206-ScienceReport

Science Report

02/06/2015

Nuno Loureiro

This will be the last Science report of Crew 148. I will summarise the

results we had, trying to make it concise and clear. A lot

of science has been done during these two weeks! We have conducted 6

scientific studies, having finished collecting the data

for the last one today. These are, for now, the main conclusions for

each of the studies:

1) In the PED pre-pilot study, we had a total of 5 subjects doing 3

runs each. Each run had 19 target points (each target was

between 1 to 10m, separated by intervals of 0.5m). In short the

protocol was the following: a) the subject stands on the

starting line with eyes closed, b) opens their eyes, sees the object

on the ground that has been placed by another crew

member, c) closes their eyes and walks until the target. Once stopped

where he/she believes the target was (and before

opening the eyes), he/she gives also a verbal report of the distance.

After that the subject goes back to the starting line to

repeat the process for another distance. During the whole time one of

the crew members was assuring the safety of the

subject.

The results obtained show that distances are very accurate up to a

distance of 6m but after that point subjects start to

underestimate distances. This happens for both tasks: verbal reports

and walking to target with eyes closed. Figure results1.png (attached)

shows two different representations of the egocentric distance

judgement for each modality. As an example, at a distance of 10,0m

subjects verbally report a distance of 9,3m and a walk a distance of

9,5m. Both results being significantly different from the

10m target (Wilcoxon signed rank test with p<0.0001).

2) In the Base Emergency Scenario Procedure Testing, a total of 10

simulations were run for all the combinations of the

following two categories: “Fire / Depressurisation” and “Level 1 / 2 /

3 / 4”. Each level had a 20min, 15min, 10min and 5min

maximum evacuation time in case the issues had not been located and

solved by then. Furthermore Levels 3 and 4 always

required evacuation, simulating an issue that could not be mitigated.

The debriefings after each run allowed the adaptation of

the proposed protocol for the emergency. Roles and order of actions

changed a lot from day one and for each of the crew

members, making the protocol much easier to follow and much more efficient.

3) For the Loss of Communications experiment a total of 12 runs were

performed. Throughout the days runs with and without

communications were compared noting the difficulties in the procedures

of both modalities. All necessary data was collected

and the results will be analysed in the near future. With training,

subjects had less difficulties to solve the task, reducing the

total time. Also it could be seen that the runs that allowed

communication between the subjects in the same team went much

faster and smoother than when the loss of communications was simulated.

4) Regarding the Dust mitigation experiment, data was collected for 10

runs during 4EVAs. Each crew member carried two

patches on the left arm, one patch where the mitigation was applied

and one for control. Patches were weighed before EVA

and after applying the mitigation. Since the objective of the study

was to understand which is the best mitigation method

(brush, towel or electrostatic cloth), these 3 methods were applied in

the non-control patches. Also controls were done in the

laboratory applying 1min of dust exposure. The data was collected and

registered and will be analysed once we are back “on

Earth”.

5) Finally for the Radish growth experiment, we were able to collect

soil that was prepared with and without cyanobacteria.

The objective of the study was to understand if the soil that had

cyanobacteria in it would be better for the growth of radish.

Two days after planting the radish seeds the first sprouts started to

appear in both the controls and cyanobacteria soils. Both

seem to be growing well, but sprouts in the cyanobacteria environment

look healthier than controls. However, one point to

note is that inside the hab it is impossible to find a place with

abundant light. Because of this, neither the controls nor the

cyanobacteria soils are getting enough light and their development is

not as rapid as expected.

6) Regarding Astronomy, we had a great start of mission with clear

skies during the first week, but very cloudy skies during the

second part of the mission. Yet, we were able to document a few

transits and occultations of the moons of Jupiter and take

great pictures of Jupiter and the moon.

Besides the 6 studies we have conducted, we have also participated in

a sociomapping experiment. For this experiment we

filled in a questionnaire before the mission, one every two days

during the mission and we will be filling one last questionnaire

by the end of the mission. Each questionnaire meant to evaluate the

environment and performance of the team and how it

evolved during the mission. Every two days we also got a short summary

of everyone’s answers concerning the previous two

days. By mid-mission and also by the end of the mission the reports

were more detailed, graphically presenting the answers

of the whole crew members.

Crew scientist signing off!