Fifteen raters individually, and in five teams of three, evaluated the test-retest repeatability of published data collection and rating methods of the Strain Index by analyzing 61 job video files twice over a 5-month period. Raters estimated average and peak hand forces, measured Duration of Exertion, cycle time, and exertions per job cycle, calculated percent Duration of Exertion and Efforts per Minute, and assigned ratings for five of the six Strain Index task variables. Twelve additional jobs were analyzed to determine Strain Index Score and hazard classification. Intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficients for task variable ratings and accompanying data ranged from 0.66 to 0.95 for both individuals and teams. The Strain Index Score ICC(2,1) for individuals and teams were 0.56 and 0.82, respectively. Intra-rater reliability for the hazard classification was 0.81 for individuals and 0.88 for teams. The results indicate that the Strain Index has good test-retest reliability.

The Strain Index is one of several tools available to evaluate exposure to musculoskeletal stressors in the workplace in order to predict whether workers are at an increased risk of developing distal upper extremity disorders. The purpose of this study was to determine the inter-rater reliability of the Strain Index. Fifteen raters initially estimated or measured data for five Strain Index task variables: (1) intensity of exertion, (2) duration of exertion, (3) efforts per minute, (4) hand/wrist posture, and (5) speed of work, using a computer to view 61 video segments of single task jobs. Video segments were organized to provide a balanced number for each of the five variables under study, where each segment was used to provide data for a single variable. Raters then assigned rating values to each task according to published procedures. For an additional 12 segments, raters performed complete Strain Index analyses, including calculation of Strain Index scores, which were used to determine hazard classifications. Raters assessed the tasks both as individuals and as members of five three-person teams. Inter-rater reliabilities of the procedures leading to and including the Strain Index scores were assessed using an intraclass correlation coefficient, (ICC(2, 1)). Inter-rater reliability for the dichotomous hazard classification was assessed using Kuder-Richardson-20 (KR-20, an ICC for dichotomous data). For task variables and estimated data, ICC(2, 1) varied between 0.66-0.84 for individuals and 0.48-0.93 for teams. The Strain Index score had an ICC(2, 1) of 0.43 and 0.64 for individuals and teams, respectively. For the most important variable, hazard classification, KR-20 was 0.91 for the individuals and 0.89 for the teams.

No abstract

No abstract

NASA's Orion spacecraft is designed to autonomously rendezvous and dock with many vehicles including the International Space Station. However, the crew is able to assume manual control of the vehicle's attitude and flight path. In these instances, Orion must meet handling qualities requirements established by NASA. Two handling qualities assessments were conducted at the Johnson Space Center to evaluate preliminary designs of the vehicle using a six degree of freedom, high-fidelity guidance, navigation, and control simulation. The first assessed Orion's handling qualities during the last 20 ft before docking, and included both steady and oscillatory motions of the docking target. The second focused on manual acquisition of the docking axis during the proximity operations phase and subsequent station-keeping. Cooper-Harper handling qualities ratings, workload ratings and comments were provided by 10 evaluation pilots for the docking study and 5 evaluation pilots for the proximity operations study. For the docking task, both cases received 90% Level 1 (satisfactory) handling qualities ratings, exceeding NASA's requirement. All ratings for the ProxOps task were Level 1. These evaluations indicate that Orion is on course to meet NASA's handling quality requirements for ProxOps and docking.

Two piloted simulations were conducted at NASA's Johnson Space Center using the Cooper-Harper scale to study the handling qualities of the Orion Command Module capsule during atmospheric entry flight. The simulations were conducted using high fidelity 6-DOF simulators for Lunar Return Skip Entry and International Space Station Return Direct Entry flight using bank angle steering commands generated by either the Primary (PredGuid) or Backup (PLM) guidance algorithms. For both evaluations, manual control of bank angle began after descending through Entry Interface into the atmosphere until drogue chutes deployment. Pilots were able to use defined bank management and reversal criteria to accurately track the bank angle commands, and stay within flight performance metrics of landing accuracy, g-loads, and propellant consumption, suggesting that the pilotability of Orion under manual control is both achievable and provides adequate trajectory performance with acceptable levels of pilot effort. Another significant result of these analyses is the applicability of flying a complex entry task under high speed entry flight conditions relevant to the next generation Multi Purpose Crew Vehicle return from Mars and Near Earth Objects.1 Aerospace Engineer, Advanced Mission Design Branch, Mail Stop EG5; michael.a.tigges@nasa.gov

The panel will discuss NASA's Crew Exploration Vehicle, Orion, which is being designed to take four humans back to the moon, and lay the groundwork for future manned missions to Mars. Given that the last design work for such a vehicle was performed over 30 years ago, a lot has changed. Since the contract was only recently awarded (2007), there is much work to be done: finalize requirements, mature the technology, design the systems and modules, produce the hardware and software, test the systems, and prepare for first flight operations planned for 2014. The panel, consisting of customer and contractor human engineering professionals, as well as an astronaut who is actively participating in the design process, will discuss current design issues, human factors approaches that are being applied, and current technical and cultural challenges. Audience insights and recommendations for addressing these challenges will form the interactive portion of the panel session.

No abstract