Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “crew 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.

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 NTRS1976

Crew safety

Crew safety in the manned spaceflight is usually associated with a small group for safety and quality assurance. Crew safety is actually an integral part of all program phases from conception through final implementation. Factors associated with improving safety at each phase of development are discussed. Topics discussed include design, manufacture, hardware/software checkout, management reviews, training and simulation, and data retrieval and analysis. Crew safety is best accomplished by flying a successful mission.

Slayton, D. K.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Commercial Crew Program Crew Safety Strategy

The purpose of this presentation is to explain to our international partners (ESA and JAXA) how NASA is implementing crew safety onto our commercial partners under the Commercial Crew Program. It will show them the overall strategy of 1) how crew safety boundaries have been established; 2) how Human Rating requirements have been flown down into programmatic requirements and over into contracts and partner requirements; 3) how CCP SMA has assessed CCP Certification and CoFR strategies against Shuttle baselines; 4) Discuss how Risk Based Assessment (RBA) and Shared Assurance is used to accomplish these strategies.

Crew Safety↗
NASA NTRS1984

Space Station crew safety - Human factors model

A model of the various human factors issues and interactions that might affect crew safety is developed. The first step addressed systematically the central question: How is this Space Station different from all other spacecraft? A wide range of possible issue was identified and researched. Five major topics of human factors issues that interacted with crew safety resulted: Protocols, Critical Habitability, Work Related Issues, Crew Incapacitation and Personal Choice. Second, an interaction model was developed that would show some degree of cause and effect between objective environmental or operational conditions and the creation of potential safety hazards. The intermediary steps between these two extremes of causality were the effects on human performance and the results of degraded performance. The model contains three milestones: stressor, human performance (degraded) and safety hazard threshold. Between these milestones are two countermeasure intervention points. The first opportunity for intervention is the countermeasure against stress. If this countermeasure fails, performance degrades. The second opportunity for intervention is the countermeasure against error. If this second countermeasure fails, the threshold of a potential safety hazard may be crossed.

Cohen, M. M.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space station crew safety: Human factors interaction model

A model of the various human factors issues and interactions that might affect crew safety is developed. The first step addressed systematically the central question: How is this space station different from all other spacecraft? A wide range of possible issue was identified and researched. Five major topics of human factors issues that interacted with crew safety resulted: Protocols, Critical Habitability, Work Related Issues, Crew Incapacitation and Personal Choice. Second, an interaction model was developed that would show some degree of cause and effect between objective environmental or operational conditions and the creation of potential safety hazards. The intermediary steps between these two extremes of causality were the effects on human performance and the results of degraded performance. The model contains three milestones: stressor, human performance (degraded) and safety hazard threshold. Between these milestones are two countermeasure intervention points. The first opportunity for intervention is the countermeasure against stress. If this countermeasure fails, performance degrades. The second opportunity for intervention is the countermeasure against error. If this second countermeasure fails, the threshold of a potential safety hazard may be crossed.

Cohen, M. M.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Nuclear electric propulsion operational reliability and crew safety study: NEP systems/modeling report

The objective of this study was to establish the initial quantitative reliability bounds for nuclear electric propulsion systems in a manned Mars mission required to ensure crew safety and mission success. Finding the reliability bounds involves balancing top-down (mission driven) requirements and bottom-up (technology driven) capabilities. In seeking this balance we hope to accomplish the following: (1) provide design insights into the achievability of the baseline design in terms of reliability requirements, given the existing technology base; (2) suggest alternative design approaches which might enhance reliability and crew safety; and (3) indicate what technology areas require significant research and development to achieve the reliability objectives.

Karns, James↗
NASA NTRS1983

Space-station crew-safety requirements

Baseline rescue and survival concepts for future space station crews are described. Preliminary studies are being carried out to identify potential threats to crew safety and means to counteract the dangers. Significant factors being considered include the type of threat, the warning time, the number of crewmembers, strategies for protection of the crew (including life-support measures redundancy), and the dependence of space station crews on ground personnel. Attention is being given to the impact of safety devices on the space station geometry and cost, as well as the equipment necessary to maintain the crew in a psychological status positive enough to cope with emergencies. Typical threats would be fire, crewmember illness or injury, and abandonment of the station. A Shuttle launch could take up to 12 days, while equipping the space station with an emergency return capsule would permit return on the same day as the capsule was occupied.

Witcofski, R. D.↗
NASA NTRS1962

CREW SAFETY AND SURVIVAL ASPECTS OF THE LUNAR-LANDING MISSION

Some of the safety and survival aspects of the manned lunar-landing mission are examined. The conditions requiring abort to the earth, lunar orbit, and lunar surface are determined. Some of the possible design requirements to permit abort to lunar orbit or surface are indicated. Lunar orbital and surface survival kits are described, and the stationing of such kits in lunar orbit and at the intended landing site is proposed.

Safety↗
NASA NTRS1973

Space shuttle sortie payload crew safety and systems compatibility criteria. Volume 1: Executive summary

As part of the effort to reduce the costs of shuttle payloads, this study was performed to determine the minimum, mandatory design and verification criteria necessary to insure that sortie payloads are compatible with the space shuttle system; distinguishing them from those criteria related primarily to mission success, configuration choices, management prerogatives, or other cost-benefit variables which are, therefore, discretionary to payload project management. It was concluded that utilization of the mandatory design criteria, presented in this report, as the basis for sortie payload specifications will produce basic systems compatibility between the orbiter and its sortie payloads at reduced costs. Also, when additional criteria are generated due to changes in subsystems, designs, or guidelines, the categorization methodology developed can aid managerial decision-making concerning these criteria. To a limited degree, the compatibility criteria as defined in this study reflect a portion of the total system safety effort involved in a manned space program.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space Station crew safety alternatives study. Volume 5: Space Station safety plan

The Space Station Safety Plan has been prepared as an adjunct to the subject contract final report, suggesting the tasks and implementation procedures to ensure that threats are addressed and resolution strategy options identified and incorporated into the space station program. The safety program's approach is to realize minimum risk exposure without levying undue design and operational constraints. Safety objectives and risk acceptances are discussed.

Mead, G. H.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space Station crew safety alternatives study. Volume 4: Appendices

The scope of this study considered the first 15 years of accumulated space station concepts for Initial Operational Capability (10C) during the early 1990's. Twenty-five threats to the space station are identified and selected threats addressed as impacting safety criteria, escape and rescue, and human factors safety concerns. Of the 25 threats identified, eight are discussed including strategy options for threat control: fire, biological or toxic contamination, injury/illness, explosion, loss of pressurization, radiation, meteoroid penetration and debris.

Peercy, R. L., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space station crew safety alternatives study. Volume 3: Safety impact of human factors

The first 15 years of accumulated space station concepts for Initial Operational Capability (IOC) during the early 1990's was considered. Twenty-five threats to the space station are identified and selected threats addressed as impacting safety criteria, escape and rescue, and human factors safety concerns. Of the 25 threats identified, eight are discussed including strategy options for threat control: fire, biological or toxic contamination, injury/illness, explosion, loss of pressurization, radiation, meteoroid penetration and debris. Of particular interest here is volume three (of five volumes) pertaining to the safety impact of human factors.

Rockoff, L. A.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Space station crew safety alternatives study, volume 1

The first 15 years of accumulated space station concepts for initial operational capability (IOC) during the early 1990's were considered. Twenty-five threats to the space station are identified and selected threats addressed as impacting safety criteria, escape and rescue, and human factors safety concerns. Of the 25 threats identified, eight are discussed including strategy options for threat control: fire, biological or toxic contamination, injury/illness, explosion, loss of pressurization, radiation, meteoroid penetration and debris.

Peercy, R. L., Jr.↗