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 667 records · Page 37
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

Crew State Monitoring and Line-Oriented Flight Training for Attention Management

Loss of control - inflight (LOC-I) has historically represented the largest category of commercial aviation fatal accidents. A review of worldwide transport airplane accidents (2001-2010) indicated that loss of airplane state awareness (ASA) was responsible for the majority of the LOC-I fatality rate. The Commercial Aviation Safety Team (CAST) ASA study identified 12 major themes that were indicated across the ASA accident and incident events. One of the themes was crew distraction or ineffective attention management, which was found to be involved in all 18 events including flight crew channelized attention, startle/surprise, diverted attention, and/or confirmation bias. Safety Enhancement (SE)-211, "Training for Attention Management" was formed to conduct research to develop and assess commercial airline training methods and realistic scenarios that can address these attention-related human performance limitations. This paper describes NASA SE-211 research for new design approaches and validation of line-oriented flight training (LOFT). Recent accident and incident data suggests that Spatial Disorientation (SD) and Loss-of-Energy State Awareness (LESA) for transport category aircraft are becoming an increasingly prevalent safety concern in all domestic and international operations (Commercial Aviation Safety Team, 2014a). SD is defined as an erroneous perception of aircraft attitude that can lead directly to a Loss-of-Control Inflight (LOC-I) event and result in an accident or incident. LESA is typically characterized by a failure to monitor or understand energy state indications (e.g., airspeed, altitude, vertical speed, commanded thrust) and a resultant failure to maintain safe flight.

Stephens, Chad↗
NASA NTRS2017

Human Factors Engineering and Ergonomics in Systems Engineering

The study, discovery, and application of information about human abilities, human limitations, and other human characteristics to the design of tools, devices, machines, systems, job tasks and environments for effective human performance.

Whitmore, Mihriban↗
NASA NTRS2017

Waveguide Modulator for Interference Tolerant Functional Near Infrared Spectrometer (fNIRS)

Many crew-related errors in aviation and astronautics are caused by hazardous cognitive states including overstress, disengagement, high fatigue and ineffective crew coordination. Safety can be improved by monitoring and predicting these cognitive states in a non-intrusive manner and designing mitigation strategies. Measuring hemoglobin concentration changes in the brain with functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy is a promising technique for monitoring cognitive state and optimizing human performance during both space and aviation operations. A compact, wearable fNIRS system would provide an innovative early warning system during long duration missions to detect and prevent vigilance decrements in pilots and astronauts. This effort focused on developing a waveguide modulator for use in a fNIRS system.

spectroscopy↗
NASA NTRS2018

The Story of Multitasking

Multitasking is endemic in modern life and work: drivers talk on cell phones, office workers type while answering phone calls, students do homework while text messaging...but, nurses also prepare injections while responding to doctor's calls, and air traffic controllers direct aircraft in one sector while handling aircraft additional traffic in another. Whether in daily life or at work, we are constantly bombarded with multiple, concurrent interruptions and demands and we have all somehow come to believe in the myth that we can, and in fact are expected to, easily address them all - without any repercussions. Accumulating However, accumulating scientific evidence is now suggesting that multitasking increases the probability of human error. This talk presents a set of NASA studies that characterize concurrent demands in one work domain, routine airline cockpit operations, in order to illustrate the ways operational task demands together with the natural proclivity to manage them all concurrently make human performance in this and in any work domain vulnerable to potentially serious errors and to accidents.

Barshi, Immanuel↗
NASA NTRS2020

Work Scheduling and Fatigue Management

There are physiological limits to human performance, influenced by the internal programming of the sleep homeostat and circadian rhythms. There are known fatigue-related risks related to different work scheduling factors. This presentation was for presentation to supervisors and managers at Stennis Space Center to provide information about physiological risks factors associated with shiftwork scheduling practices and facilitate discussion about approaches to manage the related risks.

Gregory, Kevin↗
NASA NTRS2020

Flight Simulation Scenarios for Commercial Pilot Training and Crew State Monitoring

NASA Langley researchers addressed the Commercial Aviation Safety Team Safety Enhancement 211 through a series of studies to address "Attention-related Human Performance Limiting States" which include channelized attention, diverted attention, startle/surprise, and confirmation bias. The present report focuses on the development of improved training scenarios for operationally realistic Line-Oriented Flight Training scenarios. Areas addressed in the report include: (1) Highlights of events in the LOFT scenario used; (2) Interesting findings with implications for simulator motion; (3) Eye-tracking heat maps in proximity to failure events; (4) Researcher observations of crews as test subjects versus a pilot and a research team co-pilot; and (5) The results of a follow-up questionnaire completed by pilot participants regarding their usual training as well as the scenarios employed in the SHARP studies. These pilot ratings and comments are of value to simulation training developers.

James R. Comstock, Jr.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Concept of Operations (ConOps) of an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) for Advanced Air Mobility (AAM)

The growth of new emerging operations involving Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) necessitates developing a perspective for an In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS). This perspective advances from the National Academies report on IASMS and its recommendation for developing a Concept of Operations (ConOps) for IASMS. A ConOps has been developed for In-time System-Wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) from which the IASMS ConOps pivots to provide a robust scope commensurate with the broad vision defined by the National Academies. The IASMS ConOps focuses on emerging operations and spans innovations in Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) and an increasingly complex ecosystem comprised of a widening mix of vehicles and technologies, Urban Air Mobility (UAM) with industry-federated services, traditional operations, as well as new supersonic aircraft and space launch systems.The challenge for the IASMS ConOps is to be broad to encompass innovations in the coming years and decades while agile to ensure levels of safety compatible with operational and certification requirements of the National Airspace System (NAS). The IASMS ConOps interweaves increasing complexity of operational safety capabilities and unlocking UAS Maturity Levels (UMLs). The relationships between increased complexity of automation and automated systems, fewer operators who are not as traditionally higher skilled, more complex operational environments, and aviation operations management with mixed aircraft and equipage pose a multi-dimensional space for IASMS capabilities essential for safety assurance and risk management. Instantiating IASMS capabilities and how they would be integral to AAM operations and increasing maturity of UAM could be accomplished through a series of Safety Demonstrators. These Safety Demonstrators could provide increased understanding and insight into use of controls for risk mitigation, means of compliance for certification, and operational experience with safety services such as in relation to contingency management. The IASMS capabilities can be viewed as initially residing with the vehicle, airspace, and Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP). For example, vehicle capabilities include communications including the command and control link, Remote Identification (ID), conflict advisory/alerting, and UAS system monitoring. These capabilities monitor and assess data such as battery health, aircraft state, and human performance. Complexity of ISAMS capabilities depends on a number of factors. These factors are intendedonly as a notional categorization with the purpose being to reflect the complexity of the AAM ecosystem that would drive up the complexity of ISSA capabilities including systems, sensors, models, standards, and controls. Factors could include the Vehicle Flight Management, Environment, Airspace, and Contingency Management. Each of these factors can be comprised of multiple sub-factors that contribute to increasing complexity. For example, Airspace at a lower level of complexity could be dedicated to UTM operations that are unmonitored, and at a higher level of complexity could involve mixed UTM and ATM operations. The IASMS concept includes safety services that provide data and information to different participants in AAM. The roles and responsibilities of participants can be defined using the Responsible-Accountable-Consulted-Informed (RACI) analysis. For example, for the safety service involving the Remote ID, the Operator would be accountable for providing the data, the Vehicle would be responsible for transmitting it, and the USS, SDSP, Vertiports, FIMS (FAA), and Public Entities such as safety services would be informed by receiving the data. The IASMS ConOps identifies the capabilities needed for risk mitigation and safety assurance in the increasingly complex national airspace. The ConOps serves as a pathway for engaging with industry to gain operational experience including through the Safety Demonstrator series, the RACI analysis, and operational complexity factors. The ConOps serves to integrate these different perspectives to build a cohesive and cogent approach to an AAM safety management system.

In-Time Aviation Safety Management System↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Multitasking

Multitasking is endemic in modern life and work: drivers talk on cell phones, office workers type while answering phone calls, students do homework while text messaging, nurses prepare injections while responding to doctor’s calls, and air traffic controllers direct aircraft in one sector while handling additional traffic in another. Whether in daily life or at work, we are constantly bombarded with multiple concurrent demands, and we have all somehow come to believe in the myth that we can, and in fact are expected to, easily address them all - without any repercussions. However, accumulating scientific evidence is now suggesting that multitasking increases the probability of human error. This talk presents a set of NASA studies that characterize concurrent demands in routine airline flight operations, in order to illustrate the ways operational task demands together with the proclivity to manage them all concurrently make human performance in this and in any domain vulnerable to potentially serious errors and to accidents.

multitasking↗
NASA NTRS2021

NASA Ames Fatigue Countermeasures Laboratory and AA FRMS - A Working Relationship

American Airlines and NASA Ames Research Center have a long-standing partnership to conduct human factors fatigue research in airline operations. Since 2016, using a mechanism known as a Space Act Agreement, NASA Ames’ Fatigue Countermeasures Laboratory has worked with the American’s Fatigue Risk Management team to gather sleep and alertness data from volunteer flight crew members. Operations studied include long-range transpacific flights, timing of inflight rest breaks during augmented flights, and rates of acclimation related to flights making theater changes. This mutually beneficial collaborative working arrangement allows American to conduct operations of specific interest under the FAA’s Alternative Means of Compliance process and provides NASA with a means to gather and analyze data that can be used to inform operational safety-related decisions. Earlier this year, results from the study of inflight rest breaks was published in the journal Aerospace Medicine and Human Performance. A total of 500 American pilots responded to a survey with landing crew reporting more and better-quality sleep during break 2 than break 3. Subsequent ratings of sleepiness and alertness at TOD were significantly better for crew who used break 2. Findings from this study were reported to the FAA leading to an inflight fatigue mitigation capability for many pilots in the industry. An upcoming study is to evaluate workload and alertness levels during Caribbean Turn (DFW-SJO-DFW) operations. For this study, the FRMS team and NASA will ask volunteers to collect data on sleep, workload, performance, and alertness using scientifically valid methods The information gained in this study will help inform how workload and fatigue interact with duty duration during short-haul, daytime operations.

in-flight rest↗
NASA NTRS2022

BioSentinel: Build your own BioSentinel Model!

BioSentinel will conduct the first study of the biological response to space radiation outside LEO since the Apollo missions. The project will investigate the biological effects of space radiation, and will provide an adaptable platform to perform human relevant measurements in multiple space environments in the future, including on lunar and Mars landers and orbiters.

BioSentinel↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Human Data Repositories: An In Depth Look at the New Data Request Process

As NASA transitions its focus to travel back to the moon and on to new destinations, the need to ensure the capture, analysis, and application of research and medical data is of greater urgency than at any other previous time. In this era of limited resources and challenging schedules, the Human Research Program (HRP), based at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC), recognizes the need to extract the greatest possible amount of information from the data already captured. To this end, the HRP Chief Scientist Office (CSO), HRP Program Planning and Control (PP&C) Office, and the Space Medicine Operations Division have been working together to make reuse of both research data and medical monitoring data more accessible to the user community through the Life Science Data Archive (LSDA) and the Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) Repositories. The task of both LSDA and LSAH repositories is to acquire, preserve, and distribute retrospective research (LSDA) and medical (LSAH) data and information both within the NASA community and to the science community at large, for knowledge discovery, retrospective analysis, and planning of future research studies. An additional goal is to encourage collaboration with non-NASA institutions also faced with enhancing human performance in extreme environments. In September 2022, the LSDA website and its contents transitioned to a new NASA Life Sciences Portal (https://nlsp.nasa.gov/explore/lsdahome). This site continues to feature publicly releasable information such as non-attributable datasets, experiment descriptions (from Project Mercury to ISS, as well as from multiple flight analog missions), descriptions of medical monitoring data, and LSAH newsletters (1992 - 2022). The website also provides an updated portal to request additional research and medical data not accessible from the public website. This presentation will provide an in-depth look at the new system as it relates to finding and requesting retrospective data. We will also detail processes from making a request to delivering data for different types of data requests (i.e., attributable, or non-attributable). This includes descriptions of various approval boards, what information and actions the requestor is responsible for, and key milestones in making data available for reuse.

D. M. Thomas↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Medical Lessons Learned from the Exploration Atmospheres Study

Background: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Exploration Atmospheres study (EA) was done to evaluate alternative cabin atmospheres for future spacecraft designs and planetary surface exploration of the Moon, Mars and beyond. Deep space exploration involves creating habitats and environments safe for human occupancy and means to explore the outside environment (extravehicular activities, EVA). In order to validate alternative atmospheres and pre-spacewalk procedures, the EA study was conducted to evaluate factors such as hypoxia risks, denitrogenation protocols, food limitations, medications, and the impact of other factors on human performance. Overview: Space travel is constrained by mass, volume, power and the cost of vehicle development, which creates tradeoffs in various capabilities, including breathing gasses. Higher atmospheric pressure in a vehicle means more gas, and a stronger containment vessel/habitat; while lower pressure requires higher oxygen partial pressure, which may increase fire risk. NASA’s EA study evaluated a proposed alternative cabin environment (8.2 psia, 34% Oxygen), for future spacecraft habitat, and planetary EVAs. EA included both a 3-day and a 11-day trial. These trials included a depressurization and saturation to 8.2psi at 34% O2 with additional depresses to 4.3 psia at 85% O2 for simulated EVAs, (1 EVA during the 3-day and 5 during the 11-day trials). Discussion: Planning for and executing the medical monitoring and response plan for a trial of this scope was a huge undertaking with no prior practice to fall back on. Food obstacles, sleeping issues, medications, joint injury, equipment limitations, medical privacy, multiple cases of decompression sickness, and even a COVID outbreak among the support team proved challenging. Conclusion: Testing of this nature is an essential part NASA’s preparation for the upcoming Lunar Artemis missions. As spaceflight transitions beyond low earth orbit, to planetary, even more trials of this nature will be required to learn what are the optimal atmospheric and associated operational constraints to maintain the optimal health of the crew and achieve mission objectives.

R Sanders↗
NASA NTRS2023

A Review of the Safety of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors for Long Duration Spaceflight

Introduction: As humankind ventures further into the depths of space, planning is already underway for long-duration exploration missions that will test the bounds of human performance. Deep space travel will include added risk related to stressors from the isolated, confined, and extreme (ICE) environment that lies outside the boundaries of low-earth orbit. Currently, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are considered the gold standard treatment for many mental health diagnoses including anxiety and depression; however, SSRIs are also associated with several undesired side effects. The utility of non-pharmacologic therapies for the management of behavioral health conditions has not yet been fully explored. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed and relevant articles pertaining to the psychological impacts of ICE environments, use of SSRIs in spaceflight, side effects associated with SSRIs, and non-pharmacologic treatments for anxiety and depression were reviewed. Over 100 studies were reviewed in total. Results: Reduced bone mineral density, impaired hemostatic function, significant individual variability resulting from gene polymorphisms, and drug-drug interactions are well described adverse effects of SSRIs that may complicate their operational use in the deep space environment. Many non-pharmacologic therapies have been utilized with success for the management of behavioral health conditions in the terrestrial environment that may show promise for long duration missions. Discussion: Although SSRIs have long been considered standard of care treatment for many behavioral health conditions, we cannot trivialize the risk that prolonged pharmacologic therapy may pose. The need to mitigate these risks by exploring alternative non-pharmacologic therapies has never been more relevant.

Charles H Dukes↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

XHAB - Inflatable Airlock

- Develop the requisite technology for airlock design via analysis and scale-model experimental tests - Design, develop, test, and evaluate a two-person inflatable airlock compatible with an international docking interface - Perform human operations evaluation in microgravity via neutral buoyancy simulation - Maximize opportunities for student involvement at all levels consistent with educational objectives for associated courses This document is best when downloaded and opened in Adobe 2020 version.

David Akin↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lunar Rover Motion-Based Simulation System

Our team developed a motion-based simulation system for lunar terrain vehicles which resides at Johnson Space Center’s Systems Engineering Simulator (SES) facility. This activity integrates existing fixed base simulation capabilities with a newly procured motion base platform for the design, development, evaluation, and training associated with lunar terrain vehicles. This incorporates a South Pole Lunar virtual reality simulation, combined with a pair of VR headsets, integrated within a rover cockpit on a motion platform for evaluating human performance and vehicle handling qualities for concept roving vehicle designs for surface mobility operations.

Motion-Based↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Humans to Mars, but How Many? Using Training Requirements Modeling to Inform Crew Size

Missions to Mars will differ from previous human spaceflight missions in that the onboard crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to the long communication delays. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, that crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise of the Mission Control Central (MCC) team NASA currently relies upon. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is developing a methodology for assessing the trade space of factors that affect the number of crew for future missions. This methodology includes the consideration of results from three human performance models developed using the Improved Performance Research and Integration Tool (IMPRINT) modeling platform as well as a custom-built model on expertise trained within the crew. The IMPRINT results will be presented in the modeling and simulation sub-tag. Here we present results of a model based on NASA’s crew qualification and responsibility matrix (CQRM), a tool used to identify the crew qualifications for each area of responsibility (operation, system, and payload) for a mission. The model outputs an optimized allocation of training assignments along with a flight-assigned CQRM that can be used to consider the expertise that can be trained within a crew of a given size. We discuss the CQRM model result implications on the trade space for Mars mission crew size.

Mars↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Humans to Mars, but How Many? Using Training Requirements Modeling to Inform Crew Size

Missions to Mars will differ from previous human spaceflight missions in that the onboard crew of astronauts will be required to operate in an Earth-independent manner due to the long communication delays. Without a systematic, repeatable process to determine the number and composition of crew necessary to successfully accomplish these missions, NASA increases the risk that crew sizes may be too small to meet primary mission objectives under nominal conditions and, more consequentially, that crewmembers may not have the expertise needed to successfully respond to unforeseen failures without the real-time expertise of the Mission Control Central (MCC) team NASA currently relies upon. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is developing a methodology for assessing the trade space of factors that affect the number of crew for future missions. This methodology includes the consideration of results from three human performance models developed using the Improved Performance Research and Integration Tool (IMPRINT) modeling platform as well as a custom-built model on expertise trained within the crew. The IMPRINT results will be presented in the modeling and simulation sub-tag. Here we present results of a model based on NASA’s crew qualification and responsibility matrix (CQRM), a tool used to identify the crew qualifications for each area of responsibility (operation, system, and payload) for a mission. The model outputs an optimized allocation of training assignments along with a flight-assigned CQRM that can be used to consider the expertise that can be trained within a crew of a given size. We discuss the CQRM model result implications on the trade space for Mars mission crew size.

Mars↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Development of Advanced Space Suits for Lunar Exploration

Significant work has been completed recently at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in the Space Suit and Crew Survival Systems Branch to design and mature an advanced exploration EVA (Extra-Vehicular Activity) architecture. This effort culminated in the xEMU (eXploration Extra-vehicular Mobility Unit) space suit, which was completed in 2022 and tested extensively through 2023, including human performance, cycle life performance and thermal vacuum testing. An overview of the xEMU design and test campaign is provided, as well as its value as the government reference design supporting the transition to EVA commercial services for the Artemis program. Lastly, a development roadmap is discussed which outlines NASA’s identified strategy to enable the next generation of exploration EVA hardware for sustaining-class Lunar and Mars missions.

Shane M McFarland↗