Results for “HLS” — Page 9

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evolution of the Next Exploration Toilet Through Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) Testing

Human waste collection in space is a unique and necessary function that all crewmembers must perform. The variability in how each crewmember uses the toilet to urinate and defecate introduces complexities and challenges with regards to overall hardware design. Because of this variability, it is important to consider crew inputs in all aspects of a toilet design especially with regards to crew interfaces that could impact overall waste collection. Access to crew feedback is essential to the design process and should be considered early and often through the various design phases. In 2020, NASA started a project for the Human Landing System (HLS) program to develop a Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) toilet option. The project is known as the Lavatory On-Orbit (LOO). During the early development of the LOO, the project team conducted several crew evaluations to collect and summarize valuable crew feedback on system design, function, and overall usability to influence the next design iteration. Because every person could use the system differently in space, it was extremely important to collect and analyze the data in a very methodical manner to appropriately influence the design based on the evaluation results. Establishing a standard process ensures consistent data collection from one evaluation to another, helps to maintain privacy for each test subject’s inputs and removes any potential bias from test subject to test subject. To date, the team has completed four rounds of crew evaluations with multiple crewmembers on prototypes for the different LOO subsystems. This paper will summarize the methodology used to conduct the evaluations as well as how data was collected and analyzed. The paper will also provide details on each of the evaluations and how the design was updated based on the results.

toilet↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Supporting Exploration Missions by Enabling Exploration Mission System Software

Future exploration missions will consist of a multitude of data sources, systems, and operators collaborating to complete mission objectives. Presently, NASA is instantiating the contractual mechanisms, such as the Exploration Extravehicular Activity Services (xEVAS) and Human Landing System (HLS) contracts, to produce these mission assets. Architectural planning is also underway to establish the networking protocols and infrastructure to digitally create and connect mission elements, such as LunaNET. However, without new horizontally integrated data systems, these advancements will be limited in their ability to get mission data appropriately integrated into the plan, train, fly, explore workflow of the flight operations workforce. Here we describe several mission system software development efforts underway that are designed to support human spaceflight missions. This paper describes the current iterations of a suite of tools to support EVA procedure authoring and execution, and mission context creation for both International Space Station (ISS) and Artemis missions. These tools have been developed iteratively and continue to be used in present-day ISS operations on orbit and in several NASA facilities such as the Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) and Artemis field testing. These solutions demonstrate how software development can be aligned with ongoing operations development activities to discover the features that best support both current and future human spaceflight missions.

Matthew Miller↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Induced Environments Overview

Gateway will be a long duration space station orbiting the Moon in support of NASA’s Artemis campaign. Over its lifetime, Gateway will be exposed to a variety of induced environments, including materials outgassing, chemical and electric thruster plumes, vacuum vents, and lunar dust transport (from the Human Lander System, HLS). Induced Environments can impact vehicle performance and mission success. The multidisciplinary Gateway Induced Environments Team has developed requirements and methodologies to address the complex challenge of integrating multiple elements and visiting vehicles while maintaining the Gateway induced environments within prescribed limits. The Gateway Induced Environments requirements are summarized along with the integration / verification process and preliminary system analysis results.

Gateway↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Induced Environments Overview

Gateway will be a long duration space station orbiting the Moon in support of NASA’s Artemis campaign. Over its lifetime, Gateway will be exposed to a variety of induced environments, including materials outgassing, chemical and electric thruster plumes, vacuum vents, and lunar dust transport (from the Human Lander System, HLS). Induced Environments can impact vehicle performance and mission success. The multidisciplinary Gateway Induced Environments Team has developed requirements and methodologies to address the complex challenge of integrating multiple elements and visiting vehicles while maintaining the Gateway induced environments within prescribed limits. The Gateway Induced Environments requirements are summarized along with the integration / verification process and preliminary system analysis results.

Gateway↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Plume-surface interaction testing for crewed lunar lander risk reduction

Spacecraft conducting propulsive near-surface operations such as landing or initial ascent must consider potential hazards caused by rocket exhaust interacting with planetary regolith. Gas-granular interactions can erode the surface and eject material, altering the landing site, obscuring views of the surface, and creating abrasion or impact risks. The next generation of lunar landers under development for NASA’s Human Landing System program will push us outside Apollo flight experience for plume-surface interaction. Strategic knowledge gaps and poorly constrained flight data inhibit our ability to accurately and precisely predict the plume-surface interaction environment for a given flight vehicle. We present an overview of a lunar relevant, supersonic plume-surface interaction test that will be conducted in 2024 to improve our understanding of lunar PSI and reduce associated risks to the HLS program.

Wesley A. Chambers↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

End-to-End Mission Design & Trajectory Optimization

The ability to compute end-to-end mission optimized trajectories is a critical component needed for the next generation of complex human spaceflight design and operations (Orion, HLS, Gateway, Mars). This project created a new interface for two of NASA’s trajectory tools: Copernicus and Genesis, enabling them to be used together for end-to-end mission design and optimization of all flight phases, including Earth ascent, lunar ascent, rendezvous, and lunar descent. This capability can also serve as a pathfinder for developing a future autonomous, onboard trajectory optimizer.

Software↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing New Tools for Modeling Rocket Plume-Surface Interactions

With NASA’s goal to land the next human on the lunar surface in the next few years, it has become vitally important that we have a better understanding of how future landing spacecraft will interact with the unique properties of regolith¬¬––the layer of loose, unconsolidated dust and rock on the lunar surface¬¬––which can cause hazards like visual obstructions, particulate clouds, and cratering of the landing zone. Researchers from the Fluid Dynamics Branch at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center are performing plume-surface interaction (PSI) simulations between lander engine plumes and unprepared regolith surfaces, and have developed new tools to provide predictive PSI environments for various NASA projects and missions, including the Human Lander System (HLS), Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS), and future Mars landers. These tools allow the researchers to determine how to best meet the simulation and time requirements for each project by varying model fidelity. The highest fidelity tool is the Gas Granular Flow Solver (Loci/GGFS) that models gas-particle multi-phase interactions to predict regolith cratering and ejection of particles into the immediate surroundings of the lander. At its highest fidelity, it can model microscopic regolith particle interactions with a particle size/shape distribution that statistically replicates actual regolith, however, to be most effective with today’s computing resources, it is currently run using only one to three equivalent particle sizes/shapes. The team also incorporated engineering models into their software suite to create production-ready hybrid tools with reduced fidelity. At the lowest fidelity, the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code Loci/CHEM+DIGGEM can predict crater depth over time by relating local CFD-predicted surface shear stresses to a model of erosion mass flux.

plume surface interaction↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

AI Foundation Models for Science: An Open Collaborative Initiative

Foundation Models (FMs), AI models designed to replace task-specific models, are increasingly being recognized for their versatility across numerous downstream applications. These models, trained using self-supervised techniques on any type of sequence data, circumvent the need for large annotated datasets, a major bottleneck in traditional AI model development. FMs can be applied to downstream tasks using few-shot learning and fine-tuning, significantly reducing the need for large labeled training datasets and computational resources. However, the development of FMs requires substantial resources, including access to data and compute power, expertise in the latest models, and specialized scientific knowledge for systematic evaluation. It is challenging for a single group to possess all these capabilities. To address this, NASA IMPACT has initiated an open collaborative effort, leveraging partnerships with the private sector and other groups within and outside NASA, to jointly build FMs. The overarching goal is to develop a consistent and collaborative approach to building FMs for high-value science datasets. This initiative has fostered collaboration within NASA and with external partners, including IBM Research, Clark University, DOE’s ORNL, ESA, and USGS. The effort focuses on identifying key datasets with a wide range of downstream applications, pretraining and building FMs using modified transformer architectures, evaluating compute infrastructure needs, and sharing models, pretraining and fine-tuning code, and data with the community. Furthermore, it aims to train the Earth science community to fine-tune these models for various downstream applications. Our initial effort resulted in the creation of a 100 million parameter HLS Geospatial Model within six months, which was released on HuggingFace. We are now expanding our scope to include data from weather and climate models and investigating multimodal models. We invite those interested in participating in this effort to join us by sharing their use cases, expertise, or data.

Rahul Ramachandran↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Addressing User Needs through the Stakeholder Engagement Program

Every two years, the Satellite Needs Working Group (SNWG), an initiative of the U.S. Group on Earth Observations (USGEO), surveys federal agencies to pinpoint their satellite Earth observation needs. For each expressed need, NASA-led assessment teams coordinate with the agencies to devise solutions. Solutions can include existing or modified data products as well as the construction of new data products and technologies, such as the Harmonized Landsat Sentinel-2 (HLS) product and the Catalog of Archived Sub-Orbital Earth Science Investigations (CASEI). To facilitate adoption of new data products and technologies, the SNWG Management Office’s Stakeholder Engagement Program (SEP) was established. The program’s primary goals are to respond to training and capacity building needs expressed by agencies and to encourage engagement from stakeholders as SNWG solutions are developed. To serve these needs, SEP has developed the following: an SNWG Solutions Earthdata webpage, an SEP Earthdata webpage, and an Earthdata Search Portal for SNWG products. These avenues provide assistance to users from all backgrounds and levels of expertise as well as publicize the ongoing efforts of SNWG solutions. In addition, the SEP is also collaborating with NASA’s Short-term Prediction Research and Transition (SPoRT) Center to develop user-driven applications for SNWG products leveraging stakeholder input. This presentation will provide an overview of the SEP, highlight the resources currently available to users, and describe ongoing efforts to address the needs of users, so SNWG products can be better implemented into scientific workflows.

Jenny Wood↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Verification of the Generalized Aerospace Simulation in Simulink (R)

NASA uses six-degrees-of-freedom (6-DOF) simulations tools to design, test, develop Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) software, and certify vehicle performance prior to flight. Therefore, it is critical that the 6-DOF tools used for vehicle design and certification are validated. The focus of this work is the vali-dation of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center 6-DOF “GeneraLized Aero-space Simulation in Simulink” (GLASS) framework tool. The GLASS tool framework is currently used to support NASA GN&C insight for the Human Landing System (HLS) project, simulating vehicle dynamics during lunar descent and as-cent. The GLASS framework utilizes the off-the-shelf Mathworks ® Simscape Multibody® toolbox to model vehicle multi-body dynamics. NASA’s Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) provides a set of 6-DOF simulation verification “check cases” that are available to any user needing to verify 6-DOF tools. The check cases contain seventeen atmospheric and twenty-six orbital test scenarios are provided to validate equations of motion, environmental models (e.g., atmosphere, gravitation, and geodesy) and tool propagators. This paper compares GLASS 6-DOF simulation results against the NESC check cases’ results via simulation-to-simulation comparisons. The comparisons demonstrate that GLASS simulation results are “in family” with the outputs of the applicable NASA NESC check cases and verifies the GLASS core framework dynamics and the correct implementation of the check case scenario models.

6-Dof↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Verification of the Generalized Aerospace Simulation in Simulink

NASA uses six-degrees-of-freedom (6-DOF) simulations tools to design, test, develop Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) software, and certify vehicle performance prior to flight. Therefore, it is critical that the 6-DOF tools used for vehicle design and certification are validated. The focus of this work is the validation of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center 6-DOF “GeneraLized Aerospace Simulation in Simulink” (GLASS) framework tool. The GLASS tool framework is currently used to support NASA GN&C insight for the Human Landing System (HLS) project, simulating vehicle dynamics during lunar descent and ascent. The GLASS framework utilizes the off-the-shelf Mathworks (R) Simscape (TM) Multibody (TM) toolbox to model vehicle multi-body dynamics. NASA’s Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) provides a set of 6-DOF simulation verification “check cases” that are available to any user needing to verify 6-DOF tools. The check cases contain seventeen atmospheric and twenty-six orbital test scenarios are provided to validate equations of motion, environmental models (e.g., atmosphere, gravitation, and geodesy) and tool propagators. This paper compares GLASS 6-DOF simulation results against the NESC check cases’ results via simulation-to-simulation comparisons. The comparison demonstrates that GLASS simulation results are “in family” with the outputs of the applicable NASA NESC check-cases and verify the GLASS core framework dynamics and the implementation of the check case scenario models.

6-Dof↗

NASA NTRS2024

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2023

How do tradeoffs in satellite spatial and temporal resolution impact snow water equivalent reconstruction?

Given the tradeoffs between spatial and temporal resolution, questions about resolution optimality are fundamental to the study of global snow. Answers to these questions will inform future scientific priorities and mission specifications. Heterogeneity of mountain snowpacks drives a need for daily snow cover mapping at the slope scale (≤30 m) that is unmet for a variety of scientific users, ranging from hydrologists to the military to wildlife biologists. But finer spatial resolution usually requires coarser temporal or spectral resolution. Thus, no single sensor can meet all these needs. Recently, constellations of satellites and fusion techniques have made noteworthy progress. The efficacy of two such recent advances is examined: (1) a fused MODIS–Landsat product with daily 30 m spatial resolution and (2) a harmonized Landsat 8 and Sentinel 2A and B (HLS) product with 3–4 d temporal and 30 m spatial resolution. State-of-the-art spectral unmixing techniques are applied to surface reflectance products from 1 and 2 to create snow cover and albedo maps. Then an energy balance model was run to reconstruct snow water equivalent (SWE). For validation, lidar-based Airborne Snow Observatory SWE estimates were used. Results show that reconstructed SWE forced with 30 m resolution snow cover has lower bias, a measure of basin-wide accuracy, than the baseline case using MODIS (463 m cell size) but greater mean absolute error, a measure of per-pixel accuracy. However, the differences in errors may be within uncertainties from scaling artifacts, e.g., basin boundary delineation. Other explanations are (1) the importance of daily acquisitions and (2) the limitations of downscaled forcings for reconstruction. Conclusions are as follows: (1) spectrally unmixed snow cover and snow albedo from MODIS continue to provide accurate forcings for snow models and (2) finer spatial and temporal resolution through sensor design, fusion techniques, and satellite constellations are the future for Earth observations, but existing moderate-resolution sensors still offer value.

Edward H. Bair↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Pilot Study of Medications Exposed to Vacuum

Background Few studies have been conducted regarding the effects of vacuum on medications and their packaging. While relevant on the International Space Station, understanding these effects becomes even more critical as future NASA missions venture farther away from Earth. Vehicles supporting the Artemis missions will have dedicated, vehicle-specific medical kits as well as crew medical accessory kits. Although most of the kits will be stored in a pressurized, climate-controlled volume, there are specific scenarios in which they may become exposed to vacuum. These include the vehicle being brought to vacuum to enable clearance of atmospheric contaminants, and on Human Landing System (HLS), in the airlock (in which kits may be stored) during extravehicular activities. Overview The Exploration Medical Integrated Product Team (XMIPT) in collaboration with the Department of Defense is conducting a pilot study to assess the effects of vacuum on the medications and their packaging to be used in exploration missions. Phase A of this study will focus on manufacturer’s package integrity and Phase B on identifying chemical changes through active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) testing of the medications at 0, 4.5 and 9 months post exposure. Two exposure durations, 1 hour and 8 hours were selected to represent the expected time at vacuum for an Orion contaminated atmosphere vent/repress and the time at vacuum for a lunar surface EVA. The medications for this study were identified based on those currently being considered for future Artemis missions and represent the types of pharmaceuticals and formulations that are likely to comprise an exploration formulary. Discussion The results from this pilot study will aid in decision making related to the development of medical kits, medication packaging and stowage for long duration lunar and Mars missions, and inform the direction of future medication in vacuum studies.

Vacuum↗

NASA NTRS2024

Moon to Mars (M2M) Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Process

It is the goal of Moon to Mars (M2M) to establish a single consolidated set of safety requirements and a safety review process for utilization payloads that will cross program vehicle hatches or operate externally on multiple program vehicles during transport or operation that satisfies Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Orion, EVA, and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP), Gateway (GW), and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. This document defines the Cross Program Utilization Payload (xPUP) safety review process for mission effectivity of Artemis III and beyond. This review process will help ensure protection of the overall Moon to Mars integrated system from potential hazards created by cross program payloads that either cross a program vehicle hatch or can interface with more than one M2M lunar exploration program vehicle. The process will identify payload hazards and controls that will protect ground personnel, flight crew, the integrated vehicle, ground equipment, or facilities. This process is also applicable to samples that cross hatches between vehicles including for return to Earth. The xPUP safety review process will be led by one of the M2M programs' integration safety panels, chosen on a per-payload basis. After the lead integration safety panel is determined, the common safety process is established, based on pre-determined criteria, which includes ad-hoc members from other stakeholder programs. Stakeholder programs are those that interface with the utilization payload in any way (e.g., operating on a lunar exploration vehicle or crossing program vehicle hatches). The xPUP will execute this safety review process for flight and ground utilization payload hardware design, its ground support equipment, and landing and recovery in accordance with the applicable safety requirements as specified in M2M-30043: Moon to Mars Cross Program Utilization Payload Safety Requirements. The xPUP safety process will follow the lead integration safety panel’s safety process requirements. Formal agreements will be communicated with the payload developer using the payload integration processes documented in M2M-30037, Artemis Payload Integration Implementation Plan.

payloads↗

NASA NTRS2024

Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP) Exploration EVA (xEVA) System Compatibility Standards

Extravehicular Activity (EVA) is a significant capability for Artemis Systems which includes Gateway Program (modules), Human Landing System (HLS) Program (Integrated Lander and Human Class Delivery Lander), Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV), Pressurized Rover (PR), Payloads, and any other future lunar surface assets that will be utilized for exploration or science. The EVA and Human Surface Mobility Program (EHP) will provide the following: Exploration EVA (xEVA) suits, xEVA tools and crew aids along with vehicle integration/support hardware, LTV, and PR. Being a distributed and dynamic capability (moving components), xEVA System hardware will interface with almost all elements of the Artemis architecture. As such, it is important to document a singular set of EVA compatibility standards at the programmatic level to articulate “how to interface with xEVA suit hardware” and “how to design hardware that EVA crewmembers will access and manipulate.”

Exploration↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Supervisory Control with Dual Tasking in Post G-Transition Vehicle Landings

BACKGROUND Landing during exploration spaceflight may consist of both planned automated supervisory control and unplanned crew override. Supervisory control, particularly when performed under cognitive load with additional monitoring tasks, is essential for ensuring overall mission success during landing contingencies. Evaluating performance in a relevant Human Landing System (HLS) supervisory landing task after long-duration microgravity exposure can help identify potential risks from human error and sensorimotor alterations. Adaptive changes in the sensorimotor system can manifest during g-transitions as spatial disorientation. Although training and landing aids facilitate successful landings despite disorientation, these adaptive changes may heighten cognitive demand, which must be considered in the landing strategy. It is important to characterize these effects as soon as possible following the G-transition while the sensorimotor system remains in a state of adaptive flux to inform appropriate countermeasures. METHODS A Multi-attribute Lunar Table Battery (MALTB) task was developed for an iOS tablet device to provide flexible crew testing and training capabilities in-flight and on the ground. Elements of the tablet task were derived from the Multi-Attribute Task Battery (MATB, Cegarra et al. 2020). The task requires crew members to study a map of a planned landing site and memorizing the terrain and surface landmarks to inform potential divert maneuvers during landing. The user will oversee a series of approaches through touchdown simulations on the tablet with an external camera view of the Lunar surface. The primary responsibility of the crew member will be to execute a divert if the guidance recommended site is erroneous (e.g., the guidance projected landing target is not within 10m of the planned landing site center), or the projected landing site is no longer suitable due to surface obstacles. Considering vehicle maneuverability and fuel reserves, the divert capabilities will diminish as the task progresses. In cases where a divert is initiated, a new landing target will need to be designated by the user and will be evaluated for the proximity to the original pre-planned site. A secondary operational monitoring task will challenge the user's cognitive reserve by requiring the user to maintain several gauges within acceptable limits and respond to a visual indicator while completing the landing approach. Outcome measures include distance from the planned landing site to the user-initiate divert landing location, ground slope at the new landing site, time to divert, the ability to accomplish the secondary monitoring tasks, and perceived workload. The tablet task is being evaluated in a ground-based study to determine the learning effect of first-time users. The tablet task will be utilized in a flight study to test performance multiple times postflight. Future potential testing in-flight have been identified for capsules with iOS tablet devices. Multi-attribute Lunar Table Battery Task MALTB comprises video footage of thirty distinct landing conditions. The landing scenarios feature various landing sites (n = 3), hazardous object sizes (n = 6), sun azimuth degrees (n = 4), camera modes (i.e., fixed or gimbaled), and navigation bias (i.e., true or false). Each seventy second trial uses a sixty-degree constant glideslope trajectory. The application architecture and layout include user identification setup and data storing, a guided walkthrough of the task and interface components, practice mode for task familiarization, and a modified Bedford workload scale administered following task completion. The time-based dependent measures are saved locally to the iOS Files application and post-processing scripts have been developed to evaluate the remaining measures of performance. RELEVANCE This project will deliver an operational demonstration of crew monitoring capability following spaceflight and identify potential deficits that may require remediation. Comparison of individual vestibular and cognitive changes with crew performance will help better characterize the landing risks associated with sensorimotor alterations. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This project is funded by NASA’s Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element. REFERENCES Cegarra J, Valery B, Avril E, Calmettes C, Navarro J (2020) OpenMATB: A Multi-Attribute Task Battery promoting task customization, software extensibility and experiment replicability. Behav Res Methods 52:1980-1990 doi: 10.3758/s13428-020-01364-w

Matthew McDonnell↗