and in the highest fidelity seat and suit components that were available at the time of testing for two U.S. vehicles. Matched-pair ATD tests in the same test conditions were also conducted with small female and midsized male Hybrid III ATDs. ATDs were fully instrumented. Head accelerations and subjective responses were recorded for human subjects. In some cases, chest accelerations were captured. Responses of the ATDs and humans in matched-pair tests were compared. No ATD tests showed evidence for risk of injury based on NASA occupant protection requirements. Human subjects reported 17 cases of discomfort or pain, and 1 human subject was diagnosed with a minor injury that was not evident in the ATD tests. These results provide evidence that ATDs do not capture all potential injury risks, namely lower severity injuries, discomfort, pain, and fit issues. Overall, human testing is beneficial to understanding the true risk of injury to crewmembers during Earth landings.

Teresa M Reiber↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison of Anthropomorphic Test Device and Human Volunteer Responses in Simulated Landing Impact Tests of U.S. Space Vehicles

United States (U.S.) crewed vehicles are being designed to support the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA’s) human spaceflight programs. Vehicles must be designed to meet NASA’s occupant protection requirements including landing injury assessment with anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) and analytical models. However, these tools are limited in capturing all injuries that might occur during spacecraft landings. A NASA study of injuries during Soyuz vehicle landings has shown that analytical models are underpredicting occupant injury. Because of the inherent limitations with our analytical tools, human volunteer impact testing was employed to assess flight-like landing conditions of U.S. crewed vehicles. A total of 84 human volunteer tests in 11 different test orientations and g-levels were completed as part of this effort in collaboration with the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and U.S. vehicle development companies. Human subjects were tested at various realistic landing loads and in the highest fidelity seat and suit components that were available at the time of testing for two U.S. vehicles. Matched-pair ATD tests in the same test conditions were also conducted with small female and midsized male Hybrid III ATDs. ATDs were fully instrumented. Head accelerations and subjective responses were recorded for human subjects. In some cases, chest accelerations were captured. Responses of the ATDs and humans in matched-pair tests were compared. No ATD tests showed evidence for risk of injury based on NASA occupant protection requirements. Human subjects reported 17 cases of discomfort or pain, and 1 human subject was diagnosed with a minor injury that was not evident in the ATD tests. These results provide evidence that ATDs do not capture all potential injury risks, namely lower severity injuries, discomfort, pain, and fit issues. Overall, human testing is beneficial to understanding the true risk of injury to crewmembers during Earth landings.

Teresa M Reiber↗
NASA NTRS1998

Minimization of Retinal Slip Cannot Explain Human Smooth-Pursuit Eye Movements

Existing models assume that pursuit attempts a direct minimization of retinal image motion or "slip" (e.g. Robinson et al., 1986; Krauzlis & Weisberger, 1989). Using occluded line-figure stimuli, we have previously shown that humans can accurately pursue stimuli for which perfect tracking does not zero retinal slip (Neurologic ARCO). These findings are inconsistent with the standard control strategy of matching eye motion to a target-motion signal reconstructed by adding retinal slip and eye motion, but consistent with a visual front-end which estimates target motion via a global spatio-temporal integration for pursuit and perception. Another possible explanation is that pursuit simply attempts to minimize slip perpendicular to the segments (and neglects parallel "sliding" motion). To resolve this, 4 observers (3 naive) were asked to pursue the center of 2 types of stimuli with identical velocity-space descriptions and matched motion energy. The line-figure "diamond" stimulus was viewed through 2 invisible 3 deg-wide vertical apertures (38 cd/m2 equal to background) such that only the sinusoidal motion of 4 oblique line segments (44 cd/m2 was visible. The "cross" was identical except that the segments exchanged positions. Two trajectories (8's and infinity's) with 4 possible initial directions were randomly interleaved (1.25 cycles, 2.5s period, Ax = Ay = 1.4 deg). In 91% of trials, the diamond appeared rigid. Correspondingly, pursuit was vigorous (mean Again: 0.74) with a V/H aspect ratio approx. 1 (mean: 0.9). Despite a valid rigid solution, the cross however appeared rigid in 8% of trials. Correspondingly, pursuit was weaker (mean Hgain: 0.38) with an incorrect aspect ratio (mean: 1.5). If pursuit were just minimizing perpendicular slip, performance would be the same in both conditions.

Stone, Leland S.↗