SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
This viewgraph presentation reviews the process of a human space flight conjunction assessment and lessons learned from the more than twelve years of International Space Station (ISS) operations. Also, the application of these lessons learned to a recent ISS conjunction assessment with object 84180 on July 16, 2009 is also presented.
BACKGROUND Astronauts experience postflight disturbances in postural and locomotor control due to sensorimotor adaptations during spaceflight. These alterations may have adverse consequences if a rapid egress is required after landing. Although exercise is partially effective for mitigating cardiovascular and muscular deconditioning, additional countermeasures are needed to further preserve sensorimotor function for exploration missions. We have identified proprioceptive training and electrical muscle stimulation (EMS) as promising in-flight countermeasures. Since prolonged head down bed rest (HDBR) is a spaceflight analog for body unloading and causes postural and locomotor control decrements that parallel those observed after spaceflight, it can be used to facilitate the development of these countermeasures. METHODS This study will determine the effects of proprioceptive training and EMS on functional task performance and sensorimotor function following 60 days of 6° HDBR. Subjects will be randomly assigned to one of four groups: 1)an EMS arm, 2) a proprioceptive training arm, 3) an exercise plus proprioceptive training arm, and 4) a control arm. The EMS countermeasure will include daily bilateral stimulation of selected bilateral lower extremity muscles (30 minutes per session). Proprioceptive training will be performed three days per week (20 minutes per session) consisting of body-loaded postural tasks in the horizontal position on an air bearing sled. Exercise training will mimic current protocols used on the International Space Station, but treadmill aerobic exercise will be replaced with additional cycling aerobic exercise. Primary outcome measures will include pre and post HDBR functional tests that are representative of high priority exploration mission tasks and require high demand for dynamic control of postural stability. Additional measures will be used to identify the key physiological factors contributing to countermeasure benefits. Given the constrained samples size, a Bayesian modelling approach will be used to quantify the probability that there is an effect of a given magnitude. HARDWARE AND PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT Proprioceptive countermeasure design enhancements continued as part of the Mars Campaign Office (MCO) Crew Health and Performance (CHP) Crew Health Countermeasures (CHC). The primary goals of this work were to assemble a portable version of the countermeasure system that can be used at the :envihab facility, expand the software feedback system’s capabilities, and develop an actuator loading system that mimics what could be used on the International Space Station. In addition, one major piece of exercise hardware used in previous HDBR studies, the Horizontal Squat Device, was reassembled and restored to full functionality. Human-in-the-loop pilot testing is ongoing, prior to shipping both devices to the :envihab HDBR facility. Evaluations are also underway for the best EMS device technologies and specific methods. Finally, assessment techniques are being translated for administration in the horizontal position (e.g., leg dexterity and foot sole skin sensitivity). Our current goals are to refine the countermeasure training and assessment techniques and integrate protocols across multiple modalities. RELEVANCE The deliverable from this project will be proof-of-concept sensorimotor countermeasure designs for functional task performance with full assessment of efficacy in a spaceflight analog. If one or more countermeasures are effective, they will be translated for validation with the suite of operationally implemented in-flight countermeasures. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work is supported by NASA’s Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element and by the Canadian Space Agency (L. Bent).
The elements of the NASA Life Sciences Program that are related to manned space flight and biological scientific studies in space are reviewed. Projects included in the current program are outlined and the future direction of the program is discussed. Consideration is given to issues such as long-duration spaceflight, medical support in space, readaptation to the gravity field of earth, considerations for the Space Station, radiation hazards, environmental standards for space habitation, and human operator interaction with computers, robots, and telepresence systems.
Future piloted space exploration missions will focus more on science than engineering, a change which will challenge existing concepts for flight crew tasking and demand that participants with contrasting skills, values, and backgrounds learn to cooperate as equals. In terrestrial space flight analogs such as Desert Research And Technology Studies, engineers, pilots, and scientists can practice working together, taking advantage of the full breadth of all team members training to produce harmonious, effective missions that maximize the time and attention the crew can devote to science. This paper presents, in a format usable as a reference by participants in the field, a successfully tested crew interaction model for such missions. The model builds upon the basic framework of a scientific field expedition by adding proven concepts from aviation and human spaceflight, including expeditionary behavior and cockpit resource management, cooperative crew tasking and adaptive leadership and followership, formal techniques for radio communication, and increased attention to operational considerations. The crews of future spaceflight analogs can use this model to demonstrate effective techniques, learn from each other, develop positive working relationships, and make their expeditions more successful, even if they have limited time to train together beforehand. This model can also inform the preparation and execution of actual future spaceflights.
During the next decades, manned space missions are expected to be aiming at the Lagrange points, near Earth asteroids, and Mars flyby and/or landing. The question is therefore: Are we ready to go? To answer this with a yes, we are currently using the International Space Station to develop an integrated human physiological countermeasure suite. The integrated countermeasure suite will most likely encounter: 1) Exercise devices for aerobic, dynamic and resistive exercise training; 2) sensory‐motor computer training programs and anti‐motion sickness medication for preparing EVAs and G‐transitions; 3) lower limb bracelets for preventing and/or treating the VIIP (vision impairment and intracranial pressure) syndrome; 4) nutritional components for maintenance of bone, muscle, the cardiovascular system and preventing oxidative stress and damage and immune deficiencies (e. g. omega‐3 fatty acids, PRO/K, anti‐oxidants and less salt and iron); 5) bisphosphonates for preventing bone degradation.; 6) lower body compression garment and oral salt and fluid loading for landing on a planetary surface to combat orthostatic intolerance; 7) laboratory analysis equipment for individualized monitoring of biomarkers in blood, urine and saliva for estimation of health status in; 8) advanced ultrasound techniques for monitoring bone and cardiovascular health; and 9) computer modeling programs for individual health status assessments of efficiency and subsequent adjustments of countermeasures. In particular for future missions into deep space, we are concerned with the synergistic effects of weightlessness, radiation, operational constraints and other spaceflight environmental factors. Therefore, increased collaboration between physiological, behavioral, radiation and space vehicle design disciplines are strongly warranted. Another venue we are exploring in NASA's Human Research Program is the usefulness of artificial gravity for mitigating the health risks of long duration weightlessness.
The International Space Station Medical Projects (ISSMP) Element provides planning, integration, and implementation services for HRP research studies for both spaceflight and flight analog research. Through the implementation of these two efforts, ISSMP offers an innovative way of guiding research decisions to meet the unique challenges of understanding the human risks to space exploration. Flight services provided by ISSMP include leading informed consent briefings, developing and validating in-flight crew procedures, providing ISS crew and ground-controller training, real-time experiment monitoring, on-orbit experiment and hardware operations and facilitating data transfer to investigators. For analog studies at the NASA Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA), the ISSMP team provides subject recruitment and screening, science requirements integration, data collection schedules, data sharing agreements, mission scenarios and facilities to support investigators. The ISSMP also serves as the HRP interface to external analog providers including the :envihab bed rest facility (Cologne, Germany), NEK isolation chamber (Moscow, Russia) and the Antarctica research stations. Investigators working in either spaceflight or analog environments requires a coordinated effort between NASA and the investigators. The interdisciplinary nature of both flight and analog research requires investigators to be aware of concurrent research studies and take into account potential confounding factors that may impact their research objectives. Investigators must define clear research requirements, participate in Investigator Working Group meetings, obtain human use approvals, and provide study-specific training, sample and data collection and procedures all while adhering to schedule deadlines. These science requirements define the technical, functional and performance operations to meet the research objectives. The ISSMP maintains an expert team of professionals with the knowledge and experience to guide investigators science through all aspects of mission planning, crew operations, and research integration. During this session, the ISSMP team will discuss best-practices approaches for successfully preparing and conducting studies in both the flight and analog environments. Critical tips and tricks will be shown to greatly improve your chances of successfully completing your research aboard the International Space Station and in Spaceflight Analogs.
In an effort to demystify how research funding priorities are established , the Space Radiation Element will present an introduction to the Human Space Risk Board (HSRB) framework that is that used to inform Human System Risk and can be found at https://humanresearchroadmap.nasa.gov/Risks/. These risks are based on the consequences of hazards (space radiation, altered gravity, isolation & confinement, distance from earth and hostile/closed environment) a human body is exposed to during spaceflight. The HSRB regularly evaluates risks to humans in space which includes updating the knowledge base to reflect emerging research, the development of effective countermeasures, and evolving operational approaches toward addressing those risks. To increase understanding and clarity, this talk will step through how risks (with the focus on Risk of Radiation Carcinogenesis) are assigned a rating (and color code) based on design reference missions, likelihood, and consequence. Further, The Space Radiation Element will discuss how risks, including the magnitude/rating, required technical deliverables, and expected products from current research efforts affect our element strategy and prioritization of research. In addition, navigation of the publicly available www.nasa.gov/hrp, will be demonstrated to inform principal investigators where this information can be readily accessed. Our primary objectives for this presentation/demonstration are to demystify The Space Radiation Element’s internal processes and to educate researchers concerning publicly available documents that can be used to better align their proposed objectives with Element priorities.
NASA’s Human Research Program’s Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration (HARI) delineates the uncertainty surrounding crew work with automation and robotics in spaceflight. HARI is concerned with detrimental effects of ineffective user interfaces, system designs and/or functional task allocation on crew performance, potentially compromising mission success and safety. This risk arises because of limited experience with complex automation and robotics in spaceflight. One key knowledge gap within the HARI risk is related to function allocation.
NASA’s Deep Space Network (DSN) serves as a critical element in the exploration of deep space, typically supporting 30-40 operational missions at any given time, each with unique characteristics and telecommunications requirements. In order to meet the needs of its diverse customer base, DSN relies on the Mission Support Definition and Commitments Office to interface with its customers and to develop, negotiate, and document the appropriate service commitments to meet each mission’s needs. Members of this office provide the needed support throughout each mission’s lifetime. While DSN’s primary focus in recent years has been supporting scientific missions by robotic spacecraft deployed across the solar system, the network is ramping-up to provide support for human spaceflight (HSF) endeavours to the moon and beyond, starting with the Artemis missions which aim to land humans on the lunar surface in the 2020’s. These HSF missions pose unique challenges for the DSN, including technical, operational, and programmatic concerns. Examples of challenges in each of these areas are provided, along with descriptions of how they are being addressed and open issues remaining.
The NASA/industry team responsible for developing the J-2X upper stage engine for the Space Launch System (SLS) Program has made significant progress toward moving beyond the design phase and into production, assembly, and test of development hardware. The J-2X engine exemplifies the SLS Program goal of using proven technology and experience from more than 50 years of United States spaceflight experience combined with modern manufacturing processes and approaches. It will power the second stage of the fully evolved SLS Program launch vehicle that will enable a return to human exploration of space beyond low earth orbit. Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR) is under contract to develop and produce the engine, leveraging its flight-proven LH2/LOX, gas generator cycle J-2 and RS-68 engine capabilities, recent experience with the X-33 aerospike XRS-2200 engine, and development knowledge of the J-2S tap-off cycle engine. The J- 2X employs a gas generator operating cycle designed to produce 294,000 pounds of vacuum thrust in primary operating mode with its full nozzle extension. With a truncated nozzle extension suitable to support engine clustering on the stage, the nominal vacuum thrust level in primary mode is 285,000 pounds. It also has a secondary mode, during which it operates at 80 percent thrust by altering its mixture ratio. The J-2X development philosophy is based on proven hardware, an aggressive development schedule, and early risk reduction. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and PWR began development of the J-2X in June 2006. The government/industry team of more than 600 people within NASA and PWR successfully completed the Critical Design Review (CDR) in November 2008, following extensive risk mitigation testing. Assembly of the first development engine was completed in May 2011 and the first engine test was conducted at the NASA Stennis Space Center (SSC), test stand A2, on 14 July 2011. Testing of the first development engine will continue through the autumn of 2011, be paused for test stand modifications to the passive diffuser, and then restart in the spring of 2012. This testing will be followed by specialized powerpack testing intended to examine the design and operating margins of the engine turbomachinery. The development plan beyond this point leads through more system-level, engine testing of several samples, analytical model validation activities, functional and performance verification, and then ultimate certification to support human spaceflight. This paper will discuss the J-2X development background, provide top-level information on design and development planning, and will explore some of the development challenges and mitigation activities pursued to date.
Humans have been exploring space for more than 40 years. For all those years microorganisms have accompanied, first un-manned spacecraft/cargo and later manned vessels. Microorganisms are everywhere on Earth, could easily adapt to new environments and/or can rapidly mutate to survive in very harsh conditions. Their presence in spacecraft and cargo have caused a few inconveniences over the years of humans spaceflight, ranging from crew health, life support systems challenges and material degradation. The sterilization of spacecraft that will host humans in long duration mission would be a costly operation that will not provide a long-term solution to the microbial colonization of the vessels. As soon as a human is exposed to the spacecraft, during the mission, microorganisms will start to populate the new environment. As the hum an presence in space increases in length, the risk from the microbial load, to hardware and crew will also increase. Mitigation of this risk includes several different strategies that will include minimizing the microbial load (in numbers and diversity) and monitoring. This presentation will provide a list of the risk mitigation strategies that should be implemented during ground processing, and during the mission. It will also discuss the areas that should be discussed before an effective in-flight microbial monitoring regimen is implemented. Microbial monitoring technologies will also be presented.
NASA is working with industry and international partners to return humans to the moon and eventually enable a human Mars mission. Within NASA, several organizations work together to identify, prioritize, fund, execute, and operationalize the crew health and performance (CHP) research and technology development (R&D) necessary to enable these future missions. These organizations include flight programs as well as other organizations such as the Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA), Human Research Program, Space Technology Mission Directorate, and System Capability Leadership Teams, each of which existed for several years prior to the creation of the Moon-to-Mars (M2M) Program Office in 2023. A variety of constructs, vocabularies, and processes exist for the management of risks and strategic planning across these organizations. For example, M2M objectives, program risks, human system risks, human research gaps, capability gaps, and envisioned futures are all constructs currently used within NASA for identifying and prioritizing R&D needs. Alignment and evolution of these strategic planning constructs is ongoing and will allow for alignment and traceability between M2M objectives and R&D investments at a detailed level. While this reorganization is ongoing, and even after it is established, there is a recognized need among stakeholder organizations to identify and communicate the highest CHP R&D priorities in a unified and digestible way that synthesizes the considerations and perspectives of the CHP community across NASA. To achieve this, the HMTA facilitated a series of group discussions with representatives of NASA’s CHP community, which culminated in a product identifying the eight highest priority mission-enabling CHP capabilities for human missions to Mars, referred to as the “Top Human System Capability Needs for Mars”. The list includes Earth-Independent Human Operations; Mars Duration Food System; Mars Duration Effects on Human Physiology; Risks Mitigations for Vehicle Atmospheres; Computational Injury & Anthropometric Models; Exploration Exercise Countermeasures; Individual Variability in Responses to Spaceflight; and Sensorimotor Countermeasures. Existing strategic planning and risk management tools and processes were considered, as well as practicalities of technical, cost, and schedule feasibility associated with potential R&D risk mitigations and technology solutions. The product is not owned by any one organization and does not replace existing strategic or program planning processes; rather it aims to complement and inform them with a unified set of community generated priorities. It is anticipated that this list will be re-evaluated periodically based on R&D progress and the evolving M2M architecture.
Changes in the human brain, due to spaceflight, have been a challenge to the space program since its inception; a challenge that is becoming more acute as extended International Space Station (ISS) missions become routine, a return to crewed lunar exploration is about to begin, and a multi-year crewed trip to Mars is being planned. Determining the extent to which neurophysiological adaptations may adversely impact performance in operational tasks, assessing the full-time course of these changes, and identifying/mitigating any potential long-term health consequences are crucial steps required to enable safe crew-autonomous, long-duration, deep-space missions. Vision is the predominant perceptual sense used to guide cognition and motor control in humans. Thus, it is critical for the success of any future, long-duration mission to understand how long-term exposure to microgravity and to other stressors of spaceflight and their interactions, impact visual function. This is an especially challenging task given the small and disparate samples from which we have been and will be able to collect human performance data. NASA has recently been carefully tracking spaceflight-induced ophthalmic changes, driven in large part by the fluid shifts related to microgravity. In particular, a recent study of Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) postflight measures revealed that more than two-thirds of US crew members experience significant increases in retinal thickness after 6month or longer ISS missions. Space Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome (SANS) also includes visual acuity decrements and other ocular structural changes that could adversely impact in-flight performance as missions become longer. However, the impact of spaceflight on the visual system is not limited to the retina. Recent comparisons of pre-and post-flight brain images have revealed structural changes throughout the brain that implicate visual, visuomotor, and visual-cognitive pathways, consistent with observed functional impacts (e.g., decreased speed/accuracy/timing of fine goal-oriented movements). Current limitations on inflight testing make it very difficult to determine when and under what conditions SANS and other disruptions of human neurological subsystems arise. Currently, one cannot anticipate the time course and extent of impairment and recovery. This study addresses this knowledge gap by creating an integrated framework of the relevant existing literature on visual and oculomotor function during spaceflight with an eye towards complementing current structural measures of visuomotor impairment with new oculometric standard measures. Using eye-movement based visual function assessment and diagnostics would provide a valuable enhancement of crew health and performance monitoring in support of deepspace exploration.
- The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) is responsible for the management of a portfolio of 30 human system risks that NASA tracks and configuration manages to mitigate for future crewed exploration missions. - The HSRB has been exploring the concept of causal diagrams (in the form of Directed Acyclic Graphs or DAGs) as an approach to creating knowledge graphs for each risk to enable shared mental models of causal flow from spaceflight hazards to mission outcomes among HSRB Stakeholders. - These diagrams are intended to improve insight and communication of risk across the myriad subject matter experts and management interested in human system risk reduction. This includes program managers, systems engineers, and operators in addition to the Human Health and Performance Directorate. - The DAG project was intended to create the foundation for composition of the 30 baselined DAGs into a single risk network and software is being developed in parallel to enable this forward work.
Human-computer interaction (HCI) encompasses all the methods by which humans and computer-based systems communicate, share information, and accomplish tasks. When HCI is poorly designed, crews have difficulty entering, navigating, accessing, and understanding information. HCI has rarely been studied in an operational spaceflight context, and detailed performance data that would support evaluation of HCI have not been collected; thus, we draw much of our evidence from post-spaceflight crew comments, and from other safety-critical domains like ground-based power plants, and aviation. Additionally, there is a concern that any potential or real issues to date may have been masked by the fact that crews have near constant access to ground controllers, who monitor for errors, correct mistakes, and provide additional information needed to complete tasks. We do not know what types of HCI issues might arise without this "safety net". Exploration missions will test this concern, as crews may be operating autonomously due to communication delays and blackouts. Crew survival will be heavily dependent on available electronic information for just-in-time training, procedure execution, and vehicle or system maintenance; hence, the criticality of the Risk of Inadequate HCI. Future work must focus on identifying the most important contributing risk factors, evaluating their contribution to the overall risk, and developing appropriate mitigations. The Risk of Inadequate HCI includes eight core contributing factors based on the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS): (1) Requirements, policies, and design processes, (2) Information resources and support, (3) Allocation of attention, (4) Cognitive overload, (5) Environmentally induced perceptual changes, (6) Misperception and misinterpretation of displayed information, (7) Spatial disorientation, and (8) Displays and controls.
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
I. During each nine-hour shift (or upon request), the Orbital Safety Analyst (OSA) at JSpOC updates the entire tracked catalog with the latest tracking data from the SSN and screens this catalog against NASA s assets. a) For ISS operations, a 72-hour advance screening is performed. b) For Shuttle orbit operations, a 36-hour advance screening is performed. c) If a vehicle is performing a maneuver during the screening period, OSA uses post-reboost-trajectory data supplied by Mission Control Center-Houston (MCC-H) for screening. II. An automated process is used to detect any conjunctions within 10 x 40 x 40 km box (centered on the vehicle) using Special Perturbation (SP) processing: a) Box dimensions are Radial x Downtrack x Crosstrack. b) Any object found within this box has the tracking tasking level increased to improve (hopefully) its uncertainty in its current and predicted orbital trajectory. c) OSA informs NASA if any object is found inside a 2 x 25 x 25 km box then creates and sends an Orbital Conjunction Message (OCM) to NASA which contains detailed information about the conjunction. d) For Shuttle, the box size used for screening and reporting is altered for special operations (day of rendezvous, launch screening, etc.).
NASA’s mission-operations paradigm, established during Project Mercury and minimally evolving through the Apollo Program, Space Shuttle Program, and ISS missions, has primarily depended on real-time support from a ground team of experts. This ground team has served as the safety net for crewed spaceflight missions over the past 60 years, managing the combined state of the mission, vehicle, and crew. However, this operational paradigm, which has seen little change in its Human-Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA), will face challenges during long-duration exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit. Lunar missions may experience one-way communication latencies ranging from 3 to 14 seconds, while Mars missions will encounter up to a 44-minute round-trip latency at a maximum distance from Earth. Communication delays negatively impact the behavioral health and performance of individuals and crews operating across the multi-team space-to-ground system. Previous research indicates that increased isolation and the challenges posed by delayed communication lead to heightened stress, frustration, adverse behavioral symptoms, and reduced individual performance. NASA has investigated the nature and effectiveness of managing this shift in complex operations since early 2000, but additional research is necessary to assess the issues associated with communication latencies and identify effective countermeasures. This work aimed to examine the evidence from 20 years of research on comm delays. We systematically reviewed the past 20 years of communication delay literature, focusing on how this research aligns with relevant, high-priority needs in the HSIA, Team, and BMed Risks. This type of panoramic review has not been done since 2013; a current, aggregated picture of what has been studied and how is needed to inform additional studies and mitigation development. Additional perspectives were gained from interviews with the research participants, operations experts, and communication delay researchers. Results from this effort will help characterize the risk posed by communication latency for upcoming Artemis missions and point toward potential mitigations. The final results will be presented. For the literature review, we formed a search term seed set drawing from languages used in two papers representative of the previous state of knowledge and supplemented it with additional search terms. We conducted literature searches on Google Scholar, PubMed, and Web of Science and searched NASA project archives for output from NASA-sponsored research. This search yielded 150 papers, of which 48 were relevant. SME interviews provided perspective on key communication delay issues and concerns and what is being worked on to mitigate those issues. Preliminary results of the literature review have been presented. Final results to be presented include the results of the literature review and findings from the interviews.