Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “gloves”

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 NTRS2015

High Performance EVA Glove Collaboration: Glove Injury Data Mining Effort

Human hands play a significant role during Extravehicular Activity (EVA) missions and Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) training events, as they are needed for translating and performing tasks in the weightless environment. Because of this high frequency usage, hand and arm related injuries are known to occur during EVA and EVA training in the NBL. The primary objectives of this investigation were to: 1) document all known EVA glove related injuries and circumstances of these incidents, 2) determine likely risk factors, and 3) recommend interventions where possible that could be implemented in the current and future glove designs. METHODS: The investigation focused on the discomforts and injuries of U.S. crewmembers who had worn the pressurized Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit and experienced 4000 Series or Phase VI glove related incidents during 1981 to 2010 for either EVA ground training or in-orbit flight. We conducted an observational retrospective case-control investigation using 1) a literature review of known injuries, 2) data mining of crew injury, glove sizing, and hand anthropometry databases, 3) descriptive statistical analyses, and finally 4) statistical risk correlation and predictor analyses to better understand injury prevalence and potential causation. Specific predictor statistical analyses included use of principal component analyses (PCA), multiple logistic regression, and survival analyses (Cox proportional hazards regression). Results of these analyses were computed risk variables in the forms of odds ratios (likelihood of an injury occurring given the magnitude of a risk variable) and hazard ratios (likelihood of time to injury occurrence). Due to the exploratory nature of this investigation, we selected predictor variables significant at p≤0.15. RESULTS: Through 2010, there have been a total of 330 NASA crewmembers, from which 96 crewmembers performed 322 EVAs during 1981-2010, resulting in 50 crewmembers being injured inflight and 44 injured during 11,704 ground EVA training events. Of the 196 glove related injury incidents, 106 related to EVA and 90 to EVA training. Over these 196 incidents, 277 total injuries (126 flight; 151 training) were reported and were then grouped into 23 types of injuries. Of EVA flight injuries, 65% were commonly reported to the hand (in general), metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint, and finger (not including thumb) with fatigue, abrasion, and paresthesia being the most common injury types (44% of total flight injuries). Training injuries totaled to more than 70% being distributed to the fingernail, MCP joint, and finger crotch with 88% of the specific injuries listed as pain, erythema, and onycholysis. Of these training injuries, when reporting pain or erythema, the most common location was the index finger, but when reporting onycholysis, it was the middle finger. Predictor variables specific to increased risk of onycholysis included: female sex (OR=2.622), older age (OR=1.065), increased duration in hours of the flight or training event (OR=1.570), middle finger length differences in inches between the finger and the EVA glove (OR=7.709), and use of the Phase VI glove (OR=8.535). Differentiation between training and flight and injury reporting during 2002-2004 were significant control variables. For likelihood of time to first onycholysis injury, there was a 24% reduction in rate of reporting for each year increase in age. Also, more experienced crewmembers, based on number of EVA flight or training events completed, were less likely to report an onycholysis injury (3% less for every event). Longer duration events also found reporting rates to occur 2.37 times faster for every hour of length. Crewmembers with larger hand size reported onycholysis 23% faster than those with smaller hand size. Finally, for every 1/10th of an inch increase in difference between the middle finger length and the glove, the rate of reporting increased by 60%. DISCUSSION: One key finding was that the Series 4000 glove had a lower injury risk than the Phase VI, which provides a platform for further evaluation. General interventions that reduce hand overexertion and repetitive use exposure through tool development, procedural changes and shorter exposures may be one mitigation path, but due to the way the training event times were reported, we cannot provide a guideline for a specific event duration change. When the finger length was different from the glove length, the risk of injury increased indicating that the use of larger finger take-ups could be contributing to injury and therefore may not be recommended. Prior to this investigation, there was one previous investigation indicating hand anthropometry may be related to onycholysis. We found different hand anthropometry variables indicated by this investigation as compared to the prior, specifically differences in middle finger length compared to glove finger length, which point more towards a sizing issue than a specific anthropometry issue. Additionally, although this investigation has identified sizing as an issue, the force and environmental-related variables of the EVA glove that could also cause injury were not accounted for.

Reid, C. R.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Thermal and Mechanical Testing of Neoprene Gloves Used in a Space Shuttle Microgravity Glove Box Experiment

Neoprene gloves are used in a Space Shuttle Microgravity Glove Box (MGBX) experiment. In 1999, significant corrosion was observed in the work area and on the outer surface of the left glove ring. Analysis of the corrosion products showed that they contained chlorine. The Neoprene gloves used in this glove box were obtained in 1995, with a recommended shelf life of 3 years. After storage of these gloves in a cabinet drawer until 1999, significant signs of corrosion were also observed in the drawer. Mechanical and thermal properties were determined on samples cut from the finger and sleeve areas of the "good" and "bad" gloves. This data showed significant aging of the left-hand glove, particularly in the sleeve area. Thermal analysis data by DSC and TGA was complimentary to tensile data in showing this aging. However, this test data did not pinpoint the cause of the left-hand glove aging, or of the corrosion products.

Wingard, Charles Doug↗
NASA NTRS2014

FY13 High Performance EVA Glove (HPEG) Collaboration: Glove Injury Data Mining Effort - Training Data Overview

From the time hand-intensive tasks were first created for EVAs, discomforts and injuries have been noted.. There have been numerous versions of EVA gloves for US crew over the past 50 years, yet pain and injuries persist. The investigation team was tasked with assisting in a glove injury assessment for the High Performance EVA Glove (HPEG) project.center dot To aid in this assessment, the team was asked to complete the following objectives: - First, to develop the best current understanding of what glove-related injuries have occurred to date, and when possible, identify the specific mechanisms that caused those injuries - Second, to create a standardized method for comparison of glove injury potential from one glove to another. center dot The overall goal of the gloved hand injury assessment is to utilize ergonomics in understanding how these glove injuries are occurring, and to propose mitigations to current designs or design changes in the next generation of EVA gloves.

Reid, Christopher↗
NASA NTRS2013

Glove-Enabled Computer Operations (GECO): Design and Testing of an Extravehicular Activity Glove Adapted for Human-Computer Interface

The Glove-Enabled Computer Operations (GECO) system enables an extravehicular activity (EVA) glove to be dual-purposed as a human-computer interface device. This paper describes the design and human participant testing of a right-handed GECO glove in a pressurized glove box. As part of an investigation into the usability of the GECO system for EVA data entry, twenty participants were asked to complete activities including (1) a Simon Says Games in which they attempted to duplicate random sequences of targeted finger strikes and (2) a Text Entry activity in which they used the GECO glove to enter target phrases in two different virtual keyboard modes. In a within-subjects design, both activities were performed both with and without vibrotactile feedback. Participants mean accuracies in correctly generating finger strikes with the pressurized glove were surprisingly high, both with and without the benefit of tactile feedback. Five of the subjects achieved mean accuracies exceeding 99 in both conditions. In Text Entry, tactile feedback provided a statistically significant performance benefit, quantified by characters entered per minute, as well as reduction in error rate. Secondary analyses of responses to a NASA Task Loader Index (TLX) subjective workload assessments reveal a benefit for tactile feedback in GECO glove use for data entry. This first-ever investigation of employment of a pressurized EVA glove for human-computer interface opens up a wide range of future applications, including text chat communications, manipulation of procedureschecklists, cataloguingannotating images, scientific note taking, human-robot interaction, and control of suit andor other EVA systems.

Adams, Richard J.↗
NASA NTRS2014

High Performance EVA Glove Collaboration: Glove Injury Data Mining Effort

Human hands play a significant role during extravehicular activity (EVA) missions and Neutral Buoyancy Lab (NBL) training events, as they are needed for translating and performing tasks in the weightless environment. It is because of this high frequency usage that hand- and arm-related injuries and discomfort are known to occur during training in the NBL and while conducting EVAs. Hand-related injuries and discomforts have been occurring to crewmembers since the days of Apollo. While there have been numerous engineering changes to the glove design, hand-related issues still persist. The primary objectives of this study are therefore to: 1) document all known EVA glove-related injuries and the circumstances of these incidents, 2) determine likely risk factors, and 3) recommend ergonomic mitigations or design strategies that can be implemented in the current and future glove designs. METHODS: The investigator team conducted an initial set of literature reviews, data mining of Lifetime Surveillance of Astronaut Health (LSAH) databases, and data distribution analyses to understand the ergonomic issues related to glove-related injuries and discomforts. The investigation focused on the injuries and discomforts of U.S. crewmembers who had worn pressurized suits and experienced glove-related incidents during the 1980 to 2010 time frame, either during training or on-orbit EVA. In addition to data mining of the LSAH database, the other objective of the study was to find complimentary sources of information such as training experience, EVA experience, suit-related sizing data, and hand-arm anthropometric data to be tied to the injury data from LSAH. RESULTS: Past studies indicated that the hand was the most frequently injured part of the body during both EVA and NBL training. This study effort thus focused primarily on crew training data in the NBL between 2002 and 2010. Of the 87 recorded training incidents, 19 occurred to women and 68 to men. While crew ages ranged from thirties to fifties, the age category most affected was in the forties range. Incident rate calculations (incidents per 100 training runs) revealed that the 2002, 2003, and 2004 time periods registered the highest reported incident rate levels (3.4, 6.1, and 4.1 respectively) when compared to the following years (all ≤ 1.0). In addition to general hand-arm discomfort being the highest reported result from training, specific types of hand injuries or symptoms included erythema, fingernail delamination, abrasions, muscle soreness/fatigue, paresthesia, bruising, blanching, and edema. Specific body locations most affected by hand injuries included the metacarpophalangeal joints, fingernails, finger crotches, fingers in general, interphalangeal joints, and fingertips. Causes of injuries reported in the LSAH data were primarily attributed to the forces that the gloved hands were exposed to due to hand intensive tasks and/or poor glove sizing. DISCUSSION: Although the age data indicate that most injuries are reported by male crewmembers in their forties, that is also the dominant gender and age range of most EVA crew therefore it is not an unexpected finding. Age and gender analysis will continue as more details on the uninjured population is accrued. While there is a reasonable mechanism to link training quantity to injury, the results were inconsistent and point to the need for a consistent method of suit-related injury screening and documentation. For instance, the high-incident rate levels for the years 2002 to 2004 could be attributed to a comprehensive medical review of crewmembers post-NBL EVA training that occurred from July 19, 2002 to January 16, 2004. Furthermore, there could have been increased awareness from an investigation at the NBL. These investigations may have temporarily increased the fidelity of reported injuries and discomforts during these dates as compared to surrounding years, when injury signs and symptom were no longer actively being investigated but rather voluntarily reported. Data mining for possible mechanistic factors continues and includes more detailed training timelines, hand anthropometry, and suit sizing information. The limited published data looking at hand-arm anthropometry correlated hand-anthropometry metrics with injuries stemming from glove design and operation. Future work will include further evaluation of body sizing and fit in relation to hand injury incidents.

Reid, C. R.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Glove-Enabled Computer Operations (GECO): Design and Testing of an Extravehicular Activity Glove Adapted for Human-Computer Interface

The Glove-Enabled Computer Operations (GECO) system enables an extravehicular activity (EVA) glove to be dual-purposed as a human-computer interface device. This paper describes the design and human participant testing of a right-handed GECO glove in a pressurized glove box. As part of an investigation into the usability of the GECO system for EVA data entry, twenty participants were asked to complete activities including (1) a Simon Says Games in which they attempted to duplicate random sequences of targeted finger strikes and (2) a Text Entry activity in which they used the GECO glove to enter target phrases in two different virtual keyboard modes. In a within-subjects design, both activities were performed both with and without vibrotactile feedback. Participants' mean accuracies in correctly generating finger strikes with the pressurized glove were surprisingly high, both with and without the benefit of tactile feedback. Five of the subjects achieved mean accuracies exceeding 99% in both conditions. In Text Entry, tactile feedback provided a statistically significant performance benefit, quantified by characters entered per minute, as well as reduction in error rate. Secondary analyses of responses to a NASA Task Loader Index (TLX) subjective workload assessments reveal a benefit for tactile feedback in GECO glove use for data entry. This first-ever investigation of employment of a pressurized EVA glove for human-computer interface opens up a wide range of future applications, including text "chat" communications, manipulation of procedures/checklists, cataloguing/annotating images, scientific note taking, human-robot interaction, and control of suit and/or other EVA systems.

Adams, Richard J.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Results of correlations for transition location on a clean-up glove installed on an F-14 aircraft and design studies for a laminar glove for the X-29 aircraft accounting for spanwise pressure gradient

Results of correlative and design studies for transition location, laminar and turbulent boundary-layer parameters, and wake drag for forward swept and aft swept wings are presented. These studies were performed with the use of an improved integral-type boundary-layer and transition-prediction methods. Theoretical predictions were compared with flight measurements at subsonic and transonic flow conditions for the variable aft swept wing F-14 aircraft for which experimental pressure distributions, transition locations, and turbulent boundary-layer velocity profiles were measured. Flight data were available at three spanwise stations for several values of sweep, freestream unit Reynolds number, Mach numbers, and lift coefficients. Theory/experiment correlations indicate excellent agreement for both transition location and turbulent boundary-layer parameters. The results of parametric studies performed during the design of a laminar glove for the forward swept wing X-29 aircraft are also presented. These studies include the effects of a spanwise pressure gradient on transition location and wake drag for several values of freestream Reynolds numbers at a freestream Mach number of 0.9.

Goradia, S. H.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Power assist EVA glove development

Structural modeling of the EVA glove indicates that flexibility in the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint can be improved by selectively lowering the elasticity of the glove fabric. Two strategies are used to accomplish this. One method uses coil springs on the back of the glove to carry the tension in the glove skin due to pressurization. These springs carry the loads normally borne by the glove fabric, but are more easily deformed. An active system was also designed for the same purpose and uses gas filled bladders attached to the back of the EVA glove that change the dimensions of the back of the glove and allow the glove to bend at the MCP joint, thus providing greater flexibility at this joint. A threshold control scheme was devised to control the action of the joint actuators. Input to the controller was provided by thin resistive pressure sensors placed between the hand and the pressurized glove. The pressure sensors consist of a layer of polyester film that has a thin layer of ink screened on the surface. The resistivity of the ink is pressure dependent, so an extremely thin pressure sensor can be fabricated by covering the ink patch with another layer of polyester film and measuring the changing resistance of the ink with a bridge circuit. In order to sense the force between the hand and the glove at the MCP joint, a sensor was placed on the palmar face of the middle finger. The resultant signal was used by the controller to decide whether to fill or exhaust the bladder actuators on the back of the glove. The information from the sensor can also be used to evaluate the effectiveness of a given control scheme or glove design since the magnitude of the measured pressures gives some idea of the torque required to bend a glove finger at the MCP joint. Tests of this actuator, sensor, and control system were conducted in an 57.2 kPa glove box by performing a series of 90 degree finger bends with a glove without an MCP joint assembly, a glove with the coil spring assembly, and with the four fingered actuated glove. The tests of these three glove designs confirm the validity of the model.

Main, John A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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

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

Rachel L Thompson↗
NASA NTRS1992

Investigation of the effects of Extra Vehicular Activity (EVA) and Launch and Entry (LES) gloves on performance

Human capabilities such as dexterity, manipulability, and tactile perception are unique and render the hand as a very versatile, effective and a multipurpose tool. This is especially true for unknown environments such as the EVA environment. In the microgravity environment interfaces, procedures, and activities are too complex, diverse, and defy advance definition. Under these conditions the hand becomes the primary means of locomotion, restraint, and material handling. Facilitation of these activities, with simultaneous protection from the cruel EVA environment are the two, often conflicting, objectives of glove design. The objectives of this study was (1) to assess the effects of EVA gloves at different pressures on human hand capabilities, (2) to devise a protocol for evaluating EVA gloves, (3) to develop force time relations for a number of EVA glove pressure combinations, and (4) to evaluate two types of launch and entry suit gloves. The objectives were achieved through three experiments. The experiments for achieving objectives 1, 2, and 3 were performed in the glove box in building 34. In experiment 1 three types of EVA gloves were tested at five pressure differentials. A number of performance measures were recorded. In experiment 2 the same gloves as in experiment 1 were evaluated in a reduced number of pressure conditions. The performance measure was endurance time. Six subjects participated in both the experiments. In experiment 3 two types of launch and entry suit gloves were evaluated using a paradigm similar to experiment 1. Currently the data is being analyzed. However for this report some summary analyses have been performed. The results indicate that a) With EVA gloves strength is reduced by nearly 50 percent, b) performance decrements increase with increasing pressure differential, c) TMG effects are not consistent across the three gloves tested, d) some interesting gender glove interactions were observed, some of which may have been due to the extent (or lack of) fit of the glove to the hand, and e) differences in performance exist between partial pressure suit glove and full pressure suit glove, especially in the unpressurized condition.

Bishu, Ram R.↗
NASA NTRS2009

A Combination of Traditional and Novel Methods Used to Evaluate the Impact of an EVA Glove on Hand Performance

The gloved hand is an astronaut s primary means of interacting with the environment, so performance on an EVA is strongly impacted by any restrictions imposed by the glove. As a result, these restrictions have been the subject of study for decades. However, previous studies have generally been unsuccessful in quantifying glove mobility and tactility. Instead, studies have tended to focus on the dexterity, strength and functional performance of the gloved hand. Therefore, it has been difficult to judge the impact of each type of restriction on the glove s overall capability. The lack of basic information on glove mobility in particular, is related to the difficulty in instrumenting a gloved hand to allow an accurate evaluation. However, the current study aims at developing novel technological capabilities to provide metrics for mobility and tactility that can be used to assess the performance of a glove in a way that could enable designers and engineers to improve upon their current designs. A series of evaluations were performed in ungloved, unpressurized and pressurized (4.3 psi) conditions, to allow a comparison across pressures and to the baseline barehanded condition. In addition, a subset of the testing was also performed with the Thermal Micrometeoroid Garment (TMG) removed. This test case in particular provided some interesting insight into how much of an impact the TMG has on gloved mobility -- in some cases, as much as pressurization of the glove. Previous rule-of-thumb estimates had assumed that the TMG would have a much lower impact on mobility, while these results suggest that an improvement in the TMG could actually have a significant impact on glove performance. Similarly, tactility testing illustrated the impact of glove pressurization on tactility and provided insight on the design of interfaces to the glove. The metrics described in this paper have been used to benchmark the Phase VI EVA glove and to develop requirements for the next generation glove for the Constellation program.

Rajulu, Sudhakar↗
NASA NTRS2010

Use of Traditional and Novel Methods to Evaluate the Influence of an EVA Glove on Hand Performance

The gloved hand is one of an astronaut s primary means of interacting with the environment, and any restrictions imposed by the glove can strongly affect performance during extravehicular activity (EVA). Glove restrictions have been the subject of study for decades, yet previous studies have generally been unsuccessful in quantifying glove mobility and tactility. Past studies have tended to focus on the dexterity, strength, and functional performance of the gloved hand; this provides only a circumspect analysis of the impact of each type of restriction on the glove s overall capability. The aim of this study was to develop novel capabilities to provide metrics for mobility and tactility that can be used to assess the performance of a glove in a way that could enable designers and engineers to improve their current designs. A series of evaluations were performed to compare unpressurized and pressurized (4.3 psi) gloved conditions with the ungloved condition. A second series of evaluations were performed with the Thermal Micrometeoroid Garment (TMG) removed. This series of tests provided interesting insight into how much of an effect the TMG has on gloved mobility - in some cases, the presence of the TMG restricted glove mobility as much as pressurization did. Previous hypotheses had assumed that the TMG would have a much lower impact on mobility, but these results suggest that an improvement in the design of the TMG could have a significant impact on glove performance. Tactility testing illustrated the effect of glove pressurization, provided insight into the design of hardware that interfaces with the glove, and highlighted areas of concern. The metrics developed in this study served to benchmark the Phase VI EVA glove and to develop requirements for the next-generation glove for the Constellation program.

Benson, Elizabeth A.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Contamination of Critical Surfaces from NVR Glove Residues Via Dry Handling and Solvent Cleaning

Gloves are often used to prevent the contamination of critical surfaces during handling. The type of glove chosen for use should be the glove that produces the least amount of non-volatile residue (NVR). This paper covers the analysis of polyethylene, nitrile, latex, vinyl, and polyurethane gloves using the contact transfer and gravimetric determination methods covered in the NASA GSFC work instruction Gravimetric Determination and Contact Transfer of Non-volatile Residue (NVR) in Cleanroom Glove Samples, 541-WI-5330.1.21 and in the ASTM Standard E-1731M-95, Standard Test Method for Gravimetric Determination of Non-Volatile Residue from Cleanroom Gloves. The tests performed focus on contamination of critical surfaces at the molecular level. The study found that for the most part, all of the gloves performed equally well in the contact transfer testing. However, the polyethylene gloves performed the best in the gravimetric determination testing, and therefore should be used whenever solvent contact is a possibility. The nitrile gloves may be used as a substitute for latex gloves when latex sensitivity is an issue. The use of vinyl gloves should be avoided, especially if solvent contact is a possibility. A glove database will be established by Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Code 541 to compile the results from future testing of new gloves and different glove lots.

Sovinski, Marjorie F.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Phase VI Glove Durability Testing

The current state-of-the-art space suit gloves, the Phase VI gloves, have an operational life of 25 - 8 hour Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) in a clean, controlled ISS environment. Future planetary outpost missions create the need for space suit gloves which can endure up to 90 - 8 hour traditional EVAs or 576 - 45 minute suit port-based EVAs in a dirty, uncontrolled planetary environment. Prior to developing improved space suit gloves for use in planetary environments, it is necessary to understand how the current state-of-the-art performs in these environments. The Phase VI glove operational life has traditionally been certified through cycle testing consisting of ISS-based tasks in a clean environment, and glove durability while performing planetary EVA tasks in a dirty environment has not previously been characterized. Testing was performed in the spring of 2010 by the NASA Johnson Space Center Crew and Thermal Systems Division to characterize the durability of the Phase VI Glove and identify areas of the glove design which need improvement to meet the requirements of future NASA missions. Lunar simulant was used in this test to help replicate the dirty lunar environment, and generic planetary surface EVA tasks were performed during testing. A total of 50 manned, pressurized test sessions were completed in the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) using one pair of Phase VI gloves as the test article. The 50 test sessions were designed to mimic the total amount of pressurized cycling the gloves would experience over a 6 month planetary outpost mission. The gloves were inspected at periodic intervals throughout testing, to assess their condition at various stages in the test and to monitor the gloves for failures. Additionally, motion capture and force data were collected during 18 of the 50 test sessions to assess the accuracy of the cycle model predictions used in testing and to feed into the development of improved cycle model tables. This paper provides a detailed description of the test hardware and methodology, shares the results of the testing, and provides recommendations for future work.

Mitchell, Kathryn C.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Phase VI Glove Durability Testing

The current state-of-the-art space suit gloves, the Phase VI gloves, have an operational life of 25 -- 8 hour Extravehicular Activities (EVAs) in a dust free, manufactured microgravity EVA environment. Future planetary outpost missions create the need for space suit gloves which can endure up to 90 -- 8 hour traditional EVAs or 576 -- 45 minute suit port-based EVAs in a dirty, uncontrolled planetary environment. Prior to developing improved space suit gloves for use in planetary environments, it is necessary to understand how the current state-of-the-art performs in these environments. The Phase VI glove operational life has traditionally been certified through cycle testing consisting of International Space Station (ISS)-based EVA tasks in a clean environment, and glove durability while performing planetary EVA tasks in a dirty environment has not previously been characterized. Testing was performed in the spring of 2010 by the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) Crew and Thermal Systems Division (CTSD) to characterize the durability of the Phase VI Glove and identify areas of the glove design which need improvement to meet the requirements of future NASA missions. Lunar simulant was used in this test to help replicate the dirty lunar environment, and generic planetary surface EVA tasks were performed during testing. A total of 50 manned, pressurized test sessions were completed in the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) using one pair of Phase VI gloves as the test article. The 50 test sessions were designed to mimic the total amount of pressurized cycling the gloves would experience over a 6 month planetary outpost mission. The gloves were inspected periodically throughout testing, to assess their condition at various stages in the test and to monitor the gloves for failures. Additionally, motion capture and force data were collected during 18 of the 50 test sessions to assess the accuracy of the cycle model predictions used in testing and to feed into the development of improved cycle model tables. This paper provides a detailed description of the test hardware and methodology, shares the results of the testing, and provides recommendations for future work.

Mitchell, Kathryn↗
NASA NTRS2014

EVA Glove Sensor Feasbility II Abstract

The main objectives for the glove project include taking various measurements from human subjects during and after they perform different tasks in the glove box, acquiring data from these tests and determining the accuracy of these results, interpreting and analyzing this data, and using the data to better understand how hand injuries are caused during EVAs.1 Some of these measurements include force readings, temperature readings, and micro-circulatory blood flow.1 The three glove conditions tested were ungloved (a comfort glove was worn to house the sensors), Series 4000, and Phase VI. The general approach/procedure for the glove sensor feasibility project is as follows: 1. Prepare test subject for testing. This includes attaching numerous sensors (approximately 50) to the test subject, wiring, and weaving the sensors and wires in the glove which helps to keep everything together. This also includes recording baseline moisture data using the Vapometer and MoistSense. 2. Pressurizing the glove box. Once the glove box is pressurized to the desired pressure (4.3 psid), testing can begin. 3. Testing. The test subject will perform a series of tests, some of which include pinching a load cell, making a fist, pushing down on a force plate, and picking up metal pegs, rotating them 90 degrees, and placing them back in the peg board. 4. Post glove box testing data collection. After the data is collected from inside the glove box, the Vapometer and MoistSense device will be used to collect moisture data from the subject's hand. 5. Survey. At the conclusion of testing, he/she will complete a survey that asks questions pertaining to comfort/discomfort levels of the glove, glove sizing, as well as offering any additional feedback.

Melone, Kate↗
NASA NTRS2023

Establishing Standardized Test Methods for Evaluating Space Suit Gloves

The Artemis space suit glove environmental protection garment (EPG) will be the first line of protection used to protect the crewmember’s hands from the environments encountered during extravehicular activity (EVA). As the Artemis missions will include more extreme environments, it is necessary to define tests to evaluate if gloves can meet new, challenging requirements. The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC)has funded an effort with the goal to help vendors to produce a space suit glove that is sufficiently durable to meet the needs of the Artemis missions. Three problems were identified in meeting that goal. First, there are no standardized tests defined to evaluate the durability of space suit gloves for the extreme lunar environments. Second, there is insufficient data on glove performance in a lunar environment from which to compare new designs. And third, current ISS glove TMG fabrics are unlikely to be sufficient to meet Lunar requirements. Four tasks were established to answer different aspects of these three problems. Task 1 focused on the characterization of potential glove fabrics using ASTM standardized test methods when possible. When one did not exist, new standardized test procedures were devised. Task 2 focused on developing a procedure for characterizing the thermal performance of a glove assembly. Task 3 focused on devising a standard procedure for characterizing the dust/abrasion resistance of a space suit glove. Task 4 focused on devising a standard procedure for characterizing the cut resistance of a space suit glove while at cryogenic temperatures. The new procedures created in Tasks 2, 3 and 4 were then validated by testing the Phase VI glove to collect baseline data. This paper will summarize the approach used to establish standardized test methods for each task and will expound on the ASTM process to publish the new standards.

spacesuit↗