Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “EVA training”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2000

First Astronaut- Rover Interaction Field Test

The first Astronaut - Rover (ASRO) Interaction field test was conducted successfully on February 22-27, 1999, in Silver Lake, Mojave Desert, California in a representative planetary surface terrain. This test was a joint effort between the NASA Ames Research Center , Moffett Field, California and the NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas. As prototype advanced planetary surface space suit and rover technologies are being developed for human planetary surface exploration , it has been determined that it is important to better understand the potential interaction and benefits of an EVA astronaut interacting with a robotic rover . This interaction between an EVA astronaut and a robotic rover is seen as complementary and can greatly enhance the productivity and safety of surface excursions . This test also identified design requirements and options in an advanced space suit and robotic rover. The test objectives were: 1. To identify the operational domains where the EVA astronauts and rover are complementary and can interact and thus collaborate in a safe , productive and cost- effective way, 2. To identify preliminary requirements and recommendations for advanced space suits and rovers that facilitate their cooperative and complementary interaction, 3. To develop operational procedures for the astronaut-rover teams in the identified domains, 4. To test these procedures during representative mission scenarios during field tests by simulating the exploration of a planetary surface by an EVA crew interacting with a robotic rover, 5. To train a space suited test subject, simulated Earth-based and l or lander-based science teams, and robotic vehicle operators in mission configurations, and 6. To evaluate and understand socio-technical aspects of the astronaut - rover interaction experiment in order to guide future technologies and designs. Test results and areas for future research in the design of planetary space suits will be discussed .

Kosmo, Joseph J.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Physiological Health Challenges for Human Missions to Mars

During the next decades, manned space missions are expected to be aiming at the Lagrange points, near Earth asteroids, and Mars flyby and/or landing. The question is therefore: Are we ready to go? To answer this with a yes, we are currently using the International Space Station to develop an integrated human physiological countermeasure suite. The integrated countermeasure suite will most likely encounter: 1) Exercise devices for aerobic, dynamic and resistive exercise training; 2) sensory‐motor computer training programs and anti‐motion sickness medication for preparing EVAs and G‐transitions; 3) lower limb bracelets for preventing and/or treating the VIIP (vision impairment and intracranial pressure) syndrome; 4) nutritional components for maintenance of bone, muscle, the cardiovascular system and preventing oxidative stress and damage and immune deficiencies (e. g. omega‐3 fatty acids, PRO/K, anti‐oxidants and less salt and iron); 5) bisphosphonates for preventing bone degradation.; 6) lower body compression garment and oral salt and fluid loading for landing on a planetary surface to combat orthostatic intolerance; 7) laboratory analysis equipment for individualized monitoring of biomarkers in blood, urine and saliva for estimation of health status in; 8) advanced ultrasound techniques for monitoring bone and cardiovascular health; and 9) computer modeling programs for individual health status assessments of efficiency and subsequent adjustments of countermeasures. In particular for future missions into deep space, we are concerned with the synergistic effects of weightlessness, radiation, operational constraints and other spaceflight environmental factors. Therefore, increased collaboration between physiological, behavioral, radiation and space vehicle design disciplines are strongly warranted. Another venue we are exploring in NASA's Human Research Program is the usefulness of artificial gravity for mitigating the health risks of long duration weightlessness.

Norsk, Peter↗
NASA NTRS2007

Biomedical Support of U.S. Extravehicular Activity

The world's first extravehicular activity (EVA) was performed by A. A. Leonov on March 18, 1965 during the Russian Voskhod-2 mission. The first US EVA was executed by Gemini IV astronaut Ed White on June 3, 1965, with an umbilical tether that included communications and an oxygen supply. A hand-held maneuvering unit (HHMU) also was used to test maneuverability during the brief EVA; however the somewhat stiff umbilical limited controlled movement. That constraint, plus difficulty returning through the vehicle hatch, highlighted the need for increased thermal control and improved EVA ergonomics. Clearly, requirements for a useful EVA were interrelated with the vehicle design. The early Gemini EVAs generated requirements for suits providing micro-meteor protection, adequate visual field and eye protection from solar visual and infrared radiation, gloves optimized for dexterity while pressurized, and thermal systems capable of protecting the astronaut while rejecting metabolic heat during high workloads. Subsequent Gemini EVAs built upon this early experience and included development of a portable environmental control and life support systems (ECLSS) and an astronaut maneuvering unit. The ECLSS provided a pressure vessel and controller with functional control over suit pressure, oxygen flow, carbon dioxide removal, humidity, and temperature control. Gemini EVA experience also identified the usefulness of underwater neutral buoyancy and altitude chamber task training, and the importance of developing reliable task timelines. Improved thermal management and carbon dioxide control also were required for high workload tasks. With the Apollo project, EVA activity was primarily on the lunar surface; and suit durability, integrated liquid cooling garments, and low suit operating pressures (3.75 pounds per square inch absolute [psia] or 25.8 kilopascal [kPa],) were required to facilitate longer EVAs with ambulation and significant physical workloads with average metabolic rates of 1000 BTU/hr and peaks of up to 2200 BTU/hr. Mobility was further augmented with the Lunar Roving Vehicle. The Apollo extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) was made up of over 15 components, ranging from a biomedical belt for capturing and transmitting biomedical data, urine and fecal containment systems, a liquid cooling garment, communications cap, a modular portable life support system (PLSS), a boot system, thermal overgloves, and a bubble helmet with eye protection. Apollo lunar astronauts performed successful EVAs on the lunar surface from a 5 psia (34.4 kPa) 100% oxygen environment in the Lunar Lander. A maximum of three EVAs were performed on any mission. For Skylab a modified A7LB suit, used for Apollo 15, was selected. The Skylab astronaut life support assembly (ALSA) provided umbilical support through the life support umbilical (LSU) and used open loop oxygen flow, rather than closed-loop as in Apollo missions. Thermal control was provided by liquid water circulated by spacecraft pumps and electrical power also was provided from the spacecraft via the umbilical. The cabin atmosphere of 5 psia (34.4 kPa), 70% oxygen, provided a normoxic atmosphere and because of the very low nitrogen partial pressures, no special protocols were required to protect against decompression sickness (DCS) as was the case with the Apollo spacecraft with a 5 psi, 100% oxygen environment.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRS2002

The exercise and environmental physiology of extravehicular activity

Extravehicular activity (EVA), i.e., exercise performed under unique environmental conditions, is indispensable for supporting daily living in weightlessness and for further space exploration. From 1965-1996 an average of 20 h x yr(-1) were spent performing EVA. International Space Station (ISS) assembly will require 135 h x yr(-1) of EVA, and 138 h x yr(-1) is planned for post-construction maintenance. The extravehicular mobility unit (EMU), used to protect astronauts during EVA, has a decreased pressure of 4.3 psi that could increase astronauts' risk of decompression sickness (DCS). Exercise in and repeated exposure to this hypobaria may increase the incidence of DCS, although weightlessness may attenuate this risk. Exercise thermoregulation within the EMU is poorly understood; the liquid cooling garment (LCG), worn next to the skin and designed to handle thermal stress, is manually controlled. Astronauts may become dehydrated (by up to 2.6% of body weight) during a 5-h EVA, further exacerbating the thermoregulatory challenge. The EVA is performed mainly with upper body muscles; but astronauts usually exercise at only 26-32% of their upper body maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max). For a given ground-based work task in air (as opposed to water), the submaximal VO2 is greater while VO2max and metabolic efficiency are lower during ground-based arm exercise as compared with leg exercise, and cardiovascular responses to exercise and training are also different for arms and legs. Preflight testing and training, whether conducted in air or water, must account for these differences if ground-based data are extrapolated for flight requirements. Astronauts experience deconditioning during microgravity resulting in a 10-20% loss in arm strength, a 20-30% loss in thigh strength, and decreased lower-body aerobic exercise capacity. Data from ground-based simulations of weightlessness such as bed rest induce a 6-8% decrease in upper-body strength, a 10-16% loss in thigh extensor strength, and a 15-20% decrease in lower-body aerobic exercise capacity. Changes in EVA support systems and training based on a greater understanding of the physiological aspects of exercise in the EVA environment will help to insure the health, safety, and efficiency of working astronauts.

Review↗
NASA NTRS2010

Climbing the Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Wall - Safely

The success of the EVA team, that includes the EVA project office, Crew Office, Mission Operations, Engineering and Safety, is assured by the full integration of all necessary disciplines. Safety participation in all activities from hardware development concepts, certification and crew training, provides for a strong partnership within the team. Early involvement of Safety on the EVA team has mitigated risk and produced a high degree of mission success.

Fuentes, Jose↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Immersive Technologies for Human-in-the-Loop Lunar Surface Simulations

NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, continually seeks innovative solutions to enhance its operations, particularly in the realms of testing, evaluation, and training for future missions. Immersive technologies, such as virtual, augmented, and mixed reality have proven to be powerful tools for realistic, interactive, and engaging environments. This paper explores how the Simulation and Graphics Branch at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) leverages immersive technology, modern commercial rendering engines, and physics-based systems simulations to develop human-in-the-loop systems for humanity’s return to the Moon through the Artemis program. When NASA returns to the Moon, astronauts will travel to the Moon’s South Pole where lighting conditions will cause a more complex operational environment. Human-in-the-loop testing plays a crucial role in NASA's mission planning, spacecraft and space systems development, and evaluation of operational scenarios. The development of immersive environments such as a lunar rover mockup at a video wall enables engineers and astronauts to simulate and experience mission scenarios, integrated spacecraft systems, and operational procedures in a relevant environment before deployment. By integrating realistic virtual environments, immersive technology allows for the visualization and interaction with virtual spacecraft models, mission landscapes, and complex operational tasks. This approach helps identify potential design flaws, operational challenges, and safety considerations. It also provides valuable insights for risk reduction and helps improve mission efficiency and effectiveness. With advanced motion tracking systems and custom virtual environments data can be gathered and evaluated to help NASA refine training protocols, develop specialized training procedures and optimize human-robotic interactions for future space missions. Furthermore, immersive technology offers opportunities for future training initiatives at NASA. The Virtual Reality Laboratory at JSC has pioneered training with Virtual Reality (VR) since the Hubble Space Telescope repair missions in the early 1990’s. Extended Reality (XR) simulations enable astronauts to rehearse complex spacewalks, spacecraft maneuvers, and extravehicular activities in a safe and controlled environment. By replicating the physical and cognitive challenges of space missions, immersive training experiences enhance astronauts' situational awareness, decision-making abilities, and adaptability to unexpected scenarios. Additionally, immersive technology facilitates collaborative training, allowing geographically dispersed crew and mission control personnel to engage in synchronized simulations, fostering teamwork and effective communication. The adoption of immersive technology in NASA's testing, evaluation, and future training programs has yielded significant benefits. By incorporating human-in-the-loop testing for studies involving Extra Vehicular Activities (EVA), surface mobility and landing systems, NASA can identify and mitigate risks, optimize operational procedures, and enhance mission success. Ultimately, immersive training experiences can empower astronauts to better navigate the complexities of space missions, ensuring their safety, productivity, and success in the dynamic and challenging environments they will experience at the Lunar South Pole.

Simulation Modeling Virtual Reality Immersive Tech↗
NASA NTRS2018

EVA Swab Tool to Support Planetary Protection and Astrobiology Evaluations

When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed systems meet planetary protection requirements-and to protect our science from human contamination-we'll need to assess whether microorganisms may be leaking or venting from our spacecraft. Microbial sample collection outside of a pressurized spacecraft is complicated by temperature extremes, low pressures that preclude the use of laboratory standard (wetted) swabs, and operation either in bulky spacesuits or with robotic assistance. Engineers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed a swab kit for use in collecting microbial samples from the external surfaces of crewed spacecraft, including spacesuits. The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Swab Kit consists of a single swab tool handle and an eight-canister sample caddy. The design team minimized development cost by re-purposing a heritage Space Shuttle tile repair handle that was designed to quickly snap into different tool attachments by engaging a mating device in each attachment. This allowed the tool handle to snap onto a fresh swab attachment much like popular shaving razor handles can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. To disengage the handle from a swab, the user performs two independent functions, which can be done with a single hand. This dual operation mitigates the risk that a swab will be inadvertently released and lost in microgravity. Each swab attachment is fitted with commercially available foam swab tips, vendor-certified to be sterile for Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA). A microbial filter installed in the bottom of each sample container allows the container to outgas and repressurize without introducing microbial contaminants to internal void spaces. Extensive ground testing, post-test handling, and sample analysis confirmed the design is able to maintain sterile conditions as the canister moves between various pressure environments. To further minimize cost, the design team acquired extensive ground test experience in a relevant flight environment by piggy-backing onto suited crew training runs. These training runs allowed the project to validate tool interfaces with pressurized EVA gloves and collect user feedback on the tool design and function, as well as characterize baseline microbial data for different types of spacesuits. In general, test subjects found the EVA Swab Kit relatively straightforward to operate, but identified a number of design improvements that will be incorporated into the final design. Although originally intended to help characterize human forward contaminants, this tool has other potential applications, such as for collecting and preserving space-exposed materials to support astrobiology experiments.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

EVA Swab Tool to Support Planetary Protection and Astrobiology Evaluations

When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed systems meet planetary protection requirements-and to protect our science from human contamination-we'll need to assess whether microorganisms may be leaking or venting from our spacecraft. Microbial sample collection outside of a pressurized spacecraft is complicated by temperature extremes, low pressures that preclude the use of laboratory standard (wetted) swabs, and operation either in bulky spacesuits or with robotic assistance. A team at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed a swab kit for use in collecting microbial samples from the external surfaces of crewed spacecraft, including spacesuits. The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Swab Kit consists of a single swab tool handle and an eight-canister sample caddy. The design team minimized development cost by re-purposing a heritage Space Shuttle tile repair handle that was designed to quickly snap into different tool attachments by engaging a mating device in each end effector. This allowed the tool handle to snap onto a fresh swab end effector much like popular shaving razor handles can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. To disengage the handle from a swab, the user performs two independent functions, which can be done with a single hand. This dual operation mitigates the risk that a swab will be inadvertently released and lost in microgravity. Each swab end effector is fitted with commercially available foam swab tips, vendor-certified to be sterile for Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA). A microbial filter installed in the bottom of each sample container allows the container to outgas and re-pressurize without introducing microbial contaminants to internal void spaces. Extensive ground testing, post-test handling, and sample analysis confirmed the design is able to maintain sterile conditions as the canister moves between various pressure environments. To further minimize cost, the design team acquired extensive ground test experience in a relevant flight environment by piggy-backing onto suited crew training runs. These training runs allowed the project to validate tool interfaces with pressurized EVA gloves and collect user feedback on the tool design and function, as well as characterize baseline microbial data for different types of spacesuits. In general, test subjects found the EVA Swab Kit relatively straightforward to operate, but identified a number of design improvements that will be incorporated into the final design. Although originally intended to help characterize human forward contaminants, this tool has other potential applications, such as for collecting and preserving space-exposed materials to support astrobiology experiments.

Rucker, Michelle A.↗
NASA NTRS2018

EVA Swab Tool to Support Planetary Protection and Astrobiology Evaluations

When we send humans to search for life on other planets, we'll need to know what we brought with us versus what may already be there. To ensure our crewed systems meet planetary protection requirements?and to protect our science from human contamination?we'll need to assess whether microorganisms may be leaking or venting from our spacecraft. Microbial sample collection outside of a pressurized spacecraft is complicated by temperature extremes, low pressures that preclude the use of laboratory standard (wetted) swabs, and operation either in bulky spacesuits or with robotic assistance. A team at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently developed a swab kit for use in collecting microbial samples from the external surfaces of crewed spacecraft, including spacesuits. The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Swab Kit consists of a single swab tool handle and an eight-canister sample caddy. The design team minimized development cost by re-purposing a heritage Space Shuttle tile repair handle that was designed to quickly snap into different tool attachments by engaging a mating device in each end effector. This allowed the tool handle to snap onto a fresh swab end effector much like popular shaving razor handles can snap onto a disposable blade cartridge. To disengage the handle from a swab, the user performs two independent functions, which can be done with a single hand. This dual operation mitigates the risk that a swab will be inadvertently released and lost in microgravity. Each swab end effector is fitted with commercially available foam swab tips, vendor-certified to be sterile for Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA). A microbial filter installed in the bottom of each sample container allows the container to outgas and re-pressurize without introducing microbial contaminants to internal void spaces. Extensive ground testing, post-test handling, and sample analysis confirmed the design is able to maintain sterile conditions as the canister moves between various pressure environments. To further minimize cost, the design team acquired extensive ground test experience in a relevant flight environment by piggy-backing onto suited crew training runs. These training runs allowed the project to validate tool interfaces with pressurized EVA gloves and collect user feedback on the tool design and function, as well as characterize baseline microbial data for different types of spacesuits. In general, test subjects found the EVA Swab Kit relatively straightforward to operate, but identified a number of design improvements that will be incorporated into the final design. Although originally intended to help characterize human forward contaminants, this tool has other potential applications, such as for collecting and preserving space-exposed materials to support astrobiology experiments.

planetary protection↗
NASA NTRS2004

EVA Performance Prediction

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.

Peacock, Brian↗
NASA NTRS2007

EVA Task Timing and Timeline Planning

EVA timeline development occurs using task execution data generated through underwater training and simulation. This project collected task time data during final training events for several Space Shuttle and International Space Station missions and compared like task time data collected during on-orbit execution. Analysis was performed to compare types of activities and times required for each looking specifically for how activities can be accurately trained from a timeline planning perspective. The data revealed two significant aspects of flight timeline planning; Zero-g task times will match training times for activities that can be accurately simulated with appropriate fidelity hardware; and not all activities can be simulated sufficiently to produce training task times that will reflect required zero-g times. An approach for timeline planning utilizing this knowledge is also presented.

Looper, Christopher A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Training Astronauts using Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulations and Virtual Reality

The commercial market has recently started giving significant attention to virtual and augmented reality, even though the technology has been around for many years. The Virtual Reality Training Lab (VRL) at the NASA Johnson Space Center has been using virtual reality to train astronauts for decades. This paper will focus on describing three major Hardware-in-the-Loop VR simulation systems, the Simplified Aid for EVA Rescue (SAFER) system known as the "jetpack", the Mass Handling System nicknamed Charlotte, and a simulated robotics environment for collaborative mission evaluation. Two of these systems are critical for astronaut training. Crew must certify on SAFER and go through the Charlotte Mass Handling training prior to flying to the International Space Station (ISS). Typically, they also complete at least one collaborative visualization session to review any planned Extra Vehicular Activities (EVAs), or spacewalks, before an assigned flight. Given the volatility of new technologies, the graphics and simulation environments used are maintained to be hardware agnostic to preserve a high level of fidelity. Utilizing VR for astronaut training has proved to be effective and essential for these specific systems.

Angelica D. Garcia↗
NASA NTRS2018

Results of a Manned Over Pressurization Event in the Extravehicular Mobility Unit Space Suit Assembly

The Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) is a 102 x 202 x 40-foot-deep tank holding over 6 million gallons of water used to simulate weightlessness for Astronaut training. The maxim "Train Like You Fly" refers to the desire to have the suit perform, during training, as close as possible to how it performs during an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA), particularly with respect to mobility. Therefore, the Space Suit Assembly (SSA) used in the NBL is a downgraded hardware version of the flight SSA; it is not designed for the NBL environment or operations. A classification system defines the flight Space Suit Assembly hardware as Class I, and the NBL training hardware SSA as Class IIIW. On July 20, 2017, during a manned training event in the NBL, the SSA was inadvertently over-pressurized to 22 psid; normal operating pressure being 4.3 psid. The suit subject was removed from the suit with no injury. The event was investigated by a NASA Mishap Team. The Team investigated common causes and differences between the Class I and Class IIIW Extra-vehicular Mobility Unit (EMU). The investigation determined that the event was limited to Class IIIW hardware and its external flow-controlled open loop ventilation systems. The flight EMU is a pressure regulated closed loop ventilation system. This paper will examine the differences between the Class I and Class IIIW SSA hardware and provide details of the Mishap Investigation. Corrective actions taken to mitigate risk with hardware, operations, and hazard documentation will be discussed.

Spacesuit↗
NASA NTRS1987

Results of the ACCESS experiment

All basic EVA space construction tasks included in the experiment were accomplished on-orbit successfully, and the construction task time shows good correlation with neutral buoyancy data. However, the flight assembly times were slightly longer than the best times obtained in the water tank. This result was attributed by the EVA astronauts to the new, tighter tolerance truss hardware used on-orbit as opposed to the well-worn training hardware used in the neutral buoyancy and was, thus, not a space related phenomenon. The baseline experiment demonstrated that erectable structure can be assembled effectively by astronauts in EVA. The success of ACCESS confirmed the feasibility of EVA space assembly of erectable trusses and played a role in the decision to baseline the Space Station as a 5 meter erectable structure.

Heard, Walter L., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Virtual Reality Training Lab

This video highlights the Virtual Reality Laboratory. It shows off the different systems the lab supports for crew training including Charlotte Mass Handling, Robotics and hardware checkout and SAFER. It focuses on the SAFER (Simplified Aid for EVA Rescue) system and shows briefly how to perform a SAFER rescue in Virtual Reality.

Simulation↗
DOE OSTI2024

Geometric Measures of Trustworthiness for Machine Learning Predictions

his report details the findings from the research and investigation of Geometric Measures of Trustworthiness for Machine Learning Predictions. We explored the trustworthiness of machine learning (ML) models’ predictions using geometric measures to quantify the similarity of a query point with the training data. Predictive uncertainty in ML can originate from at least three sources: (1) Model uncertainty, which represents the uncertainty in model form (e.g. decision tree, vs neural network) and estimating the model parameters from the training data, (2) Data uncertainty, which represents the natural complexities of the data such as class overlap and inherent noise, and (3) Distributional uncertainty, which represents the mismatch between the training and operational distributions. The proposed measures focus on measuring and explaining the data and distributional uncertainties by measuring the relationships of operational data with the training data.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2015

Evidence Report: Risk of Hypobaric Hypoxia from the Exploration Atmosphere

Extravehicular activity (EVA) is at the core of a manned space exploration program. Some elements of exploration may be safely and effectively performed by robots, but certain critical elements will require the trained, assertive, and reasoning mind of a human crewmember. To effectively use these skills, NASA needs a safe, effective, and efficient EVA component integrated into the human exploration program. The EVA preparation time should be minimized and the suit pressure should be low to accommodate EVA tasks without causing undue fatigue, physical discomfort, or suit-related trauma. Commissioned in 2005, the Exploration Atmospheres Working Group (EAWG) had the primary goal of recommending to NASA an internal environment that allowed efficient and repetitive EVAs for missions that were to be enabled by the former Constellation Program. At the conclusion of the EAWG meeting, the 8.0 psia and 32% oxygen (O2) environment were recommended for EVA-intensive phases of missions. After re-evaluation in 2012, the 8/32 environment was altered to 8.2 psia and 34% O2 to reduce the hypoxic stress to a crewmember. These two small changes increase alveolar O2 pressure by 11 mmHg, which is expected to significantly benefit crewmembers. The 8.2/34 environment (inspired O2 pressure = 128 mmHg) is also physiologically equivalent to the staged decompression atmosphere of 10.2 psia / 26.5% O2 (inspired O2 pressure = 127 mmHg) used on 34 different shuttle missions for approximately a week each flight. As a result of selecting this internal environment, NASA gains the capability for efficient EVA with low risk of decompression sickness (DCS), but not without incurring the additional negative stimulus of hypobaric hypoxia to the already physiologically challenging spaceflight environment. This report provides a review of the human health and performance risks associated with the use of the 8.2 psia / 34% O2 environment during spaceflight. Of most concern are the potential effects on the central nervous system (CNS), including increased intracranial pressure, visual impairment, sensorimotor dysfunction, and oxidative damage. Other areas of focus include validation of the DCS mitigation strategy, incidence and treatment of transient acute mountain sickness (AMS), development of new exercise countermeasure protocols, effective food preparation at 8.2 psia, assurance of quality sleep, and prevention of suit-induced injury. Although missions proposing to use an 8.2/34 environment are still years away, it is recommended that these studies begin early enough to ensure that the correct decisions pertaining to vehicle design, mission operational concepts, and human health countermeasures are appropriately informed.

Norcross, Jason R.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Machine-learning Solution for Automatic Spacesuit Motion Recognition and Measurement from Conventional Video

Extravehicular Activity (EVA) spacesuits exhibit unique movement patterns due to their design characteristics. Mobility assessments using traditional motion capture systems are cost prohibitive and not feasible for some training conditions (e.g., simulated lunar outdoor terrain). This paper aims to present the ongoing development of machine learning solutions to quantify suit motions from conventional videos without special sensors or hardware. Preliminary work into this field was promising but given the fast growth in deep/machine learning technologies, external expertise was sought from open-source communities. Partnerships were formed with the NASA JSC Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation (CoCEI) and an execution crowdsourcing platform partner to solicit machine learning framework developments from external contenders. NASA provided contenders with images and video clips of spacesuits with simultaneously measured motion capture data during EVA simulation tasks. The contenders used this data to train and develop generalized algorithms to predict motions. At the end of the crowdsourcing event, the top five solutions were selected from 250 submissions. Each submission was tested and scored using video clips not previously disclosed to the contenders. The weighted scoring metrics measured how well the algorithm detected the suit shape, the 2D suit joint detection accuracy, and 3D joint detection accuracy. The winning solution was able to achieve roughly 85% prediction accuracy. Overall, the algorithms could efficiently detect various types of spacesuits and motions across different EVA environments such as the NASA Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS). After continued improvements and validation, the fully developed system will enable EVA stakeholders to quantify suit kinematic patterns, which can help optimize suit, hardware, and task designs.

Linh Vu↗