Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “EVA simulation”

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 109 records · Page 6

Testing the Exploration Conops (Excon) Mockup Suit in Lunar Analog Environments in 2022

Understanding how to effectively train for Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) for Artemis missions is critical. Developing high-fidelity simulation environments is important for Artemis mission preparation. Because the actual Lunar exploration environment cannot be fully replicated on Earth, it is paramount to determine where and how to properly train the Artemis team. Tasked by the new Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program(EHP), a team of stakeholders from engineering, flight operations, human health and performance, astromaterials and science, and the crew office worked together to perform EVAs in 3 simulated lunar environments. The overall focus for this test series was developing the capability to perform Artemis simulated EVAs in high-fidelity, full-scale environments. This test series was broken into 3 distinct tests titled after the EHP integrated test team: Joint EVA Test Team (JETT). The test locations are planned to serve as Artemis training sites and were selected because of their relevance to the expected Artemis Lunar terrain. JETT1was conducted near Kilbourne Holeby El Paso, Texas and focused on hardware development and checkout. JETT2 was conducted in the Icelandic Highlands and began the transition towards EVA concept operations(con-ops), risks and technology.JETT3 was conducted near SP Crater by Flagstaff Arizona and focused on simulating the Artemis III mission with a simulated Houston based Flight Control Team (FCT) and a Science Mission Directorate (SMD) science team. All three JETT tests utilized the Excon mockup space suit. The Excon mockup suit is a light-weight, unpressurized Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU)simulator. While it cannot replicate the feel of working within a pressurized suit, it does introduce similar volume constraints and some of the mobility programing to simulate the user experience in the xEMU. Overall, the JETT testing was able to create a simulated Lunar EVA and have two subjects perform full scale operations in line with Artemis III mission expectations. Future work is planned to continue to improve the simulation quality of Lunar EVA simulations.

spacesuit↗

EMU Suit Performance Simulation

Introduction: Designing a planetary suit is very complex and often requires difficult trade‐offs between performance, cost, mass, and system complexity. To verify that new suit designs meet requirements, full prototypes must be built and tested with human subjects. However, numerous design iterations will occur before the hardware meets those requirements. Traditional draw‐prototype‐test paradigms for research and development are prohibitively expensive with today's shrinking Government budgets. Personnel at NASA are developing modern simulation techniques that focus on a human‐centric design paradigm. These new techniques make use of virtual prototype simulations and fully adjustable physical prototypes of suit hardware. This is extremely advantageous and enables comprehensive design down‐selections to be made early in the design process. Objectives: The primary objective was to test modern simulation techniques for evaluating the human performance component of two EMU suit concepts, pivoted and planar style hard upper torso (HUT). Methods: This project simulated variations in EVA suit shoulder joint design and subject anthropometry and then measured the differences in shoulder mobility caused by the modifications. These estimations were compared to human‐in‐the‐loop test data gathered during past suited testing using four subjects (two large males, two small females). Results: Results demonstrated that EVA suit modeling and simulation are feasible design tools for evaluating and optimizing suit design based on simulated performance. The suit simulation model was found to be advantageous in its ability to visually represent complex motions and volumetric reach zones in three dimensions, giving designers a faster and deeper comprehension of suit component performance vs. human performance. Suit models were able to discern differing movement capabilities between EMU HUT configurations, generic suit fit concerns, and specific suit fit concerns for crewmembers based on individual anthropometry

Cowley, Matthew S.↗

NEEMO 14: Evaluation of Human Performance for Rover, Cargo Lander, Crew Lander, and Exploration Tasks in Simulated Partial Gravity

The ultimate success of future human space exploration missions is dependent on the ability to perform extravehicular activity (EVA) tasks effectively, efficiently, and safely, whether those tasks represent a nominal mode of operation or a contingency capability. To optimize EVA systems for the best human performance, it is critical to study the effects of varying key factors such as suit center of gravity (CG), suit mass, and gravity level. During the 2-week NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) 14 mission, four crewmembers performed a series of EVA tasks under different simulated EVA suit configurations and used full-scale mockups of a Space Exploration Vehicle (SEV) rover and lander. NEEMO is an underwater spaceflight analog that allows a true mission-like operational environment and uses buoyancy effects and added weight to simulate different gravity levels. Quantitative and qualitative data collected during NEEMO 14, as well as from spacesuit tests in parabolic flight and with overhead suspension, are being used to directly inform ongoing hardware and operations concept development of the SEV, exploration EVA systems, and future EVA suits. OBJECTIVE: To compare human performance across different weight and CG configurations. METHODS: Four subjects were weighed out to simulate reduced gravity and wore either a specially designed rig to allow adjustment of CG or a PLSS mockup. Subjects completed tasks including level ambulation, incline/decline ambulation, standing from the kneeling and prone position, picking up objects, shoveling, ladder climbing, incapacitated crewmember handling, and small and large payload transfer. Subjective compensation, exertion, task acceptability, and duration data as well as photo and video were collected. RESULTS: There appear to be interactions between CG, weight, and task. CGs nearest the subject s natural CG are the most predictable in terms of acceptable performance across tasks. Future research should focus on understanding the interactions between CG, mass, and subject differences.

Chappell, Steven P.↗

Developing A Hybrid Spacesuit Simulator as A Research Tool for Assessing Extravehicular Activity Relevant Workload

Conducting human tests in a pressurized spacesuit is limited by availability, cost, and manpower; however, pressurized spacesuits are not always needed depending on the objectives of testing, including the development and testing of new informatics capabilities. The Human Physiology, Performance, Protection & Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA is developing a Hybrid Spacesuit Simulator (HS3) to support testing and characterization of human performance during analog planetary exploration extravehicular activities (EVAs). The goal of HS3 is to create a low-cost, modular, and unpressurized spacesuit simulator as a research tool that provides relevant physical and cognitive workload approximations with EVA-like immersion. HS3 consists of a soft outer suit, thermal control, gloves, boots, helmet, and integrated bioinformatics and communications. Baseline HS3 assessments were performed during 3-hour EVA simulations in two different subjects (DEMO1 and DEMO2) that included traverses at variable resistances and geological sampling activities. Liquid cooling garment (LCG) temperature, mean skin temperature, heart rate, motion capture, and metabolic rate were collected during each 3-hour simulated EVA. During DEMO1 and DEMO2, baseline metabolic rates at rest were 836 ± 327 BTU/hr and 869 ± 207 BTU/hr and increased to 2124 ± 548 BTU/hr and 2269 ± 559 BTU/hr, respectively, during 500m traverse. Average inlet LCG temperatures were 29.57 ± 6.62 °C and 25.63 ± 6.48 °C for DEMO1 and DEMO2 with increased outlet LCG temperatures of 33.53 ± 6.62 °C and 29.21 ± 4.79 °C, respectively. Overall, HS3 will enable future studies to characterize EVA tasks, human performance, and test future EVA capabilities in analog test environments without the need for pressurized suited environments.

Suit simulator↗

Time Course of Effects of Carbon Dioxide Exposure on Physical and Cognitive Performance in a Simulated Surface Extravehicular Activity Contingency Scenario

INTRODUCTION Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is a metabolic byproduct produced by humans that must be scrubbed from the atmosphere by environmental control and life support systems in space vehicles and spacesuits to prevent buildup. Current nominal CO 2 limits are set by NASA Standard 3001, however, limits during contingency situations are not specified. The purpose of this study was to characterize and quantify the physiological, cognitive, and self-assessed symptom and performance metrics as a function of inspired CO 2 (P I CO 2 ) during a simulated 1-hour contingency lunar EVA scenario in virtual reality (VR). METHODS Fifteen healthy subjects completed 7 simulated EVA scenarios walking on a passive treadmill for one hour breathing dry, ambient air mixed with added CO 2 in a blind, counterbalanced manner (P I CO 2 : 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30 mmHg) simulating a 2.0 km contingency EVA walkback to a habitat on the lunar surface in the event of a CO 2 scrubber malfunction. Subjects were immersed in a Lunar VR environment and asked to maintain their walking speed between 2.1 km/h and an upper limit individually calibrated to a fixed metabolic workload of 1.3 L/min of O 2 consumption, and performed periodic cognitive tasks and continuous cardiopulmonary measurements. Self-assessments of symptoms and task performance were measured via verbal Likert-scale survey at the onset of the walkback and at 10-minute intervals thereafter. RESULTS The time course of cardiopulmonary, cognitive, and self-reported responses at each level of P I CO 2 will be presented. All 15 subjects were able to complete the 1-hr walk back task at all CO 2 levels. Physiological responses were rapid, typically within 1 to 5 minutes. No effects of time were detected for cognitive measures. Symptomatic ratings of headache, shortness of breath, and fatigue demonstrated a time-course development, reaching asymptote after 40 minutes of CO 2 exposure. DISCUSSION These findings will inform the posture of risk associated with CO 2 exposure on human health and performance during microgravity and planetary surface operations, This will help inform decisions related to space suit and environmental life support hardware requirements and EVA operational limits for contingency extravehicular activity (EVA) scenarios.

carbon dioxide↗

CIPHER: Egress Fitness

The transition between gravity environments will involve one of the most complex, high-risk phases of exploration missions. The reduced functional capacity caused by physiological deconditioning adaptations in microgravity coupled with the stressors of re-entry into partial gravity environments will increase risks to crew, even with rigorous adherence to inflight countermeasures. Specifically, two high-risk scenarios may be required to be performed soon after gravity transitions: 1) nominal and/or emergency unassisted capsule egress task after return to Earth, and 2) planetary extravehicular activity (EVA) soon after landing on Mars or the Moon. Quantification of crewmember’s functional performance after long-duration spaceflight is necessary to inform concepts of operations for future exploration missions. The overarching aim of this study is to quantify post-landing functional performance with deconditioning after long-duration ISS missions. This study is broken down into two phases. Phase 1 includes a pilot study to assess the overall feasibility and demonstrate the capability to perform mission-like tasks shortly after landing. Phase 2, the Egress Fitness study, which is part of the Complement of Integrated Protocols for Human Exploration Research (CIPHER), uses a task-based approach to characterize functional performance in long-duration ISS crewmembers before flight and shortly after return to Earth. The pilot and full Egress Fitness study includes pre-flight and post-flight testing of simulated emergency egress out of a functional capsule mockup and a Mars gravity EVA simulation at the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) facility. The EVA simulation tasks include suit donning, hatch egress, ladder descent, task board cable operations, baggage transfer over sand/rocky regolith, alignment with a rear entry port, and suit egress. The post-flight simulated capsule egress test occurs 1–4 h after landing and the planetary EVA simulation occurs 18–36 h after landing. The full CIPHER Egress Fitness study has additional pre-flight sessions, longer EVA tasks that include traverse and geology sampling, and post-flight sessions on R+1, 4, and 8 to characterize the timeframe of recovery. Pilot Egress Fitness has completed baseline and post-flight testing on four crewmembers. That study remains open. Originally this was to cover the Boeing CFT mission, but now also includes private astronauts on commercial spaceflights. CIPHER study data collection is ongoing with 2 subjects completed and 4 additional subjects consented. This study will quantify post-landing functional performance in operationally relevant simulations to help inform fitness for duty standards and future planetary concepts of operations shortly after landing.

Jason Norcross↗

The design, fabrication and delivery of a spacelab neutral buoyancy Instrument Pointing System (IPS) mockup

Underwater simulations of EVA contingency operations such as manual jettison, payload disconnect, and payload clamp actuation were used to define crew aid needs and mockup pecularities and characteristics to verify the validity of simulation using the trainer. A set of mockup instrument pointing system tests was conducted and minor modifications and refinements were made. Flight configuration struts were tested and verified to be operable by the flight crew. Tasks involved in developing the following end items are described: IPS gimbal system, payload, and payload clamp assembly; the igloos (volumetric); spacelab pallets, experiments, and hardware; experiment, and hardware; experiment 7; and EVA hand tools, support hardware (handrails and foot restraints). The test plan preparation and test support are also covered.

Vanvalkenburgh, C. N.↗

Desert Research and Technology Studies 2005 Report

During the first two weeks of September 2005, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC) Advanced Extravehicular Activity (AEVA) team led the field test portion of the 2005 Research and Technology Studies (RATS). The Desert RATS field test activity is the culmination of the various individual science and advanced engineering discipline areas year-long technology and operations development efforts into a coordinated field test demonstration under representative (analog) planetary surface terrain conditions. The purpose of the RATS is to drive out preliminary exploration concept of operations EVA system requirements by providing hands-on experience with simulated planetary surface exploration extravehicular activity (EVA) hardware and procedures. The RATS activities also are of significant importance in helping to develop the necessary levels of technical skills and experience for the next generation of engineers, scientists, technicians, and astronauts who will be responsible for realizing the goals of the Constellation Program. The 2005 Desert RATS was the eighth RATS field test and was the most systems-oriented, integrated field test to date with participants from NASA field centers, the United States Geologic Survey (USGS), industry partners, and research institutes. Each week of the test, the 2005 RATS addressed specific sets of objectives. The first week focused on the performance of surface science astro-biological sampling operations, including planetary protection considerations and procedures. The second week supported evaluation of the Science, Crew, Operations, and Utility Testbed (SCOUT) proto-type rover and its sub-systems. Throughout the duration of the field test, the Communications, Avionics, and Infomatics pack (CAI-pack) was tested. This year the CAI-pack served to provide information on surface navigation, science sample collection procedures, and EVA timeline awareness. Additionally, 2005 was the first year since the Apollo program that two pressurized suited test subjects have worked together simultaneously. Another first was the demonstration of recharge of cryogenic life support systems while in-use by the suited test subjects. The recharge capability allowed the simulated EVA test duration to be doubled, facilitating SCOUT proto-type rover testing. This paper summarizes Desert RATS 2005 test hardware, detailed test objectives, test operations and test results.

Ross, Amy J.↗

A Decision Support System for Extravehicular Operations Under Significant Communication Latency

Within the next few decades, humanity hopes to perform extravehicular activities (EVAs) on the surface of Mars; however, several technical and operational challenges must first be overcome. Foremost among these challenges is managing a significant two-way communication latency between Earth and Mars. Current and historical paradigms of EVA operations have required near-real-time communication between the crewmember(s) performing an EVA and an Earth-based mission control. Next-generation operational paradigms for supporting deep space exploration will necessitate a distributed decision authority system, including delayed Earth-based mission control, the on-planet extravehicular crewmember(s), and intermediate mission support from intravehicular crewmember(s) within real-time communication range. This latter group is of particular interest: they must provide operations support without the plentiful resources available to mission control on Earth. For this purpose, NASA is developing the Personalized EVA Informatics and Decision Support (PersEIDS) software platform. PersEIDS is designed to bolster operator situational awareness and offload operator workload by automating the tracking and projection of consumables usage over an EVA timeline, providing real-time probabilistic safety assessments of an EVA timeline given consumables constraints, and recommending alternative EVA timeline(s) when the active timeline is not expected to be completed under consumables limits. The PersEIDS concept of operations, use cases, and models will be presented. A limited version of PersEIDS was demonstrated during a three-day-long study where each day a roughly four-hour-long simulated Martian EVA was performed in virtual reality at the NASA Johnson Space Center. The first day was a control trial without PersEIDS support; the second and third days represented different levels of decision support provided by PersEIDS to the intravehicular crewmember acting as mission control. With PersEIDS support, the IV crewmember was able to manage the mission to completion faster and with more remaining consumables; however, additional testing is required to understand confounding factors, e.g. training bias.

Mars↗

A Decision Support System for Extravehicular Operations Under Significant Communication Latency

Humanity hopes to perform extravehicular activities (EVAs) on the surface of Mars; however, several technical and operational challenges must first be overcome. Foremost among these challenges is managing a significant communication latency between Earth and Mars. Current and historical paradigms of EVA operations have required near-real-time communication between the crewmember(s) and Earth-based mission control. Nextgeneration operational paradigms for supporting deep space exploration will necessitate a distributed decision authority system, including delayed Earth-based mission control, the onplanet extravehicular crewmember(s), and intermediate mission support from intravehicular (IV) crewmember(s) within real-time communication range. This latter group is of particular interest: they must provide operations support without the plentiful resources available to mission control on Earth. Thus, NASA is developing the Personalized EVA Informatics and Decision Support (PersEIDS) software platform. PersEIDS is designed to bolster operator situational awareness and offload operator workload by automatically tracking and projecting consumables usage over an EVA timeline, providing real-time probabilistic safety assessments and recommending alternative EVA timeline(s) when the active timeline is not expected to be completed under consumables limits. The PersEIDS concept of operations, use cases, and models will be presented. A limited version of PersEIDS was demonstrated during a three-day-long study where each day a roughly four-hour-long simulated Martian EVA was performed in virtual reality at the NASA Johnson Space Center. The first day was a control trial without PersEIDS support; the second and third days represented different levels of decision support provided by PersEIDS to the IV crewmember acting as mission control. With PersEIDS support, the IV crewmember was able to manage the mission to completion faster and with more remaining consumables; however, additional testing is required to understand confounding factors, e.g., training bias.

Mars↗

PersEIDS: A Biomedical Decision Support System for Extravehicular Operations Under Significant Communication Latency

Humanity hopes to perform extravehicular activities (EVAs) on the surface of Mars; however, several technical and operational challenges must first be overcome. Foremost among these challenges is managing a significant communication latency between Earth and Mars. Current and historical paradigms of EVA operations have required near-real-time communication between the crewmember(s) and Earth-based mission control. Nextgeneration operational paradigms for supporting deep space exploration will necessitate a distributed decision authority system, including delayed Earth-based mission control, the onplanet extravehicular crewmember(s), and intermediate mission support from intravehicular (IV) crewmember(s) within real-time communication range. This latter group is of particular interest: they must provide operations support without the plentiful resources available to mission control on Earth. Thus, NASA is developing the Personalized EVA Informatics and Decision Support (PersEIDS) software platform. PersEIDS is designed to bolster operator situational awareness and offload operator workload by automatically tracking and projecting consumables usage over an EVA timeline, providing real-time probabilistic safety assessments and recommending alternative EVA timeline(s) when the active timeline is not expected to be completed under consumables limits. The PersEIDS concept of operations, use cases, and models will be presented. A limited version of PersEIDS was demonstrated during a three-day-long study where each day a roughly four-hour-long simulated Martian EVA was performed in virtual reality at the NASA Johnson Space Center. The first day was a control trial without PersEIDS support; the second and third days represented different levels of decision support provided by PersEIDS to the IV crewmember acting as mission control. With PersEIDS support, the IV crewmember was able to manage the mission to completion faster and with more remaining consumables; however, additional testing is required to understand confounding factors, e.g., training bias.

Mars↗

JETT3: A Holistic, Integrated Analog for Artemis Lunar Surface Exploration

Since 1972, NASA astronauts have performed hundreds of Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) in support of Skylab, Space Shuttle and International Space Station missions. Not since Apollo, however, have EVAs been driven by discovery-based principles of scientific exploration. Upcoming Artemis missions are challenged to build on lessons learned from Apollo, merging 50 years of EVA experience with the planetary science community’s expertise in the remote surface exploration of Mars. The highest-fidelity preparation for Artemis includes both operational and scientific underpinning to represent the complete, complex picture of lunar surface operations. The Joint EVA & Human Surface Mobility Test Team (JETT) is an interdisciplinary team providing such an environment for collaborative analog testing. JETT builds upon prior analog campaigns (e.g., [1, 2]) to provide high-fidelity environments for hardware and concept of operations development. Sponsored by the NASA EVA & Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP), JETT includes representatives from EHP, NASA Engineering, the Science Mission Directorate (SMD), Human Health & Performance, and the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD). JETT tests evaluate NASA reference designs for EVA (e.g., suits and tools), address gaps and risks for Artemis lunar surface operations, develop capabilities for EVA and science tasks, enable technology maturation, and provide training for Artemis EVA operations. JETT3, the final JETT field test of FY22, occurred Oct 3-11, 2022 in the San Francisco Volcanic Field north of Flagstaff, AZ. The test focused on developing the Artemis concept of operations and systems, including integrating an Artemis-like Science Team into a NASA Flight Control Team (FCT) to plan and execute a series of simulated lunar EVAs in an environment analogous to Artemis 3.

T. E. Caswell↗

JETT3: A Holistic, Integrated Analog for Artemis Lunar Surface Exploration

Since 1972, NASA astronauts have performed hundreds of Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) in support of Skylab, Space Shuttle and International Space Station missions. Not since Apollo, however, have EVAs been driven by discovery-based principles of scientific exploration. Upcoming Artemis missions are challenged to build on lessons learned from Apollo, merging 50 years of EVA experience with the planetary science community’s expertise in the remote surface exploration of Mars. The highest-fidelity preparation for Artemis includes both operational and scientific underpinning to represent the complete, complex picture of lunar surface operations. The Joint EVA & Human Surface Mobility Test Team (JETT) is an interdisciplinary team providing such an environment for collaborative analog testing. JETT builds upon prior analog campaigns (e.g., [1, 2]) to provide high-fidelity environments for hardware and concept of operations development. Sponsored by the NASA EVA & Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP), JETT includes representatives from EHP, NASA Engineering, the Science Mission Directorate (SMD), Human Health & Performance, and the Flight Operations Directorate (FOD). JETT tests evaluate NASA reference designs for EVA (e.g., suits and tools), address gaps and risks for Artemis lunar surface operations, develop capabilities for EVA and science tasks, enable technology maturation, and provide training for Artemis EVA operations. JETT3, the final JETT field test of FY22, occurred Oct 3-11, 2022 in the San Francisco Volcanic Field north of Flagstaff, AZ. The test focused on developing the Artemis concept of operations and systems, including integrating an Artemis-like Science Team into a NASA Flight Control Team (FCT) to plan and execute a series of simulated lunar EVAs in an environment analogous to Artemis 3.

T. E. Caswell↗

Motion-based carriage simulation of extra-vehicular activity (EVA) rescue

A research program was outlined for a series of Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) rescue studies. The general purpose is to get a better appreciation of the characteristics describing an EVA rescue scenario. Several studies have been completed in the Virtual Interactive Environment Workstation (VIEW) at NASA Ames Research Center. Similar studies are planned for a variety of simulators both to get more reliable results for the EVA rescue problem and to baseline the simulators against one another. Work is planned for a motion-based carriage to expand the validity of the previously obtained results.

Brody, Adam R.↗

Simulation of extra-vehicular activity (EVA) self-rescue

Self-rescue during EVA is examined in terms of the use of a hand-held thruster that is similar to the hand-held maneuvering units HHMU developed for earlier programs. The problem of assessing velocity-increment requirements is addressed by means of examples of simulation technologies for studying EVA. The technologies evaluated include virtual reality systems such as the Virtual Interactive Environment Workstation (VIEW) and the Space Operations Simulator, and standard approaches like the air-bearing floor and the space shuttle. The VIEW is employed for a study of five trained NASA subjects that conduct a simulated return to a spacecraft with an HMMU under variable conditions. The study demonstrates the efficacy of VIEW for obtaining fuel-consumption values, and separation velocity is identified as the most significant determinant of the fuel and time requirements for a self-rescue operation.

Brody, Adam R.↗

Metabolic rate control during extravehicular activity simulations and measurement techniques during actual EVAS

A description of the methods used to control and measure metabolic rate during ground simulations is given. Work levels attained at the Space Environment Simulation Laboratory are presented. The techniques and data acquired during ground simulations are described and compared with inflight procedures. Data from both the Skylab and Apollo Program were utilized and emphasis is given to the methodology, both in simulation and during flight. The basic techniques of work rate assessment are described. They include oxygen consumption, which was useful for averages over long time periods, heart rate correlations based on laboratory calibrations, and liquid cooling garment temperature changes. The relative accuracy of these methods as well as the methods of real-time monitoring at the Mission Control Center are discussed. The advantages and disadvantages of each of the metabolic measurement techniques are discussed. Particular emphasis is given to the problem of utilizing oxygen decrement for short time periods and heart rate at low work levels. A summary is given of the effectiveness of work rate control and measurements; and current plans for future EVA monitoring are discussed.

David J. Horrigan↗

Investigation of Hardware and Instrumentation to Measure Hand Grasp Activity with the Spacesuit Gloves

Introduction: During the 2022 suited injury summit, it was hypothesized that there will be concerns for hand and glove injuries for future exploration space missions, especially given the fact that the “total number of Extravehicular activity (EVA) hours and frequency” for lunar surface missions is expected to vastly increase [1]. It has been reported that the hands experienced the greatest “absolute numbers” of reported injuries and far exceeds other injuries during EVA [1, 2]. It was reported that the most fatiguing part of the surface EVA was the repetitive gripping tasks [3]. It was recommended that a “glove sub-team” be created to look at possible injury mechanism and mitigation strategies. Some of the recommendations that were suggested [1] are as follows: examine hand fatigue, utilize motion capture, examine the duration and frequency of hand movements, and identify frequent hand motions. We started assessing hardware and instrumentation to measure hand grasp activity in the pressurized glove environment. The purpose of this test was to perform a hardware evaluation for motion capture (MoCap) gloves obtained from StretchSense (Auckland, New Zealand). The specific gloves used were the Pro Fidelity and SuperSplay to determine the repeatability, reliability, feasibility, and useability inside of a pressurized gloved environment. Methods: The MoCap gloves were customized (e.g., battery/Bluetooth pack relocated to upper arm) to better suit the pressurized testing environment and protect the subject from unintentional injury (Fig. 1). Fourteen total subjects from different demographics (i.e., gender and pressurized glove experience level) participated in this test series. Testing included one session each of a baseline data collection (NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) building 21) and a spacesuit glove box (Fig. 2 at JSC building 7 room 2027) data collection (under vacuum down to 4.3 psid), where each session lasted 3-5 hours. Controlled and reproducible tasks to systematically evaluate the repeatability and reliability of the hardware were performed during baseline data collection. Additionally, subjects performed simulated EVA-like tasks in a pressurized gloved environment. For all sessions, MoCap gloves were placed on each of the subjects’ hands and the signal from it, or the raw capacitance (Fig. 3), was analysed. The raw capacitance was used to estimate the open and closed hand states between the testing conditions and allow us to provide an offset caused by the pressurized environment. Results & Discussion: Initial observation with the bare hands (baseline) condition showed that the MoCap gloves appeared to track grasping and releasing of the fingers (opening and closing fist) with both high- and low-speed conditions, while adduction and abduction of the fingers were not relatively tracked. A hardware evaluation was done outside of the glove box to assess the reliability and repeatability of the MoCap glove. In one task, a point force was applied to various locations on the back of the hand. When the point force was applied to the space between the 1st digit and the pointer finger, there was a noticeable distortion to the MoCap data. Another task examining an increasing force from a 10 lb. sandbag applied to the back of the hand while lying flat on a table, showed a constant flat line with only a distortion when the weight was increased or added to the back of the hand. Fig. 3 shows an object relocation task where you can see when each individual finger “opened” and “closed” (changed position) when picking up and setting down the dumbbell. When the fingers were stationary, the signal remained relatively flat compared to the peaks and valleys that can be observed in Fig. 3. This study showed promising results and imperative input into an attempt to discriminate between hand states across various functional tasks and should be evaluated with context to the repeatability and reliability outcomes. Depending on the task done inside of the pressurized glove box environment and outside, the results appear to be affected by many different factors (i.e., drift, pressure, hand size, etc.). Significance: If this hardware proves to be reliable and repeatable in determining the open and closed hand states then this may provide critical insight into assisting in the characterization of the pressurized gloved environment and the effect on crew member exertion level. Ultimately, this tool will provide useful data for quantifying the repetitive nature of EVA training and tasks. Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge the NASA Mars Campaign Office for providing funding for this research. Lastly, thanks to all the engineers and technicians at NASA JSC who helped with this data collection. References: [1] Reiber, et al. (2022), NASA/TM-20220007605; [2] Scheuring, et al. (2009), Av., Sp., and Envir. Med. 80(2). [3] Scheuring, et al. (2007), NASA/TM–2007–214755.

Rachel L Thompson↗