Results for “Assessment” — Page 2

NASA NTRS1980

Carbon/graphite fiber risk analysis and assessment study: An assessment of the risk to Douglas commercial transport aircraft

The potential hazard to electrical and electronic devices should there be a release of free carbon fibers due to an aircraft crash and fire was assessed. Exposure and equipment sensitivity data were compiled for a risk analysis. Results are presented in the following areas: DC-9/DC-10 electrical/electronic component characterization; DC-9 and DC-10 fiber transfer functions; potential for transport aircraft equipment exposure to carbon fibers; and equipment vulnerability assessment. Results reflect only a negligible increase in risk for the DC-9 and DC-10 fleets either now or projected to 1993.

Schjelderup, H. C.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the EPD and C/remote manipulator system FMEA/CIL

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Electrical Power Distribution and Control (EPD and C)/Remote Manipulator System (RMS) hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA analysis of the EPD and C/RMS hardware initially generated 345 failure mode worksheets and identified 117 Potential Critical Items (PCIs) before starting the assessment process. These analysis results were compared to the proposed NASA Post 51-L baseline of 132 FMEAs and 66 CIL items.

Robinson, W. W.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the backup flight system FMEA/CIL

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Backup Flight System (BFS) hardware, generating draft failure modes and Potential Critical Items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed NASA Post 51-L FMEA/CIL baseline. A resolution of each discrepancy from the comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter BFS hardware. The IOA product for the BFS analysis consisted of 29 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 21 Potential Critical Items (PCI) being identified. This product was originally compared with the proposed NASA BFS baseline and subsequently compared with the applicable Data Processing System (DPS), Electrical Power Distribution and Control (EPD and C), and Displays and Controls NASA CIL items. The comparisons determined if there were any results which had been found by the IOA but were not in the NASA baseline. The original assessment determined there were numerous failure modes and potential critical items in the IOA analysis that were not contained in the NASA BFS baseline. Conversely, the NASA baseline contained three FMEAs (IMU, ADTA, and Air Data Probe) for CIL items that were not identified in the IOA product.

Prust, E. E.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the life support and airlock support systems, volume 1

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Life Support and Airlock Support Systems (LSS and ALSS) hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the NASA FMEA/CIL baseline with proposed Post 51-L updates included. The discrepancies were flagged for potential future resolution. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter LSS and ALSS hardware. The IOA product for the LSS and ALSS analysis consisted of 511 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 140 potential critical items. Comparison was made to the NASA baseline which consisted of 456 FMEAs and 101 CIL items. The IOA analysis identified 39 failure modes, 6 of which were classified as CIL items, for components not covered by the NASA FMEAs. It was recommended that these failure modes be added to the NASA FMEA baseline. The overall assessment produced agreement on all but 301 FMEAs which caused differences in 111 CIL items.

Arbet, J. D.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the orbiter main propulsion system FMEA/CIL, volume 1

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Main Propulsion System (MPS) hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to available data from the Rockwell Downey/NASA JSC FMEA/CIL review. The Orbiter MPS is composed of the Propellant Management Subsystem (PMS) consisting of the liquid oxygen (LO2) and liquid hydrogen (LH2) subsystems and the helium subsystem. The PMS is a system of manifolds, distribution lines, and valves by which the liquid propellants pass from the External Tank to the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME). The helium subsystem consists of a series of helium supply tanks and their associated regulators, control valves, and distribution lines. Volume 1 contains the MPS description, assessment results, ground rules and assumptions, and some of the IOA worksheets.

Slaughter, B. C.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the communication and tracking subsystem, volume 1

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed and analysis of the Communication and Tracking hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. A resolution of each discrepancy from the comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter Communication and Tracking hardware. The IOA product for the Communication and Tracking consisted of 1,108 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 298 critical items being identified. Comparison was made to the NASA baseline which consists of 697 FMEAs and 239 CIL items. The comparison determined if there were any results which had been found by IOA but were not in the NASA baseline. This comparison produced agreement on all but 407 FMEAs which caused differences in 294 CIL items. Volume 1 contains the subsystem description, assessment results, ground rules and assumptions, and some of the IOA worksheets.

Long, W. C.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the reaction control system, volume 1

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the aft and forward Reaction Control System (RCS) hardware, and Electrical Power Distribution and Control (EPD and C), generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed Post 51-L NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter RCS hardware and EPD and C systems. The IOA product for the RCS analysis consisted of 208 hardware and 2064 EPD and C failure mode worksheets that resulted in 141 hardware and 449 EPD and C potential critical items (PCIs) being identified. A comparison was made of the IOA product to the NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. After comparison and discussions with the NASA subsystem manager, 96 hardware issues, 83 of which concern CIL items or PCIs, and 280 EPD and C issues, 158 of which concern CIL items or PCIs, and 280 EPD and C issues, 158 of which concern CIL items or PCIs, remain unresolved. Volume 1 contains the subsystem description, assessment results, and some of the IOA worksheets.

Prust, Chet D.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Assessing the Relative Risk of Aerocapture Using Probabalistic Risk Assessment

A recent study performed for the Aerocapture Technology Area in the In-Space Propulsion Technology Projects Office at the Marshall Space Flight Center investigated the relative risk of various capture techniques for Mars missions. Aerocapture has been proposed as a possible capture technique for future Mars missions but has been perceived by many in the community as a higher risk option as compared to aerobraking and propulsive capture. By performing a probabilistic risk assessment on aerocapture, aerobraking and propulsive capture, a comparison was made to uncover the projected relative risks of these three maneuvers. For mission planners, this knowledge will allow them to decide if the mass savings provided by aerocapture warrant any incremental risk exposure. The study focuses on a Mars Sample Return mission currently under investigation at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). In each case (propulsive, aerobraking and aerocapture), the Earth return vehicle is inserted into Martian orbit by one of the three techniques being investigated. A baseline spacecraft was established through initial sizing exercises performed by JPL's Team X. While Team X design results provided the baseline and common thread between the spacecraft, in each case the Team X results were supplemented by historical data as needed. Propulsion, thermal protection, guidance, navigation and control, software, solar arrays, navigation and targeting and atmospheric prediction were investigated. A qualitative assessment of human reliability was also included. Results show that different risk drivers contribute significantly to each capture technique. For aerocapture, the significant drivers include propulsion system failures and atmospheric prediction errors. Software and guidance hardware contribute the most to aerobraking risk. Propulsive capture risk is mainly driven by anomalous solar array degradation and propulsion system failures. While each subsystem contributes differently to the risk of each technique, results show that there exists little relative difference in the reliability of these capture techniques although uncertainty for the aerocapture estimates remains high given the lack of in-space demonstration.

Percy, Thomas K.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Integration of an Evidence Base into a Probabilistic Risk Assessment Model. The Integrated Medical Model Database: An Organized Evidence Base for Assessing In-Flight Crew Health Risk and System Design

This slide presentation reviews the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) database, which is an organized evidence base for assessing in-flight crew health risk. The database is a relational database accessible to many people. The database quantifies the model inputs by a ranking based on the highest value of the data as Level of Evidence (LOE) and the quality of evidence (QOE) score that provides an assessment of the evidence base for each medical condition. The IMM evidence base has already been able to provide invaluable information for designers, and for other uses.

Saile, Lynn↗

NASA NTRS2011

Assessment of Uncertainty-Based Screening Volumes for NASA Robotic LEO and GEO Conjunction Risk Assessment

Conjunction Assessment operations require screening assets against the space object catalog by placing a pre-determined spatial volume around each asset and predicting when another object will violate that volume. The selection of the screening volume used for each spacecraft is a trade-off between observing all conjunction events that may pose a potential risk to the primary spacecraft and the ability to analyze those predicted events. If the screening volumes are larger, then more conjunctions can be observed and therefore the probability of a missed detection of a high risk conjunction event is small; however, the amount of data which needs to be analyzed increases. This paper characterizes the sensitivity of screening volume size to capturing typical orbit uncertainties and the expected number of conjunction events observed. These sensitivities are quantified in the form of a trade space that allows for selection of appropriate screen-ing volumes to fit the desired concept of operations, system limitations, and tolerable analyst workloads. This analysis will specifically highlight the screening volume determination and selection process for use in the NASA Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis process but will also provide a general framework for other Owner / Operators faced with similar decisions.

Narvet, Steven W.↗

NASA NTRS2022

Environmental Justice Needs-Assessment For Health & Air Quality: Assessing the Needs and Capacity of Organizations Working Towards Health and Environmental Justice Related to Health and Air Quality

Health and air quality are concerns in environmental justice (EJ) work, as air contaminants and their adverse health effects inequitably impact communities that are often underrepresented in research and litigation. Previously, the NASA DEVELOP National Program partnered with organizations that focus on a variety of health and air quality concerns and is now committed to partnering directly with EJ organizations to address inequities in health and air quality through the application of Earth observations. To support the establishment of future partnerships, DEVELOP is working to identify potential partners for further EJ research in the U.S. regarding health and air quality. This project conducted a needs assessment with EJ organizations to quantify their EJ involvement, geospatial capacity, and interest in collaborating with DEVELOP. A broad literature review identified multiple factors influencing health and air quality for potential DEVELOP projects: agriculture, heat, wildfires, industry and transportation infrastructure, and miscellaneous factors (e.g., burning, urban heat island effect, smoke plumes, truck exhaust, and noise). The needs assessment showed that 22% of the organizations interviewed were primarily concerned with transportation infrastructure, 21% with industry, 19% with heat, 10% with miscellaneous factors (e.g., resource mining, COVID-19), 8% with wildfires, 7% with agriculture, and 6% with resource mining. This will help inform the DEVELOP Program's pursuit of EJ projects relating to health and air quality. The team also created a directory for communities impacted by air pollutants to connect with geospatial resources and NASA Applied Sciences personnel for future EJ health and air quality work.

Elizabeth Duran↗

NASA NTRS2025

Assessment of Model Outcomes Between the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) and the Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT)

The Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT) is a computational model that provides human health and medical risk predictions for crewed spaceflight missions. MEDPRAT utilizes discrete event modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation to predict critical mission outcomes (total medical events, crew health index, quality time lost, loss of crew life, removal to definitive care), condition occurrences, and resource consumption. Input parameters for MEDPRAT include crew attributes (e.g., sex), types of mission activities (e.g., whether and where crew members perform an extravehicular activity (EVA)), available resources, treatment information, and probability distributions for medical conditions. As an evolution of the Integrated Medical Model (IMM), MEDPRAT provides enhanced capabilities and higher fidelity, and incorporates more appropriate assumptions for long-duration spaceflight. IMM is the currently accepted standard for quantifying spaceflight mission medical risk in NASA operations that uses a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) approach. MEDPRAT builds on the same logical foundation as IMM but implements the model architecture through highly optimized Monte Carlo sampling methods. An analysis is performed comparing the outputs from IMM with those from MEDPRAT V1.0 and V2.0 for the same reference missions in order to quantify similarities and differences in the model outcomes. The juxtaposition between IMM and MEDPRAT V1.0 and 2.0 shown in this report demonstrates that these two models generate very similar results; where differences in outcomes are shown, these are in accordance with the underlying assumptions and differences in the model architectures. This validation effort further establishes the credibility and reliability of the MEDPRAT software.

Matthew T Prelich↗

NASA NTRS1987

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the electrical power generation/fuel cell powerplant subsystem FMEA/CIL

Results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Electrical Power Generation/Fuel Cell Powerplant (EPG/FCP) hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed Post 51-L NASA FMEA/CIL baseline. A resolution of each discrepancy from the comparison was provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter EPG/FCP hardware.

Brown, K. L.↗

NASA NTRS1986

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the data processing system FMEA/CIL

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Data Processing System (DPS) hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the NASA FMEA/CIL baseline with proposed Post 51-L updates included. A resolution of each discrepancy from the comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. The results of that comparison is documented for the Orbiter DPS hardware.

Lowery, H. J.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the electrical power generation/power reactant storage and distribution subsystem FMEA/CIL

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) is presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Electrical Power Generation/Power Reactant Storage and Distribution (EPG/PRSD) subsystem hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the NASA FMEA/CIL baselines with proposed Post 51-L updates included. A resolution of each discrepancy from the comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. The results of that comparison are documented for the Orbiter EPG/PRSD hardware. The comparison produced agreement on all but 27 FMEAs and 9 CIL items. The discrepancy between the number of IOA findings and NASA FMEAs can be partially explained by the different approaches used by IOA and NASA to group failure modes together to form one FMEA. Also, several IOA items represented inner tank components and ground operations failure modes which were not in the NASA baseline.

Ames, B. E.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the pyrotechnics subsystem

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Pyrotechnics (PYRO) hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the NASA FMEA/CIL baseline with proposed Post 51-L updates included. A resolution of each discrepancy from the comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter Pyrotechnics hardware.

Robinson, W. M.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the nose wheel steering subsystem

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Nose Wheel Steering (NWS) hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed NASA post 51-L FMEA/CIL baseline. A resolution of each discrepancy from the comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter NWS hardware.

Mediavilla, Anthony Scott↗

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the purge, vent and drain subsystem

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Purge, Vent and Drain (PV and D) hardware, generating draft failure modes and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the NASA FMEA/CIL baseline with proposed Post 51-L updates included. A resolution of each discrepancy from the comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter PV and D hardware. The PV and D Subsystem controls the environment of unpressurized compartments and window cavities, senses hazardous gases, and purges Orbiter/ET disconnect.

Bynum, M. C., III↗