The Physiological Basis for Spacecraft Environmental Limits

J M Waligora

Home/Archive/NASA NTRS

NASA NTRS · 19800007528

The Physiological Basis for Spacecraft Environmental Limits

J M Waligora

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This document is intended to provide a description of the physiological effects that determine the environmental limits required in spacecraft. The existing limits for operational environments are described in terms of acceptable physiological changes. Tolerance limits are discussed for exposures to environmental factors during unusual or contingency situations. Where environmental limits may be required but do not presently exist or where additional research is required to refine existing limits, these research needs are specified.

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

J M Waligora. 1979-01-01. The Physiological Basis for Spacecraft Environmental Limits. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19800007528

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

NASA NTRS1975

Foundations of Space Biology and Medicine - Volume 2, Book 1: Ecological and Physiological Bases of Space Biology and Medicine

Barometric pressure, gas composition, toxicity, and thermal exchange of spacecraft cabin atmospheres are discussed. Effects of gravitation, acceleration, weightlessness, noise, and vibration on human behavior and performance during space flight are also described.

Melvin Calvin↗

DOE OSTI2024

Thermally unstable roosts influence winter torpor patterns in a threatened bat species

Abstract Many hibernating bats in thermally stable, subterranean roosts have experienced precipitous declines from white-nose syndrome (WNS). However, some WNS-affected species also use thermally unstable roosts during winter that may impact their torpor patterns and WNS susceptibility. From November to March 2017–19, we used temperature-sensitive transmitters to document winter torpor patterns of tricolored bats (Perimyotis subflavus) using thermally unstable roosts in the upper Coastal Plain of South Carolina. Daily mean roost temperature was 12.9 ± 4.9°C SD in bridges and 11.0 ± 4.6°C in accessible cavities with daily fluctuations of 4.8 ± 2°C in bridges and 4.0 ± 1.9°C in accessible cavities and maximum fluctuations of 13.8 and 10.5°C, respectively. Mean torpor bout duration was 2.7 ± 2.8 days and was negatively related to ambient temperature and positively related to precipitation. Bats maintained non-random arousal patterns focused near dusk and were active on 33.6% of tracked days. Fifty-one percent of arousals contained passive rewarming. Normothermic bout duration, general activity and activity away from the roost were positively related to ambient temperature, and activity away from the roost was negatively related to barometric pressure. Our results suggest ambient weather conditions influence winter torpor patterns of tricolored bats using thermally unstable roosts. Short torpor bout durations and potential nighttime foraging during winter by tricolored bats in thermally unstable roosts contrasts with behaviors of tricolored bats in thermally stable roosts. Therefore, tricolored bat using thermally unstable roosts may be less susceptible to WNS. More broadly, these results highlight the importance of understanding the effect of roost thermal stability on winter torpor patterns and the physiological flexibility of broadly distributed hibernating species.

Biodiversity & Conservation↗

NASA NTRS1990

Space Environments and their Effects on Space Automation and Robotics

Automated and robotic systems will be exposed to a variety of environmental anomalies as a result of adverse interactions with the space environment. As an example, the coupling of electrical transients into control systems, due to EMI from plasma interactions and solar array arcing, may cause spurious commands that could be difficult to detect and correct in time to prevent damage during critical operations. Spacecraft glow and space debris could introduce false imaging information into optical sensor systems. The presentation provides a brief overview of the primary environments (plasma, neutral atmosphere, magnetic and electric fields, and solid particulates) that cause such adverse interactions. The descriptions, while brief, are intended to provide a basis for the other papers presented at this conference which detail the key interactions with automated and robotic systems. Given the growing complexity and sensitivity of automated and robotic space systems, an understanding of adverse space environments will be crucial to mitigating their effects.

Henry B Garrett↗