Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human Health and Performance”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 145 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Retrospective Analysis of Inflight Exercise Loading and Physiological Outcomes

Astronauts perform exercise throughout their missions to counter the health declines that occur as a result of long-term exposure to weightlessness. Although all astronauts perform exercise during their missions, the specific prescriptions, and thus the mechanical loading, differs among individuals. For example, inflight ground reaction force data indicate that subject-specific differences exist in foot forces created when exercising on the second-generation treadmill (T2) [1]. The current exercise devices allow astronauts to complete prescriptions at higher intensities, resulting in greater benefits with increased efficiency. Although physiological outcomes have improved, the specific factors related to the increased benefits are unknown. In-flight exercise hardware collect data that allows for exploratory analyses to determine if specific performance factors relate to physiological outcomes. These analyses are vital for understanding which components of exercise are most critical for optimal human health and performance. The relationship between exercise performance variables and physiological changes during flight has yet to be fully investigated. Identifying the critical performance variables that relate to improved physiological outcomes is vital for creating current and future exercise prescriptions to optimize astronaut health. The specific aims of this project are: 1) To quantify the exercise-related mechanical loading experienced by crewmembers on T2 and ARED during their mission on ISS; 2) To explore relationships between exercise loading variables, bone, and muscle health changes during the mission; 3) To determine if specific mechanical loading variables are more critical than others in protecting physiology; 4) To develop methodology for operational use in monitoring accumulated training loads during crew exercise programs. This retrospective analysis, which is currently in progress, is being conducted using data from astronauts that have flown long-duration missions onboard the ISS and have had access to exercise on the T2 and the Advanced Resistive Exercise Device (ARED). The specific exercise prescriptions vary for each astronaut. General exercise summary metrics will be developed to quantify exercise intensities, volumes, and durations for each subject. Where available, ground reaction force data will be used to quantify mechanical loading experienced by each astronaut. These inflight exercise metrics will be investigated relative to changes in pre- to post-flight bone and muscle health to identify which specific variables are related with improved or degraded physiological outcomes. The information generated from this analysis will fill gaps related to typical bone loading characterization, exercise performance capability, exercise volume and efficiency, and importance of exercise hardware. In addition, methods for quantification of exercise loading for use in monitoring the exercise programs during future space missions will be explored with the intent to inform exercise scientists and trainers as to the critical aspects of inflight exercise prescriptions.

Ploutz-Snyder, L. L.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The SRP believes strongly that regularly performed in-flight crew assessments are needed in order to identify a change in health status before a medical condition becomes clinically apparent. It is this early recognition in change that constitutes the foundation of the "occupational health model" expounded in the HRP Requirements Document as a key component of the HRP risk mitigation strategy that will enable its objective of "prevention and mitigation of human health and performance risks". A regular crew status examination of physiological and clinical performance is needed. This can be accomplished through instrumented monitoring of routine embedded tasks. The SRP recommends addition of a new gap to address this action under Category 3.0 Mitigate the Risk. This new gap is closely associated with Task 4.19 which addresses the lack of adequate biomedical monitoring capabilities for performing periodic clinical status evaluations and contingency medical monitoring. A corollary to these gaps is the critical emphasis on preventive medicine, not only during pre- and post-flight phases of a mission as is the current practice, but continued into the in-flight phases of exploration class missions.

Cintron, Nitza↗
NASA NTRS2014

Practicing for Mars: The International Space Station (ISS) as a Testbed

Allows demonstration and development of exploration capabilities to help accomplish future missions sooner with less risk to crew and mission Characteristics of ISS as a testbed High fidelity human operations platform in LEO: Continuously operating habitat and active laboratory. High fidelity systems. Astronauts as test subjects. Highly experienced ground operations teams. Offers a controlled test environment.: Consequences to systems performance and decision making not offered in ground analogs International participation. Continuously improving system looking for new technology and ideas to improve operations. Technology Demos & Critical Systems Maturation. Human Health and Performance. Operations Simulations and Techniques. Exploration prep testing on ISS has been ongoing since 2012. Number of tests increasing with each ISS expedition. One Year Crew Expedition starting in Spring 2015. ROSCOSMOS and NASA are partnering on the Participating Crew are Mikhail Kornienko and Scott Kelly Majority of testing is an extension of current Human Biomedical Research investigations Plan for extending & expanding upon current operations techniques and tech demo studies ESA 10 Day Mission in Fall 2015 ESA astronaut focus on testing exploration technologies Many more opportunities throughout the life of ISS! 4/24/2014 david.h.korth@nasa.gov 4 Exploration testing

Korth, David H.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Results for the Subjective Habitability Acceptability Questionnaire From HERA C5 and C6

BACKGROUND The impact of habitability on psychological and performance outcomes is recognized as an important factor in habitat and vehicle design—especially as missions increase in length. Formal evaluation of habitability’s impact is possible using the Spaceflight Habitability Acceptability Questionnaire (SHAQ), which was psychometrically validated by Roma et al. in 2022 [1]. The SHAQ survey systematically quantifies the relationships between habitat areas (e.g., bedroom, kitchen, hygiene area, office, etc.) and behavioral health and performance (BHP) outcomes (i.e., individual and team performance, mood, stress, sleep, social interaction), and considers the moderating effects of key habitability aspects (i.e., privacy, control, convenience, efficiency, comfort, social density) on that relationship. METHOD Respondents were HERA participants from Campaign 5 and 6 (n = 32). Data from three environments were used in our SHAQ analyses: SHAQ in HERA (in-mission), SHAQ at Home (pre-mission), and SHAQ in Hotel (pre- and post-mission for C6, just pre-mission for C5). For each habitat area, respondents are asked how that area layout impacts six BHP outcomes on a 201-point visual analog scale with the anchors: impairs, has no effect, and facilitates. They also had the option to respond “Not Applicable”. Follow up questions asked why six key habitability aspects (e.g., privacy) influenced the way the habitat area affected a given outcome. Participants indicated whether a habitat area’s habitability aspects were inadequate (low score) to adequate (midpoint) to ideal (high score), using a 201-point visual analog scale as well but were binned to a 7-point scale for analyses. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION When comparing across environments, ratings of BHP outcomes were worse in HERA compared to home and pre-mission hotel, but rebounded for the post-mission hotel such that post-mission hotel rating were often higher than all previous ratings. Within HERA, ratings of how a habitat area impacted an outcome skewed towards facilitation with communal areas (i.e., galley and office) rated most facilitating. The follow up questions about why six key aspects related to habitability moderated outcomes indicated that most habitat areas were rated as having “adequate” habitability characteristics. Privacy was the only moderator with average scores below adequate for all habitat areas. The office had the most moderators scoring above adequate for all habitat areas. Ratings indicated small to moderate effects of layouts on BHP outcomes: with facilitating layouts averaging between 4 and 5, and impairing layouts averaging between 2 and 4. The sleeping module layout facilitated sleep, with ratings indicating adequate comfort but inadequate privacy. The galley layout facilitated social interaction and mood, with ratings indicating adequate efficiency and convenience. The office layout facilitated social interaction, team and individual performance, with ratings similarly indicating adequate efficiency and convenience. The hygiene module worsened individual performance, mood and stress, with ratings indicating less than adequate privacy and social density. Our findings suggest there is value in having dedicated team and individual spaces. REFERENCES [1] Roma, P. G., Landon, L.B., Spencer, C. A., Whitmire, A. M., & Williams, T. J. (2022). SHAQ: Development and Validation. Human Factors: Special Issue on Spaceflight, 65(6), 1074-1104. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was funded by the NASA Human Research Program directed task Human Factors and Behavioral Performance in HERA (PI = S. Bell) to the BHP Lab. KBR Inc. and JES Tech authors were supported by KBR’s Human Health and Performance Contract NNJ15HK11B with NASA.

behavioral health↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Medical Capability Science and Research Overview and Update

The mission of the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element is to advance medical system design and risk-informed decision making for exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit to promote human health and performance in space. To accomplish this mission, ExMC focuses on several key areas: • Investigating specific risks that are relevant for human exploration spaceflight, including in-flight medical conditions, degraded or toxic medications, and renal stones • Developing medical probabilistic risk analysis tools that are integrated with systems engineering processes to inform the medical system trade space and support the development of robust requirements • Demonstrating and defining requirements for a prototype clinical decision support system • Developing and demonstrating novel medical technologies that will improve future medical capabilities in space This presentation will focus on selected scientific and technical conceptual drivers for the Element and its current and future research risks and gaps while providing an overview of the Element’s progress in 2021 and areas of focus for 2022.

Benjamin Easter↗
NASA NTRS2015

Assessing and Promoting Functional Resilience in Flight Crews During Exploration Missions

NASA plans to send humans to Mars in about 20 years. The NASA Human Research Program supports research to mitigate the major risks to human health and performance on extended missions. However, there will undoubtedly be unforeseen events on any mission of this nature - thus mitigation of known risks alone is not sufficient to ensure optimal crew health and performance. Research should be directed not only to mitigating known risks, but also to providing crews with the tools to assess and enhance resilience, as a group and individually. We can draw on ideas from complexity theory and network theory to assess crew and individual resilience. The entire crew or the individual crewmember can be viewed as a complex system that is composed of subsystems (individual crewmembers or physiological subsystems), and the interactions between subsystems are of crucial importance for overall health and performance. An understanding of the structure of the interactions can provide important information even in the absence of complete information on the component subsystems. This is critical in human spaceflight, since insufficient flight opportunities exist to elucidate the details of each subsystem. Enabled by recent advances in noninvasive measurement of physiological and behavioral parameters, subsystem monitoring can be implemented within a mission and also during preflight training to establish baseline values and ranges. Coupled with appropriate mathematical modeling, this can provide real-time assessment of health and function, and detect early indications of imminent breakdown. Since the interconnected web of physiological systems (and crewmembers) can be interpreted as a network in mathematical terms, we can draw on recent work that relates the structure of such networks to their resilience (ability to self-organize in the face of perturbation). There are many parameters and interactions to choose from. Normal variability is an established characteristic of a healthy physiological response. Healthy coupling has been investigated less extensively, but there are cases in which too tight or too loose coupling can be problematic. This might be in inter-individual behaviors, such as sleep cycles, coordination of work and meal times, and coupled motions during communication. Less apparent are couplings of physiological systems, nevertheless examples abound of coupled systems which might be monitored: cardio-respiratory rhythms; circadian rhythms, body temperature, and sleep; stress markers and cognition, sleep, and performance; profiles of biochemical markers related to immune function and nutritional status; sensorimotor aspects such as motion sickness, ataxia, reaction time, and manual control. Tools for resilience are then the means to measure and analyze these parameters, incorporate them into appropriate models of normal variability and interconnectedness, and recognize when parameters or their couplings are outside of normal limits. What to do when a problem is identified depends on its nature. Changes can be made to crew procedures, work pacing, interpersonal interactions, sleep cycles, meal timing and content, as guided by the model. Use and continued development of these methods could not only provide tools for resilience, but also meaningful autonomous work for the crew on an extended flight.

Shelhamer, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2010

Astrobiology and the Human Exploration of Mars

In March 2007, the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG) chartered the Human Exploration of Mars Science Analysis Group (HEM-SAG), co-chaired by J. B. Garvin and J. S. Levine and consisting of about 30 Mars scientists from the U.S. and Europe. HEM-SAG was one of a half dozen teams charted by NASA to consider the human exploration of Mars. Other teams included: Mars Entry, Descent and Landing, Human Health and Performance, Flight and Surface Systems, and Heliospheric/Astrophysics. The results of these Mars teams and the development of an architecture for the human exploration of Mars were summarized in two recent publications: Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0, NASA Special Publication-2009-566 (B. G. Drake, Editor), 100 pages, July 2009 and Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0, NASA Special Publication-2009-566 Addendum (B. G. Drake, Editor), 406 pages, July 2009. This presentation summarizes the HEM-SAG conclusions on astrobiology and the search for life on Mars by humans.

Levine, Joel S.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

CHP-PRA Proof-of-Concept [Simulation] Sensitivity Assessment

An effort is underway to establish a Crew Health and Performance system (CHP) tradespace tool using a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling and simulation system. The goal of the CHP-PRA effort is to provide a means of quantifying the integrated influence of CHP functions and capabilities on risk outcome metrics associated with health, performance, and long-term health. These metrics can then be used to establish potential risk-based trades on CHP system designed functionality and capabilities. Previously, our team demonstrated a proof-of-concept PRA approach that estimated the integrated influence of exercise countermeasures on 8 human system risks (Figure 1a) with outcomes associated with health and medical risk metrics. We reported that the change in the integrated relative health risk was small (Figure 1b) and that the small change in overall risk resulted from compounding and competing contribution levels of the individual risks. This interesting observation illustrates the emergent complexity of even straightforward representations of the human health and performance risk space and the ability of PRA models to capture this balance of global risk concerns. A key question that is not addressed in the initial analysis is “even though the global risk is relatively nominal, do any of the local risks become unacceptable?” In essence, we seek to determine what relative change in the human system risks are contributing to the relatively muted sensitivity of the proof-of-concept model combined risk assessments. Evaluations at the component risk level should elucidate if any individual risk reaches a high level that is subsequentially balanced by reductions in other areas. To further understand the relative changes in the component risks in the proof-of-concept model, and to elucidate how future refinements can be targeted, a means of establishing the contributions of the robustness of the proof-of-concept approach will be demonstrated.

astronaut health↗
NASA NTRS2012

Evidence Report: Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies

The Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies is identified by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Human Research Program (HRP) as a recognized risk to human health and performance in space. The HRP Program Requirements Document (PRD) defines these risks. This Evidence Report provides a summary of the evidence that has been used to identify and characterize this risk. Given that training content, timing, intervals, and delivery methods must support crew task performance, and given that training paradigms will be different for long-duration missions with increased crew autonomy, there is a risk that operators will lack the skills or knowledge necessary to complete critical tasks, resulting in flight and ground crew errors and inefficiencies, failed mission and program objectives, and an increase in crew injuries.

Barshi, Immanuel↗
NASA NTRS2012

Human Research Program: 2012 Fiscal Year Annual Report

Crew health and performance are critical to successful human exploration beyond low Earth orbit. Risks to health and performance include physiologic effects from radiation, hypogravity, and planetary environments, as well as unique challenges in medical treatment, human factors, and support of behavioral health. The scientists and engineers of the Human Research Program (HRP) investigate and reduce the greatest risks to human health and performance, and provide essential countermeasures and technologies for human space exploration. In its seventh year of operation, the HRP continued to refine its management architecture of evidence, risks, gaps, tasks, and deliverables. Experiments continued on the International Space Station (ISS), on the ground in analog environments that have features similar to those of spaceflight, and in laboratory environments. Data from these experiments furthered the understanding of how the space environment affects the human system. These research results contributed to scientific knowledge and technology developments that address the human health and performance risks. As shown in this report, HRP has made significant progress toward developing medical care and countermeasure systems for space exploration missions which will ultimately reduce risks to crew health and performance.

Effenhauser, Laura↗
NASA NTRS2016

Risk of Performance Decrement and Crew Illness Due to an Inadequate Food System

NASA is preparing for long duration manned missions beyond low-Earth orbit that will be challenged in several ways, including long-term exposure to the space environment, impacts to crew physiological and psychological health, limited resources, and no resupply. The food system is one of the most significant daily factors that can be altered to improve human health, and performance during space exploration. Therefore, the paramount importance of determining the methods, technologies, and requirements to provide a safe, nutritious, and acceptable food system that promotes crew health and performance cannot be underestimated. The processed and prepackaged food system is the main source of nutrition to the crew, therefore significant losses in nutrition, either through degradation of nutrients during processing and storage or inadequate food intake due to low acceptability, variety, or usability, may significantly compromise the crew's health and performance. Shelf life studies indicate that key nutrients and quality factors in many space foods degrade to concerning levels within three years, suggesting that food system will not meet the nutrition and acceptability requirements of a long duration mission beyond low-Earth orbit. Likewise, mass and volume evaluations indicate that the current food system is a significant resource burden. Alternative provisioning strategies, such as inclusion of bioregenerative foods, are challenged with resource requirements, and food safety and scarcity concerns. Ensuring provisioning of an adequate food system relies not only upon determining technologies, and requirements for nutrition, quality, and safety, but upon establishing a food system that will support nutritional adequacy, even with individual crew preference and self-selection. In short, the space food system is challenged to maintain safety, nutrition, and acceptability for all phases of an exploration mission within resource constraints. This document presents the evidence for the Risk of Performance Decrement and Crew Illness Due to an Inadequate Food System and the gaps in relation to exploration, as identified by the NASA Human Research Program (HRP). The research reviewed here indicates strategies to establish methods, technologies, and requirements that increase food stability, support adequate nutrition, quality, and variety, enable supplementation with grow-pick-and-eat salad crops, ensure safety, and reduce resource use. Obtaining the evidence to establish an adequate food system is essential, as the resources allocated to the food system may be defined based on the data relating nutritional stability and food quality requirements to crew performance and health.

Douglas, Grace L.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Biomedical Monitoring By A Novel Noncontact Radio Frequency Technology Project

The area of Space Health and Medicine is one of the NASA's Space Technology Grand Challenges. Space is an extreme environment which is not conducive to human life. The extraterrestrial environment can result in the deconditioning of various human physiological systems and thus require easy to use physiological monitoring technologies in order to better monitor space crews for appropriate health management and successful space missions and space operations. Furthermore, the Space Technology Roadmap's Technology Area Breakdown Structure calls for improvements in research to support human health and performance (Technology Area 06). To address these needs, this project investigated a potential noncontact and noninvasive radio frequency-based technique of monitoring central hemodynamic function in human research subjects in response to orthostatic stress.

Portfolio↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Strategies for Quantifying Human Space Flight Performance in the Crew Health and Performance System

The Crew Health and Performance-Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CHP-PRA) team at NASA Glenn Research Center is planning a customized approach to quantify human spaceflight performance changes with respect to changes to the CHP system functions and capabilities. Using the Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAG) initiated by NASA’s Human Systems Risk Board (HSRB) [1], the team is surveying potential candidate models and novel strategies that generate metrics suitable for supporting decision making related to how the CHP system may influence human system performance risk. One such investigation includes classic Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) models. Traditionally, HRA methods estimate the occurrence of human errors and their impact on the success of an activity when designing and operating a system. While humans perceive, interpret, decide on, and carry out a course of action, the factors affecting performance and error likelihood are commonly referred to as performance shaping factors (PSFs). Originally developed to alleviate safety concerns related to nuclear power plant operations, HRA methods such as THERP [2] and CREAM [3] dismantle an activity into tasks, requiring elemental steps to be executed, and assess their failure due to predefined PSFs. In this study, we compare generic HRA methods and those that incorporate some human spaceflight aspects, such as sleep conditions (SCREAM [4]), with respect to how they may be adopted to capture performance with an intention to mitigate detrimental outcomes elucidated by the HSRB DAGs. We suggest strategies to quantify astronaut performance specific to spaceflight activities and illustrate how such concepts may help in optimizing the CHP system capabilities with respect to Artemis missions.

dag↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Exercise System (EES) Development

Exploration class missions will be required to have an exercise device that is lightweight, has a small footprint, and is capable of providing enough physical stimulus and exercise variability to be an effective countermeasure against muscle and bone loss that results from the microgravity environment. Exploration exercise device prototypes should be evaluated on the ground and in-orbit for feasibility of use in microgravity for long and short duration exploration missions and efficacy of the device to maintain multi-system health and performance. The European Enhanced Exploration Exercise Device (E4D) was selected as the exploration prototype device to be evaluated on ISS for efficacy and feasibility of use as a single multi-modality device for the exercise system for exploration missions. This effort supports the continued development, testing, and verification of E4D hardware and software, internal NASA integration (Human Health and Performance, ISS Vehicle Office, Engineering, and Flight Operations), and external integration across NASA, ESA, and the Danish Aerospace Company (DAC). Providing a feasibility and acceptability assessment from a physiological efficacy and hardware durability standpoint are critical for informing use and risk associated with use on exploration missions. Clearly defined objectives from end users, stakeholders, and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) will be tested by crewmembers during acute use sessions and long duration use of the exercise device while on ISS. This effort will include a flight study where crewmembers will be asked to exercise using only the E4D during the duration of their mission and participate in a battery of physiological testing to evaluate the efficacy. Hardware is scheduled to launch in FY25 followed by 2 years of operational use after activation and checkout. A final recommendation will be provided to the Artemis program on acceptability of the device for exploration missions. The E4D needs a vibration isolation stabilization (VIS) system that serves as a platform for the exercise hardware to protect the vehicle from loads imparted during exercise. Exploration forward VIS systems will need to protect the vehicle and provide sufficient stabilization for the exerciser during performance of all critical exercises. These enabling capabilities need to be achieved within exploration vehicle power, thermal, mass, and volume limitations.

Kent Lawrence Kalogera↗
NASA NTRS2024

NASA's Human Research Program: Evolving Collaborations to Enable the Future of Human Spaceflight

Since its formation in 2007, the NASA Human Research Program’s (HRP) mission has been to reduce human health and performance risks for spaceflight exploration missions. The program has achieved this mission primarily through work in ground analogs and on the International Space Station. Over the last three years, NASA overall has seen transformative changes with the flight of Artemis I, formation of the Commercial LEO Destinations Program, commercial flights to the ISS, and new International Partners participating in human spaceflight. NASA’s HRP has embraced these new opportunities and is collaborating on all these fronts to collect biomedical research data. Artemis I marked the arrival of NASA’s new human spaceflight exploration missions. NASA has developed a Moon-to-Mars Architecture to map out how it will use the moon to de-risk and enable Mars missions. NASA’s HRP is a critical component to develop and deliver research and technologies for future Artemis Crew Health and Performance (CHP) Systems. The program is working closely with NASA’s Moon-to-Mars Office to ensure CHP deliverables are ready to demonstrate on the moon, as we also look toward Mars, and is developing the partnership strategies required to support these deliverables. Commercial space flights, both free flyer and suborbital missions and private astronaut missions to the ISS, are providing broader opportunities and subjects to characterize the space-induced changes to the human system and to test countermeasures. To better use these opportunities to achieve its mission, HRP has been working to understand the commercial spaceflight companies’ needs and then partner with them on aspects of mutual interest. In addition, NASA HRP continues to engage in long-standing relationships with its international partners through the International Space Life Sciences Working Group (ISLSWG) and other joint international groups. The Program is now also interested in sharing its knowledge and ability to collaborate on projects of mutual interest with new countries developing capabilities for human spaceflight. The next 10 years will shape how humanity partners on exploration missions to Mars. NASA’s HRP is committed to enabling and developing collaborative strategies with commercial and international partners to keep humans safe and productive as we explore longer and further into space.

Jancy McPhee↗
NASA NTRS2014

Overview of the Contributing Factor Map and How it can Support your Research

The Contributing Factor Map (CFM) is a visual representation of a taxonomy of factors influencing human health and performance in space. This presentation will give an overview of its development and its structure. It will describe various uses of the CFM that can support researchers working within the Human Research Program (HRP) Architecture of Evidence-Risk-Gap-Task-Deliverable. For example, during the Risk phase, the CFM can be used as a "menu" to help formulate a qualitative model of the factors contributing to specific consequences of concern. It provides a reference set of factors from across the operational, vehicle design, and human domains that otherwise might not be considered if approaching a risk from a specific domain perspective. Using the CFM as a reference can increase awareness of potential cross-disciplinary collaborations for overall risk mitigation. The CFM can also be used as a framework for identifying gaps in knowledge about a risk. This identification can support the subsequent development of gaps and tasks comprising the research plan aimed at risk mitigation. Examples of these types of applications of the CFM will be discussed and information on the support available to researchers in using it will be provided.

Mindock, Jennifer A.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Advanced Technologies for Space Life Science Payloads on the International Space Station

SENSORS 2000! (S2K!) is a specialized, high-performance work group organized to provide advanced engineering and technology support for NASA's Life Sciences spaceflight and ground-based research and development programs. In support of these objectives, S2K! manages NASA's Advanced Technology Development Program for Biosensor and Biotelemetry Systems (ATD-B), with particular emphasis on technologies suitable for Gravitational Biology, Human Health and Performance, and Information Technology and Systems Management. A concurrent objective is to apply and transition ATD-B developed technologies to external, non-NASA humanitarian (medical, clinical, surgical, and emergency) situations and to stimulate partnering and leveraging with other government agencies, academia, and the commercial/industrial sectors. A phased long-term program has been implemented to support science disciplines and programs requiring specific biosensor (i.e., biopotential, biophysical, biochemical, and biological) measurements from humans, animals (mainly primates and rodents), and cells under controlled laboratory and simulated microgravity situations. In addition to the technology programs described above, NASA's Life and Microgravity Sciences and Applications Office has initiated a Technology Infusion process to identify and coordinate the utilization and integration of advanced technologies into its International Space Station Facilities. This project has recently identified a series of technologies, tasks, and products which, if implemented, would significantly increase the science return, decrease costs, and provide improved technological capability. This presentation will review the programs described above and discuss opportunities for collaboration, leveraging, and partnering with NASA.

Hines, John W.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Is Mars Sample Return Required Prior to Sending Humans to Mars?

Prior to potentially sending humans to the surface of Mars, it is fundamentally important to return samples from Mars. Analysis in Earth's extensive scientific laboratories would significantly reduce the risk of human Mars exploration and would also support the science and engineering decisions relating to the Mars human flight architecture. The importance of measurements of any returned Mars samples range from critical to desirable, and in all cases these samples will would enhance our understanding of the Martian environment before potentially sending humans to that alien locale. For example, Mars sample return (MSR) could yield information that would enable human exploration related to 1) enabling forward and back planetary protection, 2) characterizing properties of Martian materials relevant for in situ resource utilization (ISRU), 3) assessing any toxicity of Martian materials with respect to human health and performance, and 4) identifying information related to engineering surface hazards such as the corrosive effect of the Martian environment. In addition, MSR would be engineering 'proof of concept' for a potential round trip human mission to the planet, and a potential model for international Mars exploration.

biohazards↗