Comparative Analysis of Human and Teleoperated Robotic Performance in Space Utility Operations

Abstract

Human participation in space exploration introduces significant cost, risk, and engineering complexity, motivating increased reliance on robotic systems for many operational tasks. However, the degree to which robotic manipulation can effectively substitute for direct human interaction remains an open human factors question. This study evaluates performance differences using a Fitts’ Law button-tapping task conducted under four distinct experimental conditions including direct human operation in a shirtsleeve environment, human manipulation using a simulated hardshell spacesuit arm, robotic manipulation with direct visual feedback of the worksite, and robotic manipulation relying on camera-based teleoperation. Following each set of trials, participants completed subjective workload assessments including the NASA Task Load Index (TLX) and the Bedford workload scale. Task performance was further quantified using Fitts’ Law, taking throughput and movement time as functions of an index of difficulty, providing a consistent measure of manipulation efficiency across conditions. Results indicate that shirtsleeve and simulated suit-arm conditions produce significantly higher efficiency and lower cognitive workload than robotic operation, whereas robotic conditions reduce perceived physical effort compared to the suited condition but introduce far greater cognitive workload. These findings suggest that direct human interaction and robotic manipulation fulfill complementary roles rather than serving as direct replacements for one another, and that future missions may benefit by integrating both approaches to balance efficiency, operator workload, and operational flexibility.