Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Humans”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1997

Csa-19, a radiation-responsive human gene, identified by an unbiased two-gel cDNA library screening method in human cancer cells

A novel polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based method was used to identify candidate genes whose expression is altered in cancer cells by ionizing radiation. Transcriptional induction of randomly selected genes in control versus irradiated human HL60 cells was compared. Among several complementary DNA (cDNA) clones recovered by this approach, one cDNA clone (CL68-5) was downregulated in X-irradiated HL60 cells but unaffected by 12-O-tetradecanoyl phorbol-13-acetate, forskolin, or cyclosporin-A. DNA sequencing of the CL68-5 cDNA revealed 100% nucleotide sequence homology to the reported human Csa-19 gene. Northern blot analysis of RNA from control and irradiated cells revealed the expression of a single 0.7-kilobase (kb) messenger RNA (mRNA) transcript. This 0.7-kb Csa-19 mRNA transcript was also expressed in a variety of human adult and corresponding fetal normal tissues. Moreover, when the effect of X- or fission neutron-irradiation on Csa-19 mRNA was compared in cultured human cells differing in p53 gene status (p53-/- versus p53+/+), downregulation of Csa-19 by X-rays or fission neutrons was similar in p53-wild type and p53-null cell lines. Our results provide the first known example of a radiation-responsive gene in human cancer cells whose expression is not associated with p53, adenylate cyclase or protein kinase C.

NASA Discipline Radiation Health↗
NASA NTRS1984

The human role in space. Volume 3: Generalizations on human roles in space

The human role in space was studied. The role and the degree of direct involvement of humans that will be required in future space missions, was investigated. Valid criteria for allocating functional activities between humans and machines were established. The technology requirements, ecnomics, and benefits of the human presence in space were examined. Factors which affect crew productivity include: internal architecture; crew support; crew activities; LVA systems; IVA/EVA interfaces; and remote systems management. The accomplished work is reported and the data and analyses from which the study results are derived are included. The results provide information and guidelines to enable NASA program managers and decision makers to establish, early in the design process, the most cost effective design approach for future space programs, through the optimal application of unique human skills and capabilities in space.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (SRP) evaluated 22 gaps and 39 tasks in the three risk areas assigned to the SHFE Project. The area where tasks were best designed to close the gaps and the fewest gaps were left out was the Risk of Reduced Safety and Efficiency dire to Inadequate Design of Vehicle, Environment, Tools or Equipment. The areas where there were more issues with gaps and tasks, including poor or inadequate fit of tasks to gaps and missing gaps, were Risk of Errors due to Poor Task Design and Risk of Error due to Inadequate Information. One risk, the Risk of Errors due to Inappropriate Levels of Trust in Automation, should be added. If astronauts trust automation too much in areas where it should not be trusted, but rather tempered with human judgment and decision making, they will incur errors. Conversely, if they do not trust automation when it should be trusted, as in cases where it can sense aspects of the environment such as radiation levels or distances in space, they will also incur errors. This will be a larger risk when astronauts are less able to rely on human mission control experts and are out of touch, far away, and on their own. The SRP also identified 11 new gaps and five new tasks. Although the SRP had an extremely large quantity of reading material prior to and during the meeting, we still did not feel we had an overview of the activities and tasks the astronauts would be performing in exploration missions. Without a detailed task analysis and taxonomy of activities the humans would be engaged in, we felt it was impossible to know whether the gaps and tasks were really sufficient to insure human safety, performance, and comfort in the exploration missions. The SRP had difficulty evaluating many of the gaps and tasks that were not as quantitative as those related to concrete physical danger such as excessive noise and vibration. Often the research tasks for cognitive risks that accompany poor task or information design addressed only part, but not all, of the gaps they were programmed to fill. In fact the tasks outlined will not close the gap but only scratch the surface in many cases. In other cases, the gap was written too broadly, and really should be restated in a more constrained way that can be addressed by a well-organized and complementary set of tasks. In many cases, the research results should be turned into guidelines for design. However, it was not clear whether the researchers or another group would construct and deliver these guidelines.

Wichansky, Anna↗
NASA NTRS2011

Human Modeling For Ground Processing Human Factors Engineering Analysis

There have been many advancements and accomplishments over that last few years using human modeling for human factors engineering analysis for design of spacecraft and launch vehicles. The key methods used for this are motion capture and computer generated human models. The focus of this paper is to explain the different types of human modeling used currently and in the past at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) currently, and to explain the future plans for human modeling for future spacecraft designs.

Tran, Donald↗
NASA NTRS2011

The Exploration of Mars by Humans: Why Mars? Why Humans?

As we commemorate the 50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's historic flight in 1961, the first flight of a human in space, plans are underway for another historic human mission. Plans are being developed for a human mission to Mars. Once we reach Mars, the human species will become the first two-planet species. Both the Bush Administration (in 2004) and the Obama Administration (in 2010) proposed a human mission to Mars as a national goal of the United States.

Levine, Joel S.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Human Modeling for Ground Processing Human Factors Engineering Analysis

There have been many advancements and accomplishments over the last few years using human modeling for human factors engineering analysis for design of spacecraft. The key methods used for this are motion capture and computer generated human models. The focus of this paper is to explain the human modeling currently used at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), and to explain the future plans for human modeling for future spacecraft designs

Stambolian, Damon B.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Maintaining Human Health for Humans-Mars

The Human Health Research Program states that Radiation is the most challenging hazard to human spaceflight beyond LEO. The International Space Station provides an analog for evaluating techniques for dealing with Altered Gravity, the Radiation Environment of the ISS is only about 45% of the deep space values where radiation due to Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCR) dominate the spectrum. The Moon and cis-lunar space are being considered as a Mars Analog training ground for preparing crews for human mission to Mars. Spending more than 200 days in deep space is considered unsafe based on our current proxy for lifetime radiation dose. The paper outlines a way forward for spending days training near the Moon and for completing roundtrip missions to Mars while remaining below the current proxy. In the first case, a GCR overcoat shields crews from radiation during cis-lunar activities before making fast transits without in-space GCR overcoats to and from Mars. This case requires continued maturation of low TRL propulsion and power technologies currently around 4 to 5 while depending on repeatable reductions in launch costs by a factor of 6 expected of current reusable rockets. The second case requires no new technology development except for the expectation that the next near-term generation of reusable rockets will reduce launch costs by a factor of around 14. Five trajectories and GCR overcoat sizes for all mission legs are presented herein to illustrate the opportunities to maintain human health for Humans-Mars missions.

Robert W Moses↗
NASA NTRS2004

Noninfectious X4 but not R5 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 virions inhibit humoral immune responses in human lymphoid tissue ex vivo

Ex vivo human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection of human lymphoid tissue recapitulates some aspects of in vivo HIV-1 infection, including a severe depletion of CD4(+) T cells and suppression of humoral immune responses to recall antigens or to polyclonal stimuli. These effects are induced by infection with X4 HIV-1 variants, whereas infection with R5 variants results in only mild depletion of CD4(+) T cells and no suppression of immune responses. To study the mechanisms of suppression of immune responses in this ex vivo system, we used aldrithiol-2 (AT-2)-inactivated virions that have functional envelope glycoproteins but are not infectious and do not deplete CD4(+) T cells in human lymphoid tissues ex vivo. Nevertheless, AT-2-inactivated X4 (but not R5) HIV-1 virions, even with only a brief exposure, inhibit antibody responses in human lymphoid tissue ex vivo, similarly to infectious virus. This phenomenon is mediated by soluble immunosuppressive factor(s) secreted by tissue exposed to virus.

2,2'-Dipyridyl/analogs & derivatives/pharmacology↗
NASA NTRS2016

Evaluation of Human and AutomationRobotics Integration Needs for Future Human Exploration Missions

NASA employs Design Reference Missions (DRMs) to define potential architectures for future human exploration missions to deep space, the Moon, and Mars. While DRMs to these destinations share some components, each mission has different needs. This paper focuses on the human and automation/robotic integration needs for these future missions, evaluating them with respect to NASA research gaps in the area of space human factors engineering. The outcomes of our assessment is a human and automation/robotic (HAR) task list for each of the four DRMs that we reviewed (i.e., Deep Space Sortie, Lunar Visit/Habitation, Deep Space Habitation, and Planetary), a list of common critical HAR factors that drive HAR design.

design reference missions↗
NASA NTRS1988

Computational human factors in human-machine engineering - The Army-NASA aircrew/aircraft integration (A3I) program

The A3I program is a joint US Army-NASA exploratory program to develop a rational predictive methodology for helicopter cockpit system design, including mission requirements and training-system implications, that integrates human factors engineering with other vehicle system design disciplines at an early stage in the development process. The program will produce a prototye human factors/computer-aided engineering (HF/CAE) workstation suite for use by design professionals. This interactive environment will include computational and expert systems for the analysis and estimation of the impact of cockpit design and mission specification on system performance by considering the performance consequences from the human component of the system, especially as an integral part of the overall system operation, and from the very beginning of the design process. The central issues of pilot workload, performance, and training needs, and appropriate uses of automation are interrelated to affect all integrated design considerations in future man-machine systems. The goal is to aid designers in understanding these complex interactions and in optimally matching human capabilities with advanced cockpit systems.

Hartzell, E. James↗
NASA NTRS1990

Applied human factors research at the NASA Johnson Space Center Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory

The applied human factors research program performed at the NASA Johnson Space Center's Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory is discussed. Research is conducted to advance knowledge in human interaction with computer systems during space crew tasks. In addition, the Laboratory is directly involved in the specification of the human-computer interface (HCI) for space systems in development (e.g., Space Station Freedom) and is providing guidelines and support for HCI design to current and future space missions.

Rudisill, Marianne↗
NASA NTRS2007

Human Research Program: Space Human Factors and Habitability Element

The three project areas of the Space Human Factors and Habitability Element work together to achieve a working and living environment that will keep crews healthy, safe, and productive throughout all missions -- from Earth orbit to Mars expeditions. The Advanced Environmental Health (AEH) Project develops and evaluates advanced habitability systems and establishes requirements and health standards for exploration missions. The Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Project s goal is to ensure a safe and productive environment for humans in space. With missions using new technologies at an ever-increasing rate, it is imperative that these advances enhance crew performance without increasing stress or risk. The ultimate goal of Advanced Food Technology (AFT) Project is to develop and deliver technologies for human centered spacecraft that will support crews on missions to the moon, Mars, and beyond.

Russo, Dane M.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Microgravity Analogues of Herpes Virus Pathogenicity: Human Cytomegalovirus (hCMV) and Varicella Zoster (VZV) Infectivity in Human Tissue Like Assemblies (TLAs)

The old adage we are our own worst enemies may perhaps be the most profound statement ever made when applied to man s desire for extraterrestrial exploration and habitation of Space. Consider the immune system protects the integrity of the entire human physiology and is comprised of two basic elements the adaptive or circulating and the innate immune system. Failure of the components of the adaptive system leads to venerability of the innate system from opportunistic microbes; viral, bacteria, and fungal, which surround us, are transported on our skin, and commonly inhabit the human physiology as normal and imunosuppressed parasites. The fine balance which is maintained for the preponderance of our normal lives, save immune disorders and disease, is deregulated in microgravity. Thus analogue systems to study these potential Risks are essential for our progress in conquering Space exploration and habitation. In this study we employed two known physiological target tissues in which the reactivation of hCMV and VZV occurs, human neural and lung systems created for the study and interaction of these herpes viruses independently and simultaneously on the innate immune system. Normal human neural and lung tissue analogues called tissue like assemblies (TLAs) were infected with low MOIs of approximately 2 x 10(exp -5) pfu hCMV or VZV and established active but prolonged low grade infections which spanned .7-1.5 months in length. These infections were characterized by the ability to continuously produce each of the viruses without expiration of the host cultures. Verification and quantification of viral replication was confirmed via RT_PCR, IHC, and confocal spectral analyses of the respective essential viral genomes. All host TLAs maintained the ability to actively proliferate throughout the entire duration of the experiments as is analogous to normal in vivo physiological conditions. These data represent a significant advance in the ability to study the triggering mechanisms which surround Herpes vial reactivation and proliferation. Additionally, prolonged replication of these viruses will allow the tracking of viral genomic shift.

Goodwin, T. J.↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Space Flight Human-System Standard Human Factors, Habitability, and Environmental Health

This slide presentation reviews the history, and development of NASA-STD-3001, NASA Space Flight Human-System Standard Human Factors, Habitability, and Environmental Health, and the related Human Integration Design Handbook. Currently being developed from NASA-STD-3000, this project standard currently in review will be available in two volumes, (i.e., Volume 1 -- VCrew Health and Volume 2 -- Human Factors, Habitability, and Environmental Health) and the handbook will be both available as a pdf file and as a interactive website.

Holubec, Keith↗
NASA NTRS2002

Integrated Human Test Facilities at NASA and the Role of Human Engineering

Integrated human test facilities are a key component of NASA's Advanced Life Support Program (ALSP). Over the past several years, the ALSP has been developing such facilities to serve as a large-scale advanced life support and habitability test bed capable of supporting long-duration evaluations of integrated bioregenerative life support systems with human test crews. These facilities-targeted for evaluation of hypogravity compatible life support and habitability systems to be developed for use on planetary surfaces-are currently in the development stage at the Johnson Space Center. These major test facilities are comprised of a set of interconnected chambers with a sealed internal environment, which will be outfitted with systems capable of supporting test crews of four individuals for periods exceeding one year. The advanced technology systems to be tested will consist of both biological and physicochemical components and will perform all required crew life support and habitability functions. This presentation provides a description of the proposed test "missions" to be supported by these integrated human test facilities, the overall system architecture of the facilities, the current development status of the facilities, and the role that human design has played in the development of the facilities.

Tri, Terry O.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Human Space Exploration and Human Space Flight: Latency and the Cognitive Scale of the Universe

The role of telerobotics in space exploration as placing human cognition on other worlds is limited almost entirely by the speed of light, and the consequent communications latency that results from large distances. This latency is the time delay between the human brain at one end, and the telerobotic effector and sensor at the other end. While telerobotics and virtual presence is a technology that is rapidly becoming more sophisticated, with strong commercial interest on the Earth, this time delay, along with the neurological timescale of a human being, quantitatively defines the cognitive horizon for any locale in space. That is, how distant can an operator be from a robot and not be significantly impacted by latency? We explore that cognitive timescale of the universe, and consider the implications for telerobotics, human space flight, and participation by larger numbers of people in space exploration. We conclude that, with advanced telepresence, sophisticated robots could be operated with high cognition throughout a lunar hemisphere by astronauts within a station at an Earth-Moon Ll or L2 venue. Likewise, complex telerobotic servicing of satellites in geosynchronous orbit can be carried out from suitable terrestrial stations.

Lester, Dan↗
NASA NTRS2016

Humans vs Hardware: The Unique World of NASA Human System Risk Assessment

Understanding spaceflight risks to crew health and performance is a crucial aspect of preparing for exploration missions in the future. The research activities of the Human Research Program (HRP) provide substantial evidence to support most risk reduction work. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB), acting on behalf of the Office of Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO), assesses these risks and assigns likelihood and consequence ratings to track progress. Unfortunately, many traditional approaches in risk assessment such as those used in the engineering aspects of spaceflight are difficult to apply to human system risks. This presentation discusses the unique aspects of risk assessment from the human system risk perspective and how these limitations are accommodated and addressed in order to ensure that reasonable inputs are provided to support the OCHMO's overall risk posture for manned exploration missions.

Anton, W.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Identified Risks of Adverse Outcomes Due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture in Human Spaceflight

The NASA Human System Risk Board (HSRB) has the overall responsibility for tracking the evolution of the top ~30 human system risks that it has identified to be associated with human spaceflight. As part of this process, the Board is charged with maintaining a consistent, integrated process to mitigate those risks, and developing evidence-based risk posture recommendations. One of the identified risks is due to inadequate human systems integration architecture (HSIA) and a driving factor of this risk is that given decreasing real-time ground support for execution of complex operations during future exploration missions, there is a possibility of adverse performance outcomes including that crew are unable to adequately respond to unanticipated critical malfunctions or detect safety critical procedural errors. The HSRB uses Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) as a communication tool for describing how astronaut exposure to spaceflight hazards leads to meaningful mission-level health and performance outcomes and as the basis for understanding intermediate causal relationships between risk contributing factors and countermeasures that link hazards to outcomes. The HSIA risk DAG will be presented and described. Historically, critical malfunctions requiring Crew/MCC management occurred at a rate of 1.7 times per year for ISS averaged over the lifetime and 3-4 times per year in the burn in phase for the vehicle. These averages do not include EVA data, which greatly increases the incident rate. Prior experience from the Apollo program showed 10/11 crewed missions experienced significant anomalies where crew relied heavily on MCC expertise in real-time. These failure patterns are in line with those observed in other complex engineered systems (e.g., oil rigs, launch systems, commercial aviation, etc.) It is likely that general malfunction and error rates are > 10% for short duration missions (<30 days), based on past and current spaceflight operations data. Likelihood of adverse outcomes has the potential to increase as crew conduct work with new, complex systems and with less ground support. For Low Earth Orbit missions and Lunar missions less than 30 days, assuming minimal comm delays, disruptions and bandwidth limitations, malfunctions and errors can affect mission objectives and crew health but may be mitigated by ground support. For Lunar missions greater than 30 days and any potential Mars mission malfunctions and errors can have Loss of Crew and Loss of Mission consequences due to reduced ground support (communication delays, constraints and blackouts) for more complex operations, as well as reduced resupply and evacuation options.

Daniel M Buckland↗