SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY”

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 109 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2014

Evaluation of Human and Anthropomorphic Test Device Finite Element Models under Spaceflight Loading Conditions

In an effort to develop occupant protection standards for future multipurpose crew vehicles, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has looked to evaluate the test device for human occupant restraint with the modification kit (THOR‐K) anthropomorphic test device (ATD) in relevant impact test scenarios. With the allowance and support of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, NASA has performed a series of sled impact tests on the latest developed THOR‐K ATD. These tests were performed to match test conditions from human volunteer data previously collected by the U.S. Air Force. The objective of this study was to evaluate the THOR‐K finite element (FE) model and the Total HUman Model for Safety (THUMS) FE model with respect to the tests performed. These models were evaluated in spinal and frontal impacts against kinematic and kinetic data recorded in ATD and human testing. Methods: The FE simulations were developed based on recorded pretest ATD/human position and sled acceleration pulses measured during testing. Predicted responses by both human and ATD models were compared to test data recorded under the same impact conditions. The kinematic responses of the models were quantitatively evaluated using the ISO‐metric curve rating system. In addition, ATD injury criteria and human stress/strain data were calculated to evaluate the risk of injury predicted by the ATD and human model, respectively. Results: Preliminary results show well‐correlated response between both FE models and their physical counterparts. In addition, predicted ATD injury criteria and human model stress/strain values are shown to positively relate. Kinematic comparison between human and ATD models indicates promising biofidelic response, although a slightly stiffer response is observed within the ATD. Conclusion: As a compliment to ATD testing, numerical simulation provides efficient means to assess vehicle safety throughout the design process and further improve the design of physical ATDs. The assessment of the THOR‐K and THUMS FE models in a spaceflight testing condition is an essential first step to implementing these models in the computational evaluation of spacecraft occupant safety. Promising results suggest future use of these models in the aerospace field.

Putnam, Jacob P.↗

NASA NTRS2023

Numerical Investigation of Occupant Injury Risks During A Realistic Transport Aircraft Crash Conditions

Researchers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) have conducted a full-scale crash test of a Fokker F28 MK1000 aircraft to investigate the performance of transport aircraft under realistic crash conditions. This crash test was computationally recreated using finite element (FE) human body models (HBMs) to further explore potential injury risks to occupants and analyze the utilization of HBMs in the aerospace crash environment. The Global Human Body Model Consortium (GHBMC) male 50th percentile occupant detailed model (v6.0) and the Toyota Human Model for Safety (THUMS) male 50th percentile occupant model (v6.1) were selected to be used in the crash simulations. The HBMs were simulated in conditions matching those of anthropomorphic test device (ATD) experiments included within the aircraft cabin during the crash test. Seven occupant locations within the cabin were simulated utilizing each of the models. The models were positioned in a neutral upright posture with hands resting on the legs and the feet contacting the floor. Head, brain, neck, and lumbar vertebra injury metrics were calculated for all trials. Both HBM models required minor modifications to stabilize these simulations. The GHBMC model required added erosion for six parts while the THUMS model only required one in order to complete the full simulation. The THUMS model, however, required a much smaller timestep for stability and therefore took significantly more computational time. In addition the GHBMC model includes integrated instrumentation while the THUMS model requires development and implementation of instrumentation. Both models predicted 100% injury risk for lumbar vertebra fracture in all test conditions. This prediction was in family with high lumbar load values measured by the ATDs during the crash test. The THUMS model consistently predicted lower injury risks than the GHBMC model in all three other metrics varying depending on the crash pulse. Overall, the THUMS model required less modifications to allow for this study. However, the GHBMC models significantly faster run time and integrated instrumentation make it a more intuitive model for this research.

Crashworthiness↗

NASA NTRS2019

Air Vehicle Factors Affecting Occupant Health, Comfort, and Productivity

Urban Air Mobility (UAM) vehicles will need to meet the safety and comfort expectations of passengers and crews. However, existing Federal Aviation Administration airworthiness standards for airplanes and rotorcraft are unlikely to adequately address these needs. Some insight into this issue may be gained from research into NASA's approach to human-systems integration standards and guidelines that promote astronaut health, safety, and performance, since both space and UAM vehicles must consider factors such as occupant motion sickness, vibration, and sound levels. Building upon knowledge garnered from the experience of NASA, the U.S. Department of Defense, and other international organizations, this presentation will elucidate: 1) how UAM-induced flight factors can impact occupant comfort, productivity, as well as safety; and 2) how government and industry standards could be developed or revised to help assure passenger acceptance of revolutionary Vertical Take Off and Landing aircraft technologies.

Adelstein, Bernard D.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) (Orion) Occupant Protection

Dr. Nancy J. Currie, of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC), Chief Engineer at Johnson Space Center (JSC), requested an assessment of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) occupant protection as a result of issues identified by the Constellation Program and Orion Project. The NESC, in collaboration with the Human Research Program (HRP), investigated new methods associated with occupant protection for the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), known as Orion. The primary objective of this assessment was to investigate new methods associated with occupant protection for the CEV, known as Orion, that would ensure the design provided minimal risk to the crew during nominal and contingency landings in an acceptable set of environmental and spacecraft failure conditions. This documents contains the outcome of the NESC assessment. NASA/TM-2013-217380, "Application of the Brinkley Dynamic Response Criterion to Spacecraft Transient Dynamic Events." supercedes this document.

Currie-Gregg, Nancy J.↗

NASA NTRS1982

Experimental stress analysis of a thin-walled pressurized torus loaded by contact with a plane

It is pointed out that pneumatic tires have a large effect on the overall landing characteristics of an aircraft. The dynamic response upon landing and steering are crucial to the safety of the vehicle and the occupants. The present investigation has the objective to compare experimentally determined strains on an inner tube in contact with a flat plate with numerical values obtained on the basis of a finite element prediction, taking into account an employment of the Structural Analysis of General Shells (STAGS). The obtained results suggest that the clamped boundary condition utilized in the STAGS calculation is not exactly simulated by the employed test setup.

Hill, D. E.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) (Orion) Occupant Protection: Appendices - Part 1

Dr. Nancy J. Currie, of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC), Chief Engineer at Johnson Space Center (JSC), requested an assessment of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) occupant protection as a result of issues identified by the Constellation Program and Orion Project. The NESC, in collaboration with the Human Research Program (HRP), investigated new methods associated with occupant protection for the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), known as Orion. The primary objective of this assessment was to investigate new methods associated with occupant protection for the CEV, known as Orion, that would ensure the design provided minimal risk to the crew during nominal and contingency landings in an acceptable set of environmental and spacecraft failure conditions. This documents contains the appendices to the NESC assessment report. NASA/TM-2013-217380, Application of the Brinkley Dynamic Response Criterion to Spacecraft Transient Dynamic Events supersedes this document.

Currie-Gregg, Nancy J.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Space Radiation

Astronauts receive the highest occupational radiation exposure. Effective protections are needed to ensure the safety of astronauts on long duration space missions. Increased cancer morbidity or mortality risk in astronauts may be caused by occupational radiation exposure. Acute and late radiation damage to the central nervous system (CNS) may lead to changes in motor function and behavior, or neurological disorders. Radiation exposure may result in degenerative tissue diseases (non-cancer or non-CNS) such as cardiac, circulatory, or digestive diseases, as well as cataracts. Acute radiation syndromes may occur due to occupational radiation exposure.

Wu, Honglu↗

NASA NTRS1998

Advanced Air Bag Technology Assessment

As a result of the concern for the growing number of air-bag-induced injuries and fatalities, the administrators of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) agreed to a cooperative effort that "leverages NHTSA's expertise in motor vehicle safety restraint systems and biomechanics with NASAs position as one of the leaders in advanced technology development... to enable the state of air bag safety technology to advance at a faster pace..." They signed a NASA/NHTSA memorandum of understanding for NASA to "evaluate air bag to assess advanced air bag performance, establish the technological potential for improved technology (smart) air bag systems, and identify key expertise and technology within the agency (i.e., NASA) that can potentially contribute significantly to the improved effectiveness of air bags." NASA is committed to contributing to NHTSAs effort to: (1) understand and define critical parameters affecting air bag performance; (2) systematically assess air bag technology state of the art and its future potential; and (3) identify new concepts for air bag systems. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) was selected by NASA to respond to the memorandum of understanding by conducting an advanced air bag technology assessment. JPL analyzed the nature of the need for occupant restraint, how air bags operate alone and with safety belts to provide restraint, and the potential hazards introduced by the technology. This analysis yielded a set of critical parameters for restraint systems. The researchers examined data on the performance of current air bag technology, and searched for and assessed how new technologies could reduce the hazards introduced by air bags while providing the restraint protection that is their primary purpose. The critical parameters which were derived are: (1) the crash severity; (2) the use of seat belts; (3) the physical characteristics of the occupants; (4) the proximity of the occupants to the airbag module; (5) the deployment time, which includes the time to sense the need for deployment, the inflator response parameters, the air bag response, and the reliability of the air bag. The requirements for an advanced air bag technology is discussed. These requirements includes that the system use information related to: (1) the crash severity; (2) the status of belt usage; (3) the occupant category; and (4) the proximity to the air bag to adjust air bag deployment. The parameters for the response of the air bag are: (1) deployment time; (2) inflator parameters; and (3) air bag response and reliability. The state of occupant protection advanced technology is reviewed. This review includes: the current safety restraint systems, and advanced technology characteristics. These characteristics are summarized in a table, which has information regarding the technology item, the potential, and an date of expected utilization. The use of technology and expertise at NASA centers is discussed. NASA expertise relating to sensors, computing, simulation, propellants, propulsion, inflatable systems, systems analysis and engineering is considered most useful. Specific NASA technology developments, which were included in the study are: (1) a capacitive detector; (2) stereoscopic vision system; (3) improved crash sensors; (4) the use of the acoustic signature of the crash to determine crash severity; and (5) the use of radar antenna for pre-crash sensing. Information relating to injury risk assessment is included, as is a summary of the areas of the technology which requires further development.

Phen, R. L.↗

NASA NTRS1972

Wind tunnel investigation of the effect of high relative velocities on the structural integrity of birds

An experimental investigation was conducted in a supersonic wind tunnel to determine the effect a sudden high velocity headwind had on the physical deformation and structural breakup characteristics of birds. Several sizes of recently killed birds were dropped into the test section at free-stream Mach numbers ranging from 0.2 to 0.8 and photographed with high-speed motion-picture cameras. These conditions simulated flow conditions encountered when birds are ingested into the inlets of high speed aircraft, thereby constituting a safety hazard to the aircraft and its occupants. The investigation shows that, over the range of headwind conditions tested, the birds remained structurally intact and did not suffer any appreciable deformation or structural breakup.

Bresnahan, D. L.↗

NASA NTRS1994

Cabin fuselage structural design with engine installation and control system

Design requirements for the cabin, cabin system, flight controls, engine installation, and wing-fuselage interface that provide adequate interior volume for occupant seating, cabin ingress and egress, and safety are presented. The fuselage structure must be sufficient to meet the loadings specified in the appropriate sections of Federal Aviation Regulation Part 23. The critical structure must provide a safe life of 10(exp 6) load cycles and 10,000 operational mission cycles. The cabin seating and controls must provide adjustment to account for various pilot physiques and to aid in maintenance and operation of the aircraft. Seats and doors shall not bind or lockup under normal operation. Cabin systems such as heating and ventilation, electrical, lighting, intercom, and avionics must be included in the design. The control system will consist of ailerons, elevator, and rudders. The system must provide required deflections with a combination of push rods, bell cranks, pulleys, and linkages. The system will be free from slack and provide smooth operation without binding. Environmental considerations include variations in temperature and atmospheric pressure, protection against sand, dust, rain, humidity, ice, snow, salt/fog atmosphere, wind and gusts, and shock and vibration. The following design goals were set to meet the requirements of the statement of work: safety, performance, manufacturing and cost. To prevent the engine from penetrating the passenger area in the event of a crash was the primary safety concern. Weight and the fuselage aerodynamics were the primary performance concerns. Commonality and ease of manufacturing were major considerations to reduce cost.

Balakrishnan, Tanapaal↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Study of Advanced Occupant Models to Quantify Injury Risk for eVTOL Vehicles

Urban transportation is currently evolving from traditional ground-based vehicles (cars, taxis, and buses) to include air-based electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) vehicles which can be utilized for on-demand transportation, cargo transport, and emergency services. These new eVTOL vehicles are designed to be small, lightweight, and able to operate autonomously without user intervention. Safety is a big part of eventual eVTOL adoption, however gaps in the consideration of safety features exist. Anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) are used in aerospace crashworthiness standards to quantify occupant injury risk and develop improved safety designs for emergency landing situations, but the ATDs currently used in aircraft certification requirements were developed many decades ago. Developments have occurred over the years involving ATD technology, which includes a host of newer and more biofidelic ATDs such as the Test Device for Human Occupant Restraint (THOR). Increased computing power has also allowed for detailed computational human body models (HBMs) to be created, such as the Global Human Body Model Consortium (GHBMC). This study aims to assess the capability of both HBMs and new ATD designs to identify injury mechanisms within eVTOL relevant emergency landing conditions. Finite element (FE) analysis was used to expand upon full-scale and seat level impact testing conducted by researchers at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to look at effects of occupant model configurations on prediction of injury. The GHBMC HBM and THOR ATD models were simulated in the seat level test conditions to characterize differences between these advanced assessment tools and traditional ATDs in the isolated seat loading environment. Results identified key differences in the responses from each of the models utilized and compared their impact response in head, neck, and spinal injury metrics. The THOR model identified potential risks for head injuries due to head impacts on the seat, however it predicted lower spinal loads than the other occupant surrogates. The GHBMC showed distinctly different biomechanical responses compared to the ATD. The GHBMC model is much more deformable than the ATDs and it exhibited higher distribution of forces and increased sensitivity to the duration of acceleration pulses. Both models incorporated into this study identified key mechanisms for injury that should be considered for passenger safety in the development of these novel aircraft. In addition, this study demonstrated the value of FE modeling for running a variety of complex human surrogates to identify potential injury mechanisms for consideration in regulation and development of new aircraft. Continued research in this field to improve validation these models will only lead to safer aircraft and more comprehensive safety measures.

Crashworthiness↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Study of Advanced Occupant Models to Quantify Injury Risk for eVTOL Vehicles

Crashworthiness↗

NASA NTRS2007

Space Radiation Cancer Risks

Space radiation presents major challenges to astronauts on the International Space Station and for future missions to the Earth s moon or Mars. Methods used to project risks on Earth need to be modified because of the large uncertainties in projecting cancer risks from space radiation, and thus impact safety factors. We describe NASA s unique approach to radiation safety that applies uncertainty based criteria within the occupational health program for astronauts: The two terrestrial criteria of a point estimate of maximum acceptable level of risk and application of the principle of As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) are supplemented by a third requirement that protects against risk projection uncertainties using the upper 95% confidence level (CL) in the radiation cancer projection model. NASA s acceptable level of risk for ISS and their new lunar program have been set at the point-estimate of a 3-percent risk of exposure induced death (REID). Tissue-averaged organ dose-equivalents are combined with age at exposure and gender-dependent risk coefficients to project the cumulative occupational radiation risks incurred by astronauts. The 95% CL criteria in practice is a stronger criterion than ALARA, but not an absolute cut-off as is applied to a point projection of a 3% REID. We describe the most recent astronaut dose limits, and present a historical review of astronaut organ doses estimates from the Mercury through the current ISS program, and future projections for lunar and Mars missions. NASA s 95% CL criteria is linked to a vibrant ground based radiobiology program investigating the radiobiology of high-energy protons and heavy ions. The near-term goal of research is new knowledge leading to the reduction of uncertainties in projection models. Risk projections involve a product of many biological and physical factors, each of which has a differential range of uncertainty due to lack of data and knowledge. The current model for projecting space radiation cancer risk relies on the three assumptions of linearity, additivity, and scaling along with the use of population averages. We describe uncertainty estimates for this model, and new experimental data that sheds light on the accuracy of the underlying assumptions. These methods make it possible to express risk management objectives in terms of quantitative metrics, i.e., the number of days in space without exceeding a given risk level within well defined confidence limits. The resulting methodology is applied to several human space exploration mission scenarios including lunar station, deep space outpost, and a Mars mission. Factors that dominate risk projection uncertainties and application of this approach to assess candidate mitigation approaches are described.

Cucinotta, Francis A.↗

NASA NTRS2025

A Summary of Results from Vertical Drop Testing of Hybrid III and WIAMan ATDs

With the development and maturation of the Urban Air Mobility (UAM) market, many new types of electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) vehicles will be flying in the national airspace carrying goods, people or conducting operations for a variety of missions. These types of vehicles are unlike current aircraft due to their novel design and operational profile. Several considerations must be examined in areas including noise, comfort and safety in order for these vehicles to be utilized and accepted into the current airspace system. Researchers at NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) have conducted sub-scale and full-scale tests on representative eVTOL airframes and seats under a variety of dynamic impact conditions. These tests were conducted to generate data necessary to inform the development of standards in the areas specific to crashworthiness of eVTOL vehicle systems and safety. The data in this report relates to occupant responses obtained during a test campaign utilizing various makes, models, and sizes of Anthropomorphic Test Devices (ATD’s, a.k.a. crash test dummies) undergoing vertical impacts in a variety of seats. The data is intended to provide occupant behavior response and injury metrics for several anticipated impact scenarios that may occur in eVTOL operations. This report will present test data highlighting the effects of several variables on the test results. Discussions on the ATD sizes, along with comparisons between different ATD makes and types will be included. The performance of an in-house developed energy absorbing seat will be detailed, and discussions pertaining to the applicability in various loading conditions will be presented. Finally, a discussion as to the applicability of the tested results to eVTOL full-scale conditions will be included.

Dynamic Drop Testing↗

NASA NTRS2003

Associations between errors and contributing factors in aircraft maintenance

In recent years cognitive error models have provided insights into the unsafe acts that lead to many accidents in safety-critical environments. Most models of accident causation are based on the notion that human errors occur in the context of contributing factors. However, there is a lack of published information on possible links between specific errors and contributing factors. A total of 619 safety occurrences involving aircraft maintenance were reported using a self-completed questionnaire. Of these occurrences, 96% were related to the actions of maintenance personnel. The types of errors that were involved, and the contributing factors associated with those actions, were determined. Each type of error was associated with a particular set of contributing factors and with specific occurrence outcomes. Among the associations were links between memory lapses and fatigue and between rule violations and time pressure. Potential applications of this research include assisting with the design of accident prevention strategies, the estimation of human error probabilities, and the monitoring of organizational safety performance.

Professional Competence↗

NASA NTRS2014

How Well Does the Latest Anthropomorphic Test Device Mimic Human Impact Responses?

One of the goals of the NASA Occupant Protection Group is to understand the human tolerance to dynamic loading. This knowledge has to come through indirect approaches such as existing human response databases, anthropometric test devices (ATD), animal testing, post‐mortem human subjects, and models. This study investigated the biofidelity of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's ATD named the THOR (test device for human occupant restraint). If THOR responds comparably to humans, then it could potentially be used as a human surrogate to help validate space vehicle requirements for occupant protection. The THOR responses to frontal and spinal impacts (ranging from 8 to 12 G with rise times of 40, 70, and 100 ms) were measured and compared to human volunteer responses (95 trials in frontal and 58 in spinal) previously collected by the U. S. Air Force on the same horizontal impact accelerator. The impact acceleration profiles tested are within the expected range of multi‐purpose crew vehicle (MPCV) landing dynamics. A correlation score was calculated for each THOR to human comparison using CORA (CORrelation and Analysis) software. A two‐parameter beta distribution model fit was obtained for each dependent variable using maximum likelihood estimation. For frontal impacts, the THOR head x‐acceleration peak response correlated with the human response at 8 and 10‐G 100 ms but not 10‐G 70 ms. The phase lagged the human response. Head z‐acceleration was not correlated. Chest x‐acceleration was in phase, had a higher peak response, and was well correlated with lighter subjects (Cora = 0.8 for 46 kg vs. Cora = 0.4 for 126 kg). Head x‐displacement had a leading phase. Several subjects responded with the same peak displacement but the mean of the group was lower. The shoulder x‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks than the human response. For spinal impacts, the THOR head x‐acceleration was not well correlated. Head and chest z‐acceleration was in phase but had a higher peak response. Chest z‐acceleration was highly correlated with heavier subjects at lower G pulses (Cora = 0.86 for 125 kg at 8 G). The human response was variable in shoulder z‐displacement but the THOR was in phase and was comparable to the mean peak response. Head xand z‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks. Seat pan forces were well correlated, were in phase, but had a larger peak response than most subjects. The THOR does not respond to frontal and spinal impacts exactly the same way that a human does. Some responses are well matched and others are not. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of this ATD is an important first step in determining its usefulness in occupant protection at NASA

Newby, N.↗

NASA NTRS2014

How Well Does the Latest Anthropomorphic Test Device Mimic Human Impact Responses?

One of the goals of the NASA Occupant Protection Group is to understand the human tolerance to dynamic loading. This knowledge has to come through indirect approaches such as existing human response databases, anthropometric test devices (ATD), animal testing, post-‐mortem human subjects, and models. This study investigated the biofidelity of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's ATD named the THOR (test device for human occupant restraint). If THOR responds comparably to humans, then it could potentially be used as a human surrogate to help validate space vehicle requirements for occupant protection. The THOR responses to frontal and spinal impacts (ranging from 8 to 12 G with rise times of 40, 70, and 100 ms) were measured and compared to human volunteer responses (95 trials in frontal and 58 in spinal) previously collected by the U. S. Air Force on the same horizontal impact accelerator. The impact acceleration profiles tested are within the expected range of multi-‐purpose crew vehicle (MPCV) landing dynamics. A correlation score was calculated for each THOR to human comparison using CORA (CORrelation and Analysis) software. A two-‐parameter beta distribution model fit was obtained for each dependent variable using maximum likelihood estimation. For frontal impacts, the THOR head x-‐acceleration peak response correlated with the human response at 8 and 10-‐G 100 ms but not 10-‐G 70 ms. The phase lagged the human response. Head z-‐acceleration was not correlated. Chest x-‐acceleration was in phase, had a higher peak response, and was well correlated with lighter subjects (Cora = 0.8 for 46 kg vs. Cora = 0.4 for 126 kg). Head x-‐displacement had a leading phase. Several subjects responded with the same peak displacement but the mean of the group was lower. The shoulder x-‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks than the human response. For spinal impacts, the THOR head x-‐acceleration was not well correlated. Head and chest z-‐acceleration was in phase but had a higher peak response. Chest z-‐acceleration was highly correlated with heavier subjects at lower G pulses (Cora = 0.86 for 125 kg at 8 G). The human response was variable in shoulder z-‐displacement but the THOR was in phase and was comparable to the mean peak response. Head x-‐ and z-‐displacement was in phase but had higher peaks. Seat pan forces were well correlated, were in phase, but had a larger peak response than most subjects. The THOR does not respond to frontal and spinal impacts exactly the same way that a human does. Some responses are well matched and others are not. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of this ATD is an important first step in determining its usefulness in occupant protection at NASA

Newby, Nate↗

NASA NTRS2002

19th JANNAF Safety and Environmental Protection Subcommittee Meeting

This volume, the first of two volumes, is a compilation of 22 unclassified/unlimited technical papers presented at the 19th Joint Army-Navy-NASA-Air Force (JANNAF) Safety & Environmental Protection Subcommittee Meeting. The meeting was held 18-21 March 2002 at the Sheraton Colorado Springs Hotel, Colorado Springs, Colorado. Topics covered include green energetic materials and life cycle pollution prevention; space launch range safety; propellant/munitions demilitarization, recycling, and reuse: and environmental and occupational health aspects of propellants and energetic materials.

Cocchiaro, J. E.↗