SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “research planning”

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 397 records · Page 22

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2010

Maximum Oxygen Uptake During and After Long-Duration Space Flight

Decreased maximum oxygen consumption (VO2max) during and after space flight may impair a crewmember s ability to perform mission-critical work that is high intensity and/or long duration in nature (Human Research Program Integrated Research Plan Risk 2.1.2: Risk of Reduced Physical Performance Capabilities Due to Reduced Aerobic Capacity). When VO2max was measured in Space Shuttle experiments, investigators reported that it did not change during short-duration space flight but decreased immediately after flight. Similar conclusions, based on the heart rate (HR) response of Skylab crewmembers, were made previously concerning long-duration space flight. Specifically, no change in the in-flight exercise HR response in 8 of 9 Skylab crewmembers indicated that VO2max was maintained during flight, but the elevated exercise HR after flight indicated that VO2max was decreased after landing. More recently, a different pattern of in-flight exercise HR response, and assumed changes in VO2max, emerged from routine testing of International Space Station (ISS) crewmembers. Most ISS crewmembers experience an elevated in-flight exercise HR response early in their mission, with a gradual return toward preflight levels as the mission progresses. Similar to previous reports, exercise HR is elevated after ISS missions and returns to preflight levels by 30 days after landing. VO2max has not been measured either during or after long-duration space flight. The purposes of the ISS VO2max experiment are (1) to measure VO2max during and after long-duration spaceflight, and (2) to determine if submaximal exercise test results can be used to accurately estimate VO 2max.

Moore, Alan D., Jr.↗

NASA NTRS2009

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

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

Norfleet, William↗

NASA NTRS2010

Advanced Technology Applications for Combat Casualty Care

Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) is an element of NASA s Human Research Program (HRP). ExMC s goal is to address the risk of the "Inability to Adequately Recognize or Treat an Ill or Injured Crewmember." This poster highlights the approach ExMC has taken to address this goal and our current areas of interest. The Space Medicine Exploration Medical Condition List (SMEMCL) was created to identify medical conditions of concern during exploration missions. The list was derived from space flight medical incidents, the shuttle medical checklist, the International Space Station medical checklist, and expert opinion. The conditions on the list were prioritized according to mission type by a panel comprised of flight surgeons, physician astronauts, engineers, and scientists. From the prioritized list, the ExMC element determined the capabilities needed to address the medical conditions of concern. Where such capabilities were not currently available, a gap was identified. The element s research plan outlines these gaps and the tasks identified to achieve the desired capabilities for exploration missions.

Watkins, Sharmila↗

NASA NTRS2010

Exploration Medical Capability

Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) is an element of NASA's Human Research Program (HRP). ExMC's goal is to address the risk of the Inability to Adequately Recognize or Treat an Ill or Injured Crewmember. This poster highlights the approach ExMC has taken to address this goal and our current areas of interest. The Space Medicine Exploration Medical Condition List (SMEMCL) was created to identify medical conditions of concern during exploration missions. The list was derived from space flight medical incidents, the shuttle medical checklist, the International Space Station medical checklist, and expert opinion. The conditions on the list were prioritized according to mission type by a panel comprised of flight surgeons, physician astronauts, engineers, and scientists. From the prioritized list, the ExMC element determined the capabilities needed to address the medical conditions of concern. Where such capabilities were not currently available, a gap was identified. The element s research plan outlines these gaps and the tasks identified to achieve the desired capabilities for exploration missions. This poster is being presented to inform the audience of the gaps and tasks being investigated by ExMC and to encourage discussions of shared interests and possible future collaborations.

Watkins, Sharmila↗

NASA NTRS2002

Boudreaux the Robot (a.k.a. EVA Robotic Assistant)

The EVA Robotic Assistant is a prototype for an autonomous rover designed to assist human astronauts. The primary focus of the research is to explore the interaction between humans and robots, particularly in extreme environments, and to develop a software infrastructure that could be applied to any type of assistant robot, whether for planetary exploration or orbital missions. This paper describes the background and current status of the project, the types of scenarios addressed in field demonstrations, the hardware and software that comprise the current prototype, and future research plans.

Shillcutt, Kimberly↗

NASA NTRS2011

DCS: A Case Study of Identification of Knowledge and Disposition Gaps Using Principles of Continuous Risk Management

The Human Research Program (HRP) is formulated around the program architecture of Evidence-Risk-Gap-Task-Deliverable. Review of accumulated evidence forms the basis for identification of high priority risks to human health and performance in space exploration. Gaps in knowledge or disposition are identified for each risk, and a portfolio of research tasks is developed to fill them. Deliverables from the tasks inform the evidence base with the ultimate goal of defining the level of risk and reducing it to an acceptable level. A comprehensive framework for gap identification, focus, and metrics has been developed based on principles of continuous risk management and clinical care. Research towards knowledge gaps improves understanding of the likelihood, consequence or timeframe of the risk. Disposition gaps include development of standards or requirements for risk acceptance, development of countermeasures or technology to mitigate the risk, and yearly technology assessment related to watching developments related to the risk. Standard concepts from clinical care: prevention, diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, rehabilitation, and surveillance, can be used to focus gaps dealing with risk mitigation. The research plan for the new HRP Risk of Decompression Sickness (DCS) used the framework to identify one disposition gap related to establishment of a DCS standard for acceptable risk, two knowledge gaps related to DCS phenomenon and mission attributes, and three mitigation gaps focused on prediction, prevention, and new technology watch. These gaps were organized in this manner primarily based on target for closure and ease of organizing interim metrics so that gap status could be quantified. Additional considerations for the knowledge gaps were that one was highly design reference mission specific and the other gap was focused on DCS phenomenon.

Norcross, Jason↗

NASA NTRS2011

Biomechanical Analysis of Treadmill Locomotion on the International Space Station

Treadmill locomotion exercise is an important aspect of ISS exercise countermeasures. It is widely believed that an optimized treadmill exercise protocol could offer benefits to cardiovascular and bone health. If training heart rate is high enough, treadmill exercise is expected to lead to improvements in aerobic fitness. If impact or bone loading forces are high enough, treadmill exercise may be expected to contribute to improved bone outcomes. Ground-based research suggests that joint loads increase with increased running speed. However, it is unknown if increases in locomotion speed results in similar increases in joint loads in microgravity. Although data exist regarding the biomechanics of running and walking in microgravity, a majority were collected during parabolic flight or during investigations utilizing a microgravity analog. The Second Generation Treadmill (T2) has been in use on the International Space Station (ISS) and records the ground reaction forces (GRF) produced by crewmembers during exercise. Biomechanical analyses will aid in understanding potential differences in typical gait motion and allow for modeling of the human body to determine joint and muscle forces during exercise. By understanding these mechanisms, more appropriate exercise prescriptions can be developed that address deficiencies. The objective of this evaluation is to collect biomechanical data from crewmembers during treadmill exercise prior to and during flight. The goal is to determine if locomotive biomechanics differ between normal and microgravity environments and to determine how combinations of subject load and speed influence joint loading during in-flight treadmill exercise. Further, the data will be used to characterize any differences in specific bone and muscle loading during locomotion in these two gravitational conditions. This project maps to the HRP Integrated Research Plan risks including Risk of Bone Fracture (Gap B15), Risk of Early Onset Osteoporosis Due to Spaceflight (Gap B15), Risk of Impaired Performance Due to Reduced Muscle Mass, Strength, and Endurance (Gaps M3, M4, M6, Ml, M8, M9) and Risk of reduced Physical Performance Capabilities Due to Reduce Aerobic Capacity (Gaps M7, M8, M9).

De Witt, J. K.↗

NASA NTRS2014

A Future with Hybrid Electric Propulsion Systems: A NASA Perspective

The presentation highlights a NASA perspective on Hybrid Electric Propulsion Systems for aeronautical applications. Discussed are results from NASA Advance Concepts Study for Aircraft Entering service in 2030 and beyond and the potential use of hybrid electric propulsion systems as a potential solution to the requirements for energy efficiency and environmental compatibility. Current progress and notional potential NASA research plans are presented.

Aircraft Design↗

NASA NTRS2015

Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment - How They Play Together

PRA methodology is one of the probabilistic analysis methods that NASA brought from the nuclear industry to assess the risk of LOM, LOV and LOC for launch vehicles. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment that uses a combination of fault trees, event trees, event sequence diagrams, and probability and statistical data to analyze the risk of a system, a process, or an activity. It is a process designed to answer three basic questions: What can go wrong? How likely is it? What is the severity of the degradation? Since 1986, NASA, along with industry partners, has conducted a number of PRA studies to predict the overall launch vehicles risks. Planning Research Corporation conducted the first of these studies in 1988. In 1995, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) conducted a comprehensive PRA study. In July 1996, NASA conducted a two-year study (October 1996 - September 1998) to develop a model that provided the overall Space Shuttle risk and estimates of risk changes due to proposed Space Shuttle upgrades. After the Columbia accident, NASA conducted a PRA on the Shuttle External Tank (ET) foam. This study was the most focused and extensive risk assessment that NASA has conducted in recent years. It used a dynamic, physics-based, integrated system analysis approach to understand the integrated system risk due to ET foam loss in flight. Most recently, a PRA for Ares I launch vehicle has been performed in support of the Constellation program. Reliability, on the other hand, addresses the loss of functions. In a broader sense, reliability engineering is a discipline that involves the application of engineering principles to the design and processing of products, both hardware and software, for meeting product reliability requirements or goals. It is a very broad design-support discipline. It has important interfaces with many other engineering disciplines. Reliability as a figure of merit (i.e. the metric) is the probability that an item will perform its intended function(s) for a specified mission profile. In general, the reliability metric can be calculated through the analyses using reliability demonstration and reliability prediction methodologies. Reliability analysis is very critical for understanding component failure mechanisms and in identifying reliability critical design and process drivers. The following sections discuss the PRA process and reliability engineering in detail and provide an application where reliability analysis and PRA were jointly used in a complementary manner to support a Space Shuttle flight risk assessment.

Safie, Fayssal M.↗

NASA NTRS2014

2014 Space Human Factors Engineering Standing Review Panel

The 2014 Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) participated in a WebEx/teleconference with members of the Space Human Factors and Habitability (SHFH) Element, representatives from the Human Research Program (HRP), the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI), and NASA Headquarters on November 17, 2014 (list of participants is in Section XI of this report). The SRP reviewed the updated research plans for the Risk of Incompatible Vehicle/Habitat Design (HAB Risk) and the Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies (Train Risk). The SRP also received a status update on the Risk of Inadequate Critical Task Design (Task Risk), the Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration (HARI Risk), and the Risk of Inadequate Human-Computer Interaction (HCI Risk).

Steinberg, Susan↗

NASA NTRS2014

2014 Bone and Muscle Risks Standing Review Panel

The 2014 Bone and Muscle Risks Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) met for a site visit in Houston, TX on December 17 - 18, 2014. The SRP reviewed the updated research plans for the Risk of Impaired Performance Due to Reduced Muscle Mass, Strength and Endurance (Muscle Risk) and the Risk of Reduced Physical Performance Capabilities Due to Reduced Aerobic Capacity (Aerobic Risk). The SRP also received a status update on the Risk of Bone Fracture (Bone Risk), the Risk of Early Onset Osteoporosis Due To Spaceflight (Osteo Risk), the Risk of Intervertebral Disc Damage (IVD Risk), and the Risk of Renal Stone Formation (Renal Risk).

Steinberg, Susan↗

NASA NTRS2015

2014 Behavioral Health and Performance Standing Review Panel

The 2014 Behavioral Health and Performance (BHP) Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) met for a site visit in Houston, TX on December 17 - 18, 2014. The SRP reviewed the updated research plan for the Risk of Performance Errors Due to Fatigue Resulting from Sleep Loss, Circadian Desynchronization, Extended Wakefulness, and Work Overload (Sleep Risk) and also received a status update on the Risk of Adverse Behavioral Conditions and Psychiatric Disorders (BMed Risk) and the Risk of Performance Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team (Team Risk).

Steinberg, Susan↗

NASA NTRS2011

Status of 3D Ice Shape Measurement Effort

(1) Main goal of the Airframe Icing Technical Challenge is to achieve acceptance of experimental and computational icing simulation tools -SupercooledLarge Droplet Icing (SLD) conditions -3D airframe components including swept wings; (2) It is necessary to develop suitable means of recording and archiving fully 3D descriptions of experimental ice accretion geometry; (3) Past research has shown that commercial laser scanners have the potential to be adapted to this task; and (4) A research plan has been developed to implement and validate the use of this technology for experimental ice accretions.

Lee, Sam↗

NASA NTRS2016

Capability for Integrated Systems Risk-Reduction Analysis

NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) is working to increase the likelihoods of human health and performance success during long-duration missions, and subsequent crew long-term health. To achieve these goals, there is a need to develop an integrated understanding of how the complex human physiological-socio-technical mission system behaves in spaceflight. This understanding will allow HRP to provide cross-disciplinary spaceflight countermeasures while minimizing resources such as mass, power, and volume. This understanding will also allow development of tools to assess the state of and enhance the resilience of individual crewmembers, teams, and the integrated mission system. We will discuss a set of risk-reduction questions that has been identified to guide the systems approach necessary to meet these needs. In addition, a framework of factors influencing human health and performance in space, called the Contributing Factor Map (CFM), is being applied as the backbone for incorporating information addressing these questions from sources throughout HRP. Using the common language of the CFM, information from sources such as the Human System Risk Board summaries, Integrated Research Plan, and HRP-funded publications has been combined and visualized in ways that allow insight into cross-disciplinary interconnections in a systematic, standardized fashion. We will show examples of these visualizations. We will also discuss applications of the resulting analysis capability that can inform science portfolio decisions, such as areas in which cross-disciplinary solicitations or countermeasure development will potentially be fruitful.

Mindock, J.↗

NASA NTRS2015

2015 Advanced Environmental Health/Advanced Food Technology Standing Review Panel

The 2015 Advanced Environmental Health/Advanced Food Technology (AEH/AFT) Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) met for a site visit in Houston, TX on December 14 - 15, 2015. The SRP met with representatives from the Space Human Factors and Habitability (SHFH) Element and members of the Human Research Program (HRP) to review the updated research plans for the Risk of Adverse Health Effects Due to Host-Microorganism Interactions (MicroHost Risk) and the Risk of Performance Decrement and Crew Illness due to an Inadequate Food System (Food Risk). During the meeting, the SRP also met with the vehicle engineers to discuss possible food storage options. The SRP would like to commend Dr. Oubre and Dr. Douglas for their detailed presentations, as well the frank, refreshing, and comprehensive engineering presentation. This gave much needed perspective to the food storage issues and reassured the committee about NASA's approach to the problem. In terms of critiques, the SRP remains unconvinced about the rationale for probiotic use other than for specific applications supported by the literature. It is not clear what gap or problem is being addressed by the use of probiotics, and the rationale for their use needs to be clearly rooted in the available literature. The SRP thinks that if low-Earth orbit is associated with immune system impairment, then there may additional risks linked with the use of probiotics. It is not clear to the SRP how NASA will determine if probiotics are having their intended beneficial effect. A similar concern is raised as to what gaps or problems are being addressed by "functional foods". Mixed infections, rather than single species infections, which can augment severity of disease, also represent a significant concern. Overall, the SRP considers this to be a strong program that is well-organized, well-coordinated and generates valuable data.

Steinberg, Susan↗

NASA NTRS2015

2015 Space Human Factors Engineering Standing Review Panel

The 2015 Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) met for a site visit in Houston, TX on December 2 - 3, 2015. The SRP reviewed the updated research plans for the Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration (HARI Risk), the Risk of Inadequate Human-Computer Interaction (HCI Risk), and the Risk of Inadequate Mission, Process and Task Design (MPTask Risk). The SRP also received a status update on the Risk of Incompatible Vehicle/Habitat Design (Hab Risk) and the Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies (Train Risk). The SRP is pleased with the progress and responsiveness of the SHFE team. The presentations were much improved this year. The SRP is also pleased with the human-centered design approach. Below are some of the more extensive comments from the SRP. We have also made comments in each section concerning gaps/tasks in each. The comments below reflect more significant changes that impact more than just one particular section.

Steinberg, Susan↗

NASA NTRS2015

2015 Dust Risk Standing Review Panel

The 2015 Dust Risk Standing Review Panel (SRP) participated in a WebEx/teleconference with members of the Space Human Factors and Habitability (SHFH) Element, representatives from the Human Research Program (HRP), NASA Headquarters, and the NASA Research Education and Support Services on November 12, 2015. The SRP reviewed the updated Evidence Report for The Risk of Adverse Health and Performance Effects of Celestial Dust Exposure, as well as the Research Plan for this Risk.

Steinberg, Susan↗

NASA NTRS2016

Human Research Program: Long Duration, Exploration-Class Mission Training Design

This is a presentation to the International Training Control Board that oversees astronaut training for ISS. The presentation explains the structure of HRP, the training-related work happening under the different program elements, and discusses in detail the research plan for the Training Risk under SHFHSHFE. The group includes the crew training leads for all the space agencies involved in ISS: Japan, Europe, Russia, Canada, and the US.

crew training↗