SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human Health and Performance”

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 73 records · Page 4

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2018

Overview of NASA Behavioral Health and Performance Standard Measures

NASA’s Human Research Program (HRP) is developing a set of “Standard Measures” for use in spaceflight and spaceflight analog environments to monitor the risks of long-duration missions on human health and performance, including behavioral health, individual and team performance, and social processes. Based on measures selected, developed, and tested under the NASA-funded Behavioral Core Measures project (PI: D.F. Dinges) as well as other projects from NASA’s Human Factors & Behavioral Performance research portfolio, NASA’s Behavioral Health & Performance (BHP) Laboratory is further evaluating the operational feasibility, acceptability, and validity of a multidisciplinary suite of objective, subjective, behavioral, and biological measures for monitoring monitor behavioral health, individual and team performance, and social processes over time. The inaugural generation of the NASA Behavioral Health & Performance (BHP) Standard Measures includes a neurocognitive test battery, actigraphy, physical proximity sensors, cardiovascular monitors, and subjective self-reports of mood, depression, and various team and social processes and performance outcomes.

Roma, P. G.↗

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 NTRSDate not supplied

Using Systems Engineering to Develop an Integrated Crew Health and Performance System to Mitigate Risk for Human Exploration Missions

New space exploration missions are currently being designed to take humanity beyond Low EarthOrbit (LEO) to cis-lunar space, the lunar surface, and eventually to Mars. These missions carryincreased risks due to a number of factors, including distance from Earth, exposure to deep spacehazards, reduced capacity and ability to resupply and evacuate, and increased communication delays.As distance from Earth grows and mission length increases, a growing proportion of overall missionrisk can be attributed to the “human system.” Almost twenty years ago, the Institute of Medicine in theUnited States recommended the early and complete integration of the human system into thespacecraft and mission design process to mitigate this increased risk inherent in exploration missions.Exploration missions will require increasing levels of crew self-sufficiency that will challenge thecurrent operational paradigms established in LEO. Enabling progressive Earth independence requiresmanagement of the increasingly complex interactions among spacecraft systems and integration of allthe data and functions that affect human health and performance into one coordinated system – theCrew Health and Performance (CHP) system. This system is a critical spacecraft system that isanalogous to other systems such as propulsion, guidance and navigation, or avionics. Design andintegration of the CHP system requires the evidence-based merger of typically disparate disciplinessuch as medicine, human factors, and physiological support system design, using systems engineering(SE) practices. The approach described here enables spacecraft and mission designers to align thescope of a CHP system with mission specific requirements, decrease risk to the crew, and increase theprobability of mission success.

Kerry Mcguire↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Systems Engineering to Develop an Integrated Crew Health and Performance System to Mitigate Risk for Human Exploration Missions

New space exploration missions are currently being designed to take humanity beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) to cis-lunar space, the lunar surface, and eventually to Mars. These missions carry increased risks due to a number of factors, including distance from Earth, exposure to deep space hazards, reduced capacity and ability to resupply and evacuate, and increased communication delays. As distance from Earth grows and mission length increases, a growing proportion of mission risk can be attributed to the “human system.” Almost twenty years ago, the Institute of Medicine in the United States recommended the early and complete integration of the human system into the spacecraft and mission design process to mitigate this increased risk inherent in exploration missions. Exploration missions will require increasing levels of crew self-sufficiency that will challenge the current operational paradigms established in LEO. Enabling progressive Earth independence requires management of the increasingly complex interactions among spacecraft systems and integration of all the data and functions that affect human health and performance into one coordinated system –the Crew Health and Performance (CHP) system. This system is a critical spacecraft system that is analogous to other systems such as propulsion, guidance and navigation, or avionics. Design and integration of the CHP system requires the evidence-based merger of typically disparate disciplines such as medicine, human factors, and life support system design, using systems engineering (SE) practices. SE provides traceability of spacecraft requirements and enables reliable and repeatable trade space analysis of the many competing options for hardware and software to be included in the mission architecture. The approach described here enables spacecraft and mission designers to align the scope of a CHP system with mission specific requirements, decrease risk to the crew, and increase the probability of mission success.

Kerry McGuire↗

NASA NTRS2009

Management of Service Projects in Support of Space Flight Research

Goal:To provide human health and performance countermeasures, knowledge, technologies, and tools to enable safe, reliable, and productive human space exploration . [HRP-47051] Specific Objectives: 1) Develop capabilities, necessary countermeasures, and technologies in support of human space exploration, focusing on mitigating the highest risks to human health and performance. 2) Define and improve human spaceflight medical, environmental, and human factors standards. 3) Develop technologies that serve to reduce medical and environmental risks, to reduce human systems resource requirements (mass, volume, power, data, etc.) and to ensure effective human-system integration across exploration systems. 4) Ensure maintenance of Agency core competencies necessary to enable risk reduction in the following areas: A. Space medicine B. Physiological and behavioral effects of long duration spaceflight on the human body C. Space environmental effects, including radiation, on human health and performance D. Space "human factors" [HRP-47051]. Service projects can form integral parts of research-based project-focused programs to provide specialized functions. Traditional/classic project management methodologies and agile approaches are not mutually exclusive paradigms. Agile strategies can be combined with traditional methods and applied in the management of service projects functioning in changing environments. Creative collaborations afford a mechanism for mitigation of constrained resource limitations.

Love, J.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Capabilities Assessments for Autonomous Missions: A Multi-Team Research Effort to Reduce Risk in the Human-System Integration Architecture for Future Deep-Space Missions

In future exploration missions beyond low earth-orbit, crew will have to execute complex operations and respond to off-nominal events, without real-time support from Mission Control. It is anticipated that increased reliance on automated systems, including human-centric vehicle and information architecture, will need to be designed to support the crew; increased risk to performance, health, and safety may occur if these are not implemented appropriately. The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element (HFBP) in the NASA Human Research Program supports research to characterize and mitigate such human health and performance risks, including the Risk of Adverse Outcome Due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA). The HSIA risk addresses the integration of onboard capability and the crew roles and responsibilities necessary to enable the crew to respond effectively and efficiently in the increasingly autonomous mission operations environment. In 2017, HFBP released the “Human Capabilities Assessments for Autonomous Missions” (HCAAM) research topic to address HSIA related questions. HCAAM is a major NASA research effort that has assembled a multidisciplinary team from seven institutions to work closely with design and engineering efforts on research towards developing and refining human performance standards, guidelines and automation tools. The scientific focus is on quantitative assessment of human capabilities relevant to future deep-space missions during which earth/spacecraft communication is so delayed and intermittent that the crew must be able to function autonomously. The integrated strategy of the HCAAM project characterizes human capabilities and limitations related to potential performance decrements during long duration exploration mission spaceflight as relevant to both routine and complex task performance; defines system characteristics that reduce the likelihood or impact of potential decrements in human performance capabilities; performs integrated assessment of intelligent system responses within the context of an operational environment with relevant NASA tools, systems, and data structures in order to determine positive or negative interactions and validate recommended approaches; and proposes specific updates to existing standards and guidelines for inclusion in NASA handbooks for the design of future spacecraft intelligent systems that provide crew performance assessment/feedback, and to also serve as decision-support aids for the onboard crew (i.e., NASA-STD-3001, and NASA/SP-Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH)). The scientific research vectors being addressed by the seven HCAAM teams include: - crew task performance (accuracy, efficiency) (crew + automation) - crew performance (accuracy, efficiency) - crew Situation Awareness - procedure design and multi-modal enhancement - concurrent tasking (mixed manual + some level of autonomy) - task handover - crew self-planning and time-lining - task design - trust in automation, real-time calibration - human multi-sensory feedback and guidance - human trust in on-board software-based intelligent assistants - virtual assistants The presentation will highlight plans and progress made in each of these research areas as well as the methods by which surrogate astronaut crews in the NASA JSC HERA spaceflight analog facility will function as human test subjects for all of the HCAAM research projects.

HCAAM VNSCOR↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessments of Physiology and Cognition in Hybrid-Reality Environments (APACHE)

NASA is planning to return to the Moon in the mid-2020s as a stepping stone to Mars missions in the 2030s. Spacewalks, or extravehicular activities (EVAs), performed on the Moon and Mars will differ in a variety of ways from those that have been performed in decades past. NASA has identified multiple risks to human health and performance associated with a crewed mission to Mars, especially those associated with exploration EVAs which are expected to be a primary mission activity. Crew may be expected to conduct up to 24 hours of EVA per person per week, where the likelihood of injury and/or mental mistakes are increased compared to ground-based training or current microgravity EVAs and the consequences of which can be catastrophic. Current test environments for exploration EVA research and technology development are large, costly facilities that are limited in their availability or capabilities. Spacesuit testing in a reduced gravity environment such as NASA’s Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory, while a good representation of the crew’s physical workload during exploration EVAs, typically has small datasets and is difficult to integrate physiological sensors or other types of crew performance measures. Meanwhile, scientific field-based testing such as NASA’s Desert Research and Technology Studies offers an operationally relevant environment for exploration EVAs, particularly for cognitive workload, but is also limited by small datasets, lack of a pressurized spacesuit, and obtrusive measures. The limitations of current analogs for exploration EVAs identify a need for a new test environment that can approximate both the physical and cognitive demands associated with exploration EVAs to enable rapid, controlled, and repeatable evaluations of human health and performance risks of exploration missions. In response, the Human Physiology, Performance, Protection, and Operations Laboratory (H-3PO) at NASA Johnson Space Center has developed a hybrid reality exploration EVA analog named the Assessments of Physiology And Cognition in Hybrid-reality Environments (APACHE) to address these limitations using a combination of virtual, physical, and hybrid reality techniques. The APACHE facility resides at NASA Johnson Space Center and serves as a large “sandbox” for EVA research and simulation. At its center is a roughly 15x20ft space surrounded by a 14” tall sandbox partially filled with lunar regolith simulant to emulate the physical feeling of walking on a planetary surface and to allow for simulated geology operations. Nearby, a curved passive treadmill (Skillmill Connect, Technogym, Fairfield, NJ) and an omnidirectional treadmill (Infinadeck, Infinadeck, Rocklin, CA) are included to enable exploration of these large virtual environments while also imposing the physical demands, representative timelines, and cognitive burdens required to navigate and traverse these distances during exploration EVA. A 6DOF motion platform is used to simulate rover operations and supports various human performance evaluations and associated risks. Lastly, APACHE can support two extravehicular (EV) crewmembers working in tandem. A computer workstation is located nearby and also supports an intravehicular (IV) crewmember as part of a full mission simulation. The IV crewmember has direct video and audio communication with the EV crew in VR to provide operational and procedural support. The software used in APACHE was created by the JSC Engineering Directorate, in partnership with Buendea, powered by a custom Unreal Engine 5 (UE5.3, Epic Games) project. APACHE currently utilizes the HTC Vive Pro Eye in a wireless configuration for VR simulations. There are two virtual environments that subjects can explore within APACHE, a Lunar and Martian surface. The virtual Lunar surface was created from LIDAR data of the Lunar South Pole to create roughly 16 sq km of explorable terrain. The virtual Martian surface contains roughly 400 sq km of explorable terrain derived from Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter LIDAR data of the Jezero Crater. The immersion and related cognitive burdens of conducting a planetary EVA is simulated through a series of EVA-relevant tasks performed in the VR environment, using these high-fidelity visual representations. Additionally, APACHE includes biosensor driven informatics, such as real-time heart rate monitoring and/or derived values from model simulations, for active monitoring by the EV crew and added cognitive demand. A “Wizard of Oz” control panel enables test operators to activate contingency events such as simulated spacesuit malfunctions, loss of communications, and/or limited visibility. Embedded performance measures such as accuracy, completeness, and execution time have been developed for various exploration tasks to objectively quantify crew performance during an EVA and compare impacts to performance when different environmental stressors, both physical and cognitive, are added to or removed from the simulation. Additionally, validated cognitive and operational performance measures such as the Digit Symbol Substitution Task have been recreated and embedded in VR for direct and relatively unobtrusive measurement of motor perception. The APACHE environment currently supports multiple research studies at NASA. Examples include the CHAPEA project, a series of simulated year-long missions on Mars by a 4-person crew; and the CO2 Contingency Walk Back Study, an investigation of elevated CO2 exposure on crew performance during a contingency EVA scenario. APACHE also provides a test environment to support the development of the Crew State and Risk Model, which is a collection of individualized, mathematical models of crew physical and cognitive state; and the Personalized EVA Informatics and Decision Support system, an operational tool for flight controllers, and eventually a self-reliant Martian crew, to make biomedically-informed decisions in real-time to optimize the EVA planning and execution with respect to crew health and performance. Some technical challenges associated with developing the APACHE environment, as well as current limitations, include VR limitless natural walking with a hybrid spacesuit simulator, optimizing performance for wireless PC VR streaming while maintaining a high degree of visual fidelity, and the integration of various physiological (metabolic masks) and psychometric (eye tracking) sensors with the VR headset.

Human Performance↗

NASA NTRS2024

Assessments of Physiology and Cognition in Hybrid-Reality Environments (APACHE) – A VR “Sandbox” for Planetary Spacewalk Research

Human Performance↗

NASA NTRS2009

Tool for Human-Systems Integration Assessment: HSI Scorecard

This paper describes the development and rationale for a human-systems integration (HSI) scorecard that can be used in reviews of vehicle specification and design. This tool can be used to assess whether specific HSI related criteria have been met as part of a project milestone or critical event, such as technical reviews, crew station reviews, mockup evaluations, or even review of major plans or processes. Examples of HSI related criteria include Human Performance Capabilities, Health Management, Human System Interfaces, Anthropometry and Biomechanics, and Natural and Induced Environments. The tool is not intended to evaluate requirements compliance and verification, but to review how well the human related systems have been considered for the specific event and to identify gaps and vulnerabilities from an HSI perspective. The scorecard offers common basis, and criteria for discussions among system managers, evaluators, and design engineers. Furthermore, the scorecard items highlight the main areas of system development that need to be followed during system lifecycle. The ratings provide a repeatable quantitative measure to what has been often seen as only subjective commentary. Thus, the scorecard is anticipated to be a useful HSI tool to communicate review results to the institutional and the project office management.

Whitmore, Nihriban↗

NASA NTRS2008

Risks Associated with Long-Term Spaceflight

Requirements driving the HHC work and deliverables are derived from the Human Research Program requirements, as well as Agency standards regarding the maintenance of human health and performance and a programmatic review of the existing evidence to support identified risks. Agency human health and performance standards define acceptable risk for each type and duration of exploration mission. It is critical to have the best available scientific and clinical evidence in setting and validating these standards. In addition, it is imperative that the best available evidence on preventing and mitigating human health and performance risks is incorporated into exploration mission and vehicle designs.

Francisco, David↗

NASA NTRS2014

IAA Space Exploration Conference

The NASA Human Health and Performance Center (NHHPC) was established in October 2010 to facilitate development of partnerships and collaborative projects in human health and performance with a focus on Earthspace benefits. The membership, which now stands at over 135 members from around the world, was developed to span the government, academic, industry and non-profit sectors, making the NHHPC a global convener in human health and performance. International members include organizations from Germany, the United Kingdom, Spain, Japan, South Africa, and India. The virtual center facilitates sharing of best practices and development of collaborative opportunities through a variety of vehicles, including annual in-person workshops, Innovation Lecture Series and Member to Member Connect webcasts, quarterly electronic newsletters, web postings, and electronic member announcements. The NHHPC has conducted four workshops leading to several collaborative projects between members, with the most recent workshop held focusing on new organizational business models for accelerating innovation. This short paper will discuss how the NHHPC facilitates partnerships and the collaborative research and technology developments projects with applications to both the NASA mission and life on Earth.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗

NASA NTRS1992

Biomedical Monitoring and Countermeasures Facility

The Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP) represents the transition within the US Space program from the 'heroic' era of space flight (characterized most vividly by the Mercury and Apollo programs) to an epoch characterized by routine access to the space environment. In this new era, the unique characteristics of the microgravity environment will enable new types of research activities, primarily in the life sciences, materials science, and biotechnology fields. In addition to its role as a'microgravity science laboratory,' Space Station Freedom (SSF) constitutes the operational platform on which the knowledge and skills needed to continue our exploration of space will be acquired. In the area of spacecraft operations, these skills include the ability to assemble, operate, and maintain large structures in space. In the area of crew operations, the potentially harmful effects of extended exposure to microgravity must be understood in order to keep the crew mission capable. To achieve this goal, the complex process of physiological deconditioning must be monitored, and countermeasures utilized as needed to keep the individual crew members within acceptable physiological limits. The countermeasures program under development for the SSF Program is titled the Biomedical Monitoring and Countermeasures (BMAC) program. As implied by the name, this activity has two primary products, a biomedical monitoring element and a countermeasures development effort. The program is a critical path element in the overall SSF Program, and should be considered an essential element of operations on board the space station. It is readily apparent that the capability to both protect and optimize the health and performance of the human operators on board SSF will be a critical element in the overall success of the SSFP. Previous experience within the Russian space program has demonstrated that the time required for countermeasures on extended missions can become a monumental operational burden. Therefore, one of the primary objectives of the countermeasures development activity will be to design and implement countermeasures which are significantly more effective than the existing generation. Other primary objectives include the following: to set health and human performance standards for all mission phases; to determine critical issues that affect performance or return to flight status; to develop and implement monitoring systems to follow health and performance status; and to understand risk, and balance the resource costs of countermeasures vs. the benefit gained.

Stewart, Donald F.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Performance Data Report: Space Medicine Division, Human Research Program, Behavioural Health and Performance Research Element

This report is the result of a collaborative effort between NASA?s Behavioral Health & Performance (BHP) Research and Operations Group to investigate and determine the availability of data pertaining to behavioral performance (and other pertinent variables) that have been collected by the laboratories at NASA?s Johnson Space Center. BHP?s Operations and Research groups collaborated to systematically identify what types of performance data are needed in relevant BHP performance domains and also to conduct structured interviews with NASA personnel to identify which data do or do not exist currently (and for instances where such data exist, to evaluate the type, quality, accessibility, and confidentiality of those data). The authors defined outcome categories of performance that encapsulate BHP performance domains, mapped BHP Research Risks and Gaps onto those performance outcome categories, and identified and prioritized indicators for each outcome category. The team identified key points of contact (subject matter experts [SMEs]) as potential interviewees, created a template for structured interview questions about sources and accessibility of performance data, and coordinated and conducted structured interviews with the SMEs. The methodology, results, and implications of this effort, as well as forward work needed, are discussed in this report.

Shea, Camille↗

NASA NTRS1997

Habitats and Surface Construction Technology and Development Roadmap

The vision of the technology and development teams at NASA Ames and Johnson Research Centers is to provide the capability for automated delivery and emplacement of habitats and surface facilities. The benefits of the program are as follows: Composites and Inflatables: 30-50% (goal) lighter than Al Hard Structures; Capability for Increased Habitable Volume, Launch Efficiency; Long Term Growth Potential; and Supports initiation of commercial and industrial expansion. Key Habitats and Surface Construction (H&SC) technology issues are: Habitat Shell Structural Materials; Seals and Mechanisms; Construction and Assembly: Automated Pro-Deploy Construction Systems; ISRU Soil/Construction Equipment: Lightweight and Lower Power Needs; Radiation Protection (Health and Human Performance Tech.); Life Support System (Regenerative Life Support System Tech.); Human Physiology of Long Duration Space Flight (Health and Human Performance Tech.); and Human Psychology of Long Duration Space Flight (Health and Human Performance Tech.) What is being done regarding these issues?: Use of composite materials for X-38 CRV, RLV, etc.; TransHAB inflatable habitat design/development; Japanese corporations working on ISRU-derived construction processes. What needs to be done for the 2004 Go Decision?: Characterize Mars Environmental Conditions: Civil Engineering, Material Durability, etc.; Determine Credibility of Inflatable Structures for Human Habitation; and Determine Seal Technology for Mechanisms and Hatches, Life Cycle, and Durability. An overview encompassing all of the issues above is presented.

Marc Cohen↗

NASA NTRS2012

Human Health Countermeasures (HHC) Element Management Plan: Human Research Program

NASA s Human Research Program (HRP) is an applied research and technology program within the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) that addresses human health and performance risk mitigation strategies in support of exploration missions. The HRP research and technology development is focused on the highest priority risks to crew health and safety with the goal of ensuring mission success and maintaining long-term crew health. Crew health and performance standards, defined by the NASA Chief Health and Medical Officer (CHMO), set the acceptable risk level for exploration missions. The HRP conducts research to inform these standards as well as provide deliverables, such as countermeasures, that ensure standards can be met to maximize human performance and mission success. The Human Health Countermeasures (HHC) Element was formed as part of the HRP to develop a scientifically-based, integrated approach to understanding and mitigating the health risks associated with human spaceflight. These health risks have been organized into four research portfolios that group similar or related risks. A fifth portfolio exists for managing technology developments and infrastructure projects. The HHC Element portfolios consist of: a) Vision and Cardiovascular; b) Exercise and Performance; c) Multisystem; d) Bone; and e) Technology and Infrastructure. The HHC identifies gaps associated with the health risks and plans human physiology research that will result in knowledge required to more fully understand risks and will result in validated countermeasures to mitigate risks.

Norsk, Peter↗

NASA NTRS2003

HUMEX, a study on the survivability and adaptation of humans to long-duration exploratory missions, part I: lunar missions

The European Space Agency has recently initiated a study of the human responses, limits and needs with regard to the stress environments of interplanetary and planetary missions. Emphasis has been laid on human health and performance care as well as advanced life support developments including bioregenerative life support systems and environmental monitoring. The overall study goals were as follows: (i) to define reference scenarios for a European participation in human exploration and to estimate their influence on the life sciences and life support requirements; (ii) for selected mission scenarios, to critically assess the limiting factors for human health, wellbeing, and performance and to recommend relevant countermeasures; (iii) for selected mission scenarios, to critically assess the potential of advanced life support developments and to propose a European strategy including terrestrial applications; (iv) to critically assess the feasibility of existing facilities and technologies on ground and in space as testbeds in preparation for human exploratory missions and to develop a test plan for ground and space campaigns; (v) to develop a roadmap for a future European strategy towards human exploratory missions, including preparatory activities and terrestrial applications and benefits. This paper covers the part of the HUMEX study dealing with lunar missions. A lunar base at the south pole where long-time sunlight and potential water ice deposits could be assumed was selected as the Moon reference scenario. The impact on human health, performance and well being has been investigated from the view point of the effects of microgravity (during space travel), reduced gravity (on the Moon) and abrupt gravity changes (during launch and landing), of the effects of cosmic radiation including solar particle events, of psychological issues as well as general health care. Countermeasures as well as necessary research using ground-based test beds and/or the International Space Station have been defined. Likewise advanced life support systems with a high degree of autonomy and regenerative capacity and synergy effects were considered where bioregenerative life support systems and biodiagnostic systems become essential. Finally, a European strategy leading to a potential European participation in future human exploratory missions has been recommended. c2003 COSPAR. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Moon↗

NASA NTRS2022

Evidence Report: Risk of Injury and Compromised Performance due to EVA Operations

During future missions to the Moon and Mars, each crewmember will most likely perform up to 24 hours a week of extravehicular activity (EVA) in support of exploration, science, construction, and maintenance tasks. Achieving mission objectives will require EVA systems and operations concepts that maximize human performance and efficiency while minimizing health and safety risks for crewmembers. Currently, over 450 EVAs have been performed in microgravity using the Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU). The EMU space suit has enabled the successful assembly and maintenance of the International Space Station (ISS) for over 20 years, as well as deployment of payload experiments, solar arrays, satellite launches and repairs. This EVA work was accomplished at a slower cadence than is expected for Moon and Mars, with ISS crewmembers performing no more than 7 EVAs during a single mission and without any back-to-back EVAs. Despite their success, ISS EVAs have resulted in more injury to EVA crewmembers than may be acceptable for long-duration exploration missions. The Apollo astronauts completed EVA tasks in suits that were designed for their short-duration lunar missions, although suit mobility problems were evident. The more frequent EVAs and more varied EVA tasks that are anticipated during the future longer-duration exploration missions will require EVA suits and systems that are better oriented to human health and performance than those used during the Apollo Program. Many of the problems that were encountered with the Apollo EVA suits (e.g., limited mobility and dexterity, high and aft center of gravity, and other features requiring significant crew compensation) will need to be corrected or mitigated to optimize EVA objectives of exploration missions. It is critical that we understand how EVA system design variables such as suit pressure, weight/mass, center-of-gravity location, joint ranges of motion, and biomedical monitoring, affects the ability of astronauts to perform safe, efficient, and effective EVAs. To achieve this understanding, EVA researchers will need to develop and execute an integrated human testing program across multiple environments. The research will provide objective data that will enable informed design decisions and crewmember standards, thereby ensuring EVA systems that optimize crewmember health, safety, efficiency, and performance. This report describes the risks to crew health, safety, performance, and efficiency caused by EVA operations, and it provides the evidence base to substantiate the importance of the risk.

EVA↗

NASA NTRS2017

Integrated Extravehicular Activity Human Research Plan: 2017

Multiple organizations within NASA as well as industry and academia fund and participate in research related to extravehicular activity (EVA). In October 2015, representatives of the EVA Office, the Crew and Thermal Systems Division (CTSD), and the Human Research Program (HRP) at NASA Johnson Space Center agreed on a formal framework to improve multi-year coordination and collaboration in EVA research. At the core of the framework is an Integrated EVA Human Research Plan and a process by which it will be annually reviewed and updated. The over-arching objective of the collaborative framework is to conduct multi-disciplinary cost-effective research that will enable humans to perform EVAs safely, effectively, comfortably, and efficiently, as needed to enable and enhance human space exploration missions. Research activities must be defined, prioritized, planned and executed to comprehensively address the right questions, avoid duplication, leverage other complementary activities where possible, and ultimately provide actionable evidence-based results in time to inform subsequent tests, developments and/or research activities. Representation of all appropriate stakeholders in the definition, prioritization, planning and execution of research activities is essential to accomplishing the over-arching objective. A formal review of the Integrated EVA Human Research Plan will be conducted annually. Coordination with stakeholders outside of the EVA Office, CTSD, and HRP is already in effect on a study-by-study basis; closer coordination on multi-year planning with other EVA stakeholders including academia is being actively pursued. Details of the preliminary Integrated EVA Human Research Plan are presented including description of ongoing and planned research activities in the areas of: physiological and performance capabilities; suit design parameters; EVA human health and performance modeling; EVA tasks and concepts of operations; EVA informatics; human-suit sensors; suit sizing and fit; and EVA injury risk and mitigation. This paper represents the 2017 update to the Integrated EVA Human Research Plan.

Abercromby, Andrew↗