SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Crew Seating”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 163 records · Page 9

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2009

Occupant Protection during Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle Landings

The constellation program is evaluating current vehicle design capabilities for nominal water landings and contingency land landings of the Orion Crew Exploration vehicle. The Orion Landing Strategy tiger team was formed to lead the technical effort for which associated activities include the current vehicle design, susceptibility to roll control and tip over, reviewing methods for assessing occupant injury during ascent / aborts /landings, developing an alternate seat/attenuation design solution which improves occupant protection and operability, and testing the seat/attenuation system designs to ensure valid results. The EVA physiology, systems and Performance (EPSP) project is leading the effort under the authority of the Tiger Team Steering committee to develop, verify, validate and accredit biodynamics models using a variety of crash and injury databases including NASCAR, Indy Car and military aircraft. The validated biodynamics models will be used by the Constellation program to evaluate a variety of vehicle, seat and restraint designs in the context of multiple nominal and off-nominal landing scenarios. The models will be used in conjunction with Acceptable Injury Risk definitions to provide new occupant protection requirements for the Constellation Program.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗

NASA NTRS2024

Evaluation of Intranasal Scopolamine for the Prevention of Wave Motion Induced Motion Sickness While Maintaining Performance on Operationally Relevant Tasks

Motion sickness represents one of the greatest clinical challenges impacting crew activities during and following g-transitions. Our overall goal is to characterize the effectiveness of motion sickness countermeasures during controlled laboratory experiments using capsule wave motion simulation and during field testing in operational environments. This laboratory study focused on prevention of motion sickness using intranasal scopolamine using a double-blinded repeated measures design in 30 subjects (19M, 11F). Intranasal scopolamine was provided by Defender Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (DPI-386 Nasal Gel, referred to as Inscop) self-administered by a nasal pump (Aptar Pharma) that delivers 0.4 mg dose (0.2 mg / nostril). During each session, subjects were exposed to complex wave motion on a six degree-of-freedom platform that included pitch, roll and heave at provocative stimulus frequencies (0.1-0.25 Hz) while seated in an illuminated cabin deprived of external visual cues. Motion sickness symptoms were compared across treatment and placebo control sessions counterbalanced across subjects and separated by at least one week. The time-to-motion sickness endpoint was based on severe malaise, defined as symptom score of ≥8 points using the Pensacola Diagnostic Index [1]. The bioavailability of scopolamine for each session was estimated from plasma concentrations obtained every 15 min[2]. Side effects during the treatment session were minimal, and performance was not impaired on a test battery including motion perception tracking, tablet-based eye-hand coordination and psychomotor vigilance testing. The plasma concentration remained near-peak levels throughout the 45 min motion sickness testing for most subjects. The percentile ranking on the Motion Sickness Susceptibility Questionnaire [MSSQ, 3]was moderately correlated with the motion sickness time-to-endpoint during the placebo control session (rho = –0.3, p=0.056). Seventeen subjects did not reach an endpoint during their placebo session and were eliminated from subsequent analysis. Another subject was excluded due to insufficient plasma concentration during the treatment session. For the remaining 12 subjects, the change in time-to-motion sickness endpoint between placebo and treatment sessions was moderately correlated with plasma concentration (rho =0.48, p = 0.056), improving on average 4.4 ± 18.4 min, mean ± std with Inscop versus placebo. Our results are consistent with previous findings that intranasal delivery of scopolamine can be effective at reducing motion sickness symptoms with minimal cognitive or sedative side effects. Future work is needed to optimize the delivery of Inscop for rescue (treatment) of symptoms following g-transitions as one of the key advantages of this formulation is self-administration in a suited environment. We will also explore how the combination of Inscop with non-pharmaceutical sensory aids, e.g., vibrotactile feedback of Earth vertical, may further mitigate motion sickness and improve task performance.

S J Wood↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crewmembers and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80 individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of 2021. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3 %) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

N Newby↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crew members and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of September 2023. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3%) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

N Newby↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crewmembers and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80 individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of September 2023. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3 %) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

P Greenhalgh↗

NASA NTRS2010

Crash Test of an MD-500 Helicopter with a Deployable Energy Absorber Concept

On December 2, 2009, a full scale crash test was successfully conducted of a MD-500 helicopter at the NASA Langley Research Center Landing and Impact Research Facility . The purpose of this test was to evaluate a novel composite honeycomb deployable energy absorbing (DEA) concept for attenuation of structural and crew loads during helicopter crashes under realistic crash conditions. The DEA concept is an alternative to external airbags, and absorbs impact energy through crushing. In the test, the helicopter impacted the concrete surface with 11.83 m/s (38.8 ft/s) horizontal, 7.80 m/s (25.6 ft/s) vertical and 0.15 m/s (0.5 ft/s) lateral velocities; corresponding to a resultant velocity of 14.2 m/s (46.5 ft/s). The airframe and skid gear were instrumented with accelerometers and strain gages to determine structural integrity and load attenuation, while the skin of the airframe was covered with targets for use by photogrammetry to record gross vehicle motion before, during, and after the impact. Along with the collection of airframe data, one Hybrid III 50th percentile anthropomorphic test device (ATD), two Hybrid II 50th percentile ATDs and a specialized human surrogate torso model (HSTM) occupant were seated in the airframe and instrumented for the collection of occupant loads. Resultant occupant data showed that by using the DEA, the loads on the Hybrid II and Hybrid III ATDs were in the Low Risk regime for the injury criteria, while structural data showed the airframe retained its structural integrity post crash. Preliminary results show that the DEA is a viable concept for the attenuation of impact loads.

Littell, Justin D.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Acquisition of Skill Proficiency Over Multiple Sessions of a Novel Rover Simulation

Following long-duration exploration transits, adaptive changes in sensorimotor function may impair the crew's ability to safely perform manual control tasks such as operating pressurized rovers. Postflight performance will also be influenced by the level of preflight skill proficiency they have attained. The purpose of this study was to characterize the acquisition of skills in a motion-based rover simulation over multiple sessions, and to investigate the effects of varying the simulation scenarios. METHODS: Twenty healthy subjects were tested in 5 sessions, with 1-3 days between sessions. Each session consisted of a serial presentation of 8 discrete tasks to be completed as quickly and accurately as possible. Each task consisted of 1) perspective-taking, using a map that defined a docking target, 2) navigation toward the target around a Martian outpost, and 3) docking a side hatch of the rover to a visually guided target. The simulator utilized a Stewart-type motion base (CKAS, Australia), single-seat cabin with triple scene projection covering 150 deg horizontal by 50 deg vertical, and joystick controller. Subjects were randomly assigned to a control group (tasks identical in the first 4 sessions) or a varied-practice group. The dependent variables for each task included accuracy toward the target and time to completion. RESULTS: The greatest improvements in time to completion occurred during the docking phase. The varied-practice group showed more improvement in perspective-taking accuracy. Perspective-taking accuracy was also affected by the relative orientation of the rover to the docking target. Skill acquisition was correlated with self-ratings of previous gaming experience. DISCUSSION: Varying task selection and difficulty will optimize the preflight acquisition of skills when performing novel operational tasks. Simulation of operational manual control will provide functionally relevant evidence regarding the impact of sensorimotor adaptation on early surface operations and what countermeasures are needed. Learning Objective: The use of a motion-based simulation to investigate decrements in the proficiency to operate pressurized rovers during early surface operations of space exploration missions, along with the acquisition of skill proficiency needed during the preflight phase of the mission.

Dean, S. L.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Space Suit Portable Life Support System Thermal Control Valve Ball Design

A Thermal Control Valve (TCV) has been in development for the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit Portable Life Support System (xEMU PLSS). The xEMU PLSS TCV controls flow going to the liquid cooling and ventilation garment that the crew member wears during extra-vehicular activity to expel waste heat. A previous TCV version with a linear actuator and diverter valve has been tested to attempt to control the flow accurately. The previous valve has a non-linear flow response relative to valve position and has struggled to meet the setpoints desired for precise thermal control. While many diverter valve design variations have been attempted, all previous designs have had difficulty meeting set points. Additionally, high precision machining is required to create a metal-on-metal seal which has its own drawbacks and does not always meet requirements for internal leakage. This metal seal also requires stalling a linear actuator to load the seal in compression or tension which has caused sticking failures when stalled. A new approach and design for a TCV has been developed which uses a rotational ball to control flow and has demonstrated a much more precise and linear flow control. The design functions like a two-way ball valve with two Teflon seats that cradle and compress the ball for sealing. The ball outlet has a unique geometric design to create a set-able orifice like hole which is more predictable at controlling flow. Additionally, the Teflon seat performs much better for preventing internal leakage than the metal seal and prevents sticking by having a large range in which it is sealed without having to stall the actuator. This paper will review a new proposed xEMU PLSS TCV ball design and compare it with previous iterations of the design.

Ryan Ogilvie↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Space Suit Portable Life Support System Thermal Control Valve Ball Design

Ryan Ogilvie↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Operational Implications from Field Test Results: Sensorimotor Guidelines for Exploration Missions

Two key sensorimotor objectives of the joint NASA-Russian Field Test (FT) study were (1) to quantify functional performance on long duration crewmembers as close to landing as possible, and (2) to develop a recovery timeline back to preflight baseline. The purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of the FT results and discuss the operational implications for future exploration missions. The NASA and Russian teams conducted a total of 48 Field Tests, including 18 using a reduced Pilot FT (PFT) protocol. The combined PFT/FT cohort included 14 first-time fliers, 4F, and nine cosmonauts who repeated FT during a second mission. The mission durations were 185 ± 42 days, mean ± std. Nominally, the initial postflight session was performed in the medical test at the Soyuz landing site or at the nearby airport (R+2.2 ± 1.3 hrs, mean ± std), and then repeated multiple times throughout the postflight recovery. The common tasks performed across PFT and full FT protocols included sit-to-stand, recovery from fall (prone to stand) and tandem walk, performed in that order of increasing difficulty. The full FT protocol also included seated tasks (eccentric gaze, dysmetria finger to nose, eye-hand coordination on a tablet, grip force discrimination), a standing posture test with an upper body perturbation, a timed up and go mobility test with obstacles, and a dynamic visual acuity task during vertical oscillations. While there was considerable variability in the postflight outcome measures across crewmembers, the level of vestibular/cerebellar and sensorimotor impairment was greater than previously observed during shorter spaceflight missions. Most striking was the higher incidence of motion sickness even without constraining the standard medical interventions. Motion sensitivity prevented some crewmembers from attempting and/or completing the early testing. The recovery timeline varied with task complexity, generally taking longer when either the basis of support was limited (e.g., tandem walk) or visual cues were deprived (eyes closed). Based on this evidence, mission planners need to expect a range of response across individuals and tasks following G-transitions. Individual health assessments are recommended along with development of pre-worked, prioritized content and timelines, with the ability to change roles depending on crew readiness. Handholds and balance aids are recommended to help stabilize the crewmembers to perform specific tasks (e.g., touch screen selection) or to allow the crewmember the ability to rest with onset of symptoms. Based on anecdotal reports and performance on computerized dynamic posturography, multiple testing on landing day appeared to be beneficial for some participants, while others may have pushed beyond their motion tolerance limit in an effort to complete more FT objectives. Instead of delaying planetary surface operations to allow for recovery, our results suggest that early mobility may be important. Early active self-administered retraining, individualized based on the level of initial impairment and motion sensitivity, will enable a more efficient motor learning and enhance crew performance.

S J Wood↗

NASA NTRS1999

CO2 Accumulation in the Non-Conformal Helmet of the NASA Launch and Entry Suit During Simulated Unaided Egress

The Launch and Entry Suit (LES) has been worn by astronauts since 1988 for Space Shuttle launch and landing. Previous work indicated that carbon dioxide (CO2) accumulation in the LES non-conformal helmet might be high during locomotion while wearing the LES. The purpose of this study was to characterize the inspired CO2%, metabolic requirements, and egress performance during a simulation of an unaided egress from the Space Shuttle in healthy male subjects wearing the LES and walking on a treadmill. With the helmet visor closed, 12 male subjects completed a 6-min seated prebreathe with 100% O2 followed by a 2-min stand and 5 min of walking at 1.56 m/sec (5.6 km/h, 3.5 mph) as a simulation of unaided egress. All subjects walked with four different G-suit pressures (0.0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 psi). After a 10-min recovery, subjects walked 5 min with the same G-suit pressure and helmet visor open for the measurement of metabolic rate (VO2). When G-suit inflation levels were 1.0 or 1.5 psi, only 4 of our 12 healthy, non-micro-gravity exposed subjects completed the unaided egress. Inspired CO2 levels greater than 4% were routinely observed during walking. The metabolic cost at the 1.5 psi G-suit inflation was over 135% of the metabolic cost at 0.0 psi inflation. During unaided egress, G-suit inflation pressures of 1.0 (required inflation for missions greater than 11 days) and 1.5 psi resulted in elevated CO2 in the LES helmet and increased metabolic cost of walking, either of which could impact unaided egress by returning space flight crews.

Greenisen, M. C.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Short Duration Bioastronautics Investigation 1904: Human Factors Assessment of Vibration Effects on Visual Performance during Launch

The primary objective of the Short Duration Bioastronautics Investigation (SDBI) 1904 was to determine visual performance limits during Shuttle operational vibration and g-loads, specifically through the determination of minimal usable font sizes using Orion-type display formats. Currently there is little to no data available to quantify human visual performance under the extreme g- and vibration conditions of launch. Existing data on shuttle vibration magnitude and frequency is incomplete and does not address human visual performance. There have been anecdotal reports of performance decrements from shuttle crews, but no structured data have been collected. Previous work by NASA on the effects of vibration and linear g-loads on human performance was conducted during the Gemini era, but these experiments were performed using displays and controls that are dramatically different than current concepts being considered by the Constellation Program. Recently, three investigations of visual performance under vibration have been completed at NASA Ames Research Center: the first examining whole-body vibration, the second employing whole-body vibration coupled with a sustained g-load, and a third examining the effects of peak versus extended duration vibration. However, all of these studies were conducted using only a single x-axis direction (eyeballs in/out). Estimates of thrust oscillations from the Constellation Ares-I first stage are driving the need for realistic human performance requirements. SDBI 1904 was an opportunity to address the need for requirements by conducting a highly focused and applied evaluation in a relevant spaceflight environment. The SDBI was a companion effort to Detailed Test Objective (DTO) 695, which measured shuttle seat accelerations (vibration) during ascent. Data from the SDBI will serve an important role in interpreting the DTO vibration data. Both SDBI 1904 and DTO 695 were low impact with respect to flight resources, and combined, they represent an efficient and focused problem solving approach. This project provided (a) immediate data for developing preliminary human performance vibration requirements; (b) flight validated inputs for ongoing and future ground-based research; and (c) preliminary information related to Orion display format design.

Thompson, Shelby↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Space Suit Portable Life Support System Thermal Control Valve Ball Design

A Thermal Control Valve (TCV) has been in development for the Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit Portable Life Support System (xEMU PLSS). The xEMU PLSS TCV controls flow going to the liquid cooling and ventilation garment that the crew member wears during extra-vehicular activity to expel waste heat. A pervious TCV version with a linear actuator and diverter valve has been tested extensively to attempt to control the flow accurately. The previous TCV diverter valve has a non-linear flow response relative to valve position and has struggled to accurately meet the setpoints desired for precision thermal control. While many diverter valve design variations have been attempted, previous designs have all had difficulty in meeting set points. Additionally, high precision machining is required for these diverter valves to create a metal-on-metal seal which has its own drawbacks and doesn’t always meet requirements for internal leakage. This metal compression seal also requires stalling the linear actuator to load the seal in compression or tension which has demonstrated valve sticking failures when stalled. The xEMU PLSS TCV implements a new approach and design for a TCV which uses a rotational ball to control flow and has demonstrated a much more precise and linear flow control. The design functions like a two-way ball valve with two Teflon seats that cradle and compress the ball for sealing. A new geometric design modification to the ball outlet can create a set-able orifice like hole which is more predictable at controlling flow than using an annulus with the previous diverter valve. Additionally, the Teflon seat performs much better for preventing internal leakage than the metal seal and prevents sticking by having a large range in which it is sealed without having to stall the actuator. This paper will review a new proposed xEMU PLSS TCV ball design and compare it with previous iterations of the design.

Ryan Ogilvie↗

NASA NTRS1988

Spacecraft Fire-Safety Experiments for Space Station: Technology Development Mission

Definitions, overall descriptions, and preliminary apparatus and instrumentation requirements are presented for three spacecraft fire-safety experiments appropriate for inclusion in a growth-version of the Space Station. The experiments are as follows: 1. Combustion and Flame Spread of Typical Spacecraft Materials in a Low Velocity Convective Flow in Low Gravity 2. Fire and Fire-Extinguishant Interactions with Various Fire Scenarios in Low Gravity 3. Smoldering and Deep-Seated Combustion in Low Gravity. The experiments were selected from an assessment of recommendations for advanced technologies for prevention, detection, and control of fires in spacecraft. The experiments and their facilities are intended to constitute a portion of a Spacecraft Fire Safety Technology Development Mission (TDM). Basic requirements for the mission study are that the Space Station is essential for the accomplishment of the experimental objectives and that the technology being developed is appropriate for the growth version of the Space Station. The advantages of these three experiments are that, not only do they explore problems relevant to the Space Station operation and utilization, but also they constitute tests adaptable to two multiuse facilities installed in the Space Station laboratory module, the Combustion Tunnel Facility and the Combustion Facility. Three additional spacecraft fire-safety experiments, essential precursors to the TD M for near-term performance, are also described as follows: 1. Near-Term Testing of Materials for Combustion and Flame Spread 2. Near-Term Extinguishment of Fires in a Low-Gravity Test Bed 3. Post-Fire Recovery of Sensitive Electrical and Electronic Equipment. For all the experiments, the study defines accommodations in terms of first-order space, mass, power, consumables, and crew-time estimates. The study also reviews the key problems to be addressed, namely experiment safety hazards, non-intrusive diagnostics development and waste-products disposal. A preliminary task and time schedule for design, development, and experiment fabrication is proposed.

Youngblood, Wallace W.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Robonaut 2 - Building a Robot on the International Space Station

In 2010, the Robonaut Project embarked on a multi‐phase mission to perform technology demonstrations on‐board the International Space Station (ISS), showcasing state of the art robotics technologies through the use of Robonaut 2 (R2). This phased approach implements a strategy that allows for the use of ISS as a test bed during early development to both demonstrate capability and test technology while still making advancements in the earth based laboratories for future testing and operations in space. While R2 was performing experimental trials onboard the ISS during the first phase, engineers were actively designing for Phase 2, Intra‐Vehicular Activity (IVA) Mobility, that utilizes a set of zero‐g climbing legs outfitted with grippers to grasp handrails and seat tracks. In addition to affixing the new climbing legs to the existing R2 torso, it became clear that upgrades to the torso to both physically accommodate the climbing legs and to expand processing power and capabilities of the robot were required. In addition to these upgrades, a new safety architecture was also implemented in order to account for the expanded capabilities of the robot. The IVA climbing legs not only needed to attach structurally to the R2 torso on ISS, but also required power and data connections that did not exist in the upper body. The climbing legs were outfitted with a blind mate adapter and coarse alignment guides for easy installation, but the upper body required extensive rewiring to accommodate the power and data connections. This was achieved by mounting a custom adapter plate to the torso and routing the additional wiring through the waist joint to connect to the new set of processors. In addition to the power and data channels, the integrated unit also required updated electronics boards, additional sensors and updated processors to accommodate a new operating system, software platform, and custom control system. In order to perform the unprecedented task of building a robot in space, extensive practice sessions and meticulous procedures were required. Since crew training time is at a premium, the R2 team took a skills‐based training approach to ensure the astronauts were proficient with a basic skill set while refining the detailed procedures over several practice sessions and simulations. In addition to the crew activities, meticulous ground procedures were required in order to upgrade firmware on the upper body motor drivers. The new firmware for the IVA mobility unit needed to be deployed using the old software system. This also provided an opportunity to upgrade the upper body joints with new software and allowed for limited insight into the success of the updates. Complete verification that the updated firmware was successfully loaded was not confirmed until the rewiring of the upper body torso was complete.

Diftler, Myron↗

NASA NTRS2014

How Well Does the Latest Anthropomorphic Test Device Mimic Human Impact Responses?

One of the goals of the NASA Occupant Protection Group is to understand the human tolerance to dynamic loading. This knowledge has to come through indirect approaches such as existing human response databases, anthropometric test devices (ATD), animal testing, post‐mortem human subjects, and models. This study investigated the biofidelity of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's ATD named the THOR (test device for human occupant restraint). If THOR responds comparably to humans, then it could potentially be used as a human surrogate to help validate space vehicle requirements for occupant protection. The THOR responses to frontal and spinal impacts (ranging from 8 to 12 G with rise times of 40, 70, and 100 ms) were measured and compared to human volunteer responses (95 trials in frontal and 58 in spinal) previously collected by the U. S. Air Force on the same horizontal impact accelerator. The impact acceleration profiles tested are within the expected range of multi‐purpose crew vehicle (MPCV) landing dynamics. A correlation score was calculated for each THOR to human comparison using CORA (CORrelation and Analysis) software. A two‐parameter beta distribution model fit was obtained for each dependent variable using maximum likelihood estimation. For frontal impacts, the THOR head x‐acceleration peak response correlated with the human response at 8 and 10‐G 100 ms but not 10‐G 70 ms. The phase lagged the human response. Head z‐acceleration was not correlated. Chest x‐acceleration was in phase, had a higher peak response, and was well correlated with lighter subjects (Cora = 0.8 for 46 kg vs. Cora = 0.4 for 126 kg). Head x‐displacement had a leading phase. Several subjects responded with the same peak displacement but the mean of the group was lower. The shoulder x‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks than the human response. For spinal impacts, the THOR head x‐acceleration was not well correlated. Head and chest z‐acceleration was in phase but had a higher peak response. Chest z‐acceleration was highly correlated with heavier subjects at lower G pulses (Cora = 0.86 for 125 kg at 8 G). The human response was variable in shoulder z‐displacement but the THOR was in phase and was comparable to the mean peak response. Head xand z‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks. Seat pan forces were well correlated, were in phase, but had a larger peak response than most subjects. The THOR does not respond to frontal and spinal impacts exactly the same way that a human does. Some responses are well matched and others are not. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of this ATD is an important first step in determining its usefulness in occupant protection at NASA

Newby, N.↗

NASA NTRS2014

How Well Does the Latest Anthropomorphic Test Device Mimic Human Impact Responses?

One of the goals of the NASA Occupant Protection Group is to understand the human tolerance to dynamic loading. This knowledge has to come through indirect approaches such as existing human response databases, anthropometric test devices (ATD), animal testing, post-‐mortem human subjects, and models. This study investigated the biofidelity of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's ATD named the THOR (test device for human occupant restraint). If THOR responds comparably to humans, then it could potentially be used as a human surrogate to help validate space vehicle requirements for occupant protection. The THOR responses to frontal and spinal impacts (ranging from 8 to 12 G with rise times of 40, 70, and 100 ms) were measured and compared to human volunteer responses (95 trials in frontal and 58 in spinal) previously collected by the U. S. Air Force on the same horizontal impact accelerator. The impact acceleration profiles tested are within the expected range of multi-‐purpose crew vehicle (MPCV) landing dynamics. A correlation score was calculated for each THOR to human comparison using CORA (CORrelation and Analysis) software. A two-‐parameter beta distribution model fit was obtained for each dependent variable using maximum likelihood estimation. For frontal impacts, the THOR head x-‐acceleration peak response correlated with the human response at 8 and 10-‐G 100 ms but not 10-‐G 70 ms. The phase lagged the human response. Head z-‐acceleration was not correlated. Chest x-‐acceleration was in phase, had a higher peak response, and was well correlated with lighter subjects (Cora = 0.8 for 46 kg vs. Cora = 0.4 for 126 kg). Head x-‐displacement had a leading phase. Several subjects responded with the same peak displacement but the mean of the group was lower. The shoulder x-‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks than the human response. For spinal impacts, the THOR head x-‐acceleration was not well correlated. Head and chest z-‐acceleration was in phase but had a higher peak response. Chest z-‐acceleration was highly correlated with heavier subjects at lower G pulses (Cora = 0.86 for 125 kg at 8 G). The human response was variable in shoulder z-‐displacement but the THOR was in phase and was comparable to the mean peak response. Head x-‐ and z-‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks. Seat pan forces were well correlated, were in phase, but had a larger peak response than most subjects. The THOR does not respond to frontal and spinal impacts exactly the same way that a human does. Some responses are well matched and others are not. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of this ATD is an important first step in determining its usefulness in occupant protection at NASA

Newby, Nate↗

NASA NTRS2002

Airline Chair-rest Deconditioning: Induction of Immobilization Thromboemboli?

Air passenger miles will likely double by year 2020. The altered and restrictive environment in an airliner cabin can influence hematological homeostasis in passengers and crew. Flight-related deep various thromboemboli (DVT) have been associated with at least 577 deaths on 42 of 120 airlines from 1977 to 1984 (25 deaths/million departures), whereas many such cases go unreported. However, there are four major factors that could influence formation of possible flight-induced DVT: sleeping accomodations (via sitting immobilization), travelers' medical history (via tissue injury), cabin environmental factors (via lower partial pressure of oxygen and lower relative humidity), and the more encompassing chair-rest deconditioning (C-RD) syndrome. There is ample evidence that recent injury and surgery (especially in deconditioned hospitalized patients) facilitate thrombophlebitis and formation of DVT that may be exacerbated by the immobilization of prolonged air travel. In the healthy flying population immobilization factors associated with prolonged (> 5 hr) C-RID such as total body dehydration, hypovolemia and increased blood viscosity, and reduced various blood flow (pooling) in the legs may facilitate formation of DVT. However, data from at least four case-controlled epidemiological studies did not confirm a direct causative relationship between air travel and DART, but factors such as history of vascular thromboemboli, various insufficiency, chronic heart failure, obesity, immobile standing position, more than 3 pregnancies, infectious disease, long-distance travel, muscular trauma and violent physical effort were significantly more frequent in DVT patients than in controls. Thus, there is no clear, direct evidence yet that prolonged sitting in airliner seats, or prolonged experimental chair-rest- or bed- rest-deconditioning treatments cause deep various thromboemboli in healthy people.

Greenleaf, J. E.↗