Virginia Tech
    • Log in
    View Item 
    •   VTechWorks Home
    • ETDs: Virginia Tech Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Masters Theses
    • View Item
    •   VTechWorks Home
    • ETDs: Virginia Tech Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    • Masters Theses
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Methods for Calculating Motion Induced Interruptions as Applied to a Space Capsule After Splashdown

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Hanyok_LW_T_2013.pdf (14.00Mb)
    Downloads: 15735
    Date
    2013-01-21
    Author
    Hanyok, Lauren Watson
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The introduction of calculation methods for motion induced interruptions (MII) in 1984 introduced a new way to quantify human factors in addition to the motion sickness index (MSI). The 1990 Graham method for calculating MII uses a combination of a vessel's acceleration and roll to determine a "tipping" factor to calculate MII per minute. The Applebee-Baitis (AB) method considered that the motions are implicitly considered in accelerations, and therefore did not require roll to calculate MII. This thesis examines and analyzes the differences between the AB and Graham methods and compares their results for a unique hull form shape, a cylindrical capsule, in rough seas to determine which method is preferred. Two tests were performed by the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division (NSWCCD) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on the Orion Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) in post-splashdown conditions. A one-quarter scale model of the CEV was tested at the Aberdeen Test Center in Aberdeen, Maryland. Direct comparison of the analyzed data, MII sensitivity to location, and scaling analyses are examined and future work to further the application of MII calculation methods are proposed. The symmetry of the capsule leads to the assumption that roll and pitch-dominant MII calculations should be on the same order of magnitude. They are not because both MII methods only take roll-motions into account. The inclusion of both pitch and roll motions for the MII calculations is proposed as future work. The Graham method was found to be the more appropriate calculation because it is more conservative, and therefore preferred in the context of crew safety.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10919/19252
    Collections
    • Masters Theses [21068]

    If you believe that any material in VTechWorks should be removed, please see our policy and procedure for Requesting that Material be Amended or Removed. All takedown requests will be promptly acknowledged and investigated.

    Virginia Tech | University Libraries | Contact Us
     

     

    VTechWorks

    AboutPoliciesHelp

    Browse

    All of VTechWorksCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    Log inRegister

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    If you believe that any material in VTechWorks should be removed, please see our policy and procedure for Requesting that Material be Amended or Removed. All takedown requests will be promptly acknowledged and investigated.

    Virginia Tech | University Libraries | Contact Us