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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Compiling a Comprehensive EVA Training Dataset for NASA Astronauts

Training for a spacewalk or extravehicular activity (EVA) is considered a hazardous duty for NASA astronauts. This places astronauts at risk for decompression sickness as well as various musculoskeletal disorders from working in the spacesuit. As a result, the operational and research communities over the years have requested access to EVA training data to supplement their studies. The purpose of this paper is to document the comprehensive EVA training data set that was compiled from multiple sources by the Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) epidemiologists to investigate musculoskeletal injuries. The EVA training dataset does not contain any medical data, rather it only documents when EVA training was performed, by whom and other details about the session. The first activities practicing EVA maneuvers in water were performed at the Neutral Buoyancy Simulator (NBS) at the Marshall Spaceflight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. This facility opened in 1967 and was used for EVA training until the early Space Shuttle program days. Although several photographs show astronauts performing EVA training in the NBS, records detailing who performed the training and the frequency of training are unavailable. Paper training records were stored within the NBS after it was designated as a National Historic Landmark in 1985 and closed in 1997, but significant resources would be needed to identify and secure these records, and at this time LSAH has not pursued acquisition of these early training records. Training in the NBS decreased when the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, opened the Weightless Environment Training Facility (WETF) in 1980. Early training records from the WETF consist of 11 hand-written dive logbooks compiled by individual workers that were digitized at the request of LSAH. The WETF was integral in the training for Space Shuttle EVAs until its closure in 1998. The Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) at the Sonny Carter Training Facility near JSC opened in March 1997 and is the current site for US EVA training. Other space agencies also have used water to simulate weightlessness and train for EVAs. Russia has a training facility similar to the NBL named the Hydro Lab. The Hydro Lab began operations at the Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center (GCTC) in 1980 and has been used extensively to the present. Although a majority of training in the Hydro Lab uses the Russian Orlan suit, a small number of sessions have been conducted using a NASA suit. The Japanese Weightlessness Environment Test System (WETS) went into service at the Tsukuba Space Center in 1997 but was closed in 2011 due to extensive earthquake damage. Several sessions were performed using a NASA suit, but these sessions were short and considered "development" runs. LSAH has assembled records from the WETF, NBL and Hydro Lab. Recording of the EVA training data has changed considerably from 1967 to present. The goal of early record keeping was to track use of hardware components, and the person involved was treated as a suited operator, not as a focus of interest. Records from the past two decades are fairly precise with the person, date, suit type and size noted. On occasion the length of the session was listed, but this data is not included on all records. Records were merged from data sources and extensive cleaning of the records was required since the multiple sources frequently overlapped and duplicated records. To date the LSAH EVA training dataset includes over 12,500 EVA training sessions performed by NASA astronauts since 1981. The following variables are included for most records: Name, Sex, Event date, Event name, HUT type, HUT size, Facility, and Estimated run time. For a smaller subset of records, the following variables are available: Actual run time, Time inverted, and the suit components Waist bearing type, Shoulder harness, Shoulder pads, and Teflon inserts. The LSAH dataset is currently the most complete resource for data regarding EVA training sessions performed by NASA astronauts. However, it is not 100 percent complete since the WETS (Japan) and NBS (Marshall) training facility data were not included. This dataset has been compiled by LSAH to study the relationship of EVA training to musculoskeletal injuries but has many other non-medical applications. This dataset can be provided to other groups in order to respond to program and research questions with appropriate board approvals.

Laughlin, M. S.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Shoulder Postures in EVA Training in Reduced Gravity Analogues

Shoulder Postures in EVA Training in Reduced Gravity Analogues K. Guhl1, L. Vu2, H. Kim3, S. Rajulu4 1KBR Inc., Houston, TX, 2Aegis Aerospace Inc., Houston, TX, 3Leidos Innovations, Houston, TX, 4NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX. During extravehicular activities (EVAs) and EVA training in both the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) and at the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS), crewmembers perform a variety of hand-intensive tasks with frequent arm/shoulder repositioning while wearing a pressurized spacesuit. As a result, crewmembers may experience ergonomic stressors such as awkward shoulder postures. The ergonomic shoulder risk is also compounded by limited or restricted shoulder mobility of the spacesuit, extreme work positions such as overhead tasks, and tasks with heavy tools and repetitive motions. Prolonged or frequent shoulder elevation and overhead work, in particular, can lead to excessive stresses and musculoskeletal injuries of the shoulder joints. Future EVA missions, specifically lunar surface EVAs, will also be longer in duration and thus increase the exposure to awkward shoulder postures. In this study, we aimed to assess the ergonomic risk of awkward shoulder postures in simulated lunar surface EVAs by quantifying when and how long the arms are raised above the chest level. We assessed video recordings of pilot lunar EVA simulations (3 lunar trials each in the NBL and at ARGOS and 2 microgravity EVA trials in the NBL). These runs consisted of both training and engineering test objectives. Actual demands for shoulder use varied for different EVA types and analogues, but many EVA runs have common tasks and require similar motion components. A video observation and event logging software was used to document the duration and occurrence of the subject’s arms being raised throughout the video recordings of each EVA run. An arm raised instance was classified as the arm being at 90 degrees or above with relation to gravity for lunar EVA training events and with relation to the body for microgravity EVA training events. Such events included EVA hardware maintenance or heavy geology sampling tool operations. Events where the arm load was partially supported by external objects, like climbing a ladder or leaning against a surface were separately identified and excluded. Statistical analysis was performed to summarize the timing, frequency, and durations of the arm raise events and compared across the different EVA tasks and analogue types. Preliminary observations indicated that the total duration and number of arm raised instances were surprisingly smaller for lunar surface EVA training as compared to microgravity EVA training. The observed difference may be attributed to differing task demands and unique environmental characteristics found in lunar EVAs in comparison to microgravity EVAs. A detailed statistical analysis will be performed between lunar surface EVA training events and microgravity EVA training events in the final submission. Overall, this analysis is expected to provide insight into how ergonomic recommendations can be refined for lunar EVA training with pressurized suits. It may also inform task design and influence suit padding design to better protect crewmembers during future lunar training.

Kaitlyn Lea Guhl↗
NASA NTRS2017

Tracking Historical NASA EVA Training: Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) Development of the EVA Suit Exposure Tracker (EVA SET)

During a spacewalk, designated as extravehicular activity (EVA), an astronaut ventures from the protective environment of the spacecraft into the vacuum of space. EVAs are among the most challenging tasks during a mission, as they are complex and place the astronaut in a highly stressful environment dependent on the spacesuit for survival. Due to the complexity of EVA, NASA has conducted various training programs on Earth to mimic the environment of space and to practice maneuvers in a more controlled and forgiving environment. However, rewards offset the risks of EVA, as some of the greatest accomplishments in the space program were accomplished during EVA, such as the Apollo moonwalks and the Hubble Space Telescope repair missions. Water has become the environment of choice for EVA training on Earth, using neutral buoyancy as a substitute for microgravity. During EVA training, an astronaut wears a modified version of the spacesuit adapted for working in water. This high fidelity suit allows the astronaut to move in the water while performing tasks on full-sized mockups of space vehicles, telescopes, and satellites. During the early Gemini missions, several EVA objectives were much more difficult than planned and required additional time. Later missions demonstrated that "complex (EVA) tasks were feasible when restraints maintained body position and underwater simulation training ensured a high success probability".1,2 EVA training has evolved from controlling body positioning to perform basic tasks to complex maintenance of the Hubble Space Telescope and construction of the International Space Station (ISS). Today, preparation is centered at special facilities built specifically for EVA training, such as the Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL) at NASA's Johnson Space Center ([JSC], Houston) and the Hydrolab at the Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Centre ([GCTC], Star City, outside Moscow). Underwater training for an EVA is also considered hazardous duty for NASA astronauts. This activity places astronauts at risk for decompression sickness and barotrauma as well as various musculoskeletal disorders from working in the spacesuit. The medical, operational and research communities over the years have requested access to EVA training data to better understand the risks. As a result of these requests, epidemiologists within the Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) team have compiled records from numerous EVA training venues to quantify the exposure to EVA training. The EVA Suit Exposure Tracker (EVA SET) dataset is a compilation of ground-based training activities using the extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) in neutrally buoyant pools to enhance EVA performance on orbit. These data can be used by the current ISS program and future exploration missions by informing physicians, researchers, and operational personnel on the risks of EVA training in order that future suit and mission designs incorporate greater safety. The purpose of this technical report is to document briefly the various facilities where NASA astronauts have performed EVA training while describing in detail the EVA training records used to generate the EVA SET dataset.

Laughlin, Mitzi S.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Helmet-Mounted Display Technology for Eva Training in NASA's Neutral Buoyancy Lab

Currently, during extravehicular activity (EVA) on the International Space Station (ISS), astronauts are in constant communication with mission control; however, this paradigm will significantly change during future NASA exploration missions due to limited and time-delayed communications. As exploration missions will thereby require an increase in crew autonomy, it is hypothesized that heads-up display (HUD) technology can supplement communications with mission control. Before introducing novel display technology to EVA operations, it must first be demonstrated and evaluated in an EVA training environment. The UC Davis Center for Spaceflight Research, in collaboration with NASA Johnson Space Center’s Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations (H-3PO) Lab has developed a low-cost and rapid development helmet-mounted display (HMD) for EVA training at NASA’s Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL). The first two phases of HMD testing (Phase I and II) at the NBL focused on technology and capability development and demonstration. Crew member feedback was obtained that evaluated aspects of HMD including its user satisfaction, visibility, readability, and usefulness. Overall, feedback indicated HMD was readable, un-obtrusive, and the available display modes had potential to be useful and enhance EVA training. HMD display modes currently available include: real-time biofeedback (metabolic rate), phase elapsed time (PET), ability to set timers, task procedural aids (e.g. Pistol Grip Tool settings) and custom messages. The goal for Phase III, which is currently underway, is to evaluate the effects that access to bioinformatics through HMD has on astronaut training and performance at the NBL. For this phase of testing, crewmembers will be asked to perform a go/no-go task while wearing HMD throughout the NBL run to characterize crew member state of situational awareness with respect to HMD. This information could be used to inform how best to display relatively important or supplemental, but not critical, data in the future.

Heads up display↗
NASA NTRS2016

EVA Training and Development Facilities

Overview: Vast majority of US EVA (ExtraVehicular Activity) training and EVA hardware development occurs at JSC; EVA training facilities used to develop and refine procedures and improve skills; EVA hardware development facilities test hardware to evaluate performance and certify requirement compliance; Environmental chambers enable testing of hardware from as large as suits to as small as individual components in thermal vacuum conditions.

Cupples, Scott↗
NASA NTRS2016

Compiling a Comprehensive EVA Training Dataset for NASA Astronauts

Training for a spacewalk or extravehicular activity (EVA) is considered hazardous duty for NASA astronauts. This activity places astronauts at risk for decompression sickness as well as various musculoskeletal disorders from working in the spacesuit. As a result, the operational and research communities over the years have requested access to EVA training data to supplement their studies.

Laughlin, M. S.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Results from an Investigation into Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA) Training Related Shoulder Injuries

The number and complexity of extravehicular activities (EVAs) required for the completion and maintenance of the International Space Station (ISS) is unprecedented. The training required to successfully complete this magnitude of space walks presents a real risk of overuse musculoskeletal injuries to the EVA crew population. There was mounting evidence raised by crewmembers, trainers, and physicians at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) between 1999 and 2002 that suggested a link between training in the Neutral - Buoyancy Lab (NBL) and the several reported cases of shoulder injuries. The short- and long-term health consequences of shoulder injury to astronauts in training as well as the potential mission impact associated with surgical intervention to assigned EVA crew point to this as a critical problem that must be mitigated. Thus, a multi-directorate tiger team was formed in December of 2002 led by the EVA Office and Astronaut Office at the JSC. The primary objectives of this Tiger Team were to evaluate the prevalence of these injuries and substantiate the relationship to training in the NBL with the crew person operating in the EVA Mobility Unit (EMU). Between December 2002 and June of 2003 the team collected data, surveyed crewmembers, consulted with a variety of physicians, and performed tests. The results of this effort were combined with the vast knowledge and experience of the Tiger Team members to formulate several findings and over fifty recommendations. This paper summarizes those findings and recommendations as well as the process by which these were determined. The Tiger Team concluded that training in the NBL was directly linked to several major and minor shoulder injuries that had occurred. With the assistance of JSC flight surgeons, outside consultants, and the lead crewmember/physician on the team, the mechanisms of injury were determined. These mechanisms were then linked to specific aspects of the hardware design, operational techniques, and the training environment. During the 1999 to 2003 time frame many variables converged to make it impossible to determine with any accuracy which one or two root causes were primarily involved. Therefore a broad range of recommendations was established to prevent future injury to crewmembers training in the NBL in the near term. Many of these recommendations are lessons learned that are essentially timeless and therefore should be passed on to future EVA endeavors to ensure that hardware designs and operational techniques utilized in the future consider the demands of training on the human body here on earth.

Johnson, Brian J.↗
NASA NTRS1987

A synopsis of the EVA training conducted on EASE/ACCESS for STS-61-B

Experimental Assembly of Structure in EVA (EASE)/Assembly Concept for Construction of Erectable Space Structures (ACCESS) training problems; photography/television coverage; training schedules; flight data file (FDF), and flight rules production are summarized.

Havens, Kathryn A.↗
NASA NTRS1989

STS-32 LDEF EVA training in WETF with Low and Dunbar

Astronauts Low and Dunbar are shown entering the Weightless Environment Training Facility to perform tasks they might be called on to do if extravehicular activity were required during their mission to retrieve the Long Duration Exposure Facility.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

Return to Flight: Crew Activities Resource Reel 1 of 2

The crew of the STS-114 Discovery Mission is seen in various aspects of training for space flight. The crew activities include: 1) STS-114 Return to Flight Crew Photo Session; 2) Tile Repair Training on Precision Air Bearing Floor; 3) SAFER Tile Inspection Training in Virtual Reality Laboratory; 4) Guidance and Navigation Simulator Tile Survey Training; 5) Crew Inspects Orbital Boom and Sensor System (OBSS); 6) Bailout Training-Crew Compartment; 7) Emergency Egress Training-Crew Compartment Trainer (CCT); 8) Water Survival Training-Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL); 9) Ascent Training-Shuttle Motion Simulator; 10) External Tank Photo Training-Full Fuselage Trainer; 11) Rendezvous and Docking Training-Shuttle Engineering Simulator (SES) Dome; 12) Shuttle Robot Arm Training-SES Dome; 13) EVA Training Virtual Reality Lab; 14) EVA Training Neutral Buoyancy Lab; 15) EVA-2 Training-NBL; 16) EVA Tool Training-Partial Gravity Simulator; 17) Cure in Place Ablator Applicator (CIPAA) Training Glove Vacuum Chamber; 16) Crew Visit to Merritt Island Launch Area (MILA); 17) Crew Inspection-Space Shuttle Discovery; and 18) Crew Inspection-External Tank and Orbital Boom and Sensor System (OBSS). The crew are then seen answering questions from the media at the Space Shuttle Landing Facility.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2000

STS-92 Crew Training

Footage shows the crew of STS-92, Commander Brian Duffy, Pilot Pamela A. Melroy, and Mission Specialists Koichi Wakata, Leroy Chiao, Peter J.K. Wisoff, Michael E. Lopez-Alegria, and William S. McArthur during various parts of their training. Clips are seen of the Shuttle bailout training, Shuttle arm and extravehicular activity (EVA) training at the Virtual Reality Lab, EVA training at the Neutral Buoyancy Lab, Shuttle operations training, EVA prep and post training in the Full Fuselage Trainer, ascent and post insertion training in the Guidance Navigation Simulator, and Mission Specialist Wakata in the Shuttle Engineering Dome and training on the Manipulator Development Facility.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2012

EVA Skills Training

Dr. Parazynski and a colleague from Extravehicular Activity (EVA), Robotics, & Crew Systems Operations (DX) worked closely to build the EVA Skills Training Program, and for the first time, defined the gold standards of EVA performance, allowing crewmembers to increase their performance significantly. As part of the program, individuals had the opportunity to learn at their own rate, taking additional water time as required, to achieve that level of performance. This focus on training to one's strengths and weaknesses to bolster them enabled the Crew Office and DX to field a much larger group of spacewalkers for the daunting "wall of EVA" required for the building and maintenance of the ISS. Parazynski also stressed the need for designers to understand the capabilities and the limitations of a human in a spacesuit, as well as opportunities to improve future generations of space. He shared lessons learned (how the Crew Office engaged in these endeavors) and illustrated the need to work as a team to develop these complex systems.

Parazynski, Scott↗
NASA NTRS1974

Review of extravehicular activity for Shuttle program

Extravehicular activity (EVA) is a baselined Shuttle Orbiter capability. It can provide cost-effective servicing operations for payloads, on-orbit repair, and techniques for meeting various on-orbit contingencies. The basic EVA system planned consists of Orbiter-integral provisions, carry-on life support provisions, and EVA support equipment provisions. The Orbiter-integral provisions include the internal airlock, the EVA Egress module, and the docking module, each of which provides an egress path. The carry-on life support provisions will be two Extravehicular Mobility Units (EMU), composed of an Astronaut Life Support Assembly (ALSA) and a Space Suit Assembly (SSA). The support equipment includes tethers, special tools, translation aids, and workstations. The Shuttle Orbiter EVA requirements and possible tasks, EVA crew rescue equipment and techniques, crew support, EVA training, and EVA timeline activities are described.

Covington, J. H.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Instrumented Walking and Turning Test to Evaluate Suited Gait Dynamics and Performance in Extravehicular Activity Training Environments

Background and aims: Walking will be required for many exploration tasks on the Moon during the Artemis program. Walking in a straight line on the confined floorspace of a testing area, and repetitive treadmill walking that requires no change in direction may not adequately reflect the balance and coordination required during ambulation. Also, performance of turning maneuvers may be affected differently in different extravehicular activity (EVA) training facilities that simulate partial gravity. For example, the Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) simulates lunar gravity by adding weight to underwater subjects to alter buoyancy and achieve the equivalent ground reaction force of 1/6 of Earth’s gravity (1/6G), whereas the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS) uses a computer controlled overhead suspension system programmed to continuously offload a percentage of a subject’s weight to simulate 1/6G. The degree to which dynamic movements such as turning are comparable across these EVA training facilities has not yet been evaluated. The instrumented gait test helps NASA scientists and engineers evaluate gait dynamics and performance in suited conditions, and this test demonstrates the unique characteristics and limitations of EVA training facilities. We developed an instrumented walking and turning test using inertial measurement units (IMUs) and conducted the test at NASA’s EVA training facilities. Results were used to compare suited walking and turning characteristics in the ARGOS and the NBL. Methods: Subjects donned the Mark III space suit during offloading with the ARGOS spreader bar gimbal and donned the Z2.5 space suit while underwater in the NBL with weights and floatation added to achieve realistic suit center of gravity. The test team securely attached three Opal (APDM, OR, USA) wireless IMUs on the space suit for each test run: one on the middle of the hard upper torso, and one on the left and on the right ankle bearings. During the NBL tests, the IMUs were encased in a waterproof housing (GoPro) with foam added to create a tighter fit. At both testing facilities, 6.3 m x 1.0 m (LxW) walking lines were marked, and a cone for turning or walking around was located at the end of the walking path with another line on the other side of the cone to indicate the stopping point after walking around the cone. Under simulated 1/6G, subjects began by standing at the marked line with their arms folded across the chest, they then walked at a preferred speed along the straight walking path until they reached the end, turned 180 degrees around the cone, and finally stopped at the marked stopping point. All IMU data recorded during testing were automatically saved to the internal memory. Then, raw IMU signals were processed using custom MATLAB (Mathworks, MA, USA) code to compare gait parameters during both the walking and the turning components of the task. These parameters included time (s), speed (m/s for walking and rad/s for turning), step number (n) and walk:turn time ratio (% time spent straight walking versus turning). Results: Less time, faster gait, fewer steps, and higher walk:turn ratio during both walking and turning components were exhibited during tests performed at the ARGOS versus those performed at the NBL. During the NBL tests, the slower walking speed continued at the same rate throughout a U-shape turn. During the ARGOS tests, the subjects performed shorter and tighter turns at 4 times the speed of the NBL turns because they walked 30% faster and the vertical offloading system gave them more support. Conclusion: Our data show that the differences in walking and turning parameters during the NBL tests may be due to the high viscosity in the water environment where the motion of the lower limbs was slow and did not reach full flexion and extension. These tests improve the current knowledge of testing environments in preparation for EVAs on the lunar surface.

Kyoung Jae Kim↗