Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Publishers
Posted

As NASA continues to pursue new human missions to low Earth orbit, lunar orbit, the lunar surface, and on to Mars, the NESC continues to provide a robust technical resource to address critical challenges.

The NESC Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS), Crew Systems, and Extravehicular Activity (EVA) discipline is led by the NASA Technical Fellow for ECLS, Dr. Morgan Abney, ECLSS & Crew Systems Deputy Dave Williams, Extravehicular & Human Surface Mobility Deputy Danielle Morris, and EVA Deputy Colin Campbell. In 2023, this team led assessments and provided support to the Commercial Crew Program, ISS, Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, Extravehicular and Human Mobility Program, Gateway International Habitat, and Moon-to-Mars Program. Three of the most notable activities in 2023 are briefly described below.

Mitigation for Water in the Helmet During EVA

During EVA22 in 2013, water was observed in the helmet and assumed to be the result of a “burp” from the drink bag. No further investigation was pursued because water had been observed to some degree (water on visor, wet hair, etc.) on eight previous occasions. The result was a nearly catastrophic event during EVA23, where astronaut Luca Parmitano experienced dangerous quantities of water in his helmet. Both EVA23 and EVA35 in 2016 contributed to identification of drowning as a key risk, which resulted in several water mitigation approaches. Based on these approaches, the program determined the risk level to be acceptable for nominal EVA. However, in March 2022, a crewmember returning from EVA80 noticed water accumulated on the visor of his helmet obstructing ~30-50% of his field of view. Due to the increasing complexity of EVA objectives on EVA80 and forward, the ISS Program identified loss or reduction of visibility as a greater risk than previously recognized and sought to identify methods to prevent even small quantities of liquid water from forming in the helmet during EVA. The NESC was asked to provide support to the activity through modeling of the helmet and two-phase (water and oxygen) flow behavior in microgravity, through model validation testing, and through testing of mitigation hardware identified by the larger team. The model predictions provided a map (Figure 1) of anticipated liquid water formations based on the contact angle between the face or head and the helmet surface. Based on the ISS helmet with no water mitigations, the model predicted that large blobs would most likely form bridges between the helmet and face and that rupture of those bridges would result in the majority of liquid transferring to the face. To mitigate this risk, the ISS EVA80 team devised a solution to add absorbent materials in the path of the oxygen and water entering the helmet. Following EVA23, the helmet absorption pad (HAP) was added for bulk water collection. The improved mitigation strategy based on EVA80 included a HAP extender (HAP-E) and a helmet absorption band (HAB) (Figure 2). The NESC provided modeling of the mitigation hardware and validation testing of the HAB configuration using flow conditions anticipated in ISS operation (Figure 3). The testing provided ground validation of the HAB performance. The HAB and HAP-E have both been implemented in flight.

techup2023-pg58-61-art1.png?w=2048
Figure 1. Map of predicted water formations within a helmet as a function of face/head and helmet contact angles. Dashed rectangle indicates the expected domain of the ISS helmet with no water mitigations. 
techup2023-pg58-61-art2.png?w=2048
Figure 2. Water mitigation strategy for the ISS helmet: a) sketch of HAP, HAP-E, and HAB, b) side view of early prototype, c) bottom view of early prototype. 
techup2023-pg58-61-art3.png?w=1386
Figure 3. HAB ground validation testing under trickle water flow conditions.

Evaluation of Terrestrial Portable Fire Extinguishers for Microgravity Applications 

The tragic fire of Apollo 1 has, of necessity, instilled in NASA an enduring respect for the risk of fire in spacecraft. As such, robust fire detection and response systems have been a cornerstone of NASA-designed vehicles. Portable fire extinguishers (PFE) are a fundamental fire response capability of spacecraft and both carbon dioxide and water-based PFEs have been used by NASA historically. However, terrestrial-based PFEs, particularly those using new halon-based suppressants, may provide improved capability beyond the NASA state-of-the-art. In 2023, the NESC sought to evaluate the effectiveness of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) PFEs in microgravity. The team developed an analytical model to predict the discharge rate of three terrestrial COTS PFEs containing CO2, HFC-227ea, and Novec 1230. The model considered the internal geometry of the PFEs, the material properties of the suppressants and their corresponding PFE tanks, and the effects of microgravity and in-flight perturbations. The results predicted that for PFE tanks containing dip tubes, like those for HFC-227ea and Novec 1230 where nitrogen gas is used as a pressurant, microgravity plays a significant role in the discharge performance due to two-phase flow. Figure 4 shows the various equilibrium configurations based on gravity and perturbations. As a comparison, the analysis predicts >80% discharge of the HFC-227ea in the COTS PFE within ~30 seconds with the remainder discharging over ~0.5-1 hours when discharged in a terrestrial fire (Figure 4A), while only 60-80% discharges in 30 seconds with the remainder discharging over 1-2 hours in microgravity (Figure 4C). 

techup2023-pg58-61-art4.png?w=1406
Figure 4. Equilibrium two-phase configurations of nitrogen (white)-pressurized liquid suppressant (blue). A) PFE held nominally with nozzle up in 1-g with no perturbations, B) PFE held inverted in 1-g or in 0-g where liquid preferentially accumulates away from the dip tube entrance with no perturbations, C) PFE in 0-g at the statistically most probable state with no perturbations, D) PFE in 0-g where nitrogen preferentially accumulates at ends of the PFE with no perturbations, E) PFE in any level gravity with significant perturbations (shaken up), and F) statistically most probable state in 0-g following complete discharge.

Based on this analysis, the use of terrestrially designed PFEs containing gaseous pressurant over a liquid suppressant will likely result in decreased initial discharge of the suppressant and significantly longer total discharge times in microgravity as compared to terrestrial discharge performance. Testing is ongoing to validate the models using a custom-designed PFE test stand (Figures 5 and 6) that enables multi-configuration testing of COTS PFEs. 

techup2023-pg58-61-art5.png?w=1368
Figure 5. (left) PFE test stand for model validation. Design prevents directional load effects to enable accurate mass measurement during PFE discharge. Figure 6. (right) Insulated PFE housing and remote discharge control allows for accurate, real-time thermal measurements during validation testing.

Standardized Abrasion, Cut, and Thermal Testing for Spacesuit Gloves and Materials  

State-of-the-art spacesuit gloves have been optimized for the challenges of ISS. Artemis missions call for high-frequency EVAs at the lunar south pole, where temperatures in the permanently shadowed region (PSR) will expose crew gloves to temperatures lower than ever previously experienced and where frequent and repeated exposure to regolith dust and rocks will present significantly increased risk for abrasion and cuts. With the development of new spacesuits by commercial partners, inexpensive and repeatable test methods are needed to characterize, evaluate, and compare gloves and glove materials for their thermal performance at PSR temperatures and for their resistance to lunar regolith abrasion and cuts. To address these needs, the NESC is leading a team to develop standardized test methods in coordination with ASTM International Committee F47 on Commercial Spaceflight.  

Three standardized methods are currently in development. The first method seeks to standardize lunar dust abrasion testing of glove (and suit) materials based on adapted “tumble testing” first proposed at NASA in 1990. The NASA-designed tumbler (Figure 7) enables testing of six samples per run and compares pre- and post-tumbled tensile strength of materials to compare abrasion resistance. The method is highly controlled using a commercially available tumble medium and lunar regolith simulant.  

Because material properties change with temperature, the second method seeks to develop a standardized approach to evaluate the cut resistance of glove materials at relevant cryogenic temperatures. The method is an adaptation of ASTM F2992 Standard Test Method for Measuring Cut Resistance of Materials Used in Protective Clothing with Tomodynamometer (TDM-100) Test Equipment. In order to allow for cut evaluation at cryogenic temperatures, the TDM-100 cut fixture was modified to include channels for liquid nitrogen flow (Figure 8A), thereby cooling the test material to 77 K. 

techup2023-pg58-61-art6.png?w=1366
Figure 7. Hardware used in the tumble test method. Tumbler apparatus (left). Tumbler with panel removed to show lunar regolith simulant and commercially available tumbler media (top right). Tumbler panel showing lunar regolith simulant (bottom right).

The third method seeks to evaluate the thermal performance of gloves down to PSR requirement temperature of 48 K. Historical thermal testing of gloves was conducted with human-in-the-loop (HITL) testing for both radiative and conductive cooling. Conductive cooling was accomplished by having the test subject grab thermally controlled “grasp objects” and maintain contact until their skin temperature reached 283 K (50 ºF) or until they felt sufficient discomfort to end the test themselves. While HITL testing is critical for final certification of gloves, iterative design and development testing would benefit from a faster, less expensive test. To meet this need, the NESC is developing a glove thermal test that uses a custom manikin hand designed by Thermetrics, LLC (Figure 8B). 

techup2023-pg58-61-art7-1.png?w=1374
Figure 8. A) Mandrel used in cut testing as designed for ambient testing (left) and cryogenic testing (right). Flow channels allow for liquid nitrogen flow to cool the material sample to cryogenic temperatures. B) Prototype of Thermetrics, LLC custom manikin hand for spacesuit glove thermal testing.

The manikin hand is outfitted with temperature and heat flux sensors to monitor heat transfer to the hand. The hand is placed within a spacesuit glove and thermally controlled with internal water flow to simulate human heat generation. The Cryogenic Ice Transfer, Acquisition, Development, and Excavation Laboratory (CITADEL) chamber at JPL is then used to test the glove thermal performance at a range of temperatures from 200 K down to 48 K. Thermal performance is evaluated to mimic historical HITL testing under both radiative and conductive cooling. Conductive cooling is accomplished through a temperature-controlled touch object and is evaluated using two touch pressures. All three methods will be incorporated as ASTM F47 standard test procedures following NASA and ASTM committee review and approvals (targeting 2024).  

techup2023-pg58-61-art8.png?w=2048
ASA astronaut and Expedition 68 Flight Engineer Nicole Mann is pictured in her Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) during an EVA. The NESC has recently contributed to astronaut safety investigations of water accumulating in EMU helmets during EVAs, and developing EMU gloves for use in the harsh conditions of the lunar south pole.

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
      5 min read
      Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
      In-person participants (L-R) – Back row: Jason Lytle, Stuart Lee, Eric Bershad, Ashot Sargsyan, Aaron Everson, Philip Wells, Sergi Vaquer Araujo, Steven Grover, John A. Heit, Mehdi Shishehbor, Laura Bostick; Middle row: Sarah Childress Taoufik, Stephan Moll, Brandon Macias, Kristin Coffey, Ann-Kathrin Vlacil, Dave Francisco; Front row: James Pavela, Doug Ebert, Kathleen McMonigal, Esther Kim, Emma Hwang; Not pictured: Tyson Brunstetter, J. D. Polk
      Online participants: Stephen Alamo, Mark Crowther, Steven Nissen, Mark Rosenberg, Jeffrey Weitz, R. Eugene Zierler, Serena Aunon, Tina Bayuse, Laura Beachy, Becky Brocato, Daniel Buckland, Jackie Charvat, Diana Cruz Topete, Quinn Dufurrena, Robert Haddon, Joanne Kaouk, Kim Lowe, Steve Laurie, Karina Marshall-Goebel, Sara Mason, Shannan Moynihan, James Pattarini, Devan Petersen, Ruth Reitzel, Donna Roberts, Lucia Roccaro, Mike Stenger, Terry Taddeo, Gavin Travers, Mary Van Baalen, Liz WarrenNASA In October 2024, NASA’s Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) initiated a working group to review the status and progress of research and clinical activities intended to mitigate the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during spaceflight. The working group took place over two days at NASA’s Johnson Space Center; a second meeting on the topic was held in December 2024 at the European Space Agency (ESA) facility in Cologne, Germany.
      Read More about the Risk of VTE The working group was assembled from internal NASA subject matter experts (SMEs), the NASA OCHMO Standards Team, NASA and ESA stakeholders, and external SMEs, including physicians and medical professionals from leading universities and medical centers in the United States and Canada.

      Background
      Spaceflight Venous Thrombosis (SVT)
      Spaceflight Venous Thrombosis (SVT) refers to a phenomenon experienced during spaceflight in which a thrombus (blood clot) forms in the internal jugular vein (and/or associated vasculature) that may be symptomatic (thrombus accompanied by, but not limited to, visible internal jugular vein swelling, facial edema beyond “nominal” spaceflight adaptation, eyelid edema, and/or headache) or asymptomatic. Obstructive thrombi have been identified in a very small number of crewmembers, as shown in the figure below.

      Note that the figure below is for illustrative purposes only; locations are approximate, and size is not to scale.

      Approximate location of identified thrombi in crewmembers.Source: Modified from Cerebral Sinus Venous Thrombosis – University of Colorado Denver With treatment, crewmembers were able to complete their mission, and anticoagulants were discontinued several days prior to landing to minimize the risk of bleeding in the event of a traumatic injury. Some thromboses completely resolved post landing, and some required additional treatment.
      Pathophysiology of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE)
      The proposed pathogenesis of VTE is referred to as Virchow’s triad and suggests that VTE occurs as the result of:
      Alterations in blood flow (i.e., stasis), Vascular endothelial injury/changes, and/or, Alterations in the constituents of the blood leading to hypercoagulability (i.e., hereditary predisposition or acquired hypercoagulability). Note: pathophysiology are the changes that occur during a disease process; hypercoagulability is the increased tendency to develop blood to clots.
      The Virchow’s triad of risk factors for venous thrombosis.Bouchnita, 2017 Blood stasis, or venous stasis, refers to a condition in which the blood flow in the veins slows down which leads to pooling in the veins. This slowing of the blood may be due to vein valves becoming damaged or weak, immobility, and/or the absence of muscular contractions. Associated symptoms include swelling, skin changes, varicose veins, and slow-healing sores or ulcers. In terrestrial medicine, venous thrombosis is typically caused by damaged or weakened vein valves, which can be due to many factors, including aging, blood clots, varicose veins, obesity, pregnancy, sedentary lifestyle, estrogen use, and hereditary predisposition.

      Spaceflight Considerations
      Altered Venous Blood Flow and Spaceflight Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome

      In addition to the terrestrial risk factors of VTE, there are physiological changes associated with spaceflight that are hypothesized to potentially play a role in the development of VTE in weightlessness. Specifically, researchers have explored the effects of the microgravity environment and subsequent observed headward fluid shifts that occur, and the potential impact on blood flow. Crewmembers onboard the International Space Station (ISS) experience weightlessness due to the microgravity environment and thus experience a sustained redistribution of bodily fluids from the legs toward the head. The prolonged headward fluid shifts during weightlessness results in facial puffiness, decreased leg volume, increased cardiac stroke volume, and decreased plasma volume.
      Crewmembers have also experienced altered blood flow during spaceflight, including retrograde venous blood flow (RVBF) (the backflow of venous blood towards the brain) or stasis (a stoppage or slowdown in the flow of blood). While the causes of the observed stasis and retrograde blood flow in spaceflight participants is not well understood, the potential clinical significance of the role it may have in the development of thrombus formation warrants further investigation.
      Doppler imaging of a retrograde flow in the left internal jugular vein.Yan & Seow, 2009 Other physiological concerns affected by fluid shifts are being studied to consider if any relation to VTE exists. Chronic weightlessness can cause bodily fluids such as blood and cerebrospinal fluid to move toward the head, which can lead to optic nerve swelling, folds in the retina, flattening of the back of the eye, and swelling in the brain. This collection of eye and brain changes is called “spaceflight associated neuro-ocular syndrome,” or SANS. Some astronauts only experience mild changes in space, while others have clinically significant outcomes. The long-term health outcome from these changes is unknown but actively being investigated. The risk of developing SANS is higher during longer-duration missions and remains a top research priority for scientists ahead of a Mars mission.
      Conclusions and Further Work
      Based on expert opinion and the assessment of the risk factors for thrombosis, an algorithm was developed to provide guidance for in-mission assessment and treatment of thrombus formation in weightlessness. The algorithm is based on early in-flight ultrasound testing to determine the flow characteristic of the left internal jugular vein and associated vasculature.
      NASA Working Group Recommendations
      The working group recommended several areas for further investigation to assess feasibility and potential to mitigate the risk of thrombosis in spaceflight:
      Improved detection capabilities to identify when a thrombus has formed in-flight, Pathophysiology/factors leading to thrombi formation during spaceflight, Countermeasures and treatment
      For more information on the working group meeting and a complete list of references, please see the Risk of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) During Spaceflight Summary Report.
      Risk of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) During Spaceflight Summary Report Share
      Details
      Last Updated Mar 14, 2025 EditorKim Lowe Related Terms
      Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) Astronauts General Human Health and Performance Humans in Space The Human Body in Space Keep Exploring Discover Related Topics
      OCHMO Independent Assessments
      Independent assessment plays a crucial role in NASA’s long-term success by addressing essential questions requiring rapid response to support further…
      Aerospace Medical Certification Standard
      This NASA Technical Standard provides medical requirements and clinical procedures designed to ensure crew health and safety and occupational longevity…
      Human Spaceflight Standards
      The Human Spaceflight & Aviation Standards Team continually works with programs to provide the best standards and implementation documentation to…
      Human Spaceflight and Aviation Standards
      The Human Spaceflight and Aviation Standards Team continuously works with subject matter experts and with each space flight program to…
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      Center Director Dr. Jimmy Kenyon gives an overview of NASA Glenn Research Center’s areas of expertise and how it supports the agency’s missions and programs. Credit: NASA/Susan Valerian  NASA Glenn Research Center’s Director Dr. Jimmy Kenyon and Chief Counsel Callista Puchmeyer participated in a local symposium that addressed the operational and legal challenges of human spaceflight. The one-day conference was held at the Cleveland State University (CSU) College of Law on Feb.13.  

      Kenyon gave a keynote that provided an overview of NASA Glenn’s areas of expertise and how the center supports the agency’s missions and programs. He also talked about the role of growing commercial partnerships at NASA.  
      Panelists, left to right: Col. (Ret.) Joseph Zeis, senior advisor for Aerospace and Defense, Office of the Governor of Ohio; Callista Puchmeyer, chief counsel, NASA’s Glenn Research Center; and Jon. P. Yormick, international business and trade attorney, Yormick Law, answer questions on operational and legal challenges of human spaceflight at a Cleveland State University College of Law symposium. Credit: NASA/Susan Valerian  Puchmeyer, a graduate of CSU’s College of Law and recent inductee into its Hall of Fame, participated in a panel about Northeast Ohio’s aerospace industry and the legal aspects of commercial partnerships. 
      Additionally, human spaceflight experts from academia, law, and science spoke throughout the day on topics ranging from the health and training of astronauts to the special law of space stations. Romanian astronaut Dumitru-Dorin Prunariu joined remotely to provide a personal perspective. 
      Return to Newsletter Explore More
      2 min read NASA Releases its Spinoff 2025 Publication 
      Article 4 mins ago 1 min read NASA Glenn Welcomes Spring 2025 Interns
      Article 4 mins ago 5 min read NASA’s Chevron Technology Quiets the Skies
      Article 22 hours ago View the full article
    • 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)
      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
    • By European Space Agency
      The European Space Agency (ESA) and AAC Clyde Space, a New Space company specialising in small satellite technologies, have jointly signed a contract for the first phase of satellite constellation project INFLECION. The initiative will transform Maritime Domain Awareness – the understanding of activities at sea – by enhancing safety, efficiency, compliance, and environmental sustainability in maritime operations.
      View the full article
  • Check out these Videos

×
×
  • Create New...