Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to James, John T..
The toxicological assessments of 2 grab sample canisters (GSCs) from the Shuttle are reported in a table. Based on the end-of-mission sample, the Shuttle atmosphere was acceptable for human respiration.
The toxicological assessments of 2 grab sample canisters (GSCs) from the Shuttle are reported. The toxicological assessment of 9 GSCs and 6 pairs of formaldehyde badges from the ISS is also reported. Other than a problem with traces of acrolein in the samples, the air quality was acceptable for respiration.
Reports on the air quality aboard the Space Shuttle (STS-129), and the International Space station (ULF3). NASA analyzed the grab sample canisters (GSCs) and the formaldehyde badges aboard both locations for carbon monoxide levels. The three surrogates: (sup 13)C-acetone, fluorobenzene, and chlorobenzene registered 109, 101, and 109% in the space shuttle and 81, 87, and 55% in the International Space Station (ISS). From these results the atmosphere in both the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station (ISS) was found to be breathable.
Space Toxicology is a unique and targeted discipline for spaceflight, space habitation and occupation of celestial bodies including planets, moons and asteroids. Astronaut explorers face distinctive health challenges and limited resources for rescue and medical care during space operation. A central goal of space toxicology is to protect the health of the astronaut by assessing potential chemical exposures during spaceflight and setting safe limits that will protect the astronaut against chemical exposures, in a physiologically altered state. In order to maintain sustained occupation in space on the International Space Station (ISS), toxicological risks must be assessed and managed within the context of isolation continuous exposures, reuse of air and water, limited rescue options, and the need to use highly toxic compounds for propulsion. As we begin to explore other celestial bodies in situ toxicological risks, such as inhalation of reactive mineral dusts, must also be managed.
Scores of compounds are found in the International Space Station (ISS) atmospheric samples that are returned to the Johnson Space Center Toxicology Laboratory for analysis. Spacecraft Maximum Allowable Concentrations (SMACs) are set with the view that each compound is present as if there were no other compounds present. In order to apply SMACs to the interpretation of the analytical data, the toxicologist must employ some method of combining the potential effects of the aggregate of compounds found in the atmospheric samples. The simplest approach is to assume that each quantifiable compound has the potential for some effect in proportion to the applicable SMAC, and then add all the proportions. This simple paradigm disregards the fact that most compounds have potential to adversely affect only a few physiological systems, and their effects would be independent rather than additive. An improved approach to dealing with exposure to mixtures is to add the proportions only for compounds that adversely affect the same physiological system. For example, toxicants that cause respiratory irritation are separated from those that cause neurotoxicity or cardio-toxicity. Herein we analyze ISS air quality data according to toxicological groups with a view that this could be used for understanding any crew symptoms occurring at the time of the sample acquisition. In addition, this approach could be useful in post-flight longitudinal surveys where the flight surgeon may need to identify post-flight, follow-up medical studies because of on-orbit exposures that target specific physiological systems.
The toxicological assessments of 3 grab sample canisters (GSCs) from the Shuttle are reported in Table 1. Analytical methods have not changed from earlier reports. The recoveries of the 3 surrogates ( 13C-acetone, fluorobenzene, and chlorobenzene) from the 3 Shuttle GSCs averaged 96, 90, and 85 %, respectively. Based on the end-of-mission sample, the Shuttle atmosphere was acceptable for human respiration.
The toxicological assessments of 1 grab sample canister (GSC) from the Shuttle are reported in Table 1. Analytical methods have not changed from earlier reports. The recoveries of the 3 surrogates (C-13-acetone, fluorobenzene, and chlorobenzene) from the Shuttle GSC were 100%, 93%, and 101%, respectively. Based on the historical experience using end-of-mission samples, the Shuttle atmosphere was acceptable for human respiration.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is an anthropogenic gas that accumulates in spacecraft to much higher levels than earth-normal levels. Controlling concentrations of this gas to acceptable levels to ensure crew health and optimal performance demands major commitment of resources. NASA has many decades of experience monitoring and controlling CO2, yet we are uncertain of the levels at which subtle performance decrements develop. There is limited evidence from ground-based studies that visual disturbances can occur during brief exposures and visual changes have been noted in spaceflight crews. These changes may be due to CO2 alone or in combination with other known spaceflight factors such as increased intracranial pressure due to fluid shifts. Discerning the comparative contribution of each to performance decrements is an urgent issue if we hope to optimize astronaut performance aboard the ISS. Long-term, we must know the appropriate control levels for exploration-class missions to ensure that crewmembers can remain cooperative and productive in a highly stressful environment. Furthermore, we must know the magnitude of interindividual variability in susceptibility to the adverse effects of CO2 so that the most tolerant crewmembers can be identified. Ground-based studies have been conducted for many years to set exposure limits for submariners; however, these studies are typically limited and incompletely reported. Nonetheless, NASA, in cooperation with the National Research Council, has set exposure limits for astronauts using this limited database. These studies do not consider the interactions of spaceflight-induced fluid shifts and CO2 exposures. In an attempt to discern whether CO2 levels affect the incidence of headache and visual disturbances in astronauts we performed a retrospective study comparing average CO2 levels and the prevalence of headache and visual disturbances. Our goal is to narrow gaps in the risk profile for in-flight CO2 exposures. Such studies can provide no more than partial answers to the questions of environmental interactions, interindividual variability, and optimal control levels. Future prospective studies should involve assessment of astronaut well being using sophisticated measures during exposures to levels of CO2 in the range from 2 to 8 mmHg.
Space faring nations plan to return human explorers to the moon within the next decade. Experience during the Apollo flights suggests that lunar dust will invariably get into the habitat where the finest portion (less than 5 micrometers) could be inhaled by the crew before it is cleared from the atmosphere. NASA is developing a database from which a 6-month, episodic exposure standard for lunar dust can be set. Three kinds of moon dust were prepared from a parent sample of Apollo 14 regolith #14003,96. Our goal was to prepare each type of dust sample with a mean diameter less than 2 m, which is suitable for instillation into the lungs of rats. The three samples were prepared as follows: separation from the parent sample using a fluidized bed, grinding using a jet mill grinder, or grinding with a ball-mill grinder. Grinding simulated restoration of surface activation of dust expected to occur at the surface of the moon on native lunar dust. We used two grinding methods because they seemed to produce different modes of activation. The effects of grinding were preserved by maintaining the dust in ultra-pure nitrogen until immediately before it was placed in suspension for administration to rats. The dust was suspended in physiological saline with 10% Survanta, a lung surfactant. Rats were given intratrachael instillations of the dust suspension at three doses. In addition to the three moon dusts (A, C and E), we instilled the same amount of a negative control (TiO2, B) and a highly-toxic, positive control (quartz, D). These additional mineral dusts were selected because they have well-established and very different permissible exposure levels (PELs). Our goal was to determine where lunar dusts fit between these extremes, and then estimate a PEL for each lunar dust. We evaluated many indices of toxicity to the lung. The figure shows the changes in lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), a marker of cell death, for the five dusts. Benchmark dose software (Version 2.1.2) from the Environmental Protection Agency was used to estimate the 10% effect levels (BMD(sub 10)) using five models. The best-fitting model was used to estimate the optimal BMD(sub 10) (table)
The lunar expeditions of the Apollo operations from the 60 s and early 70 s have generated awareness about lunar dust exposures and their implication towards future lunar explorations. Critical analyses on the reports from the Apollo crew members suggest that lunar dust is a mild respiratory and ocular irritant. Currently, NASA s space toxicology group is functioning with the Lunar Airborne Dust Toxicity Assessment Group (LADTAG) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) to investigate and examine toxic effects to the respiratory system of rats in order to establish permissible exposure levels (PELs) for human exposure to lunar dust. In collaboration with the space toxicology group, LADTAG and NIOSH the goal of the present research is to analyze dose-response curves from rat exposures seven and twenty-eight days after intrapharyngeal instillations, and model the response using BenchMark Dose Software (BMDS) from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Via this analysis, the relative toxicities of three types of Apollo 14 lunar dust samples and two control dust samples, titanium dioxide (TiO2) and quartz will be determined. This will be executed for several toxicity endpoints such as cell counts and biochemical markers in bronchoaveolar lavage fluid (BALF) harvested from the rats.
This is a script for a video about toxicology and the space shuttle. The first segment is deals with dust in the space vehicle. The next segment will be about archival samples. Then we'll look at real time on-board analyzers that give us a lot of capability in terms of monitoring for combustion products and the ability to monitor volatile organics on the station. Finally we will look at other issues that are about setting limits and dealing with ground based lessons that pertain to toxicology.
The toxicological assessments of 2 grab sample canisters (GSCs) from the Shuttle are reported. Analytical methods have not changed from earlier reports.
NASA will build an outpost on the lunar surface for long-duration human habitation and research. The surface of the Moon is covered by a layer of fine, reactive dust, and the living quarters in the lunar outpost are expected to be contaminated by lunar dust. Because the toxicity of lunar dust is not known, NASA has tasked its toxicology laboratory to evaluate the risk of exposure to the dust and to establish safe exposure limits for astronauts working in the lunar habitat. Studies of the pulmonary toxicity of a dust are generally done first in rodents by intratracheal/intrapharyngeal instillation. This toxicity screening test is then followed by an inhalation study, which requires much more of the test dust and is labor intensive. Preliminary results obtained by examining lung lavage fluid from dust-treated mice show that lunar dust was somewhat toxic (more toxic than TiO2, but less than quartz dust). More extensive studies are in progress to further examine lung lavage fluid for biomarkers of toxicity and lung tissues for histopathological lesions in rodents exposed to aged and activated (ground) lunar dust samples. In these studies, reference dusts (TiO2 and quartz) of known toxicities and have industrial exposure limits will be studied in parallel so the relative toxicity of lunar dust can be determined. The results from the instillation studies will be useful for choosing exposure concentrations for the animal inhalation study. The animal inhalation exposure will be conducted with lunar dust simulant prior to the study with the lunar dust. The experiment with the simulate will ensure that the study techniques used with actual lunar dust will be successful. The results of instillation and inhalation studies will reveal the toxicological risk of exposures and are essential for setting exposure limits on lunar dust for astronauts living in the lunar habitat.
Air monitoring is secondary to rigid control of risks to air quality. Air quality monitoring requires us to target the credible residual risks. Constraints on monitoring devices are severe. Must transition from archival to real-time, on-board monitoring. Must provide data to crew in a way that they can interpret findings. Dust management and monitoring may be a major concern for exploration class missions.
Lunar dust exposures occurred during the Apollo missions while the crew was on the lunar surface and especially when microgravity conditions were attained during rendezvous in lunar orbit. Crews reported that the dust was irritating to the eyes and in some cases respiratory symptoms were elicited. NASA s vision for lunar exploration includes stays of 6 months on the lunar surface hence the health effects of periodic exposure to lunar dust need to be assessed. NASA has performed this assessment with a series of in vitro and in vivo tests on authentic lunar dust. Our approach is to "calibrate" the intrinsic toxicity of lunar dust by comparison to a nontoxic dust (TiO2) and a highly toxic dust (quartz) using intratrachael instillation of the dusts in mice. A battery of indices of toxicity is assessed at various time points after the instillations. Cultures of selected cells are exposed to test dusts to assess the adverse effects on the cells. Finally, chemical systems are used to assess the nature of the reactivity of various dusts and to determine the persistence of reactivity under various environmental conditions that are relevant to a space habitat. Similar systems are used to assess the dissolution of the dust. From these studies we will be able to set a defensible inhalation exposure standard for aged dust and predict whether we need a separate standard for reactive dust. Presently-available data suggest that aged lunar highland dust is slightly toxic, that it can adversely affect cultured cells, and that the surface reactivity induced by grinding the dust persists for a few hours after activation.
After several decades of human spaceflight, the community of space-faring nations has accumulated a diverse and sometimes harrowing history of toxicological events that have plagued human space endeavors almost from the very beginning. Lessons have been learned in ground-based test beds and others were discovered the hard way - when human lives were at stake in space. From such lessons one can build a risk-management framework for toxicological events to minimize the probability of a harmful exposure, while recognizing that we cannot foresee all events. Space toxicologists have learned that relatively harmless compounds can be converted by air revitalization systems into compounds that cause serious harm to the crew. Our toxic risk management strategy now includes an assessment of the fate of any compound that might be released into the atmosphere. Propellants are highly toxic compounds, yet we have not always been able to thoroughly isolate the crew from exposure to these toxicants. Leakage of fluids from systems has resulted in hazardous conditions at times, and the behavior of such compounds inside a spacecraft has taught us how to manage potentially harmful escapes should they occur. Potential combustion events are an ever-present threat to the wellbeing of the crew. Such events have been sufficiently common that we have learned that one cannot judge the health threat of a given fire by the magnitude of the event. Management of such risks demands monitoring of combustion products. In the category of unpredictable toxic events, if one assumes that fires are predictable, we can place experience with toxic microbial metabolites, upsets during repair operations, and discharges from filters that have accumulated a substantial load of pollutants in their absorption beds. Management of such events requires a broad-spectrum, real-time analytical capability to discern the identity and concentrations of pollutants if they enter the atmosphere. Adverse events are an integral part of any human activity, and the spacefaring community must learn as much as possible from mistakes and near misses.
The toxicological assessments of 2 grab sample canisters (GSCs) from the Shuttle are reported. Analytical methods have not changed from earlier reports.
Health effects of brief and prolonged exposure to carbon dioxide continue to be a concern for those of us who manage this pollutant in closed volumes, such as in spacecraft and submarines. In both examples, considerable resources are required to scrub the atmosphere to levels that are considered totally safe for maintenance of crew health and performance. Defining safe levels is not a simple task because of many confounding factors, including: lack of a robust database on human exposures, suspected significant variations in individual susceptibility, variations in the endpoints used to assess potentially adverse effects, the added effects of stress, and the fluid shifts associated with micro-gravity (astronauts only). In 2007 the National Research Council proposed revised Continuous Exposure Guidelines (CEGLs) and Emergency Exposure Guidelines (EEGLs) to the U.S. Navy. Similarly, in 2008 the NASA Toxicology Group, in cooperation with another subcommittee of the National Research Council, revised Spacecraft Maximum Allowable Concentrations (SMACs). In addition, a 1000-day exposure limit was set for long-duration spaceflights to celestial bodies. Herein we examine the rationale for the levels proposed to the U.S. Navy and compare this rationale with the one used by NASA to set its limits. We include a critical review of previous studies on the effects of exposure to carbon dioxide and attempt to dissect out the challenges associated with setting fully-defensible limits. We also describe recent experiences with management of carbon dioxide aboard the International Space Station with 13 persons aboard. This includes the tandem operations of the Russian Vozduk and the U.S. Carbon Dioxide Removal System. A third removal system is present while the station is docked to the Shuttle spacecraft, so our experience includes the lithium hydroxide system aboard Shuttle for the removal of carbon dioxide. We discuss strategies for highly-efficient, regenerable removal of carbon dioxide that could meet the 1000-day SMAC of 0.5%, which would apply to long-duration voyages to Mars.