Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “human contribution”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Robotic Missions to Small Bodies and Their Potential Contributions to Human Exploration and Planetary Defense

Introduction: Robotic missions to small bodies will directly address aspects of NASA's Asteroid Initiative and will contribute to future human exploration and planetary defense. The NASA Asteroid Initiative is comprised of two major components: the Grand Challenge and the Asteroid Mission. The first component, the Grand Challenge, focuses on protecting Earth's population from asteroid impacts by detecting potentially hazardous objects with enough warning time to either prevent them from impacting the planet, or to implement civil defense procedures. The Asteroid Mission involves sending astronauts to study and sample a near-Earth asteroid (NEA) prior to conducting exploration missions of the Martian system, which includes Phobos and Deimos. The science and technical data obtained from robotic precursor missions that investigate the surface and interior physical characteristics of an object will help identify the pertinent physical properties that will maximize operational efficiency and reduce mission risk for both robotic assets and crew operating in close proximity to, or at the surface of, a small body. These data will help fill crucial strategic knowledge gaps (SKGs) concerning asteroid physical characteristics that are relevant for human exploration considerations at similar small body destinations. These data can also be applied for gaining an understanding of pertinent small body physical characteristics that would also be beneficial for formulating future impact mitigation procedures. Small Body Strategic Knowledge Gaps: For the past several years NASA has been interested in identifying the key SKGs related to future human destinations. These SKGs highlight the various unknowns and/or data gaps of targets that the science and engineering communities would like to have filled in prior to committing crews to explore the Solar System. An action team from the Small Bodies Assessment Group (SBAG) was formed specifically to identify the small body SKGs under the direction of the Human Exploration and Operations Missions Directorate (HEOMD), given NASA's recent interest in NEAs and the Martian moons as potential human destinations. The action team organized the SKGs into four broad themes: 1) Identify human mission targets; 2) Understand how to work on and interact with the small body surface; 3) Understand the small body environment and its potential risk/benefit to crew, systems, and operational assets; and 4) Understand the small body resource potential. Of these four SKG themes, the first three have significant overlap with planetary defense considerations. The data obtained from investigations of small body physical characteristics under these three themes can be directly applicable to planetary defense initiatives. Conclusions: Missions to investigate small bodies can address small body strategic knowledge gaps and contribute to the overall success for human exploration missions to asteroids and the Martian moons. In addition, such reconnaissance of small bodies can also provide a wealth of information relevant to the science and planetary defense of NEAs.

Abell, Paul A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Contribution of Pilots to Resilience in Normal Operations: A Survey Approach

Much of our knowledge about human performance in flight safety has come from the analysis of undesired events, whether accidents, incidents, or crew behaviors identified via flight exceedance monitoring or observational techniques. In recent years, there has been an acknowledgement that operational personnel are not merely sources of “human error”, but also make a unique human contribution to safe outcomes. In a few celebrated cases, this takes the form of “heroic saves”, but on many more occasions, operational personnel contribute to safety through everyday, often-unnoticed actions that turn potentially hazardous situations into non-events. An emerging approach to safety, frequently referred to as “Safety II,” proposes that the positive human contribution is an important and largely untapped source of safety information. Some airlines have successfully trained observers to identify and record the positive behaviors exhibited by the crew over the course of a flight. In other cases, flight crew are interviewed about good practices or positive behaviors. However, each of these methods are relatively limited in scale and resource intensive. A survey could provide a relatively low-cost approach to systematically gather this information on a larger scale. The primary purpose of the research was to develop and assess a surveys methodology for assessing crews' activities in normal flights and the operational perturbations encountered during normal operations. We hope that such a survey could be both a research tool as well as a safety management aid for the aviation industry. We collected responses concerning revenue flights from two groups of airline pilots (N = 25 & N= 65). The results indicated that relatively few flights proceeded exactly as in the original flight plan. Pilots routinely anticipated and adapted to changing circumstances. We will review the challenges encountered in developing the survey and summarize preliminary findings from two administrations of the survey to airline pilots.

human contribution safety↗
NASA NTRS2014

The Asteroid Impact and Deflection Assessment Mission and its Potential Contributions to Human Exploration of Asteroids

The joint ESA and NASA Asteroid Impact and Deflection Assessment (AIDA) mission will directly address aspects of NASA's Asteroid Initiative and will contribute to future human exploration. The NASA Asteroid Initiative is comprised of two major components: the Grand Challenge and the Asteroid Mission. The first component, the Grand Challenge, focuses on protecting Earth's population from asteroid impacts by detecting potentially hazardous objects with enough warning time to either prevent them from impacting the planet, or to implement civil defense procedures. The Asteroid Mission, involves sending astronauts to study and sample a near-Earth asteroid (NEA) prior to conducting exploration missions of the Martian system, which includes Phobos and Deimos. AIDA's primary objective is to demonstrate a kinetic impact deflection and characterize the binary NEA Didymos. The science and technical data obtained from AIDA will aid in the planning of future human exploration missions to NEAs and other small bodies. The dual robotic missions of AIDA, ESA's Asteroid Impact Monitor (AIM) and NASA's Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART), will provide a great deal of technical and engineering data on spacecraft operations for future human space exploration while conducting in-depth scientific examinations of the binary target Didymos both prior to and after the kinetic impact demonstration. The knowledge gained from this mission will help identify asteroidal physical properties in order to maximize operational efficiency and reduce mission risk for future small body missions. The AIDA data will help fill crucial strategic knowledge gaps concerning asteroid physical characteristics that are relevant for human exploration considerations at similar small body destinations.

Abell, Paul A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Contribution of Pilots to Resilience in Normal Operations. Part II: A closer look at briefings: Anticipation and Monitoring Also Known as Planning and Coordination

Much of our knowledge about human performance in flight safety has come from the analysis of undesired events, whether accidents, incidents, or crew behaviors identified via flight exceedance monitoring or observational techniques. In recent years, there has been an acknowledgement that operational personnel are not merely sources of “human error”, but also make a unique human contribution to safe outcomes. In a few celebrated cases, this takes the form of “heroic saves”, but on many more occasions, operational personnel contribute to safety through everyday, often-unnoticed actions that turn potentially hazardous situations into non-events. An emerging approach to safety, frequently referred to as “Safety II,” proposes that the positive human contribution is an important and largely untapped source of safety information. Some airlines have successfully trained observers to identify and record the positive behaviors exhibited by the crew over the course of a flight. In other cases, flight crew are interviewed about good practices or positive behaviors. However, each of these methods are relatively limited in scale and resource intensive. A survey could provide a relatively low-cost approach to systematically gather this information on a larger scale. The primary purpose of the research was to develop and assess a surveys methodology for assessing crews' activities in normal flights and the operational perturbations encountered during normal operations. We hope that such a survey could be both a research tool as well as a safety management aid for the aviation industry. We collected responses concerning revenue flights from two groups of airline pilots (N = 25 & N= 65). The results indicated that relatively few flights proceeded exactly as in the original flight plan. Pilots routinely anticipated and adapted to changing circumstances. We will review the challenges encountered in developing the survey and summarize preliminary findings from two administrations of the survey to airline pilots.

human contribution safety↗
NASA NTRS2012

The Analysis of the Contribution of Human Factors to the In-Flight Loss of Control Accidents

In-flight loss of control (LOC) is currently the leading cause of fatal accidents based on various commercial aircraft accident statistics. As the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) emerges, new contributing factors leading to LOC are anticipated. The NASA Aviation Safety Program (AvSP), along with other aviation agencies and communities are actively developing safety products to mitigate the LOC risk. This paper discusses the approach used to construct a generic integrated LOC accident framework (LOCAF) model based on a detailed review of LOC accidents over the past two decades. The LOCAF model is comprised of causal factors from the domain of human factors, aircraft system component failures, and atmospheric environment. The multiple interdependent causal factors are expressed in an Object-Oriented Bayesian belief network. In addition to predicting the likelihood of LOC accident occurrence, the system-level integrated LOCAF model is able to evaluate the impact of new safety technology products developed in AvSP. This provides valuable information to decision makers in strategizing NASA's aviation safety technology portfolio. The focus of this paper is on the analysis of human causal factors in the model, including the contributions from flight crew and maintenance workers. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) taxonomy was used to develop human related causal factors. The preliminary results from the baseline LOCAF model are also presented.

Ancel, Ersin↗
DOE OSTI2014

Tracking Contributions to Human Body Burden of Environmental Chemicals by Correlating Environmental Measurements with Biomarkers

The work addresses current knowledge gaps regarding causes for correlations between environmental and biomarker measurements and explores the underappreciated role of variability in disaggregating exposure attributes that contribute to biomarker levels. Our simulation-based study considers variability in environmental and food measurements, the relative contribution of various exposure sources (indoors and food), and the biological half-life of a compound, on the resulting correlations between biomarker and environmental measurements. For two hypothetical compounds whose half-lives are on the order of days for one and years for the other, we generate synthetic daily environmental concentrations and food exposures with different day-to-day and population variability as well as different amounts of home- and food-based exposure. Assuming that the total intake results only from home-based exposure and food ingestion, we estimate timedependent biomarker concentrations using a one-compartment pharmacokinetic model. Box plots of modeled R 2 values indicate that although the R 2 correlation between wipe and biological (e.g., serum) measurements is within the same range for the two compounds, the relative contribution of the home exposure to the total exposure could differ by up to 20%, thus providing the relative indication of their contribution to body burden. The novel method introduced in this paper provides insights for evaluating scenarios or experiments where sample, exposure, and compound variability must be weighed in order to interpret associations between exposure data.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Exceptional stratospheric contribution to human fingerprints on atmospheric temperature

In 1967, scientists used a simple climate model to predict that human-caused increases in atmospheric CO 2 should warm Earth’s troposphere and cool the stratosphere. This important signature of anthropogenic climate change has been documented in weather balloon and satellite temperature measurements extending from near-surface to the lower stratosphere. Stratospheric cooling has also been confirmed in the mid to upper stratosphere, a layer extending from roughly 25 to 50 km above the Earth’s surface (S 25 − 50 ). To date, however, S 25 − 50 temperatures have not been used in pattern-based attribution studies of anthropogenic climate change. Here, we perform such a “fingerprint” study with satellite-derived patterns of temperature change that extend from the lower troposphere to the upper stratosphere. Including S 25 − 50 information increases signal-to-noise ratios by a factor of five, markedly enhancing fingerprint detectability. Key features of this global-scale human fingerprint include stratospheric cooling and tropospheric warming at all latitudes, with stratospheric cooling amplifying with height. In contrast, the dominant modes of internal variability in S 25 − 50 have smaller-scale temperature changes and lack uniform sign. These pronounced spatial differences between S 25 − 50 signal and noise patterns are accompanied by large cooling of S 25 − 50 (1 to 2 ° C over 1986 to 2022) and low S 25 − 50 noise levels. Our results explain why extending “vertical fingerprinting” to the mid to upper stratosphere yields incontrovertible evidence of human effects on the thermal structure of Earth’s atmosphere.

climate modeling↗
DOE OSTI2024

Estimating the Contributions to Human Error Probability from the Convolution of the Distribution of Time Available and Time Required

As part of their duties, Human Reliability Analysis must often evaluate if crews in nuclear power plants (NPPs) can complete tasks associated with a human-failure event within time limits. For example, the time required in NPP scenarios is determined by systematic and structured walkthroughs, feasibility studies, recorded times from training exercises, and interviews with experienced operators and experts. Typically, a point estimate is derived for the estimate (mean, maximum, or 95th percentile of time required). Using point-estimate values can mask the risk associated with variability among crews, plant conditions and set-up, environmental conditions, and other impact factors under which these actions are executed. While point estimates for time required and time available have served the industry well, without considering the uncertainty they could lead to biased understanding about the risk. The Integrated Human Event Analysis System - General Methodology (IDHEAS-G) model (developed by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NRC) for human error probability calculates human error probability by summing two probabilities: insufficient time and cognitive error. As such, the model takes a more holistic approach by considering the full distributions for time required and time available to calculate the human error probability because the time available to complete the task is insufficient. In this study, we expand on the work of the NRC and discuss methods for estimating these time considerations. For example, for the time required, the impact of Performance Influencing Factors (PIFs) on the distribution was divided into impacts that are aleatory in nature, such as crew-to-crew variability, and those that are epistemic (i.e., the PIFs). Starting with the factors that introduce aleatory uncertainty, a first-order distribution was developed from a large set of time required (i.e., NPP task completion times) data for the range of operator actions that occur in the NPP control room under simulated accident conditions. The first-order distribution can then be adjusted to account for epistemic uncertainty using research associated with the impact of applicable PIFs on the time required. We also develop guidance for analysts to address the probability distributions for the time available. The guidance we developed on how to estimate time required and time available distributions is based on the identification of pertinent research and data, data analyses, and expert knowledge elicitation.

human error probability, human performance, time e↗
NASA NTRS2001

EVA Considerations

The contents include: 1) Human Contributions; 2) Tasks for Humans (History and Future); 3) Environmental and Physical Limitations; 4) Human and Robotic Implementation Options; 5) Ground Test Experience; 6) Needed Enabling Information and Technology; and 7) Strategic Issues.

Fullerton, R.↗
NASA NTRS2014

How HRP Research Results Contribute to Human Space Exploration Risk Mitigation

In addition to the scientific value of publications derived from research, results from Human Research Program (HRP) research also support HRP’s goals of mitigating crew health and performance risks in space flight. Research results are used to build the evidence base characterizing crew health and performance risks, to support risk research plan development, to inform crew health and performance standards, and to provide technologies to programs for meeting those standards and optimizing crew health and performance in space. This talk will describe examples of how research results support these efforts. For example, HRP research results are used to revise or even create new standards for human space flight, which have been established to protect crew health and performance during flight, and prevent negative long-term health consequences due to space flight. These standards are based on the best available clinical and scientific evidence, as well as operational experience from previous space flight missions, and are reviewed as new evidence emerges. Research results are also used to update the HRP evidence base, which is comprised of a set of reports that provide a current record of the state of knowledge from research and operations for each of the defined human health and performance risks for future NASA exploration missions. A discussion of the role of evidence within the HRP architecture will also be presented. The scope of HRP research results extends well beyond publications, as they are used in several capacities to support HRP deliverables and, ultimately, the advancement of human space exploration beyond low-Earth orbit.

Lumpkins, S. B.↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Multi-purpose Crew Vehicle European Service Module: a European Contribution to Human Exploration

This paper provides an overview of the system and subsystem configuration of the MPCV European Service Module (ESM) at Preliminary Design Review (PDR) stage as well as its perspectives of utilisation within the global space exploration endeavour. The MPCV ESM is a cylindrical module with a diameter of 4500 mm and a total length - main engine excluded - of 2700 mm. It is fitted with four solar array wings with a span of 18.8 m. Its dry mass is 3.5 metric tons and it can carry 8.6 tons of propellant. The main functions of the European Service Module are to bring the structural continuity between the launcher and the crew module, to provide propulsion to the MPCV, to ensure its thermal control as well as electrical power and to store water, oxygen and nitrogen for the mission. The current agreement foresees the development and production by Europe of one flight model, with an option for a second one. This module will be assembled in Europe and delivered to NASA in 2016. It will be used for a flight of the MPCV Orion in December 2017.

Design↗
NASA NTRS2013

The Multi-purpose Crew Vehicle European Service Module: a European Contribution to Human Exploration

This paper provides an overview of the system and subsystem configuration of the MPCV European Service Module (ESM) at Preliminary Design Review (PDR) stage as well as its perspectives of utilisation within the global space exploration endeavour. The MPCV ESM is a cylindrical module with a diameter of 4500 mm and a total length – main engine excluded – of 2700 mm. It is fitted with four solar array wings with a span of 18.8 m. Its dry mass is 3.5 metric tons and it can carry 8.6 tons of propellant. The main functions of the European Service Module are to bring the structural continuity between the launcher and the crew module, to provide propulsion to the MPCV, to ensure its thermal control as well as electrical power and to store water, oxygen and nitrogen for the mission. The current agreement foresees the development and production by Europe of one flight model, with an option for a second one. This module will be assembled in Europe and delivered to NASA in 2016. It will be used for a flight of the MPCV Orion in December 2017.

European Service Module↗
NASA NTRS2014

How HRP Research Results Contribute to Human Space Exploration Risk Mitigation

In addition to the scientific value of publications derived from research, results from Human Research Program (HRP) research also support HRP's goals of mitigating crew health and performance risks in space flight. Research results are used to build the evidence base characterizing crew health and performance risks, to support risk research plan development, to inform crew health and performance standards, and to provide technologies to programs for meeting those standards and optimizing crew health and performance in space. This talk will describe examples of how research results support these efforts. For example, HRP research results are used to revise or even create new standards for human space flight, which have been established to protect crew health and performance during flight, and prevent negative long-term health consequences due to space flight. These standards are based on the best available clinical and scientific evidence, as well as operational experience from previous space flight missions, and are reviewed as new evidence emerges. Research results are also used to update the HRP evidence base, which is comprised of a set of reports that provide a current record of the state of knowledge from research and operations for each of the defined human health and performance risks for future NASA exploration missions. A discussion of the role of evidence within the HRP architecture will also be presented. The scope of HRP research results extends well beyond publications, as they are used in several capacities to support HRP deliverables and, ultimately, the advancement of human space exploration beyond low-Earth orbit.

Lumpkins, Sarah↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

LLMs and GenAI Tools to Depict Contributions of Human Systems to Spaceflight Tasks Execution

Recent advancements in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (AI/ML) technologies, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs) capable of sophisticated syntax analysis, offer substantial potential in automating complex processes, thereby saving time and human resources. This study explores the development of an LLM-driven model designed to analyze and categorize a diverse set of Mars mission tasks into 18 predefined Human System Task Categories (HSTCs) based on their textual descriptions. As part of developing the Crew Health and Performance – Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CHP-PRA projects Performance Risk Model (PRisM) proof-of-concept, we established a framework to project performance scores from small-scale tests onto a preliminary list of Mars tasks. The foundation of our model was a comprehensive spreadsheet populated by NASA experts and clinicians, which detailed each Mars task alongside binary indicators of HSTC involvement. This dataset enabled the initial application of supervised ML, training and testing on existing HSTC labels. The HSTCs were originally defined from a medical system perspective, focusing on task impairments due to deteriorated human health. To expand our model's scope to include categories impacting performance, we face the challenge of generating binary labels (0 or 1) for new categories without pre-existing data. We address this by employing Generative AI (GenAI) software to determine whether a given task involved a new category by asking, "Does task A involve using category B?" We validate our approach by comparing the GenAI's binary classifications with the expert-provided labels for existing HSTCs. Notably, we utilize Ollama [4], a locally hosted GenAI tool that does not require cloud access, thus safeguarding NASA's proprietary data from unauthorized exposure. This study demonstrates the feasibility of leveraging cutting-edge AI tools to advance research, paving the way for automation and rapid decision-making in space exploration.

Mona Matar↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Psychophysiological Methods to Assess Pilot Productive Safety Behaviors

The NASA System-Wide Safety (SWS) Project is focused on developing new technologies and operational concepts for the aviation industry to meet the increasing global demand while maintaining the current ultra-safe system safety levels. To achieve this, the SWS Project is developing research priorities, including In-time System-wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) and In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS; Ellis et al., 2019). A critical component of the IASMS is the human as pilot and in other roles in aviation operations as demonstrated by SWS human factors research on rare occurrences of human error and the far more prevalent human safety producing behaviors (e.g., Hollnagel, 2016). The talk presented by Chad Stephens of NASA Langley Research Center and NASA SWS Project will describe the history of human factors research involving psychophysiological and biocybernetics methods supporting aviation safety conducted at NASA. Specific examples of recent NASA crew state monitoring research focused on a psychophysiological assessment method and system to enable Training for Attention Management will be demonstrated. Current SWS research including the SWS Operations and Technologies for Enabling Resilient In-Time Assurance (SOTERIA) flight simulation study and a data testbed created to enable study of Human Contributions to Safety (HC2S) will be presented. Ongoing collaborative research efforts with Boeing researchers will be highlighted and opportunities for further collaboration will be discussed.

psychophysiology↗
DOE OSTI2014

Top-down and bottom-up definitions of human failure events in human reliability analysis

In the probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) used in the nuclear industry, human failure events (HFEs) are determined as a subset of hardware failures, namely those hardware failures that could be triggered by human action or inaction. This approach is top-down, starting with hardware faults and deducing human contributions to those faults. Elsewhere, more traditionally human factors driven approaches would tend to look at opportunities for human errors first in a task analysis and then identify which of those errors is risk significant. The intersection of top-down and bottom-up approaches to defining HFEs has not been carefully studied. Ideally, both approaches should arrive at the same set of HFEs. This question is crucial, however, as human reliability analysis (HRA) methods are generalized to new domains like oil and gas. The HFEs used in nuclear PRAs tend to be top-down—defined as a subset of the PRA—whereas the HFEs used in petroleum quantitative risk assessments (QRAs) often tend to be bottom-up—derived from a task analysis conducted by human factors experts. The marriage of these approaches is necessary in order to ensure that HRA methods developed for top-down HFEs are also sufficient for bottom-up applications.

02 PETROLEUM↗
DOE OSTI2014

One Size Does Not Fit All: Human Failure Event Decomposition and Task Analysis

In the probabilistic safety assessments (PSAs) used in the nuclear industry, human failure events (HFEs) are determined as a subset of hardware failures, namely those hardware failures that could be triggered or exacerbated by human action or inaction. This approach is top-down, starting with hardware faults and deducing human contributions to those faults. Elsewhere, more traditionally human factors driven approaches would tend to look at opportunities for human errors first in a task analysis and then identify which of those errors is risk significant. The intersection of top-down and bottom-up approaches to defining HFEs has not been carefully studied. Ideally, both approaches should arrive at the same set of HFEs. This question remains central as human reliability analysis (HRA) methods are generalized to new domains like oil and gas. The HFEs used in nuclear PSAs tend to be top-down—defined as a subset of the PSA—whereas the HFEs used in petroleum quantitative risk assessments (QRAs) are more likely to be bottom-up—derived from a task analysis conducted by human factors experts. The marriage of these approaches is necessary in order to ensure that HRA methods developed for top-down HFEs are also sufficient for bottom-up applications. In this paper, I first review top-down and bottom-up approaches for defining HFEs and then present a seven-step guideline to ensure a task analysis completed as part of human error identification decomposes to a level suitable for use as HFEs. This guideline illustrates an effective way to bridge the bottom-up approach with top-down requirements.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗