Time-Varying Optimization of Networked Systems With Human Preferences
Not provided.
Automation & Control Systems↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Human System”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Towards a framework of human factors certification of complex human-machine systems
As far as total automation is not realized, the combination of technical and social components in man-machine systems demands not only contributions from engineers but at least to an equal extent from behavioral scientists. This has been neglected far too long. The psychological, social and cultural aspects of technological innovations were almost totally overlooked. Yet, along with expected safety improvements the institutionalization of human factors is on the way. The introduction of human factors certification of complex man-machine systems will be a milestone in this process.
Bukasa, Birgit↗
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Human-in-the-Loop Controller and Pilot Acceptability Study: Collision Avoidance, Self-Separation, and Alerting Times (CASSAT)
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has been mandated by the Congressional funding bill of 2012 to open the National Airspace System (NAS) to Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). With the growing use of unmanned systems, NASA has established a multi-center "UAS Integration in the NAS" Project, in collaboration with the FAA and industry, and is guiding its research efforts to look at and examine crucial safety concerns regarding the integration of UAS into the NAS. Key research efforts are addressing requirements for detect-and-avoid (DAA), self-separation (SS), and collision avoidance (CA) technologies. In one of a series of human-in-the-loop experiments, NASA Langley Research Center set up a study known as Collision Avoidance, Self-Separation, and Alerting Times (CASSAT). The first phase assessed active air traffic controller interactions with DAA systems and the second phase examined reactions to the DAA system and displays by UAS Pilots at a simulated ground control station (GCS). Analyses of the test results from Phase I and Phase II are presented in this paper. Results from the CASSAT study and previous human-in-the-loop experiments will play a crucial role in the FAA's establishment of rules, regulations, and procedures to safely, efficiently, and effectively integrate UAS into the NAS.
Comstock, James R., Jr.↗
Recommendation for a Medical System Concept of Operations for Gateway Missions
NASA’s exploration missions to cis-lunar space will establish a permanent gateway to future transport missions to Mars. These missions mandate a significant paradigm change for mission planning, spacecraft design, human systems integration, and in-flight medical care due to constraints on mass, volume, power, resupply, and medical evacuation capability. These constraints require medical system development to be tightly integrated with mission and habitat design to provide a sufficient medical infrastructure and enable mission success. This concept of operations provides a vision of medical care needs that will be used to guide the development of a medical system for the cis-lunar Gateway Habitat. This medical system will serve as the precursor to what is implemented in future exploration missions to Mars. This concept of operations documents an overview of the stakeholder needs and system goals of a medical system and provides examples of the types of activities for which the system will be used during the mission. This concept of operations informs the ExMC systems engineering effort to define the Gateway Habitat Medical System by documenting the medical activities and capabilities relevant to Gateway missions, as identified by the ExMC clinician community. In addition, this concept of operations will inform the subsequent systems engineering process of developing technical requirements, system architectures, interfaces, and verification and validation approaches for the medical system. This document supports the closure of ExMC Gap Med01: We do not have a concept of operations for medical care during exploration missions, corresponding to the ExMC-managed human system risk: Risk of Adverse Health Outcomes & Decrements in Performance due to Inflight Medical Conditions.
Rubin, David↗
CHP-PRA Proof-of-Concept [Simulation] Sensitivity Assessment
An effort is underway to establish a Crew Health and Performance system (CHP) tradespace tool using a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling and simulation system. The goal of the CHP-PRA effort is to provide a means of quantifying the integrated influence of CHP functions and capabilities on risk outcome metrics associated with health, performance, and long-term health. These metrics can then be used to establish potential risk-based trades on CHP system designed functionality and capabilities. Previously, our team demonstrated a proof-of-concept PRA approach that estimated the integrated influence of exercise countermeasures on 8 human system risks (Figure 1a) with outcomes associated with health and medical risk metrics. We reported that the change in the integrated relative health risk was small (Figure 1b) and that the small change in overall risk resulted from compounding and competing contribution levels of the individual risks. This interesting observation illustrates the emergent complexity of even straightforward representations of the human health and performance risk space and the ability of PRA models to capture this balance of global risk concerns. A key question that is not addressed in the initial analysis is “even though the global risk is relatively nominal, do any of the local risks become unacceptable?” In essence, we seek to determine what relative change in the human system risks are contributing to the relatively muted sensitivity of the proof-of-concept model combined risk assessments. Evaluations at the component risk level should elucidate if any individual risk reaches a high level that is subsequentially balanced by reductions in other areas. To further understand the relative changes in the component risks in the proof-of-concept model, and to elucidate how future refinements can be targeted, a means of establishing the contributions of the robustness of the proof-of-concept approach will be demonstrated.
astronaut health↗
Virtual workstations and telepresence interfaces: Design accommodations and prototypes for Space Station Freedom evolution
An advanced human-system interface is being developed for evolutionary Space Station Freedom as part of the NASA Office of Space Station (OSS) Advanced Development Program. The human-system interface is based on body-pointed display and control devices. The project will identify and document the design accommodations ('hooks and scars') required to support virtual workstations and telepresence interfaces, and prototype interface systems will be built, evaluated, and refined. The project is a joint enterprise of Marquette University, Astronautics Corporation of America (ACA), and NASA's ARC. The project team is working with NASA's JSC and McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company (the Work Package contractor) to ensure that the project is consistent with space station user requirements and program constraints. Documentation describing design accommodations and tradeoffs will be provided to OSS, JSC, and McDonnell Douglas, and prototype interface devices will be delivered to ARC and JSC. ACA intends to commercialize derivatives of the interface for use with computer systems developed for scientific visualization and system simulation.
Mcgreevy, Michael W.↗
A Microfluidics-HPLC/Differential Mobility Spectrometer Macromolecular Detection System for Human and Robotic Missions
Our goal is to develop a unique, miniaturized, solute analyzer based on microfluidics technology. The analyzer consists of an integrated microfluidics High Performance Liquid Chromatographic chip / Differential Mobility Spectrometer (?HPLCchip/ DMS) detection system
fatty acids↗
Human Landing System (HLS) Program Non-Design Driver Lunar Environments
The purpose of this white paper is to provide a source of information on lunar environments which, according to scientific and engineering consensus, should not impact human-class spacecraft design. Additionally, comparisons are shown between the Apollo missions and Artemis mission parameters for solar lighting angles at the landing sites and plasma region exposure.
HLS↗
Optimizations of Human Restraint Systems for Short-Period Acceleration
A restraint system's main function is to restrain its occupant when his vehicle is subjected to acceleration. If the restraint system is rigid and well-fitting (to eliminate slack) then it will transmit the vehicle acceleration to its occupant without modifying it in any way. Few present-day restraint systems are stiff enough to give this one-to-one transmission characteristic, and depending upon their dynamic characteristics and the nature of the vehicle's acceleration-time history, they will either magnify or attenuate the acceleration. Obviously an optimum restraint system will give maximum attenuation of an input acceleration. In the general case of an arbitrary acceleration input, a computer must be used to determine the optimum dynamic characteristics for the restraint system. Analytical solutions can be obtained for certain simple cases, however, and these cases are considered in this paper, after the concept of dynamic models of the human body is introduced. The paper concludes with a description of an analog computer specially developed for the Air Force to handle completely general mechanical restraint optimization programs of this type, where the acceleration input may be any arbitrary function of time.
Payne, P. R.↗
Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, and Psychosocial Adaptions within a Team
The Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team (the Team Risk) is primarily performance-focused, with a secondary emphasis on behavioral health outcomes resulting from team performance and interpersonal interactions. Monitoring tools, measures, and countermeasures are aimed at enhancing team processes and team composition configurations to optimize team performance and functioning. Long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) will include major challenges that could affect team performance, including social isolation, physical confinement, a small and diverse crew, communication delays between crew and ground, limited or no crew rotation or evacuation options, limited or no resupply, and a high-consequence environment. Each of these conditions will affect the crew’s coordination, cooperation, psychological well-being, and performance. Although the International Space Station (ISS) remains important for studies that require spaceflight testing and validation, the current conditions on the ISS do not adequately mimic the exploration environment that is required for National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) teams research, and thus access to terrestrial or ground-based analogs of LDEM conditions is paramount. The emphasis on analogs for research is reflected in this updated evidence review of the Team Risk, and includes data from studies conducted at isolated, confined, extreme (ICE) environments (e.g., Antarctic stations), and from several mission simulation analogs such as the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) (HERA Experiment Information Package, 2014), also known as isolated, confined, controlled (ICC) environments. These studies have characterized many team factors regarding LDEMs, and the Team Risk has now matured from risk characterization to focusing more on countermeasure development. Because spaceflight evidence for team-level research is lacking, no reliable data is available to quantify the impact of team-level variables on individual and team-level outcomes during spaceflight missions. Until recently, no systematic attempt had been undertaken to measure the performance effects of team cohesion, team composition, team training, or team-related psychosocial adaptation during spaceflight. The Team Risk is a relatively young research area for NASA, with substantial growth only since the 2000s, and with limited access to spaceflight performance data. As a result, spaceflight evidence is lacking to identify specifically what team composition, level of training, amount of cohesion, or quality of psychosocial adaptation is necessary to reduce the risk of performance errors in space. However, astronaut journals and interviews and reports from spaceflight subject matter experts (SMEs) provide testimonies that team performance during spaceflight is important for mission success and to maintain crew health. Team spaceflight data is now being collected as part of the Spaceflight Standard Measures task (Clement, 2021)—a set of core measurements related to many human spaceflight risks that are collected from astronauts before, during, and after long-duration missions. The team-related standard measures focus on team cohesion, team performance, group living, team climate, and team processes. Collection of standard measures data is ongoing and published data is not yet available. Finally, although spaceflight evidence is lacking, evidence gleaned from ground studies and spaceflight analog studies will help close the gaps outlined in the Team Risk. Ground-based studies provide quantitative evidence for team functioning in ICE environments. Academic research on teams has produced dozens of meta-analyses that can be used to understand the general relationships among team inputs (e.g., team member characteristics and skills, job context), team processes, and emergent states (e.g., coordination, communication, cooperation, cohesion, trust, shared cognition), and team outcomes (e.g., effectiveness, errors, adaptation). Teams are complex, incorporating individual characteristics of team members, but also existing at a level that is greater than the sum of its parts. Therefore, the Team Risk must be integrated with other individual-focused NASA Human Research Program (HRP) risks, including Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Sleep, and Human-Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA), and emerging research indicates more integration may needed between the Team Risk and the physiologically oriented risks. Much of this integration occurs through the Human Systems Risk Board (HSRB). A lack of team functioning may be a stressor in some circumstances, but the team often acts as a countermeasure. For example, support for team leaders and teammates can facilitate individual functioning and encourage psychological and physically healthy behaviors and attitudes. However, more research is needed regarding teams during LDEMs and the remaining gaps in the research are described in the current report.
Lauren Blackwell Landon↗
NASA's UAS NAS Access Project
The vision of the Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project is "A global transportation system which allows routine access for all classes of UAS." The goal of the UAS Integration in the NAS Project is to "contribute capabilities that reduce technical barriers related to the safety and operational challenges associated with enabling routine UAS access to the NAS." This goal will be accomplished through a two-phased approach based on development of system-level integration of key concepts, technologies and/or procedures, and demonstrations of integrated capabilities in an operationally relevant environment. Phase 1 will take place the first two years of the Project and Phase 2 will take place the following three years. The Phase 1 and 2 technical objectives are: Phase 1: Developing a gap analysis between current state of the art and the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) UAS Concept of Operations . Validating the key technical areas identified by this Project . Conducting initial modeling, simulation, and flight testing activities . Completing Sub-project Phase 1 deliverables (spectrum requirements, comparative analysis of certification methodologies, etc.) and continue Phase 2 preparation (infrastructure, tools, etc.) Phase 2: Providing regulators with a methodology for developing airworthiness requirements for UAS, and data to support development of certifications standards and regulatory guidance . Providing systems-level, integrated testing of concepts and/or capabilities that address barriers to routine access to the NAS. Through simulation and flight testing, address issues including separation assurance, communications requirements, and human systems integration in operationally relevant environments. The UAS in the NAS Project will demonstrate solutions in specific technology areas, which will address operational/safety issues related to UAS access to the NAS. Since the resource allocation for this Project is limited ($150M over the five years), the focus is on reducing the technical barriers where NASA has unique capabilities. As a result, technical areas, such as Sense and Avoid (SAA) and beyond line of sight command and control will not be addressed. While these are critical barriers to UAS access, currently, there is a great deal of global effort being exercised to address these challenge areas. Instead, specific technology development in areas where there is certainty that NASA can advance the research to high technology readiness levels will be the Project's focus. Specific sub-projects include Separation Assurance, Human Systems Integration, Communications, Certification, and Integrated Test and Evaluation. Each sub-project will transfer technologies to relevant key stakeholders and decision makers through research transition teams, technology forums, or through other analogous means.
Johnson, Charles W.↗
Utilizing Radioisotope Power Systems for Human Lunar Exploration
The Vision for Space Exploration has a goal of sending crewed missions to the lunar surface as early as 2015 and no later than 2020. The use of nuclear power sources could aid in assisting crews in exploring the surface and performing In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) activities. Radioisotope Power Systems (RPS) provide constant sources of electrical power and thermal energy for space applications. RPSs were carried on six of the crewed Apollo missions to power surface science packages, five of which still remain on the lunar surface. Future RPS designs may be able to play a more active role in supporting a long-term human presence. Due to its lower thermal and radiation output, the planned Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG) appears particularly attractive for manned applications. The MCNPX particle transport code has been used to model the current SRG design to assess its use in proximity with astronauts operating on the surface. Concepts of mobility and ISRU infrastructure were modeled using MCNPX to analyze the impact of RPSs on crewed mobility systems. Strategies for lowering the radiation dose were studied to determine methods of shielding the crew from the RPSs.
Schreiner, Timothy M.↗
UAS Integration in the NAS Project: Integrated Test and Evaluation (IT&E) Flight Test 3
The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability, Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project will conduct a series of Human-in-the-Loop and Flight Test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS.
interoperability↗
Integrated Test and Evaluation Flight Test 3 Flight Test Plan
The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability, Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project will conduct a series of Human-in-the-Loop and Flight Test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS.
Unmanned↗
UAS-NAS Flight Test Series 3: Test Environment Report
The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration in the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability (SSI), Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communications (Comm), and Certification to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Detect and Avoid (DAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project is conducting a series of human-in-the-loop (HITL) and flight test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity, and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS. The integrated events started with two initial flight test used to develop and test early integrations and components of the test environment. Test subjects and a relevant test environment were brought in for the integrated HITL (or IHITL) conducted in 2014. The IHITL collected data to evaluate the effectiveness of DAA Well Clear (DWC) algorithms and the acceptability of UAS concepts integrated into the NAS. The first integrated flight test (and the subject of this report) followed the IHITL by replacing the simulation components with live aircraft. The project finishes the integrated events with a final flight test to be conducted in 2016 that provides the researchers with an opportunity to collect DWC and Collision Avoidance (CA) interoperability data during flight encounters.
flight test↗
NASA Human Health and Performance Strategy
In May 2007, what was then the Space Life Sciences Directorate, issued the 2007 Space Life Sciences Strategy for Human Space Exploration. In January 2012, leadership and key directorate personnel were once again brought together to assess the current and expected future environment against its 2007 Strategy and the Agency and Johnson Space Center goals and strategies. The result was a refined vision and mission, and revised goals, objectives, and strategies. One of the first changes implemented was to rename the directorate from Space Life Sciences to Human Health and Performance to better reflect our vision and mission. The most significant change in the directorate from 2007 to the present is the integration of the Human Research Program and Crew Health and Safety activities. Subsequently, the Human Health and Performance Directorate underwent a reorganization to achieve enhanced integration of research and development with operations to better support human spaceflight and International Space Station utilization. These changes also enable a more effective and efficient approach to human system risk mitigation. Since 2007, we have also made significant advances in external collaboration and implementation of new business models within the directorate and the Agency, and through two newly established virtual centers, the NASA Human Health and Performance Center and the Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation. Our 2012 Strategy builds upon these successes to address the Agency s increased emphasis on societal relevance and being a leader in research and development and innovative business and communications practices. The 2012 Human Health and Performance Vision is to lead the world in human health and performance innovations for life in space and on Earth. Our mission is to enable optimization of human health and performance throughout all phases of spaceflight. All HHPD functions are ultimately aimed at achieving this mission. Our activities enable mission success, optimizing human health and productivity in space before, during, and after the actual spaceflight experience of our crews, and include support for ground-based functions. Many of our spaceflight innovations also provide solutions for terrestrial challenges, thereby enhancing life on Earth. Our strategic goals are aimed at leading human exploration and ISS utilization, leading human health and performance internationally, excelling in management and advancement of innovations in health and human system integration, and expanding relevance to life on Earth and creating enduring support and enthusiasm for space exploration.
Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
NASA Human Health and Performance Strategy
In May 2007, what was then the Space Life Sciences Directorate, issued the 2007 Space Life Sciences Strategy for Human Space Exploration. In January 2012, leadership and key directorate personnel were once again brought together to assess the current and expected future environment against its 2007 Strategy and the Agency and Johnson Space Center goals and strategies. The result was a refined vision and mission, and revised goals, objectives, and strategies. One of the first changes implemented was to rename the directorate from Space Life Sciences to Human Health and Performance to better reflect our vision and mission. The most significant change in the directorate from 2007 to the present is the integration of the Human Research Program and Crew Health and Safety activities. Subsequently, the Human Health and Performance Directorate underwent a reorganization to achieve enhanced integration of research and development with operations to better support human spaceflight and International Space Station utilization. These changes also enable a more effective and efficient approach to human system risk mitigation. Since 2007, we have also made significant advances in external collaboration and implementation of new business models within the directorate and the Agency, and through two newly established virtual centers, the NASA Human Health and Performance Center and the Center of Excellence for Collaborative Innovation. Our 2012 Strategy builds upon these successes to address the Agency's increased emphasis on societal relevance and being a leader in research and development and innovative business and communications practices. The 2012 Human Health and Performance Vision is to lead the world in human health and performance innovations for life in space and on Earth. Our mission is to enable optimization of human health and performance throughout all phases of spaceflight. All HH&P functions are ultimately aimed at achieving this mission. Our activities enable mission success, optimizing human health and productivity in space before, during, and after the actual spaceflight experience of our crews, and include support for ground-‐ based functions. Many of our spaceflight innovations also provide solutions for terrestrial challenges, thereby enhancing life on Earth. Our strategic goals are aimed at leading human exploration and ISS utilization, leading human health and performance internationally, excelling in management and advancement of innovations in health and human system integration, and expanding relevance to life on Earth and creating enduring support and enthusiasm for space exploration.
Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
Human Readiness Levels Explained
The Human Readiness Level scale complements and supplements the existing technology readiness level scale to support comprehensive and systematic evaluation of human system aspects throughout a system’s life cycle. The objective is to ensure humans can use a fielded technology or system as intended to support mission operations safely and effectively. This article defines the nine human readiness levels in the scale, explains their meaning, and illustrates their application using a helmet-mounted display example.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗