Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
NASA PM CHALLENGE            LESSONS LEARNEDKSC Human Factors Lessons Learned      Damon B. Stambolian      NASA Kennedy S...
KSC Human Factors GroupGena Henderson Ph.D.   Darcy Miller   Tim Barth Ph.D.   Barbara Kanki Ph.D.
Sections of Presentation   Importance of Human Factors for    Ground Processing   Human Factors Lessons Learned and    A...
The Importance of Ground Human  Factors for Ground Processing
The Importance of Ground Human  Factors for Ground Processing              Courtesy to Tim Barth for these slides
Summary of Lessons Learned   Lessons Learned Entries:   1801 Human Factors Engineering; Acceptance, Implementation, and ...
Human Factors Accomplishments        from Lessons Learned   The Human Factors Engineering Analysis (HFEA) Tool   Orion H...
The Human FactorsEngineering Analysis (HFEA)           Tool
The Human Factors Engineering Analysis    (HFEA) Tool   KSC Design Engineering;      Define the human factors Level 5 re...
HFEA Process   Human factors engineering analysis was required to be performed by    qualified human factors engineers   ...
HFEATHuman/System   Issues   Requirement (Source, Title, SubInterface               Section, and requirement words)
HFEAT                            Type of processing,Conditions   Consequences   Assembly, Nominal,                        ...
HFEAT       Requirement Satisfied, Verification, Consequence, Likelihood,       Priority Rank, Why Non-Compliant, Recommen...
Example Actuator Motor     Mobile Launcher                              Crew Access Arm                                   ...
HFEA Report for Crew Access ArmActuator Motor Issue
Orion Human Factors                   Timeline Analysis  Multi Purpose                       Vehicle Assembly   Launch Pad...
Orion Human Factors Timeline Analysis   Orion vehicle goes through several areas and stages of    processing before its l...
Modification of HFEAT for TimelineAnalysis   The HFEAT was modified to analyze the task in a    timeline, and additional ...
Example of Establishing Access in Multi Purpose Processing FacilityFunctional flow block diagram at MPPF                  ...
Development of Human Factors   Requirements for Ground Processing of Flight Hardware             Janis Connolly        Cha...
Development of Human Factors Engineering Requirements for        Application to Ground Task Design for a NASA Flight Progr...
Human Systems Integration Requirements   (HSIR)1.2 SCOPE AND PRECEDENCEThe requirements in this document are applicable to...
NASA-STD-3001, VOLUME 2Section 13, Ground Maintenance and Assembly, will addressthe requirements for the configuration of ...
Ares I Forward Skirt                Mockup AnalysisUpper Stage                                 MOCKUP Forward Skirt       ...
Example Ground Support Equipment                  There is little that can be done to change                   these cram...
Avionics Boxes   The analysis determined the best locations of avionics    boxes based on the technicians location capabi...
Hatch
Biomechanical Analysis of   Installing Avionics BoxesPlacing Box Accurately   L5/S1 spinal stress
Biomechanical Analysis of AvionicsBox Installation                              Cold plate                              da...
Assessing Human Factors  using Motion Capture
KSC Human Engineering Modeling and Performance Laboratory           (HEMAP) Human Factors Analysis Process                ...
Orion Seat Removal & Replacement                         Motion CaptureCAD Models with Human Models                       ...
Orion Avionics Box Installation
Self-Contained Atmospheric Protective Ensemble                  SCAPE Suit                              Markers placed on ...
Interactive Virtual collaboration     Interactive virtual collaboration of motion capture data      among KSC and MSFC   ...
Head-Mounted Displays   Incorporation of wearable Head-Mounted Displays    (HMDs):      Negates need for physical mockup...
Pro E Manikin
Pro E Manikin   PRO E MANIKIN                for Verification
Pro E Manikin
Pro E Manikin
Solution           NASA Internal Only
Solution
KSC Design VisualizationKSC Design Visualization has the capability to analyze  human factors.These factors include sight ...
KSC Design Visualization                           LAS safe and arm                           access at PAD               ...
KSC Design Visualization                   Pryo access                   Water filter access                   Astronaut e...
KSC Display/Control Screens
Display and Control Screen Requirements   Human Machine Interface (HMI) Programming Guidelines,    (KGCS) local screen gu...
IOPSS Screen Shot
Screen Shot With HFEA Notes
Screen Shot With HFEA Notes
HFEA Report
Recommendations
Recommendations to Agency   Continue to develop Human Factors requirements    at all SE&I levels (1 to 5). E.g. NASA STD ...
Thanks to the folks across the NASA Agency, and at KSC, for your contributions towards thehuman factors achievements forim...
References   Dr., Kanki, B,; Dr., Barth, T,; Ms, Miller, D,; Mr, King, J,; Mr., Stambolian, D,; Ms, Hawkins, J,; Mr, West...
BACKUP
No clear communication between the Apollo      program and the Shuttle program 5376Description of Driving Event:During the...
The use of human factors and the Space Flight     Awareness (SFA) in the Apollo development 5377Description of Driving Eve...
Human Engineering should be considered aSystems Engineering and Integration function 1831 Lesson(s) Learned: Human Enginee...
Human Factors Engineering; Acceptance,      Implementation, and Verification as a System 1801   Lesson(s) Learned:   Inc...
Human Factors Engineering; Acceptance,         Implementation, and Verification as a SystemLesson(s) Learned:   4. Human ...
Human Factors Engineering; Acceptance,         Implementation, and Verification as a SystemLesson(s) Learned:   8. Spacef...
Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Support             Equipment (GSE) Human Factors Engineering             Pathfinder 541...
Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Support             Equipment (GSE) Human Factors Engineering             PathfinderDesc...
Lessons Learned Entry 5416   HFE concepts need to be infused as early as possible during the design phases and    reinfor...
1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and  Operability of Constellation Ground Systems 2136Description of Driving Event...
1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and        Operability of Constellation Ground SystemsLesson(s) Learned:  In doc...
1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and        Operability of Constellation Ground SystemsLesson(s) Learned:   Becau...
1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and        Operability of Constellation Ground SystemsRecommendation(s):  Levera...
1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and        Operability of Constellation Ground SystemsRecommendation(s):  Once t...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Stambolianv2

16,661 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

Stambolianv2

  1. 1. NASA PM CHALLENGE LESSONS LEARNEDKSC Human Factors Lessons Learned Damon B. Stambolian NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Engineering and Technology Directorate Katrine Stelges NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) United Space Alliance Donald H. Tran NASA Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Engineering and Technology Directorate
  2. 2. KSC Human Factors GroupGena Henderson Ph.D. Darcy Miller Tim Barth Ph.D. Barbara Kanki Ph.D.
  3. 3. Sections of Presentation Importance of Human Factors for Ground Processing Human Factors Lessons Learned and Accomplishments Recommendations
  4. 4. The Importance of Ground Human Factors for Ground Processing
  5. 5. The Importance of Ground Human Factors for Ground Processing Courtesy to Tim Barth for these slides
  6. 6. Summary of Lessons Learned Lessons Learned Entries: 1801 Human Factors Engineering; Acceptance, Implementation, and Verification as a System. 1831 Human Engineering should be considered a Systems Engineering and Integration function 2136 1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and Operability of Constellation Ground Systems 5200 Synchronization of Vehicle Development with Ground Systems Development 5376 No clear communication between the Apollo program and the Shuttle program 5377 The use of human factors and the Space Flight Awareness (SFA) in the Apollo development 5378 Improved Quick Disconnect (QD) Interface Through – Visual Indicators and Labeling 5416 Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Support Equipment (GSE) Human Factors Engineering Pathfinder 5480 Human Factors Review in the Critical Review Board (CRB)44 recommendations implemented6 partially implemented9 have not been implemented
  7. 7. Human Factors Accomplishments from Lessons Learned The Human Factors Engineering Analysis (HFEA) Tool Orion Human Factors Timeline Analysis Spacecraft Requirements for Ground Processing Ares I Forward Skirt Mockup Analysis Biomechanical Analysis of Installing Avionics Boxes Assessing Human Factors using Motion Capture Pro E Manikin KSC Design Visualization KSC Display/Control Screens
  8. 8. The Human FactorsEngineering Analysis (HFEA) Tool
  9. 9. The Human Factors Engineering Analysis (HFEA) Tool KSC Design Engineering;  Define the human factors Level 5 requirements from the FAA HFDS for each CxP GOP subsystems (Over 40 Subsystems)  Develop a process for developing these requirements and improve the design for ground operations Examples of subsystems:  Crew Access Arm  Hypergol  Breathing Air  LO2  Cold Gas Helium  LH2  Crew Module Ammonia  GHE  Environmental Control  Ignition Overpressure/Sound  Electrical Ground Support  Vehicle Access Arms Equipment  Umbilicals
  10. 10. HFEA Process Human factors engineering analysis was required to be performed by qualified human factors engineers  Human Factors Engineering Analysis (HFEA) Tool was used to develop a dedicated subset of requirements from FAA requirements for each subsystem  Meetings were held between the human factors engineers, lead design engineers, and systems engineers:  To understand the human interfaces of the subsystem  To understand the task at these interfaces  To determine the human factors considerations/issues with these task interfaces  To get agreement on the allocation of requirement on these task interface issues  And to derive human engineered design solutions for these requirements
  11. 11. HFEATHuman/System Issues Requirement (Source, Title, SubInterface Section, and requirement words)
  12. 12. HFEAT Type of processing,Conditions Consequences Assembly, Nominal, inspection, Emergency, etc.
  13. 13. HFEAT Requirement Satisfied, Verification, Consequence, Likelihood, Priority Rank, Why Non-Compliant, Recommendation, Notes.Each Tab is a FAA Chapter: Design equipment for maintenance, Controlsand visual indicators, etc.
  14. 14. Example Actuator Motor Mobile Launcher Crew Access Arm Actuator MotorActuator motor Complete visual and physical access Access for maintenance Move the motor
  15. 15. HFEA Report for Crew Access ArmActuator Motor Issue
  16. 16. Orion Human Factors Timeline Analysis Multi Purpose Vehicle Assembly Launch PadProcessing Facility Building
  17. 17. Orion Human Factors Timeline Analysis Orion vehicle goes through several areas and stages of processing before its launched at the Kennedy Space Center  In order to have efficient and effective processing, all of the activities need have a human factors engineering analysis  Corresponding Human factors requirements and design solutions needed to be defined Areas of Processing  MPPF (Crew module and Service module)  Vehicle Integration Building (VAB) (Crew module/Service module to Launch Vehicle and Ground Support Equipment  Launch Pad
  18. 18. Modification of HFEAT for TimelineAnalysis The HFEAT was modified to analyze the task in a timeline, and additional input columns were added.  Location  FFBD Event and Number  Tasks, Issues and Actions  Team Actions Activity 1 Activity 2 Activity 3
  19. 19. Example of Establishing Access in Multi Purpose Processing FacilityFunctional flow block diagram at MPPF Short stack pallet
  20. 20. Development of Human Factors Requirements for Ground Processing of Flight Hardware Janis Connolly Charles, Jr. H. Dischinger Keith V. Holubec Barry Tillman
  21. 21. Development of Human Factors Engineering Requirements for Application to Ground Task Design for a NASA Flight Program The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has long employed human factors requirements for development of flight systems. The Level 1 NASA-STD-3000, Man Systems Integration Requirements, does not include human factors design requirements for ground tasks, and therefore, programs have not been required to develop human factors requirements for ground crew tasks. The result has been that ground crews have had to develop complicated strategies for accomplishment of ground assembly and maintenance of flight systems. The Constellation Program (the execution program for the Exploration Vision) has accepted the responsibility, imposed by the NASA Administrator, to find ways to reduce ground operations costs. One of the ways the Program is doing this is through the application of human factors design requirements for the ground processing to flight systems. This is in the Level 2, Human Systems Integration Requirements document (HSIR)
  22. 22. Human Systems Integration Requirements (HSIR)1.2 SCOPE AND PRECEDENCEThe requirements in this document are applicable to the Constellation Systems,including but not limited to Orion, Ares I, Ares V, Altair, Mission Systems (MS),Ground Operations (GO), Extravehicular Activity (EVA), and Flight Crew Equipment(FCE)The requirements in this document address the needs of the flight crew during allphases of flight. These requirements also address the needs of ground personnelduring pre-flight preparation, maintenance, and post-flight activities on the flightvehicles where there is a common interface with the flight crew3.9 GROUND MAINTENANCE AND ASSEMBLYThis section addresses tasks to be performed by NASA and its launch sitecontractors in accomplishment of launch site processing and ground maintenance.Launch site processing includes vehicle assembly (e.g., Ares I + Orion) activitiesthat occur within the Outer Mold Line of the Launch Stack, Launch Stack physicalintegration (e.g., umbilical integration), and launch preparation (e.g., propellantloading). Ground maintenance includes corrective and preventive maintenanceactivities associated with Line Replaceable Unit (LRU) removal and replacement.
  23. 23. NASA-STD-3001, VOLUME 2Section 13, Ground Maintenance and Assembly, will addressthe requirements for the configuration of interfaces that arecommon to both flight crew and ground personnel. Thissection is currently marked reserved and will be developedduring Fiscal Year 2010.https://standards.nasa.gov/documents/viewdoc/3315785/3315
  24. 24. Ares I Forward Skirt Mockup AnalysisUpper Stage MOCKUP Forward Skirt First Stage
  25. 25. Example Ground Support Equipment  There is little that can be done to change these cramped dimensions in rocket design, so adjustments were made to:  the ground support equipment  box placement locations and heightsSEAT  The ground support equipment acts as a seat, and foot rest.  Ground support equipment installed to:  protect the technician from injury  protect the flight hardware from damageFoot Rest
  26. 26. Avionics Boxes The analysis determined the best locations of avionics boxes based on the technicians location capabilities and:  Box weight  Tool access  Hand volumes  Cable routes
  27. 27. Hatch
  28. 28. Biomechanical Analysis of Installing Avionics BoxesPlacing Box Accurately L5/S1 spinal stress
  29. 29. Biomechanical Analysis of AvionicsBox Installation Cold plate damageBox in restricted space EMG and reflective markers Force Plate
  30. 30. Assessing Human Factors using Motion Capture
  31. 31. KSC Human Engineering Modeling and Performance Laboratory (HEMAP) Human Factors Analysis Process Motion Captured Task Real time (Actual Techs & Biomechanical Biomechanical Data) Model CAD and Human Real Task Real time Simulations Human Factors Analyses and Real time Ergonomic Recommendations Analysis HEMAP supports multiple person/object tracking into live ergonomic analyses
  32. 32. Orion Seat Removal & Replacement Motion CaptureCAD Models with Human Models SEAT
  33. 33. Orion Avionics Box Installation
  34. 34. Self-Contained Atmospheric Protective Ensemble SCAPE Suit Markers placed on SCAPE suits to create actual life size and motion of suits
  35. 35. Interactive Virtual collaboration  Interactive virtual collaboration of motion capture data among KSC and MSFC  The web sharing of motion capture tasks within the shared virtual environment provides real-time ability to update designs based on actual human-system interfaces being evaluated. Combined Design EnvironmentMotion Capture at KSC Motion Capture at MSFC
  36. 36. Head-Mounted Displays Incorporation of wearable Head-Mounted Displays (HMDs):  Negates need for physical mockups.  Familiarization/training benefits  Collaborative web sharing of models and live motion tracking among NASA centers  Immersing the HMD wearers in simple physical mockups
  37. 37. Pro E Manikin
  38. 38. Pro E Manikin PRO E MANIKIN for Verification
  39. 39. Pro E Manikin
  40. 40. Pro E Manikin
  41. 41. Solution NASA Internal Only
  42. 42. Solution
  43. 43. KSC Design VisualizationKSC Design Visualization has the capability to analyze human factors.These factors include sight lines, visibility, reach, motion, joint loading, repetition, calories and any additional impediments caused by safety or life support systems.
  44. 44. KSC Design Visualization LAS safe and arm access at PAD SCAPE fueling SCAPE access Astronaut emergency egress
  45. 45. KSC Design Visualization Pryo access Water filter access Astronaut egress post flight Access arm assessment
  46. 46. KSC Display/Control Screens
  47. 47. Display and Control Screen Requirements Human Machine Interface (HMI) Programming Guidelines, (KGCS) local screen guidelines document Ground Elements Integrated Launch Operations Application Software Implementation Standards (ILOA) human factors section for local and remote screen design. Screens currently under development  GSP (Ground Special Power)  ECS (Environmental Control System)  CMASS (Crew Module Ammonia Servicing System)  FLDS (Fire Detection)  LH2/LO2  IOPSS (Ignition Overpressure Sound Suppression)
  48. 48. IOPSS Screen Shot
  49. 49. Screen Shot With HFEA Notes
  50. 50. Screen Shot With HFEA Notes
  51. 51. HFEA Report
  52. 52. Recommendations
  53. 53. Recommendations to Agency Continue to develop Human Factors requirements at all SE&I levels (1 to 5). E.g. NASA STD 3001. Continue to develop human factors processes, tools, motion capture and other mockups and human modeling. Continue the Human factors collaborations between centers for our missions and programs, tools, requirements, and processes. Continue to revisit and improve upon these lessons from the past. And develop new lessons as we go through these incremental developments.
  54. 54. Thanks to the folks across the NASA Agency, and at KSC, for your contributions towards thehuman factors achievements forimproving ground processing for launch and crewed space vehicles.
  55. 55. References Dr., Kanki, B,; Dr., Barth, T,; Ms, Miller, D,; Mr, King, J,; Mr., Stambolian, D,; Ms, Hawkins, J,; Mr, Westphal, J,; Ms, Dippolito, P; Mr, Dinally, J,; Ms, Blunt, M. “ Human Factors Issues in the Design of Ground Systems: A Pathfinder Activity” http://www.congrex.nl/08a11/programme.asp Jeffrey S. Osterlund & Brad A. Lawrence. 61st Virtual Reality: Avatars in Human Spaceflight Training. International Astronautical Congress, Prague, CZ. Copyright ©2010 by the International Astronautical Federation. http://kave.ksc.nasa.gov/HEMAP/HEMAP2010/HEMAP2010.mp4 Damon B. Stambolian, Dr. Gena Henderson, Ms. Darcy Miller, Mr. Gary Prevost, Mr. Donald Tran, and Dr. Tim Barth.“1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and Operability of Ground Systems up to CxP PDR” 2011 IEEEAC paper#1007 Gregory M. Dippolito & Damon B. Stambolian. Co-authors; Bao Nguyen, Charles Dischinger, Donald Tran, Gena Henderson, Dr. Tim Barth. Human Factors Analysis to Improve the Processing of Ares-1 Launch Vehicle. 2011 IEEEACpaper#1022 Roland Schlierf & Damon B. Stambolian; co-authors Darcy Miller, Juan Posada, Mike Haddock, Mike Haddad, Mr. Donald Tran, Dr. Gena Henderson, and Dr. Tim Barth, Human Factors Operability Timeline Analysis to Improve the Processing Flow of the Orion Spacecraft. 2011 IEEEACpaper#1021 Damon B. Stambolian, Shihab S. Asfour, Moataz Eltoukhy, and Stephanie Bonin. Avionics Box Precision Placement in Restricted Space. XXIIIrd Annual International Occupational Ergonomics and Safety Conference. June 9-10, 2011 United Space Alliance Human Engineering Modeling and Performance (HEMAP) Laboratory. OFT-1 Backbone Avionics Installation/Removal Assessment. Baseline Report (Overall Access, Gross Motor Tasks Damon B. Stambolian., Marie-Jeanne O. Steady Ndiaye., Brad A. Lawrence., Katrine S Stelges., Lora C. Ridgwell., Mary K. Osterhout., Robert E. Mills., Gena Henderson., Donald Tran., and Tim Barth. Human Modeling for Ground Processing Human Factors Engineering Analysis. 2012 IEEEACpaper#0175 NASA Lesson Learned Entry: 3696. 2010. Avionics Cooling. https://nen.nasa.gov/web/ll/home/llis-doc-viwer? url=https://nen.nasa.gov/llis_content/imported_content/lesson_3696.html Damon B. Stambolian., Steven W. Larcher., Gena Henderson., Donald Tran., and Tim Barth. Avionics Box Cold Plate Damage Prevention. 2012 IEEEACpaper#1074 Stambolian, D., Eltoukhy, M., Asfour, S., & Bonin, S. (2011, July). Investigation of avionics box precision placement using motion capturing and thermal imaging techniques. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 2(7)
  56. 56. BACKUP
  57. 57. No clear communication between the Apollo program and the Shuttle program 5376Description of Driving Event:During the transition from the Apollo program to the Shuttle program, concerning ground processing human factors, there was no clear review of what they learned from the Apollo and how it could assist their efforts in the Shuttle Program.Lesson(s) Learned: It is extremely important from the beginning of a program to review and use what you have learned from the program before it. The entire agency needs to be coordinated in the development of a program, and the agency needs to look everything they learned from previous program. One center may be able to learn from a situation at another center that could assist them in the development process of a program.Recommendation(s): At the pre beginning stages of a program or a project, review situations that evolved from previous programs and see if you can implement and incorporate these solutions in the new program or project. Human Factors and other lessons from flight crew can be applied to ground crews, and ground crew lessons can be applied to flight crews. Also, a lesson from launch vehicle systems, ground systems, or crewed vehicle systems; may be applicable to all three systems.
  58. 58. The use of human factors and the Space Flight Awareness (SFA) in the Apollo development 5377Description of Driving Event:o Since there was not a dedicated human factors section in the Apollo reference materials, there were no formal human factors lessons learned as well. However, there were several methods used to analysis human factors and provide proper training for the human interacting with the hardware that was developed.Lesson(s) Learned:o With the increase of new technologies and untried methods, and the importance that spacecraft processing operations play in the success of each mission, more emphasis in human factors will be required. The 0-G human factors practices for the flight crew are well in place and will be easily accepted in future programs, but 1-G human factors for the ground personnel will need special attention because there has not been an emphasis for this in previous spacecraft development.Recommendation(s): As the use and development increases, ensure that the new designs are assessed by a human factors engineer. Provide proper training for the new technology and systems established immediately to reduce confusion and human error. Continue to use the SFA program as a training tool. Coordination between the flight and ground crew are essential to mission success.
  59. 59. Human Engineering should be considered aSystems Engineering and Integration function 1831 Lesson(s) Learned: Human Engineering contributions are best considered if integrated during the design process. Failure to involve Human Engineering at the System level ultimately leads to design that are less then optimal from a maintainability, supportability, and operability standpoint. Recommendation(s):  1. Future Programs should place more emphasis on Human Engineering effects for design, development, and operation.  2. An effective approach would be to include Human Engineering under Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I).  3. Ensure data products are in place up front to address Human Engineering Functions at the Systems level.  4. To ensure that Human Engineering is not overlooked within each system, e.g., Mechanical, Electrical, Fluids, etc., each system should have its own Human Engineering section to confirm that this particular system has been addressed by Human Engineering. Within this section, useful parts of MIL- STD-1472 and other applicable Human Engineering documents that apply to this system should be listed.
  60. 60. Human Factors Engineering; Acceptance, Implementation, and Verification as a System 1801 Lesson(s) Learned: Include Human Factors Engineering as an essential system for human spaceflight. Human Factors Engineering impacts all systems having interfaces and interactions with humans, including: hardware, software, flight preparation, mission operations, and maintenance for both ground and flight. How Solved: The Human Engineering Office was established within the Spacecraft Project Office. Human Engineering was included at a visible level for RFPs and WBSs. Recommendation(s): 1. Human Factors Engineering requirements that are carried as applicable requirements should not be ignored; rather they should be (a) adequately funded, (b) implemented in the design definition, and (c) properly verified. 2. Human Factors Engineering personnel with training, experience, and expertise should be hired and retained at NASA and at the contractors as key personnel. 3. Human Factors Engineering design tools should be funded to enable spacecraft- specific research and design development, providing actual data from trade-off studies. Include 1-g full-scale mockups and multi-degrees-of-freedom simulators as well as virtual simulators.
  61. 61. Human Factors Engineering; Acceptance, Implementation, and Verification as a SystemLesson(s) Learned: 4. Human Factors Engineering awareness training and re-education should be provided to NASA and contractor management, budget controllers, contracting officers, design discipline leads, as well as to legislative and executive branch government leaders. 5. Emphasize that Human Factors Engineering is a primary systems discipline necessary for safe and efficient spaceflight. 6. Human Factors Engineering scope and language at NASA and among the contractors must be standardized with the overall Human Factors Engineering community. For example, does Human Factors Engineering include everything in NASA-STD-3000 or is it limited to what might be funded for crew systems and cockpit layout? For example, does habitable volume mean the same thing to each NASA and contractor player? 7. Human Factors Engineering should be included in the work breakdown structure (WBS) of the new program, Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV). Preferably this should be done in the Systems Engineering / Systems Integration section; alternatively a standard Human Factors Engineering statement should be called out in every WBS callout for deliverables having human interfaces.
  62. 62. Human Factors Engineering; Acceptance, Implementation, and Verification as a SystemLesson(s) Learned: 8. Spaceflight proposals should include a stand-alone section on Human Factors Engineering, with emphasis on scope, personnel, resources, and facilities all with sufficient funding to accomplish a successful Human Factors Engineering design. In addition, the introduction and executive summary should make it clear that Human Factors Engineering is a primary system. 9. Data from Human Factors Engineering assessments and tests should drive lower level requirements and resulting design. 10. Human Factors Engineering should be involved and integrated in the daily engineering problem solving and integration process. 11. Human Factors Engineering should have signature authority on all designs and drawings affecting human environments, interfaces, and interactions. 12. Human Factors Engineers with training, experience, and expertise should be the ones making decisions on Human Factors Engineering. This should be done with participation, but not domination, by users (crew, ground support personnel, mission controllers) and managers.
  63. 63. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Support Equipment (GSE) Human Factors Engineering Pathfinder 5416Description of Driving Event:Opportunity to improve KSC designs by optimizing flight and ground crew interfaces with ground systems and GSE. The expected outcomes are: Ground systems/GSE that are safer and easier (and therefore cheaper) for ground crews to operate and maintain. Fewer mishaps during ground operations where ground system/GSE designs are cited as contributing factors or causes.Lesson(s) Learned: HFE expertise should be embedded in the design teams and various engineering organizations. Prioritize limited Human Factors Engineering (HFE) resources by ranking systems based on assessments of human-system integration technical risks (complexity, criticality/hazards, and frequency of human-system interactions) and schedule risks. HFEs should have adequate training and relevant spacecraft (launch vehicle, payload) processing experience. Supplement HFE expertise with the experiences and expertise of technicians, operations engineers, systems engineers, quality engineers and inspectors, engineers from other disciplines, and Safety and Mission Assurance(S&MA) as needed.
  64. 64. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Support Equipment (GSE) Human Factors Engineering PathfinderDescription of Driving Event:Opportunity to improve KSC designs by optimizing flight and ground crew interfaces with ground systems and GSE. The expected outcomes are: Ground systems/GSE that are safer and easier (and therefore cheaper) for ground crews to operate and maintain. Fewer mishaps during ground operations where ground system/GSE designs are cited as contributing factors or causes.Lesson(s) Learned: HFE methods, processes, and tools need to be part of the systems engineering process over the entire system life-cycle. Use human interface modeling and simulation capabilities for evaluating designs from a HFE perspective Integrate human factors engineering into the systems engineering process. Taking a systems engineering perspective also promotes consideration of common/shared HFE issues across multiple design teams. Develop a HFE process to accept and adapt heritage ground systems and GSE designs from one program to the next. Use mishap, close call, and process escape data from comparable systems to improve
  65. 65. Lessons Learned Entry 5416 HFE concepts need to be infused as early as possible during the design phases and reinforced during all milestone reviews. Require human factors assessments as part of 30, 60, and 90% design review packages. Determine criteria for a complete, valid human factors assessment at each design phase. A centralized authority or Point of Contact (chief human factors engineer function) and common assessment tools can help ensure accurate, consistent, valid, and value-added human factors engineering assessments. 14. Engineers need to exercise good engineering judgment in addition to satisfying human factors requirements. Provide training on applicable HFE standards and program/project requirements that are specifically tailored for ground system/GSE design teams. 15. Provide practical guidance materials handbooks and workbooks for ground system/GSE design teams. Provide as many relevant ground system/GSE examples and design case studies in the training materials and handbooks as possible.
  66. 66. 1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and Operability of Constellation Ground Systems 2136Description of Driving Event:The early work of the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) focused on human factors engineering (i.e., applying what is known about human capabilities and limitations to the design of products, processes, systems, and work environments) as it related to human spaceflight, particularly crew health and performance. During the transition from the Orbital Space Plane Project (OSP) Program to the Constellation Program, the requirements for applying human factors engineering to the design of tasks related to the ground processing of space vehicles were not well-defined.Lesson(s) Learned: Use available experiences and lessons from prior programs to optimize ground processing operability by leveraging human capabilities, not exceeding them. Employ people qualified in human factors engineering on the team from the beginning of the project. Make human factors a proactive part of the design process with well-defined requirements that add value to the design. Voice the need for human factors accommodations where appropriate. Even if these comments are not accepted, the effort is worthwhile because it helps to develop a better awareness of the importance of human factors.
  67. 67. 1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and Operability of Constellation Ground SystemsLesson(s) Learned: In document reviews, look at previous successful human factors program documentation such as Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) lessons learned publications, and make comments to promote consideration of human factors. Try to incorporate human factors into the design proactively, reactively, and everywhere. When resources are limited (which is often the case when using human factors engineering in a particular engineering culture for the first time), apply them to the areas that will produce the best results. Also, build on past successes and combine the work done on multiple successful projects. Creating human factors requirements at a higher level is important in gaining acceptance of human factors requirements at lower levels. Future NASA programs should consider incorporating all Level 2 (L2) human factors requirements into one document such as CxP 70024, Constellation Program: Human-Systems Integration Requirements (HSIR), i.e., include the ground processing human factors requirements for ground hardware with the ground processing human factors requirements for flight hardware. Recommend that pilot testing of new processes be done as soon as possible, but make sure that the pilot test will produce added value.
  68. 68. 1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and Operability of Constellation Ground SystemsLesson(s) Learned: Because MIL-STD-1472 was used as a human factors standard in the past, it is hard to adopt a requirements document with less content, even though complying with the more than 1,700 requirements in MIL-STD-1472 would have been very difficult. Human factors engineers should perform the human factors assessment as embedded members of the design team. When processes already exist, try to modify them to incorporate the human factors design considerations. Exercise patience and be ready to compromise in gaining acceptance of new requirements. From the beginning, make sure existing documentation is understood. Work early to improve the existing documentation or obtain a buy-in from all parties that the human factors requirements document can supersede existing documentation. Do not disregard work that is not accepted when first proposed. To add value for the stakeholders, the work may need to be adjusted or used at a later time.
  69. 69. 1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and Operability of Constellation Ground SystemsRecommendation(s): Leverage the use of human factors to improve the design for the human aspect of nominal operability, including assembly, maintenance, inspection, and the integrated and stand-alone testing required for initial flight tests. Develop and refine the Human Factors Engineering Analysis (HFEA) Tool and processes as an efficient and effective means to develop design packages for 30%, 60%, and 90% design reviews, and as a tool for final design reviews. Formally document the human factors assessment process and tool in the L3, L4, and L5 System Engineering Management Plans (SEMPs). Once the requirements used in the HFEA Tool mature, do the following: - Incorporate a complete set of the high-level (parent) ground systems human factors requirements into NASA STD-5005 and KSC-DE-512-SM. - Incorporate these requirements into revisions of the L3 document, CxP 72006, Ground Systems: System Requirements Document (GS-SRD). - Revise CxP 72210, Ground Systems: Human Factors Requirements Document (GS-HFRD) to develop a stand-alone human factors requirements and assessment process document. - Work to have these ground human factors requirements written into CxP 70024, HSIR, or future L2 NASA human factors documents.
  70. 70. 1-G Human Factors for Optimal Processing and Operability of Constellation Ground SystemsRecommendation(s): Once the revised NASA-STD-5005C is accepted by the Constellation Program (CxP), incorporate the FAA’s Human Factors Design Standard into the HFEA Tool. Apply human factors principles and analysis during the design of ground processing activities to prepare flight hardware for CxP test flights. Prove the usefulness of human factors engineering so that it will be commonly accepted as part of the work breakdown structure of projects at KSC. As future work for the HFEA Tool, identify associated HF standards and lessons learned from previous NASA programs and industry as well as identify solutions and analysis methods proven from use of the HFEA Tool, design of subsystems, and from other sources. Incorporate this information into the HFEA Tool so the human factors engineer may better select requirements and methods when designing ground processing systems. Employ the human factors systems engineering processes and lessons learned from development of Ares I ground systems to the development of ground systems for Ares V.

×