Human Space Flight

The first human space flight, in the early 1960s, was aimed primarily at determining whether humans could indeed survive and function in micro-gravity. Would eating and sleeping be possible? What mental and physical tasks could be performed? Subsequent programs increased the complexity of the tasks the crew performed. Table 1 summarizes the history of U.S. space flight, showing the projects, their dates, crew sizes, and mission durations. With over forty years of experience with human space flight, the emphasis now is on how to design space vehicles, habitats, and missions to produce the greatest returns to human knowledge. What are the roles of the humans in space flight in low earth orbit, on the moon, and in exploring Mars

Human Factors in Space Flight

After forty years of experience with human space flight (Table 1), the current emphasis is on the design of space vehicles, habitats, and missions to ensure mission success. What lessons have we learned that will affect the design of spacecraft for future space exploration, leading up to exploring Mars? This chapter addresses this issue in four sections: Anthropometry and Biomechanics; Environmental Factors; Habitability and Architecture; and Crew Personal Sustenance. This introductory section introduces factors unique to space flight. A unique consideration for design of a habitable volume in a space vehicle is the lack of gravity during a space flight, referred to as microgravity. This affects all aspects of life, and drives special features in the habitat, equipment, tools, and procedures. The difference in gravity during a space mission requires designing for posture and motion differences. In Earth s gravity, or even with partial gravity, orientation is not a variable because the direction in which gravity acts defines up and down. In a microgravity environment the working position is arbitrary; there is no gravity cue. Orientation is defined primarily through visual cues. The orientation within a particular crew station or work area is referred to as local vertical, and should be consistent within a module to increase crew productivity. Equipment was intentionally arranged in various orientations in one module on Skylab to assess the efficiency in use of space versus the effects of inconsistent layout. The effects of that arrangement were confusion on entering the module, time spent in re-orientation, and conflicts in crew space requirements when multiple crew members were in the module. Design of a space vehicle is constrained by the three major mission drivers: mass, volume and power. Each of these factors drives the cost of a mission. Mass and volume determine the size of the launch vehicle directly; they can limit consumables such as air, water, and propellant; and they impact crew size and the types of activities the crew performs. Power is a limiting factor for a space vehicle. All environmental features (e.g., atmosphere, temperature, lighting) require power to maintain them. Power can be generated from batteries, from fuel cells, or from solar panels. Each of these sources requires lifting mass and volume from Earth, driving mission cost. All engineering decisions directly impact the design for habitation design and usage. For instance, if fuel cells are used they produce water, which is used for drinking and food preparation. If a different power source is used water has to be carried and stored on the vehicle which then directly impacts the food system choice as well as the launch weight of the vehicle

The use of PLAID in the Space Station Freedom viewing analysis

The focus early in the Space Station Freedom Program was on identifying viewing requirements for both direct viewing (windows) and indirect viewing (closed-circuit television). Currently, an analysis is being conducted to address the feasibility of viewing for Space Station Freedom. The goal of this analysis is to determine the optimum location for the windows and closed-circuit television cameras in order to meet the established requirements. Additionally all viewing provisions must adequately support Space Station assembly and on-board operations once the Station is operable. PLAID, a three-dimensional graphics system developed at NASA/Johnson Space Center, was selected for use as the primary tool in this analysis. PLAID provides the capability to simulate the assembly of the Space Station Freedom, as well as to examine operations on the Station as it evolves. In addition, it is used as a tool to analyze general out-the-window viewing conditions for all Space Station components, and provides the ability to integrate an anthropometric scale-modeled person (representing a crewmember) with the Station's interior architecture

Required Area for a Crew Person in a Space Vehicle

This 176 page report was written in circa 1966 to examine the effects of confmement during space flight. One of the topics covered was the required size of a space vehicle for extended missions. Analysis was done using size of crew and length of time in a confmed space. The report was based on all information available at that time. The data collected and analyzed included both NASA and (when possible) Russian missions flown to date, analogs (such as submarines), and ground studies. Both psychological and physiological responses to confmement were examined. Factors evaluated in estimating the degree of impairment included the level of performance of intellectual, perceptual, manual and co-ordinated tasks, response to psychological testing, subjective comments of the participants, nature and extent of physiological change, and the nature and extent of behavioral change and the nature and extent of somatic complaints. Information was not included from studies where elements of perceptual isolation were more than mildly incidental - water immersion studies, studies in darkened and acoustically insulated rooms, studies with distorted environmental inputs - unpattemed light and white noise. Using the graph from the document, the upper line provides a threshold of minimum acceptable volumeall points above the line may be considered acceptable. The lower line provides a threshold of unacceptable volume - all points below the line are unacceptable. The area in between the two lines is the area of doubtful acceptability where impairment tends to increase with reduction in volume and increased duration of exposure. Reference is made of the Gemini VII, 14-day duration mission which had detectable impairment with a combination of 40 cubic feet per man for 14 days. In line with all other data this point should be in the 'marked impairment' zone. It is assumed that the state of fitness, dedication and experience influenced this outcome

A comparison of paper and computer procedures in a Shuttle flight environment

The Electronic Procedures Experiment (EPROC) was flown as part of the Human Factors Assessment (HFA) experiment aboard the SpaceHab-1/STS-57 mission. EPROC is concerned with future, longer-duration missions which will increasingly rely on electronic procedures since they are more easily launched, updated in-flight, and offer automatic or on-request capabilities not available with paper. A computer-based task simulating a Space Station Propulsion System task was completed by one crewmember. The crewmember performed the task once using paper and once using computer procedures. A soldering and desoldering task was performed by another crewmember. Soldering was completed with paper procedures and desoldering was completed using computer procedures. Objective data was collected during each task session from the computer programs, videotapes, and crew notations in the paper and computer procedures. After each task session, subjective data was collected through the use of a computer-based questionnaire program. Resultant recommendations will be made available to future designers of electronic procedures systems for manned-space missions and other related uses

Human Centered Autonomous and Assistant Systems Testbed for Exploration Operations

The Engineering and Mission Operations Directorates at NASA Johnson Space Center are combining laboratories and expertise to establish the Human Centered Autonomous and Assistant Systems Testbed for Exploration Operations. This is a testbed for human centered design, development and evaluation of intelligent autonomous and assistant systems that will be needed for human exploration and development of space. This project will improve human-centered analysis, design and evaluation methods for developing intelligent software. This software will support human-machine cognitive and collaborative activities in future interplanetary work environments where distributed computer and human agents cooperate. We are developing and evaluating prototype intelligent systems for distributed multi-agent mixed-initiative operations. The primary target domain is control of life support systems in a planetary base. Technical approaches will be evaluated for use during extended manned tests in the target domain, the Bioregenerative Advanced Life Support Systems Test Complex (BIO-Plex). A spinoff target domain is the International Space Station (ISS) Mission Control Center (MCC). Prodl}cts of this project include human-centered intelligent software technology, innovative human interface designs, and human-centered software development processes, methods and products. The testbed uses adjustable autonomy software and life support systems simulation models from the Adjustable Autonomy Testbed, to represent operations on the remote planet. Ground operations prototypes and concepts will be evaluated in the Exploration Planning and Operations Center (ExPOC) and Jupiter Facility

Human factors assessments of the STS-57 SpaceHab-1 mission

SpaceHab-1 (STS-57) was the first of six scheduled Commercial Middeck Augmentation Module (CMAM) missions seeking to offer entrepreneurial companies an opportunity to use the resource of microgravity. The SpaceHab module, which occupies about one-fourth of the payload bay, is approximately 2-3/4 meters (9 feet) long and 4 meters (13.5 feet) in diameter. It provides a shirt-sleeve working environment and contains the storage space equivalent of 50 middeck lockers, considerably over and above the number of experiments that can be carried in the orbiter middeck alone. A modified Spacelab tunnel links the SpaceHab module to the middeck. While in orbit, the orbiter payload bay doors remain open, exposing the padded exterior of the lab and tunnel to space until preparation for reentry at the end of the flight. The crew for SpaceHab-1 was comprised of four males and two females, each of whom participated in some part of the human factors assessment (HFA) evaluation. The HFA was one of over twenty experiments manifested on this maiden flight of the SpaceHab module. HFA consisted of HFA-EPROC, HFA-LIGHT, HFA-SOUND, HFA-QUEST, and HFA-TRANS. The goal of HFA-EPROC was to assess the advantages and disadvantages of paper versus computer presentation for procedural tasks. The next two evaluations investigated the module's lighting and acoustic environment. HFA-TRANS sought to evaluate the design of the SpaceHab tunnel and to characterize translation through it. HFA-QUEST represented a consolidation of the in-flight questions generated by the HFA principal investigators involved in the acoustic, lighting, and translation studies

Outcomes in patients with gunshot wounds to the brain.

Introduction:Gunshot wounds to the brain (GSWB) confer high lethality and uncertain recovery. It is unclear which patients benefit from aggressive resuscitation, and furthermore whether patients with GSWB undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) have potential for survival or organ donation. Therefore, we sought to determine the rates of survival and organ donation, as well as identify factors associated with both outcomes in patients with GSWB undergoing CPR. Methods:We performed a retrospective, multicenter study at 25 US trauma centers including dates between June 1, 2011 and December 31, 2017. Patients were included if they suffered isolated GSWB and required CPR at a referring hospital, in the field, or in the trauma resuscitation room. Patients were excluded for significant torso or extremity injuries, or if pregnant. Binomial regression models were used to determine predictors of survival/organ donation. Results:825 patients met study criteria; the majority were male (87.6%) with a mean age of 36.5 years. Most (67%) underwent CPR in the field and 2.1% (n=17) survived to discharge. Of the non-survivors, 17.5% (n=141) were considered eligible donors, with a donation rate of 58.9% (n=83) in this group. Regression models found several predictors of survival. Hormone replacement was predictive of both survival and organ donation. Conclusion:We found that GSWB requiring CPR during trauma resuscitation was associated with a 2.1% survival rate and overall organ donation rate of 10.3%. Several factors appear to be favorably associated with survival, although predictions are uncertain due to the low number of survivors in this patient population. Hormone replacement was predictive of both survival and organ donation. These results are a starting point for determining appropriate treatment algorithms for this devastating clinical condition. Level of evidence:Level II

Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study

Background: The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings: This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (74·0%) had emergency surgery and 280 (24·8%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (26·1%) patients. 30-day mortality was 23·8% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (51·2%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 38·0% (219 of 577), accounting for 81·7% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 1·75 [95% CI 1·28–2·40], p\textless0·0001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (2·30 [1·65–3·22], p\textless0·0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3–5 versus grades 1–2 (2·35 [1·57–3·53], p\textless0·0001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (1·55 [1·01–2·39], p=0·046), emergency versus elective surgery (1·67 [1·06–2·63], p=0·026), and major versus minor surgery (1·52 [1·01–2·31], p=0·047). Interpretation: Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research