CLDP Human Systems Integration Workshop: Crew Interfaces
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The Gateway Program must meet NASA's Agency-level human rating requirements, which are intended to accommodate human capabilities and limitations while protecting the safety of the crew, and providing to the maximum extent practical, the capability to safely recover the crew from hazardous situations. Human systems integration represents a key human rating component of Moon to Mars systems to support the execution of Artemis missions, including compliance with mandatory standards for Health and Medical, Safety and Mission Assurance, and Engineering. The human system requirements, together with the human systems integration plan, medical operations requirements, and Gateway sub-system specifications, represent the flow-down of NASA Health and Medical Standards (NASA-STD-3001, Volumes 1 and 2) into the Gateway system. This paper discusses how these documents and other human systems integration activities provide full consideration of human capabilities and limitations as part of the total system design trade space, serving as an example on how the human must be effectively integrated as part of the system in order to achieve mission success. At a bigger scale, the paper con-tributes to the application of systems engineering standards to cutting-edge space exploration initiatives and to the dialogue on how systems engineering can continue to evolve to meet the needs of such ambitious projects.
NASA-STD-3001 Space Flight Human-System Standard Volume 1, Crew Health, Volume 2, Human Factors, Habitability and Environmental Health, and the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH) have replaced the Man-Systems Integration Standards (MSIS), NASA-STD-3000. For decades, NASA-STD-3000 was a significant contribution to human spaceflight programs and to human-systems integration. However, with research program and project results being realized, advances in technology, and the availability of new information in a variety of topic areas, the time had arrived to update this extensive suite of standards and design information. NASA-STD-3001, Volume 2 contains the Agency level standards from the human and environmental factors disciplines that ensure human spaceflight operations are performed safely, efficiently, and effectively. The HIDH is organized in the same sequence and serves as the companion document to NASA-STD-3001, Volume 2, providing a compendium of human spaceflight history and knowledge. The HIDH is intended to aid interpretation of NASA-STD-3001, Volume 2 standards and to provide guidance for requirement writers and vehicle and habitat designers. Keywords Human Factors, Standards, Environmental Factors, NASA
Integrated human-Earth system models inform energy-water-land system dynamics and policies, yet their results are difficult to trace through input-data, model structure, scenario configurations, and solved outputs. Because this information is siloed across disconnected artifacts, process-based IAMs have historically lacked a unified, queryable representation. Such lack of traceability prevents researchers from systematically isolating the multi-sector drivers of complex outcomes (such as tracing water-scarcity results back to distant energy-system dynamics) or conducting holistic uncertainty attribution across hundreds of interacting parameters. To address this concern, our work documents the software engineering process of a knowledge graph that unifies these four layers for the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA_Reference scenario, GCAM v9.1). The graph was built as a relational property graph in DuckDB from the run’s own artifacts: the input-preparation dependency map (gcamdata chunk map), the model’s XML input files, the run configuration, and the results database (BaseX), successfully mapping the model’s declared structure. The resulting graph comprises 204,321 nodes and 1,687,814 edges across 16 node types and 15 edge types, with approximately 16.3 million time-series values stored separately to maintain structural efficiency. To ensure representation fidelity, every edge carries an epistemic-status annotation recording the warrant for the relationship (structural, provenance, dependency, or model-derived), and a machine-readable provenance ledger classifying the origin of every schema element. Evaluation against a fixed five-benchmark suite with locked baselines reports zero structural orphans, zero dangling edge endpoints, and 100% of output-producing technologies traceable to raw input files. Two interactive interfaces present the graph, including a serverless browser application built on DuckDB-Wasm. By establishing the first end-to-end provenance framework for an IAM, this work enables researchers and scientists to systematically audit complex policy scenarios, debug model structures, and trace policy-relevant outputs to their data origins in real time.
The mathematical model of an integrated human thermal system is formulated. The system consists of an external thermal regulation device on the human body. The purpose of the device (a network of cooling tubes held in contact with the surface of the skin) is to maintain the human body in a state of thermoneutrality. The device is controlled by varying the inlet coolant temperature and coolant mass flow rate. The differential equations of the model are approximated by a set of algebraic equations which result from the application of the explicit forward finite difference method to the differential equations. The integrated human thermal system is simulated for a variety of combinations of the inlet coolant temperature, coolant mass flow rate, and metabolic rates. Two specific cases are considered: (1) the external thermal regulation device is placed only on the head and (2) the devices are placed on the head and the torso. The results of the simulation indicate that when the human body is exposed to hot environment, thermoneutrality can be attained by localized cooling if the operating variables of the external regulation device(s) are properly controlled.
The mathematical model of an integrated human thermal system is formulated. The system consists of an external thermal regulation device on the human body. The purpose of the device (a network of cooling tubes held in contact with the surface of the skin) is to maintain the human body in a state of thermoneutrality. The device is controlled by varying the inlet coolant temperature and coolant mass flow rate. The differential equations of the model are approximated by a set of algebraic equations which result from the application of the explicit forward finite difference method to the differential equations. The integrated human thermal system is simulated for a variety of combinations of the inlet coolant temperature, coolant mass flow rate, and metabolic rates.
For decades, Space Life Sciences and NASA as an Agency have considered NASA-STD-3000, Man-Systems Integration Standards, a significant contribution to human spaceflight programs and to human-systems integration in general. The document has been referenced in numerous design standards both within NASA and by organizations throughout the world. With research program and project results being realized, advances in technology and new information in a variety of topic areas now available, the time arrived to update this extensive suite of requirements and design information. During the past several years, a multi-NASA center effort has been underway to write the update to NASA-STD-3000 with standards and design guidance that would be applicable to all future human spaceflight programs. NASA-STD-3001 - Volumes 1 and 2 - and the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH) were created. Volume 1, Crew Health, establishes NASA s spaceflight crew health standards for the pre-flight, in-flight, and post-flight phases of human spaceflight. Volume 2, Human Factors, Habitability and Environmental Health, focuses on the requirements of human-system integration and how the human crew interacts with other systems, and how the human and the system function together to accomplish the tasks for mission success. The HIDH is a compendium of human spaceflight history and knowledge, and provides useful background information and research findings. And as the HIDH is a stand-alone companion to the Standards, the maintenance of the document has been streamlined. This unique and flexible approach ensures that the content is current and addresses the fundamental advances of human performance and human capabilities and constraints research. Current work focuses on the development of new sections of Volume 2 and collecting updates to the HIDH. The new sections in development expand the scope of the standard and address mission operations and support operations. This effort is again collaboration with representatives from the Johnson Space Center Missions Operations and Space Life Sciences Directorates and the Engineering Directorate from Kennedy Space Center as well as discipline experts from across the Agency.
The purpose of the Human Integration Design Processes (HIDP) document is to provide human-systems integration design processes, including methodologies and best practices that NASA has used to meet human systems and human rating requirements for developing crewed spacecraft. HIDP content is framed around human-centered design methodologies and processes in support of human-system integration requirements and human rating. NASA-STD-3001, Space Flight Human-System Standard, is a two-volume set of National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Agency-level standards established by the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer, directed at minimizing health and performance risks for flight crews in human space flight programs. Volume 1 of NASA-STD-3001, Crew Health, sets standards for fitness for duty, space flight permissible exposure limits, permissible outcome limits, levels of medical care, medical diagnosis, intervention, treatment and care, and countermeasures. Volume 2 of NASASTD- 3001, Human Factors, Habitability, and Environmental Health, focuses on human physical and cognitive capabilities and limitations and defines standards for spacecraft (including orbiters, habitats, and suits), internal environments, facilities, payloads, and related equipment, hardware, and software with which the crew interfaces during space operations. The NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 8705.2B, Human-Rating Requirements for Space Systems, specifies the Agency's human-rating processes, procedures, and requirements. The HIDP was written to share NASA's knowledge of processes directed toward achieving human certification of a spacecraft through implementation of human-systems integration requirements. Although the HIDP speaks directly to implementation of NASA-STD-3001 and NPR 8705.2B requirements, the human-centered design, evaluation, and design processes described in this document can be applied to any set of human-systems requirements and are independent of reference missions. The HIDP is a reference document that is intended to be used during the development of crewed space systems and operations to guide human-systems development process activities.
As part of the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) project, research on integrating small UAS (sUAS) into the NAS was underway by a human-systems integration (HSI) team at the NASA Langley Research Center. Minimal to no research has been conducted on the safe, effective, and efficient manner in which to integrate these aircraft into the NAS. sUAS are defined as aircraft weighing 55 pounds or less. The objective of this human system integration team was to build a UAS Ground Control Station (GCS) and to develop a research test-bed and database that provides data, proof of concept, and human factors guidelines for GCS operations in the NAS. The objectives of this experiment were to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of flying sUAS in Class D and Class G airspace utilizing manual control inputs and voice radio communications between the pilot, mission control, and air traffic control. The design of the experiment included three sets of GCS display configurations, in addition to a hand-held control unit. The three different display configurations were VLOS, VLOS + Primary Flight Display (PFD), and VLOS + PFD + Moving Map (Map). Test subject pilots had better situation awareness of their vehicle position, altitude, airspeed, location over the ground, and mission track using the Map display configuration. This configuration allowed the pilots to complete the mission objectives with less workload, at the expense of having better situation awareness of other aircraft. The subjects were better able to see other aircraft when using the VLOS display configuration. However, their mission performance, as well as their ability to aviate and navigate, was reduced compared to runs that included the PFD and Map displays.
Consideration of an integrated human thermal system consisting of a human thermal system proper and an external thermal device. A mathematical model of the integrated system has been used in a computer simulation, and the simulation results have been verified through comparison with the results of experiments carried out on nine human subjects. The comparison indicates that the model simulates the system reasonably well.
One of the most fundamental changes to the air traffic management system in NextGen is the concept of trajectory based operations (TBO). With the introduction of such change, system safety and resilience is a critical concern, in particular, the ability of systems to gracefully degrade. In order to design graceful degradation into a TBO envrionment, knowledge of the potential causes of degradation, and appropriate solutions, is required. In addition, previous research has predominantly explored the technological contribution to graceful degradation, frequently neglecting to consider the role of the human operator, specifically, air traffic controllers (ATCOs). This is out of step with real-world operations, and potentially limits an ecologically valid understanding of achieving graceful degradation in an air traffic control (ATC) environment. The following literature review aims to identify and summarize the literature to date on the potential causes of degradation in ATC and the solutions that may be applied within a TBO context, with a specific focus on the contribution of the air traffic controller. A framework of graceful degradation, developed from the literature, is presented. It is argued that in order to achieve graceful degradation within TBO, a human-system integration approach must be applied.
One of the most fundamental changes to the air traffic management system in NextGen is the concept of trajectory based operations (TBO). With the introduction of such change, system safety and resilience is a critical concern, in particular, the ability of systems to gracefully degrade. In order to design graceful degradation into a TBO envrionment, knowledge of the potential causes of degradation, and appropriate solutions, is required. In addition, previous research has predominantly explored the technological contribution to graceful degradation, frequently neglecting to consider the role of the human operator, specifically, air traffic controllers (ATCOs). This is out of step with real-world operations, and potentially limits an ecologically valid understanding of achieving graceful degradation in an air traffic control (ATC) environment. The following literature review aims to identify and summarize the literature to date on the potential causes of degradation in ATC and the solutions that may be applied within a TBO context, with a specific focus on the contribution of the air traffic controller. A framework of graceful degradation, developed from the literature, is presented. It is argued that in order to achieve graceful degradation within TBO, a human-system integration approach must be applied.
Integrated human waste/monopropellant propulsion system for manned space flights
NASA created a new approach for human system integration and human performance standards. NASA created two documents a standard and a reference handbook. The standard is titled NASA Space Flight Human-System Standard (SFHSS) and consists of two-volumes: Volume 1- Crew Health This volume covers standards needed to support astronaut health (medical care, nutrition, sleep, exercise, etc.) Volume 2 Human Factors, Habitability and Environmental Health This volume covers the standards for system design that will maintain astronaut performance (ie., environmental factors, design of facilities, layout of workstations, and lighting requirements). It includes classic human factors requirements. The new standards document is written in terms so that it is applicable to a broad range of present and future NASA systems. The document states that all new programs prepare system-specific requirements that will meet the general standards. For example, the new standard does not specify a design should accommodate specific percentiles of a defined population. Rather, NASA-STD-3001, Volume 2 states that all programs shall prepare program-specific requirements that define the user population and their size ranges. The design shall then accommodate the full size range of those users. The companion reference handbook, Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH), was developed to capture the design consideration information from NASA-STD-3000, and adds spaceflight lessons learned, gaps in knowledge, example solutions, and suggests research to further mature specific disciplines. The HIDH serves two major purposes: HIDH is the reference document for writing human factors requirements for specific systems. HIDH contains design guidance information that helps insure that designers create systems which safely and effectively accommodate the capabilities and limitations of space flight crews.
The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the Moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program's objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, the crew will need more onboard systems autonomy and functionality to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft to ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with: audio, video, lighting, and crew controls subsystems. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program--especially crew controls, which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable enough to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error--especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA's approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls, is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that focuses on incorporating NASA's Human-Rating Requirements-that ensures human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.