r~ NASA_CR-171224 

19850005165 

A Reproduced COP)----------------- -

OF 

Reproduced for NASA 

by the 

NASA Scientific and Technical Information Facility 

FFHo 672 Aug 65 

111111111 lIn IIII nlll IIIII IIIII Inll nIl Inl 

NF02670 

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19850005165 2019-03-15T12:47:46+00:00Z
/' 

.. \ 

" 

'l 

. , -

I 

i -

, . 

! 

l. 

b 

\ 

( ..... ',-, .... "". r';, -•• ~~ '';'l'.'''':, -- ·)"·~"ftJ.: -.-~ '"",,-,,,.,:: l)~'(, 'f' '" .... ~-' -'J"''''~~:~k~:';-~>;~"",,~~7~~jr ",.,':,'''0. - "" •• , " ,!f .. ~ ,." A- •• ~ ,,'s;:'-' ,.!"'. '~}f'> ~~~, _ .• ,;~:::?~:~~~.~2!~§~;;~ " •• "" '" .... <.: .:...t'C"'," ", • , , .. 

:: 

.' 

.. ~! :\: 

~ ,,- --~-"~ 

MCDONNELL D OUG:.AS ASrli70NAUTICS COMP~i"JV 

Q/ MCDO~NCLL DOUGL~~ 

COR~n .... Y'to,." 

....... "'''- ~..s...,. 

----------.-~.~------ -
I. 

0- .-. 

. 

,. 

.. 

r-

... MCOONNEL~ DOUGLAS '--'" C;O#Ir-o.Ar'~ 

C.,,,,, .... "-,, NAS II )~ 11 

01'0 III" 614 

DR~ 

OCTOBER 198.t 

THE HUMAN ROLE IN SPACE 

Volume II - Reseach Analysis 

and Technology Rtport 

DR·4 

Moe H1295 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS, A57RONA.UTICS COI"."IPANV-HUNTINGTOfll arACH 

5301 Bol,iJ AH'''U(! 1f1Jf/t1ll!}101) SUth C .I/'oml.} 92641 (714) 896 3311 

... - A -~'- ----.- . - ... -------------
I 

I 

j 

.. 

L, 

PREFACE 

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 space missions; (2) establish valid 

criteria for allocating functional activities between humans and 

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

economics, and benefits of the human presence 1n space. 

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

of 1984. 

The final report has been prepared 1n three separate volumes: 

Volume I - Executive Summary 

Volume II - Research Analysis and Technology Report 

Volume III - Generalizations on Hu~q Roles in Space 

This document is Volu~e II in the series. It is the technical 

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

which the study results were derived. 

The study results are intended to provide info~~tion and 

guidelines in a form that will enable NASA program ~~nagers and decision~~kers establish, early in the design process, the most 

cost-effective design approach for future space programs, through the optir.~l application of unique huwan skills and capabilities in space. 

Questions and comments regarding this study or the material 

contained in this document should be directed to: 

Stephen n. Ha 11 

THURIS Study Manager 

Code PO 24 

National Aerona~tics and Space Administration G~orge C. Harshall Space Flight Center 

(205) 453-419& 

Harry L. Wolbers 

THURIS Study l1anager 

(or) 

McDonnell Douglas Astro1uutics Company 

Huntington neach, California 

(714) 89&-4754 

.• ,. "'j' '(' I" ,- .. , . 

McaO .. Ne:LL DOUOLf;iJ' 

/ 

. -, 
This Page Intentionally left Blank 
cornmrs 

Section 1 IUTRODUCTIOU AIm S~I/oi!!ARY 1-1 

Section 2 HUf-iAU QUALIFICATIOilS FOR SPACE ACTIVITIES - TASK 1 2-1 

2.1 Human Capability Data 2-1 

2.2 Historical Precedents and Past Experience ~-lO 

Section 3 SPECIFIC PROJECT ASSESSME~TS - TASK 2 3-1 

3.1 Selected Project Analyses 3-2 

3.2 Mission Tirnelines 3-10 

3.3 Human Support Requi rements 3-21 

3.4 Economics of Human Activities in Earth Orbit 3-29 

3.5 Evaluation 3-48 

Section 4 TECHUOLOGY REQUIREHEUTS AIlD TASKS - TASK 3 4-1 

4. 1 Technology Requirements 4-1 

4.2 Technology Gaps 4-7 

4.3 Technology Plan 4-18 

Section 5 GEHERALIZATIOUS 011 HUI.v\N ROLES Itl SPACE - TASK 4 5-1 

Section 6 THURIS BIBLIOGRAPHY 6-1 

Appendix A Human Capabllity Data A-l 

Appendix B Owen Garriott Intervlew; Observations During the Solar 

Max Repair Mission B-1 

Appendix C Project Analyses C-l 

Appendix C-l Analysis of Space Platfom IHssions C-2 

Appendix C-2 Analysis of Life Science IHssions C-6 

Appendix 0 Activity Tir.:eline Profiles and Data Sheets for 37 

Generic Activities 0-1 

Appendix E Support Equipment Requirements for 37 Generic 

Act1Vities E-l 

Appendix F Cumulative Costs as a Function of lIur.1ber of Times 

Activity is Perfomed for Seven Han-I·lachine t~odes F-l 

•• , I: ~ I", • I , 

,- MCOO .. NIIf .... "OUOL~ 

v 

., " ( ft 

~ 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank 
FIGURES 

1-1. Categories of Man-Machine Interaction 1-2 

1-2. Study Methodology 1-4 

2-1. The Structure of Intellect 2-5 

2-2. Key Capabilities 2-6 

2-3. Limiting Factors - Effects of Atmospheric StrEsses on Hu~~n Performance 2-8 

2-4. Limiting Factors - Effects of Other Environmental Stresses on 

Human Perforw~nce 2-9 

2-5. Limiting Factors - Spare Adaptation Synd~ome (Exposure to Wei ghtl essness) 2-10 

3-1. Project Analysis (Levels of Definition) 3-2 

l' 3-2. Space P1atfo~ System Design Concept 3-3 

3-3. Space P1atforn Project Analysis 3-4 

3-4. Life Sciences Dedicated Laboratory 3-5 

3-5. Life Sciences Laboratory (Project Analysis) 3-5 

3-6. List of Generic Activities 3-11 

3-7. Typical Activity Timeline Profile: Activate/Initiate System Operation 3-12 

3-8. COdrse Motor tlovem~nts 3-14 

3-9. /{t..'1lan Capabil i ti es Requi red for Each Acti vi ty 3-18 

3-10. Release/Secure Mechanical Interface 3-21 

3-11. Release/Secure Mechanlcal Interface Examples 3-22 

3-12. Typical Support Equipment Evaluation Sheet 3-27 

3-13. Space Station (Full Capability) 3-30 

MCDONN"'(.(. DOlJot.L~ vii 

-
rr 

3-14. Space Station (Zero Mission) 3-31 

3-15. THURIS Cost Methodology 3-44 

3-16. Activity 20 - Ir.~lementation Procedures/Schedules Cumulative 

Cost vs. Repetitions Including Operations 3-45 

3-17. Activity 36 - Transport Loaded Cumulative Cost vs. Repetitions Including Operations 3-46 

3-18. Activity Null'!>er 32 - Replace/Clean Surface Coatings Curru1ative 

Cost vs. Repetitions Including Op~rations 3-47 

3-19. Activity Nurrber 27 - Proble:1 Solving/Decision r~aking/Oata 

Analysis Cumulative Cost vs. Repetitions Including Operations 3-48 

3-20. Equipment COli1llonality Supervised and Independent Hodes 3-51 

3-21. Equal Cost Curves for Hanua1 Activatfon as Con:pared to Each of 

the Other Man-Hachine Implementation t~odes. 

Activity 29 - Release/Secure Mechanical Interface. 3-55 

3-22. Activi ty t4untJer 29 Release/Secure l-techani ca 1 Interface 3-56 

4-1. Supporting Human Factors Enabling Technology 4-6 

rr 4-2. Correlation of Generic Activities and Space Station Hfssion 

Parameters 4-9 

4-3. Development Path for Electrical Connector Tools 4-21 

4-4. Developrrent Path for Space Based Electrophoretic Production 

Units 4-22 

4-5. Technology AdvanceMent Classifications 4-22 

4-6 •. A Time-Phased Technology Plan for Critical Areas of Enhancing Technology 4-23 

5-1. Machines are E~tensions of Man~s Capabilities 5-3 

5-2. Reduction of Risk - The Issue of System Reliability 5-7 

5-3. Time Required to Reach Various Technology Readiness Levels 5-8 

5-4. Deci sf on Process for Identify; n9 the t·!an-'·lachi ne ~iode to Use 

in the Initial Conceptual Design Effort for An Advanced Space System 5-10 

5-5. Uorksheet for Defining the Human Role in Space 5-11 

MCDONNELL DOUG'-~ \1111 

.. --
'I' 

! -

I 

,I 

5-6. 

5-7. 

5-8. 

5-9. 

5-10. 

Example of Worksheet Procedure 

Release/Secure Hechanical Interface 

Time Required to Advance Level of Technological Readiness 

Activity !~umb-er 29 - Release/Secure f-iecnanical Interface 

Cumulative Cost vs. Frequency Including Operations 

Cost Correction for Equipment Commonality 

ix 

MCDONNELL DOUGL~ 

• 

5-12 

5-13 

5-13 

5-14 
This Page Intentionally Left Blank 
I 

r .. 

1 

I 

IT ti 

~ 

2-l. 

2-2. 

3-1. 

3-2. 

3-3. 

3-4. 

3-5. 

3-6. 

3-7. 

3-8. 

3-9. 

TABLES 

Basic Human Capabillties 

Historical Precedents/Experience Observed 1n Previous 

Manned Mlssion Activitles 

IVA and EVA Task Time Comparisons (Coarse-Motor Movements) 

IVA and EVA Task Time Comparisons (Fine-Hotor Movements) 

Skylab EVA Tasks 

Benefit of ~tanl s Participation in Space Activi ties 

Support Equipment List for Costing Various Man-Machine Modes 

Activity Costing Factors 

Pressurized Volume and Utility Services Cost 

Logistics Operations Cost 

Space Stution Facility Cost for Operating Hour for Activities 

Requiring Direct Human Involvement in Space 

3-10. Ground Control and Data-Handling Facl1ities User Service Charge 

2-2 

2-12 

3-15 

3-15 

3-16 

3-19 

3-24 

3-31 

3-32 

3-33 

3-34 

Per I1inute 3-35 

3-11. EVA Support Items User Service Charge Per !1inute 3-36 

3-12. Took Kits and Mechanical Support Equipment Production Unit Costs 3-38 

3-13. 

3-14. 

3-15. 

3-16. 

4-1. 

4-2. 

Command, Control, Communication, and Data Management Equip~ent 

Production Unit Costs 

Orbi ta 1 t~obi1 i ty System Producti on Uni t Costs 

Operating Systems Software, Software Development Costs 

Commonality Cost Correction Factors 

Technology Readiness Levels 

Crew Station Design Related Projects and Status 

'I .. ,.-.. - ... . -

XI 

/ 

MCDONNE .... oouo~ 

3-39 

3-41 

3-43 

3-54 

4-4 

4-4 
.' - 4-3. 

4-4. 

4-5. 

Extravehicular Activity Related Projects and Status 

Teleoperations Related Projects and Status 

Manned Stati~n Element Functions 

XII 

.- /MCDONNeLL DOlJa~ 

4-5 

4-5 

4-8 

- . 

r 

-, 

1 
". 

Section 1 

IHTRODUCTIOII AIm SUHMARY 

The space project managers and engi neers wi th; n UASA today are faced \'Ii ttl 

a significant challenge. On the one hand, with the Shuttle's attainment of 

operational status, the nation's Space Transportation System (STS) has 

successfully completed one more step toward establishing the permanent 

presence of man in space. On the other hand, the competing demands on this 

nation's limited economic resources are forcing an increasing awareness of the 

need to maximize economic efficiency in achieving the goals and objecti~es of 

future space missions. To meet this challenge, a ratiOfial methodology and set 

of performance and cost criteria are critically needed by space project 

managers and decision makers if they are to design the most cost-effective 

man-machine systems to accomplish specific missions. 

To be of value, these assessment procedures must clearly indicate to the 

decision maker the optimal location of each activity and functional operation 

along the continuum from direct human interventlon and control to independent 

system operations. 

As a point of reference, too often in system d~sign an artificial 

dichotomy is created that attempts to classify systems as manned or unmanned. 

There is no such thing as an unmanned system: everything that is created by 

the system designer involves man in one context or another; everything in our 

human existence is done by. for, o~ against man. The point at issue is to 

establish in- every system context the optimal role of each man-machine 

component. 

To this end, the Human Role in Space (THURIS) Study has ~l) investlgated 

the role and the required degree of direct involvement of humans in future 

space missions; (2) established criteria for the allocation of functional 

activities beb/een humans and machines; and (3) investigated the technology 

requirements, economics and benefits of the human presence in space~ Six 

/ 

MCDOIII"' ... LL DOIJGL~ 
basic categories of man-machine interaction were considered in the study. 

They were Hanual, Supported, Augmented, Te1eoperated, Supervised, and 

Independent modes of operation. These categories are defined in Figure 1-1. 

Manual 

Supported 

Augmented 

Teleoperated 

SupervIsed 

Independent 

UnaIded IVA/EVA, wltn SImple (unpoweredl hand tools 

Requires use of supportong machInery or faCIlitIes to accomplish 

aSSIgned tasks (e g ,m3nned maneuvering unlU and foot 

restraont deVlC~) 

Amplif,cat,on cf human sensory·motor capabIlitIes 

(powered tools, exo-skeletons, etc) 

Use of remotely controlled sensors and actuators allOWing 

the human presence to be removed from the work sIte 

(remote manlpul&tor systems, teleoperators, telefactors) 

Replacement of direct manual control of SYltem operatIon WIth 

computer-dorected furCllons although maintaining humans 

In supervIsory control 

Caslcally Independent self-acluatlng, self.heallng operatIons 

but requiring human ,ntervenllon occas,onally (automatIon 

and art,flc,al Intell,gence) 

Figure 1·1. Categories of Man-Machine Interaction 

The study activity \iaS organized into four task areas, as fo1101-/s: 

TASK 1 - HUHA/l QUALIFICATIOIIS FOR SPACE ACTIVITIES 

The objective of this task was to provide documented information on human 

capabilities and limitations in order to establish guidelines for defining the 

human role in manual, support~d, augw.ented, teleoperated, supervised, and 

independent modes of system operation. 

TASK 2 - SELECTED PROJECT ASSESSf1EIHS 

The objectives of this task were (1) to analyze a repiesentative set of 

space missions in order to identify a generic set of mission activities that 

may in turn be used as a catalog from \~hich a selected number can be extracted 

as applicable to describe any future space mission (Subtask 2.1); (2) to 

develop typical timeline data and mission impact factors for each of the 

generiC activities in order to be able to synthesize and co~pare the viable 

alternative options for accomplishing future mission obJectives (Subtask 2.2); 

(3) to define the hardware and software support requirements associated with 

each activity implementation option to sufficient depth to allow cost data on 

the alternative modes of implementation to be developed (Subtask 2.3); (4) to 

1·2 

/ 

MCDO""""~"L DOUO"~ 

.. - ~ 

• J 

I 

f 

• • 

· . 

, 

... 

... I 

f · . 

• J 

., 

! 

, 

· . 
I"i' I -----

r -

! I t 

prepare comparative cost data associated with the provision, support, and use 

of various degrees of direct human involvement in future space missions 

(Subtask 2.4); and (5) to develop a methodology for evaluating in qualitative 

and quantitative terms the impact of varying degrees of human involvement on 

the effectiveness and economy of satisfying the requirements of future space 

projects (Subtask 2.5). 

TASK 3 - TECHUOLOGY REQUIREHEUTS 

The objective of this task was to identify the requirements for the 

technological developments that enable and enhance the human role in space and 

to uncover gaps that will need to be considered in both ground-based research 

and development programs and in flight experiments, as appropriate. 

TASK 4 - GENERALIZATIONS ON THE HUMAll ROLES IN SPACE 

The objective of th1s task \'las to summarize (in an easily accessible 

procedural format) the methodology developed during the THURIS study for 

selecting the optimal mode of man-machine interaction in any specific system 

application. To accomplish this objective, the information generated in Task 

1 - Human Qualificaticns for Space Activities, Task 2 - Specific Project 

Assessm~nts, and Task 3 - Technology Reauirements \'/dS used to develop a 

declsion guide to assist space project managers in assessing the relative 

value of the various categories of man-machine interaction in meeting the 

activity requirements of future space systems. 

'The overall study flow is summarized in Figure 1-2. 

In the fol1o\'!ing sections of tnis docurr.ent, the analyses and data 

generated and the results obtained in each of these task areas is presented. 

Section 2 describes the Task 1 analyses, Section 3 describes the Task 2 

analyses, Section 4 describes the Task 3 analyses and Section 5 describes the 

Task 4 analyses. Many different criteria can be suggested as candidates for 

inclusion in the decision process for allocating functional activities between 

humans and machines. As will be described in the following pages, the study 

team hds concentrated on three principal indices: performance, cost, and 

technological readiness as an indicator of success probu~11ity. 

1-3 

MCDONNELL DOtJGL~ 
-I 

Task 1 - Human 

Quahf,catlons 

Benefits 

AnalysIS 

Study Goal - RatIonal 

methodology for optlmlzmg 

human role m space 

Croterla - Performance 

• Cost. RIsk 

Flguro 1·2. Study Methodology 

Assessment 

~'odel 

Prolect Work 

AnalysIs 

Task4-

Fiole 

AllocatIons 

Task 3-

Technology 

P"qulrements 

With regard to perforwance, 37 generic classes of activities were defined 

(see Section 3) that, when cORbined in the required oper~tlonal sequences, 

could be used to describe a broad spectrum of potential ~ace programs. For 

each of these activities and for each category of man-machine interaction 

(manned, supported, augmented, teleoperated, supervised, and independent 

operations), the limiting factors in tems of sensing, information processing 

and motor actions have been defined and the requirements for human involvement 

have been described (see Section 2). 

Some system operational requirements specify performance beyond human 

sensory or psychomoto~ capabilities (e.g., sensing outside the visible band of 

the electromagnetic spectrtlm, force actuation beyond normal human capability, 

or exposure to extreme pressure, temperature, or toxic envlronments). As a 

general rule, however, response tlme was found to be the most generally 

applicable discriminator betl-'/een the manually controlled modes and the 

supervised and independent nodes of operation. If responses in time periods 

of seconds or less are required, then the activity is generally best performed 

" MCDONNIlLL oo .. o~ 

1-4 

-
n' , j 

... , 

, 

.. 

in the supervised or independent modes. Applications where speed of response 

would dictate that the activities be p~rformed in the supervised or 

independent modes might include launch abort procedures and orbital trajectory 

corrections. If allowable response times become minutes or hours, then all 

modes might be applicable and the criteria of cost effectiveness or 

technological readiness would provide the more appropriate basis for selection 

of a particular mode of implementation. 

Witn re'1ard to cost, costing..models l'iere derived (see Sectlon 3) that 

~ic.ided comparative data on the relative costs for each man-mach1ne mode in 

performing each activity, from one to many hundreds of times. It was found 

that some system operational requirewents are of such a low demand that the 

development of automated systems becomes prohibitively expensive in view of 

the benefits achieved. These comparath'e costing data were further refined to 

take into acount the cOlimonality that can exist among the equipment items or 

resources needed to support multiple activities. 

With regard to technolo~lcal readiness. it was found by the stu~ team 

that the level of readiness could provide another useful metric in the role 

allocation decision process. The higher the technological readiness level of 

a given m~n-machlne implementation concept, the nore confidence the 

decision-rlakel' would have that the mission objectives could be met within ti:r:e 

and budget. In other words, the higher the readiness level, the higher will 

be the. probabil ity of mlssion success. 

ror programmatic planning purposes, the schedule risk in meeting progral~ 

milestones is directly dependent upon the readiness level. It was found that 

the tfl~ scale required to achieve a given level of technological readiness 

depends in turn upon the degree of co~~lexity of th2 system to be developed. 

For relatively simple systems, the times required to move froi.1 concept to 

operational readlness may take from 1 to 5 years. This time range often 

reflects the impact of factors other than technical progress on the 

development process, such as political or budgeting constraints or the 

availability of corollary systems required to demonstrate or aid 1n the 

de..-elopment of the item in questl0n. The time requirel:Jent for a more conplci 

syste~ may ta~c even longer. 

,-

... CDONN~"" 0000,-9 1-5 

, • 

-

i
Based upon the analysis described in Sections 2. 3. and 4. a decision 

guide was fonnulated that Gan be used to logically allocate space activities 

to alternative man-machine implementation modes based upon the criteria of 

performance. cost and technological readiness as developed in Tasks 1. 2, and 

3 of the study. Such a guide might take many forms. One procedural approach 

that appears promising, however, utilizes a worksheet format and is described 

in Secti on 5. 

16 

... CQO..,"'" .... OO&JOL~ 

, 

I , . 

-. 

. 

. 

. 1 ~ 
.... 1 

Section 2 

HUHA" QUALIFICATIOlIS FOR SPACE ACTIVITIES - TASK 1 

The objective of Task 1 was to provide information on hu~an capabilities 

and limitations and on their application to space mission tasks. This was 

accomplished by compiling data on a large number of basic and unique human 

capabilities, defining the limiting factors relevant to these capabilities, 

and by documenting historical precedents and past experience from various U.S. 

and Russian space mission reports. 

2.1 HU1-lAfl CAPABILITY DATA 

A d~tailed list of human capabilities applicable to space mission 

activities was compiled from previous stUdies. human f~ctors texts, and 

biO'lledical references. For simplification purposes tht!se capabilities I"ere 

grouped into thre~ categories: Sensory/Perceptual; Intellectual; and 

Psychomotor/!-!otor. A list of the capabilities exanined under each of these 

three categories is pre~ented in Table 2-1. 

For each capability, a definition was provid~d. its chal'acteristics were 

identified, factors which tend to change or linit the capability were listed, 

and comwents were made regarding the relevance and application of the 

capability to man's role in space. ThlS data is summari1ed for each of the 

basic human capabilities in Appendix A. 

~h11e conSiderable quantitative data were found 1n the literature defining 

sensory discri~ination abilities and the fine and gross motor responses tM~ 

humans are capable of making, the higher level cognitive functions are not as 

precisely defined in terns that can be used directly by system engineers. To 

address thi s problem of defining the "i ntell igent" operations of the human 

ele~ent in man-mach1ne systems. we have borrowed the terminology proposed by 

the eminent psychologist, J. P. Guilford, in his "Structure-of-Intellect" 

model. In exanining the nature of human intelli~ence, Guilford defines the 

dimensions of intelligence in tems of Cognition, Her.lOry, Divergent 

Production, Convergent Production and Evaluat1on. 

,/ 

MCOO""'''''LL DOU"L~ 

2·' 

,. 
/ [ I 

n 

~ -

Table 2-1 

BASIC HUI1AI~ CAPABILITIES 

A. Senso~/Perceptual and Capabilities 

o Visual Acuity 

• Brightness Detection and Discrimination 

o Color Discrimination 

o Depth Perception and Discrimination 

o Peripheral Visual Detection and Discrimination 

o Visual Accommodation ~ 

• Detection and Discrimination of Tone 

o Discrimination of Sound Intensity 

o Sound Localization 

o Detecti on of Li gilt Touch 

o Tactile Recognitlcn of Shape and Texture 

o Discrimination of Force Against Limb 

• Discrimination ~f Limb Movement and Location 

• Detection and Discrimination of Angular Acceleration 

o Equil i bri urn 

o Detection ao1d Discrimination of Vibration 

o Detection of Heat and Cold 

o Detection and Discrimination of Odors 

B. Intellectual Capabilities 

8 Cognition 

o Hemory 

e Divergent and Convergent Production 

o Evah:ation 

C. Psychomotor/Hotor Capabil ities 

e Production and Applicatlor. of Force 

o Control t)f Speed of Hotion 

G Control of Voluntary Responses 

o Continuous-Adjustment Control (Tracking) 

o Arm/lland/Finger flanipulation 

o Body POSitioning 

Cognition is defined as awareness, immediate discove~ or rediscove~, or 

recognition of information in various forms: comprehension or understanding. 

Information acted upon by the human element can be in the form of figures. 

symbolz, se~antic units, behavioral units, classes, relations, systems and 

transformations. 

The terms cognition and perception overlap to some degree. Both 

perception and cognition are concerned with input info~ation from sensory 

2·2 

/' 

'"COONN" .... DOUG"§;! 

1 

•• 

. .. 
sources. Perception, however, is concerned primarily with sensory properties 

and with the cognition of figural units. The complete cognitive process 

includes operation with symbolic, semantic, and behavioral concepts as well._ 

Perception is midway along a continuum extending from sensing at one end to 

thinking at the other. It is the process of organizing and interpreting 

sensory inputs based upon past experience. Cognition involves a broader range 

of mental acivity including awareness of semantic meaning and abstra~t 

concepts. 

Hemo!), is defined as inforT"ation retention or storage, with some degree of 

availability of information in the same form in which it was committed to 

storage and in connection with the same cues with which it was learned. 

Hemory is distinguished from cognition per se by the ability ~o recall 

information having once been exposed to the information. Hemory storage. 

however. 1s an essential condition or determiner of cognition. 

Divergent Production can be defined as the generation of new information 

fror.l given infonnation where th'~ emphasis is on variety and quantity of output 

fror.l the same source. Divergent Pro~uctlon 1s re~a~;.;,p creative 

imagination. In this process, iteMS of information are retrieved fror.l memory 

storage and used to generate a number of varied responses. 

Convergent Production is defined as the derivation of logical deductions 

or at least compelling inferences leading to a unique answer or conclusion. 

In convergent production the probl~~ can be rigorously structured, and is so 

structured, and an anSlier is forthcoming without much hesitation. 

Evaluation is defined as a process of comparing a product of information 

with knol'lll information according to logical criteria and making it-decision 

concerning criteria satisfaction. 

Planning and scheduling activities, monitoring flow patterns, target 

recognition. understanding speech patterns. etc •• are examples of the 

cognitive operations that will be required in future space systems. In the 

understanding of speech, for example, peak clipping of the Signal causes 

considerably less intelligibility loss than center clipping. Understanding 

2·3 

MCDO"'''''''&' DOVO~ . .. 
1 

.. 

the relative level of cognitive capabilities of humans in recognizing 

information in alternative fo~s pe~its the system designer to select the 

most efficient design approach for meeting mission objectives. r·lemory for 

procedures, target characteristics, etc., will be essential in long duration 

space missions as will the Diverqent Production operations in problem solving. 

development of alternative courses of action, and improvising in emergencies. 

Convergent Production operations are required in trouble-shooting tasks and 

Evaluation operations will be essential for assessing the level of normal or 

abnormal performance of system elements and, through comparative judgments of 

"greater than," "less then," or uequal to," to direct system operations in the 

most expeditious manner. 

Historically there seems to have been a belief that these "mental" 

operations are the same whetrer they are performed with verbal-meaningful 

information or with visua1-figural information. In fact this is not true. 

Extensive factor-analytical results have proved \~rong the belief that the same 

ability is involved regardless of the kind of infonr.3tion with ~hich we deal. 

Using hundreds of tests of mental activity, Guilford has de~onstrated over 

forty intellectual factors. These factors are related to tasks involving the 

processing of different types of infornation ranging from figures or pictures, 

to sy~bo1s such as letters or nu~~ers, to using words in speaking or reading, 

to responding to the nonverbal inter~ctions in the behavior of other people. 

Tasks may also require dOing different things ~,ith the infonnation such as 

predicting or anticipating outcomes; transforming the info~ation from one 

form to another; organizing or structuring the infonnation into u meaningful 

aggregate, recognizing or establishing relationships between blo or more itens 

by virtue of their COfllilon properties, or deal fng with individual units 0'-

items of information having unique characteristics. Accordingly, the 

description of intelligent behavior must allow for the interrelationships of 

infonnation content and the products of the intellectual activity \litn the 

basic operations themselves (i.e., Cognition, Hemory, Divergent Production, 

Convergent Production, and Evaluation!). 

This multidimensional model of human intellectual activity can be 

visualized as shown in Figure 2-1, where each cell in the multidimen~ional 

matrix represents a potentially unique intellectual activity. If intellectual 

2·4 

MCDONNII!LL D<>lJa,~ 

T 

I 
rj 

./ , ,. 

/' 

-. 

OPERATIONS 

PRODUCTS 

CDrJTENTS 

r E,,'~'''o r Convergent Production 

Olv~rgent Production 

Memory 

Cognition 

I~ 

Units ...... 

Classes 

Relations 

Systems 

Transformations 

Implications 

Figural 

Symbolic 

Semantic 

Beo,avloral 

Adapted From GUilford, J P The Nature of HUl1'an Intelligence, 

McGraw-HIli, New York, 1967 

Figure 2·1. The S(ructure of Intellect 

abilities and act~vities can be described in tenns of this IIStructure of 

Intellect" Model, and if tasKs to be performed in advanced space systems can 

be analyzed in tenns of these same categories, a pOI'lerful tool becomes 

U 

C 

avai1abl e for defining the intellectual role of the human in system operations. 

11iss10n activities will benefit to a greater or lesser extent by the 

direct, onboard participation of ~an. Of the list of basic human capabilities 

summarized in Table 2-1, seven clusters of capabilities are considered key for 

establishing the extent of man's direct participation in space activities (see 

Figure 2-2). Thc5e key capability clusters are those that should serve as the 

basis for the selection of the hunan to perform a function rather than 

allocating the function to a machine; they are those on which the product of 

tile activity will be directly dependent. The following is a list of the key 

capability clusters, wit~ a discussion of their characteristics and importance. 

Visual Capabilities. Although specific visual capabilities, such as 

visual acuity and depth perception, can be measured and assessed individually, 

2·5 

/ 

IMCDONNI<LL DOCJO~ 
Basic Human Capabilities 

A Sensory/Perceptual Capab.llt.es 

II V.su&1 Acu.ty 

• Brightness Detection and D.scromlnatlon 

a Color DISCrimination 

• Depth Perception and D.scnmonatlon 

II Peropheral VISual DetectIOn snd D.scrom.natlon 

a VISual Accommodation 

• Detection and D,scromonatlon of Tone 

• D.scromlnatlon of Sound IntenSity 

II Sound Locallzat.on 

iii Detect.on of L'9ht Touch 

II Tect.le Recoqn.t.on of Shape Bnd Texture 

II D,scromonatlon of Force A9<lIf"t LlfT,b 

II D,scromlnat.on of L.mb MOllement and Location 

II Detection and D.scr.mlnat.on of All9ular Acceleration 

n EqUilibrium 

• Detection and D,SCrimination of V,brat,o., 

II Detect.on of Heat and Cold 

II Detection and D,scr.mlnat,on of Odors 

B Intellectural c;'pabi1.t.es 

a Cogn.:lon 

II Memory 

II Divergent and Convergent Product.on 

II Evaluat.on 

C Psychomotor/Motor C"pab htles 

II Product.on and Appllcat.on of Force 

II Control of S~ed of Mot.on 

II Control of Voluntary Re<Donses 

• Contlnuous·Adlustment Control (Trac~lngl 

B Arm/Hand/Fon;!r Man,pula\ron 

ioI 60dy Pos.tlonong 

Figure 2·2. I{ey Capab,lItlCs 

almost all are used i~ concert in tasks requiring observation and inspection. 

Visual capabilities \',ere, therefore, considered as a unit capability in this 

evaluation. 

rian would be selectively chosen for tasks requiring visual evaluations, 

when visual capabilities were combined with intellectual capJbilities, 

particularly when a subsequent action is dependent on the evaluation. 

Examples of such tasks include earth observations and laboratory examinations 

of specirren characteristics either unaiJed or \'lith the use of a microscope. 

/ 

MCDONN"' .... DOUGLq ! " 

2·6 

. {~ .. 

I 
Gross Bogy/Limb Activities. Similar to visual capabilities. numerous 

individual capabilities are used 1n concert. without distinction. in tasks 

requiring the use of arms. legs. and body torso for their conduct. For this 

reason a number of psychomotor/motor capabilities such as arm/hand/finger 

control of force. arm/hand/finger control of speed of motion. and body 

positioning were combined into the key capability of gross body/limb 

activities. 

Man would be selectively chosen on the basis of this key capability for 

such applications as complex structural assembly involving infrequently 

repeated functions. and subsystem maintenance particularly when 

troubleshooting was involved requiring the use of convergent production or 

other intellectual c~pabilities in concert with gross body/limb activities. 

Fine Manipulative Activities. This key activity is supported by nu~erous 

sensory modalities such as detection of light touch and tactile recognition of 

shape and texture; it is the fine manipulative activities. however. that 

directly satisfy tas~ objectives. Fine manipulative activities \'/hen applied 

to such fUnctions as animal surgery and dissection and cOh.plex assewbly and 

repair at a workbench u~ually cannot be duplicated by autcrnated devices. Han. 

therefore, is usually essentlal in most tasks requiring this key capability. 

Han~s greatest assets with respect to his participation in space ativities 

are his intellectual capabilities, most particularly cognition. divergent 

proc!uction. conver9..ent production, and evaluation. f.fan~s mtillory. of all 

intellectual capabili~ies. is the one most easily duplicated and surpassed by 

computer activities. Although man~s memory does have some unique 

characteristics which support and reinforce the other intellectual 

capabilities. in space activity planning. man would seldom be selectively 

chosen on the basis of his lremory alone. The other intellectual capabilities 

are. however, unique and are the primary reasons for the human role in space. 

COQnition. Vital to all activities requiring infonnation processing and . i nterpretati on. 

Divergent Production. Essential to all tasks requiring a creative or 

innovative approach; plays a unique role in the utilization of man in space 

activities. 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUG~g 

2·7 

-

A 
Convergent Production. Of value to tasks, such as maintenance 

troubleshooting, requiring logical deductions. 

Evaluation. Essential to such tasks as laboratory analyses and the 

engineering evaluation of extravehicular technology experiments. 

The remainder of the capabilities listed in Table 2-1 are normally 

utilized in either an ancillary mode supporting the key capabllities, or they 

are made use of by the task designer when designing the man¥machine interface. 

Illustrative examples of the use of ancillary-capabilities include the support 

that fine manipulative activities receive from tactile capabilities or the use 

of auditory capabilities to receive sound signals or alarms in a particular 

task design. 

The limits of human capabilities may be altered by both environmental and 

task-related factors. Among the most co~~only examined factors are 

atmospherl c stresses--hostil e changes in the i ndl vidua l' sambi ent, breathi ng 

atmosphere. Six such stresses are ldentified in Figure 2-3. The severity of 

the effect of each stress is dependent upon both the intensity of the 

variation and the duration of the exposure. Each of the stresses indicated is 

capable of producing unconscicusness or death with the appropriate combination 

of duration and intensity. The indicated values arc those generally 

ConccntratlOn/ln'e~lty of Stress 

Pe,fo,ma.,ce InJurlou$ or 

Type of St'e55 Degradong Life Threatening 

Decreased 02 

(hYPOXIal 

P02 - 109 mm Hg P02 - 73 mm Hg 

Increased O~ 

(02 toxlcltYI 

P02 - 400 mm Hg P02 - 1500 mm Hg 

Increased CO., Pea;! - 20 rrm Hg Pe02 - 45 mm Hg (hypercaprlJr 

IncreasE:-d - 950 F - 120"F 

temperature 

(hypprtherm la' 

Decreased - 500 r - 390 F 

temperature 

(hypother'Tllal 

Atmospheroc - 25 ppm eo - 400 ppm CO 

conta'llination 

(e g. Co) 

Figure 2·3 Llmltlllg Factors - Effects of AtmoJsphcric Stresses on ~lum3n Performance 

2·6 

McDONNe .... DOIJG"~ 

r 

[ 
, 

, I 

.. 

considered to be the least intense that will produce either performance 

degradation or injury with unlimited exposure. 

Atmospheric stresses are usually compensated for by EelS systems, either 

in the spacecraft or associated with the Er~U in EVA. Because of this, 

atmospheric stresses do not commonly restrict activities, but they do add to 

the cost of utilizing man. 

The human is susceptible to environmental stresses other than atmospheric 

and these other stress factors, like atmospherlc stresses, may reach 

intensities that can produce injury or death. Stresses of the type inc:cated 

in Figure 2-4 are not as subject to belng counteracted as are variations in 

atmospheric characteristics and are usually avoided by speclflc approaches to 

spacecraft design characteristics or mission operations. 

The Space Adaptation Syndrome (SAS) or space motlon sickness has occurred 

to some degree on all U. S. space flights since i<lerC"ury and Gemini. In 

addition. 49 percent of the Russian cosmonauts have reported the condition. 

The symptoms are generally the same as those asociated with conventional 

motion sickness. They cccur early in flight, peak at about 24 to 36 hours, 

but may last as long as four days. 

The occurrence of SAS cannot be predicted in any given individual. Once 

adaptation has occurred in flight. however. and it always does, the individual 

is exceptionally resistant, even to challenging exposures. for the rest of the 

flight and for a week or rr.ore postflight. 

Inten51!y of Stress 

Performance InJuriOUs or 

Type of Stress Degrading Life Threatening 

VlbrDtlOn 003 9 $ at 2 g's at 

- 4 to 8 Hz - 3 to 8 Hz 

NOise 80 to 85 dB 100 to 120 dB 

GZ acceleration 2 to 3 g' 5 to 6 g 5 

GX accelerallon 5 to 6 g', 12 to 15 y's 

Light Complex 24 x 105 lumen,/ft2 

IoniZing radla Ion - > 5 rads/clay 

FlqlJro 2 4. Limiting Factors - Effects of Other Enmonmcntal Stresses on Human Performance 

2·9 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUOL~ 
\ 

" 

\ 

i 

! 

• 

t 

~ 

I 

f 

i 

t 

~ 

l 

" ! 

I \ f 

I t 

t 

t • 

I I . I I 

I 

---.---- - ----- -..._--..."' ......... -----.- --- -

The extent to which SAS degrades crew performance has not been measured 

with any accuracy or precision. There is some evidence that dedicated, 

well-trained crelt members \1111 perform successfully despite the effects of 

SASe On the other hand. some activities on previous missions have been 

postponed or cancelled because of SASe Figure 2-5 summarizes preVlOUS SAS 

experience on U. S. spaceflights. Hore definitive information un the effects 

of SAS or prevention procedures are not likely to be released in the im~ediate 

future since all such crel1 data are now considered I~ASA-proprietary. 

Human Duration of Exposure (hoursl 

Capabilities 

Impacted <3 312 1224 2448 48·12 7296 > 96 

V,s,on None Mod Mod Neq Neg None None 

DiScriminatiOn None Mod Mod Neg Neg None "Jone 

Discrimination Neg Mod 51g SI9 SI9 S'9 SI9 

of angular 

acceleration 

Cognition None Mod SI9 Sig Mod Neg None 

Memory None Neg Neg None None None None 

Evaluat.on None Mod S'9 "od Neg None None 

Visual motor Mod S,g Sig Mod Neg Neg None 

trackmg 

Manipulative None Mod Sig SI9 Mod Neg None 

sl Ills 

Body Mod SI9 SI9 Moj Mod Neg None 

posltlon,"g 

Impact Code l--

(Decrease In obsen. ed capabilityl 

None (Nonel 

Negligible (NeDI 

Moderote (ModI 

Significant (S191 

FIgure 2·5 LImIting Factors - Space Ad<lptatlon Syndrome (Expo'ure to We,ghtlenne:s) 

2.2 HISTORICAL PRECEDEIHS AtJD PAST EXPERIEUCE 

It is one thing to arrive at a conclusion regarding the capabilities or 

limitations of the human for participating in a l'liSS10n activity on the basis 

of empirical laboratory data and deductive reasoning; it is quite another to 

be able to clte specific examples, taken from preVlOUS spaceflight experience, 

of the astronaut accompl,shing precisely what it was predicted that he or she 

could do. To identify creH opel"ations and activities from prior space 

mlssions that could be used to illustrate the hu~an capability to perform 

effectively in an actual mission situation, we examined a large number of 

documents from various sources. These included reports published in technical 

journals, such as Aviation, Space, and Environ~ental Medicine, Aviation Ueek 

and Space Technology, and Spacefl i ght; IlASA 11, 5S1 on Reports; STS f1i S5 ion 

2·10 

/ 

"'CDO"'N~LL DO"'OL~ 

1 

I 
Debriefings; Experiment Operations Handbooks; and symposia reports. These 

infonaation sources were supplemented by information obtained from debriefing 

interview tapes of the Spacelab One mission and a with personal interview of 

an astlnnaut (Owen K. Garriott) who participated in both the Skylab and the 

Spacelab missions (see Appendix B). Study team members were also present in 

the :~ission Operations Control Center to observe crew performance during the 

STS Flight 4l-C (Solar Max Repair Hission). 

Examples of human activities in space operations were selected from 

Skylab, STS, Spacelab, Salyut, and Soyuz missions and are su~arized in Table 

2-2. They consist of the specific ,niss10n activity, the general crew 

activities involved, comments on important aspects of the operation, and the 

name of the source document from which the information was derived. This 

listing is not meant to be all-inclusive but rather it is intended to provide 

examples of the range of crew activities that are possible in future space 

missions. 

11any other specific examples could have been cited. On Skylab, for 

example, the crew performed servicing operations that \-{ere ne.er originally 

planned or intended to be done in orbit. Leaks in the airlock module cooling 

loops resulted in a condition where Coolanol fluid had to be added. If 

service ports had been provided in the system, it would have been a simple 

matter to replace the fluid. As it was, the crew had to install a saddle 

clamp and puncture a line in order to add Coolanol to the system. This 

potentially iMportant role of the flight crew on a space vehicle is typified 

by the comments, general impressions, attitude and behavior of the first 

Skylab cre\'1 who are quoted as stating, "He cail fix anything given the proper 

tool s in space that we can fix on the ground." The experience by all three 

cre\'{s demonstrated clearly that man is the key link in enhancing mission 

success by retaining, or restoring to service. critical functions. To do this 

the man must have access in both EVA and IVA operations. 

One of the biggest problems in the Skylab EVA repair operations was the 

lack of EVA restraint deyices. One of the very important lessons learned from 

Skylab about EVA operatlons was that the crel" needed the abil ity to get to any 

place on the outside of the vehicle for repair jobs. An important groundrUle 

2·11 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOUG'-C)f 

~ 
Table 2·2. Historical Precedents/Experlen~s as Observej In Previous Manned MISSIon Activities (Page 1 of 8) 

POCUMtNT ~mIQM ~PlvITI [Nq~2[~ Gt'~R[~ !tll.UIJ..U tQ!!!!tm 

A,rospu. ",dle.l 0 Skyhb', Apollo Ttlucopt 0 'o.ltlon ""~m • Slyll!)" Apollo TtIU(CPf u,IIU,r AnO( lIoy nJ4 lIount (Al"' In,. canlHor 0 k~.,..,.,,, '-~ - rtqubltd [YA to rt'lllO'V,. rtpliCftrtnt 

AnnulI I<tot In, ", ..... g .. '.' rttrh .. 1 1114 • !.f'fitI')yplrf':zla~. SO"''''"2 Ind ret..-t,,'.l 0' 'tlll c._rnl 

.,port resuppl, 0 Tn"H!"rt L('I3d!~ IIlIgllhlS 

0 Rt1tu'.!un"~ PI!,h!ftl,'1 

lli.!!!..tU 0 ".Un. ErA 

Skyhb £lptrhnco • Optnt"f 0' obut"YIUon • •• 'tln/ncure a.nhln'ul • Crw encounUr.d Mghtr thlf\ 

Bul1tUn 11 .. tnd .... I. ",,'tIp', OoeUr, tntrrfict tJlp,ehd torqu. eft ",'"dow ,.tch Jun. ltl4 Adlpt.r ,"CA, • leweoyt/r.p ',cI coY,r111, Mel'l.nts. 

0 110 pro.ldo4 ,oot or bOily .. ,tral.t 

to C .... torlCt 1~lIo4 tOnlu, 

0 Cr ..... ""t.' body Igllnlt ... 11 strvcturt' 

Skylob {aptrhne. • Co .. octlY •• ctlon durIn, first 0 Co""! ~~U~Kt!!/Hh!~~IUl 0 Door htcUng _chlnh. ovor- BulhU. IS (YA to r,p. t,. ClMrl doo~ tt!!.tl~ rlddtn 

Soptttr.lllr "14 thot hid fall .. to ..... In 0 1!5!1~l'It .Q!:£~Hur!llHh~~Y'.1 

oP'" 0 jnl'tfC tlc-bl-rye • 000 plnnod In o~. po.ltlon I Cnowe/replace conr'", 

Skyhb bptrltfIC. 0 Ol'plo)'INPlt 0' sun,hed. O"l 0 Ad!!l'tllltg"t !'~ 0 ',c;v'"4 to ,r.ct • th,,.., ,h.de 

Bulltt'. IS Skyhb 3 _. £VA • [0'"' 1,.,.£v(llr1'x ~",(Pd!l":lf. dovn the ~tct, 0' orbital iIIOrtshop 

S.pt_t. 1914 lcrMy1tl.Lort!r,t lo~ 

0 ~tf'\~rlr-r;!ta~! t!2I}IJl.gu1~"1 0 ROQ"'rod to ... ...",. t .... 55 It 

• Jw.olftM'nt proceltUrti/schfduln poll'l (11 "hen "Ir poll), l'ftdhss 

0 .,I •• se/lKuA HthlntCil cloth"l tn. ilhth'4 to uch 

Intortl .. • ..... 104 polt 

0 .tGOY'/r~'ac. coY,r1"1 

• Trlftsport IOld" • Twa crn....,,. plrfonwdl npltr 

Icthltr 

- • On. c",","n 1 .. "" .. 4 It AT" structural strut 

• 1:'1. c...-n posltlonod It (VA hitch 

0 (YA tletch cr"""",,, '''t!'\blrd 

Stqtr:tntf'd polu and ~u"d poln' 

and l1n. to s,con4 [fA crholr .. n 

• Polts po,Hlone" and tthChtd to 

C'JS stMKh,... 

• l"erN' 'hade aUltl'll'iS to "cured pohs 

• tVA rf'pttr fCthlty wu sucCluhl 

and IccCIIPl1thflS wHh "'"'1:11 tra ,.,.; 

Skyhb tar"'o .. o • [VA doplcY""nt 0' J .... 9.d t p~~"nt!!ll • Skrhb I '011' I,.., did not dep'oy !ullotl. n Skyhb \Ollr Irray wln9 t (ltt f's.L!l:!...a~.J!!....1.! .. t • .,,. St,ttf'lber 1914 (o!!.~1!!Q.I) • Styhb 2 wtnt (VA to cut dtbrls 

• Adjust/lllt;"t tl.ments ,trap Inti f'rttt sof.r i""'y wlnq 

• Gathtr'r.placo t •• ls/'Q.'~ ... nt 

• l"Vlf'l'll!nt proct'du",,/schfdul., • htt "·cC'!91 hht'd d.sptt. hek of 

• f'roblPfl soh'ng/dfcl,IOII <tngl 

data analysts ,pec~ tc cD"tI1'19'"CY uthtty 

• hluu/sftur. "'fct\ll'lful 

'nterhcl' 

• '~~t/r"placr (ovtrlng 

• lrans,,"ort lGJrjfd 

Skylab hptr1lnu • hqu1rt1l'eflt to chen • ~r'" arhu t".tfngJ • CI'W'" l.n, found to hlV' debrh 'rOft Bullottn 15 contlllln6Ud UNr. l,ns t r...thtr/rfplue tooh/tQu1".,.nt Skyhb hunch thrUlt,rs 

SeptelObtr It14 (tVA) • Irtsptct/obunt 

• Chln,d durtr., £VA 

Slyt.b £r~,rtC'nCl • R,qu'ufMnt to rltr;l.'r tOt • !tl.hztflfn'Shlp, uU"" • C4ar ja. of tlptr' .. nt S019 

Bullotln IS and rotlt ton ~tar j4. en ~ t!:.!1.!.O S,Pt~'t U14 corolhry uptrlJll:tnt son to 'rt. • 1l!-~~/t.""'1"U' lXUt'!! • hqu'"d to o,tn gur bOI 

,nl!!::L£rl!rU tl')..!! gur 

• Conftna/ytr\fy proctdur,,1 

"he~u 1.s/op."'lt I ellS 

• Gltf\,r/rfPlace to;)h/.q\lt~nt 

• I~llfAnt prOCfdufti/schdules 

• Pro~l'" ,ohln1/docl.'on Nkln91 

C:atl Inll)'s" 

• Imo.,l/nphc. cOYlr1"; 

212 

-, 

I 

• f 
/' 

/ 

Tabla 2 2. Historlc81 Precedents/Exporlences 8S Observed In PrevIous r.bnned MIssion Activities (Page 2 of 8) 

t2l'!'!!f.!I I!.llli.Q!..!tllIllI I!!mm mI'lUUUUill t.~t!!!l 

Sl, .. t [0 .... , ..... • ,""Ir..,ft' ,. ,."he. hU.4 • ~ruW'.L~~~t~r • 11m , .. u" .... If •• IIOU 

.. 11.11. " "'IOH P"""" ,.ft .. *dIu' • tL.n!'..t<'H~~lStt"U.l ! lIil"~S&_ .. , .. rl~l I,ll" 

5.,11 ••• 1114 """_, I!Otl llllall.t I ""htU/I.uta'.I'tU "" I c." ,.,tf .... 1 .. ",lwO! .. u .,.,at'''' '-'N t •• ,,,I&CtC .. It~ IN'" 

• ~lethll''''",'.I'' ,\,\1 .. coli <I"'N ... botn! .p.,.UIM 

• ..... st/,tcli'" wcJs,e.tCll 

'ottrl ... 

'rftIN"VI .1 l~. I C6Ad .. t .1 ..... '1 .... 1 MUI. I ~"'ifttut. 'f'I"~ • to ... ,I •• u ' ....... Itd I. ,"Ull", 

Slylob ltl, H.,... MU1b.1., 'ifft(""" • 'U!!.!!.\U til 1111 •• ,,,"I. Sc. t.-.ctl S)"fIlOottwll (51,11' II. III. """ ." • lli!.J/""f~~ !J.~*U UU-UC Itport • .l(th.U" .. Uht. tt,tM I hn.I_1 loch.dtC , .. 'It ..... l un. J~~ln OOtrlttOf' O(u1....,.'., Hlt/,Ioft 'I'It. a)ttM 

-9"'-.; lU4 I J'ju.II,ll; •• 1_oU SloUlhlly hn. 5, .. 11. Lou" .. II ... I AI~lr/n_". 1t'c-tf'(I' "'"ton Ton I Otl( t hUt/tu".'-..u \yUd OCtt,., '0f'I • All Uyl., e""""tI .... 0<1 1\ btl. 

• khct ch,ta-;. 1. It.te or '''Soct ,Of d .. n .. lor .. ,,,I_It 

<_Ill ... I """.f'/,."hu '"hI ""PlMnt 

• 1.,1 .... 1It ,reC~8"' ,~.ln 

• ro,1I10. _.1. 

I • ...". ~4111. 

'rft,.floql or I~. • ,_ .. , 01 .... '1_1 ~IJl. I 'IIRIU ~III I h,.,t ... t WI p.,ro"..d Ott .U St,"b LIIo .. Ubolle .(t!tHy (Sl,I,. II. I Mthal./lnUI.t. t),1t. NfMIIH Sl) 1.:., .'n 10", Sc1.n<n S~'h,. III. IOf 1" oo.raliM USA·HC ltP4rt I Uja.tI.1I9. ,1. .. 0" • htt"'_"'t d.,tt"t4 t. dtU",'M JSC~lU. • '~pl .. /rt-o". ,",,0I..,4'U' "fltt,. dIU,,, , .... tnoUe Icthlt,. ", ... rt &owt'tlt>., .t'. I COJ"Iflt<tlihcc.Mut ,1.(tr1ul riU •• ~ t.10<I~ ,,"Uwr, fWf't"1 

lat,rlac. .urch. 'ft wtt3tl,nn.n I C~IC t 'Wjte/tr".t~.t, ,,,,h. 

1I,.rlt loft • AU Crt"WM'tl en 111 .,,,Ieft' 'WftCt1Cf\f'8 I c..th'rlt .. phc~ tHh/,..q..~.t I' "-t .. Cl!urn,' .N! ,,,bJHU I 1.,1f"'Wl'lt crct,dll",lscP\N"I,$ 

I 1n,p~tloburYf 

I 'ttord/\ torr 'I"-'"'t 0 Ith.u/.e:::ur. """.1'11 hUrf". 

~rG(uett"U of tfl, • C"ftC!\lct " "pf'r'e.nt "172. 0 ~~!!..!'tU I HI" "#I"'''f~ tA cul1ht'''9 tPl.fr SL,lo' LII. 1:0<11 Q,lU _l1~,.....,."t 0 A.c\htl,Il"ltht. 'Y1tM (11tH tOot., 1" ..1\, M,;).,..,,,,t D""ci U,~) 

~C'tft(" s,.~'h ... (~tyhD II. 111.1114 IVI o,.rlt'tlt 

.A!.-AI J50C ht-ort I AdJult/.lI"" .I .... u I U ... t:*O t~trat"n. 1"'4 

JSC-ann. • C~r."UI '"foMlt!tto. o"lIlell ... r-rlo,j "C.r<H to 1<-1 , .... ".1'16" ItH • Cue t hUt/Unlt"IU 'rUtti '1(" tJD,rt .. ", I~ (OIQ.Ift'tlt'~ to 

o:>nlth" tr~d 

I Dhpl., \!llI 

• r,.llP_nt ~ro<"'~"""h1lul" • All St,II' , ........ p .. f.,....~ 

• I",pf'ttlcb"~' tlp«r18&"fjt 

• 'ntt1tJII no-,.t. 0 hcor'd ,I._flU 

• bw:nt l.'IOo!ull' 

'roCt~tt'l1' of u" 0 In'll?~1 DI.~ .. 110,110. • 'lLttU1tLll.1.!.'l~/jC' \ t "'l{~tl I aleC'! "..,110, w"' t,.n,frrr .. ~ tl) 

Styl.~ Llle (SkyhD II. III. 1M IV) 0 hC1.!.Ul..!"~'~1!11..,tl' AvtO!'lttSt'. ~~I .. 'rO(IU:lr, lASP") s,tt~n SywGo,h.llt I A.cthlt~It:t'UUt sr"" ctfttr1h"d. 1n4 Uor~4 1ft "uut' U$A-JSC Itpoort o:.rlt 104 JSt~2n I tltlc:thltt/Unt1eit. SY1teo • llood 'Mltln vtn t((""rtd 0'" &11 M.w~r UU Cr.rlt tOft .. .,,.., S.yle) _U,10", .~ ,,,:>~rttd 

• c.at"'tr/rtpbc, tCQh/«.t~t t,nul Iliitrt .. "u 

• l!lfl,"",~l proctdurU/U"t~"IU 

• 'o,Ulo." t!IO<!"ttl I IHrlO'ft ~~u I. 

0 Stou/tt'(on .1 .... flU 

A .. tat \0" Wfft ,n4 I lfilut~nt t. ,,,rey I ft,.., 0 .cth.U/tattllt. ,ystn • TM, c~.rl\toft "u IPt'4rtntl, C!~. ty 

S~I(' hct.noto~y rtf 'act h. hrer Oft \1". Htrit1c" rt"!:IQl. cot'trot 

2t r.Dn ... ·y Itn rte .... trt an4 fMVSh, I Coa"""u,tfr ,roce4111'''' .'rror1 of ttoo.. S..aIJll.t·, ICh.Clu1n/oc.,..t loa, I COMPflU4 ... ~"r .net ",.y ~,.t 'c"hU sallr 111"(0" I tlfltt\uh/U,..Ift.JU ,yUM .. tt.r U~ to (olhet 0" ttl. ~ottct 

(So,wr 17/5 .. 1r\lt ., o~ .. rlt tOft tf't", .frKt1ft1 tnH~f'lt p..rf"~l'Ice 

• l"'tltct/otu,trl'l 

• .. ,bu/clt •• 1urra" (Ntln, 

"whtt~ Wttk In~ • .'~u'rr6t"t 10 .. '~v!!eft."ll to • t1!:1'1.1U!Js.!.!~ I ,~. cr ... hd \I po.ttlOft th. llitl •• Ie 

!~.c. Ttc~"Iol~, •• Ift..lll1v ,o,Ut~ t .... ular I AdJwU/1lii" .ltetaU I, to ""ct v'. hlttccpf'" ult It 

l~ Jun. 1'1) ttlucoO' ~o. to • a&1functlc" 0 (~\lU dU. the "'floUr 0' V, sohr 4hk III tl\. t"UtU-C-1U paint',., 0 Con"I"111.1 .... r.'t prot.""rnl 

'tUCtl, UtY1 Sthl~'~ tl'l.l, 1(.tl.hh,/O'Jtrlt IO'ft' ,Pt. trtv ,,\t~ thl 'tttho"O~f fr~ U·. • ,olir TUur(" t"~lPr1"'Atl 0 hnp't tloburv, ,"41u' '11.,.,llu to !!lOr. I«(urattl)' 

(SoyUI lJ/$tlytllt 4) • "rotd .. ,o1wI~1 4,,"10." ..... tnvl ~lto' tt. rCloUl'"i .'rrors -.0 ..... "" 

dill ''''.1),1 U I,. lh .. ''''~p'ort Itructurl' 

2·13 
~ 

r I 

Table ~·2. HIstorical Precedents/Explmences as Observed In PrevIous Manned MIssIon Aeth'.tleS (Page 3 of 8) 

~ ~Im::! 'm'l!! l!:lli:!l m"lc 'mxlm~ ~ 

! ..... lIlt-' 0 ' .... I ...... t u mol' IY 0 &<1 hat,lIolIllI •• ,u .. 0 Styvl It .. ,.,1 ..... T.Y. e_ra 

••• II. Itp I , ... , ... SOy., 11 ~'UI ... .. If.octl .. 

" ... ry Itll ISo,.1 '''.,.11. &SIP • .... _.t "O(t~"U/"M4.'tI 

J •• , ItlS IA,,,., t,"",.. 0 hp.,,· .. tru. ... 'hk •• e1'4 c ... ra Jt_t boa" 

• proed .. ,ol.t~/4Khtoa ht. ,,"'It'''' ... tltf".t ...... ,.'" 

• Itl'."/IH"'. "''''.'(11 hUrit(t 

, 0 heo".'NOlu. to'Hrtltf 

I~",,!~,,·t • Av-PZiu\. of .11' ..... '" : ~~HiH~~!. • Soyn l' ,,-..w '.Clytst,. h~pl ....... t 

Vol It." 4 utllltt, "u.t,. .. r taf."..tt •• ~ .. t~.,. e&ur-w,\lOI'II re(,I ... rrull 

A9,II Itll bY' ~" .. , ~U..,.utM ,,...,... 0 1,uPlCtlC¢1f'nt __ "" ...... t ... , nt.1l110 

5&'\'111 S Ca,.r llfS&'1'It S • ,,.. .... to 10 I o"dfC II 1011 .. Ua,1 

).1, 1911, .... ''''nlt 0 =' .. rv.U ... , .. de auurtt.ly p"'- '1ct1'4 tter&lv..U., c:Oftf1ttOfl' .. t 

•• t .... ". bJ ... _t Ie 09"I_ot 

SoI"fll, .. • S&yw, lJ (Oct 711 .. t_1e • AdJ .. ",II,. .1_." 0 S ....... 14 ~.<l" ..... 11, .. lib ,., It ... J 1::., ..... fa t tt' wtu. • (",t".; .. r"" ""0<,,,,'"1 5& lrvt ! IItr Ifll S4Y" 14 (f •• III ...... , Uh'4~ln 

h<l'fIt Hltlrt" 0 Co,r.t,u ~.ta 0 Styv. n "'. ',,,,,t .. t"' Irl"'., 

• '''flcthet./tt,.,,,,,ta 'It,t ... wn~ In •• I .... tle doc'h, .,.IM ~.r"h. I. ta,II •• Ittnopt 

• D4tHt cft.l...- ,. "<It .... 

.""dltl_ 

• Iol."..tl.., ._.,,1 .. 0 "'M.U tradt"', 

'poetlll,ht 0 '''''''Dl, .1 5&1 rrt , 0 

~~::: !:, t:i!~r~: 1 !rstl'tl 0 laot' (Oftt"1 trIftH .• rt .. Mel. 

"D,I1 nIl • Pr-o,reu I 110(" vtth 0 'rot"" I Cd ... ,.~.4 , ... S.",r 

,.1 lO 5&lr" • (l .. It) ~ ...... o~.rat t"" ".cocultl uecolIl.lI, C .. ,. "I" 

110 • ,.PJ lw er'" toe'" • C ..."""n,II, ''''(f~."'' 5&lrvt I 

•• tout tul', ,,''<<,,,In/OJ.rattfWl' 0 C.uthattlt.",taU. ,yltta 0 n. tvtcPWttr I,IC«,aft, UII'\'! Oft 

_ .. tlOft tit. UtiflV',s stICH'''' $or~:. 

0 •• ' .. u/s.K.r. a~fI.& .. 'c.1 ICC0r1U""9 to ~ .. o-ttt h tlltr"dt4 

htarhc. 'or trl ... '~rt CMrI:tl611' l~ ."'~"" 

0 1 tao .. ,,..,, 11<. cnt1"tet lon-a-'tln(11(ilh; of orbHal 1'1" 

• T, •• ,J)Or't 1&H,4 Utlto .. , -11071 0' tl\. hunchtl\l 

" to carry o.t usts ,"<I (~r.-

f'fft'fh. r:~tt!ltuttO"l c.f u. ("iT' 

or t~, oa-b-oIrd t.J,ttn .f\~ f~\,Itt· 

.. ftt. to 1I.11:hc dt'(k1llt9 w\tt. u .. 

o,.bU.l "'M2'd co.1Iiltt S.41"wt ., 

Soyllll n. to Glih.r fer tPt, (C\»-

ot ... ",,1 for Us J!CW9r " ... ttt .MI 

dt".,.."t t.~o .. ,. t~"'IJift*ftt • • "NrUn 1M tit.,h h for 1 tlt-

".t'P'Qr1. 0' (rev ... 4 f~" sctl'fttUtc 

.lp'Drltl",,. 1M "~''''~fIIU ' (OMrlt '" is rf1llt"hut't of ttl. 

~-<I'11 C!6«:ttft-; IItrt h. UN'" 

CH,tt bf'tWf'tn U. umcan,.e-j SQyVI 10 .It' S.'ywt 4 bttwt." 11 Now un .ft4 

It f.b nil I 

• erN MfttllHt tr,",hrn4 '''Hl1ts 

, ..... '''''1''" I to Stl,.t I. 

0 'roqr.1I I c!tlt .... nd 'fuel. f'(jvtp-

"fit 1M ht;~1fu'. vt"td. l"fft 

'U1H with vult. \l:ft<1CClt'\S. I! .... 

Dl"'blhd .1\4 ,II("wof'd to k,tt \lit 1_ 

ttl, .t:~)'Ief'tt~ 

~~u'l1~,.t • lYA tA.,,~.'tl~ tN UP-I'" • A.:tJ-.U/II1,,. .I .. nt, • (VA obJtcttv. to ""ptct ·o.t:w .. nt 

J .... lua (5&I,.t , [H. 0.. 11. • Acth,U/lnttht. "st ... ,IPIII"'U' cf 511)'11t" to (htt 

,.1 lG I1rn Soyt.t ['11. st", •• "n) o~r.tIOA faulty d~c" t,., ,,'It, ".rto,.. ft1).llr 

I/o • • tOQ;,'y",,,,1cU. h,,,,,..t10. fllfQrt .S Il:ItUury 

• c..t~frlft"Phu tMh/r~;tJ;Qinlt 

• ""POttl~1t"" 0 ~o'c. 1trl: IN hl~ h-Id coler If 

0 t~ ... /t-e:hc. cntr1n9 U.'. IIttl"" eft [YA 0 Tra"stort IN"~ 

• " .. "<I too .. ",...4 to ,hut .n:t a4Ju,t 

.q1tpltftt " ntClUI")' 

• ·Sfil1-rfifd' spac. suitt. attllu-i 

Sp.auf 1I91'tt • c.".ra t wort ~rh"'ft~. ,,, • Info .... t1Oft pro<tlstn9 • Ie #4. pht Ie' to ltro-9 

AI,I~u't lUI ..".1;"lt.ltn".,n U"wII.D lJ) • 'rebh-~ 1Ohtl\~/dtc1,to" Jrttrrhv ..,U" Cr JDU!>~ ,. I.,,,,,'" 

y.1 10 ..... ,.../\1&t1 .'Ilyl h Sk,h) II lClto .. pilot 

100 • • AdlPtt4 to Ilro-9 I. I to 10 d.y_ 

• All Skylab cr ... _.n .Id~h .;.d 

2·14 

" , 

I 

.l 
Table 2·2. Histollcal Precedents/Experiences as Observed an PrevIous Manned MISSion ActiVities (Page 4 of 3) 

~ !mlll! AmWI ~ill!l.!1U m!!l!J.U 

• "'J"OI04iY \In .try ,hU.-.dlp'''' 

... 11 10 ... ,,~I1 .. 'n." 

• • .... n.l1oul fttUft9. ,_ uMo.fert-

,'1, U"Ctl, shlry ~"" "et." .t tt., • 

• .. 'lIPut Oft, or tJtC).&'rMfIt 0'. .... tol f ... lt .. , 

S!>Iuf II'hI • '-Mr.1 p.rlonuau t. • l.f .... II •• ~n":tn'..., • It 14opllll •• II hro·, 

"'rt~ lilt wt,,,, I.u"'." (SoY •• lOI • "HI ... ,ohtnt/UthtM Jol.l ~SI • 'ollU ,ffort «tn.' '01 21 kl~.1 ., .. "otJliU In,ly,h 

110 ) • ... ,,.tatiOft tt. (oflflnwd. 

·ft"l .'J. (,ft ..... 00'/111 .. 

.... 11 b"" • 

• 1_<10<1 .. -0., d~V' 1\.&, bun 

"r .. ft~'. tI.u",u Oft t •• Itn' NY ., l'UUt'ott t ...... "Mlulftn' ,.r IIR" .f .,.11-bt"'1 hn to '''Oro ••• • v.t wort .st ftd luff,,. 10001Y ... 

w,.. '"\11':" Oft N4'CI' 1ft4 btol&f ... teal rtu.re" .rt4 ch.Ultd Oft th. filiI .. "Il~ Uood .f V ...... 11 ., u. "nh •• rt'j •• rto,,", ,.,.rt, of t ....... , lh.a ... cOf't(IIoIct.d t.c ........ 

1~IClI .. ,..' .. ou Aplrt f .... 

t~t U. "'1 l'tt(:lU.ry to trl"S'.!' 

all tho equl_ftt .... ,c~ SOYOI 10 

flo' '"""~t 10 tb. ~ lyot •• rIIltI .. 

\ SUtlM.-

Sl>fuflh~1 • ..... I..-.t to ~"'I' do/fill •• • '1.!,!Ht~H1'1~~M'~;1 flil. • Seyvr lliSllyvl , ~.Irn ~'"'I' ef J.lr Itli f •• 1 toot (SoyIIr lUklyul " J!.l!!!.ts. ! C.h, .. lYw futl 'tift' ,.1 21 '"",,,n .,rll lin, • C~alc.&tl iltfor:eUOII 

.. , • Ct"ftrv./ .... r1tr p"o(K¥rel' • Cofl.t4 II ptrt.rll. tlilte. "htrJ .. l'J/~Ir:t I 0-'1 .. ,...,.tl,., nttrogtft ;n 'rOta ful 

• e..c\hlt./hn\'ft,t. trite. D-p'.,.ttCcA e InGh. ""U,. 1~C' stlttf!ft (OIP.!!ltl 

• Otu:t c~ .. r., I. 'hI' or .bo-.t "._Cft CI'Itir cf trultr to ((,~U'(tf\ at4 h HQ1r'" 'ultl tan 

• 1~1_.t Pn><O<I.rt,'sc""d.,,, 

• a,lnn/ucn, &;:I(~_tCl' • 1,1"'" ... 1 to othor two t.r.k$ Iftttl'"fu. 

• , ... "t/rr"HI ' .... "1119 • Yf1't notj' t.J.nt to sp.et tn. C"\I'1:t' tII't" .Uro1t" 

SJ>a<tlllt~1 • Ct'plor--t 0' '"(h~l. • ActhU.t',.tUU. Syttf. 0 !Alf\1;t • 'fth'Ull hI te:l to d."ttt Dc. to-)" IU, • .... "11.· .nt."", c,cr.thw. ,.t",.t'<&I1, Yol 21 (~IJ.t "'r01rtu " • It4JuU'tHe"" 11ttNftl1 ~ .. II a C~"I"tt '"'0"..,.\1:)111 • Grovnd COfttrol utt Itn4 P't1,.u • 

• COftf t~Yf:rl I, proc.lS.,r,,' (&tft:Hn,..,td caM]O cnft) TY ca_r" 

lCht4"ln/cnratlDu to (ht,,..'''' prc!tIN 

• (leploy/r,t,.",t IPPCr"tj. 

• Clluet Chllll,_ tn 'hU or • .~tt centrol of th. t'ld'o 1111- <ondltl ... ICOp. IIIO'fHatftt .tld Uil 'rKt\Oft ef 

a IItlQ 1..-~""t prot .-durn Is flead .. 1ts ttl utl'fi.ftl k'U u"tt~td '1"0-. 

• 'relll .. sohh''ijU.,H'M IrovDd (01\t"l 

_d I .. /d.t ..... Iy'" 

Spoctf I '9't 0 ",,,,".-4 rtl4l1r. ""ftt"."c. • p~.u!!(~...uill • SoYUI 1-4 erN Il' ~ro1' __ ~ for Atrll nu Arod schnlHtc 'lurtu"l, • '-Ctl ... u-/'"UIU. ,,.,tew rt;t.'r '''''''t''''"'t Cfl S"yut " Wol 2J (Soy"Z l"/~ly.t " oP.ra.UO'ft 11 S-tlyd , h 'Mt Clutl. th •• ut 

•• S "O";rtU 12) • AI lou,tt/.nt 9"/4t ItrU~.t. of the uri.,· 

• (0."I"""wlI""1 pre<.eu.ns/ 

IthHil.ll.I/:,ror,t • 6ft, • S~U factory .Ip.rtlllntl .lso 

a O".cth.t,/t.n:II",.t. Iyst .. p1l1'l",4 

op.nt'cn 

• Dhpb.- ~.ta 

• lapl,.,,,t procHv""/lct'Jldul., .-

sn·l Orbtter • ,""nutl control of IIQW .Ah-IS • .CJ"st'.II~ •• 1r .... U • Curl., ""t .1010 ptrl04 <Abln Mlnhn hpo,.t to obt,'n utltt'! ",.a,... .tr • tnlCir'Golt to" prO(."hv .... ,. .'r '),IlM f.alhli to rnpl)l\4 JSC IlJl. (Srs·l) • In".,tlcbune .... ~",t ltsl • 'r"tll" lo1.1"9/4"htoft • l~.rltl.l. cal.,tor ,.,t It 

.... ht/dU.I.,llrl " - 4)1 II' -sn - OIlS 

• SyUM did not rupoll': Ul\ttl erN 

·phu".,· Utt "'''''''9 Jr bYNU 

.... h. tJII th .. 1,,11 """,, .. "oSU10" . 

2 15 
. / 

" 

, 

Table 2·2. Historical Precedenu/Experiences as Observed 10 PrevIous Mannod MIssion Activities (Page 5 of 8) 

~ ~Im~ ~~TI'ITI l!!D.~IRlt 4mXllIU ~ 

SIS·I Orbll" • ActwUtDft of o .. «rrtd. coat"' • COft' ,ra/y.,II)' "tee,CII'''' • Stir trachr ''''wU.rt not cyc.1h9 

tUntoli hport to Opt" sauU", _ lOt ,,"KUlu/oPfr.t tCft, 091. 1M ,'ou4 U "Pined 

JSC 11111 t .. ,ltr (SIS-II • O."ft, pro<~ur.'I"tltdullSl 

"'v.,t 1111 op,rlt ton, • erw ..... lyu4 ,robl,.. ,hutt'r 

• l~l ... nt prO(._.,r"/'d~td"ln H\ rtlPoM'ftf to IMto cofttrol 

• 'robl,. sohln9/drc "'Oft ..... n./d.U IM'"h • ~ftVl' .."rrh1'. 0' shutt., br erN ,.ltd :'('0,1.-

- Sp.(tlll'~t • C .......... Ul ... 01 ,,, .. lie • C_ItlI, I., ...... tI •• • Th, ''',~t be, •• II tho II .... , 

D<1.~or lUI "'" 10. Ih' _fit 0' • lnfo,..,1t ttHt pr('<,n "t .... 10, 1M .1I4.d j.,1 ,It or Ihfl 

•• 1 '9rICiIIv" (So ,,..1 'I • In,,,,,, ,lot""." kinin 

.. • ,.oIi' ....... I.'/4.ehl .. Dlktfti/dAt& .".1)'111 • lh. c...-v DOftitom t~. pre,,,,,, 0' 

• "'""It I .. ,,,., tM lror..fr, 'tllon Ind ,pctl to '.plrts 

, .. fo""r.,. ''ac101091, .trt".lt.llre .!WI othor Ohelpll ... 

• The erN WIry .ccur.l.ly ","H1,ttif 

Wf"'¥flt _,.141 hi war'oul 9row'"t .re, 

S~CI"19ht • (mt" .. e, nool" .. tM • tutlili~.'2~'II!£! £! £!l!uU • """tt Uti tlft.lctor IIAHuI'IoCtfOfl.4, UII 

Ochh.I1U ' .... -f ,_....,. 'Ittttor • lftlPect/otntf"Y1 U"'" WI .bli to dh.ut1llbl. th. untt. 

Vo' (SO'l"'t " • Probl .. lohtn,/dl''''_ fll"'OIII •• ta t.o ruhct ttt .... ,-

.. ""II9".U ••• Ir'" , ... tloned p.rt .!WI Nu>.I, It 

• ..1tau/ucurt uch,,'e.1 I.urt.ct 

$TS 2 O~It., • CIT .. 'I ........ ' • £cthu.lI.ttlIU >"tes • alspl" ... It ,1 CIT failed do,lII1 .""'Oft Rtl>Ort (SIS-21 ~r.t'Cft fttoOl1>lt _r.lI ... , 

J5C n.u • .... J.U/.II'. ,I_II 

,.Drury 'Ul • (o •• Itt/dls(OM,,1 ,IKt.l .. l • C ............. '.Il~ •• It 

'at.rhe. 

• hac t "'ah/t.,., ... t. Iyd_ • Crw ",I.e" 1111 .... It "lth eptnttftll Chpl., .ott 1m> .rt ,tdl'" 

• r.othtr/ .. ~1 ... 10011/""'_1 

• l.,lN!t"t ~rot.t::ltrtt/""M~"l" 

• 'o,ltlon _.10 

• l.l ... "I,uyr. l1li'(1\1,,1(11 

'"ttrlul 

• .~ .... .,..,.1. 

• !.ror./ucor' 11 ..... "t 

SIS" 011>11., • hut If Ct"I" na l' ,tre"tt • A<I, .. t.II.ltlatt >,., •• • O.r'II1 4",2 US OPl"t',,-s. Ihe 

M",1Oft h;H)rt bNlhr o,.r&t '0' £JI1 "",ht/elb<N " CUll" ctrc.tt 

JSC II'~' (STS-l) • Ccl'tfttct/dhco"'lftut .lectr.cal brtd .• r ~.nH 

h~l'1lIry nil 'Merh,. 

• J",f)fet/ebu"'l • CrN nut '"alar 

• Prvl>ltll ,0h'n~/~.c"l ... 

IICklnV/41t1 ••• "sls • , .. Itt I •• ~rt.k .. "4 •• t .. h. pn>bl .. - • Tro.blt .~ootln9 11.,.104 ~r.ble. 

-- -- to .Hu,h. ,,,,.r'fllt ""'\of b ... r1b"'" 

sa·, CrlllI .. • iif-tlr~Ga~ ,..,ttc, "pI Ita .. • Ac.thu.ltnU tate ,ytt ... .-CRT 414 .ot rl,p"'4 t ••• try ..... ~~-I III1"ton If,crt _'It ($TS·3) op.,.t tOll .t hybo.rd 

lSI: lelll • Coftl t nLI'fIr1f'l ,roc.".I,,",/ 

Ju •• n62 Ic".4"1,, • erev ,trfo"..d ... Uvnct1oa p .. oud\tru , Ccr"",ct/dhcon,. .. ,t IIHtrf,.1 

1f'1urfaee • 'ro~l" halated to Huck .... yboard 

• Cucth.U/t.,..h\lt. ,,.,ttG ,,,ltc' op, ... tloft 

• 0",,,. prou·dll .. n/uhHvl., • !.wttc.~ nphuil froe aft 'l,.tO.rd .. 'OIUlon ~"h 

• 'rob1 ... 'Ohtn9/dwchto'l • S.bltlhtr4 ."Itrh el .. r.4 probl ... Nt h-;/dlt. 111"',., h 

• Ce hUt/'Hur. _ch.ft'n' 

,,,UrIne 

• IttIO'" IIOdv 11 

STS') Orbllir • -'ctult~C>ft 01 r'l'l0a4 ~1 , Acthttl/,,,Uhtt 'rUn • 'hi of ,,. "1.,10101 ha., ,. III IIOw1l 

Mintan _.po .. t (1' .. ) u .. ru (r ... operlt 'ooft , .. r,I,.I'elt 

JSC 18)'8 null '"attr a-~ e~n4' • Cor,I 1 rw1,,·r , '''1 ~r:lcfdurnl 

J\I'" 1981 ua.,.. start .~ sto, , Shth ca .. " tloPp~d • ctrtwh 

(SIS·l) • Ott" t e'\I"91 tft Hat. or brllhr cond 1t 1011 

• In'PtU/(llIurvl • Bruhr ",u nut 

• C .... n fat ltd t=r ,too Oft (CMfNf'ld 

trOll erN 

• tOI 0' 111. ro. 011 bt'orr ....... 

'tcpptd 

2·16 

'. 

• j 

J 
Table 2·2 Historical Precedents/Experiences as Observed In PrevIous Manned MISSion ActiVities (Page 6 of 8) 

~~ I!mIQ~ mlYIII l!lli:m mI'I; mmTI!~ rn!1!U 

SU·] OrllIU. • CloII"" ., ,IYI •• d port 400' 0 ~'lhal.II.\tIaU .,,1 .. 0 ~.hot .. IaIIN IIU •• pproal ... UI, 

"'utOl'l It~rt ~lu.I" tt,II •• dvrt ... Ial'~ oP,rlt to" Zl ~" ., orlllU, I. hll-... 

JSC 11341 c I .. vro (STS-]I 0 C •• fI~ ... ", ,roc"'.ro./ Ililtad. 

Ju •• lUI SChvdvl" 0 D.U.I .~.t' I •• hl. or 0 Crov "or'lftl. I. 10,-". Ililiud. c ... I tI ... 

• 1 .. 1_.1 pro<tdv"I/"~.d.l. a Crov ttcycl .. coor 

a In" .. I/.~ .. r ... a Doo. , ... OIs'.ll, cloltd ,.d lal.hed 

STS-] Orll't" • Tr.",at,,'on of y.t,. on • ~cl ... t.ltol\ I,t. ,,,t .. • STS·] COl's .. It ',Ihd I. 1 ..... 11 

IIIhitOft I.port "tr,I'n e-rew (~ -vtlt\. . ~.rat'oa 

JSC 13).1 (STS·ll 0 [ __ IClt. '.""..IICtI 0 IIftIt _Id rlClIv. S'tn,I 

J ••• Ual • C ...... tldlsc ... ut .!tct.'ul 

"'terrace 0 •• port .. NlfuftcttO'l to ,round 

a Dllcth.tf/ttnLi"-ite ,y1\,. (04Itr01 

cOftdIt I •• 

a DeUc t chJftge lit u. it or 0 I&tL,,'" ro,I.}td 

• concl tt ton 

• 6Ith.r/r.p het too h/.q" I pl'll-nt • IIftIt f.I" 10 t ... ,.11 

laplHfflt proCtdu,n/sc:t'lldyl. 

0 •• t .. u/lieur, .. ,hantu' 0 $p.jr. U::CU was dlfploytd ,ruf 

tntfr'u, (oteUrtutiOfts .... 1". rnH·,d 

SL-I Clotr.II .... 1 • "I\.r.' vorl ~rfonuft(t 1n • Jntontlt 'Oft ,rou" 1ft9 • STS-9ISl-1 Sy.ltas w14Jht Jenn .. " 0 'robl .. ,0hlngldtcll'ctI 

hbrf.f '"I ISIS·t/SL-II ... U .... /d.U ••• IYIIt 0 All CrtW .. \hlt, C.rl ... ""1 ' ••• or 

O"",r un . bG d,,1- .,., too tu., to 4:t 

occll.,UuUon 10 It .. 9 

0 0 .. 10 •• ed to ,,,lIuUIt to r ..... , 

tho first 4., or two ,hould ~. ,1._ It I ... vork oc\hlt, porl04s 

- 0 t •• ~ Ct'N _r "~rttd Ih.t It 

toot bttw .. n two '1'4 thr ... d'),S to 

'''''y .. ,II .. tll. 10 Zlro t 

SL-l "1'0.111 .... I 0 trydro<]o. 10 .rlAl I ...... tor 0 Dtt.ct ttul~. fit stat. or 0 STS-t/Sl-I $y,hO\ (STS-tlSl) coM I tlt"ft Nur c-n4 .t ,,'niet") trN 'ou~d 

OrbrltllA, • 1",1.",rt prG<ti!urtt/tchtd.'" ~)'Cro<].n '0 drlnt'''1 ... Ior 

00.-" nn · 0 100 ...... tlo' pre«nln? 0 Pro::'l" salwln,/dtc'stOft 0 Crow 'OCIro.h'" ..... , 0' 1I\,.<tlnl IIIt1lO9/d.ta ,n.ly.1t "rcirog.A 'rOil whr 

- - SL-I OI>orlllo.al 0 LOUIt ftohu 'roo strvctwr. 0 O.ttel 'h"~' ,. ,hto or 0 SIS-flSl-l 

Syn .... I. ~II t,.,.r I two I\o\lr con4lt'o,\ Crev c~Strved loud .o".s a.brlt',n, IAlI .. "" (SU..,/SL-II 0 h'o~t'Oft PF"'OCt"f"9 0 .. _. nn 0 J",p.ct/cbslrYe 0 hU ... t.~ al fO .~ 1t,,1 

0 Probh .. Uhht;/dKh1on 

aet hg/dlU Ina'1S Is 0 TMu?H 10 '- c.lo.llln, wi" hot! cold [I"S 

0 .... h •• ern I ... h.d 

Sl·1 0;0 ... 11 ... 1 0 "I .... dlffl.vlt, ,. ""'.'°1 • D,tut chlft-:-- tn stltl Or" • n!·"Sl·I SyU •• n orlllur ~I'h ISIS-!lSl-l) condltl •• Hot •• 41f11,ult to .. I .... 

hbrltftnl • R. hUI/ucure ... ,frlI,,'ul D •• __ • itO] hurtact • I"tdual spr1ng Unstoa til h.tch 

• .""' .... ,"p1u. eo.erin, Dt("."". 0 '.n'bl. (u.,onll .... ) de It. P 

Aeron 1"4t,'* 

Sl-I O<<o,Hlo .. I • " .. nUll ,.,for'Wltnce cf Ortlttl' • Acthlt.I\"Ufati lytle. • STS-tlSl-l 

Sr·h ... ......... 1.9 (SIS-9ISl-l) op.r.t 10ft '.rfort'i;!ltd 216 e.".uurs on"'1trb1t 

O.,br" ftf 9 • ~Jull/.I ;n .h"""U hctobtr llel • COCf""IiJ"tcatt '",tornitton 0 ,. 0' 2U -.an'u .... " wert rul ",.. • ConftraJ'IfrUy proctdLlresl ch.nus/ •• dlt 10 .. 

sch'dlll1t1/e-;rent 'ons 

• Oucthah/U,..tnat. IyslM • t.rtnt to orttt.r erN aptnl tOft 

• II'IfcnNt1on prouts'"9 • "c~n4 .utOlWt Ie NIt.unr'n\"! I. 

• 'rebl .... ,ohln11~fch1011 "'tun ~tf"9/dIU .n.l)'s1l 

Sl·l OPtr.\lo".' • hvhtcft tft proudurn • Acth;t."ftU1att IV',t .. • Srs·tlSl-1 

:t)'stf1'l' Sl~-"$L-I Optrat Ion 

hbrh' tnt • Con:t\l,.,luta 'nfom.6t1cn 0 N"" ."4/0" rrwiSrd pro(t"~ur" I\ot 

Co.Nt; .. ltCl • (cn(1ra!wtrtfy rroudurnl tood prltllct 

• Ouctlntt/ttralh.tt S)'ltC"'W 

i Opt"t ion • hun of COP'''"' to ertv 

2·17 
Table 2·2. Historical Precedents/Experiences s, Observed In P(evlous Manned MIssion ActIVIties (Page 7 of 8) 

~ elm£!! '.TlWI 00 \Iill.illlliLilll!lllll ~ 

• lapl ..... t ,roc ••• rn/IChtdvlts 

• I.fo_tt ... procu.I., • Trll" Ind vn 10 sit. 

• In,pect/obu ..... 

Sl-\ O;>or.tl .... 1 • I .... ~ of fI.l. physIc. • A<thU.llnttht •• ,1100 0 ~TS-tr.L-\ 

SyU_ (cot .... , up,rt .. "t tft nil op.r.thlll fl.'. phy,lcs •• por' .... 1 did ""t co Cebrltlt., tI .. (SlS-trsL-I) 0 MjwU/IlI," .I_otl wel1, toot lOft~tr than elp .. ctt~ 

D"KWr un 0 c~.I'Il. I.f.,.,.tt"" 

0 ~"<lh.I./I .... IMt. 'wst .. • flvtd co'_ portletl ., tlp.r .... t 

_rott .. ha' d.II ... ltw , Dell .. proc ...... "" ...... ' .. ' .plntt"", • e'N Inl.,hcod with '1 .11 T ; 

• Ctltct , ... .,. I. st.t. or to ' .... r.t. ,lotIi. _I"utlonl .... ~ltl .. 

• 11III1_t proc", .. I,,,ht4.'n • hllfrl_t obJ •• th. ""111ed 

• I.f ...... t' ... proc." lot I l",ptet/Hun. 

• ' .... , .. ,.IYI.,/d .. I"OII .... kt.-~/.lt. l~ly'h 

SL" Ooeratlo ... ' I ~Ia ...... ,_ftt S,st .. (I<':S) I Ccnllnll .. ,II, proc":.rnl I STS·"Sl·1 

\"t_ f.II .... (S1S-t/SL-I) \(f'I".lt1/,~r&t. te," Wul. 11> •• ,_01 S"I'" (loWS) ... d 

D.brt.ftft, 0 Rao •• /nZllIu.. cow.r'n, ,rcbltes by rdtv 4. by", 1 "" 

, Dec ldIor 1911 I Iopllt,"I ... IVrfiC. (Ntlftls .. lttl., ~ .... "ute 

I (st'Nt .. tllat c, ... II. '.n to I.otd 

",lng \It\ 

Sl·1 Cpor.tI .... 1 I &MI ... I ,,1104.11., of ... ~ • A\I ... t'l,u'~.l4lltr'b.U • STS-t/SL-l 

Syst ... STS-t/Sl-l • et.ftn. pn<.durn/ICMdulul Won ICl,"_le4 12 .r Oft. IZ ~r 0" D.~r"lI .. ~,.tl .. , 

D ..... r 191) • liII'l_.1 ,roc"" .. s/lchtll.lu 0 n-I crow ..... "',PV with scbod.to .0<1 

0 IIU,.,.,c.'/c~un. rKau.M DO (N~. 

, . 0 STS·' cr .... c ..... lI<I., ,ontlts • tilt,,, cMltttr (~It Iho tralftil' 

II I .h., •• IPtelalhl ( .. II.' .... 

for cOIll'nt."C1) 

AyhttOft ""I:,k • 110<'4 .. ",I .. roq.l,.. 'or • Gathtr/rcplact tc-oh/~'lft~"t 0 :rS·tr.L-l , s.~tc. Ttcttnoto-:)' STS-9ISL-l III. "l.'\t .. • Stort/rt"Cc~ .1e~!'tt - C'e.ctci).&,. 1'. n:'l '''wnHiltlena 0 501'111,.1 ... "~I.\I'" 0 'I~ ~r"", freo two ,.yl.d , .',,'en ,p,dalhU for 1\h 

'lt1eftct, hwnt'utbn, 

.--' . 1.'It'Oft 'hd. • ht'.r'~t ntu;. fer .... nr.". • ~, I STS-tISL-I 

, SP<'I TKhnoloqy .f ""h'''i .f 01004 thro .... ' 0 Act hat./l.lttlle Iysl .. 

m_er It. un le4y ISH-Jlst'l) op.enl1en I lolt,..1 blood fl ... '" ... , ..... I Apply/r..." ... btlltWdlc.' letJJor Ilptrh.ftt 

• tolll.totlnlllOfrtpl!y.tllIl" • Con'1r:1.,.,rH't pro(edt.l"'/ 

IU.1trcMlttt" Itr'tirteJ. tctltduln/op.rlt '0." to~ S.~n4 ~y ... " •• I Ducth.tl/tart!ltMte s)'Itea 

rlSulttftt fr'Olfl "'tern.al bloo4 o,pe,.t ,"" 

flow I Crcod",,.cod. ClUa 

0 D"~hy(lt. 

I t.th,r/npbcI tGOh/tqJ'~nt 

0 Store/rrc(!f''I1 .hacftt 

A.ht1O't 1tttt • Fat 1.,.. 0' fIOetr'e caw', • A<th.U/loltlato 'VII ... 0 STS·tlSL-1 .. Sp .. ,. TKhnol09't ({,.triUft upert.nt) 6.1 ce.ralten Cecitllbtr 11, lUl (STS-tr.L·l) • tClfMW.U\tute 'ftrCnJ4lto,\ 0 not,1, c .... ,. lGo .... ') .114 lila 

I Corn hte dati clu.Ue J&-.d 

• 5-tCoM e.ISttt. j .... 4 on • Cuct h~t./tenat"lh l't'ltl!'D lSI. f,_ of ctl-J Opt,.t t03 • JSC ground H"lItd to le''', (lMr. 

• C.sH •• r/n,lIu tooh/fQut,mrt In wnNny &nd to SlS ... '/SL·1 erN 

• Il:IOlf'Mrt pro<f'd.,lres/ul'ltd",,, 

• In\ptC t/c~urvr • A.p.a'r proc,dwrn vorktd cut in 

• 'rtChtM N"';luhthn of obJ"U rul It .. It JSC 

• 'rcbl ... 'Iohil'1Nuhton 

Mlt.'nq/d.tI '"th'" • JSC ,round erN d,.h.d. 'h,:2 

• ',hl'St/uUlre ,.,(haniu' ind ..... 'Ud fUt;ht erN throu9h 

'nUr",r prCKtdurtl to np.tr to Ja. 

• PHlICu,/rtp.Ut ca.".rln9 

• hl.y"d to err .... to .,hct rrp .. 'r 

• C ..... r. put tICk all II •• by f\,~ht 

erN 

A.ht ten Wuk • heeYll 0' ..,"unctt(\C\~n, • Conn.et/dhco"'nKt .lInr1u) • STS·"SL·l , S:;>.ce hthrt01Q1' hoth,.,..1 furftlu', 'fller"e. ~ec_or It. Itn cltet,tc.1 IYlle'll frt'tl I c..lhor/rrpl ... l .. h/.cioi~I"Oi.1 0 ~ttrh1s schnee rack ero!Jle1l1 

.... hrlah schnel red. 0 I .. pf< lI.bu ..... - Stu,k Ntrrhl u!!I;lh t4 rntare tlpnte.t'nt to • Prob 1 te loh1"9/",c1l1o" - '.cuUJI hd. 

ePlntl~1 tUtus Oft eat,'oQ'/d6h Iftll" h .. 11Ie\d(al short 

ST$·trsL·' I ~~ ... eo<:.I. 

• • ....,n/rt'lac. co .... 't"1 

218 

/ ' 

r 

r 

! 

I oC 

.... 
l' 

Table 2-2 Historical Precedents/Experiences as Observed an PrevIOus Manned MIsSIon Activities (Page 8 of 8) 

~ mm. A~TI!JTI Itnum c:~lR" AmnTIU ,_rHos 

I O'l boArd dle, ••• tle ehltt .... t a.4 

- ,Ioet,lul bypo" (holatl.,) br 

crtW u," "'Jority of I1ptr\aPlt 

hlnlonl'lft , 'epalr of h19h rate 4ah , Acthat.lI.lthto 'yll .. I STS-tlSl"1 

to SPlCO Ttchn.lon roc.nltr a. SIS-tlSl-1 Optrlt tOft 

0 .. -., It. Itl3 I C.n.tet/dhc ...... t ,Ioctrlcil I "I,h rato dlt. rlconl.r fa 11 04 ell 

tnterhe. 5th dl, 

I klCthlh/ta .. IMte .y.t ... 

Oil' rat t01 • hc.rod .. ope ... - 1 ral1l" fo"1Id to I h.poet/ot"nl '- .tuck , ,","10ft .... I"'lItlo. of "Joct I 1_ .. /I'9jIIICI coo .. l .. • 10111" fro .. 

I hit .. rnt.rod 

A.',t1on .. uk • ... hl ... of rI ... pIIy.l., • I.e tlntoll. It tat •• y,t .. • Sn-t/Sl-I , 5,plC' Technol091 at:M!u 1 •• Ipert .. nt Oft opt,.t1oa 

keMller It. lte3 SIS-tlSl-1 • • I locole/a" I,n/dl st.lbuto I .1014 phy'ICI _.1, 1Io*.I ... t ... 

• C_IClII hfo .... tlOft ••• rll ... probl_ 

I C_.et/dl" ..... t f,"14 1I'1t .. rhc. • Sr ..... d "" .... I d .. ll04 _"lco-

• eeanhatl/t, .. ' .. t •• yot .. tla., 

""crltl .... I • 1I,ht c,..., I~P lIl' fl. 

STS al-C I leqy1r ... "t for erN to eon'''' • !!!Ml!L!!!1t.o.stl~rl!l'n! !l"!!! I A n,h, of r-hotQfr.ph\. TV rKOrdtn9' 

fll~~t C,..., tar Ird ,hatO'lrapll the hoo.y- ~~ aMi two t",crahr. Iilll'I1Un"ftnt, wr. 

leport c .... Itrutt"rt crolt04 by I P.(!Ollvr(lo t'c.',)~ .. ct. Oft tb, •• OCUI'"' 

~y"84 Itlllin hoMr'"' .... ". In • ~...!!1ill wt;htltn tnwtrONWRt • AtllwlltllnlUatt ."t •• • the c,.... foun4 t~ ••• per,_t ... t. ot'erat 'Oft tnt.,utlll1 all4 .ntortaln'o, 

• ktKt e~ln~. I •• tato H' 

condItIo. 

• , .. Itlon 1OOd,1. 

sa 11-( • .~., ..... t for Oft-o"'lt • Irl"H':~r~ v"tl'§d~~ I 'ntt1c"I"i cf t"l. f'FI WI I"udtt'cut F lItht Cr ... r.~.1rs of the Soh,. • Conf\mlwtrUy f:!rcu4,,",' and .nlbl~ cr~.r plut"#,fnt 

hport KI.i...". spacecraft "t'.,duln/c,?frlt tOM "U"' .. fnetlo", of .'" 1"tta of U.t 110,"114 • COf'nttt/c2hc.O"Intct ehctrlc.l 4 .. IrO<l .... hlll 

hhrful 

I G.tther/rt;lilact tooh/t1"'pMftt • Tht ~I .'d,d the n:hc....,.nt .tu'tom 

• 'olU'en ... --dul1 .n4 h ."" f(lufti tMt 1N",~u'ttr'"; th. 

I "',ul/nnr. IMChlft'ul ~ 1b ~"h Wli rtO Il:r'ODtn 

'nttrhel 

I RC1W)Y' ftiOdul. , Thl (VA CI~ .. r tool VOlrt:" very w1' and 

• EtflQvt/nphc. cont'n, Ihoa14 b, cons'~rrt'd a ,tandu'd tool 

• Transport I ... d.~ 

SIS 41-( • Utlll .. t'.n .f 10.'11 thru.hr • tQf-W'c.!!!1!.tQ-ry trlltlJ.!!.i • NIl! .... f1_ with Ittl'ud. hold Flight CrN u.1' l1~'\ts dyrtrt; U,. - • IntorNtt"n proCfntf'l9 

hl'ort d~ktn9 1,,4 lhi)Ututton • Prob1~ lOhtn9/dechtoft • thrv\tt,. (UI ItghU h'.dtuh whf'ft 

~y 1984 ItU"'llU Nktng/dl.ta Inllys" thrush" Irc au:t6UtlcAI1y ftrtttg to 

N'ntltn d,,'nd tUft",:. 

2-19 

. -
1 

/' 

/ 

for any future manned system would be that the crewmen have equipment and 

suitable restraint and mobility~fas to go anywhere on the interior or 

exterior of the vehicle while in orblt. 

The presence of crewmen and the availability of manpower to correct 

problems and maintain equipment should result in a lower weight system 

overall. As an example, Skylab estimates (made after the failure of the 

orbital workshop solar wing to deploy automatically) indicated that a manual 

deployment Mode for the solar arrays would have produced a 15 percent weight 

savings in that subsystem. 

In both the Apollo Telescope Hount and the Earth Resources Experiment 

Package Payload on Sky'ab, the crewmen proved inval~able in assisting and 

directing the pointing capability of both these experiments. The crewmen 

greatly enhanced the quality -of the data retrieved by being ab-lt'! to -observe 

the overall situation and direct or point the experiment at the areas of 

interest. It is in this area of making selective executive decisions that 

man's role is irreplaceable. 

On Sky1ab it was found that the space limitations that a man experiences 

here on Earth due to gravity did not necessarily apply in orbit. For example, 

the large food lockers (in excess of 6 cu ft and ever 250 lb) were ve~ 

readily relocated in zeIo gravity by one crewman working alone as c~m~ared to 

four men required on the ground. 

In the debriefings, all crewrr.en agreed that zero gravity \1111 1 n the 

future allO\-I the designer of an orbital system more freedom in selecting 

volumes and weights for the crewmen to manipulate. One crehman made the 

slatement that it would have been fedsible in space to relocate an object the 

size of the film vault. (The Skylab vault wa~ in excess of 12 cu ft and 

weighed approximatey 3,000 lb.) 

Examples of these past experlences drawn froJ:1 previous mission:3 Here 

valuable not only in confirMing man's capability to perform specific 

activities in space but also in establishing a basis for developing a generiC 

set of activities in Task 2 that could be used to describe future missions. 

220 

/ 

MCDONNCLL DOUGL~ 

•• 
~ : , I 

i -

1 

r -

I 

I 

, -I 

l. 

r 

L 

,-"_.- ~ 

I' 

Section 3 

SPECIFIC PROJECT ASSESSI~ENTS - TASK 2 

The oojectlve of Task 2 was to deflne and descrioe a structured apprcdcn 

for optim1Zlng the role of humans and humans supported by mclcllines in carryin9 

out tne requirel,lents of selected space proJects. To accompl iSrl tnls 

OOJect1ve, a gener1c hst of act1v1t1es was l1erlVeJ (Section 3.1) that coulJ 

oe used to Jescrioe any future space miss10n. TnlS list of activ1t1es was 

cor,1pareJ to the human performance capaoil iti es and 1 imitat1 ons sUIi1l11dri zeJ 1.1 

TasK 1 to detennine the degree of human invol vement that can reasonaoly De 

expected to De associated witl1 each of the indi vidual activit1es. Past 

experience suggests that the util1zation of the cdpab1lities of tne hUulan 

element in the implementat10n of any man-macnine system is llmiteJ only by the 

creat1 ve imag1nat10n of tne system designer, witn only a few except10ns. Tne 

princlpal limting factor in the duect 1nvolvement of tile nW,lan 1n system 

operatlon 1 stile flnite nwailn response tlrne assoclateti w; tn tne perfOrll1dnCe of 

any actlvity or taSK. AccorJlngly, in Section 3.2 ranges of response tlmes to 

Oe expected in tne performance of eacll actl Vl ty are presenteti for eacn of tne 

loan-macnine modes, from direct manual l:1vol vement to inJlrect or independent 

systems operatlons. Tnese t1mellne data I'lere deriveJ frolll r.tany sources 

incl UtJ1tlg prior. system operatlOns, researcll data, simulatIons and eng1neeriny 

analyses. 

In Section 3.3, tne supporting equl pnent and resources neeJed to ililpl el~er.t 

edch actlvity in eacl1 mode of man-machine interactlOn are identifled. In 

SeCtlOn J.4, the economlC factors and cost of equlp~ent anJ other dctlvlties 

associated vl1tn provld1ng, support1ng. and utllizlng IlUInan capabilities in 

advar.ced space miSSlOIlS are 1dentlfied and qUdntlfleJ. 

In Sectlon 3.b, a metnod 1S presenteJ for evaluatl~Y in qualltative anJ 

quantltatl ve terms tile cost effectl veness of varYlng degrees of hur,Jall 

111vol vement in meetlng the requ1re,oents of future space proJec~s anli 1n1ssions. 

3-1 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUCL~_ 

- - ~ -...- ...... -- -- ..~............. -- ~ . 
\ 

I 

i 

I 

~ 

I 

0$.1 SEL£CTEU PIWJECT AIJAL YS£S 

In ~der to derlve a generlc 11St of activlties that could oa used to 

describe dlly future space ml ssi on, varl ous space proJects were analyzed. Tile 

analyses entailed the deflnitlon of tne various levels of events used to 

descrlbe a given mission. It was recognized that each project could require 

one vI more missions to be perfonneJ. In the cases examin~ eacn mission was 

broken dOHn to tne sequence level to describe tile detailed operations for tile 

91Ven mission. As illustrateJ in Figure 3-1, tile sequences were then furtner 

deflned tllrough the ldentificatlon of the activltles tilat Iliade up eaclI 

operatlonal sequence. Once the activity level events were Jeflned lt was 

found that a great deal of cOlllnonal ity existed among the various operational 

sequences and tile missions. In other \'1ords, the same baslc actlVltles \'1ere 

fuund to oe requlred in dlfferent operations and 1n different mlSSlons. The 

activities were !Jrouped t0ge~~er to elimlnate redundancy. The oOJectlvc ~ias 

to develop a flna1 list or basic or generic activitles, eacll witn unique 

cilaracteristlcs, tnat wilen coralline!.! coulJ be used to descrloe any fllture Spdce 

missloRS. 

BdSed on the level of Jetalled lnfonl1a'tion currently aVdllaole, tile Spdce 

Platfonn ffilSSlons were selected for the initial analysis of activitles. The 

Space Platfon~ (Figure J-2) proJect was a conceptually deslgned free-flYlng 

FIgure 3-1. Project AnJlym (Leve!s of DefInitIon) 

3-2 

/' 

MCDONNELL DOUG~~ 
'T 

I 

/ 

! 

! 

/ 

I 

I 

f 

I. 

I. 

1 

l. 

!. 

/ 

Full CapacIty 

Redundant 

Thermal System 

Ku Band 

Antenna _ .~ ~ ___ (~, -<>-

~ 

FIgure 3·2. Space P/3tform System DesIgn Concept 

platform tnat could provide serV1ces such as electrical pOI'Ier, thennal 

control, and communiCctt1ons dnd data Ilandl ing to a IHde range of i"ttaclled 

payloads. In scneduled revislts by the Space SII'Jttle, opportumties were 

provlJeJ for utillzatlon of the human presence in maintenance. servlcing, and 

repd1r as well as in the lnltlal deployment and/or asser,lbly of payloads. Tne 

source of 1nfonnation ut1lized in the analysis of tile Space Pldtfonn mlssions 

was the HUAC Phase B Space Platform stuJy reports (Reference 70). i3ased upon 

tIllS inforl.latlon, the Space Platfonil missl0ns were divldect into tllelr 

respectl ve sequences and tllen the sequences were further cdtegorizeJ into the 

detailed operatlonal act1Vltles. TOls analysls may oe founJ 1n Appelld1x C-l. 

Tne analysls of tne Space Platfonn (Figvre J-3) resulted 1n tile 

llientiflcatloll of flve mlSS10n cdtegorles. Eacll of tile respactlVe mIssions 

was defined oy tne sequence level events required to perfonn tllose l:tiss10ns. 

As can be seen at the sequence level, several events may occur 1 n more thdn 

one mission. For example, tile bertning operdtlor: between tile Space Platfo",1 

and Space Snuttle not only app~ars in tile pdylo1d reconfigurat1on m1SS1on dS 

3·3 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUGL9---

• 
/ 

i 

/ 

I 

/ 

,r 

Sequence 

Activity , 

W 

D,scor.nect 

Payload/PS 

Umbilical 

Figure 3-3. Space Platform Project AnalySIS 

Unberth 

Payload 

Transfer to Storage Port 

27 Generic ActiVities 

Berth on Storagu Port 

Derived From Space Platform AnalySiS 

Evolutionary 

Growth 

Separate 

Etc 

I :::w • 

snmm. but also in tile inltial deployment and ma1ntenJnce mi:;s10115, as l\fell as 

evolutlonary growth missions. The reason is that 10 order to perforl:l tn05e 

1011ssions, lt lS required tnat the Space Platfonn and Spdce Shuttle be bertl1eJ 

togetner. Tile sequence .level operations are tnen furtller defined I)Y 

lJentlfY1ng tne activities necessary to acr.omplish thdt operdtlOn. As stateJ 

previollsly, these identifled act1 vitles were eXd'llined and cor.lllined Imere 

appropriate. On the oasis of this analysis, 27 generic dctlvitles wer~ 

derl ved. 

Tne Genertc Actl vity List contlnued to expand as otller space projects lIere 

analyzed. Tile additlonal space projects that were eXdlillneJ lncl uded the 

AJvanceJ X-ray Astrophysics Facillty (AXAF) study; Skylao loi5510115 froln SL-2. 

S~-3 and SL-4; Space Station ffi15sion mojels; and L1fe Sciences Laooratory 

m1SS10n5. Tne analysls of tne 11fe SClences project (Flgure 3-4) centered 

dround tnree ldentifled mlssions as slJown in Flgure 3-5. These missions I/ere 

al1.llyzeti at tile sequence I evel and each seqence in turn I~as reJefl ned into lts 

odsic actlv1t1es. An lnterestll1g note dunng tillS analYSls \~as that even 

3·4 

/' 

MCDDNNE .... DOUO .. 8--

' .. 

.. 
r 

i . 

I 

Figure 3-4. Life SCiences Dedicated Laboratory 

I PROJECT' 

MISSION) 

ISEaUENC~ 

ACTIVITY 

Visually 

'Inspec: Rats 

VilthlO Habitat 

Examlno 

Displays of 

Haoltat 

EnVironmental 

Parameters 

Inspect 

Reco.:ls of 

Food and 

Water 

Consumption 

Figure 3·5. Life SCiences Laboratory (Project AnalySIS) 

35 

/ 

McaONNCLL aOUGL~ 

Evaluate 

Animals 

Health 

Process Url.le 

Samples 
,t'T 

thouyh the sequence 1 eve 1 e vents were notdl.> 1y different for eactl 1 i fe sci ence 

miSSIon tnere was once again considerable commonality alllong the activities 

requIred In tne different miSSIon elemt!nts. Tne analysis of the lIfe sciences 

project mdY be found in AppendIX C-2. Another infonnation source \thiclI WdS 

utilized in !Ilese andlyses was tne lur study of AutolnatlOn, Roootlcs, an.! 

r·1acnlne Intelligence Systems (AI{AlHS) study (References 67,68.69). This 

study ilad liefl ned some ..i.30 "Generic Functi ona 1 £1 ements II and tllese functi ond 1 

elements uere also matched against tile listing of lieneric Activities. 

AS each new source of miSSIon data and/or mission actiVIties was eXdlillneJ, 

the previously defined generIC actIvities were matched against the new 

infonnation. If a specific actiVIty could not easily be described by one of 

tile prevIously defIned generic actl vlties, a new actl vity category was 

ldentifled for Incorporation into the generic actIvity list. 

Tile analyses of tl1ese space proJects down to tne activity level oas 

resulted in the identIfication of the 37 unique activities. It IS our oelief 

toat this set of gpneric activities will prove to oe a useful tool in 

descrIbIng the operatIonal sequences required in the broad spectrum of 

potential space missions anticl pated In tne COtn1lly decades. 

Descriptions of eacn of the .37 benerlC Activities follow: 

1. Acti vate/Inlti ate <;ystem Operati on. Those events and/or COhll:Jdlld 

sequences Involved in the activatIon or ln1tializatlon of a space baseJ systen 

or sllDsystelo. 

2. Adjust/Align Elements. Thuse adJustment actIvitIes involvej In sucn 

operations as aliynll1ent of optIcal elements, fllle tunlng of preclsion 

el ectroni C equi ll11ent, antenna pointl ng, and remote camera fOCUSing operatlons. 

3. Allocate/Asslgn/Distribute. Those activities involving the 

reallocatIon, or redistrlbution of resources: e.g., the redistributlon of 

power, coolant flow, etc., to sens1tlve SUJsystem equl~ent to reflect 

operational needs or contIngency operatIons. 

4. Ap~y/Remove iliomedlcal Sensor. Those unIque actlvltles a~socfdteJ 

With the lnstallatlon/removal and cleamng of sensors usej to Obtdlll 

DIOll1edlcal data from a test subJect. 

S. t.or.Jl~unicate Infon.1dtlon. rtlose actiVIties lnvol vlng tile e:;tablislllllent 

of tile communlcatlons llnk and tile transmlSlon of information from one source 

3·6 

/ 

MCCONNE .. '- DOUG"~ 

" ... 
I 

! , 

I 

/ 

!1 

I 

i 

I 

to another. It 1 ncl udes the verlla I or Vl sua 1 ; ntercnange between tl10 cre,'Men 

as w~l1 as the electronic trdnsf~rence of sClentiflc lnfonnatloll from a space 

prooe to a terrestrial-baseJ user. 

O. Compensatory Tracklng. ThOse activitles invol vlng continuous control 

adJustments to null an error signal against a fixed reference. 

7. Compute Oatd. Tflose actl vi tles requiring d lOecllanlZcd form of lata 

processing such as in structural analyses, cOr.1putation of positions of 

celestial oodies. or otner fonns of nu~erical computdtions. 

d. Conflnn/Verify Procedures/Sclledules/Operatlons. Tnose actlVitlcs 

invol vlng the assessment of l-iI1etl1er or not a prior event has ln fact been 

accomplished (SUCll as a syster,l verification o· cneckout >, or a proceJure 

satlsfiea, or a scnedule met. 

9. Connect/~lsconnect Electricdl Interfdce. Those actlvltles requlrlng 

the completl0n or teliilindtion of an electrical lnterface. Tney may involve 

util i zation of 011 nd-rnated/self-al ; gnl n9 connectors, mul tHurn scre,I-Jrl ve 

interface plates, or simlldr devices. 

10. Connect/Disconnect Fluid Interface. Tnose actlvlties requlrin~ the 

completion or termlnation of a fluid interface. They may involve utilizatl0n 

of ~ Simple pluy In, sleeve lock co~nectlon, multiturn scre~ drive interface 

plates, or slml1ar devices. 

11. Correlate Data. Those actlvities lnvolvlng the iJentificatlon of 

poSltl ve or oegatl ve relatlonshl ps or co,mlonal ities al;1ong data sets sucil as 

organ1zdtlonal structures, cnardcterlstlcs, or processes. 

12.' Deacti vate!Termlnate System Operation. Toose events and/or co..,manJ _ 

sequences invol ve...! in tn<: teni1lnatlon or deaetl vatlon of a space-odsed systc,lI 

or subsystem. 

13. Decode/Encode Odta. Those activlties invo1vln:J tile conver.slon of 

ddta lnto elther lts anginal forul or lnto a form comp,ltible for 

trd'1SlnlSS10r.: e.g., co~ertlng trdllSI:lltteJ digltize:.i data into its original 

analoy form or dlgitlzln~ analog data for trdnsmlSS10n to tne ground station. 

14. Define Procejures/SchcJulcs/Uperdtlons. Tnose activltles involvlng 

loglcal deductl0ns or convergent productlon leaJlng to developacnt of 

proceJures, scneJules, or operatlons wah preJlctable outcOr.les. 

l!l. Vepl OJ /Hetract Appendaqe. TtlOSC dct i Vl tl es associ ateJ \~i til tile 

extcnsl0n of cl narJware el el.lent to a posltion where lts assigned functlon ca~ 

be realizeJ, or conversely, the stol'llng of that ndrd~/are element based on tas~ 

completlon or safety conslderatlOns. 

3·7 

.. ~ , -
---

10. Detect Change in Stdte or Condition. rhose activities where tne 

departure of a parameter from its orlginal or referenre state or condition 1S 

required to be sensed or observed. 

17. Uisplat Data. Tnose activities i~volvln~ the presentation of 

infonlldtion/dat,! by visual, auditory, or tactile means. 

lB. Gather/Replace Tools/£qui pnent. Tl10sc acti vities invol ved in tile 

ootdining or in tne return 109 of tools or equipnent USN to perfon:l a specific 

task such as collecting or replacing maintenance tools or donning/doffing tile 

I~anned ,·Ianeuverlng 1I0lt (I-I:~U). 

19. Handle/Inspect/Examine Livlng Organlslns. Tnose activitles involvlng 

the unlque operations associated with worKiny \'l1th living orgaOlsrns. These 

activities involve the mdnipulation and general handling of aniffidls rangln~ 

from stroking to inspectlng or examining anatornictli characteristics. 

20. Implement Procedures/Schedules_. Those activities invo1vln!:l tile 

instituting and carrying out of pr~cedures or schedules (such as updating a 

r.liSS10n model/schedulei as distinguished from activating or lnltiating system 

operations. 

21. Information Proces5ing. Those acti vities invol vin9 the categorlZing, 

extracting, lnterpolating, itemizlng, taoulatlng, or translating of 

i nfonnatlon. 

22. InspcctlODserve. Tnose activaies lnvo1vlng the critical appraisal 

of events or obJects. They may lOcl ude the ven flcation or the identl ficatlon 

of d particular element SUCIl as dal1lage inspection of a returnin;) OTV, tile 

observation and ldentl ficatlon of a cel estial ODJect, or the behavior of a 

llvlng organlslll. 

23. I·leasure (Scdle) PtlYsical ~imensions. Tnos~ activities involving tile 

estllnation or appralsal of a JlmenSlon agalnst a graduated standard or 

crltenon. 

24. Plot Data. Those actlVlties invo1vlng the mapplng, dlsplaying, or 

locating of data by means of a speci fled coordinate system. 

25. Position Mojule. Those actlvitles involvlng the posltlonlng of a 

component lnto a deSlred orlentatl0n: e.g., lnstalling a neli cOr.1ponent. or 

tiltlng d payload lnto lts launcn orlentdtion. 

26. Precisl0n IIlnlpulatl0n of ObJects. Those actlvltles illvo1v1ng tasks 

Hlllcn requ1re a nign degree of IOdnual dexterity 1n orJer to be accolnplishe.J 

sucn as the assel.lbly/dlsdsser.lDly of small intricate r.lechtlnisms or tile 

installation of I~edsure,nent sensors, i.e., strdln gauges, th(!n.1ocouples, etc. 

36 

/ 

MCDONNELL Douo'-9--
r 

I 

" 

" 

i 

27. Problem $olving/Uecision I~aking/Oata Analysis. Those judgmental an.! 

sometimes creatlve activities lnvol'/ing the dral'ling of inferences or 

conclusions through the use of cosnition, convergent or divergent product1ol1, 

memory, and comparative evaluation. functions to be perfoffilel1 may include 

analyzlng, calculating, choosing, compdrlng, estiIRating, or planning. 

2~. Pursuit Tracking. Those activities involving continuous control 

ac.JJustsnent to match actual and desired signals Ithen tne desired or reference 

signal is continually changing. 

2~. Release/Secure ~ecnanlcal Interface. Those activltie~ involving tne 

IRanipulat10n of a mechanlcal interface rang1ng from a simple one-handeJ, 

over-center latch application to a hign torque, multlturn threaJed fastener. 

1·lay involve manipulation of I.lultiple fasteners arranged in various patterns or 

configurations. 

30. ~emove 11odule. Those activitles invol ving the physical extractl0n or 

removal of a component after the mechanical, electrical, or thennal interfacec; 

have been releasea or ctisconnected • 

.31. Remove/Replace Covering. Tnose activities involving the removal or 

reinstallatl0n of an access coverlng or a protective covering as requlred to 

~ain access to system elements or to cover tnem up upon completion of the \'wrK. 

32. Replace/Clean Surface CoatinQs. Tno~e unique activities involving 

tile restoratlon of d degraded/contamlnated surface coatln!;! suen as replaC1n!:l a 

radlator's tilenllil coating or cleanlng an optical systertls vlelnng surface. 

33. Replenlsl1l1aterlals. Those activltles involvlng the resupplYlng of 

consumaol es such as refuel1ng a sp-lcecraft, rechat"ging an optics cryo-based 

coollng system, or providing fOQ!j suppl ies to all animal hoUl n9 fdCl ~ ity. 

34. Store/Record Element. Those actlvlties involv1ng the recorj1~g or 

stordge of 1 tems for ooth snort-tenn and long-tern perioJs: e.g., 

recording/storage of experimental data or tellporary storage of a blomedical 

salnple. 

Jo. Surg1cal 11anipulations. Those actlvltles, SUCI1 as a surglcdl 

procedure or a dlssection lncluding tlssue sample acquisitlons, that require a 

l11gh degree of sodll and knowledge as well as manual dexterity 1n o("d~r to be 

dccompll shed. 

36. Transport Loaded. Tnose activities involving tile conveYlng of a 

Pllyslcal ODJect oy SOfilC transportation devlce from one location to another: 

e.g., the transporting of a cOlnponent Vla a cre~,.man or a reJilote mampulator 

system. 

3·9 

/ 

McnONNItLL DOUO~~ 
, 

I 

/ 

I 

J7. Transport Unloaded. ThOse activities involving the movements of an 

unloaded i nJi vidual or device from one location to anotller: e.g., the 

move~ent of a crewman to a worksite wltnout carrying tools or equ1pment, or 

tne I:lovement of a remote mani pul ator system wi tn notlli n9 attacned. 

Fi gure 3-6 identHi es the sources from wni Ch eacn of tile generi c s p-3ce 

activlties that compose the final 11sting was deriveJ. 

J.l ,HSSIOIJ TII1ELl NES 

Once a generlc set of activlties had been established that could be used 

to describe any future space misSlon, the next step was to establish the 

reldt+¥e appl1cability and value of the alternative man-Inacnine mwes in 

accomplisning these activities, both indlvidually and in composite as might be 

dictated by a specific set of mission requlrements. In order to estaollsil the 

degree of human fnvolvement that could reasonably be expected to be associated 

with each of tne indivldual activitles, tnree sets of performance crlteria 

were considered: the first set was the range of performance times requireJ to 

Q:CO~pll Sh the task; tne second set ~/as the requi rements for huraan in '/0 1 ve,nent 

in terns of sensory/perce~tual, lntellectual and PSYChor.lOtor f· . .mctioilS; and 

toe tOl rJ set was the lllilltl n9 factors 1 n nUlndn 1 nvol veJ.lent in tenllS of the 

human response capabi11ties for senslng. information processing. and Motor 

actions. 

kn addresslng the criterlon of perfonnance time requir~nents, miSSlon 

timeline data avallable from prior space mlsslons, lab_oratory ~tudies, systelll 

sllnulations and engineerin~ Jeslgn studies were utllized to estdDliso a 

reference set of timel i ne data for each actl Vl ty and for each category 0 f 

man-machine lnteraction • 

. 

Tne categorles of ulan-maclnne lnterdction are oaseJ upon tIle nU1lan 

operator's level of partlcipation in the performance of the task and were 

deflned as fo11olls: 

i'1anual. Unaided IVA/EVA, witn simple (unpowereJ) IlanJ tools 

Supported. Use of supporting machlnery or facilitlcs requircj to 

dccomplisn asslgned taSks (e.g., manned maneuvering units, foot restrdlnt 

devices. etc.) 

3·10 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOIJG~~ 

-. 

• 

... 
r 

Source 

GeneriC Space ActIVIties (1) 121 131 LIfe AXAF Sky lab Space Space ARAMIS SCIences 

Plalform SIal Ion Stuey IMIT} Laboratory 

1 Activate Initiate System Operation 0 • • • 0 • 2 Adlust/Allgn Elements • 0 0 • 3 Allocatet Assign' Diet r Ibute I) • • 0 • 4 Apply/Remo,. BIomedIcal Sensor 0 • 0 0 

5 Communicate Inform~Jtlon • • • • • • 6 Comp~nsatory TrJcklng • 0 

7 Com put'! Data • • • • 0 • 

8 Confirm/Verify PrOCedlJft:'stSchf'dulesiOperatlons • 0 • • • 9 Connect, Disconnect Electrical Interfac .. 0 • • • • 10 Connect/Disconnect FlUid Interfa'Ce • • • • 11 Correlate Dala 0 • • • 0 

12 Deacllvale/Termlnate System Operallon • 0 • • 0 • 13 Decode/Encode Da" 0 • 0 

14 Define Procedurps/Schedules/Operatlons • • 0 0 • 15 Deploy/RetracI Appendage e • 0 • • 16 Detect Ch,lnge .n State or Condlllon 0 • • • 

17 Display Data • 0 0 0 e 

18 Gather/Replace Tools/EquIpment 0 0 " I) • ., 19 Handle/lnspect/Examme LIVing Organisms 0 

20 Implement Proct'dures,Schedules 0 e • 0 0 

21 Information Proc€.ssmg 0 0 0 • 

22 Inspect/Obsen e 0 • • 0 0 

23 Measure (Scale) PhySical O.mf'nSIOtlS 0 0 

24 PIOI Data 0 • • • 

25 PosItIon Module 0 • 0 0 0 0 

26 PrpClslon ManlplJla',on of Objects 0 • 27 P'oblem SolVIng/DeCISIon Makong/ Datd AnalYSIS 

0 • • • 0 

28 PursuIt Tracking 0 • 0 • 

2-9, Re!"'ase Secure fI.'echaflical Interface S • • e • 0 

30 Remove "'odule 0 0 0 e • 0 

31 RpmC"vt"/R eplace COVCf'tr'k] 0 0 • 0 

32 R~prace Clean Surface Coatln9~ • • • 33 Replenish MatenalS " • V 0 0 

34 S'urp/Rec('lrd EI- m ... nts 0 0 • 0 e 

35 Surgical r ... 1.:Hllpulatlons • 36 Transport Loxtcd • 0 0 0 0 • 

37 Transport UnlOlcled • e • 0 0 

III Includes EREP und ATM Act,v,t,e. 

(2) Include~ ACtivities Derl\led from the AnalysIs of Space Platform Ground System Data \1anagement Study 

I' 

\ . 131 Includes 330 Ge~e"c Fu lCtlonal ElemLnts Derived from the Geosynchronous Platform Arivanced X Ray Astrophyslc. 

Factlltv Teteoperator Mdneuvt'lrlng Systt!m and Space Platform 

I L I 

Figure 3 6 List of Generic ActiVities ... /]' I 

J. 

, [ 3·11 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUGL~ ~ 

,-
--- oF' _-

I 

Augmented. Jlmpllflcatlon of Iluman sensory or motrr capabIlities (pol/ered 

tools, exosl<eletons. electron mIcroscopes. etc.) 

Teleoperated. llse of remotely controlled sensors and actuators allo'llin~ 

tile Iluman presence to De rt;JiloveJ from tile IlorK site ( relilotel:ldni pul ator 

systems. teleoperdtors, telefactors) 

SupervIsed. t{eplacement of Jirect manual control of system operatIon WIt.1 

cowputer-Jlrectej 

from ~rollnJ-OdseJ 

Independent. 

functIons although maintaining numans in supervisory control 

or orDital-based work statIons 

Udslcally lnJependent self-actuating, se1f-lrealln~ 

operdtlOns out re~U1r1ng IlUlilall InterventIon occaslOllally (relIes neavlly on 

dutrnnatlon and drtificldl Intelligence) 

SWllfnary tllUel1ne profiles, as snOlill in FIgure 3-7. \(ere prepareJ for eac.! 

of tile J7 actIvIties to depIct tne range of times assocIated WIth eacl1 moJe of 

hlal1-.ndCllllle Interaction. Tne tirael1ne profIles for each of the 37 actIVitIes 

mdy be founJ In Appendix I). In eaen case. the tlmellne profiles were 

constructeJ 1 n dccorJallce .n tn the fo 11 O\~l ng grounJ rul es: 

Man Mdchme 

CategorICs Time Scale 

~% 0 S,,,,".r Task \J th Actual Manu~1 ! On Orhlt Pedormance- - o Slm,lar Task Pertormed ,n a 

~§ Spac~ S,mulat'o~ 

SupporJed 8) 12 0 Enq,nee"nc Estomate n.,en on DeslQn or Operatronal 

~ E.pe"."c p 

Augmented 

4 8 ,\ /lm/'err are rcfcrc!lUs to 

sou",s (se< Al'pclld,t DI 

~ I 

Teleoperated I 

1 2 ®[!3J I 

SupervISed I 

Ground I 

I 

~00 I 

SupervlSf'd 

On Orbit 

Indepondent 0(2)k0> 

C I 1 1 1 1 1 I 

OC~Egt 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 8 

, s~o"': I Minutes Hours I 

Figure 3·7. TYPical ActtVlty Tlmelme Profile Actmltc/lmtl3te System Operatlcn 

- / 

/MCDONNeLL DOIJ(]L~ ",/ / 

3·12 

l~ • 

.. 

T 

I 
/ 

I 

I 

I 

/ / hi 

I 

/' 

I 

,,/ 

" 

I 

Ij ,- , 

. 

, 

j 

/, 

/ 

I 

/ 

,I 

/ 

......... '- .-

i _ 

L 

1 

.. 

i -

I 

t 

f -

, 

,/ I 

I ,.-I! 

• All of the generic space actl vit les encompass events tllat will be 

perfonned on-orbit. 

• Tne range of tlme for accomplishing a task is deflne:i by a mlnlHIUhl tasK 

time and a maXlmum task time based on specific tasks identified during the 

analysis of previous space prOJects (references cited). 

o The tlmes are based elther on actual space performance (0). a space 

slmulation (0). or on engineering estimates derived from conceptual deslgns 

or from sllmlar operational experiences (O). (The numbers \'lithin the symbol s 

designate tne speciflC data sources. rnese sources are listed in Appendlx D.) 

e Those actlvities that \iere determlned to require dlrect hu,nan 

1 nvol vement for accompll snment will not be considered for supervi sed or 

independent appllcatlons. 

• Operatlons in the manual category will De limited to 50 minutes based 

on evaluations associated with manual fatigue levels and span-of-attentl0n 

limits. 

e for actlvlties tllat require support equipnent. ;c is assumej that the 

crewmen have a \'Iorking/operational kno\'l1edge of that equi(1ilent and special 

tra1ning 1S not required. 

An lmpartant conslderatlon wilen eval uat; n9 tnanua 1 tasK perfonnances is 

Whether or not times d1ffer for accompllshing slmilar tasks 1n the EVA as 

cOlnpareJ to the IVA mode of operat10n. 

In order to provlde a baS1S for estimating the tlmes for accampl isl1ing 

dctl V1 ti es 1 n eacn of these moJes, comparatl ve data \tere needed on fi ne ant1 

coarse r,lotor actlvltles to be performed in zero g both Hith and \'11thout a 

pressurized SUit. Since sucn data was not readily availaole from actual space 

flights, \le elected to develop tnese dat..:. by analyzlng video tapes taken in 

tile 110AC and the JolSfC Neutral Buoyancy Simul ators dur1 ng the past year. In 

1 !18J. HDAC perfonned tliO seri es of Neutral Buoyancy Tests in Hhi cil the same 

maintenance and serV1Cl ng tasks were perforlned. Tne fi rst test was performeJ 

1n SCUt3A only. Willch equates to tile slmulate.:i IVA enV1ron;nent. T\1e second 

test senes involved pressure-SUlted sUDJects, \'illlCn Slmulated tne EVA 

enV1 ronment. By cornpdri ng task performance tlli1eS for d representatl ve 

selection of tasks requ1rlng floe and coarse motor dctivlt1es under silnul~tej 

zero 9 (neutral buoyancy) uhen using a pressure unit and Ilhen using scuba 

3-13 

/ 

MCDONNELL OOUOL~ 
, . / 

I , I 

I 

t 

I 

/ 

/ 

/ 

..--r 

..----

/ 

-- I " I 

equipnent only, it was believed a reasonaole basis of relating IVA and EVA 

tasK times could be obtained. It was llypotllesizeJ that tne scuba perfonl1ance 

would De equivalent to an IVA perfonnance in zero g. 

As an example of coarse mo ,r Inovelnents, a handcranking operation sucn as 

mlgnt be invol veJ in deploying an dppendage was selected. Observatl0nal data 

were avallable from the video tapes for three crank radii (3 inches, 6 inches, 

and 9 inches) for a series of scuba and pressure suit trials. 

In slmilar fashl0n, observational data related to fine motor lilovementswere available under eacn condition for two tasks: (1) mating and dematlng 

electrical connectors, and (2) removing and installing fluid interfaces. 

Figure 3-8 plots the average times observed (Table 3-1) under each 

operational mode for the various crank radii. Table 3-2 summarizes the 

average times observed for the tasks requiring fine motor movements. 

30 

i3 20 

26 EVA 

~ V--

IVA 

~ r 23 

c: 

0 -

20 0 

~ 

~ 

E 

.:: 

'" '" " i 

<t 10 

o 

o 3 6 9 12 

Hand Crank Handle Radius (on ) 

Figure 3-8. Coarse Motor Movements 

3·14 

McaONNICLL DouaL~ 

.. 

• 
I 

'II 

I 

I 

/ 

/ 

I 

I 

/ 

I 

I 

/ 

/ 

/ 

, 

/ 

/ 

-.... : 

, , 

/ 

I , ! / 

Table 3-1. IVA and EVA Task Time ComparISons 

(Coarse·Motor Movements) 

Average times 

(sec) 

Task IVA EVA 

Manual nand Cf8nk 

3'lnch radius 20 21 

6'lnch radius 22 24 

9-lnch radius 23 26 

.&.verage 

: /' 

Ratio 

EVA/IVA 

105 

109 

113 

109 

From this observational data, it was concluded that the times for 

performing coarse motor movements should be roughly comparable for most IVA 

and EVA operations (Table 3-1), although as may be noted in Figure 3-8, the 

greater the movement required (as in the case of turning a crank with a nine 

inch radius), the greater the discrepancy becomes between the IVA and EVA 

performance times. The differences observed are undoubtedly due to the 

restrictions in pressure suit articulation. In the case of fine motor 

movements, (Table 3-2) the EVA operations seem to take about 1.5 ti~cs 

longer. This difference can be attributed to the sensitivity and dexterity 

di fferences bet\'leen the 910yed versus the ungloved hand. 

Table 3·2 IVA Jne: EVA Task Time ComparISons 

(FlOe-Motor Movements) 

Average 

times 

(sec) Rallo 

Task IVA EVA EVA IVA 

Electrical connectors 

Coax - 6 turns, threaded 19 31 163 

Bayonet - 120-deg lock and unlock 9 14 175 

FIUI::l Interlace 

Remove 10 13 130 

Install 14 20 1 14 

Average 153 

It is believed that the tlm~line data derived from the neutral buoyancy 

chambers is a very reasonaul~ approximation of the actual times that will be 

experienced in zero g. To substantiate this hypothesis, the Skylab EVA tasks 

were reviel'{ed by the study team. Table 3-3 compares the planned times based 

on neutral buoyuancy simulations on the ground and the octual times ooserved 

in space for ten composite EVA tasks On Skylab 2, 3, and 4 for which data were 

3-15 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUGL~ 

1 

I 
. 

'l 

/ 

" 

, 

I 

I 

, I 

I 

I / / 

~ ,-

,.- -

l' 

) 

i 

I 

I 

I 

/ 

I I / 

// 

Table 3-3. Skylab EVA Tasks 

EVA Planned time- Actual tlmr J. time 

events (minutes) (minutes) (minutes) 

1 45 35 -10 

2 248 203 -45 

3 105 96 -9 

4 448 391 -57 

5 275 270 -5 

6 156 161 +5 

7 388 394 +6 

8 442 413 -29 

9 212 209 -3 

10 323 319 -4 

Total 2642 2491 - 151 

Overall - 6% under estimate (15112642 minutes) 

r , 

available. Out of a total of 2642 mimltes of pl cnned operations, the actual 

EVA times totaled 2491 minutes or 6% less (faster) than had been allocated. 

Based on this prior experience, it was concluded that the time estimates 

derived from the recently conducted neutral buoyancy simulations provide 

reasonable estimates of on-orbit perfo~ance times, at least to the level of 

precision required for the THURIS stuqy. 

In ViE." of the data suggesting: (1) the general compatibillty of IVA and 

EVA performance times; (2) the validity of neutral buoyancy data as a basis 

for estimating performance times in zero gravity; and (3) the high probability 

that an 8-psi EVA suit requiring no prebreathing time will be available in 

time for missions now in the conceptual design stage; it was concluded that no 

differentiation ~"ou1d be required beb'leen IVA and EVA for the purposes of a 

first approximation of performance times. The design decision as to whether 

EVA or IVA \-[ou1d be required in future systems will be established by 

prograrltllatic criteri a otner than performance times. Accordingly, the timel i ne 

pl'ofiles appearing in Appendix 0 do not differentiate bebleen the IVA and the 

EVA modes for the manual, supported, and augmented categories. 

In addition to performance times, the other crlteria considered in 

defining the applicability of the various modes of man-machine interaction 

were (1) the requirements for human involvement in terms of 

sensory/perceptual, intellectual, and psychomotor functions, and (2) the 

limiting factors in human involvement in te~s of the human response 

3-16 

,,-

MCDONNELL OOUOL~ 

• 

.1 
... 

/ ~'(;'\-

1" , 

, ",/ 

,.( 

i 

'1 I '/ 

I 

I 

/ 

/i----

! 

I 

-

I ..J 

0., 

capabilities for sensing, information processing, and motor actions. The 

human capability data developed in Task 1, and described in Appendix A, 

provided the information used in tois definition process. Figure -3-9 

summarizes in matrix form the human c~pabilities defined in Section 2 that are 

required to perform each of the generic space activities. 

An attempt \~as also made to identify the role that each of these 

capabilities played in each of the generic space activities; and, by assessing 

the importance of this role, to gain some understanding of the benefit of 

man's onboard participation in each activity. In some instances, the generic 

space activity could be applied to a broad range of mission activities, som~ 

of which would benefit significantly from man's participation an~~ers of 

which would benefit very little or not at all. For most, however, a 

reasonably precise eV(lluation could be made. Table 3-4 presents the t'esults 

of this assessment of the benefit of man's participation in each of the space 

activities. 

The activity timeline profiles found in Appendix 0 also indicate the 

requirements for human involve~ent as well as the limiting factors in human 

involvement for each of the man-machine categories. The limiting factors 

noted on these timeline profiles reflect the human capability classifications 

that could be exceeded by the requirements of the specific activity. In these 

cases, additional support would be required from the machine elements in terms 

of enhancing the setlsing, information processing, or motor actions of tlje 

human o~erator. Where limiting factors are exceeded, a transition into a more 

mechanized man-machine category will generally be required in order to obtain 

the optimal task performance cor.siderations. 

As an example of the issues considered at this point in the analysis, 

Figure 3-10 presents the timeline profile and notes the human capabilitie~ 

requi red and thf' 1 imi ti ng factors associ ated \'1ith the vari OUS man-machi ne 

categori es for the at;ti vity titl ed "Rel ease/Secure Mechanical Interface". The 

ranges of tifiles for accompllshing the activity have been determined from 

speciflc applicatl0ns. Activities in the manual category for example could 

involve tasks ranging from simple, one-handed over-center latches to numerous 

multiturn captive fasteners that could be arranged in various patterns (see 

3·17 

/ 

... CDONNE .... DOUG .. 9---
(I 

I 

omC:~!l\L F:. -- OF POOf{ QUAd I / 

C)/ MCDONNELL DOUGL~ 

HUMAN 

CAPABILITIES 

GENERIC SPACE 

ACTivITIES 

1 Actlvatellnmate System ('peratlon 

2 Adl~st/Ahgn Elements 

3 Allocate/A,s,gnfD,strlbute 

4 ApplY'Remove B,omed,cal Sens(\< 

5 Communicate Information 

6 Compensatory Tracking 

7 Compute D3Ia 

8 Conflrm'I; enly Procedures/Schedules 

9 ConnectlD,sconnPCt Elect"cal Interlace 

10 Connect'D,sconnect F'uld Interface 

11 Correlate Dat3 

12 Deactl ... atefTermtnate System Operation 

13 OecodDfEncode Data 

14 Del,ne Procedures/Schedu les/Oper~ 'Ions 

15 De;>loy/Retract AOJpendage 

16 Detect Chan~e '" State or CondItion 

17 D,splay Data 

18 Gather/Replace Tools/Eq'Jlpment 

19 Hand'e/'nspect/Ex:arnme LIVing Organisms 

20 Implement Procedures!Sched~les 

21 (n'formatlon Processing 

22 I nspeet/Oosprve 

23 rfteasure (Scale' Phy. t31 D,menSIOns 

24 Plot Data 

25 POSI"O~ Module 

26 PreCISion Manipulation of Oblf'ct~ 

27 Problem Solving/DecISIon Making! 

Data Aralysls 

28 PursuIt Tracklnq 

29 Release/Secure Mel.hanlcal Interface 

JU Remove Module 

31 Remove/fleplace Coverong 

3:7 Replace/Clean Surface CO"lllnQ~ 

33 R"'ple-nlsh r .. 1atcrnls 

34 StoreJRecord Element 

35 SurglCdl Manipulations - 36 Tr2n5port Loaded 

37 Trans[lo" UnloJdud 

j'-" -- ~ - - ..... "''''''0._ J .::. 

c: 

0 

;; 

c: 

~ C 

~ 0 

:;; c3 c: "C ?: c: ~ 

~ :; I'J .. u c c: R <! o ~ c3 _ .t: 

;;; ~'" u - (; a .. ~ _m "0 :> 00 "- u 

1 2 3 

• • 0 

III 

• • • 

" 0 

• 

• 

0 

0 

• 

0 

0 0 " e 

0 

0 

• 0 0 

0 0 e 

0 

8 

0 

0 

• 0 e 

0 

Q 

e 

• 

.. • It 

0 

0 I.) 

8 

It 

SENSORY/PERI 

., 

c: 

0 

Ic ~ 0 C c: .. c: 2 E ~ ;:; .t: 

g c: c: "C u 

~ c: "C " 0 " "C 0 c: .. 0 c: I- .. 0 c: .!; :.: en " E 0 c: .. 2 c: c3 '0 en 0 

~ ;:. c ~ E '" "C c: '0 .::i 0.0 ;; g E c 2 c a .. - c ~iO u Q ;:; 2 .. c: '1§ U u c: c: ; c 

Ca E <:: e ~ 2 .t: '" " - .. u ~~ ,,-0 3 u 

;:~ a ~ ~ t '" .. c: :> C c3 0 00 "-,,, ..J 0 

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 

0 • 

0 

0 

III " 0 0 

: 

I) e 0 c 0 

I 

0 C 

I 

III • ., 

e 0 

I) I 

G 0 

0 0 I 

I 

0 0 e 0 

0 0 

IS 0 I 

.. 

to 0 

.. 

0 
~ -) ~ 

. 

1

0 • 0 • • • 41 0 0 0 0 CI Q 0 '" V"ual AccommodatIon 

0 0 0 " DpteCllOn and Dlscrlmmatlon on Tone 

4 III G CX> Dl$cromlnat,on of Sound Intrnslty en 

m 

2 

en 0 0 0 <0 localizatIon of Sound 0 

::lJ 

-< "-

0 0 

- ~ 0 0 0 • • 0 0 DetectIon of lIght Touch m 

::lJ 

(') 

0 0 " 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 GI 0 0 41 :: Tactl'e RecognItIon of Shape and Texture !:gl 

-I 

c: 

• • • ;j DlscrlmtnatlOn of Force ):>' 

Against l,mb r I 

• .. • • 0 III • W RecognItIon of lImb (Movement 0 " 0 and locatIon' I 

A Detection and D,scn""natlon of i Angular AcceleratIon 

0 0 • U; EquilIbrium 

0; 

Detrctcon ~.,d DISCrimination of 0 Vibration 

0 • 0 0 ~ DetectIon of Heat and Cold I 

." 

DetectIon and DISCrimination i .- 0 Q W of OJors I 

to 

c 

;; 

Cf w 

cD (l) 

:J: 

c 

Oc E 

:J "TI;:u (') "Oii 0' 

"C n -; "-

0 [ - ,"'J : ...... 

.('\ ~ 

::lJ t .. : 

'" -. ,r, 

~ or .. 

a. 

." ~ m () 0. 

0 • 13 0 0 0 Q 0 0 It 0 • 0 III e It 0 0 0 0 " 0 III 0 0 " • • 0 0 0 • 0 o 41 • • ~ CognItIon 21 

-I 

0 41 • 0 0 0 III • • • • 0 0 0 0 Q • " 0 0 0 0 0 .., 0 0 0 • • 0 0 '" 0 Memory ~I r 

m 

(')' 

• 0 C • • 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 ., • ~ D,vergent and Convergent Production -I 

c: 

):>' 

0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • o • '" Evaluation r 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. • 0 0 0 0 • • '" 

0 • fI 0 0 0 • 0 0 • ..., ProductIon and ApplicatIon 

• '" 0 • 0 0 \) \) 0 0 0 C 0 • w of Force ~ 

en 

-< 0 0 • 0 '" Control of Speed of MotIon (') .. :J: 

0 

• 0 0 • '" s: • 0 • 0 • o 0 0 0 • 411 0 CI • 0 U1 Control of Voluntarv Responses 0 

-I 

0 .. " 0 • 0 '" Continuous Adjustment Control ,TrackIng' ::lJ '" I- n 

::r 1..7 ):> () 

c..: ~ 

-, < 

~ "'I 

• CI o 0 0 Q • o 0 0 0 • 0 o CI " 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 • • 0 '" ArmIH<l"d/Flnger Manopulatlon s: " 0 i -I 

Q ~ 0 o • C-~O~ I '" 0 • 4) 0 C 0 CX> LlodV PO$Inonlng ::lJ 

-c-

- -_ .. 

- -- --I-

:: I 

· · . · . fl; f.;1~, 

""""" 
'-

--L 

.,.. 

L 

.' 

, \ 

, . 

Table 34. Benefit of Man's ParticipatIon an Space Activities (Page 1 of 21 

No 

Generic tpace 

activity 

1 I.ct'vate Inillate 

system operation 

Key 

capabilities 

utilized 

In man's 

partlcl"atlon 

Evaluation 

V,s,on 

Mampulatlcn 

V,s,on 

2 Adjust align elements Cognltoon 

EvalualiOn 

3 "lIocate assign Cognillon 

Benefit of man's ontx)3rd participation 

Equipment 

canba 

elimll'ated 

Yes 

No 

Performance 

of activity 

Is Improved 

Probability 

01 mission 

success Is 

Increased 

In some cases Negligible 

I, some cases No 

In some cases 

Overall 

benellt from 

man's onboard 

participation 

Beneficial 

t Jot slgnlf,cant 

Rationale 

Automatlca'ly act'Vated :;ystems Will 

predominate 

Most alignment C?eratlons w,th,n 

Man 5 capabilities 

Pnmanly ,ulomz'!!d operations diS" ~ute Convergent Prco:! 

-------~--~-----+-------~------+-----~--------~----------------~ Ao-"Pty ,.,.nove CogMlon Not """.~::'Ia Yes Yes Essen~a! Operatons cannet eaSlIy be 

" blOmec'.cal sensors M;!!1!pUla!lon """" • automaU!d 

5 Commum('ate Cognition No i~ some cases No Not significant CommunicatIOn IIOk established 

Inforrr,at,on VISion automatically 

6 Compensa'ory 

tracking 

7 Compute data 

"~nlt'on 

(valJahon 

VISion 

Manlpulahon 

CogOlt,on 

EvalualiOn 

Conform v6nfy Cognotlon 

8 procedures. [valuation schedules operaliOns 

Ccf1rwc!.~$COI1tlect 

~ elednc<;! Itl!Itrlaoos 

~'d;:;conrl"¢l 

1~ fliJid lr';::rl::::1lb 

11 Correlate data 

Vll:iOtl 

0<00$ fhlof I-J::. 

1A.¥l:Dt'~~ol1 

EV3iUa',()ll 

ViSJOO 

Gtcas I \:)!or Act 

M<>.rupu'::--m 

EvoJ(l;lt't;1\ 

COC)nitlon 

Evaluallon 

Deactivate terminate Manipulation 12 VI~lon 

systeM operation Evaluation 

13 Decode encode data Cogl11liOn 

Convergent Prod 

Dp,ol' l"CCC~"'C5! Cogn'~cn 

14 schoou'es.o~t.~ons D'ver~enl Prod 

15 Deploy retract 

appendage 

V,Sion 

Gross Motor Act 

Ct-an:'tO;> 

E,"J!~!ion 

V.siCII 

MCUONNELL DOIJGLd 

No 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

Y~s 

Yes 

I~ 

No 

Yes 

Yes 

In sO'1"le cases M,nlmal 

In so""'l ca.<es 

No 

In some cases 

3,19 

Neglg,ble 

No 

In some 

cases 

Not Sl9n1flcanl 

Not significant 

Not slgnlf,cant 

Not slgnlflcarl 

Not Slgnilicant 

BenefiCial 

eBn~C;i'}Qf 

es~("~cl 

Ben~';:cQ1~ !Q' 

ElS~«I\'lt 

H.ghly dependert on nature of 

tracking task Null,fy,ng error sognal 

could be automatic 

Man Will play negligible role In most 

data computation 

Man would usually function In a 

backup role only 

TytlICZI L'tJzall~ of man's basle 

ca;:aoMes 

T)'}'!CallJt'&zt/tlCO of ('I.an S b~!.!c 

cap:±'~lm 

Man I'oould usually function In a 

backup ro'e only 

Automatically deact,valed systems .... ,it 

be the norm 

Computer f:JncIIO~ only 

It':.'tJv tf .S wOOlly d~dent en rrt"J1 s 

In\el!ectu.:;l ca:;"bJ<tl!l5 

Seldo'll re~ea'ed ccl",lIes are poor 

candlda'es for a'J'cmallOn 

S3'on;I';c,;;:~~;nOI1 ch1.,.l;1,..,-.ct~~ 

Jot ilCr,lfj(Y 

!~t~ih~~A~'!'i'l st<~;!:mcl~';j It; 

!tn ,1,0:31"" 

( . 
--

I 

Table 3-4. Benefit of Man's Participation 10 Space ActivIties (Page 2 of 2) 

Key Benefit of min S onboard partlclpallon 

capabIlities p"".,,, I Overall 

uUltzed Equipment Performanco 01 mission ~nefltlrom 

Genetic space In man c can be 01 actIvIty success Is man S onbosrd 

No activIty participation eliminated Is Improved Incrt;st'd partIcIpation Rationale 

VIsICll 

22 1r.~oo:;sf\'Q' CO';MIOtI Yes Ycr. Yn figt1ly bCl1l~h:-~1 I.~n·' Ulllctr.-e ot!,i!!'\<il«)I'.$ SUpeflQf 

Cva:ua!lOO 10 aut.."Il1"eo ~M~'"9 

o.~~IProd. 

23 Moasure (sca'e) V,StO'l I~ some cases No lin sOlT'e E)(Ine'loa' (I' some M~n IS best a·tema'r.~ '" ~ 

pt>ys,ca' d'me'lS'ons lE\alual~ cases cas~s s,luallOns 

24 ip'ct dala GogO'11On !No IMn,mal ~ : l.vl S'Q",llca~1 Pnm~rlly 3 t.OtT""i.'Ule' '\. "=t'C'l 

iV'St().1 I lin sorre t. 

25 POSitIOn moduld I Eva,va'lOn In some cases lin some cases I Bene!tc.al Ii)< SOrT'S I.'an s bere',llllgh'y ceC'e""~~ en 

Gross MOlor Act cases I actlVll>es I type 01 aCI'v1'f 

Pr=ion VtSIOt1 M:n s rnnn:pu!.w". sl<tll3 t='o~ ~ 2$ tnM:plJ~of Mal'IP'J!;::On Yes Yt'S YC$ 1,1051 olton es$t'l\lOll ¢Jptcated tot 6.'J~'Il2:i: ~~ ~s Cogn.too 

ProbI3'11 so/mg' Cot)n.lion , 

Z'T ~ma.:.~~ Otverganl Prod. Yes Yes Yes Essental Ikn esse:1'"..d trt <:t!cl.:n Convl'S',)m Plod- _1)'''8 E ~ altlU!lo'l 

29 PUf$ull tracXlng Gogo",on I ManiDulal'On M,'llrrJI Yes IMlnlmal Coulj be Stg~,f.ca'lt Depe"1dent 0.' spec',: 1"<lO<~ 13.5" 

VI~:lIl 

~ ~~'\ecure G'~ ~l~lOr k1. Yes YM Yes s...~!!f.00l1i> E'w~'Y tJ\<;XatO!l cl I"".:!t! S 

roo....~l~..l('.G M:!Jl':)Vb;!;on e£w.W:! cap3!;l!lt'~ In ~t$ act\~ 

Evct.a!..~ 

V's.cn I 1'1 some I Bere',Clallo' SO'I'e ~'a' S bene' I t>ogn~1 d-tot'<"'~ en 30 Re"'o.e modu'e E.a'uailon lin some ca~es 1'1 SO'Tle cases C35e I m"SIQn aCI Vlt es !)pe 01 aci>V'ti IG'oss ~lolo' Act 

18('"e'--:'all~r SOMe I 

Remo,e ,epl.l:e VISIOn In SO'Tle IcO\e, 'emo'11 Man s !;ere',t l'.h'Y c .. ~~t en 31 E't'a'uat

,oJ'1 f'l sc~e cases In SO'l'e cases lcove-tng G,oss ,,"elo. Act cases 'ep'JCE"'ent taSk cha'~;:';>f's':S 

a:t ,,!feS 

Re.~C'ca.-t V~StO'1 8~'ICM;! 10 Inlre~.J.~ 01 O!t":\' .... ~) .. .,. 32 E.aluat~ Yes Yes Y~ sw .... -e ccatl!'g~ G'O! s Moter Act ~er.n~ aulOMat:OO . 

VI!"!CO BertrlCsllO OGg'% 0: ~..:~ Is ~~ C'l 33 RSP'enis,,\ male-tets e.a>';;)ltOIl Yes In s:r;.e ClJ.e'S Yes es.si!OL.aI n.'\~$eOfl~ G:r..,s /,1o!::r ,!::I 

34 I Store record £-te'Tlent Ie :>gMlon No NQ Nu NOI S _" foea'i 

Man 5 PJrl':';l.3t~~ cf t~~'1 O"iII,n 

Iso'a'l'd cases 

t"slon 3S Su:7...<11 /ar,"?Ulat-on Not aw'.ca!k Yes Yes Essen!ll A.c: .... ~ nol ~rcpr~, ~ r...~.at.cn 

I nm, ... ptJl£l:ons .t.~~ltOll .- 3S !TransC'Ort load~d or IVIS 'n I~ sOlT'e Cepc~e!"t 01 Chara::trnsl cs Cl t~;'S C;, \3i' In SO'l'C cases In SO"1e CJses ~ !~"a'a:le"SI CS oj 37 lu"OlCed ICogl'I,on cases tlS~ elterSl\et; lor t~s 2C''\'~'( 

I . G 055 P~olor Act 

! Snadcd actIvit,es <:re those V¥htlh dIrect huma'l partlCJpatlon is consIdered most ben,.1,ctal or ~:!.s~rltlal 

Figure 3-11). Actillities such as these ,-qJire primarily sensory/perceptual 

and psychomotor capabilities in order to accomplish thp assigned task. nle 

physical action for accomplfshing the task is the limiting factor since 

exerting high torques could be required. In the "Supported" man-~JChlne 

category a crCl'iI1lan in restraints might perform the task with a manual ratchet 

/ 

MCOON"WI<,L "OUGL.~ ..;:~ 

320 

1 

I 

I 

I 
fj' J 

-"-

, 

\ 

L 

, 

Man Machone 

C~tego"es T.me SC3le 

Manual 8~JIli~@l 

Supported ci>:0m~@ i I 

Augmen ed 10@J 

Teleoper.'t'd ~§] I I ,eV o S.ml"r Tas,," \Vllh Actual 

SUp."rvlsed 0., Orblt Performance 

Ground c:::J 

:8<0 o S,mdar Task Performed on a 

Superll.sed Space Simulation 

On-Orb.t c:::J o Eng.nee. on) Estimate Based 10 on DeSign or OperatIonal 

Independent I I E XPf'r It~nce 

.1 , i i I 

OC~E~l 10 20 30 40 SO 1 2 4 6 8 

Seconds Mlnutt'5. Hour, 

FIgure 3-10. Release/Secure Mel:hantcallnterface 

RCQu"ements for 

HUMan Involveme-nt 

0 • 

0 0 

G 0 

0 0 e 

I 

0 0 0 

0 0 (,) 

0 0 

co .. 0 -" " 0 ~- UoE- ~ E ~u ;; 0 c ~ .L: 

"'''' :g u 1/lQ. ,. 

c;: 

\ " '( 

L.m.lIn~ Factors on 

Human In\"Olvement 

0 

I 0 

I 

I • I : 0 I 

I I , I 1 

I 

I . '" c r: 

!: 9", 9 -c: C ., - u .. E = « III ~ <- C U _0 

I c ~ -COo 

I 

I 

I 

wrench. However. if the force required to manipulate the mechanical interface 

requires more torque than the crewman can exert, then the action 

classification for that category is a liniting factor. In this case the 

activlty \'lould require augmentation in the form of a powered hand tool. 

Examples of tasks that might fall in the uSupervisedu category lnvolve 

commanding and monitoring mechanized mechanical interface actlvations such as 

the shuttle payload retention latches or launch restralnt devices (see Figure 

3-11). The on-orbit supervised category requires sensory/perceptual as \tell 

as lntellectual capabilities on the human's part even though the action itself 

might be accomplished by re~ote control. 

3 • .3 HUf1AN SUPPORT REQUIREMErHS 

Once the capabilities and limitations of each man-machlne mode have been 

establlshed and their impact on the performance of each activity identified, 

the next issue to be addressed is to determine the relative cost of each of 

the applicable modes of imple~entation. Assuming that two or more alternative 

implementation concepts will be feaslble for accompllshing a speciflc 

/ 

"'CDONNE~L DOUOLt:;:f ~ 

321 

" ,. .-
, 

) 

/- --

-",,<,-

./ 

--' 

, I. OJ J 1..~ _, , ..... ~J.~.j..~ ___________ _ 

or Pv'" _ ______ I 

"i 

~ 

Handed Over Center SImp'e, ~~~h Application 

"va',on of Shuttle Com."anddA~~t"nt,on Ll;:at;,:c.;.,.h ____ _ Pavloa _ 

Figure 3,11 ~~~~~:D~rl~a~c~e~E:x:a:m~~p_le_s ________ _ Release /Secure r.'ec h3nlC31 Int. 

3·22 

c::-l' MCDONNELL DOIJQI.~ 

n Nu~rous Multltur 'Fasteners CaPt,ve 

d r ..1o··'utor R l le<)seof Command h anne-stra1flt Dcvu:rs Launc ~ 
.. 

r 

:' 

/ 

j . 

, 

I 

, \ 

/ 

I 

; 

activity. the determining factor in the mind of the system engineer becomes 

the question of cost. Accordingly, the resources and support equipment needed 

to accomplish each acttvity in each of the feasible man-machine modes was 

identified to a sufficient depth to allow comparative cost data to be 

developed. 

The initial compilati~n of the resources and the support equipment was 

derived in conjunction with the timeline analyses described in Section 3.2. 

In addition, several past and ongoing space proJects such as the Skylab 

missions and the Unmanned Space Platform missions were reviewed to ensure that 

the final listing of resource needs and support equipment represented all of 

the most pertinent items. 

The support eqv~pment necessary for the various man-machine modes included 

Facilities; EVA Support Items; Tool Kits and Mechanical Support Equipment; 

Command, Control, Communication, and Data Management Equipment; Orbital 

Mobility Systems; and Operating Systems Soft\'tare. Table 3-5 lists the 

specific support equip~ent items identified in each of these categories. For 

reference purpose' the paragraph nUlT'bers in Section 3.4 of thi s report tha t 

contain the costin~ '~fonmation pertinent for ea~h ite~ in Table 3-5 are noted 

parenthetically on tht: ..able. 

To provide a basis for estimating the relative costs of alternative 

man~machine modes, a specific operational example \'1as selected for each 

activity. The example chosen was one for which a deSign concept "las already 

avallable or one that in fact had been implemented in a previous program. Th~s 

same example was then used for each of the man-machine mod~~ ~hat was 

applicable to the performance of a specific activity. For comparative 

purposes, this provided a common base for identifying the support requirements 

and for assessing the relative level of support necessary for each nan-machine 

mode. Since the obJective was only to deterQine the relative cost of 

implementing each mode, the use of a corrnnon example was believed to be 

adequate to provide a meaningful basis for co~parison. While either simpler 

or more complex examples than those chosen would change the absolute magnitude 

of the support requirements and their associated costs, it was reasoned that 

the relative costs of the alternative man-machine categorles would remain 

3·23 

NfCDONNe"LL DOUO~ 
, 

, 

, 

I 

/ 

I 

/ 

/ 

, 

/~ 

r--- -----

rl 

I 

I 

i 

I 

" 

Table 3-5 

.J 

/ 

SUPPORT EQUIPI4EIH LIST FOR COSTWG VARIOUS MAU-MACHINE HODES 

A. 

A1. 

A2. 

A3. 

M. 

AS. 

AG. 

B. 

Facilities 

Space Station Facility 

Ground Control Center, Baseline System 

Payload Control Center, Baseline System 

Data Handling Facility, Baseline System 

TracKing and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) 

Unmanned Platform Basic Resources 

EVA Support Items 

Bl. Extravehicular Hobility Unit (EHU) 

B2. 

83. ' 

c. 

Manned Haneuveri ng Uni t (~tMU) 

Remote l1anipulator System (RMS) 

Tool Kits and Mechanical Support Equipment 

Cl. Power Tool, Portable 

C2. Tool Kits. Hanual 

C3. Gas Recbarge Kit 

C4. Fluid Recharge Kit 

C5. Test Set. Alignment/Calibratlon. Portable 

CG. 

C7. 

Test Set. Electrical Checkout 

Surface C~ltlng/Refurbishment Apparatus 

C8. Support Equipment. Experiment Specific - Category A 

C9. Support Equipment. Experiment Specific - Category 8 

Cl0. 

Cll. 

C12. 

C13. 

C14. 

Support Equipment. Experiment Specific - Category C 

Support Equipment. Experiment Specific - Category 0 

Cherry Picker wlth Hork Platform (R!'1S) 

Restraints to Support ~'anned Activlties 

Life Sciences Experlments Tool Klts 

3·24 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DO"'O"~ 

(3.4.1 ) 

(3.4.2) 

(3.4.2) 

(3.4.2) 

(3.4.3) 

(3.4.7) 

(3.4.4) 

(3.4.5) 

[ 

H 

~ 
-, 

'! - ... ~, 

..... ~-~ 

rr 

I] 

Table 3-5 

SlIPPORT EQUIPMENT LIST FOR COSTING VARIOUS MAIl-MACHINE MODES (Continued) 

D. 

Dl. 

02 • 

03. 

04. 

05. 

06. 

07. 

08. 

09. 

010. 

01l. 

012. 

013. 

014. 

015. 

016. 

017. 

018. 

019. 

020. 

02l. 

022. 

023. 

024. 

025. 

Command, Control, Communication, and Data 

Management Equipment 

Control/Display for Remote Gimbals 

Control/Display for Remote Cameras (TV and Photo) 

Automatic Adjustment for Control of Remote Equipment 

Voice Interco~~unication 

Control and Display Activation and Nonitoring 

Equipment, Keyboard 

Hardware for Accepting Remote Commands 

Display and Software for Record Keeping, Procedures, 

Schedules. and 1,1aintenance 

Computer Programmed for Command and Control of a 

Specific Function/Task by Artificial Intelligence 

Encode/Decode Data Equipwent 

Data Computation and Reduction Equipwent 

Input/Output Data Buffer Equipment 

Central Timing Unit 

USSC Interface l1anagenent Unit 

Remote Units 

cm·1S Central Un; t 

High-Rate Recorder 

Low-Rate Recorder 

USSC-II Computer 

Ku-Band Communication Equipment 

S-Band Communication Equipment 

Low-Gain Antennas 

RF Transfer Swftcn 

Support Instrumentation/Sensor Equipment 

Tel emetry Uni t 

Payload Command and Data Acquisition Unit 

3·25 

/ 

MCDONNE .... DOUGLB----

(3.4.6) 
I 

I 

I 

I 

/ 

, 

I 

/' 

I 

---~----

'T I 

. ..J 

I / 

/ I I 

Table 3-5 

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT LIST FOR COSTING VARIOUS ~~-MACHINE MODES (Continued) 

E. 

El. 

E2. 

Orbital Mobility Systems 

Orbital Maneuvering Vehicle (O~tV) 

Orbital Transfer Vehicle (OTV) 

E3. Telepresence r~anipulator System (TMS) 

F. Operating Systems Software 

Fl. User Interface 

F2. Facility Readiness Test (Integration) 

F3. Dynamic Scenario Profile Generation 

Command Generation 

Telemetry Data Handling 

Input/Output 

Test Data Generation 

Data Base Generation/11aintenance 

Data Reduction 

Support Software 

(3.4.8) 

(3.4.9) 

F4. 

F5. 

Fo. 

F7. 

Fa. 

F9. 

FlO. 

Fll. Software tor Con~and and Control Hardware Controlled from a Remote 

Ground or Orbital-Based Work Station 

F12. Software for Ccw.puter Programmed for Cow~and and Control of a 

Specific Function/Task by Artificial Intelligence 

essentlally constant regardless of the level of complexity of the task 

required. Slnce only relatlve costs were to be determined, this line of 

reaSOnl ng pennitted different examples to be used l'I'ith different acti vitles. 

To a~d in the process, an evaluation sheet, shown in Flgure 3-12, Has 

developed. For each of the genenc actlvltles, a specific example ~/as 

select~d to analyze for each of the appllcable man-machlne categories. Tne 

support equi pilent ltems were tllen ldentl f1 cd that woul d be requ1 reJ in order 

to accofilpll sh the ass 1 gned task in eacll man-machl ne category. For exampl e. 

3·26 

/ 

MCOONN£LL DOU"L~ 
----

l' _ .. r------

" 

" I 

I 

I _-

J - J' 

/ 

I 

I 

/ 

I 

I 

I 

I 

--, , 

, 

r 

I' 

I 

I 

I 

~ 

, j 

, 

ACTIVITY ~IlJtUlER: 1 

ACTIVATE/INITIATE 

SYSTEH OPERATIo/~ 

/ 

, , I t / 1/ '\ ,I 

SUPPORT EQUIPHEllT REQUI REMENTS 

CATEGOr.IES OF rVlN-HACHINE IIlTERACTIOIIS 

I 

E I SUPERVISED L N 

S A E 0 

U , U 0 ~ E 

P G P P 

H P M E G E 

A 0 E R R 0 N 

N R N A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E E E ~l I N 

L 0 0 0 0 T T 

HUMAN SUPPORT EQUIPMEtrr REQUIRED (SEE TABLE E-1) 

A1 A1 A1 A1 

C8 C8 C9 C10 

C13 C13 05 

D6 

I V A 

A1 A1 A1 

B1 B1 B1 

C8 C8 C9 

C13 C13 C13 

E V A 

EXNlPLE - Actwate Ca~,~rd/T. V. IMage Gathering EQUl pnent 

MANUAL - 35 r.lill Camera 

SUPPORTED - 351m Camera wlth Auto Advance 

AUGIIEUTED - 35r.Jm Camera Wl th Auto Timi ng Sequence 

TELEOPEP~TED - RMS TV Camera 

SUPERVISeD GROUIID - TV Ca'Tlera 

SUPERVISEn OIl-0PBIT - TV Canera 

WDEPENDEtli - Satell lte Ir.1age Equlpnent 

·ConSldered as one ltem of support equlpm~nt 

08 - Computer Hard\~are 

F12 - ASsoclated Software 

Figure 3,12. TYPical Support EqUipment Evaluation Sheet 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUOL~ 

327 

A2 A1 A2 

AS 05 A3 

A6 06 A4 

05 Fll - ,AS 

06 A6 

Fll 03 

[\6 

07 

08,F12* 

I I 
r 

I 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

.I 

referring to Figure 3-12, the specific example selected for "Activate/Initiate 

System Operation" is tne "activation of camera/TV lmage-gathering equill11ent." 

Accomplishing this task in the manual category through an EVA mode of 

operation involves four items of support equipnent. Referring to Table 3-5, 

the four items required were identified as fo11O\'/s: 

Al - Space Station Facility 

Bl - Extra vehi cul ar Hob11 i ty Uni t (mU) 

C6 - Support Equill11ent, Experiment Specific, $10,000 

(35mm Camera £quipnent) 

C13 - Restraints to Support rlanned Acti vities 

This support equipment identification process continued through the rest 

of the applicable man-machine categories. 

In the Supported mode, the system might include a motor-driven advance. 

In the Augmented mode, toe adjustment of the lens opening and timing sequence 

might be automated. In the Teleoperated mode, the camera \~ould be adjusted by 

re~ote command. In the Supervised mode, the initiation of the picture 

sequences would be corrmanded from a remote location but the activation of all 

operations would be preprogranr.led. In the Independent !'lode, the system l'lould 

be activated by a self-contained sensor system. 

Although the performance times for IVA and EVA operat1ons were judged to 

be similar as discussed 1n Section 3.2, the support equip1'ent items necessary 

for IVA and EVA operations were ~~ua11y different. Accordingly, both IVA and 

EVA support requirements were identified when applicable, as illustrated in 

Figure 3-12. 

Tne 37 activity support equip~ent evaluation sheets will be found in 

Appe,.dix E. Each sheet contains the table of required support equipfi1cnt items 

for each of the man-machine categories for both IVA and EVA modes of operation 

where appllcable. Also the specific examples that were chosen to represent 

the generic space activity are indicated on the sheets for each of the seven 

man-machine categories. 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUGL~ 

3·28 

I. 
,..--.1' __ " 

rj 

; 

I, 

/ I 

I. 

i. 3.4 ECOtIOr1ICS OF liUi-tAN ACTIVITIES IN EARTH ORBIT 

jI 

I. 

r -

I 

~ ! 

i , i 

The development of comparative cost data for use in evaluating the 

economic advantages and disadvantages of the alternative modes of man-macnine 

i nteracti ons consi sted of bw steps. These steps were to (1) identify the 

significant factors influencing space activity costs, and (2) establish a 

usage cost methodology for all elements included in thesE identified cost 

factors. The activity support requirements described in Section 3.3 provided 

the initial definiton of the cost factors. Once a cost methodology ~as 

established, the reiative cost differences in accomplishing each of the 

generic classes of activities by each of the alternative man-machine modes 

could be determined. 

Activity support requirements were found to fall into two general groups. 

T~ese two groups can be identified as (1) time related and (2) 

frequency-of-use related requirements. The time related group is 

characterized by the requirement for a support element to be used over an 

estimated activity timeline and includes use of the space station facility, 

the ground control and data handling facilities, the tracking and data relay 

satellite system, and the EVA support items. The frequency-of-use related 

group is characterized by the requirement for a multiuse support item needed 

to perform an activity and includes tool kits and 

meChanical sl'pport equiJlnent; command, control, co:nmunication and data 

management equipment; unnanned platform basic resources; orbital mobllity 

systems; and operati ng sjstems soft\'iare. 

The approach used to develop usage cost methodology for the above listel 

support requirements is described in the following paragraplls, starting with 

the tlme related group followed by the frequency-of-use related group. 

3.4.1 Space Station Facllity 

No flrm guidelines or charge policies for developlng operational user 

costs ln tile Space Station era are currently avallal>le from government 

sources. Accordlngly. the general approach taken in thlS study was to 

establish a mission-related lncremental cost as the basis for charging space 

actl vltles requiring dlrect human lnvol ve,nent at the space station. The 

incremental cost \/as defined as the cost diffel'cnce betHeen full 

3·29 

/ 

MCDONNE .... "OVG~g 

I 
I 

I ' 

I 

I 

.I"i' ' r j 

\ 

v-) 

i' 

I 

I 

&ai ssion-support capabil ity and "zero mi ssion" man-i n-space-only capabil i ty. 

The basic space station sizlng parar.1eters (cre\'I size. number of modules. 

electrical power. communlcations data rate, and thermal contr~l) were defined 

for both a full capabl1ity IOC station and a hypothetical "zero mission" 

station that supported no payloads and was required only to r.1alntain itself in 

orBit. The differences in ctesisn parameters between the "zero mission" and 

tne "full capability" configuratlon are illustrated in Flgures 3-13 and 3-14. 

Activity costlng factors are presented in Table 3-6. 

The 11DAC computerized space faci1 ity cost prediction model I'las then run 

with these two sets of values to establish the incremental cost assoclated 

with the support of potential users or specific missl0ns. The cost difference 

between tne zero capability and the full capability facility was adjusted to 

exclude design and development cost assuming that nonrecurring cost should not 

be included when developing a baseline for estimating user charges. A 

ten-year life was assumed for the hardware represented by the resulting 

HabitabIlity 

Module 

Crew SrZe· 8 

Reboost -----~ 

System 

66 kW Power Control 

Data Management 

300 Mbps Communtcatlon 

48 kW Thermal Control 

Figure 3·13. Space Station (Full Capability) 

/ 

McnONNE .... oouaL~ 

Research uboratory 

3·30 
I' 

1. 

I 

L 

l' i' 

I ! 

r 

Habitability 

Modul& 

Crew SIZe - 2 

Reboost 

System -----4-

13·kW Power Control 

Data Manaoement 

25 Mbps Communication 

32·kW Thermal Control 

OP"C{": '~ •. ...._.". '-\ • 't OF PO" • '''': _, ,.1 , 

LogistiC" 

Mod~le 

Command 

and Control 

Module 

F':lure 3·14. Space. :tlon (Zero MIssIOn) 

Table 3-6 

ACTIVITY COSiH:G FACTORS 

, \ 

4 Pressurrzed MOdules 

Habltab,llty 

Module 

Cost elements tha~ are p~imarily a function of time use (cost/minute) 

o Space station facilitles and logistics operations 

o Ground control and data handling facilities 

a Tracking and data relay satellite sy~te~ 

o EVA support items 

Co~t elements that are pri~arily a function of number (N) of uses (cost/use) 

• Tool kits and mechanical support equipment 

o Co~~and. control, communications and data management equipment 

o Unmanned platform resources 

o Orbital mobility systems 

o Operatlng systems soft'dare 

3·31 

MCDONNtE .... Do"aL~ 
/ 

incremental space station facility cost. A straight line amortization results 

in an average cost per year which when divided by available operating 

man-hours per year yields a cost of $10,427 per operating hour for manned 

utilization of the space station pressurized volume and utility services. 

This calculation is illustrated in Table 3-7. 

Tabl e 3-7 . PRESSURIZED VOLur,1E AND UTILIT Y SERVICES COS TO ) 

fULL zEim 

CAPABILITY 

S i4\TION 

IHSS!ON INCREr~ENTAL 

STATION COST 

6 6 6 

($ x 10 ) ($x.10) ($ x 10 ) 

Simulator/Developnent Hardware 1380 794 586 

Fll ght Harc1\'Iare 2244 1366 878 

Total 3624 2160 1464 

Amortlzed Incremental Cost = $146411 = .$146.41-1/yr 

10 years 

"ost Pet' Oparating Hour = 314fi.4rV,tr = glO,427/hr 

14,040 hrs/yr(2) 

(1 i Productlon cost only; excludes design and develop:11ent cost. 

(2) 6 men x 9 Ilrs/day x 5 days/llk x 52 wks/yr = 14.040 hrs/yr. 

A similar incremental cost approach was used to estimate logistics 

operations (replacement s;lares, consumab1es, maintenance, and repairs) 

associated ~/ith the space !;tation facility. ThlS resulted in a cost of 

$12.201 p~r operating hour for space station logistics operations. The HDAC 

cost model run generated the values for thlS calculation and these values are 

summarized in Table 3-8. 

The incremental cost for lOglstics transportation was determined by 

allocating the Space Shuttle f11ght cost in proportion to the ratio of 

3-32 

/ 

.. rnnlWlW,r_. nn'Ir.. a.. 
r. 

I. 

(] 

Table .3-8 

LOGISTICS OPERATIONS COST 

FuLL ZERO 

CAPA8ILITY IHSSIOU 

STATION STATION 

6 6 

($ x 10 ) (S x 10 ) 

~eplacement Spares & Consumab1es 261.5/yr 129.7/yr 

Ifaintenance & Repairs 

Total 

Cost Per Uperatlng Hour = 

97.81.1!:. 58.3/t,r 

359.3/yr 188.0/yr 

$171.3:1/yr = $12.201/hr 

14.040 hrs/yr 

I NCR£~lE rJr AL 

COST 

6 

(S x 10 1 

131.8/yr 

39".5/yr 

171.3/yr 

logistics operavions incremental cost to full capability cost with a further 

cost-sharing adjustment. This res~lte~ in a cost of S9,402 per hour 

calculated as follows: 

Assuming 20% sharing wlth other payloads and 4 STS flights per year; 

Total Cost = Sl3611/flt x 80% x 4 flts/yr = $275.2H/yr 

Allocation factor (from logistics operations) = S17l.3M = 48% 

$359. 311 

Incremental Cost = $275.211/yr x 48% = $132H/yr 

Cost per Operating Hour = S132M/yr = $9,402/hr 

14.040 hrs/yr 

In addition to the three Major elements of space station facil1ty cost 

described above, estimates were added for use of airlock and safe haven 

resources to complete tne space station facility usage charge. Based on data 

contained in the IIOAC cost data bank, these two items were estimated at $164 

per hour and $328 per hour, respectlvely. The sum of all flve elements 

amounts to $32,522 per hour (or $542 per minute) for use of the space station 

facility. This value is summarlzed in the Table 3-9. 

3·33 

MCDONNELL nOlJoB' 
~ • e __ _ 

, 

--. 

: 

\ 

--

/ 

. , 

Taole 3-9 

SPACE STATION FACILITY 

COST PER OPERATING HOUR FOR ACTIVITIES REQUIRHli DIRECT HU~IAN 

INVOLVEMENf IN SPACE 

(1984 Doll ars ) 

Pressurlzed Volume & Utl1ity Servlces 

Loglstics Operatlons 

Loglstics Transportation 

Alrlock 

Safe Ha yen 

Total Space Station Facility 

3.4.2 Ground Control and Data-Handling Facilities 

$10,427 

12,201 

9,402 

164 

328 

~32,522 

-, 

Tnis category within the tlme-related group includes the ground control 

center, payload control center, and ~ata-hand1ing facility. The ti~e-re1ated 

charges for use of these facl1ities is based on a ten-year amortization of 

production cost plus annual operatl0ns cost allocated over the estinated 

a'1nua1 ani1abi1ity time. The production and operations cost data \~ere 

obtained from the MDAC Space Platform Ground System Study*. An examille of the 

usage charge calculation for the ground control center is as follows: 

Amortized Production Cost 

Annual Operations Cost 

Total Annual Cost 

S3.874M £ 10 yrs = $ 0.387M 

3.345l1 

$3.73211 

Annua 1 Ava i1 ab i1 i ty Ti me = 480 mi nutes per day (8 hours) x 5 days per \~eek 

x 52 weeks per year = 124,800 minutes 

Cost per j·linute = $3. 732:1/yr = $30/min 

124,800 min/yr 

* Ford Aerospace and Comunlcatlons Corporation, ~e Platform Gr-ound 

Sys tern Study t Oasell ne Data Package, prepared under r·:DAC Contrac t 

NAS8-33955, July 1982 (see Reference 70). 

/ 

MCUOAlNL.l.L ">OU(la.~ ~ "'-'" 

3-34 

-----.. 
/ 

--. 

,.' 

\ 

/ 

) / I 

/ 

Costs per minute for the other two facility items were calculated in a 

similar manner. The results of these calculations are summarized in 

Table 3-10. 

Tabl e 3-10 

GROUND CONTROl. AND DATA-HANDLIliG FACILITIES 

US£~ S£I{VIC£ CHMGE PER [11 NUTE 

(1984 Dollars) 

1 • Ground Control Center, casel1 ne System 

2. Payload Control Center, Basellne System 

3. Data Han~11ng Facil1ty, Basel1ne System 

3.4.3 Tracldng and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) 

$30/,ni n 

46/mi n 

11 /m1 n 

The time-related charge for use of the TORSS is $110 per minute. This was 

obtained from the UASA Hanagement Instruction, IITracking and Data Relay 

Satellite System (TDRSS), Use and Reimbursement Policy for Non-U.S. Government 

Users," I-larch 1983. 

3.4.4 EVA Support Items 

This category within the time-related group includes the Extravehicular 

110bility Unlt emu). the Hanned 11aneuvering Unit (Nl1U), and the Remote 

r1anipulator System (R11S). The time-related clldr"ges fol'" use of these items 1S 

based on a ten-year amort1zation of production cost plus annual operations 

cost allocated over the estimated annual availability time. An example of the 

usage charge calculation for the Ef.1U is as fol101'1s: 

Amortized Production Cost S2.0:1!. 10 yrs = S .2H 

Annual Operations Cost 2.01\ 

Total Annual Cost $2.2~1 

Annual Avallab11ity Time = 1)40 minutes per day (9 hours) x 5 days 

per week x 52 weeks per year = 140.400 minutes 

Cost Per {~inute = $2.2N/yr = S15.67/min 

140,400 min/yr 

3·35 

\ 

\ 

'I 

-
.. _---.. -

) 

------- / 

Costs per minute for the other two items ,,,ere calculated in a similar 

manner. The results of these calculations are summarized in Table 3-11. 

Tab1 e 3-11 

EVA SUPPORT IT£HS USER SERVICE CHARGt: PER rlINUTE 

(1984 lJoll ars ) 

Extra vehi cul a r 1101>11 i ty Un; t (EI1U) 

Hanned Haneuveri ng Unl t (HNU) 

Remote !-Iani pul ator System (Rj"'S) 

(1) Contacts \"11 tIl JSC Personnel (1983 - 19134). 

(2) Quote from Spar Ltd •• Canada, 1983. 

3.4.5 Tool Kits and Hechanical Support Equipment 

S15. 67/mi n. (l ) 

53.33/min. (1 ) 

121.00/min. (2) 

This first category within the frequency-of-use related group includes 

special tools, test sets, refurblshn.ent kits, restraints, etc •• which could be 

used to support a number of different activities and would probably be reused 

many times during their operational life. The cost per use for these items is 

based on an approach that employs a quantity-adjusted a~ortization of unit 

production cost combined with a dollar-value-adjusted operations cost. The 

following equatlon is use~ to estimate the usage charge for the equipment 

items as a funct{on of 'number of anticipated uses. 

Cost/Use = c + O.25CO. t3 

where C = initial production unlt cost of ltem 

where N = number of times an activl ty is performed usi ng the item 

TIle flrst term of tnis equatlon represents an amortlZatlon of the ln1tlal 

unlt cost (cost olvlded by nU~Der of uses). It wl1l be noted that the nu~ber 

of uses (N) 1S aJJust:!d by an exponent whose value is 0.848. This adJustment 

is appl1ed to account for the grellter rlsk of equip.lent fa1lure and potentldl 

replacement as the ltem lS continually used anJ refurtnshed over its entlre 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOUC:;L~ ..>;.../ 

3·36 

I 
, 

/ 

, ' , 

-,' 

/ 

, . , 

, 

, 

/ 

r 

/' /~ 

useful life. The 0.848 exponent 1S related to a 90~ cost-reduction curve 

which is corilmonly used in cost/quantity relationships. In the present 

application, doubl1ng the number of t1mes an activity 1S perfonned results in 

an average cost which is 90% of the previous cost. As an example, a change in 

frequency from 10 to 20 (a factor of 2) would reduce the average unit cost as 

follows: 

(2°·848) f 2 = 0.90 or 90~ reduction 

ApplY1ng this approach to the computat1on of equ1pment cost amortizat1on 

results 1n a progresslvely greater value for the amortlzatlon of lnltlal cost 

c:)l11pdred to a stra1ght-line all10rtizat1on sChedule, as the number of uses 

increases. 

The second term of this equatlon represents a recurring operatlons cost 

per use for maintenance and refurblshment, calculated as a percentage of 

in1tial equipment cost. The scaling adjusbaent applied here (the exponent 

whose value is 0.8) results in a decreasing percentage of lnitial cost as the 

1nlt1al cost becomes larger. Tn1s rationale allows for an adequate 

refurblshment charge for a relatively 101-1 cost item and also prevents an 

exceSS1ve cnarge being appl1ed to a very high cost item. As an exa~ple, the 

percentage charge on a S10,000 1tem 1S approx1mately 4% \~hereas the percentage 

on a $10,000,000 item 1S only about 1'.t. ihese percentages are JudgFlent 

fact?rs based on related analys1s from prevlous stud1es. Thp base produc~lon 

urnt cost data c:nd data sources for all Hems ln tIllS category are SL.iilMar1zeJ 

in Taoll? 3-12. 

J. 4. 6 COfilf"and, Control, COfil!11Unl CiA ti on, and Da ta l'l~nagement EgUl p:1ent 

Tn1s frequency-of-use category 1ncludes control/dlsplay panels, ~omputers, 

keyboards, data storage equ1~ent, intercom devices, servo actuators, 

encoders, decodet's, and support lnstrumentation. All are assuf,lej to be 

rnu~t1use 1telns capable of support1ng a number of dlfferent aC1vitles. The 

same cost per use equation descrlbed under Tool K1tS and Hechanlcal Support 

Equipnent 1S used to est1mate the usage charge for these 1tems. The base 

productlon Unlt cost data and data sources for all items 1n tllis category ~re 

SUIili11arlzed in Table 3-13. 

3·37 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOIJGL~ '-' ~ 
/ 

tJ'1 I 

- .. _--

\ 

"""~-- '. 

/ 

Table 3-12 

TOOL K ITS AND HECHAIU CAL SUPPOR r EQU IPHE NT 

PROOUCTIOI1 UNIT COSTS 

1. Po\~er Tool, Portable 

2. Tool Klts, Manual 

J. Gas Recharge Klt 

4. Fluid Recharge Kit 

(1984 Dollars) 

5. Test Set, A11gnment/Calibration, Portable 

b. Test Set, ElectrTcal Checkout 

7. Surface Coating/Refurblshment Apparatys 8A. Support Equipment, Experlment Speclf1C 

8d. Support Equ1pment, Experiment Specific 

8C. Support Equipnent, Experiment Speclfic 

81l. Support Equi poent t Experiment Specifi C 

9. Cherry Picker wlth Ilork Platform (RNS) 

10. Restrai nts to Support 1,1anned Activl ti es 

11. Life SClences Experiments Tool Kits 

$ 52, OuO ( 2 ) 

16,000 (2) 

76,000 (1) 

152,000 (1) 

315,000 (1) 

210,000 (1) 

456,OuO (1) 

10,000 (3) 

50,000 (3) 

250,000 (3) 

1 ,000,000 ( 3 ) 

645,OOU (2) 

124,000 (2) 

34,000 (3) 

(1 ) tlcDonnell U·ougl as Astronauti ~s Company, Power System Desi gn Concept Study, 

Phase C/O Cost Estimate, DR-6 Final Report, Contract ~~8-33955, June 1981. 

(2) Essex Corporat1on, Analysis of Large Space Structures Assembly, I~SA 

Report rlo. 3751, December 1983. 

(3) 11cDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company, In House Studies and Engineenng 

Jud9:nent. 

3.4.7 Unmanned Platform Basic Resources 

TIll s .category provlJes a usage charge for the basic resources port1on of 

the unmanned platform (subsystem capab11ity not requireJ to support payloads) 

where unmanned support is requlred to perform a particular activ1ty. The f1UAC 

cost model predicts a total platform production cost of S304.6b mill ion or 

$036.466 mill10n per year asuming a ten-year amortlZation. Tne ratio of 

platform Subsystem pOlier requ1 rements to total power requirements is 

2.5 kw/14.0 kW or 0.17857. ApplY1ng th1S ratio to the $36.466 mill10n per 

year total results 1n an allocation of 36.512 IIlil1ion per year for platform 

basic resources. 

A current platform miss10n analys1s shows an average of 1260 actlv1ties 

per year invol v1ng platform usage. The average cost per use based on these 

values 1S $6.5l2H/126U = $b163/use. Applying tile quantity aJjustment exponent 

3·38 

c-:'/' MCDONNELL DOI.JGL~ 

[ 
, 

\ .1 , 

--r r 

r 

I· 

! 

I. 

/ 

L 

- I I 

Table 3-13 

COi1HAtJD. CONTROL. CO,1IWtJICATION, AND DATA tlANAGEMENT EQUIPilENr 

PRODUCTION UNIT COSTS -~.. ,1984 Dollars) 

1. Control/Display for Remote Gimbals 

2. Control/Display for Remote Cameras (TV and Photo) 

3. Automatic AdJustment or Control of Remote Equlpnent 4. Voice Intercommunlcatlon 

5. Control and Dlsplay Activatlon and I~onit"'ring 

Equipnent, Keyboard 6. Hardware for Acceptlng Remote Commands 

7. Display and Software for Record Keeping, Procedures. 

and Schedules Maintenance 

8. Computer Progranuned for Command and Control of a 

Specific Functlon/Task by Artlficial Intelllgence 

9. Encode/Decode Data Equlpment 

10. Data Computatlon and Reduction Equi pment 

11. Input/Output Data Buffer Equlpment 12. Central Tlming Unlt 

13. NSSC Interface Management Unit 

14. Remote Units 

15. CDt1S Central Unit 

15. Hlgh-Rate Recorder 

17. Low-Rate Recorder 

ld. NSSC-II Computer 

19. KU-Band Communication Equipment 20. S-8and Co~nunlcatlon Equipnent 21. Low-Gain Antennas 

22. RF Transfer SWltCIl 

23. Support Instrumentat'on/Sensor EqUl pnent 24. Tel emetry Urrtt 

25. Payload COhlmand and Data Acqulsitlon Unit 

.$155,000 

108,00U 

608,000 

381,000 

175,000 

75,000 

200.000 

1,521,000 

68,000 

380.000 

141,000 

1,305,000 

770,000 

324,000 

567,000 2,4113.000 

495,000 

1,521,000 

7,029,000 

1,570,000 

405,00U 

81,000 

3.108,000 68,000 

432,000 

(1) 

(l ) 

(1) 

(2 ) 

(1) 

(J) 

(1) 

(1) 

(3 ) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

(1) 

( 1 ) 14cOonnell Doug1 as Astronauti cs Company, Power System Desl gn Concept Study, Phase C/D Cost Estlmate, DR-6 Final Report. Contract r~S8-3395b. June 1981. 

(2) 11cDonnell Douglas Astronautlcs Company, tlanned Orbltal Systems Concepts Study. Flna1 Report - Progral:J111atlcs for Extended Duratlon foIisSlons. Contract 

IJASU-31014, Report No. MDC G5919, September 1975. 

(3) 11cDonnell lJouglas Astronautlcs COI;]pany, Payload ASS1St Ilodu1e (PM) Program, Actual Cost Experience for Slmi1ar Items. 

3·39 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOUGL9 
..... 

I / 

! 

of 0.048 descrioed under tool kits results in a calculated first use (C) of 

$2.2 ml11ion as follows: 

c ..: $5168 

c = $2.2 mill ion 

The general equation for cost per use as a functlon of number of uses (N) 

is tnen 

Operations cost was estimated to be 25% of the production cost 

re1ationsnip or 

$0.550H 

,p.848 

3.4.8 OrIn ta 1 HObll1 ty Systems 

ThlS frequency-of-use categorJ includes the Orbital !·laneuverlng Vehlc1e 

(OMV), the Orbital Transfer Vehicle (OTV), and the Teleprpsence Manipulator 

Systelil (T14S). These are all complex, expensive systems that \'Ii11 be designed 

for ml!lti pl e appllcati ons and 1 arge numbers of uses. The cost per use for 

tllese 1 te:ns is based on an approach slmll ar to that described under Unmanned 

Platform 8asic Resources. A ten-year amortlzation of productlon unlt cost was 

again used along with an assllj~ption of 250 uses per year. An example uSlng 

the ms shows tile following calculatlons: 

Amortized Annual Productlon Cost = $41.0 milllon .. 10 years:: $4.hl/yr 

Average Cost Per Use = 34.111 f 250 :: S16,400/use 

Calculated Flrst Use (C) :: S16,400 x 250°. 848 :: Sl.771~ 

Operatlons Fi rst lise :: 0.25 x $1. 77111 :: $0.44311 

These calculated values aQount to U.0432 and 0.0108 tiQes production 

cost as follows: 

Product~on First Use 

Operatlons Flrst Use 

/ 

MCOONNELL vou"'~ 

= $1.77111 '" $41.00011 = 0.04032 

:: SO.443M f S41. OOOi1 :: 0.0108 

3·40 

umt 

.~ 

.1 

.. 

1 

i 

~ 

tl 

n ;j 
./ 

I 

i 

/ 

, 

I 

ta "'.-

I 

.. 

--- f /' I I' ..\ 

I " ./ 

Since the same ten-year amortization and 250 uses per year is used for all 

three items in this category, the following general equatlon can be used to 

estimate the usage charge for tnese ite~s as a function of number of 

anticipated uses: 

Cost/Use = 

O.0432C 

tp·848 + 

O.Oluae 

;po 8~8 

where C = lnitia1 production unit cost of item and N = number of times an 

actlvity is perfonned using the it~. 

The base productlon unl t cost data and data sources for the three i telilS in 

thlS category are summarized in Table 3-14. 

Tab1 e 3-14 

ORBITAL ItOBILITY SYSTEr1S 

PRODUCTION UNIT COSTS 

(1984 0011 ars ) 

1. 0,'blta1 l>1aneuverlng Vehlc1e (Oi4V) 

2. Orblta1 Transfer Vehicle (OTV) 

3. Te1epresence 14anipu1ator System (Tl1S) 

(1) Contacts with JSC Personnel (1903 - 1984). 

(2) Consensus of Prevlous NJ\SA and Contractor Studles. 

$ 65,000,000 (1) 

131 ,000,000 (2) 

41,000,000 (3) 

(3) tssex Corporatlon, Ana1ysls of Large Space Structures Assemo1y, NASA 

Report tJo. 3751, December 1983. 

3.4.9 Uperatlng Systems Software 

Software ltens are also cnarged as a function of number of uses, but a 

S11ght1y dlfferent approach Has employed and may be described as follows: 

Cost/Use = C 

N + 0.S5C 

NO. i34d 

\~t/ere l. = inltia1 softHare developnent cost and N = nunbcr of tme5 an 

act1vlty 15 performed using the softl'/are element. 

3-41 

MCDONNELL DOllGLg 
\ 

I 

i 

. 

/~ -' ,I' 

I 

.' 

I 

/ 

a.. ........... 

Tne first term of tllis equation represents a straight-line amortization 

of tile lnitial software developnent cost. Although the general cost analysis 

!:Iroundru1 e was to amortize prc,1uction cost only, software does not have an 

identiflao1e productHln cost and its deve10p.lent cost is considered compara:'le 

to hdrdwar~ production cost as a base for amortizatlon. The sofb/are items 

included in support requ1rements are all general, mu1timission systems and do 

not include payload-specific software. No cost/quantity adJustment was 

app11ed for risk of fa11ure since the hardware adjustment did not appear 

applicable in tile case of repetltive use of software. The second term of the 

equatlon represents ~ recurr1ng operat1ons cost-per-use for software 

malntenance. Data from the 1982 Space Platform Ground System Study indicate 

tMt software ma1ntenanre at a nominal 100 uses over 10 years amounts to aoout 

110% of original software deve10pnent cost. Since software maintenance is 

related to time as well as number of uses, it was assumed that the m;nlmUill 

soft''Iare mal ntenance charge for one use over ten years woul d be 50% of the 

nomlna1 lO-year cost, or 55~ of initial software developnent cost. ThlS 

startlng value was scaled in relatlon to quantity using the same 0.848 

exponent appl1cation descrlbed under equ1pment cost amortlzatlon. This 

results in an lncreasingly greater total software maintenance operations cost 

as tne number of uses lncreases. The base software development cost data and 

data sources for this category are sumrnarlzed 1n Table 3-15. 

3.4.10 Cost Ilethodology Application 

Appl1cation of the above descrlDed cost methodology, shown scnematlcally 

in Flgure 3-15, consists of (1) obtainlng inputs of support requlrement 

elements from tne act1vity definition sheets and mean t1mes to perforlO from 

tile actlvity tlmel1ne sheets, (2) running the appropriate equations with the 

appl icable unit cost and cost per hour data for a representatl ve number of 

t1mes perfonned, and (3j p10ttlng tile composite cost/quantity calculations in 

the fonn of curnul ati ve cost versus frequency of use curves. The results of 

the cost methodology a~plicatlon consist nf 37 sets of cost curves which 

surnmar1Ze, for eaCh of the 31 genenc space actlvltles, the relative economlCS 

associated \'lith the performance of each actl V1ty b.t the seven alternatl ve 

hlodes of man-machl ne i nteracti on. All 37 sets of cost versus frequency of use 

curves are presented 1n Appendix F. Two variat10ns in the data rlotted are 

presented for each acti V1 ty. Tile fl rst vari ati on excl udes operati ons costs 

/ 

MCDONNI!LL OOIJG~ 

3·42 

I. 

.. 

I 

R 

" v 
I 

f 

rJ' 

I 

'I 

, 

.a....... . I 

I 

1. User Interface 

Table 3-15 

OPERATING S YSTEl1S SOFTwARE 

SOFTHARE DEVELOpr~EtJT COSTS 

(1984 Dollars) 

2. Facility Readiness Test (Integration) 

3. Dynamic ScenarlO Profile Generation 

4. Command Generation 

5. Telemetry Data Handling 

b. Input/Output 

7. Test Data Generation 

8. Data Base Generation/i,1aintenance 

9. Data Reduction 

1U. Support Software 

11. Software for Conunand and Control Hard~'1are Contro11 ed 

from a Remote Ground or Orbital-Based liork Station 

$ 1,654,000 (2 ) 

1,654,000 (2 ) 

6,565,000 (2 ) 

3,283,000 (2 ) 

4,911 ,000 (2 ) 

1,654,000 (2 ) 

465,000 (2) 

956,000 (2 ) 

465,000 (2) 

956,000 (2 ) 

8,478,000 (1) 

12. Software for Computer Program~ed for Command and 

Control of a Speclfic Functlon/Task by Artificial 

Intel11gence 16,956,000 (1) 

(1 ) 11cDonncll Oougl as Astronautl cs Company, PO\'ler System Desl gn Concept 

Study, Phase C/O Cost Estlmate, OR-6 Final Report, Contract 

NAS8-33955, June 19d1. 

Ford Aerospace and Communications Corporatl0n, Space Platform Ground 

System Study, Basel ine Data Package, prepared under 11DAC Contract 

NAS8-33955, July 1982. 

associated with equifIaent refurbisllment, platform operations and maintenance, 

orblta1 mobi11ty systems operatlOns, and software malntenance. The second 

varlatl0n lncludes these operatlons costs along wlth all applicable 

time-related usage charges and frequency-of-use related production cost 

a~ortlzatl0n charges. The lncluslon of operations costs probably represents a 

more equltable approach to establ1shing user charges. The data excluding 

operatlons cost are presented to recognize the current general1zed level of 

/ 

MCDONNELL. DOUGL$-

3-43 
/ rr' I 

I 

I 

i 

/ /, 

B 

rl Arllw,ly 

ct.'tnllN)R\ 

IT •• 2 11 

H Actl'lIfY 

',"'rho., 

n.,k221 

y Ac.U'IIiV 

suppo.t 

,~"u.m.nIS 

fTaM 2 3. 

I MD"C' ....... ,"'or mal .on d,Uablnk 

J ~ 

1-

r 

t-~ 

I 

f 

Cos, elements 11'1.1 u. proma,.ly 

• IwnChan of 11m. 101M iCOlllmlnul •• 

• S;:lKe sla"o" l,cII .. ~, 

.:1M ioo.,.n'CI COIW'':U on, 

• (",'OUn(j (.>nI,.,1 and 

d3!& hal'lC"1 ng tac htlt!! 

• T,«1o. "9 and cl<ltol 

fPtavU pi ' ..... " .. m 

.EVAsuPPOfrlh!mI 

Colt .Iam'ntl t" ... r. pttma"l., .. functIOn 

01 nllmb!l, tN) ot U," teo,r/" .. , 

, 

f 

I / / 

Curnul.ulII" case 0' IIC1l'nty 

I'"~ h~u."cv tit ,ept't loOn 

CUf.'" to, •• ch m.n 

COlt ., .. h.lnClion of 

S~. ",'Ion ',c,hl., 1""'PO'lat,.," artuu' wPputl .qu opm."' MIld 

kJqlt.ha costs, aNt 

dUlyeyel ... I • COf'T7m~"d CO"trl)l comm,," .nd d~t. m<jlnt t'Qu.p 

r--- P'C.c1uCf on cn, 'pt>'3t.0<', CO\! 

N 64& 

COtt 

Pl'l'orm 11 "',"CllOn b.n'c "soy~ 

Df I 'qulpm.nt orbllal motul.ty 

.y.l.ms s.ot w._, ,Ad 9'Qwf'ld 

~ppu.t Op41',llOn, cast. 

Figure 3-15. THURIS Cost Methodolo!lY 

P'OOl,.ctlon CO'll • "'1"""I,on~ C'}Sf~ 

III 1I48 

operations cost analysls and provlde an easy means to s~~-~~ -cost 

data result1ng from future detal1e~ operations analysis. 

Fi gu:-e 3-16 1 11 ustrates the a pp1 i catl Oil of the cost metnodo logy for one of 

the 37 generic space activitles, "Imp1ehlent Procedures/Schedules. II The 

activity definltioJl and time11ne sheets (see Appendlces 0 and E) for this 

activity identify the specifi~ support requirement itews and mean tiQes to 

perform this activity 1n each of the seven modes of man-f'lachine interaction. 

The costs per use for time-related items (see Figure 3-15) are calculated as 

t .. e product of the mean time to perform (from the actlvity timellne sheet) and 

the app11cao1e cost per hour or minute (from Sections 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3, and 

3.4.4). The costs per use for frequency-of-use related ltems (see Flgure 

3-15) are calculated using the applicable production unit costs or software 

costs entered lnto the appropriate equatlons docu~ented 1n Sections 3.4.5, 

3.4.6, .3.4.7, 3.4.8, and .3.4.9. Cumulative costs are calculated for all 

:i-44 

MCDONNEl.1. DOUOl.g 

( 

f 
'1\ I 

r 

.-

•.. 

r 

\ 

j 

.. 

c 

~ 

:E 

/ 

1000,------------r----------~------------r_----~----__, 

1oo+-----------~----------_t----------~~~------~~ 

..q--- ---- . _ ~_ .... It··- __ .)to -- _. )t-_.-

10+-----------~----------~------~~~~--------__1 ••••• +-•• ~ • 

~-...:...------,. 

..... ~ ....... ~ ... . ••••• + ••••••• + ••••• 

• ••• Manual 

~----------_+----"'"""~~'7""r_l ___ ---Supported Augmented 

__ .. __ .... _ Teleoperated 

___ ... _SU(lervlsed - Ground 

____ , _Supervisee - On Orbit 

__ 4_" _Independent 

0.1 ~--.---.-........ ~J--"'--r-""""I"TT'T+-!~!!!\lI!i~~'f-"""!~~~~ 1 10 100 1000 10.000 

Num:'er of Times ActiVity IS Performed 

Figure 3·16. ActiVity 20-lmplementatlOn Procedures/Schedl.:es Cumulative Cost vr. 

Rejletltlons Includrng Operations 

specified ltems at representative quantities of 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 500, 

1000, 5000 and 10,000 to provide sufficient data points to plot the composite 

cost versus frequency-of-use curves for each of the seven man-machine 

interaction modes. 

3.4.11 Observations 

Although the implementation costs for each individual activlty in each 

man-machine interaction ~ode are somewhat different, a rather significant 

observation is that the cost level for direct human involvement (manual, 

supported, augmented, or teleoperated modes) generally remains considerably 

lower than the cost for remote human involvement (supervised and independent 

modes) over a large number of times that the activity might be performed (1 to 

1000 times). As may be noted on Figure 3-1~. the cost differentials were 

generally observed to span two orders of magnitude when only a few activations 

are required (1 to 10) but narrowed to one order of magnitude when the number 

of activations approached 1000. For the most activities, the manual mode can 

be performed in a relatively short time period (less than 1 hour) with only 

3·45 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUOLZ--
f 

; 

minimal inexpensive support equipment. The $32,522 per hour space station 

facility charge, although a significant factor if lengthy times are involved, 

remains at a relatively low cost le~el for short time periods until the 

frequency of use approaches 1000. Performing activities in the independent or 

teleoperated modes requires, 1n most cases, a relatively expensive initial 

investment in support equipment and software which does not compare favorably 

with the manual mode unless amortized o'ler a large number of uses. 

Variations from the patterns observed in Figure 3-16 occurred for a few 

activities where unusual equipment or timeline 

a particular mode of man-machine interaction. 

high cost for Activities 36 and 37 - Transport 

requirements were specified for 

For example, the relatively 

Loaded/Unloaded (see Figure 

3-17) in the teleoperated mode occurs becausQ t~e average time to acomplish 

this class of activity with a teleoperator was estimated to be 60 minutes as 

predicated upon the timeline data of Subtask 2.2. Another example is Activity 

32 - Replace/Clean Surface Ccatings (see Figure 3-18) where the manual and 

supported modes also become relatively costly when the number of times the 

loo°Tr==================~lr--------~r---------l ------- Manual 

• - --Supported -. ...-.-...- Al!~mented 

• _ _ • ~ Teleonerated 

_ • • _Ill _ •• _ Supervised - Ground 

100 • Supervlseo - On Orbit 

_ ... _'" _Independent 

." ... 

......................... 

.. ' 

" 

.' " 1+'" 

.' .' .. ' 

.. ' 

.. ' 

.. ' .' .. .,' 

Number of Times ActiVity IS Performed 

.. ' .' 

.' 

.. ' 

~., .' 

Figure 3·17. ActiVity 36 - Transport Loaded Cumulative Cost vs. Repatltlons Including Operations 

/ 

MCOO","'E"l. DOUO"~ 

346 
tJ'. ( 

I' ': I 

I 

, 

, 

I 

\ 

• • J 

I· 

I 

I r-- .. : 

\ \'.- :. 

\, 

. \ 

. ," \ 

\ i 

;--. -'1--

,. 

I 

r 

I 

I • 

l' 

. . 

\ . ' 

1 

.. 

.. 

C 

~ 

:E 

= .. 

.!! 

"0 

c 

1000~----------.-----------~----------~--------~ 

l00+-----------+-----------+_--------~~--~~--__; 

10+-----------+-----~~~~~~------+_--------__; 

................... 

.. ' ................................ 

• ••• Manual 

• -. --Supported 

--~_ Augmented 

.. • _ .. _ .... Teleoperated 

__ ... _ .. _. __ Supervised - Ground 

• I. SupervlsPQ - On Orbit 

_ • .-.-.-.. _Independent 

01+-----~~~+---~~~~+-----~~~+_--~~~~ 

1 10 100 1000 10,000 

NUMber of Times ActiVity IS Performed 

Figure 3-18 ActiVity Number 32 - Replace/Clean Surface Coatmgs Cumulative Cost vs. Repetitions 

Includmg Operations 

activity is to be performed lncreases to one hundred or more. Again. this,was 

due primarily to the average time (150 minutes) required for this activity in 

tne manual mode as derived from the timeline tata developed in Subtask 2.2. 

A principal criterion used to identify the critical technology issues to 

be consider~d 1n Task 3 is t~e need to improve productivity and to thereby 

reduce the cost of future space operations. One of the highest cost 

activities identified to date, espec1ally in the supervised and independent 

modes of operation, is Activity t~umber 27 - Problem Solving/Decision l~al~in9' 

and Data Analysis (Figure 3-19). The cost in th1S case is due in large part 

to the requirements for relatively expensive sensors, instrumentation, and 

software needed when operat1ng in the supervised and independent modes. This 

suggests the nee~ for a better undbrstanding and coupling of artificial and 

human intelligence and the development of techniques for the effective 

utilization of Uexpert" systems. On the other hand, in Activity 3l (see 

Figure 3-17), the high cost of the manned and supported modes suggests the 

need for improvements in the process tachrology for cleanlng optical surfaces 

and/or coatings i~ space. 

3·47 

/ 

MCDONNeLL C'OUGL~ 
"- " 

--

--- ... 

\ --...:- --

-, "-, ------ ----- - 7"'t"---

I 

, .. -.... 

1000·?------------r----------~------------r_--------__, 

100+------------r----------~------'~~~r_~~--,r~ 

.. 

c 

~ 

~ 

-'1--- -

: 10+-._-.-.~~.-~--~--~~~~~~-.1~~----~~r-----------; 

:! 

'0 

o .................... ~- ........ 

10 

.. _ .-.-...-- f..ugmer)ad 

.. _ .. _ ... _ Teleorwr.Jtec1 

_ • -a -•• -S .. lpLP/,SPU - Grnunrt 

100 1000 10,000 

Numb,r of Tlmn Activity IS Performed 

FIgure 3-19. ActiVIty Number 27 - Prool~m Solving/DecISIon Making/Data Analysl. Cumulatlye Con 

vs.. RepetitIOns IncludtnQ Operations 

3.5 EVALUATION 

In Section 3.1. a gener1c set of mission activit1es was described ~ased 

upon a review of past and proposed space missions. This gener1c set of 

activlties wa: des1gned to provide the bUllding blocks from which f~ture space 

mlssior.s could be synthesized. In Section 3.2. comparatlve timeline data for 

each of the basic actlv1tles were developed. In Section 3.3, the support 

equipment requircl~ents assoc1ated with each activ1ty implementatlon option 

were ide1t1fied and this 1nfornation 1n turn was used in Section 3.4 to 

prepare comparatlV€ cost data associated with the prov1s1on, support, and 

utilization of various degrees ~f direct human involvement in future space 

misslons. 

Tne techn1ques descrlbed and the informJt1on developed in the precedlng 

sectlons provlde the frarnewor~ for developlng a methodology cO~PJratlve 

costlng. It 1:> intended that tins netnodology prov1de a basi,; for eVdluatlryg 

the lnpact of vlrying dC3rces of hUr.1J.n invol vemcnt on the effcctl'vt!ness and· 

econor.1Y of satlsfying the requirements of future space proJects. In 

/ 

IWc.'o""-lIIwrl.. ... Oc-,t/( a..~ _ _ "'-../ 
\ 

J 

-' 

-----

/ 

'., 

I' 

.... I 

-, '- / 

/ 

, 

--- - . -

" 

\ " • , I 

accomplishing this goal. it was believed that the comparative data would be 

most useful if they were expressed in a tabular or graphic format. Factors 

that need to be considered ir. formulating a strategy for evaluating the impact 

of varying degrees of hUman involvement in satisfying the actlVity 

requirements are (1) the performance limits associated \iith dir~ct or indirect 

human involvement. (2) the number of times a specific activity is to be 

performed, (3) and the number of aifferent activities that are required to be 

performed in the operati ona 1 sequence bet-ng exami ned. The 1 imi ti n9 factors on 

direct human involvement are primarily associated with sensing (whetncr 

stimuli are within or outside of the range of human sensory capability); 

infonnatlon processing (whether or not the complexlty of the lnformatlQn to be 

proce~~ed requires supplemental aids); aod action (whether or not the action 

required is within the range of human motor responsesi. These limiting 

factors are well documented. as di5cussed in Section 2 and can be addressed in 

cnecklist fashion in the initial conceptual design phase of the progralJ 

development process. 

In many cases, alternative modes of man-machine interaction could satisfy 

performance requirements. The issue then becomes one of cost; i.e., ~hich of 

the appl~cable man-machine modes of interaction is the most cost effective. 

In addressing this ;ssue. the most important factors are the nUr.1hel' of 

tlmes a speciflC actlvity is to be performed, and the number of diffcr~nt 

actlVities that are required to be perfonned in the operational sequence. 

Conventional wisdom would susgest that even if a glven activity \~ere capable 

of belllg performed in a manull mode. the cost of a man/hour or man/r.linute in 

space is so high that lf that activity l1ere required to be repeated a n!.l~er 

of times, a cross-over point would qUlckly be reached wherr it would be ~~st 

cost effective to implement a mot'e automated approach to the activity 

perforl;'lance. In sir.111 ar fashian, it can be reasoned that the human operator is 

basically a single channel mechanism and cannot be expected to pel'fom 

multlple activltles sil~ultaneously although the actlvltles might bt: p';lofJMed 

sen ally 1 f the perfonnance t me pen:11 ts. 

In order to provde d comparative base for eXalnlnlng the cost 

cffecti"PllP'Ss of tne varlOUS man-r.1aClllne Inodes and to establlsh the cress-over 

pOlnts where one moje becones more cost effectlve than anotner, It WdS 

3·49 
) 

y 

\ 

, ", , 

\ 

\ 

'-

\ ) \ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

, \-

· , I 

, .- ---

believed desirable to equate the reldtive cost of perforning each activity by 

each of tne mo.:1es of implementation to a COIi1fl1on dollar base, and to thereby 

establlsh a famlly of equal cost cUl"ves based upon the fo11ol-l1ng relatlonshlp: 

£0 '';1 t ion ----

One 

(A) 

Cost for Performing 

an Activity "N" 

Tlmes in tne 

Oi rect Hanua 1 Hade 

= 

(8 ) 

Cost for Performing 

an !\ct1 Vl ty "N" 

Tir..cs 1 n an 

I nd 1 rect i10d e 

If A > B. then an indirect mode should be considered. If A < B. then 

a direct mode should be consider"XI. If A = B. the decision must be based on 

other criteria. One additlonal factor must be considered 1n establish1ng 

these cost relationsllips. hOI~ever. and that is the total number of actlvlties 

requ1red 1n the operational sequence. In dealing with the cost of direct 

manual 1 nvol vement in the performance of any set of acti vai es. the mo<;~ 

slgOlflcant factor is the crew tlme requlred anJ the cost per unit of crell 

tilne. 

The more actlvltles that are raqu1red. the more tlme 1S requlreJ. and th~ 

hlgner the cost. ThlS is true of the Inanual. supported. aug;;1ented and 

teleoperated moJes of operatlon. In the case of the operatlonal modes IItH~r~ 

the hltma'llnVolvement 1S more lndlrect (l.e., the superv1sed-g,·ound. tile 

s upervl sed -on-orb 1 t. and tile 1 ndependent modes). the prl nc 1 p.ll contr1 Dutor to 

tne cost of performing a set of act1vltles 1S more directly dependent upon th~ 

cost of the resources and the support1 ng equl pnent 1tems r~qul red to perfcl'l'1 

each actlv1ty In orblt rather than upon the time requ1red to accomplisn tile 

actlvlty. This means thdt In the moJes requinng Indlrect hurnart lnvolveilent. 

the reductlon of cost due to the potentlal of shdrlng COr.lf.l0n equlpTIent 1te"1S 

and co~non resourLes can be a s1gnlf1cant factor 1n the cost equatIon. 

A COI01:10n find1ng 1n prev10us stuoles has been that tllere IS a great cteJl 

of COlTIlDOna 11 ty aillong the equi p'Ient Hems reqlJi red to support a broad spectru.1 

of ~lSS1ons. or space act1v1t1es. That lS, the fIrst few act1Ylt1es exan1neJ 

w111 wtroduce a number of nell equi p;lent requi relOents. TIll s equi poent. 

tlOrleVer, 15 also founlJ to be requ1red by other act1v1tles. As nCI'" actlvlties 

3-50 

/ 

MCOaAl1WF:LL DOl.lGLq ..>::--' 

_ ... - --- -
/ 

fj" 

~- . 

\ 

, 

l' 

.~" -- \ ' 

" \ 

') 

\ ___ __ --.I --------... 

are analyzed, fe\~er and feller additional or unique equi jl1Ient Hems are 

uncovereJ. The list of unique items of support equipnent grows in a 

negatively accelerated fashion until af~er some point a plateau is reached and 

tne analysls of additional activlties leads to no major changes in the total 

lllventory of support equ1J:xnent required. As illustrated in Figure 3-20. tnis 

tYPlcat trend also has been observed in the present study. As may be seen 

from Flgure 3-20, the initlal activlty consldered requlred 12 items of support 

equlpnent. Eacll additlona1 activlty contnbuted only a few more items of 

support until after tI,e 21st activlty. no addltional equlpnent Hems were 

addeJ to the lnventory and the cOIIL'lIonallty plot reached a plateau. A standard 

f.1DAC-11cAuto curve-fittlng program was used to develop tile best fltting 

equation to describe thlS commonallty curve. In this process. a number of 

equatlons lIere examined including tnose for a log-log linear curve. a true 

power curve, a i inear--curve flt, an asymptotlc po,ver function, a 

seni1og-1inear relation, a llnear-semilog relation. an exponent ·al curve, and 

21 . 10 , . ~~ IT·'-:-·-·.~·:.-.·.·--;.·::'-::::'-'-:l·'-.·'-'-:.·.·:--:.T-·- ----::._.1. '-' -. -----. ~ ---.. --. -. -.!. --••• -•• --- t I • I • 18l-------____ + ._. _____ .. e ;_e_. '-0 ~ •••• _e_ •••• ; '" .e ______ -!- ___ •••••• _. : •• _ ••• __ ._. 

I : : ! : : 17 ................... -, ••• _............... • _ .. _-- ,_ ....... _.- .-..... -:-._ ... _ .. - .. ----r-"-· .. - ... - ...... ~ ...... -_ ....... . 

: ! I : I 16 ......... _ ........... ,. .. --••• 0- .................. y .............................. - ---.................. _-_. -----.... - ..... .. 

: I : : : : 

~ 15 ....... • - .. --.... -~- •• --.. • .. ---: .---....... _ .... : .. ---........ - .. -~.-- • ... _ ...... _o. r .. · ... · ..... _---: .... _--------

:; 14 ------ .----.~. e "'---1--" -.-. --. ~-. '--'-----1--· ----' ---.!------·-----1·-··-·---·- ~ .' I ' I iI: 1 J ~ _ ...... -_ ... -_ ............ -_ .... --_ .. ! .. -....... _ ...... -.. -......... __ ..... r--_ ... --_ ..... ~- .. -.. -.... --_ ... ~ 12 ."-G- '" .... "' ... -.... -....... i-.-... --..... +-....... -.... -... -~ .... -.. -..... ~.- .. -................ i .. --...... _ .. - '- 11 --/-_ ....... ;-.. - ....... .. -.-~ ... .... _ ..... ---: ..... - .... -_ •• ~ .. - ....... __ .... ~ ._-............... ~- .... - .. -_ .... - .. o. 

c: : : : : I : E 10 ........... - .......... ~ ---.... --_ ... ! ............ -.. -.. _-'-- -................. : .......... - ..... --.. ~ ... .... _ ............ : --............... .. 

~ 9 ........ - - _ ..... i .......... _ .. ---.... ~ ............... ---.: .. -.......... -... -.. ~ .. -.. -... -_ ...... ~o. .................... .: .. - - ........... --.. 

C' I I ! t • 

~ ~ ~-··-----·-·----------f-------~---------:-·-t---.-::--.-.--·:-·-T--:--:----.-::::~·::--:--------::-T--:--:---·-·--.-·---t·:--.---------.-:--. E ~ I' " • 6 ... --...... .... --.. ~- ........ -.......... -!-.. _ ......... - -. .. r-... · ......... ·· --! ..... -....... - _ .... ; ............ -... _--:-_ .. - ...... _ .... .. 

~ 5 -_ .... -_ .... -- -~- .. ......... _-- --~ --- ..... -_ .. ! ..... -.. -.... _ .... ~- .. _ .... --_ ...... :-...... _-....... .... ~ ..... -.--... -_. I I .' • 4 ............ -- ----.~ ........ -_ ................. -....... _--........ - ...... 1 .................................... _ ..... l ........... _ ... _ , • I I , , 

, " " 

3 2: _-___ -:------:----:.~---::--:----:----.T--------.-:--------.-~ ·.-.---------------:-T-·.-._::_-: _____ ·:1 -::::: __ ----::.r::: ._:: __ : ___ -_- . . 

09 

OS 

07 

06 

05 

04 

03 

02 

01 

y • <) 8327. 0 7G!J22X - 0 017833'(2 O+-------r-~---~-----~~~~~~~~~~-----~-----~-O 

o 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 

FIgure 3 20. EqUIpment COl1'monaflty SupervIsed and I.,dependent Modes 

/ 

MCDONNELL DotJoc.B' 

3-51 

i!" 

E 

c •. 

> 

oS 

;: 

E "

c. 

:; 

cr 

w 

C 

c: 

0 

(; 

Co 

C 

,;: 
'. -~ 

I 

i , I 

I 

/ 

I 

!... { 

/ 

a quadratic curve. Of these. tne best fitting curve describ1ng the study data 

\'/as found to be a quadratic equation in the followin-g fonn: 

Y = 9.8327 + O.76922X - O.012938X2 

where Y 1 s the numbel' of equ1 pnent items requ1 red. and Xis the number of 

activlt1es required in the m1ssion. The coefficient of detenn1nation for th1S 

relat10nsnip (R2) was 0.96293. 

Recognlzing the fact that most operat10nal sequences.to accompllsh miss10n 

obJect1ves require a number of d1fferent activit1es and recognizing that many 

individual support iterns would be cormoon to more than one activity. it was 

bel1eved to be des1rable to lnclude the commonality factor and to compare the 

rel ati ve cost of perform1 n9 a 9i yen act1 vity in each of the man-mach1 ne modes 

(manual. supported. augmented. teleoperated. supervised. or independent) as a 

function of the number of dl fferent acti vities required as \>Iell as by the 

number of t1mes each activity 1S to be repeated during the operat10nal 

sequence. 

If it 1S assumed that there 1S a d1rect relat10nship bet~een the 

1mplelilentat10n cost fol' accompllshing a specific act1v1ty and the nurilt>er of' 

supporting equipnent items requlreJ (l.e., the Activ1ty Implementation Cost lS 

a funct10n of the number of equlpment items rpquired), then a cost correct1on 

factor to allow for the comi11onal1ty of equ1pl'ent needs among lIlultlple 

actlvlt1es can be established as follows: 

Nu,·mER OF EQU I PI'IE NT 

f ITEMS REQUIRED FOR 

= "N" ACTIVITIES 

l II t I WI ~ 

f ITEMS R~QUIHED FOR 

A SINGLE ACTIVITY 

MCDOfllNI!LL DOUGLc;:t 

\...-'..:./ 

/ 

3-52 
.. 

;1 I 

! " 

\ 

\ 

or 

COIMONALlTY 

COST CORI{ECTlOtl 

FACTOR FOR ~ULTIPLE ACTIVITIES 

[

COi'lllONALITY COST ] 

CORRECTIVE FACTOR 

= 

= 

,I 

9.8327 + O.76922AN - O.012938AN 2 

9.8327 + O.76922A1 - O.012938Al 2 

9.8327 + O. 7922AN - O.01293i3rl/J 2 

1 U. 59 

Table 3-16 11sts typlcal values of the Commonality Cost Cotrectlon Factor 

as a functlon of the number of activities requlred in the operatlona1 sequence. 

A re1at10nshi p can then be establ ished to compare tile cost effectl veJless 

of alternative man-machine modes by taklng the data on the estimated costs of 

perform1ng a speclfic activ1ty for any number of repetitions in each 

man-macnine raode, as described in Sect10n 3.4, and applying the fo110\'I1ng 

assumptl0ns: (l) The cost for performing multiple activlties in the 

man-machi ne moJes requi ri ng d 1 rect manual i nvo1 veillent (manual. supported, 

augmented, teleoperated) 1S directly proportlOnal to tile number of dlfferent 

activ1t1es requlred, and (2) tne cost for perfonning mu1t1ple activities in 

the man-Mdchine modes reqUlr1ng lnd1rect manned involvement (Supervlsed anJ 

Indepe~dent) can be descr1bed by a quadratic relationshlp as illustrated in 

F1gure 3-20. 

The express~on presented as, Equation One above can be modlfied to include 

the commonallty factor and the locus of points deSCi'lblng the boundary where 

1t is equally cost effectlve to implement the activity requlrements by eittler 

of tliO man-maC(l1ne modes can be determined as follows: 

COST FOR PEI{FOIMItJG tJU,'.h3ER OF 

AN ACTIVITY "N" TIllES X DIFFERENT 

I N THE DIRECT ,·lANUAL ACTIVITIES 

:-10UE 

COST FOR PERFOPJ·1I NG 1 = AN ACTIVITY fltI" X 

Tl,1ES HJ AN INDIRECT 

1l0UE J 

COJl.'iJ l-JALI TY 

CORRECTION 

FACTOR FOR 

MULTIPLE ACTIVITIES 

2 9.8327 + O.76922AN - O.01293dA N The l.omrnonallty Correction Factor 1 s eql'al to: -------~-----'""'"'-

1 O.5~ 

3·53 

/ 

MCOONNeL<, OOUGL.@ 
0"> I 

/ / ' 

--' 

/ 

.. 

'e 

.-

, 

fj" 

I 

i 

./ 

Table 3-16 

COf~rtONALITY COST CORRECTION FACTORS 

Number of Actl vities 

1 

2 

J 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

1 6 

17 

18 

~ 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

30 

35 

/ 

McnONN"LL DOlJa~~ 

Comnonality Cost Correction 

Factor 

1.00 

1.07 

1.14 

1. 21 

1.27 

1.33 

1.39 

1.45 

1.50 

1.55 

1.60 

1.65 

1.69 

1. 74 

1. 78 

1.81 

1.85 

1.88 

1. 91 

1.94 

1.96 

1.98 

2.00 

2.02 

2.04 

2.01 

2.u7 

3-54 

/ 

Rel ati ve 

Cost/Acti vit,l 

1.00 

.54 

.38 

.30 

.25 

.22 

.20 

.18 

.17 

.16 

.15 

.14 

.13 

.12 

.12 

.11 

.11 

.10 

.10 

.10 

.09 

.09 

.09 

.08 

.08 

.07 

.06 

~ 

f .t _ 

f'f 

L. 
')'1 

1'-

r. 

r 

I. where AN represents the number of different activities. It should be 

cautioned that the baslc quadratic equation was deri ved from the data obtained 

in the current study and sllould be used only within that frame of reference. 

If the number of actlvitles should slgnificantly change. the optlmal 

descriptive equatlon should be reestablished b~sed upon a new set of limiting 

values. 

Using this approach, equal cost curves fer the manual mode compared to 

each 01' the other man-machine lffiplementation modes were plotted for each 

actlvlty as illustrated in Flgure 3-21. When considered individually, each of 

tnese curves represents the locus of equal cost points for various 

comblnations of the_total number of unique actlvities required and the number 

of repetltions anticlpated for a specific activlty. Above or to the right of 

speciflc curves. it is more cost eff~ctive to use the man-machine mo:1e noted 

and below or to the left of a specific curve, it is more cost effective to 

conslder the use of a manual mode. 

10 

(fl 

35 \ w 

.... 

I-

.... 

> 

30 \ .... 

CJ 

a:: 25 

I- . 15 . . n::: 

W 20 lI... 

.... 

Cl 

I- 15 

0 

n:: 

w 

CD 10 :E 

=> 

Z 

FIgure 3·21. Equal Cost Curv~s for Manual ActIvatIon as Comparl'd to Each of the Other Man·Machlne 

Impl~mentatlon r •• odes. ActIVIty 29 -- Release/Secure Mechanical Interface. 

355 

/ 

MCDONNel .. DOUGLg 

, 

-
\ 

/ 

ir 

-

I II 

~hen all of the individual curves are plotted together as a family, the 

areas bounded by the individual curves define the regions where each specific 

man-machine mode is the most cost effective. Figure 3-22 portrays these 

regions of applicability. As illustrated in Figure 3-22, if onl) the one 

activity were required to be performed, it would need to be repeated thousands 

of times before it would be cost effective to provide some degree of automdted 

support (i.e., the supervised mode of cperation). On the other hand, if a 

total of 16 activities I"ere required to be performed to accomplish the mission 

objective, and if the number of times Activity 29 was to be performed were 

only two hundred, designing the mission objective to be accomplished in the 

supervised mode becomes an attractive option. 

40 

35 

Independent 

30 

g 

~ 25 0 

oct 

C 

~ 

.: 2U 

0 

'0 

~ 15 

E 

2 " 

10 

5 

Supported 

0 

10 10,000 100 1,000 

NumLer of RepetItIons of Each ActivIty 

Figure 3·22 Activity Number 29 Release/Secure Mech.anlCJI Interface 

From these graphic presentations of the equal cost curves, it can be 

concluded that if each man-machine mode is equally capable of meeti~g the 

performance requirements of a group of activitles. lt generally is more cost 

effecti ve to impl ement the acti Vl ty in one of the di rect manual modes 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUGL~ _____ 

~ 

3·56 

• 
I 

rl'j' :/ 

, I 

j 

I. 

i I 

,I I 

I 

/ 

----

/ I 

! 

/ I 

(including supported or augmented) than in an indirect mode (supervised or 

independent). It is only when a series of 30 or more different activities is 

required to be repeated hundreds of times each, that the indirect ~odes of 

operation become the more cost effective modes. 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOUGL~ 

3-57 

( 

l 
, 

... 

t[', 

/ 

• 

~ r I •• 

-

SectlOn 4 

TECH1.DLOGY REQUIR8~Errrs ANlJ TASKS - TASK 3 

The objectives of t!1is task were to (1) identify the requirel;Jents for 

tecnnology developments needed to enable and enhance the human role in space 

activ1ties, and (2) uncover gaps that may exist 1n current technology 

development plans that will need to be f1lled to reallze the full operatlonal 

potential of ~dvanced manned space system~. 

(naol ing tecnnology development can be described as those specific 

developnents necessary to provide the basic capaoility required to meet 

specific mission goals and objectives. Enhanc1ng technology describes tl10se 

researCh anj development proJects that are supporti ve of tile major enabling 

technologies. The enhancing technologlcal developments generally lead to 

standardization and improvements in productivlty includlng perfonnance, cost 

effectiveness and risk reduction. 

A review of NASA plann1ng documents has led to the concluslon that the 

current plans which lLl\SA is HI the process of developing and executing in 

support of the enabling technolog1es for future space programs do incluJe the 

major issues of concern. tJo "shm~ stoopers" I/ere found that would precl ude 

the Jevelopment of a manned space platform capable of su~;:;ortln~ the neeJs and 

objectives of a Droad spectru~ of future mlssions. On the other hlnd, a 

number of areas, which mlght be tenned "enhanclng technology," were ldentifled 

where gaps in support exist and l¥here supported researC/l and developcent 

act1vities could greatly enhance the accompllsr,l.lent of a H1Je rao3e of 

missions in a more cost effective manner. 

4.1 TECH NOLOG Y RElJU !R£,'lDITS 

In tne i1entiflcation of requirements for the technolog1cal developlents 

tnat enabl e and enhance the huma'1 rol e HI future space operatlOns, four 

sources of information were utllued. Tnese I~ere as follo.~s: 

A. I-lASA Spdce Systems Technology I·lodel - 5th ls:..ue, January 1984. 

/ 

MCDONNELL OOUG~ 

4·1 
. 

. 

, 

; 

/ 

! 

/ 

/ .,:? 

8. ResearCh and Technology Objectives and Plans (RTOPS), 1983-84, as 

a va 11 ab 1 e from NASA Centers. 

C. NASA Space Stat10n Task Force 111ssion Requirement \.lorking Group (tIRWG) 

110del of tne potential ~pace Station missions for the years 1991-2000-. 

D. The 37 generic activit1es defined in Task 2 of the THURIS study. 

Source A provlded an organizatlOnal frame\~ork for technology planning, 

source 8 provided the 1 i st of the research and technology object; ve~ uhf ch are 

currently sCheduled to be addressed, source C provlded a time reference for 

detennHling when speci fic operational capabil ities \'iere needed, and source D 

def1ned tile specific man-maChine activities that uill be requlred in 

accomplishing the operational objectives defined in source C. By considering 

each of these references in relationship to the others, it becomes posslble to 

surface those activ1t1es most in demand and to assess the timeliness of tv\SA's 

planned and ongoing R&D projects as well as to identify areas of R&D coverage 

t~at may currently appear to be inadequate to support the Srace Station 

related missions of the 1991-2000 time period. either 1n scope or in technlcal 

focus. 

The f1 rst source of 1 nformati on exami ned was the NASA Space Systems 

Technology 140del.(1) This seven-volume document represents a vltal element 

of t:le nat10n ls space tecnnology program planning and implementatlon process 

and 1S a companion to the NASA Long-Range Plannlng Document. It is updated 

annually. Although the Space Systems TeChnology model covers all technlcal 

areas, tile areas of SpeCl flC 1 nterest to the THURIS study were those deal ing 

with the human factors elements of manned systems. 

Tilree types of human factors operations are described in the Space Syster.1s 

Technology Hodel. The first class of operations includes "hands-::on" tasks 

perfonned at creu statl0ns located l'lith1n the habltab1e portions of the Iilanned 

space fac11ities. Technology needs of these work stat10ns lnclude displays, 

(1) NASA Space Systems Technol091 l·lode1, F1 fth Issue dated January 1984. 

NASA-Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology, Code RS, i!ashington, 

D.C. 2U540. Issued under tne authcrlty of Stan R. Sadin, Deputy 

01rector, Program Development, OART/RS. 

4·2 

/ 

MCDONNCL .. "OCJGL~ 

, 
rJ'1 

! 

/ 

/ 

/ \ 

/ 

/ 

, I / 

software advances, and man/machine task allocations. The cre\'I \lork station 

needs include designs employing emerg1ng display and control technology. "user 

fri endly" interfaces, artl fi C1 al lntell i gence, computer-aided probl em solvi n9, 

and dsslstance to tne crew 1n decls10n-making actlvlties. 

The second type of human factors operations is "hands-on" tasks performed 

oy the crel'l dUrlng extravehicular activities. Here the enabling technology 

requ1rements address "next generation" EVA work systems, improved tools, 

transfer aids and procedures. Typlcal products of these technologies include. 

low-fdt1gue/long-durat1on space suits, gloves and accessories, force-aided 

tools and flxtures, restraints and mObil1ty aids, and situation and work 

status displays. 

Tne third type of human factors operations is joint man-machlne 

teleoperations, and includes technology focusing on the operator's \'lOrk 

station, interface equipnent and end-effector/actuator units. Elements of the 

work station include controls, operational displays, status monitoring 

displays, and control-display dynam1cs. Interface equipment issues include 

transmlssion of signal s betHeen operator and effector. The remote 

end-effector/actuator lssues address senslng, manipulating, and mobl11ty at 

the rerilote slte. An overall issue is develop1ng the technology which enables 

tne extensi on of tile human motor and sensory presence 1 ncl ud 1 ng botn tne 

Psycl1Orilotor and the human intellect. A feu examples of teleoperations 

applications include Shuttle-attached manipulators, free-flY1ng satelllte 

servlcing units, and automat1c assembly machlnes. 

The second sourLe of inforrilat1on exam1ned by the TIlURIS study team was 

those current Research and Technology ObJectives and Plans (RTOPs) available 

as of Aprll 1934 frolll the NASA centers that consldered human factors enaol ing 

technologles. These IHOPs were arranged lnto the three types of operatlonal 

conslderatlons ldentl f1 ed from the Sp"lce Systems Tecimology Hodel (Source 

lb. l); i.e., (1) ~station deslgn, (2) extravehicular activity, and (3) 

teleoperatl0ns. The proJected status of the outputs of these researCll areas 

was quant1f1ed in tenns of the level of technology readlness expected fro~ 

eacl1 proJect bet~leen the present tlme and the IOC of a Space Statlon 

4-3 

/ 

MCDONNELL. DOUGLG~ L)<./ 

n 

( 
. ./ 

J I' 

/ 

\ 

I , 

1 '... 

. { 

! 

1" 

I 

\ , - \ 

\ 

, 

(approximately 1991). The readiness levels are defined on a seven-point scale 

as shown in Table 4-1. A list of the projects, their assigned NASA lead 

center, and their proJected status is shOlin in Tables 4-2, 4-3, and 4-4, and 

further sUfllllari zed on Fl gure 4-1. 

The thl rd source of i nformati on exami ned by the THURIS study team \~as tile 

currently evolvIng space mission descriptive data being generated for the 

Table 4-1 Technology Reat!mess Levels 

LEVEL 1 BASIC PRINCIPL£S OBS£RVED AND REPORTED 

LEVEL 2 CONCEPTUAL OESIGN FORMULATED 

LEVC:L 3 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN TESTED M~L YTICAV_ r OR EXPERIf'lEUTALL Y 

LEVE .. 4 CRITICAL FUIICTION/CHAAACTERISTIC OEHDNSTAATION 

LEVEL 5 Ca-IPJl£kT /BREADBOARD TESTEO I N RELEVA~ EIIV 1 RO/l>lt:llT 

LEVEL 6 PROTOTYPE/E'IGI'iEERING HODEL TESTEO IN RE .. EVAUT DIV o"''4EUT 

LEVEL 7 EII:i: I£ERW; /'IOOEL TE" TEO SPACl 

LEVE~ a FULL OP::Rftll(,,,~L CAPABILITY (FOC) 

(BASELII£1l IUTU r;;ODUCTION uo;..>IGN - LEVlL a) 

Table 4-2. Crew Station DeSign Rel3~ed Projects a Id Status 

TECHNOLOGICAL REA~INESS LEVEL 

(1-7) & DATE PROJECTIOII 

- ADVANCED lflFO'?r.ATlorI PROCESSING SYSTEM (6) ,.,Nt 85 

FLIGHT OL'roNST~'TIOa (AlPS) - JSC (7) DEC 88 

- MICROPROCESSOR CGliiROLLED MW!r\NIS~1S - JSC (3) AUG 87 

- AUTO/,!.ATED SUBSYSTU! /4,MIAGEI',UH - JSC (5) ocr 8) 

- CREW STA TI 011 Hl!/i.!Jl Fr,CTOllS - JS( (3) FEB 86 

- SPACE STATION DATA ~)W~AGEtrHT SYSTEM - JSC/GSFC (3) JUN 85 

- MAN'S ROLE IN SprCE I1AIIiTENANCE - r.SFC (7) OCT 86 

- "'All/MCH I liE IIITERFI',(E DES I GH 1 ECIlNOLOGY - MSFC (6) APR 85 

- HABITABIl ITY TECH~.:;lOGY - I',sFC (3) SEP 86 

(APPLICATIO~ Of THURIS RESULTS) 

- INTFRACTIVE HU~tJl FftCTORS (TD~X 2~70) - MSFC (7) JULY 1991 

- EARTH OBSERVATlml I:ISTRUMErn TECHNOLOGY <TD:1X 2260) - LRC (7) JULY 1992 

- HABITATION TECH1lGLOGY <TDMX 2520) (7) JULY 1991 

4-4 

MCDONNeLL DOUGL§;;!j' 

/ 

\ 

I 

A 

R U I
. 

" 

Table 4-3. Extnfttlle"l~t ActivIty RII.t&d ProftCU and Statui 

TtCllltOLOGICAL READINESS LEYEL 

(1-7) , DAT£ PROJECTro~ 

- lAS[R AJIITHR£nTR Ie PlAPPING SYSTEM - JSC (4) OCC 86 

- GlaTt [KD [FF[CTOR - JSC (5) FEB £6 

- EVA rlMfRIC woruc STATlO!i ArID k[STRAIHTS - .IS( (6) OCC 86 

- ERJ HEADS UP DISPlAY - JSC (5) .lUll 85 

- lIiFJ!f SlR[I;GTH MD muoll roOf'. - .IS( (5) FlAY a7 

- STRUCTURAl. ASSE1t5tY D£lllI'.STRATJo., UI'U{It{HT - RSFC (7) JIll 85 

- f'lJDL'lM COltSTRL'CTiOIt/PWtIPUtATOll S£RYICIIIG - K'SFC «(j) ",.\11 87 

- OOBITA!. ECUIPl'lHT (RMSfER TECHHIO!.[S - KSfC (1) Jro'l 86 

- t£PlOmJH/ASS[F.Bt'(ICO!HRIr.:!:~ iITzV. i~l - IRe (7) JULY 1992 

- lARCE spr'(E AlH[hM TWilaOGY CHm 7210) - JPl (]) JUly 1992 

Teble 44. Tllooptfetlom Rellted Pro,tCU ,nd Statui 

- tID PlATFORM./REMDTE SERVICInG - ftSFC 

- SPt.CE PlATHlRn ElPfIlDM!l.ES P.£SUPIU - !'!SfC 

- SATEllITE I~D SYSTEMS SERVICI~G - nsFC 

- TElE~ES(fl{( IDilX STATI~ - ~fC 

TEOiHOLOGICAL READINESS LEVEL 

(1-7) & DATE pnOJECrrON 

(5) DEC 85 

m M'R 88 

(6) JA.'1 87 

(6) .rut 87 

- AIiV1JKED Cf:fjlTA!. S£RVICII.'G T[CtlUOGY EXPERIP.flnS - flSFC m AUG 86 

- TElEPRESH{[ TECI!:tClOGY (TMX 21;6:1) - J?l (7) J:Jl 19;} 

- SATflll IE SfF.VIClhli TECfll::l.l"GY (TOO 2550> - PtSfC m JUl 1991 

- AN SfRVICI1:G TW::;QOGY CW-a 257Q) m JUt 1991 

Spdce Station ,1isS1(\n.Requira.1ents Working Group (MRWli) Hission l~oJe1. The 

11!{IIG is the part of the Space Station Task Force assigned the responsibility 

for defining a model mission, schedule, and set of requirements for tne 

l~9l-2UOO tlme frame. Within the model at the pres~nt time are seven 

technology develolJl1ent missions directly associated ~/ith IUlnan factors 

enabling technologles. Tflese Missions are also included on Tables 4-2, 4-3, 

and 4-4, and are identified by the TOl'lX designator in parentneses following 

the project tltle. 

The 37 generlc actlvities defined in TdSK 2 of the THURIS study were 

correlated wittl space station crew task a55ign,n~nt5 invol ving 16 mlSS10n 

4·5 C - ;}--

IhCOO"''''.LL OOIJOL~ 

• 

': .. 
Typ.cal TKhnoloooeal , 5~ 6~ 7tC:. lOCO U~d 

Atld.neu LItVIII AdvanCt!S 1-,sMO '" 18Ma 

·1,aWO-SomPI:1 0 AdOQu". 

60 Mo - Complex \) N.t><h Foculld Emph,,1S 

66 '6 0 AlPS FI.(jht 

MiV Flight I o.,.,anuratll)n 

0.1 OPmo 31' I ~ Ml eroorO" .. e11Of 

Cantroll~d Moeh 

66 l'!. I 5.6.,. f; I AUlom41~ Sulnvrtem 

'.·.I\ag~r 

36, 6 Cr_Srahon ii 

I Huml''' Factors (\" 

6 .;: 

36, Space S'4hO'l Data « 

I M.tn.!l"~nt Svs ~ 

7l:J. ? Man' Role In 

~ Maintenance 

A6 I {i M.n/Mechme IntMfaee 

I Oes.II" T .chnology 

3A--. ? Heb.tab.lltv 

T~hnolOTf 

46.- 6 U5!r Anthropometnc 

I Wa;lP'''lJ System 

6b...- 0 1 Glow End 

I Effector 

G6, 10 EVA Genenc 

i Work S'atiOn 

56 I 0 w 

EMU H~3ds· ~ I UP 01~p14V e 

I '"" 56 0 Hum:., Strength « 

> 

I Il~d Mot.o., Mooel w 

7/\ 0 I Slruct Anv 

Oemo Expertment 

6t::.. D Mod Construct.onl 

M4nlpulstor StrvlClOg 

7/\ 0 Orb.ul EQUIp 

Tr~ .... fcr 'rt-chnIQUes 

5/\ 6l' 2.6. 0 LEO Platforml 

Remote Servicing .' 

7/\ 0 $;l&c;e PIal form .. 

U 

Expend Resupp/v 0" " 

0_ c: 66 $arefl,'e lind c 

Svs Servlcl~9 g 

!! 

6/\ 0 Tele,lresenCl! 8-

<l 

Work Station .. 

; 76, 0 Adv Orbital ServlCln'J 

Technology e"peflmentt 

cy 1985 I 1985 I 1967 I 19aa I 1989 I 19<:0 I 1991 I 1992 I 1993 

Space Station IOC 

Figure 4-1. Supportln!) Huml!n Factors Enabling Technolo!JY 

MCOON"''' .... DOU""~ 

4·6 
parameters. These parameters included (1) the location or-the -werk (IVA. 

EVA); (2) tne involvement of the crew with the mission equipncnt (e.g., 

initial setup and Checkout. daily routine operations, p2rfodic operations less 

frequent than daily mission equfpnent maintenance. repair operations. an,i 

response to cllange and unexpected events); and (3) the pl aces where the work 

is perfonlled relative to eight space station functional elements. These space 

station functional elements include pressurized modules. attaChed payloads in 

unpressurized areas, command. control. and c~nmunicatfons (e3 ) functions, 

deployment/construction/dssembly functions, proximity o~ions, and payloaJ 

staglng for earth return. The descrtptions of the functional elements defined 

by the HR..Ili are summarized in Table 4-5. 

The results of correlating the generic activities to the space station 

r.lission parameters are displayed in Figure 4-2. An entry in the boJy of the 

matrlx indicates that for a particular crew activity and mission parameter 

intersection. a mission-related neN 1-S established"; -tnspection of the nur.tDer 

of mission parameters associated with each of the activities shows that \mile 

all activities are required in various locations to support future missl0ns. 

11 out of the 37 activities are in most demand. Tnesc eleven activities 

(indicated by a count of 15 or 16 in the total colUr.1n of the matrix) include: 

adJuc;t/align elements; CO;rfh'Jnicate infomation; confinn/verify 

procedures/schedul es/operati ons; gatller /repl ace tool s/equi Jl11ent; impl er.len t 

procedures/schedules; inspect/ooserve; pOSition module; problem 

solVing/decision making; release/secure mechanical interface; transport 

loaded; ('nd transport unloaded. 

4.2 TECHt-lOLOGY GAPS 

Technology gaps can arise frof;) one factor or a conbination of three 

f~ctors: (1) need for increased perfonnance capabillty, (2) schedule 

incompatibillties, and (3) costs associated with (l) and (2). 

A gap in technology can exist either when the capability to perform a 

certain action is totally lacking or \'ihen the capability to perfonn a given 

aetlon is questionable and associated with a risk factor which lS 

unacceptable. 

4-7 

MCDONIVI!LL DOUO~ 

.. -----_._-._- . -
Tabl e 4-5 

HANtlEO STATION ELE.~EUT FUNCTIOtlS 

1. Pressurized Laboratory 

A pressurized crew station module will provide po\ier, low gravity. and 

long duration cre~ support for conducting laboratory work and operational 

support. Payload elements m~ be integrated directly into the module. 

2. Attached Payloads 

ProvlS1on \~11l be made to accolliilodate payload elements exterior to the pressuri~ed module. Llmlted resources plus periodic crew tending anJ 

servicing ",ill be provided. Resources could inclu:1e command, control, an:! 

data nandling. 

3. Command, Control, and Communicatl0ns Support 

,Provls1ons Wl11 De made wlthln tile space station system to re'llotely c~ar~. control, monitor, throughput. and preprocess data for free-flyers 

and platfonlls. 

4. Deployment, ASSeMbly, Construction 

The space station system wl11 provide support capability for constructlon. 

assemoly, and deployment. This support implies all required service 

devices such as manipulators and 1-1r1Us. 

5. Proxiulity Operations 

Payloads cap"ble of maneuvering tllctilsel yes within a reasonable distance of 

tne station will be maintained. serviced and checked out. Reasonable 

distance is defined as that llmited by capabil1ty of EIIU or a small 

proximity operatlons vehlcle (PUV). 

6. Remote Haintenance, Servicing, Checkout, and Retrleval 

Payloads, remote from the space statlon. can be r.1aintd.lned/serviced and chec~ed out via a remotE'y operated service vehicle. Servicing could be 

provlded on tne payload at its locations or the payload could be 

retrieved. serllfced, and returne-d. The space statlon 1 ike~'1ise provides 

for cOlXlanding. controll1ng. malntaining. and servicing tile serVlce 

vehicle. . 

7. Payload In~egration and Launch 

Payloads/sdtcllltes requirlng transfer to other orblts can be brought to 

the space station by the Shuttle Orbiter, inte9rat~d with a transfer 

stage. and launChed. The transfer stages could be co~~anded and 

controlled from the space station. These stages could be either 

expendable or reusable. Reusable transfer stages can be based at the ~pace station. serviced. maintained, and refueled. Expendable stages could be stored and servlced. 

d. Payload Sta[ing for Earth Return 

Payloads, experlwental samples, or captured samples requiring return to 

earth can be delOated. prepared and stored unt11 placed in tIle Orbiter for 

return to earth. Tms function also includes tile preparation of payload 

equq:ment for return at the conclusl0n of its mlSS1on. 

4-6 

• .h -r;..rf> -

----'"-----------------

, 

1 -, 
Space Statl0'1 MISSion Par,met.rs 

LocatIon C(If'lNActly,t .... Spac" Stillion FynctlOf\ll £If'menn 

":l 

z:. .. ! c c: GENERIC c " >- ~ - f '; 

f ~ 2 -; .. c: 

0 ;: ACTIVITIES l.' 'B Il. c3 .5 c. U e '0 lI! a: ~ lE « c: 2 ::< .. >- § " ";1 go 

eX u " "' 0 <5 .Q « u ~ 'E ~ 

~ ~ - EO 50 

~ ~ -c a ~ .. .., .. 0 .. ,. .. « « ~ Ii: < v 0 ci: a: Il. 

.. Vi -;;; 

- ~ > c ;; t ;; .. .. 0 .... 0 "- :ii a: c: - ... M Of .n 10 r- IC .... 

1 Ac".a"ilnl'ID'e Syllem O~r'100n X X X X X X X X X X X X 12 

2 Ad,ult,AIogn EI.m~nfS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 16 

J Alicea,!' I AS"fjn, D'ltrlbute X X X X X X X X X X X X X 13 

'I Apply R~ove BlomNlal Sen,or X )( X X X & 

5 Commun'CJltp It'lft)fmaf.on X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 16 

6 Compen .. 'Dry TrackIng X X X X X X X X 8 

7 CompUto Data X X X X X X X 7 

a Con',rmlV.,,'y Proe:eduresl X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 16 

SCMdules'OP<'r a"on, 

9 Connec,/D.seonnect Electr.cal X X X X X X X X X X X X X 13 

In,edolCe 

10 Connectl Dlsconn~ct Flu,d Interface X X X X X X X X X X X X 12 

11 Correlate Dala X X X X X X X 7 

12 Duct.vatelTerm,na,,, System X X X X X X X X X X X 11 

Oper",on - 13 DecOde/Code Oala X X X X X 5 

14 Oe""" Procedures:Schedules' X X X X X X X 7 Oper.I.on, 

15 OepIOy,R.tract App@ndag!! X X X X X X X X X X X X X 13 

16 Dftect Chan<;e In Sta,e or X X X X X X X X X X X X 12 ConditIon 

17 D,splav Data X X X X X X X X X X X 11 

IB G.th .. /Replace1oolstEQu.pment X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 15 

19 Handlt/fnspeoctiExamtne LIve X X X X X 5 

OrganIsms 

20 Implement Procedur~/Sched.Jles X X X X X X X X X X ,( X X X X X 16 

21 Information ProcesSing X X X X X X X X X X X II 

22 Inspect/Ob",r •• X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 15 

23 Measur. IScale) PhysIC;al X X X X X X X X X 9 

Oiment,ons 

24 Piol Data X X X X X X 6 

25 Position r'o'1ooule X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 16 

26 Prpc lion Manopulal.on of Oblects X X X X X X X X X X X X 12 

27 Problem Solvlnq/De-eI'lon Makln!i! X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 15 

Oa la Ana I YSI S 

28 Purswt Tracking X X X X X X X X 8 

29 Release/Secure Mechanocal X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 16 Interface 

30 Remo.e Module X X X X X X X X X X X X X 13 

31 Remo",,/Replace Co •• "ng X _X X X X X X X X X X X X 13 

32 Reploce/Clean Sur'ace Coat.ng X X X X X X X X B 

33 Replenosh M3tf".', X X X X X X X X X X l< 11 

34 StorelRecord Element X X X X X X X X X X X X X IJ 

35 Surgical Mar'IIDutatlons X X X X X 6 

36 TLlnsporl Loaded X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 16 

37 Transport Unlc.oded X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 15 

FI91ue 4-2. Correlation of GenerIc ActIvitIes &nd Space Station MI!SICn Pan:mcters 

/ 

MCDONNrrLL DOllaL~ 

4·9 

____________ .-__ ~··~·~~~ __ ._ ... M~~~ • .aCr.u"~ ____ --~ww--________________________________________ • .A'~- • -.~~~~~~3· .. ______ ~~·~~~~-~~ ~) 
1 

A gap in tecnnology can oe identified if the technology reaJiness level 

does not meet schedule constraints for implementation. 

A gap in technology can also arise when the costs assoclated with 

estal>1ishing tile capability to perform an action at a specific time in the 

future puts the specific action outside of the limits of economical 

viability. Often these cost factors can be the predominant drivers in 

determining the feasibility of a gfven tecnnological approach. For example, 

the technology exists to producc_ flawless gem-quality diamonds of very large 

size. The cost of this production, however, is such that the synthetically 

produced end product would be priced above the present market for natural 

diamonds with equivalent characteristics. 

One of the more important indicators of the level of technology risk is 

the time required to progress from one level of technical readiness to tne 

next until ultimately fully operational capability (FOC) is achieved. 

Typically the period of time to progress from level 2 to FOe ranges fro~ eight 

to twelve years, depending on the c~~plexity of the element being developed. 

The readiness levels leading to FOe are noted on Figure 4-1 for each of the 

enabling technologies currently included in NASA-Research and Technology 

Objectives and Plans and for ~hich a full-scale develop~ent is the ultinate 

objective. As a general observation, those projects associated uith EVA and 

teleoperations reach FOe fruition in a time dO'l1ain consistent ~/ith the IDe of 

the space station. Hence, activities depending upon the successful completion 

of these projects can be accomplished with a reasonable and acceptable level 

of technical risk. For the IVA work station related projects,~owever, the 

risk assessment acceptability is less clear. 

To illustrate the complexity to be anticipated in the design of IVA work 

stations, consider the Advanced Solar Observatory. The Advanced Solar 

Observatory CASO) mission is one of the more complex of the missions described 

in the MR~IG data set. The payload equipment includes the solar soft x-ray 

telescope, the pinhole occulter. and the solar optical telescope. ASSigned to 

be accorr;;Jodated by the 2a-1/2-degree co-orbiting platform, 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 

4-10 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOlJa~ 
(f 

I' 

I • space station attached p~load. Other options being evaluated include final 

assembly and checkout at the station prior to placement in operational orbit. 

The two station crewmembers assigned to the mission will need to be 

: specially trained and will operate 8 hours each day. The crew will view three 

i-video displ~s at an IVA work station for real time operation of the mission. 

I 

L 

! 

I: 

C 

r 

V- --

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

design of the crew work station which supports this mission needs to be 

efficient from an operator's pOint of view, user friendly from a man-machine 

intellectual interchange point of view, and "expertK from an information 

sharing and data recall and exchange point of view. 

The Advanced Solar Observator,y illustrates a key point. As the 

sophistication of future payloads increases, there will be an accompanying 

shift in crew support skflls/requirewents. A transition occurs from the more 

physical tasks to the more intellectually oriented \'1ork activities wfth the 

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

development ~namic wherein the blue collar worker changes to a white collar 

worker as the transition from production of goods to provision of services 

takes place. 

An HRHG mi ssi on even more comp1 ex than the ASO is the Sol f.r Terrestri al 

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

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

The STO mission calls for operations of 90 d~ys per year or about one week 

,each month. The general objectives of the mission are to study space plasma 

atmospheric interactions utilizing observations of natural and induced 

atmospheric emission~~ to exploit the natural plasma laboratory of sYJce. 

The specific obJectives are to investigate the influence of an electron beam, 

an arc jet, and a neutral gas plu~e on the high-altitude atmosphere, including 

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

from the pqyload 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. 

4·11 

". 

MCDONN6!1.L DOlJaL~ 

• 
In order to appreciate the complexity of the STO mission, it is 

appropriate to describe the ele~nts of the payload. The objecti~es are met 

by an electron beam of energy 1 to 20 ~ev with 1 to 25 kilowatts of power, a 

helium or argon magneto-plasma-Qynamfc arc-jet wfth 2 to 10 kilo9ra~s per 

pulse, 250 ev particle energies, a charge current probe from the OSS-T 

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

instr-uments is called SEPAC, (Space Experimt:/ot with Particle Accelerators). 

The electron beam accelerator (EBA) will be designed for ultimate po~tlevel' 

of some hundred kilowatts, allowing for substantial growth in objectives. The 

power radiating radio frequency facility is called WISP (Waves in Space 

Plasma) and consists of a VLF transmitter operating in the 1 to 30 kilohertz 

band, an HF transmftter. and a receiver operating from 0.1 to 30 megahertz. 

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

Antenna elements extend 150 meters in each of two opposite directfons with 

tip-to-tip distance of 300 meters. The cornmon operating research equipment 

assembly controls antenna retraction and extension. 

The complete payload package includes the SEPAC, WISP, and AEPI (video 

camera) f nstruments together with a Sol ar r~oni tor package and the x-ray 

telescope. Subsatellites and instrum~nt probes are also required. The 

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

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

assembly for attachment to the Spac~ Station. Integration hardware for 

providing power, thermal control, Signal transfer, and electrfcal distribution 

is assemDl~d on the pallet(s). The integration hardware includes an active 

themal loop. 

The baseline scenario calls for one week per month of intensive operation 

of SEPAC and WISP \Iith the assumption that one (SEPAC or WISP) is in a passive 

mode while the other is active. Coordinated (interleaved) .pulses of SEPAC and 

WISP would be desirable. A growth option includes operation of SEPAC and IHSP 

at the same time if resources permit. The video camara is included to observe 

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

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

magneti c f1 el d towai'd any auroral spot formed by e:ni ssi on from the SEPAC 

and/or HISP units. The camera is to controlled by the Space Station crell. 

4·12 

/ 

MCDO"'''''LL DOCJC~ 

! , 
I' 

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

is visuali~ed 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 IUSP is to be mounted at the crel., 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 ~le efficiency of the crew/mission equipment functional and 

operational interfaces as embodied in the selection and implement~tion of the 

design features of the work station. 

As the emphasis changes 1n the workplace. as illustrated by the ASO and 

the STO missions, the design of the ere,., work 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 NexpertN systems. Activities important in IVA for these 

advanced missions are Adjust/Align, Communicate Information, Confirm/Verify, 

Implement Procedures. Inspect/Observe and Problem Solving/Decision Making/Data 

Analysis. 

The successful impl ementati on of the MR~!G Advanced Sol ar Observatory and 

Solar Terrestrial O~servatory missions will be highly dependent upon the 

development of work stations that (1) communicate f1uentl~~ith humans 

(speaking, writing. drawing, etc.); (2) assist in interactive problem solving 

and inference functions (deductive reasoning); and (3) provide knowledge base 

functions (information storage, retrieval. and "expert" systems for support). 

In ordel' to develop these worl~ stations of the future, ho~{ever. a better 

understanding is required of human intellectual capabilities and how they 

function in different operations (such as convergent production. divergent 

product"ion, memory, cognition. or evaluation) and \-/ith different contents 

(such as pictorial or figural. symbolic. semantic, and behavioral elements) in J order to obtain specific products (implications, transformations, etc.). Even 

when people don't sp;ak the same language they can com~unicate to some degree 

using gestures, facial expressions, etc •• because they share common biological 

structure, needs, and common patterns of thought and behavior and knowledge of 

4-13 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUOLfi,;5'-

-
the world. A n~ed exists for a more Nnatural A language for man/machine 

communication using interfaces that are congenial and transparent for the 

average person. The use of voice interactive controls and displays offers 

considerable promise for enhancing man/machine communications. 

With regard to the issue of technology readiness and risk assessment, the 

schedule of project accomplishments shown in Figure 4-1 suggests that the EVA 

enabling technologies appear to be adequately planned 1n order to support the 

space station scheduled IOC in 1991. This view is further supported by the 

fact that the EVA equi pment, for the most part, is of the Ncarry-onll as 

opposed to the IIbuilt-inli character. Carry-on equipment items are more easily 

ac~o~nodated than are mission and payload equipment items which must be 

incorporated in the basic_~tation 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 

would suggest that the IVA capabilities and work stations would need to be 

frozen in design several years before the start of the build-up and launch 

I ' 

-1, sequence for the station modules and elements. On the other hand, these worl~ 

stations must be designed to b~ capable of meeting the needs of a continually 

changing set of mission requirements, some of which (for example, the ASO and 

the STO missions) will place an extremely complex set of operational demands 

on the control/display configurations of the work station. This scheduling 

consideration strongly suggests that a technological gap exists in the work 

station related projects and planning. It is further suggested that these IVA 

related technology developments need to be focused on designs which are 

adaptive and transparent to emerging design improvements. allowing for both 

hardware and software updates to be made to the basic work station even after 

the work station is operational. 

Tre 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 designers often utilize the 

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

4·14 

/ 

MCOONNI":LL Doua~ 

____ ....... ~ ____ ~_oL .... ____ ... ~~_ .. , .. ___ ... _,_ ....... ~ __ ... ___ ~ __ .... -

... -

, .. 

: i 

i 

• ~ '>;'~-

i $_,,::._ .. 1. ztt:GC'"':!:!G"~~!?"'i;r:;'; ,.~:;;;~~ 
, : 

tJ', 

I: 

I 

I. 

I,; 

b 

.. ~. ' 

system together. The real issue to consfJer fn the development of work 

stations is to increase the productivity of the human fn order to enhance his 

value to the mission. In order to increase human pr~ductivity we must 

continue to develop our understanding of the cognitive processes involved in 

work station design and we must contin~e the developm~~f aids and 

techniques that can be used to enhance human productivity. Some of the 

specific issues related to work station design tr.~t fall in the domain of 

"enhancing" technology and can be considered as technology gaps at the present 

time are as follows: 

A. Nature of Human Intelligence. Continuing effort should be directed 

toward developing a better understanding of the nature of human intelligence 

in order to deyelop work stations permitting more effective use of human 

intellectual capabilities. 

By taking advantage of ongoing work in the behavioral sciences 

oriented toward developing paradigms of human intellectual processes and 

operations, the relationships of these processes to different contexts and to 

different products can be used to establish specific goals for technological 

developments to enhance the huwan role in space. Three areas of research and 

development should be emphasized: 

1. Development of systems that comw.unicate fluently with humans 

through speaking, writing, drawing, etc. Interfaces must be congenial and 

transparent for the average person. 

2. Development of problem solving and inference functions utilizing 

automated classification techniques, multispectral image exploitation, and 

artificial int~lligence applications for sensor data fusion. To date 

artificial intelligence has been of limited value in formulating optinal 

combinations of sensory data because specific combinations are based upon the 

needs and experiences of specific users. 

3. Development of knollledge base functions or so called "expert" 

systems util izing the efficient storage and selective retrieval of 

inform~tion. Much of the current work in the behavioral sciences is oriented 

toward examining the differences between experts and novices in activities 

such as pl~ing chess, solving problems in physics, or in computer 

programming. The general finding is that most differences seem to be 

qualitative rather than quantitative, i.e., differences in approach rather 

than in the amount of processing or searching done. While processing roles 

4·15 

/ 

MCDONNO!LL DOIJG~ 
can be speeded up for novlces, by replicating expert strategies, results to 

date suggest that we are a long way from being able to painlessly and 

instantly make a novice an expert in any given field. 

B. t~easurement of Human Productivity. Continuing effort is required to 

develop valid measures of human performance an~ rroductivity. ~he as~~nt 

and/or evaluation of human-machine systems is impossible without techniq~es to 

accurately measure human performance in the operational environment. Such 

measurement techniques are necessary to provide objective data that can be 

used to improve operational procedures and system design concepts. A problem 

especially common to human factors evaluations is that the measurement 

techniques proposed often modify, bias, or otherwise change the behavior being 

observed. The most pel tinent w~ of avoiding this form of "instrumentation 

error" is to develop and validat~ performance measurement techniques that do 

not interfere with the behavior being observed. Techniques such as remote 

movement-sensing devices, voice stress analyzers, and other indirect or 

secondary behavioral measurements offer promise of providing noninterfering 

performance measurement capability. Before such techniques can be 

meaningful:y employed in the operational environfTlent, hm't'ever, they need to be 

validated to ensure that they indeed measure what they are purported to 

measure. This will require laboratory and field studies under controlled 

conditions. 

Another research area of considerable current interest and one that 

bears directly on the human role in future space systems is the area of 

"cognitive ergonomics II or mental workload assessment. While man's 

physiological performance limits are fairly well defined. his mental workload 

limits are less completely understood. It is known that excessive mental 

workload negatively affects human operators in both their physical and 

psychological well-being. The effect of stress on cognitive perform~nce tends 

to manifest itself in a narrowing of the span of attention, inadequate 

distribution and switching of attention. forgetting of proper sequences of 

actions, incorrect evaluations of Situations. slowness in arriving at 

decisions, and failure to carry out decisions made. Questions regarding the 

amount of stress a human operator can accept before performance deteriorates 

or breaks down need to be resolved, and measurement and predictive devices 

need to be developed. Hental l\'orkload shoJld be one of the major criteria 

4·16 

,/ 

MCDnNN~LL DOIJOL~ 

• I 
upon which decisions covering the acceptability and effectiveness of 

man-machine systems are made. 

Recent research on the use of (1) the P-300 evoked cortical (brain) 

response potential (ERP). and of (2) sinus arrhythmia as potential indicators 

of cognitive performance levels shows promislng results. 

These and other similar issues relating to the measurement of human 

performance bear directly on the technology requirements and planning for 

hardware and system design. and on the operational and procedural 

recommendations for augmenting and optimizing the human role in space. 

C. Critical Incident Analysis of Human Performance. Continu1ng effort 

is requi red to investi gate and understand the causes of the IIhuman error" in 

space system operations as well as incidents of exceptional performance. in 

order to identify and classify the causal factors and to establish guidelines 

for the design of future space systems. 

It is recognized that the capability for direct human int~rvention 

can enhance the reliability of advanced systems. However, precise 

mathematical modeling of hu~an performance in the context of establishing the 

reliability of complex electromechanical systems is an elusive goal. A more 

logical approach i~ to focus on case stu~ies of either exceptional behavior. 

or conversely on human error in performance, a:1d to diagnose the factors 

contributing to the exceptional behavior, or con.arsely the causes of the 

errors. By better understanding the causes of human error and/or the factors 

leading to exceptional perfo~ance through the analysiS of previous incidents, 

we can recommend procedures that permit the human to enhance system operations 

by reducing the risk of system failure. 

D. Space Stati'on Horksllop. Continuing effort is required to develop thetechnology needed to provide an organized. integrated, on-orbit maintenance 

depot-wor~shop for the space station. This requires developing the tools and 

devices for use in zero-g as \'lell as the integrated workshop concept. The 

tools include lathes, milling machines. grinders, welding machines. and \~ork 

benches. 

To date, on-orbit maintenance and repair has been limited and 

generally ad hoc. A permanent space station will require and provide the 

unique opportunity for extensive real-time orbital malntenance of the station 

itself. its ancillary systems, ar.d various satellites. To support such a 

range of requi rements. an on-orbi t, rna; ntenance depot-~/orkshop technology must 

4-17 

/ 

MCDONNELL OOUGL~ 
{ \ 

be developed. Standardization of hardware cannot be guaranteed: therefor~~ 

the maintenance-servicing facility must be flexible in its capabilities, yet 

sufficiently organized to acco~odate varied spacecraft functions. Special 

tools and techniques must be developed to complement the planned standard tool 

kit approach. Fabrication must be considered as a possibility. large-vehicle 

restraint techniques, support lighting, and typical shop facilities (air. 

power fluids, etc.) must be considered. 

E. Visual Displav Develop~~nt. ContinUing effort is required in the 

development of visual display terminals since it i~s anticipated that just as 

today, 80~ of the information required by future space crews will be obtained 

through the sense of sight. Whether video displays or other visual media are 

used; fssue~to be addressed include such items as the consideration of the 

following: 

0 Surface Screen Polarity and Color 

0 Surfaee Screen Reflections/Filters 

• Display Positior.s 

0 Display Luminance 

e Display Figure-Ground Contrast 

0 Character Design 

0 Information Content Formatting 

0 Fl icker 

0 Ambient Illumination 

0 Types of Tasks 

0 Time Constraints for Utilization of Specific Visual Displays 

4.3 TECHNOLOGY PLAtt 

NASA has recently i nsti tuted a human factors research program to ensure 

the timely availability of man-machine interface design technology for the 

space program. Past experience, as well as automation technology forecasts, 

point to a need for the human's unique capabilities in a maximally effective~ 

and efficient program to utilize and to exploit the potential of space. 

However, the high cost of each man-hour in space, the difficulty in handling 

injuries, and the adverse public senti~ent that would result from mission 

failures require that humans in space be provided with maximJlly effective and 

safe tools, procedures, and work stations. 

4·18 

MCDONNeLL DO"OL~ I 
The goal of NASA's space human factors program is to develop the 

technology for (1) determining which tasks should be done by humans and which 

by automation~ (2) determining which human tasks should be done in the 

shirtsleeve environment of the spacecraft and which in the EVA environment 

wearing spacesuits; and (3) development methods for designing safe, effective 

tools, procedures, and crew stations for astronaut use. The program to 

accomplish this is called manned systems and is divided into the following 

elements: 

A. Basic Methodology 

B. Crew Station Design 

C. Ground Control/Operation 

D. Teleoperations 

E. Extravehicular Activity Support 

Basic methodology encompasses the development of hUman factors techniques, 

methods, data bases, and standards to design and evaluate human/syst~m 

interfaces for use in space anthropomet~. methods for formatting support 

documentation, and methods for allocating tasks--to humans and to automation. 

Crew station design focuses on developing methods and techniques for using 

advanced display and control technology (e.g., flat panel displays, 

touch-sensitive panels, voice recognition/synthesis, etc.) more efficiently. 

Ground control operation encompasses the development of techniques for 

designing ground control stations requiring few human controllers and solving 

the human implications of'transferring operations (e.g., assembly, test, and 

launch) from the ground to a space station. 

Teleoperations focuses on the development of man-machine interface 

requirements of teleoperators (remote manipulatiun devices). This includes 

visual and tactile feedback to the human, as well as information input methods. 

Extravehicular activity support encompasses the development of improved 

tools, procedures, and work stations for the suited astronauts and the design 

of equipment for ease of servicing by extravehicular activity. NASA's current 

EVA system uses a "SOft" spacesuit that operates with a pure oxygen atmosphere 

4·19 

,.,COO"""L" DOU .... ~ 

-_'\ 
at 4.2 pounds per square inch (psia) absolute pres~ure and a Portable Life 

:;~ppo.!t System (PLSS) that uses LiOIt cartridges for carbon dioxide remove.l, .. 

bottled oxygen at 6,000 psia for gas makeup, and a water boiler that vents 

about 2 pounds of water per hour for heat rejection. 

A -hard· suit is now under development that can operate within an internal 

pressure of 8 psia and is er.pected to afford improved mobility and 

reliability. This suit is expected to eliminate the need for prebreathing 

oxygen to purge nitrogen from the wearer's body fluids before EVA operations. 

The most difficult problems are expected in development of a MOl'e compact PLSS 

that incorporates a regenerable carbon dioxide removal subsystem and provides 

thermal control without venting water. 

As was described in Table 4-1, seven levels of technology readiness can be 

used to define the relative level of maturity of a given concept. The time 

scale required to achieve each level of technolo9ical readiness depends in 

large part upon the degree of complexity of the system to be developed. For 

relatively simple systems, the ti~2S required to mov~ from ievcl one to level 

seven may take from one to five years. This time range often reflects the 

impact of factors other than technical progress on t'le development process, 

such as politic~l or budgeting constraints or the availability of corollary 

systems required to demonstrate or aid in the development of the item in 

question. An example of the develop"~nt path for a simple system is 

illustrated in Figure 4-3. The devices in this case are small electrical 

connector tools to be lIsed in changing orbital replacement units (ORUs) on a 

space platfona. During neutral buoyancy tes~s at MSFC in 1981 the need for 

such tools was identified. The steps from conceptual design (level 2) to 

testing an engineering model (level 6) took about one year. To proceed to the 

next level of testing an engineering model in space and then to obtain full 

operational capability (FOC), approximately 30 months ~/ill be required because 

of Scheduling and STS manifest constraints. 

The time requirement to move from level one to level seven for a more 

c~plex system may take from 10 to 20 years. An example of the development 

path for a more complex system is illustrated in Figure 4-4. The system 

illustrated is an ElectrophJretic Production Unit currently under development 

at McDonnell Douglas. Although thp potential of electrophoresis as a 

4·20 

MCUONNIZLL novoL~ 

1 

. I 

. ! 

I ' 
Technology 

Readlne1S 

L eve I 

- .. - .. Inilial and Full 

Operational 

Capabllltv 

7 - Engmeenng Model 

Test I n Space 

6 - Englneenng 

Mod&1 Tested 

5 - Componentl 

Breadboard Telled 

4 - Critical Function/ 

1980 

Characteristic Demo 

3 - Conceptual 

Oe1.gn Analvzed 

2 - Conceptual 

Design Formulated 

1 - BaSIC Principles 

ObservedlReported 

1981 1982 I 1 

~ 

3 

~ 

3 

Figure 4 3. Development Path for Electrical Connector Tools 

Calendar Vear 

1983 1984 1985 1986 

1 1 1 I 

~ 

-v 

-- 30 

9 

-

separation technique has been known since the turn of the century. the 

specific application and value of a space-based system was initially conceived 

in the period between 1972 and 1974. By 1975 a conceptual design (level 2) 

had been developed anti engineering model s \~ere developed and tested (level 6) 

in the 1979-81 time period. The first test of the engineering model in space 

occurred on STS-4 in June of 1982. Tests Iti11 continue through 1984. Tile 

development of a full-scale production facility in all probabi~ity will depend 

upon the availabili~y of a man~~d space station with a current estimate of FOe 

in 1992. Similar examples of the time required for technological advancement 

can be dra ... m from the historic data of other complex space systems. The 

concept of building and launching a diffraction limited IR-VIS-UV orbiting 

telescope was advanced in the early 1960s. Over 20 ye~rs will have elapsed 

between the early conceptual desi gn (level 2) and the aclli evement of full 

operational capabl1ity of the space telescope in 1986. 

This composite experience is summanzed in Figure 4-5. This experience 

when related to the space station development schedule and to the technology 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOfJCat::;:i __ '-4../ 

4·21 
1" 

~ 

Technology Calendar Year Production· 

Readiness 1965 1970 1975 19BO 1985 191

90 Level \ 19~5 I I I I 

8 - Initial and Full Clinical Trials \ Operational · Capability I Shuttle !lay · 

-'1 

~ • I 7 - Engineering Model Space Stallon 

Ten on Space Mid Deck I 

6 Eng.neerong 

30 I 

- -- I 

Model Tested r- I 

I 

5 - Component/ I I 

• Parallel Activity I 

Breadboard Tested I 

I I 

4 Crotlcal Function/ 

42 I I - CharaCltroSllc Demo '" I 

I 

I 

3 - Conceptual Parallel ActiVity I 

Design Analyzrd I 

t 

2 - Conceptual 

~ I 

I 

O~lgn Formulat.d I 

I I 

1 - B.SlC PrinCiples i I 

• • 121/2 Years -I I Observed/Reported I 

I 20 Years I 

'One Product - 25% of Market 

Figure 4-4. Develcpment Piltll for Space Based ElectroplY.n!!tlc Production Umts 

III 

Ci 

> ,c.> 

~ 

III 

'" c.> 

c: 

:0 

... 

CI> 

c:: 

,.. 

CI 

0 

'0 

c: 

.&; 

u 

c.> 

... 

FOC 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

Mod:;ralely 

Complex 

Systems 

Levtl2 

Level 3 

Level 4 

LevelS 

Level 6 

level 7 

Techno'ogy Readiness Level,; 

Basic Prtnclples Observed and Reported 

Conceptual Design Formulated 

Conceptual Design Tested Analytically or Expenmentally 

Crotlcal Function Characteristic Demol'stratlon 

Component Breadboard Tested In Relevant Envlror.ment 

Prototype Englneenng Model Tested In Relevant Environment 

Englncerlng Modcl Tested In Space 

o 5 10 15 20 

Years to Full Operational Capability (FOC) 

Figure 1\-5. Techno!oTf Advancement ClaSSifications 

,-

MCOONI'V~L'" OOUOL.~ 1.;:.U 

422 

.1 

. , 

-, 

.! 

-t 

I 

t 
n ~ f: 

r 

I' 

, \ 

\ 

gaps identified in Section 4.2 provides a frame of reference for creating a 

technology plan for advancing the human role in space. 

Using NASA's human factors research program as a guide, issues dealing 

with Basic Methodology can be considered to reflect a technology readiness 

level of one. Issues dealing with Crew Station Design reflect a technology 

readiness level of two. Issues dealing with Ground Control/Operation reflect 

a technology readiness level of three. Current Teleoperations r~search and 

development programs also reflect a technology readiness level of three. 

Extravehicul ar Acti vi ty Support programs are currently quite far along and 

could be considered to be at level four or level five. 

In Figure 4-6, estimated time-phased technology readiness levels of the 

five areas which were identified iFrthe THURIS stu~ as representing 

developments needed for the enhancement of crew work station designs are 

plotted to show their relationship to the Space Station Reference Schedule and 

the current NASA Human Factors Research Program categories. 

Space 

Station 

Reference 

Sl:hedult 

71 t ~ I 

¢BRFP 

loe 

~ 

Technologlcs Key to Enablln9 ~ Inltl.1 SPSC9 Station 

Technology t--------' 

Technology Enhancing 1-______________ Technologies Key for Evolutionary Growth _ 

Foe 17,,(1 ~ level 7 ., @ ® @0 ..J 

7 

CD 

::I level 6 ., 

c 

-6 

.. levelS .. 

a: 

>- Level 4 8' 

"0 

c: level3 - ~ 

<> 

t! level :2 

level 1 

Calendar Year 

Growth 

St811011 

~ 

Technology Needs 

°21 Nature of Human Intelligence o Measurement of Human 

ProductiVIty 

@ Crotlcal 'nCld-nt Analvsls of 

Human Performance 

@sspaceStationworkShoP ® VISual DI$pl~y Development 

Figure 4-6. A Tlme-Ph3~d Technolo:lY Plan for Critical Areas of Enhancing Techno/o!lY 

4-23 

/ 

MCDONNIl'" DOU .... fiJ:-.-
/' 

,/ 

/T 

Figure 4-6 suggests the recommended timetable for implementing systematic 

studies of these research areas including ground (levels 1 to 4) and flight 

(levels 5 to 7) experiments that should be pursued in order to accomplish the 

backbone supporting research and technology needed to support manned spa~e 

operations in the coming decades. 

4·24 

/ 

MCDO,"NI!fLL DO(JGL~ 

7 -. -. -- ----~- .. -.---~ 
Section 5 

GENERAlIZATIONS ON HUMAN ROLES IN SPACE - TASK 4 

The objective of Task 4 was to integrate the analyses and results of the 

three preceding tasks into an easily accessible procedural format that can 

provide space project managers and systems engineers with a logical b~sis for 

deciding. early in the conceptual design process for advanced systems. which 

space activities can most efficiently be conducted by manned. supported. 

augmented. teleoperated. supervised. or independent operations. 

We have learned from the U.S. and Soviet* space programs to date that (1) 

systems can have indefinite operational lifetimes in space lithey are 

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

structures too large to be launched inta~t can be constructed and assembled on 

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

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

successfully achieving mission objectives. 

) 

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 compared to those formerly 

required to survive the high launch-acceleration loads of unmanned launch 

vehicles. As a result. complex mechanisms secondary to the main purpose of 

the instrument will no longer need to be installed to remove peripheral 

protective devices or to activate and calibrate instruments remotely. With 

the crew members available to load film. for example. complex film transport 

systems are not needed. and malfunctions such as film jams can be easily 

corrected manually. The time required to calibrate and align instruments 

*The Soviets have been reported to rely heavily on manned involvement in order 

to repair equipment and subsystems with serious shortcomings in reliable and 

trouble-free serVlce life. 

5·1 

MCDONNE .... DOUOL~ 

l'U:-) 
---

r] 

directly can be as little as 1/40th of that required to do the same job by 

telemetry from a remote location. In general, physicai articulation and 

movement constraints in teleoperated systems resu1t in performance times that 

are up to ten times longer then if the same tasks could be performed directly 

by human operators (Reference 20). 

With the availability of extended-duration manned missions. specific 

experiments and operations no longer will 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 

SEA SAT. for example. required one hour of ground-based computer time for 

processing before it could be used or examined, or a value assessment made. 

Scientist-astronauts in situ could determine in real-time whether cloud cover 

or other factors are within acceptable ranges before recording and 

transmitting data. 

The astronaut can abstract data from various sources and can co~bine 

multiple sensory inputs (e.g •• visual, auditory. tactile) to interpret. 

understand. and take appropriate action. when required (see Figure 5-1). In 

some cases the human perceptual abilities permit signals below noise levels to 

be detected. Man can react selectively to a large number of possible 

variables and can resp(nd to dynamically changing situations. He can operate 

in the absence of complete information. He can perform a broad spectrum of 

manual movement patterns. from gross positioning actions to highly refined 

adjustments. In this sense, he is a varia~le-gain servo system. 

Thus. ~ith the 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 functions, 

routine computations or operations. and large-scale data-processing functions 

can be expected to be performed by computers capable of being 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 work 

done by the cre\'/s manning the space platforms of the coming generation. 

5-2 

/ 

MCDONN~"" DOUGL~ .... . __ . \.. J:", 
rJ' 

\. 

I I , 

rj 

l-ten 

Surpass Present Day Machines in the Ability to 

o Sense or Detect Minimum Amounts of Visual and Acoustic Energy 

o Recognize and Interpret Patterns of Light and Sound 

e Improvise and Use Flexible Procedures 

o Store Large Amounts of Information Over Long Periods and Reca1l 

Relevant Facts at Appropriate Times 

• Reason Inductively 

o Exercise Judgment 

Machines 

Surpass Man in the Ability to 

o Respond Rapidly to Control Signals 

o Apply Great Force Smoothly and Precisely 

o Perform Routine Receptive Tasks Reliably 

o Store Information Briefly and Erase Co~pletely 

o Process Information Deductively, Including Ability for Computation 

o Handle Highly Complex Operations - r~any Tasks at Once 

Figure 5-1. Machines Are Extensions of Manis Capabilities 

When assessing the relative value of the various categories of man-machine 

interaction in accomplishing the objectives of future space missions, many 

different criteria can be suggested as candidates for inclusion in the 

decision process. 

The criteria of performance, cost, and mission success prQbabilltj 

(prograM confidence) are the princlpal factors that program or project 

managers and system engineers use in selecting the most cost-effective 

/ 

McnONNE .... nouG~ 

- - ---- --_. -_ .... _- ---- .... . 

5-3 
(j 

approach to meeting mission objectives. The decision maker must base his 

judgment on knowledge that a particular implementation option Cdn or cannot 

meet the performance requirements in terms of such factors as force, sensory 

discrimination, speed, and accuracy. If it can meet the performance 

requirements, can it do so within the system environmental constraints of 

temperature, pressure, radiation. atmospheric constituents, mass limitations, 

acceleration disturbance limits, etc.? In many cases, more than one 

implementation option can meet the performance requirements, and it is then 

necessary to examine the relative costs and success probability associated 

with each approach. While the final selection in the tradeoff between an 

acceptable probability of success and the resultant cost must rest with the 

decision maker. the intent of this study was to provide a frame of reference 

in which the interrelationships of these pertinent parameters can be made 

visible, and from which rational or informed decisions can be derived. 

With regard to performance, 37 generic classes of activities were defined 

(see Section 3) that, when combined in the required operational sequences, 

could be used to describe a broad spectrum of potential space programs. For 

each of these activities and for each category of man-machine interaction 

(manual, supported. augmented, teleoperated, supervised, and independent 

operations), the limiting factors in terms of sensing, information processing 

and motor actions have been defined and the requirements for human involvement 

were described. As a general statement, response time was found to be the 

most generally applicable discriminator between the manually controlled modes 

,and the supervised and independent modes of operation. If responses in time 

periods of seconds or less are required, then the activity is generally best 

performed 1n the supervised or independent modes. In the UActivate/Initiate 

System OperationU or "Information Processing" activity classifications, for 

example. applications where speed of response would dictate that the 

activities be performed in the supervised or independent modes might include 

launch abort procedures and orbital traject~!~ corrections. If allowable 

response times become minutes or hours, then all modes might be applicable and 

the criteria of cost effectiveness or success probability would provide the 

more appropriate bases for selection of a particular mode of implementation. 

With regard to cost, costing models were derived (see Section 3.4) that 

provided comparative data on the relative costs for each man-machine mode in 

MCDONNIfLL ooua~ 
\ 

I' 

performing each activity, froM one to many hundreds of times. These 

comparative costing data were further refined to take into account the 

commonality that can exist among the equipment items or resources needed to 

support multiple activities (see Section 3.5). 

In developing an estimate of success probability, the study team initlally 

considel'ed two issues. Cne was the issue of human reliability and how the 

hU~4n can best be used to increase mission success probability; the second was 

the impact of the state of technological readiness on mission success. 

In reference to the issue of human reliability, considerable work has been 

done in the last twenty years in attempting to de~elop quantitative indices of 

human reliability. Swain, (1977)(1) and Swain and Guttman, (1980)(2) have 

developed techniques for calculating the reliabil ity of co:r.plex man-machine 

systems such as nuclear power reactors by mathematically integrating human and 

machine error information. Hammer, 1972(3), provided human reliability 

ratings for over 50 specific manual tasks such as installing gaskets, 

installing lockwires, removing Marmon clawps, loosening nuts, etc. Recently, 

the U.S. tJ:.wy~s Sea System Com;nand has prepared a "Human Reliability 

Prediction Systel:1 Users ~lanual"(4) for use in estimating the impact of human 

reliability in electronic maintenance and serviCing tasks directed toward 

improving mission equipm~nt availability. 

Although precise analytic techniques exist wh~n predicting the reliability 

of complex mechanical or electrical systeli.s with components of knOltn 

Cl) S\'min, A. D. (1977). Error and Reliability in Humln Engineering. In 

B. Wolman (Ed.) "International Encyclopedia of Psychiatry, Psychology, Psychoanalysis, and tleurology (Vol. 4, pp. 371-373). New York: Von Nostrand 

Reinhol<l. 

(2) Swain, A. D., and Guttman, H. E. (1980). Handbook of Human Reliability Analysis with Emphasis on Nuclear PO\~er Plant Application (NUREG/CR-1278). Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office. 

(3) Hammer. Willie, Handbook of System ~nd Product Safety, Prentice-Hall I 

Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1972. 

(4) U.S. Department of the Navy. llul:1an Reliabil ity Prediction System User's' r~anual, Sea Systel'ls COrmlilnd, Wa~hington, D.C., December 1977. ' 

5-5 

MCDO","''''LL oouaL~ 
reliabilities, and ~ome success as noted in the references has been achieved 

1n predicting human reliability factors in certa~n well structured tasks, 

considerable caution must be exercised in attempting to treat the analysis and 

integration of human and machine error in a manner analogous to the techniques 

used in dealing with physical sY$tems. The basic problem is that human errors 

are fundamentally different from machine errors. When a physical component 

fails, the system is usually designed so that the failure is isolated and 

doesn't affect other components. When humans make a mistake, 

resulting frustrations may increase the likelihood of subseque~t errors. 

Machine failures generally require human intervention to rep~ir or replace the 

failed component. On the other hand, humans can monitor their own performance 

and can often correct tnei~ own errors before they affect system performance. 

In physical systems, rp1undant components are assumed or designed to be 

independent and by being placed in parallel networks, can increase system 

reliability. Redundancy in crew size or presence, however, does not 

necessarily increase reliability and in fact the social interactions among 

crew members can lead to COrmlon conclusions that may in fa·;t be wrong. On the 

""Other hand, the human's perception of the 1f~elihood of tIle fan Jre of 

specific components can lead to a greater sensitivity and awareness for 

impending failure and the potential for anticipating correctiVe actions. 

While mathematical modeling of human performance may be possible in well 

structured tasks, the precise mathematical modeling of human performance for 

systems in the very early conceptual design phase is an elusive goal. 

On the basis of past experience (see Figure 5-2), the basic rule when 

designing new systems should be to consider the human element not in terms of 

being a component in series with other system elements and having a specific 

numeric value of reliability, but rather as an element functioning in parallel 

with the machine components. The human element can enhance system operations 

by reducing the risk of system failure through the utilization of human 

perfonnance capabilities to provide parallel or redundant resources in t:he 

form of maintenance/servicing, repair/replacewent, ind reprogram~ing of the 

machine elements. 

Based upon tOday's state of kno\'iledge of human capabilities and 

limitations it \'/as concluded that human reliability remains a difficult 

5-6 

ey/ MCDONNeLL DOUGL~ 

~ __ ~ .......... _ .... ___ .............. .-..-_ ..J~_ ~ ..... ,.,--.- ~ ... -------~----------

.. 
., 

t 

! 

Machine CharacterIStics 

• Component failures generallv independent 

• ReqUIres rep.ilr or replacement t-V external agent 

• Parallel (or redundant) components assumed to be Independent 

• ":::thematlcal models can describe machine reliability 

Human Characteristics] 

• Tend to compound errors 

• Capability for self-correctlon of errors 

• Social Inleractlons lead to common and perhaps erroneous perceptIOns 

• Variable gaIn settongs on error s~nSltlvlty 

ConclUSions I • Difficult to establish meaningful reliability goals bv 

mathematlcallv combining human error data woth 

machine reliabIlitY data 

• Enhance probability of success bV placong human 

elements and machine elements In parallel 

• Machines monltc;.r humans and humans manage machmes 

Inputs~ ~ r.hn ~ Outputs 

Mach.ne ~ 

Most DeSirable 

Less DeSirabie Inputs~achme ~ Outputs 

Figure 5·2 Reduction of Risk - The Issue of System Reliability 

concept to quantify, especially when dealing with the very early ptOeliminary 

design phase of,~dvanced systems. Accordingly it was believed that further 

exploration of human reliability as a numeric indication of the success 

probabil i ty of various modes of man-machi ne interaction \1oul d not be warranted 

and in fact woul d be beyond the scope of the present study. Obvi au sly tile 

system designer will find it beneficial to enhance mission succe~s probability 

whenever possible by prov!ding redundancy in all critical systems and by 

including the capability for on-orbit servicing and repair. If this approach 

to advanced system design is followed as a basic design philosophy, it \1aS 

reasoned that a mare immediately useful metric for assessing the success 

probability of alternative man-machine modes could be based upon the state of 

technological readiness of the alternative implementation concepts. This then 

was the approach that the study team followed. 

As described in Section 4 of this report, seven levels of tech~ology 

readiness can be established as follows: 

Level 1 Basic Principles Observed and Reported 

5·7 

/' 

MCDUNNrru. DOUOLfi,i:'_ 

1 .• __ 

-
tT 

Level ? 

Leve-l 3 

Level 4 

Level 5 

Level 6 

Level 7 

Level 8 

.f 

Conceptual Design Formulated 

Conceptual Design Tested Analytically or Experimentally 

Critical Function/Characteristfc Demonstration 

Component/Breadboard Tested in Relevant Envfronment 

Prototype/Engineering Hodel Tested in Relevant Environment 

Engineerfng Model Tested in Space 

fUll Qperational £apabi11ty and (FOC) Base11ned Into Production 

Desfgn 

Technology designated as off-the-shelf or otherwise reflecting current 

operational capabilities would be considered as FOC. 

Figure 5-3 summarizes the expected relatfonships between technological 

readiness levels and time. Silnple Systems may be defined as requiring 

o Implementation of a singular action. 

o Operations generally independent of other functions. 

c Unique applications although basic princfples well understood. 

Foe 8 

7 

M 

] 

.5 6 

~ c 

'& 

.. 5 co: 

?n 

0 

(5 

c 4 .r:. 

u 

.. 

I3 

:< 

1 

0 5 

- roun an r I 

n rpP'1 ent 

." 

/-ElectrophoresIs 

." ProductIOn Unit 

/?Q~'" 

,~~----------------------~------~ 

Level 1 

Lewl2 

Levell 

Level 4 

Level 5 

Level 6 

Level 7 

Level 8 

Trchnologlcal Readlneu Levels 

Ba1IC prmclple1 observed and reponed 

Conceptual deslqn formulated 

Conceptual deslq ... tested analytically or experimentally 

Critical function/characteristic demonstrat'on 

Compenent/breadboard tested In relevant environment 

Prototype/engineering model tested In relevant en\.lronmtJl1t 

Engineering model tested In space 

Full Oper3tlo'"lal CDpab.hty (FOC) 

10 15 20 

Yea., to Full Operational C8pob,hty (FOC) 

Figure 5-3 Time ReqUired to Reach Vallous Technology Readiness levels 

5-0 

/ 

MCDONNtrLI. IJOVG~ 

• I 

I ( . 
; 

I' 

f]" I. 

.-, 

! • 

r-

, 

, 

, -

! 4 

II I' 

An example might be a ratchet wrench which is required to remove and install 

mechanical fasteners. Most manual and supported modes of man--mach1ne 

interaction would fall into this cate~ory. 

l40derately Complex Systems may be defined as requiring 

• Hultiple interacting functions or actions. 

• Complex control logic or networks. 

• Basic implementation techniques similar to previously developed 

systems. 

An example might be a computer work station which provides data computation, 

correlation, and plotting capabilfties. t~ost augmented, teleoperated, and 

some supervised modes of man-w~chine interaction w~uld fall into this category. 

Complex Systems may be defined as requiring 

• Hultiple interacting functions or actions. 

G Complex control lngic or networks. 

• Reduction to practice of design concepts. (Comparable system has not 

been developed.) 

An example might be a remotely controlled satellite servicing system capable 

of self-actuating or self-healing operations in response to external stimuli. 

Host remo~e1y super~;sed and independent man-machine interactions would fall 

into this category. 

Based upon the criteria of performance, cost, and technological readiness 

,as developed in Tas~s 1, 2, 3, and.4 of the study, the study team has 

attempted to formulate a decision guide that can be used to logically allocate 

space activities to alternative man-machine implementation modes. In 

developing this decision guide, we recognized that such decisions are highly 

dependent upon the time period in which a given system will be implemented. 

That is to say, the capabilities to support man in space will continue to 

evolve as will the other technologies including the applications of artificial 

intelligence and the advanced development of micro- and macro-manipulators. 

Furthermore. the index numbers (performance times, cost data, technological 

readiness, etc.) used in the decision process at this point in time can be 

expected to change as better information becomes available from future studies 

and from operational experience. Accordingly, the decision model suggested 

5-9 

/ 

MCOUNN.La. aou.c~ 

• <I 
" . 

\ 

below should be con~idered as still in the evolving stage and should be viewed 

in that context. Even so, it is believed that the procedure as outlined will 

prove to be useful in the early conceptual design process to help decision 

makers formulate a strategy for selecting an initial reference design 

configuration. As the design con~~pt crystallizes, it would be anticipated 

that the design solutions ",'auld be iterated to take advantage of the better 

data on perform3nce, cost, and success probability that become available as 

the design matures. In some cases, it may also be expected that the preferred 

mode of implementation will change in later stages of the preliminary design 

process as better design data are developed. 

With these caveats in mind, and recognizing that the guide might take many 

forms. a simplified schematic of the decision process is presented in Figure 

5-4. In order to accomplish the steps in this decision process, a worksheet 

format has been prepared as illustrated in Figure 5-5. An example of hOI'l this 

worksheet might be utilized 1s illustrated in Figure 5-6. 

Identlfv act,vit es reqJlred In system operatIon 

Id~ntlfy mo~..machlnQ modes meeting p~rformance 

requoremenu of each actIvIty 

Dltermlne mon cost-effectIve mod~ for each ectlvltv 

EstImate state of te~"nologlcnl read,ness for the most cost-effectIve mode fo' each actIvIty 

Rank each man-m3chon~ mode accordong to the number of 

",ctIVOIiCS for whIch It II th' most cost-effectl\e ~pproJch 

Select mode WIth h,ghest applicab,lity (rank) 

Select mode WIth next h,ghest applIcability (rank 

as determlMd on Step 5 

Figure 54. DeCISIon Process for Identlfymg the Man-Machmo Mode to Use In tho Initial Conceptual 

DeSign Effort for An Adviinced Splice System 

5-10 

MCDONNE .... oovo .. g 
, s1!' 

~ Man Machine Categories ,.. ~ 

g. f-, -a: - ~u '0 

.. t ~ ] I C ~t: ~g a: a: E~ " ., ~~ 

~~ ., "' .. til 0- ~ .::'" - OJ ~ c: 8. elc 'IJ 0 .. -=> ~E 0: £ -tJ ... ,.. ~~ -; ~ 50! :; :l > - 8. 00: a:_ o~ u ~ ~ 0 ~.c 0: - ~ " t: 0 ., ~ .. ~ .J:"O _0 111- 0: Q. co .. a.C) 0.0 .. u" ea: .J:u '" o ~ .. " " OJ ~, ~l "0 .... .. uct Z~ :E ~ ct ~ .: ... a: u ... > 

Actlvlly Name A B C 0 E F G H I J K L 

1 Actlvatellnltlate System Operation -- ---- _. 2 Adlust/Allgn Elements r-- --t--- -_. - - - - - ~- - ---f-- 3 Allocate/Assign/Distribute t-- -- - - - -- -- - 1- ~ Apply/Remove Biomedical Sensor ~ - ._- --f-- 5 Communicate Information -- -

6 Compensatory Tracking --- - - - 7 Compute Data - - - :;;:: - - -- ---- 8 ConflrmNerlfy Procedure/Schedule/ 

OperatIOns - - t--- --- - - - 9 Connect/Disconnect Electrical < 

Interface - --t--- --- - - ---- - 10 ConnE.ct/D,sconnect Fluid Interface 

11 Correlate Data - - --f-- == - 12 Deactivate/Terminate System 

Operation -- - ---- 13 Decode/Encode Data --~- --t--- -- - -~ -- -- 14 Define Procedures!Schedules! 

OperatIOns -- - --- 1--- --- $ 

15 DeploylRetract Appendage 

16 DelPet Change III State or Condition - ---- --- 17 Display Data - -- - -- ------ --- -- - 18 Gather/Replace Tools/EqUipment 1-- -- --- --- -- r- 19 Handle/Inspect/Examine L,v,ng - --- -~ ~:i~~ 

Organisms ! ~'-Y - -~: ' -:;. 

20 Implement Procedures/Schedules - - - -- - - ---

,21 InformatIOn Processing - - - '--- - - - -- - ---r-- 22 Inspect/Observe 

23 Measure (Scale) PhYSIcal DimenSIons - - --- t---

- -- 24 Plot Data - - --- = ---- 25 PosItion Module t= 

26 PrecISion MaOlpulatlon 01 Objects - f- -- - - -- f- 27 Problem SolvinglDeClslon Making! 

Data AnalYSIS 

t 

f-- - - 23 PUrsUit Tracking 

29 Release!S»cure MechaOlcal Interface - --->-

30 Remove Module f 

31 Remove!Replace Coveting 

32 Replace!Clpan Surface Coatings - -- - -- -- 33 Replenish Materials ---- -- 34 I Store/Record Element 

35 Surglc<ll ManipulatIOns --- -- - - --- --- -- - 36 Transport Loaded - - 37 Transport Unloaded 

Summary Data M l>< N 0 P Q R S T U V W 

~ Number of Times Selected OJ 

c:J Man Machine > 

~ OJ ~ ?. ...J 

Categories Not ::: .. ~ '" 0: E t; 0: OJ 

Appropn3te to c:: OJ ;?> c: 0: 

ActiVIty Impl~mentatlon -;; ~..;: ~-= t:_ 

"0 ~ a>- x 0 

0 o ~ 

.. '" ~ 0 '" 0 ... ::!a: o.u :!z 

Figure 5-5. Worltsheet for DI:flO1I19 the Hum:m Hole In Space 

5·11 

r-:y/ IttIJICDONNELL DOUO'-~~ 

., 
Space Platform 

Payload No.2 

Activity Name 

'_1 Activate/Initiate System Operation 

2 Adjust/Align Elements 

3 Allocate/Ass,gn/D'strobute 

!"2!f I P .. rsuorrrac~ong 

29 I Rele3se/Secure MechanICal Interface 

~! Remove Modu'e 

31 RemolletReplace Covering 

321 Replace/Clean Surface Coatings 

33 Replen,sh Mate .. al. 

J.1 I Store/Record Element 

35 Surgical Manopulatlons 

36 ! Transport Loadpd 

Summary Data 

NA • Not Applicable 

to thiS MISSIon 

l:::::J Man Mac!>lne 

Catogoroe. Not 

Approproate to 

ActiVity Implementation 

Figure 5 6 Example of Worksheet Procedure 

ll~ Man Machine Categoroe. ! ... - ~U 

'0 "N[: 2Q '0 '0 .. I :; li- e: O:I§-g '0 ... ;0 '0'0 i;1 .. S::I 0- t- ~ C ~c: '0 ;:." ': > I- E ~ 50: c: -" ..... g ~ ¥ '0.2 ;; ;; ., " > ~ 8- Oc: C!_ ~ 

~ ~ 0 ~.o c: - 0- 0 " .. 11,) ... 4:'0 _ 0 c: .. .. ;; 

6~ ~~ " ~\,'llgo '0 u .., 00: .. ~ :> 

~ .. '" .. :i; <t <I) I '" I .: 1-0: UI- > 

A B C 0 E F G H I J I K L 

V 1 V " V V NA V' NA ;. ·t '_+~ "- _'~ 0 " " V NA :.jl NA 1 ~ ~ __ 

-~T--:- =: ::: -1--= ~= 1 - - - - =t ---f- f-':"----f----- - -- <---. -- ---t--

t-~~=- =. .--=-I-=-- L=-L-:--=-t---+, --;--i ~A..!--: -- ---=-t-= ,- - -- ~ - NA - - - -

NA I - - - -

I-'-'N~A'-'-_-t--_-+-_-t--_--· - - - -- -'-r----T:---j 

16 i'X 4 ----J 1-_ 

M : N 

- 1 1 - I 10 - 6 I 141 5 

o i P I a I R I S t-T-r-U"-+!, """V"-+, -W-:-i 

Number 01 Times SeI<'Cted 

In using this worksheet, seven modes of man-machine interaction have been 

selected to represent the steps along the continuum from direct manual 

operation at one extreme to completely independent self-healing, 

self-actuating systems at the other. Tnese modes are designated as manual, 

~upported, augmented, tel eope'ra ted, supervi sed-ground, supet'vi sed-orb it, an d 

independent and were defined 1n Section 1 of this report (sec F1gure 1-1). 

Examples of the nomogrdphs that are to be used wHh the lIorksheet are 

illustrated in Figures 5-7 to 5-10. The cost numbers in these nomographs'are 

based upon production and operations costs only (as described in Section 3.4) 

and do not include design and development costs. It ''las assumed that llASA 

will most llKely not include nonrecurring costs ,~hen developing user charge 

pol1cies for ddvanced space systems. 

The cost charges for the activities to be conducted 1n the direct manual 

modes (manual, supported, aug,l1cnted, and teleoperated) ''lore based primarily on 

a cost per unit time factor. On this basis, the delta costs for EVA over IVA 

/ 

MCDDNNr;LL Doua~g/ 

5-12 

./ 

I 

I 

- I 

I 

, 

· , 

t 

· . 

· \ 

· , 

-.. 
, 

r[ 

'j 

Man MachIne 

Categones TIme Scale 

Manual I I 

Supported b 

Augmented I 

F Teleoperated 

I I 

SupervIsed 

Ground c::J 

Sup&rvlsed I 

On-OrbIt c:::J 

I 

Independent I i I I • 0" 0: ;. E ~ 1 10 20 30 40 

Seconds A-mutes 

Figure 5-7. Re/e::~e/Secure rJlechanrcallnterface 

(FOCI 8 

7 

.. 

g 

.. 6 -J 

.. .. .. 

0: 

-5 5 r,o 

.. 

It 

>-

8' 

"0 4 0: 

.J: 

U 

.. 

t3 

2 

1 

0 5 

I • 50 1 

Levell 

Level 2 

Level 3 

Level 4 

Level 5 

Level 6 

Level 7 

leve'S 

10 

Requirements for limIting Factors on Human Involwment Human Involvement 

- 0 0 e 

. 0 e Q 

., e 0 

0 6) ., .... 

I 

.... 0 .... 

0 .... 0 

0 0 I L J . 

2 4 6 8 "iii 1; 0: 

"iii 2 ;; '" C 2", c: -" u ;; -0: 

E .. - 2 ~- .!! c e!;l og. 0 u Hours ~ .J: .:s ~ ., C "u ~ 

OU < .: u _0 .... ;: Ulc.. c.. 

ndependent 

Techno'ogy Readoness Levels 

BaSIC pnnclples observed and reported 

Conceptual deSIgn formulated 

0: ~ _0.. 

C,nceptual deSIgn tested analytIcally or expenmentall\ 

Crotlcal functlon/characterostlc demonstratIon 

Component/breadboard tested on relevJ~t environment 

Prototype/englnecro"g model tested on relevant environment 

Engoneerong model teslPd on space 

Full Operatlona' Capab,l,ty (FOCI 

15 20 

Time Rcqulred on Years 

FIgure 5 8 T,me ReqUIred to Advance Level of Techn%glcal ReadIness 

5·13 

/ 

MCDO"'''''''&. .. "OUG~ 
\ 

-fT I 

" 

.. 

c 

~ 

::E 

.5 

e 

~ 

"0 

D 

l000~================~~r---------'---------1 

• ••• Manual 

• - --Supported 

• .-.........-......- Augmented 

.. _ .. __ .. _ Teleonerated 

_._._ ... _Super~lsed - Ground 

100 I' •• Superv1sea - On Orbit g-+-------:::Jlo-::.-.----:~~ 

.--. .-..-.. _Independent 

..... ---_.-

___ 01(.---.H--

10 

._ •• + ••• _ ••• ...--

....................... 

10 100 1000 10,000 

Number of Times ActlYlty IS p.,rformed 

Figure 5·9. ActlYlty Number 29 - Release/Secure MochanlclIl Interface CumulBtlYe Cost 

YS. Frequ~ncy Including Operations 

21 

20 

19 

18 

17 

"tl 16 ~ 

;; 15 cOl 

c: 14 

E 13 

::: 12 •• • 0 

~ 

c 11 

E " 10 c. 

;; 11 cw 8 '0 7 1l 

E 6 z " 5 

4 Y· 9 8327 + 0 76922X -O012938X2 

3 

2 

1 

0 

0 5 10 15 20 30 

NumLer of ActiVities 

Figure 5·10. Cost Correction for Equipment Commomllrty 

5·14 

MCDOIWNII!LL DOUG~ 

10 

09 

08 

07 

2:-

a 

06 C 

~ 

.E 

~ 

05 c 

II> 

E 

c. 

:; 

04 cUI 

.. 

a 

03 c 

g 

Ci 

0. 

02 a 

.t 

01 

00 

35 
I 

0'- .i 

'" 

7- ----

were negligible when compared to the overall cost of manned space cperations. 

Thus, it was not found necessary for the initial approach to selecting the 

baseline operational modes to determine whether the activity would be done by 

IVA or EVA. The issue of IVA or EVA can be resolved later in the design 

process based on more detailed performance and operational requirements, and 

not by cost per see 

To determine the man-machine category to consider in the initial 

conceptual design of a space system, six key questions need to be addressed. 

The suggested procedure for answering these questions is illustrated below. 

~ 

~ Which of the 37 unique acivities are involved in meeting the 

mission objectives? 

1. Place a check mark in column A of the worksheet (Figure 5-6) by each of 

the 37 activities that are required for accomplishing the mission 

objective. 

2. For each activity checked in column A, estimate th~ number of times that 

activity will be performed during the mission and enter the numeric 

estimate in column B. 

3. Add the number of checks in column A and enter total in Box ~,. 

Which modes of man-machine interaction can meet the performance 

reqUirements of each activitl? 

1. Consult the timel ine charts fo:md in Appendix 0 that are associated I'lith 

each activity checked in colum~ A (see sample Figure 5-7). Place a check 

in each of the man-machine categories. columns C through I. that could be 

used to satisfy the mission requirements, basing your judgment on: 

• Time requi rements for performi ng actl vi'ty. If the response time 

required is seconds or less. the indirect modes (supervised or 

independent) would be preferred. 

5-15 

MCDONN" .... DOUOL~ 
/ 

,'-

• Limiting factors that may restrict human invo1vem~nt. If limiting 

factors on human involvement are noted on the time1ine charts it may 

be helpful to consult the Human Capability Data Descriptions in 

Appendix A. 

EJTEP 3 Which man-machine mode represents the most cost-effective 

approach to the performance of each activity? 

1. For each activity. checked in column A of the worksheet. circle the check 

mark in column C through I that represents the most cost-effective 

man-machine implementation mode, as determined fran each set of cost vs 

number-of-times-activities-is-performed curves (see sample Figure 5-9). 

a What is the state of technological readiness for the most 

cost-effective man-machine modes identified in Step 3? 

1. For the man-machina mode circled in columns C through I. estimate the 

techno1cgical readiness level (see Figure 5-8) and enter this value in 

col tsnn J of the worksheet. 

2. Find the medi~n level of all of the technological readiness values entered 

in column J and enter this median value in box U. This median value 

defines the overall technological readiness of the aggregate of the 

proposed implementation concepts for the r.1ission being analyzed. 

6 I~hat is the relative degree of applicability (ranI<) of each 

man-machine mode in accomplishing the mission objective? 

1. Enter the total number of circled check marks in columns C through I in 

boxes U through T re5pectively. These totals indicate the relative degree 

of applicability of the alternative man-machine modes. 

~ ~ Which mode should be considered as the baseline for initiating 

the conceptual design of thG system? 

1. Starti ng with the most frequently occurri ng mode (boxes N through T on 

worksheet) proceed through the iterative process irdicated in Figure 5-4. 

5-16 

MCDONNELL DOUO~ 
.. 

1 • 

L 

2. The present technological readiness level of each man-machine mode should 

be estimated using the criteria listed on Figure 5-8. 

3. For the man-machine implementation mode circled in cotumns C through I for 

each activity, determine from Figure 5-8 the number of years required to 

advance from the present technological readiness level to a technological 

readiness level of 7 and enter in column L of the worksheet. 

4. Enter the maximum value in column L in box W. This value represents-the 

estimated development time required to achieve the highest level of 

technological readiness (minimum risk) for the most cost-effective 

implementation. 

5. Continue the iterative process until an acceptable baseline mode is 

established. If no single mode is found to be acceptable, it may be 

necessary to select a combination of modes that represents the minimum 

number of modes required to achieve the mission objectives within the time 

constraints imposed. 

Other factors to be considered in formulating the initial conceptual 

design of an advanced space syst~~ are the issues of reliability and cost 

penalties associated with using alternative approaches to increase the 

technological readiness level and to thereby increase the success probability. 

~Iith regard to enhancing operational rel i abil 1ty, it is recommended that 

~nerever possible a manual mode be identified for each activity as backup to 

the prime mode selected. It is suggested that this backup mode be the least 

complex level of man-machine interaction (categories C through I) that can 

meet the performance and technological readiness requirements. 

If multiple man-machine modes are determined to be required to accomplish 

the mission objectives, an overall estimate of the technological readiness of 

the system can be made by finding the median of the readiness values entered 

in column J of the worksheet and recording thi: median value in box U. 

5·17 

/ 

McaONNELL DOUCL~ 

, ... --

, 
I 

/ 

J 

I 

/ 

I 

/ 

To assess the cost impact of increasin~ the technological readiness level 

(Success Probability) identified in box U. the following procedure could be 

utilized. 

1. Enter Figure 5-8 \lith the desired time to IOC. Determine the 

man-machine modes that can achieve the highest technological readiness levels 

within the time to IOC. 

2. For the activity with the lowest technological readiness rating in 

• 

column J. examine columns C through I to determine if any of the modes with a 

higher rating as identified in Figure 5-8 can meet the activity requirements. 

3. For those man-machlne modes that have higher technology readiness 

1 eve 1 s. for the acti vi ti es bei n9 c onsi de red , use Fi gure 5-9 to determi ne the 

cumulative costs to perform each activity for the number of time~ identified 

in column B. 

4. Using the cumulative dollar value for the man-machine mode having the 

lowest cost value as ·he denominator, compute the relative cost ratios for the 

applicable modes. 

5. Determine the commonality correction factor for the specific activity 

fr~~ Figure 5-10 based upon the total number of activities required in the 

operational sequence (box M on worksheet). (Refer to Table 3.5-1 for the 

derivation of this correction factor.) 

6. ~!ultiply the cost ratios determined in St!O'p 4 above by the correction 

factor determined in Step 5. This value gives an approximation of the cost 

increase ratio required to achieve a higher level of technological readiness 

for accomplisning the specific activity being considered. E~ter this value in 

coJumn K. 

7. Repeat Steps 2 and 6 for each activity where the technological 

readiness factor is less than 7. 

8. For all activities where the technological readiness is 7, en~er the 

value 1 in column K. 

9. Find the average of the values in column K and enter in box V. TRe 

value in box V is an estimate of the relative increase ir program cost 

required to accomplish the mission objective with the minimal risk (highest 

level of technological readiness). 

The procedural methodology outlined above has attempted to provide a 

technique for logically dete~ining early in the conceptual design process for 

5-18 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOC.JO~ 

.. 1 

l 

[ 

I 

I 

-
I 

/ 

I 

/ 

rj 

I' I 

a new space system which of the various modes of man-machine interaction c&n 

be used to most effectively perform the activities required. 

Our analyses to date have confirmed once again the conventional wisdom 

I that the human role in future space systems will draw heavily upon the 

l. intellectual capabilities and the sensory/perceptual capabilities of the human 

observer. Of all of man's sense modalities, vision is the most important for 

future space applications. Man's capabilities for recognizing information in 

various forms and comprehending or understanding (cognition). his capabilities 

for creative imagination (divergent production), his ability to rigorously 

I 1_ 

structure problems and develop solutions (convergent production), and his 

ability to make decisions (evaluation) will continue to be essential 

ingredients in future systems. ~tany examples from experiences on previous 

space missions illustrate these capabilities. 

Performance, Cost, and Success Probability (technological readiness) 

remain the principal criteria in determining Hhere along the continuum, from 

direct manual intervention to independent oPQratfons, the mis~ion requirements 

of future space programs can best be met. Oy defining a generic set of 

activities from which systems m~cting future mission requirements can be 

synthesized. and by assigning performance. cost, and technological readiness 

metrics to each of these generic activities, a-mechanism becomes available for 

developing a logical rationale for optimizing-the m~n-machine interface. 

By use of the methodology developed in this study, it will become possible 

to establish early in the design process the most cost effective design 

approach for future space pr'ograms, th)'ough the optimal applicati on of uni que 

\~ human skills and capabilities. I 

i: 

! 

r. 

/ 

MCOONNELL DOUOL~' _ 

(~ 

5·19 

• 

.. 
(T 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

Section 6 

THURIS BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Anon., t4flftary Space Systems - Technology Hodel, AIM f~an-in-Space 

Systems Panel Report. September 1982 and Narch 1984. 

Anon •• Skylab: Sensors and Remote Sensing in Support of the EREP 

Oceanograplnc Program, Abstract, NRL Problem R07-20. Washington, D.C., 

Uecernber 1972. 

Anon., SUlIlilary of Corrunents from Tapes of SL-l Crel" Debriefings. prepareJ 

by HDTSeO. Decelilber 1983. 

Akin, D. L., et al, ARk4IS - Phase II, Volume 1: Telepresence 

Technology Oase Developnent. f1arshall Space Flight Center, Contract 

NAS8-J4381, October 1983. 

Alon, U. L., et al, ARAlHS - Phase II, Volume 2: Telepresence ProJect 

Applications, 11arshall Space Fllght Center, Contract UAS8-3438l, October 

1983. 

Ak in. D. L., et a 1. ARAllIS - Phase II, Volume 3: Execut 1 ve Sur:1'1ary, 

t4arshall Space Fl i ght Center. Contract NASa-34381. October 1983. 

Akin, David L, and Hary L. Bowden, EVA Capabllit~es for the Assembly of 

Large Space Structures, rHT -Space Systems Laboratory, IAF 82-393, 

Carnbndge, 11A, October 1982. 

Akln, David L., Human-I~achine ActiVlty Trade-offs, tUT-Space Systems 

LaboNtory. Cambridge. HA, October 1982. 

Akin. David L.. Autonomy/Automation/Robotlcs, lIIT-Spdce Systems 

Laboratory. Cambridge, HA. October 1982. 

6-1 / 

MCDONNI£ .... OOUG"~ 
10. Annstrong. Charles H •• and Craig Fundllng. f1ission Operations 

Dlrectorate, EVA Checklist, 41-C (STS-13) Flight Supplement, Final. 

NASA-JSC Contr. t-b. JSC-17325. 16 "larch 1984. 

11. Bathurst, James R •• Richard F. Pain. and Dana B. Ludewig, An Eval uation 

of the ATM Man/Hachi ne Interface - Phase 3, /·tarsha1: Space Fl1 ght 

Center, t~A CRF-1205d6. December 1974. 

12. Berry, Charles A., and Gerry L. Homick, Findings on Aroerlcan Astronauts 

Bearing on the Issue of Artlficial Gravity for Future I·tanned Space 

Venicles, Aerospace f1edicine, February 1973. 

13. Boehm-Davis, Deborah A., et al, Human Factors of F1 igllt-Deck Automation 

- N,ll.!,A/Industry llorkshop, k.tes Research Center, NASA Tech. Hemo 81260. 

January 1981. 

14. Bond, Robert L., Skyl ab Experience Bull etl n tb. 26: The r~ethods and 

Importance of t·~an-Nachlne Enqineerlng Evaluations in Zero-G, tJASA-JSC, rr JSC-U9560, HOt1~ ton, Texas, (·lay 1976. 

l;7 - -

15. Brantley, Whitt, Shuttle Flight Experlments Evaluatlon (Status), 

I-Iarshall Space Flight Center, Alabama, September.1983. 

16. Brown, Jeri H., Skyl at> Experlence Bull etin lb. 6: Space Gannents for 

IVA l1ear, 11DAC-HB, August 1974. 

17. Car.1pOell, 8. H •• Advanced Space Planning and Conceptual Analysls 

(Study 2.1) Flnal Report, Volur.1es 1 - 3, Aerospace Corp., NAS1~-2884, 

Apr; 1 1977. 

la. Ctleston, T. Stephen. and David L. Winter, Human Factors of Outer SpaCE 

Productlon, Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1980. 

19. Chucker, S. 11., and R. J. Dellacamera. Ii:utral Buoyancy SlmUlatlOn jest 

Plan for Space Craft Operations and f.1alntenance. HDAC paper N8-51iJ. IRAD 

Task #131206. July 1983. 

6-2 

MCDONN~LL DOIJG~ 

- ;0 
... , 

. rr 

20. Clarke, 1-1. H., Hamel, W. R., and Draper, J. V., Human Factors in Remote 

Control Engineering Developnent Activities, Proceedings, 31st Conference 

on Remote Systems T eClmo logy, 1983 , Vol ume 1, Alleri can IJuc 1 ea r Sad-ety. 

21. Crippen, Robert L., STS 41-C Flight Crml Report - Solar J.lax Repair 

!'Ii 5S ion, (Internal I"'er.torandum), NASA-Johnson Space Center, Houston, 

Texas, l1ay 1984. 

- 22. Da1t~n. :~aynal'j, Sky1ab Experience Bulletin lb. 1: Transtation i10dcs 

and Bump ProtectlOn. HUAC-HB. June 1974. 

23. Oa1ton, J.1aynard, Skylab Experience Bulletin lb. 2: Architectural 

Requirements for Airlock. 11DAC-H~. June 1974. 

24. Dalton. I~aynard. Skylab Experience Bulletin lb. 3: Architectural 

Requirements for Sleeping Quarters, r1DAC-HB. July 1974. 

25. Dalton, HaYllard, Skylab Experience Bulletin tb. 4: Design 

Characteristics of the Sleep Restraint. ImAC-HB. July 1974. 

26. Dalton, l1aynard, Skylab Experience Bulletin lb. 7: An Overviel/ of IVA 

Personnel Restralnt Systems, ~mAC-HB, October 1974. 

27. Dalton, l-laynard, Skylab Experience Bulletin lb. 9: Foot Restraint 

Systems. f.lOAC-HIl, December 1974. 

28. lJa1ton, Ilaynard. Skylab Experience Bulletin ~b. 10: Body Restraint 

Systems, IIIJAC-HB, December 1974. 

2~. Emurian, Henry H., and Josep11 V. Brady, Behavioral and BioloqlCcll 

Effects of Changes in Group Size and Ilcmbershlp, Technical Report 

TR-OIIR-l0. The Johns Hopkins Universlty, Baltimore, rIO, June 1984. 

311. ESA Headquarters, Study on r~anned Versus Automated Space Act 1 vi tl CS, 

I~ldterm Review. l1atra Espace, Paris, France, June 1980 • 

6-3 

MCDO""""'LL DOUGL$ 

/ 

.... 
--

31. Franklin. George C •• Crew Station Specifications. ~~A-JSC. JSC-07387B, 

Houston, Texas. January 1982. 

32. Freitas, Rooert A., and Hill iam P. Gilbreath. Advance Autonation for 

Space i,tissions. U.S. Government Printing Offlce. \~ashington. D.C •• 

August 1980. 

3.3. Garriott, OWn K •• "Sky1ab Report: Manis Role in Space Research," 

Science, October 1974, Volume 186, pp. 219-2Zo. 

34. Garriott, Ol'len K., et al, "Payload Crel'/ Itembersl Vie\~ of Spacelab 

Operations," Science, July 1984. Volume 225, pp. 165-167. 

35. Grumman Aerospace Corp., Satellite Services SySt~d Analysis Study, 

Volume 2: Satellite & Services User 11odel, t.JAS9-16120, NASA-JSC, 

Bethpage. fEw York. August 1981. 

36. Grumman Aerospace Corp., Satellite Services Sy5te~ Analysis Study, 

Volume 2A: Satellite & Services User l10del - Appendix, t·1AS9-16120, 

NASA-JSC, Bettl page, t~w York, August 1931. 

37. GruMlan Aerospace Corp., Satellite Services Systen Analysis Study. 

Volur.1e 3: Servlce EgulJl11ent Requirements, NAS9-16120, tLA.SA-JSC, 

Bethpage. te\i York, August 1981 •. 

33. Gr~an Aerospace Corp., Satellite Services Syste~ AnalyslS Study, 

Volu,tle 3ft.: SErvice Eguipnent ReguirelJ'lellts - ApE~ndix. tlAS9-l6120, 

NASA-JSC. Bethpage, tJew York, August 1981. 

39. GrumQan Aerospace Corp., Satellit~ Services System Analysis Study~ 

Volume 4: Service Equl[I!lent Concepts. NAS9-161 20, NASA-JSC. Beth?<lge, 

~\., York, August 1981. 

40. Gr~nan Aerospace Corp •• Satel11te Services SY5tem Analysis Study. 

Volume 5: Prograr..:natic5, NAS9-l6l20, NASA-JSC. Bethpage. lie','l York, 

August 1981. 

/ 

MCOO"'N"'L'- DOUO"~ 

6-4 

-, \!.) , 
r 

~. 

, 

/ 

41 • Guil ford, J. P., The Nature of Human I ntell i gence, '-lcGraw-Hi 11 800k 

Company, New York, New York, 1967. 

42. Gundersen, Robert T., Skylab Experience Bulletin No.5: Inf1ight 

Haintenance as a Viab1 e Program £1 ement, I~DAC-HB, September 1974. 

43. Gundersen, Robert T., Skvlao Experience Bulletin tb. 13: Tools, Test 

Equienent and Constr.ilables Required to Support Inflight l1aintenance, 

I1DAC-HB, Ibvember 1974. 

44. Hall, Stephen 13., ProJections of Future I·fanned Space Actl vity 

Heguirements, Harshall Space F11ght Center, Alabama, December 1980. 

45. 

46. 

Hall STephen B., et al, The Human Role in Space, l1arshall Space Flight 

Center, NASA TH 82482, April 1982. 

HorniCK, J. L., et a1, lndi vidual Differences in Susceptibil tty to Hotion 

Slckness Among Six Skylab Astronauts, Vol. 2, Pergamon Press, 1975. 

47. Haverkamp, J.D., HSFC Skylab Mission Sequence Evaluation, Marshall 

Space Flight Center, NASA m X-64d16, l1arch 1974. 

48. Johnson, Nalcolm L., Skylab Expgrience Bulletin tb. 8: Cleansing 

Provislons I~ithin the Waste 11anagement COr.1partment, I~DAC-H!3, October 

1974. 

49. JOhnson, Richa .. d D., Autonomy and the Human Element in Space: Executive 

Su~ary, Stanford University, Stanford, Cal1fornia, December 1983. 

SO. Johnson, Rl cnard D., Han I s Rol e 1 n Space. Bi osystcms Oi vi si on, 

NASA--Ames Research Center, prepared for the 13th Intersociety 

Conference on Environmental Systems, San Francisco, Californla. July 

1983. 

51. Kerwin. J. P., Welghtlessness: A Case Hlstory, Vol. 2, Pergamon Press. 

lnS. 

- I'" 

MCOONN~LLDouaL~ 

6·5 

, 
i 

/ 

-- --

52. Lacor.1De, J. L., I~aintenance of Long Life Space Systems - Final Report, 

J.1atra Espace, Ve1izy, France, October 1981. 

5J. Lam, 00 Hau. et a1, Study on i·'anned Versus Automated Space Act1vities, 

Hatra Espace, Velizy, France, December 1980. 

54. Lougllead, T. E. and E. C. Pruett, EVA (.1anipulation and Assembly of Space 

Structure Col umns. Essex Corp., prepared for l~arshall Space F11 ght 

Center, NAS8-32989, 1980. 

55. Lowrie, J. W., et al, Evaluation of Automated Decisionmaking 

Methodologies and Development of an Integratea Robotic System Simulation 

- Study Results, Hartin Harietta Aerospace, Denver, Colorado, September 

1982. 

56. Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, STS-1 Orbiter Final 111 ssion Report, 

NASA-JSC, August 1981. 

57. Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, STS-2 Orbiter 11;s5ion Report, NASA-JSC, 

February 1982. 

58. Lyndon 8. Johnson Space Center, STS-3 Orbitel' Mission Report, NASA-JSC, 

June 1982. 

59. Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, STS-4 Orbiter t1ission Report, NASA-JSC, 

September 1982. 

60. Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, STS-4 Orb1ter Hission Report -

Supplement. NASA-JSC, t-bvember 1982. 

61. Lyndon B, Jollnson Space Center, STS-5 S~e Shuttle Program ['lission 

Report, NASA-JSC, December 1982. 

62. Lyndon B, Johnson Space Center. STS-6 Space Shuttle Program llission 

Report, NASA-JSC, Hay 1983. 

,I 

... CDO"' .. "' .... Doua .. 9-- 6·6 . , 

, 

.1 ~ 
/ 

f 

I 

6J. Lyndon B, Johnson Space Center, STS-7 Space Shuttle Program Hission 

Report, tlASA-JSC, July 1983. 

64. Harsllall Space F11 gnt Center--Program Developnent, Proposed Shuttl e 

Flight Experiments Su~nary, August 1983. 

65. J1arshall Space Flight Center, Teleoperator Haneuvering 

Systcm--Preliminary Deflnition Study, Alabama, June 19\33. 

bb. J.larsllall Space Flight Center, Skylab Experiment Integration Sum:nary. 

NASA, I1SFC-SL-73-2, 11arch 1973. 

67. 11assachusetts Institute of Technology, ARAIHS Phase II Flnal Report. 

6U. 

b9. 

70. 

Volume 1: Te1epresence Tecnnology Base Deve1o!l1lent, Cambridge, 

~assachusetts, June 1983 • 

. Iassachusetts Institute of Technology, ARfu~IS Phase II Final Report, 

Volu~e 2: Te1epresence Project Applications, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 

June 198J. 

,~assachusetts Instltute of Technology, Anfu~IS Phase II Flnal Report. 

Vol ume 3: Executl ve Summary, Cambridge, r1assachusetts. June 19i33. 

J·lcDonnell Douglas Astronautlcs Company, Alternative System Design 

Concept Study (Space Platform/Power System), Contract t~S8-3395~ (16 

OR's plus supplemental reports), July 1982. 

71. (·lcDonnel1 Douglas Astronautics Company, Orbital workshop rfission 

Eva1uatlon Report Crew Systems Sky1ab I and II 11issions, prepared for 

11SFC Crew Systems, Skylab J4ission Support, December 1973. 

72. J1cDonnell Dougl as Astronauti cs Company, Space 1,la i ntenance and 

Contlilgcncy Operations Slmulation Neutral Buoyancy Testing nB-51) -

final Report, !<lUC H0190, Huntington Beach, CA, Nay 1983. 

IMCDONN~LL " DO(lOL,f;if 

6·7 

. l~ 
, 

I _ .... --

73. 11cDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company, Space Station Life SC1ences -

Executi ve Summary. 11DAC-HB. ~1DC H0743, prepared for NASA-Ames, 

NAS2-11539. December 1983. 

74. 11cDonnel1 Douglas Astronautics Company, Space Station Life Sciences 

Volume I, Technoloqy Assessment and Developnent Plan, I~DAC-HB, HOC 

H0743, prepared for NASA-A.l1es. NAS2-11539. September 1983. 

75. I1clJonnell Douglas Astronaut1cs Company. Space Station L1fe Sciences -

Volume II, Experlment Technology Reguirements, HDAC-HB, I~DC H0743, 

prepared for NASA-Ames, ~-!AS2-11539, September 1983. 

76. McDonnell Douglas Astronauti,s Company, Space Station Life Sciences -

Volume III, EguifJllent Infonnation Catalog, t1DAC-HB, HOC H0743, prepared 

for NASA-Ames, NAS2-11539, September 1983. 

77. 11111 er, Rene H., t1arvi n L. H1 nsky, and Da vid B. S. Smlth, Space 

Applications of Automation, Robotics and ~'achine Intelligence Systems 

(ARAl·IIS) Volume 1: ExecutlVe SU'l1ll1ary. NASA CR-162079. Cambridge, 

Massachusetts, August 1982. 

78. Miller, Rene H •• r1arvin L. i'linsky, al'd David 13. S. Smith, Space 

Applications of Automation, ROJot1CS and t1ach1ne Intelllgence Systems 

(MAIllS) Vol ume :r: ARAHIS Overvicl1, Phase 1, Final Report, t~SA 

CR-162082, CambrIdge, 11assachusetts, August 1982. 

79. Miller, Rene H., Harvin L. H1nsky, and David B. S. Smith, Space 

Apel ications of Automation, Robotics and Nachine Intell igence Systems 

(ARN1IS) Volume 4: Application of ARfl~IS CapabilItIes to Space ProJect 

Functional Elements, Phase 1, FInal Report, NASA CR-162082, Cambridge, 

I~assachusetts, August 1982. 

ao. Hontemer10, 11elvln D., and Alfred C. Cron, Space Hu,oan Factors: 

Workshop Proceedlngs Volumes 1 and 2, NASA, Washington, D.C., August 

1982. 

MCDONNELL. DOlJaL~ 

6-8 

'1 

• I 

I 

.J 

.. 

, 

/ 
I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

/ / '1' 

/ 

f 

/ 

I 

I 

/ 

! 

rT 

" 

, / , '( 

81. 14oore, J. P., F-13 Functions Allocation Report, r~OAC-STL, Repert No. 14DC 

A4216, June 1976. 

82. Hurphy, George lo, Habit.ability Support for Hanned r~issions of Space -

2000, HDAC Paper presented to the 3Jrd IAF Congress, f4DC G8835, Pari s 

France, October 1982. 

83. NASA Office of Space Science, Blomedical Research. Contract tJAS\~-3469. 

Washington. D.C •• NOvember 1981. 

84. National Aeronautics and Space Adrnlnistration. Analysis of Large Space 

Structures Assembly: Il.:m/r1achine Assembly Analysls NASA Cft-37S1, 

NASA8-32989, MSFC, Decen.ber 1983. 

85. l~tiona1 Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA-ASEE 1983 Summer 

Faculty Program: Autonomy and the Human Element In Space. Stanford 

University, California, August 1983. 

86. National Jleronautics and Space Admlnistration, Space Station System 

Operational Requirements, prepared by Spdce Station Task Force. Decewber 

1983. 

37. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Space Station Program 

Uescription Document. (Yellm'i Books), (6) Vo1ur.1es, prepared by Space 

Sta1"ion Task Force. \{ashington, D.C., March 1984. 

88. 

89. 

90. 

Natlona1 

Package: 

~1arshal1 

Aeronautics and Space Administration, Technlca1 Support 

f)ptical Sensor for Robotics. Vol. 7, IJo. 2, I4FS-257l3, 

Space Flight Center, Alabama, 1982. 

I~tlonal Aeronatics and Space Administration, Johnson Space Center. 

Apollo 12 I~lsslon Report. folSC-018S5. Houston, TX, 11arch 1970. 

National Aeronautlcs and Space Admlnlstration, Johnson Space Center, 

i1isslon P1annlng and Analysis Divislon. The 25-Kl101'1att POI'ler Syster.1 -

l3aseline Reference i11ssion. JSC-17066, February 1981. 

6·9 

/ 

McDONNe .... DOUO .. 8---

, 

I 
:- , I , i 

I 

;rr I 

/ 

, 

I 

\. 

I 

I 

- / -1 

91. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Johnson Space Center, 

Apollo l41Hssion Report, 14SC-041l2. Houston, TX, r~ay 1971. 

9,l. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, r~arsha11 Space Flight 

Center, Sky1ab ,,1ission Events (SL-l/2, SL-3 & SL-4), #25i100700, February 

1974. 

93. National Research Council, Airforce Studies Board, Automation in Combat 

Aircraft, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1982. 

94. Nicogossian, A. E., et al, Space Physiology and Hedicine, prepared by 

Biotechnology, Inc., NASA Document No. SP-447, Office of Space Science, 

I~ashington, D. C., September 1982. 

95. Nof, Shimon Y., James L. Knight, Jr., and Gavriel Salvendy, Effective 

Utilization of Industrial Robots -- A Job and Skills Analysis Approach, 

Purdue University, West lafayette, Indiana, September 1980. 

96. Qnan, C. r1., B. K. Lichtenberg, and K. E. Money. Space 140tion Sickness 

Honitoring Experiment: Spacelab 1, Paper til. 35, NATO-AGARD Aerospace 

Medical Pnne1 Symposium on f4otion Sickness: Hechanisms, Prediction, 

Prevention & Treatment, Will iamsburg, VA, 3 11ay 1984, prepared by 

t~an-Vetlic1e Laboratory, Department of Aeronautlcs and Astronautics, 

Center for Space Research, Nassachusetts Insti tut.' Technology, 

Cambridge, Nass. 

97. p~' er, James F., et al, Spaceflight Oeconditioning and Physical 

Fitness, Biotechnology, Inc., Contract NASU-3469, Falls Church, 

Virginia, January 1981. 

98. Parsons, H. Hcll vaine, and Greg P. K~~"'sley, Robotics and HUMan 

Factors: Current Status and Future Prospects, Alexandria, Virginla, 

1982. 

99. Paul, R. P. and Nof, S. Y., Work Hettlods (·leasureraent--A Comparlson 

Between Robot and Human Task Performance, Volume 17 (3), Purdue 

llnlverslty, Hest Lafayette, Indiana, FebruarJ 1979. 

/ 

MCDONNELL OOUGL~ 

6-10 

/. 
/ 

/ 

I 

/ 

t I: l 

, 

! ' , 

100. Peercy, Bob, and Bob Witcofski, Space Station Crew Safety Alternatives 

Study - l~idterm Briefing, tb. SS083-0064, Rock\~el1 International, Hay 

198J. 

101. Pi",tt, J. L., Human Factors Systems Analysis Report-Harpoon l~eap(ms 

System, I1DAC-STL, Report No. NOC 1::0951, February 1975. 

102. Price, Harold E., e~ a1, DOD and Service ReglJirements for Human Factors 

H&1i in the Unitary System ACquisition Process, U.S. Anny Research 

Instltute for Behavioral and Soclal Sciences, Contract r40A. 

103. Price, Harold E., et al, The Contribution of Human Factors in ~\il itar.l. 

System Deve1opnent: Methodological Considerations, U. S. Army Research 

Insticute for Behavloral and Social Sciences, Tech. Report 476, July 

1980. 

104. Price, Harold E., et al, The Allocation of Functions in i1an-I'\achine 

Systems: A Perspective and Llterature Review, Biotechnology, Inc., 

June 1982. 

105. Pulliam, R .. et a1, A [·lethodology for Allocating Nuclear POl1er Plan 

Control Functions to Human or Automatic Control, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commlssion, Office of t~clear Regulatory Research, Agreement lb. 

40-550-75, August 1983. 

106. Rockwell International, Space Station Cre\1 Safety Alternati yes Study 

Interim Briefing, SS083-0106, Contract NASl-17242, September 1983. 

107. ROCKwell Intet'nat~ollal: Space Station Cre\~ Safety Alternatives Study 

Final Oral Presentation, SSLl84-0052, Contract NASl-17242, 14ay 1934. 

108. RO:5enmayer, C. E., F-18 I~'ssion Analysis Report. HDAC-STl. Report /lb. 

HOC A3970, June 1976. 

109. Sa\iyer, Charles R., et al, rleasurlng and Enhancing the Contribution of 

Human factors in l·hlitary System Dp.ve1opnent: Case StudlES of the 

/ 

MCDONNIZI-L DOtlGL~ 

6·11 

.. .... . 
/ 

I 

" 

I 

/ 

I 

I 

/ 

/ 

I 

, I 

I I / I / -, 

J 

ftppl ication of Impa.;;t Assessment l'1ethodologies, U.S. Amy Research 

Institute for Behaviord1 and Social SCiences, Technica} Report No. 519, 

July 1981. 

110. Saxton, Donald R., and JOM W. Na1oney. D.:!finition of Technology 

Developnent [·lissions for Early Space Station--OTV Servicing--Volume 

Executive Summary, General Dynami cs, GDC-SP-83-052, San Oi ego, 

California, June 1983. 

111. Saxton, ~ona1d R., and John ~/. ~aloney, ~finition of Technology 

Ueve1oll11ent i41ssions for Early Space Station--OTV Servlcing--Vo1ume 2 

Technlcal Report, General Dynamics, GOC-SP-83-0b2, San Diego, 

California, June 1983. 

112. Schrock, Silerm, et al, Definition of Technology Deve10flllent 11issions for 

Early Space Station - Satellite/Servicing, Second Interim Reviell i4artin 

Hari etta, I1RC-83-1864, NASA Contract NAS8-35081, prepared for NASA/11SFC, 

Hunts vill e, AL, ~Iarch 1984. 

11 J. Sky1 ab Program Office, W\SA Headquarters, Lessons Learned on the Sky1 ab 

Program, I~arshall Space Fl1ght Center, Alabama, February 1974. 

114. Sky1ab Program Office, NASA Headquarter~, Lessons Learned on the Sky1ab 

Program, Washi ngton, D. C., r4arch 1984. 

115. Sky1ab Program Office, NASA Headquarters, Lessons Ledrned on the Skylab 

Program, Kennedy Space Center, Florida, April 1984. 

116. Skylab Program Offlce, t~SA Headquarters, Lessons Learned on the Sky1ab 

Program, Jonnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, April 1984. 

117. Stokes, J.W., I~an/System Requlrements for l~eightless Environments, 

I~SFC-STD-512A, Harshal1 Space F1 i ght Center, Al aoama, Ibvember 1976. 

118. Waltz, Don, and Al Medler, Definition of Satellite Serviclng Technology 

Deve10f!~ent l'l1ssions for Early Space Station - Phase II, I-tidterlll Reviel'l, 

/ 

"'CDONN~LL DDUOL~ 

6·12 

. \ 

-
I 

I 

:t 

/ 

/ 

119. 

TRW Contrdct NAS8-35081, prepared for NASA/HSFC, Huntsville, AL, '·larch 

1984. 

white, Ronald J., D. B. Cramer, Joel I. Leonard, and W. P. Bis:10p, Space 

Station and the Life of SciencP$, prepared for AIASA/NASA symposium, All 

83-7089, Arlington, Virginia, July 1983. 

12U. i'/iener, Earl L., and Ren~/ick E. Curry, ~ __ .iqht-Oeck A'Jtomation: Promises 

and Problems, Jlmes Re~earch Center, NA~. ,echo f1emo 81206, June 1980. 

121. Wong, Peter C. S., 'HI: The i~an-I"a{"hlne Interface, TRW Electronics, 

1982. 

122. von Puttkamer, Jesco, On 11an 's Role in Space, NASA, Washington, D.C., 

December 1974. 

122. von Ti esenhausen, George, An Approach Toward Funet; on All oeat; on Betl'leen 

Humans and Ma~hines in space Statl0n Actl vities, NASA TN-82510, Nars/lall 

Space Flight Center, Alabama, Nbve~ber 1982. 

MCDONNELL DOUGL~ 

6-13 
/ 

/ 

j 

rJ I. 

L 

-

-

APPENDIX A 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

A·1 

c;/ MCDONNEL&, DOUO~ 
1" 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Senso~/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Visual Acuity 

Definition: Visual acuity is the ability of the eye to see fine details: the 

resolvlng po~er of the retina with respect to details of the Image. 

Various aspects (types) of visual acuity have been described; these include: 

o Minimum perceptible acuity - The ability to see small objects 

against a plain background. 

8 Minimum separable acuity - the ability to see objects as separate when they are close together 

o Minimum distinguishable acuity - the ability to distinguish 

irregularities and discontinuities in the contours of an object. 

Charucteristics: Visual acuity is commonly expressed in terms of the ~inutes 

of visual angle subtended by the detail being discriminated. 

o The average normal eye can distinguish features that subtend 1.0 

minutes of arc, which is equivalent to 20/20 vision on the Snellen 

chart 

o The threshold for minimum perceptJal acuity is 0.008 minutes of 

arc; for minimum separable acuity, 0.4 minutes of arc; and for 

minimum distinguishable acuity. 0.8 minutes of arc. 

Limiting Factors: The effectiveness of visual acuity is affected by the 

fo 11 OWl ng 11 ml tl ng factors. 

8 Intensity of illumination 

o Amount of contrast between the target and the background 

o Duration of the presentation 

o Speed of motlon of target 

o Location in the visual field 

o Wavelength of the illumination 

Comments: The characterlstics and limitations of visual acuity will be more 

lmportant than any othel' aspect of visual capabilities in deternining mi\n's 

role in space opel"ations. Acuity plays a significant role in such activities 

as target detection and selection, accurate align~nt. and pattern recognition. 

A-2 

/ 

MCO(~NNCL" DOUG'~ 

-
r 

I 

.. 

HU~1AN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Senso~/Perceptual Capabili~ies 

HUHAN CAPABILITY - Brightness Detection and Discrimination 

Definition: Brightness detection is the ability of the eye to identify light 

at very low intensities; br1ghtness discrimination is the ability to detect a 

change in the brightness of a li9ht source or the difference in brightness of 

two or more light sources. 

Characteristics: Brightness is commonly measured in terms of millilamberts 

TriiCT ~lhlCh 1 S a measure of luminance. 

o The rods or cones in the light-adapted eye can detect luminances as 

low as 0.004 mL 

8 Rods in the dark adapted eye can detect luninances as low as 

0.00001 ml 

o Discrimination can be expressed in terms of the just noticeable 

difference (jnd) by the formula: jnd (in %) WB/BX100, where WB = the change in brightness, and B = the initial brightness. Generally, a difference of approxililately 10% is required to 

identify a brightness change. 

limiting Factors: The follO\</ing factors can affect the threshold of 

brightness detection and discrimlnation. Although detection and 

discl'lrination are both affected by most of the factors, they are not 

necessarily affected equally by all factors. Limiting factors are listed 

belO\'/ 1n association with the capability that they more strongly affect. 

13 DetectlOn 

- Wavelength of stimullis - Previous lig~t exposure of observer - Duration of prior exposure 

• Dis~rimination 

- Shape and size of stimulus - Region of retina stimulated - level of illumination on test 

Comments: Brightness detectl0n and discrimlnation are involved in 

astronomical ohservation and in some aspects of pattern recognition. The darkadapted eye is very sensitive in comparison with mechanical light detectors. 

/ 

MCOONNI'LL OOUOL~ 

A-3 
. 

• I 

1 

r] 

HU~AN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Senso~/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Color Discrimination 

Definition: Color discrimination includes three different perceptions which m~ be defined separately. 

• Hue discrimiration - The ability to detect the smallest difference 

1n wave length of two test fields. 

c Brightness discrimination - The ability to detect a change in the 

bri ghtness Of a 1i gilt source or the difference in bri ghtness of blo 

or more light sources (previously defined). 

o Saturation discrimination - The ability to detect small differences 

in the percentage of I'/hlte lig~t in two fields of identical hues. 

Characteristlcs: The characteristics of brightness discriminat;on are 

descr1bed under "Brightness Detection and Discrimination". Saturation 

discrimination is usually considered too difficult to measure for the 

determination of accurate thresholds. 

Hue discrimination will vary with the wavelength. The s~allest differe~ce in 

wavelength that can be detected as a difference in hue when biO fields are 

preser,ted are: 

Color 

-

Blue 

Green 

Yell 0\1 

Orange 

Red 

Smallest Difference in Wavelength 

2.5 millimicrons 

1.0 ni~limicrons 

3.3 millimicrons 

1.5 nillimicrons 

20.0 millimicrons 

liMitin~ Factors: The following factors can affect the thresholds of color 

dl scnmlnatlon. Although most factors will have an effect on each of the 

perceptions (hue, brightness, and saturation) the ones presented are 

particularly related to hue discrlmin?tlon. 

o Color of light source 

o Color of light reflected frorn-nearby surfaces 

a Level of illumination 

• Surface reflectivity characteristics 

Conrnents: The capability of color discrimination is involved in nany operatlonal and maintenance tasks, since switches, Hires, and ducts tend to be 

color coded. Ordlnarily, however, the situations will present no challenge .) capability limits. 

A-4 

/ 

MCVDN"'''LL vOCJaL~ 

. \TJ ./ 
----

Hur·1AN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUHArl CAPAOILITY - Depth Perception and Discrimination 

Definition: Depth perception and discrimination may be defined in one of the 

To II OIH n9 ways. 

a The esti~ate of the distance of an obJect from the observer 

o The estimate of the relative distance of b/o or more objects frola 

the observer 

" The difference in parallax corresponding to the minimum distance 

two objects can be displaced along the line of sight and stlll be 

recognlzed as being at d1fferent distances. 

Characteristics: Judgment of absolute distance is very inaccurate, judg~ent 

of relatne d1stance 1S, hO\~ever, very accurate. Angular dlfferences as small 

as 2 seconds of parallax can be detected. The value of una1ded binocular 

vision in depth perception is greatest fer' distances less than 20 feet. 

Oeyond thlS distance ~onocular cues of textural gradient, perspective, light and shadol/, interposition of objects, atmospheric attenuation, etc. are of 

primary importance in judging depth or distance. Ilith optical aids such as 

binocular range f1nders, stereopsis can be used to judge relative distances at 

Much greater ranges. 

Li~iting Factors: The following factors can affect the accuracy of depth per- ception and discrlm1nat1on. 

o Distance of objects frOM eye 

o Absence of obJects of known size for com?arison 

o Atmospherir condltlQOS 

o Illuminatlvn intenslty 

o Stlmulus size 

o Honocular versus binocular cues 

Coments: The capabillty of depth perception has played. and continues to 

play, an important role in cre\." involvement in space operations. 110 dlfficulties have been expenenced by cre\'Ir.1en 111 the use of depth perceptlon. It 

may be concluded that tYPlcal space operations do not normally challenge the 

limits of this capabil1ty. Important examples of tasks p~rforned by Cre\'/r,len 

in space which rely heavily on depth perception include: Apollo docking with 

lunar lander and Apollo dock1ng with Skylab, operation of the Shuttle renote 

manipulator systcm, and the usc of the manned mancuvcrlng unlt in translatln~ 

to a remote target, e.g., solar max satellite. 

A·5 

/ 

MCl)Of/VNC1..L PO(JOL~ '--~ 

I 

) 
---

-: 

HUMAN CArABIlITY DATA 

CAPAOIlITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Capabilities 

HU~1At1 CAPABILITY - Peri pheral Vi sual Detection and Di scrimination 

Definition: Perlpheral visual detection and discrimination may be defined as 

the abl1lt/ to perform specified visual tasks with the visual stir.ulus located 

in various parts of the vl~ual field other than in the central area, i.e., 

with the lMage in varIous locations on the retina. 

Characteristics: A large number of parameters must be considered in 

lOent;tYlnq the capabilities and limitations of peripheral visual detection 

and d1 scnmnation. The folloW1 ng table ident1f1es many of the lnvolved 

factors and illustrates limits that have resulted from tasks in the mil1tary. 

limitinr Factors: The following factors can alter the values of both the 

hor1zon al and vertical angular llmits of peripheral visual detection and 

discrim1nat1on identified 1n the previous table. 

• Brightness of visual object 

o C~ntrast of the object ~Il th its background 

o Color of the object and color contra~t 

o Duration of exposure 

Comnents: Perlpheral v1sual.detection and discrininat10n are basic in normal 

vlsual operations and are, addltlonally, dlrectly involved in a large number 

of space tasks such as target location, rendezvous and dock1ng, and tracklng. r'lan's capab1litles 1n thlS category are limited, hOl,ever, particularly in 

situat10ns involvtng the dark-adapted eye. The involvenent of man in a space act1v1ty based on hlS peripheral v1sion capab1llties would seldom be at a 

level below independent or supervised. 

/ 

MCDONNEl.L DOCJGLQ 

'-~ 

A6 

.J ) 
" 

~ , • 1 

I 

/ 

. ." : 

HORIZONTAL LIMITS VERTICAL LIMITS 

Temporal Naval 

Amblnocular Binocular Field Field 

TYPE OF FIELD AND Field Field Angle Angle 

MOVEMENT PERMITTED FACTORS LIMITING FIELD (each side) (each side) Up Down 

a Moderate movements of head Range of fixation 60° 45° 

and eyes, assumed as , 

Eyes 18° right or left Eye deViation (assumed) 15° 15° 15° 15° 

150 up or down Peripheral field from pOint of 95° (45°) 460 67° 

fixation 

Head 45° right or left Not penpherdl field from central 110° 60°· 610 840 

fixation 

30° up 0; down Head rotatmn (assumed) 450 450 30°· 30°· 

Total penpheral field (from central 

line) 

b Head fixed 

Eyes fixed (central position Field of penpheral vIsion (central 9So 600 460 670 

Wit h respect to head) flxdtlon) 

c Head fixed Limits of eye devIation 74° 55° -- 48° 66° 

(= range of fixation) 

Eyes maximum deViation Peripheral field (from point of 91° Approx (5° 18° 160 

fIxation) 

Total peripheral fIeld (from central 165° 600 • 660 820 

head ""Ie) 

d Head maximum movement Limits of head motion 720 7.1.0 

1 

80°· 900 • 

(= range of fIxation) 

Eyes fixed (central with Pertpheral field (from POint of 9.5° 60° 460 67° 

respect to head) fixation) 

Total perlpherdl field (from central 1670 132° 1260 1570 • 

body!tne) 

e MaXimum movements of Limits of head motion 720 72° 80° - 90° 

head and eyes MaXimum eye deViation 74° 550 48° 660 

Ranqe of fixation (from central 1460 127° 1280 156() 

body line) 

Peropheral field (from POint of 91° Approx (5°) 180 160 

fixation) 

Total peripheral field (from central 237° 132° 146° 172°· 

body line) 

• Adapted from Wulfeck, J W ,et ai, VIsion In Military AViation, WADe Technical Report 58-399, 1958 

/ 

MCDONNELl. aoual.f:i};' 

A7 
, 

"I ... 

/ 

/ 

1" 

------

/ 

/ 

, 

/ 

( 

/ 

." 

HUt,tAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptuai Capabilities 

HUHAN CAPABI LITY - Vi sua 1 AccorT.1odati on 

Oeflnltion: Visual accommodation is the ability to bring to focus on the 

retlna obJects located a short distance from the eye. 

CharacteristlCS: Visual acco~modation is limited to objects located no closer 

than approxlmately six inches to the eye (in adults). 

Limltlng Factors: Factors that can affect the abillty of an individual to 

vlsually acconmodate with reference to objects located at various distances 

from the eye include the age of the individutl and the characteristics of the 

visual median. 

Conments: Although visual acco~modation plays an important role in nany of 

the tasks associated with space operations, e.g., detailed workbench repair, visual lnspection and examination of biological specimens, it is not expected that space actlvltles lIill impose any unique challenges to this capabillty. The sane visual aids that would be used in terrestrial tasks would be 

simllarly applled in space. 

• 

, MCDONNeLL DOUGLQ 

---...::....-

AS 
rr 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Detection and Di scrimination of Tone 

Def;ni tion: 

--~, 

o Tone Detection - The capability of the ear to detect sounds of small int~nsity. The threshold of tone detection is the smallest intensity 

(1 c:'1est amount of energy) at a qi ven frequency that can be dete~ted 

(intensity is measured in decibels [db] where db = log dynes/cm~). 

• Tone Discrinination - The capability of detecting just noticeable 

ditference (Jnd) in the change in the frequency of a stimulus. The 

threshold of tone discrimination is the mini~um amount of change in 

frequency that can be detected with a probability of 0.5. 

Characteristics: 

o Ihe threshold for tone detection will vary with the frequency of the 

tone in approximate accordance with the following table. 

Frequency (cps) db 

10 :ro100 -30 

500 -60 

1000 -65 

2000 -70 

5000 -60 

10000 -45 

8 Regarding tone discrimination, there is generally no ability to 

perceive a change in frequency in sounds whose intensity is below 

-20 db. 

o For sounds above 20 db, a frequency difference of 3 cycles per 

second can normally be discriminated for tones below 1,000 cycles 

per second. 

o . For tones above 1000 cps, the just noticeable difference (jnd) is 

usually about 0.3% of the frequency of the tone. 

Limiting Factors: 

o lone Detection - Factors tending to affect the capability to detect 

low intensity sounds include: - sound frequency - age of listener - previous exposure - background tones or noise 

o Tone discrimination is affected by the same fectors as tone 

detection and, additionally, is influenced by: - the loudness ~f the tones - duration of the tones 

A-9 

/ 

... CDONN" .... DOlJG~ 

, 

-~ 

I 

r 
/ 

, 

/ 

--~-

I , 

Co~ents: Sounds are frequently used as audito~ signals in space mission 

operations, and sounds of different frequencies are used to impart different 

types of information. Tone detection and difcrimination are, consequently, 

necessary capabllities among space crehmen; thresholds are, however, never 

approached and th~ ~apability is, therefore, not challenged. Additlonally malfunctions are frequently detected initially by the crehman noticing the 

advent of a new sound or a tone change in an existing sound. This auditory 

capabll ity is useful, but \-/oul d not normally be considered in operations 

planning. 

A·l0 

MCDONNtl!LL novoL~ 

, 

" 
-~ 

~-

~ 

------" 

. - , 

,I 

! 

, 

! I 

/ 

/ 

! 

/' 

/ 

I 

/ 

f 

I' 

,It] 

r 

r 

, 

..--

1 

! 

I 

I' 

r' 

I 

I' 

i 

[ 

I~ 

: 

I 

I. 

f" 

t~ 

7 

/ I! 'I 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - $cnso~/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Discrimination of Sound Intensity 

" 

Definition: Sound intensity discrimination identifies the ability to detect a 

change 1n the loudness of a sound. The threshold of discrimination is the 

just noticeable difference (jnd) of loudness change (energy change) to the 

loudness (energy) of a sound. 

Characteristics: Sound intensity discrimination is strongly dependent upon both the tone and loudness of the initial (test) sound. At frequencies between 500 and 5000 Hz a difference of less than 1 db can be detected for 

sound intensities between 10 and 60 db. 

Limiting Factors: The fo11o\'ling factors can affect the jnd of a change in sound lnten~l~ 

o Sound frequency 

o Sound intensity 

o Age of listener 

o Background noise 

o Previous exposures 

Co~nts: Discrimination of sound intensity is not expected to be a widely used capability among crew personnel. Sound intensity discrimination often 

works in concert "ith visual capabilities in docking or other continuous 

adjustment type tasks but it will probably not be of much importance and ,,/nl 

not be challenged by man's activities in space. 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DO&laL~ 

A·ll 

I I 

~I 

,I 

I 

1 
/ 

/ 

/ 

I 

. 1,/ I , I ' ' 

I 

--- /-1 _ 

.~ 

--

HUfrtAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Senso~/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUI-1AN CAPABILITY - Sound Localization 

'I 

Definition: Sound localization is the ability of a subject to perceive t~e 

di recti on from which a sou'nd arri ves. 

Characteristics: Sounds with frequencies up to 500 Hz call usually be located 

wlthln approximately 10-12 deg. Sounds with higher frequencies (e.g., 3000 

Hz) can be located only withln about 20 deg. 

Limiting Factors: The accuracy of sound locali~ation can be affected by the 

followlng factors: 

o Direction of the sound in relation to the median plane of the head 

o Frequency of the sound 

o Loudness of the sound 

o Knowledge of tha characteristics of the sound 

Comments: Sound localization is a factor in the normal behavior and 

activltles of an individual but should not become important in defining the 

role of man in space operations. Tasks involving man would not be expected to 

depend upon, emphasize, or challenge this capability. 

A 12 

/' 

McDONNe .... DOIJGL~ 

.. 

-
~ [ 

/' I / 

/ 

- , / 

I 

/ I , 

~-

I 

1 

i 

i 

/' 11 

/r[ I 

"R 

.u 

n 

R I , / 

i 

« 9 

B ... 

11 {I 

iJ 

;j t;" 

It 

lQ" 

~ 

, 

HUr~-N CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - SensorY/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUf.1AU CAPABILITY - Detection of Light Touch 

Definition: Detection of light touch is the ability to detect and to loc~te 

tHe appllcation of a small a~ount of pressure to the skin surface. This 

capability may a1 so be defined in terns of "two-point thresho1 dOl: the abi1 ity 

to detect t\'/o pressure poi nts as separate when the di stance between them is 

small. 

Characteristics: The threshold for the detection of light touch varies 

extensively wlth the area of the body tested. The two tables included below 

illustrate this condition. 

Thresholds for the Detection of Light Pressure 

Body Region 

Finger Tip Back of Finger Front of Forearm 

Back of Hand 

Abdomen 

Back of forearm 

Sole of foot (Thick Area) 

Amt. of Pressure Required for Detection (gms/mm2) 

3 

5 

8 

12 

26 

33 

250 

Threshold for Two-Point Discrimination 

Body Region 

Finger Tip 

Trunk 

Tongue 

Back of Hand 

Distance Bet\1een Points 

2-3 IJlj;l 

60-70 mm 

1-2 m:n 

35-40 mm 

Limitinq Factors: The factors \,Ihich can affect the threshold of detection of 

llght touch incfude tile follo\ling: 

o Body region stimulated 

o Rate of stimulus onset 

o Duration of stimulus application 

e Skin temperature 

Comments: Detection of light touch, particularly as it contributes to fine 

manipulative skills, is one of the prlncipal capabilities that establishes 

man's role in space. A number of activities Hhich have been identified as 

candidates for sp~ce conduct, such as small animal dissect:on and surgery and 

repair and assembly requiring precise and exact manipulations, cannot be 

performed ~ithout man's direct involvement. 

A-13 

. 

-
I 

I 

(j" 

-. 

. 

rr 

\ r-) 

HUrlAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Capabilitles 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Tactile Recognition of Shape and Texture 

Definition: Tactile recognition is the capability of perceiving and 

understanding the form and distinctive characteristics of objects by touch 

sensors only. 

Characteristics: Tactile sensitivity may be used to distinguish the shape of 

various objects if the shapes are not similar to each other. Although no 

general limitations have been identified, extreme care has been used in the 

development of control knobs that may be recognized by touch alone and wo"ld 

not be confused with each other. Tactile sensitivity may also be used in 

identifying textures, as long as the textures are sufficiently distinctive. 

For example. smooth, fluted, and knurled surfaces can be accurately discriminated but different patterns and depths of knur1ing and f1utir.g are 

more difficult to distinguish from each other. 

Limiting Factors: Practically. tactile recognition is generally a function of 

tfie Tlnger tlpS. Some factors, which tended to limit tactile sensitivity such 

as the area of the body stimulated, are not applicable in this instance. Skin 

temperature. however. \'4i11 tend to affect tactile recognition to the same 

degree that it affected sensitivity. Additionully, the ~loved hand is 

generally less capable of recognizing shapes and surfaces than the skin 

surface directly applied to the object. An exception to this may occur in 

regard to roughened surfaces ,,,herei 11 the materi a 1 of the glove woul d catch on 

the raised elements of the surface. 

COr.r:1ents: There are feH, if any. space-related tasks for which man would be 

selected or rejected because of his tactile recognition capability or its 

limltations. This capability is frequently recognized, hO~/ever, in the coding of controls by shape, size. and texture. Requirements for this type of coding , may be found in numerous human factors design handbooks. 

/ 

MCDONNELL DDlJGL~ 

A·14 

I 

, . I ~ 
9 

H 

J 

I 

T 

J 

J 

1 

T 

.. ' 

(T I 

. I 

I 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Cdpabi1ities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Discrimination of Force Against Limb 

Definition: Discrimination Qf force against limb is the capability of sensing 

relatlve amounts of force and changes in force acting against an extreMity. 

Characteristics: The capability of judging relative amounts of force or 

reslstance actlng against the movement of a limb is usually measured and 

expressed in tenns of "difference 1 im~nu whi ch is the average difference in 

force that can just barely be detected; thus, two forces have to differ (by an 

amount greater than the limen to be detected as being different. 

From the results of experiments. it appears that the hand/arm and foot/leg are 

quite similar in their capability to judge differences in force; also the 

capability of the hand/am to judge differences in linear forces ''las similar 

to the capability of Judging torque forces. The difference limen is much 

greater for forces of less than 5-10 pounds than it is for forces greater than 

ten pounds. 

(Difference Limen as a Proportion of Force) 

Force in Pounds 

1 

5 

10 

20 

30 

40 

Linear Force 

Foot/Leg Hano/Arn 

0.10 

0.07 

0.05 

0.O~5 

0.0"4 

0.21 

0.10 

0.08 

0.07 

0.06 

0.06 

Torque Force 

tLand/Arm 

0.24 

0.09 

0.07 

0.06 

0.06 

0.05 

Lirr.itinq Factors: The fol1ouing factors can affect the accuracy of OT5crlminatl~orce against limb. 

o Amount of force 

c P~sition of subject 

o Fatigue 

COmMents: The capability of discriminating force again$t limb is ~ost 

frequently utilized in control manipulation. The operator of a control can 

sense both movement and force through his proprioceptive sense. Force and 

movement are, therefore, the primary sources of contrr1 feedback. This 

capability is consequently used to advantage in the design of controls rather 

than in the selection or rejection of humans in specific space operations. 

A·15 

MCOON" .. LL pOUGL~ 
0 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUHAN CAPABILITY - Discrimination of Limb Hovement and Location 

Definition: Discrimination of lirrb movement and location 1s the capability to 

sense the rate and direction of movement of a lir.:b and to identify its fina1 

location without visual cues. 

Characteristics: With training, blind positioning movements can become 

reasonably accurate. A blind positioning movement is one in which an 

individual moves a hand or foot in free space from one designated location to 

another without benefit of visual cues, such as reaching for a control device 

when the eyes are othen-/ise occupied. Accuracy is greatest for positions directly in front of the operator. The follo\,/ing table illustrates the 

decrease in accuracy in terms of the average distance of hits from the center 

of targets positioned at various positions with respect to an operator. 

Left Right 

1350 900 450 00 450 900 1350 

2.8" 2.4" 2.6" 1.8" 2.2" 2.4" 3.0" 450 up and outl'lard 

2.6" 2.4" 2.2" 1.1" 2 .,11 .t. 2.2" 2.5" shoulder level 

2.8" 2.2" 2.0- 2.0" 2.0" 2.4" 450 dOHn and outl'lard 

Tests related to discrimination of limJ movement and location were performed by Skylab astronauts but the results were inconclusive and difficult ~o 

interpret. 

Limiting Factors: Factors that tend to limit the accuracy of discrimination 

of limb movement and location include: 

e Position of target relative to subject (as shown in the above 

table) 

o Posture and orientation of subject (Hhen an individual is sitting 

or standing on ~ tilting platform, as opposed t~ sitting on a level 

seat, inaccuracies increase rapidly and non-uniformly.) 

• Training 

Comments: This capabil,ty does not appear to be a pacing factor in the 

selectlon of man fOI' specific roles in space. 

MCDON~LLDOVOL~ A·16 
-, 

I 

L 

t· 

() . I ,

r 

til" 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Detection and Discrimination of Angular Acceleration 

Definition: The capability of detecting the onset of angular acceleration and 

changes 1n the magnitude of angular acceleration 1s usually defined in terms 

of the physiological threshold which is the smallest ~mount of angular acceleration, or a change therein, that can be perceived by an individual. 

Characteristics: Under ideal conditions, the limits of perception of angular 

mot1on (angular acceleration) are dependent upon-two factors: (1) the angular 

acceleration applied; and (2) the time over I'lhich the angular acceleration is 

applied. In general, for an angular acce1era~ion to be sensed by the 

horizontal semicircular canals, the product of the acceleration and the time 

of application of the acceleration must be equal to or greater than 

approximately 2.5 degrees per second. Thus, if a oerson ''Iere subjected to a 

horizontal angular acceleration (yaw) of 2.5 degrees per second2 fOl' a 

1-second period, he would barely be able to perceive angular motion. If, 

however. the angular acceleration were 5.0 degrees per second~, it would 

require only 1/2 second of this acceleration to enable the person to perceive angula~ motion. On the other hand, if he were subjected to a 0.25 degree per second acceleration, it would require at least 10 seconds of this 

acceleration for h1m to be able to perceive motion. This concept is referred 

to as t~u1der's lalo.. and 1n equation form is 

aT = 2.50 /sec. 

The absolutely minimum acceleration that can be perceived by the horizontal 

canals, when a theoretically infinite time of application is allowed, is equal 

to 0.0350/sec. 2• It is generally believed that the ~ertical semicircular 

canals are s~mewhat more sensit1ve than the horizontal, and under those 

circumstances 

aT 2.5° /sec. 

for the vertical canals. We must always remember, however, that '~ulder's 

constant (2.So/sec.) holds true only under certain ideal conditions (i.e., in sltuations similar to the experimental conditions under which Mulder's data 

were obtained). In real-life s1tuations the threshold ~ay varY considerably, depending upon the state of arou~a1 or upon the wotivatlons of the lndividual. 

Limiting Factors: Factors that can influence the sensitivity of detecting the 

onset of and changes in angular acce1eratlon include: 

Q Which semicircular canals (horizontal, vertical, frontal) are 

st1mu1ated 

Q A previously applied anguldr acceleration 

o The presence or absence of ,10n-labyri nthine cues. 

Corrrnents: The capability to detect and discriminate the cnset and magnitude of angular accelerations is involved in the use of the MMU (Manned Maneuverlng Unit) and similar devices. Angular acceleration sensitivity I'/ould not be 

expected to be cha1lenge~ by any rol~ of man in sPJce operations. A more 

COr.Jr.1on concern of man's involverrent with angular acceleration is the 

detrimental effects of excessive angular accelerations. 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOtJG~ 

A·17 

-

~ 
. '-

J 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Detection and Discrimination of Linear Acceleration 

Definition: The capability of detecting the onset of linear acceleration and 

changes 1n the magnitude of linear acceleration is usually defined in terms of 

the physiologlcal threshold: the smallec;t amountor linear acceleration, or a 

change therein, that can be perceived by an individual. 

Characteristics: The absolute thresholds of linear acceleration sensitivity 

(otoJlth tunctlon) are measured in two ways: 1) a change of 1.5 degrees in 

the direction of linear acceleration acting upon the otolith organs can be 

perceived under ideal conditions; and 2) a change of 0.01 g (9.8 centi~tsrs 

per second per second) in the length of the linear acceleration vector acting 

upon the otolith organs has been reported to be perceptlble. 

Limiting Factors: Factors whicn can influence the sensitivity of detecting the onset of and changes in linear acceleration include: 

• The original directlon of the stimulus • 

o The original strength of the stimulus. 

o The status of the receptors with respect to adaptation. 

Comments: The capability to detect and discriminate the onset and Magnitude of l1near accelerations is involved in docking procedures and similar 

operations. linear acceleration sensitivity would not, in all likelihood, be 

challenged by nny role selected for man in space operations. A more common 

CClcern of man's exposure to linear accelerations is the detrimental effects 

the supra-threshold Gx• Gy, and Gz accelerations associated with 

launches, l~ndings, and spacecraft tumbling. 

" MCDON" «'L'- DOl/GI.{;;:J' 

l...~ 

A 18 
1'1 

-. 

,/ 

--1\ 

/ , 

HUAA~1 CAPAtHLITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Capabilities 

/ , 

HUMAtl CAPABILITY - Detection and Discrimination of Vibration 

Definition: The capability to detect vibration and to discriminate among 

var10US v1bratory frequencies and amplitudes may be defined as the conbinat1on 

of frequency and amplitude at ''Ihich repeated tactile stimuli cease to be 

identified as discrete events and are sensed as a continuous (vibratory) sensation. 

Characteristics: Although the perception of locally applied vibratory stimuli 

1S consldered to be a cutaneous sense, a part of the vestibular apparatus, the 

sacculus is thought to participate in the perception of whole-body vibration 

exposures. The t~rcsho1d for vibr~tions applied tangentially at the finger- tips is approximately 10 Hz at 10- G and 800 Hz at 0 3 G. Whole-body vibrations become barely perceptible at about 2 x 10-~ G at frequencies 

between 3-7 Hz. The threshold of-perception rises rapidly for frequencies lower than 1 Hz and higher than 10-Hz. 

Limiting Factors: Factors which can influence the sensitivity of detection 

and discrimination of vibration include: -

o Amplitude and frequency of the vibratory stimuli (discussed under 

"Characteristics") 

o Direction of vibratory stimul1 with respect to the body surface 

being stimulated 

Co~ents: The capability to detect and d1scriminate vibration is generally 

lnvolved in humJn performance; it is nct, however, a capability that would be 

emphasi:ed in assigning human roles in space. Of more interest to man 1n 

space is the effects of vlbrati'on on human performance. 

/ 

MC'DO'V",!I!I - DounLf:ij 

A·19 

\ 

--,I 

-
-----

------ / 

HUw\U CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - SensorY/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Detection of Heat and Cold 

/ 

Definition: Heat and cold are detected by sensors in the skin which respond 

to an lncrease or decrease in the skin temperature in that area. The 

threshold for temperature detection is the smallest rise or fall in ~­

perature that can be detected. 

Characteristics: The adequate sti~ulus for both warmth and cold is heat. 

t01d is not a positive quantity. and temperature does not have the dimension 

of energy. The threshold stlmulus for cold receptors is a fall in temperature 

at the rate of O.004oC per second and, for warmth receptors. a rise of 

O.OOloC per second. both continuing for three seconds. The thermal sense 

organs record not the temperature of objects. but the temperature of the skin 

at the depth at which the receptors are situated. Hence. they are stimulated 

by internal heat as well as by the heat of the environment. The most important temperature is the temperature of the skin. Objects having a temperature close to the physiologic zero. i.e •• ihe temperature of the skin, 

elicit neither warmth nor cold sensations. On the other hand, even wann air 

falling on wann skin, such as with fever, arouses sensations of cold. 

LiMiting Factors: Factors ~hich tend to influence the sensitivity of heat and 

cold detectlon include the follO\ting: 

o Area of the body stimulated 

o Pre-stlmulus skin tem~erature 

o Adaptation 

Co~nts: Some space station operations may benefit from man's ability to 

detect temperature changes as Hell as temperature quality and quantity; these, ho ... ·ever. would customilrlly be unplanned situations and not the type that would 

define a role for man in their conduct. Hore cor.:monly, interest is centered 

on man's ability to tolerate temperature changes rather than his detection 

threshold. 

" MCDONNeLL OOUGL.f;:f---

A20 

, .. 
/ 

I 

rJ' 

. 

"1 

.--

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Sensory/Perceptual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Detection and Discrimination of Odors 

Definition: The ability to detect and discriminate odors is a function of the 

olfactory mc~brane which lies in the superior and posterior part of the nose. 

It is stimulated by substances in the air which are volatile. at least 

slightly water soluble. and iipid soluble. In order to reach the olfactory merrobrane most substances must be drawn into the nose \'11 th purposeful inhalation which is greater in volume and flow rate than normal resting respiration. 

Characteristics: Absolute olfactory thresholds vary considerably. depending 

upon the method of ~easurement. but agree in indicating very high 

sensitivity. For example. artificial mus~ can be detected at a concentration 

of only 0.00004 mg. per liter of air and mercaptan at 0.00000004 ~g. per liter 

of air. Although the threshold concentrations of substances tt.at evoke smell 

are extremely slight. concentrations only 10 to 50 tires above the threshold 

values evoke maximum inte~sity of smell. This is in contrast to most other 

sensory systems of the body, in \'1 hi ch ranges of detection are very 1 arge, 

50.000 to 1 in the case of the eye and even much greater in the case of the 

ear. 

It appears, therefore, that the smell sense is concerned more with detecting 

the presence or absence of odors rather than \O/ith quantitative detectlon of 

their intenslties. S.'llell can adapt within a few seconds to a fm'l ~lnutes 

until it is alnost extinguished. After adaptation has taken place, the s~nsitivity of the olfactory cells returns gradually to normal over a period of many minutes. 

limiting Factors: ~actors which tend to limit the sensitivity of odor 

detection and dl scrmination I nclude the follo\"1i n9: 

It Uature of the stimuli 

o ~1ethod of stimulus presentation 

o Condition of the olfactory epithelium 

o Adaptation 

Co~ents: The capability to detect and discri~inate odors is useful in the 

detectlon of contaminants in air. water, or food; and. in some instances. in 

identifying substances by smell. The use of thlS capability by man in space would. however, be a chance event; it \'lOuld not be a part of planned l:1ission 

operatl0ns. In addition odor detection is easily extinguished by adaptation 

or overload; discrlmlnation of indivldual stimuli in a mixture is poor; 

detection is non-dlrectional, and significant training is required for 

accurate identiflcation. 

A 21 

/ 

MCDON/IIC .... votJG~~ 

\ 
• • 

1'\ 

/ 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

___ ~CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Intellectual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Cognition 

Definition: Cognition may be defined as awareness. immediate discove~ or rediscove~. or recognition of information in various forms: comprehension or 

understanding. Information acted upon by the human element can be in the form 

of figures, symbols, semantic units. behavioral units, classes. relations, 

systems and transformations. 

Characteristics: Th~ terms cognition and perception overlap to some degree. Both perceptlon and cognition are concerned with input information from 

sensory sources. Perception, hO\"ever, is concerned primarily with sensory properties and \-lith the cognition of figural units. The complete cognitive 

process includes operation with symbolic, semantic. and behavioral concepts as 

well. Perception is midway along a continuum extending from sensing at one 

end. to thinking at the other. It is the process of organizing and 

interpreting sensory inputs based upon past experience. Cognition involves a 

broader range of mental activity including awareness of semantic meaning and 

abstract concepts. 

Limitin2 Factors: Factors which tend to change the effectiveness of cognitive activltles lnclude: 

o State of arousal 

o Sensory overload 

o EnvlronMental stresses 

o Fatigue 

Co~ents: Planning and scheduling activities, monitoring flow patterns, 

target recognitlon, understanding speech patterns, etc., are examples of the 

cognitive operations that wil 1 be required in future space systems. In the 

transmission of speech,for example, peak clipping of the signal causes 

considerably less intelligibility loss than center clipping. Understanding the relative level of cognltive capabilities of humans in recognizing information in alternative forms permits the system designer to select the 

most efflcient deslgn approach for meeting mission objectives. 

A22 

Q/ "'COONN~L'- DOUGL~ 

~ 1 

\ , 
-/ 

" 

, , 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Intellectual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Menory 

Definition: Memory is defined as the retention or storage, with some degree of availability of information in the same form in which it was COmRitted to 

storage and in connection with the same cues with which it was learned. 

Memory storage, however, is an essential condition or determiner of 

cognition. Memory is distinguished from cognition per se by the ability to 

recall information havi ng once been exposed to the i nfonnation. 

Characteristics: Information storage is of two distinct types: long-term and 

short-term. Short-term memo~ storage capacity is generally limited to about 

eight individual items. The human generally organizes stored information in 

terms of sensory modality (visual, audito~, etc.). The most significant 

storage problem occurs because of the potential interference between old 

("held") information and new items that present themselves during the holding period. This accounts for the frequent "reversal errors" in infomation 

processing. As a general principle, human memo~ is more effectively utilized 

as a means ~f orienting and sequencing information than as a deposito~ for 

i so 1 ated data or syr..bo 1 i c i terns. 

Limiting Factors: Factors which tend to change the effectiveness of memory functions incluae: 

o State of arousal of the human system (alertness) 

o Environmental stresses 

o Organization/disorganization 

o Cumulative disruption 

o Fatigue 

o Traini ng 

Co~ents: Memory will be e~sential in long duration space missions for 

procedures, target characteristics, etc. 

A23 

/ 

MCOONNE:LL DOIJGL,f,;J:-..-
I / 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Intellectual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Divergent and Convergent Production 

Definition: 

• Divergent Production - is related to creative imagination. In this 

process, ltecS of information are retrieved from memo~ storage and 

used to generate a number of varied responses. Divergent 

Production can be defined as the generation of new inforMation from 

given information where the emphasis is on variety an~ quan~ity of 

output from the sa~e sourc~. 

o Convergent Production - is the derivation of logical deductions or 

at ledst co~pel1ing inferences leading to a unique answer or 

conclusion. In convergent production the problem can be rigorously structured, ann is so structured, and an answer is forthcoming without much hesitation. 

Characteristics: The conception of divergent-production abi11t;es came about 

through investigation of certain hypotheses regarding the c~mponent abilities 

most relevant to creative performance. A factor of fluer.cy was expected, and 

three klnds of fluency were found; a factor of flexibnity was expected, alld 

two kinds !',ere found; and an expected factor of originality materialized. 

Later, in a study of planning abilities, a factor of elaboration was expected and was demonstrated. 

But factors of fluency and flexibility have been found in nonverbal tests as 

\lell as in verbal tests. Search among nonverbal tests revealed the parallels essentially complete in figural and symbolic areas of lnformation alongsice those in the semantic catego~. The three kinds of fluency are concerned with 

the products of units, relations, and systems; the two kinds of flexibility 

are concerned with classes and transformation, into which catego~ originality fits; and elaboration has to do with i~plications. 

Utillzation of DP abilities is observed in tasks that involve the production of information, in quantity and in variety. and sometimes with alterations in 

that information. Experimental work has demonstrated the forms and conditions 

needed for optimal utilization of these abilities. 

Limiting Factors: The limiting factors which are associated with divergent and convergent production are similar to those associated with other 

intellectual capabilities. 

Co~ents: Divergent production operations are required in problem solvlng, 

development of alternative courses of action, and improving in emergencies; 

convergent productlon operations are required for troubleshooting tasks. 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUOL'w--

A-24 

- 1 

, 

• 

, 

. 

, 

; 
,(j' 

4 

/ 

\ 

\ 

J 

"T" 

'/ 

• 

.. -

\ · . 

· -\ 

· . 

,-

, 

f • 

I I 

HUMlUJ CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Intellectual Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Evaluatfon 

Definition: Evaluation is defined as a process of comparing a product of 

information wi th kno~m information accordi ng to logical criteri a and maki ng a 

decision concerning criteria satisfaction. 

Characteristics: It has been found that evaluative abilities may be neasured 

by tests that call for either absolute judgment of the yes-no, disjunctive 

type or relative judgments of the "I'/hich-is-best" type. The forner probably 

has the advantage of providing better experimental control of what is measured. 

One of the most important issues when considering the use of this capability in system operations is the definition of the kinds of criteria for judgment that are required in the tasks to be accomplished. The more precise .criteria 

of identity, consistency, and similarity work well in some instances; it is 

not certai n whetl1er they can be universally appl ied aoong the r.lany different 

task applications. In experimental studies. tests with looser criteria of 

various kinds have been variously successful. indicating some breadth of 

generality with respect to criteria for evaluation. No criteria of an 

aesthetic or ethical character have bepn applied. It is possible that 

aesthetic or ethical judgments involve new dimensions of evaluative behavior. 

Limiting Factors: Limit1ng factors which are associated with evaluat10n are 

slml1ar to those associated wlth other intellectual capabilities. 

Comments: Evaluation operations will be essential for assessing the level of 

normal or abnomal perfonnance of systef.l clements and, through comparative judgments of "greater than." "less than," or "equal to," to direct system operations 1n the most exped.itious manner. 

A 25 

MCDO~NE~~DOUGL~ 

.. • 
/ 

/ 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Psychomotor/Hotor Capabilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Production and Application of Force 

Definition: 1.4.uscle force is a function of the following. 

o r~uscle Tension - Huscle tension is maximum ,-,hen the length of the muscle 

is greatest and momentarily there is no change in length. tljuscl e force 

decreases as the muscle shortens and as its rate of shortening increases. 

o Mechanical Advantage - Power is applied at the point of muscle attachment 

(i.e., the long bones are the lever arms, and the joints are the 

fulcrums). Thus, for example, when muscle force of extension 1S applied 

at the elbo\'l, pOI-fer is greatest "Ihen the elbow- is flexed. HO\'lever, 

optimum mechanical advantage occurs at the midpoint of full elbow travel. 

Optimum mechanical advantage more than compensates for the shortened 

muscle, therefore providing maximum strength at the midpoint. Human 

muscles in maximum contraction can exert considerable force (as much as 

1000 Ib, 453 kg), but such forces cannot be fully utilized directly because all muscles work at some mechanical disadvantage, thus reducing 

output but increasing rate of movement. 

The production and application of muscle force also includes the fo1lm-.fing 

aspects: 

o Strength: The maximum force that muscles can exert isor.lctrically in a 

single voluntary effort. 

o Isometric strength (static): The maximum force that muscles can exert 

when muscle length remains constant during contraction. 

o Isotonic strength: The maXlr.lum force that r.lUscles can exert '-/hen muscle 

tension is kept constant. 

o Concent"i e force: The force exerted \-/hen the musel e is shortened against 

an external resistance. 

o Eccentric force: The force exerted uhen the nuscle lengthens passively against an external force. 

o Effort: Physiological strain, both static and dynamic. 

o Work: Dynamic effort (i.e., force times displacement). 

o Endurance: The ability to continue \lork or exert force. 

A 26 

/ 

MCDOMNI!!LL DOUO~ 

/ 

'j 

I .. , 

I 

( 

, 

I ... 

t 
. , I' 

/1 

/ 

I ,,/ 

~ rr 

n 

H 

g 

g 

n 

R 

I 

( 

'T ( OJ 

/ 

I 

, 

f 

I ' , 

Characteristics: Data are available relating maximum muscle strength to a 

number of factors including body build, body position, limb p~sition, and age. Values of interest may be found in ~ost human factors design handbooks and are 

too numerous to be repeated in this document. Selected examples are given.- - below: 

0 Hand grip strength 

0 Back lift 

0 Finger pull 

• Forearm 1 i ft 

0 Benc.:h 

0 Pedal force 

0 lever Force (seated) 

0 lever Force (standing) 

o Hand Cranking 

e lifting Forces 

o lifting and Carrying 

134 1bs (mean of U.S. Air Force, 

personnel) 

male 

350 1bs (mean of males) 

8 1bs 

60 Ibs 

21 Ibs 

60 lbs (from a seated position) 

45 lbs (fore-aft), 18 1bs (lateral) 

130 Ibs (away from body). 120 lb~ (toward 

body) 

40 inch-1bs {plane of cranking perpendicular 

to operator1s frontal plane, 35 inch-lbs 

(plane of cranking parallel to operators frontal plane) 

66 1bs (floor level to knuckle height) 62 

lbs (knuckle height to shoulder helghtj. 60 

lbs (shoulder height to arm reach) 

95 lbs (36 inches above floor) 

75 1us (48 inches above floor) 

50 1bs (60 inches above floor) 

I) floving large Objects 150 Ibs (with no structural push-off support) 

149-194 lbs (with structural push-off support) 

(The value is dependent upJn the distance of 

the object from the support and on the 

height of the force plate.) 

o Endurance Haximum muscle force can be exerted for no 

longer than approximltely 30 seconds, after 

which it begins to decrease rapidly. At one 

minute it is about 60% of maximum; at 2 

minutes, about 40%; and at 4 minutes, 

slightly better than 25%. After four 

mi nutes endurance decl i nes more slOl'lly so 

that at 10 minutes it remains at about 18% 

of maximum. 

Limiting Factors: Factors that can aff~ct the maximum amount of force that 

can be proauced by muscular activities Include the fo1101,,;ng. 

A·27 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUOL9-- r.

c
• Age and sex 

• Body build 

o Thermal envi ronment 

o Acceleration 

/ 

MCOONNLLL OOUGL~ 

, 

/ 

In general. adult females are only about 

two-thirds as strong as adult males. 

In tenns of age. indlviduals have maximum 

strength between the ages of 30 and 40. 

Usually there is a rapld development in 

strength between the ages of 13 and 19, and 

this development slows somewhat between the 

ages of 20 and 25. This is followed by a 

slower increase in strength to the maximum 

betwf ~,~ 25 and 30 years of age. People begln to lose about 10 percent of their 

strength by age 40, 15 percent by age 50, 20 

percent by age 60, and at least 25 percent by age 65. 

As a rule. people with larger body builds 

have more strength, although less powerfully 

built individuals may require less oxygen for a given task requiring strength. Slender persons often are best at performing rapidly fatiguing tasks involving strenuous 

exercise. Physique does not necessarily correlate \,/ith the abl1 ity to perform 

moderate exercise. Uormal persons usually show a 30 to 50 percent increase in strength after about 12 weeks of training. 

Strength is affected by health. diet, and 

the use of drugs, and strength often varles 

with diurnal conditions (e.g •• people usually have maximum strength at about 

midmorning). 

Heat ~ffects strength adversely (e.g.,when 

temperatures exceed 850F (290C), 

especially under conditions of high humidity). In general, however, low 

temperature has little effect except in 

terms of body mobility and flnger dexterity. When individuals become 

acclimated to a hot environment, they generally gain back a great deal of their 

normal strength. 

Although accelerations up to 5 g's do not 

affect strength, endurance is affected. Arm 

movements are effective up to about 6 g's, and wrist and flnger mOVEMents are effectlve 

up to about 12 g's. Practical 

considerations lnclude the following: 

A28 
j' 

:: 

o ~motiona1 Condition 

Forces acting against the direction of 

acce1eration are decreased. 

Forces acting with the direction of 

acce1 erations a,'e increased. 

Forces acting perpendicular to the direction 

of acceleration are least affected. 

Strength may increase under stress (i.e., fear, panic, rage, or even excitement). 

However, skill and accuracy generally are 

degraded. 

It has been demonstrated that, with 

hypnosis, pull with forearm flexion may 

increase as much as 26 percent. Increases 

may also occur when the maximum effort is 

preceded by a pistol shot or when the 

subject shouts during the effort. 

Gen~rally speaking, psychological rather 

than physiological factors d~ermine maximum 

strength in the "real world". . 

It has been noted that wnite-collar Horkers 

generally are about 10 to 20 percent weaker 

than manual or blue-collar workers. The 

implicatiQns is that the latter are used to 

a rougher and more strength-demanding environment. 

Comments: Two of the more important factors in determining the amount of 

force that an individual is able to exert in a given situation are body position and limb position. 

o Body position 

MCOONN",L'-oouaL~ 

When individuals are not restricted in terms 

of body position and are provided \lith 

appropriate supporting and/or anchoring facilities, they generally will assume a 

position from which they can apply their 

maximum forr.e capability. However, this 

does not necessarily mean that this is 

always the best position for maintaining 

lesser force applications for extended 

periods of time. 

A·29 

r.; 

\..: 
( 

I 

• Limb position 

" MCDONNELL nOUGL~ 

Since there is usudlly a reciprocal response during force applications (e.g., lifting, 

pushing, and pulling), it is important to 

provide appropriate support and anchoring conditions, such as a flat, leve: floor or 

deck; ~ solid, stable seat and seat 

backrest; or a footrest. 

Both limb position and direction of force 

application are iMportant variables in 

determining the amount of force an 

individual can apply. Handgrip forces 

generally are greater if the gripping task 

is close to the 1ndividual's body than if it 

is at arm's length. Arm strength is greater if the individual can push against a 

back rest or footrest. Haximum 1 eg force 

occurs when the individual's knee is 

slightly bent (in a seated position with the 

leg just "short" of maximum extension and 

with the ball of the foot at approximately the same level as the individual's 

buttocks). Haximum am force occurs when 

the force can be applied approximately at 

shoulder level. For the seated individual, 

pull force is greatest when the object is 

positioned at nearly naX1mum arm length; 

push force is greatest when the object 1S 

positioned at about half the full arm 

extens10n. 

Lifting capabilities depend on the size, 

shape, and gripping characteristics of the 

package being lifted and on the distribut10n 

of weight within the package. For example, 

a package that is too large to allow the 

individual to ~/rap his 0" her ams around 

it, to grip it securely, or to offset poorly 

distributed weight (the package's c/g 1S too 

far from the individual's own c/g) cannot be 

1 i fted or earn ed ~Ii thout the probabi 1 ity that the individual will drop it. will lose 

his or her balance, and/or will suffer 

strain and possibly some semlperrnanent or 

permanent i nj ury. 

Selccted strength eapabilitles for various 

lifting and force-application sltuations are 

provided on the followlng pages. Since some 

of the data pertaln only to adult males. a 

good rule of thur:1b for applying the 

guidel1nes to females is that fCr:1ales 

genera l1y are about one-thi rd \'leaker than 

males. 

A30 
\ 

\ 

; , \ 

\-. \ 

\ 'I, \ 

rr J 

(' ~ /1 

I' 

, 

" 

\ 

-7- . 11 

'> 

I -- , 

/1' j 

\ -, 

, ' , , , \ , I 

\ 

I 

, r, 

"I 

" 

I 

. \ 

,-

I 

.. 

L 

-

These factors become all-important in the almost frictio~less environment of 

space. Handholds, footholds and body restraints become the key to any task 

requiring strength application. Strength values determined in a one-g environment must be extrapolated with caution to the wJightless environ~ent 

since similar anchoring and body positioning is often difficult to obtain. A 

compendium of values is not available for the zero-g situation.,,-

Of course, moving lar!i~ objects in space is much more simple. No limits have 

yet been set on the mass of an object l',hich is practical to maneuver and 

translocate in space. Size, restricting both visi;ility and positioning, 

appears to be much more of a constrai nt than mass. 

/ 

MCOO"''''16LL t>OlJGL~ 

A 31 

I~ 

-
---orr' 

I _ 

---

r\' 

-, 

,/ - ----- .. ~ ... ' .. 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Psychomotor/Motor Capab11ities 

HUNAN CAPABILITY - Control of Speed of Motion 

Definition: The most easily identifiable and measurable manifestation of 

control of speed of mot10n is reaction time or respon3e time. Th1S czpability is generally considered at two levels. Simple reaction time 1S the shortest 

t1r.1e betlleen the moment a sensory receptor 1S stimulated and the tir.le SOr.1e 

body elem~nt reacts. The measurer.lent of slmple reactlon tlme, however, 

typically involves a def'I~~c! response, such as pressing a key, which allows a 

comparison of the reactio~ time of various sensory channels to be included in 

he r.leasurenent. Complex reaction tlme is a demonstration of the capability ln 

which infolr.1atlon-processing time is included in the r,.easurement. Customanly the subject is asked to recognize one Stir.1Ulus from ar.1ong sevel'al and to 

respond by selecting one of several response modes. 

Characteristics: Response t1me may be considered a function of several 

factors, 1 nclUdl ng: 

• The sensory chann€l through which the stimulus is in1tiated. 

8 The signal or stimulus characterlst1CS. 

o The complexity of the signal. 

• The signal rate. 

G Whether anticipatory provisions are present. 

• The response mode, e.g., the body member used. 

Tests involving key response have demonstrated the redctlon times for various 

input chC1nnels (e.g., hearing, 0.15 sec; touch, 0.16 sec; and sight, 2.0 

sec) • 

The follD\~ing estiMates have been made regarding the several components of a 

conplex reaction. T1me: Stimulus detect10n and neural transit ti~e, 

0.1 !,ec; brain recognition time, 0.4 sec; decisior,-'I1aking tme. up to 

4.0 sec; and motor respor.se time, 6.0 sec. 

Ot~c~ generali:ations of interest include the following: 

o It generally takes about 20 percent longer to respond WIth the fe't 

than with the hands. 

A 32 

'
---

/ 

---(I '. I 

I 

-.. 

' .... 

I 

f 

\ 

o The preferred hand is usually about 3 percent faster than the 

nonpreferre.d one. 

o Everyone has a refractory period of about 2 to 3 seconds, 

regardless of a stimulus demand rate, which means that a second 

stlmulus arriving within 0.5 seconds will be treated together wlth 

the fi rst. 

o Simple reaction times usually can be reduced by as Queh as 40 

percent by providing an alerting signal. 

Limlting Factors: Factors which tend to limit control of speed of motion and 

alter response time include the following: 

• Signal intensity: The greater the intensity of the signal, the 

faster will be the reactlon time. 

o Signal anticipation: ~hen the signal is anticipated, reaction time 

is typically shorter. 

• Practi ce: Reacti on time tends to be reduced \'1ith practice. 

o Pacing: If operators can set their own pace, they can often react 

faster to known signals. 

" Signal quality: Operators generally can react faster to a 

high-pitched sound, a brighter light, a larger visual target, a 

lrnger-duration slgna1. and a signal emanating from a partlcular 

1 ocati on. 

" 

0 

0 

0 

0 

" 

Li~elihood of signal appearance: The least likely signals will 

have tre longest reaction times. 

Signal fonnat: \4hen slgna1s are arranged sequentially or are 

meaningfully groupe~. reactlon time is typically shortened. 

Overload: Although an operator can adjust to excessive slgna1 

rates by relying on mer.10ry for short bursts. total response fallure 

may occur when rates are too high for' too long. 

Number of response choices; e.g., 1 choice, 0.20 seconds; 7 

choices, 0.60 seconds. 

Reach distance. 

End point control and preciSion (in contradistinctlon to the end 

pOlnt be1ng autom~tically controlled). 

o Added manual force requlred by response. 

o Distractlon. 

A 33 

'0 . l ! J 

x-I 

\ 
. / 

.'. 

\ 

\ J \ 

\ 

\ 

" \ 

~ 

rr \ 

~ 

. \ 

\ 

\ 

. 

• Physical and psychological stress. 

o Workplace constraints. 

• System feedback. 

, ----- ----

Comments: Control of speed of motion, response time, and reaction time are 

essential elements in crew tasks. In general, this capability has its most 

significant impact on task design. So~e operations, however, which involve 

extremely brief response times would be inappropriate for man's involvement. 

These usually must be identified on a function-by-function basis. 

.' 

/ 

MCOOIVIlttICLL DOVGL~ ~ 

\ 

\ 
\ 

\ 

---- --..--

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Psychomotor/Motor C~~abilities 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Control of Volunta~ Responses 

\-

Definition: Voluntary control of movement is part of the perceptual-~otor 

process lnvolving coordination between ~ne or more sensors, the brain, and the 

musculoskeletal system. Voluntary movements are generally classified as 

tension movements or ballistic movements. Tension movements are slow intense 

movements created by the contraction of antagonistic muscle5 operating one 

against the other with unequal tension. Ballistic movements are free and 

generally ~ore rapid, since the simultaneous operation of an~onjstlc mu~les 

~ \!It'na 'l'lt'fl'n mum. 

Characteristics: Because of the complexity of voluntary response control, few 

specific tests and ~easurements can be devised which accurately deflne lts 

characteristics. The following generalizations may be used to better 

understand the capacities and limltations of the capability. 

o Sensorimotor control between any of the sensory chann~~~~-~ 

hands is generally more accurate and reliable than that between the 

sensory channel and the feet. 

• Hand and arm movements coordi nation is better \~hen these movements 

are close to the body and sym~etrical. 

• Arm movements that progress forward and/or away from the body are 

More accurate than arm movements that are directed toward th~ 

body. The same is true of leg movements. 

o Right-har.ded individuals are more proficient at making clockwlse 

moveMents than at Making counterclockwise mover.~nts; left-handed 

individuals are just the oppcsite. However, all people make 

clockwise movements better with the right hand, and 

counterclockwise movements better with the left hand. 

o Generally, a person can rotate hi s or her hand and \-/rl st more 

precisely in one direction t~an another. 

o Multiple arm and/or leg translato~ movements are more efficient 

when they are similar, i.e., moving the left hand to the left or 

forward I'/hile at tne same time movlng the rlght hand to the right and fon~ard. 

o A person can apply force more accurately to two 5iPlultancously 

operated controls when the controls are located symmetrically wlth 

respect to the body and uhen the directions of f,lOVement are simllar. 

A35 

MCDON", ... '- DOUO~ 

\
i 

r 

; 

: " 

f "-

\(] 

• Uhen separate and different kinds of controls are operated simultaneously, there is a high probability that the operation of 

one or another control will suffer in terms of operator input efficiency. 

o Combined movements, suc:, as trying to push and precisely rotate a 

control at the same time, almost invariably introduces inaccuracy in one of the motions. 

• Excessi ve di spari ty beth'een b/o manual operati ons often resul ts in 

a complete breakdown of the sensorimotor response of one of the 

acti vi ti es. 

c Continuous feedback is desirable in order for most control 

movements to remain optimiled. that is to maintain an accurate 

direction, force appllcation, and/or rate of movement. 

• 

• 

On the basis of proprioceptive feedback, individuals judge extent 

of movement more accurately than movement lorce applied, and force 

more accurately than duration of movement. 

Although visual control is more ir~portant while an individual is 

learning a new perceptual-Motor task, as performance becomes 

habltual, proprioceptive feedback may become the more important 

feedback resource. 

o When less than 0.5 second per movel;,.;nt is required, blind movements 

are as accurate as when us:ng visudl positioning. 

o When the rate of moveMent is constant, accuracy diminishes as the 

interval between Movements increases. 

o It takes about 0.04 seconds to develop maximum tension. 

limiting Factors: Factors that tr-nd to affect the speed and accuracy of 

voluntar), response control include the folloHing. 

oMenta 1 set. 

o Practice and training. 

o Motivation. 

o Physlcal characteristics of the \'lOrkplace. 

o Envlronmental factors. 

o Fatlgue. 

Coments: Tasks reqU1rlng highly reflned and coordlnated MOVefl1ents are most 

often a 11 ocated to man because of the techn; ca 1 dl fficul ty and cost of 

produclng machines that dre capable of slmilarly refined moven~l1ts. This 

capability is the governing factor or is signlflcantly involved in the 

a5signment of man to numerous roles in space opcratlon. 

/ 

/MCDONNELL DOUG"~ 

A36 
,~ 

.. 

m 

B 

If 

I 

r 

, 

,. 

r 

, 

,. 

.-, 

/ 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Psychor.lOtor/f1otor Capabil ities 

HUMAN C~oABILITY - Continuous-Adjustment Control (Tracking) 

Definition: In continuous adjustment or tracking tasks some input specifies 

the deslred output; this may be constant or variable. The input is typically received directly from the environment. If the input is sensed mechanically, it may be presented to operators in the form of signals on a display. The 

input signal is commonly referred to as a target. and its movement is called a 

course. The target can usually be described math!matically and shown 

graphically. The input, in effect, specifies the desired output of the 

system. The output is usually brought about by a physical response with a 

control mechanism. In some systems output is reflected by some indication on 

a display commonly called the controlled element. 

Characteristics: In continuous-adjustment control tasks, control 

ettectlveness depends on, at least, the following factors. 

e The ability of the operator to anticipate what is going to happ~n 

when he provides input to the system. 

o The ability of the operator to predict what will happen when he 

makes specific system inputs. 

o Feedback on a timely basis about \-that is happening as the operator makes control inputs. 

o How much dlfferentlation. integration. and/or algebraic addition the control and display task requires of tfie operator. 

o How well the specific control and display devices provide 

compatible relationships between the operator's sensory. perceptual and motor and physical characteristics. 

Two types of tracklng tasks are generally recognized: 

o Pursuit tracking - A tracking task in which the operator's control 

and display system provides separate indications for input and 

output; i.e., the operator makes inputs into the control and then 

to a display element to follow a target. 

8 Compensatory tracking - A tracking task in which input and output signals are presented to the operator in terms of a d,fference 

beb/een the system and the operator's control inp,Jt. 

/ 

MeDON",,, .... IOOIJO",B' 

A37 

f ~ ... _ 
-, ' 

./ 

.. 

t;' 

" 

, 

I 

Limiting Factors: Factors which can affect the effectiveness of the control 

lnclude the following: 

• 

0 

0 

0 

0 

The duration of the delay between inputs • 

The amount of noise in the system. 

The relationship beb/een control and display direction and rate of 

motion • 

Controller force requirements. 

Relationship of the position, direction, and range of movement of 

the contro11er with the operator's musculoskeletal system and 

operating posltion. 

o The number of controls requiring integrated operatlon. 

• Operator's fatigue. 

Comments: Humans have proven themselves most competent and efficient in 

certaln continuous-adJustment tasks. such as rendezvous and docking activlties. particularly "/hen sufficient preview of the "track ahead" is 

available. A blanket statement cannot be made regarding the allocation ~f 

continuous-adjustment tasks to man or machine. Each situation should be 

judged withi n itself to determine 1 f the factors are present \,/hich lIill pemi t 

man to perform effectively. 

MCOONNIrLL .. ou .. ~ A·3B 

.:.. .. )""'--

-
o 

, ! 

HUMAN CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Psychomotor/Motor 

HUMAN CAPABILITY - Ann/Hand/Finger Hanipulation 

Definition: This human capability describes the ability to accomplish tasks 

lnvolvlng flne, detailed. and precise movement of the fingers, hands and arms. 

such as those used in handling small items and specimens. assembllng small 

parts. and in fine adjustment of controls. 

Characteristics: Because of the varied nature of manipulative movements. no 

quantitatlve data have been developed concerning their characteristics or 

limitations. The following generalizations have been made regarding finger dexterity and control operation accuracy. Although certain people develop considerable dexterity with practice. the average person is able to perform certain types of control manipulations more accurately than others. 

• Rotatlunal manipulation is more accurate than sliding manipulation 

or movenent of thumb or finger wheels. although the latter is more 

accurate than the sliding manipulation. 

o Rotation in the horizontal plane is generally more accurate than 

rotation in the vertical plane. alt"')ugh the horizontal accuracy depends on the ability of the operator to rest his or her hand on 

the adjacent surface. 

o h pencil-sized joy stick is manipulated more precisely than one 

requiring a full fist grip. and the accuracy is increased 

significantly if the operator can rest his or her arm on a nearby horizontal surface. 

o An L-shaped handle is more accurately positioned than a round knob. 

such as a doorknob. 

limiting Factors: Factors which tend to influence-the effectiveness of 

manipulative movements include: 

e light intensity. 

0 Temperature. 

0 Training (familiarity with task) • 

0 Alertness/Fatigue. 

0 Design of work area. 

COrTr.lents: Nan's manipulative Skll1s are among his maJor assets \'lith respect 

to hlS role in space operations. tJumerous tasKs, partlcularly those 

associated with the operation of research laboratorles, require manipulative Inovements WhlCh would be extremely difficult (if not impossible) and costly to 

automate. 

" MCDONNELL DOUGL$---

A-39 

...-.. 

" ~' 
/ 

, r 

HUMAU CAPABILITY DATA 

CAPABILITY CATEGORY - Psychomotor/f.1otor Capabi 1 ities 

HUMAN ~APABILITY - Body Positioning 

Definition: In this context, body positioning refers to setting up the body 

as a work platform in a coordinated fashion. The function includes 

neuro-muscular facilitation, muscular strength, and proprioception. 

Characteristics: The only definitive values that have been developed relative 

to booy posltloni~g are those associated with the limits of body movement from 

various positions. These are termed functional dimension of the body and are 

available in human factors handbooks. Values are customarily presented in 

terms of population percentiles, e.g., 5th, 50th, and 95th percentiles. 

Limiting Factors: Task-associated body positioning accomplished in the l-g environment ~il1 be altered significantly in the weightless environment. The 

restraint system, including footholds, handholds, and torso restraints, 

available for the task will, to a great extent, govern the approach taken for 

body positioning. Under certain conditions significant limitations may t'e 

placed on performance because of this dependency on available restraints. 

A second factor associated with extra-vehicular operations is the restrictions 

placed on body posltlOning by the ENU. Rigorous human factors design principles must be incorporated into the configuration of any system and its 

components that is a candidate for EVA maintenance or repl~cement 1n order to 

be responsive to the restrictions on normal body positioning. 

Comments: Body positioning and the limitations imposed by the space situation 

mUSt be considered in any allocation of tasks to man which require whole-body invol vemel;lt. 

MCDONNeLL DOIJG~ A-40 

/ 
1', 

I 

I. 

/ 

I I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

rj 

, 

1. 

SELECTED REFERENCE SOURCES PROVIDItlG r~ORE DETAILED ItJFORNATIOIl 

ON HUMAN CAPABILITIES AND LIMITATIotlS 

Bennett, E., J. Degan, and J. Spiegel, Hu~an Factors in Techn~109Y, 

McGraw-Hl11 Book Company, Nelo' York, 1963. 

2. Bibernan, H., Perception of Displayed Infonnation, Plenum Press, 

New York, 1973. 

3. Fitts, P. M. and M. I. Posner, Hunan Performance, Brooks-Cole 

Publishing Company, California, 1967. 

4. Fogel, L. J., Biotechnology: Concepts and Applications, Prentice-Hall, 

Inc., Englewood Cllffs, New Jersey, 1963. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

Guilford, J. P., The Nature of Human Intelligence, HcGraw-Hill Book 

Company, New York, 19b/. 

Guyton, A. C., Textbook of Hedical Physiology, W. B. Saunders COr.lpany, 

Philadelphia, PA, 1981. 

Huchlngson, R. D., New Horizons for Human Factors in Design, 

McGraw-Hl11 Book Company, Ne~1 York, 1981. 

HcConnick, E. J. and Ii. S. Sanders. Human Factors in Engineering and 

Des; gn, McGral'l-Uill Book Company, ~lew YOr"k, 1982. 

9. Meister, D., HUr.1an Factors: Theory and Practice, I'liley, New York, 1971. 

10. Morgan, C. J. et al, Human Engineering Guide to Equipr.lent Deslgn, 

HcGrav/-Hill Book Company. New York, 1963. 

11. 11urphy. G. L., The Role of Han in Earth Observation5. l,lDAC Paper 

presented to the Earth Surveys Steering Group, NASA Headquarters, 

Washi ngton, D. C., 1969. 

12. 

11. 

National Aeronautics and Space Adninistration, Bio-astronautics Data 

Book; NASA SP-3006. U.S. Government PrintTiig 11ifice1

, 1iash'ington, O:C., 

1973. 

12. Ruch, T. C., and Patton, H. D., Physiology and Biophysics, Volume I, 

The Nellvous Systen, H. B. Saunders Company, Philadelphla, PA, 20th 

Editl0n. 1973. 

13. Sherr, S .. Fundarrentals of Display System Deslgn, Hiley-Interscience, 

New York. 1970. 

/ 

MCDONNI!LL DOUGL~ 

A41 
14. Van Cott, H. P. and R. G. Kinkade, Human Engineering Guide to Equipment 

Design, U. S. Government Printing Offlce. Washington, D.C., 1972. 

15. Uebb, Paul, Bioastronautics Data Book, NASA, Scientific and Technical Info~ation Divls1on, Washlngton, D.C., 1964. 

16. Woodson, H. E •• Human Factors Design Handbook, McGral'l-Hill Book 

Compar\y, New York, 1981. 

17. Wulfeck, J. W. et al., Vision in Hilltary Aviation, WADC Technical 

Report 58-399, 1958. 

;' 

MCDONNELL DOUG~ 

A42 

~ "-~-

~ \ 

>.-

J 
. 

~ 

! 

I 

/ 

0" -, 

) 

r 

r .. 

• I 

! 

\:llo. 

/ 

,"CdONN£'LL DOUGLQ L>U 

- ---------- .' . 

APPENDIX B 

OHEN GARRIOTT INTERVIEll 

APRIL 10, 1984 

- OBSERVATIONS DURING THE 

SOLAR HAX REPAIR rHSSIOtI 

B 1 

-,-7+-
/ 

/ 

, 

\ /f 

/' 

I 

, 

/ 

/ 

<r . 

Interview "lith Owen K. Garriott 

April 10. 1984 

1. Based on your Skylab and Spacelab experiences. what are the lessons 

learned or technology gdPS that should be considered in defining the 

hUman role in future space systems? 

A fairly complete su~ary of my observatlons on Skylab appeared sEveral 

years ago in SClence (18 Oct 1974. Vol. 186. pp 219-226) (see Reference 

33). I have also prepared a summary of SpJcelab I events and lt appears 

in the July 13. 1984 issue of Science magazine (see Reference 34). These 

observations should be of interest to you. Technol03Y has improved froo 

the lessons learned on Skylab and muc~ of it has been built into Spacelab. 

The use of a computer ln particular in Space1ab \-/as very helpful for 

schedul i ng and other types of activiti es. There was no such computer on 

Skylab. 

The Spacelab \-/as not designed to be repalred by the creH because of lts 

short duration misslon. Things dld tall, however, and we had to agaln 

prove that [;lan lias capable of developlng vlOrkarounds and flxlng thl ngs 

"/hen they break. 

2. What have been your observations on the Space Adaptation Syndrome? Can 

the crew maintain their ability to work while experiencing these 

conditions? Can they mentally override the discomfort? 

In ny experlence, not everjone has been subJect to thlS syndrome. For 

example, on Skylab only two indivlduals suffered noticeable effects. In 

any event, hOI'iever, \"hen the crell is gOl ng through thi s time we shoul d 

try to keep thelr \'lOrkload to a mimmum. Physical actlVities are not 

impalred by SAS but r.lental activities do suffer because of the lethargiC 

state that SAS can lnduce untll adaptatlon occurs. ThlS state of 

lethargy can last 2 or 3 days. 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUGL~ 

- •• '"'· ...... _. ____ r ______ "' __ 

62 

'""'" --~-

-.. -
\ ~ , 

I 

I 1 

(rj 

/ 

/ 

, 

, 

. \. -- 'i " I 

, I '\ .J • I 

'f ,-' 

I 

!~ 

, f j 

i" 

3. When performing a manual tasK. what did you find to be the preferr~d body 

orientation? Did you use your hands or feet to ground out torques? 

On the general subject of restraints, I strongly recommend the use of 

foot loops which enable the crewmen to have both hand~ free for work 

purposes. \lhi1e \'lOrking, you normally have a check11st 1n one hand and 

are using your other hand to fllP sWltches or whatever. I recommend the 

addi ti on of many more loops for Spacel abo The foot loop'. are nice 

because you can use them for restraint, but \-/hen not in use they lay flat 

and are not an obstruction on the floor. With reference ~o body 

orientat10ns for perfoming tasks, it doesn't really r,latter 1f youlre 

~pside down or not Just as long as you Ire 1n the same orientatlon as the 

panel you' re I'/ork1 ng at • 

4. It has been reported that the deployment of the camera in the Space lab 

Airlock was a difficult operdtion. Is this a task that migh~ be bett~r 

done in the automated mode I'ather than manua 11y? 

f1anual deployment was not bad, the hard part Has latching the 5 or so 

doglegs to secure the hatch (th1S requires about SO lbs of fo~ce to 

accompllsh). ~lth regard to mak1ng lt automated rather than manual, 

"Absolutely not!!". As an example, during a shift change (In Space1ab, 

was coming on and the first order of bUS1ness \/as to deploy the alr1ocl... 

The Shlft gOlng off had 'lnstalled a locklng pln in the dep1oYr.1ent 

mechanism, but didn't pass that informatlon on. Ilhen I attempted to 

crank it I irrmediately felt sonething was \-/rong and had to I.ake up the 

cre~lTilan who went off. If automated, sOr.1ethi ng cou1 d have been damaged. 

B3 ry/ MCDONNEI._ OOCJGL~ 
s. In your experience, how realistic are the proposed tfmelfnes for future 

sp4ce station ofssfons; e.g., the COG concept of each person workfng 

9 hours/day. 5 dtys/week? 

Ground prepared pre-~ission tirnelines are so~etiMes good and so~etfnes 

not. tor easy predictable activities like system activations or 

deactivations, flipping switches. or other things along those lines. the 

tf~e1fncs arc good. HO~/ever. tfMelfnes for experir:'ents like fluid 

physics were off bj{ about a factor of three and this uas because the 

experiMent required real-ti~e reactions in order to accomplish the 

experiment. As a result of this the mission specialists had to do what 

they could during the scheduled mission tmes and they had to add an 

extra day Just to finish the experiment. ExperiMents can't always be 

accurately siMulated in advance when dealing with unknown results. Work 

schedule~ for the 10 day mission were good based on 12 hours/day and 

shoul d not be char:;ed. I don't particularly care for 5 daYS/Heck and 9 

hours/day. I suggest scheduling for 9 hours, but having the shifts run 

for 12 hours. f.ly rationale is that you have to div1<!e 24 hours evenly 

either by 2 or 3 Wh1Ch results in 12 or 8 hour shifts respectively. 

6. Do you have any observations on any other limiting factors on hu~~n 

involver,~nt that should be considered when planning future ~issfons? 

I don't have any particular observations relative to hunan li~iting 

factors. Intersocial activities are important for missions like Skylab 

or Space Station. When you Hark in such close quarters it's important 

for the indlviduals to have separate sleep areas so they have a place to 

go to be by the!'1selves. Another i~portant area is that the cre~1 Hho 

works together needs to trdin together. Everyone in the team needs to 

know what ev~rJone's work responsb1lities are and ~mat the person's 

feelings and weaknesses are. For example. tmC has an engineer flying on 

the next shuttle, but very few people 1n the astronaut office know who he 

is. However, he has been working with the crew and the" knOll him, 

hopefully!! Also. schedule 1 hour/day for exercise. 

Mco " .. ,....,r .... DOUOL:"~ 

B-4 c-~ 
! . 

. . 

I 

• 

7. Can you cite any critical events that have occurred in previous missions 

that fn turn will help define th~ human role in future missions? 

In-flight repair of Skylab not only saved the program from near disaster 

but also was an essential eler.1ent in the coopletion of most of the 

€xperinental objectives. 

(Ed. note - Owen Garriott's article entitled "Si:ylab Report: rtan's Role 

in Space Research", Science, 18 Oct 1984, Vol. 186, pp. 219-226, gives an 

excellent su~ary of the critical events that required hunan 

partlclpation durlng the Skylab olssions.) 

Spacelab as well benefited froo the human presence. A substantial amount 

of the experimental operations and data "Iere saved through the innovative 

naintenance and repair capabilities inherent in the crew. For exaople. 

the High Data Ratc Recorder (HORR) tape transport janoed and was cleared 

by hand. In preparation for flight. no naintenance training for this 

failure was provided. but the crcII was helped by having becot'le far.1i1iar 

with the unit during tralning for a tape change. On the other hand, one 

experiocnt used a sr.1all tape recorder to generate vlsual inages to 

present to one eye in a vestibular test. Although the tape recorder 

janQed, the crew was instructed not to attempt a repair. Postflight 

inspection revealed that the probleM could have been readily fixed. 

The flexibility and innovatl0n represented by having the cre~1 available 

is a resource \ihlCh should be capital ized upon. HO\lever, prefl ight cre\'I 

training should include general famillarization with almost all ooving 

equipncnt iteos • 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOUOL9--

B5 

------...... -.----................... -----<-1 ____ .-.... . 
8. One of the most important issues in designing future mission operations 

is to make proper utilization of human intelligence whether on the ground 

or on orbit. Do you have any comments in this regard? 

Man's presence is important for conducting various types of experiments. 

The crewnan perfo~ing the experiment may not be an expert in the field 

of study for that task., but he is able to interact with the ground-based 

PI's and still be able to obtain good data from the experiment. An 

analogy might be the crewman serving as the end-effector for the 

PI/Remote Hanfpulator. Both Skylab and Spacelab are good exar.lples of 

this type of interactlon. 

9. Are there anY specific aids and/or support equipment that in your mind 

could Significantly increase the effective utilizat~on of human 

intelligence in space? 

Contro 1 sand dl spl ays need vast improver.lents t/hich can better util i ze the 

hu~n. The dynar.lic evolution of software can be lncorporated to provide 

better details rather than the present 2 dinensional TV dlsplays. A lot 

of development is required in thlS area. 

,10. It has been suggeste~ that a dJsplay systern that could pictorially 

pinpoint the crewmvn's/exparimenter's location with respect to the earth 

would be very useful in order to knoH what to do and when to do it prior 

to the target appearing. Is there a need for such a display? 

It is very inportant for the crewnen/experimenter to know where his 

relative position is "lith respect tJ the earth. For example, the ground 

track data at rlission Control "is not available on orbit. For Spacelab \Ie 

had an electronic instrument (frOM a Silicon Valley company) Nhich sho\led 

where ue \'1ere plus we could input lnformation for specHlc targets p1us a 

feu other bell sand Hhistles. J. Young l1ked it so much that it may fly 

on all flights from here on out. 

/' 

fWCDONNI!LL DOClOLfi;:---

66 

~~ - - -~--- ~-------"-. --- '. 

," " 
1 

, . 

! , 

11. How adequate have the IVA lighting facilities been to date? How does 

Spacelab compare to Skylab in this respect? 

Lighting was good on toth Skylab and Spacelab wlth no light problems 

anywhere. Since we know what the interior design is. it can be pocked up 

on the ground to deterni ne the necessary 1 i ghti n9 requi rements. Hot Much 

else to say about this. 

12. Are there any fur.c~fonal limits to human perfOrMance in space that you 

can foresee? 

a. Limits based on human senses and motor limitations? 

b. Limitations restricting humans ability to use their senses or mntor 

capabilitfes at a given time due to: radiation exposure; debflitating 

effects of zero-g, i.e. muscle atrophy; etc. 

With reference to tile first question, I can't think of any scheduled 

activlties that were compronlsed by human limits. 

My feelings on radiation exposure are that people should not and will not 

be €xposed to high levels of radiation. The effects of long-tern 

exposure to zero-g are signified by thr loss of muscle tone in the 10~ler 

body. Therefore, phYsical training is required in order to keep those 

nuscles in shape. tty opinion is that 1 hour per day for physical 

training is sufficient. rieuror:luscular weakness is not evident in space; 

it is cnly noticed after return to Earth. 

/ 

MCOO"'''',..LL DOIJO~ 

B7 
OBSERVATIONS DURIUG THE 

SOLAR MAX REPAIR fl1SSI011 

During STS FLight 41-C (the Solar Hax Repair Mission) two THURIS Study team 

menbers, R. J. Dellacamera and S. M. Chucker, were present at the I1ission 

Operations Control Center at JSC, to observe the crew performance and - interaction during thi~ mission and to obtain data/information pertinent to 

the continuing definition of the human role in space. 

STS Flight 41-C was launched on Friday, April 6, 1984, and b'as scheduled to 

perform two prirnary missions. The first was to deplcy in orbit the IlASA/LRC 

Long Duration Exposure Facility (LDEF) and the second was to capture, repair 

and redeploy the Solar f.laximum Spacecraft (srr-I). 

The fi rst schedul ed EVA I'las set for SundilY, 4pri 1 8, I'lhere the cr:wmen I'lere to 

capture the SHH by means of the Banned Haneuveri n9 Uni t cr~lU) t stop the 

spacecraft's lO/sec rotation and pennit the RI·tS to capture the SH:1 and 

install it in the Flight Support Stand (FSS) I~here the naintenance activities 

would take place. They were then to change out the failed attitude control 

module which would ha'le concluded the first EVA. However, the retrieval 

operation did not proceed as planned. lJelson and ~is H!1U approached the 

spacecraft and matched its rotation rate, but when the T-pad impacted the 

trunnion, the jal'ls did not release and he bounced off the satellite. n·1O 

other attempts ,,,ere made; hOHever. those too were unsuccessful. One other 

attempt was nade to stabilize the satellite's motion and that was to grab one 

of the solar arrays and stop the rotation. Although this attempt was 

unsuccessful. it was later found to have improved the solar array-to-sun angle 

thus al10wlng the batteries to achieve a 10~ recharge. The unsucces3ful 

attempts to retrieve the SHH resulted in an increase in the satellite's 

/ 

MCOON",.LL DouaLa-- B8 

•• ¥ 

-
rotation rates from lO/sec in roll only, to la/sec in roll and pitch and 

O.60 /sec in yaw. The HMU retrieval was discontinued because the available 

propellant was approaching a red line condition. At this point, the EVA was 

tenninated in order to re-evaluate the repai'· mission alternatives. 

OBSERVATIOIl - These unsuccessful atte~pts could have been successful if the 

human operator could have manually triggered the jaws in the T-pad mechanism. 

Risk of failure could have been reduced by desi~ning for redundant manned 

operations. 

The decision lias made to attempt an RHS rotating grapple of the spacecraft, if 

the r-otation rate coul d be reduced. The Payload Control Center activated the 

spacecraft's torquer bars in order to stabilize the vehicle. Since this 

operation requires 24 to 36 hours, thr! Shuttle initiated a separation burn to 

conserve fuel rather than having to station keep. 

On Tuesday, April 10, the Shuttle approached solar max to attempt the rotating 

grapple. By this time, the spacecraft had been stabilized to a O.50/s~c 

rotation in the roll axis and had a slight coning angle of abou~ 150• The 

RHS went into a cor.rnunications bl."ckout region just as the Rr1S grapple 

operation began. lIhen comunications \"ere reestablished'tlle cre\~ indicated 

they had ca.Jtured the spacecraft. 

jhe baseline mission schedule \'1as modified and the second EVA, scheduled for 

. lIednesday. April 11, was ch~nged to accomplish all of the repair activities at 

one time. The actual repair operation went ve~ smoothly since the cre~~en 

had perfonned these tasks several times during the IIHF training sir.1tIlations. 

The maintenance interfaces manipulated by the crewmen \~ere as fo110\~s: 

Attitude Control Hodule -

The mechanical attad'u":1ent conslsted of 2 large Acme bolts each 

tightened to 100 foot-lbs and requiring 8 revolutions to undo the 

interface. The electncal interface \~as accomplisrcd through a 

self-aligning, blind-Mated connection. A special battery-powered 

torque wrench tool r/as used to access the Acme bol ts. 

/ 

.... COON"' ..... DOtlC..;;;J 

89 

• 

r:

\
Coronagraph's l~ain Electronics Box (!1EB) - - A hinge had to be attached to the MEB to allow the box to ~wing out 

to provide access to the 11, O-series electrical conne~tors. These 

connectors were he1 d dOlm with a total of 22 screws requi ring 4 turns 

each. There was d special pOI-{ered screwdriver set used to rer:love 

both the electrical connectors and mechanical attach~ents. Uhen the 

new I1EB was inst~lled it again interfaced with the hinge to allow 

access for installing the electrical connectors. The reattach~ent of 

the electrical connectors made use ~f spring clips rather than the 22 

screws. 

Van Hoften cOr.r:lented after removing the ACS l:1odule that the torque wrench tool 

worked very well. 

03SER'/ATIOI/ - lIith proper tool s, any task that can be accamp1 i shed by a hUr:la:'1 

operator on the ground can be accomplished in orb1t. 

During this EVA operation, the Hikon 35r.l~ camera experienced a filn jam. 

Ilelson removed the thennal covering, removed the pOlter drive and unjanmed the 

frar.le that Has stuck (whl1e in the EIlU). He then reversed the process, 

reasser.lbled the unit, an0 was thereby able to salvage the 35~ photos. 

OBSERVATIOII - Hunan ingenuity can be used to handle contingency operations, 

develop liorkarounds an~ increase mission success probability. 

Van Hoften reported that about sm of the solar array cells I'lere delaminated. 

Iteam'ihil e, the ground \'las recei vi ng good po\~er i ndi catic!1s from the spacecraft. 

OBSERYATIOIl - Human Sensory/Perceptual processes can sense and detect changes 

in state or condition that Houl d be very difficul t to "instrument for renote 

monitoring. 

A photo recon of the satelllte was perfonned for about 3~ minutes. The 

crell"1lan was 1n the manipulator foot restraint {i'lFR) for this operatlon. 

/ 

... CDO,.,. .... L DOUG .. §)' B·l0 , 

, - ., Q 

i
r 

r 

I" 

I 

I 

i 

I 

L 

onSERVATIO!1 - The success of this operation was hlghly dependent upon the 

effectiveness of the comnunication interaction between the EVA and IVA crewmen. 

The crewmen performi ng the SfU1 repai rs ended up about an hour ahead of 

schedule. The timelined mission was to take about 4 hours and 50 minutes, 

while in actuality they cOr:1pleted the mission in just under 4 hours. 

OBSERVATIOtl - Timeline data derived from ground based and neutral buoyancy 

Slmulations are accurate enough to be used for mission planning purposes. 

After the repairs were completed, the spacecraft was checked out to verify 

that the Modules had been properly installed. To do this. the ground 

acti vated the heaters in the two ne\'i modul es and they recei ved a posi ti va 

indication that they \~ere functioning. During this time Van Hoften took the 

opportunity to perforo some additional evaluations of the !1HU's operation. 

OBSERVATIOlI - The capability of the human operator to redeflne procedures. 

operations and/or schedules to take advantage of fortuitous opportunities for ' 

data gathering can significantly enhance the value of technology development 

Missions. 

The second EVA was then te~inated after a successful repair misslon. The FSS 

rotated the spacecraft around to provide access for the Rr1S. The RtlS then 

grappled the spacecraft and lifted it from the FSS. At this point. the ground 

co~anded the deployment of the TDRS antenna on the Sl1~ and the spacecraft was 

released. 

" MCDONN<rLL OOCJOL9--

B 11 

11 • __ 
, 

~ i 

! 

CBSEqVATIOH - The classes of generic space activitIes (as developed in the 

THURIS study) which were observed during this mission included the follo\~ing: 

1. Activate/Initiate System Operation 

2. Adjust/Align Elements 

3. Connunicate Information 

4. Confirm/Verify Procedure/Schedule/Operations 

5. Connect/Disconnect Electrical Interface 

6. Deactivate/Terminate System Operatlon 

7. Define Procedures/Schedules/Operations 

3. Deploy/Retract Appendage 

9. Detect Change in State or Condltion 

10. Gather/Replace Tools/Equipment 

11. Implement Procedures/Schedules 

12. Inspect/Observe 

13. Heasure (Scale) Physical Dimensions 

14. Position Module 

15. Precision :lampulation of ObJects 

16. ?:-ob1em Solvlng/Dec;s;on :laklng/Data Analysis 

17. Re1 ease/Secure i1echanica1 Interface 

18. Re~ove Module 

19. Remove/~ep1ace CoverIng 

20. Store/Record Elenent 

21. Transport loaded 

22. Transport Unloaded 

8-12 / 

MCDO"'NELL DOUOL~ ...... _ _ ~ ______ w _____ _ 

I 
1 

.. 

[ , 

! -

.. i 

I) -, 

r; 

I ,..,. , 

c-t:t 

.:...r 

C-1 

C-2 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOUG'-~ 

APPENDIX C 

PROJECT ANALYSES 

ANALYSIS OF SPACE 

PLATFORM HISS IONS 

ANALYSIS OF LlFE 

SCIENCE MISSIONS 

C-l 
Appendix C-l. SPACE PLATFORM PROJECT (Page 1 of 4) 

HISSIe. .. OPERATIONAL SEQUENCES 

InItial Deployment Extract from Cargo Bay (Shuttle) 

Berth 

Deploy Appendages 

Attach ~iT6ad 

System VerIfIcatIon Check 

Separate 

Payload Peconflguratlon Close PrOXImIty OperatIons 

Berth 

Payload Exchange 

;' 

MCDONNELL DOUGLa 

C2 

~ 

OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES 

Release lon~eron latches 

lift SP from Cargo Bay Deploy Certhlng r~chanlsm 

Lower SP t~ -'rthing PosItion 

Insert Trunn.ons into Longeron Latches 

Close Longeron latches 

Mate SP/Crblter Ur.bilical 

Deploy Antennas 

Acqulre/Autatrack TORS 

OrbIter to SP Communications 

ftevate Radiator 

Deploy Solar Arrays 

ActIvate TCS and EPS 

Checkout TCS and EPS 

OrbIter to SP Power and Cooling Begin SP CMG Spinup 

In-Bay C~eckout af Payload Release longeron latches 

LIft Away Fran Cargo Bay Maneuver Payload to BerthIng Port 

Bertlt-'l"aylaad to Port 

Hate Payload/SP umbIlIcal 

Payload to SP Power/CoolIng 

BegIn Payload Operations 

SP VerIfIcation Operation En~ Payload OperatIons 

Orblter/S? to SeparatIon Attituce 

OrbIter to Internal Power/CoolIng OrbIter to Intprnal CommunIcatIons 

DIsconnect Orblter/S? U~bllical 

InhIbIt SP CfAG's 

Release Longeren latches 

II ft/Release SP From OrbIter 

Enable SP CMG's 

Orbiter/SP Sep'n Burn Sequence 

Retract SP Solar Arrays to 10: 

Retract SP RadIator 

OrbIter Approach to 200 Feet 

VerIfy SP OK for DockIng OrbIter Approach to 40 Feet 

InhIbIt OrbIter PRCS 

InhIbIt Orbiter VRCS and SP CMG's 

Lower SP to Bert~lng PosItIon 

Insert TrunnIons into Longeron Latches 

Close Lon~eron Latches 

Mate Orblter/SP UMbIlIcal 

Extend SP Solar Arrays to lOG: 

Extend SP Radlator 

OrbIter to SP TORS Comm 

Orbl ter to SP Power/CoolIng ActIvate SP WG's 

Payload to Interndl Power/CoolIng 01sconnect Paylead/PS ~blllcal 

Unberth Payload Transfer to Storage Port 

Berth on Storage Port 

In-Bay Chec~out of Payload 

, 
1'-- r 

j 

r 

I 

/ 

AppendlX C-1. . SPACE PLATFORM PROJECT (Page 2 of 4) 

MISSION 

MaIntenance 

EvolutIonary Growth 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOUGLQ 

y::./ 

OPERATIONAL SEQUENCES 

Stow Old Payload 

Separate 

Close Prox1m1ty Operations 

Berth 

l1odu1e Exchange 

Separate 

Close PrOXlmlty OperatIons 

Berth 

r10dule InstallatIon 

C3 

OPERATION~L ACTIVITIES 

Release longeron Latches 

LIft Awal From Car90 Bay 

Maneuver Payload to BerthIng Port 

Berth Payload to Port 

Mate Payload SP ~bl1ical 

Payload to SP Power/Cooling Payload Checkout 

Unberth Payload 

Transfer to Cargo Bay 

Insert TrunnIons into longeron latche$ 

Close longeron latches 

Orblter/SP to Sep'n AttItude 

Orbiter to Internal Power/CoolIng Orbiter to :nternal TORS Comm 

DIsconnect Olblter/SP ~bl1lca1 

InhIbit SP CH':;'s 

Release Longeron Latches 

Lift/Release ~P From Orb1ter 

Enable SP CP.G's 

Orb1ter/SP Sep'n Burn Sequence 

See P/L Reconflgurat10n 

See P/L Reconf1guration 

Pre-Ma1ntenance Activ1ties 

Gather Pequ1red Tools 

Haneuver to Ma1ntenance locat10n 

GaIn Access to Old Module 

DIsconnect E1ectr1ca1 Connectors 

Undo mechanIcal attach~lent 

ReMOve Old Module 

Transport Old ~:odu1e to Cargo Bay Attach Old M~dule to CarrIer 

Pel"ove flew Moc' .. le From Carner 

Transport r.ew Nodu1 e to Maintenance 

loca t1 en Install new ~~dule In MountIng Pos1t1on 

Secure P.echanlcJ1 Attachment 

Connect E1ectr1cal Con~ectors 

Replace Access CoverIngs Transport to Cargo Say Replace Tools 

Post MaIntenance Act1vlt1es 

System VerIfIcatIon 

See P/L Reconflgurat10n 

See P/L Reconfiguration 

See P/L Rpconf1guratlon 

Gather Tools 

Maneuver to Module Spares Carr1er 

Remove New Solar Array WIng From 

Carrier 

Transport to Storagp Port 

Berth to Storage Port Ma~euver to Starboard Solar Array WIng DI~connect Electr1ca1 Connectors 

Undo Hccharllcal Fasteners Rc~ovc Old Solar Array Wing 

Transport Old S/A W1ng to Spares Carner 

Attach Old S/A I/Ing to Carner 

r1anell.rer to Storage Port 
AppendlX C-1. SPACE PLATFORM PROJECT (Page 3 of 4) 

MISSION OPEMTIONAl SEQUEIIC~5 

Separa te 

HI SSlon Free-Flyer Ops Capture Oa ta 

/ 

MCDONNELL UOUGL~ ,-~ 

P reproces s Oa ta 

C-4 

OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES 

Remove Ilew 51 A 1J1 n g 

Transport New S/A WIng to Installation 

Position 

Install S/A Wing Secure MechanIcal Attachments 

Connect ElectrIcal Connectors 

Maneuver to Spares Carr er Remove Battery ChargIng Pack Trar~port to InstallatIon PositIon 

GaIn Access For Hodule InstallatIons 

Install Battery Chargers in MountIng 

POSltIO'lS 

Secure Hechanlcal AttachMents 

Connect ElectrIcal Connccto(~ 

Maneuver to Spares CarrIer 

Remove Battery Regulator Pack 

Transport tn !~stallatlon PosItion 

Install Batte.y Regulators In MountIng 

POSitions 

Secure Hech~.ical Attach~~nts 

Connect ElectrIcal Connectors 

Ma1euver to Spares CarrIer 

Remove Battery Pack 

Transport to Installation POSItIon 

Install Uatterles In Hountlng PosItIons 

Secure Mechanical Attachments 

Connect ElectrIcal ConnectJrs 

Replace Access CoverIngs ~~npuv~r to Spares Carrier 

Remo\e New S/A WI~g FrOM CarrIer 

Transpcrt to Storage Port 

Berth to Storage Port 

Maneuver to Port SIde S/A WIng Dlscornect Elect'lcal Connectors 

Undo Mecha~clal Fasteners 

Remove Old S/A WIng 

TranJport 01 d S/A IIlng '0 Spares Carrier 

Attach Old SIA WIng to CarrIer 

Maneuver to Stc/age Port 

Remove /lew S/A WIng Transport /lew S/;., WIng to InstallatIon 

POSItIon - Install S/A WIng Secure I~chanlcal Attachments 

Connect Electrical Connectors 

Transport to Cargo Bay Replace Tools 

System VerI flcatlon Check 

See P/l Reconflguratlon 

Pecelve and C~unt Blocks 

Block Error Check 

DeblOCk and I'o<!ss Store 

TransmIt to Preprocessor 

Receive Data and Store 

Reverse Tape Pecorder Data and 

Prepare to Batch 

Extract Data and Establish 

ObservatIon Sets 

Correlate and Append AnCIllary DJta 

ArchIve and Transnlt to User or ProcessIng FaCIlIty 

1 
Appendix C-1. SPACE PlATrORH PROJECT (Page 4 of 4) 

HISSIC'l 

ilhn "aslon 

Ci'ERAT IO'lAL SEQUE!ICES 

Analyze OD.trvatlons (Peal TI~el 

CallbrHlon 

locate Observations 

Analyze Health and Safety (Oil) 

Define 11stnuncnt Tlnellne & Connand 

Schedule I'~neuvers 

Schedule Observation 

Analyze Hlssion Tlnplfre 

Sc~cdul e Pesourtes 

Integrate Connands & Schedules 

Co~and TDRSS, Platform, 

Payload & Instrurents 

Relay Co~unlcat,on 

Platfom C & eH 

Payload C & OH 

C5 

OP[PATION~L ACTIVITIES 

Bufft'r I/O 

Dnplay Data 

EnhJnce OHa 

Analyze Data 

I~stnuoent RJdl~trlc Correction Instnu~ent Gec~~trlc Correction 

Platfo~ Polntlrg Correctlcns 

Payload Pointing Corrections 

Phybacl: DaU ['~co"1'Iutite and Llnlt C~ccl 

[.track H&S Subset and Scale 

Output and Olsplay Processed Data ~ard Ccpy and Plct Data 

Define Payload Tlmellne, Ccnnands & 

POinting Profile 

Define Platfo~ Housel:eeplng & 

Science Support ConnJnds & Tlnelfne 

Define Instru~ent Constr.fnts on l'>Jneuvers 

Define Payload Requfrenents & 

Constraints 

Est~bllsh PlatfOrM I'~neuver Proffle 

Establish Oayload MJneuver Profile 

Establish Platforo Co-'a~~ il~ellne 

Est~bllsh Payload Connand Tinellnp Establish InstrL-ent Co~~nd Tl~ellne 

l~entify Platfo~ hesource Constraint 

VIolations 

l~entl(Y P~ylo4d Pesource Vlolatlens ~esolve Conflicts 

Define TDRSS Tl~es & Services 

Defl ne 'IASC0'4 TI'"Ies & Services 

Conflrn Screcules Res~lve Conflicts & Changes 

Develo~ & TI~e Correlate U~l'nk 

~ Real Tine Co~~nd Peo~le 

Constra,nt Cheek Inte~rated Con~nd 

load 

Ac~uire Co~unlcation Links U~llnk ~~nory l03ds Perfo~ & Harage Real TI~e Co~~ndin9 

Provide Links & Serv,ces 

link ~SGT to DCr Ac~u,re S? ~F leek 

rF Quality Creeks & Dc~odulate rata 

Bleck & Forward Data 

E~o~e Payloa1 OJta Strea~ 

Correlate & Ercoce AnCillary Data ~4Itiple~ & hF OJta 

Decode & Distribute Platfcro & P~ylo~d Connand & Connard loads 

Synchronize & [reode $cns~r Dlta [~tr~ct Qufel Lcct Cb5ervJtlo~ OJt4 Syn~hronlze & (rtcde H~S Cdta 

Ta9 $ Output Cat4 to P~yload C & OH 

process Instru~nt COMnJrods & C~dnd 

loads 
AppendIx C-2. LIFE SCIENCES RESEARCH PROGRAM (Page 1 of 6) 

HISSIO'j 

I. Study Of Bone Oe~lnerallzatlon 

In Zero Gravl ty 

/ 

,l\.fLDONf\lCLL DCJUG"~ ""-" 

OPERATImiAL 

SEQUEI~CES 

A. Maintain & 

!'.cnltor Rat 

Colony 

OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES 

1. Visually Inspect rats within habitat a. Hale direct ylsual Inspections. 

b. Inspect video i~4ges of rats. 

Z. ExaMine displays of habitat envlron~ntal 

para'netel s. 4. Call up envtronnental data. 

b. Evaluate data with respect to 

requl red ranges. 

3. Inspect records of food and water 

consul"ptlon a. Call up records for specl~ent on 

CRT. 

b. Co~are records with nomal 

consumption data. 

4. Evaluate anImals health. 

s. Process urIne samples a. ReMove urine collector 

b. Keasure urine \olun-~ and deliver 

aliQuot to container. 

c. Place container In freezer - check freezer temeprature 

d. Recora"data on appearance of urine 

and s~-nple size. 

B. ~easure Mass 1. Transfer rat froM habItat to S~ 

of Rats a. Pe~Nve habItat fro~ holdIng 

C AcqUIre, 

Precess, and 

Store Rat 

Blood San-pIe 

eG 

faClIi ty. 

b Place habItat In workbe~ch. I c O?en ha~ltlt ar.d rp~o~e rat 

d Trallsfcr rJt to SM."::> module and I 

secure e. Attach restraInt module to S~RD. 

2 Opera te S"'"~~. 

a. ActIva.te S~~J. 

b Pead d15plaj of rat's ~~ss and 

record. 

3. Return rat to holding facility. 

Acquire blood 5a~le and centrifuge 

4. PeT.Ove rat fro~ habItat at 

wor~bench" 

b. Place rat In restraInt unIt 

C Apply tall re~ter. 

2 Acquire blood s.-~l. and centrIfuge 

a. Pel"o~e bIOG~ sd~ple frc~ tall veIn 

b Transfer s~~le to centrIfuge tube. c. Return r3! to habItat In holdIng 

fac III ty. d. Centrlf~;~ blood ~a~ples 

. . 

• I 

• 

-

~ 
T 

e· 

r 

, . 

AppendIx C-2. LIFE SCIENCES RESEARCH PROGRAI-1 (Page 2 of 6) 

HISSIO'I 

;' 

",COO'\/N#L( D(JtJGL~ -~ 

OP[RATlO/1AL 

S"[QtJErlCES 

D. Sacrifl ce Rats, Acquire 

and Store 

tissue 

Sarnple~ 

E Analyze Blood 

and Urine 

SaMples 

C7 

O?(AATlO'IAL ACTIVITIES 

3. Store Saft.ples 4. Draw off plasMa from tubes. 

b Record volume an~ transfer to 

stora;e tubes c. Store se~ples In freezer - note 

freezer te~peratures 

1. Prepare rats fo~ dlssectlo~. 

a. Remove rat from hablt~t In workbench 

enclosure. 

b. Return habitat to holding unit. c. Place rat I~ gUillotine restraint 

SystE'M 

d Guillotine rat. e. ReMove rat fro~ ~ulllotfne 

restraint s/ste~ and secure to 

dissection board 

2. Dissect rat and remove tissue saM~les 

a. Dissect rat and remove saMples of 

intereH. 

b. ReMOve sa~ples and place in holding 

contalrers. 

3. Freeze sz~les and store. a Transfer sarples fro~ saline 

solution to cryogeniC coolant. 

b. Re~ve sa~les from cryogenic 

freezer and store in freezer. c DIscard rc~alns Into waste 

Managerent systeM. 

Analyze sa-;>les a. Re~ove sa~ples from freezer and 

thaw 

b. Transfer sarples to analyzer 

conta Iners. c. Place sa~ples In analyzer and 

l;ctlVJte 

d. Operate analyzer. e Exanlne and ~ecord results. 

2 Study results. 

a. Exa~lre data for lnterral consistency. b Cc~pare data to norr31 values c. Co~pare data to expected changes. 

d. I'ake Ju~g'l'ents abcut bone loss 

In zero graVIty. e log conclusions and diSCUSS With 

terrestrial P.I 's 

3. Plan subsequent experl~e~ts 

a. Dete~lne If changes warrant 

alteratIons In exp protocol. b Detemlne laboratory ~u~port 

capabilities. c. Plan logIstics 
r ...... ... 

Appendix C-2. LIFE SCIENCES RESEARCH PROGqA~ (Page 3 of 6) 

MISSlorl 

II. Study of ~~tabollC Work In 

Zero GravIty In fiUl'lJI1S 

/ 

MCI~ONI'ttICLL DOUOL~ --...:...,; 

OPERATlOUAl 

SEQUENCES 

F. Perfo"" 

Histological 

AnalySiS 

A Set Up 

ExperIment 

for Metabollc 

Experiment 

B Prepare 

Subject for ~(!tabollc 

TestIng 

OPE RATIONAL ACTI V ITI ES 

Prepare tiSSUe! a. Pc~ve tissue and trim for mounting on 1:11 croto':'!: 

b. l!tbed tissue in paraffin c. Hount tissue block on microtoMe 

d. O~erate mlcroto~ 

e. Mount tls~ue slices on microscope 

sl ides 

f. Conduct staining procedure 

Z. Examine tissues under microscope a ~ount slide on ~Icroscope!. 

b. Focus microscope c. Examine tissue for abnormalities. 

d P~otograp~ vIews of Interest. e. Pecord flndinss and discuss with 

terrestrial P I 

J. Study results 

4. Exa,lne data fo internal consistency. b. Co~are data to normal values. c. COT~are data to expected changes. d Hake judgTents about bone loss 

In zero gravity e. Lo~ conclUSIons and diSCUSS WIth 

terrestrial P.l 's 

4 Plan subseqycnt experl~nts 

a Cetc~lne if changes wdrrant 

alterations In elp protocol 

b. Deter-Ine laboratory support 

capablllt1es. c Plan logIstics 

Prepare bIcycle ergometer a. Re~ve fro, stor~ge and as~e~ble. 

b. Checkout functions and calIbrations. c Introduce workload progra~ into 

ergometer ~Icro~ocessor. 

2. Set up cardiovascular ~onjtorlng system. a. EstablIsh approprIate 1nterconnections dTong systen corpo~ents. 

b. Chec~out functIons, operatIons, 

and calibrations 

3. Set u~ ~tabolic ~on1torlng systeM. a EstablIsh approprIate 1nterconnectIons ~~~n9 systeM co~ponents. 

b Checkout functIons, operatIons, 

and c~liberatio~s. 

1. ~easure r~ss of subJect 4. POSitIon subject in body mass measurCT~nt deVIce (r~'.D) 

b. Act1vate and operate 6MMD c Peae ~ass frem B~~J display and 

record. 

C8 

. I 
.... 

Appendix C-2. LIFE SCIENCES RESEARCH PROGRAH (Page 4 of 6) 

MISSION 

I' 

I\-tCDo"¥"",rLL DOllGL~ '"~ 

OPERATIONAL 

'if U[I,CES 

C. Monitor 

Metabolic 

Work 

o j:,nalyze 

Metabol ic 

Experlnent 

OPEPATlDrlAL ,iCTlVITIES 

Z. Arply sensors to subject. a. Subject electrode locations on subject. b. Prepare and apply eleclrodes. c. Attach electrode leJd system d. Connect lead syste~ and check 

IntegrIty of asse~blies. 

3 Fasten, adJLst, and checkout respiratory 

mask and va he. a. PosItion Mask and fasten head straps b. Adjust mask to faCIal anatomy of su~ject. 

c j:,ttach valve and hose to ndsk. 

d Check mask for flow and leaks. 

1. Monitor cardiovascular function. a Check heart rate display. 

b. Evaluate heart rate with regard 

to work load. c. ExamIne [CG waveforn 

d. Identify rCG abnorMalities e. Actuate oscl11oscop~ camera. f. Check operatIon of strip chart 

recorder 

9 Assess status of subject 

2 Monitor l'1etabollc para~ters. 

a MonItor 02 consumptIon/C02 productIon 

b Evaluate netabollc rate with regard 

to workload c. Assess status of subJect's 

physIcal ccnditlonlng 

d. Ckeck co~outatlon of PQ e Exa~lr.e and evaluate operatIon 

of X-Y plotter. 

3 Terninate netabolic work test a MonItor phySIologIcal paraMeters durl~g recovery perIod 

b. ReMove electrodes/sensors fro~ : subJect c. DIsas5e-bl~ and store experIment 

equlp-;ent 

d. Collect experlme~t records. 

Reduce e~perl~ent data. a. Enter data frOM experincnt records 

onto data forms 

b Calculate derIved values and 

correlatIons c Evaluate effects of zcro gravIty on MetabolIC wor~ 

d. Record conclUSIons and dISCUSS 

..,rot terrestnat P [ 's 

2 Plan slbscQucnt cxpcrlm~nts 

C9 

a Dete~lne If changes warrant 

alteratIons In expo protocol. b DetermIne laboratory support 

capab' J !tIes. c Plan logIstIcs 
.. 

AppendlX C-2. LIFE SCIENCES RESEARCH PROGRAM (Page 5 of 6j 

III. 

MISSION 

Study Of Vestibular Function 

In Zero Gravity 

McnONNEt.1. nOtJc",CY 

/ 

.>-.-/ 

OPERATIONAL 

SEQUENCES 

A Set Up 

Equi;rnent for 

VestIbular 

Experiment 

B Conduct 

VestIbular 

FunctIon Exp 

OPERATIONAL ',CTlVITIES 

1. Assemble VRF and prerpare for operation a. Assemble shaft arms and drive 

systen. b. Attach specimen modules. c. Test operatIon of VRF systen. 

2 Set uv electro~hysiologlcal me!surement 

systen a. Establish appropriate InterconnectIons. 

b. Ch:ckout functIons. operations. and calibrations. 

Prepare specim~n for test. a Transfer ha~ltat from holding 

facility to workbench ~n~losure • b. Remove rat forn habitat and 

anesthetize c. ExamIne status of im,lanted 

electrodes. 

d. A"ply surface electrodes e Check signal characteristICS 

f. Install rat in VRF module 

9 Attach speCImen ~odule to VRF 

h. Recheck electrophysiologlcal 

SIgnals 

Conduct prelln experl~er.t actiVItIes a. Collect ba~ellne (non-rotatIonal) 

data 

b Progran operatIonal paraneters 

Into VRF mIcroprocessor c Check Module environmental 

parameters 

2. InitIate experlnent. a ActIvate VRF rotational ~nd 

graVItational vector pro9ra~s. 

b Check operation of monItorIng 

system c. Dls,lay physiological paraneters. 

dEvaluate phYSl010Sical varldbles 

WIth respect to acceleration vectors I 

3. Monitor experl~ent procedure. a. ~lonltor envlron~ental displays. 

b Ponltor VPF operatIons c MonItor electrophyslologlcal dISplays 

4 Ternlnate experIMent a Stop VRF rotatIon 

b Continue ~onltorinn c:~'trophv~iologIcal dlspla>s • c Transfer module to general puroose workbe~ch 

d Disconnect electrod~ leads and 

specinen restraInt syste~ 

e Transfer specimen to habItat 

and return to holdln~ fac'llty 

C 10 

-

" ..... 
r 

r 

·: 

AppendlX C-2. LIFE SCIENCES RESEARCH PROrRAM (Page 6 of 6) 

OPERATIONAL 

ImSIQ'1 SCIENCES 

C Analyze 

Vestibular 

Exp Data 

/ 

MCOONNFLL oouca£ 

1-

QPERATlOtlAL ACTIVITIES 

Reduce experiment data a. Enter data on data fcl'1"s. 

b. Calculate derived \al~es and corre I a tf ons. c. Evaluate effects of rotation on phYSIological varIables 

d. Record conclusions and dISCUSS 

with terrestrIal P.I.·s. 

2. Plan subsequent experiments. 

ell 

a Detprmlne if changes warrant 

alteratIon In ex". protocol b Dete~lne laboratory support capabIlitIes. c. Plan logIstIcs. 

l.q 

• 
l' 'I 

/~ J 

r I 

, 

APPENDIX D 

ACTIVITY TIHELINE PROFILES AND DATA SHEETS 

FOR 37 GENERIC ACTIVITIES 

/ 

MCDONNf!LL O?CJoW 01 

.. 
APPEUOIX 0 

Timeline Profiles 

This appendix contains the timeline profiles for each of the 37 Generic Space 

Activities derived in Task 2.1. For each activity, a tirne1ine range bar 

represents the tYPlca1 range of times that can be expected in accomplishing 

the specific task in each man-machine category. For each time range, one or 

mor~ information sources are referenced. The symbology as described in 

Section 3.2 of the report designates the general nature of the source. The 

information sources that are referenced in the timeline profiles correspond to 

the fo 11 owi n9 : 

(1) :1cDonne11 Douglas Astronautics Company, Alternative System Design 

Concept Study (Space PlaHtf""trewl!f' System), Contract tlASB-33955, 

DR Hos. 1-16, July 1982. 

(2) Space Platfo~ Ground System Study - Final Report, 7/21/82, Ford 

Aerospace and Colit11unications Corporation (Subcontract to f4DAC under 

IIAS8-33955). 

(3) Space Statlon Program Description Document - Book #6, Appendix S, 

Operations Studies, Second Level White Pages, 8/83, Space Station 

Operations Working Group, I~ASA-KSC. 

(4) lJatlonal Aeronautics and Space Administration, Sky1ab r1ission 

Seguence Evaluation, mX-64816. J.1arch 1974. 

(5) 

(6) 

Space Station - Vol. III, Oook 3, 48 Hr. Analysis. MDe G0634, 7/70, 

Contract IlAS8-25140. 

Space Station - Crew Operations Definitions, HOC G0645, 8/70, 

Contract lJAS8-25140. 

02 / 

MCDOloiNELL D<>UCl~ 

~ 
j [ 

r 

-. flj 

(7) Space Maintenance and Contingency Operations Simulation Neutral 

Buoyancy Testing (llB-51) - Final Report, HOC H0190, I~DAC-HB, 11ay 1983. 

(8) 11cGol'lnell D<luglas Astronautics Company Engineering Estimate. 

(9) :lational Aeronautics and Space Administration, Johnson spate Center, 

Hission Planning and Analysis Division. The 25-Kilowatt Power System 

- Baseline Reference Hission. JSC 17066, February 1981. 

(10) General Dynamics, Definition of TDHs for Early Space Station - Orbit 

Transfer Vehicle Servicing, Vol. 2 - Technical Report, Contract 

NAS3-35039. June 1983. 

(11) Spacelab liSTS 9 Operations Debriefing and Flight Review. 

(12) Similar task has been demonstrated/observed in some Qther actual 

space flight operation. 

(13) :lational Aeronautics al1d Space Admjnistration, 11arshall Space Flight 

Center, Analysis of Large Space Structures Assembly - Man-Machine 

Assembly Analysis, Contractor Report lJo. 3751, IlAS8-32989, December 

1983. 

(14) El'iald Beer (Editor), ReMotely Hanned Systerls - Exploration and 

Operation in Space, California Institute of Technology, 1973. 

/ 

.. r,nn1WIIWF. I nouoL~ 

03 
.. ~,.~. t- " • 

ACTIVITY TIMELINE GROUNDRULES 

II Range of Times Derived From Analyses of SpecIfic Tasks 

~ Similar Task With Actual On·Orblt Performance-

(§.] Similar Task Performed In a Space Simulation 

@ Engineering Estimate Based on Design or Operational Expenence 

• ActiVities Requiring Direct Human Involvement for Accomplishment 

Ehminate Supervisedllndependent Options 

~ a Manual Operattons Limited to 50 Minutes Based on Fatigue Levels 

and Attention Span Limits 

\I "Limiting Factors" Establish Rationale for Man·Machine Category 

Allocations 

Mt'n· ..... chlM' 

Cateson~s 

M.nual 

Support.d 

Augmented 

Teleopereted 

Supervl.ed 

Ground 

Supervl.ed 

On-Orbit 

Independent 

ACTIVATEIINITiATE 

SYSTEM OPERATION 

R~ulrem6?nts for 

Time Scale Human Involyem~nt 

~~ I i \ 

I " 0 • ~@1 

I " 0 " ~ I 0 ! G • 7a"i<mi14l i I l- ! • 0 0 

~§J I I I I I I " ct 0 

~00 I I i 0 0 I 0 

(1X2)1® I 

i I C =:l 0 I 0 , OC~E:l 10 20 30 40 SO 1 2 4 6 G _Oi I 0 

~2 '0 on l, M .. 0 

~nd. ""Inutl' Hour, ~l::! t I "," "- .r 

04 

VCS98S 

I Limiting Factors In 

Human Involvement 

I 

I I 

• ! 

• I 

I 

i 0 I I 

I 

" : I 

j 

i 

I I 

1 I 

I 

I 

! I 

.. I II c c 

;; 

; ~ .. '" g I 

';:1 

- 1 

! . , 

-1 

\ 

. i 

I 
\ 

\ 

J 

;r 

! , r 

I 

I \ 

rt" L 

L 

.------, "'--;--------~ ~-~.-------, __ - I -,. 

ADJUST/ALIGN ELEMENTS VGSS87 

M.,..a.cac:hlne Requlremento lor Llmltln~ Faclor. In c..'.-gont. nmeScalr Human InvGJvtfM'rt Human Involve.,...n! 

i Mln",,1 • 0 0 0 0 

I 8 

Support..t C) 0 0 0 

8)9 

Augmenl..t 0 • 0 0 

T elfl>pefaled r"4 " • 0 0 • 0 

Su~_ • • 0 Ground • Su~rY\sed ~® • • 0 On-Ortlll • 

(9::V 

IndepenMnl t::::=l 0 0 

O~ae=l 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 & 8 

-- .. 0 '" e", c e Oc !!. ~-= " '0 ;0 = .. ~~ ~ E e E~ u 0 .. Second. Mlnules Hour. " e .. ~ OJ ~v .. ~ s:, 00 

"'~ £ u 

... ~ct ;:, 

ALLOCATE/ASS~GN/DISTRH3UTE 

M.on-,,.Iac:hln.e Requf,pments for Llml1lng Factors In 

C.I~ooe. Time Scale Human In\'o'y.ment Humlln In"olwement 

8 , I U.nual 0 0 

Su~rt"" ~ 0 Q 

AllgMftlI..t ~ • " I Te~l.d 

~ , 0 I $ 0 

1 2 8 Supo!!nit~ • 0 " Ground 

Su~rY\sed CJ@ 0 0 

I 

o""'n 0 ...... ' 

CiXV0 I"""~nclenl l:!:l 0 0 

O~~E:l 10 20 .0 40 SO 1 2 4 6 8 

-- .. <; .. CD' e e g~ ~.~ ~ ~ '0 -.; 

~g. E :;; e:: 4( 

Second. Mlnutrs Hours cu <; 0 ., 221 .. ~ r- 1/)" Q. :E ~ .Ell. ;:, 

MCDONNI<tLL DOUO~ 05 
1ftIIII!Z:.:: __ - - -:.~--... - ---...... --~-.. - ..... -.----=;:;; 

I .. 

~ !.+:.~~" VGS8S9 ~yr( .. ~ .. ~~~(~ APPLY/REMOVE BIOMEDICAL SENSOR .... "?i 

Man ... achln. Requlrement1 tor Llmiling ractoA In C.t~ortfl Tlm.Saltt Human In"oJv.m~r •• Human 1.,woJ.,.m.nt 

i (8) (11N2) I "'.nu.1 0 0 0 0 • 

I (a) 

Supported • • • 0 

Augmented I ill I 0 I • • I • 

® I I 

Teleopft.ted I ! • I • • • I 

Suponl.ed N/A I Ground 

Suponlsed N/A I On-Orb.t I 

I 

tndependent N/A 

I I O~~E:' 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 8 _ e ;;; " .. I C <0 I C c 9. ~.3 " '0 ;; 00. U E c lUI u -.. !! 0 .. < Second. Mlnut •• HOUA cU 

.~ ;; .r:: .. UJ~ :s ~ 

~ - I 

N/A - Not Applicable 

~'- il~'"::,,1 VGS930 

-v'" .( i ~, COMMUNICATE INFORMATION ";::-':':/ , 

M.n·'Jaehlne Requirements lor I Um·t ng Factors In ! C.t"l/ort .. Time Scale Human tn'4olv.rT'~t Human l"yoJ~e~e.,t 

.~~~ I 

o I I 

Manu.1 I .. 0 I 

~ I 

Supportod I I 

~11~ 

I) 0 0 

I 

Augmented 0 0 0 a e 

Teleop.Jrlted 

~ I 

G;.(2 2 

0 .. 0 I ! 

SuperYl •• d 

I I Ground 0 0 0 I 

c;g> . SupomHd 

On·Orbll 0 0 • I 

I ~;l , Independf'nt .~ 

, 0_ 0 I 

OC~E:' 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 5 ;;; to e", I e -~ 0 c Oc i!'.2 ~ ~ '0 ;;; 00. E ~: ~ - I .. 0 E:! .. SKondl Mlnutea Hours cu U '" .. ~ .r:: 00 

"'cl: :s ~ :€Q: .. I 

06 
.. , q24< Q <Wfoi4IJ(1\; ~ __ ... 

SuppOrt.., 

Aug ........ .., 

COMPENSATORY TRACKiNG 

Tim. Sealt 

Requirements for 

Human Involv~menl 

Iw, I I I' 

I N/A 1 I 

! N/A i I I 

I N/A I I! 

o I .. 1 I 

"G5991 

Llmillng F.ctors k.:-J Human InvoJwement 

! , 

I 

I 

I 

I 

~~::;-.:-' [[:,~:==::JI • i • I • 

~ I r:(i); I ! 0 ! 0 I. : I 

Independenl ~~1 .. 0~8~:~::~:~. ~I---':L-J,-Ji-!-L-Ll~.~l! ~.JI_J!L ___ i; _jl o ~ ~ E : 1 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 8 - I - I ~ 

Seconds !, Mlnu'es Hours tIl 1 1 :;i :€ I ... I ~ 

N/A - Nol Appilcoble 

~~ ~ ....... ~ ... ~ VCS9!12 COMPUTE DATA ~ ~ .. I'~ h 

. ;'(;-~. . Man-Machine RINlUlrf'm~,..ts for Llmlhng Factors In Categories ".,.,., Seale Human Involwemtnl Hum,n Inyolvem~nl 

~~6X8 <11) . : I , U.nu.r I 0 I 0 I I • I , 

0~' I . I 

I I Sul!l>Or1ed ! I I 0 ! 0 I I 0 

Augmented ~0 I 0 I 0 I • I 0 I 0 

I i I ! I leleoperated I N/A I ! : I I I I 

@0 ! 

Supervl.td I i Ground f I i • I • ! • i 

~C?(!) I I I I I , I I I 

SUP9rvlscd E 0 • I • I On-Orbit 

(8) I , I I 

I I I Ind~pend.nt I: I 0 I • I ! 0". til V 1 10 20 30 40 SO 1 2 4 6 8 ;; a lUI C=l.E:r c 

! 

-. 0 

~.: ~ !! i '0 I ~~ E :; ~ Socond. I IoInrtts Hours CU 0 .., . ~ 

I ~ .,.:: li I .= a. r a. 

N/A - Nol Applicable 

07 
CONFIRM/VERIFY PROCEDURES/ 

SCHEDULES/:JPERATIONS 

VQSHl 

"'.n .. M .. chln. Cal~on .. I R'qullf-'l't 10' I l .... '"n9 helen In I tiu.".a., Inyol •• i1Wn1 .. ~" I"~"""nt 

"'anllar • • 0 

I 

0 I II • 

• I • I • • I 0 

• I • I • I 0 • 

I 

• I 0 I 

o 0 

• I • . , O .. ··u1 10 20 30 CO 50 1 :2 • 6 8 

~ 0 I '" I c",o c C..I.E: 0 I ~ .. I c I o c I 

~~ I ;; .. HI ~ I 0 ... f " .... ~ 0 . s.co.- MIRV". I Houn. '" i l~ I .. ~ .. IH j , 

, :s .,5'" I I ... 

CONNECT/DISCONNECT 

ELECTRICAL INTERFACE 

I"'an Machi". i I C.I~on .. I 

Manual 

Supporttd 

Aug:m.nt.d 

T ... .op...,.I.d 

SupervIsed 

Cround 

SU~f"fI"ltd 

On-O~(I 

Indf'pe"~nl 

(1;~I'O\ 

~<~ 

~\3 

1(i):;C; 

:c:::J 

~t},re;' 

(1\'9\ 

g , 

I O--_ul 

c 04 E: I 10 20 

, 

30 

I l~n~.! Mlnul" 

i I 

0 

, I 4~ SO 1 2 « 

I 

I Houfl 

I 

08 

I ReQut"'f"fn4'ots t-:>r : It-n h'\4 Facto" In t Hu".,n In'lOhlt'mfl'it i ttUM;:1't t~"Q.iW'f'noe'n' 

I I • I • , 0 

I 

• I I 0 , , , • I I 0 I I 0 0 I 0 • 

I 

I 0 I I • I , I 

• I 0 ! $ 

I , 

0 I • ! 0 

I 0 I • I I I b 8 I .. I -So C , .. 0 5. ~ /:'z ~ 

I 

;; 

~ -.; I 0,,- ~ • , w , : , .. ~~ t .... '" !? I 0. to. 

0: ! 

, 

I 

J 

0 

I 

I 

I 

! 

I 

I 

; 

0 

I 

I 

I 

I 

1 
~ 

}.\,o~-....... CONNECT/DISCONNECT ~ 

FLUID INTERFACE .. ~:'J 

!~:;'"-

Min ~ac""", R~ulr .. menlt 'or t limiting FlelO" In I 

C.l~oflel Tim_ S~I. Human Inyot"if'~nt I Hum." Inyolnmen' 

ITI!:'@ I I ! ! j ! loIa" ... 1 r:::J I I • I I • I • I 

~0@ I , I 

Suppcrt<ICI ! I I , I t:::J I 0 I • I I 0 

Auta .... nt<ICI I I (a)'~ I I 

I -

7]~ I I I I I 

0 I 0 I I • I I , T.IeoP. ... t<ICI ".'~ I I , , 

~ • , • I ; 

Supo .... M<I 

CrouncJ I I • • • (8) I I , Supomwd 

I I 

. 0 ... 0<1>11 c:::::J ! 0 ; • • I 

tg>, ~r:1 I , 1 : I Indo..-nd.n. , ; , I I • C 

O---UI ,a 20 3D 40 SO , Z • 6 G ,Oij I 

· 0 ... I s'" I c I C!le!:1 

I 

I " I ~ ~"' ~ 

00. '0 .. ~~ I ~ £ c I ... 0 E: I ~ ;: I s.condl I Ulnul •• Hou~ c , ;; &. ~ .. .. - 00 J , "'.:: I s .. :€ Q: I I :: I ... I , 

VG!'.1J<J6 

CORRELATE DATA 

Time Sule R.QUIfc-m~tl lor I limiting factor, ,n 

Hum:n In'fot-r.mtnt • Hvman ,""ohit""nt 

jlll.nUII 010 • (8) I I 

Support.d I I I , I 

I ., I 0 I I • I 

(e' , I 

Aug~nted I I :: I I til I • , I I 0 I I I T .... o~'.ted I , NlA ! I I I I ISUP.mUd I CD I I I 

c;.,oun:l D I I I , 0 , 0 I 0 1 • I I • I Sup~l .. d 

I I 

I On Orbit CJ 0 1 0 I 0 I • ~ I I j I Ioo.pondtnl I 0 I 0 I , , , O •• - u 1 10 ~ 30 40 sa 1 2 • b a 

,~ I '4 ~ '" I c .. , c;~E~ c 

I 

.5 Oc ,.~ .2 t "0 

I ~~ I I oQ. E ~ , ~ s.con~. I ... 0 Ulnutfl Hours ~ ~ ." ~v i 00 , ,"1~"J. :s £Q: I I :. I N/A t<:cl Arp ICJble 

09 

(i) 
® 1ro1C'_ DEACTIVATErCERMINATE ;~-r~ :$""""" SYSTEM OPERATION - '1~# ? 

~ ni"'7-.. 

........ .;.~ 

loI.r~U .. d,,". , R~utr.~ntl tOf' 

Calf'9Oml TlmeSUle I HUmAn 'n .. OI,.,.m.,,1 

~<§> I I Ma_ i I 

I i I I 

~ • I • • , I ! ~ j 

0 • I 0 I 0 08 ~ . I i 

i I 0 I • I • t;0ft:~~ . i 

T.~I04 . I ; i , . 0 I 0 • , 

~i)0 I I I S~04 I Gt'OUtId I 0 i I • • ~00 J I , J J , S~ J I , O...orttcl I I I • I • 0 

~ i I I IrocIepencIenl 

1 I • I • OC;'E~1 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 • ,';i I .. 

I 

!; ", I ... " , ~ "0 §~ I e 

s.cOftdII ~ "'nutt. I Houl1l c" I 0 . ~ 

, , "'t: :s · J ~ I i :. 

DECODE/ENCODE DATA 

Mln-Mact"n. i 

Catt!"gort-u TIMe Sui. ~ Requ'r~m'nls fef 

I Humin InweJy."",,,' 

I (s) ! I I I /,I"" ... , I "'" : : , , 0 , J 

'~ I ! ~ 

Sul'9Ort.d I:: =1 , i 0 

. I I (8) I Auo-..ted .=:=:1 I 0 i 

i 

Teltepon;te<S IN/A I I (1X2~ I J t SuPfl'1"" I r; :' :::J I 0 I 0 0 Crou.,d i I I 

(1I'D}t;> I J 

Sup.t'niHd f : ::c:J I • I 0 I 0 01>-011>11 I I 'XS }:12) 

c:: =: I ::--::1 I~cndent , i ! . It III 

O~~E~l '0 20 30 40 50 , 2 • 6 a , .. 0 "I I ~~ c; 

S.ccndl I I 2~ E Minute. Hout"l Cu G ,,- .c 

"'t:. ~ 

I it. 

NIl. - NOI Apph.cabl. 

/ 

MC:OONNIZLL oo,,"'":::'~ 

010 

VOSH7 

I llmlUrtg factor. In I H",m.n Inwolw.m.nl 

I I I 

I I I 0 ! I I 

I 

I 1 

• , 

I J 

, 

I I 0-

I 

I 

I 0 J 

I , ! I , 

I I I , , , : i 

I , I 

I I ! 

I at I .. c: .E C I !? 

I f S OJ I I <C 

J I 1/1 ... 

0 I ~ I 

I , 

, llmlhng F~CI"r, In I HunZin Inyot ... .,..'n' i 

I I I 

I 

I 

I • , 

I j 

I e I . I I 

I • , 

I I I 

I 

I I I I I . I 

I I . I 

I . 

(It I "'I c 

~ I .: I ~ ~ : I c 

'" i £1 

" . .. 

. 1 

.. 

• T 

, 
1] 

. / 

~I 

'~j.~ ® DEFINE PROCEDURES/ VC!;99!I 

i"7~""',- ;. ~ t ... _ 

R~~: SCHEDULES/OPERATIONS 

"'"n-U.eht"" Rt"Quu'e'n'I4'nlS lor I Llmillng fie Ion In 

Cat.gort •• Tim. Sale Human Ittyot""men1 H"'M,n Invol ... mt'nt 

I(~>( a )Ct~) ~ i I I I i Uanu.! r:::!: ::.::::: ::-;,:,,:1 I I 0 I 0 • 1(8)(8) I I I 

I 

I 

Suppof1.d c:.::~=:::::;;m I I 0 I • I • (6)( 8) i AUV .... nlltd ~ I ! • I • i • , I I • I 

I I , , 

I , I I 1 T mopftalltd I NIl. I 

~ i I I I SU~1'f1Md I I I I • I • I • I 

Ground I I ; I 

~ : I I 

Supel'flOO<! I • I • I • i I I On-Orbll 

0)'2\CS)<~ ! , I i I I I , I Ind.pendent r\?'':i~ I • I 0 I I I I , 1Q 20 30 40 SO , 2 • 6 8 

-- . !i .. C ogHl ~" I C <01 I j E ~ g.~ oQ. C ~ E: 

_1 

.. 0 . 5-.ondt ""nut •• '" 

1 

Haun ~~ .. OIl ~ U I 

'5 2 e. I 1 '" :. ~ .. £'" l. I 

HlA - Nal AppIoc::abl. 

VCTOOO 

DEPLOY/RETRACT APPENDAGE 

Lt.n-eA.xh.nel 

c..',eQOfles 

Su~ 

O~II 

I.-Grpendenl 

o ~ ;, E :' 10 20 30 40 SO 

MeDON"'tJrLL ocuo~ 

! R",ul~ffte'nu for I llmlHnlJ f.ctorl I' I' I HumIn tnyolnment Hum'., 1., ... ol.tm~nt ] ! , 

o ,-

I 

o I 

010 

I 

• I , 0 

• I 0 

010 I 

010 

I 0 

, 

! 0 

, 0 

i • , 

i 0 I , 

, 

I IS 

I 12_68 - I . ~2 

o 

'0 

E 

o Houri t 

r:. if I 

D·ll 
....... -

~ I 

DETECT CHANGE IN STATE VGTOOI 

OR CONDITION 

Rr.lUI'lfmant. fo, I Umitmo factors In Time Seal_ Hum," Invtu ... mf'nl Human Invelnlnent 

.... nual (4)(a')1p 

~: .. :=j • • 0 

Suppon.d ~~:. • • • A"lImenttd ~.S~: I • • • 0 

TeMo~",r.d 

~ • • • ~upt>fVf'ed a) 1 • • 0 Ground 

s.,p.,vrud 0 On-Orbll • • 

Ind.~ndenl 0 CI 

20 30 40 SO 1 2 • 6 8 _ .. ;; 0 '" c:",1 c: 

" ~~ ~2 .!2 " "0 0; 00. ~ E c: U -.. .. e .. .. MlnulOl Hours c:u ~ Q ., .. - 0):: 

~ .,-Go :s £Q: Go 

l' 

\ 

, 

_ I 

~ 

~ -:Ju,-'-

VGTOO2 

~-:~d~, D!SPLAY DATA ~~;\;;;:; 

U.".. .... dlIM I Re-c;u·rem.nts for I Limiting F.ctors 'n Cal09ont. I Time Sent. Hum." tnYolrtm~ ... t HU""M Inyolvement 

-, 

I 

! 

0200<& \ I I 1 I t I 

U.nUlI I I I ; c::::::J i i 0 e I 0 

I 

II I I GXv I I I I SuP!>Mt'd I I 

c::J 0 I 0 • 0 i 

@J~ I I I I I AU!lnMntood i 0 ., • " I I I 

(8)(13) I T~td I I I 

~ I 0 I 0 0 0 , 

I ! I I I I I 1 Su~_ I • ! I!I I • I Ground \ , 

~ I I 

I i 

I Su~n-Ised • , 0 0 0,..011>11 I I 

~ I I I 

1n6e_t • : i I 

• 1 

O···ut 10 20 30 40 50 I 2 4 6 8 _"Q ;; 1; '" c:", I I:~t:" c: ~.§ I 

SKO~d: I ... " ~ '0 ~g. E --c: 

~ E i .. Mlnutea HOUri c:u ;; 0 ., .. - &: 00 .," £ u :fa: I Go ... 

it. 

012 . i 

I 

.1 G' 
, , 

'Y 

- [ 

~ GATHER/REPLACE ~~ ..... _-r..,-", YGT0C3 

o'(}.~.!.: :- ri~-t TOOLS/EQUIPMENT 

.... n· .... chlne R.quJremantl 10' I UmUln; Factort In 

Cat.-gorlet Time Sale Human Involwet1Wf\1 I Hum~ .,.,ol.,tom.nl 

.!2~C!)~~ I I , I Manual 1 \ t::::=I G I I 0 I I • (D00<@>~ I I I I 

Support~ e:::::J 0 I 1 • I 0 

I I 

~ I : I 

..... g"...nt~ 0 I • I I • 

I a)rtC1 I , , 

Teleoperated E I 1 0 I • I • • , 

I ; I I 

SupeNlsed I N/A , I I 

, I G,oUnd 1 , I I 

Supt'NlMd I I I N/A : I On-Ortlll i , I I 

1 I ; I I I I , , Independent N/A 1 , , I 

O~:E:1 10 20 3D 40 50 t 2 " 6 8 _'i . 0 '" 

I 

'"I c c .'.l ... " !> 

2~ '0 .. ~! ~ e ~ u 0 .. I Seconds Mlnut~. HOUri f~ U " ~ '" ~ I ."w :5 ';:1 ... ~ I N/A - Not AppU~a~lt 

YGTOO4 

~ 

+p.-.,r-.... I~J HANDLE/INSPECT! , ........ ~\ .. t",t>!4 EXAMINE LIVING ORGANISMS .' 

Man-Mac"'!,..e ! R~ulrtm.nl. '0' I UI'1'!lng Faetors In Catf'gonet Time Seal. I Human Invcl.ltmf"nl I Human IrwolwHntnl 

~ I i I I 

I 

, I 

I 

, 

I I.IIanlUll I • 0 0 • I 0 

~ I I I 

Supporttd I 

I , • (II I • 0 , 

f3 I I i Augmentod 

• I " , 0 

I ! I 0 

(a) ! I 

Ttltoperattd I I I I I I 0 0 I 0 0 I ! • , I 

I 

I 

Supt'NlMd PI/A I I 1 I Ground 

~ I I I I I 

Supt''''I'~ I 

I I i 

i I 

: On-O~n 0 0 0 I i 

1N/A 

I I Ind~n" ... t I I 

I I , I 

O'~E:t 10 20 30 .0 50 1 2 " ti 8 -. 

J 

:; n 

<: '" c ,g " ~.2 (; .. 00. E :: -.. 0 ~ ~ Seconde Mlnut •• Hours c" .., ~ .. - ~ 0 "," ... .;: 

:. N/A - No! Applicable 

MCOCNNI6'-L DOua~ D 13 
/ 

/ ' " '-I' . , 

Man-MachIne 

Ca'O\lori •• 

"'an .. ' 

SUppof1od 

T~al'" 

~ 

Mln.Machlne> I C~te-gon.s 

.... nu.1 

Supported 

l.ugMenled 

Tol.ol»rel": 

Supom.ed 

Cround 

Supom_ 

On-Or1l11 

'nd4tpend~1 

IMPLEMENT 

PROCEDURES/SCHEDULES 

TlrM Sui. 

Second. Hours 

R .. qulrtmpnts lot limiting Faclors in 

Hum .. n fnwol •• men, Human In\'olwemenl 

e • 

• • • 

• I • • 

• I • 

o 

• 

! 

, 

, 

I • 

I 

VGTOO6 

INFORMATION PROCESSING 

, RequlrtiUtnts fot I liMiting F,etors , ... 

Time Sale , Human Inwolwement I Human Inwolwemeont 

~~ I i I I I 

I I I • 0 0 , 0 

~ I I I 0 I e 0 0 ., 

8 QY , 0 I 0 I " I 

I 0 I 0 

d@"' I 

I I , I I 

1 2ai.~ I 0 0 0 0 I • : , I , I I 0 I 0 0 , I & I ! I 

I 

I I 0 • ., i 1 

Id: ~f>1 0 I e I I , I O~~E:~ 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 8 

~~ .. to I ,,,. I c 0 r. 

~ 

'~~'I " (; .. "' I 00. U ~ .. E :; .!! §~ <t 

Mlnula. HourS ;~ -.; 0 <? i 00 flit; :5 EO: 

r:. 

/ 

MCOONN6ZLL DO"'O'::~ 

D 14 

I 

I •• 

. . 
l' r 

-/ 

/' 

/ 

INSPECT/OBSERVE VCTOO7 

Mln-Mlchi". Requirements for lIMlling Fitton In 

Cot~orl .. Time SUle Humin Involvem.nt Human tnYol~,.m .. nl 

MonWl' o • o 

: I · Svpporled o • , o 

Augmented I I • I 0 • • i 

Supemwd 

Ground 

Supemsed 

On-Ortllt 

Independent 

O·· .. ul 

C"E~I 

Seconds t 

I 

o I • I • 

o • I ! 

o I 0 II 

• ! 0 

10 20 3D 4Q 50 1 2 4 6 II _.. I ;; ; ~~ ~ 

-"c ~J ~" I Hours -

. Ul~:5 

Minutes 

I 

MEASURE (SCALE) 

PHYSICAL DIMENSIONS 

o 

;; 

E 

o 

.. 

~ 

Min Mschlne Rtqulremenls lor C.lrgorl •• Tim. Seal. Humin InyolveMent 

Manual ~~ • 0 • 

Supported 

~~ 0 0 

Augmented 

~ • 0 

Teoleoperated ~a [§ 0 0 ., 

Supervised 1 2 12 0 C Ground 

Supervised ~U> 0 0 On Orbit 

Independenl ~ • 0 

1 , 1_- L O .... ·u1 10 20 30 4J 50 1 2 4 6 8 . 0 :'::'1 I U' ,.~ ~ ;; ~~ ;:; E .!! 0 Mlm .• tl!'s Hours ~ ~ -. t I Ill" Q. ~ I C. --~--

IKCDONNI1lL&. DOUO~ D 15 

• i 

... 

~ 

" .. 

II) 

""I 0<: 

HII 00 

~a: I 

1I0T008 

limiting Factor. In 

Bunln I,wolvemont 

0 0 

0 

• • 0 

co '" " .. 

<: <: g 

-= <: 

.. < CII ~ Ii. 

.. 
!F' -~ \ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ ~' t-.:WF:- PLOT DATA '~~j7 

Mln-Ifochln. Requirementllor 

Cllegorl .. TIme Seale Hum.n Involnmenl 

Manu.1 0'8) • • • 

(a) Supporled 

~ • • 0 

Augmented • 0 

Teleoperated !NIA 

SUplnllltd ~ • 0 0 Ground 

Supuvloed ~ G • 0 On-Orbit 

Indopondonl ~ 0 0 . • O~~E:' 10 20 30 40 SO 1 2 4 6 8 -.. .. 0 

I 

~3 " '0 0"- u .... e !! Second. Mlnulu Hour. C u .. 0 .. ~ I' 

~.!! ~ :. 

... 

PDSITION MODULE 

. Mln .. M&chlnt' ! Re-qulrements tor 

C.'''Qones Time Scale Hum.n Inyolvement 

~0~ 

I Manu.1 C) 9 0 

Suppcrtt<l ~0<g>§] 0 0 0 

Augmenl..., <3~ • $ 9 

T ol.operaled ~r7'1@](1] ! I 9 0 • (8' i Supervlud c:J I Ground 4) 0 0 

Supem""" (61 i On-Orbll Cl ! 0 

I , • • Indepen~ent I IVA I i D~~E~' 10 20 30 40 SO 1 2 4 'J 8 -;; .. 0 

I -I ~~ ! "0 i oc>. - E .. S.cOr\(fS! Mlnutel Hou" c ... 0 .. ~ 

~ I on" Q. ~ Q. 

VGT009 

lImlUng F.Clon In Human In~olwem'nt 

• • 0 

0 • 

DO Ceo C 

~ 0" 0 

~E C '3 .. '" II) l;~ - ~ ,EQ. 

VGT010 

limiting Faclor. In Human tn'lolvemenl 

I 

I 0 I • 

i 0 I I 0 

I 

I 

e I 0 

I 0 , 

I I 

I I I I I 

I 

co C", 

~ ~ 0" 

~: Ii E .. .. on ~ ... 00 

Sn: 

I 

I 

'It 

I 
r 

r 

r I. 

~ 

~ .. 

~~ 

M.n.Machlnoe 

Categories 

ManuII 

Support.., 

Augment.., 

T et.operated 

SupenrlMd 

Ground 

Supervised 

On-Oro II 

Independent 

1 • 

1/ 

PRECISION MANIPULATION YOT01t 

OF OBJECTS - RequIrements for Umiling F.clors In TI",. Sc.le Human (nwoh'.men1 Human Involyement 

(e)<g><p) 

I ! 

I 

t I • • • 0 I • (8) I 

I f;: ; I 

I I 

I • 0 0 e • (a) I I I t::::::l • • • 1 

I 

, IUA I I I I I I NJA I 

I , I 

I H/A I I t I 

I I I I 

I NJA I I , i I 

O;!~E:; 10 20 30 .0 50 1 2 • 6 II ,. .. ~ II .. I c: 

~i! " '0 

11 

5! oc. U U - E .. ~ a Second. I Minute. Hours '" c:u 

.. ~ c; 

~ .,,, , ... ~ a. . 

N/A - Nol Applocable 

U.n· ... achlntr 

C.legom. 

.... nu.1 

Support~ 

Au~mented 

Teleope",t.d 

Supe .. I.~ 

Ground 

Supe .. lsed 

On-Oroll 

PROSLEr., SOLVING/DECISION 

MAKING/DATA ANALYSIS 

YGT012 

Tlme So.le 

K4XSXs),io):jt) 

I: ~gxa) I 

Requirements for Limiting Factors 'n 

Human lnvolwe-nent Human Inyoly~mtnt 

• 

• 

: I 

• 

It 

o 

o \ 0 ! 

o I 0 ! 

I • \ e I 

01.010, 

I 'I o 1 0 I I 

~ 0 0 110 I I 81~ 

~~----~~~~~~~~~~L--L~i __ ll--J Ind~pend~nt t: ,. 0 I 

o ~ ~ e ~ 1 10 20 30 ~O 50 1 2 • 6 8 - ;; 0 01 I '" I 0: 

}] =~.. (; E ~ I ~ ~r2- g .~I~I.c V)~ .. ~ £ -5 >- v, ~ _ I 

r:. 

Second. Minute. Hours 

017 
/ 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

~ .~~ '1:\7:- PURSUIT TRACI{ING 

M.n.Mltchlne ~ Require~r $ 10r 

Categories Tim. Scale I Human Inwohcmcot 

Manual ~.a",;( .. I~ 

I 0 0 

~ ! 

Supported I 0 • • 

Augmented ~ , 

, 0 • • I~ I 

T eleope,.ted I I • • • [ 

Supe",laed H/A , 

Ground I 

I 

Supervtsed 

I HIA On-Ortll' 

Ind.pendenl N/A I 

O~:E=' 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 Ii II ,;; ;; 0 

~.a " 0 -

0,," OJ E .. .!! 0 Second. Minute. Houn Cu 

,,~ ;; s: en" ~ u 

"" :-

"" N/A - Nol Applicable 

Man PJI;;chlne 

Cate90ri~s 

Manual 

Suppor1ed 

Augmented 

Telloperated 

Supervised 

I u~ound 

Supervlseod 

On-O,bll 

Independent 

L 

RELEASE/SECURE 

MECHANICAL INTERFACE 

I'lequlrements lor 

Time Scale Hums., Involvement 

8~ITlj..9~ I I r I 

I 0 I 0 

0~ITl~3>§: i I I 

I 

I 

I I 0 I 0 0@l ! 

::J I 0 I 

I • I~~ I , : 

I I 0 0 1 0 

(a) I I I I : c:J ~ 0 0 • 0<0 I 

I I I 

c:::J I I • 0 e 

CD I 

I I 0 I I • i O~~E~~ 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 8 -;; I ;; I (; I I ! ~.a I ~ -0 

i 00. ~ 

I 

E 

Seconds I 

-.. Minute. I Hours c u I ;; 0 .. ~ .c: "'~ I E ~ I I "- i1. 

018 

VGT013 

Umlting Factor. in HUman Involvemenl 

I 

• I • , • , 

I 

; • 0 I 

! 

I 

, 

I 

; I 

I 

~ c'" c: c Oc .2 .. ~: ~ u S .. c en ~u 

00 

~.t 

VGT014 

I Limiting factors In I I Hum3n Invol'll'menl 

I I 

I 

I ! • I 

I I 

I I ct I 

1 , 

• I I 

I • I I 

I 

I I i , 

I 

I 

I I 

, 

'" c", I c: c: , Oc 51 ~ : .::;; 

I IO- U .. §~ c III i : on .- ~ . I .= Co J 

r 

.1 -, 

, 

, 

- j 
/ 

I 

I 

r 

/ 1 

, . 

, -

i ~ t~'~~ -;'''b-'J''{~ ~ ... '" \ ..... REMOVE MODULE \. 'l~ ~ 

Man-l.I.chIM Req"".ments .or 

C.IO',/oral TIme SC81. Human In~c;l .... ment 

Manual ~0~~§] 0 • 0 

Suppor11<1 0)m0~@] 

t:J • • • 

Augmenll<l 0 I 

~ • e 0 

Teleoperale<l 0 0 0 

Supel'YlsO'd 

~ 0 • Ground e 

Supel'Yl_ K!) On-Orbit t:l Q • • 

In<1epen<lenl T N/A 

O~~E:1 1Q 20 3D 40 SO 1 2 4 6 8 _«i ;; ~ 

0 

~~ " 0 0,," U - E .. ~ 0 Second. Mlnult. Hour. CU 

.. ~ .. s: en" E U ... :;-

... N/A - Nol ApplICable 

REMOVE/REPLACE COVERING 

Men-MachlM 

Cat.-ganes 

Manual 

Support"" 

Tel~opert:lC!'d 

Supervlsl<l 

Ground 

Supervlsl<l 

On-Orbll 

Second. 

MCUONNtlLL DOCJa~ 

Requlrrm~nt' fer 

Human InvQIY~m~nt 

I o 

o 

I CI 

o 

• 0 

• • 

,0 20 30 ~O 50 , 2 4 6 8 _ ;; 

>-" 00. 

... Hours ~~ 

"':. 

0-19 

o 

• 

• 

o 

~ 

o 

E 

o 

'f 

0: 

VOTOIS 

Umiling faclorsl" Hum.n In'f,,'wement 

I I I 0 

i I 

! 

0 i I • 

I I 

I • 

! I 

• I I I 

: 

I 

I 

I 

I 

, '" CD 

f C C Oc 9. .. 1=· c 

~E u .:; I >: 

I ~£ I 

I 

VOTO!6 

Llnitlng fJllctors in 

Human InYolyement 

I 

I 

I I 

I o I 

I 

I CI 

T, 
~ 

~t.:..;u....r VGT017 ;;r '. '<'" "_~~~ . REPLACE/CLEAN SURFACE COATINGS ~")., ... ";.~ 

Man.Machfne R~u'r.m.ntl .or UmJUng Factors in C.te-gorl., Tin". Sui. Human InvoJvemenl Hum.n Jnwo,.,.pmen' 

Manual (~) 

""" 0 • I 0 • (!> I I Suppor1ed I 

" . • • I • 0 

Augmonlod i~) I , I 

r:- : :> ; :: I • • I e I • ;&.[£4] I ! I I Teltopereled , :oJ • 0 I • • I 

Supervlaed N/A I I Ground I I 

SUlH'''''Md N/A , 0n-0<1>1I I 

Independent N/A I I I I I Oa~E~l 10 20 30 40 !O 1 2 4 6 8 ,'; l; co cal c 

!*ond: 

.. c o c: ~a .!? ~ '0 

~ Ou. -. E e:: u -.. ~ 

Mlnu", Houra '" <=u Qi 0 ... l; g I .. ~ VI:' '5 :§ .. £A: Q. 

N/A - Not App,"""bl. 

~r 

~~., VGlOIS 

j' -4:\ f,~ " .. ......... ~.~ REPLENISH-MATERIALS '1-'<~/ 

Man Machin" I ReqUirements for r limiting Factort In Cal.-goriet Time Seate j Hur-Ian Invo'yemel1t Human In.o)vtment 

i(S)<:?> i I I i Manual 1'0 ?i) I I ! 0 0 • I • 

Suppor1.d I I I r. I • 0 0 I • ~@ I I . AU!lmented i • 0 0 I I I 0 

I~ I 

T.I.o~rel.d I 

, 0 0 0 " SupervIsed ~) 

Ground 0 I 0 0 I 0 ., 10 , Supen1 •• d ,. : : : ! .:oJ 

I 

I I On 0<1>11 • • CI 0 

0 ! I I I I Indflpendent c=J I 0 0 

°C~E~l 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 8 ,0; " :; '" I c: co I 0: 

I 0: 

lUI I second: 

~.2 

~ '0 ;; ~ ~e- E ~ :c 

I 0 Minutes Hours f~ <:; 

Vlil: " '" E ~ , ,S:n.. i Q. I 

IMCDOPJN::rLL uouo~ 020 
\ 

r 

® ~ VQTDIV t r; {~ 

f"~ STORE/RECORD ELEMENT -." \-{, -.. ~-

Mln-Mlchlne ReQulre-me"tllor 'ImUln~ Factor. In C.t~orlel Time Scale Human Involvement Hum .. n Involwement 

Manual ~ • • " • 

Supported 

~ • 0 • • 

Augmonlod 0 • e • 0 

~~ releoperated • • • • 2 (8 11) 

Supervl.ed • 0 Ground • 

Supervlse<l ~ J 0 0 On-OrM • 

Independent ~~ • " , 

OC:~E:1 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 8 ,';i OJ 0 co c .. c c Oc .2 ~= " '0 -;; =; 00. 

~ E :; ~: ;:; ... 0 c( 

Second. Minutes Houri cu .. .c '" .. ~ 0:': ",,, E .. ... £0: ,.. 

It. 

~~ ~"J<"I''' VGr020 ....... - .~=1~) -;- SURGICAL MANIPULATIONS 

Man·Machm. Requirements for I llml'mg Factors In 

Categories Tlmllt Scale Hum.!n Involv1!menl Humen '·1Yolve-men! 

I (8) 

I I Mlnual I I It 0 e " I I (e) I I Supported I I I e I') 0 • 

Aug-nenfed 

(e) 

I I 

I 

I I I 0 I') I 0 : I 

I 

I 

Teleoperaled N/A I I 

I I I Sltp~rvl.ed N/A Ground I , I i I I 

SLpervl •• d I NlA 

I 

I I On-Orbll 

I I , , I 

Independenl I N/A I I , ._- 0-- .. u 1 10 20 30 40 50 1 2 4 6 3 ,;;; .. , (; '" c" c ":I.E:::, 

I 

c o c .2 /:'~ " 

1 00. -0 .. ~: 

~ E :; U ~ .. et! < 

s-.nd'j Mlnutel Uourl ~~ 0 U) "'- DO "," Q. !; ~ :s~ ;;: 

N/A - Holl-ppltuble 

D 21 

-
! ! . . '-

1\ I 

I 

TRANSPORT LOADED 

ll .... M.el"". Rf'Qul'rlnfl'lfl '01 

C·'''oOt ••• Tim. Sui. ...u"'_" t".oty~"'t 

~0~@1 I I 

lJ.nlal • • I • I I 

SuI>P4r1.od ~~@] • I • I • 

~ , "'ug""'''le~ • I e ! 

I • 

T*lfl:ptltled I ~?D~<f1)[1Jl , • I • I I I I • 

@ I I 

SUpnlMd I • I Ground • • 

1 

I 

S"~Nt •• d ;50 I 0 I • 0 On-Orbll 

i<Wj> I I I 

Independenl I ! I • I • I 

O·· .. u1 10 20 30 CO SO 1 2 4 & a 

I I c: ~ E ~ -. l; 

?:~ · " 0 £2- u e .!! I 0 S.cond. Mlnule. Houl'l C u .. ~ ;; ., .. 1 c: :s ~ I :. 

TRANSPORT UNLOADED 

!/. .. " M.chln.! 

C~IP9"fl" I 

"'.nu.1 

Augl"Mnled 

Suporvtltd 

Ground 

1n.d~p.er\(If.,..· I ~ : , 

TIme Scale 

~li?i 

0(e)~@ 

, (8) 

I :: 

: -: 

'" 

~ . O··"ul 

C oJ. E : I 10 ~O 30 40 

S-f'Cond. f -.thule' 

I 

I 

: 

~O 1 2 C 6 

i 

i Hour. 

! 

D 22 

R~\Jtn~nl' tor 

kum~n In'lol •• m.-nt 

e I • I 0 

0 I 0 Q 

e I • • 0 I • I • 0 , • , • 0 I ., I • 

l Q 0 

a _<i I ~ 

I " ,., ;; 00. 

. ~ E 

~~ I 0 

~ I CII-Go I 

I 

I r: 

VGTO:I 

t U""ilnQ FAcIO" In t Hum.., ,nyo, ... tnef" 

, I 

• , I 

I • 

• 

I I 

I I 0 

I 

I I 

i 

I I 

I 

I , 

.. I &~I " .. "~ ~ ~E i I " .. ~ u • 

~£ ~ 

VGT0Z2 

UM'ht' .. ~ F actor, In 

f Hum,n In¥ol'le-me-nt 

I 

I 

I 

I 

! • 

, 

I 

I 

I '" I '" " I 

I c c 

~ I " I -;; I l; I E 

! 

... I '" , 

I c I ~ ! I 
r/ MCDONN"LL OOtJ"L~ 

APPENDIX E 

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT 

REQUIREMENTS FOR 

37 GEHERIC ACTIVITIES 

E·l 
/ 

Table E-l 

SUPPORT EQUIPHENT LIST FOR COSTING VARIOUS HAN-HACHINE NODES 

A. Facilities 

Al. Space Station Facil1ty 

A2. Ground Control Center, Baseline System 

A3. Payload Control Center', BaseH ne System 

M. Data Handling Facility, Baseline System 

AS. Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TOnSS) 

A6. Unmanned Platform Basic Resources 

B. EVA Support Items 

Bl. Extravehicular f.!obility Unit (Ef.1U) 

B2. Nanned Maneuvering Unit (HNU) 

B3. Remote Manipulator System (RHS) _ 

C. Tool Klts and Hechanical Support EquiPfIlent 

C1. Power Tool, Portable 

C2. 

C3. 

C4. 

CS. 

C6. 

Tool Kits, Manual 

Gas Recharge Kit 

F1uld Recharge Klt 

Test Set, Alignment/Callbration, Portable 

Test Set, Electrlcal Checkout 

C7. Surface Coating/Refurbishment Apparatus 

C8. Support Equipment, Experiment Specific - Category A 

C9. 

C10. 

Support Equlpment, Experiment Specific - Category B 

Support Equipment, Experiment Specific - Category C 

Cll. Support EqlJipment, Experiment Speclfic - Category 0 

C12. Cherry Picker with Work Platform (Rl'lS) 

C13. Restraints to Support Hanned Activities 

C14. Life Sciences Experiments Tool Kits 

E2 

/ 

MCDO .... NtfLL DOUOL$--

- , 

" 
I 

I 

I 

--

I 

I 

--

Table E-1 

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT LIST FOR COS rING VARIOUS I-tAU-MACHINE VoOOES (Contlnued) 

D. Command, Control, Communicati on, and Data 

Management Egulpment 

U1. Control/Display for Remote Gimbals 

02. Contro1/01sp1ay for Remote Cameras (TV and Photo) 

03. Automatic AdJustment for Control of Remote Equipment 

04. Voice Intercommunicatlon 

05. Control and Display Activation and I-lonitorlng 

Equipment, Keyboard 

06. Hardware for Acceptlng Remote Commands 

07. 01sp1ay and Software for Record Keeping, Procedures, 

Schedules, and Maintenance 

Oti. Computer Programmed for Command and Control of a 

Specific Functl0n/Task by Artificial Intelligence 

09. 

010. 

Dl1. 

Encode/Decode Data Eqlllpment 

Data Computation aoq Reduction Equlpment 

Input/Output Data Buffer Equlpment 

012. Central iimlng Unit 

013. NSSC Interface Management Unit 

014. Remote Unlts 

015. COMS Central Unlt 

D16. Hlgh-Rate Recorder 

017. Low-Rate Recorder 

D18. NSSC-II Computer 

019. Ku-Band Communlcation Equlpment 

U2D. S-Band Communlcatl0n Equlpment 

021. Low-Galn Antennas 

022. RF Transfer SWltch 

023. Support lnstrumentatlon/Sensor Equlpment 

ll24. Telemetry Unit 

025. Payload Command and Data Acqulsltlon Unlt 

----------- -------------------------

MCOOI'tlNIfLL C10UOL~ 

E3 
I 

I 

Table E-l 

SUPPORT EQUIPNENT LIST FOR COSTING VARIOUS MAN-MACHHIE HODES (Continued) 

£. Orbital Mobll ity Systems 

El. Orbital 14aneuvering Vehlcle (OMV) 

E2. Orbltal Transfer Vehicle (OrV) 

£3. Tel epresence Hani pul ator System (TI1S) 

F. Operating Systems Software 

Fl. User Interface 

F2. Facillty Readlness Test (Integration) 

F3. 

F4. 

FS. 

Fb. 

Fl. 

Dynamic Scenari~ Profl1e Generation 

Com~and Generatlon 

Telemetry Data Handling 

Input/Output 

Test Data Generation 

F8. Data, Base Generation/I'1alntenance 

F9. Data Reduction 

FlO. Support Software 

Fll. Software for COMmand and Control Hardware Controlled from a Remote 

Ground or Orbltal-Based Work Statlon 

F12. Software for Computer Programmed for ComrOland and Control of a 

Speclfic Function/Task by Artlficlal Intelligence 

E4 

MCDON"''' .... DOUO"~ 

, 

;' /' 

. i 

. ) 

I .L 
'. 

,/ 

.' 

; 

1 •• 

. , 

j 

L 

" I 

I 

. 

/ 

SUPPORT EQUIP/lENT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY llUIIDER: 1 CATEGOPIES" OF I~N-ltACHHIE HITERACTIOUS 

E SUPERVISED I 

l N 

S A E 0 

U U 0 u E 

P G P U P 

ACTIVATE/ItUTIATE H P M E G E 

SYSTEfI OPERATIotl A 0 E R R 0 II 

N R N A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E E E II I N 

L 0 0 0 0 T T 

HUMAN SUPPORT EQUIPMENT REQUIRED (SEE TABLE E-1) 

A1 A1 A1 A1 

C8 C8 C9 C10 

C13 C13 05 

06 

I V A 

Al A1 Al 

B1 B1 B1 

C8 C8 C9 

C13 C13 C13 

E V A 

EXN1PLE - Actwa:e Canera/T. V. Inage Gatherl ng EqUl pnent 

~1Atl!!~.~ - 35 r.tM Canera 

SUPPORTED - 35nn Canera ~11 th Auto Advance 

AUGr!EIITEO - 35r.tr.1 Canera Wl th Auto T1I:11 ng Sequence 

TElEOPERATEO - Rll$ TV Canera 

SUPERVISED GROUND - TV Camera 

SUPEPVI!;m Oll-OPBIT - TV Canera 

I1lDEPEllDEllT - Satelllte Inage EqU1pnent 

*Consldered as one 1teM of support equ1pment 

08 - Computer Hardware 

F12 - Assoclated Software 

/ 

MCDONN' .... L DOlJOL~ 

E5 

A2 A1 A2 

AS 05 A3 

A6 06 A4 

05 -Fll AS 

06 A5 

Fll 03 

[16 

D7 

Oa.f12* 
I 

- I 

-: 

. / 

/ 

I 

/ 

r 

/ I ~ I 

SUPPORT EQUIPMEIIT REQUIREMHITS 

ACTIV lTY tllJrlBER: 2 CATEGORIES OF t1MI-MACHIliE H1TERACTIO/IS 

I 

E SUPERVISEO L 

S A E 

U U 0 0 

P G P N 

ADJUST/ALIGN M P M E G 

ELH1EtJTS A 0 E R R 0 

IJ R N A 0 R 

'U T T T U B 

A E E E 1'1 I 

L 0 0 0 0 T 

HUI1AN SUPPORT EQUIP~lEI.T REQUIrEi' 

Al Al Al Al A2 

C5 C2 Cl 05 A5 

C5 C5 E3 A6 

C13 C13 05 

D6 

I V A Fll 

Al Al Al 

Bl Bl 81 

C5 C2 814 

C13 C5 Cl 

C13 C5 

E V A C13 

EXJ!J1PLE - AdJust/P.egulate Themal Fluld Flo," P.ate to External Radlator 

I1IUIUAL - Hand Actwated Val ve 

SUPPORTEO - Tool Assisted Valve 

AUGrlENTED - POHer Too 1 ASSl sted Va 1 ve 

TELEOPERAiED - Renote Satell1te Servlcer for Ilanual Valve 

SUPERVISED GROUND - llechan12.ed Valve On Space Platfom 

SUPERVISED Oil-ORBIT - Ilechanlzed Valve On Space PlatfolT.l 

HJDEPEIIDEllT - Self I~onltorlng and AdJustlng Autonatic Valve 

* Considered as one ltem of support equlpment 

08 - Computer Hardware 

F12 - Assoclatcd Sofblare 

MeDON"''''-'' D0L10"~ E6 

J_ Al 

05 

06 

Fll 

I 

tl 

0 

E 

P 

E 

II 

0 

E 

tl 

T 

A2 

A5 

A6 

D3 

D6 

D7 

D8,F12* 

. I 

I -
\-

I 

'I 

I 

I 

/ 

/ 

I 

, 

I 

I 

/ 

" I J 

J 

T 

I .' 

r 

;-

I 

/ 

---

ACTIVITY /JtAI8E~: 3 

ALLOCATE/ASSIGII 

DISTRIBUTE 

, I 

I' 

,I 

/ 

SUPPORT EQUIPI1ENT REQUIRENENTS 

CATEGORIES OF HAN-MACHINE HITERACTIOHS 

~ SUPERVISED L -

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P 11 

N P M E G 

A 0 E R R 0 

N R N A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E II I 

L D 0 0 0 T 

fI UI WI SUPPOP.T EQUIPIIEIIT REQUIREO 

Al Al A1 Al A2 Al 

C2 B7 C2 DS AS DS 

C2 C6 £3 A6 06 

C6 C13 05 Fll 

C13 D7 06 

Fll 

I 

1/ 

D 

E 

P 

E 

N 

D 

E 

II 

T 

A2 

AS 

A6 

D3 

06 

07 I V A D8,F12* 

E V A 

EXAtlPLE - PO~/er Di sru~ti on fron Fail ed Solar Array. Requi red to Reass1 gn POller Pout; ng 

and Reallocate and Red1 stn bute POHer 

llAtJUAL - S~" tch by Hand and Circu1 t Breaker Control 

SUPPORTED - Troubleshoot1ng and SW1tch1ng and Clrcult Breaker Control 

AlXiflElITEO - Troub1eshootlng ~l1th Ald of Data File and Olsplays 

TELEOPEP.ATED - Renote Sate11 1 te SerVl ced By Tel epresence Ilanl pul ator Systen 

SUPERVISED GROUIID - Ground Comanded S~l1tch1ng on Rer.1ote Platforr.! 

SUPERVISED Oil-ORBIT - On-Orbit Comanded SWltchlng of Rer.1ote Platforr.1 

IIIDEPEllDENT - Self-heallng Syster.1s 

* Consldered as one ltrm of support equlpment 

08 - Computer Hardware 

F12 - ASsOclated Soft~are 

MCDONNI'i .... Doua~ E·7 

-
I 

I 

i 

1 

/ 

I 

/ 

/ 

I 

I 

/ 

I 

(\ 

/ 

/ 

' , 

.. 1\0" 

,., , 

f I 

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY NLf~BER: 4 CATEGORIES OF MAII-MACHHIE INTERACTIONS 

I 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P N 

APPLY /REMOVE M P t~ E G BIO~:EDI CAL SENSOR A 0 E R R 0 

N R N A 0 R 

~ T T T U B 

A E E E N I 

L D D D 0 T 

HUMAN SUPPORT EQUIP~iE~IT REQUIRED 

Al Al Al 

C14 C14 Cll 

C13 C13 

C14 

I V A 

-

E V A 

EXANPLE - Attach Picl:up Electrodes to SubJect 

MANUAL - Cleanse Tlssue Area, Apply Sensors 

SUPPORTED - Cleanse Tlssue Area, Apply Sensors 

AUGMENTED - MicroscoP1C Installat10n of Sensor 

TELEOPERATED - tlot Appllcable 

SUPEPVISED GROUND - t/ot Applicable 

SUPERVISED OU-ORBIT - Not Applicable 

INDEPENDENT - Not Applicable 

MCDONNflLL DOUO~ E8 

I 

{4Q 

] 

--\ 

.:: I 

N 

0 

~ 

P 

E 

N 

0 

E 

tI 

T 

-

- . 

. 

i,
. 

1" 

, 

, 

I 

! 

I 

, , 

I 

i 

;

' 1-

/ / 

SUPPOPT EQUIP~TENT REQUIREMEIITS 

ACTIV ITY tllJ!1BEP.: 5 CATEGORIES OF rWl-I1ACHIIIE INTEPACT! {"IS 

~ SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P 

C0I1I11.111I CA TE M P M E G 

INFORllA TI 011 A 0 E R R 

rl R N A 0 

U T T T U 

A E E E II 

L D D D D 

HUIIAIJ SUPPORT EQUIP/IEUT REQUIRED 

A1 A1 A1 A1 A2. 

C13 D4 B3 AS 

04 05 D5 A6 

05 

D6 

I V A F11 

Al Al . Bl B1 

C13 C13 

D4 

E V A 

EXAlIPLE - Transmt Data 

~IAUUAL - Verbal VOlce Conmnlcation 

SUPPORTED - VOlce Actlvated Connunlcatlon Systen 

ALGI1HITED - Intercon VOlce Comunlcatlon 

TELEOPERATED - Comand/Contro1 of Rer:lote Hanlpulator Systen 

SUPEP.VISED GROUIJD - Comanded nata II nk Transm SSlOn 

SUPERVISED Oil-ORBIT - Comanded Data Llnk TranSr:llSS10n 

IIIDEPENDEIlT - Spacecraft Autononous Data llnk Transmlsslon 

*Consldered as one ltem of support equlpment 

OS - Computer Hardware 

F12 - ASSOCl ated Softvlare 

/ 

MCDONNIE .... DOUGl~@.. 

E·g 

~ 

0 

R 

B 

I 

T 

A1 

D5 

D6 

Fll 

I 

I 

I 

N 

D 

E 

P 

E 

Il 

D 

E 

II 

T 

A2 

A5 

A6 

03 

D6 

07 

OS.F12* 

-
I , 

/ 

/ 

1 

/ 

/ 

, 

SUPPORT EQUIPHENT REQUIPEMfNT~ 

ACTIVITY NUHBER: 6 CATEGORIES OF HAil-MACHI/IE IIITERACTIOIIS 

T 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P N 

C0I1PENSA TORY M P M [ G 

TR.IICKING A 0 [ R R 0 

tl R N A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E [ E /J I 

L D D D D T 

HUHAH SUPPORT [QUIP/1EUT REQUlr.ED 

I V A 

[ V A 

EXM1PlE: Antenna Lock-on and Track TORSS 

MAIJUAL - lJot Appllcable 

SUPPORTED - !Jot Applicable 

AUGr1E/JTED - t'ot Appllcable 

TElEOPERATED - Hot Appl icable 

SUPER'! ISrD GROUIJD - Conmand Auto Track System 

SUPErVISEI) 0I1-0rDIT - Comand Auto Track Systen 

IIJDEPENDEIJT - Pre-programned Auto Track Systen 

*Consldered as one ltem of support equlp'Tlent 

08 - Conputer Hardware 

f12 - Associated Software 

E-l0 

A2 Al 

A5 03 

A6 D5 

D3 06 

05 Fll 

06 

Fll 

, I 

I 

u 

D 

[ 

P 

E 

N 

0 

E 

N 

T 

A2 

A5 

A6 

03 

D6 

07 

D8,F12* 
(j' r. 

r 

l. 

/ 

SUPPORT EQUIP~lENT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY tJUllBER: 7 CATEGORI £5 OF IlAt/-llACHINE IIlTERACnOtls 

I 

E SUPEPVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 0 

P G P N 

CO/1PUTE DATA M P M E G 

A 0 E R R 0 

N R tl A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E tl I 

L D 0 D " T " 

HUllA1I SUPPORT EQUIPllENT REQUIP.ED 

A1 A1 A1 A2 

C8 C13 A6 

C13 010 A7 

D5 

FlO 

I V A 

-

E V A 

EXM1PLE - Oetermlne Spacecraft Posltion Fron Sensor Data 

IWlUAL - Manual COr.1putatlOn 

SUPPORTED - Use of Hand C0r.1putatl0n Equlpnent 

AUGMENTED - COr.1puter Alded Conputatl0n 

TFLEOPERATED - flot Appl1cable 

SUPERVISED GROUND - COr.1r.1and Sofb/are rrograr.1 ConputatlOn _ SUPERVISED OU-ORBIT - Cormand $ofblare Prograr.1 COr.1putat1On 

IIlDEPE1JDDJT - Self-ln1tlated Software Prograr.l For COr.lputatl0n 

* Consldered as one ltem of support equlpment 

08 - Computer Hard\~arc 

F12 - Assoclatcd Software 

/ 

MCOUNNI£LL DOUOL~ 

E·11 

• 

A1 

05 

010 

FlO 

I 

N 

D 

E 

P 

E 

N 

D 

E 

N 

T 

A2 

AS 

A6 

D7 

D8,F12* 

I 
SUPPORT EQUIPI1EHT REQUIPEllENTS 

ACTIVITY tllJl1DER: 8 CATEGOPI ES OF IlAtl-I'ACllltIE IIITERACTI OilS 

I 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P 

COtiFIRI1/VERIFY ~, P M E G 

PROCEDURE/SCHEDULE A 0 E R r R 

OPEIlATIOIIS tI R Il A 0 

U T T T U 

A E E E tI 

L 0 0 0 0 

HWIAII SUPPORT EQUIP/lnIT REQUIP.EO 

Al Al Al Al A2 

C13 C13 02 AS 

07 E3 A6 

C9 

02 

I V A 06 

F11 

Al 

B1 

C13 

E V A 

. 

EXN1PLE - Conf1rQ/Ver1fy Solar Array Oepioynent 

llANUAL - V1sual Lool: 

SUPPORTED - V,sual Look Aided Oy Status Ind1cator 

AUGf1EUTED - 01 splay Of Go/tlo-Go H1th Aud10 lIo-Go Slgnal 

TELEOPERATEO - Ver1fy Ihth Per.tote T.V. (T.I1.S.) 

SUPERVISED GROUtID - Cor.tr.tand Venflcat10n tilth Renote T.V • . SUPERVISED OU-OPRI T - Comand Ver1 f1 cat1 on III th Rerote T. V. 

HlDEPEIlDEtn - Auto Status )./1 th Self F1X For /:o-Co IndlcatlOn 

* Cons1dered as one ltem of suoport equlpment 

08 - Computer Hardllare 

F12 - Assoclated Software 

/' 

MCDONNELL Doua~ 

E 12 

0 

N 

0 

R 

B 

I 

T 

Al 

C9 

02 

06 

Fll 

I 

tI 

0 

E .. P 

E 

tI 

0 

E 

/I 

T 

A2 

AS . 

A6 

03 

[17 

DB.H2 .... 

• I 

I 
c 

EY.; -~--""-""'-'""I-- ----~-, -~- --------------~ 

J 

J 

-. ACTIVITY NUtlBER: 9 

CONt/ECT /DISCOIJNECT 

ELECTRICAL 

- IUTEPJ"ACE 

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT PEQUIPEMEtJTS 

CATEGORIES OF rIAII-MACHI//E 

~ l 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P 

M P M E 

A 0 E R 

N R N A 

U T T T 

A E E E 

L 0 D 0 

I1JTERACTIOUS 

SUPERVISED 

~ G 

R 0 

a R 

U B 

II I 

D T 

HurWI SUPPORT EQUIPrlENT REQUIRED 

J ~ 

I 

...... , 

Al Al Al Al 

C2 C2 Cl 05 

C13 C13 E3 

I V A 

-

Al Al Al 

81 81 81 

C2 C2 Cl 

C13 C13 C13 

[ V A 

I' 

EXMIPLE - Electrlcal Interface Connector Plate 

llAIlUAL - Ilanual Ratchet 

SUPPORTED - Manual Ratchet ~" th Restralnts 

AUGI1ENTEo - Power Tool Appll cat, on 

TELEOPERATED - T.M.S. Actlvated Ratchetlng Operation 

SUPERVISED GROUND - r~chanlzed Drlve Operatl0n 

SUPERVISED OIl-ORfJIT - ~lechanlzed Dnve Operatlon 

INDEPENDENT - ~lechan1Zed OrlVe OperatlOn 

* Consldered uS one ltem of support equlpToent 

08 - Computer Hardware 

F12 - ASSoclated Software 

E·13 

A2 Al 

AS 05 

A6 06 

05 Fll 

06 

Fll 

I 

II 

0 

E 

I> 

E 

Il 

0 

E 

II 

T 

A2 

AS 

A6 

03 

06 

07 

D3,Fl2* 

. 
SUPPOPT EQUIPMEtlT PEQUIPEHENTS 

ACTIVITY timBER: 10 CATEGOPIES OF ~WI-HACHIIIE INTEP.ACnOlIS 

I 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 U 

P G P N 

COWl ECT /0 I SCOWl ECT M P M E G 

FLUID IUTEPiACE A 0 E R R 0 

II R tl A a R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E II I 

L D 0 0 D T 

HUIIAIi SUPPORT EQUIP/lENT REQUIPEn 

Al A1 Al Al 

C2 C2 Cl -- os 

C13 C13 E3 

I V A 

A1 Al Al 

151 81 B1 

C2 C2 Cl 

C13 C13 C13 

.. E V A 

. 

-

EXN~PLE - Fluld Interface Connector Plate 

P.AIIUAL - 11anual Ratchet 

SUPPORTED - nanua 1 Pa tchet ~Ii th Re:. trill nts 

AUGflEUTED - POller Tool Appllcatlon 

TELEOPE'PATEO - T./'.S. Actwated PatchetlnQ (lperatlon 

5~PEkVISED GROUND - /~chanlzed Drlve Operatlon' 

SUPERVISED Ofl-ORAIT - nechanned Onve Operatl0n 

ItIDEPt:NDEtlT - 11echJnlZed Dnve Operatl0n 

·Consldercd PS one lten of support equlp~ent 

DB - Co~puter Hardware 

F12 - ASSoclatcd Softhare 

Itfcoo .. ,...u. oO"'G~ E 14 

P2 111 

AS 05 

A6 06 

05 Fll 

06 

Fll 

-

, ! 

I 

tJ 

D 

E 

P 

E 

/I 

0 

E 

II 

T 

P2 

A5 

A6 

03 

£16 

07 

D8.FlZ· 
--.. ----

/ 

SUPPOPT EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTlV ITY tllflBER: 11 CATEGORI ES OF ~WI-llACHIIIE IIITEP.ACTIOUS 

I 

E I SUPEPVISECl L N 

S A E 0 

U U 0 ~ E 

P G P P 

CORRELATE DATA 11 P M:- E G E 

A 0 E R R 0 II 

N R II A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E I E E II I tl 

L 0 0 0 D T T 

HUlIAII SUPPOPT EQUIPf\ENT REQUIPED 

A1 Al Al A2. Al A2 

C13 C13 ft3 05 AS 

D5 A6 F'9 A6 

FlO D5 D7 

F9 D8,Fl2* 

I V A 

E V A 

EXUIPLE - Perforn An Evaluation To Correlate Data Obtalned Fron An Orbltal Experlne~t 

IIAlIUAL - Vlsual Or Long Hand Oenved Evaluatlon 

SUPPORTED - Visual Or Long Hand Derived Evaluatlon tilth Restralnts 

AlJGnEIJTED - Evaluatl0n Perfomed WI th Ald Of Computer 

TELEOPERATED - IIot Appl1cable 

SUPERVISED GROUllD - Software Perfomed Evaluatl0n 

SUPERVISED OIl-ORBIT - SoftHare Perfomed Evaluatlon 

HlOEPEriDE/lT - Software Perfor.ed Ev",luatlon 

* Consldered as one lte~ of support equlr~ent 

D8 - Co~puter Hald~are 

F12 - ASSOclated Software 

" /MenON"'''L'- DO<JO~ 

E·15 
. 

,- -- I 

.;< -. 

, 

SUPPORT EQUIPMEtlT PEQUIPEMENTS 

ACTIVITY 1I111BE~: 12 CATEGORIES OF tlAtI-HACHIIIE INTERACTIOtlS 

I 

E SUPERVISED I 

L N 

S A E 0 

U U 0 u E - P G P t' P 

DEACTIVATE/ M P t1 E G E 

TERm NATE SYSTEM A 0 E R R 0 U 

OPERATIOIl N R Il A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B I E 

A E E E N I II 

L 0 0 0 0 T T 

HUt-WI SUPPORT EQUIPI~EtIT REQUIRED 

A1 A1 A1 A1 A2 041 .42 

C8 C8 C9 C10 AS D5 A3 

C1J C13 05 A6 D6 A4 

06 05 Fll Ar; 

06 .46 

I V A Fll 03 

[16 

07 

D8.F12* 

- A1 A1 A1 

B1 Bl B1 

C8 C8 C9 

C13 C13 C13 

E V A 

EXN1PLE - Deactlvate Canera/lnaglng Equlpnent 

MAllUAL - OeactlVate 35"n Canera 

SUPPonTED - Deactlvate 35r~ Canera 

AUGrtEIITED - Deactivate Video Ca,lera Fron Cor,sole 111 th Rotar}' Selector Srtltch 

TELEDPEPATED - DeactlVa te Renote Vl dec Car'era 

SUPERV ISED GROUtlD - Deact 1Vate Renote Vi deo Canera 

SUPERVISED Oll-OPBIT - Oeactlvate Penote Vldeo Canera 

I1WEPENDEIJT - Deact lVate I~agl ng Systen 

* Consldered as one ltem of support equlpment 

08 - COMputer Hardware 

F12 - ASsoclated Software 

.I 

MCDOIWIWlE:LL DOUOL~ 

E 16 

,I' 

.1 
,. 

/ 

/ 

, 

SUPPORT EQUIPtlENT P.EQUIREllENTS 

ACTIV lTV NUllBER: 13 CATEGOPIES OF MAII-llACHII!E I1JTE RACTI OtiS 

~ SUPEPVISED l 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P ~ DECODE/ENCODE H P ~I E G 

DATA A 0 E R R 0 

II R II A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E U I 

l 0 0 0 0 T 

HlJllAIJ SUPPORT EQUIPI1El!T PEQUIPED 

Al Al Al A2 Al 

C13 A5 05 

05 A6 09 

05 flO 

09 

I V A FlO 

Al Al 

81 B1 

CI3 C13 

E V A 

-

EXAH?L~ - Trans fOl111 Data From One Fonnat to Another 

1~~rlUAl - Decode Sanple Meter Read1ng 

SUPPORTED - Decode Aud1tory Warn1ng S19na1 

AUG:~Elm:D - Decode Co;nplex Data Fornat 

TElEOPEP.ATED - /Jot Appl1cable 

SUPEPVISED GROUlID - Decode Connand From Ground Contrel 

SUPERVISED Oil-ORBIT - DecfJde Comand Fran On-Orblt Control 

IIJDEPEt:OEIJT - Auto Cor.nand From Selfcontrolled and '1onltorl ng Systcn 

*Cons1dered as one 1te~ of support equ1~ent 

03 - Co~puter Hardhare 

Fl2 - ASSOCl ated Softllare 

/ 

... COo'""' ..... DOUO .. 9-- E17 

I 

/I 

0 

E 

P 

E 

II 

D 

E 

II 

T 

1-2 

A5 

"6 

03 

07 

OS 

D3 

F12 
/ 

I 

/ 

/ - / 

,/ 

'/ 

I 

/ 

/ 

'.I 

SUPPORT EQUIPt-lENT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY NUMBER: 14 CATEGORI ES OF tlAtHlACHII'E IIITEPACTIOUS 

1 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P 

DEFINE PROCEDURES! M P M E G 

SCHEDULES/OPERAT 10115 A 0 E R R 

N R N A 0 

U T T T U 

A E E E /l 

L 0 0 0 0 

HU/lArJ SUPPORT EQUIPtlEr:T REQUIPED 

A1 A1 A1 A2. 

C13 C13 AS 

07 A6 

05 

07 

I V A Fll 

E V A 

I 

EXN1PLE - Deflne Procedures For Troubleshotlng A Faulty Conponent 

rWlUAL - Cre~man Ortemlnation Of Procedures 

SUPPOrTED - Crelman Restralr.ed-Dete~lnatlon Of Procedures 

AUG/1E/JTED - COr.1puter Aldcd Procedure Deterr.11natlon 

TELEOPEPATED - /lot App11cable 

SUPERVISED GROUND - Connanded Software Generatlon Of Procedures 

SUPERVISED OIl-ORBIT - Comanded SoftHare GeneratlOn Of Procedures I~DEPE"DE"T - Self-Inltlated Software Generatl0n Of Procedures 

*Con5icered as one lte~ of support equlpment 

08 - Conputer Hardware 

F12 - Assoclated Software 

"'COO"'''' .. LL ooLlaL~ E 18 

u 

II 

0 

R 

B 

I 

T 

A1 

05 

07 

Fll 

I 

I 

I 

~I 

!l 

E 

P 

E 

II 

0 

E 

U 

T 

A2 

A5 

A6 

03 

07 

DB.F12* 

., 

. , 

-. , 
I 

I 

01-

.. 

j' 

rI 

I 

'J 

~'I 

SUPPORT EQUIPI1ENT REQUIREHEtJTS 

ACTIVITY IIUlIBEP.: 15 CATEGORIES OF llAl/-MACHI/IE IIlTERACTIOIiS 

1 

E SUPERVISED l 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P N 

DEPLOY/RETRACT M P H E G 

/>PPE/WAGE A 0 E R R {) 

II R II A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E II I 

L D D D D T 

HUIAIi SUPPORT EQUIP/IEUT REQUIRED 

Al 

D5 

E3 

I V A 

Al Al Al 

Bl Bl Bl 

C2 C2 Cl 

C13 C13 C13 

E V A 

-

EXAlIPLE - Oeploy Solar Array 

Pv\/WAL - lIanually Hand Cranked 

SUPPOflTED - /lanual1y Hand Cranked Alded Il1th Restralnt 

AUGI1EIITEO - PO~/cr Tool Asslsted 

TELEOPERATED - tlot Appl1cable 

SUPERVISED GROUIJD - I~chanlzed Drlve 

SUPERVISED Oll-OPBIT - l1echanized Drlve 

IIIDEPEIJDENT - l1echanlZed On vc 

*Consldcred as one ltem of support equlpment 

08 - Computer Hardware 

Fl2 - ASSOCl ated Softllare 

" MCOONN" .... oouc .. fi».-- E 19 

A2 Al 

A5 D5 

A6 D6 

05 Fll 

D6 

Fll 

-

/ , 

I 

N 

D 

E 

P 

E 

N 

D 

E 

/I 

T 

A2 

A5 

A6 

D3 

06 

07 

D8,Fl2* 
-1' 

• 

/ 

/ 

! 

----~'--

/ / 0 / I / 0 , / 

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT REQUIRH1ENTS 

ACTIVITY tJlIIBER: 16 CATEGOPIES OF ttAlI-MACHItIE INTERACTIONS 

~ SUPERVISED I 

l II 

S A E 0 

U U 0 0 E 

P G P U P 

DETECT CHAUGE IN M P 11 E G E 

STATE OR CotJDITION A 0 E R R 0 IJ 

IJ R IJ A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E E E /I I IJ 

L 0 0 0 0 T T 

HUHAlJ SUPPORT EQUIPIIEIJT REQUIPED 

A1 A1 A1 1,1 A2 A1 A2 

C13 05 05 A5 05 1,5 

C13 06 A6 023 A6 

E1 05 Fl1 07 

023 08 

I V A Fll DB,F12* 

023 

A1 1,1 A1 

91 91 91 

C13 C13 C6 

C13 

E V A 

EXN1PlE - Detect Change In Condltl0n Of Solar Array Elenents 

HAIJUAL - Vlsual Detemlnatl0n 

SUPPOflTED - Vlsual Oetemlnatlon Alded lI1th Pestralnt 

AUGMENTED - Electrlcal Test Set Checkout 

TELEOPERATEO - O~~ TV Inspectlon 

SUPERVISED GllOUIJD - Comanded tlonltorl ng Of So~ ar Array POtier Generatl0n 

SUPEPV ISEO Oil-ORBIT - Comanded ~'Onl ton n9 Of Solar Array PO~ler Generat 1 on IIIDEPEIJDEIJT - Autonatlc tlonltorlng And Detectlon Of Solar Array Pmler Output 

* Consldered as one lte~ of support equlpment 

08 - Computer Hardware 

F12 - ASSoclated 50ftware 

E 20 

MCOON.VELL DOUGL~ 

., 
...-- --...-

,if u -~-----

m / 

/ i 

----.J... -. J / 

J ---,I 

! 

" J 

/ or 

J 

I T J. ~, 

" " .> / 

'~r i-

!-

. 

: 

/ 

" 

,/ 

" v '\ I. 

SUPPORT EQUiPMENT REQUIREI~ENTS 

ACTIVITY tltalOER: 17 CATEGORIES OF llAfI-IIACHHlE ItlTEPACTIOflS 

- I 

E SUPERVISED l 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P II 

DISPLAY DATA M P M E G 

A 0 E R R 0 

N R N A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E U I 

L D D D 0 T 

HUllAlI SUPPORT EQUIPMENT REQUIPED 

A1 A1 A1 Al A2 

[15 C9 D5 AS 

C13 C13 E1 A6 

D5 05 

FlO 

I V A 

E V A 

EXtl1PLE - Display Dally Hlsslon Actlvlty Log 

11AllUAL - Obtaln Pre-prlnted ~llss1on ActlVlty Log SUPPOPTED - Obtaln Pre-prlnted Mlsslon ActlVlty Log A~ru[!lTED - Obta1n Logs V1a Sl~ple Co~puter Dlsplay 

TELEOPEPATEO - Obtain Logs V1a Data Llnk Fran A Pe~ote Statlon 

SUPERVISED GROutJD - Cor,lputer Dl splayed ActlV1W Logs SUPERVISED Oil-ORBIT - Corputer Dlsplayed ActlVlty Logs WDEPEIlDEtJT - Conputer D1 splayed Actlv1ty Logs 

* Cons1dered as one ltem of support equlpment 

08 - Computer Hardware 

F12 - ASSoclated Software 

/ 

MCDONNE .... DOUG"~ 

E-21 

Al 

05 

FlO 

• ! 

I 

N 

D 

E 

P 

E 

N 

D 

£ 

N 

T 

A2 

A3 

AS 

A6 

D7 

D8,Fl2* 
I 

/ 

/ , 

" 

/ 

,-,'if' . -, {' / ; 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

1 

, 

SUPPORT EQUIPMEtlT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY NUMBER: 18 CATEGORIES OF MAN-MACHHIE HlTERACTIOUS 

~ SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P N 

GATHER/REPLA.CE M P M E G 

TOOLS/EQUIPMEtlT A 0 E R R 0 

N R N A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E N I 

L 0 0 0 0 T 

HUMAtI SUPPORT EQUIPI1ENT REQtJIREO 

Al 1\1 Al 05 

C2 C2 Cl Al 

C13 C13 E3 

FlO 

I V A 

B1 Bl Bl 

Al A1 A1 

C2 C2 C1 

C13 C13 C13 

E V A 

EXAMPLE - Gather The Requi red Tool s To Perfom A r~odu1 e Exchange 

~v\NUAL - Gather Slmp1 e Tool s 

SUPPORTED - Gather More COMplex 1001s Requirlng Restraints 

AUGr.:EIHED - Gather Power And Standard Tool s 

TELEOPERATEO - Gather Tools From Remote Area With TMS 

SUPERVISED GROUllD - Not Appllcable SUPERVISED OU-ORBIT - Not Appl1cable INDEPENDENT - Not Appl1cab1e 

E-22 

I 

N 

0 

E 

P 

E 

N 

0 

E 

N 

r 

I 

" j 

•• 

\ 

-... 
I 

, I 

i 

Ii 

~ _:-----.- ~~",",,-. --

II 

,tj g 

/ 

, 

J 

, 

~--

/ 

.. 

l.. 

I 

j 

J 

.1 

SUPPORT EQUIP~lENT REQUIRHlENTS 

ACTIVITY NUl1BER: 19 CATEGORIES OF IlAli-ltACHIIIE WTEPACTIOIIS 

~ SUPERVISED l 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P ~ HAIJDLE/INSPECTI 11 P M E G 

EXAr1INE LIVING A 0 E R R 0 

ORG~IJISIIS N R N A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E N I 

l 0 0 0 0 T 

HUltAlI SUPPORT EQUIPI!EUT REQUIr.ED 

Al A1 A1 Al 

C14 C13 C9 C9 

C14 C13 02 

06 

I V A 

E V A 

EXM1PLE - Exanlne To Deternlne The Health Status Of A Rat 

IWJUAL - Vlsua1 Exar.nnatlon 

SUPPORTED - Vl sua 1 EXa'11 natl on 111 th Use Of Re 5 "rai nts 

AUGllE1JTEO - Use Of E1ectronlc 11onltOrl ng Equi .. r:1ent 

TELEOPERATED - E>-amlne/lnspect by Use of eeTV Syste.ll 

SUPERVISED GROUlm - Not Appllcable 

SUPERVISED ON-OrBIT - Exanlnc Printout Fron Instrunented Pat 

INDEPEUDEIH - Not Appllcable 

/ 

MCDONNeLl.. DOU"..§;f 

E 23 

A1 

05 

[16 

023 

FlO 

I 

Ii 

D 

E 

P 

E 

N 

0 

E 

/J 

T 
I 

I 

'rr 

... 

. 

. \ 

V) 

I / 4 

SUPPORT EQUIPIlENT REQUIREMENTS 

I ACTIVITY UUHBER: 20 CATEGORI ES OF MAN-I1ACHiliE HlTEP.AC TI OilS 

T 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P II 

II1PL EIIEIlT M P M E G 

PROCEDURES/SCHEDULES A 0 E R R 0 

II R II A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E II I 

L D D D D T 

HUI~AIl SUPPORT EQUIPIIDIT P.EQUIREO 

A1 A1 A1 Al A2 A1 

C13 C13 DS AS D5 

07 E3 A6 06 

05 fll 

06 

I V A Fll 

A1 A1 

B1 B1 

C13 C13 

E V A 

EXMIPlE - Inplenent Procedures To Troubleshoot A faulty Conponent 

MAIIUAL - Vocal Cormand To Inp1enent 

SUPPOr-TED - 11anolall y Inp1 enent Procedures fron Pestra 1 nts 

AUGIlEUTED - COIJputer Alded IIJplenentation Of 11alntenance Procedures 

TELEOPEP.ATED - Ir;;pler.1ent Procedures Through Use Of ms 

SUPERVISED GROUIJD - Connand Software Ir.JplelJentatlOn Of Procedures 

SUPERVISED OIl-ORBIT - Comand Software Ir.Jplenentatlon Of Procedures 

ItJDEPEIJDDIT - Self-Imtlatcd Sofb/arc Inplcncr ~atlon Of Pr'occdures 

* Consldered as one ,tem of support equlpment 

D8 - Computer' I -jwa re 

F12 - Assoc,at~~ Software 

MCDONNeLL DOCJGLQ 

'-~ 

/ 

E 24 

I 

II 

D 

E 

P 

E 

II 

D 

E 

II 

T 

A2 

A5 

A6 

03 

06 

07 

DB,Fl2* 

-

. I , 

" , 
'.1 

/ 

SUPPORT EQUIPMDJT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY tHJrlBER: 21 CATEGORIES OF lIAN-t1ACHII1E IIJTEPACTIOIIS 

I 

E SUPERVISED I 

L N 

S A E 0 

U U 0 u E 

P G P N P 

WFOP.lIA TI ON M P N E G E 

PROCESSIIIG A 0 E R R 0 Il 

/J R U A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E E E 11 I /I -

L 0 D D D T T 

HU~lAtJ SUPPORT EQUIP/IEllT REQUIrED 

Al Al Al A2 Al A2 

C8 C9 C10 AS [15 AS 

C13 F8 A6 F8 A6 

D5 FlO 07 Fa D8,Fl2* 

I V A FlO F8 

-

Al 

81 

C8 

C13 

E V A 

EXN~PLE - Extract A Speclflc Malntenance Procedure 

rv,rJUAL - Vlsual Fllp-Through For Speclflc Checkllst 

SUPPOP.TED - Auto Fllp-Through For Speclflc Checkl1st 

AUGMEHTED - Call Up Procedure Fror.! Computer Data !lank 

TELEOPERATEO - /Jot Appllcable 

SUPFPVISEO GROUIID - Connand 11a 1 ntenance Procedure For An I dentified Fall ed Iten 

SUPFRVISED OU-ORBIT - COMmand r~intenance Procedure For An Identlfled Falled Iten 

Wr't..'EtIDHIT - Auto Comand For Detectlon Procedure For A Fall ed I ten 

* Consldered as one ltem of support equlpment 

08 - Computer Hardl'iare 

F12 - ASsOClated Software 

" MCDONNFLL DOUCLt:X--

~ 

E 25 

p '4 

-
/ 

~ ... "p, 

.. 

"F. ( ¥F • 44" Pli 

'4 

SUPPORT EQUIPtlENT REQUIREMHITS 

I ACTIVITY UlJIIBER: 22 CATEGORIES OF HAII-MACHII1E IIITEPACTIOIIS 

I 

E SUPERVISED l 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P N 

I IJSPECT /OBSEIlYE M P M E G 

A 0 E R R 0 

N R N A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A £ E E N I 

l D D D D T 

HUllAll SUPPOPT EQUIPHEtlT' PEQUIRED 

A1 A1 A1 A1 A2 A1 

C13 C1D 83 A3 AS 

C13 Cl0 AS 05 

02 A6 06 

05 Fll 

I V A 06 

Fll 

Al Al Al 

Bl B1 B1 

C13 C13 Cl0 

C13 

E Y A 

EXNlPLE - Hake Observatlon Of Solar ACtlvlty 

llAlIUAL - Vlsual Observatlon 

SUPPORTED - YlSual Observatlon t11th Restralnts 

AUGIlENTED - Ylsual Cbservatlon Alded By Solar Vlewer 

TELEOPERATED - External Yldeo Canera Operatlon On PI1S 

SUPERY ISED GROUND - Conr.1anded IR Yl eWl n9 Syster:t 

SUPErVISED Oil-ORBIT - Comanded IR Ylewlng System 

IliDEPEIWEIJT - Conr.1andec i~ Vl e~1l ng 8r Preprogral'l';1ed Comand Si gna 1 

*Consldered as one ltem of support equlpment 

03 - Conputer Hardware 

F12 - ASSoclatcd Software 

" MCDONNeLl. OOUGLQ 

'-, " 

E-26 

• ;¢L •• 

I 

tI 

D 

E 

P 

E 

II 

0 

E 

II 

T 

A2 

A3 

AS 

A6 

03 

06 

07 

D8,Fl2* 
J 

J 

T 

r 

.,. 

J 

" ,.: 

, . 

i 

< 

, . 

• 1124 • p e ; !WtlP@.UfBliUiA 4 , *,$ XZ-(:;CW;a..A!B4JC Ci.&k? aao 

SUPPORT E~UIPHENT REQUIREI1EtlTS 

ACTIV ITY Nu/1BER: 23 CATEGOP.IES OF tlMI-MACHHfE linE RAC TI Oil S 

~ SUPEP.VISED I 

L /I 

S A E 0 

U U 0 ~ E 

p G P P 

I1EASURE (SCALE) M p 11 E G E 

PHYSICAL OIMENSIOIlS A 0 E R P. 0 /J 

N R IJ A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E E E II I IJ 

L 0 0 0 0 T T 

HUrlAt, SUPPORT EQUIP/1EUT REQUIREO 

A1 Al A1 A1 A2 Al A2 

C8 C8 C13 OS AS 05 AS 

C13 023 023 A6 06 AS 

E3 05 023 06 

06 07 

I V A 08,Fl2* 

023 

Al Al A1 

B1 B1 B1 

C8 C8- C13 

C13 C13 023 <. 

E V A . 

EXA/1PLE - Oeterm ne 01 stance BetHeen Spacecra ft And Oes 1 red Tat get 

rlArJUAL - Vlsua1 Deten:nnatlon 

SUPPORTED - Vlsual Oete~lnatlon Alded By COAS (Crew Optlca1 Al'gnnent Slght) 

AUGtlErJTEO - Oetemlnation By Radar System ' 

TELEOPERATEO - Oeteminat1ol1 By Rer.lOte Sensor/Visual Systen 

SUPERV ISEO GROUtJD - Comanded Tel er.1etry Data 

SUPERVISED OIl-ORBIT - Comanded Telenetry Data 

IIIDEPEIJDENT - Preprograr.ned Slgnal For Comanded Telenetry Data 

* Consld2red as one lte~ of support eqUipment 

08 - Co'nputer Hardllare 

012 - Assoc'ated Software 

/ 

MCDONNIELL DOUGLg 

E 27 
, 

t 

. ~. 

" .. 

1--

f 

\ 

-

SUPPORT EQUIPHEIH REQUI RH1ENTS 

ACT:VITY 11L'MBER: 24 CATEGORIES OF 11A1I-11ACHIIlE JtfTE P .ACT! at J S 

I 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P Il 

PLOT DATA M P H E G 

A 0 E R R 0 

/I R II A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E II I 

L 0 n 0 0 T 

HU/tAIJ SUPPORT EQUIPl1E1lT REQUIRED 

Al Al Al A2 Al 

C9 C10 A3 05 

C13 C13 f..4 FlO 

05 A5 

A6 

I V A 05 

FlO 

E '/ A 

EX~!PLE - Plot Experlnent Oerlved Data For Evaluatlon Purposes 

l~tJUftL - ~'anua 1 Plot 

SUPPORTED - Hanual Plot Ihth Hand Calculator And Pestralnt Ald(s) 

AUG1'D~TED - Use Conruter To Plot Data TELEO?E~f\ED - I:ot Appllcable 

St:PERVISED GRCUND - Comand Conputer To Plot Routlne 

SUPEPViSEn CI1-OPB~T - Ccmand Conruter To Pl.:>t Poutlne 

IIIDEPElmENT - Preprogrannec. 51 gnul To Comand Con~utcr To Plot Routlnc 

.. Cons1 de'- 2d as one 1 te'T' of S uiJport equ1 p'-cnt 

08 - Co-outer Hard~are 

FIZ - ~S50clated Sof~l~r~ 

E 78 

/ 

"".~"(:t""''''rL_ c.>OUGa..~ '--'" 

....... -

---- r 

I 

!J 

D 

E 

P 

E 

II 

0 

E 

II 

T 

A2 

A3 

A4 

AS 

"5 

07 

~S ,FlZ* 

. 
.....- I 

l' 0 

I 

--. 

", 

J 

..... 

-- . " 

\ \ 

/ 

,. 

SUPPORT EQUIPMEtJT REQUIRE~IEtJTS 

ACTIVITY /lUtmER: 25 CATEGORIES OF IWI-tIACHIHE IIITEPACTIOIIS 

~ SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 I 0 

p G P ~I 

POSITION 1100ULE ~, P 11 E G 

A 0 E R R 0 

IJ R tI A 0 R 

U T T T U B . A E [ [ II I 

L 0 0 0 0 T 

Hl!lt.-'IfI SUPPOPT EQUIPIIEUT PEQL'IPEn 

" 

A1 A1 A1 A1 A2 Al 

C13 C8 05 AS 05 

C13 [3 A6 06 

05 Fll 

06 

I V A Fll 

A1 A1 Al 

B1 Sl 81 

C13 C13 C8 

C13 

[ V A 

EXAMPLE - POSltlon Sample Materlal Co~talner In Its Instal1dtlon Posltlon In 

Materlal ProceSSlnq Experlment 

l':MIUAl - ~lanual ly Installed 

SL'PPOPTED - l1anually Irstalled 1:1 th Ald Of R.:strill nts 

ALKll1EllTED - InstallatlOfl Alded By Deployable PosltlOnlng [levlce 

TEL EOPEP.ATEO - Installed Renoteh By TItS 

SUPERVISED Gf:CUllD - Ground Cc-r'3'1ded Carousel Posltlomng Devlce 

SUPEPVISED OII-etl[JIT - Orbltal Cor-mdr>d of Carousel POSltlonlng DeVlce 

WDEPn!DEIJT - /lot Arpl1cable 

/ 

MCOONNFLL nOtlGL .... (.L. 

-"--' 

E 29 

, 

I 

1/ 

0 

E 

P 

[ 

fl 

0 

E 'I T 
~ , 

'[ 

~-

----

--

"', 0] , \ ' 

J ----.... ... , / ~ 

SUPPORT EQUIPME~T REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVIT'{ NlP.SER: 26 CATEGORIES OF WUI-MACHIHE INTERACTIONS 

I 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A, E 

U U 0 

P G P ~ PRECISIOII M P M E G 

WlNIPULATION A, 0 E R R 0 

OF OBJECTS N R N A 0 R 

U T T I·· U B 

A, E E E N I 

L D D [) -;..," B T 

HUMAN SUPPORT EQUIPMEIlT REQUIRED 

Al A,1 Al 

C13 C13 

C8 Cl0 

I V A 

. 

Bl 91 Bl 

Al Al Al 

C13 C13 e13 

C8 C10 

E V A 

I 

EXAI'.PLE - Preclse Alignment Of Optical Vie~llng DeVlce 

HAUUAL - ~Ianual Hand Adjust':1ent 

SUPPORTED - Manual A,dJustnent A,lded By ~echanlcal Screw AdJuster -

AUGMENTED - Fine AdJustrent Aided By Electro-optlcal Allgnment De·/lce 

TELEOPERATED - Not Applicable 

SUPERVISED G!{OUUD - ~lot Appllcable 

SUPERVISED ON-ORBIT - Not Appllcable 

INOEPEI,DENT - Ilot Appl1cable 

E-30 

.., 

, I 

I 

Il 

0 

E 

P 

E 

N 

D 

E 

II 

T 
. I 

f\' 

\ 

. 

-, , 

, . , 

" , ' 

/ 

, if 

T 

j 

:- ' 

SUPPORT EQUIPNENT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY 1Il.t18ER: 27 CATEGORIES OF tlMl-/1ACHIIIE IIITEPACTIOIIS 

I 

E SUPEPVISED l 

S A E 

U U 0 0 

P G P N 

PROBlEll SOlVING/ M p M E G 

DECISION I1AKIIIG/ A 0 E R R 0 

DATA A/IAlYSIS II R II A 0 R 

U T T T U 8 

A E E E N I 

L 0 0 0 0 T 

HUllAl1 SUPPORT EQUIP/lEnT REQUIRED 

A1 A1 A1 A1 A2 A1 

C2 C2 C2 83 A5 05 

C13 C6 05 A6 023 

C13 05 no 

023 

I V A F,O 

A1 A1 A1 

81 B1 81 

C2 82 C2 

C13 C13 C6 

C13 

E V A 

-

EXA/IPLE - Troubleshoot/fault Isolate 11alfunct10n In Fa11ed Umt 

/WIUAL - Hanually Troubleshoot 

SUPPORTED - tlanually Troubleshoot Hlth A1d Of P.estralnts 

AUGflENTEO - Use Test Set for Faul t Isol at10n 

TELEOPEPATED - Troubleshoot Penote Iten Ut 111 Zl ng RIIS 

SUPERVISED GPOUliD - Comand Fault Isolat10n Progran 

SUPERVISED OIl-Of WIT - eomund Fault IsolatlOn Progran 

!!.&JFPEIIDEIIT - Preprogranrcd 5'9na1 To Connand fault IsolatlOn Progran 

* Cons 1 dered as one 1 tem of 5upr,ort equ1 p;nent 

08 - Co:-;puter Hardllare 

F12 - ASsoc1atcd Soft~are 

/ 

MCUOl'ft/NELL DOUGL~ o..--'-L/ 

E 31 

" 

.. -.,. . 

J 

N 

0 

E 

P 

E 

U 

D 

E 

II 

T 

A2 

A5 

A6 

07 

D8,F12* 

023 
/ 

.. 

SUPPORT EQUIPMDlT REQUIREMDHS . ) 

ACTIVITY NUMBER: 28 CATEGORI ES OF MAN-MACflIIIE INTERACTIO}lS 

----- ~ SUPERVISED I 

L N 

S A E 0 

U U 0 u E 

P G P N P 

PURSUIT TRACKWG M P M E G E 

A 0 E R R 0 N 

N R N A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E E E N I tJ 

L 0 D 0 D T T 

HUMAN SUPPORT EQUIPMENT REQUIRED 

A1 A1 A1 02 

C13 C13 A1 

C8 C10 83 

I V A 

E V A 

EXAMPLE - Dock; ng And Latchl ng Of R!1S After Usage 

MANUAL - Visual Trackl ng 

SUPPORTED - VIsual TracKIng With AId Of RestraInts 

AUGIIENTED - VIsual TracKIng WIth AId Of Zoom TV On RNS 

TELEOPERATED - 8ulkhead Mounted T.V. Cameras Expand VIsual Coverage 

SUPERVISED GROUND - Not ApplIcable SUPERVISED Oil-ORBIT - Ilot Appllcable 

INDEPE"DENT - Not Applicable 

rj 

f:'\/ MCOO'¥N~LL DOUO':::.~ 

E32 
- ~-

r]/ 9 

/ I 

J 

I 

T 

"'f 

\ , 

,-

, 

---,,-, 

SUPPORT EQUIPf.1ENT REQUIRENENTS 

ACTIV ITY HUrIREp.: 29 CATEGORIES OF MMJ-lIACHItJE I1JTERACTIOtJS 

T 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P N 

RELEASE/SECURE M P M E G 

HECHAIJI CAL A 0 E R R 0 

I1JTERFACE N R N A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E /I I 

L D D D 0 T 

HUllA1l SUPPORT EQlJIPtlElJT REQUIRED 

A1 A1 A1 A1 A2 A1 

C2 C2 C1 Ds AS 05 

C13 C13 E3 A6 [\6 

05 Fll 

06 

I V A Fll 

A1 A1 A1 

B1 B1 81 

C2 C2 C1 

C13 C13 C13 

E V A 

EXN1PLE - Release Latchlng llechamsr.T 

f.\AtJUAL - Hanua 1 Act lVat1 on 

SUPPORTED - I·Ianual ActH'at10n III th Pestralnts 

AUGrlENTED - Act lVatlOn ~11 th Use Of Power Tool 

TELEOPEP.ATED - illS OperatlOn To ActlVate Ifechanlsn 

5UPERV I3EO GROU'JD - Connand 51 gna 1 To Act lVate tlechan1 sn 

SUPERVISED OIl-Or-SIT - Comand Sl gnal To ActH'ate !lechan1 Sr.T 

IIIDEPEHDEIIT - Preprogrann.;d To Cornand A S1 gna 1 To Actl vate rlechan 1 sn 

* Consldered as one 1tem of support equlpment 

08 - Computer Hardware 

F12 - ASSoclated Software 

/ 

MCDONNel.L DOUGLQ 

,~ 

E 33 

I 

• J 

I 

II 

D 

E 

P 

E 

II 

D 

E 

N 

T 

p.J. 

AS 

A6 

03 

D6 

07 

D8,F12* 
1 

I I 

SUPPORT EQUIP~lOJT REQUIPEMENTS 

ACTIVITY /lL~1BER: 30 CATEGORIES OF I':MJ-11ArH~IJE I/ITERACTI OilS 

I 

E SUPEPVISED I 

L II 

S A E 0 

U U 0 u E 

P G P U P 

REI10VE IIODULE M P 11 E G E 

A 0 E R R 0 /I 

N R II A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E E E tI I /I 

L 0 0 0 0 T T 

HunAN SUPPORT £OUI PI1EIJT REQlII rEO 

I'll I'll I'll A1 A2 Al 

C13 C8 83 A5 05 

C13 05 A6 D6 

D5 Fll 

06 

I V A Fll 

I'll I'll I'll 

B1 B1 R1 

C13 C13 C8 

C13 

E V A 

EXftMPLE - Remove A Sample Materla1 Contalner From Its Mountlng Locatlon, Mechanlca1 

Interface Has Been Released 

HAlIVAL - Manual Hand Actlon 

SLPPO~TED - 11anua1 Hand ActlOn Alded By Restral nt 

ALGI1EtlTED - Penova1 Of f-Iodule 111 th Spec~al Tool 

TEl EOPEPATED - R~lS UtlllZed To Grasp And R~move Ilodule 

SUPEPV ISm GROVIJD - Ground Comnanded Carousel D2V 1 ce 

SUPERVISED OIl-ORBIT - Orblta1 Command of Cat'ousel DeVlce 

INDEPENOEIIT - /lot Appl1cable 

/ 

MCDONNeLL DOIJGLQ 

-"'--" 

E 34 

I 

, , . 
f 

J 

.,. 

/ 

/ 

. 

\ 

\ 

~I I 

I ,;' 

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT REQUIPEMEIJTS 

ACTIVITY IWllBER: 31 CATEGORI ES OF HA-tI-/1ACHIt'E I1lTEAACTI OilS 

I 

E SUPEPVISEO I 

L /I 

S A E 0 

U U 0 u E 

P G P IJ P 

REllOV E/ REPLACE /1 P ~1 E G E 

COVERIIIG A 0 E R R 0 II 

II R II A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E E E II I IJ 

L 0 0 0 0 T T 

HU/lAtl SUPPORT EQUIP/'EIIT rEQUIrED 

A1 A1 A1 A1 A2 A1 A2 

C2 C2 C1 D" ~ AS 05 AS 

C13 C13 n A6 06 A6 

05 F11 06 

06 07 

I V A Fll 08.F12* 

I 

, 

- A1 A1 A1 

B1 B1 81 

C2 C2 C1 

C13 C13 C13 

E V A 

. 

EXM1PLE - Penove Cover For Dpt1ca1 Telescope Systen 

/1ArJUAL - /Ianua 1 Rer:lOva 1 

SUPPORTED - ~lanua1 Renoval A1d Ry Restralnts 

AUQEtlTED - Renova1 A1ded 8y Power Tool 

TELEOPEPATEO - A1ded By TIIS Penova1 Operatlon 

SUPERV ISED GROUIJD - Comand Opem ng Of Opt1 ca 1 Cover1 ng 

SUPERVISED 0I1-0PBIT - Connand Openl ng Of Optl ca 1 Coven nq 

I1lDEPElIDEIJT - Preprograr.1ned 51gna1 To Connand Openlng Of Optlca1 Covering 

*Consldered as one ltem of support equlpment 

08 - Computer Hardware 

F12 - ASSoclated Software 

E 35 I' 

MCDONNeLL DOaJGLQ 

-~ 

i 

• i 
I 

{ 

,/ / ~-- -J 

.' 

I 

I 

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY NUMBER: 32 CATEGORIES OF MAN-MACHWE ItITERACTIONS 

I - E I SUPERVISED L tJ 

S A E 0 

U U 0 0 E 

P G P N P 

REPLACE/CLEAN M P M E G E 

SURFAC~ A 0 E R R 0 N 

COATINGS N R U A 0 R 0 

U T T T U B E 

A E E E N I -N 

L 0 D D D T T 

HUMAN SUPPORT EQUIPMEtlT REQUIRED 

Al Al C7 05 

C2 C2 Al Al 

C13 C13 E3 

C7 

I V A 

Bl B2 B1 

Al Al C12 

C13 B1 Al 

C2 C13 C13 

C2 C7 

E V A 

-, 

EXAMPLE - Clean Rdolator Surface Coatlng 

MANUAL - Manually Clean With Simple Tool s 

SUPPORTED - Manually Clean Large Areas. Use rl,I,1U For EVA 

AUGMEIHED - Use Power Cleani ng Apparatus On MFR (Manipulator Foot Restral nt) 

TELEOPERATED - Use ms Wlth Power Cleanlng Apparatus 

SUPERVISED GROUND - !lot Appllcable 

SUPERVISED ON-ORBIT - Not Appl1cable 

INDEPENDENT - /lot Applicable 

MCDONNIltLL DOUO~S-- E-36 

t 

- • I 

- I 

l 
'(1/ 

.II 

I / 

, 

I 

/1" 

I 

1"/ . / 

/ 

/ 

/ 

!I" 

'j " 

r. 

,-

I 

i 

SUPPORT EQUIPHEHT REQUIREMEllTS 

ACTIVITY IWIIBER: 33 CATEGORI ES OF rlAlI-IIACHHIE lIITERACTIONS 

I 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P ~ REPLEIIISH IlATERIALS N P M E G 

A 0 E R R 0 

N R N A 0 R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E IJ I 

L 0 0 0 0 T 

HUrtA!! SUPPORT EQlJIPI~EIJT REQUIRED 

Al Al Al Al A2 Al 

C9 C9 C4 C4 A5 05 

C13 C13 05 AS 06 

£3 05 023 

06 Fll 

I V A 023 

Fll 

A1 A1 Al 

81 81 B1 

C9 C9 C4 

C13 C13 C13 

E V A 

I 

£XAlIPLE - Pecharge LOll Fluld Level In Thernal Control Syster' 

rlAtJUAL - Ilanually Hand Punp Fluld Into Systen 

SUPPORTED - Ilanually Hand PUr.1p Flulds Into Systen Alded By Pestralnts 

AUGrtEIJTED - Utl11ze Fluld Recharge Klt 

TELEOPEPATEO - TIIS Operatlon Wlth F1uld Pecharge Klt 

SUPERV ISED GROUIID - Comanti Fl Ul d Trans fer Fror.1 Reserve To Systen 

SUPERVISED 0I1-0PBIT - Comand Fluld Transfer Fran Peserve To Systen 

IIIDEPEllDEtlT - Auto-Comand To Transfer Fluld Fror.1 Peserve To Systen 

* Consldered as one lte~ of support equlpment 

D8 - Co~puter Haruware 

F12 - Associated Software 

E-37 

WC..,OlttNELL DO()GL~ " -~ 

--------_ .. . , 

+-

-

I 

N 

0 

E 

P 

E 

N 

0 

E 

tI 

T 

A2 

AS 

A6 

03 

06 

07 

08,Fl2* 

D23 
; 

I 

/ /' I 

I ; 

, 

SUPPOPT EQUIPMENT REQUIRnlENTS 

ACTIVITY UlJtlBEP.: 34 CATEGORI ES OF /lAtf-/IACHItiE HJTERACTIOUS 

I 

E SUPERVISED l 

S A E 

U U 0 u 

P G P N 

STORE/RECORD H P M E G 

ElEMEtlT A 0 E R R 0 

tl R N A 0 • R 

U T T T U B 

A E E E II I 

l 0 0 0 0 T 

HUIIAIl SUPPORT EGUIP/IEUT REQUIPED 

A1 A1 A1 A1 

C13 05 D5 

C13 E1 

I V A 

-- Al A1 Al 

B1 B1 B1 

C13 C13 C13 

. 

E V A 

EXAlIPLE - Record Observat10na1 Data 

MANUAL - Manual Record 

SUPPOf'lEO - Manual Record A1ded By Restra1nts 

AUGtlENTED - Use Of Conputer To Record Data 

TELEOPERATED - Off{ V1 deo Record1 ng Of Data 

SUPERVISED GROUtJD - Comand Recordl ng Of Data 

SUPERVISED Oll-OPBIT - COIT'(lnd Pecordlng Of Data 

IIJDEPEIJDEtJT - Auto-Comand S1 gna 1 To Record Data 

*Consldered as one Item of support equlp~ent 

DB - Computer Hardware 

F12 - ASSOCIated Software 

/ 

MCDONNELL DOUGiLD/~ , , 

E 38 

A2 A1 

A5 05 

A6 Fll 

05 

Fll 

. ~ 

• I 

I 

Il 

0 

E 

P 

E 

N 

0 

E 

IJ 

T 

A2 

A5 

A6 

07 

D8,F12* 

. 
rT' 

rr 

-: 

Il 

/ 

I ---------- - - - ----------

I 

f 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

~ 

t 

r 

j--

,. 

L 

r 

I 

,. 

L 

,-

fl. 

l. 

i' 

I 

, 

I. 

! 

o. 

r 

I 

I. 

[ 

r 

L 

SUPFJRT EQUIpr~ENT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY NUMBER: 35 CATEGORI ES OF MAti-MACHINE INTERACTIOHS 

~ SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P ~ SURGICAL M P M E G 

MANI PULATIONS A 0 E R R 0 

II R N A 0 oR 

U T T T U B 

A E E E N I 

L D D D D T 

HUMAII SUPPORT EQUIPMENT REQUIRED 

A1 A1 A1 

C14 C14 C14 

C8 C9 

I 

I V A I 

E V A 

EXM~PLE - Obtaln Tlssue SaMple From SubJect 

MANUAL - Manual Use Of Simple Surgical Instrunent 

SUPPORTED - Special Surglcal Tool/Instrument 

AUGlltElnED - USc 1>11croscope To Ald Pemoval Of Tlssue 

TELE0?ERATED - Uot Appllcable 

SUPERVISED GROUND - Not Appl icable 

SUPERVISED ON-ORBIT - r:ot Appllcable 

INDEPEtlDEtH - Not Applicable 

MCOON"'.LL OOIJOI..A~ '-

E·39 

I 

N 

D 

E 

P 

E 

N 

D 

E 

N 

T 

-
( 

-~ .. ----~ .. ,-..--.- ---- -....-......... -..--

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT IlEQllIPnlDnS 

ACTIVITY IlUIIllER: 36 CATEGORIES OF fIAH-I-IACHINE I NTERACiI OIlS 

I 

E SUPERVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P 

TnAlISPORT LOADED M P M E G 

A 0 E R R 

/I R /I A 0 

U T T T U 

A E E E /I 

L 0 D D 0 

HUllA1I SUPPORT EQUIPrlEIlT REQUIPEO 

A1 A1 A1 

C13 B3 

- D5 

I V A 

A1 A1 A1 

81 R1 31 

C13 C13 82 

'" ""C'I'j . 

E Y A 

EXM1PLE - Transport Replaceable Unlt To Its Insta11at1on Locat1on 

fWJUAL - flanual Transl at10n 

SUPPORTED - 11anua1 Translat10n 1/1 th Tethers And Handho1ds 

AUGI'E/ITEO - Translat10n W1 th NllU 

TELEOPEP.ATEO - Translat10n 111 th R~lS 

SUPERVISED GROU/lD - /Jot Appllcab1e 

SUPEPVISED Oll-OPBIT - /lot App11cable 

INOEPE/IOEH - Not App11cabl e 

-. 

u 

II 

0 

R 

B 

I 

T 

NOTE: Tr(lnspo~t Loaded operat10ns beyond the non,\al work1ng enVHonr'ent (e g., to 

geo;ynchronous orb1t) could requ1re many hours. In the forespeab1e future 

I 

II 

D 

E 

P 

E 

N 

D 

E 

II 

T 

such act1v1t1es would be performed only 1n the ~\Jperv1sed or Independert 

modes. Ther fore 1n the THURIS study cost1ng analyses. tra~5port operat1ons 

beyond the nc.ma 1 worl1 ng enV1 ronment \~el'e not cons 1 dered. 

E 40 

/ 

_,...., ______ ..,_ .. __ CY 

• 

I 

•• 
, 

\ 

\. \ 

\ ., 

~ 

1" ( 

J 

I 

I 

I 

/ 

\ 

, 

, 

, 

, 

" ... 

\ \ --, 

.. 

, a\ 

\ " 

, \ 

\ ; 

J 

I • 

, 

I 

)' 

. Irr 

\ 

, 

, 

\' '-

\ 

\ 

:l; ... ,' 

T 

.j 

, . 

I 

.J 

SUPPOPT EQUIPr1ENT REQUIREMENTS 

ACTIVITY UurlBER: 37 CATEGORIES OF rWJ-MACHHlE ItlTEPACTIOflS -I 

1 

E SUPEPVISED L 

S A E 

U U 0 

P G P 

TRANSPORT UrJLOADED H P M E G 

A 0 E R R 

II R Il A 0 

U T T T I u 

A E E E II 

L 0 0 D 0 

HUllAtI SUPPORT EQlJIP/'EI1T PEQUII1Efl 

Al Al Al 

C13 B3 

D5 

I V A 

Al Al Al 

B~ 01 01 

C13 C13 B2 

cn 

• E V A 

EXAIlPLE - Translate Fron \lork LocatlOn To Obtaln Replacenent Unlt 

!WlUAL - Manua 1 Transl at1 on supporTED - /1anual Translatlon Il1th Tethers And Hancrolds 

At.;GI~E/mO - TranslatlOn ',;1 th lUlU 

TELEOPEPATE[l - Translatlon tIl th t:rlS 

SUPERVISED GROUtJD - /Jot Appllcable 

SUPERVISED OIl-OI1[1IT - Hot Appllccble 

IfJDEPEIJDEtJT - /Jot Appllcable 

0 

IJ 

0 

11 

B 

I 

T 

NOTE' Transro'"'t Unloaded operatlO'lS beyond the nonnal I~Qrk1ng env1ronr.ent (e.g •• 

1 

1/ 

D 

E 

P 

E 

tJ 

D 

E 

II 

T 

to geosynchronous orblt) could rpqu1re many hours. In the foreseeable future, 

such act1v1t1es would be ~erfonned only 1n the Superv1sed or Lndependent 

modes. Therefore 1n the THU~IS stuoy crst1ng analyses, transport operdt1ons 

beyond the nonnal work1ng enVlronment I,ere root consldered. 

E 41 

I 

.. 
-... 

./ 

--

--. 

-........ - I 

t 

\ 

:] 

- , 

APPENDIX F 

CU~IUlATI 'JE COSTS AS A FU;JCTI ON 

OF NU~BE~ OF TIMES ACTIVITY 

I S PERFORt'~ED FOR SEVEN r·1At'-!-NACHI NE MODES 

/ 

... CDO ..... 6tLL 00"0'-8-- I- 1 

" 
I 

.. ~ 

. I \ -. . 

/ 

. 

, " , 

\ 

INDEX 

ActlVlty O--General Ca~e A--Teleoperated Codes 

ActlVity O--General Case B--Teieoperated Cooes 

Activlty O--General Case C--Teleoperated Codes 

ActlVlty l--Actlvate/Initlate System Operation 

ActlVlty 2--AdJust/Allgn Elements 

ActlVlty J--Allocate/AsSlqn/Oistrlbute 

Activlty 4--Apply Blo~edlcal Sensor 

A~tlVlty 5--Cor.~unicatp Information 

Activlty 6--Compensatory Tracking 

ActlVlty 7--Comoute Data 

Al , OS, and 

A 1 , 05. and 

fll • 05. and 

Act; vity 8--Confi nn/Ven fy Procedures/Schedul es/Opera tior ... 

hctlVlty 9--Connect/Disconnect Electrical Interface 

Actl~lty lO--Connect/Dlsconnect fluld Interface 

ActlVlty ll_-Correlate Data 

ACtlVlty 12--~eactlvate/Termlnate System Operatlon 

ActlVlty 13--Qecode/Encode Data 

Activlty 14--0efine Procedures/Scnedules/Oreratlons 

ActlVlty 15--CPDloy/~etract Appenaage 

Activlty 16--~etect Change 1n State or Conditlon 

Act1Vlty 17--ulsplay Oatl 

ActlVlty 18--Gat~er/Replace Tools/lQulp~ent 

ActlVlty 19 -Handle/lnspect/Examlne Llvlng Organlsms 

ActlVlty 20--Inrle~ent Procedures/Schedules 

ActlVlty 21--Informatlcn Processing 

ActlVlty 22--Insrecti0bserve 

,\ctlVl ty 23--i'easure "Scale", Phyc;lcal DlriienSlOns 

F2 

El 

E3 

B3 

....... - \ 

F-4 

F-5 

F-6 

F-7 

F-8 

F-9 

F-10 

F-ll 

F-12 

F-13 

F-14 

F-15 

f-16 

F-i7 

F-18 

F-19 

F-20 

F-21 

F-22 

F-23 

F-2·1 

F-25 

F·26 

r -27 

F-28 

f-29 

. , 

! 
'. 

I 

T \ -, 

" 

. " 

, 

\ 

\ 

\ , 

\ I 

" 

\ 

"\1 

\ \ 

\ 

'. 

Attivlty 24--Plot Data 

Activlty 25--Positlon Module 

Activity 26--PrecislOn Manipul.'tlon of OOJects 

ActlVity 2i--Problem Solving/Dechion Making/Data ,inalysis 

Activity 28--Pursuit Tracking 

ALtivlty 2g--Reledse/Secure Mechanlcal Interface 

Activity 30--Remrve Module 

Activlty 31--Remove/Replace Covering 

Activity 32--Replace/Clean Surface Coatings 

ActlVlty 33--Replenisn Materlals 

ActlVlty 34--Store/Record Element 

ActlVity 35--5urglcai t1anlpulations 

Activity 36--Transport loaded 

ACtlVlty 37--Transport Unloadea 

LEGEND 

e 9 a e Manual 

-.-e-.-e-o-a--. Supported 

-.-b-.~lr--. Augmented 

. ____ ~-~-~--_~ __ -. Teleoperated 

~ 

.. ---}(-.--)(_ ... w-.. )t. __ ..• Supervlsed - Ground 

Supcrvlsed - On Orblt 

~ ~. 9 ?- - Independent 

/ 

M~DONVr'LL oOCJCI.Q' ~'..:../ 

F 3 

F-30 

F-31 

F-32 

F-33 

F-34 

F-35 

r-35 

F-37 

f-38 

F-39 

F-40 

F-41 

r-42 

F-43 
I 

I _ 

~ -- \ ~. 

\ 

\ 

\ 

1

-· - . / 

If> 

Z 

a 

..I 

.::! 

:c 

z 

lfl 

£>: 

a: 

..I 

..I 

0 

0 

If) 

5 

..I 

-I 

:c 

z 

ttl 

n' 

n: 

-I 

..I 

0 

0 

flCT tlUMBER Q-GENERAl. CASE • TELEOPERATE:D CODES A 1, DS, & E 1 

CUMULATIVE: COST VS. fRE~UENCY 

EXCLUD lNG CfERATI ONS 

100~-----------,------------,-----------~------------~ 

10 

---~ ---- - )( -

.................... ..................... 

10 100 looa 

NUr.BER or TIME3 RCTIVIT~ IS PERfORMEO 

OCT NUM!:f:R O-GE~'CRP.L. CASE TELECPE~9TEO ceDES A 1, D5, &. E 1 

CUNULAT I \ E COST 1/5 fREOUCNcr 

INCLUDING OPERATlCNS 

\00CXl 

I~~----------~------------~----------~------------~ 

100 

---- ---- )( .. )( - )( _ _ )of .. 

10 

................ + ....... -

................................. 

o \.+---~~~~~\O--~--~~~~llc-O--~~~~~I~ooa~~~~~~\~OOOO 

~uMB~R Of TINES ACT[VITl IS PERfC~M[D 

F-4 

, . 

.. , 
" 

-rlj. , ' 

I 

I', ' . . " "-

! 

I 

I 

I 

t 

.... 

en 

Z 

a 

.J 

.J 

r 

z 

1I1 

~ 

II: 

.J 

.J 

a 

a 

en 

Z 

a 

.J 

.J 

r 

z 

tr) 

~ 

u: 

.J 

.J 

a 

0 

ACT NUMBER O-GE~ERAL CASE B TELEOPERATEr CODES A1, D5.& E3 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. fREOUENCr 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

IOO~-----------r----------~-----------.r---------~ 

10 

-9--- ~--

- "." )( 

-- --It •• _ • .)(. -

....................... ••••• + .............. . 

10 100 1 (XX) 

NUMBER Of TIMES ACTIVITY IS PERfORMEO 

ACT NUMeER O-GENeRAL CASE El n:U::OPERA1tD CODES A 1, 05, S, E3 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. rRECUENCr 

JNCLUO JNG OPERAr! eNS 

10000 

I~~-----------r----------~------------r---------~ 

100 

-9----

)( .)(.-

.. -x . .... -)t ...... 

10 

_ ........ + .......... a..+ .... __ .. 

.......... 1""' ................ .. 

....... 

F·5 

MCOONf'I",&'L DOUO~ 
---IT\ I 

, . 

/0' , 

/ 

ACT NUMBER O-GENERAL CASe C 'TCLeOPCRATCO CODES Al, O~,& B3 

CUMULRTIVE COST V5. fREOUCNcr 

EXCLUDING OPDRRTIONS 

/ 

IOOT-----------~------------~----------__ ~----------~ 

__ -11-

V'I _ _ )(_ _ - -)(.- - -- - ~-- - --~-- --

~ 101===~==~~~~~~==~==9r--~~~--~~~~------~ 

-I 

-' 

1: 

V'I 

cr: 

II: 

-' -' o 

o 

VI 

Z 

0 

-I 

-' 

1: 

~ 

VI 

rr 

a: 

-' -' 0 

0 

10 ICO I COl 

NUMBER or TIMES ACTIVITY IS PERfCRMED 

ACT NUMBER O-GENCRAL CASE C TELEOPERATED CODES Al,D5,& 83 

CUMULATI VI: COST VS. fREOUENcr 

INCLUDING OPERf.TIONS 

10000 

I~~------------,------------~----------__ r-----------~ 

I~+-----------~~-----------r----------__ ~~----~~r~ 

-9--- --Q---- -- )(- -- .)(. 

.-)( -

10 

----~ ........ ~. ······ .... ····l- - :::---~ 

o I+---T-~~~~~~--~~~~--~-r.~~~~--~~~~~ 

I 10 JOJ 10CXl 10000 

NUMBER or II MES ACTI'n TY IS PERF'ORMEQ 

F6 

/ 

MCOONNIlLL DOUO~~ 

" 
'T' 1 I 

I 

II , 

T -, - T -

" 

-, 

'i' t- ~. 

I. 

... 

I 

ACTIVITY NUMBER 1-~CrIVATC/INITIATE SYSTEM OPCR~TION 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. fRE~UENCY 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

lOOT-----------~------------,_----------~------------~ 

---- ---- U1 _...)( .. _ _ *__ - .... oo-)t- .. _ .... -.w ..... 

5 IO;===~==~===1===+====~==~--+--=~~-1~----~~--i 

:j 

I: 

Z 

Ifl 

~ 

a:: 

...J 

...J 

8 

tn 

Z 

0 

...J 

...J 

I: 

Z 

~ 

Ifl 

a::: 

a:: 

J 

...J 

0 

0 

•.••• + ••••••. + ••••• 

........... 

10 leo ICl:XI 

NUMBER Of rI~ES ACTIVITY IS PERfORMED 

ACTIVITY NUMBE~ I-ACTIVATE/INITIRTE SYSTEM OPERRTIW 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. fRE~UENCY 

H;CLLD I N:J OPERATI OtIS 

10000 

IOOO~----------~------------,------------,r-----------~ 

lCO 

10 

-x--"--

................................... 

---'1---

__ )( __ __)f- -

.. ' 

.......... ...... 

.' .. ' 

........... .<' 

10 leo 1000 

tJU:1BER Of TIt"'iES ACTIVITY IS PERfORMED 

F7 

10000 

MCDo""""eLL DOUOL~ 

, 
. 

I 

7 

RCTIVITl NUH6£R 2-AOJUST/RLIGN ELEMENTS 

CUMULArIVe COST VS. rRe~ 

~XCLUOING OPERATIONS 

IOO·~----------~~----------~------------r-----------~ 

~ 10 - ---)(- -- - )( --- - . )( - -- --)(----- a 

:l 

~ 

z 

-

en 

0:: 

a::: 

:l 

a 

a 

In 

Z 

a 

...1 

...J 

~ 

Z 

III 

n::: 

a::: 

...J 

...1 

0 

CI 

1000 

100 

10 

0.1 

1 

........................... 

--_ ••••••••• _-+-.-••• 

10 100 1000 

NUMBER Of TIMES RCTIVIT~ IS PERfO?MEn 

ACrrVITY NUMBER 2-ADJUSTIALIGI~ ELEMENTS 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. fREOUO~CY 

INCLUDING OPERATIONS 

- ----./ 

10000 

./ 

tr"'/ 

.~ 

~- / 

1'---'1---

>--.Jr-- _ 

1---9---- --)to--~ ~ "'J"';' __ -It -- --)( -

----)(- -- -- )( --- .' ::? ...... , ~.?' 

.. -.. ~/ ••••• -r .................... .-

••••• + •••• , •. + ••••• 

~ ~ 

_-,,-;.t~ ~ 

J10 100 1000 IlXloo 

NUMBER Of TIt1[:~ PCTIVITY IS FERfCfU,[Q 

Fa 

/ 

NlCDONNICLL DO&JG~S--

I .j 
I 

\ 

, 

\ -r \ . . / 

/ 

\ 

/ 

en 

z 

0 

J 

...J 

x: 

=: 

en 

0:: 

a: 

...J 

J 

0 

0 

en 

Z 

0 

...J 

...J 

x: 

Z 

U) 

0:: 

a: 

...J 

..J 

0 

0 

I Y 

ACTIVIIY UUNBta 3-flLOCAT~/ASSIGN/OISTRI6UTe 

. CONULRT11C COST VS. fReQUENCY 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

100~----------~----------~'-----------~~----------~ 

10 

0.1 

-- - - K- .-

..................... 

~,-- ---

--4--- ......... -- • - .- )+--- _.~.-. -- -~--- -- -)(- . 

......................... 

10 100 1000 

NUMBER or Tr~ES ACTIVITY IS PERfOflMEO 

ACTIVITY NUM8ER 3-ALLOCATE/ASSIGN/DISTRI6U!E: 

CUMULATIve COST VS. fREQUENCY 

INCLUDING OPERATIONS 

10000 

I~~-----------,------------'-----------~------------~ 

100 

---- ~-- - 0)( 

-)( -- )( - )( 

o _)( 0 __ 

10 

...................... .-................. . 

0.1 

10 Ica I~ 10000 

NUMBER Of TIMES P,CTI V I TY I S PERfORMED 

F9 

/ 

MCOONNllrLL DOUQ~S--
,/ 

/T' , 

I' 

i' 

I. 

II 

I I 

r 

I 

I I 

I 

/ 

1 

'" :z: 

8 

..J 

..J 

x: 

:z: 

.... 

I/) 

a::: 

II: 

..J 

..J 

0 

0 

III 

z 

0 

..J 

..J 

:c 

::; 

til 

a::: 

a:: 

oJ 

..J 

0 

0 

OCrIVlTr NUHBER i-F.PPL't BIOMEOICfl. SENSOR CUNULRrIV~ COST VS. fREOUCNCr ~XCLUOING OPERRTIONS 

IOCQT-----------~----------~------------r_--------__, 

100 

IQ 

..a---- A 

-~-

0.1 

DDI~~?-~~~~--~~--~~--~~~~~~--~~~~ 

I 10 100 IIXXl 10000 

NUMBER Of rIMES ACTIVITY IS P~RfORMEO 

PCTIVIT'( NUMBER i-APPL't BIOMEOICAL SENSOR 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. fREOUDICr 

INCLUDING OP£HArIONS 

I~~-----------r-----------~-------------r-----------' 

100 

10 

0.1 

10 loe lro:l loo!XI 

NUMBER Of TINES ACTIVITY IS PERfORr.EO 

F·lD 

MCDONN_LL OOfJO~ 

• 
J 

rr 

ACTIVITY NUMe~R 5-CONMUNICATE INfOrut~TION 

CUMULATIVe COS! VS. fR£OUENCY 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

lOO~----------~------------,-----------~----------~ 

..-.-- ---- .+ 

_____ )(' ______ )(_____ _ __ )f---l<----

~ 10 - ---.0(- --- --* --- -

:j 

x: 

z 

-IfI 

~ 

5 

..J 

a 

CJ 

If) 

z 

a 

...l 

...l 

r 

z 

-

en 

~ 

a: 

...l 

.J 

0 

Cl 

•....•..... 

10 ICJ 10CXl NUMB£R or TIHES ACrIVITY IS PERfORMEO 

ACTIVITY NU:1BCR 5-CO:1MUNICA~ WfO~HATIOIJ 

CUNLLArIVE COST VS. fREOUENCY 

INCLUDING OPCRATIO."IS 

..... 

.' 

10000 

I~.------------.------------.-----------~----------~ 

100 

-- -~ 

~-- --.--.- ----)( --- - )( --- _ )to -- -- ~- --

Ie 

10 ICO 10CXl 

NUMB£R or TIH£S ACTIVITY IS PERfORMED lCOCXl 

F·ll 
.. c' 

, 

I 

, 

/ 

en 

z 

Cl 

.J 

.J 

1: 

Z 

-

en 

n:: 

a: 

.J 

..l 

Cl 

0 

tf) 

z 

0 

.J 

.J 

1: 

Z 

~ 

If) 

Ck: 

a: 

..l 

..l 

0 

0 

100 

10 

HDJ 

100 

10 

o I 

I 

RCITlvr NUM8~R 6-COMP~NSR10Rr TRRCKING 

CUMULATIVE COST vs. fR~aU~Ncr 

EXCLUOING OPERRTIONS 

r--~---' ---- --- )(--- --*---- __ )( -- -------

-...q----' 

--~ -~------

~ 

-

-. 

10 100 urn 

NUMBER Of TIMES ACTIVITY IS P~RFORMEO 

ACITIVY NUMBER 6-COMPENSATORY TRRCKING 

cu.'1lJl..firl vr: COST VS. fREQUENCY 

INCLUO lNG OPt:RRrI QNS 

............... 1000:) 

!I"""/ 

./' /'l " 

..,..--V ~----

1------ __ io-- J1- _ r,- -' ___ )" ___ - )t-- ~ -'" 

.--)( _ .. )(-" 

10 100 lCXD 

trunBER or TINE5 ACTIVITY IS PERFORMED 1000:) 

F·12 

MCDON"'.L" DOuaLd ~'-....../ 

"

-

-. 
I 

/ 

/ 

, /f 

I 

,/ ---

/ 

! 

/ 

(f) 

Z 

0 

-.l 

--l 

-:s:: 

z 

If) 

0;: 

a: 

--l 

--l 

0 

0 

J 

/ 

ACTIVITY ~~M6~R 7-COMPUTE CRTR 

CUMULATIVe COST VS. fREOUENCY 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

IOCCT---------------T-------------~r_-------------~--------------_, 

100 

10 

0 I 

......._-9--

__ --x- --- )(- --

---

10 100 (000 

NUMBER Of TIMES ACTIVITY IS PERfO~MED 

ACTIVITY NUI1BER 7-CDH'U!E DATA 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. fREOUD~CY 

I~~~UDING OPERATIONS 

10100 

IOCC~----------_.------------._----------_.------------~ 

IOO+-----------~----------_+----------~~~~--~~ --~ -'?--~v~.;: ~ .......--- ---- ~;-;_x 

-I!'~ IJ+-------------+-__ -_-_-)(---------~------~~~--~?'~~T------------~ 

- -)(- ---)(-- -- ~ 

--- O.I+----------~~+_----------~~----------~·------------~ 

+---~~~~~+_--~~~~~~--~.~~~.~-T~~~ (0 100 (000 (0000 

~~MBER or TIN~3 ACTIVITY IS PERfORr.EO 

F-13 

" 

. ,. 
, \ 

I 

\ I 

/~j' I ' / r 

r 

J 

/1 

/ 

, -

/ 

,", -- " -{ , 

I -.J \ J 

I' 

I 

1 

\ 

, -"- < 1 \ 

V 

I 

II 

, 

i \ 

/ ' 

\ ,-

RC! NUMBER 8-CONfIRM/VERlf't' PROCEDURES/SCHEDULES/OPERATIONS 

CUMULATIVE COS! VS. fREOU/)lcr EXCLUDING OPERATIONJ 

lOOI~----------~r------------r------------r-----------~ 

__ -9--

~--

VI ___ • x ._. - No -- -' --- _·It- ._.-)(.- •• 

5 101===~==~~~==~====~==~--~~~~-4--------~~ 

-' -I 

:c 

z 

-

VI 

It: 

5 

-I 

a 

o 

V> 

Z 

o 

-' -I 

:c 

z 

VI 

cr 

a:: 

-' -l 

o 

a 

D.I 

1 

••••• + ••••••• + ••••• 

... ~ ..... ••••• -t- o •• 

10 ICO I (XX) 

NUMBER Of TIMES ACTIVITr IS PERfORMED 

ACT NUMBER a-CONfiRM/VERIfY PROCEJURES/SCHEDlJLES/OPE~A7IONS 

CUMUL.9TIVE COS! VS. fREOUE:IlCr 

INCLUD ING OPEHRTI ONS 

10000 

IOCQT------------,------------,-----------~------------~ 

IOO.;----------~ 

___ IJ'--

~--

___ )( __ J(- .' >'_., _ )f .-

IDt----------~-----------4-------~~~~~L-------~ ........................... ~ 

......................... 

-~-

10 ICO l.m 10:00 

tJUMBE:R Of TIMES ACTIVln 15 PERFCR:'1EO 

F 14 

,I 

_ ::1 t. 
B::TJVITl' N~CR 9-CO"l-:f:cr/OJSCO~CT o..CCTRICfl. [NTaU1'\C!': 

Il.!1t.JLI\TJ VI: COST VS. fRCOUOfCT 

EXCLUDING OPCRRTIONS 

IOOT-----------~------------~------------~----------J 

~~:' 

---- --:. ... ~ /..--1 ---- .,.-1!--- / "---;'"/ ' on __ ... _ - .. --.-

~J9t=~====~=i==~==~==*=~~--~~.~ ... ~.~~~~~-i 

•• -. It --_ ••• _--

:j ...... . .....• 

VI 

z 

a 

-l 

-l 

~ 

Z 

VI 

n:: 

5 

...J 

8 

1 tal 

100 

10 

...................... 

..... ............ ..... 

flCTlV[i'( NlJ.'1eol 9-COH~CT/OlSCOi\. ... '!:CT El.E:CTnICf't. INTtRrACf: 

1'----0---

. -lC _ .... -- 1." .... -

....... + ............... 

Ct.I1'1LU\TIVC COST vS. r;:;LOt.'DtCr 

INCLLOIt::> OP[i;rl'ICNS 

.v--:::;; 

----- 1'---9--

.w .-- - )t. -'-

_.-)1-- -::.::::::-

..... 

........ V"""',., 

~/ 

k& ............ . ... "" . .' ~ 

.... ~ ·····h 

,,? 

.................. ............... ~? ...... d-

- .# 

a 1 

I 

bd:::l . ltool 

F·15 

c-y 

,
t]\ 

feflVln tlUMam IO-CCI-M:C1/0ISCO"''''£CT fLUID INTERrRct 

Mt.l1ltIV!: COST vs. rmll:JO~Cl' 

£xCtW I Nt; OPERATI ('.tiS 

l~~----------r---------~-----------r----------, 

• =-9-

'" .. ... • .. _ _ w _ - ._ ... M- _-M- ...... 

a 10 

::i 

r 

z 

-

II> 

Z 

0 

::i 

r 

z 

V'I 

()! 

~ 8 

IIXXI 

100 

10 

.. ~- •• + ••••••••••••• 

........ .....•....... 

fen V ITt tlur.:!rn IO-COII!£CT/OI5CONl'ZCT flUID Hln:rJ"nct 

CU1WitI VE: COST VS. rrlf:~Uc."CY 

It.tLtJOWG OPCRATIONS 

.,.,-

V"".,., 

.,.,-

..-- .~~ . ," ~ -'1-- 1------ 1"- --- .... ~j;1 --9----- 1"--' . ..' ~ 

•• , )( •• ____ ,.. _'0 -_.)(._- ,.. -.--.......... ~ ...... ;;>~ ..... //' 

t-............... / ,.V ........................ 

•.... + •.•.... + ..••. .0 

"-~ 

~~ 

o I 

I 

~, , , hI 100 1= 

.,~MBCR cr TIM~5 fiCTIVITY IS PERrC~NEO 

IOCca 

F 16 

\ ' .. 

, 

... 1 

. .. 

o. 
In 

Z 

0 

::f 

J: 

z: 

.... 

'" cr: 

3 

8 

lJ') 

Z 

0 

-' -' 

J: 

~ 

o.n 

no: 

5 

-' 8 

l 

RCTIV In t.PJ/'l;f:n Il-CCRRfl.AlC CAm 

Ml.umvr: COST VS. fRf.:OUOlC't 

rXCLtro Ill,; OPERATl eelS 

I~~----------~------------~----------~------------, 

UXI 

10 

0.\ 

10 ICO 1000 

N.)t16CR or TIMts RCnVln IS PE:RfORME:Q 

RCTIVIT'r ttJr.8f:R ll-CC.'~Ro..RTE: CRm 

CUMULA!lVC COST vS. fRE:OUEJIC't 

1"''CLUlWG OPERTIONS 

IIlXXl 

lan·~----------~--------------,----------------~-----------, 

100 

-9--- 10 

)( .. __ - M - -

0.1 

OCI+---~~'-~~--~~~~~+----~~~~~ ____ ~~~~ 

1 10 ICO • 'XX) 

NUMBER or T!NES ACTIVITY IS PCRfOn~~O 

10000 

F 17 

• A··~- • - . mt:"1-~~~~~~·~':~~-:'4~~~ ... ("~d$£-l~~:=U~SU$#1'j.'· ;g.~~-nc~AN...z;;;;:r;-:'fi-_~~ 
en 

li 

..J 

..J 

1: 

Z 

en 

tI! 

a: 

..J 

..J 

a 

a 

cn 

Z 

0 

..J 

..J 

:c 

z 

cn 

ex: 

a: 

..J 

..J 

0 

CJ 

PCT[VITY NUl'tlrn 12-!l:IICTIVATE/TERt1U::In: Sl'STEH OPeRATION 

CLr1ULATIVC COST VS. rm:OUCNCr 

EXCLUO I ~,'C OPERAT IONS 

IO~----------------r-------------r-----------------~----------~ 

10 

-'1--- --- ,. - -- If - ".. .-It --

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

... -..... -..... ........ 

10 100 ICXll 

NUMBER or ~It1CS ACTIVITY 15 p~Rr~MOD 

ACTIVITY NUMBCR 12-c(f1CTIVATE/TERMIN9TE srSW1 OPERATION 

CUNULATlVC COST VS r~COUE~IC'l' 

It-.'CLUOlIlG OPERATlOtIS 

.CXl)T-------------~------------~------------~---

100 

-<1---

_)( __ >C - --

10 

...... ~.- ...... + .......... 

----

........ 

)f --

.' ........ 

1t0a3 

O.I+--... -.................... +-....... ...-.--....... 4--~---....--...+--_-.-....... ~~ I '0 lOO IIXXl 10000 

~N~BER or TIMES ACTIVITY IS PERr~qM[O 

F·18 

., 

I 

.. I 

., 

• I .. 

.. 

_. . 
'" 7-

0 

::1 

1: 

Z 

tn 

~ 

a: 

::i 

8 

'" z: 

a 

J 

J 

1: 

Z 

- r tn 

cr:: 

u: 

J 

J 

8 r -

I 

L 

1 ' 

a 

L 

r 

(j .. 

1 

f'CTlVITY NUI18E:R IJ-m::ccm:IE:Il:COE ORTA 

CUMULATIVE COST 'IS. rREOUE~Cr 

EXCLUOWG OPERATIONS 

IOOOr-----------r-----·-----.~---------~----------1 

100 

-4--- ---- 10 

IC _ -' __ IC ___ ' Of --- - )( 

O.I,i ---.--.............. ~IJ ICO lem 

NUM8£R or TIMES ACTIVITY IS PCRfOqMEO 

ACTIVITY NUMBER I J-oc:coor 1~'ICOOE: Q9TP 

CUMULATIVE COST '15. rc~CG~IC'~C,( 

INCLUO ItIG ('PERRI: 0'.5 

:oo~ 

1~~----------~-----------'r-----------7-----------1 

100 

.--- ---- 10 

- ~ - _ ItIC • 

10 100 IC;::a 100::0 

~~M6E:R or TINES r.CT[VITY IS PERrCRHCO 

F-19 
If) 

a 

:J 

;: 

Z 

-If) 

c= 

~ 8 

." 

8 

:J 

:s= 

:z 

-

U1 

e:: 

a: 

:j 

0 

Cl 

r.cn Y lTl' N1J18E:R li-O!:rm: PfiOCEOt..m:S/SCHalt1.LS/OPEMT I ONS 

CU1ll.RrIVe: COST VS. rR!:OUENCI' 

EXCt.lD ItlG OPERATI ONS 

100Q~------------,-------------,-------------,-----------, 

ICXl 

10 

D.l 

.q--- ___ .. ___ ,_ -- If- -- - )C---

ACTIV[TY NL~e~ 11-c~rINC fROCCOURe:S/SCHOO~.LS/OPEp.RTlm~s 

M\JL.9TIVf: COST vs. rRE:OU~NC" 

INCLLOING OPfRArONS 

l~iT-----------'-----------'-----------'-----------' 

,.-~. 

IOO+------------+-----------;--------~~~~--__:~ 

--._- -;;f 

__ ... v_ .... _ __ 'I( .. __ ... _ ... _ ... _w ... - ...... .1'(--" -----1"--- ----

10 

0.1 

to 100 100J 10000 

NU~8ER or TIN~S RCTIVIT1 IS PERr~\MEO 

F·20 

lO, 

. -. 
I. 

v> 

z 

0 

::l 

1: 

= til 

0:: 

II: 

-1 

-1 

0 

0 

v> 

Z 

0 

-1 

-1 

1: 

= 

til 

0:: 

II: 

-1 

-1 

0 

0 

ACTIVITY NUH6~R IS~OEPLOr/RETRACT RPPENDAGE 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. fREOUCNCY 

EXCLUOltlG OPCRATIONS 

I~~-----------r----------~r-----------~--------·--~ 

100 

10 

.._-9-

)( Ie 

---- II - )( 

.......................... 

......................... 

10 100 lOCO 

NUMBER or TIMES A~TIvITY IS p~Rrn~MEO 

ACTIVITY MJl19ER IS-CEPLor;PCTRACT flPPE'~OASE 

CU1'1ULATI VE COST VS. fREOUENcr 

INCLUDING OPERnTlONS 

ICXXXl 

IOCO~------------r------------r------------~-----------' 

100 

-----)(oO ... -" 

)( • -- It 

10 

..................... -

........................ 

10 100 lOCO IOCOO 

tUMBER or TINES ACTIVITY 15 PERrOQNEO 

F·.21 
J:: 

Z 

-

en 

Z 

a 

..J 

..J 

:: 

~ 

U) 

CY. 

5 

..J 

a 

0 

ACTIVITr NUM6£R 16-0~TtCT CHANG~ IN STRT~ OR CONDITION CUNUlArIV~ COST VS. fRCOUENCr 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

1a»T---------------~----------------~----------------~~----------~ 

lOO~----------~----------~------------~------~~~ 

lol-=-=··~~-=-=··=·=·~~:-:·:-~-:·:-~~:·:-·:-:--:~:·:·: .. ~==::===:::~t:=---------J 

+ _ ••••••• + ••••. .... 

...................... 

10 loa 1000 NUMCER or TIMES P.CTIVITY IS P£Rf~~MOO 

RCTIVITr N~~e!R 15-~£TtCT CHANG~ IN STflT£ OR CONDITION 

CUl1LUlTIVE: COST VS. fRf::OUOJcr 

It,'CLUOlt-.3 OPERATIONS 

,ooQl 

I~~----------~----------~------------~--------~ 

1C!l 

IO-

... -----~ _.-. )(-..... 

+ ••••• •••.• +.-••.• 

-.--~-

..... of-

••••••• + ••••• 

Q. \+---...-..,...........,....,..,..,.....fIO-----...... ...,...,,.......jlo-a --............. ....,......,,........ .... ,...1000,------..................... I...jooctl 

NUMBER Of TIH~S ACTIVITY IS P(RfO~MEO 

F 22 

'"t 

I 

.f 

; 

· ~ 

• I 

· . 
(~ 

ACTIVITY NUMBER 17-0ISPLRY ORTR 

CUMULATIVe COST VS. rR~aU£NCr 

EXC~UOING OPERATIONS 

loo • .-----------,-----------~----------~--------~ 

IOt-----------r----------+----~~~~~~~~~ 

------.~":. 

~ O.It----------------~r_~~---------~------------------~---------------~ 

j 

8 

en 

Z 

'0 

-.J 

-.J 

::s: 

z 

-

<f) 

0:: 

«: 

-.J 

-.J 

0 

Cl 

0.01 t-7~-------~r_-----------+----------------1~--------l 

O.OOI+---~~~~~--~~~~~4_---~~~~~---~~~~~~ I 10 100 1000 IOOCO 

1000 

100 

10 

C.I 

0.01 

0.001 1 

NUMBER Of TIN~S RCTIVITY IS PERfORMED 

ACTIVITY NUMBeR 17-0I~PLRY DRTA CU~ULATIVC COST VS. fREQUeNCr INCLUDING OPERA IONS 

-

~...-

--------' ~--Q>- _-o--.-]~ 

.. <?"'- • ' 

:.::.~ •• ::::.JI.~ .... -. " ... ~~ .. -", .......... 

~ 

-

~v ~ V ..... -=--tF-== / ~ ...,. 

~ ~ 

.-/ 

10 100 lOCI.) NUMBER or TIMES nCTIVITr IS PERFOR~LD 

F·23 
ACTIVrTr NlR18ER lB-G.IlTHER/RE:PU'lCE: ToaL.~!CQWIP"E:NT 

CUMULATIVe COST VS. rR~OUDNCY 

f:XCl.l.OING OPERATIONS 

100~---------------~------""------""~---------------~---------------~ 

. ' ~ ~ e IOI+---.... ----.... ~~--------------~ ......... -•• -•• -.~.~.~· .... ~~~--------~ 

:f 

til 

§ 

::l 

-

x: 

Z 

(f) 

ex: 

a: 

.J 

.J 

0 

0 

11m 

100 

IQ 

0.1 I 

..... ., 

......... - .•... +_ ••. 

••••• -t-.............. . 

10 ICO um NU~B~R or TIMES ACTIVITY I~ PERfORM~O 

PoCTrVITY HUl"'3E:R la-r;RiHE:R/RCPLAC~ TOOL5/courPMOlT 

W1Ul.ATlVe COS! VS. fRE:OUOICY 

I NCl.lJJ I N~ OrmA! IONS 

10000 

. .... ~,£/ "r 

••••• ,d.",l' 

.-' '/z -

....... ."" ..... ..,-y ..... .,,;- ., ••• + ••••••• _ ••.• ~ ..................... ,.& 

/ 

r-~- ~··;·~·l 

~~ 

10 100 1000 10000 

HU~6E:R Of TIMES F.CIIVITY IS PERfORMEC 

F 24 

, . 

• • 

. , 

.. 

-, 

.1 

. ' 
T 

rj 

• 

a 

w 

J 

'T' 

.. 

r 

r -

i 

en 

z 

a 

.J 

.J 

:r: 

:= 

III 

cr 

a: 

...J 

...J 

o 

o 

(f'l 

A:Tlvny NUM8E:R 19-HANOLE/INSPECTlEXfUlIlIE: LIVING ORGRNISMS 

CUMULATI VE COST VS. fREOUENCY 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

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

IOt-----------~~-----------r--~~--~--~~~~~--_; 

0.1t-----------~~----'"?'..:::::..---r------------t_--------__1 

OOIt-----~~~~r------------r------------t_----------_; 

0001,+ --~--~~~~IDr-----~~~~IC~O----~~~--lan+.-----~~~~IOCOO 

NUMBE~ or TIME:S ACTIVITY 15 PERfORMED 

ACTIVITY r~lr.1ElCR 19-HANDLE/INSPECTlEXAMlIlt: LIVING ORGANISMS 

CUMULArIVE: COST VS. fREOUENC'! 

INCLUOING OPERATIONS 

Im+-----------~r-----------r-----------t_~~----~~ 

e IO+---------,--~--------~~~--------~~~~--~~--_i 

...J 

...J 

:r: 

:= 

III 

cr 

a: 

~ O.I~----------~------~~---r--~-------r_----------_i o 

Cl 

OO,+-----~r&~~-------------r------------~----------_i 

Oool+---~ __ ~~~--~ __ ~~~~--~ __ --~~~----~~~~ 

1 10 100 I'm 10000 

NUMB~R or ~[ME:S ACTIVITY IS PERrD~~O 

F·25 

• A .~~- _,_ _ ..... 

c:.::;:-o;:?z=:.;.'::.!~:' i'~: ~""~\7.G.:?"'::::'=:"::'~~';~~"'1 .. "';;~::;:;:::.::r--," ~ _~,t"~?:''&.;.:T~:;~':;;:~~ .• - . c~~ "P~z.:, ,bJ 

, 
en 

Z 

0 

-:l 

l: 

= 

en 

0: 

II: 

-l 

..J 

0 

0 

en 

?: 

0 

..1 

..1 

::: 

= en 

0: 

a: 

..J 

..1 

0 

0 

ACTIVITY NUMBER 20-IMPLEMENr PROCEDURES/SCHEQULES CtJ1ULRTIVE: COST VS. f~COUE:NCr 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

loolr---------------~----------~----------~------~ 

10 

-'1--- ----- _._ ~ _____ It ___ ----It- - --~-- --

_ .................... . _ •••• + •••.•• -+._ ..• 

./ ...... ;; .......... / 

?/ 

10 roo 100J 

~UM6ER Of TINES RCTIVITr IS PERfORMED 

flCTIVITr NUt!5E:R 20-IMrLE~NT PROCEDU"ES/SCHEOULES 

CUMLUmVf: COST VS. fRE:OUi:NCr 

INCLUDING OPERATIONS 

10000 

I~r-----------~------------~----------~------~ 

100 

--- ---- __ • )(. --- -- )(- --- 't ---)<- - --)(. ---

10 

•• -•• + •• __ ......... _ • 

.............. _.-t-••••• 

-~-

o I+-__ ~~~~~~ ___ ~~~~~~~ __ ~~~~ __ ~~~~~J I 10 loa lOCO I(XlOO 

hUnSER Of TIMES ACIIvlrr IS PERfORMED 

f·26 

/ 

MCDON"'.u.. OOUQ~S--

.1 

1 

1 

1 

.. 

, .. 
J 

J 

i .. 

r 

I · . 

or' 

i 

; . 

~ 

~ . , 

~ · 

,-

~ 

~ . 

j 

! 

• t 

.. -

rJ ,,' 

t 

VI 

Z 

0 

-' -' 

1: 

Z 

-

Vl 

a: 

II: 

-' -' 8 

U') 

z 

c 

-' oJ 

:E: 

~ 

(/) 

a: 

II: 

oJ 

-' C 

C 

ACtIVIT! NUMBER 21-INfORMftTION PROCESSINB~' 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. fREQUENCr 

EXCLUDING OPERATlalS 

tOOI~-----------r----------~------------r---------~ 

10 

-r--- ---'1---

---~----

.J( ___ - ____ )t- ____ If---

10 100 lOCO 

NUMBER Of TIMES RCTIVITY 15 PCRfaQMEO 

RCTIVIT! Ntr.1Bf:R 21-INfORHRTIurl PROCESSING 

CUMULATIYE: C'JST VS. fREOUDjCl' 

INCLUOI~~ OPERATl~NS 

10000 

I~~-----------.------------~-----------.----------~ 

100 

---- 10 __ ~-_._- --J( ___ • --- - It ---

_-1:--

10 100 I ceo 10000 

NUMBER Of TIMES ACTIVITY IS P(RfC~MED 

F·27 

MCDONNOILL oo(Ja~ 
ACTIVln NU'18E:R 22-(tlSPECT/C3SE:ltvC 

CU1Ul.J1T1v!: COST 'IS. rRCQ1JE:IICY 

(XCLLUING OPERATIONS 

IOO~----------~~-----------r------------~----------~ 

---- >C 0 fCo-' Ul >C 0 11-.- n 1!ll===~==*==;=~=+-"::::::~-::7':;L------; 

..J 

..J 

s: 

Z 

Ul 

0:: 

5 

..J 

g 

tI'I 

a 

..J 

..J 

r 

z 

Ul 

cr 

a: 

j 

CJ 

o 

10 ICO Itxn 

NUMBER or TIMES RCTIvltY IS PE~r~r.EO 

ncrrv Ii'!' N!J~9ER 22-I"SPE:CT IDeSERVE: 

CtJMUUlTI'iC c:Jsr "'5. fR[O:;!]JCr 

(NC:'UO/lt; OPERRTlC',S 

10000 

I~T------------.r------------r------------.------------' 

loo4-------------~----------~------------~~----~~~ 

-z;--- ---- _)(. 'oC'-

_ J( 

IO+-------------~----------~--------~~~----------~ 

10 IO~ ICJ''') 10000 

NUMbER or 11 HES peT! v I TY IS PERrO::U1EO 

F·28 

MCOONNIZLL OOCJGL~ 

:1 , I :1 .... ,I .. 1 

I -. 

.. 

-. 

-. 

I 
, ' ,-'"7"'\[ 

flCTIVlTr ti'J1OCR 2J-t1tRSt..~f: 'SCfltf:' PH'(SICflL. DIMeNSIONS 

CUMI.A..RTlVt: COST vs. nU:OUOIC'{ 

£:XCLIJ) lUG OP£RATI ellS 

IOOT------------r----------~------------r_--------~ 

.,.. 5 IOI+-----------4-._-.-.+-.-.-•• -.• ~.~~~--~~~~~--~~~~ 

::1 •• - •••••• -........ . 

J: 

Z 

-

J: 

Z 

-

L....<t--~-.-/·...--~--·- .~--- .. __ --_w It'" .--- --

10 IC~ 1000 

NUMBER or TIMCS ACTIVITY IS PERfORMED 

fiCTIVITT N~eER 2J-MCAS~~~ 'SCf,~' p~rSIC~L DIMENSIONS 

CU1Ul.RTIVt: COST VS. fR!:C~IQIC,( 

IM:LlIOlt;:; Oi'E:RATlQ.1"S 

100CIl 

IOCQ~-----------r----------~------------r-----------, 

lro··~----------~-----------+--------~~~~~----~ 

10 ICO 1000 

~UMe~R Of TINES R:TIVITY IS PERfORMED 10000 

F 29 
<n 

i5 

-:i 

-:c 

~ 

III 

cr 

~ 8 

tt\ 

a 

-::i 

:c 

~ -

III 

c.: 

a: 

.J 

.J 

0 

0 

fCTlVln tlJMSER 21-FLOT DATA 

W1l.l..ATIv!: COST VS. fRf:OUENCY 

EXCLLDHiG OPERAtiONS 

100~-----------r----------~------------~--------~ 

.-.-_ ...... __ -'v_---9-

ID+-----------~----------_4------------~~~~~~ 

0.1 

IC----.--M-- -- -.. --~------ --

o.olh~---------I---------~--------~-------~ 

D.OOt+---~~~~~----~~~~--~ ____ ~~~----~--~ 

I 10 leo I COO 

I CD:) 

100 

10 

0.1 

O.CI 

0.001 I 

NUMBER or TIMCS ACTtvlTY 15 PCRfU~MEO 

ACTIVITY NUMeER 21-PLOT DATA W1ULA!IV~ COST VS. fReQUCNCY 

INCLLOlNG OPERATlQ.'1S 

loc.ao 

---'" -/" 

. L ~'/. 

~-----1-- ____ --10------., -""- '-" 

~ 

, • )C ".,7 

----l(---- ~---

___ 1(- ____ )t- -- ~' 

L----~ 

____ .. ~,...e 

~ 

~ v ~ __ o--.~ 

/ lr--' 

y 

10 IC~ 1CX1l IOOQ3 

NUNEER Of TINES A:TIVltT IS PCRfa~MED 

F-30 

.. --e 

] 

1 

"'1' 

I 

•• 

•• 

~. 

I .. 

I 

• 1 

.. 

-( 
, 

<1'1 

7-

0 

oJ 

..J 

I: 

Z 

\fl 

~ 

II: 

oJ 

oJ 

0 

U 

ACTIVITY NUMBER ~S-POS(T[ON NODULE: 

CIJ1ULATI VE: COST "5. f"REQU!JIC'! 

EXCLUD ltJG OPERAT IUNS 

IOO~-----------r-----------,------------~----------~ 

10 " 

•. + ................. . 

)( . " .. 

....... 

................... 

......................... 

10 IO:! lem 

~UM8ER Of TIMES ACIIVl!'! IS PERFORr,ED 

RCTIVITY NUM8ER 2S-PDSlTIOtl t'OO'JLE 

CUNULATl VC COST VS. fR[OU!:tlC'! 

ItICLt.::JING OPEH1'lTlCNS 

IOO.------------r-----------,------------~----------~ 

.l( • .. . -

" -l( 

~ IO+_----------~-----------4--------~--+_~~------~ o 

J 

oJ 

I: 

Z ••••• ~ •••••••••••• 

(fl 

n::: 

a: 

..J 

.J 

o 

o 

... ~ ...... ........ + .... 

............. .. , 

10 100 lem 

~U!1BCR Of TIMCS ACiIVI!'! IS PERFORMED 

F 31 

"'COON,,,trL:. DOUG~~ 

1(Xl:)l 
en 

:z: 

a 

::I 

J: 

% 

.... 

III 

~ 8 

en 

e 

:i 

J: 

= III 

cr: 

a: 

" -I 

-I ~ 0 

a 

''I 1 

ACTIVITY NUMBER 26-PRECISIOtl !lnNIPULRTION or OBJECTS 

CUMULATIve COST V~. fREQUENCY 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

IOOO~----------~----------~----------~--------~ 

100 

10 

f ~' /,.?" 

lOla I COl 

NUMBER or TIMES ACTIVITY IS PERfORMED 

RCTIVITY NUt'eCR 26-PP.E:CISIOU I1f1NlPULRTICN Of OBJECTS 

CUI1U1..A!lve: COST VS. mECUO:Cl 

INCLWW:; OPERArIONS 

ICXlCXl 

I~~----------~----------~----------~--------~ 

100 

10 

10 100 I~ 

tUM6ER Of TIMES ACTIVITY IS PERfOKMEO 

100CXl 

F 32 

1 

..,. 

I 

•• 

.r 

-. , 
"f' D 

I 

J 

J 

..,.. 

,.. 

, 

.l. 

, 

.. 

r 

I 

'T r 

r 

. 

l. 

ro 

I 

.. 

:. 

I 

:j 

-l: 

PCT Nli1BtR 21-PRO!3L01 SOLVrt.'G/Dr;CISlmJ HAl( ING/DATR RNflLYSIS CUMUlftTIV~ COST VS. fRCOUENCr 

EXCtLO I NG OP£RArI ONS 

I~~-----------r----------~------------~--------~ 

lOOT------------r----------~------------r_--------~~ 

-q-. __ .... - .... 9---- __ -#I--

- -.~ 

10~ I __ :-=-X:-:-~-=--:~:-~:-~;;;;~~~~;;~~:;::::~~------~ ..... +-....... •.... ~ ,/''' _ ..•....... +..... ,,- ,~" 

ACT NU~3ER 27-PRC9L01 SOLVIIJ3/0CCISION MAKING/OATn ANALYSIS 

0l1ULATIVr; COST VS. fREOULNCr 1~'CtUOIt;.:; OPE:RArIONS 

I~~-----------r----------~------------r---------~ 

100+------------+-----------4------__ --~~~~~~--~~ 

...q--- -- ::: 10 ____ ~--- __ ~ _ .. --.-............. . 

5 

...l 

8 

10 lCO I COl 10000 

NUMBER Of TINES ACTIVITY IS PERfORMED 

F 33 

.. j
~ 

., 

- T { 

.. I 

-. 

( 

., 

RCTIVIT'!' 1IUl18E:R 26-PUR5UIT TRflCI(JIl(3 

CUt1U1JlTlVE: COST VS. fRE:OUO~Ct' -. 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS ... ICO ... ' 

... ",., I .' , .... . ' ~ . .. ' 

to .' 

en ~ I 

a 

-:l 

::t: .. :; 

ttl 

0:: O.t 

5 

-.I 

8 

/' 0.01 ./ 

, , 

0.001 , t 10 leo 1000 10000 -. 

l' 

NUMEER or TIMES ~CTIVITY J5 PERfOR~EO 

RCTIVrTY NtJ:19!':R 26-PURSUlT TRRCKWG 

CU1U'JlrI'vt: COST VS. fR!:ouDlcr , 

INCl.UDING OP£RAl'IONS 

100'J 

i 

.1 

100 

en 

z tD 0 

-....... , -.I 

-.I 

::t: < 

-, z 

.... 

ttl 

n:: 

~ 0.1 

8 

0.01 

0.001 \ 

1 10 1"0 \ '\."'0 10000 

_. ~JMeER or TIMES rCTIVITY IS PERfc.:{i1m 

1~, F·34 

McaONNIICu., DOV .. t:.~ , 

...; 

~ 
:J 

-x: 

z 

... 

, ' """'J ' 

E 

,. - -

flCTlvnr NlJ1&R 29-Ro.EAst/SE:CURE: t1ECHRNICfl. INTCRfRCE: 

CUrtULflTIVE: COST VS. fRE:OUE:NCt 

EXCI.UOllli OPCRR!10NS 

tOOI~----------~----------~----------~----------~ 

100 

III 

0.1 t 

... .. -- ..... -........ ........................... 

10 ICO 10CXl 

NUMstR Of TIMes RCTIVITY IS PE:RfORMED 

RCTIVITY NtX1&R ~-Re:LERS::/SE:CUR£ ItCHRHICRL INTE:RfflCE ~Ut.f\!IVC COST VS. rm:CUENC't 

mCLl.OItlG OPfRArIOHS 

.".., 

~/ 

...... """ t-----..,..,-';;;' 

~ ~, 

;-...--_. -- .. -:> .... ~ .-_.,. --.::;:.:.::.:::: _ .. >t*---*- -- .' .,;;?, • _ •• -H'-"-' )00' --. 

• .+., . ... W ._/ V ................... .' 

.................. ••• -+- -f7' . -... 

""" ~," 

.-.\-~~ ~ 

10 I 0 I CO) tOO 

H'JlleER Of TIMES ACTIVIT'! IS PERfOR11EO 

F 3S 

. .. 
--

ACTIVIT! HUMBER 3Q-REMOVe ~OOULC 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. rRCOULNC! 

EXCLUOHlG OPERATIONS 

IOOT-----------~~----------_r------------~----------_, 

on 

Z ID 0 

J 

J 

:I: 

Z 

III 

c:: 

II: 

J 

J 

0 

0 

)( .0)( II • II 

)(.. )( 

.. -.~ ..... 

........................ ........................ 

10 100 1000 

NUMBER O~ TIMES ACTlVITY IS PERFCR~ED 

ACTIVIT! NU~5ER 3Q-REMOVE HJOLLC 

Cu:1ULArIVC COST vS rp~OUC:JCt 

INCl.UDING OPERATIONS 

I~ 

IOO~----------~-------------r------------.-----------~ 

o ")( 

x- - .)(-

o ~ ID+-----------~------------·~------~~--r_~~------~ .' J ........... . 

.J 

:I: ........................ 

~ ....................... . 

III 

c:: 

5 

J 

o 

o 

MCOO .... 'U.L OOtJO~ 

10 IGO 1000 

NUMBER or TINES ACTIVITY IS peRfORMED 

F 36 

] 

1 

1 

..., 

• • 

.. · 

\ 

. I 
[ 

r .. 

-, 

i -

! 

1 

L 

0;:' 

~ 

<l 

... 

" , 

':> ,1" .... 

~ 

,'T-" 

RCTIVITY tUl16ER 31-RE:NOVE:lREPLnCE COVERINg 

ClR1t.l..flTIVE: COST VS. fRE:QUEllC't EXC~UOING OPERRTIO~S 

I~T-----------------r-------------~---------------r-------------' 

VI .,. * ... __ *___ ---J( _ •• - )(-- •• -

e 

_ 1°t=::::i:=~=*==;:==;::=F=F==:':.:'!"· .N 4""-=-7/r-:;r-j 2 ............ . x: ...... . z ..... + ...... . 

..... • .... -+ ..•• -_ •• - .... 

, 

RCTIVITY NUMBER 31-REMOVE/REPLACE COVERING 

CUHUl.AtlVE: COST VS. fRCQUCNCr Ih'C~UDINB OPERflTIOHS 

I~T----------------r--------------~---------------r-----------------' 

IOO~--------------r--------------+---------------~~------------~ 

---- ... _ x .. - ....... - )t-_ .. r --.. )(-0 -- .. -)It ...... 

IO~----------------~--------------+-----~~~---~~--------~ .............. + •• , •• ................ ....................... 

IQ I 0 1000 

NUMBER Of TIMES RCTIVITY IS PERfO~MEO 

F-37 

.. - -

IOOro 

-
1 

V> 

Z 

o 

.J 

.J 

:c 

z 

-IF) 

~ 

a: 

::J 

o 

Cl 

flCTIVITY Nlt'03[:R 32-REPLflCE/ct.f:AH SURfACE CORTINGS 

CU1L'LArIVC COST VS. rRI:OUCNC'l' 

EXCLUDING OPCRATIONS 

lam,~----------~----------~~----------~----------~ 

IOOI~-----------+-----------4~----------~~----~~~ 

, 

IOIf------------+--------~~~----~~--+_----------~ 

--_ ......... . 

+ ••••• 

10 100 trol 

NU~EER Of TIMES ACTIVITY IS PERfO~MEO 

ACTIVITY NU~3CR 32-RCPLfiCC/ct.CA~ SU~fACC COATINGS 

CUMULATIVe COST VS. rREOUCNC'l' 

INCLUJING OPCRATIONS 

UXlOO 

I~~-----------r----------~------------r-----------~ 

IOO+------------+-----------4----------~f~--~'---~ 

IOf------------+------~~~~~'-------~--------~ .................. 

......... + ....................... .. 

10 100 lOCI:) 10000 

NUMBER or TINES ACTIVITY IS PERfORMED 

F·38 

/ 

IH'CDONNlELL DOUOLA~ ~ 

] 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

--
1 J 

I 

r 

I 

,... 

i 

1 

,-

I 

1 . 

) 

tn 

~ 

-:l 

-x: 

z 

-

ACTIVITY NUMBER 33-REPLENISH MATERIALS 

CUMUWRTIVE COST VS. rnEOUDNCt 

EXCLUDING OPERATIONS 

locnT-----------~------------~----------~------------~ 

IOOf-----------~----------_+----------~~~~~--~~ 

..q---- --._- IOIj:-='='-~X=-'=':':'~X~':--~-':-~-~:':"='~"~-:-:]~ ____ --~~~~~~~---J ................ 

·····~······--·.7:// 

, ~ 

••••• + ••••••• + •• -. 

O.I+---~~~~~--~~~~~--~~-r~~~--~~~~ I 10 100 Itm 10000 

NUN6~R or TIMES ACTIVITY 15 PERfORMED 

ACTIVITY NUI"'.9ER 33-REPLEtU5H MRTERIALS 

Ct.J:1Lt.ATl VE COST VS. ffiEOUENC't 

INCLUOING OPERATIONS 

I~T--------------~------------~-----------~------------~ 

loof-----------~-------------~------~~~~~------~·~~ 

--q..- _ •• _ .-Y.--" •• "l!"'" ••• ~' • 

IC~---------f------------+---..,......"....:.::::.:.-~~~- ----I ........... 

lQ ...................... . ~ ••••. + ••••••• + ••••• 

g 

10 100 lOCO loo:xl 

NUn6~R Of TIH~S P.CTIVITY 15 PERfO~~£D 

F·39 

MCOO""'IIru.. OOCJoif 

-
en 

z 

0 

..J 

..J 

:c 

z 

-tTl 

IX: 

5 

..J 

8 

en 

Z 

o 

-:l 

:c 

z 

-tTl 

c.: 

a: 

:j 

C) 

o 

ACTIVITY ~~MBeR 3i-STORE/RECORO CLt~~T 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. rRE:OUOlC'( 

EXCLLOWG OPERATIONS 

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

lOCI 

10 

_9_--

.-................... . 

10 100 ICXXI 

NUMBER or TIMes ACTIVITY IS PERfORMED 

ACTIVITY NUMSER 3i-5TORE/RECORD ELEMENT 

Ct/.'1ULAT!VE COST VS. fREOUEI~CY 

INCLUDIN3 OPERATIONS 

10000 

I~~-----------r-----------'------------r-----------' 

10+-------------+----------~~~~--~~~~------~ 

............. -......... --_. ............. --_ .... --_ .. 

10 I ail lOCO 10000 

NUMBER or TlMES RCTIVITY IS PCRfORJ1CO 

F-40 

1 

1 

1 

l' 

I 

-, 

- 1 

• 

- ---' 
rr I 

J 

J 

.' 

, 

Ir 

r-

,.. 

11m 

100 

tt) 

Z 

0 

::I 10 

r 

:; 

tt) 

~ 

5 

-.J 

0 

0 

0.1 

flCTIVITY NUHB!:R 3S·5URGICAL NflNIPULRTIOHS 

CIJ1lLflrIVE: COST VS. fRE:OUCNC'( 

EXCLL'D II.'G OPERAr! ONS 

10 100 I !XX) 

NUHB~R Of TIMES RCTIVITY IS PE:RfORM~D 

flCTIVIT'I' NUl1!l!:R 35-5U'{GICAL MANIPULATIONS 

CUMUlJlTIVE: COST VS. fRCOUCNC'( INCLUOI~G OPERATIONS 

I~~-----------r-----------.------------r---------~ 

10 IOJ 1000 NUMBER or TINES ACTIVITY IS PERfORMED lcx::tl 

F 41 

r"\./ MCDONNfi!LL DOUO~II':-~'-

>V 
,,' I 

" 

:T 

~ 

'I' 

(I) 

6 

:J 

J: 

% -If> 

cr! 

~ 13 

en 

7-

0 

:J 

1::: 

Z -If) 

cr! 

5 

J 

0 

Cl 

ICOl 

100 

10 

D,l 

, 

Itnl 

100 

10 

D.I 

, 

RCtIV[TY NUM9tR ~6-TRRN5PORT LOADED 

CUMULATIYE: COST YS. fR!:OlJDlC'C 

EXCLLOING OP£RATI~iS 

.. ' 

.. ' 

.' .' ",' 

.' .' .' .. ' 

.' .. ' .' ,.' 

" 

•••• f' 

. "

.. ' A··- .' .' .' .' 

.' .. ' 

........ .' .. ' ............. 

10 lel lOCO 10000 

NUMBER Of TIMC5 R:TIVITY ]s PtRfOOr.::o 

ACTIVITY Nu~eEn j5-TR~~~PORT LOrJ~D 

CUMULATIVe COST VS, fPECUE:NCY IN~LUiJWG OpeRATIONS 

, 

. " 

. ' 

,. .... 

. . " ' .' .. ' 

.. ' ~ f .' fl' 

.... . .' 

. . .. ' ~' 

.. ' 

,t., .. ' .' ~ ~ tIII··-.' ~ 

V ;" 

................... ..... ~ 

~ 

10 WI In")) I~ 

NU~3ER Of TIMES ACTIVITY 15 PCRfCRnCO 

Traf'SPort l03ded {'peratlon$. b"yond the "erma I wor~m9 €nJlronmcnt (e ~h to goosynchronoJs orb,t' could require ~ny hours. 

1"\ thl. foresct.!Jbie future suct-. actiVit •• i v..O;Jld he pufo ...... (.J on:y In t'1l'1 ~r.'!!~~q or I~~;::..:.!t mOOl"S 'n the THUBIS s~ud" 

"u#tlng anJIy'ses for trdn~pcrt O"1l.:'ratlo<"~ b~) cnd the rormJI \\orklf'l;;1 f.n~lrcnml!nt " .... ere not perlCrm(d 

F-42 

-, I 

.1 

f 

.1 

-; 

i 

, . 

.. ~ 

,,' 

.. 

~ . 

-. , 

I 

... 

oOf 

i 

J 

I 

1 

.. 

"' 

.. 
~-

• I 

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

r" j 

oj. • 

:j 

r 

z 

-II) 

~ 8 

en 

z 

0 

-:j 

l::. 

~ 

11'1 

rr 

5 

.J 

8 

ICIXl 

100 

10 

a.1 

I 

flCTIV (TY tlUt'l9!:R 37-TRfiHSPORT UNLOAOm 

CUMULATIVE COST VS. rREaUE~Cr 

EXCLlIJl/lG OPE;.')fiTICNS 

- .' ",.' .' .. ' 

" ;rS' ....... ./ 

.-,. ,/ .' .' " 

.. ' 

./ 

",,'/ .' . " f ~ 

. . .'. .,,11' .. ' J ,/ V .. ' ~.". .f.'1" .... ,/ -.. - .... .' ,,/ ~ 

..... ., ..... ..... 

../0"" 

/" /~ 

... -..... 

...e-.-

- ~-' 

10 

~ 

leo I Cr.'!) 

NUM2ER or TIMes P~TIVITY IS PERfOKn~ 

ACTIVITY Ntll'l3!:H 37-mFlNSf'C~T w~c~m:o 

ClJ11u..ATlvE COST VS. mcaucNC'C 

I r.'CLtJJ IN'; OPERFIrI 01.5 

ICIXl~----------------~------------~r----------------'-----------------' 

100 

10 .' .- .' 

.' 

..... . ' 

O,If---T-~~~~---~ __ ~~·~~--~~~~~~-----~--~~ I to leo I CO) I~ 

NUMBER Of TI~E5 ACTIVITY IS PERfCR~EO 

Transport Uf)loaded operatl",ns beyond thil normal ~orkln'1 envlronm(mt re <J.. to 9e-Qsynchrof'lO..J' o"blt' cO..Jld r"Qulre ",.my ha.,J~ 

In the fore\c'Cf!ble futurU, luch aCtIVItIf~S \"would be ~trtorM~d only Hl tht ~..d~5~d or tn(1~r~"cenI mJdcs In the THURI:.i ltuJv, 

costing arl31yses for transport operations bevond t"-'e nO,,,...31 wc..-rhng envIronment w~re not vel tormpd 

F 43 

~, 
'~~ "~,:-:;. t;7;~ ~: ,: i~~~?": ,':' :. "".~:: :;:-k~:~_;~('r·:.~~~:;~ "~7?T~iI:.:i 

"' ." I 

J, 

, " 

""J' 

'r 

, 

'" . ; , . 

" 

'. 

: 

" ; 'i. ~~--,. 

1" ~ ,.." .

4!, 

t~ l 7 ~ ~ 

...... ::'''t;::';~ 

\' £ J't-'; 

, ""-~' ~.:- ,. 

~ .0:; ,; 

;. ~: .;: ~ 

:"::; t~'" 

.. :: '"-' - ~ 

-' , 

- r:::-

, , 

- , 

" 

-- ...... ~-

~ • -< ~ ":. r .. 

.. - .... ;; 1 r... ::r~. -... ~ 

..... t"1 .... - '> - ~-
End of Document