Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “risk”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

CO 2 Pipeline risk assessment and comparison for the midcontinent United States

For this work, a comprehensive quantitative risk assessment for the construction and operation of CO 2 transportation networks considered for the Midcontinent United States was conducted. The results showed risks associated with CO 2 pipelines were significantly less than those of other pipeline types. The assessment used four conceptual pipelines of different lengths to discuss risks operators may see. The assessment evaluated the risk associated with construction and operation using data from the US Occupational Safety Health Administration to determine the risk of injury or death for pipeline workers and data from the US Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration for CO 2 , natural gas distribution, natural gas transmission/gathering, and non-CO 2 hazardous liquid pipelines to develop quantitative likelihood and severity values leading to risk values. The data for the assessment covered incidents from 2010 to 2017 for CO 2 pipelines. The average risk for construction and 30 years of operation for four CO 2 pipeline configurations ranging between 79 and 1,546 miles in length was found. The construction and operational risk averaged between $\$1,400,521$ (approximately $\$0.02$/tonne of CO 2 ) for the shorter pipeline (79 miles) and $\$27,481,939$ (approximately $\$0.10$/tonne of CO 2 ) for a longer pipeline (1,546 miles). The largest risks of fatality for CO 2 pipelines comes from vehicle transport. The largest operational risk to the pipeline was due to leakage. Public pipeline opposition is also a significant risk; it was not quantified but is addressed.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Development of Dry Cask Risk Tools

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has repeatedly expressed a desire to increase the use of risk in its decision-making. The Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Policy Statement published in 1995 formalized the Commission’s commitment to risk-informed regulation through the expanded use of PRA. While a great deal of work has been done to incorporate risk insights into the regulatory framework for at-power nuclear reactors. Far less progress has been made to risk inform the dry-casks and nuclear waste transportation areas of the nuclear fuel cycle. INL was tasked with incorporating the information from the two completed dry cask PRAs as well as any additional available information into a tool that helps the NRC use those insights to identify levels of risk at various stages in the nuclear waste cycle. The first task was to address the License Amendment Request (LAR) Process for Dry Cask storage, the second task is for the incorporate transportation into the tool, and the third and final task will be incorporate any additional regulatory applications for dry cask storage. This report covers the first task of the tool and will eventually incorporate the remaining two tasks may be completed in the future and built off the model described here. Task 1 specifically asked to incorporate the risk insights into the process for determining and prioritizing review of license amendment changes related to storage applications by outlining a resource allocation strategy and defining recommendations of for the depth and breadth of the LAR review. It was requested that the tool be similar in design to the SDP notebooks/worksheets and contain quantitative, qualitative, or semi-quantitative approaches to assessing the risk of the change. The final tool that was selected by INL to be developed was a flowchart and associated rationale document that allows the reviewer to quickly assess potential LAR changes and their associated risks as well as the rationale behind the risk categorization. This risk categorization will lead to specific actionable recommendations to expect from a change of that specific category. This allows for a more consistent review process as well as improving the overall efficiency of the review itself.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2020

Risk Importance Ranking of Fire Data Parameters to Enhance Fire PRA Model Realism

Fire is historically and analytically a significant contributor to nuclear power plant risk. The level of fire risk and the methods, tools and data for modeling this risk is highly debated by experts. One area of debate is the input data used in fire modeling and how to deal with this data’s high uncertainty. This report outlines initial work performed for determining the key parameters causing this uncertainty and how it propagates into nuclear power plant models. This research paves the way for the development of methods to reduce fire data uncertainty used in modeling. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has mandated that nuclear power plants perform fire risk modeling. However, there are several issues with the current risk modeling implementation that affect the results. Approved modeling methods can be overly conservative and often do not match plant experience. Also, the data used in the modeling can have high uncertainties and is influenced by expert judgement. To evaluate input data uncertainty, researchers performed an initial review of several fire experiments done at Sandia National Laboratories. Uncertainties for fire data can come from many sources, such as experiment design constraints, environmental conditions, or other plant-specific aspects. There are many different significant and insignificant parameters driving the uncertainty. Additionally, the uncertainty of the different input data used in the fire modeling could have a significant or insignificant effect on the entire plant risk. A four-step methodology was developed to perform Integrated Probabilistic Risk Assessment Importance Ranking. A demonstration case using these steps was set up and three of the four steps were completed in fiscal year (FY) 2019 and the fourth step done FY 2020. These steps are: 1. The qualitative analysis of potential sources was conducted with the following items identified for the demonstration. • Maximum heat release rate • Time to maximum heat release rate • Duration of max heat release rate • Time to decay • Thermal conductivity of concrete • Specific heat of concrete • Density of concrete • Cable jacket thickness 2. A quantitative characterization of dominant sources of uncertainty was performed. A list of distributions and determined values of the dominant sources is shown in Appendix A. 3. A quantitative screening of the potential sources of uncertainty using Morris Elementary Effects Analysis was completed. An experimental model using the physics-based fire modeling tool Fire Dynamics Simulator was developed and coupled with the Risk Analysis Virtual Environment. The Morris analysis identified at least two parameters that can be eliminated as significant contributors (specific heat of concrete and cable jacket thickness). 4. Global importance measure (Global IM) analysis to generate a comprehensive ranking based on their influence on the plant risk. In this research, a moment-independent Global IM is used since it can address (a) uncertainty in the input parameters of the fire model, (b) uncertainty in the risk outputs, and (c) non-linearity and interactions among input parameters in the fire model, more accurately than the correlation-based and variance-based global methods. The observations from the research showed that, depending on the initial and boundary conditions of the fire scenarios, fire-induced damage could have a very small probability and could be dominated by the tail of the uncertainty distribution; hence, the accuracy of the correlation-based and variance-based methods is questionable. The moment-independent Global IM analysis in this research provides a better understanding of how experimental uncertainty data affects industry’s plant models and where improvements in that data will have the largest benefit for improving fire modeling accuracy in causing core damage. Among the five unscreened parameters obtained from the Morris EE analysis, the Global IM analysis results for the case study indicated that max heat release rate and fire location are the most important parameters. The report also outlines benefits of using a unified computational platform that integrates the underlying simulations (e.g., a fire progression model), quantitative screening (using the Morris EE method), and the Global IM analysis. A unified platform can (i) facilitate the ranking of input parameters considering multiple key fire scenarios simultaneously, rather than considering one scenario at a time, (ii) contribute to more explicit and accurate treatment of dependencies at multiple levels of Fire PRA, (iii) facilitate the sampling-based uncertainty quantification for Fire PRA, and (iv) help generating both “industry-wide” and "plant-specific" ranking of uncertainty sources in Fire PRA. Future research should be done to include additional parameters such as detection/suppression or cable fire spread. Adding a PRA software such as SAPHIRE to the RAVEN platform would help with plant model integration and improve treatment of fire-induced dependency. The I-PRA risk importance ranking methodology offered in this report can provide valuable information for efficiently (a) enhancing the realism of Fire PRA for existing plants and (b) supporting the development of Dynamic Fire PRA for advanced reactors and new plants.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Summary of Technical Peer Review on the Risk Assessment Framework proposed in Report INL/RPT-22-68656 for Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems

This report summarizes the peer review activities initiated by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) during fiscal year (FY) 2023 for the evaluation and improvement of the methodology developed under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program, Risk Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway, digital instrumentation and control (DI&C) risk assessment project. In FY 2019, the RISA Pathway initiated a project to develop a risk assessment strategy for delivering a technical basis to support effective and secure DI&C technologies for digital upgrades/designs. A framework was proposed for this strategy, which aims to (1) provide a best-estimate, risk-informed capability to quantitatively and accurately estimate the risk impact of plant modernization, considering the introduction of high safety-significant safety-related (HSSSR) DI&C systems, (2) support and supplement existing risk-informed DI&C design guides by providing quantitative risk information and evidence, (3) offer a capability of design architecture evaluation of various DI&C systems, (4) assure the long-term safety and reliability of HSSSR DI&C systems, and (5) reduce uncertainty in costs and support integration of DI&C systems in the plant. The R&D efforts of this project from FY 2019 through FY 2022 were focused on methodology improvement and demonstration of the proposed framework for the risk assessment and design optimization of safety-critical DI&C systems. Collaborations with the nuclear industry have been initiated to support the reliability and risk assessment of their DI&C systems by using the proposed framework. In FY 2023, the framework has reached to a point for a technical peer review and obtain stakeholder feedback. This peer review activity includes coordination of the reviews performed by a group of industry stakeholders, documentation of the peer review suggestions, providing resolutions and responses to the peer review comments. The objective of this technical peer review is to obtain representative feedback on the proposed framework to improve the technical qualities of its methodology and readiness for deployment to the industry. Feedback may identify potential areas for improvement and further development. The Subject Matter experts were invited to review the latest project report documenting the methodology developed in the project and provide evaluations of the technical qualities of the proposed framework and relevant methods. The reviewed project report is “An Integrated Framework for Risk Assessment of High Safety-significant Safety-related Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems in Nuclear Power Plants: Methodology and Demonstration” INL/RPT-22-68656 (short as “INL/RPT-22-68656” in this report). This peer review report documents the technical questions provided for technical peer review and introduces the technical peer reviewers from the stakeholders including nuclear utilities, regulators, and universities. Comments from technical peer reviewers and the resolutions and responses to these comments are outlined. Insights and lessons learned from the technical peer review are summarized in conclusions and future work. The primary audience of this report are DI&C designers, engineers, and probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) practitioners. This includes stakeholders, such as the nuclear utilities and regulators who consider the deployment and upgrade of DI&C systems, DI&C software developers and reviewers, and cybersecurity specialists.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Integrated Issues and Risk Management: A Theoretical Framework Overview

The contractor requirements document for DOE O 226.1B, Implementation of Department of Energy Oversight Policy, requires DOE/NNSA contractors to establish an assurance system that includes, among other things, “Rigorous, risk-informed, and credible self-assessment and feedback and improvement activities. Assessment programs must be risk-informed, formally described and documented, and appropriately cover potentially high consequence activities” and “Contains an issues management process that is capable of categorizing the significance of findings based on risk and priority and other appropriate factors….” However, the term “risk-informed” is not defined in this or any other DOE order, and no formal guidance on how to integrate the two concepts currently exists. The Risk Management Guide for Defense Programs released by NA-18, Office of Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I), states it is “a framework and general guidance to program office personnel on the effective management of program risks and issues”, however it then defines issues as “events with 100% likelihood of affecting program objectives” and states “unless specified otherwise, the term “risk” will also serve to represent issues for the remainder of this plan,” severally limiting its ability to provide adequate guidance on this topic. Outside of DOE scope, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S. NRC) imposes similar requirements. ASME NQA-1-2015 Requirement 16 states “Conditions adverse to quality shall be identified promptly and corrected as soon as practicable. In the case of a significant condition adverse to quality, the cause of the condition shall be determined, and corrective action taken to preclude recurrence. The identification, cause, and corrective action for significant conditions adverse to quality shall be documented and reported to appropriate levels of management. Completion of corrective actions shall be verified”. The purpose of this document is to provide a best-in-class framework for an integrated risk and issues management process. This process would provide a robust feedback loop between risk management and issues management to: Enhance risk identification and characterization, use risk handling principles to improve corrective action planning, and ensure regulatory compliance.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison of Artemis 2 and Artemis 5 Model Outcomes Using the Impact Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool

BACKGROUND The Artemis campaign is a Moon exploration program with a series of six planned missions, five of which will be crewed. These five crewed missions will contain a single mission segment (space flight), or multiple mission segments involving space flight (Orion), lunar landing (LTV) and/or space habitat (Gateway). Each crewed segment faces the risk of unique medical conditions, necessitating medical sets/kits tailored to those specificities. To support and enable a data-driven and evidence-based decision-making process through out a mission’s life cycle, a software tool called IMPACT was developed. Using probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) methodologies, IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a novel tool built for analyzing the possibility of encountering complex medical risks during space flight, and for identifying the medical resources and capabilities needed to treat those potential at-risk medical conditions. This presentation will seek to compare IMPACT’s computational results upon potential complex space medical conditions (e.g., sprain/strain back or sleep disturbance) using IMPACT’s risk metrics and the associated optimized medical sets/kits between two Artemis missions: single segment Artemis 2 and multi-segmented Artemis 5. OVERVIEW By identifying potential medical conditions in space using input criteria such as crew quantity and composition, certain crew physical characteristics, mission duration and mission activities, IMPACT can produce analyses on the type of medical resources and capabilities needed to produce an optimized medical set/kit to address those medical conditions. IMPACT achieves this by performing hundreds of thousands of Monte Carlo simulations of missions to build aggregate pictures of medical risk. IMPACT’s risk metrics include loss of crew life (LOCL) – a measure of crew mortality due to medical conditions in space, return to definitive care (RTDC) – the need to perform crew evacuation, and task time lost (TTL) – a measure of the inability to perform activities due to crew disability. These risk metrics are applied to every medical condition identified by IMPACT’s computation analyses for every segment of the mission. Medical sets/kits are optimized to address these medical conditions but must fit within the stated Artemis Design Reference Mission (DRM) request for mass and volume physical size constraints. ANTICIPATED ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION Using two Artemis missions, Artemis 2 and Artemis 5, IMPACT will provide the analyses for comparison of medical set/kit contents based upon mass and/or volume requirements and identify the at-risk medical conditions within both missions. This paper serves as an initial exploration of probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) medical risk calculations between two crewed Artemis missions and is not intended to be deemed the official medical response for the Artemis campaign.

probabilistic risk assessment↗
DOE OSTI2021

Individual tree damage dominates mortality risk factors across six tropical forests

Summary The relative importance of tree mortality risk factors remains unknown, especially in diverse tropical forests where species may vary widely in their responses to particular conditions. We present a new framework for quantifying the importance of mortality risk factors and apply it to compare 19 risks on 31 203 trees (1977 species) in 14 one‐year periods in six tropical forests. We defined a condition as a risk factor for a species if it was associated with at least a doubling of mortality rate in univariate analyses. For each risk, we estimated prevalence (frequency), lethality (difference in mortality between trees with and without the risk) and impact (‘excess mortality’ associated with the risk, relative to stand‐level mortality). The most impactful risk factors were light limitation and crown/trunk loss; the most prevalent were light limitation and small size; the most lethal were leaf damage and wounds. Modes of death (standing, broken and uprooted) had limited links with previous conditions and mortality risk factors. We provide the first ranking of importance of tree‐level mortality risk factors in tropical forests. Future research should focus on the links between these risks, their climatic drivers and the physiological processes to enable mechanistic predictions of future tree mortality.

Zuleta, Daniel↗
DOE OSTI2021

Expected individual benefit of prophylactic platelet transfusions in hemato‐oncology patients based on bleeding risks

Abstract Background Prophylactic platelet transfusions prevent bleeding in hemato‐oncology patients, but it is unclear how any benefit varies between patients. Our aim was to assess if patients with different baseline risks for bleeding benefit differently from a prophylactic platelet transfusion strategy. Study design and methods Using the data from the randomized controlled TOPPS trial (Trial of Platelet Prophylaxis), we developed a prediction model for World Health Organization grades 2, 3, and 4 bleeding risk (defined as at least one bleeding episode in a 30 days period) and grouped patients in four risk‐quartiles based on this predicted baseline risk. Predictors in the model were baseline platelet count, age, diagnosis, disease modifying treatment, disease status, previous stem cell transplantation, and the randomization arm. Results The model had a c‐statistic of 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54–0.64). There was little variation in predicted risks (quartiles 46%, 47%, and 51%), but prophylactic platelet transfusions gave a risk reduction in all risk quartiles. The absolute risk difference (ARD) was 3.4% (CI −12.2 to 18.9) in the lowest risk quartile (quartile 1), 7.4% (95% CI −8.4 to 23.3) in quartile 2, 6.8% (95% CI −9.1 to 22.9) in quartile 3, and 12.8% (CI −3.1 to 28.7) in the highest risk quartile (quartile 4). Conclusion In our study, generally accepted bleeding risk predictors had limited predictive power (expressed by the low c‐statistic), and, given the wide confidence intervals of predicted ARD, could not aid in identifying subgroups of patients who might benefit more (or less) from prophylactic platelet transfusion.

Cornelissen, Loes L.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Space Radiation Cancer Risk Projections for Exploration Missions: Uncertainty Reduction and Mitigation

In this paper we discuss expected lifetime excess cancer risks for astronauts returning from exploration class missions. For the first time we make a quantitative assessment of uncertainties in cancer risk projections for space radiation exposures. Late effects from the high charge and energy (HZE) ions present in the galactic cosmic rays including cancer and the poorly understood risks to the central nervous system constitute the major risks. Methods used to project risk in low Earth orbit are seen as highly uncertain for projecting risks on exploration missions because of the limited radiobiology data available for estimating HZE ion risks. Cancer risk projections are described as a product of many biological and physical factors, each of which has a differential range of uncertainty due to lack of data and knowledge. Monte-Carlo sampling from subjective error distributions represents the lack of knowledge in each factor to quantify risk projection overall uncertainty. Cancer risk analysis is applied to several exploration mission scenarios. At solar minimum, the number of days in space where career risk of less than the limiting 3% excess cancer mortality can be assured at a 95% confidence level is found to be only of the order of 100 days.

Cucinotta, Francis↗
NASA NTRS2004

Identifying, Assessing, and Mitigating Risk of Single-Point Inspections on the Space Shuttle Reusable Solid Rocket Motor

In the production of each Space Shuttle Reusable Solid Rocket Motor (RSRM), over 100,000 inspections are performed. ATK Thiokol Inc. reviewed these inspections to ensure a robust inspection system is maintained. The principal effort within this endeavor was the systematic identification and evaluation of inspections considered to be single-point. Single-point inspections are those accomplished on components, materials, and tooling by only one person, involving no other check. The purpose was to more accurately characterize risk and ultimately address and/or mitigate risk associated with single-point inspections. After the initial review of all inspections and identification/assessment of single-point inspections, review teams applied risk prioritization methodology similar to that used in a Process Failure Modes Effects Analysis to derive a Risk Prioritization Number for each single-point inspection. After the prioritization of risk, all single-point inspection points determined to have significant risk were provided either with risk-mitigating actions or rationale for acceptance. This effort gave confidence to the RSRM program that the correct inspections are being accomplished, that there is appropriate justification for those that remain as single-point inspections, and that risk mitigation was applied to further reduce risk of higher risk single-point inspections. This paper examines the process, results, and lessons learned in identifying, assessing, and mitigating risk associated with single-point inspections accomplished in the production of the Space Shuttle RSRM.

Greenhalgh, Phillip O.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Harnessing the Risk-Related Data Supply Chain: An Information Architecture Approach to Enriching Human System Research and Operations Knowledge

NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) and Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD), not unlike many NASA organizations today, struggle with the inherent inefficiencies caused by dependencies on heterogeneous data systems and silos of data and information spread across decentralized discipline domains. The capture of operational and research-based data/information (both in-flight and ground-based) in disparate IT systems impedes the extent to which that data/information can be efficiently and securely shared, analyzed, and enriched into knowledge that directly and more rapidly supports HRP's research-focused human system risk mitigation efforts and SLSD s operationally oriented risk management efforts. As a result, an integrated effort is underway to more fully understand and document how specific sets of risk-related data/information are generated and used and in what IT systems that data/information currently resides. By mapping the risk-related data flow from raw data to useable information and knowledge (think of it as the data supply chain), HRP and SLSD are building an information architecture plan to leverage their existing, shared IT infrastructure. In addition, it is important to create a centralized structured tool to represent risks including attributes such as likelihood, consequence, contributing factors, and the evidence supporting the information in all these fields. Representing the risks in this way enables reasoning about the risks, e.g. revisiting a risk assessment when a mitigation strategy is unavailable, updating a risk assessment when new information becomes available, etc. Such a system also provides a concise way to communicate the risks both within the organization as well as with collaborators. Understanding and, hence, harnessing the human system risk-related data supply chain enhances both organizations' abilities to securely collect, integrate, and share data assets that improve human system research and operations.

Buquo, Lynn↗
NASA NTRS2002

Risk Management for the International Space Station

The International Space Station (ISS) is an extremely complex system, both technically and programmatically. The Space Station must support a wide range of payloads and missions. It must be launched in numerous launch packages and be safely assembled and operated in the harsh environment of space. It is being designed and manufactured by many organizations, including the prime contractor, Boeing, the NASA institutions, and international partners and their contractors. Finally, the ISS has multiple customers, (e.g., the Administration, Congress, users, public, international partners, etc.) with contrasting needs and constraints. It is the ISS Risk Management Office strategy to proactively and systematically manages risks to help ensure ISS Program success. ISS program follows integrated risk management process (both quantitative and qualitative) and is integrated into ISS project management. The process and tools are simple and seamless and permeate to the lowest levels (at a level where effective management can be realized) and follows the continuous risk management methodology. The risk process assesses continually what could go wrong (risks), determine which risks need to be managed, implement strategies to deal with those risks, and measure effectiveness of the implemented strategies. The process integrates all facets of risk including cost, schedule and technical aspects. Support analysis risk tools like PRA are used to support programatic decisions and assist in analyzing risks.

Sebastian, J.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Risk Acceptance Personality Paradigm: How We View What We Don't Know We Don't Know

The purpose of integrated hazard analyses, probabilistic risk assessments, failure modes and effects analyses, fault trees and many other similar tools is to give managers of a program some idea of the risks associated with their program. All risk tools establish a set of undesired events and then try to evaluate the risk to the program by assessing the severity of the undesired event and the likelihood of that event occurring. Some tools provide qualitative results, some provide quantitative results and some do both. However, in the end the program manager and his/her team must decide which risks are acceptable and which are not. Even with a wide array of analysis tools available, risk acceptance is often a controversial and difficult decision making process. And yet, today's space exploration programs are moving toward more risk based design approaches. Thus, risk identification and good risk assessment is becoming even more vital to the engineering development process. This paper explores how known and unknown information influences risk-based decisions by looking at how the various parts of our personalities are affected by what they know and what they don't know. This paper then offers some criteria for consideration when making risk-based decisions.

Massie, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Probabilistic Risk Assessment Procedures Guide for NASA Managers and Practitioners (Second Edition)

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is a comprehensive, structured, and logical analysis method aimed at identifying and assessing risks in complex technological systems for the purpose of cost-effectively improving their safety and performance. NASA's objective is to better understand and effectively manage risk, and thus more effectively ensure mission and programmatic success, and to achieve and maintain high safety standards at NASA. NASA intends to use risk assessment in its programs and projects to support optimal management decision making for the improvement of safety and program performance. In addition to using quantitative/probabilistic risk assessment to improve safety and enhance the safety decision process, NASA has incorporated quantitative risk assessment into its system safety assessment process, which until now has relied primarily on a qualitative representation of risk. Also, NASA has recently adopted the Risk-Informed Decision Making (RIDM) process [1-1] as a valuable addition to supplement existing deterministic and experience-based engineering methods and tools. Over the years, NASA has been a leader in most of the technologies it has employed in its programs. One would think that PRA should be no exception. In fact, it would be natural for NASA to be a leader in PRA because, as a technology pioneer, NASA uses risk assessment and management implicitly or explicitly on a daily basis. NASA has probabilistic safety requirements (thresholds and goals) for crew transportation system missions to the International Space Station (ISS) [1-2]. NASA intends to have probabilistic requirements for any new human spaceflight transportation system acquisition. Methods to perform risk and reliability assessment in the early 1960s originated in U.S. aerospace and missile programs. Fault tree analysis (FTA) is an example. It would have been a reasonable extrapolation to expect that NASA would also become the world leader in the application of PRA. That was, however, not to happen. Early in the Apollo program, estimates of the probability for a successful roundtrip human mission to the moon yielded disappointingly low (and suspect) values and NASA became discouraged from further performing quantitative risk analyses until some two decades later when the methods were more refined, rigorous, and repeatable. Instead, NASA decided to rely primarily on the Hazard Analysis (HA) and Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) methods for system safety assessment.

Stamatelatos,Michael↗
NASA NTRS2015

Menstrual Cycle Control in Female Astronauts and the Associated Risk of Venous Thromboembolism

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common and serious condition affecting approximately 1‐2 per 1000 people in the USA every year. There have been no documented case reports of VTE in female astronauts during spaceflight in the published literature. Some female astronauts use hormonal contraception to control their menstrual cycles and it is currently unknown how this affects their risk of VTE. Current terrestrial risk prediction models do not account for the spaceflight environment and the physiological changes associated with it. We therefore aim to estimate a specific risk score for female astronauts who are taking hormonal contraception for menstrual cycle control, to deduce whether they are at an elevated risk of VTE. A systematic review of the literature was conducted in order to identify and quantify known terrestrial risk factors for VTE. Studies involving analogues for the female astronaut population were also reviewed, for example, military personnel who use the oral contraceptive pill for menstrual suppression. Well known terrestrial risk factors, for example, obesity or smoking would not be applicable to our study population as these candidates would have been excluded during astronaut selection processes. Other risk factors for VTE include hormonal therapy, lower limb paralysis, physical inactivity, hyperhomocysteinemia, low methylfolate levels and minor injuries, all of which potentially apply to crew members LSAH data will be assessed to identify which of these risk factors are applicable to our astronaut population. Using known terrestrial risk data, an overall estimated risk of VTE for female astronauts using menstrual cycle control methods will therefore be calculated. We predict this will be higher than the general population but not significantly higher requiring thromboprophylaxis. This study attempts to delineate what is assumed to be true of our astronaut population, for example, they are known to be a healthy fit cohort of individuals, and combine physiological impacts of spaceflight (cephalic fluid shifts, lower limb inactivity) to understand specific risks associated with hormonal contraception.

Jain, Varsha↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Utilizing Open-Source Earth Observations to Inform the Toa Baja Municipality’s Flood Risk Mitigation Efforts and Educate the Public

Global climate changes contribute to more intense and frequent tropical storms, subjecting places like Toa Baja, Puerto Rico to critical damage. Known as “the underwater city” due to its propensity to flood, residents of Toa Baja face constant flood risk. During extreme tropical storm events, such as Hurricane Maria in 2017, residents experienced up to 20 feet of inundation. The NASA DEVELOP National Program collaborated with the Municipio Autónomo de Toa Baja, ResilientSEE-PR, and the MIT Urban Risk Lab to supplement 2018 FEMA HEC-RAS flood maps that designate 63% of Toa Baja as a flood plain. This analysis provides a high-resolution interpretation of flood risk through two lenses; susceptibility and vulnerability. For this analysis, susceptibility consists of nine weighted layers: NDVI, landcover, slope, elevation, topographic wetness index, height above nearest drainage, saturated hydraulic conductivity, distance to water, and storm surge. These factors are consistently used to evaluate susceptibility to flood, but their weights vary by analysis. Vulnerability consists of population, informal settlements, and building density, which were given equal weight. Susceptibility and vulnerability were combined to map flood risk. This analysis used a bivariate legend to understand the different levels of risk along a spectrum from low susceptibility and low vulnerability (low risk) to high susceptibility and high vulnerability (high risk). Data processed in Google Earth Engine, which identified historical inundation on various occasions, were used to validate the flood susceptibility layers. Results showed 89% of areas designated as high susceptibility are located within the floodway designated by the FEMA HEC-RAS maps. The eastern region of Toa Baja is most at risk for flooding due to high susceptibility to flooding along with a high density of population, buildings, and informal settlements. The resulting map also reveals the presence of smaller high-risk areas all around the municipality. This analysis provides scientific evidence for flood risk mitigation in Toa Baja by highlighting areas that might be impacted by strong floods in the future. Additionally, these results are communicated in an Esri ArcGIS StoryMap, an accessible platform that can easily inform the public about the flood risk in their neighborhood.

Adriana Le Compte↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

HUMAN FACTORS AND BEHAVIORAL PERFORMANCE EXPLORATION MEASURES: ASSESSING ASTRONAUT RISK

INTRODUCTION: The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Exploration Measures (HFBP-EM) suite is a set of standardized measures to assess behavioral health and performance risk related to future exploration class missions, and to support reduction of the Human Research Program’s (HRP) Behavioral Medicine (BMed), Team, Sleep, and Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA) risks. This presentation will provide an overview of the HFBP-EM program, describe its implementation across spaceflight analogs and the international space station (ISS), and discuss its applicability to audience members. TOPIC: HFBP-EM is a research program designed to develop a standard set of measures that can be used in space and space-analog research to characterize BMed, Team, Sleep, and HSIA risks. It is an ongoing research project that is used examine the validity and reliability of HFBP measures, as well as their shorter forms. It also serves as a test bed for HFBP measures being considered for the spaceflight standard measures. The suite of measures is used to test the efficacy of countermeasures. To date, HFBP-EM has been collected in Human Exploration Research Analogs campaigns 4 and 5, and the SIRIUS 19 mission in the Russian Ground Based Experiment Complex. A subset of the HFBP-EM suite was collected during spaceflight as part of HRP’s Standard Measures in Spaceflight Project. Data was collected from a total of 55 multinational astronaut and astronaut-like crewmembers (mean age: 39.5, SD = 7.6; 31% female; 91% with advanced degrees). Three broad categories of HFBP-EM measures and their relevance to HRP risks will be discussed: 1) surveys that assess team functioning (Teams risk) as well as mood and affect (Bmed risk), 2) performance-based tasks of cognitive functioning and operationally relevant performance (Bmed risk), and 3) physiological biomarkers of sleep (sleep risk) and heart rate (Bmed risk). We will provide an overview of the background of the HFBP-EM program, what the suite currently includes, and next steps in its future development. We will also discuss the application to aerospace practitioners and researchers. APPLICATION: Astronaut teams selected for future space exploration missions will face several challenges that pose significant yet still unknown risks to the behavioral health and performance of astronauts. The HFBP-EM suite provides a comprehensive assessment of behavioral health and performance in space analog and spaceflight settings. This suite can be applied to both operational and research settings to advance risk reduction research for long duration space exploration missions.

S T Bell↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Applications and Performance of a Lightning Risk Assessment using Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM) Data

Lightning is a hazard globally, particularly in lesser-developed countries. Cloud-to-ground lightning strikes are a threat to human safety, motivating a desire to monitor location-based lightning risk to mitigate harm. A lightning risk assessment for human safety was created that uses a combination of probabilistic risk calculation and spatial lightning mapping data to produce a risk magnitude. This risk magnitude evolves with time and changing conditions and is compared to tolerability thresholds in order to evaluate safety. The risk assessment using lightning mapping array (LMA) flash extent density (FED) data was found to perform comparatively (with respect to issuing lightning warnings) to a more standard method of monitoring lightning safety where National Lightning Detection Network (NLDN) flashes were monitored within a 5 nautical mile radius of a location of interest. This research investigates the replacement of LMA FED with FED from the Geostationary Lightning Mapper (GLM) within the risk assessment framework. Using GLM FED would allow for risk to be calculated outside of LMA domains and anywhere within the GLM field of view, including areas outside of the United States (US). A few applications of the risk method with GLM FED are shown and discussed for locations both in and outside of the US. Additionally, the performance of the risk method is compared based on the type of lightning input source (LMA vs GLM). The end goal of this work is to provide forecasters and end users with a tool to help monitor lightning risk in decision support scenarios.

Kelley Murphy↗