Results for “risk objectives” — Page 15

NASA NTRS2011

Recent Experiences of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) Guidance Navigation and Control (GN and C) Technical Discipline Team (TDT)

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) is an independently funded NASA Program whose dedicated team of technical experts provides objective engineering and safety assessments of critical, high risk projects. NESC's strength is rooted in the diverse perspectives and broad knowledge base that add value to its products, affording customers a responsive, alternate path for assessing and preventing technical problems while protecting vital human and national resources. The Guidance Navigation and Control (GN&C) Technical Discipline Team (TDT) is one of fifteen such discipline-focused teams within the NESC organization. The TDT membership is composed of GN&C specialists from across NASA and its partner organizations in other government agencies, industry, national laboratories, and universities. This paper will briefly define the vision, mission, and purpose of the NESC organization. The role of the GN&C TDT will then be described in detail along with an overview of how this team operates and engages in its objective engineering and safety assessments of critical NASA.

Dennehy, Cornelius J.↗

NASA NTRS2012

The International Space Station: Unique In-Space Testbed as Exploration Analog

Final assembly of the International Space Station (ISS) was completed in 2011. As articulated in the 2011 NASA Strategic Plan, the Agency's first goal is to extend and sustain human activities across the solar system. Thus, the emerging NASA vision is to launch a bold and ambitious new space initiative to enable human space exploration beyond low-Earth orbit to Lagrange points, the moon, near-Earth asteroids (NEAs), and Mars and its environs. To accomplish this vision, it is necessary to develop and validate innovative exploration technologies and operational concepts. With the extended life of the ISS to 2020 and possibly 2028, NASA has a mandate to maximize the potential of the Nation's newest National Laboratory. Exploration and ISS teams within NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) have initiated a cooperative effort: the ISS Testbed for Analog Research (ISTAR), a high-fidelity operational analog that complements existing NASA terrestrial laboratory and field testing. To maximize use of the ISS platform to evaluate new exploration technologies, capabilities, and operational concepts to better comprehend and mitigate human spaceflight risks, ISTAR seeks out and encourages investigations dubbed "exploration detailed test objectives" (xDTOs). These xDTOs, building blocks of ISTAR missions, develop and optimize the operations concepts and the use of new technologies that should reduce risks and challenges facing astronauts on long exploration spaceflight voyages. In this paper, we describe (1) the rationale behind ISTAR, (2) a five-year strategic plan, (3) the approach for mission formulation, development, integration, and execution, (4) concepts for near-term missions that implement a phased approach for using ISS as an exploration testbed, and (5) the planned Mars mission simulation using the ISS. This paper will also document several challenges ISTAR must address to execute its missions.

Analog Mission↗

NASA NTRS2008

Lunar Surface Habitat Configuration Assessment: Methodology and Observations

The Lunar Habitat Configuration Assessment evaluated the major habitat approaches that were conceptually developed during the Lunar Architecture Team II Study. The objective of the configuration assessment was to identify desired features, operational considerations, and risks to derive habitat requirements. This assessment only considered operations pertaining to the lunar surface and did not consider all habitat conceptual designs developed. To examine multiple architectures, the Habitation Focus Element Team defined several adequate concepts which warranted the need for a method to assess the various configurations. The fundamental requirement designed into each concept included the functional and operational capability to support a crew of four on a six-month lunar surface mission; however, other conceptual aspects were diverse in comparison. The methodology utilized for this assessment consisted of defining figure of merits, providing relevant information, and establishing a scoring system. In summary, the assessment considered the geometric configuration of each concept to determine the complexity of unloading, handling, mobility, leveling, aligning, mating to other elements, and the accessibility to the lunar surface. In theory, the assessment was designed to derive habitat requirements, potential technology development needs and identify risks associated with living and working on the lunar surface. Although the results were more subjective opposed to objective, the assessment provided insightful observations for further assessments and trade studies of lunar surface habitats. This overall methodology and resulting observations will be describe in detail and illustrative examples will be discussed.

Carpenter, Amanda↗

NASA NTRS2015

NASA System Safety Handbook. Volume 2: System Safety Concepts, Guidelines, and Implementation Examples

This is the second of two volumes that collectively comprise the NASA System Safety Handbook. Volume 1 (NASASP-210-580) was prepared for the purpose of presenting the overall framework for System Safety and for providing the general concepts needed to implement the framework. Volume 2 provides guidance for implementing these concepts as an integral part of systems engineering and risk management. This guidance addresses the following functional areas: 1.The development of objectives that collectively define adequate safety for a system, and the safety requirements derived from these objectives that are levied on the system. 2.The conduct of system safety activities, performed to meet the safety requirements, with specific emphasis on the conduct of integrated safety analysis (ISA) as a fundamental means by which systems engineering and risk management decisions are risk-informed. 3.The development of a risk-informed safety case (RISC) at major milestone reviews to argue that the systems safety objectives are satisfied (and therefore that the system is adequately safe). 4.The evaluation of the RISC (including supporting evidence) using a defined set of evaluation criteria, to assess the veracity of the claims made therein in order to support risk acceptance decisions.

Safety Case↗

NASA NTRS2024

NASA Risk Management Handbook: Version 2.0, Part 1

The purpose of this handbook is to provide an in-depth reference for the practice of risk management in NASA, updating the guidance offered in its original version, NASA/SP-2011-3422 (November 2011), and closely aligning the updated guidance with the current NASA Procedural Requirements for Agency Risk Management, NPR 8000.4, and the parent NASA Policy Directive for NASA Governance and Strategic Management, NPD 1000.0. NPD 1000.0 introduces with emphasis the concept of “Risk Leadership,” making it a fundamental tenet and pillar of the risk management culture that it advocates for the Agency. NPR 8000.4 applies this concept and establishes Risk Management (RM) requirements for the Agency as an integrated enterprise, as well as the RM requirements for portfolio elements within the enterprise. Such elements include the various programs and projects that contribute to the Agency’s objectives and the various institutional activities carried out by entities that contribute to mission support. The present version of the handbook also emphasizes the integration of risk management processes across activity and project life cycles and their coordination and interaction with day-to-day programmatic and organizational functions. Areas of application of risk assessment and management that were not covered with specific guidance in the preceding version are addressed in this version with in-depth examples. The handbook is structured into two parts, whose chapters are in turn organized in a sequential order intended to facilitate a gradual and progressive introduction of the reader to risk management principles and practices. Part 1 of the handbook is dedicated to the introduction of the basic foundations of the NASA integrated risk management framework, the related fundamental risk concepts, the description of the risk management and decision processes that are to be implemented within the framework, the discussion of the risk assessment techniques that should be utilized in support of such processes, and the management and organizational interactions and interfaces that should be enabled to implement an effective integration of risk management activities within the Agency. Part 2 provides self-contained, end-to-end examples of application of the processes and techniques introduced in Part 1, in the context of both programmatic (i.e., project and/or mission related) and institutional activities.

Uncertainty↗

NASA NTRS2009

Wind Characterization for the Assessment of Collision Risk During Flight Level Changes

A model of vertical wind gradient is presented based on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) wind data. The objective is to have an accurate representation of wind to be used in Collision Risk Models (CRM) of aircraft procedures. Depending on how an aircraft procedure is defined, wind and the different characteristics of the wind will have a more severe or less severe impact on distances between aircraft. For the In-Trail Procedure, the non-linearity of the vertical wind gradient has the greatest impact on longitudinal distance. The analysis in this paper extracts standard deviation, mean, maximum, and linearity characteristics from the NOAA data.

Carreno, Victor↗

NASA NTRS2019

High Efficiency Megawatt Motor Preliminary Design

The High Efficiency Megawatt Motor (HEMM) is being designed to meet the needs of Electrified Aircraft Propulsion (EAP). A preliminary design has been completed and risk reduction activities are being conducted in three key areas: cryogenic cooler design, superconducting rotor coil design and manufacturing, and stator thermal management. The key objective of HEMM is to establish a motor technology which simultaneously attains high specific power (>16kW/kg ratio to electromagnetic weight) and high efficiency (>98%) by judicious application of high temperature superconducting wire and integrated thermal management. Another important feature is to achieve the performance goals with an eye to aircraft integration constraints. An electromagnetic analysis was performed which shows that the proposed HEMM design meets the performance objectives if key current capability and mechanical constraints are achieved. The risk reduction activities are the first assessment of the key design features. The HEMM technology could be applied to a range of aircraft types that require megawatt level electrical power.

Jansen, Ralph H.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Risk Management at the Total Project Level

Flight Projects plan their work against challenging technical objectives and tight schedules, and in the new environment of Faster-Better-Cheaper, low, rigid budgets.

Risk Management Space Projects↗

NASA NTRS2007

Measurement Decision Risk - The Importance of Definitions

One of the more misunderstood areas of metrology is the Test Uncertainty Ratio (TUR) and its cousin, the Test Accuracy Ratio (TAR). There have been many definitions over the years, but why are these definitions important to a discussion on measurement decision risk? The importance lies in the clarity of communication. Problems can immediately arise in the application (or misapplication) of the definition of these terms. In other words, while it is important to understand the definitions, it is more important to understand concepts behind the definitions and to be precise in how they are applied. The objective of any measurement is a decision. Measurement Decision Risk is a way to look at the quality of a measurement and although it is not a new concept, it has generated a lot of attention since its addition as a requirement in the new U.S. National Standard, ANSI/NCSL Z540.3-2006. In addition to Measurement Decision Risk as the prime method of managing measurement risk, Z540.3 has also added, as a fall-back, an explicit definition for TUR. The impact these changes might have on calibration service providers if these requirements are levied on them has become the topic of much discussion and in some cases concern. This paper looks at the concepts behind the definitions and how they relate to Measurement Decision Risk. Using common examples, this paper will also provide a comparison of various elements of risk related to measurement science using the concepts of TAR, TUR, accuracy ratios, and Consumer Risk (False Accept Risk). The goal is to provide a better understanding of their relevance to the measurement decision process.

Mimbs, Scott M.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Measurement Decision Risk - The Importance of Definitions

One of the more misunderstood areas of metrology is the Test Uncertainty Ratio (TUR) and the Test Accuracy Ratio (TAR). There have been many definitions over the years, but why are these definitions important to a discussion on measurement decision risk? The importance lies in the clarity of communication. Problems can immediately arise in the application (or misapplication) of the definition of these terms. In other words, while it is important to understand the definitions, it is more important to understand concepts behind the definitions and to be precise in how they are applied. The objective of any measurement is a decision. Measurement Decision Risk is a way to look at the quality of a measurement, and although it is not a new concept, it has generated a lot of attention since its addition as a requirement in the new U.S. National Standard, ANSIINCSL Z540.3-2006. In addition to Measurement Decision Risk as the prime method of managing measurement risk, Z540.3 has added, as a fall-back, an explicit definition for TUR. The impact these new requirements may have on calibration service providers has become the topic of much discussion and in some cases concern. This paper will look at the concepts behind the definitions and how they relate to Measurement Decision Risk. Using common examples, this paper will also provide a comparison of various elements of risk related to measurement science using the concepts of TAR, TUR, accuracy ratios, and Consumer Risk (False Accept Risk). The goal of this paper is to provide a better understanding of their relevance to the measurement decision process.

Mimbs, Scott M.↗

NASA NTRS2003

Burn-Resistant, Strong Metal-Matrix Composites

Ceramic particulate fillers increase the specific strengths and burn resistances of metals: This is the conclusion drawn by researchers at Johnson Space Center's White Sands Test Facility. The researchers had theorized that the inclusion of ceramic particles in metal tools and other metal objects used in oxygen-rich atmospheres (e.g., in hyperbaric chambers and spacecraft) could reduce the risk of fire and the consequent injury or death of personnel. In such atmospheres, metal objects act as ignition sources, creating fire hazards. However, not all metals are equally hazardous: some are more burn-resistant than others are. It was the researchers purpose to identify a burn-resistant, high-specific-strength ceramic-particle/metal-matrix composite that could be used in oxygen-rich atmospheres. The researchers studied several metals. Nickel and cobalt alloys exhibit high burn resistances and are dense. The researchers next turned to ceramics, which they knew do not act as ignition sources. Unlike metals, ceramics are naturally burn-resistant. Unfortunately, they also exhibit low fracture toughnesses.

Stoltzfus, Joel M.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Sustaining a Mature Risk Management Process: Ensuring the International Space Station for a Vibrant Future

The International Space Station (ISS) risk management methodology is an example of a mature and sustainable process. Risk management is a systematic approach used to proactively identify, analyze, plan, track, control, communicate, and document risks to help management make risk-informed decisions that increase the likelihood of achieving program objectives. The ISS has been operating in space for over 14 years and permanently crewed for over 12 years. It is the longest surviving habitable vehicle in low Earth orbit history. Without a mature and proven risk management plan, it would be increasingly difficult to achieve mission success throughout the life of the ISS Program. A successful risk management process must be able to adapt to a dynamic program. As ISS program-level decision processes have evolved, so too has the ISS risk management process continued to innovate, improve, and adapt. Constant adaptation of risk management tools and an ever-improving process is essential to the continued success of the ISS Program. Above all, sustained support from program management is vital to risk management continued effectiveness. Risk management is valued and stressed as an important process by the ISS Program.

Raftery, Michael↗

NASA NTRS2010

Comparison of ORSAT and SCARAB Reentry Analysis Tools for a Generic Satellite Test Case

Reentry analysis is essential to understanding the consequences of the full life cycle of a spacecraft. Since reentry is a key factor in spacecraft development, NASA and ESA have separately developed tools to assess the survivability of objects during reentry. Criteria such as debris casualty area and impact energy are particularly important to understanding the risks posed to people on Earth. Therefore, NASA and ESA have undertaken a series of comparison studies of their respective reentry codes for verification and improvements in accuracy. The NASA Object Reentry Survival Analysis Tool (ORSAT) and the ESA Spacecraft Atmospheric Reentry and Aerothermal Breakup (SCARAB) reentry analysis tools serve as standard codes for reentry survivability assessment of satellites. These programs predict whether an object will demise during reentry and calculate the debris casualty area of objects determined to survive, establishing the reentry risk posed to the Earth's population by surviving debris. A series of test cases have been studied for comparison and the most recent uses "Testsat," a conceptual satellite composed of generic parts, defined to use numerous simple shapes and various materials for a better comparison of the predictions of these two codes. This study is an improvement on the others in this series because of increased consistency in modeling techniques and variables. The overall comparison demonstrated that the two codes arrive at similar results. Either most objects modeled resulted in close agreement between the two codes, or if the difference was significant, the variance could be explained as a case of semantics in the model definitions. This paper presents the main results of ORSAT and SCARAB for the Testsat case and discusses the sources of any discovered differences. Discussion of the results of previous comparisons is made for a summary of differences between the codes and lessons learned from this series of tests.

Kelley, Robert L.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ARCTRON: A Rapid Experimental Proving Ground for TPS Experiments and Arcjet Technology Development

Innovation in high-enthalpy facilities is fundamentally limited by the cost and risk of experimentation. New concepts for plasma control, diagnostics, facility components, and plasma-material interaction often require repeated iterations that are impractical to perform in production arcjets. As a result, promising ideas may remain unexplored or reach operational facilities only after significant development effort. ARCTRON is being developed as a rapid experimental proving ground where new ideas in plasma science, arcjet engineering, diagnostics, and material response can be conceived, tested, and quantitatively evaluated before transition to large-scale facilities. The platform combines radio-frequency (RF) and DC arc plasma generation, externally applied magnetic fields, configurable gas composition, reduced-pressure operation, laser heating, electrical biasing, and modular diagnostic access. These capabilities permit the plasma source, applied forcing, test article, and measurement configuration to be modified independently, allowing individual physical mechanisms to be isolated more readily than in a traditional test environment. One class of investigations addresses fundamental plasma-surface interaction physics. Conventional material tests often expose a specimen simultaneously to convective heating, reactive species, pressure, shear, radiation, and surface-current effects. The resulting material response may be measured accurately, while the contribution of each mechanism remains difficult to identify. ARCTRON is designed to vary these effects selectively. Plasma chemistry can be changed independently through configurable gas mixtures; magnetic fields and electrical biasing can modify charged-particle transport; laser heating can provide a non-plasma thermal input; and pressure, flow, and discharge mode can be varied over a broad operating space. This enables controlled tests of hypotheses involving surface catalycity, reactive-species transport, plasma-assisted oxidation, electromagnetic effects, shear, and the relative contributions of thermal and chemical loading. A second class of investigations enabled by this approach concerns the engineering of high-enthalpy facilities themselves. Arc-heated facilities are limited by electrode erosion, unstable arc attachment, localized heating, and damage to nozzles and other plasma-facing components. ARCTRON provides a lower-cost environment for testing concepts intended to mitigate these limitations. Candidate investigations include the use of applied magnetic fields to alter current paths and reduce plasma interaction with nozzle walls, ExB forcing to introduce controlled plasma rotation, magnetic or geometric approaches for distributing arc attachment, and alternative electrode or discharge configurations intended to reduce erosion and improve stability. Because the platform is reconfigurable, these concepts can be evaluated through repeated design--build--test cycles before they are considered for implementation in operational facilities. The platform also supports the development and validation of diagnostics that may be difficult to introduce initially into a large arcjet. Current and planned measurements include spatially resolved optical emission spectroscopy, electrostatic probes, fast imaging, pyrometry, calorimetry, laser-induced fluorescence, and absorption spectroscopy. These diagnostics are intended not merely to document a nominal operating condition, but to constrain the local plasma state and its relationship to component or material response. The modular facility geometry allows diagnostic concepts to be tested, calibrated, and compared under repeatable conditions before deployment in more demanding environments. ARCTRON is also supported by an integrated software suite. Automated control and data acquisition allow discharge parameters, gas composition, magnetic fields, diagnostic timing, and test configuration to be recorded as part of each experiment (STARDAC - Software for Testing, Analysis, Research Data, and Control). The Backend for Experiment Analysis, Storage, and Traceability (BEAST) is a database that provides the infrastructure needed to associate heterogeneous measurements with facility configuration, specimen identity, calibration state, geometry, and analysis provenance. This backend is particularly important for exploratory campaigns, in which many related configurations may be tested, and the value of an individual experiment depends on its connection to earlier and subsequent iterations. Complementary analysis capabilities, including computer-vision-based transient response measurements (arcjetCV), three-dimensional surface reconstruction (STARSCAN), and model-based Bayesian inference (SHIELD), and tomography data analysis (TOMATO, PuMA) can be incorporated when required by a specific hypothesis without becoming the focus of every campaign. The central objective of ARCTRON is therefore not to maximize heat flux or reproduce a complete flight environment. Its purpose is to reduce the cost and time required to ask consequential questions about plasma behavior, plasma-facing materials, diagnostics, and arcjet technology. By providing a controlled environment for rapid reconfiguration, mechanism isolation, quantitative measurement, and iterative engineering, ARCTRON can help mature concepts that would otherwise remain too speculative or too risky for evaluation in production facilities. The resulting knowledge can then guide the design of material models, focus test objectives in larger arcjets, reduce facility-development risk, and improve the physical basis of high-enthalpy ground testing. This work will present the ARCTRON architecture, operating modes, diagnostic suite, and digital experimental workflow. Initial experimental results from the first integrated operation of the facility will be presented, including flow characterization, power limitations, and deployment of the initial diagnostic suite. Ongoing development efforts aimed at catalycity characterization, magnetic plasma control, and advanced optical diagnostics will also be discussed, illustrating how the platform supports rapid iteration from concept to experiment.

experimental diagnostics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ARCTRON: A Rapid Experimental Proving Ground for TPS Experiments and Arcjet Technology Development

Innovation in high-enthalpy facilities is fundamentally limited by the cost and risk of experimentation. New concepts for plasma control, diagnostics, facility components, and plasma-material interaction often require repeated iterations that are impractical to perform in production arcjets. As a result, promising ideas may remain unexplored or reach operational facilities only after significant development effort. ARCTRON is being developed as a rapid experimental proving ground where new ideas in plasma science, arcjet engineering, diagnostics, and material response can be conceived, tested, and quantitatively evaluated before transition to large-scale facilities. The platform combines radio-frequency (RF) and DC arc plasma generation, externally applied magnetic fields, configurable gas composition, reduced-pressure operation, laser heating, electrical biasing, and modular diagnostic access. These capabilities permit the plasma source, applied forcing, test article, and measurement configuration to be modified independently, allowing individual physical mechanisms to be isolated more readily than in a traditional test environment. One class of investigations addresses fundamental plasma-surface interaction physics. Conventional material tests often expose a specimen simultaneously to convective heating, reactive species, pressure, shear, radiation, and surface-current effects. The resulting material response may be measured accurately, while the contribution of each mechanism remains difficult to identify. ARCTRON is designed to vary these effects selectively. Plasma chemistry can be changed independently through configurable gas mixtures; magnetic fields and electrical biasing can modify charged-particle transport; laser heating can provide a non-plasma thermal input; and pressure, flow, and discharge mode can be varied over a broad operating space. This enables controlled tests of hypotheses involving surface catalycity, reactive-species transport, plasma-assisted oxidation, electromagnetic effects, shear, and the relative contributions of thermal and chemical loading. A second class of investigations enabled by this approach concerns the engineering of high-enthalpy facilities themselves. Arc-heated facilities are limited by electrode erosion, unstable arc attachment, localized heating, and damage to nozzles and other plasma-facing components. ARCTRON provides a lower-cost environment for testing concepts intended to mitigate these limitations. Candidate investigations include the use of applied magnetic fields to alter current paths and reduce plasma interaction with nozzle walls, ExB forcing to introduce controlled plasma rotation, magnetic or geometric approaches for distributing arc attachment, and alternative electrode or discharge configurations intended to reduce erosion and improve stability. Because the platform is reconfigurable, these concepts can be evaluated through repeated design--build--test cycles before they are considered for implementation in operational facilities. The platform also supports the development and validation of diagnostics that may be difficult to introduce initially into a large arcjet. Current and planned measurements include spatially resolved optical emission spectroscopy, electrostatic probes, fast imaging, pyrometry, calorimetry, laser-induced fluorescence, and absorption spectroscopy. These diagnostics are intended not merely to document a nominal operating condition, but to constrain the local plasma state and its relationship to component or material response. The modular facility geometry allows diagnostic concepts to be tested, calibrated, and compared under repeatable conditions before deployment in more demanding environments. ARCTRON is also supported by an integrated software suite. Automated control and data acquisition allow discharge parameters, gas composition, magnetic fields, diagnostic timing, and test configuration to be recorded as part of each experiment (STARDAC - Software for Testing, Analysis, Research Data, and Control). The Backend for Experiment Analysis, Storage, and Traceability (BEAST) is a database that provides the infrastructure needed to associate heterogeneous measurements with facility configuration, specimen identity, calibration state, geometry, and analysis provenance. This backend is particularly important for exploratory campaigns, in which many related configurations may be tested, and the value of an individual experiment depends on its connection to earlier and subsequent iterations. Complementary analysis capabilities, including computer-vision-based transient response measurements (arcjetCV), three-dimensional surface reconstruction (STARSCAN), and model-based Bayesian inference (SHIELD), and tomography data analysis (TOMATO, PuMA) can be incorporated when required by a specific hypothesis without becoming the focus of every campaign. The central objective of ARCTRON is therefore not to maximize heat flux or reproduce a complete flight environment. Its purpose is to reduce the cost and time required to ask consequential questions about plasma behavior, plasma-facing materials, diagnostics, and arcjet technology. By providing a controlled environment for rapid reconfiguration, mechanism isolation, quantitative measurement, and iterative engineering, ARCTRON can help mature concepts that would otherwise remain too speculative or too risky for evaluation in production facilities. The resulting knowledge can then guide the design of material models, focus test objectives in larger arcjets, reduce facility-development risk, and improve the physical basis of high-enthalpy ground testing. This work will present the ARCTRON architecture, operating modes, diagnostic suite, and digital experimental workflow. Initial experimental results from the first integrated operation of the facility will be presented, including flow characterization, power limitations, and deployment of the initial diagnostic suite. Ongoing development efforts aimed at catalycity characterization, magnetic plasma control, and advanced optical diagnostics will also be discussed, illustrating how the platform supports rapid iteration from concept to experiment.

experimental diagnostics↗

NASA NTRS2006

Exploration Health Risks: Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Maintenance of human health on long-duration exploration missions is a primary challenge to mission designers. Indeed, human health risks are currently the largest risk contributors to the risks of evacuation or loss of the crew on long-duration International Space Station missions. We describe a quantitative assessment of the relative probabilities of occurrence of the individual risks to human safety and efficiency during space flight to augment qualitative assessments used in this field to date. Quantitative probabilistic risk assessments will allow program managers to focus resources on those human health risks most likely to occur with undesirable consequences. Truly quantitative assessments are common, even expected, in the engineering and actuarial spheres, but that capability is just emerging in some arenas of life sciences research, such as identifying and minimize the hazards to astronauts during future space exploration missions. Our expectation is that these results can be used to inform NASA mission design trade studies in the near future with the objective of preventing the higher among the human health risks. We identify and discuss statistical techniques to provide this risk quantification based on relevant sets of astronaut biomedical data from short and long duration space flights as well as relevant analog populations. We outline critical assumptions made in the calculations and discuss the rationale for these. Our efforts to date have focussed on quantifying the probabilities of medical risks that are qualitatively perceived as relatively high risks of radiation sickness, cardiac dysrhythmias, medically significant renal stone formation due to increased calcium mobilization, decompression sickness as a result of EVA (extravehicular activity), and bone fracture due to loss of bone mineral density. We present these quantitative probabilities in order-of-magnitude comparison format so that relative risk can be gauged. We address the effects of conservative and nonconservative assumptions on the probability results. We discuss the methods necessary to assess mission risks once exploration mission scenarios are characterized. Preliminary efforts have produced results that are commensurate with earlier qualitative estimates of risk probabilities in this and other operational contexts, indicating that our approach may be usefully applied in support of the development of human health and performance standards for long-duration space exploration missions. This approach will also enable mission-specific probabilistic risk assessments for space exploration missions.

Rhatigan, Jennifer↗

NASA NTRS1982

Aeronautics research and technology. A review of proposed reductions in the FY 1983 NASA program

Reductions in the Fiscal Year 1983 program from the original proposal to the levels of the appropriation request submitted to Congress are reviewed. The request asked for an assessment of the national criticality of the excluded programs and, for each one, the risk (probability of success) associated with achieving the objectives sought and the degree to which it might be assumed by the private sector. Based on this request, a charge comprising an assessment of those aeronautics projects excluded from the FY 1983 budget request to Congress, the likelihood that industry would undertake them, the impact of their not being done, and the more general question of the need for government to bridge the gap between the aeronautics research and technology base and early application was developed. The charge further specifies that the assessment is to encompass considerations of safety, national defense, efficient transport, and the national economy.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1982

Flat-plate solar array progress and plans

The emphasis of the Flat-plate Solar Array Project has been shifted from price goals and commercial development toward longer-term, higher risk, higher-potential-payoff opportunities. The revised objectives, status, and plans of the project are presented and technical progress is noted in the areas of: large-area sheet formation; silicon feedstock refinement; flat-plate module process sequence development; and engineering and environmental testing.

Callaghan, W. T.↗