SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “human spaceflight”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2009

Auditory and Vestibular Issues Related to Human Spaceflight

Human spaceflight provides unique opportunities to study human vestibular and auditory systems. This session will discuss 1) vestibular adaptive processes reflected by pronounced perceptual and motor coordination problems during, and after, space missions; 2) vestibular diagnostic and rehabilitative techniques (used to promote recovery after living in altered gravity environments) that may be relevant to treatment of vestibular disorders on earth; and 3) unique acoustical challenges to hearing loss prevention and crew performance during spaceflight missions.

Danielson, Richard W.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Endocrine relationships during human spaceflight

Human spaceflight is associated with a chronic loss of protein from muscle. The objective of this study was to determine whether changes in urinary hormone excretion could identify a hormonal role for this loss. Urine samples were collected from the crews of two Life Sciences Space Shuttle missions before and during spaceflight. Data are means +/- SE with the number of subjects in parentheses. The first value is the mean preflight measurement, and the second value is the mean inflight measurement. Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) [27.7 +/- 4.4 (9) vs. 25.1 +/- 3.4 (9) ng/day], growth hormone [724 +/- 251 (9) vs. 710 +/- 206 (9) ng/day], insulin-like growth factor I [6.81 +/- 0.62 vs. 6.04 +/- 0.51 (8) nM/day], and C-peptide [44.9 +/- 8.3 (9) vs. 50.7 +/- 10.3 (9) micrograms/day] were unchanged with spaceflight. In contrast, free 3,5,3'-triiodothyronine [791 +/- 159 (9) vs. 371 +/- 41 (9) pg/day, P < 0.05], prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) [1, 064 +/- 391 (8) vs. 465 +/- 146 (8) ng/day, P < 0.05], and its metabolite PGE-M [1,015 +/- 98 (9) vs. 678 +/- 105 (9) ng/day, P < 0. 05] were decreased inflight. The urinary excretion of most hormones returned to their preflight levels during the postflight period, with the exception of ACTH [47.5 +/- 10.3 (9) ng/day], PGE2 [1,433 +/- 327 (8) ng/day], PGF2alpha, [2,786 +/- 313 (8) ng/day], and its metabolite PGF-M [4,814 +/- 402 (9) ng/day], which were all increased compared with the preflight measurement (P < 0.05). There was a trend for urinary cortisol to be elevated inflight [55.3 +/- 5. 9 (9) vs. 72.5 +/- 11.1 micrograms/day, P = 0.27] and postflight [82.7 +/- 8.6 (8) micrograms/day, P = 0.13]. The inflight human data support ground-based in vitro work showing that prostaglandins have a major role in modulating the changes in muscle protein content in response to tension or the lack thereof.

Flight Experiment↗

NASA NTRS2017

Review of Significant Incidents and Close Calls in Human Spaceflight from a Human Factors Perspective

This project aims to identify poor human factors design decisions that led to error-prone systems, or did not facilitate the flight crew making the right choices; and to verify that NASA is effectively preventing similar incidents from occurring again. This analysis was performed by reviewing significant incidents and close calls in human spaceflight identified by the NASA Johnson Space Center Safety and Mission Assurance Flight Safety Office. The review of incidents shows whether the identified human errors were due to the operational phase (flight crew and ground control) or if they initiated at the design phase (includes manufacturing and test). This classification was performed with the aid of the NASA Human Systems Integration domains. This in-depth analysis resulted in a tool that helps with the human factors classification of significant incidents and close calls in human spaceflight, which can be used to identify human errors at the operational level, and how they were or should be minimized. Current governing documents on human systems integration for both government and commercial crew were reviewed to see if current requirements, processes, training, and standard operating procedures protect the crew and ground control against these issues occurring in the future. Based on the findings, recommendations to target those areas are provided.

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗

NASA NTRS2010

Evaluating Failures and near Misses in Human Spaceflight History for Lessons for Future Human Spaceflight

Studies done in the past have drawn on lessons learned with regard to human loss-of-life events. However, an examination of near-fatal accidents can be equally useful, not only in detecting causes, both proximate and systemic, but also for determining what factors averted disaster, what design decisions and/or operator actions prevented catastrophe. Binary pass/fail launch history is often used for risk, but this also has limitations. A program with a number of near misses can look more reliable than a consistently healthy program with a single out-of-family failure. Augmenting reliability evaluations with this near miss data can provide insight and expand on the limitations of a strictly pass/fail evaluation. This paper intends to show how near-miss lessons learned can provide crucial data for any new human spaceflight programs that are interested in sending man into space

Barr, Stephanie↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-Space Manufacturing to Support Human Spaceflight

As human spaceflight pushes beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO), resupply of consumables becomes a significant challenge. One solution to this problem is In-Space Manufacturing (ISM), the capability to perform on-demand manufacturing and repair of consumables in an in-space environment. ISM offers significant flexibility to missions as it allows for a high degree of tailor ability and reduction in launch mass. Leveraging advancements in fabrication, repair and recycling, ISM provides a highly sustainable and affordable solution to exploration mission operations and logistics. In this talk, advances in printed electronics and sensors, ranging from nanomaterial ink development and hands-free fabrication methodologies to devices will be presented. Applications presented will include sensors for crew health monitoring along with supporting electronics. In the future, these devices will be fabricated and characterized on the International Space Station and the approach will be evaluated for future in-space manufacturing to support human spaceflight.

nanotechnology↗

NASA NTRS2009

Evaluating Failures and Near Misses in Human Spaceflight History for Lessons for Future Human Spaceflight

There have been a number of studies done in the past drawn on lessons learned with regard to human loss-of-life events. Generally, the systemic causes and proximate causes for fatal events have both been examined in considerable detail. However, an examination of near-fatal accidents and failures that narrowly missed being fatal could be equally useful, not only in detecting causes, both proximate and systemic, but also for determining what factors averted disaster, what design decisions and/or operator actions prevented catastrophe. Additionally, review of risk factors for upcoming or future programs will often look at trending statistics, generally focusing on failure/success statistics. Unfortunately, doing so can give a skewed or misleading view of past reliability or a reliability that cannot be presumed to apply to a new program. One reason for this might be that failure/success criteria aren't the same across programs, but also that apparent success can hide systemic faults that, under other circumstances, can be fatal to a program with different parameters. A program with a number of near misses can look more reliable than a consistently healthy program with a single out-of-family failure and provide very misleading data if it is not examined in detail. This is particularly true for a manned space program where failure/success includes more than making a particular orbit. Augmenting reliability evaluations with this near miss data can provide insight and expand on the limitations of a strictly pass/fail evaluation. Even more importantly, a thorough understanding of these near miss events can identify conditions that prevented fatalities. Those conditions may be key to a programs reliability, but, without insight to the repercussions if such conditions were not in place, their importance may not be readily clear. As programs mature and political and fiscal responsibilities come to the fore, often there is considerable incentive to eliminate unnecessary conservatism, design margin, redundancy, operational support, testing, training, or safety oversight. An evaluation that demonstrates how these features and capabilities averted disaster can ensure processes that saved lives or missions are not discarded without appropriate review and understanding. Close examination of accidents that almost were can also highlight differences in design from one program to another, either justifying reliability comparisons or negating them. It can also provide considerable insight into how those saving factors were developed and implemented so that similar methods can be used to ensure appropriate life-saving and mission saving factors can be developed, even for a dissimilar space program. The lessons are appropriate for seasoned manned space programs and agencies, but crucial for untried agencies and organizations that are interested in sending man into space. The large body of publicly available near miss and accident data available provide invaluable insight into programmatic, technical, and even political issues that can be addressed before they impact safety. In this paper, we examine a number of these near misses and accidents and steps a program, agency, or potential spacefaring company might take to improve their chances of success and avoid mission or safety disasters using this data.

Barr, Stephanie↗

NASA NTRS2011

Structural Design Requirements and Factors of Safety for Spaceflight Hardware: For Human Spaceflight

This document establishes the structural requirements for human-rated spaceflight hardware including launch vehicles, spacecraft and payloads. These requirements are applicable to Government Furnished Equipment activities as well as all related contractor, subcontractor and commercial efforts. These requirements are not imposed on systems other than human-rated spacecraft, such as ground test articles, but may be tailored for use in specific cases where it is prudent to do so such as for personnel safety or when assets are at risk. The requirements in this document are focused on design rather than verification. Implementation of the requirements is expected to be described in a Structural Verification Plan (SVP), which should describe the verification of each structural item for the applicable requirements. The SVP may also document unique verifications that meet or exceed these requirements with NASA Technical Authority approval.

Bernstein, Karen S.↗

NASA NTRS2022

Directed Acyclic Graphs: A Tool for Understanding the NASA Human Spaceflight System Risks - Human System Risk Board

For over a decade, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has tracked and configuration-managed approximately 30 risks to astronaut health and performance that occur before, during and after spaceflight. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB), a Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Board at NASA Johnson Space Center, is the entity responsible for identifying, assessing, analyzing, and monitoring the official understanding of the risk or risk posture for each of the Human System Risks and determining – based on evaluation of the available evidence – when that risk posture changes. The ultimate purpose of tracking and researching these risks is to find ways to reduce the risk that astronaut crews face during spaceflight. Historically, research, development and operations relevant to one risk have been conducted in isolation from other risks; these individual risk ‘silos’ enabled initial characterization of each specific risk. In spaceflight however, the impact of exposure to risk for astronaut crews is cumulative, and not independent of exposures or other risks, as all the adverse effects of the spaceflight environment begin at launch, continue throughout the duration of the mission and in some cases across the lifetime of the crews. In January of 2020, the HSRB at NASA embarked on a pilot project designed to assess the potential value of causal diagramming as a tool to facilitate understanding of these cumulative and interdependent effects as applied within Human System Risk management. This process uses directed acyclic graphs as a means of formalizing a shared mental model of the causal flow of risk among Risk Board stakeholders. Initially this model was to improve communication among those stakeholders, but the potential value exceeds communication alone. The causal diagrams are formulated as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to function as a type of knowledge graph for reference for the board and its stakeholders. This document is a sister document to NASA/TM 20220006812 Directed Acyclic Graph Guidance Documentation (1). In that document, the basic guidance for creating and standardizing directed acyclic graphs as tools for cross-risk analysis is provided. This document contains the initial configuration managed DAGs that were created as a result of applying those principles. These initial versions were accepted by the HSRB in January of 2022. Each of the Human System Risks are represented by a DAG that has been reviewed by the larger Human Health and Performance community at NASA including life scientists, physical scientists, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, exercise specialists and more. These results show the starting point for Human System Risk DAGs as shared mental models and communication aids across the boundaries of the various expertise needed to understand and mitigate the human risks in spaceflight. Because they are a starting point, each of these DAGs can be expected to change over time as new or refined evidence becomes available. The process for updating these DAGs can be found in the JSC-66705 Human System Risk Management Plan (2) that is publicly available on the NASA Technical Reports Server.

Erik L. Antonsen↗

NASA NTRS2000

ISS Utilization and Countermeasure Validation: Implementing the Critical Path Roadmap to Reduce Uncertainties of Extended Human Spaceflight Expeditions

Human exploration of space requires the ability to understand and mitigate risks to crews exposed to the conditions associated with such missions. This becomes a greater imperative as we prepare for interplanetary expeditions involving humans who will be subjected to long transit periods in microgravity as they travel to a distant planet such as Mars, embark and live on the planet's surface for an extended time, and finally, return to the 1 g environment of Earth. We need to know, more definitively, what the human health, safety, and performance risks are, and how to prevent or counteract them throughout all phases of a long duration mission. The Johnson Space Center's Space and Life Sciences Directorate along with the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI) have been engaged in a strategic planning effort that identifies the most critical risks confronting humans who will venture forth on such missions and the types of research and technology efforts required to mitigate and otherwise reduce the probability and/or severity of those risks. This paper describes the unique approach used to define, assess and prioritize the risks and presents the results of the assessment with an emphasis on the research and technology priorities that will help us to meet the challenge of long duration human spaceflight missions.

Leveton, Lauren B.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Printed Sensors and Electronics for Sustained Human Spaceflight

As human spaceflight pushes beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO), resupply of consumables becomes a significant challenge. One solution to this problem is In-Space Manufacturing (ISM), the capability to perform on-demand manufacturing and repair of consumables in an in-space environment. ISM offers significant flexibility to missions as it allows for a high degree of tailorability and reduction in launch mass. Leveraging advancements in fabrication, repair and recycling, ISM provides a highly sustainable and affordable solution to Exploration mission operations and logistics. In this talk, advances in printed electronics and sensors, ranging from nanomaterial ink development and hands-free fabrication methodologies to devices will be presented.

In Space Manufacturing↗

NASA NTRS2017

Review of Significant Incidents and Close Calls in Human Spaceflight from a Human Factors Perspective

No abstract available

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Identified Risks of Adverse Outcomes Due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture in Human Spaceflight

The NASA Human System Risk Board (HSRB) has the overall responsibility for tracking the evolution of the top ~30 human system risks that it has identified to be associated with human spaceflight. As part of this process, the Board is charged with maintaining a consistent, integrated process to mitigate those risks, and developing evidence-based risk posture recommendations. One of the identified risks is due to inadequate human systems integration architecture (HSIA) and a driving factor of this risk is that given decreasing real-time ground support for execution of complex operations during future exploration missions, there is a possibility of adverse performance outcomes including that crew are unable to adequately respond to unanticipated critical malfunctions or detect safety critical procedural errors. The HSRB uses Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) as a communication tool for describing how astronaut exposure to spaceflight hazards leads to meaningful mission-level health and performance outcomes and as the basis for understanding intermediate causal relationships between risk contributing factors and countermeasures that link hazards to outcomes. The HSIA risk DAG will be presented and described. Historically, critical malfunctions requiring Crew/MCC management occurred at a rate of 1.7 times per year for ISS averaged over the lifetime and 3-4 times per year in the burn in phase for the vehicle. These averages do not include EVA data, which greatly increases the incident rate. Prior experience from the Apollo program showed 10/11 crewed missions experienced significant anomalies where crew relied heavily on MCC expertise in real-time. These failure patterns are in line with those observed in other complex engineered systems (e.g., oil rigs, launch systems, commercial aviation, etc.) It is likely that general malfunction and error rates are > 10% for short duration missions (<30 days), based on past and current spaceflight operations data. Likelihood of adverse outcomes has the potential to increase as crew conduct work with new, complex systems and with less ground support. For Low Earth Orbit missions and Lunar missions less than 30 days, assuming minimal comm delays, disruptions and bandwidth limitations, malfunctions and errors can affect mission objectives and crew health but may be mitigated by ground support. For Lunar missions greater than 30 days and any potential Mars mission malfunctions and errors can have Loss of Crew and Loss of Mission consequences due to reduced ground support (communication delays, constraints and blackouts) for more complex operations, as well as reduced resupply and evacuation options.

Daniel M Buckland↗

NASA NTRS2022

Integrating Mission Timelines and Procedures to Enhance Situational Awareness in Human Spaceflight Operations

Future human spaceflight missions to the Moon, Mars, and beyond will have significant transmission delays and reduced communications bandwidth compared to operations in Low Earth Orbit, requiring increased crew autonomy due to the limited availability of real-time support from Mission Control Center (MCC). In this paper, we argue for the development of technology to enhance situational awareness (SA) for a remote MCC and astronauts onboard the vehicle, describe a usability study conducted towards this aim, and identify key usability features for the design of future integrated timeline tools. By tightly integrating timelines and procedures, future crew systems can predict future constraint violations, suggest resolutions to these violations, and ultimately support more successful missions.

User experience↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrating Mission Timelines and Procedures to Enhance Situational Awareness in Human Spaceflight Operations

user experience↗

NASA NTRS2019

Implementation of Human System Integration Workshop at NASA for Human Spaceflight

The human is a key element in the complex system of systems underlying space exploration missions. As a critical system, its operating bands and requirements need to be characterized and integrated with other systems. Optimal integration of the human system with hardware and software elements has an impact on multiple aspects of mission execution, including human health and performance, risk mitigation, effective design and functionality, enhanced safety, and reduced lifecycle costs. The field of Human Systems Integration (HSI) represents an interdisciplinary and comprehensive cross-cutting approach encompassing technical and management processes for integrating human as a system consideration and objective within and across all other system components and multiple domains. In addition to human activities, HSI covers training, operations and support dimensions. Moreover, HSI is an essential enabler to systems engineering practice, emphasizing human system aspects toward optimizing fully integrated system of systems performance while systematically infusing the needs of all users during the earliest stages of development. Consistent with the National Space Exploration Campaign, NASA is developing the Gateway, a lunar orbiting platform that will serve as astronaut habitat, support transit to deep space, validate new technologies and systems, and function as a science laboratory and communications hub, among other uses. It is an essential element of a phase that will extend human exploration into deep space through evolvable infrastructure and advanced technology, supporting assembly and logistics of other exploration architecture elements. In an effort to explore the current status and forward plan of HSI implementation in the mission (system of systems) lifecycle, the HSI Employee Resource Group conducted an HSI workshop using the Gateway Program as a case study. It revealed how different organizations at the Johnson Space Center incorporate HSI in their processes in preparation for the development and operation of the Gateway. The workshop focused on HSI methodology for implementation of the six NASA HSI domains: Human Factors Engineering, Operations Resources, Habitability and Environment, Maintainability and Supportability, Safety, and Training. Results from the workshop are reported on this paper, as well as some historical background of HSI at NASA, and the success in using an Employee Resource Group to promote technical knowledge. The authors hope that this information can be used to disseminate best practices for translational applications to other space exploration systems.

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗

NASA NTRS2019

Implementation of Human System Integration Workshop at NASA for Human Spaceflight

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗

NASA NTRS2025

Human Spaceflight Applications of Novel Miniature X-Ray Technologies

INTRODUCTION: Radiography (XR) has long been a cornerstone of terrestrial medical imaging, though it has not yet been used in the spaceflight environment. Medical systems for human spaceflight missions are constrained by mass, volume, and power, and until recently, XR systems have been considered too large and power-consuming for spaceflight diagnostic and therapeutic applications. However, the rise of commercial spaceflight and NASA’s refocused efforts on returning crews to the Moon for long-duration missions have introduced a higher degree of medical risk to human spaceflight and require a re-evaluation when optimizing medical system design. Over the last decade, XR devices have miniaturized while maintaining good diagnostic and therapeutic sensitivity and specificity, making new in-flight medical and non-medical XR applications a possibility. Initial research identified several medical conditions where miniature XR would be beneficial for the diagnosis and/or management of medical conditions arising in space, though a more in-depth analysis is required to identify whether XR may add value to the management of such conditions. With this presentation, we aim to introduce the potential utility of miniature XR, review prior work highlighting where XR may be beneficial, and evaluate how miniature XR may reduce medical risk in human spaceflight missions. METHODS: IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a risk assessment tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design by quantitatively estimating mission medical risk. IMPACT v1.0 includes a novel evidence library baselined to exploration environments, an expanded list of 119 medical conditions, medical capabilities and resources critical for management of these medical conditions, and the ability for rapid and iterative analysis in the setting of modifiable design reference missions (DRMs). Our first analysis identified which of the 119 medical conditions XR had diagnostic or therapeutic utility for. Subject matter experts (SMEs) recorded which XR views would be performed under ideal terrestrial circumstances for diagnosis/management of each condition, as well as which views are pragmatic for spaceflight limitations. A second analysis utilized IMPACT to identify significant conditions that contribute greatest to medical risk during a notional long-duration Lunar orbit and Lunar surface DRM. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life (LOCL), need for return to definitive care (RTDC; medical evacuation), and an estimate of crew task time affected (TTA). Using a standardized semi-quantitative scoring methodology, a deeper evaluation of each of the most significant medical conditions was performed. Data from both of these separate analyses were used to hypothesize what ideal and pragmatic XR studies may impact clinical management of the most significant conditions predicted to lead to medical risk. RESULTS: Approximately 1/3 of the IMPACT conditions were identified as being more effectively or comprehensively assessed or treated with the addition of miniature XR technology. The resulting conditions benefitting diagnostically and therapeutically from XR are revealed, as well as the ideal and pragmatic XR views and medical procedures benefitting from XR. The conditions of clinical significance and those most contributing to risk are also displayed. Among the conditions that contribute greatest to LOCL, four conditions for which XR may improve the diagnosis and management of include: decompression sickness, traumatic shock, dental abscess, and respiratory failure. Among conditions that contributed to RTDC, the evaluation and management of wrist fracture is likely improved by XR. For conditions leading to crew TTA, evaluation and management of EVA shoulder injuries, upper and lower extremity strains, back strains, and EVA hand injuries are likely improved by XR. DISCUSSION: Miniature XR in spaceflight has the potential to improve the evaluation and management of a substantial portion of conditions that most contribute to medical risk. This presentation is an introduction to the possibilities miniature XR provides for future human spaceflight missions and subsequent presenters will expand on potential applications in more detail. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: 1) Understand the previous limitations of using radiography in the management of spaceflight medical conditions; 2) Evaluate the findings from the IMPACT tool analysis, which allows quantification of the benefit miniature XR could provide for managing high-risk medical conditions in long-duration lunar orbit and surface missions, focusing on improvements in crew health outcomes; 3) Analyze case studies where miniature XR technology could reduce the medical risks associated with spaceflight missions, specifically in diagnosing and managing conditions such as decompression sickness, traumatic shock, and EVA-related injuries.

A Anderson↗

NASA NTRS2006

Fault Management Techniques in Human Spaceflight Operations

This paper discusses human spaceflight fault management operations. Fault detection and response capabilities available in current US human spaceflight programs Space Shuttle and International Space Station are described while emphasizing system design impacts on operational techniques and constraints. Preflight and inflight processes along with products used to anticipate, mitigate and respond to failures are introduced. Examples of operational products used to support failure responses are presented. Possible improvements in the state of the art, as well as prioritization and success criteria for their implementation are proposed. This paper describes how the architecture of a command and control system impacts operations in areas such as the required fault response times, automated vs. manual fault responses, use of workarounds, etc. The architecture includes the use of redundancy at the system and software function level, software capabilities, use of intelligent or autonomous systems, number and severity of software defects, etc. This in turn drives which Caution and Warning (C&W) events should be annunciated, C&W event classification, operator display designs, crew training, flight control team training, and procedure development. Other factors impacting operations are the complexity of a system, skills needed to understand and operate a system, and the use of commonality vs. optimized solutions for software and responses. Fault detection, annunciation, safing responses, and recovery capabilities are explored using real examples to uncover underlying philosophies and constraints. These factors directly impact operations in that the crew and flight control team need to understand what happened, why it happened, what the system is doing, and what, if any, corrective actions they need to perform. If a fault results in multiple C&W events, or if several faults occur simultaneously, the root cause(s) of the fault(s), as well as their vehicle-wide impacts, must be determined in order to maintain situational awareness. This allows both automated and manual recovery operations to focus on the real cause of the fault(s). An appropriate balance must be struck between correcting the root cause failure and addressing the impacts of that fault on other vehicle components. Lastly, this paper presents a strategy for using lessons learned to improve the software, displays, and procedures in addition to determining what is a candidate for automation. Enabling technologies and techniques are identified to promote system evolution from one that requires manual fault responses to one that uses automation and autonomy where they are most effective. These considerations include the value in correcting software defects in a timely manner, automation of repetitive tasks, making time critical responses autonomous, etc. The paper recommends the appropriate use of intelligent systems to determine the root causes of faults and correctly identify separate unrelated faults.

O'Hagan, Brian↗