https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19850005166 2019-03-15T12:47:59+00:00Z
·- . 

• '.1 

" .,', 

. ~'. 

:.51" ," 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS ASTnONAoUTICS CO"~"PAI'II'V 

COrtl·OPl4TfON 

•• • - .' , • , .... ", ~ ---'.- >" --- • .... Alo ~ / ~t::.'? "..- :IF : - ~ ~ .. ~ "~'"r-"" ~~ -- -I'Y d ..,J'- ~:..~ L~' 

r=---:'!:t"t'1'%·)-~~'!s~~~~..L2-:7<"~.~~sr-fr~~~r; )~~~n-~-~4-2~~·?? .-:-~~~::""'; ~\~ri~~?'77~~';';;"~:Z~~/ , 

\/ ---;-----------------------,--------~--------------------------------------------~ 
/ 

MCDONNCL~ DOUGLAS '-.../ COHPOH",.,nN 

Co,,,,.>(. r.o NAS B 35611 

OPO No 6~4 

OR .. 

THE HUMAN ROLE IN SPACE 

Volume III 

Generalizations on Human Roles In Space 

DR·4 

OCTOBER 1984 MOC H1295 

, t, 

""CDONNIZLL DOUGl.AS ASTnONA.UTIC~ cor",TPAr"V-HUNTING1TON O';:ACN 

5301 Bo/s" A; rnue fla" t "'gran 8<",(/) C"ldOrrli.l 926 II (li f J 8953311 
The Human Role in Space (THURIS) study was a 12-month effort to 

(1) investigate the role and the degree of direct involvement of humans 

that will be required in future $pace mi~sions; (2) establish valid 

criteria for allocating functional activities between humans and 

machines; and (3) provlde insight into the technology requirements, 

economics, and benefits of the human presence in space. 

The study startrd in October of 1983 and was completed in September 

of 1984. 

The findl report has been prepared in three separate volumes: 

Volume I - Executive Summary 

Volume II - Research Analysis and Technology Report 

Volume III - Generalizations on Human Roles in Space 

This document is Volume II in the series. It is the technical 

report of the work accomplished and contains the data and analyses from 

WhlCh the study results were derived. 

The study results are intended to provide information and 

guidellnes in a form that wi 11 enable NASA program rnaragers and 

decision-makers establish, early in the deslgn process, the most 

cost-effective design approach for future space programs, through ~he 

optimJl application of unique human skills and capabilities 1n space. 

Questions and cc~ents regarding this study or the mJterial 

contalned in th1s doc~nent should be directed to: 

Stephen 8. Uall 

THURIS Study Manager 

Code PO 24 

Natlo03l A~ronautics and Space Administration 

George C. Harshall Space Flight Center 

(205) 453-4190 

Harry l. Wolbers 

THURIS Study Manager 

( or) 

HcDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company H~ntington Beach, Callfornia 

(714) 896-4754 

~ ... ,.... '" , .1 p • (~r 

III 

/ 

MCDONNELL uoua .. 

'-

~ ~ 
cornEras 

Section 1 HUHAN ROLES IU FUTURE SPACE SYSTEHS 

Section 2 FACTORS AFFECTING CREW PRODUCTIVITY 

2.1 Internal Architecture 

2.2 Crew Support 

2.3 Crew Activities 

2.4 IVA Systems 

2.5 IVA/EVA Interfaces 

2.6 Remote System 11anagernent 

2.7 Recoillllcndations for Further Uork 

Section 3 EPILOGUE 

Appendix A Descriptions of 37 Generic Activities 

Identified in THURIS Study 

Appendix B Human Capabilities Required for Each Activity 

Appendix C Examples of 37 Generic 

in Space 

Activities Perforrred 

, . '. , r . I' "':-1 

v 

/ 

""COO""",,,,'-L DOUC":"~ 

1 

11 

11 

15 

21 

31 

34 

35 

36 

39 

43 

51 

55 
,. 

Secti on 1 

HUMAN ROLES IN FUTURE SPACE SYST81S 

Thirty-seven generic activities have been defined in the THURIS study that 

can in turn be used to describe the operational sequences required in a broad 

spectrum of the potential space missions foreseen for the coming decades. For 

reference purposes, a brief description of each of the 37 generic activities is 

presented in App~ndix A and a tabular summary of the human sensory/perceptual, 

intellectual. psychomotor, and motor capabilities that are requirp-d to perform 

each of the generic space activities is ptOesented in Appendix B. 

To illustrate the human performance potential for accomplishing these 

activities in future space systems. we have selected examples from the 

accomplishments of previous space flights. Appendix C presents a sum~ary of 

these data. 

From actual space flight experiences such as those illustrated in Appendix 

C, and from an understanding of the basic human capabilities and liMitations, 

as su~arized in Volume II of this report, the potential roles of hu~ans in 

space can be defined for the benefit of the systeM designer. The desi9n~r can 

then weigh the advantages and disadvantages of direct hU':'lan involvement in any 

specific mission operation and select the optimal man~':iachine mode for 

accomplishing his objectiv~. 

in order to gJin further visibility into the specific activities that will 

be important in each functional element of future space systems and to ~~ereby 

identify the human roles in these future systems. the THURIS study team 

exa~fnea the ~pace mission descriptive data generated for ~,e emerging Space 

Station Hissioll Model as developed by the I1ASA tHssion Requirements Horking 

Group (HRWG). The t~RWG \'/as a part of the 1983-1984 Space Station Task Force 

at tlASA Headquarters assigned the responsibility for defining r.lission models, 

schedules, and opcrationd1 requircr.:ents for the 1991-2000 tiMe frar.:c. 

c 
The 37 generic activities defined in the THURIS study were correlated with 

16 space station mission param~ters. These parameters included (1) the 

location of the work, i.e., intravehicular activities (IVA) or extravehicular 

activities (EVA); (2) the involvement of the crew with the mission equipment 

(e.g., initial setup and checkout, daily routine operations, periodic 

operations other than daily, maintenance of mission equipment, repair 

operations, and response to change and unexpected events); and (3) the places 

where the work is perfo,~ed relative to eight space station functional 

elements. These space station functional elements include pressurized 

modules, attached payloads in unpressurized areas, command, control and 

communications (C3) functions; deployment/construction/assembly functions; 

proximity operations; and payload staging for return to Earth. The eight 

functional elements defined by the NRWG are surrrnarized in Table 1. 

The results of correlating the generic activities to the space station 

mission parameters are presented on Figure 1. An entry in the body of the 

matrix indicates that for a particular generic activity and mission parameter 

intersection, a mission-related need is established. Inspection of the nUMber 

of lJlission paraMeters associated with each of the activities sho't'/s that all 

the activities are required to support future missions in one context or 

another and 30~ are required in neal'ly every context (11 out of the 37 

activities in most demand, as indicated by a count of 15 or 16 in the total 

column of the matrix). Those activities that appear to be most frequently 

required are adjust/align cl~nts; cOF.m~nicatc fnforrut1on; confirm/verify 

procedures! schedul es/opera,tf cns; gather/repl ace tool s/equf (r.~:'lt; 1r:;p1 ement 

pr~tedures/scheculcs; inspect/o~servc; position wodule; piOblc~ 

sohing/decisfo:l-r.:ddn!}/<bta analysis; release/secure ~"'!:hanfcal fr.t,erfacc; 

transr~rt load~d; and tran~port unload~d. From these data, it can be 

concluded that the human role in future space operations will be a very real 

and necessary onc. Further exa1nination of some of the specific research 

projects 1n the MRHG r~ission r~odel provides insight into some of the specifics 

of this role. 

2 

., 

I 

I 

• 

I 

" ! 

i 

I 

, .. 

"1 

I 

· · 

.. 

-, t 

t 

.! 
Tabl e 1 

r~ANNED STATIOI~ ELEI·1ENT FUUCTIONS 

1. Pressurized Laboratory 

A pressurlZed cre\~ station module will provide power, lou-gravity, and 

long-duration creli support for conducting laboratory work and operational 

support. Payload elements may be integrated directly into the module. 

2. Attached Payloads 

Provlslon will be made to accon~odate payload elements exterior to the 

pressurized module. Limited resources plus periodlc crew tending and 

servicing will be provided. Resources could include command, control, and 

data handling. 

3. Command. Control, and Communications Support 

Provls10ns 1'1111 be made \1ith1n the space station system to remotely command, control, monitor, throughput, and preprocess data for free-flyers and pl atforms. 

4. De 10 ~ent Assemb1 , Construction 

The space stat10n system I'll provide support capability for construction, asser.~ly, and deployment. ThlS support implies all required servfce devices, such as manipulators and manned maneuver1ng units (t~1Us). 

5. ProxiMity Operations 

Payloads capable of maneuvering themselves \'lithin a reasonable distance of 

the station \,/111 be m"lintained, se)'viced, and checked out. Reasonable 

distance is defined as that limited by the ctipability of the 

extravehicular mobility unit (81U) or a s~all proximity operations vehicle 

(POV) • 

6. Remote Maintenance, Servicing, Chockout. and Retrieval 

Payloads remote trom the space station can be malntained, serviced, and 

checked out via a remotely operated service vehicle. Servicing could be 

J:rovided on the payload at its locatlons or the payload could be 

retrieved, serviced, and returned. The space statlon likewise provides for'co~anding, controlling, maintainlng, and servicing the serVlce 

vehicle. 

7. Payload Integration and Launch 

Payloads and satell 1 tcs requl ring transfel' to other orbl ts can be brought 

to the space station by the Shuttle Orbiter, integrated \lith a transfer 

stage. and launched. The transfer sta~es couid be co~a!1ded and 

controlled from ~le space station. These stages could be either 

expendable or reusable. Reusable transfer stages can be based at the 

space station, serviced, maintained, and refueled. Expendable stages could be stored and serviced. 

8. Payload Staglng for Return to Earth 

Payloads, exper1r.1enta}- samp 1 es, or captured sampl es requi ri ng return to 

Earth can be dematcd. prepared. and stored Until placed in the Orblter for 

return to Earth. TillS function also includec; the preparatlon of payload 

eq1lipment for return at the conclusion of its mlssion. 

3 
Space Station Mluton P.uamptl rs 

Location Cfew Activities Spacp SlatlOn Functtonal EIf>mPIlts 

'tl 

" " '" !? c 

GENERIC ~ c .. M ~ '" 2 .., :3 5 Co :. ACTIVITIES ~ ~ .c <l. 

~ U a a. ~ U t: (5 a; u 2 § ;: .. :l <t " :< .c ;; '0 

OJ U .. '" 'C v 0 .9 c u ~ .. c. . E ~ II) <t c M ::: 

i ¥ c ;:; 0 .. M ~ 0 '" ,.. <t :!: ~ c: .7i u 0 .t a: .. en <t a. "'-

~ > c ~ UJ ~ ~ ~ Ii: ~ "" - N M ~ III .... '" 

I Actlvate/lnll.ale Syl1.m Operallon X X X X X X X X X X X X 

2 AdJust/Allqn Etc-menta X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

3 Allocate/An,gn/D"tr,but. X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

4 Apply/Remove B,omed,c.l' Stn,or X X l( X X 

5 CommunIcate InformatIon X X X X X X X X X X X '< X X X X 

6 Compeos.1OlV TrackIng X X X X X X X X 

7 Compute Data X X X X X X X 

8 Conform/V."fv Proc.dures/ X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

Schedule,/Cperatlons 

9 Connect/OI~eonnec:t Electrical X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

Interface 

1O Connect/D,sconnect FlUId Interface X X X X X X X X X X X X 

11 Corrolate Data X X X X X X X 

12 Otactlvat~lTermlnate System X X X X X X X X X X X 

Operation 

13 Decode/Code Data X X X X X 

14 DefIne Procedures/Schedules/ X X X X X X X 

Operollon, 

15 DeploviRetract Appendage X X X X X X X X X X X X Y 

16 Detect Change on State or X X X X X X X X X X X X 

ConditiOn 

17 DISplay DalO X X ). X X Y X X X )< X 

IS Gather/Replace Too,s/Equlpment X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

19 Ha"dle/ln~pECI/Examone LIve X X X X X 

Org3nl,m, 

20 Implcmtnt PrCCi'd.Jres/Schedules X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

21 Infofmatlcn ProcesSing X X X X X X X X X X X 

n tn'5pec"IObsf'rve X X X X X X X X '< X X X X '< X 

23 Mrasurc (Scale) Phvslc..: X X X X X X X X X 

DimenSIOns 

24 Plot Data X X X X X X 

25 POSItIon Module X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

26 PreCISion M3nlpula1l0n of Objects X X X X X X X X X X X X 

27 Problem SolVing/DeCISion Ma"-ln91 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

O.)t3 Analy'sis 

23 runult Track mg X X X X X X X X 

29 Rel~a'5e/Secure rv'echzrucal X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

In"dote 

30 Remove f .. hdule X X X X X X X X X X X )I X 

31 R('movt"/fteDI.t~ Cov~flng X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

32 n."lact/Cltan Sur"c, CoJlln? X X X X X X '< X 

33 R('plenl~h rv'\aterlals X X X X X '< X X X X X 

34 StoreiRecord Element X X X X X X X X X X X X X 

3S SUflJlcal Manipulations )( X X X X 

3G TLansport LO.1dp d X X X >. X X X X X X X X X )( X X 

37 Tran,por, Unload_ct X X X X X X X X X X X '< X X X 

Figure 1, Correlation of Generic ActIVIties 3nd SP1C:) StatIon Mlssl\Jn Parailleters 

4 

/ 

MCDO",,,'LL DOUOLfi!f---

2 

0 

l12 

16 

13 

5 

16 

8 

7 

16 

13 

12 

7 

" 

5 

7 

13 

12 

II 

15 

5 

16 

11 

15 

9 

6 

16 

12 

15 

3 

16 

13 

13 

8 

11 

13 

G 

16 

t!> 

.. 

I 

\ , . 

I 

.1 

-. I 
The Advanced Solar Observatory (ASO) mission is one of the more complex of 

the missions described in the MRWG data set. The payload equipment includes 

the solar soft X-ray telescope, the pinhole occulter, and the solar optical 

telescope. Assigned to be accoFomodated by a co-orbiting platform in an 

inclination of 28 1/2 degrees, the payload will be periodically maintained and 

refurbished by a station-based remote servicer. As an option, the payload 

could also be accommodated as a free-flyer or as a space-station-attached 

payload. Other options being evaluated include final assembly and checkout at 

the station before placement in operational orbit. 

The two station crewmeffibers assigne~ to th~ mission will need to be 

specially trained and will operate a hours each day. The crew will view three 

video displays at an IVA work station for real-time operation of the mission. 

In order to enable and enhance the scientific obJectives of the mission, the 

deSign of the crc\,1 work station that supports this mission needs to be 

efficient from an operator's point of viel-', user friendly from a man-machine 

intellectual interchange point of vie\'I, and "expert" from an information 

sharing and data recall and exchange points of view. 

The Advanced Solar Observatory illustrates a key point. As tile 

sophistication of future payloads increases. there will be an accompanying 

shift in crew support ski1ls/requirem~nts. A transition occurs from the more 

physical tasks to the more intellectually oriented work activities with the 

progression of time. This pattern appears to be analogous to the industrial 

dcve10fni:ent dynamic, wherein the blue collar worker changes to a \~hite collar 

worker as the trans'ition ·from production of goods to provision of services 

takes place. 

An NRWG mission even more complex them the ASO is the Solar Terrestrial 

Observatory (STO). As defined by the MRWG, this mission is planned for a 

first flight in the 1991-1992 time fra~e. with a mission duration of 730 

days. The STO mission calls for operations of 90 days per year or about 1 

week each 1'10nth. The general objectives of the mission are to study space 

plasma at:nosphcdc interactions using observations of natural and induced 

/ 

IMCDO,"NI£LL OOtJOLGf.--

5 
atmospheric emissions, and to exploit the natural plasma laboratory of space. 

The specific objectives are to investigate the influence of an electron beam. 

an arc jet, and a neutral gas plume on the high-altitude atmosphere, including 

the production of artificial aurora. In addition. radio waves are transmitted 

from the payload in the HF and VLF bands and received in the HF band. 

Atmospheric effects in the visible and UV are to be observed with a video 

camera. Solar monitoring instruments are also planned to be included. as well 

as an X-ray telescope. 

In order to appreciate the complexity of the 5TO mission. it is 

appropriate to describe the elements of the payload. The objectives are met 

by an electron beam of energy 1 to 20 kev. with 1 to 25 ~ilowatts of power; a 

helium or argon magneto-plasma-dynamic arc jet with 2 to 10 kilogrdms per 

pulse. 2S0-ev particle energies; a charge current probe from the 05S-T 

satellite; and possibly a neutral gas plume. This collection of science 

instruments is called SEPAC. (Space Experiment with Particle Accelerators). 

The electron beam accelerator (EBA) will be designed for ultimate power levels 

of some hundred kilowatts. allowing for substantial grm'/th in objectives. The 

power-radiating radio frequency facility is called UISP (liaves in Space 

Plasma) and consists of a VLF transoitter operating in the 1- to 3D-kilohertz 

band. an HF transmitter- and receiver operating from 0.1 to 30 megahertz. The 

dipole antenna subsystem radiates VLF and HF and receives the HF signals. 

Antenna elem~nts extend 150 meters in each of two opposite directions, \'iith 

tip-to-tip distance of 300 meters. The conrnon operating rese(l.rch equipment 

asser.bly controls antenna retraction and extension. 

The complete payload package includes the SEPAC, HISP, and AEPI (vldeo 

camera) instruments together tli til a Sol ar 110nl tor package and the X-rdY 

telescope. Subsatellites and instru~ent probes are also required. The 

payload is visualized as being contained on one or more pallets that include 

the science instruments, an antenna support structure, and a berthing adapter 

assembly fat' attachment to the Space Station. Integration hard\'\'are for 

provlding power. thennal control, signal transfer. and electrical dlstribution 

is asser.1bled on the pal1et(s). The integration hard\':are includes an active 

therr.lll loop. 

6 

/ 

MCDONNIILL DOUG'C.$-

, i 

I 

I 
The baseline semlario of about 1 "leek per month of intensive operation of 

SEPAC and WISP assumes that one (SEPAC or UISP) is in a passive mode while the 

other is active. Coordinated (interleaved) pulses of SEPAC and HISP would be 

desirable. A growth option includes operation of SEPAC and WISP at the same 

time, if resources permit. The video camera is included primarily for 

observing the effects of SEPAC and WISP. It is required for all SEPAC 

operations and some WISP operations. The camera is normally pointed along the 

magnetic field toward any auroral spot formed by emission from the SEPAC 

and/or WISP units. The camera is to be controlled by the Space Station cre'tl. 

An operator's console within the pressurized elements of the Space Station 

is visualized as being used to monitor health and safety of the mission 

equipment, to provide quick-look data reduction, and to issue commands. 

Support equipment for SEPAC and WISP is to be mounted at the crew work station 

in addition to the control electronics for these instruments and for the 

SUSIM, the X-ray telescope, and the AEPI. Displays are to provide output 

data, including the video results from AEPI. The operator's console will also 

be used to control instrumented sub-satellites. Crucial to the success of the 

mission will be the efficiency of the functional and operational interfaces 

between crew and mission equipment, as embodied in the selection and 

implementation of the design features of the \'1ork station. 

As the eMphasis changes in the vmrkplace, as illustrated by the ASO and 

the STO missions, the design of the crew worl, stations must also change to 

reflect the change from the physical to the intellectual. To more effectively 

utilize hUMan intelligence, a better match is required with machine 

intelligence and with "expert" systems. 

The successful implementation of the r<jR~!G At'vClnced Solar Observatory and 

Solar Terrestrial Observatory missions will be highly dependent upon the 

development of \'1ork stations that (l) Com:nunicate fluently ~/ith hUmans 

(speaking, writing, dral'ling, etc.), (2) assist in interactive problem solving 

and inference functions (deductive reasoning), and (3) provide kno~ledge b~se 

functions (information storage, retrieval, and "expert" systems for SUPP0i't). 

7 

MCDONNe .... DO"Cl~ 
In order to develop these work stations of the future, however, a better 

understanding is required of human intellectual capabilities and how they 

function in different operations (such as convergent production, divergent 

production, memory. cognition, or evaluatior,j anct with different contents 

(such as pictorial or figural, symbolic, semanti~. and behavioral elements) in 

order to obtain specific products (implica~ions, transformations, etc.). Even 

when people don1t speak the sam~ language, they can communicate to some degree 

using gestures~ facial expressions, etc., because they share common biological 

structure and needs, and common patterns of thought and behavior and knO\~l edge 

of the world. A more II natural" language is needed for corrmunication between 

man and machines using interfaces that are congenial and transparent for the 

average person. Voice interactive controls and displays offer considerable 

promise in this respect. 

With regard to the issue of technological readiness to support the human 

role in future space operations, it would appear that the EVA-enabling 

technologies as currently planned are well designed to support the scheduled 

space station IDe in 1991. This view 1s further supported by the fact that 

the EVA equipment. for the most part, is of the IIcarry-onll as opposed to the 

IIbuilt-in ll character. Carry-on equipment items are more easily accon~odated 

than are mission and payload equi~~ent items. which must be incorporated in 

the basic station deSign. For this reason carry-on iteMS can be integrated 

into the station build-up sequence later in the life cycle than can mission 

and payload equipment items. 

: 

In contrast with .the EVA technologies, the IVA technologies are an 

integral part of the basic design of the space station. At the outset. this 

wOlll d suggest that the IVA capabi 1i ti es and \lork stat; ons woul d need to be 

frozen in deSign several years before the start of the buildup and launch 

sequence for the station modu1es and cle~ents. On the other hand. these work 

stations must be designed to be capable of meeting the needs of a contipually 

changing set of mission requirements. some of WhlCh (for example. the ASO and 

the STO missions) will place an extrewely co~plex set of operational demands 

on the control and display configurations of the Hork ~tation. ThlS 

sched~ling conslderatlon strongly suggests that a technological gap exists in 

the \'lork-station-related projects and planning. It is further suggested that 

8 

/ 

MCOO,.,"' ...... oouow-

• J 

--, 

-7 

. 

--
these IVA-related technology developments need to be focused on designs that 

are adaptive and transparent to emerging design improvements, allowing for 

both hard~are and software updates to be made to the basic work station even 

after the work station is operational. 

The human being represents a remarkably flexible and adaptable system. 

The human can learn to operate and function effectively in many nonoptimal 

work environments. It has been said that system designel·s often use the human 

component in a man-machine system as a glue to hold the rest of the system 

together. The real issue to be considered in the development of improved work 

stations is to identify ways to increase the product~vity of the human in 

order to enhance his value to the mission. 

, / 

MCDONHI£LL DOUUL~ 

9 
This Page Intentionally left Blank 
l. 

[ 

i' 

I 

i' 

I 

. 

Section 2 

FACTORS AFFECTING CREW PRODUCTIVITY 

In terms of his basic capablities and limitations, man 1s essentially 

invariant. In terms of basic abilities, people w111 not be much different in 

the year 2050 than they are today. Recognizing this constancy in sensory, 

perceptual t intellectual, and psychomotor abilities, the real issue will be to 

improve productivity through (1) hardware and system improvements that can 

enhance human performance, or (2) procedure and operational changes that will 

allow more effective use of the human eleltent in the man-machine systems of 

the future. 

We recognize that many di fferent factors will have an impact-tlpon cre\'1 

productivity. In this section we offer comments on a few of the specific 

issues that should be considered when designing advanced space systems in 

order to enhance the hUltan role in space. 

2.1 INTER~AL ARC~ITECTU~E 

2.1.1 Workplace Layout 

In developing recom;endatfons for the optililll configuration and 

arrangement o(manned (l!odules and individual crew \'lork stations to enhance 

productivity, the following considerations must be taken into account: 

anthropo~etricSi foot, hand, and/or body restraint syste~s; traffic flow; 

materials handling; sccial interaction; safety; lighting; hy~ie.ne';-.f.md 

transmi ss i on and no1 se control; and adaptabil i ty and gro,:th potenti::1. 

The objective in work station design. a~ with any korkplace deyelo~~nt 

effort in~olYfng lf~ited space, should be to achieve opti~ use of tilC 

interfor spaco~ based on priorities of spatial needs a~d hUl~n factors design 

principles. 

Work statiors oriented radially about the interior of the r:'odule (e.g., 

Skyl ab r4ul ti pl e Docking Adlpter) may be more space effi ci cnt than arrangcfTlents 

wlth a floor and cciling, where all worl stations are oriented using the floor 

/ 

MCDONNeLL. DOVOLA~ ~ 

11 

') \f' IT' 
r 

and ceiling as consistent points of reference (e.g., Skylab Orbital Workshop 

and Spacelab). However, moving from work station to work station in the 

former configuration is considered more confusing than in the latter because 

of the 1 acl< of vi sual cues ",fforded by the f1 oor and ceil ing. Space vol ume 

utilization versus a standardized frame of reference for ease of orientation 

is an important issue to be resolved. 

Another consideratiQn in workplace design is the issue of multiple-use 

work stations versus dedicated work stations. Reducing the number of work 

stations and using multipurpose, reconfigurable work stations would save 

space, but it mi ght force the crew to \~ork in shifts, adhere to work station 

use schedules. and spend time reconfigurfn9 the work station. Depending on 

the circu~stances, this might be an inconvenience, disrupting sleeping cre~~en 

and increasing time required for work station setup. Because of the obvious 

need for redundancy, especially in critical life-support systems, the 

resolution of this issue will require the development of an acceptable 

compromf se between the two approaches. 

2.1.2 Traffic Flml 

Traffic f1o~ throUg'l any manned moduie ui11 be a mi:jor consideration in 

cnh~rcin: hu-~n productivity. 

Certain major considerations should be taken into account in establishing 

a traf,fic flOH syste'il. First, traffic frequency should be considered a major 

criterion 1n developing a flo~ pattern. Once traffic needs for various crew 

work stations have been d~termined. a flow puttern must be developed that 

provides maximum efficiency of travel between work !:tations \lith a filinimu;n of 

negative intcl"actions occurring beween those traveling through modules and 

work area!:, sensitive areas (sleep, hygiene, etc.), and/or othel" traffic. 

Second. the Mass being transported through the 40rk area must be 

considered. Flow patterns should mini:'lizc the distance large masses are 

transported, reduce as much as possible the congestion caused by large ~asses 

transported thr'ough ti ght areas, and reduce the frequency of transport. 

MCOONNe:C. .. c;.O('OL~ 12 

... 

: . 

• I 

c 
, 

Third, redundant paths of traffic flow should be considered. There are 

several reasons for this, the primary one being safety. In the event of a 

failure (fire, decompression, etc.) of one module, it would be necessary to 

avoid that module in getting to other \>lork stations. Other reasons justifying 

redundant paths include the need to avoid general congestion or to avoid 

sensitive experimental areas, sleep areas, or hygiene areas. 

2.1.3 Storaqe and Stowage 

The storage eler~nt affects h~an productivity because retrieval and 

replacement of 1tecs necessary for work-related activities always bear a tiM~ 

cons~tion penalty. ~~fficient volume must be allocated as storage space, 

but design of other systems may tend to drive the amount of storage space and 

its location. It is important that human productivity be included in any 

trade studies that concern storage. Specifically, optimizing the crew 

interface in the sense of locating, retrieving. and replacing stored items is 

the issue; factors to be considered should include the following: 

o Optimization of storage location relJtive to erei., usc of stored items 

(centralized storage versus local mini-storage versus automated retrieval and 

replacement) 

G Unique sto~age methods to optimize storage volume use. 

o Inventory infomation providing location. quantlty. use rate. and shelf 

life 

o Handling of used materials, such as trash and \'/aste 

Although past experiences in Skylab and Shuttle will provide useful data. 

storage system(s) in future space syste~s may prove to be substantially 

different due to the consi deration of human producti ... i ty. Approaches for the 

storage system may include: 

o Arrangement of storage to make items that are frequently used easily 

accessible 

o Provision of a syste~ of mini-storage near the use areas 

e USE' of centralized storage with automated retrieval and replaccf.'cnt 

13 
II' '-" -

2.1.4 Other Architectural Factors 

Some of the other specific internal architectlre issues that affect hu~~n 

productivity are as follows: 

ISSUES 

Di ameter and 1 ength of modul es 

Number and placement of windows 

Interior partitions 

Reconfigurable versus 

fixed work stations 

Solid floor versus grid or 

open structure 

Floors and cei1in~s versus 

open area 

Noise control - Affecting sleep/rest - Affecting work - Affecting communications 

Spatial requlrements. for work 

stations 

Restraint systems - Personnel 

- Equi~nent/materials 

Anthropometri cs - Work stations/devices/table(s) - Common areas - Waste management/hygiene facil ities - Passa gel-lays 

MCOO,.."''' .... D .. tla .. ~ 

14 

DESIGN OR OPERATIONAL FACTORS 

AFFECTWG PRODUCTIV lTV 

Noise control; space utilization; 

number of connecting tunnels and 

hatches 

Loss of wall space; crew preference 

or attitude; recreation source; 

1 i ght source 

Grouping; noise control; additional 

wall space 

Scheduling conflicts: multiple 

shifts; reconfiguratfon time: 

contingency operation 

Air flow; noise level 

Noise levels; visual cues; 

isolation and privacy; air flo\'1' 

Insulation; deflection; dampening; 

masking; mininize at source 

Rigid constructl0n; flexible (infrequent chJnges); reconfigurable (daily changes); co~binatlons; 

optimum versu~ mfni~um requirements of volume 

Passive; active; hybrid solutions 

Design for full range of humJn 

variation; design for restricted 

range of V<1ric1tlon; desi gn \11 tit 

adjustable or flexible approach 

, 

.. 
2.2 CREW SUPPORT 

2.2.1 Personal Hygiene 

In addftfoJ to the obvious envfro~ntal support requirements such as 

pressure, tei:lpcrature, hlmlidfty, etc., ~rsonal hygiene equfp;;lent. ruaterials, 

and rr:etho~ are critical for the physiological and psychologfcal ~~e1fare of 

cre~ers. Key systems include: 

e Body waste management - collection of urine, feces, menstrual fluids, 

perspiration, and vOMitus 

o Body cleansing - frequent bathing of hands or body parts, whole body, 

and hair and scalp 

o Oral hygiene - daily care of the teeth and gu~s 

o Personal grooming - body hair rer.lOval by cutting or shaving, hair 

combing and brushing, nail cleaning and trimming; skin care using lotions, 

antiperspirants, perfumes, and cosmetics 

To maxi~ize crew pro~ctivi~J. personal hygfen~ equfp=~nt must be 

~sign~d to ~infm1ze cre~ tfG~ required for use, operaticn, end oa1ntenancc. 

and to preclu~ return of odors, ~artfculute3. biotic con~cin~nts. or toxic 

g~ses to the spacecraft ~~sph~re. Significant engineering d~velopnent 

effort ~/i1l be needed to arrive at a \</ashlng system that is satisfactory for 

long-term use in tile weightlessness of space. The amount of water used for 

washing will be as important a problem as controlling where it goes. 

Some important ground rules for future manned systems are as follo\>ls: 

G Facilities and provisions for collectlon of body, personal cleanliness, 

and grooming should be as near earthlike as possible. 

o The system shaul d prov; de fot' \thol e-body bathl ng every 3 days, with 

mul tiple daily hand and face \'lashing for each Crel'lmeii.ber. 

o Haste water from bathlng and other washings must be collected and 

stored in ~aste water tankage, or recycled. 

o Fecal waste should be collected and stabillzed by drying before storage 

and return to Earth in the logistics rrodule. 

, Fecal and urine collectors must be compatible with both mlle and female 

CrCWl:1er~~ers • 

15 

/ 

NfCDO'\iNIEI.L DOCJOLA~ l,~ 
o Absolute privacy during bathing and other personal hygiene activities 

should be available. 

o Contingency fecal and urine collection systems must be provided for use 

1n the event of failure of the nominal bOdy-waste collection system. 

o Personal grooming supplies fr~~ commercially available sources can be 

provided for the exclusive use of each cre~member. Personal preference 

selection should be accommodated "hen feasible. 

Previous space llight programs have identified-the importance of personal 

hygiene equipment and materials: collection, and storage of body waste 

(feces. urine. vomitus) is essential to life support, while the equipment and 

method of collection affects productivity and morale. 

The most complex system in the personal hygiene area is that of 

collecting. storing. and disposing of feces and Urine. Most of the problems 

result from the microgravity environment and ~~e inherent difficulty 

associated wih handling liquids and semisolid materials outside of closed 

contain~rs. Accidental escape of urine and/or feces into the cabin 

environm~nt is esthetically revolting. biologically hazardous. and could 

damage or degrade perfo~ance of other equipment and components. 

Whole-boQy bathing presented a problem for Skylab cre~members in that the 

equipment required too much time to set up and tear do~n after use. Also, the 

method for water removal from the skin (hand hel d vacuum c1 eaner) \'ias not 

satisfactory. However, the crews did appreciate ~~e opportunity for 

whole-body bathing, in spite of the fact trat thejl..d.id not ufeel" dirty. 

An analysis of Skylab reports indicated that while sponge baths are 

adequate for cleaning the skin on long-duration missions, they are inadequate 

for cleaning the hair and scalp. Also, sponge baths lack the psychologically 

refreshing val ue of full-body shOl'lering. Hhcn the Skyl ab cre~1 di d actually 

devote the hour or so required to set up and then clean and secure the 

collapsible on-board shOl"ler, they felt invigorated. The inordinate time 

requirelil~nt. hO\~ever. may have significantly eroded the positive effect on 

producti vity. 

16 

r ' - - ,~ -- -'- -

• j 

~1 . 

I .. 

, 

I 

, 

· . 

· . 

! 

-. 

, c, 

· . 

f 

.1 

· . 

, 

, 

.1 
r --

The design and location of hand-washing equipment requires additional 

design and evaluation effort. 

Studies must be performed to ensure that the personal hygiene system \'1111 

meet crew requirements and mission constraints. The main tradeoff to be 

conducted will be between development costs. which must be paid early in the 

program, and the estimated costs of lowered crew productivity. \'/hich are both 

contingent and deferred. An important concern will be to minimize the amount 

of water used for personal hygiene. A substantial reduction in water 

inventory. with consequent savings in hardware and launch ~osts. is possible 

by optimizing crew washing or bathing systems. 

A trade study also needs to be performed to evaluate program costs for a 

waste collection equipment that will-perform with high reliability and will 

require only limited maintenance for several years in orbit co~pared to a 

system that wil' be designed for return to Earth for refurbishment on the 

logistics shuttle. Another trade study that is vital to this program element 

is that of urine and feces storage and disposal techniques and equipment. 

2.2.2 Lighting 

The type and design of the If!;ht1ng sys1m.l for \tor~ stations and space 

facilities cun ha\'c a decided effect on the prodvcti'lity of the crc:-J. 

Excessively bright sunlight or artificial light, either direct or reflected, 

coul d be potentiully dama~ing to the eyes of Cre\imem!>ers. Poor 1 i ghting can 

result 1n mistakes and misinterpretation of written cOITrnunications, instrument 

readings. and command and control displays. Poor lighting can also lead to 

eye strain and fatigue. which slow down and impair general mission 

performance. Glare and excessive adaptation to light changes can result in 

exacerbating any stress reactions, thereby further impairing long-term 

performance. It is also necessary to define the proper lighting environment 

for different work tasks and living activities. including recreation and sleep. 

Different light sources have unique spectral and intensity properties that 

must be factored into the overall lighting design. The color and reflectance 

of the surounaing surfaces around the WOt'~ station must be considered. as well 

17 

/UCDONNrrLL DOua~ 
as the location and interaction of various light sources to produce general 

diffuse lighting, overall work station lighting, and specific lighting for 

unique experimental setups and industrial processes. For example, 

experimentation in space may require unique color rendition or surface texture 

rendition for monitorlng the progress of critical experiments. Such 

special ized perception may /lot have been needed in the more conventionally 

instrumented environments of previous missions. CRT image quality, analog and 

digital instrument readout quality, and visibility of flat panel and other 

state-of-the-art display sources must also be taken into account. 

2.2.3 Health Maintenance 

Exercise is a critical concern on long-dur4tion space o1s5ions and it 

directly affects \fork load analyses and work/rest scheduling. Due to the 

many effects of muscle atrophy and bone decalcific~tion characteristic of 

microgravity environments, speci~l attention must be devoted to defining 

specific fonns and amounts of exercise. f1any of the required data are already 

available from previous space misSions, in particular the Skylab series. 

Further work is required, however, 1n order to establish the most efficient 

forms of exercise in tenns of time demands as \fall as to deal with the 

psychological aspects of exercise. That is, vhat appears to be requil'ed is to 

develop II~ethods of exercise that make efficient use of time and are less 

boring and more motivating than those that have been employed or proposed for 

astronaut use. 

Based on a review of the Skylab's archives, it has been suggested that 

exercise be made more recreational. The suggestion of the S~ylab crews was 

quite simple: place the ergometer in front of the windo\'l. Clearly, this 

would serve to motivate some crew members. Additional measures must pe 

developed, hOI-lever, to ensure variety of experience and long-tern motivation. 

Alternative solution5 might involve bicycle ergometers, with tunable eRTs 

displaying recorded scenes of famous bike paths of the \,/orld, feature filrr.s, 

or other prograrrrning. Competition might be used as an effective (.'ot1Vator by 

maintaining station physical abllity and perfornance records--or at least 

individual perfo~ance records. In this regard, zero-gravity physical g~mes 

(perhaps played in Jumpsuits fitted I'lith bun gee cords) may serve as 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOCJG~ 

18 

, I 

.! . 

• I 

, 

.. ! 
appropriately motivating activities as the station matures. Also, the 

relative merits of group versus individual exercise must be evaluated. 

2.2.4 Food and Uater Systems 

The most important aspect of a food system is Ii'.easured in tenns of its 

ability to meet biochemical require~nts for maintaining the health of the 

individual in a particular environment. In broad te~s. the design 

pnilosophy for any food system is to provide nutrients for adequate diets in a 

form or manner that ensures palatable food that is safe, easy to prepare and 

consume, and is time efficient in terms of quick cleanup and maint€nance. 

An important set of factors affecting diet selection is found in the role 

of food as an element of psychological well-being. Individual patterns of 

food intake are rarely based upon physiological need. Physical hunger for 

food and emotional needs for gratification are frequently intermixed. Sensory 

pleasure derived from eating is often substituted for other physical and 

emotional needs. El imination of this source of sensory pleasure in persons 

confined to long-term space stations is contraindicated if positive social 

interaction, morale, and work initiative is to be maintained. 

Also, changes in a cre~ember's ability to detect some food flavors have 

been reported sporadically throughout the manned space flight programs of the 

US and the USSR. If these changes in taste perception do exist in some 

individuals. the problem needs to be resolved before food is selected for 

future space missions. 

The paiatability of the food and the cre\'1's acceptance of Meals over a 

period of a month or more requires that this area receive special 

consideration. High-quality food service relies upon food that can be 

consi stently prepal'ed and served day in and day out \-:ithout detectabl e change 

in taste. appearance, aroma. or texture. This characteristic is 

self-defeating when a population is confined to consuming food that is so 

highly reproducible and con~istcnt in organoleptic quality. All institutional 

food becomes monotonous at some point in time. The challenge in building food 

systems for lcng-tem space flight is to delay that point at \~hich the food 

becomes monotonous. 

19 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUG~ 
Food safety is usually expressed in terms of microbiological organisms 

measured in sample food lots. These measurements have been standardized 1n _ 

the space program and in commercial practice and do not appear to offer any 

unusu~l challenges to the assembly of food supplies that are safe for 

consumption over long periods of time. 

2.2.5 Communications Systems 

The type and quality of the communication system can have definite effects 

on the performance and productivity of the crew. Han~s ~st important role 

in space is to take care of the unforeseen, to execute complex reasoning and 

judgment tasks, to troubleshoot, and to bypass possible equipr.ent 

malfunctions. All these tasks require a ~igh degree of co~~nicat1ons beth 

-nthin the manned space facility and with Earth. A poor communication system 

can result 1n mistaken instructions or incorrect information ruining certain 

experiments or industrial processes. Awkward or cumbersome communication 

equipment or procedures can slow down the effectiveness of crew members and 

create a wasteful information float where important communications are 

unnecessarily delayed. Such delays can be disastrous in the case of emergency 

cornnunications. A co~nunication system that is not user friendly and well 

human-engineered can lead to frustration and fatigue, which can further impair 

the crew's overall performance on other taSKS. 

Thus, it is essential that a carefully engineered communication system be 

designed for future space missions that takes into account the unique features 

of a s~irtsleeve laboratory environment in space. So~e of the factors that 

must be considered are the highly reverberant and sometimes noisy environment 

within the modules, the unique needs for privacy and proprietary information 

transfer concerning industrial processes, organizational and hierarchical 

communication structures that will enhance the collective proGuctivity of the 

entire crew, and hardware and procedures that are appropriate for a 

shirtsleeve environment with a variety of disciplines in a less structured 

cre~1 situation than hds prevailed in previous missions. 

20 

MeDON,.,,,LL 004Jo,,~ 

.. 

i 

. . 

.. 

f .. 

"' 

, 

... 

.... 

-• 

~i 

( 

-. , 

I .. 
r 

r 2.2.6 Housekeeping 

Housekeeping for future space missions includes trash manager.:-ent and the 

cleaning of ~ork stations and living areas. It is an ele~ent that has 

significant impact on hUT~n productivity inasw~ch as it is a dfrect charge to 

overhead and reduce~ crew time available for system operations and 

experiments. 

On Skylab and previous Shuttle missions, crews have spent considerable 

time performing housecleaning tasks and managing the trash (ref. "Lessons 

Learned on Sky1ab Program", ~ASA-JSC, r·1arch 6, 1974 and Task Order 55, 

"Housekeeping/Trash Management", Contract N~S9-l6589). Those tasks that pose 

the greatest impact on Clew time should receive the highest emphasis as the 

initial list of housekeeping issues affecting human productivity is being 

derived. 

2.3 CREW ACTIVITIES 

2.3.1 Crew Training 

In the area of crCH training. future missions wfll present challenges 

thyt have not b~en encountered on previo~s ~i~sicn5. AltiloUgh the ~\Ylab 

fl i gilts \--'ere for extended perf ods (up to 84 dz:.ys), the avera 11 scale of ttl:! 

sysu;;:JS was c~r~ limited than Ciln be ej\pected fOi· future space stations, bot.'1 

in size and opcr~tional ccoplexity. Also, where Skyl~b astronauts had a 

single set of p~~load-dcp€ndent tasks, the future crc~s could be faced ~th a 

constantly changing array of p~lo~ds. and payload-specific training r.~ occur 

on orbit as ~ell as preflight. This is especially true for crew members with 

longer tours of duty in space. The training concepts must, therefore, 

conslder not only preflight ground training but also familiarization and 

proficiency training in space. 

The training needs for future crew mewbers can be broken up into the 

fo11m'ling areas: 

A. Crew Systems Operation - This includes all of the day-to-day 

operations required to carryon life at the space station, such as eating, 

sleeping, personal hygiene, and exercise. 

/ 

MCDONNELL OOUGL9---

21 

, 
\ 

\ 

B. Station Operations - This includes all the nominal day-to-day 

operations required to maintain the space station systems, such as life 

support, attitude control, energy management, navigation, etc. 

c. Payload Operations - This includes all the nominal operations required 

to deal with the various payloaas, such as installation and setup, experiment 

data gathering, sample retrieval and handling, removal and dismantling, etc. 

D. Station Anomalies - This includes all the expected and unexpected 

repairs of space station systems that the crew will be required to perform. 

E. Payload Anomllies - This includes all expected and unexpected repairs 

of payload systems that the crew will be required to perform. 

The impact of the type of training required by the various different types 

of crewmembers upon productivity of the crm'l as a whole must be considered. 

Using these training requirements, the applicable methods for each type of 

training can be prioritized according to the time, cost, and training value. 

It is envisioned that the levels and types of training for the various 

cre\~'members will require both current, standard training methods and new, 

state-of-the-art training methods. 

2.3.2 In-Fl i gilt Haintenance 

It is antici(hltcd that crt.';;.'r."E.!t:::Jcrs ttf11 be required to perfom both 

sch~duled end ur.sched..!led I:"ainrenance actions. To do so. Crclf,~lii'lCTS sltoul d 

be provided with lucid instructions and trained to perfo~ efficiently ull 

routine actions. Unscheduled maintenance actions are More difficult to 

anticipate. Thus, cre\Ymernbers must be trained and famil iar with appropriate 

systems and equipm~nt regarding the safety and missions of the space station. 

Appropriate troubleshooting programs must be made available and certified in 

the early stages of equip~ent selection. 

As an example of the issues to be considered, selected cre,~e~bers could 

be trained on specific systems and equipment as specialists, or all 

cre~tm~m~ers could be trained on all equipment and systeTos, or some combination 

of specialists ~nd generalists could be established. In-flisht maintenance 

can be scheduled during ~JOrking hours as a part of the 'Working day, or 

scheduled outside of production hours, or some combination thereof. 

22 

MCDONNIfLL DOUOL~ 

~-- ------ -- - ---

, 

-~ 
2.3.3 Planning and Scheduling Activities 

A scheduling procedure should be provided that will yield the highest 

possible crew productivity when the schedules are actually implemented during 

a mission.' 

Efficient performance by the spa;e crews \-lill depend largely on how 

activtties \1ere planned and sched~lled. Huch has been learned 1n this regard 

during the Skylab and Spacelab missions. 

Major impairwents to productivity can arise as a consequence of crew 

fatigue. Also, poor scheduling could lead to crowded work areas and other 

forms of cross-interference among crewmembers. 

On the positive side, optimum duty cycle and job rotation arrangements can 

ensure that crewmewbers will have their peak energy resources available not 

only for crucial activities but for proJect continuity when they would 

otherwise be distracted by fatigue. 

Attitudinal benefits are likely to be achi~ved if cre~~embers are 

encouraged to participate in the development of the decision rules for 

scheduling. Like'l/ise, some level of cre\~ autonomy during the mission is 

likely to have positive morale effects. Insofar as such atti~udinal factors 

influence actual productivity, that value can be maximized. Hoy/ever, such 

provisions must be balanced against the 11kelihood that the mission might need 

to be extended if an activity schedule is not fulfilled. Commercial clients 

could also become disaffected if their undertakings are not carried out at a 

deslgnated time. 

Another area, also, has not been adequately explored. Specifically, there 

is a comr:lon assllmpti on that duty cycl es shoul d refl ect the normal ground \lork 

schedule as closely as possible -- or if not, that rest periods should be 

inserted at frequent, regular intervals during the rnnssion. These assumptions 

may fail to reflect the prospect of changes in the \,/ort: relative picture and 

particularly the endocrine production pattern during the mission. Fo~ 

example, a reasonable hypothesis might be that, early in the mission, 

23 n/ MCOONN'LL DOUD~L 
crewmembers should easily tolerate longer work periods because of their 

"excited" condition. If so, the duration of the work period should be 

gradually shortened over the total mission -- i.e., the change-of-shift 

frequency would gradually increase in tune with the changes in endocrine 

output and related factors. The tradeoff factor in such an arrangement would 

be hi gher aggregate work output versus the compl exi ty of a nonconstant auty 

cycle schedule. 

The effectiveness of manual operations in space has been demonsb'ated for 

planned, contingency, and emergency operations. The effectiveness of remote 

operations has been demonstrated for potentially hazardous situations 

requiring human intelligence. The effectiveness of automated operations has 

been demonstrated for completely deterministic situations, where all events 

that could occur during an operation are ertirely predictable. Data show that 

autonomous operations for repetitive tasks will increase productivity, 

compared to manual operations for such tasks, freeing crewmembers to per\orm 

more challenging tasks. However, provisions must be mada for crewmembers to 

verify automatic and semiautomatic operations, and to override such operations 

if contingencies arise. 

Function allocations involve tradeoffs between productivity, risk, and 

costs (dollars. weight. volume). At one extreme, all functions that could be 

performed by machines could be so allocated, \'iith cre'h'ffier1bers having to 

perfol'm all other functions. Excessive costs would result. as Hell as 

increased probability of unreliable mission performance. No Matter hOI" 

carefully the automated machine is designed, unexpected events requiring human 

intelligence \~ill arise and. "then they do, creK11ernbers must be prepared to 

cope ~ti th them. At the other extreme, all functions that coul d be perfomed 

by cre\1i'!lembers could be so allocated, with machines performing all functl0ns 

beyond human llmitati ons. HO\,/ever. excessive qual ifi cati on 1 evel sand 

training tiMes for cre~members, exposure of cr~wmembers to excessive risks, 

and requirements for life support of unnecessary cret~e~bers would necessarily 

result. 

MCDONNELL DOUO~ 

24 
2.3.4 Organizatio~ 

Both individual compe~nca and tea~work factors will contribute to crew 

perfonnance. These factors interact 1n the actual accomplishment of most of 

the work aci;ities (and, indeed, will permeate nonwork activities, such as 

food consu~ption and recreation, as well). 

The interaction between organizational arrangements and the exercise of 

individual cumpetencies for productive purposes can be illustrated by the 

problem of role assignment. If the assigned role of a cre"me~ber does not 

recognize and permit the expression of the competence, the competence is 

effectively lost to tile cre\'1 as a whole. Specifically, a work activity could 

be assigned to an individual with less competence than another avaflable 

cre .... T.'Icmber and a lower 1 evel of crel1 producti vity woul d resul t. 

The tea~ork factors pose a more serious threat of potential impairments 

to productivity. For example. many studies of team productivity have revealed 

othe~lise hldden impainnents associated with the coordination process. TIle 

gross effect i 5 mad~ c1 ear and simpl e when it is sho;1O that producti ve output 

per menber goes dOwn as team size is increased. 

On the positive side, it is also clear from studies of group productivity 

that social instigation can enhance productivity when the work acth'ity 

requires creativity or inventiveness. Likewise, so-called synergistic effects 

are achievable ~hen the unique cognitive resources of each team member are 

integrated by means of a completely shared conceptual framework. In such 

instances, each participant (cre~ember) is able to program his or her 

contribution to the joint activity 1n such a way that the contribution COl::es 

at the correct stage of the activity sequence without the need for 

coordination curves or overt sequence control interventions. 

In sl~ary. orgdnizati~nal arrange~~nts can have a profound effect on 

pro~ctivity. If the organizational arrangc~~nt is ~rong.· even tile hfgh 

level of COiiipctence produced by the individual crei."i1erbers will b~ blccked off 

fro::! expression. If the org3nfzut1onal arNnger,~ents are I!right. 1O the cl'ew as 

a corporate entity can t. lnscend any individu11 limitations. 

25 

/ 

MCDONNRLLQOUOL~' 
While there exists a good knoi/ledge base on small group organizational 

arrangements and productivity, many of the potential tradeoffs have not been 

characterized in quantitative terms -- particularly in the specific context of 

future space operations. A useful example is provided by tile question of 

cross-training. First, it can be assumed that there is an absolute 

requirement for some level of cross-training to meet contingencies related to 

crewme~ber accidental disabilities. The question is not only how complete 

such cross-training should be, but what positions and individuals should be 

cross-trained for what sldlls. Should cross-training ~,e detennined mainly by 

individual aptitudes or interesL~, or should each position on the crew have a 

preassigned cluster of backup functions? Since cross-training engenders 

tangible costs and it is unrealistic to expect all creh~e~bers to have 

complete mastery of every skill area, more mixing and matching will beessential. The ideal apportioning algorithm would incorporate all the values 

in a tradeoff matrix including dollar cost, aptitudes. role compatibilities. 

skill area criticality, etc. 

Each prospective organizatlonal arrangement will involve a com~licated set 

of value tradeoffs tilat will need to be integrated in a composite tradeoff 

structure that will reveal botto~line cost and productivity relatio~ships. 

2.3.5 Crew Activities, Station Autono~ 

A ground support group might be cOwposed of mission control personnel~ 

payload operations personnel, and principll investigators \those experiments 

are on board the spacecraft. Typical tasks incurrbent upon the ground support 

team are; 

o TIle general monitoring of experi~ent data. 

c C~ntroll1n9 the experiments designed to be priwarily unattended by the 

fl i ght cre\'I'. 

o Assisting the flight crew with maintenance and repair of the flight 

hardware and software. 

Cit The general monitonng of crell actlvlty to observe thelr physical and 

mental health. 

I 

I .. 
\ 

\ 

\ 

f 

The degree to which each of these functions is performed is a function of 

the crew-versus-ground autonomy, philosophy of the experiment design, level of 

expertise on the part of the crew and the ground support team members, 

duration of the mission, and how nominally the spaceflight is progressing. 

Examination of the day-to-day requirements for Spacecrew-Ground Support 

Group interactions will lead to tile identification and resolution of the 

critical issues impacting operational procedures, emergency procedures, and 

simulation activities. 

The critical issue on ~tation auton~~ is to arrive ut the best policy 

(or policy-generating procedure) for balancing the space crew~s level of 

dependency on ground control. This problem has an extensive history that 

developed before the space program. Specifically, in airf11ght navigation, 

two distinct policies emerged in the post-WW II era. The policy for civilian 

airflights \'fas near-total autonomy for the flight crew. The role of ground 

station personnel was strictly advisory. This policy was derived from the 

older precedent coverlng the captains of ships at sea. The alternative policy 

was developed for ~ilitary airflights. The military policy gives the ground 

controller more authority. Over the years, \'#ith the advancement of radar and 

computer technologies, the real differences between civilian and military air 

traffic control have diminished, but this gradual chanse does not necessarily 

reflect an optimum balance for air traffic control, much less space-based 

operations. 

The relationship of station-based and ground-based activities embOdies 

both parallel activities and interactions. The ground station will have 

access to all Earth-based support systems, computers, simulators, technical 

support staff, ad.'ilinistration, etc., for the purpose of supporting nominal 

station activity or dealing witll unforeseen circumstances. The station-based 

control wili have the advantage of proximity and site communication when 

dealing \lith station operations. To the extent that crew act1vit1e~ are 

nominal, that training Has appropriate. and that ttlC hard'/are is functioning 

corredly, cre-It' activity should be designed to be carr1ed out independently of 

ground control. The e..<tent to h'llich ground activities are supporting station 

,-

... COON"' ...... Doua..fif---

27 
operations, such as status monitoring, computational support, and scheduled 

resupply, such operations will also be conducted in parallel with, and 

independently of, station or crew activities. 

The direct line be~cen the autonomy question and productivity lies in 

which group can do the ~ust successful job on a given-class of activities. 

For example. regardless of the level of remote systems monitoring and 

telecommunication from station to ground facility. there are going to be 

events and circumstances in the station operation that can only be 

intelligently interpreted by the station crew. However, the ground facility 

will always have access to the broadest range and depth of expertise and the 

greater computer support capacity. Thus, if the ground facility preempts a 

role or set of activities that requires that broadband perceptions be 

available only to the station crew, productivity will suffer. Likewise, the 

reverse is true. 

An indirect link also exists. That is, there arc psychological 

sensitivities associated with autonomy and !'Ihat has come to be called fate 

control. If a COMmand relationship is perceived to be arbitrary and coersive, 

those in the subordinate position can beco'i1c demoralized to a degree, with 

possible degraqation of productivity as the ultimate consequence. 

A..,other aspect of this relationship that Hill effect human productivity is 

command authority for s~'tion activities. Even if nominally independent, 

station crew activities have to be reported to ground control; or if 

activities have to be authorized by ground control, this \,/111 have a negative 

effect on productiVity, per see During initial operations, it is expected 

that much of the activity \~i11 be serial, Hith much checking beu'Iccn ground 

station control and space station control. The kej tradeoffs to be considered 

are how much control should be serial and for how long - i.e., what is the 

operational learning curve; what type of nominal information shoul d be first 

to be relinquished to either space station or ground station; and what are the 

28 

/ 

MCOO""N"LL DouaL~ 

~- .. ~ .... ~---

. ..~ 

"I 

! 

• • 

· . 

, 

· . 

1 

· . 

· r 

\ · . 

" . 
~1 -----

protocols for dealing with off-nominal activities? It is proposed that a 

classic task analysis. with task criticality as one of the w~asures, be 

undertaken fOl' each ne'~ space system as t.he basis for allocating parallel cre~ 

activities to either ground or space. and as a means of deciding what crew 

activities should be undertaken serially and which group has the initiation 

lead. 

Station autonomy will also be strongly influenced by the reliability, type 

and acceptance of station command equipment, and-the roles and relationshps 

between the human operator and the r.tachines. With a limit on the human 

resources. the degree of reliance upon machine systems might be expected to 

increase. This Hill be strictly dependent upon user acceptance, or else more 

control authority might be routed to the ground control systems. where there 

is not such a limit upon human resources. 

The crucial issue in this area ;s beb~een the imposition of purely 

rational criteria based on objective capabilities and limitations of the 

station as a locus of control -- on the one hand -- and the inclusion of 

subjective factors in the specification of the optlmum balance -- on the other 

hand. The resolution of the tradeoff hangs on the real degree to which thfo 

suojective factors can actually depress productivity. Conceivably, it is 

possible that crenwer.bers could be disgruntled by a perceived lack of autono~ 

and yet perform with high efficiency. 

2.3.6 Computer Hodeling 

During recent years, significant advances have been made in the teols 

available for modeling hUman p~rfo~an~e. complex 1nfo~1tion ~anagfr~~nt. 

simulation, training. etc. For example, hu~an factors engineers new can 

develop computer ~odels and conduct experi&rents on hurean operator-system 

design before any kind of prototype is available. In the past, the primary 

means for evaluating human performance was to collect empirical data. For 

systems or situations that did not yet exist, the only recourse available to 

the analyst was to look for analogous situations in order to draw inferences 

about hOI ... the hUlilan \'1ould perforPl in the new situation. The p"ocess of 

extrapolating to the new situation was largely b~sed on intuition, and the 

result was a rather poor estir.1dte of humln performance. 

29 

MCDO,.,,,,ICLL. DOUGLg 
Modeling enhances productivity in various dimensions. The two most 

frequently measured are cost and feasibility. It is frequently more expensive 

to coll ect ureal \torl dU data than to develop and use a computer model.. Al sa.. , 

it is sometimes impossible to collect real-world data. For example, when the 

system under study does not exist or when you want to conduct potentially 

destructive tests, computer models have to be used. 

Perhaps one of the most critical tools to achieve overall mission 

efficiency is the modeling of the flight resources and scheduling in real 

tirr..e. The longer the mission duration, the less applicable are the previous 

models used for mission planning. TIle concepts could be changed to vary the 

methods used for flight definition as a function of long-term duration, 

renm'ial of resources, using solar enefgy for a nonexpendable resource, and 

frequency of crew replacement. 

Some of the criteria for selecting appropriate models might i~ude: 

o Processina versus storage and retrieval requirements. The issue is 

whether to assign the burden to the processing algorithms and heuristics or to 

massive and detailed data storage. 

o Precision versus amount of data. In this case the determination hinges 

on whether an optimal solution is required or a IIgood enough U solution will 

do. In most loosely st.'uctured or fuzzy set variables, such as crel'l comfort, 

IIgood enough U solutions usually suffice. 

o Complexity of the processing versus complexity of the representation. 

Here the problem revolves around the issue of co~~lexity of the processing 

versus complexity of the representation or structure of the data. 

9 Fidelity of simulation. The general rule would be t~ Maximize fidelity 

within the constraints of the simulation technology, time, cost, etc. 

o Cost. The bottom line will be to identify the most cost-effective 

modeling approach. 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOUO~ 

30 

'I 

. 

I ~I 

t 

I .,J, 

1 

f 

,f. 

r 

-.... -.-.. .. _--- ~ .~" 
I' 

/ 

,/ 

:r 

2.4 IVA SYSTEHS 

The number. type. design, and locations of IVA work stations can be 

derived from mission operation requirements. such as science monitoring~ 

station maintenance, corrrnand a"d data management. etc •• in which case 

development of speciallZed work stations could be argued. With the increasing 

sophistication of software-derived control and display systems. however, much 

stronger arguments can be made for general-purpose. reconfigurable work 

stations to support the broad range of station requirements from each work 

station. Touch control displays, interactive keyboards, high-speed 

high-resolution graphic displays. track balls and hand controllers, and 

computer-derived command menus can control and display vast amounts of 

variable information from any of several work stations that have been 

configured by the operator. 

The effects the work station design \,/111 have on human productivity depend 

on how well general elements, such as hand controllers. key pads, CRT 

displays. and the like, are integrated into a single reconfigurable work 

station. Other aspects that will affect productivity will be display layout, 

density. conditioning, operator training, and similar variables inherent in 

any Hork station. The description of the Essex Reconfigurable I{orkstation 

fil ed in the UASA-tlSFC Technology Sri efs (1984) and the I~SFC-PROC-711 A 

Spacelab Display and Command Usage Guidelines (1982) are examples of work on 

space-based work stations and control and display technologies for advanced 

space applications. 

Cos t tradeoffs for speci a l-purpose versus general-purpose \,IOl'k stat; ons 

can be developed as can cost tradeoffs for integrating advanced technology 

into work stations versus using off-the-shelf controls and display~. 

11easuring operator performance times and accuracy for tasks is also a way to 

compare technological trades. Superior accuracy and reduced operator response 

times can, in some cases, justify increased costs associated with 

technological innovation. 

/ 

"'COON/weLL OO(JOL$--

31 
- , 

! 

Some of the specific issues related to work station design that affect 

human productivity are the following: 

ISSt.!ES 

General Purpose 

versus Specfalized Work Stations 

Restraint Systems (Personal) 

Restraint Systems 

(r-taterials. Tools) 

Displays and Controls 

Anthropometric 

Considerations 

DESIGN OR'OPERATIOIlAL FACTORS 

AFFECTItIG PRODUCTIVITY 

Number of subsystems or experlments; tlme to 

reconfigure work station; complexity of work 

station design; scheduling conflicts; 

potential space savings 

Foot restraints (velcro. grid. toe bar; 

chair; waist restraint 

Velcro. clips. elastic bands; storage locker; 

work station commonality 

Dedicated or multipurpose; use of keyboards. 

VOUs, LCD. LED, incandescent, etc.; flags 

versus lamp indicators; energy consumption; he3t production 

Fixed versus adjustable workstations; 

vertical racks versus \~ork stations; 

\iraparound work stations versus standard; height. widths 

Science monitoring, operations and maintenance data. subsystem status 

monitoring. diagnotics, record keeping. and personnel communication are 

examples of some of the datu management required. !low these data are 

acquired, coded, organized. updated. displayed, and stored \Iill have a very 

great effect upon human productivity. Within each of these elements, 

tradeoffs wlll have to be made in terms of command management. such as item 

entry versus special command key entry versus menu commJnd selection; display 

layouts. such as block versus field versus columns versus scroll lists; and 

display feedback of controls and commands. such as command sent versus command 

characteristic sensed versus automated sequence initiation. Tradeoffs for 

advanced technologies will also have to be made. These would include issues 

in data management, such as artificial intelligence and expert SystEMS, and 

voice corr.:nand and feedback systems. 

/ 

fttIJCOONNI!I.~ DouaL~ <.>:,./ 

32 
,/ 

" 

, 

, 

\ 1 

I, 

Work stations developed for past manned space flight programs were 

primarily intended for use by highly skilled crewmembers h~vfng an extensive 

background in the operation and control of flight v~hicles. These early 

designs were used to furnish cockpit-type data and payload status information 

for crew evaluation. TIle burden of data reduction and analysis by the crew 

created serious workload penalties and engendered a requirement for extensive 

crew training programs. This training included thousands of hours of mission 

simulations providing a range of learning experiences to qualify crews to 

operate both simple and complex vehicle control and mission equipment. as \'1ell 

as handle contingency situations. 

The emphasis for work areas 1n future space systems will be to support 

research and operations in a wide variety of disciplines. As such, it is 

impractical to provide extensive training for all potential crenmembers. 

Thus, the data management system must provide a highly coherent user interface 

(user friendly) to a wide spectrum of user expertise with a minimum of 

fatigue-inducing factors. 

The role of data processing in space operations has increased 

dramatically. As more experience has been gained ~tith the man-machine 

interface. areas of needed improvement have been repeatedly identified. For 

example, in the Shuttle, contingency responses arE' contained in an extensive 

printed Fl ight Data Fi 1 e (FIJF). The cre\"r.nember must locate the procedure in 

the multiple volume FDF and mentally integrate data from multiple sensors 

before formulating the proper response. f~anual searches of voluminous data 

and cre\1 gathering of data from various sensors to formulate actions is 

clearly tlme comsur.ling and detrin:ental to high productivity. A significant 

increase in cre~ productlvity and efficiency could be achieved by automating 

crew access to these files, with the Data Hanagement System collecting and 

lntegrating necessary sensor data and prompting the crew far proper action. 

Display responSlveness is considered to be a significant Spacelab problem 

area. On Spacelab, retrlcving a dlsplay format for use by a crcrMewber takes 

10 to 15 seconds. Studles have shown that system response ti~es of less than 

a second are necessary for maxir.lizing productivity. l1ass memory hardware and 

33 
soft\-/are impleMentation and allocation of insufficient data processing power 

between system elelllents are the underlying causes of this sluggish response. 

2.5 IVA/EVA INTERFACES 

IVA/EVA interfaces include all those resources and equipment or 

capabilities that are required to support an extravehicular (EV) operation. 

These include such items as: 

- Ai rl oc~s 

- EVA equipment servicing area 

- Atmospheric considerations 

- Communications capabilities 

- EVA equipment stowage 

- Data management capabilities 

- Logistics support impacts 

- Pre- and post-EVA personnel hygiene requirements 

- Crew training activities 

Within the context of each of these supporting areas, EVA support 

functions I'lill impact each of the manned station eler.ient functions described 

earlier (see Table 2). Based upon these interrelationships, the operational 

issues and the design factors that influence hu~an productivity must be 

identified and evaluated. For exalliple, the accessibility and storage of 

servicing and maintenance information is an issue pertaining to the data 

management capability for EV operations. With respect to that is~ue. the 

impact on Crel'l productiYity coul d be detennined by the time and effort 

required by the crew to retrieve and prepare information for EV operations. 

The design factors contributing to increased productivity might involve a 

computer-based retrieval system that incorporates voice recognition and 

activation and that displays the infornation on CRTs both at space ~tion 

work station as well as within the space suit. Conversely. those factors 

detracting from the crew's productivity might involve the manual extraction of 

information from various docu~entation sources and manually constructing EVA 

checklists. 

34 

I ' 

J 

• _. 1 ... ~_ 
I 

/ 

/ 

, 

I 

I 

For each issue, the viable approaches must be identified and evaluated to 

determine the concept that best meets the needs of the crewman, based on 

enhancing total system effectiveness or productivity. 

It can be anticipated that specific IVA/EVA interface factor's that 

contribute to hum~n productivity ~ight include the following: 

G EVA SUit Design 

- Donning and doffing 

- Prebreathe requirement 

- ~~intenance and repair 

- Cleaning and drying 

- Stowage and storag~ 

- Anthropo!l'~try 

- Insuit food and water provisioning 

- Insuit body wa~te col1ection/containti.~nt 

o Restraints and mobility aids 

o lighting (fixed and portable) 

• Environ!l'~ntal (pressure, tenperature, humidity) 

o Volu=~ and configuration (single versus multiple occupancy) 

Q Personal hygiene 

- Post-EVA suit and body cleaning and body \iaste collection during 

exte~ded 02 prebreatile 

o Housekecping 

2.6 REMOTE SYSTEH MANAGEHENT 

The ability to manipulate, pOSition, movc, insert, extract, and perform 

other dexterous tasks has been the domain of EVA cre~~embers for most missions 

to date. The introduction of large-scale remote ~anipulatcrs and s~~llcr 

servicing m!nipulator arms uill add versatility to orbital operations and 

increase the overall system~s productivity, given appropriate designs for tile 

manage~ent of re~~te systems. 

IVA conduct of tasks via remote manipulation can conceivably permit 

increases in productlVity by allowing continuous operation through 

shift-\tork. Also. shift periods can be on the order of tens-of-minutes or for 

35 

MCDONNELL OOUGL~ 
.--

I 

, 

I 

, 

I 

I 

,p 

several hours. depending on task difficulty aru1~erator stress or fatigue 

factors. Productivity using manipulator systems will depend upon vis~ 

feedback. task lighting. hand controller designs (especially feedback of 

forces and torques). and work station design. 

The impacts on total system productivity of single-versus-multiple 

manipulator arm operations; single- and dual-hand controller operations; track 

bar-versus-joystick operations; graphic support. such as predictive displays; 

and specialized-versus-general-purpose manipulat~r systems need to be 

investigated in terms of the criteria of cost. prob~bility of success, and 

-performance via remote-versus-EVA approaches. 

2.7 RECOMHENOATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK 

Based upon the foregoing comments, in order to enhance the human role ~ 

space, some of the more critical areas requiring further research are as 

fonows: 

Internal Architecture 

c Research is needed to establish firm guidelines and standards regarding 

the degree of constancy of spatial orientation required in zero gravity 

workplace and work station design. 

o Research is needed to develop valid criteria that can be used in 

establishing an optimal balance or compromise between requirements for 

multipurpose versus dedicated work stations. 

Creu Support 

o A continuing assessment of the personal hygiene and waste management 

systems is required in ot"der to optimize a system design that meets crew 

requirements within mission and programmatic (cost and schedule) constraints. 

o A continuing assessment of exercise techniques for long-duration 

spaceflight is needed to develop efficient yet physiologically and 

psychologicall~ acceptab1e procedures for maintaining physical and mental 

health. 

MCDONNIilLL Doua~ 

36 

" 
Crew Activities 

o Research is needed to establish the optimal level of cross-training of 

crew skills in order to maximize crew effectivene~s and overall productivity 

whil e sti 11 accommodati ng conti nge~cy operati ons such as the unpl anned 

disability of crewmewbers. 

o A better understanding is required as to whether duty cycles and shift 

work should remain constant in long-duration missions or whether adjustments 

should be made to account for changing biorhythms. endocrine production 

patterns. etc. 

o Continuing applied research is required on the dynamics of small group 

organizational arrangements and productivity. 

o The issue of balance between ground control and space crew autonomy 

needs further study in order to establish the best policy for optimizing the 

space cre'.'Ils level of dependency on ground control and to detemine when the 

balance of control should shift from the ground to the space facility. 

o Continuing effort is needed in developing computer-based descriptive 

and predictive models of human performance of space activities that can in 

turn interact with computer models of flight resource utilization and 

real-time mission scheduling. 

IVA Systems 

o Continuing effort is required in work station design to evaluate 

controls and displays for special-purpose and general-purpose work stations. 

and to optimize the data management system interfaces to make more effective 

use of human intellectua! capabilities. 

IVA/EVA Interfaces 

o IVA/EVA interface factors that enhance human productivity need to be 

identified and approaches for improving total system effectiveness need to be 

evaluated. 

Remote System Hanagement 

o Further research is required in the design of controls and displays for 

improving the effectiveness of remote manipulators and the management of 

remote systems. 

MCDO"'''CLL DOUG'-~_ 

37 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank 
r: 

r, 

, 

\ 

Section 3 

EPILOGUE 

We have learned from the US and Soviet* space programs to date that (l) 

systems can have indefinite operational lifetimes in space if they are 

designed to permit the contingency of in-flight repair and maintenance; (2) 

structures too large to be launched intact can be constructed and assembled on 

orbit, using man's unique capabilities; and (3) the flexibility and creative 

insights provided by the crew in situ significantly enhance the proba~ility of 

successfully achieving mission objectives. 

Reflecting upon their experiences as crehmembers of the Spacelab 1 

mission, Garriott, Parker, Lichtenberg, and Merbold** succinctly described 

their activities in space by describing three levels of cre\,1 participation in 

accomplishing the mission objectives. At one level, the space crew found 

itself highly involved in research activities and working togeth~r with 

principal investigators on the ground in the performance and real-time 

interpretation of research results. This was the case in areas such as space 

plasma physics, life sciences, and so~e materials-science and fluid-physics 

experiments. At another level, the crew found itself perforning other 

technical tasks \:ith very 1 ittle ground interaction. This \,'as the case in the 

installation of cameras on a high-quality window or scientific airlock table 

and in the verification of their pl'opcr performance. At a third level, the 

specifi c experiments were 1 argely cantrall ed from the ground \'1ith the space 

cre\'1 parti ci pati ng only when needed to veri fy experiment performance or to 

assist in malfunction analysis and correction. 

*lhe Sovlets have been reported to rely heavily on manned involvement in order 

to repair equlpment and subsystet11s \'1ith serious shortcor.Jings in reliable and 

trouble-free service llfe. 

**(h/en K. Garriott, Robert A. P.. Parker, Bryon K. Lichtenberg, and Ulf Herbold, 

Payload Crewmcmbers View of Spacelab Operations, Science, Vol. 225, 13 July 1984, pages 165-167. 

/ 

IKCDO",,,,,. .. L DOUGL9---

39 
I 

i 

I 

I 

I 

, 

! 

\ 

It can be anticipated that future space missions are likely to continue to 

requit'e human support at each of these levels. 

The ability of the crew to manually assemble delicate instruments and 

components and to remove protective devices, such as covers, lens caps. etc., 

means that less-rugged instruments can be used as com~ared to those formerly 

required to survive the high launCh-acceleration loads of unmanned launch 

vehicles. As a result, complex ~echanisms secondary to the main purpose of 

the instrument will no longer need to be installed for rerr.oving peripheral 

protective devices or activating and calibrating instruments remotely. Hith 

the cre~r.nembers available to load film, for example, complex f11m transport 

systems are not needed. and malfunctions such as film jams can be easily 

corrected manually. The time required to calibrate and align instruments 

directly can be as little as 1/40th of that required to do the same job by 

telemetry from a remote location. Even for pure manipulative tasks. 

experienced operators arc found to take eight times longer using dexterous 

electronic-foree-reflecting scrvomanipulators as compared to perfor;ning the 

same tasks by direct contact. 

Specific experiments and operations no longer wlll need to be rigidly 

planned in advance, but can change as requirements dictate. One of the 

greatest contributions of crews in scientific space missions can be in 

reducing the quantity of data to be transmitted to Earth. One second of data 

gathered on SEASAT, f~r example, required 1 hour of ground-based co~puter 

time for processing before it could oe used or examined. or a value assessment 

made. Before recording and transmitting data, scientist-astronauts in situ 

could determine in real-time whether cloud cover or other factors are within 

acceptable ranges. 

The astronaut can abstract data fro~ various sources and can co~ine 

multiple sensory inputs (e.g., visual, auditory. tactile) to interpret. 

understand. and take appropriate action. l'ihen required. In some cases the 

human perceptual abilities permit signals belmt noise levels to be detected. 

Ilan can react selectively to a large nur:ber of posslble val'iables and can 

respond to dynamically changing situations. He can operate in the absence of 

/ 

IMCDONIt.e'LL OOtJGLt:;:r' 

L-~ 

40 

• 1 

i 

• 1 

( 
.---

compl ete informati on. He can perform a broad spectr'um of manual movement 

patterns. from gross positioning actions to highly rl'fined adjustme"ts. In 

this sense. he is a variable-gain servo system. 

Thus. with tle advent of manned platforms in space. there are alternatives 

to the expensive deployment of remotely manned systems, with their operational 

complexity and high cost of system failure. Long-term repetitive f~nctions, 

routine computations or operations. and large-scale data processing functions, 

however. can be expected to be perfonned by computers capable of bei ng checked 

and serviced by crews in orbit. just as they are now serviced in ground 

installations. In addition. the normal functions of the terrestrial shop. 

laboratory. and production staff will find corollary activities in the '>lork 

done by the crews manning the space platforms of the coming generation. 

The human being represents a remarkably flexible and adaptable system. 

The real issue to consider is where. along the continuum fro!"l direct manual 

intervention to independent operations, the specific mission requirements of 

future space programs can best be met. The criteria of Eerfor~Jnce, cost. and 

technological readiness described in Volume II of this report remain the 

prinCipal factors in this decision process. and the human role in space can be 

defined using these criteria for the syste~ designer. The task then beco~es 

one of enchancing the productivity of the human in his assigned roles. The 

observations su~rnarized in tllis document suggest some of the systen design 

conslderations and technology develop'-wnts that can significantly impact liu;;!an 

effectiveness and productivity in future space systems. 

41 
This Page Intentionally left Blank 
Appendix A 

DESCRIPTIONS OF'37 GEN':iUC ACTIVITIES IDOOIFIED IN THURIS STUDY 

43 

f:'x/ MCOOI'tlNIELL. DOUC'/~ 
This Page Intentionally left Blank 
/ 

,/ 

--

.. 

I 

, 

Appendix A 

-. 

DESCRIPTIONS OF 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES IDENTIFIED III THURIS STUDY 

1. Activate/Initiate System Operation 

- Those events and/or command sequences involved in the activation 

or initlalization of a space-based system or subsystem. 

2. Adjust/Align Elements 

- Those adjustment activities involved in such operations as 

alignment of optical elements, fine tuning of precision electronic equipment, 

antenna pointing, and remote camera focusing operations. 

3. Allocate/Assign/Distribute 

- Those activities involving the reallocation or redistribution of 

resources; e.g •• the redistribution of power. coolant flo\,l. etc •• to sensitive 

subsystem equipment to reflect operational needs or contingency operations. 

4. Apply/Rerno'le Biom~dical Sensor 

- Those unique activities as~ociated with the installation and 

removal and cleaning of sensors used to obtain biomedical data from a test 

subject. 

5. Com~unicate Information 

- Those activities involving the establishment of the CCrr:.1unications 

link and the transmission of information fro~ one source to another. It 

includes the verbal Of-visual interchange between two cre~men. as well as the 

electronic transference of scientific infOrMation from a space probe to a 

terrestrial-based user. 

6. Compensatory Tracking 

- Those activlties involving continuous control adJustments to null 

an error signal against a fixed reference. 

7. Co~pute Data 

- Those activities requiring a mechlnized form of data processing, 

such as in structural analyses, computatlon of positions of celestlal bodies, 

or other forms of numed ca 1 computa dons. 

45 ,. ,..coo"' .. ~u. DOUO .. t:;;:f 

~ 
/ 

8. Confirm/Verify Procedures/Schedules/Operations 

- Those activities involving the assessment of whether or not a 

previous event has in fact been accomplished (such as a system verification or 

checkout), or a procedure satisfied, or a schedule met. 

9. Connect/Disconnect Electrical Interface 

- Those activities requiring the completion or termination of an 

electrical interface. They may involve use of b1ind-mlted/self-aligning 

connectors, multiturn screw-drive interface plates, or similar devices. 

10. Connect/Disconnect Fluid Interface 

- Those activities requiring the completion or termination of a 

fluid interface. They may involve use of a slmple plug-in, sleeve-locK 

connection, multiturn screw-drive interface plates, or similar devices. 

11. Correlate Data 

- Those activities involving the identification of positive or 

negatlve relationships or commonalities among data sets, such as 

organizational structures, characteristics, or processes. 

12. Deactivate/Terminate System Operation 

- Those events and/or com:nand sequences involved in the termination 

or deactiv~ticn of a space-based syste~ or subsystem. 

13. Decode/Encode Data 

- Those activitles involving the conversion of data into either its 

original fona or into a form compatible for transmission: e.g. converting 

transmitted dlgitized data into its orlginal analog form or digitizing analog 

d3ta for transmissicn to the ground station • • - 'c"" 

14. Define Procedures/Schedules/Operations 

- Those activities involving logical deductions or convergent 

production leading to d~velop~ent of procedures, schedules, or operations with 

predictable outcomes. 

15. Deploy/Retract Appendage 

- Those activities associated with the ext~nsion of a hardware 

element to a posltion where its assigned function can be realized, or 

conversely, the stOr/; n9 of that hard\'1are el er.rent based on task compl eti on or 

saf~ty considerations. 

/ 

MCDONN:t!LL "cuol~ 

46 
~-: .. 

r 

! 

16. Detect Change in State or Conditton 

- Those activities wherein the departure of a parameter from its 

original or reference state or condition is required to be sensed or observed. 

17. Display Data 

- Those activities involving the presentation of information or data 

by visual, auditory, or tactual means. 

18. Gather/Repl ace Tool s/EquipPlent 

- Those activities involved in the obtaining or in the returning of 

tools or equipment used to -perform a specific tasl~, such as collecting or 

replacing maintenance tools or donning/doffing the Manned Maneuvering Unit. 

19. Handle/Inspect/Examine Living Organisms 

- Those activities involving the unique operations associated with 

working with living organisms. These activities involve the manipulation and 

general handling of animals, and range from stroking to inspecting or 

examining anatomical characteristics. 

20. Implement Procedures/Schedules 

- Those activities involving the instituting and carrying out of 

procedures or schedules (such as updating a mission model/schedule), as 

distinguished frOm activating or initiating system operations. 

21. Information Processing 

- Those actlvities involving the categorizing, extracting, 

interpolating, itemizing, tabulating, or translating of information. 

22. Inspect/Observe 

- Those activities involving the critical apPI'aisal of events or 

obJects. They rray include the verification or the identification of 

particular elements, such as damage inspection of a returning OTV. the 

observation and identification of a celestial object, or the behavior of a 

living organism. 

23. f1easure (Scale) Physical Dir.lensions 

- Those activlties involving the estimation or appraisal of a 

dimension against a graduated standard or criterion. 

24. Plot Data 

- Those activities involving the mapping, displaying. or locating of 

data by means of a specified coordinate system. 

47 

MCOONNELL oOlJo .. q 

~ 
/ 

" 

-- ; 

J 

/' 

/ 

; 

/ 

,. 

25. Position I~odule 

- Those activities involving the positioning of a component into a 

desired orientation; e.g •• installing a new component. or tilting a payload 

into its launch orientation. 

26. Precision r~anipulation of Objects 

- Those activities involving tasks which t'equire a high degree of 

manual dexterity in order to be accomplished such as the assenIDlyjdisassembly 

of sm~ll intricate mechanisms or the installation of measurement sensors, i.e. 

strain gauges, thermocouples, etc. 

27. Problem Solving/Decision Making/Data Analysis 

- Those judgmental and sometimes creative activities involving the 

dra\~ing of inferences cr conclusions through the usc of cognition, convergent 

or divergent production, memory and comparative evaluation. FUnctions to be 

performed may include analyzing, calculating, choosing, comparing, estimating, 

or planning. 

28. Pursuit Tracking 

- Those activities involving continuous control adjustment to Match 

actual and desired signals ",hen the desired or reference signal is continually 

changing. 

29. Release/Secure r'~chanical Interface 

- Those activities involving the manipulation of a mechanical 

interface ranging from a simple one-handed, over-center latch application to a 

high torque, (llulti-turn threaded fastener. ~lay involve manipulation of 

multiple fasteners arrang,ed in various patterns or configurations. 

30. Re'llOVe r<mdul e 

- Those activities involving the physical extraction or reffioval of a 

component after the mechanical, electrical or thermal interfaces have been 

released or disconnected. 

31. Remove/Replace Covering 

- Those activities involving the removal or reinstallation of an 

access covering or a protective covering as required to gain access to system 

clements or to cover them up upon completion of the \~or.k. 

32. Replace/Clean Surface Coatings 

- Those unique activlties involving the restoration of a degraded or 

contamlnated surface coating such as replacing the thenroal coating on a 

radiat.or or cleaning the vic':ling surface of an optical systems. 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUO~ 

48 

i .. 

... 

, .. 

1 .. - ......

. . 

.. 

I 

.. , 

-. 

\. 
! - / 

! 

/ 

/ 

/ 

33. Replenish r-taterials 

- .Jhose activities involving the resupplying of consumables, such as 

refueling a spacecraft, recharging an optics cryo-based cooling system, or 

providing food supplies to an animal holding facillty. 

I I 34. Store/Record Element 

.. 

L 

[ 

r 

- Those activities involving the recording or storage of items for 

both short-term and long-term periods; e.g., recording and storage of 

experimental data or the temporary storage of a biomedical sample. 

35. Surgical r~anipulations 

- Those activities, such as a surgi~Jl procedure or a dissection, 

including tissue sample acquisitions, that require a high degree of skill and 

kno\1ledge as well as manual dexterity to accomplish. 

36. Transport Loaded 

- Those activities involving the conveying of a physical object by 

some transportation device from one location to another; e.g., the 

transporting of a component via a crewman or a remote manipulator system. 

37. Transport Unloaded 

- Those activities involvlng the movements of an unloaded lndividual 

or device from one location to another; e.g., the move~nt of a cre~man to a 

worksi te til thout carrying tool s or equi p:nent, or the movement of a remote 

manipulator system with nothing attached. 

/ 

NfCDONNIirLL DouOLq 

~ 

49 

.............. 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank 
I 

I 

i 

·1 

I 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

Appendix B 

HUr4Al~ CAPABILITIES REQUIRED FOR EACH ACTIVITY 

51 c:x/ MCDONNIf&.L DOUG~ 

f rtf 

.. ( 
I 

, 

/ 

f 

,.. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

n 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

.lU 

31 

32 

3J 

34 

35 

36 

37 

, I 

ORlGIN~L P,'.:'; .' 

OF POOR QUALITY 

HUMAN 

CAPABILITIES 

GENERIC SPACE 

ACTIVITIES 

ACtivate/Initiate System Operation 

Adjust/Align Elements 

Allocate/Ass,gn/D,st"bute 

Apply/Remove BIomedIcal Sonsor 

Communicate Information 

Compensatory Tracklnq 

Compute Data 

Conf,rm/Verofy ProcedJre./Schedules 

Connect/D,s.connect EI~tncal Interface 

Connect/D,sconnect rluld Interf~ce 

Co "elate D.I~ 

Deact,vate/Term,natc Systpm Oper.toon 

Decode/Encod. Ddta 

Delone Procedures/SchEdules/OperatIons 

Deplov /Aetroct Appendage 

Deteet Chan;r.l In State or ConditIon 

DISplay Oat. 

GatherlRepl.ce Tools/EQuIpment 

Handle/Inspect/ExamIne LIVIng Ortanluns 

Implement PrOci'dures/Scl;edules 

Information Processing 

I nS::M!ct/Observe 

Fv"easure (Scale) Phy!.,cal DimenSIOns 

Plot Data 

PO~ltlon ModulePrecIsIon Manopulatlon of Oblects 

Prcblem Solvlrg/Declslon lJiaklng/ 

Data Anelysls 

PursuIt Trackong 

Release/Secure r'l'ech3nlcal Interface 

Remove t'll'odule 

Remove/Replace Covering 

R(>pl~e/Cle3n Surface Coatings 

Replpr'lIsh Materia's 

Stote/Record Elprnent 

SurgIcal ManipulatIOns 

Transport Loaded 

Transport Unloaded 

i!' 

:; 

u 

« 

.. 

;: 

:> 

1 

• 

(I 

I) 

• 

0 

• 

CiI 

0 

0 

0 

e 

0 

e 

f) 

G 

CI) 

0 

0 

0 

C 

0 

• 

(I 

• 

0 

• 

& 

e 

e 

I) 

0 

" 

c; 

!! c ;; g c 

~ u "0 c e ~ !;l !! .. oc 

0 ;; C _ 0 

c 0 .. ;;; 

~ ;;; C 

~ ~ ~ 00 c ::: '" .. .. - u - e e ~ ~ .. 0- .. c to :: 

eS _.c ~ u 

~ ~ " ~ -'" .c - ~ ;: (; 0 0 _Dl n v 8 ;:'0 "- ., ~ 

00 00 & ~ 

2 3 4 5 

• I) 

0 It 

0 (I 

(I 0 

0 0 0 

0 

II 

0 I) 

0 

" lit 

• 

0 

Appendix B 

HUMAN CAPABILITIES flEQUIRED FOR EACH ACTIV ••• 

SENSORV/PERCEPTUAL 

~ 

.. a e .. 0 .. 

l- Ie ~ ~ 

0 c 0 0 

c e 

.. .. c; .. ~ E c; g ~ E 

'0 J! .c 

.. ~ 0 ~ .. c; C u I/) .. :i c e 

~ C ~ U !! :> ~ C ~ "0 0 (; n :; 0 c I-

~ VJ :> c u. E ~ 0 

~ "& 0 .§, g !;l ;;; 

0 0 ell 0 .:; - .. E 0 0 .:; c: 0:;; c c 0- E "0 '? g- on ~~ ~ 

c c 0 c c c 0 .. ;;; u ;;; E ~g " u E .. u !! '" u c c C .. C..J - C« -'" ~ c c « g ; !! c: E :: o ~ 4? Q 

.. ~ c ~ ;:; .. ~ 

~ 

u .. ~ ~ ;: C go..J ~g, ~~ '" ~ ~ ~ n; :; a; ~ ;; :t"O ~.J? :> 0 - '" c: 1i .. e r:r 0 ..J 0 I- 0« 0« w 0> 

6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 

• 0 

• 0 

0 0 

0 

0 

e 0 It 

0 f'J e 

" 0 III (I 0 III 00 

(I I) 

0 0 

O CI " (I 0 0 

0 0 

0 0 0 0 

0 • Q 

0 0 e C 0 

f) I) ., 

• 0 «' 0 

0 . 

0 Q 

0 (II 

0 I) 0 

0 0 0 

------- , 
'4 0 

• 

• 

o 0 

o 0 o 0 0 

o c 

. (I 0 0;1 II) 

<It fj 

0 

0 

- o I) o Q CD 0 o 0 o 0 0 

~. 

. ' ~ \ "'rl 

CJ 0 0 0 o 0 \) 0 0 

0 0 

0 

,-e, o 0 OIl 0 13 o Q 0 0 0 

r) 

1..: 

-1 '" C ~ ~ 41 ., C Q 0 

.. : ) 

1 

> ~ 

o 0 

oj i.j o iii 0 o 0 o ., 

Q 0 I) • 

(I fb \) Q 0 J 0 I) 0 0 0 

e <:} 0 e 0 e 0 

'--

',-

" 

, GI CJ 

I) e 

0 0 

0 1II • o I) 0 

0 G 000 C Q Q o Gl 

0 

0 0 C G • 0 

, 

<» 

CII <II 0 

0 tI 

CJ It o 0 " e • 0 0 o • o 0 I) 0 0 ~ Q o • e 0 C 0 

0 e 0 ., 0 0 C> C> G C • o 0 o 0 0 • 0 • • 

0 0 CD ill «> ., 0 o 0 0 0 

0 II) o 0 0 o " iii o • 0 $ 0 • !) I) <II o 0 0 o 0 

Q (1 0 0 " o 0 I) o 4) o (II o f) 

0 

I !I 0 0 • o C ill ~ 0 0 CI 

o 0 " III 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 " 0 • 0 

I) (} o 0 

i'TCCEDIXG PAGe BCAi'<K i':OT Flt~rr.!1 

.... LIiI:III:::' .. \IU"CI' ... __ 

--

-

0> D,scrom,nat.on 01 Sound Inten,,1Y 

!O Local,zation 01 Sound -0 DetectIon 01 Llghl Touch 

:: TactIle RecognItIon 01 Shape and Texlure 

D,scllm.nal.on of Force ~ Against LImb 

Rocogn.lton 01 LImb IMovement 

;;; and LocatIon) 

b Deteellon and D,,,,"mlnatlOn of 

Angular AcceleratIon 

0 

- Equ,hbroum <J'I 

m Detection and D'SCllmm8t.on 01 

V.bratlon 

-.... Delectlon of Heat and Cold 

g; 

Detection and DISCrimination 

of Odors 

0 • iO CognItIon 

0 0 ~ Memory 

" ~ D,vergent and Convergent ProductIon 

• .., EvaluatIon .... 

ProductIon and Ap;>hcal.on It .... 

w of Force 

.., 0 ,. Control of Speed 01 MotIon 

0 .., Control 01 Voluntary Ruponses '" 

0 ~ ContInuous AdJustment Control \ Tratl"ngl 

0 • .., Arm/Hand/Fmg3r Man.pulatlon ..... 

.., 

0> Body P05ltlonlng 

-- - -

"-\ 

en 

rn 

z 

III 

0 

:;Q 

< --U 

m 

:;Q 

n 

m 

-0 

-C 

e: 

» 

r 

Z 

-I 

m 

r 

:;; . 

("), 

-I, e:, 

» 

r; 

I 

I 

~ ~ 

~ ~' d 

:;Q' {j 

~ 

0 

g 

C 

:.0 

B 

-. 

~ r-

." 

:<;.t 

t, 

I·j 

',' .,' 

,. 

~ 

~ 

!: 

::! 

m 

(I) 

:;Q5C 

~i r;w 

." 

o 

:Il 

~ :x: 

~ ;: 

~ 

......... Ji 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank 
Appendix C 

EXAf.1PLES OF 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORMED IU SPACE 

55 

/ 

MCDONNf!LL DOUG~ 
This Page Intentionally left Blank 
D 

If APPElmIX C 

E~~PLES Or 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES PERFOru~ED IN SPACE 

T Activity Generfc Space w- No. Activit.l Task Acco~21ished COIlIlIcn ts Reference 

\ l. Activate/Initiate Shu ttl e crew STS-9/Spacel ab 1 The slllTmary of 

L System Operation manually initiated STS-9/SL-l crew 

216 attitude Young and Shaw got very tired debriefing ! - maneuvers not only performfng the ~ane~vers, but having to wat~h the 

clock very carefully to timeline them properly. 

The orbfter was used as a 

pofnting system for the Atmospheric Emission Photometric 

Imaging (AEPI) experiment. 

94 maneuvers were real-time 

changes/additions. 

2. Adjust/Align Soviet crew man- Soyuz-17/Salyut-4 Aviation week and 

Elements ually aligned the Space Technology 

rotating mirror on The tel escope 's pointing system 30 June 1975 

the solar tele- was inoperative due to ~irror 

scope blindfng by the sun and requfred 

the manual positioning of the 

rotating mirror. 

To properly positio~ the rotating mirror the crew had to 

listen to ~,e mirror's move~ents 

in its support structure. To 

do this the crew used the stethescope fro~ ~~e medical supplies. 

The calculation and precise 

positioning of the rotating 

mirror enabled ~,e contin~ation 

of their solar research. 

3. Allocate/Assign/ Crew on the Space- STS-9/SL-l The sumary 0 f 

Distribute lab 1 mission were STS-9/SL-l crew 

aSSigned to work The spacelab cre~ were happy debriefing 

2, l2-hour shifts with the working arrangenent 

during the mission and recomended no changes. 

The shuttle crew, however, 

thought that the shifts were 

too 10n9 and could be dangerous 

~ , , if an unforeseen pro~lem 

shoul d arise. It ~ias reeo'llnended that workloads/shifts 

be redistributed. 

57 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOCJQ'-~ 

.nt! 

., J,;. -~.,..,. . 

'-
EXAMPLES OF 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORHEu IN SPACE (Cont'd) 

Activity Generic Space 

No. Activity Task Accomplished CO!lIl1en ts Reference 

4. Apply/Remove Experiment M092 Skylab 4 Skylab Experfence 

Bfomedical blood pressure Bulletin 15 

Sensor measurement system Crew changed to cuff 12 and September 1974 

cuff 11 failed to operations returned to norw~l 

drive the experiment support system 

displays and was 

removed 

5. COllrnunicate Crew communicated Soyuz 35/Salyut 6 SpacefH ght 

Inforl'1ation precise locations October 1981 

of forest fires in During the dry season the 

remote areas crew observed and reported 

locations of many forest ffres. 

The crew received messages of 

thanks from firefighters for 

thefr tf~ly warnings. 

6. Compensatory Skylab crew had to Skylab 2 mission HSFC Skylab 

Track fng manually perforM a Mission Report-

(usually consid- zeroing posftion The cre~ reported problems with Saturn Workshop 

ered to be more alignment of the ffne sun sensor wedge posftion NASA TMX-64814 

efficiently fine sun sensor fndfcators. October 1974 

perforMed in an wedge for the solar 

aut~~ated -error- observa tory The prol>lem was caused by a 

null 1ng- mode timing error in the on board 

al though hunans computer. 

can manually perform co~pensatory The problem was corrected by 

trackfng tasks updating the navigation-paraif requfred) meters in the computer. and by 

the crew zerofng the fine sun 

sensor t/edge posftion at the 

start of each orbftal day. 

7. Compute Data Cosmona~ts had to Soyuz 17/Salyut 4 Aviation Week and 

make precise Space Technology 

posftion calcula- The telescopes pointing system 30 June 1975 

tions fn order to malfunctioned due to blinding 

determine when to of the mfrror by the sun. 

stet' the Il'ovell'ent 

of the rotating Pointfng of the telescope was 

mirror of the solar acco~plished by reorienting the 

telescope to over- station and ther> calculatfng the 

come the pointing desired position of the rotatfng 

problem they were Mirror and moving it to that 

experiencing position. .. The repairs worked satisfactorily. thus enabling the solar 

research to continue. 

58 

/ 

MCDON"''' .... DOUGL~ .,6 

~ ... r . - - ---
, , I 

EXAMPLES OF 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORMED IN SPACE (Cont'd) 

Activity Generic Space 

No. 

8. 

9. 

-'0. 

Activitl 

Confirm/Veri fy 

Procedures/ 

Schedules/ 

Operations 

Connect/Disconnect 

E1 ectr·::al 

Interface 

Connect/Disconnect 

Flufd Interface 

/ 

,..coo,.,NrLL r>OUGLB 

Task Accom2'ished 

The crew visually 

(via CCTV) observed 

the dep10~ent to 

veri fy the PAM 

lDO~r Ignltton 

In the Solar Max 

Repair l.'1i ss i On 

exchang~ of the 

Haln Electronics 

Box (MEB). the crew 

disconnected and 

reconnected 11 "0" 

serfes electrical 

connectors 

The crew reservfced 

the prir.ary coolan t sys teet on the 

airlOCK module 

Co..'T.Ien ts 

STS 41-0 

The crew used the manipulator 

arm camera to observe the ~otor 

Ignition. 

The orbiter was faced away from 

the motor firing so as not to 

expose the orbiter'S windows to 

so11 d rocket IlIOtor debrl s • 

When the motor ignited the dfsbnce beb4ecn the spacecrAft and 

the orbiter was approxlClatel y 

10 mfles. 

STS 41-C 

During the rC!'1Oval of t."e 

connectors. the crew had to 

re~ove 22 s~all sere,s (2 per 

connect.or) • To do thfs they 

used a powered scrCl1drlver. 

While reconnecting the 

connectors the crew used SMall 

spring-type retention clips to 

secure the interface rather 

than reinstall fng the 22 small 

screws. 

Skylab-4 

The coolant system on the 

afrlock modJle was leaking 

fluid and tt\~ operating pressure 

had dropped essentially to zero. 

Reservfcfng of this syste~ had 

not been cons idared until it 

started leal..ing in orbit. 

59 

Reference 

Aviation Week and 

Space Technology 

10 Septcroer 1984 

Mission 

operations 

directorate, 

STS 4l-C EVA 

Checklist 

NASA-JSC Con tr. 

Iio. JSC-1732S 

16 ...lrch 1984 

JSC Lessc'1s 

Learn~d en the 

Skyl ab pro!i"'am 

30 Aprfl 1974 
,,/ 

--~---

- - EXAli?lES OF 37 G£NERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORMED IN SPACE (Coot' d) 

Activity ~ncrlc Space 

110. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

Activit~ Task AccomolishPd 

COrrelate Data COsmonauts 

predicted grain 

crop yields by 

correlating agricultural/changes and 

vegetation patterns 

during the growing 

season 

Deactivate/ The operatIon of 

Terminate System the Electrophoresis 

OperatIon system was manually 

temlnated 

Decode/Encode One EVA cre'..mln 

D.3ta receIved an alert 

warnIng relative to 

one of his SUIt 

systems, this he 

quickly translated 

to be a hIgh 

sublimator pressure 

I'r:!!ssage 

/ 

MCQO"''''''LL DO(JGL~ 

-' .... ~ ~ -

~nts 

Soyuz 3S/Sa 1 yut 6 

This mission coincided with 

the growing season in the USSR. 

Crew becatr.:! ad<.->pt at predicting 

harvest YIelds. 

On one occasion they estimted 

the yield of grain crops at 

30 quintals/hectare (552 lbs/ 

acre) and the actual harvest 

resulted in 34 (625.6 lbs/ 

acre). 

STS 41-0 

The EOS systen began experlencing "WIldly divergent 

pressures" and autorr~tlcal1y 

shut oo'lin. It was reset, 

pressures again went out of 

tolerance and system was 

manually snut down 

The obser.atlons of the 

probl~ beIng experIenced 

were tran~~itted to the ground 

for their evaluatIon. 

STS 4l-C 

The cause of the problem 

appeared to be ccnt~lnation 

which prevented complete valve 

shutoff &~rin9 perIods of low 

demantf (10'.4 metabol ic rate). 

The crewman followed the 

standard procedure of shuttIng 

off the supply water untIl 

comfort dIctated a restart. 

60 

Rpference 

Spacefl i gh t 

October 1981 

Aviation ~k and 

Space Technology 

10 SCilterrber 1984 

.. 

.. 

< 

Flight 41-C 

mission report 

for mJ, ,.:r,J 

and anCIllary 

hardware crew 

syst~ div;$ion 

1 July 1984 

---..... .... - ..... ~·.I ...... :t ... a 
EXAMPLES OF 37 GENERIC AC~IES PERFORMED IN SPACE (Cont'd) 

Activity Generic Space 

No. Acti ... i tl Task Accom~lished COtmlCnts Reference 

14. Deffne During operatfon STS 41-D Avfation W~ek and 

Procedures/ of the electro- Space Technology 

Schedules/ phores is sys teHl, The unit was eXperiencfng a lO Septe"'ber 1984 

Operations proble'llS arose problem with software 

wllich required coumandfng operations. 

I redefinftion and 

I changes fn the The machine was set to the full 

operational pro- manual operation and began 

cedures in real functioning normJlly. 

ti~ 

The operational speed at which 

the machfne processed the 

material "as manually revised 

to attempt to process as much 0 f 

the material as possible. 

The flow was befng vectored too 

far to the left up the colul1ln 

so the deflection vanes had to 

be ~anually changed. 

STS-9/Spacelab 1 

15. Deploy/Retract Oeployt;1cnt and The cranking operation was a SUrnary of the 

'. Appendage retraction of the problen wfth the outer hatch STS-9/Spacelab 1 

Scientiffc Airlock level operation. crew debricfings 

(SAL) on Skylab I 22 IJece::ber 1983 

was acco:o:pl i shed by It was estfrl'..lted to require 

~anual handcrankfng about 50 pounds of force at 

the end of the 2 foot handl e 

without restraints to accor.!-

plish this operatfon. 

,,<- This task was less stiff in the 

hot case than in the cold case. 

16. Detect Change in Crew detected STS-9/Spacelab 1 Sumary of the 

State or Condftlon presence of ~ydro- SiS-9/Splcelab 1 

gen in their By the end of the ofssion the crew dt~rfefings 

drinking water by crew had developed a method to 22 Oec~er 1983 

the pecul1 ar manually ~eparate the gas frcQ 

taste the water. 

61 

/ 

MCOONNI!!LL DOUOLA~ ~ 
EXAMPLES OF 37 bENERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORMED IN SPACE (Cont'd) 

I 

I Activity Generfc SPlce 

110. Activf t,l Task Accom~lfs~ed CO!l".t1ents 

17. Dfsplay Data -Shopping 1 fsts- Skylab 11 I 5 IV 

were manually prepared to display The lists were origfnally 

potentfal o~jec- devfsed to suggest to the 

tives and to crewmen a variety of s~ort 

a 11 OIl the crewmen objectives that coul d be met 

to work fndepen- If an extra 5 or 10 minutes of 

dently of ground observing time should becone 

advice in selecting avanable. 

targets for the 

solar observatfons The data collected in these 

Intervals were found to be 

so useful that soon the ground 

team was requesting specific 

allotl:lents of tiod be used 

entirely at the creWlMn's 

option. 

18. Gather/Repl aCe Fifteen Items of STS 41-C 

Tools/Equipment equipment lIS well 

as tools were Items used durfng the EVAs 

obtained and f ncl uded the T -pad fer the IJw"lU 

replaced during to dock wi th Sohr Max; nany 

the Solar l-lax tools such as the powered 

Mission EVAs screwdriver, the p~~er tool. 

and the scissors used to 

expose the MES; the ~.anipulator 

Foot Restraint (MFR); and the 

35 ~ camera for p~oto 

docUll"-entati on. 

19. Handl e/lnspect/ A honeyco~ STS 41-C 

Examine Lhing structure created 

Organisms by Italian honeyb~es The experfment consfsted of an 

while in a wefght- enclosure whfch housed approxless environocnt iro tel y 3300 bees. 

was eX(l':lfncd in 

situ The experiment re~ufred a series 

of photographs. TV recordfngs. 

and two tenperature r.Jeasurecents to be pcrfcrred on three 

occasions. 

The crew found Ute experfl'len t 

both interesting a;Jd entertainfng. 

/ 

I 

62 

/ 

MCDONNI!LL POuo~ 

Reference 

Slcylab Report: 

Mall's Role fn 

Space research. 

Science cagazine 

18 October 1974 

STS 41-C 

Flfght crew 

report 

24 May 1984 

EVA checlel fst 

STS 41-C 

16 "'.arch 1934 

STS 41-C Flight 

crew report 

24 Hay 1984 

-.-- .. -~--

-1 

) 

i 

I • I 

-. ! 

i 

. 

• a 

. _L 
" 

, 

, 

, 

/ 

I 

r 

-.... --~-

. / 

, 

r 

r 

l 

EXAMPLES OF 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORMED IN SPACE (Cont1d) 

Actfvfty Generfc Space 

No. Actfvfty 

20. 

21. 

22. 

Implement 

Procedures/ 

Schedules 

Infonnatfon 

Processfng 

Inspect/O>Jserve 

Task Accomplfshed 

Crewman was 

requfred to implement procedures 

relayed fro~ the 

ground to repair 

f11m jam in the 

metric camera 

Use of the Shu ttl e 

Portable On-Board 

Computer (SPQC) 

a 11 owed the crew 

to process fnformation fn real time 

and identffy Earth 

observation targets 

relatfve to their 

ground trade 

Crewmen would 

observe fluctuations fn Extr~e 

Ui tl'c1violet (EUV) 

i ntens i ty to 

predfct probable 

locatfons of solar 

flares 

/' 

MCDONN'-LL DOLlaL~ 

CO::T.ie n ts 

STS-9/Spacelab 1 

Detafled repair procedul'es were 

developed on the ground. 

The crewman was not previously 

familiar WiL~ the insides of 

the carnera. 

The procedure waS carried out 

in the darkness of a sleeping 

bunk completely by hand without visually seeing the camera. 

STS 41-C 

63 

SPOC identified the crews 

location at a glance. provided 

excellent cues for acquisition 

of signal and loss of signal 

for both TDRESS and STDN sites 

and readily identffied Earth 

o~servation targets. 

Sl:.ylab missions 

The cr~n would observe 

these intensity fluctulltions. 

knOWing t~at a possibility of 

an Ir.:pending solar nare exists. 

and would initiate the appropriate experiocnt operatfon. 

Thfs prediction technique 

allowed for the recordfng of 

the n are activity wi thin a 

few minutes of its earliest 

manifestation and well before 

it reached peak inte"lsl ty. 

Ref~rt'flCe 

Science tbgazfne 

13 July 1984 

Payload crew 

~erebers' view of 

view of Spacelab 

operations 

STS 41-C Flight 

Crew Report 

24 Mly 1984 

Skyl ab Report: 

"'.an • s 1\01 El In 

Space resc.!rch. 

Science ~gazfne 

18 Octc!lel' 1974 
EXAMPLES OF 37 GEt/ERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORMED IN SPACE (Coll!.'c}J 

Activity Generic Space 

No. Activitl Tas~ Accomelished COIlIllcn ts Reference 

23. Heilsure (Scale) The Crew Optical STS 41-C STS 41-C Flight 

Physical Alignli',cnt Sight Crew Report 

Dimensions (COAS) w~s used to During rendezvous the COAS 24 l'olY 1984 

measure the ranga fnftially marked the spacecraft 

and the line-of- ilt approxfll'.ately 600K ft. 

sight angle to the 

Solar Max space- During proxir.fty operations 

craft during the COAS was used to monitor 

rendezvous and the relative positfons and /~ proximity opera- closure rates between the 

tfons spacecraft and Shuttle. 

24. Plot Data The Mass measure- SKylab 2. 3. and 4 Proceedings of 

ments of the crew- the Skylab Life 

merbers in the Mass measured in oscillating Sciences 

Skylab missions chair called Body Mass Movement symposiUlll 

were plotted Device (BXHO). IlASA-JSC Report 

periodically during JSC-09275. 

the missions Time, BMMO ~~perature, and NovelCber 1974 

oscillating period plotted in 

log for each experiment. 

All crewrren participated in 

this exp2ri~ent. 

25. Positi on Iiodu1 e Positioning the STS 41-C STS 41-C Flight 

Solar Max MEB in Crew Report 

its rrountfng hinge HEB had to be install:d on a 24 May 1984 

was a tight fit mounting hing~ in order to 

but was a110~ for installation of L~e 

4cCOll'pl1 shed. electrical connectors. 

During the pOSitionIng of the 

module a tight fit was 

experienced, however, with a 

slight tap of the fist it went 

in. 

.l, 

64 

MCDONNeLL DOlJa~ 
r 

EXAMPLES OF 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORMED IN SPACE (Cont'd) 

Activity Generf c Space 

No. Activitl Task Accom2lished Corrrrents Reference 

26. Precision Emergency repair Soyuz 35/Salyut 6 Spaceflight 

Manipulation was accoQplished October 1981 

of Cbjects on the Elena-F When the detector malfunctioned, 

/ ga~~ ray detector the crew was able to disassemble 

the unit, fashion a pin to 

replace the Malfunctioned part 

and reass~le it. 

-- ' 

The controllers were surprised 

when the uni t fafled and the 

crew with no consultation embarked 

on its repair. 

27. Problem Solving/ Problems arose and STS-9/Spacelab 1 Science magazine 

~:cision Making/ fl ui d physi cs 13 July 't984 ~\ata Analysis experiments had to During the fluid physics 

be greatly ~diffed experiments the fluid behavior 

when air bubbles observed and reported to the 

appeared in the ground investi~ators required 

liquid containers, a complete revision of the 

anti spread barriers procedures in real tf~e in 

fafled to prevent order to solve the prohtems 

liquid spreading, encountered and to acco~plish 

and electrostatic the desired taSKS. - - effects and other 

surprises were SiMilarly, along with developencountered ing the new procedures, ~~e 

crew devised har~~are modifications and substitutions in 

accomplishing the experirent's 

goal s. 

--.. --

65 

MCOONNffLL DO"O~ 

" 
.-----

-..---

/ 

/ 

,/ 

-~ 

I 

I 

----} 

/ 

! 

, 

I 

, 

I 

I , 

l - /../ 

< " 

I 

" 

" 

/ 

/ 

. 

I 

./ 

I 

, 

I 

/ 

/ 

-

EXAMPLES OF 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORMED IN SPACE (Cont'd) 

Act.ivity Generic Space 

No. Activit::t 

29. Pursuit. TrackIng 

29. Release/Secure 

Mechanical 

Interface 

30. RC!OOve Module 

MCO""''''ELL DOlJGLg 

Task Accomplished 

The IR spect.rometer 

experi~ent. was used 

to locate and t.rack 

specific ground 

targets such as 

agricultural 

fields, 

The crew manipulated the two 

Acne screws on 

the ACS module of 

the Solar ,:ax 

spacecraft (8 revs 

each) with the 

Hodule Service 

Tool ("ST) 

The crew manually 

ramved the 500 Ib 

ACS rrodule fran 

the Solar Hale 

spacecraft 

Ca:ments 

Skylab nlssions 2, 3, and 4 

Simultaneous aircraft and 

ground truth was being Obtain~d 

concurrent with the IR spectrarooter data. 

The field of view of the 

spectraneter- was only 1 mi 11 iradian, which corresponds to a 

square on the earth of .4 kilometer per SIde. 

Careful training and considerable experience were rcqul red 

to locate and track the deS ired 

target. 

In additIon several different 

targets were sanetirr.cs acquired 

only a few mInutes apart In 

tiroo . 

STS 41~ 

The thermal blanket had to be 

rem:lvec1 to Install the hST. 

Th(! PtST was set at a torque 

value of 100 ft/lbs. 

The cr~n was restralnt~ In 

the manipulator foot restraInt. 

STS 41-C 

After releasing the mechanIcal 

interfa~ on the ACS module 

the crewman removed the ~OO lb 

unit. 

66 

The C~4n was restralncc1 in 

the manIpulator foot restraInt 

Reference 

Skylab Report: 

Han's Pole in 

Space research, 

Science magazine 

18 October 1984 

STS 41~ Flight 

Crew rep':)rt 

24 t"lY 1984 

STS 41-C Flight 

Crew Report 

24 ~y 1934 
/ 

/ 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

/ 

I 

, / ' , I 

-----1 / 

.. ! 

_-r 

/ 

Activity 

No. 

31. 

32. 

33. 

Generic Space 

Activity 

Remove/Replace 

Covering 

Replace/Clean 

Surface Coatings 

Replenish 

Baterials 

EXM~LES OF 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES PEr~O~£O 'N SPACE (Cont'd) 

Task Acc~plished 

The crew had to 

remove the thermal 

blanket to expose 

the Solar Hax l-lain 

Electronics Box 

(MES) 

Cos~~nauts recoated 

the receiving and 

focusing mirrors 

of the Orbital 

Solar Telescopa 

The primary airlock 

module coolant leop 

was recharged by 

repleni~hing the 

coolant supply in 

order to support 

planned creri EVAs 

67 

COlmlents 

STS 41-C 

To expose the MES the crew had 

to make three. 4 foot vertical 

cuts and two, 2 foot horizontal 

cuts. 

The EVA scissors used to make 

the cuts were d1 ffi cult tJ work 

with • 

Salyut 4 

Due to particulate matter 

collecting on the mirror's 

optical surfaces, the crew was 

required to apply nelf reflective 

layers on the mirrors. 

The procedure involved using 

an all~ir.u~ globule which was 

Ilal ted by a tungsten wire 

carrying an electric current. 

Skylab 4 

The crew carried a servicing 

kit consisting of an 18 931. _ 

tank \l1th 40 lbs of coolant in 

a locker in the co~and r.odule. 

The coolant reserve tank was 

pressurized to 35 psi with 

nitrogen and was then hooked 

into the primry coolant loop 

by puncturing the line and 

charging the systc-lI. 

Reservicing the sys~ilI allOt/cd 

the crew to use liquid cooling 

in their suits during EVAs. 

Reference 

EVA checkl1s t 

STS 41-C 

16 Barch 1984 

STS 41-C Flight 

Cre-t Report 

24 t~y 1984 

Aviation Wack ~nd 

Space Technology 

24 February 1975 

Spaceflight 

Octctler 1981 

Aviation W~~ and 

Sp~ce Technology 

26 November 1973 

.... -...--.. - ... ",,-- ... ~ .. - -- ........ -~ - ---~- ...... -
EXAMPLES OF 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES PERFORMED IN SPACE (Cont'd) 

/' Activity Generic Sp~ce 

No. Activitl Task Accomplished COtmKlnts Reference 

34. Store/Record The Skyl ab crCl.,s Skylab Missions 2. 3 and 4 The procedings R.f 

El er.r.!nts were subject to the Skylab Life 

several medical Each of the cre'tt'lr.embers were. Sciences ..... --_.1- - studies of which on a routine basis. to obtain sy:npos i U'lI 

some required samples in order to determine JSC-09275 

samples of blood the effects of long term space November 1974 

and urine to be exposure. 

stored till return 

to Earth This resulted in many samples 

in storage throughout the 

particular Skylab Qfssions. 

35. Surgical Creww.ember blood STS-9/Space 1 ab 1 Aviation Week tnd 

Manipulations samples obtained Space Technology 

for Life Sciences Blood was drawn from two pay- 19 December 1983 

investigations load and mission specialists 

for purposes of the Life 

Sciences experiments. 

36. Transport Loaded Cre~man maneuvered STS 4l-C STS 41-C Flight 

500 lb ACS Module Crew Report 

-' while transporting Cr~n transported unit while 24 !·tlY 1984 

" -" i t fro~ the "Iork- in the manfpulator foot 

site to t."Ie storage restraint. 

loc~tfon 

Handling the unit ~Ias easy durin~ transport as long as 

translation rates were kept low. 

Handling larger masses in thi s 

sal1'e manner ~lolJl d be equally 

feasible as long as there Itere 

adequate handholds. 

37. Transport Unloaded Cre~men translated STS 6 STS 6 EVA 

around the Shuttle Crew Debriefing 

cargo bay during Crewr:n ~ere tethered to t.~e 3 H<:.y 1983 

an EVA operaticn slidewfre which runs the length 

of the cargo bay. 

Translation around ~,e ecrv 

car.leras ~Ias difff cult. 

68 

/ 

MCDOf>lHf!LL DOUGL9---

~ --
. \ 

. 

I 

v--) 

-, 

~ ... "''' "-J..'4;. ",":':'~'±-1'" - .. - '~ ..... _,,' ... ". ... 

-~ or 

.. ,., 

'" 

'. 

: 

'<, 

, " "-

" 

'. 

.,~~~~t.'JIt=:·(~ 

,e 

~~j-~>:':- .. ~ 

• , J ~ .. 

~ .. ';:: ,,:-~. 

-{~- '" ~-

} .. -..-1 

, -. 

i- J "-, 

, " 

, . 

'-' 

---" , .' 

""'" 
End of Document