Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “PRA”

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 199 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Method and system for dynamic probabilistic risk assessment

The DEFT methodology, system and computer readable medium extends the applicability of the PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) methodology to computer-based systems, by allowing DFT (Dynamic Fault Tree) nodes as pivot nodes in the Event Tree (ET) model. DEFT includes a mathematical model and solution algorithm, supports all common PRA analysis functions and cutsets. Additional capabilities enabled by the DFT include modularization, phased mission analysis, sequence dependencies, and imperfect coverage.

Dugan, Joanne Bechta↗
NASA NTRS2013

Near-Earth Phase Risk Comparison of Human Mars Campaign Architectures

A risk analysis of the launch, orbital assembly, and Earth-departure phases of human Mars exploration campaign architectures was completed as an extension of a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) originally carried out under the NASA Constellation Program Ares V Project. The objective of the updated analysis was to study the sensitivity of loss-of-campaign risk to such architectural factors as composition of the propellant delivery portion of the launch vehicle fleet (Ares V heavy-lift launch vehicle vs. smaller/cheaper commercial launchers) and the degree of launcher or Mars-bound spacecraft element sparing. Both a static PRA analysis and a dynamic, event-based Monte Carlo simulation were developed and used to evaluate the probability of loss of campaign under different sparing options. Results showed that with no sparing, loss-of-campaign risk is strongly driven by launcher count and on-orbit loiter duration, favoring an all-Ares V launch approach. Further, the reliability of the all-Ares V architecture showed significant improvement with the addition of a single spare launcher/payload. Among architectures utilizing a mix of Ares V and commercial launchers, those that minimized the on-orbit loiter duration of Mars-bound elements were found to exceed the reliability of no spare all-Ares V campaign if unlimited commercial vehicle sparing was assumed

Manning, Ted A.↗
NASA NTRS2014

An Example of Risk Informed Design

NASA Engineering requested a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to compare the difference in the risk of Loss of Crew (LOC) and Loss of Mission (LOM) between different designs of a fluid assembly. They were concerned that the configuration favored by the design team was more susceptible to leakage than a second proposed design, but realized that a quantitative analysis to compare the risks between the two designs might strengthen their argument. The analysis showed that while the second design did help improve the probability of LOC, it did not help from a probability of LOM perspective. This drove the analysis team to propose a minor design change that would drive the probability of LOM down considerably. The analysis also demonstrated that there was another major risk driver that was not immediately obvious from a typical engineering study of the design and was therefore unexpected. None of the proposed alternatives were addressing this risk. This type of trade study demonstrates the importance of performing a PRA in order to completely understand a system's design. It allows managers to use risk as another one of the commodities (e.g., mass, cost, schedule, fault tolerance) that can be traded early in the design of a new system.

Banke, Rick↗
NASA NTRS2014

International Space Station End-of-Life Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Although there are ongoing efforts to extend the ISS life cycle through 2028, the International Space Station (ISS) end-of-life (EOL) cycle is currently scheduled for 2020. The EOL for the ISS will require de-orbiting the ISS. This will be the largest manmade object ever to be de-orbited, therefore safely de-orbiting the station will be a very complex problem. This process is being planned by NASA and its international partners. Numerous factors will need to be considered to accomplish this such as target corridors, orbits, altitude, drag, maneuvering capabilities, debris mapping etc. The ISS EOL Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) will play a part in this process by estimating the reliability of the hardware supplying the maneuvering capabilities. The PRA will model the probability of failure of the systems supplying and controlling the thrust needed to aid in the de-orbit maneuvering.

Duncan, Gary↗
NASA NTRS2014

Application of Fault Management Theory to the Quantitative Selection of a Launch Vehicle Abort Trigger Suite

The theory of System Health Management (SHM) and of its operational subset Fault Management (FM) states that FM is implemented as a "meta" control loop, known as an FM Control Loop (FMCL). The FMCL detects that all or part of a system is now failed, or in the future will fail (that is, cannot be controlled within acceptable limits to achieve its objectives), and takes a control action (a response) to return the system to a controllable state. In terms of control theory, the effectiveness of each FMCL is estimated based on its ability to correctly estimate the system state, and on the speed of its response to the current or impending failure effects. This paper describes how this theory has been successfully applied on the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Space Launch System (SLS) Program to quantitatively estimate the effectiveness of proposed abort triggers so as to select the most effective suite to protect the astronauts from catastrophic failure of the SLS. The premise behind this process is to be able to quantitatively provide the value versus risk trade‐off for any given abort trigger, allowing decision makers to make more informed decisions. All current and planned crewed launch vehicles have some form of vehicle health management system integrated with an emergency launch abort system to ensure crew safety. While the design can vary, the underlying principle is the same: detect imminent catastrophic vehicle failure, initiate launch abort, and extract the crew to safety. Abort triggers are the detection mechanisms that identify that a catastrophic launch vehicle failure is occurring or is imminent and cause the initiation of a notification to the crew vehicle that the escape system must be activated. While ensuring that the abort triggers provide this function, designers must also ensure that the abort triggers do not signal that a catastrophic failure is imminent when in fact the launch vehicle can successfully achieve orbit. That is, the abort triggers must have low false negative rates to be sure that real crew‐threatening failures are detected, and also low false positive rates to ensure that the crew does not abort from non‐crew‐threatening launch vehicle behaviors. The analysis process described in this paper is a compilation of over six years of lessons learned and refinements from experiences developing abort triggers for NASA's Constellation Program (Ares I Project) and the SLS Program, as well as the simultaneous development of SHM/FM theory. The paper will describe the abort analysis concepts and process, developed in conjunction with SLS Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) to define a common set of mission phase, failure scenario, and Loss of Mission Environment (LOME) combinations upon which the SLS Loss of Mission (LOM) Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) models are built. This abort analysis also requires strong coordination with the Multi‐Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) and SLS Structures and Environments (STE) to formulate a series of abortability tables that encapsulate explosion dynamics over the ascent mission phase. The design and assessment of abort conditions and triggers to estimate their Loss of Crew (LOC) Benefits also requires in‐depth integration with other groups, including Avionics, Guidance, Navigation and Control(GN&C), the Crew Office, Mission Operations, and Ground Systems. The outputs of this analysis are a critical input to SLS S&MA's LOC PRA models. The process described here may well be the first full quantitative application of SHM/FM theory to the selection of a sensor suite for any aerospace system.

Lo, Yunnhon↗
NASA NTRS2014

International Space Station End-of-Life Probabilistic Risk Assessment

The International Space Station (ISS) end‐of‐life (EOL) cycle is currently scheduled for 2020, although there are ongoing efforts to extend ISS life cycle through 2028. The EOL for the ISS will require deorbiting the ISS. This will be the largest manmade object ever to be de‐orbited therefore safely deorbiting the station will be a very complex problem. This process is being planned by NASA and its international partners. Numerous factors will need to be considered to accomplish this such as target corridors, orbits, altitude, drag, maneuvering capabilities etc. The ISS EOL Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) will play a part in this process by estimating the reliability of the hardware supplying the maneuvering capabilities. The PRA will model the probability of failure of the systems supplying and controlling the thrust needed to aid in the de‐orbit maneuvering.

Duncan, Gary W.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Quantitative Risk Modeling of Fire on the International Space Station

The International Space Station (ISS) Program has worked to prevent fire events and to mitigate their impacts should they occur. Hardware is designed to reduce sources of ignition, oxygen systems are designed to control leaking, flammable materials are prevented from flying to ISS whenever possible, the crew is trained in fire response, and fire response equipment improvements are sought out and funded. Fire prevention and mitigation are a top ISS Program priority - however, programmatic resources are limited; thus, risk trades are made to ensure an adequate level of safety is maintained onboard the ISS. In support of these risk trades, the ISS Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) team has modeled the likelihood of fire occurring in the ISS pressurized cabin, a phenomenological event that has never before been probabilistically modeled in a microgravity environment. This paper will discuss the genesis of the ISS PRA fire model, its enhancement in collaboration with fire experts, and the results which have informed ISS programmatic decisions and will continue to be used throughout the life of the program.

Castillo, Theresa↗
NASA NTRS2015

Developing Probabilistic Safety Performance Margins for Unknown and Underappreciated Risks

Probabilistic safety requirements currently formulated or proposed for space systems, nuclear reactor systems, nuclear weapon systems, and other types of systems that have a low-probability potential for high-consequence accidents depend on showing that the probability of such accidents is below a specified safety threshold or goal. Verification of compliance depends heavily upon synthetic modeling techniques such as PRA. To determine whether or not a system meets its probabilistic requirements, it is necessary to consider whether there are significant risks that are not fully considered in the PRA either because they are not known at the time or because their importance is not fully understood. The ultimate objective is to establish a reasonable margin to account for the difference between known risks and actual risks in attempting to validate compliance with a probabilistic safety threshold or goal. In this paper, we examine data accumulated over the past 60 years from the space program, from nuclear reactor experience, from aircraft systems, and from human reliability experience to formulate guidelines for estimating probabilistic margins to account for risks that are initially unknown or underappreciated. The formulation includes a review of the safety literature to identify the principal causes of such risks.

Safety Performance Margin↗
NASA NTRS2016

Characterizing Epistemic Uncertainty for Launch Vehicle Designs

NASA Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) has the task of estimating the aleatory (randomness) and epistemic (lack of knowledge) uncertainty of launch vehicle loss of mission and crew risk, and communicating the results. Launch vehicles are complex engineered systems designed with sophisticated subsystems that are built to work together to accomplish mission success. Some of these systems or subsystems are in the form of heritage equipment, while some have never been previously launched. For these cases, characterizing the epistemic uncertainty is of foremost importance, and it is anticipated that the epistemic uncertainty of a modified launch vehicle design versus a design of well understood heritage equipment would be greater. For reasons that will be discussed, standard uncertainty propagation methods using Monte Carlo simulation produce counter intuitive results, and significantly underestimate epistemic uncertainty for launch vehicle models. Furthermore, standard PRA methods, such as Uncertainty-Importance analyses used to identify components that are significant contributors to uncertainty, are rendered obsolete, since sensitivity to uncertainty changes are not reflected in propagation of uncertainty using Monte Carlo methods. This paper provides a basis of the uncertainty underestimation for complex systems and especially, due to nuances of launch vehicle logic, for launch vehicles. It then suggests several alternative methods for estimating uncertainty and provides examples of estimation results. Lastly, the paper describes how to implement an Uncertainty-Importance analysis using one alternative approach, describes the results, and suggests ways to reduce epistemic uncertainty by focusing on additional data or testing of selected components.

Novack, Steven D.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Characterizing Epistemic Uncertainty for Launch Vehicle Designs

NASA Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) has the task of estimating the aleatory (randomness) and epistemic (lack of knowledge) uncertainty of launch vehicle loss of mission and crew risk and communicating the results. Launch vehicles are complex engineered systems designed with sophisticated subsystems that are built to work together to accomplish mission success. Some of these systems or subsystems are in the form of heritage equipment, while some have never been previously launched. For these cases, characterizing the epistemic uncertainty is of foremost importance, and it is anticipated that the epistemic uncertainty of a modified launch vehicle design versus a design of well understood heritage equipment would be greater. For reasons that will be discussed, standard uncertainty propagation methods using Monte Carlo simulation produce counter intuitive results and significantly underestimate epistemic uncertainty for launch vehicle models. Furthermore, standard PRA methods such as Uncertainty-Importance analyses used to identify components that are significant contributors to uncertainty are rendered obsolete since sensitivity to uncertainty changes are not reflected in propagation of uncertainty using Monte Carlo methods.This paper provides a basis of the uncertainty underestimation for complex systems and especially, due to nuances of launch vehicle logic, for launch vehicles. It then suggests several alternative methods for estimating uncertainty and provides examples of estimation results. Lastly, the paper shows how to implement an Uncertainty-Importance analysis using one alternative approach, describes the results, and suggests ways to reduce epistemic uncertainty by focusing on additional data or testing of selected components.

Novack, Steven D.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Architecture for Integrated Medical Model Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is a modeling tool used to predict potential outcomes of a complex system based on a statistical understanding of many initiating events. Utilizing a Monte Carlo method, thousands of instances of the model are considered and outcomes are collected. PRA is considered static, utilizing probabilities alone to calculate outcomes. Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment (dPRA) is an advanced concept where modeling predicts the outcomes of a complex system based not only on the probabilities of many initiating events, but also on a progression of dependencies brought about by progressing down a time line. Events are placed in a single time line, adding each event to a queue, as managed by a planner. Progression down the time line is guided by rules, as managed by a scheduler. The recently developed Integrated Medical Model (IMM) summarizes astronaut health as governed by the probabilities of medical events and mitigation strategies. Managing the software architecture process provides a systematic means of creating, documenting, and communicating a software design early in the development process. The software architecture process begins with establishing requirements and the design is then derived from the requirements.

Probability Theory↗
NASA NTRS2018

Bridging the Engineering and Medicine Gap

A primary challenge NASA faces is communication between the disparate entities of engineers and human system experts in life sciences. Clear communication is critical for exploration mission success from the perspective of both risk analysis and data handling. The engineering community uses probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) models to inform their own risk analysis and has extensive experience managing mission data, but does not always fully consider human systems integration (HSI). The medical community, as a part of HSI, has been working 1) to develop a suite of tools to express medical risk in quantitative terms that are relatable to the engineering approaches commonly in use, and 2) to manage and integrate HSI data with engineering data. This talk will review the development of the Integrated Medical Model as an early attempt to bridge the communication gap between the medical and engineering communities in the language of PRA. This will also address data communication between the two entities in the context of data management considerations of the Medical Data Architecture. Lessons learned from these processes will help identify important elements to consider in future communication and integration of these two groups.

Walton, M.↗
NASA NTRS2019

The Effect of Heroic Medical Care on Mission Medical Outcomes

Study Objective: A catastrophic medical event depletes medical resources. What happens to the rest of the mission’s medical outcomes after such an event? Use Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to see if we can find out. What is the Integrated Medical Model? PRA model using Monte Carlo methodology; Used to assess mission risk due to in-flight medical events; User defined Design Reference Missions (DRM) (crew, duration, EVA (Extra-Vehicular Activity), etc.); Considers outcomes for 100 medical conditions that have or may occur in-flight; 100,000 trials conducted per DRM.

Reyes, David P.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Challenger disaster was caused by an Apollo decision

NASA’s view of risk changed between early Apollo and the Space Shuttle. Risk was a known serious problem at the beginning of Apollo and the risk estimates were disturbingly high. To avoid public concern, risk analysis was discontinued. Risk analysis was avoided in Shuttle, leading to an unnecessarily risky design. The immediate cause of the Challenger tragedy was the mistaken decision to launch in cold weather. The fundamental cause was the high risk of the Shuttle design. Before Challenger, management thought and testified that the probability of an accident was 1 in 100,000. After Challenger, Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) found a roughly 1 in 100 chance of a Shuttle failure. The recent Orion design uses the safer Apollo approach, with a hardened capsule, launch abort escape, and the crew placed above the rocket tanks and engines. During Apollo it was estimated that, “assuming all elements from propulsion to rendezvous and life support were done as well or better than ever before, that 30 astronauts would be lost before 3 were returned safely to the Earth.” The chance of astronaut survival was only 10%. After the Apollo 1 tragedy, the awareness of risk led to an intense focus on achieving safety. “The only possible explanation for the astonishing success – no losses in space and on time – was that every participant at every level in every area far exceeded the norm of human capabilities.” During Apollo, a NASA PRA found that the chance of success was “less than 5 percent.” The NASA Administrator felt that “the numbers could do irreparable harm,” and discontinued numerical risk assessment.

Harry W Jones↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Predictive Modeling to Assess and Address Challenges and Limitations Associated with Clinical Care and Decision Support in Deep Space

Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) is a method for assessing and integrating the risk of failure in a multivariate system. While it is often applied by engineers designing complex machines, it could also be applied to humans to assess the probability of a health “failure” treating diseases as the multiple “variables” and the human as the “complex machine.” The Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT) was developed to apply PRA to assess medical risk for exploration spaceflight and inform the design of medical systems for space flight. The NASA engineering community utilizes event-driven and fault tree probabilistic techniques to classify risk in the space flight environment by leveraging the inherent knowledge of complex space flight system design and testing to quantify risk. However, in harmonizing the risk of human space flight, answering the question of “How do we balance astronaut health, performance and resource risks with other engineering risks on exploration space missions?” remains a profoundly challenging and largely qualitative practice. The Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT) is one aspect of the Human Research Program’s efforts to represent space fight human health and performance risks quantitatively.

L Mcintyre↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Root Cause Analysis of the Data Refinement Process – Medical Conditions Capability Resource Tables

The medical system for spaceflight thus far has been designed to support missions in low earth orbit (LEO). Crew capabilities are limited and heavily dependent on the team of medical support staff at Mission Control Center (MCC) to guide diagnosis and management. However, missions to the Moon and Mars will suffer from several constraints that will make this ground support focused approach to care ineffective. In order to update and modify medical system design, NASA has relied on Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling to mitigate medical risk through trade space analysis. Specifically, capability resource tables (CRT’s) were developed to create a dataset of resources required to manage a list of accepted medical conditions significant in exploration spaceflight. With 120 conditions, this dataset contained hundreds of capabilities and thousands of resources with tens of thousands of cells of data. Initially these tables were built in excel for high throughput during development, but ultimately had to be transferred, managed, and modified into the Evidence Library database for modeling purposes. The process of collating and reviewing the Evidence Library revealed numerous errors in the dataset that had to be corrected through iterative changes. Several error types emerged during this process and can be broken into specific classifications defined as “input”, “transcription”, “structural”, “branching”, and “information”. In reviewing these error types through the root cause analysis (RCA) approach, we were able to identify the contributors to these errors which included single data review points, changing product end goals, limited software selection, time constraints and several others. By reviewing and evaluating the underlying causes we can provide possible system improvements that can be implemented for current and future data management in PRA model inputs.

A. Anderson↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Brace For Impact – It’s Coming, Do You Know What to Do With It?

Long-duration human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for providing in-mission medical care. Compared with the International Space Station, the greater distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and significant limitations on the evacuation of ill or injured crew. Spacecraft mass, volume, and power will be curtailed while higher demands will be placed on the crew’s knowledge, skills, and abilities. In this higher risk environment, it is important to define and quantitatively estimate human system risk attributable to medical conditions. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) and medical trade space analysis tool being developed by NASA to advance medical system design for exploration missions. IMPACT has made a number of enhancements on the Integrated Medical Model, the PRA tool currently used by NASA. These updates include a novel medical evidence base baselined to a long duration, deep space exploration environment; an expanded medical condition list; and a trade space analysis capability (e.g. comparing risk profiles and mass/volume constraints for medical capabilities and resources). IMPACT core functionality includes quantification of a medical capability set and assisting with identification of specific medical resources/hardware for exploration missions. In addition, IMPACT provides sophisticated trade space capabilities to estimate how human system risk varies with changes to the mission architecture or medical capability set. This presentation will provide a brief overview of the IMPACT tool, discuss representative use cases, and show example results.

Benjamin Easter↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Impact-Identified Medical Capabilities with Largest Effect on Medical Risk for an Extended Duration Artemis Mission

Historically, identifying resources to include in a medical system has been based on heuristically guided clinical subject matter expert assessment. Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) and tradespace analysis have the power to simplify and increase the fidelity of this traditional approach by providing initial risk estimates and system design solutions that fit within the specified constraints. This will be especially important as the increased mission complexity, distance from Earth, and duration of LDEMs is likely to drive an increase in mission medical risk. NASA’s Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces tool (IMPACT) is designed to do just that. IMPACT uses an evidence based medical database of conditions likely to affect LDEM outcomes and a PRA computational engine to estimate how medical conditions and included medical capabilities affect mission outcomes. We identified the 10 medical conditions with the largest effect on medical risks and determined what medical system capabilities affected risk reduction the greatest.

Anderson A↗