Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human Systems Integration”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2006

Human Factors Engineering as a System in the Vision for Exploration

In order to accomplish NASA's Vision for Exploration, while assuring crew safety and productivity, human performance issues must be well integrated into system design from mission conception. To that end, a two-year Technology Development Project (TDP) was funded by NASA Headquarters to develop a systematic method for including the human as a system in NASA's Vision for Exploration. The specific goals of this project are to review current Human Systems Integration (HSI) standards (i.e., industry, military, NASA) and tailor them to selected NASA Exploration activities. Once the methods are proven in the selected domains, a plan will be developed to expand the effort to a wider scope of Exploration activities. The methods will be documented for inclusion in NASA-specific documents (such as the Human Systems Integration Standards, NASA-STD-3000) to be used in future space systems. The current project builds on a previous TDP dealing with Human Factors Engineering processes. That project identified the key phases of the current NASA design lifecycle, and outlined the recommended HFE activities that should be incorporated at each phase. The project also resulted in a prototype of a webbased HFE process tool that could be used to support an ideal HFE development process at NASA. This will help to augment the limited human factors resources available by providing a web-based tool that explains the importance of human factors, teaches a recommended process, and then provides the instructions, templates and examples to carry out the process steps. The HFE activities identified by the previous TDP are being tested in situ for the current effort through support to a specific NASA Exploration activity. Currently, HFE personnel are working with systems engineering personnel to identify HSI impacts for lunar exploration by facilitating the generation of system-level Concepts of Operations (ConOps). For example, medical operations scenarios have been generated for lunar habitation in order to identify HSI requirements for the lunar communications architecture. Throughout these ConOps exercises, HFE personnel are testing various tools and methodologies that have been identified in the literature. A key part of the effort is the identification of optimal processes, methods, and tools for these early development phase activities, such as ConOps, requirements development, and early conceptual design. An overview of the activities completed thus far, as well as the tools and methods investigated will be presented.

Mihriban Whitmore↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Campaign Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the Moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program's objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, the crew will need more onboard systems autonomy and functionality to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft to ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with: audio, video, lighting, and crew controls subsystems. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program--especially crew controls, which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable enough to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error--especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA's approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls, is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that focuses on incorporating NASA's Human-Rating Requirements-that ensures human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

artemis↗
NASA NTRS2015

UAS-NAS Integrated Human in the Loop: Test Environment Report

The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration in the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability (SSI), Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research was broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of the Test Infrastructure theme was to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the execution of integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project developed an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment incorporating live, virtual, and constructive elements capable of validating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project planned to conduct three integrated events: a Human-in-the-Loop simulation and two Flight Test series that integrated key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events were built on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of previous simulations and tests, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS. The purpose of this document is to describe how well the system under test was representative

Human in the Loop↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Establishing Trust in NASA’s Artemis Program Computer-Human Interface (CHI) Implementation

The NASA Artemis program will return humans to the moon. This time, with the help of commercial and international partners, the program’s objective is a permanent moon base. The moon base infrastructure, including an orbiting moon station and moon surface assets, will be developed for astronauts to stay for the long haul to learn to live and work on another planet in preparation for an eventual Humans-to-Mars mission. As the roundtrip communication delays increase in deep space exploration, more onboard systems autonomy and functionality will be needed to maintain and control the vehicle or habitat. These mission constraints will change the current Earth-based spacecraft ground control support approach that will demand more safe, efficient, and effective Computer-Human Interface (CHI) control. For Artemis, CHI is defined as the elements that the crew interfaces with-audio, video, lighting, and crew controls. Understanding how CHI will need to evolve to support deep space missions will be critical for the Artemis program-especially crew controls which is the focus of this paper. How does NASA ensure crew controls are reliable to control complex systems and prevent a catastrophic event due to human error-especially when the astronauts could be physiologically and/or psychologically impaired? NASA’s approach to mitigating catastrophic hazards in human spaceflight system development such as crew controls is through a holistic system engineering and Human System Integration methodology that embraces NASA’s Human-Rating Requirements-ensuring human performance characteristics to control/safely recover the crew from hazardous situations within the human interface design are considered. This paper discusses, at a high level, CHI for the Artemis program. Next, a discussion of what it means to human-rate a space system crew controls and how trust in the human-computer interface begins with the NASA human rating requirements. Finally, a discussion on how systems engineering, and the human system integration process ensures that crew control implementation incorporates the NASA human-rating requirements.

Human-Rating↗
NASA NTRS2015

UAS Integration in the NAS Project: Integrated Test and Evaluation (IT&E) Flight Test 3

The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability, Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project will conduct a series of Human-in-the-Loop and Flight Test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS.

interoperability↗
NASA NTRS2008

Human Rating Requirements for NASA's Constellation Program

NASA s Constellation Program (CxP) will conduct a series of human space expeditions of increasing scope, starting with missions supporting the International Space Station and expanding to encompass the Moon and Mars. Although human-rating is an integral part of all CxP activities throughout their life cycle, NASA Procedural Requirements document NPR 8705.2B, Human-Rating Requirements (HRR) for Space Flight Systems, defines the additional processes, procedures, and requirements necessary to produce human-rated space systems that protect the safety of crew members and passengers on these NASA missions. In order to be in compliance with 8705.2B the CxP must show appropriate implementation or progression toward the HRR, or justification for an exception. Compliance includes an explanation of how the CxP intends to meet the HRR, analyses to be performed to determine implementation; and a matrix to trace the HRR to CxP requirements. The HRR requires the CxP to establish a human system integration team (HSIT), consisting of astronauts, mission operations personnel, training personnel, ground processing personnel, human factors personnel, and human engineering experts, with clearly defined authority, responsibility, and accountability to lead the human-system integration. For example, per the HRR the HSIT is involved in the evaluation of crew workload, human-in-the-loop usability evaluations, determining associated criteria, and in assessment of how these activities influenced system design. In essence, the HSIT is invaluable in CxP s ability to meet the three fundamental tenets of human rating: the process of designing, evaluating, and assuring that the total system can safely conduct the required human missions; the incorporation of design features and capabilities that accommodate human interaction with the system to enhance overall safety and mission success; and the incorporation of design features and capabilities to enable safe recovery of the crew from hazardous situations.

Berdich, Debbie↗
NASA NTRS2015

Integrated Test and Evaluation Flight Test 3 Flight Test Plan

The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration into the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability, Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communication to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Sense and Avoid (SAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including the integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project will conduct a series of Human-in-the-Loop and Flight Test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS.

Unmanned↗
NASA NTRS2016

UAS-NAS Flight Test Series 3: Test Environment Report

The desire and ability to fly Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in the National Airspace System (NAS) is of increasing urgency. The application of unmanned aircraft to perform national security, defense, scientific, and emergency management are driving the critical need for less restrictive access by UAS to the NAS. UAS represent a new capability that will provide a variety of services in the government (public) and commercial (civil) aviation sectors. The growth of this potential industry has not yet been realized due to the lack of a common understanding of what is required to safely operate UAS in the NAS. NASA's UAS Integration in the NAS Project is conducting research in the areas of Separation Assurance/Sense and Avoid Interoperability (SSI), Human Systems Integration (HSI), and Communications (Comm), and Certification to support reducing the barriers of UAS access to the NAS. This research is broken into two research themes namely, UAS Integration and Test Infrastructure. UAS Integration focuses on airspace integration procedures and performance standards to enable UAS integration in the air transportation system, covering Detect and Avoid (DAA) performance standards, command and control performance standards, and human systems integration. The focus of Test Infrastructure is to enable development and validation of airspace integration procedures and performance standards, including integrated test and evaluation. In support of the integrated test and evaluation efforts, the Project will develop an adaptable, scalable, and schedulable relevant test environment capable of evaluating concepts and technologies for unmanned aircraft systems to safely operate in the NAS. To accomplish this task, the Project is conducting a series of human-in-the-loop (HITL) and flight test activities that integrate key concepts, technologies and/or procedures in a relevant air traffic environment. Each of the integrated events will build on the technical achievements, fidelity, and complexity of the previous tests and technical simulations, resulting in research findings that support the development of regulations governing the access of UAS into the NAS. The integrated events started with two initial flight test used to develop and test early integrations and components of the test environment. Test subjects and a relevant test environment were brought in for the integrated HITL (or IHITL) conducted in 2014. The IHITL collected data to evaluate the effectiveness of DAA Well Clear (DWC) algorithms and the acceptability of UAS concepts integrated into the NAS. The first integrated flight test (and the subject of this report) followed the IHITL by replacing the simulation components with live aircraft. The project finishes the integrated events with a final flight test to be conducted in 2016 that provides the researchers with an opportunity to collect DWC and Collision Avoidance (CA) interoperability data during flight encounters.

flight test↗
NASA NTRS2013

An Evaluation of Operational Airspace Sectorization Integrated System (OASIS) Advisory Tool

In January 2013, a human-in-the-loop evaluation of the Operational Airspace Sectorization Integrated System (OASIS) was conducted in the Airspace Operations Laboratory of the Human Systems Integration Division (Code TH) in conjunction with the Aviation Systems Division (Code AF). The development of OASIS is a major activity of the Dynamic Airspace Configuration (DAC) research focus area within the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) Airspace Systems Program. OASIS is an advisory tool to assist Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) En Route Area Supervisors in their planning of sector combinedecombine operations as well as opening closing of Data-side (D-side) control positions. These advisory solutions are tailored to the predicted traffic demand over the next few hours. During the experiment, eight retired FAA personnel served as participants for a part-task evaluation of OASIS functionality, covering the user interface as well as the underlying algorithm. Participants gave positive feedback on both the user interface and the algorithm solutions for airspace configuration, including an excellent average rating of 94 on the tool usability scales. They also suggested various enhancements to the OASIS tool, which will be incorporated into the next tool development cycle for the full-scale human-in-the-loop evaluation to be conducted later this year.

decision support tools↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Systems Intergration & Engineering: HSI & E Design Influence

The design of space systems is a long and complicated process where changes to the design increase cost and schedule as the design progresses into implementation. Human Systems Integration uses tools such as mockups, Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality and human simulations early in the design process to evaluate designs for usability, operability, and maintainability. This early design influence provides cost and schedule savings during manufacturing and operations. Examples of how MSFC EV74 Human Systems Integration Team have used these tools to evaluate hardware designs will be discussed.

Tanya Andrews↗
NASA NTRS2022

Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, and Psychosocial Adaptions within a Team

The Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team (the Team Risk) is primarily performance-focused, with a secondary emphasis on behavioral health outcomes resulting from team performance and interpersonal interactions. Monitoring tools, measures, and countermeasures are aimed at enhancing team processes and team composition configurations to optimize team performance and functioning. Long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) will include major challenges that could affect team performance, including social isolation, physical confinement, a small and diverse crew, communication delays between crew and ground, limited or no crew rotation or evacuation options, limited or no resupply, and a high-consequence environment. Each of these conditions will affect the crew’s coordination, cooperation, psychological well-being, and performance. Although the International Space Station (ISS) remains important for studies that require spaceflight testing and validation, the current conditions on the ISS do not adequately mimic the exploration environment that is required for National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) teams research, and thus access to terrestrial or ground-based analogs of LDEM conditions is paramount. The emphasis on analogs for research is reflected in this updated evidence review of the Team Risk, and includes data from studies conducted at isolated, confined, extreme (ICE) environments (e.g., Antarctic stations), and from several mission simulation analogs such as the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) (HERA Experiment Information Package, 2014), also known as isolated, confined, controlled (ICC) environments. These studies have characterized many team factors regarding LDEMs, and the Team Risk has now matured from risk characterization to focusing more on countermeasure development. Because spaceflight evidence for team-level research is lacking, no reliable data is available to quantify the impact of team-level variables on individual and team-level outcomes during spaceflight missions. Until recently, no systematic attempt had been undertaken to measure the performance effects of team cohesion, team composition, team training, or team-related psychosocial adaptation during spaceflight. The Team Risk is a relatively young research area for NASA, with substantial growth only since the 2000s, and with limited access to spaceflight performance data. As a result, spaceflight evidence is lacking to identify specifically what team composition, level of training, amount of cohesion, or quality of psychosocial adaptation is necessary to reduce the risk of performance errors in space. However, astronaut journals and interviews and reports from spaceflight subject matter experts (SMEs) provide testimonies that team performance during spaceflight is important for mission success and to maintain crew health. Team spaceflight data is now being collected as part of the Spaceflight Standard Measures task (Clement, 2021)—a set of core measurements related to many human spaceflight risks that are collected from astronauts before, during, and after long-duration missions. The team-related standard measures focus on team cohesion, team performance, group living, team climate, and team processes. Collection of standard measures data is ongoing and published data is not yet available. Finally, although spaceflight evidence is lacking, evidence gleaned from ground studies and spaceflight analog studies will help close the gaps outlined in the Team Risk. Ground-based studies provide quantitative evidence for team functioning in ICE environments. Academic research on teams has produced dozens of meta-analyses that can be used to understand the general relationships among team inputs (e.g., team member characteristics and skills, job context), team processes, and emergent states (e.g., coordination, communication, cooperation, cohesion, trust, shared cognition), and team outcomes (e.g., effectiveness, errors, adaptation). Teams are complex, incorporating individual characteristics of team members, but also existing at a level that is greater than the sum of its parts. Therefore, the Team Risk must be integrated with other individual-focused NASA Human Research Program (HRP) risks, including Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Sleep, and Human-Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA), and emerging research indicates more integration may needed between the Team Risk and the physiologically oriented risks. Much of this integration occurs through the Human Systems Risk Board (HSRB). A lack of team functioning may be a stressor in some circumstances, but the team often acts as a countermeasure. For example, support for team leaders and teammates can facilitate individual functioning and encourage psychological and physically healthy behaviors and attitudes. However, more research is needed regarding teams during LDEMs and the remaining gaps in the research are described in the current report.

Lauren Blackwell Landon↗
NASA NTRS2014

Exploration Technologies for Operations

Although the International Space Station (ISS) assembly has been completed, the Operations support teams continue to seek more efficient and effective ways to prepare for and conduct the ISS operations and future exploration missions beyond low earth orbit. This search for improvement has led to a significant collaboration between the NASA research and advanced software development community at NASA Ames Research Center and the Mission Operations community at NASA Johnson Space Center. Since 2001, NASA Ames Research Center has been developing and applying its advanced intelligent systems and human systems integration research to mission operations tools for several of the unmanned Mars missions operations. Since 2006, NASA Ames Research Center has also been developing and applying its advanced intelligent systems and human systems integration research to mission operations tools for manned operations support with the Mission Operations Directorate at NASA Johnson Space Center. This paper discusses the completion of the development and deployment of a variety of intelligent and human systems technologies adopted for manned mission operations. The technologies associated with the projects include advanced software systems for operations and human-centered computing. Human-centered computing looks to the processes and procedures that people do to perform any given job, then attempts to identify opportunities to improve these processes and procedures. In particular, for mission operations, improvements are quantified by specifically identifying how a tool can increase a persons efficiency, enhance a persons functional capability, andor improve the assurance of a persons decisions. The Ames development team has collaborated with the Mission Operations team to identify areas of efficiencies through technology infusion applications in support of the Plan, Train, and Fly activities of human-spaceflight mission operations. The specific applications discussed in this paper are in the areas of mission planning systems, mission operations design modeling and workflow automation, advanced systems monitoring, mission control technologies, search tools, training management tools, spacecraft solar array management, spacecraft power management, and spacecraft attitude planning. We discuss these specific projects between the Ames Research Center and the Johnson Space Centers Mission Operations Directorate, and how these technologies and projects are enhancing the mission operations support for the International Space Station. We also discuss the challenges, problems, and successes associated with long-distance and multi-year development projects between the research team at Ames and the Mission Operations customers at Johnson Space center. Finally, we discuss how these technology infusion applications and underlying technologies might be used in the future to support on-board operations of the crew and spacecraft systems as human exploration expands beyond low earth orbit to destinations in the solar system where communications delays will require more on-board autonomy and planning by the crew. Longer communications delays will require that the ground mission operations support will be primarily strategic in nature, while the tactical level of planning, systems monitoring and control, and failure analysisisolationrecovery will be the responsibility of both the spacecraft autonomous systems and the crew. Our expectation is that the technologies

mission operations↗
NASA NTRS2017

Review of Significant Incidents and Close Calls in Human Spaceflight from a Human Factors Perspective

This project aims to identify poor human factors design decisions that led to error-prone systems, or did not facilitate the flight crew making the right choices; and to verify that NASA is effectively preventing similar incidents from occurring again. This analysis was performed by reviewing significant incidents and close calls in human spaceflight identified by the NASA Johnson Space Center Safety and Mission Assurance Flight Safety Office. The review of incidents shows whether the identified human errors were due to the operational phase (flight crew and ground control) or if they initiated at the design phase (includes manufacturing and test). This classification was performed with the aid of the NASA Human Systems Integration domains. This in-depth analysis resulted in a tool that helps with the human factors classification of significant incidents and close calls in human spaceflight, which can be used to identify human errors at the operational level, and how they were or should be minimized. Current governing documents on human systems integration for both government and commercial crew were reviewed to see if current requirements, processes, training, and standard operating procedures protect the crew and ground control against these issues occurring in the future. Based on the findings, recommendations to target those areas are provided.

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA's UAS NAS Access Project

The vision of the Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Integration in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project is "A global transportation system which allows routine access for all classes of UAS." The goal of the UAS Integration in the NAS Project is to "contribute capabilities that reduce technical barriers related to the safety and operational challenges associated with enabling routine UAS access to the NAS." This goal will be accomplished through a two-phased approach based on development of system-level integration of key concepts, technologies and/or procedures, and demonstrations of integrated capabilities in an operationally relevant environment. Phase 1 will take place the first two years of the Project and Phase 2 will take place the following three years. The Phase 1 and 2 technical objectives are: Phase 1: Developing a gap analysis between current state of the art and the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) UAS Concept of Operations . Validating the key technical areas identified by this Project . Conducting initial modeling, simulation, and flight testing activities . Completing Sub-project Phase 1 deliverables (spectrum requirements, comparative analysis of certification methodologies, etc.) and continue Phase 2 preparation (infrastructure, tools, etc.) Phase 2: Providing regulators with a methodology for developing airworthiness requirements for UAS, and data to support development of certifications standards and regulatory guidance . Providing systems-level, integrated testing of concepts and/or capabilities that address barriers to routine access to the NAS. Through simulation and flight testing, address issues including separation assurance, communications requirements, and human systems integration in operationally relevant environments. The UAS in the NAS Project will demonstrate solutions in specific technology areas, which will address operational/safety issues related to UAS access to the NAS. Since the resource allocation for this Project is limited ($150M over the five years), the focus is on reducing the technical barriers where NASA has unique capabilities. As a result, technical areas, such as Sense and Avoid (SAA) and beyond line of sight command and control will not be addressed. While these are critical barriers to UAS access, currently, there is a great deal of global effort being exercised to address these challenge areas. Instead, specific technology development in areas where there is certainty that NASA can advance the research to high technology readiness levels will be the Project's focus. Specific sub-projects include Separation Assurance, Human Systems Integration, Communications, Certification, and Integrated Test and Evaluation. Each sub-project will transfer technologies to relevant key stakeholders and decision makers through research transition teams, technology forums, or through other analogous means.

Johnson, Charles W.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Task Load Management in Earth Independent Medical Operations

BACKGROUND: Medical care in spaceflight carries a high task load and can easily overwhelm a small crew. Present day operations in low Earth orbit (LEO) offload most medical tasks to ground teams in mission control. This team includes dozens of flight surgeons, specialists, and engineers and supports the on-orbit crew in monitoring environmental systems, tracking medications, guiding procedures, providing expert advice, and many other tasks. However, the physical limitations of the speed of light and technical limitations of bandwidth, channel capacity, and signal processing mean that missions beyond LEO cannot rely on this level of telemedical support. The further we travel from Earth the more these tasks will fall on the shoulders of the crew and the greater the risk of task saturation to the wellbeing of the crew and the success of the mission. Exploration class space crews will need progressively more robust systems for managing task load as they progress further out in space. OVERVIEW: Medical task management systems will need to assist with two broad categories of tasks; cognitively intensive tasks and procedure execution tasks. In both cases the goal is for the systems to operate in the background with minimal human-in-the-loop intervention. To accomplish this such systems will need to be designed with careful consideration for human factors and human systems integration to maximize efficiency, minimize alarm fatigue, and avoid inadvertently increasing task loads. Finally, the key domains of space medicine tasking can be used to map present day and near future technologies to the areas where they are best suited to support and identify gaps which can be targeted for research and development. DISCUSSION: Task load is a major challenge for Earth Independent Medical Operations to overcome. It will require careful coordination between experts in a variety of fields paying attention to human factors and human systems integration as well as technical and medical expertise. If done well medical task management systems can handle many of the tasks currently run by humans in mission control and enable human crews to maintain terrestrial standards of care in the extraterrestrial environment.

Dana Levin↗
NASA NTRS2016

Integrating Spaceflight Human System Risk Research

NASA is working to increase the likelihoods of human health and performance success during exploration missions, and subsequent crew long-term health. To manage the risks in achieving these goals, a system modeled after a Continuous Risk Management framework is in place. "Human System Risks" (Risks) have been identified, and approximately 30 are being actively addressed by NASA's Human Research Program (HRP). Research plans for each of HRP's Risks have been developed and are being executed. Ties between the research efforts supporting each Risk have been identified, however, this has been in an ad hoc fashion. There is growing recognition that solutions developed to address the full set of Risks covering medical, physiological, behavioral, vehicle, and organizational aspects of the exploration missions must be integrated across Risks and disciplines. We will discuss how a framework of factors influencing human health and performance in space is being applied as the backbone for bringing together sometimes disparate information relevant to the individual Risks. The resulting interrelated information is allowing us to identify and visualize connections between Risks and research efforts in a systematic and standardized way. We will discuss the applications of the visualizations and insights to research planning, solicitation, and decision-making processes.

Mindock, J.↗