SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Footage shows the crew of STS-98 during various phases of their training, including an undocking simulation in the Fixed Bases Shuttle Mission Simulator (SMS), bailout training, and extravehicular activity (EVA) training at the NBL.
An overview of the improvements made on the spacewalking suits and equipment used to assemble the International Space Station (ISS) while in orbit is presented. Details are given on the adjustable heaters and helmet lights. The tools used are shown, and the safety equipment, such as space life jackets and stiff tethers, are described. Astronaut training in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) and shuttle simulators also are seen.
The construction and evolution of the International Space Station (ISS) is seen through various clips. Live footage shows the following: (1) the Zarya Module under construction and during launch preparations; (2) the Unity Module under construction, during launch preparations, and being lowered into the payload canister; (3) STS-88 Mission Specialists Jerry Ross and Jim Newman during training for their spacewalks, including activities in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL); (4) Zarya and Unity docking to the Service Module; (5) the Expedition 1 crew (William Shepherd, Yuri Gidzenko, and Sergei Krikalev) during emergency escape training in the Black Sea and during water survival training at Johnson Space Center; (6) the X-38 Crew Return Vehicle Drop Test; and (7) the US Destiny Laboratory Module, Pressurized Mating Adapter (PMA), Service Module, Italian Multi-Purpose Logistics Module, US Airlock, and US Habitation Module under construction. Computerized animations show the following: (1) an ISS fly-around; (2) the STS-88 Space Shuttle as it docks with Zarya and attaches Zarya to the Unity Module; (3) the Space Shuttle as it docks with ISS and installs the Z1 truss segment and PMA; (4) the Soyuz spacecraft as it docks with ISS; (5) interior and exterior views of the Columbus Attached Pressurized Module; and (6) a Transhab animation showing the interior and exterior and marking the components.
Footage shows the crew of STS-100, Commander Kent Rominger, Pilot Jeffrey Ashby, and Mission Specialists Chris Hadfield, Scott Parazynski, John Phillips, Umberto Guidoni, and Yuri Valentinovich Lonchakov, during various parts of their training, including the crew photo session, postlanding egress, extravehicular activity (EVA) large tool training, EVA training in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL), secondary payload training, and during VHF training.
This video is a collection of computer animations and live footage showing the construction and assembly of the International Space Station (ISS). Computer animations show the following: (1) ISS fly around; (2) ISS over a sunrise seen from space; (3) the launch of the Zarya Control Module; (4) a Proton rocket launch; (5) the Space Shuttle docking with Zarya and attaching Zarya to the Unity Node; (6) the docking of the Service Module, Zarya, and Unity to Soyuz; (7) the Space Shuttle docking to ISS and installing the Z1 Truss segment and the Pressurized Mating Adapter (PMA); (8) Soyuz docking to the ISS; (9) the Transhab components; and (10) a complete ISS assembly. Live footage shows the construction of Zarya, the Proton rocket, Unity Node, PMA, Service Module, US Laboratory, Italian Multipurpose Logistics Module, US Airlock, and the US Habitation Module. STS-88 Mission Specialists Jerry Ross and James Newman are seen training in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL). The Expedition 1 crewmembers, William Shepherd, Yuri Gidzenko, and Sergei Krikalev, are shown training in the Black Sea and at Johnson Space Flight Center for water survival.
Footage shows the crew of STS-109 (Commander Scott Altman, Pilot Duane Carey, Payload Commander John Grunsfeld, and Mission Specialists Nancy Currie, James Newman, Richard Linnehan, and Michael Massimino) during various parts of their training. Scenes show the crew's photo session, Post Landing Egress practice, training in Dome Simulator, Extravehicular Activity Training in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL), and using the Virtual Reality Laboratory Robotic Arm. The crew is also seen tasting food as they choose their menus for on-orbit meals.
Footage of the eighth day of STS-109 is shown during which Mission Specialists John Grunsfeld and Rick Linnehan service the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). A broad overview of the Columbia Orbiter mission is presented. On the fifth extravehicular activity (EVA) of the mission, Grunsfeld and Linnehan installed a new cryogenic cooling system and radiator on HST for NICMOS (Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer) which had not been previously operational due to the failure of an earlier cooling system. Linnehan and Grunsfeld are both shown on the end of the Orbiter's robot arm, the Remote Manipulator System, which was controlled by Commander Scott Altman. Following the completion of their spacewalks, the two Mission Specialists make statements which include thanking the numerous support personnel. Linnehan answers questions on the differences between training simulation at facilities such as the Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) and his actual experiences in space.
Footage shows the crew of STS-112 (Jeffrey Ashby, Commander; Pamela Melroy, Pilot; David Wolf, Piers Sellers, Sandra Magnus, and Fyodor Yurchikhin, Mission Specialists) during several parts of their training. The video is arranged into short segments. In 'Topside Activities at the NBL', Wolf and Sellers are fitted with EVA suits for pool training. 'Pre-Launch Bailout Training in CCT II' shows all six crew members exiting from the hatch on a model of a shuttle orbiter cockpit. 'EVA Training in the VR Lab' shows a crew member training with a virtual reality simulator, interspersed with footage of Magnus, and Wolf with Melroy, at monitors. There is a 'Crew Photo Session', and 'Pam Melroy and Sandy Magnus at the SES Dome' also features a virtual reality simulator. The final two segments of the video involve hands-on training. 'Post Landing Egress at the FFT' shows the crew suiting up into their flight suits, and being raised on a harness, to practice rapelling from the cockpit hatch. 'EVA Prep and Post at the ISS Airlock' shows the crew assembling an empty EVA suit onboard a model of a module. The crew tests oxygen masks, and Sellers is shown on an exercise bicycle with an oxygen mask, with his heart rate monitored (not shown).
The STS-111 Crew is in training for space flight. The crew consists of Commander Ken Cockrell, Pilot Paul Lockhart, Mission Specialists Franklin Chang-Diaz and Philippe Perrin. The crew training begins with Post Insertion Operations with the Full Fuselage Trainer (FFT). Franklin Chang-Diaz, Philippe Perrin and Paul Lockhart are shown in training for airlock and Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) activities. Bailout in Crew Compartment Training (CCT) with Expedition Five is also shown. The crew also gets experience with photography, television, and habitation equipment.
The STS-111 Expedition Five Crew begins with training on payload operations. Flight Engineer Peggy Whitson and Mission Specialist Sandy Magnus are shown in Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS) procedures. Flight Engineer Sergei Treschev gets suited for Neutral Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) training. Virtual Reality lab training is shown with Peggy Whitson. Habitation Equipment and procedures are also presented.
The STS-113 crew consists of Commander Jim Weatherbee, Pilot Paul Lockhart, and Mission Specialists Michael Lopez-Alegria and John Herrington. The goal of the STS-113 mission is to deliver the Expedition Six crew to the International Space Station and return the Expedition Five crew to Earth. Also, the P1 Truss will be installed on the International Space Station. The STS-113 crew is shown getting suited for Pre-Launch Ingress and Egress. The Neutral Buoyancy Lab Extravehicular Activity training (NBL) (EVA), CETA Bolt Familiarization, and Photography TV instruction are also presented.
STS-114 Discovery crew is shown in various training exercises at Johnson Space Center. The crew consists of Eileen Collins, Commander; James Kelley, Pilot; Charles Camarda, Mission Specialist; Wendy Lawrence, Mission Specialist; Soichi Noguchi, Mission Specialist; Steve Robinson, Mission Specialist; and Andy Thomas, Mission Specialist. The exercises include: 1) EVA training in the VR lab; 2) Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) EVA Training; 3) Walk to Motion Base Simulator; 4) EVA Preparations in ISS Airlock; and 7) Emergency Egress from Crew Compartment Trainer (CCT). A crew photo session is also presented. Footage of The Space Shuttle Atlantis inside the Kennedy Space Center Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) after its demating from the Solid Rocket Booster and External Tank is shown. The video ends with techniques for inspecting and repairing Thermal Protection System tiles, a video of external tank production at the Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF) and redesign of the foam from the bipod ramp at Michoud Assembly Facility (MAF).
The goal of this study is to determine the role that moisture plays in the injury to the fingers and fingernails during EVA training operations in the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory. Current Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU, with a PLSS) as configured in the NBL was used for all testing and a vent tube was extended down a single arm of the crewmember during the test; vent tube was moved between left and right arm to serve as experimental condition being investigated and the other arm served as control condition.
Drawing from the experiences of the Apollo missions, it is evident that the off nominal center of gravity (CG) induced by the portable life support system (PLSS) had significant impact on the locomotion stability of the crew. This in turn is believed to have been a major contributor to the high numbers of falls and high metabolic rates experienced by the crew, and thus significantly hampered the crew s performance. With this in mind, the EVA Physiology, Systems and Performance (EPSP) group at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) has been conducting tests to assess how spacesuit CG location impacts human performance in simulated lunar and Mars gravity. The results acquired to date show correlations between CG location and performance. However, noticeable variations in the performance data have been observed across subjects for fixed CG configurations. Consequently, it was hypothesized that this variability may be attributed to the anthropometrics of the different test subjects. It was further hypothesized that trunk-to-height ratio (THR) may be directly correlated to performance in reduced gravity; i.e. subjects with increased THR may have increased performance. To test this hypothesis, lunar and Mars gravity test data acquired over three years during NASA Neural Buoyancy Lab (NBL) tests and NASA Extreme Environment Missions Operation (NEEMO) missions were analyzed against THR, height, trunk length, and subject body mass/weight. The results of the study supported the hypothesis relating THR and performance, while the other three anthropometric parameters did not provide consistent correlations with performance. This in turn suggests that human performance in reduced gravity may be more dependent on anthropometric proportions than on body segment lengths and mass/weight.
Introduction: The overarching objective of the Integrated Suit Test (IST) series is to evaluate suited human performance using reduced-gravity analogs and learn what aspects of an EVA suit system affect human performance. For this objective to be successfully achieved, the testing methodology should be valid and reproducible, and the partial-gravity simulations must be as accurate and realistic as possible. Objectives: To highlight some of the key lessons learned about partial-gravity analogs and testing methodology, and to suggest considerations for optimizing the effectiveness and quality of results of future tests. Methods: Performance testing of suited and unsuited subjects was undertaken in different reduced-gravity analogs including the Space Vehicle Mockup Facility s Partial Gravity Simulator (POGO), parabolic flight on the C-9 aircraft, underwater environments including NASA s Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) and the Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL), and in field analogs including Desert Research and Technology Studies (RATS), the Haughton Mars Project (HMP), and the JSC Rock Pile. Subjects performed level walking, incline/decline walking, running, shoveling, picking up and transferring rocks, kneeling/standing, and task boards. Lessons Learned Analogs: No single analog will properly simulate all aspects of the true partial-gravity environment. The POGO is an ideal environment from the standpoint that there are no time limits or significant volumetric constraints, but it does have several limitations. It allows only 2 translational degrees of freedom (DOF) and applies true partial-gravity offload only through the subject s center of gravity (CG). Also, when a subject is doing non-stationary tasks, significant overhead inertia from the lift column seems to have a negative impact on performance. Parabolic flight allows full translational and rotational DOF and applies offload to all parts of the body, but the simulation lasts less than 30 seconds. When this is coupled with the volumetric constraints of the plane, both task selection and data collection options are significantly limited. The underwater environments also allow all 6 DOF and allow off-loading to be applied throughout the body, but the data collection capabilities are limited to little more than subjective ratings. In addition, water drag negatively affects performance of tasks requiring dynamic motion. Field analogs provide the ability to simulate lunar terrain and more realistic mission-like objectives, but all of them operate at 1-g, so suited human performance testing generally must utilize a reduced-mass or "mockup" suit, depending on study objectives. In general, the ground-based overhead-suspension partial-gravity analogs like POGO allow the most diverse data collection methods possible while still simulating partial gravity. However, as currently designed, the POGO has significant limitations. Design of the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) has begun and is focusing on adding full x,y,z translational DOF, improved offload accuracy, increased lift capacity, and active control of the x and y axes to minimize offload system inertia. Additionally, a new gimbal is being designed to reduce mass and inertia and to be able to work with different suits, as the current gimbal only supports suited testing with the Mark III Technology Demonstrator Suit (MKIII).
Astronaut physical performance capabilities in micro gravity EV A or on planetary surfaces when encumbered by a life support suit and debilitated by a long exposure to micro gravity will be less than unencumbered pre flight capabilities. The big question addressed by human factors engineers is: what can the astronaut be expected to do on EVA or when we arrive at a planetary surface? A second question is: what aids to performance will be needed to enhance the human physical capability? These questions are important for a number of reasons. First it is necessary to carry out accurate planning of human physical demands to ensure that time and energy critical tasks can be carried out with confidence. Second it is important that the crew members (and their ground or planetary base monitors) have a realistic picture of their own capabilities, as excessive fatigue can lead to catastrophic failure. Third it is important to design appropriate equipment to enhance human sensory capabilities, locomotion, materials handling and manipulation. The evidence from physiological research points to musculoskeletal, cardiovascular and neurovestibular degradation during long duration exposure to micro gravity . The evidence from the biomechanics laboratory (and the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory) points to a reduction in range of motion, strength and stamina when encumbered by a pressurized suit. The evidence from a long history of EVAs is that crewmembers are indeed restricted in their physical capabilities. There is a wealth of evidence in the literature on the causes and effects of degraded human performance in the laboratory, in sports and athletics, in industry and in other physically demanding jobs. One approach to this challenge is through biomechanical and performance modeling. Such models must be based on thorough task analysis, reliable human performance data from controlled studies, and functional extrapolations validated in analog contexts. The task analyses currently carried out for EVA activities are based more on extensive domain experience than any formal analytic structure. Conversely, physical task analysis for industrial and structured evidence from training and EV A contexts. Again on earth there is considerable evidence of human performance degradation due to encumbrance and fatigue. These industrial models generally take the form of a discounting equation. The development of performance estimates for space operations, such as timeline predictions for EVA is generally based on specific input from training activity, for example in the NBL or KC135. uniformed services tasks on earth are much more formalized. Human performance data in the space context has two sources: first there is the micro analysis of performance in structured tasks by the space physiology community and second there is the less structured evidence from training and EV A contexts.
As an early step in the preparation for future Extravehicular Activities (EVAs), astronauts perform neutral buoyancy testing to develop and verify EVA hardware and operations. Neutral buoyancy demonstrations at NASA Johnson Space Center's Sonny Carter Training Facility to date have primarily evaluated assembly and maintenance tasks associated with several elements of the International Space Station (ISS). With the retirement of the Shuttle, completion of ISS assembly, and introduction of commercial players for human transportation to space, evaluations at the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) will take on a new focus. Test objectives are selected for their criticality, lack of previous testing, or design changes that justify retesting. Assembly tasks investigated are performed using procedures developed by the flight hardware providers and the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD). Orbital Replacement Unit (ORU) maintenance tasks are performed using a more systematic set of procedures, EVA Concept of Operations for the International Space Station (JSC-33408), also developed by the MOD. This paper describes the requirements and process for performing a neutral buoyancy test, including typical hardware and support equipment requirements, personnel and administrative resource requirements, examples of ISS systems and operations that are evaluated, and typical operational objectives that are evaluated.
Topics covered include: Miniature, Variable-Speed Control Moment Gyroscope; NBL Pistol Grip Tool for Underwater Training of Astronauts; HEXPANDO Expanding Head for Fastener-Retention Hexagonal Wrench; Diagonal-Axes Stage for Pointing an Optical Communications Transceiver; Improvements in Speed and Functionality of a 670-GHz Imaging Radar; IONAC-Lite; Large Ka-Band Slot Array for Digital Beam-Forming Applications; Development of a 150-GHz MMIC Module Prototype for Large-Scale CMB Radiation; Coupling Between Waveguide-Fed Slot Arrays; PCB-Based Break-Out Box; Multiple-Beam Detection of Fast Transient Radio Sources; Router Agent Technology for Policy-Based Network Management; Remote Asynchronous Message Service Gateway; Automatic Tie Pointer for In-Situ Pointing Correction; Jitter Correction; MSLICE Sequencing; EOS MLS Level 2 Data Processing Software Version 3; DspaceOgre 3D Graphics Visualization Tool; Metallization for Yb14MnSb11-Based Thermoelectric Materials; Solvent/Non-Solvent Sintering To Make Microsphere Scaffolds; Enhanced Fuel-Optimal Trajectory-Generation Algorithm for Planetary Pinpoint Landing; Self-Cleaning Coatings and Materials for Decontaminating Field-Deployable Land and Water-Based Optical Systems; Separation of Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes with DEP-FFF; Li Anode Technology for Improved Performance; Post-Fragmentation Whole Genome Amplification-Based Method; Microwave Tissue Soldering for Immediate Wound Closure; Principles, Techniques, and Applications of Tissue Microfluidics; Robotic Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering and Organ Growth; Stress-Driven Selection of Novel Phenotypes; Method for Accurately Calibrating a Spectrometer Using Broadband Light; Catalytic Microtube Rocket Igniter; Stage Cylindrical Immersive Display; Vacuum Camera Cooler; Atomic Oxygen Fluence Monitor; Thermal Management Tools for Propulsion System Trade Studies and Analysis; Introduction to Physical Intelligence; Technique for Solving Electrically Small to Large Structures for Broadband Applications; Accelerated Adaptive MGS Phase Retrieval; Large Eddy Simulation Study for Fluid Disintegration and Mixing; Tropospheric Correction for InSAR Using Interpolated ECMWF Data and GPS Zenith Total Delay; Technique for Calculating Solution Derivatives With Respect to Geometry Parameters in a CFD Code; Acute Radiation Risk and BRYNTRN Organ Dose Projection Graphical User Interface; Probabilistic Path Planning of Montgolfier Balloons in Strong, Uncertain Wind Fields; Flight Simulation of ARES in the Mars Environment; Low-Outgassing Photogrammetry Targets for Use in Outer Space; Planning the FUSE Mission Using the SOVA Algorithm; Monitoring Spacecraft Telemetry Via Optical or RF Link; and Robust Thermal Control of Propulsion Lines for Space Missions.