SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “NASA Program Space Human Factors”

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 325 records · Page 18

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2016

Review of NASA's Evidence Reports on Human Health Risks

NASA has requested a study from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to provide an independent review of more than 30 evidence reports on human health risks for long duration and exploration spaceflight. The evidence reports, which are publicly available, are categorized into five broad categories: (1) behavioral health and performance; (2) human health countermeasures (with a focus on bone metabolism and orthopedics, nutrition, immunology, and cardiac and pulmonary physiology); (3) radiation; (4) human factors issues; and (5) exploration medical capabilities. The reports are revised on an ongoing basis to incorporate new scientific information. In conducting this study, an IOM ad hoc committee will build on the 2008 IOM report Review of NASA's Human Research Program Evidence Books. That report provided an assessment of the process used for developing the evidence reports and provided an initial review of the evidence reports that had been completed at that time. Each year, NASA staff will identify a set of evidence reports for committee review. Over the course of the study all evidence reports will be reviewed. The committee will hold an annual scientific workshop to receive input on the evidence reports it is reviewing that year and an update on the recent literature. The committee will issue an annual letter report that addresses the following questions relevant to each evidence report: 1. Does the evidence report provide sufficient evidence, as well as sufficient risk context, that the risk is of concern for long-term space missions? 2. Does the evidence report make the case for the research gaps presented? 3. Are there any additional gaps in knowledge or areas of fundamental research that should be considered to enhance the basic understanding of this specific risk? 4. Does the evidence report address relevant interactions among risks? 5. Is input from additional disciplines needed? 6. Is the breadth of the cited literature sufficient? 7. What is the overall readability and quality? 8. Is the expertise of the authors sufficient to fully cover the scope of the given risk? 9. Has the evidence report addressed previous recommendations made by the IOM in the 2008 letter report?

Scott-Conner, Carol E. H.↗

NASA NTRS2003

Materials trade study for lunar/gateway missions

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) administrator has identified protection from radiation hazards as one of the two biggest problems of the agency with respect to human deep space missions. The intensity and strength of cosmic radiation in deep space makes this a 'must solve' problem for space missions. The Moon and two Earth-Moon Lagrange points near Moon are being proposed as hubs for deep space missions. The focus of this study is to identify approaches to protecting astronauts and habitats from adverse effects from space radiation both for single missions and multiple missions for career astronauts to these destinations. As the great cost of added radiation shielding is a potential limiting factor in deep space missions, reduction of mass, without compromising safety, is of paramount importance. The choice of material and selection of the crew profile play major roles in design and mission operations. Material trade studies in shield design over multi-segmented missions involving multiple work and living areas in the transport and duty phase of space mission's to two Earth-Moon co-linear Lagrange points (L1) between Earth and the Moon and (L2) on back side of the moon as seen from Earth, and to the Moon have been studied. It is found that, for single missions, current state-of-the-art knowledge of material provides adequate shielding. On the other hand, the choice of shield material is absolutely critical for career astronauts and revolutionary materials need to be developed for these missions. This study also provides a guide to the effectiveness of multifunctional materials in preparation for more detailed geometry studies in progress. c2003 COSPAR. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

NASA Discipline Radiation Health↗

NASA NTRS2010

The Right Stuff: A Look Back at Three Decades of Flight Controller Training for Space Shuttle Mission Operations

This paper will summarize the thirty-year history of Space Shuttle operations from the perspective of training in NASA Johnson Space Center's Mission Control Center. It will focus on training and development of flight controllers and instructors, and how training practices have evolved over the years as flight experience was gained, new technologies developed, and programmatic needs changed. Operations of human spaceflight systems is extremely complex, therefore the training and certification of operations personnel is a critical piece of ensuring mission success. Mission Control Center (MCC-H), at the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, in Houston, Texas manages mission operations for the Space Shuttle Program, including the training and certification of the astronauts and flight control teams. This paper will give an overview of a flight control team s makeup and responsibilities during a flight, and details on how those teams are trained and certified. The training methodology for developing flight controllers has evolved significantly over the last thirty years, while the core goals and competencies have remained the same. In addition, the facilities and tools used in the control center have evolved. These changes have been driven by many factors including lessons learned, technology, shuttle accidents, shifts in risk posture, and generational differences. Flight controllers will share their experiences in training and operating the Space Shuttle throughout the Program s history. A primary method used for training Space Shuttle flight control teams is by running mission simulations of the orbit, ascent, and entry phases, to truly "train like you fly." The audience will learn what it is like to perform a simulation as a shuttle flight controller. Finally, we will reflect on the lessons learned in training for the shuttle program, and how those could be applied to future human spaceflight endeavors.

Dittemore, Gary D.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Computational Modeling of Space Physiology

The Digital Astronaut Project (DAP), within NASAs Human Research Program, develops and implements computational modeling for use in the mitigation of human health and performance risks associated with long duration spaceflight. Over the past decade, DAP developed models to provide insights into space flight related changes to the central nervous system, cardiovascular system and the musculoskeletal system. Examples of the models and their applications include biomechanical models applied to advanced exercise device development, bone fracture risk quantification for mission planning, accident investigation, bone health standards development, and occupant protection. The International Space Station (ISS), in its role as a testing ground for long duration spaceflight, has been an important platform for obtaining human spaceflight data. DAP has used preflight, in-flight and post-flight data from short and long duration astronauts for computational model development and validation. Examples include preflight and post-flight bone mineral density data, muscle cross-sectional area, and muscle strength measurements. Results from computational modeling supplement space physiology research by informing experimental design. Using these computational models, DAP personnel can easily identify both important factors associated with a phenomenon and areas where data are lacking. This presentation will provide examples of DAP computational models, the data used in model development and validation, and applications of the model.

simulation↗

NASA NTRS1997

Aviation Safety Reporting System: Process and Procedures

The Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) was established in 1976 under an agreement between the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). This cooperative safety program invites pilots, air traffic controllers, flight attendants, maintenance personnel, and others to voluntarily report to NASA any aviation incident or safety hazard. The FAA provides most of the program funding. NASA administers the program, sets its policies in consultation with the FAA and aviation community, and receives the reports submitted to the program. The FAA offers those who use the ASRS program two important reporting guarantees: confidentiality and limited immunity. Reports sent to ASRS are held in strict confidence. More than 350,000 reports have been submitted since the program's beginning without a single reporter's identity being revealed. ASRS removes all personal names and other potentially identifying information before entering reports into its database. This system is a very successful, proof-of-concept for gathering safety data in order to provide timely information about safety issues. The ASRS information is crucial to aviation safety efforts both nationally and internationally. It can be utilized as the first step in safety by providing the direction and content to informed policies, procedures, and research, especially human factors. The ASRS process and procedures will be presented as one model of safety reporting feedback systems.

Connell, Linda J.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Overview of the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA)

In 2013, the Human Research Program at NASA began developing a new confinement analog specifically for conducting research to investigate the effects of confinement on the human system. The HERA (Human Exploration Research Analog) habitat has been used for both 7 and 14 day missions to date to examine and mitigate exploration risks to enable safe, reliable and productive human space exploration. This presentation will describe how the Flight Analogs Project developed the HERA facility and the infrastructure to suit investigator requirements for confinement research and in the process developed a new approach to analog utilization and a new state of the art analog facility. Details regarding HERA operations will be discussed including specifics on the mission simulation utilized for the current 14-day campaign, the specifics of the facility (total volume, overall size, hardware), and the capabilities available to researchers. The overall operational philosophy, mission fidelity including timeline, schedule pressures and cadence, and development and implementation of mission stressors will be presented. Research conducted to date in the HERA has addressed risks associated with behavioral health and performance, human physiology, as well as human factors. This presentation will conclude with a discussion of future research plans for the HERA, including infrastructure improvements and additional research capabilities planned for the upcoming 30-day missions in 2016.

Neigut, J.↗

NASA NTRS2011

The First Flight Decision for New Human Spacecraft Vehicles - A General Approach

Determining when it is safe to fly a crew on a launch vehicle/spacecraft for the first time, especially when the test flight is a part of the overall system certification process, has long been a challenge for program decision makers. The decision on first flight is ultimately the judgment of the program and agency management in conjunction with the design and operations team. To aid in this decision process, a NASA team undertook the task to develop a generic framework for evaluating whether any given program or commercial provider has sufficiently complete and balanced plans in place to allow crewmembers to safely fly on human spaceflight systems for the first time. It was the team s goal to establish a generic framework that could easily be applied to any new system, although the system design and intended mission would require specific assessment. Historical data shows that there are multiple approaches that have been successful in first flight with crew. These approaches have always been tailored to the specific system design, mission objectives, and launch environment. Because specific approaches may vary significantly between different system designs and situations, prescriptive instructions or thorough checklists cannot be provided ahead of time. There are, however, certain general approaches that should be applied in thinking through the decision for first flight. This paper addresses some of the most important factors to consider when developing a new system or evaluating an existing system for whether or not it is safe to fly humans to/from space. In the simplest terms, it is time to fly crew for the first time when it is safe to do so and the benefit of the crewed flight is greater than the residual risk. This is rarely a straight-forward decision. The paper describes the need for experience, sound judgment, close involvement of the technical and management teams, and established decision processes. In addition, the underlying level of confidence the manager has in making the decision will also be discussed. By applying the outlined thought processes and approaches to a specific design, test program and mission objectives, a project team will be better able to focus the debate and discussion on critical areas for consideration and added scrutiny -- allowing decision makers to adequately address the first crewed flight decision.

Schaible, Dawn M.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Urinary Acid Excretion Can Predict Changes in Bone Metabolism During Space Flight

Mitigating space flight-induced bone loss is critical for space exploration, and a dietary countermeasure would be ideal. We present here preliminary data from a study where we examined the role of dietary intake patterns as one factor that can influence bone mineral loss in astronauts during space flight. Crewmembers (n=5) were asked to consume a prescribed diet with either a low (0.3-0.6) or high (1.0-1.3) ratio of animal protein to potassium (APro:K) before and during space flight for 4-d periods. Diets were controlled for energy, total protein, calcium, and sodium. 24-h urine samples were collected on the last day of each of the 4-d controlled diet sessions. 24-h urinary acid excretion, which was predicted by dietary potential renal acid load, was correlated with urinary n-telopeptide (NTX, Pearson R = 0.99 and 0.80 for the high and low APro:K sessions, respectively, p<0.001). The amount of protein when expressed as the percentage of total energy (but not as total grams) was also correlated with urinary NTX (R = 0.66, p<0.01). These results, from healthy individuals in a unique environment, will be important to better understand diet and bone interrelationships during space flight as well as on Earth. The study was funded by the NASA Human Research Program.

Zwart, Sara R.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Coordination of International Risk-Reduction Investigations by the Multilateral Human Research Panel for Exploration

Effective use of the unique capabilities of the International Space Station (ISS) for risk reduction on future deep space missions involves preliminary work in analog environments to identify and evaluate the most promising techniques, interventions and treatments. This entails a consolidated multinational approach to biomedical research both on ISS and in ground analogs. The Multilateral Human Research Panel for Exploration (MHRPE) was chartered by the five ISS partners to recommend the best combination of partner investigations on ISS for risk reduction in the relatively short time available for ISS utilization. MHRPE will also make recommendations to funding agencies for appropriate preparatory analog work. In 2011, NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) and the Institute of Biomedical Problems (IBMP) of the Russian Academy of Science, acting for MHRPE, developed a joint US-Russian biomedical program for the 2015 one-year ISS mission (1YM) of American and Russian crewmembers. This was to evaluate the possibilities for multilateral research on ISS. An overlapping list of 16 HRP, 9 IBMP, 3 Japanese, 3 European and 1 Canadian investigations were selected to address risk-reduction goals in 7 categories: Functional Performance, Behavioral Health, Visual Impairment, Metabolism, Physical Capacity, Microbial and Human Factors. MHRPE intends to build on this bilateral foundation to recommend more fully-integrated multilateral investigations on future ISS missions commencing after the 1YM. MHRPE has also endorsed an on-going program of coordinated research on 6-month, one-year and 6-week missions ISS expeditions that is now under consideration by ISS managers. Preparatory work for these missions will require coordinated and collaborative campaigns especially in the psychological and psychosocial areas using analog isolation facilities in Houston, Köln and Moscow, and possibly elsewhere. The multilateral Human Analogs research working group (HANA) is the focal point of those planning discussions, with MHRPE coordinating between the national programs and then supporting implementation on ISS. Experience gained during preparations for the 1YM has identified improvements in both American and Russian processes to enable well-integrated investigations on all subsequent ISS expeditions. Among those is that the greatest efficiency is to be gained with investigations that are fully integrated from their conception, with co-principal investigators, a consolidated proposal and integrated plans for crewmember time and other flight-related resources. Analog investigations preceding future ISS expeditions will employ these lessons in efficiency to evaluate the techniques and tools to be validated aboard ISS. In this way, the resources and capabilities of ISS can be applied most efficiently to solving the problems facing astronauts of all nations in missions deep into the solar system.

Charles, John B.↗

NASA NTRS1997

Medical therapy, calcium oxalate urolithiasis

The development of diagnostic protocols that identify specific risk factors for calcium oxalate nephrolithiasis has led to the formulation of directed medical regimens that are aimed at correcting the underlying metabolic disturbances. Initiation of these treatment programs has reduced markedly the rate of stone formation in the majority of patients who form stones. This article discusses the rationale that underlies the choice of medical therapy for the various pathophysiologic causes of calcium oxalate nephrolithiasis and the appropriate use of available medications.

Review↗

NASA NTRS2015

SLS-SPEC-159 Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) Revision D

This document is derived from the former National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Constellation Program (CxP) document CxP 70023, titled "The Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE), Revision C." The original document has been modified to represent updated Design Reference Missions (DRMs) for the NASA Exploration Systems Development (ESD) Programs. The DSNE completes environment-related specifications for architecture, system-level, and lower-tier documents by specifying the ranges of environmental conditions that must be accounted for by NASA ESD Programs. To assure clarity and consistency, and to prevent requirements documents from becoming cluttered with extensive amounts of technical material, natural environment specifications have been compiled into this document. The intent is to keep a unified specification for natural environments that each Program calls out for appropriate application. This document defines the natural environments parameter limits (maximum and minimum values, energy spectra, or precise model inputs, assumptions, model options, etc.), for all ESD Programs. These environments are developed by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Natural Environments Branch (MSFC organization code: EV44). Many of the parameter limits are based on experience with previous programs, such as the Space Shuttle Program. The parameter limits contain no margin and are meant to be evaluated individually to ensure they are reasonable (i.e., do not apply unrealistic extreme-on-extreme conditions). The natural environments specifications in this document should be accounted for by robust design of the flight vehicle and support systems. However, it is understood that in some cases the Programs will find it more effective to account for portions of the environment ranges by operational mitigation or acceptance of risk in accordance with an appropriate program risk management plan and/or hazard analysis process. The DSNE is not intended as a definition of operational models or operational constraints, nor is it adequate, alone, for ground facilities which may have additional requirements (for example, building codes and local environmental constraints). "Natural environments," as the term is used here, refers to the environments that are not the result of intended human activity or intervention. It consists of a variety of external environmental factors (most of natural origin and a few of human origin) which impose restrictions or otherwise impact the development or operation of flight vehicles and destination surface systems. These natural environments include the following types of environments: Terrestrial environments at launch, abort, and normal landing sites (winds, temperatures, pressures, surface roughness, sea conditions, etc.); Space environments (ionizing radiation, orbital debris, meteoroids, thermosphere density, plasma, solar, Earth, and lunar-emitted thermal radiation, etc.); Destination environments (Lunar surface and orbital, Mars atmosphere and surface, near Earth asteroids, etc.). Many of the environmental specifications in this document are based on models, data, and environment descriptions contained in the CxP 70044, Constellation Program Natural Environment Definition for Design (NEDD). The NEDD provides additional detailed environment data and model descriptions to support analytical studies for ESD Programs. For background information on specific environments and their effects on spacecraft design and operations, the environment models, and the data used to generate the specifications contained in the DSNE, the reader is referred to the NEDD paragraphs listed in each section of the DSNE. Also, most of the environmental specifications in this document are tied specifically to the ESD DRMs in ESD-10012, Revision B, Exploration Systems Development Concept of Operations (ConOps). Coordination between these environment specifications and the DRMs must be maintained. This document should be compatible with the current ESD DRMs, but updates to the mission definitions and variations in interpretation may require adjustments to the environment specifications.

Roberts, Barry C.↗

NASA NTRS2017

SLS-SPEC-159 Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) Revision E

The DSNE completes environment-related specifications for architecture, system-level, and lower-tier documents by specifying the ranges of environmental conditions that must be accounted for by NASA ESD Programs. To assure clarity and consistency, and to prevent requirements documents from becoming cluttered with extensive amounts of technical material, natural environment specifications have been compiled into this document. The intent is to keep a unified specification for natural environments that each Program calls out for appropriate application. This document defines the natural environments parameter limits (maximum and minimum values, energy spectra, or precise model inputs, assumptions, model options, etc.), for all ESD Programs. These environments are developed by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Natural Environments Branch (MSFC organization code: EV44). Many of the parameter limits are based on experience with previous programs, such as the Space Shuttle Program. The parameter limits contain no margin and are meant to be evaluated individually to ensure they are reasonable (i.e., do not apply unrealistic extreme-on-extreme conditions). The natural environments specifications in this document should be accounted for by robust design of the flight vehicle and support systems. However, it is understood that in some cases the Programs will find it more effective to account for portions of the environment ranges by operational mitigation or acceptance of risk in accordance with an appropriate program risk management plan and/or hazard analysis process. The DSNE is not intended as a definition of operational models or operational constraints, nor is it adequate, alone, for ground facilities which may have additional requirements (for example, building codes and local environmental constraints). "Natural environments," as the term is used here, refers to the environments that are not the result of intended human activity or intervention. It consists of a variety of external environmental factors (most of natural origin and a few of human origin) which impose restrictions or otherwise impact the development or operation of flight vehicles and destination surface systems.

Roberts, Barry C.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Designing a Better Spacecraft: Assessing Flight Operability of Human Rated Spacecraft

The design of a human rated spacecraft is a complex and costly process requiring the integrated assessment of many individual criteria. Historically, it has been difficult to include in that integrated assessment the design s full impact on the flight operations community and its costs. The unique "operability requirements" have not been well understood, nor has there been a well-defined set of criteria for assessing operability. As a result, flight operations organizations and program managers are often faced with difficult and costly operations phase implementations. In response, the Mission Operations Directorate at NASA s Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center has established a formal technique to evaluate and communicate the operational characteristics of spacecraft system designs for the Constellation Program. This process is not intended to replace or replicate other critical assessments such as risk, reliability and safety assessments. Instead, this new technique adds to the assessment toolset a means to address the concerns and potential cost drivers that are unique to the operational phase of a program and the flight operations community. This paper describes the implementation and application of this "Spacecraft Flight Operability Assessment Scale" in supporting vehicle design efforts. The six key factors of flight operability are defined, with guiding principles and goals stated for each factor. A standardized rating technique provides feedback that is useful to both the operations and program management communities. Sample assessments of legacy spacecraft, including the Space Shuttle and International Space Station systems, are provided to provide real world examples of this technique s application.

Crocker, Alan R.↗

NASA NTRS1997

Angiogenesis and osteogenesis in an orthopedically expanded suture

The purpose of this study was to examine the angiogenic and the subsequent osteogenic responses during a 96-hour time-course after sutural expansion. Fifty rats were divided into: (1) a control group that received only angiogenic induction through injection of 5 ng/gm recombinant human endothelial cell growth factor (rhECGF); (2) an experimental group that received orthopedic expansion and rhECGF; (3) a sham group that received expansion and sodium chloride (NaCl) injection; and (4) a baseline group that received no expansion or injection. All rats were injected with 3H-thymidine (1.0 microCi/gm) 1 hour before death to label the DNA of S-phase cells. Demineralized sections (4 microm thick) were stained with hematoxylin and eosin. Angiogenesis and cell migration were analyzed with a previously established cell kinetics model. Analysis of variance was used to test the hypothesis that enhancement of angiogenesis stimulates reestablishment of osteogenic capability. Blood vessel number, area, and endothelial cell-labeled index significantly increased in experimental groups, but no difference was found between control and baseline groups. Labeled-pericyte index and activated pericyte numbers in the experimental group were also higher than in the sham groups. These results show that supplemental rhECGF enhances angiogenesis in expanded sutures but not in nonexpanded sutures. Data also suggest that pericytes are the source of osteoblasts in an orthopedically expanded suture.

NASA Discipline Musculoskeletal↗

NASA NTRS1993

Space flight and the immune system

Depression of lymphocyte response to mitogens in cosmonauts after space flight was reported for the first time in the early 1970s by Soviet immunologists. Today we know that depression of lymphocyte function affects at least 50% of space crew members. Investigations on the ground on subjects undergoing physical and psychological stress indicate that stress is a major factor in immune depression of astronauts. This is despite the fact that weightlessness per se has a strong inhibitory effect on lymphocyte activation in vitro. Although the changes observed never harmed the health of astronauts, immunological changes must be seriously investigated and understood in view of long-duration flight on space stations in an Earth orbit, to other planets such as Mars and to the Moon.

NASA Discipline Regulatory Physiology↗

NASA NTRS2016

NASA Human System Risk Assessment Process

NASA utilizes an evidence based system to perform risk assessments for the human system for spaceflight missions. The center of this process is the multi-disciplinary Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The HSRB is chartered from the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) at NASA Headquarters. The HSRB reviews all human system risks via an established comprehensive risk and configuration management plan based on a project management approach. The HSRB facilitates the integration of human research (terrestrial and spaceflight), medical operations, occupational surveillance, systems engineering and many other disciplines in a comprehensive review of human system risks. The HSRB considers all factors that influence human risk. These factors include pre-mission considerations such as screening criteria, training, age, sex, and physiological condition. In mission factors such as available countermeasures, mission duration and location and post mission factors such as time to return to baseline (reconditioning), post mission health screening, and available treatments. All of the factors influence the total risk assessment for each human risk. The HSRB performed a comprehensive review of all potential inflight medical conditions and events and over the course of several reviews consolidated the number of human system risks to 30, where the greatest emphasis is placed for investing program dollars for risk mitigation. The HSRB considers all available evidence from human research and, medical operations and occupational surveillance in assessing the risks for appropriate mitigation and future work. All applicable DRMs (low earth orbit for 6 and 12 months, deep space for 30 days and 1 year, a lunar mission for 1 year, and a planetary mission for 3 years) are considered as human system risks are modified by the hazards associated with space flight such as microgravity, exposure to radiation, distance from the earth, isolation and a closed environment. Each risk has a summary two-page assessment representing the state of knowledge/evidence of that risk, available risk mitigations, traceability to the Space Flight Human System Standards (SFHSS) and program requirements, and future work required. These data then can drive coordinated budgets across the Human Research Program, the International Space Station, Crew Health and Safety and Advanced Exploration System budgets to provide the most economical and timely mitigations. The risk assessments were completed for the 6 DRMs and serve as the baseline for which subsequent research and technology development and crew health care portfolios can be assessed. The HSRB reviews each risk at least annually or when new evidence/information is available that adds to the body of evidence. The current status of each risk can be reported to program management for operations, budget reviews and general oversight of the human system risk management program.

Francisco, D.↗

NASA NTRS1997

The effects of programmed administration of human parathyroid hormone fragment (1-34) on bone histomorphometry and serum chemistry in rats

PTH treatment can result in dramatic increases in cancellous bone volume in normal and osteopenic rats. However, this potentially beneficial response is only observed after pulsatile treatment; continuous infusion of PTH leads to hypercalcemia and bone abnormalities. The purpose of these studies was to determine the optimal duration of the PTH pulses. A preliminary study revealed that human PTH-(1-34) (hPTH) is cleared from circulation within 6 h after sc administration of an anabolic dose of the hormone (80 microg/kg). To establish the effects of gradually extending the duration of exposure to hPTH without increasing the daily dose, we programmed implanted Alzet osmotic pumps to deliver the 80 microg/kg x day dose of the hormone during pulses of 1, 2, and 6 h/day, or 40 microg/kg x day continuously. Discontinuous infusion was accomplished by alternate spacing of external tubing with hPTH solution and sesame oil. After 6 days of treatment, we evaluated serum chemistry and bone histomorphometry. As negative and positive controls, groups of rats received pumps that delivered vehicle only and 80 microg/kg x day hPTH by daily sc injection, respectively. Dynamic and static bone histomorphometry revealed that the daily sc injection and 1 h/day infusion dramatically increased osteoblast number and bone formation in the proximal tibial metaphysis, whereas longer infusion resulted in systemic side-effects, including up to a 10% loss in body weight, hypercalcemia, and histological changes in the proximal tibia resembling abnormalities observed in patients with chronic primary hyperparathyroidism, including peritrabecular marrow fibrosis and focal bone resorption. Infusion for as little as 2 h/day resulted in minor weight loss and changes in bone histology that were intermediate between sc and continuous administration. The results demonstrate that the therapeutic interval for hPTH exposure is brief, but that programmed administration of implanted hormone is a feasible alternative to daily injection as a route for administration of the hormone.

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS2011

Integration Process for the Habitat Demonstration Unit

The Habitat Demonstration Unit (HDU) is an experimental exploration habitat technology and architecture test platform designed for analog demonstration activities. The HDU previously served as a test bed for testing technologies and sub-systems in a terrestrial surface environment. in 2010 in the Pressurized Excursion Module (PEM) configuration. Due to the amount of work involved to make the HDU project successful, the HDU project has required a team to integrate a variety of contributions from NASA centers and outside collaborators The size of the team and number of systems involved With the HDU makes Integration a complicated process. However, because the HDU shell manufacturing is complete, the team has a head start on FY--11 integration activities and can focus on integrating upgrades to existing systems as well as integrating new additions. To complete the development of the FY-11 HDU from conception to rollout for operations in July 2011, a cohesive integration strategy has been developed to integrate the various systems of HDU and the payloads. The highlighted HDU work for FY-11 will focus on performing upgrades to the PEM configuration, adding the X-Hab as a second level, adding a new porch providing the astronauts a larger work area outside the HDU for EVA preparations, and adding a Hygiene module. Together these upgrades result in a prototype configuration of the Deep Space Habitat (DSH), an element under evaluation by NASA's Human Exploration Framework Team (HEFT) Scheduled activates include early fit-checks and the utilization of a Habitat avionics test bed prior to installation into HDU. A coordinated effort to utilize modeling and simulation systems has aided in design and integration concept development. Modeling tools have been effective in hardware systems layout, cable routing, sub-system interface length estimation and human factors analysis. Decision processes on integration and use of all new subsystems will be defined early in the project to maximize the efficiency of both integration and field operations. In addition a series of tailored design reviews are utilized to quickly define the systems and their integration into the DSH configuration. These processes are necessary to ensure activities, such as partially reversing integration of the X-Hab second story of the HDU and deploying and stowing the new work porch for transportation to the JSC Rock Yard and to the Arizona Black Point Lava Flow Site are performed with minimal or no complications. In addition, incremental test operations leading up to an Integrated systems test allows for an orderly systems test program. For FY-11 activities, the HDU DSH will act as a laboratory utilizing a new X-Hab inflatable second floor with crew habitation features. In addition to the day to day operations involving maintenance of the HDU and exploring the surrounding terrain, testing and optimizing the use of the new X-Hab, work porch, Hygiene Module, and other sub-system enhancements will be the focus of the FY-11 test objectives. The HDU team requires a successful integration strategy using a variety of tools and approaches to prepare the DSH for these test objectives. In a challenging environment where the prototyping influences the system design, as well as Vice versa, results of the HDU DSH field tests will influence future designs of habitat systems.

Gill, Tracy↗