SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “risks”

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 253 records · Page 14

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2008

Measurement Decision Risk - The Importance of Definitions

One of the more misunderstood areas of metrology is the Test Uncertainty Ratio (TUR) and the Test Accuracy Ratio (TAR). There have been many definitions over the years, but why are these definitions important to a discussion on measurement decision risk? The importance lies in the clarity of communication. Problems can immediately arise in the application (or misapplication) of the definition of these terms. In other words, while it is important to understand the definitions, it is more important to understand concepts behind the definitions and to be precise in how they are applied. The objective of any measurement is a decision. Measurement Decision Risk is a way to look at the quality of a measurement, and although it is not a new concept, it has generated a lot of attention since its addition as a requirement in the new U.S. National Standard, ANSIINCSL Z540.3-2006. In addition to Measurement Decision Risk as the prime method of managing measurement risk, Z540.3 has added, as a fall-back, an explicit definition for TUR. The impact these new requirements may have on calibration service providers has become the topic of much discussion and in some cases concern. This paper will look at the concepts behind the definitions and how they relate to Measurement Decision Risk. Using common examples, this paper will also provide a comparison of various elements of risk related to measurement science using the concepts of TAR, TUR, accuracy ratios, and Consumer Risk (False Accept Risk). The goal of this paper is to provide a better understanding of their relevance to the measurement decision process.

Mimbs, Scott M.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Identification and Evaluation of Integration and Cross Cutting Issues Across HRP Risks

The HRP Integrated Research Plan contains the research plans for the 32 risks requiring research to characterize and mitigate. These risks to human health and performance in spaceflight are identified by evidence and each one focuses on a single aspect of human physiology or performance. They are further categorized by aspects of the spaceflight environment, such as altered gravity or space radiation, that that play a major role in their likelihood and consequence. From its inception the "integrate" in the Research Plan has denoted the integrated nature of risks to human health and performance, the connectedness of physiological systems within the human body regardless of the spaceflight environment, and the integrated response of the human body to the spaceflight environment. Common characteristics of the spaceflight environment include altered gravity, atmospheres and light/dark cycles, space radiation, isolation, noise, and periods of high or low workload. Long term exposure to this unique environment produces a suite of physiological effects such as stress; vision, neurocognitive and anthropometric changes; circadian misalignment; fluid shifts, deconditioning; immune dysregulation; and altered nutritional requirements. Matrix diagraming was used to systematically identify, analyze and rate the many-to-many relationships between environmental characteristics and the suite of physiological effects. It was also to identify patterns in the relationships of common physiological effects to each other. Analyses of patterns or relationships in these diagrams help to identify issues that cut across multiple risks. Cross cutting issues benefit from a multidisciplinary approach that synthesizes concepts or data from two or more disciplines to identify and characterize risk factors or develop countermeasures relevant to multiple risks. They also help to illuminate possible problem areas that may arise when a countermeasure impacts risks other than those which it was developed to mitigate, or identify groupings of physiological changes that are likely to occur that may impact the overall risk posture.

Steinberg, S. L.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Update on Risk Reduction Activities for a Liquid Advanced Booster for NASA's Space Launch System

The stated goals of NASA's Research Announcement for the Space Launch System (SLS) Advanced Booster Engineering Demonstration and/or Risk Reduction (ABEDRR) are to reduce risks leading to an affordable Advanced Booster that meets the evolved capabilities of SLS; and enable competition by mitigating targeted Advanced Booster risks to enhance SLS affordability. Dynetics, Inc. and Aerojet Rocketdyne (AR) formed a team to offer a wide-ranging set of risk reduction activities and full-scale, system-level demonstrations that support NASA's ABEDRR goals. For NASA's SLS ABEDRR procurement, Dynetics and AR formed a team to offer a series of full-scale risk mitigation hardware demonstrations for an affordable booster approach that meets the evolved capabilities of the SLS. To establish a basis for the risk reduction activities, the Dynetics Team developed a booster design that takes advantage of the flight-proven Apollo-Saturn F-1. Using NASA's vehicle assumptions for the SLS Block 2, a two-engine, F-1-based booster design delivers 150 mT (331 klbm) payload to LEO, 20 mT (44 klbm) above NASA's requirements. This enables a low-cost, robust approach to structural design. During the ABEDRR effort, the Dynetics Team has modified proven Apollo-Saturn components and subsystems to improve affordability and reliability (e.g., reduce parts counts, touch labor, or use lower cost manufacturing processes and materials). The team has built hardware to validate production costs and completed tests to demonstrate it can meet performance requirements. State-of-the-art manufacturing and processing techniques have been applied to the heritage F-1, resulting in a low recurring cost engine while retaining the benefits of Apollo-era experience. NASA test facilities have been used to perform low-cost risk-reduction engine testing. In early 2014, NASA and the Dynetics Team agreed to move additional large liquid oxygen/kerosene engine work under Dynetics' ABEDRR contract. Also led by AR, the objectives of this work are to demonstrate combustion stability and measure performance of a 500,000 lbf class Oxidizer-Rich Staged Combustion (ORSC) cycle main injector. A trade study was completed to investigate the feasibility, cost effectiveness, and technical maturity of a domestically produced Atlas V engine that could also potentially satisfy NASA SLS payload-to-orbit requirements via an advanced booster application. Engine physical dimensions and performance parameters resulting from this study provide the system level requirements for the ORSC risk reduction test article. The test article is scheduled to complete critical design review this fall and begin testing in 2017. Dynetics has also designed, developed, and built innovative tank and structure assemblies using friction stir welding to leverage recent NASA investments in manufacturing tools, facilities, and processes, significantly reducing development and recurring costs. The full-scale cryotank assembly was used to verify the structural design and prove affordable processes. Dynetics performed hydrostatic and cryothermal proof tests on the assembly to verify the assembly meets performance requirements. This paper will discuss the ABEDRR engine task and structures task achievements to date and the remaining effort through the end of the contract.

Crocker, Andrew M.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Pitfalls and Precautions When Using Predicted Failure Data for Quantitative Analysis of Safety Risk for Human Rated Launch Vehicles

Launch vehicle reliability analysis is largely dependent upon using predicted failure rates from data sources such as MIL-HDBK-217F. Reliability prediction methodologies based on component data do not take into account system integration risks such as those attributable to manufacturing and assembly. These sources often dominate component level risk. While consequence of failure is often understood, using predicted values in a risk model to estimate the probability of occurrence may underestimate the actual risk. Managers and decision makers use the probability of occurrence to influence the determination whether to accept the risk or require a design modification. The actual risk threshold for acceptance may not be fully understood due to the absence of system level test data or operational data. This paper will establish a method and approach to identify the pitfalls and precautions of accepting risk based solely upon predicted failure data. This approach will provide a set of guidelines that may be useful to arrive at a more realistic quantification of risk prior to acceptance by a program.

Hatfield, Glen S.↗

NASA NTRS2016

BBN-Based Portfolio Risk Assessment for NASA Technology R&D Outcome

The NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) vision falls into six strategic thrusts that are aimed to support the challenges of the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). In order to achieve the goals of the ARMD vision, the Airspace Operations and Safety Program (AOSP) is committed to developing and delivering new technologies. To meet the dual challenges of constrained resources and timely technology delivery, program portfolio risk assessment is critical for communication and decision-making. This paper describes how Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) is applied to assess the probability of a technology meeting the expected outcome. The network takes into account the different risk factors of technology development and implementation phases. The use of BBNs allows for all technologies of projects in a program portfolio to be separately examined and compared. In addition, the technology interaction effects are modeled through the application of object-oriented BBNs. The paper discusses the development of simplified project risk BBNs and presents various risk results. The results presented include the probability of project risks not meeting success criteria, the risk drivers under uncertainty via sensitivity analysis, and what-if analysis. Finally, the paper shows how program portfolio risk can be assessed using risk results from BBNs of projects in the portfolio.

Geuther, Steven C.↗

NASA NTRS2017

NASA Space Radiation Protection Strategies: Risk Assessment and Permissible Exposure Limits

Permissible exposure limits (PELs) for short-term and career astronaut exposures to space radiation have been set and approved by NASA with the goal of protecting astronauts against health risks associated with ionizing radiation exposure. Short term PELs are intended to prevent clinically significant deterministic health effects, including performance decrements, which could threaten astronaut health and jeopardize mission success. Career PELs are implemented to control late occurring health effects, including a 3% risk of exposure induced death (REID) from cancer, and dose limits are used to prevent cardiovascular and central nervous system diseases. For radiation protection, meeting the cancer PEL is currently the design driver for galactic cosmic ray and solar particle event shielding, mission duration, and crew certification (e.g., 1-year ISS missions). The risk of cancer development is the largest known long-term health consequence following radiation exposure, and current estimates for long-term health risks due to cardiovascular diseases are approximately 30% to 40% of the cancer risk for exposures above an estimated threshold (Deep Space one-year and Mars missions). Large uncertainties currently exist in estimating the health risks of space radiation exposure. Improved understanding through radiobiology and physics research allows increased accuracy in risk estimation and is essential for ensuring astronaut health as well as for controlling mission costs, optimization of mission operations, vehicle design, and countermeasure assessment. We will review the Space Radiation Program Element's research strategies to increase accuracy in risk models and to inform development and validation of the permissible exposure limits.

Huff, J. L.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Risk of Adverse Health Outcomes and Decrements in Performance Due to In-flight Medical Conditions

The drive to undertake long-duration space exploration missions at greater distances from Earth gives rise to many challenges concerning human performance under extreme conditions. At NASA, the Human Research Program (HRP) has been established to investigate the specific risks to astronaut health and performance presented by space exploration, in addition to developing necessary countermeasures and technology to reduce risk and facilitate safer, more productive missions in space (NASA Human Research Program 2009). The HRP is divided into five subsections, covering behavioral health, space radiation, habitability, and other areas of interest. Within this structure is the ExMC Element, whose research contributes to the overall development of new technologies to overcome the challenges of expanding human exploration and habitation of space. The risk statement provided by the HRP to the ExMC Element states: "Given that medical conditions/events will occur during human spaceflight missions, there is a possibility of adverse health outcomes and decrements in performance in mission and for long term health" (NASA Human Research Program 2016). Within this risk context, the Exploration Medical Capabilities (ExMC) Element is specifically concerned with establishing evidenced-based methods of monitoring and maintaining astronaut health. Essential to completing this task is the advancement in techniques that identify, prevent, and treat any health threats that may occur during space missions. The ultimate goal of the ExMC Element is to develop and demonstrate a pathway for medical system integration into vehicle and mission design to mitigate the risk of medical issues. Integral to this effort is inclusion of an evidence-based medical and data handling system appropriate for long-duration, exploration-class missions. This requires a clear Concept of Operations, quantitative risk metrics or other tools to address changing risk throughout a mission, and system scoping and system engineering. Because of the novel nature of the risks involved in exploration missions, new and complex ethical challenges are likely to be encountered. This document describes the relevant background and evidence that informs the development of an exploration medical system.

Antonsen,Erik↗

NASA NTRS2017

Evaluating Process Effectiveness to Reduce Risk

It is well documented that government agencies do not have the same incentive as the private sector to focus on process effectiveness and continual improvement of those processes. It is also well documented whenever government agencies fail to deliver efficient, effective, consistent, and fair services to the citizens. In spite of the various "reinventing government" and "effectiveness initiatives" of the past decades, and in spite of the efforts on the part of many agencies to improve, government in general still lags behind industry in creating a culture of effective processes and systems. While the tragic events that unfolded recently in Flint, Michigan, teach us that running government "like a business" does not always take the needs of the citizenry into account, there are many lessons and techniques from the private sector that government agencies can use to improve. The incentive to improve, while mandated by various administrations1, needs to come from within the workforce, in order to effectively take root. The best, most effective incentive is to reduce, control or eliminate risk. Government agencies face some of the same risks as the private sector, while some are unique. While ISO 310002 has been around since 2009, risk has taken on increased visibility within the private sector with the advent of the emphasis on risk-based thinking in ISO 9001:20153. The relationship between risk-based thinking and effective processes is simple and direct. Those processes that are well thought out and standardized (i.e. Plan-Do-Check-Act), will have taken into account the applicable policy, statutory, regulatory, safety, quality and technical parameters, which may not occur to someone performing the process with minimal experience or training; and thus protect the employees, the public and the agency from statutory and regulatory violations; delay in providing services; non-delivery of services; harm to public or employee safety and health; cost overruns; breaches in security; loss of confidence in government; failure of publicly funded projects; damage to the environment; ethics violations, and the list goes on; with local, national and even international consequences. The Plan-Do-Check-Act process, also known as the "process approach" can be used at any time to establish and standardize a process, and it can also be used to check periodically for "process creep" (i.e., informal, unauthorized changes that have occurred over time), any necessary updates and improvements. While ISO 9001 compliance is not mandated for all government agencies, if interpreted correctly, it can be useful in establishing a framework and implementing effective management systems and processes.4 Another method that can be used to evaluate effectiveness is the scorecard definitions in Mallory's Process Management Standard5 as a basis for evaluating work on the process level on effective, and continuously improved and improving processes. With processes on the lower end of the scale, agencies are vulnerable to a great many risks, with employees and managers making up many of the rules as they go, leading to the above listed negative results. Without clear guidance for nominal operations, off-nominal situations can, and do, increase the likelihood of chaos. In an increasingly technical environment, with inter-agency communication and collaboration becoming the norm, agencies need to come to grips with the fact that processes can become rapidly outdated, and that the technical community should take on an increased role in the maturation of the agency's processes. Industry has long known that effective processes are also efficient, and process improvement methods such as Kaizen, Lean, Six Sigma, 5S, and mistake proofing lead to increased productivity, improved quality, and decreased cost. Again, government agencies have different concerns, but inefficiencies and mistakes can have dire and wide reaching consequences for the public that they serve. While no one goes to work planning to cause harm, it is up to agencies to establish upper level systems, which make establishment and compliance with processes possible. Again, Mallory provides us with a Systems Management Standard6, similar to the Process Management Standard, with a scale of 0-5 for systems effectiveness and maturity. Deming determined that "eighty-five percent of the reasons for failure are deficiencies in the systems and process rather than the employee. The role of management is to change the process rather than badgering individual employees to do better." 7 It is not just the working level employees who need effective processes, but the mid-and upper level managers as well. A disciplined management culture sets the tone for the employees, aids both routine and off-nominal decision-making, and incorporates risk -based thinking into the systems and processes as a matter of normal activity. Figure 1, illustrates the relationship between ineffective and effective processes and risk, through the use of the "stoplight" colors that are commonly used to show serious situations (red), situations which may be improving or deteriorating depending on trends (yellow), and situations that are under control and continuously improved (green).

Shepherd, Christena C.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Modelling the Risks Remotely Piloted Aircraft Pose to People on the Ground

Worldwide there is much e ort being directed towards the development of a framework of air- worthiness regulations for remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS). It is now broadly accepted that regulations should have a strong foundation in, and traceability to, the management of the safety risks. Existing risk models for RPAS operations do not provide a simple means for incorporating the wide range of technical and operational controls into the risk analysis and evaluation processes. This paper describes a new approach for modelling and evaluating the risks associated with RPAS operations near populous areas based on the barrier bow tie (BBT) model. A BBT model is used to structure the underlying risk management problem. The model focuses risk analysis, evaluation, and decision making activities on the devices, people, and processes that can be employed to reduce risk. The BBT model and a comprehensive set of example risk controls are presented. The general model can be applied to any RPAS operation. The foundations for quantitative and qualitative assessments using a BBT model are also presented. The modelling and evaluation framework is illustrated through its application to a case-study rotary wing RPAS for two operational scenarios. The model can be used as a basis for determining airworthiness certification requirements for RPAS.

Barrier bow tie model↗

NASA NTRS2019

Program Promotion Can Distort Space Systems Engineering and Deny Risk

NASA's spectacular success in the Apollo moon landings was achieved against the odds by an obsessive dedication to reducing the great risk. But risk analysis predicted so many astronaut fatalities that it was thought to be unreasonably pessimistic and potentially damaging to the Apollo program. Risk analysis was discontinued, risk was neglected in space shuttle engineering, and so the space shuttle design was unnecessarily dangerous. Since the Apollo era it has been understood that long human space missions would recycle oxygen and water to avoid the very high launch cost of directly supplying them. The development of recycling systems was justified by the need to increase material closure and reduce launch mass. When it was recognized that increasing closure leads to rapidly diminishing returns, the program goal was changed to reducing launch mass and reliability, cost, and risk were considered irrelevant. Systems engineering and especially the discouraging problems of risk and cost have been deliberately ignored because they detract from program promotion, with unfortunate results. Current human launch system design does account for risk and the result strongly resembles Apollo. Current life support design continues to assume recycling, even though the recent great reduction in launch cost now allows direct supply of oxygen and water with significantly better quality, reliability, cost, and risk.

Advocacy↗

NASA NTRS2019

The Missing Economic Risks in Assessments of Climate Change Impacts

Economic assessments of the potential future risks of climate change have been omitting or grossly underestimating many of the most serious consequences for lives and livelihoods because these risks are difficult to quantify precisely and lie outside of human experience. Political and business leaders need to understand the scale of these ‘missing risks’ because they could have drastic and potentially catastrophic impacts on citizens, communities and companies. Scientists are growing in confidence about the evidence for the largest potential impacts of climate change and the rising probability that major thresholds in the Earth’s climate system will be breached as global mean surface temperature rises, particularly if warming exceeds 2°C above the pre-industrial level. These impacts include: (1) Destabilisation of ice sheets and glaciers and consequent sea level rise. (2) Stronger tropical cyclones. (3) Extreme heat impacts. (4) More frequent and intense floods and droughts. (5) Disruptions to oceanic and atmospheric circulation. (6) Destruction of biodiversity and collapse of ecosystems. Many of these impacts will grow and occur concurrently across the world as global temperature climbs. Some of these impacts involve thresholds in the climate system beyond which major impacts accelerate, or become irreversible and unstoppable. When a threshold is breached, it might cause one or more other thresholds to be exceeded as well, leading to a cascade of impacts. Many of these impacts could exceed the capacity of human populations to adapt, and would significantly affect and disrupt the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people worldwide. These impacts would also undermine economic growth and development, exacerbate poverty and destabilise communities. Economic assessments fail to take account of the potential for large concurrent impacts across the world that would cause mass migration, displacement and conflict, with huge loss of life. Economic assessments that are expressed solely in terms of effects on output (e.g. gross domestic product), or that only extrapolate from past experience, or that use inappropriate discounting, do not provide a clear indication of the potential risks to lives and livelihoods. It is likely that there are additional risks that we are not yet anticipating simply because scientists have not yet detected their possibility, as we have entered a period of climate change that is unprecedented in human history. Some advances are being made in improving economic assessments of climate change impacts but much more progress is required if assessments are to offer reliable guidance for political and business leaders on the biggest risks. The lack of firm quantifications is not a reason to ignore these risks, and when the missing risks are taken into account, the case for strong and urgent action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions becomes even more compelling.

DeFries, Ruth↗

NASA NTRS2020

Farm-Level Risk Factors of Increased Abortion and Mortality in Domestic Ruminants during the 2010 Rift Valley Fever Outbreak in Central South Africa

Background:Rift Valley fever (RVF) outbreaks in domestic ruminants have severe socio-economic impacts. Climate-based continental predictions providing early warnings to regions at risk for RVF outbreaks are not of a high enough resolution for ruminant owners to assess their individual risk. (2) Methods: We analyzed risk factors for RVF occurrence and severity at the farm level using the number of domestic ruminant deaths and abortions reported by farmers in central South Africa during the 2010 RVF outbreaks using a Bayesian multinomial hurdle framework. (3) Results: We found strong support that the proportion of days with precipitation, the number of water sources, and the proportion of goats in the herd were positively associated with increased severity of RVF (the numbers of deaths and abortions). We did not find an association between any risk factors and whether RVF was reported on farms. (4) Conclusions: At the farm level we identified risk factors of RVF severity; however, there was little support for risk factors of RVF occurrence. The identification of farm-level risk factors for Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV) occurrence would support and potentially improve current prediction methods and would provide animal owners with critical information needed in order to assess their herd’s risk of RVFV infection.

Melinda K Rostel↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human System Risk Changes in 2021

The 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. Risks are re-evaluated in a Continuous Risk Management (CRM) process. This session will summarize the risk posture changes that have occurred in the last year and what high level research, performance, and epidemiologic data have informed those changes. Human System Risks updated in 2021 include: Dynamic Loads, Sensorimotor, EVA, Crew Egress, Behavioral Medicine, Electrical Shock, Human System Integration Architecture (HSIA), Toxic Exposure, Bone Fracture, Cardiovascular, Medical Conditions, Renal Stone, CO2 Exposure, and Pharmacology.

Mary Van Baalen↗

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 NTRSDate not supplied

IMPACT-ing Exploration Spaceflight Risk Prediction and Medical System Design

Human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in-mission medical care. Compared with the ISS, the greater distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and significant limitations on the evacuation of ill or injured crew. Spacecraft mass, volume, and power will be curtailed while higher demands will be placed on the crew’s knowledge, skills, and abilities. In this higher risk environment, it is important to: a) quantitatively estimate human system risk attributable to medical conditions, a process known as Probabilistic Risk Analysis, and b) use these estimates to inform medical system design. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a PRA and medical trade space analysis tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design. IMPACT improves upon and will soon replace NASA’s existing tool, the Integrated Medical Model, with: a novel evidence base baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 120 medical conditions; a significant increase in the number of medical resources that can be utilized and in the flexibility of their use; and the modelling of time lost performing mission-specific tasks due to medical conditions. IMPACT provides evidence-based, mission-specific PRA estimates of in-flight medical risk and an initial list of clinical capabilities and medical resources/hardware to be considered. In addition, sophisticated trade space capabilities estimate how human system risk varies with changes to the mission architecture or medical capability set (e.g., if the system mass constraint decreases by 10% or ultrasound is removed). This panel will provide an overview of IMPACT, its intended use cases, and future development plans. The panel will be the first public presentation of IMPACT results, including medical risk estimates for extended duration Artemis missions, the medical conditions most influencing medical risk metrics, and the clinical capabilities that have the largest effect on medical risk.

Ben Easter↗

NASA NTRS2022

Quantifying Cybersecurity Risk for NASA Missions

An end-to-end cyber risk assessment process is presented that is based on the combination of guidelines from the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST), the standard 5x5 risk matrix, and quantitative methods for generating loss exceedance curves. The NIST guidelines provide a framework for cyber risk assessment, and the standard 5x5 matrix is widely used across the industry for the representation of risk across multiple disciplines. Loss exceedance curves are a means of quantitatively assessing the loss that occurs due to a given risk profile. Combining these different techniques enables us to follow the guidelines, adhere to standard 5x5 risk management practices and develop quantitative metrics simultaneously. Our quantification process is based on the consideration of the NASA and JPL Cost Risk assessment modeling techniques as we define the cost associated with the cybersecurity risk profile of a mission as a function of the mission cost.

Miller, Robert L.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preliminary Medical Risk Estimates and Clinical Capability Needs for Artemis IV

BACKGROUND Human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in- mission medical care. Compared with the ISS, the greater distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and significant limitations on the evacuation of ill or injured crew. Spacecraft mass, volume, and power will be curtailed while higher demands will be placed on the crew’s knowledge, skills, and abilities. In this higher risk environment, it is important to: a) quantitatively estimate human system risk attributable to medical conditions, a process known as Probabilistic Risk Analysis, and b) use these estimates to inform medical system design. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a PRA and medical trade space analysis tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design. IMPACT v1.0 improves upon and will soon replace NASA’s existing tool, the Integrated Medical Model, with: a novel evidence base baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; a significant increase in the number of medical resources that can be utilized and in the flexibility of their use; and the modelling of time lost performing mission-specific tasks due to medical conditions. METHODOLOGY: This abstract will present IMPACT estimates of medical system risk and clinical capability needs for the Artemis IV mission. Artemis IV is currently scheduled for 2026 and will visit the Gateway space station in lunar orbit prior to the second lunar landing of the Artemis program. The baseline Artemis IV mission that was modeled was 28 days in duration with phases including Orion outbound, 4 days on the Gateway space station in lunar orbit, 2 crew on the surface of the Moon for approximately one week, an additional 5 days on Gateway, and then return to Earth. This baseline was compared to two alternative 34-day design reference missions (DRMs) that shifted the lunar sortie earlier or later in the mission profile. Assumptions included 2 female and 2 male crew and a notional medical system mass of 25 kg. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life (LOCL), consideration of medical evacuation (known as return to definitive care – RTDC), and an estimate of crew time lost due to medical conditions (Task Time Lost – TTL). The presentation will also describe the medical conditions that are the greatest drivers of risk as well as the clinical capabilities and resources that have the largest effect on risk. RESULTS: All three DRMs had very low probability of LOCL from medical conditions, primarily due to short duration. RTDC was also similar across the DRMs. In contrast, TTL was higher in the early lunar sortie DRM due to earlier occurrence of EVA-related medical conditions. Taken as a whole, there was no clinically significant difference in medical risk across the three missions. Results for clinical capabilities and an example medical equipment list will be discussed but were similar across DRMs.

D Hilmers↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Characterizing the Risk: Review of Sensorimotor Evidence and Research Roadmap

BACKGROUND: NASA’s Artemis program will take astronauts back to the lunar surface for the first time in almost 50 years. Despite the successes of the previous Apollo program, the Artemis missions will differ in duration, vehicle characteristics, and landing tasks that may exacerbate the risks to crew health/safety and mission objectives. NASA’s Human Research Program identifies the risk of altered sensorimotor/vestibular function impacting critical mission tasks as one of the top priority risks to lunar exploration missions. This session will review the existing evidence and remaining gaps in knowledge for the sensorimotor risk. DESCRIPTION: Alterations in sensorimotor processing during spaceflight can lead to motion sickness, spatial disorientation, and decrements in postural control, locomotion, and fine motor control during and following gravity-transitions. The risk of impairment is greatest during and soon after gravity-transitions, when performance decrements may have high operational impacts (e.g., manual landings, immediate egress following landing, and early extravehicular activities (EVAs)). Recent studies have specifically improved the risk characterization of changes in perception, motion sickness, postural and locomotor control, manual control, and fine-motor coordination. However, given the difficulty in obtaining measurements during and soon after gravity-transitions, evidence for initial decrements immediately following gravity-transitions remains limited. The most significant gaps in the risk include manual control ability around gravity-transitions, the incidence and severity of motion sickness during landings, and the ability to perform egress/EVAs soon after gravity-transition. To address these gaps, current research roadmaps leverage both spaceflight studies and ground-based analogs for risk characterization and countermeasure development/validation. DISCUSSION: This panel will further describe the current sensorimotor research strategies with an emphasis on the operational scenarios of manual control, crew egress, and EVA. The goal of this research is to accommodate the needs of the crew and facilitate human capabilities to ensure lunar mission success. This work will prepare NASA for successful Artemis missions and enable the next giant leap, the exploration of Mars.

Timothy Ryan Macaulay↗