Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Publishers
Posted

1 min read

Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)

astronauts working in ISS
ESA (European Space Agency) astronaut and Expedition 67 Flight Engineer Samantha Cristoforetti works inside the International Space Station’s Unity module reconfiguring components for the Solid Fuel Ignition and Extinction investigation that explores fire growth and fire safety techniques in space.
NASA

Safe, breathable air is essential for crew health. Human spaceflight has involved toxicological events ranging in severity from trivial to life-threatening. Toxic exposure to chemical contaminants can originate from environmental system leaks, payload leaks, pyrolysis of polymeric materials, off-gassing of polymeric materials, use of utility compounds, propellant entry, microbial products, and human metabolism.

To ensure crew safety, these risks are mitigated by preventive measures aimed at reducing or eliminating toxic exposure events as well as by monitoring and intervention post-release to minimize impacts to crew and reduce impacts to crew health and performance as well as long-term health consequences.

Boeing’s Orbital Flight Test-2 (OFT-2) is Starliner’s second uncrewed flight test to the ISS
Boeing team members don hazmat suits as they prepare for the landing of Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner spacecraft at White Sands Missile Range’s Space Harbor, Wednesday, May 25, 2022, in New Mexico. Boeing’s Orbital Flight Test-2 (OFT-2) is Starliner’s second uncrewed flight test to the International Space Station as part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program. OFT-2 serves as an end-to-end test of the system’s capabilities.
NASA

Directed Acyclic Graph Files

+ DAG File Information (HSRB Home Page)

+ Toxic Exposure Risk DAG and Narrative (PDF)

Toxic Exposure Risk DAG Code (TXT)

Share

Details

Last Updated
Mar 11, 2025
Editor
Robert E. Lewis

View the full article

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By NASA
      6 min read
      Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
      Risks Concept Risk is inherent in human spaceflight. However, specific risks can and should be understood, managed, and mitigated to reduce threats posed to astronauts. Risk management in the context of human spaceflight can be viewed as a trade-based system. The relevant evidence in life sciences, medicine, and engineering is tracked and evaluated to identify ways to minimize overall risk to the astronauts and to ensure mission success. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) manages the process by which scientific evidence is utilized to establish and reassess the postures of the various risks to the Human System during all of the various types of existing or anticipated crewed missions. The HSRB operates as part of the Health and Medical Technical Authority of the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer of NASA via the JSC Chief Medical Officer.
      The HSRB approaches to human system risks is analogous to the approach the engineering profession takes with its Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in that a process is utilized to identify and address potential problems, or failures to reduce their likelihood and severity. In the context of risks to the human system, the HSRB considers eight missions which different in their destinations and durations (known as Design Reference Missions [DRM]) to further refine the context of the risks. With each DRM a likelihood and consequence are assigned to each risk which is adjusted scientific evidence is accumulated and understanding of the risk is enhanced, and mitigations become available or are advanced.
      Human System Risks This framework enables the principles of Continuous Risk Management and Risk Informed Decision Making (RIDM) to be applied in an ongoing fashion to the challenges posed by Human System Risks. Using this framework consistently across the 29 risks allows management to see where risks need additional research or technology development to be mitigated or monitored and for the identification of new risks and concerns. Further information on the implementation of the risk management process can be found in the following documents:
      Human System Risk Management Plan – JSC-66705 NASA Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Implementation – NPR 7120.11A NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements – NPR 7120.5 Human System Risk Board Management Office
      The HSRB Risk Management Office governs the execution of the Human System Risk management process in support of the HSRB. It is led by the HSRB Chair, who is also referred to as the Risk Manager.
      Risk Custodian Teams
      Along with the Human System Risk Manager, a team of risk custodians (a researcher, an operational researcher or physician, and an epidemiologist, who each have specific expertise) works together to understand and synthesize scientific and operational evidence in the context of spaceflight, identify and evaluate metrics for each risk in order to communicate the risk posture to the agency.
      Directed Acyclic Graphs 
      Summary
      The HSRB uses Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAG), a type of causal diagramming, as visual tools to create a shared understanding of the risks, improve communication among those stakeholders, and enable the creation of a composite risk network that is vetted by members of the NASA community and configuration managed (Antonsen et al., NASA/TM– 20220006812). The knowledge captured is the Human Health and Performance community’s knowledge about the causal flow of a human system risk, and the relationships that exist between the contributing factors to that risk.
      DAGs are:
      Intended to improve communication between: Managers and subject matter experts who need to discuss human system risks Subject matter experts in different disciplines where human system risks interact with one another in a potentially cumulative fashion Visual representations of known or suspected relationships Directed – the relationship flows in one direction between any two nodes Acyclic – cycles in the graph are not allowed Example of a Directed Acyclic Graph. This is a simplified illustration of how and the individual, the crew, and the system contribute to the likelihood of successful task performance in a mission. Individual readiness is affected by many of the health and performance-oriented risks followed by the HSRB, but the readiness of any individual crew is complemented by the team and the system that the crew works within. Failures of task performance may lead to loss of mission objectives if severe.NASA View Larger (Example of a Directed Acyclic Graph) Image
      Details
      At NASA, the Human System Risks have historically been conceptualized as deriving from five Hazards present in the spaceflight environment. These are: altered gravity, isolation and confinement, radiation, a hostile closed environment, and distance from Earth. These Hazards are aspects of the spaceflight environment that are encountered when someone is launched into space and therefore are the starting point for causal diagramming of spaceflight-related risk issues for the HSRB.
      These Hazards are often interpreted in relation to physiologic changes that occur in humans as a result of the exposure; however, interaction between human crew (behavioral health and performance), which may be degraded due to the spaceflight environment – and the vehicle and mission systems that the crew must operate – can also be influenced by these Hazards.
      Each Human System Risk DAG is intended to show the causal flow of risk from Hazards to Mission Level Outcomes. As such, the structure of each DAG starts with at least one Hazard and ends with at least one of the pre-defined Mission Level Outcomes. In between are the nodes and edges of the causal flow diagrams that are relevant to the Risk under consideration. These are called ‘contributing factors’ in the HSRB terminology, and include countermeasures, medical conditions, and other Human System Risks. A graph data structure is composed of a set of vertices (nodes), and a set of edges (links). Each edge represents a relationship between two nodes. There can be two types of relationships between nodes: directed and undirected. For example, if an edge exists between two nodes A and B and the edge is undirected, it is represented as A–B, (no arrow). If the edge were directed, for example from A to B, then this is represented with an arrow (A->B). Each directed arrow connecting one node to another on a DAG indicates a claim of causality. A directed graph can potentially contain a cycle, meaning that, from a specific node, there exists a path that would eventually return to that node. A directed graph that has no cycles is known as acyclic. Thus, a graph with directed links and no cycles is a DAG.  DAGs are a type of network diagram that represent causality in a visual format.
      DAGs are updated with the regular Human System Risk updates generally every 1-2 years. Approved DAGs can be found in the NASA/TP 20220015709 below or broken down under each Human System Risk.
      Documents
      Directed Acyclic Graph Guidance Documentation – NASA/TM 20220006812 Directed Acyclic Graphs: A Tool for Understanding the NASA Human Spaceflight System Risks – NASA/TP 20220015709 Publications
      npj Microgravity – Causal diagramming for assessing human
      system risk in spaceflight
      Apr 22, 2024
      PDF (3.09 MB)
      npj Microgravity –
      Levels of evidence for human system risk
      evaluation
      Apr 22, 2024
      PDF (2.47 MB)
      npj Microgravity –
      Updates to the NASA human system risk management process
      for space exploration
      Apr 22, 2024
      PDF (2.24 MB)
      Points of Contact
      Mary Van Baalen
      Dan Buckland
      Bob Scully
      Kim Lowe
      Human System Risks Share
      Details
      Last Updated Mar 11, 2025 EditorRobert E. LewisLocationJohnson Space Center Related Terms
      Human Health and Performance Human System Risks Explore More
      1 min read Concern of Venous Thromboembolism
      Article 31 mins ago 1 min read Risk of Acute and Chronic Carbon Dioxide Exposure
      Article 30 mins ago 1 min read Risk of Adverse Cognitive or Behavioral Conditions and Psychiatric Disorders
      Article 30 mins ago Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From NASA
      Humans In Space
      Missions
      International Space Station
      Solar System
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      1 min read
      Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
      NASA astronaut Douglas Hurley is helped out of the SpaceX Crew Dragon Endeavour spacecraft onboard the SpaceX GO Navigator recovery ship after he and NASA astronaut Robert Behnken landed in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Pensacola, Florida, Sunday, Aug. 2, 2020. The Demo-2 test flight for NASA’s Commercial Crew Program was the first to deliver astronauts to the International Space Station and return them safely to Earth onboard a commercially built and operated spacecraft. Behnken and Hurley returned after spending 64 days in space. Photo Credit: (NASA/Bill Ingalls)NASA New spacecraft that will transport crews to the Lunar and Martian surfaces and return them to Earth may have diverse landing modalities which will function in different landing environments. Additionally, the crew may be deconditioned on landing, impacting their ability to independently egress the vehicles, perform post-landing tasks in a timely manner, and perform surface EVAs post-landing -including those required for emergencies.
      Boeing and NASA teams work around Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner spacecraft after it landed at White Sands Missile Range’s Space Harbor, Wednesday, May 25, 2022, in New Mexico. Boeing’s Orbital Flight Test-2 (OFT-2) is Starliner’s second uncrewed flight test to the International Space Station as part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program. OFT-2 serves as an end-to-end test of the system’s capabilities. Photo Credit: (NASA/Bill Ingalls) Directed Acyclic Graph Files
      + DAG File Information (HSRB Home Page)
      + Crew Egress Risk DAG and Narrative (PDF)
      + Crew Egress Risk DAG Code (TXT)
      Human System Risks Share
      Details
      Last Updated Mar 11, 2025 EditorRobert E. LewisLocationJohnson Space Center Related Terms
      Human Health and Performance Human System Risks Explore More
      1 min read Risk of Toxic Substance Exposure
      Article 15 mins ago 1 min read Risk of Urinary Retention
      Article 15 mins ago 1 min read Risk to Crew Health Due to Electrical Shock (Electrical Shock Risk)
      Article 15 mins ago Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From NASA
      Humans In Space
      Missions
      International Space Station
      Solar System
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      1 min read
      Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
      The space shuttle Endeavour is seen on launch pad 39a as a storm passes by prior to the rollback of the Rotating Service Structure (RSS), Thursday, April 28, 2011, at Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Fla. During the 14-day mission, Endeavour and the STS-134 crew will deliver the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) and spare parts including two S-band communications antennas, a high-pressure gas tank and additional spare parts for Dextre. Launch is targeted for Friday, April 29 at 3:47 p.m. EDT.NASA It is important to protect humans from unintended electrical current flow during spaceflight. The thresholds for contact electrical shock are well established, and standards and requirements exist that minimize the probability of contact electrical shock. Current thresholds were chosen (vs. voltage thresholds) because body impedance varies depending on conditions such as wet/dry, AC/DC, voltage level, large/small contact area, but current thresholds and physiological effects do not change. By addressing electrical thresholds, engineering teams are able to provide the appropriate hazard controls, usually through additional isolation (beyond the body’s impedance), current limiters, and/or modifying the voltage levels. Risk assessment determined that the probability of an event was extremely low, and the most serious consequence is expected to be involuntary muscle contraction.
      Lightning strikes the Launch Pad 39B protection system as preparations for launch of NASA’s Space Launch System (SLS) rocket with the Orion spacecraft aboard continue, Saturday, Aug. 27, 2022, at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. NASA’s Artemis I flight test is the first integrated test of the agency’s deep space exploration systems: the Orion spacecraft, SLS rocket, and supporting ground systems. Launch of the uncrewed flight test is targeted for no earlier than Aug. 29 at 8:33 a.m. ET. Photo Credit: (NASA/Bill Ingalls) Directed Acyclic Graph Files
      + DAG File Information (HSRB Home Page)
      + Electrical Shock Risk DAG and Narrative (PDF)
      + Electrical Shock Risk DAG Code (TXT)
      Human System Risks Share
      Details
      Last Updated Mar 11, 2025 EditorRobert E. LewisLocationJohnson Space Center Related Terms
      Human Health and Performance Human System Risks Explore More
      1 min read Risk of Toxic Substance Exposure
      Article 15 mins ago 1 min read Risk of Urinary Retention
      Article 15 mins ago 1 min read Risk to Vehicle Crew Egress Capability and Task Performance as Applied to Earth and Extraterrestrial Landings
      Article 14 mins ago Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From NASA
      Humans In Space
      Missions
      International Space Station
      Solar System
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      1 min read
      Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
      Astronaut Mark Vande Hei swaps out components on an advanced new toilet installed inside the International Space Station.NASA Exposure to the altered gravity in the spaceflight environment may cause physiological changes. One of these changes is the inability to completely empty the bladder or urinary retention. Causes of urinary retention in the early phases of flight include altered baseline physiology seen with exposure to microgravity, the anticholinergic side effects of medications that are taken to combat space motion sickness, and other factors. Urinary retention may impact health on orbit by causing discomfort and increasing the risk of urinary tract infection. Treatment, including urethral catheterization, has been performed on orbit.
      Directed Acyclic Graph Files
      + DAG File Information (HSRB Home Page)
      + Urinary Retention Risk DAG and Narrative (PDF)
      + Urinary Retention Risk DAG Code (TXT)
      Human System Risks Share
      Details
      Last Updated Mar 11, 2025 EditorRobert E. LewisLocationJohnson Space Center Related Terms
      Human Health and Performance Human System Risks Explore More
      1 min read Risk to Crew Health Due to Electrical Shock (Electrical Shock Risk)
      Article 15 mins ago 1 min read Risk to Vehicle Crew Egress Capability and Task Performance as Applied to Earth and Extraterrestrial Landings
      Article 14 mins ago 1 min read Risk of Toxic Substance Exposure
      Article 15 mins ago Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From NASA
      Humans In Space
      Missions
      International Space Station
      Solar System
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      1 min read
      Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
      Astronaut Serena M. Auñón-Chancellor Examines Her Eyes in SpaceNASA Exposure to altered gravity can cause ocular and brain structural changes to develop during spaceflight; these changes could lead to vision alterations, cognitive effects, or other deleterious health effects. SANS is a syndrome unique to humans that fly in space, and there is no terrestrial disease equivalent. Brain structural changes appear small but seem to indicate that over half of crewmembers experience one or more symptoms of SANS. Determining intracranial pressure during spaceflight could improve our understanding of SANS mechanisms and improve our ability to target countermeasures for determining risk for future missions.
      NASA astronaut Karen Nyberg, Expedition 36 flight engineer, conducts an ocular health exam on herself in the Destiny laboratory of the Earth-orbiting International Space Station. (NASA)NASA Directed Acyclic Graph Files
      + DAG File Information (HSRB Home Page)
      + SANS Risk DAG and Narrative (PDF)
      + SANS Risk DAG Code (TXT)
      Human Research Roadmap
      + Risk of Spaceflight Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome
      + 2022 April Evidence Report (PDF)
      Human System Risks Share
      Details
      Last Updated Mar 11, 2025 EditorRobert E. LewisLocationJohnson Space Center Related Terms
      Human Health and Performance Human System Risks Explore More
      1 min read Risk of Toxic Substance Exposure
      Article 15 mins ago 1 min read Risk of Urinary Retention
      Article 15 mins ago 1 min read Risk to Crew Health Due to Electrical Shock (Electrical Shock Risk)
      Article 15 mins ago Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From NASA
      Humans In Space
      Missions
      International Space Station
      Solar System
      View the full article
  • Check out these Videos

×
×
  • Create New...