Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Stand”

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.

At least 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Risk Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Risk Standing Review Panel (SRP) was favorably impressed by the operational risk management approach taken by the Human Research Program (HRP) Integrated Research Plan (IRP) to address the stated life sciences issues. The life sciences community at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) seems to be focused on operational risk management. This approach is more likely to provide risk managers with the information they need at the time they need it. Concerning the information provided to the SRP by the EVA Physiology, Systems, and Performance Project (EPSP), it is obvious that a great deal of productive activity is under way. Evaluation of this information was hampered by the fact that it often was not organized in a fashion that reflects the "Gaps and Tasks" approach of the overall Human Health Countermeasures (HHC) effort, and that a substantial proportion of the briefing concerned subjects that, while interesting, are not part of the HHC Element (e.g., the pressurized rover presentation). Additionally, no information was provided on several of the tasks or how they related to work underway or already accomplished. This situation left the SRP having to guess at the efforts and relationship to other elements, and made it hard to easily map the EVA Project efforts currently underway, and the data collected thus far, to the gaps and tasks in the IRP. It seems that integration of the EPSP project into the HHC Element could be improved. Along these lines, we were concerned that our SRP was split off from the other participating SRPs at an early stage in the overall agenda for the meeting. In reality, the concerns of EPSP and other projects share much common ground. For example, the commonality of the concerns of the EVA and exercise physiology groups is obvious, both in terms of what reduced exercise capacity can do to EVA capability, and how the exercise performed during an EVA could contribute to an overall exercise countermeasure prescription.

Norfleet, William↗
NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (SRP) evaluated 22 gaps and 39 tasks in the three risk areas assigned to the SHFE Project. The area where tasks were best designed to close the gaps and the fewest gaps were left out was the Risk of Reduced Safety and Efficiency dire to Inadequate Design of Vehicle, Environment, Tools or Equipment. The areas where there were more issues with gaps and tasks, including poor or inadequate fit of tasks to gaps and missing gaps, were Risk of Errors due to Poor Task Design and Risk of Error due to Inadequate Information. One risk, the Risk of Errors due to Inappropriate Levels of Trust in Automation, should be added. If astronauts trust automation too much in areas where it should not be trusted, but rather tempered with human judgment and decision making, they will incur errors. Conversely, if they do not trust automation when it should be trusted, as in cases where it can sense aspects of the environment such as radiation levels or distances in space, they will also incur errors. This will be a larger risk when astronauts are less able to rely on human mission control experts and are out of touch, far away, and on their own. The SRP also identified 11 new gaps and five new tasks. Although the SRP had an extremely large quantity of reading material prior to and during the meeting, we still did not feel we had an overview of the activities and tasks the astronauts would be performing in exploration missions. Without a detailed task analysis and taxonomy of activities the humans would be engaged in, we felt it was impossible to know whether the gaps and tasks were really sufficient to insure human safety, performance, and comfort in the exploration missions. The SRP had difficulty evaluating many of the gaps and tasks that were not as quantitative as those related to concrete physical danger such as excessive noise and vibration. Often the research tasks for cognitive risks that accompany poor task or information design addressed only part, but not all, of the gaps they were programmed to fill. In fact the tasks outlined will not close the gap but only scratch the surface in many cases. In other cases, the gap was written too broadly, and really should be restated in a more constrained way that can be addressed by a well-organized and complementary set of tasks. In many cases, the research results should be turned into guidelines for design. However, it was not clear whether the researchers or another group would construct and deliver these guidelines.

Wichansky, Anna↗
NASA NTRS2010

Human Research Program Space Radiation Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Space Radiation Standing Review Panel (SRP) met at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) on December 9-11, 2009 to discuss the areas of current and future research targeted by the Space Radiation Program Element (SRPE) of the Human Research Program (HRP). Using evidence-based knowledge as a background for identified risks to astronaut health and performance, NASA had identified gaps in knowledge to address those risks. Ongoing and proposed tasks were presented to address the gaps. The charge to the Space Radiation SRP was to review the gaps, evaluate whether the tasks addressed these gaps and to make recommendations to NASA s HRP Science Management Office regarding the SRP's review. The SRP was requested to evaluate the practicality of the proposed efforts in light of the demands placed on the HRP. Several presentations were made to the SRP during the site visit and the SRP spent sufficient time to address the SRP charge. The SRP made a final debriefing to the HRP Program Scientist, Dr. John B. Charles, on December 11, 2009. The SRP noted that current SRPE strategy is properly science-based and views this as the best assurance of the likelihood that answers to the questions posed as gaps in knowledge can be found, that the uncertainty in risk estimates can be reduced, and that a solid, cost-effective approach to risk reduction solutions is being developed. The current approach of the SRPE, based on the use of carefully focused research solicitations, requiring thorough peer-review and approaches demonstrated to be on the path to answering the NASA strategic questions, addressed to a broad extramural community of qualified scientists, optimally positioned to take advantage of serendipitous discoveries and to leverage scientific advances made elsewhere, is sound and appropriate. The SRP viewed with concern statements by HRP implying that the only science legitimately deserving support should be "applied" or, in some instances that the very term "research" might be frowned upon. We understand the desire of management to ensure that research stay focused on mission objectives, but the terms used are code words fraught with different meaning for scientists. Such expressions, taken at face value, convey a profoundly flawed view of science, can easily lead down counterproductive paths, and have the potential to irretrievably corrupt NASA requirements. The SRP understands and endorses the mandate to keep research efforts focused on the mission needs. However, thoughtful application of knowledge gained by understanding the mechanisms and pathways of biological effects cannot be replaced.

Woloschak, Gayle↗
NASA NTRS2010

Analysis of Flame Deflector Spray Nozzles in Rocket Engine Test Stands

The development of a unified tightly coupled multi-phase computational framework is described for the analysis and design of cooling spray nozzle configurations on the flame deflector in rocket engine test stands. An Eulerian formulation is used to model the disperse phase and is coupled to the gas-phase equations through momentum and heat transfer as well as phase change. The phase change formulation is modeled according to a modified form of the Hertz-Knudsen equation. Various simple test cases are presented to verify the validity of the numerical framework. The ability of the methodology to accurately predict the temperature load on the flame deflector is demonstrated though application to an actual sub-scale test facility. The CFD simulation was able to reproduce the result of the test-firing, showing that the spray nozzle configuration provided insufficient amount of cooling.

Sachdev, Jai S.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Thrust Stand Characterization of the NASA Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT)

Direct thrust measurements have been made on the NASA Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) ion engine using a standard pendulum style thrust stand constructed specifically for this application. Values have been obtained for the full 40-level throttle table, as well as for a few off-nominal operating conditions. Measurements differ from the nominal NASA throttle table 10 (TT10) values by 3.1 percent at most, while at 30 throttle levels (TLs) the difference is less than 2.0 percent. When measurements are compared to TT10 values that have been corrected using ion beam current density and charge state data obtained at The Aerospace Corporation, they differ by 1.2 percent at most, and by 1.0 percent or less at 37 TLs. Thrust correction factors calculated from direct thrust measurements and from The Aerospace Corporation s plume data agree to within measurement error for all but one TL. Thrust due to cold flow and "discharge only" operation has been measured, and analytical expressions are presented which accurately predict thrust based on thermal thrust generation mechanisms.

Diamant, Kevin D.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Human Research Program 2010 Chair Standing Review Panel Meeting

The 13 Human Research Program (HRP) Standing Review Panel (SRP) Chairs, and in some cases one or two additional panel members (see section XIV, roster) referred to as the Chair (+1) SRP throughout this document, met at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) on December 7, 2010 to allow the HRP Elements and Projects to report on their progress over the past year, their current status, and their plans for the upcoming year based on NASA's current goals and objectives for human space exploration. A large focus of the meeting was also used to discuss integration across the HRP scientific disciplines based on a recommendation from the 2009 HRP SRP review. During the one-day meeting, each of the HRP Elements and Projects presented the changes they made to the HRP Integrated Research Plan (IRP Rev. B) over the last year, and what their top three areas of integration are between other HRP Elements/Projects. The Chair (+1) SRP spent sufficient time addressing the panel charge, either as a group or in a separate closed session, and the Chair (+1) SRP and the HRP presenters and observers, in most cases, had sufficient time to discuss during and after the presentations. The SRP made a final debriefing to the HRP Program Scientist, Dr. John B. Charles, prior to the close of the meeting on December 7, 2010. Overall, the Chair (+1) SRP concluded that most of the HRP Elements/Projects did a commendable job during the past year in addressing integration across the HRP scientific disciplines with the available resources. The Chair (+1) SRP agreed that the idea of integration between HRP Elements/Projects is noble, but believes all parties involved should have the same definition of integration, in order to be successful. The Chair (+1) SRP also believes that a key to successful integration is communication among the HRP Elements/Projects which may present a challenge. The Chair (+1) SRP recommends that the HRP have a workshop on program integration (with HRP Element/Project representatives and maybe outside experts), to interpret the several meanings of integration and how they best can be implemented for the HRP. Another suggestion regarding integration between HRP Elements/Projects is that the HRP convene a meeting of scientists who have a good record of pursuing multidisciplinary/integrative research in the general areas that are relevant to the HRP; identify those that are of high priority; and then support research on those, giving priority to multidisciplinary/integrative teams in which all relevant HRP disciplines are represented. Some of these teams may be already established and functioning within the HRP; others might be organized in response to NASA's research announcements. Lastly, the Chair (+1) SRP felt that there were two overarching issues that spanned across all of the HRP Elements/Projects. The first, which was discussed in great detail, is access to the astronaut medical records, psychological as well as physical. New research will not be useful unless one has access to what has been done, what has worked, and what has not worked. Second is access to records of what medications are being taken by the astronauts while in-flight. The Chair (+1) SRP feels that there needs to be good medical reconciliation to know beginning to end what is happening healthwise to the astronauts.

Steinberg, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2011

Thrust Stand Measurements of the Microwave Assisted Discharge Inductive Plasma Accelerator

Pulsed inductive plasma thrusters [1-3] are spacecraft propulsion devices in which electrical energy is capacitively stored and then discharged through an inductive coil. This type of pulsed thruster is electrodeless, with a time-varying current in the coil interacting with a plasma covering the face of the coil to induce a plasma current. Propellant is accelerated and expelled at a high exhaust velocity (O(10-100 km/s)) by the Lorentz body force arising from the interaction of the magnetic field and the induced plasma current. While this class of thruster mitigates the life-limiting issues associated with electrode erosion, pulsed inductive plasma thrusters require high pulse energies to inductively ionize propellant. The Microwave Assisted Dis- charge Inductive Plasma Accelerator (MAD-IPA), shown in Fig. 1, is a pulsed inductive plasma thruster that addressees this issue by partially ionizing propellant inside a conical inductive coil before the main current pulse via an electron cyclotron resonance (ECR) discharge. The ECR plasma is produced using microwaves and a static magnetic field from a set of permanent magnets arranged to create a thin resonance region along the inner surface of the coil, restricting plasma formation, and in turn current sheet formation, to a region where the magnetic coupling between the plasma and the theta-pinch coil is high. The use of a conical theta-pinch coil also serves to provide neutral propellant containment and plasma plume focusing that is improved relative to the more common planar geometry of the Pulsed Inductive Thruster (PIT) [1, 2]. In this paper, we describe thrust stand measurements performed to characterize the performance (specific impulse, thrust efficiency) of the MAD-IPA thruster. Impulse data are obtained at various pulse energies, mass flow rates and inductive coil geometries. Dependencies on these experimental parameters are discussed in the context of the current sheet formation and electromagnetic plasma acceleration processes.

Hallock, Ashley K.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Thrust Stand Measurements Using Alternative Propellants in the Microwave Assisted Discharge Inductive Plasma Accelerator

Storable propellants (for example water, ammonia, and hydrazine) are attractive for deep space propulsion due to their naturally high density at ambient interplanetary conditions, which obviates the need for a cryogenic/venting system. Water in particular is attractive due to its ease of handling and availability both terrestrially and extra-terrestrially. While many storable propellants are reactive and corrosive, a propulsion scheme where the propellant is insulated from vulnerable (e.g. metallic) sections of the assembly would be well-suited to process these otherwise incompatible propellants. Pulsed inductive plasma thrusters meet this criterion because they can be operated without direct propellant-electrode interaction. During operation of these devices, electrical energy is capacitively stored and then discharged through an inductive coil creating a time-varying current in the coil that interacts with a plasma covering the face of the coil to induce a plasma current. Propellant is accelerated and expelled at a high exhaust velocity (O(10-100 km/s)) by the Lorentz body force arising from the interaction of the magnetic field and the induced plasma current. While this class of thruster mitigates the life-limiting issues associated with electrode erosion, many pulsed inductive plasma thrusters require high pulse energies to inductively ionize propellant. The Microwave Assisted Discharge Inductive Plasma Accelerator (MAD-IPA) is a pulsed inductive plasma thruster that addressees this issue by partially ionizing propellant inside a conical inductive coil before the main current pulse via an electron cyclotron resonance (ECR) discharge. The ECR plasma is produced using microwaves and a static magnetic field from a set of permanent magnets arranged to create a thin resonance region along the inner surface of the coil, restricting plasma formation, and in turn current sheet formation, to a region where the magnetic coupling between the plasma and the theta-pinch coil is high. The use of a conical theta-pinch coil also serves to provide neutral propellant containment and plasma plume focusing that is improved relative to the more common planar geometry of the Pulsed Inductive Thruster (PIT). In this paper, we describe thrust stand measurements performed to evaluate the specific impulse and thrust efficiency of the MAD-IPA for a variety of propellants. Propellants tested include both widely-used, non-reactive noble gases like argon, and rarely-used propellants such as water, hydrazine and ammonia. Dependencies of impulse data on propellant species are discussed in the context of the current sheet formation and electromagnetic plasma acceleration processes.

Hallock, Ashley K.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Measuring Gap Fraction, Element Clumping Index and LAI in Sierra Forest Stands Using a Full-Waveform Ground-Based Lidar

The Echidna Validation Instrument (EVI), a ground-based, near-infrared (1064 nm) scanning lidar, provides gap fraction measurements, element clumping index measurements, effective leaf area index (LAIe) and leaf area index (LAI) measurements that are statistically similar to those from hemispherical photos. In this research, a new method integrating the range dimension is presented for retrieving element clumping index using a unique series of images of gap probability (Pgap) with range from EVI. From these images, we identified connected gap components and found the approximate physical, rather than angular, size of connected gap component. We conducted trials at 30 plots within six conifer stands of varying height and stocking densities in the Sierra National Forest, CA, in August 2008. The element clumping index measurements retrieved from EVI Pgap image series for the hinge angle region are highly consistent (R2=0.866) with those of hemispherical photos. Furthermore, the information contained in connected gap component size profiles does account for the difference between our method and gap-size distribution theory based method, suggesting a new perspective to measure element clumping index with EVI Pgap image series and also a potential advantage of three dimensional Lidar data for element clumping index retrieval. Therefore further exploration is required for better characterization of clumped condition from EVI Pgap image series.

Zhao, Feng↗
NASA NTRS2012

Reverberant Acoustic Testing and Direct Field Acoustic Testing Acoustic Standing Waves and their Impact on Structural Responses

The aerospace industry has been using two methods of acoustic testing to qualify flight hardware: (1) Reverberant Acoustic Test (RAT), (2) Direct Field Acoustic Test (DFAT). The acoustic field obtained by RAT is generally understood and assumed to be diffuse, expect below Schroeder cut-of frequencies. DFAT method of testing has some distinct advantages over RAT, however the acoustic field characteristics can be strongly affected by test setup such as the speaker layouts, number and location of control microphones and control schemes. In this paper the following are discussed based on DEMO tests performed at APL and JPL: (1) Acoustic wave interference patterns and acoustic standing waves, (2) The structural responses in RAT and DFAT.

vibro-acoustics↗
NASA NTRS2014

Standing Without Gravity: the Use of Lower Body Negative Pressure for Research and Reconditioning in Spaceflight

Weightlessness during spaceflight causes cephalad redistribution of intravascular and extravascular fluid, provoking cardiovascular and autonomic nervous system adaptations. The resulting functional state is appropriate for weightlessness but can result in orthostatic hypotension and intolerance during and after return to a persistent acceleration or gravitational environment. Lower body negative pressure (LBNP) applies subambient air pressure to the legs and lower abdomen inside a volume sealed at the waist, and decompression by 40‐50 mmHg reverses the spaceflight‐induced cephalad shift. LBNP has been used both to test the state of cardiovascular system during spaceflight and as a countermeasure by all space‐faring nations. Two configurations have thus far been used in spaceflight since the first LBNP flew on the first Soviet Salyut station in 1971. The Soviet and Russian configuration, used in four Salyut stations, the Mir space station and the Russian segment of the International Space Station, has no saddle to support the body so during decompression the feet press against the bottom of the collapsible chamber which shortens and applies force against the feet proportional to the decompression level. Thus, activation of the skeletal musculature partially counteracts vascular and venous pooling in the enclosed body segments, stimulating the orthostatic compensatory mechanisms as they would be standing on Earth. In the American configuration, used aboard Skylab and the Space Shuttle, a saddle supported the astronaut so the feet did not contact the bottom of the chamber, and vascular engorgement was not countered by muscular contraction. This minimized skeletal muscle involvement, unmasked vascular compensatory mechanisms for research purposes, and allowed measurements of changes in leg volume and muscle sympathetic nerve activity. Both variants have demonstrated research and therapeutic value in appropriately designed protocols. LBNP continues to be used for research and countermeasures on ISS, and future versions may explore the value of exercise during LBNP as an integrated countermeasure. This paperwill review the history and development of LBNP for spaceflight research and therapeutic purposes.

Charles, John B.↗
NASA NTRS2014

2013 Space Radiation Standing Review Panel Status Review for: The Risk of Acute and Late Central Nervous System Effects from Radiation Exposure, The Risk of Acute Radiation Syndromes Due to Solar Particle Events (SPEs), The Risk Of Degenerative Tissue Or Other Health Effects From Radiation Exposure, and The Risk of Radiation Carcinogenesis

The Space Radiation Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) was impressed with the strong research program presented by the scientists and staff associated with NASA's Space Radiation Program Element and National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI). The presentations given on-site and the reports of ongoing research that were provided in advance indicated the potential Risk of Acute and Late Central Nervous System Effects from Radiation Exposure (CNS) and were extensively discussed by the SRP. This new data leads the SRP to recommend that a higher priority should be placed on research designed to identify and understand these risks at the mechanistic level. To support this effort the SRP feels that a shift of emphasis from Acute Radiation Syndromes (ARS) and carcinogenesis to CNS-related endpoints is justified at this point. However, these research efforts need to focus on mechanisms, should follow pace with advances in the field of CNS in general and should consider the specific comments and suggestions made by the SRP as outlined below. The SRP further recommends that the Space Radiation Program Element continue with its efforts to fill the vacant positions (Element Scientist, CNS Risk Discipline Lead) as soon as possible. The SRP also strongly recommends that NASA should continue the NASA Space Radiation Summer School. In addition to these broad recommendations, there are specific comments/recommendations noted for each risk, described in detail below.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2014

2013 Advanced Environmental Health/Advanced Food Technology Standing Review Panel Final Report

The 2013 Advanced Environmental Health/Advanced Food Technology (AEH/AFT) Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) participated in a WebEx/teleconference with members of the Space Human Factors and Habitability (SHFH) Element, representatives from the Human Research Program (HRP), and NASA Headquarters on November 22, 2013 (list of participants is in Section IX of this report). The SRP reviewed the updated research plans for the Risk of Adverse Health Effects Due to Alterations in Host-Microorganism Interactions (Host Microbe Risk) and the Risk of Performance Decrement and Crew Illness Due to an Inadequate Food System (Food Risk). The SRP also received a status update on the Risk of Adverse Health Effects of Exposure to Dust and Volatiles during Exploration of Celestial Bodies (Dust Risk). Overall, the SRP was impressed with the strong research plans presented by the scientists and staff associated with the SHFH Element. The SRP also thought that the updated research plans were thorough, well organized, and presented in a comprehensive manner. The SRP agrees with the changes made to the Host Microbe Risk and Food Risk portfolios and thinks that the targets for Gap closure are appropriate.

Steinberg, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2014

2013 Immune Risk Standing Review Panel Research Plan Review for: The Risk of Crew Adverse Health Event Due to Altered Immune Response

The 2013 Immune Risk Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) participated in a meeting with representatives from the Human Research Program (HRP) Human Health Countermeasures (HHC) Element and HRP management on February 3-4, 2014 in Houston, TX to review the updated Research Plan for the Risk of Crew Adverse Health Event Due to Altered Immune Response in the HRP Integrated Research Plan. The SRP is impressed with the work the immune discipline has done since the 2012 SRP review and agrees with the new wording of the Gaps, no longer questions, now statements. The SRP also likes the addition of adding targets for closing the Gaps, but it is not clear how they got to some of the interim stages (interval percentages). A major concern that the SRP has mentioned since the initial 2009 SRP meeting is that there is still not enough emphasis on the interdisciplinary aspect of the immune risk associated with other risks (i.e., nutrition, radiation, etc.). The SRP recommends that a "translational SRP" or advisory group be developed that is composed of members from all of the HRP SRPs. The SRP also thinks that the immune discipline should consider a more systems biology approach. Lastly, the SRP is concerned that the risks observed in research from low Earth orbit (LEO) missions may not accurately reflect all the risks of longer duration flight beyond LEO. Also, there does not seem to be a concern for immune responses that may occur when someone is in space longer than six months, for example, a Mars mission would take three years. The absence of disease in past and current flight scenarios does not mean the risk may not be there in future flight settings.

Steinberg, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2014

2013 Immune Risk Standing Review Panel Evidence Review for: The Risk of Crew Adverse Health Event Due to Altered Immune Response

The 2013 Immune Risk Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) met for a site visit in Houston, TX on February 3-4, 2014. The SRP reviewed the new Evidence Report for the Risk of Crew Adverse Health Event Due to Altered Immune Response (from here on referred to as the 2013 Immune Evidence Report), as well as the Research Plan for this Risk that is in the current version of the Human Research Program’s (HRP) Integrated Research Plan (IRP).

Steinberg, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2014

Methods to Fabricate and Improve Stand-alone and Integrated Filters

Embodiments of the invention provide for fabricating a filter, for electromagnetic radiation, in at least three ways, including (1) fabricating integrated thin film filters directly on a detector; (2) fabricating a free standing thin film filter that may be used with a detector; and (3) treating an existing filter to improve the filter's properties.

Greer, Frank↗
NASA NTRS2012

Impact of Acoustic Standing Waves on Structural Responses: Reverberant Acoustic Testing (RAT) vs. Direct Field Acoustic Testing (DFAT)

Loudspeakers have been used for acoustic qualification of spacecraft, reflectors, solar panels, and other acoustically responsive structures for more than a decade. Limited measurements from some of the recent speaker tests used to qualify flight hardware have indicated significant spatial variation of the acoustic field within the test volume. Also structural responses have been reported to differ when similar tests were performed using reverberant chambers. To address the impact of non-uniform acoustic field on structural responses, a series of acoustic tests were performed using a flat panel and a 3-ft cylinder exposed to the field controlled by speakers and repeated in a reverberant chamber. The speaker testing was performed using multi-input-single-output (MISO) and multi-input-multi-output (MIMO) control schemes with and without the test articles. In this paper the spatial variation of the acoustic field due to acoustic standing waves and their impacts on the structural responses in RAT and DFAT (both using MISO and MIMO controls for DFAT) are discussed in some detail.

speakers↗
NASA NTRS2014

2014 Sensorimotor Risk Standing Review Panel

The Sensorimotor Risk Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) met on December 17 - 18, 2014 in Houston, TX to review the current status of the Risk of Impaired Control of Spacecraft, Associated Systems and Immediate Vehicle Egress due to Vestibular/Sensorimotor Alteration Associated with Space Flight (Sensorimotor Risk) in the Integrated Research Plan (IRP). During the meeting, the SRP received an in-depth briefing of the current status of the Sensorimotor Risk from Dr. Jacob Bloomberg, the Human Research Program (HRP) Sensorimotor Discipline Lead Scientist and Dr. Millard Reschke, the Chief Scientist of the Neuroscience Laboratories at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC). The SRP was impressed with the information that Dr. Bloomberg and Dr. Reschke presented and think that the in-person meeting (instead of WebEx/teleconference) allowed for more interactive and thoughtful conversations.

Steinberg, Susan↗