China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Are We Thinking Like Rocket Scientists and Engineers?
Published in Travis S. Taylor, Introduction to Rocket Science and Engineering, 2017
That’s right. Each time astronauts conduct EVAs outside the ISS, some amount of oxygen is lost in the air locks and used up in the suits. During the shuttle era, there was plenty of oxygen on the ISS, and EVAs were not limited, at least due to lack of oxygen. Now, there are much fewer EVAs allowed because there simply is not enough oxygen available up there, and we don’t have a big-enough rocket to take it up often enough. EVAs are vital to our repairing the ISS, conducting experiments, and learning how to work in space. Who knew that the cancellation of a rocket program would hinder us in such a way? Who was thinking of the big picture?
Human-Machine System Performance in Spaceflight: A Guide for Measurement
Published in Mustapha Mouloua, Peter A. Hancock, James Ferraro, Human Performance in Automated and Autonomous Systems, 2019
Kimberly Stowers, Shirley Sonesh, Chelsea Iwig, Eduardo Salas
In habitat operations, tasks include extravehicular activities (EVAs), which involves an astronaut spacewalking outside the shielded walls of his or her spacecraft and protected only by a spacesuit. In EVAs, measurement tools and resources are limited, requiring unobtrusive measurement to be made in real time while the astronaut is in motion. Thanks to advancements in technology, the use of physiological measures (e.g., Kramer, 1991; Mehler, Reimer, & Coughlin, 2012) and cameras (Liao et al., 2005) is becoming continually less obtrusive and more reliable for capturing real time data.
Applying Research-Based Training Principles
Published in Lauren Blackwell Landon, Kelley J. Slack, Eduardo Salas, Psychology and Human Performance in Space Programs, 2020
Donna L. Dempsey, Immanuel Barshi
Newly hired Space Shuttle astronaut candidates (ASCANs) were provided 2 years of initial training, focused extensively on the vehicle’s systems, prior to being designated as “astronauts” qualified for flight assignment and ready for flight-specific training. Between the end of ASCAN training and being flight-assigned, astronauts had additional training opportunities. Space Shuttle mission objectives were clearly defined (e.g., servicing the Hubble Space Telescope, installing the Joint Airlock to the ISS), and detailed flight plans were built for missions lasting up to 17 days. Flight-specific training for Shuttle missions was typically 1 year long, although flight delays often extended this training time. Crewmembers were assigned roles (e.g., commander, pilot, mission specialist) with unique job duties, and provided intensive training focused on ensuring they could perform their assigned duties and tasks as per their mission timeline. The commander and pilot were required to demonstrate proficiency in piloting the vehicle for ascent, entry, and rendezvous, as well as in docking and vehicle operations. They were provided training on these tasks in training facilities ranging from part-task trainers to high-fidelity, full-task, motion-based simulators, as well as training in the Shuttle Training Aircraft, an aircraft modified to duplicate the handling of a Space Shuttle during approach and landing. Mission specialists were required to demonstrate proficiency in performing EVAs, robotics operations, and scientific operations and were provided training on these tasks in mock-ups and simulators of varying fidelity, including EVA training in a neutral buoyancy simulator. Although much of this flight-assigned training was provided to individual or pairs of crewmembers within system or discipline training flows, flight-specific simulations allowed the entire crew to practice ascent and entry, as well as practice challenging longer mission flight plan sequences such as satellite deployments or EVA tasks, integrated as a team with MCC. Space Shuttle astronauts averaged about 120–160 hours of flight-specific integrated simulation time with MCC per crewmember in fixed- and motion-based simulators.
Analysis of the relationship between hip joint flexion/extension and torques in the mark III space suit using a computational dynamics model
Published in Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, 2021
Patrick McKeen, Conor Cullinane, Richard Rhodes, Leia Stirling
Extravehicular activity (EVA) space suits (“space suits” or “suits”) have been used from the beginning of human spaceflight through the modern day to provide life support and protect the astronaut. The design of these critical tools and their constituent space suit assemblies (SSAs) has many aspects: spacesuit designs must consider the interaction of mass, volume, walking effort, mobility, agility, and suit fit (Abramov et al. 2001). Operators wearing earlier EVA suits have developed a variety of injuries in a range of locations, including the shoulder and hip, due to prolonged use, including erythema, abrasions, muscle soreness/fatigue, paresthesia, bruising, blanching, and edema (Scheuring et al. 2009; Opperman et al. 2010; Stirling et al. 2019). To address these difficulties, a good design should maximize human performance and efficiency, while preventing injury (Gernhardt et al. 2009).