Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human Systems”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2010

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

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

Holubec, Keith↗
DOE OSTI2020

An Integrated Energy Systems Prototype Human-System Interface for a Steam Extraction Loop System to Support Joint Electricity-Hydrogen Flexible Operations

Due to increasing economic competition from renewables and combined-cycle natural gas plants, nuclear power plants are looking toward flexible operations to enhance their cost competitiveness. The Integrated Energy Systems project under the Light Water Reactor Sustainability program of the U.S. Department of Energy focuses on joint electricity-hydrogen flexible operations. Joint electricity-hydrogen flexible operations entail the nuclear power plant diverting thermal energy via main steam to a hydrogen production plant located nearby. The steam serves to enhance the efficiency of the hydrogen production. Furthermore, high temperature electrolysis requires a large amount of electricity, which the plant can also provide. The plant provides steam and electricity to the hydrogen plant throughout the day, but during peak demand hours the nuclear power plant returns to solely providing electricity to meet the high demand. Through this flexible concept of operations, the plant can optimize the thermal energy it produces without having to maneuver the power of the plant. This report documents the human factors process to design and develop a prototype human-system interface for the steam extraction loop that serves as the conduit between the nuclear power plant and the adjacent hydrogen plant. The design process followed the human factors guidelines set by NUREG-0711, Human Factors Engineering Program Review Model (O’Hara, Higgins, & Fleger, 2012), and expanded upon by the Guideline for Operational Nuclear Usability and Knowledge Elicitation (GONUKE; Boring, Ulrich, Joe, & Lew, 2015; Boring, Lew, & Ulrich, 2016). The design process entailed operator interviews to determine the concept of operations for the steam extraction loop, a review and adaptation of digital interface design concepts developed by the team in prior projects, an iterative design process, and reviews conducted by both operators and human factors experts. Several versions of the prototype human-system interface were developed. Operators were interviewed to determine what design features they found useful and would like to see in the interface. The design underwent a review by human factors experts against NUREG-0700, Human Interface Design Review Guidelines (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2019), to ensure compliance with the latest human factors standards for digital interfaces in nuclear applications. The design was then prototyped as a functional windows-based application integrated with the Generic Pressurized Water Reactor simulator modified to include the steam extraction loop. The simulation is supported by the Human Systems Simulation Laboratory at Idaho National Laboratory, which supports operator-in-the-loop testing. This is an ongoing project and the next phase of the project entails performing an operator-in-the-loop usability study to evaluate the interface and examine the proposed concept of operations to extraction steam from the nuclear power plant for delivery to the coupled hydrogen production plant.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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

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

Daniel M Buckland↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA-STD-3001, Space Flight Human-System Standard and the Human Integration Design Handbook

NASA-STD-3001 Space Flight Human-System Standard Volume 1, Crew Health, Volume 2, Human Factors, Habitability and Environmental Health, and the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH) have replaced the Man-Systems Integration Standards (MSIS), NASA-STD-3000. For decades, NASA-STD-3000 was a significant contribution to human spaceflight programs and to human-systems integration. However, with research program and project results being realized, advances in technology, and the availability of new information in a variety of topic areas, the time had arrived to update this extensive suite of standards and design information. NASA-STD-3001, Volume 2 contains the Agency level standards from the human and environmental factors disciplines that ensure human spaceflight operations are performed safely, efficiently, and effectively. The HIDH is organized in the same sequence and serves as the companion document to NASA-STD-3001, Volume 2, providing a compendium of human spaceflight history and knowledge. The HIDH is intended to aid interpretation of NASA-STD-3001, Volume 2 standards and to provide guidance for requirement writers and vehicle and habitat designers. Keywords Human Factors, Standards, Environmental Factors, NASA

Whitmore, Mihriban↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

High Value Risk Targets in Human System Risk

The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) has the overall responsibility for tracking the evolution of the top ~30 human system risks that it has identified to be associated with human spaceflight. The Board is also charged with maintaining a consistent, integrated process to mitigate those risks, and developing evidence-based risk posture recommendations. Each Risk Custodian Team (RCT) identifies High Value Risk Mitigation Targets (HVRMT) that have the highest likelihood or greatest impact in reducing their risk. These typically include areas where there are major gaps in knowledge or capability; or other targets that promise to yield returns worthy of investments in time, money and other resources by stakeholders interested in reducing Human System Risk. As part of the review of each risk the Board members consider and discuss the HVRMT statements, which are then approved by the Board Chair. High Value Risk Mitigation Targets can include research activities funded by the Human Research Program, but often involve recommending standards, monitoring, or other operational goals to reduce risk. This presentation will discuss common themes and highlights of the approved HVRTs to inform IWS attendees and the wider research community.

D M Buckland↗
NASA NTRS2022

Directed Acyclic Graphs: A Tool for Understanding the NASA Human Spaceflight System Risks - Human System Risk Board

For over a decade, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has tracked and configuration-managed approximately 30 risks to astronaut health and performance that occur before, during and after spaceflight. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB), a Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Board at NASA Johnson Space Center, is the entity responsible for identifying, assessing, analyzing, and monitoring the official understanding of the risk or risk posture for each of the Human System Risks and determining – based on evaluation of the available evidence – when that risk posture changes. The ultimate purpose of tracking and researching these risks is to find ways to reduce the risk that astronaut crews face during spaceflight. Historically, research, development and operations relevant to one risk have been conducted in isolation from other risks; these individual risk ‘silos’ enabled initial characterization of each specific risk. In spaceflight however, the impact of exposure to risk for astronaut crews is cumulative, and not independent of exposures or other risks, as all the adverse effects of the spaceflight environment begin at launch, continue throughout the duration of the mission and in some cases across the lifetime of the crews. In January of 2020, the HSRB at NASA embarked on a pilot project designed to assess the potential value of causal diagramming as a tool to facilitate understanding of these cumulative and interdependent effects as applied within Human System Risk management. This process uses directed acyclic graphs as a means of formalizing a shared mental model of the causal flow of risk among Risk Board stakeholders. Initially this model was to improve communication among those stakeholders, but the potential value exceeds communication alone. The causal diagrams are formulated as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to function as a type of knowledge graph for reference for the board and its stakeholders. This document is a sister document to NASA/TM 20220006812 Directed Acyclic Graph Guidance Documentation (1). In that document, the basic guidance for creating and standardizing directed acyclic graphs as tools for cross-risk analysis is provided. This document contains the initial configuration managed DAGs that were created as a result of applying those principles. These initial versions were accepted by the HSRB in January of 2022. Each of the Human System Risks are represented by a DAG that has been reviewed by the larger Human Health and Performance community at NASA including life scientists, physical scientists, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, exercise specialists and more. These results show the starting point for Human System Risk DAGs as shared mental models and communication aids across the boundaries of the various expertise needed to understand and mitigate the human risks in spaceflight. Because they are a starting point, each of these DAGs can be expected to change over time as new or refined evidence becomes available. The process for updating these DAGs can be found in the JSC-66705 Human System Risk Management Plan (2) that is publicly available on the NASA Technical Reports Server.

Erik L. Antonsen↗
DOE OSTI2021

EXTRACTING HUMAN RELIABILITY FINDINGS FROM HUMAN FACTORS STUDIES IN THE HUMAN SYSTEMS SIMULATION LABORATORY

Modernization of U.S. nuclear power plants (NPPs) is widespread, with most plants currently replacing and transitioning equipment, control systems, and human system interfaces (HSI)s from analog to digital displays. This conversion remedies the obsolescence of analog parts along with needs for increased intuitiveness of design, safety, and capabilities. The Human Factors and Reliability team at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) carried out twelve control room modernization studies in the newly designed Human Systems Simulation Laboratory (HSSL) over nine years. The HSSL was constructed as a testbed for evaluating human factors techniques and performance measures, HSI frameworks, and cutting-edge operational concepts in NPPs. Installing a full-scope training simulator enabled direct design and evaluation work on the same instrumentation and control (I&C) and HSIs located at U.S. plants. The subsequent addition of glass top bays afforded crews opportunities to implement operations via the simulator using full-scale representations of their home NPP. Additionally, functional HSI prototypes were created, providing an environment for operator-in-the-loop benchmark studies. The HSSL has assisted in upgrades of six commercial NPP control rooms and served as an invaluable proving ground for new NPP operations technology. Human reliability analysis (HRA) was not originally the focus of the studies; however, data relating to HRA such as type and frequency of human errors can be extracted from the studies. INL is currently extracting data from the HSSL study reports to apprise how information gathered from simulation, HSI, and other related studies can create a broad look across different data sources to help inform HRA methods.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS2009

Space Flight Human System Standards (SFHSS): Human Factors, Habitability and Environmental Factors" and Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH) - Volume 2

This viewgraph presentation reviews the standards for space flight hardware based on human capabilities and limitations. The contents include: 1) Scope; 2) Applicable documents; 3) General; 4) Human Physical Characteristics and Capabilities; 5) Human Performance and Cognition; 6) Natural and Induced Environments; 7) Habitability Functions; 8) Architecture; 9) Hardware and Equipment; 10) Crew Interfaces; 11) Spacesuits; 12) Operatons: Reserved; 13) Ground Maintenance and Assembly: Reserved; 14) Appendix A-Reference Documents; 15) Appendix N-Acronyms and 16) Appendix C-Definition. Volume 2 is supported by the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH)s.

Davis, Jeffrey R.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Human-System Interface Risk Analysis Based on Redundancy-guided Systems-theoretic Hazard Analysis and Human Reliability Analysis

Human-system interfaces (HSIs) play an important role in enabling operators to communicate with the nuclear power plant (NPP) side. Getting the information required to understand a NPP’s current status or perform necessary actions for responding to a given operational context are representative operator tasks performed using HSIs. To date, HSIs have been mainly evaluated in the context of human reliability analysis (HRA). However, the current HSI evaluation that occurs during HRA may be challengeable on two fronts: (1) reflecting the unique characteristics of HSI systems and (2) considering situations in which HSIs are poorly operated due to software/hardware malfunctions. Accordingly, this study proposes an approach for specifically evaluating HSIs for digital instrumentation and controls (DI&C) systems, using Redundancy-guided Systems-theoretic Hazard Analysis (RESHA) and HRA. RESHA is a method for analyzing DI&C systems with redundancy features. In this study, we investigate how HSIs are evaluated in existing HRA methods, and what challenges exist in the current approaches. To better evaluate HSIs for DI&C systems, this study modifies the existing HSI evaluation process by additionally modeling the HSI back- and front- ends. In this paper, a HSI fault tree for the APR1400 DI&C system is introduced through a piping and instrumentation diagram. It then touches upon what aspects of the suggested method must be further researched.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Identified Risk of Adverse Outcomes due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture

The NASA Human System Risk Board (HSRB) is responsible for tracking the evolution of the top ~30 human system risks identified to be associated with human spaceflight. As part of this process, the Board is charged with maintaining a consistent, integrated process to evaluate those risks and developing evidence-based risk posture recommendations. Risks are ranked by likelihood and consequence. Intermediate causal relationships between risk contributing factors and countermeasures that link hazards to outcomes are described using Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs). The DAGs are also useful for identifying common factors and countermeasures across the top 30 risks as well as communicating how astronaut exposure to spaceflight hazards leads to meaningful mission-level health and performance outcomes. One of the top risks tracked by the HSRB is The Risk of Adverse Outcomes Due to Inadequate Human-Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA). This risk captures the possibility that due to decreasing real-time ground support during missions beyond LEO, crew will be unable to adequately respond to unanticipated critical malfunctions or detect safety-critical procedural errors. The HSIA risk is ranked red (high) for Lunar surface and Mars missions due to the probability of Loss of Crew and Loss of Mission consequences. This paper describes the evidence that supports the HSIA risk ranking and presents the central narrative of the HSIA risk DAG-- i.e., anomaly detection, diagnosis, intervention, and task performance. Characterizations of the current state of practice for each of the DAG’s central nodes and the future tools needed for successful anomaly response are provided.

human-systems integration architecture↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human System Risk Changes in 2021

The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) has the overall responsibility for tracking the evolution of the top ~30 human system risks that it has identified to be associated with human spaceflight. As part of this process, the Board is charged with maintaining a consistent, integrated process to mitigate those risks, and developing evidence-based risk posture recommendations. Risks are re-evaluated in a Continuous Risk Management (CRM) process. This session will summarize the risk posture changes that have occurred in the last year and what high level research, performance, and epidemiologic data have informed those changes. Human System Risks updated in 2021 include: Dynamic Loads, Sensorimotor, EVA, Crew Egress, Behavioral Medicine, Electrical Shock, Human System Integration Architecture (HSIA), Toxic Exposure, Bone Fracture, Cardiovascular, Medical Conditions, Renal Stone, CO2 Exposure, and Pharmacology.

Mary Van Baalen↗
NASA NTRS2019

Implementation of Human System Integration Workshop at NASA for Human Spaceflight

The human is a key element in the complex system of systems underlying space exploration missions. As a critical system, its operating bands and requirements need to be characterized and integrated with other systems. Optimal integration of the human system with hardware and software elements has an impact on multiple aspects of mission execution, including human health and performance, risk mitigation, effective design and functionality, enhanced safety, and reduced lifecycle costs. The field of Human Systems Integration (HSI) represents an interdisciplinary and comprehensive cross-cutting approach encompassing technical and management processes for integrating human as a system consideration and objective within and across all other system components and multiple domains. In addition to human activities, HSI covers training, operations and support dimensions. Moreover, HSI is an essential enabler to systems engineering practice, emphasizing human system aspects toward optimizing fully integrated system of systems performance while systematically infusing the needs of all users during the earliest stages of development. Consistent with the National Space Exploration Campaign, NASA is developing the Gateway, a lunar orbiting platform that will serve as astronaut habitat, support transit to deep space, validate new technologies and systems, and function as a science laboratory and communications hub, among other uses. It is an essential element of a phase that will extend human exploration into deep space through evolvable infrastructure and advanced technology, supporting assembly and logistics of other exploration architecture elements. In an effort to explore the current status and forward plan of HSI implementation in the mission (system of systems) lifecycle, the HSI Employee Resource Group conducted an HSI workshop using the Gateway Program as a case study. It revealed how different organizations at the Johnson Space Center incorporate HSI in their processes in preparation for the development and operation of the Gateway. The workshop focused on HSI methodology for implementation of the six NASA HSI domains: Human Factors Engineering, Operations Resources, Habitability and Environment, Maintainability and Supportability, Safety, and Training. Results from the workshop are reported on this paper, as well as some historical background of HSI at NASA, and the success in using an Employee Resource Group to promote technical knowledge. The authors hope that this information can be used to disseminate best practices for translational applications to other space exploration systems.

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗
NASA NTRS2019

Implementation of Human System Integration Workshop at NASA for Human Spaceflight

The human is a key element in the complex system of systems underlying space exploration missions. As a critical system, its operating bands and requirements need to be characterized and integrated with other systems. Optimal integration of the human system with hardware and software elements has an impact on multiple aspects of mission execution, including human health and performance, risk mitigation, effective design and functionality, enhanced safety, and reduced lifecycle costs. The field of Human Systems Integration (HSI) represents an interdisciplinary and comprehensive cross-cutting approach encompassing technical and management processes for integrating human as a system consideration and objective within and across all other system components and multiple domains. In addition to human activities, HSI covers training, operations and support dimensions. Moreover, HSI is an essential enabler to systems engineering practice, emphasizing human system aspects toward optimizing fully integrated system of systems performance while systematically infusing the needs of all users during the earliest stages of development. Consistent with the National Space Exploration Campaign, NASA is developing the Gateway, a lunar orbiting platform that will serve as astronaut habitat, support transit to deep space, validate new technologies and systems, and function as a science laboratory and communications hub, among other uses. It is an essential element of a phase that will extend human exploration into deep space through evolvable infrastructure and advanced technology, supporting assembly and logistics of other exploration architecture elements. In an effort to explore the current status and forward plan of HSI implementation in the mission (system of systems) lifecycle, the HSI Employee Resource Group conducted an HSI workshop using the Gateway Program as a case study. It revealed how different organizations at the Johnson Space Center incorporate HSI in their processes in preparation for the development and operation of the Gateway. The workshop focused on HSI methodology for implementation of the six NASA HSI domains: Human Factors Engineering, Operations Resources, Habitability and Environment, Maintainability and Supportability, Safety, and Training. Results from the workshop are reported on this paper, as well as some historical background of HSI at NASA, and the success in using an Employee Resource Group to promote technical knowledge. The authors hope that this information can be used to disseminate best practices for translational applications to other space exploration systems.

Silva-Martinez, Jackelynne↗