NASA NTRSDate not supplied
Virtual fit tests using 3D body scans have provided a cost-effective means to predictively assess spacesuit fit for the current and future astronaut population. However, fit is a complex issue influenced by physical interferences, subjective preference, and many other factors. Fit can substantially differ between the type of hardware, environmental conditions, and tasks being performed. Namely, fit changes across different contexts, such as 3D printed mockup evaluations, pressurized one-g suited test events, neutral buoyancy and other training events, and flight extravehicular activities (EVA). These challenges make it difficult to validate virtual fit frameworks to physical suit sizing. This study proposes a new method of validation using the wealth of historically archived suit fit data. Physically Assessed Fit (PAF) data was assessed from astronauts and test volunteers who wore the legacy Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU). The data was collected during the past decades at NASA and considered to be most reliable and dependable. Each participant was 3D scanned for body shape and spacesuit-critical dimensions were measured per NASA guidelines. The participants’ size preference for hard upper torso (HUT) assembly was retrieved from their pressurized suit fit check records. Fit assessments were also updated after one-g EVA training, neutral buoyancy training, and EVA flights. Virtually Assessed Fit (VAF) was done by overlaying the CAD model of a HUT with the 3D body scans of the PAF participants. Each body scan was iteratively adjusted for the position inside the HUT to minimize the suit-to-body contact interference while satisfying a set of prescribed requirements. Then the residual contact area, depth, and volume were quantified as VAF metrics. This process was repeated for the different HUT sizes, including medium, large, and extra-large. Statistical modeling is currently in progress and will be presented at the conference. A statistical classifier will be developed to predict a fit probability for different HUT sizes as a function of the corresponding person’s VAF metrics. The HUT size with the highest fit probability will constitute the most likely size selection for the person, and the prediction will be compared against the corresponding PAF data. The participant data will be randomly pre-grouped into either a model development or validation subset. While the model development subset will be used to build the probability model, the validation subset will be used to assess the model accuracy. Also, the locations and magnitudes of suit-body-contacts will be estimated from VAF. This information can identify the critical suit geometry and body shape features that influence suit fit. The variations found in PAF size selections by subjects with similar VAF metrics will allow for investigations into subjective preferences, for example, tight versus loose fit. Overall, this study is expected to provide a structured validation of a virtual suit fit framework, which has not been possible in the past. The outcome can also provide useful insights and potential limitations for interpreting virtual fit tests for future spacesuit designs and population accommodation.