Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “FMEA”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2012

Spaceflight Ground Support Equipment Reliability & System Safety Data

Presented were Reliability Analysis, consisting primarily of Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), and System Safety Analysis, consisting of Preliminary Hazards Analysis (PHA), performed to ensure that the CoNNeCT (Communications, Navigation, and Networking re- Configurable Testbed) Flight System was safely and reliably operated during its Assembly, Integration and Test (AI&T) phase. A tailored approach to the NASA Ground Support Equipment (GSE) standard, NASA-STD-5005C, involving the application of the appropriate Requirements, S&MA discipline expertise, and a Configuration Management system (to retain a record of the analysis and documentation) were presented. Presented were System Block Diagrams of selected GSE and the corresponding FMEA, as well as the PHAs. Also discussed are the specific examples of the FMEAs and PHAs being used during the AI&T phase to drive modifications to the GSE (via "redlining" of test procedures, and the placement of warning stickers to protect the flight hardware) before being interfaced to the Flight System. These modifications were necessary because failure modes and hazards were identified during the analysis that had not been properly mitigated. Strict Configuration Management was applied to changes (whether due to upgrades or expired calibrations) in the GSE by revisiting the FMEAs and PHAs to reflect the latest System Block Diagrams and Bill Of Material. The CoNNeCT flight system has been successfully assembled, integrated, tested, and shipped to the launch site without incident. This demonstrates that the steps taken to safeguard the flight system when it was interfaced to the various GSE were successful.

Fernandez, Rene↗
DOE OSTI2025

Preliminary System Interface Failure Mode Analysis for Two Advanced Reactors

This study explores two distinct Balance of Plant (BOP) configurations: the Rankine cycle for a sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR) and the Brayton cycle for a gas-cooled reactor (GCR). As representative designs, the Power Reactor Innovative Small Module (PRISM) by GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy was selected for the SFR, while the Gas Turbine Modular Helium Reactor (GT MHR) by General Atomics was chosen for the gas-cooled reactor. Both configurations were adapted to deliver high-quality heat for industrial applications. A Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) was conducted for each system to identify critical failure modes affecting key components. This study marks the first phase of a two-step design optimization approach, integrating FMEA into the design process. Based on the analysis, design modifications and mitigation strategies were proposed to enhance system resilience. The second phase, to be detailed in a subsequent report, will focus on the role of the control system in mitigating these failures. The FMEA serves as a foundation for defining the control topology, ensuring system resilience against component failures that could compromise essential functions, such as electricity and heat production.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the ascent thrust vector control actuator subsystem 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 Ascent Thrust Vector Control Actuator (ATVD) 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 ATVC hardware. The IOA product for the ATVC actuator analysis consisted of 25 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 16 potential critical items being identified. Comparison was made to the NASA baseline which consisted of 21 FMEAs and 13 CIL items. This comparison produced agreement on all CIL items. Based on the Pre 51-L baseline, all non-CIL FMEAs were also in agreement.

Wilson, R. E.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the 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 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 results were than 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 for the Orbiter RMS hardware are documented. The IOA product for the RMS analysis consisted of 604 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 458 potential critical items being identified. Comparison was made to the NASA baseline which consisted of 45 FMEAs and 321 CIL items. This comparison produced agreement on all but 154 FMEAs which caused differences in 137 CIL items.

Tangorra, F.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the landing/deceleration (LDG/DEC) subsystem 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 Landing/Deceleration (LDG/DEC) 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 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 LDG/DEC hardware. The IOA product for the LDG/DEC analysis consisted of 259 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 124 potential critical items being identified. Comparison was made to the NASA baseline which consisted of 267 FMEA's and 120 CIL items. This comparison produced agreement on all but 75 FMEA's which caused differences in 51 CIL items.

Odonnell, R. A.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the body flap subsystem 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 Body Flap (BF) 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 BF hardware. The IOA product for the BF analysis consisted of 43 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 19 potential critical items being identified. Comparison was made to the NASA baseline which consisted of 34 FMEAs and 15 CIL items. This comparison produced agreement on all CIL items. Based on the Pre 51-L baseline, all non-CIL FMEAs were also in agreement.

Wilson, R. E.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the elevon actuator subsystem 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 Elevon 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 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 Elevon hardware. The IOA product for the Elevon analysis consisted of 25 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 17 potential critical items being identified. Comparison was made to the NASA FMEA/CIL, which consisted of 23 FMEAs and 13 CIL items. This comparison produced agreement on all CIL items. Based on the Pre 51-L baseline, all non-CIL FMEAs were also in agreement.

Wilson, R. E.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the rudder/speed brake subsystem 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 Rudder/Speed Brake (RSB) 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 along with the proposed Post 51-L CIL updates included. 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 RSB hardware. The IOA product for the RSB analysis consisted of 38 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 27 potential critical items being identified. Comparison was made to the NASA baseline which consisted of 34 FMEAs and 18 CIL items. This comparison produced agreement on all CIL items. Based on the Pre 51-L baseline, all non-CIL FMEAs were also in agreement.

Wilson, R. E.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the guidance, navigation, and control subsystem 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 Guidance, Navigation, and Control System (GNC) 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 for the Orbiter GNC hardware is documented. The IOA product for the GNC analysis consisted of 141 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 24 potential critical items being identified. Comparison was made to the NASA baseline which consisted of 148 FMEAs and 36 CIL items. This comparison produced agreement on all but 56 FMEAs which caused differences in zero CIL items.

Trahan, W. H.↗
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 hydraulics/water spray boiler 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 Hydraulics/Water Spray Boiler (HYD/WSB) 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 HYD/WSB hardware. The IOA product for the HYD/WSB analysis consisted of 447 failure mode worksheets that resulted in 183 potential critical items being identified. Comparison was made to the NASA baseline which consisted of 364 FMEAs and 111 CIL items. This comparison produced agreement on all but 68 FMEAs which caused differences in 23 CIL items.

Bynum, M. C.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Model-OA wind turbine generator - Failure modes and effects analysis

The results failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) conducted for wind-turbine generators are presented. The FMEA was performed for the functional modes of each system, subsystem, or component. The single-point failures were eliminated for most of the systems. The blade system was the only exception. The qualitative probability of a blade separating was estimated at level D-remote. Many changes were made to the hardware as a result of this analysis. The most significant change was the addition of the safety system. Operational experience and need to improve machine availability have resulted in subsequent changes to the various systems, which are also reflected in this FMEA.

Klein, William E.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Ground Operations Autonomous Control and Integrated Health Management

An intelligent autonomous control capability has been developed and is currently being validated in ground cryogenic fluid management operations. The capability embodies a physical architecture consistent with typical launch infrastructure and control systems, augmented by a higher level autonomous control (AC) system enabled to make knowledge-based decisions. The AC system is supported by an integrated system health management (ISHM) capability that detects anomalies, diagnoses causes, determines effects, and could predict future anomalies. AC is implemented using the concept of programmed sequences that could be considered to be building blocks of more generic mission plans. A sequence is a series of steps, and each executes actions once conditions for the step are met (e.g. desired temperatures or fluid state are achieved). For autonomous capability, conditions must consider also health management outcomes, as they will determine whether or not an action is executed, or how an action may be executed, or if an alternative action is executed instead. Aside from health, higher level objectives can also drive how a mission is carried out. The capability was developed using the G2 software environment (www.gensym.com) augmented by a NASA Toolkit that significantly shortens time to deployment. G2 is a commercial product to develop intelligent applications. It is fully object oriented. The core of the capability is a Domain Model of the system where all elements of the system are represented as objects (sensors, instruments, components, pipes, etc.). Reasoning and decision making can be done with all elements in the domain model. The toolkit also enables implementation of failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), which are represented as root cause trees. FMEA's are programmed graphically, they are reusable, as they address generic FMEA referring to classes of subsystems or objects and their functional relationships. User interfaces for integrated awareness by operators have been created.

Figueroa, Fernando↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

What Went Wrong: A Survey of Wildfire UAS Mishaps through Named Entity Recognition

Increasingly, unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are being applied to wildfire incidents for tasks such as mapping, aerial ignition, and delivery. As a result, incident reporting systems for wildfires are beginning to accumulate data related to UAS mishaps in wildfire response. In this research, we apply state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) techniques to develop a custom Named Entity Recognition (NER) model which extracts a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA)-style survey of wildfire UAS mishaps reported in SAFECOM. The custom NER model is built by fine-tuning an existing (BERT) model, resulting in a generalizable NER model that can extract engineering relevant entities including failure modes, causes, effects, control processes, and recommendations from any failure-relevant text. Similar mishaps are clustered and reported as single rows within the FMEA. For each cluster, frequency, severity, and overall risk are computed. The methodology can be applied as part of a broader safety management system to track trends in mishaps and discover knowledge that can be utilized to improve safety outcomes and system performance.

Machine Learning↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

What Went Wrong: A Survey of Wildfire UAS Mishaps through Named Entity Recognition

Increasingly, unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are being applied to wildfire incidents for tasks such as mapping, aerial ignition, and delivery. As a result, aviation incident reporting systems for wildfires are beginning to accumulate data related to UAS mishaps in wildfire response. In this research, we apply state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) techniques to develop a custom Named Entity Recognition (NER) model which extracts entities relevant to safety analysts. The custom NER model is built by fine-tuning an existing Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) model, resulting in a generalizable NER model that can extract engineering relevant entities including failure modes, causes, effects, control processes, and recommendations from failure-relevant text. This model performs passably, with a weighted average f1 score of 0.33 across entity types, indicating more labeled training data is needed. Extracted entities are used to form a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA)-style survey of wildfire UAS mishaps reported using the SAFECOM system. Similar mishaps are manually clustered and reported as single rows within an FMEA. Foreach cluster, we compute frequency, severity, and overall riskin accordance with FAA standards. This methodology can beapplied as part of a broader safety management system totrack trends in mishaps (e.g., likelihood, severity) and discoverknowledge (e.g., causes, effects) that can be utilized to improvesafety outcomes and system performance.

Machine Learning↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

What Went Wrong: A Survey of Wildfire UAS Mishaps through Named Entity Recognition

Increasingly, unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are being applied to wildfire incidents for tasks such as mapping, aerial ignition, and delivery. As a result, incident reporting systems for wildfires are beginning to accumulate data related to UAS mishaps in wildfire response. In this research, we apply state-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) techniques to develop a custom Named Entity Recognition (NER) model which extracts a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA)-style survey of wildfire UAS mishaps reported in SAFECOM. The custom NER model is built by fine-tuning an existing (BERT) model, resulting in a generalizable NER model that can extract engineering relevant entities including failure modes, causes, effects, control processes, and recommendations from any failure-relevant text. Similar mishaps are clustered and reported as single rows within the FMEA. For each cluster, frequency, severity, and overall risk are computed. The methodology can be applied as part of a broader safety management system to track trends in mishaps and discover knowledge that can be utilized to improve safety outcomes and system performance.

Machine Learning↗
DOE OSTI2025

Risk Assessment of EIC Central Detector (ePIC) Solenoid Magnet (MARCO)

As part of the BNL-JLab-CEA Electron Ion Collider (EIC) collaboration, the design of a 2 T, 2.8 m bore diameter, 3.8 m long conduction cooled superconducting detector magnet design is completed. Such magnet will be employed at the interaction region of ePIC for physics experiment. The magnet is a passive shielded solenoidal magnet system consisting of 3 coils wound with specially designed conductor using NbTi Rutherford type cable in copper stabilized channel. This paper describes the risk analysis as the part of Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) that was carried out as a team to identify their various failure modes and risks associated with the magnets system. In conclusion, this FMEA is intended to become the content of the designed document as an integral part of the engineering assessment and the statement of work for the potential vendors towards design and built.

Ghoshal, Probir K. [Thomas Jefferson National Acce↗
DOE OSTI2026

Hazard and risk analysis framework for nuclear power plant–based integrated energy systems

Employing integrated energy systems (IESs) with nuclear power plants (NPPs) can improve NPP utilization by leveraging dedicated thermal and electric power delivery, but it may also increase operational safety risks. This paper presents a framework to identify and quantify hazards and risks for such IESs. The framework combines accidentology to review past industrial accidents with failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) to identify potential future incidents. Hydrogen explosion and toxic chemical release hazards are of particular concern. Explosion consequences are quantified using the Bauwens-Dorofeev (Bauwens) and trinitrotoluene equivalent mass (TNT-EM) methods, while chemical release consequences are computed using the Gaussian atmospheric dispersion method. Operational disturbances from direct electrical and thermal integration that may affect NPP safety are modeled using probabilistic risk analysis (PRA). Hazards and risks are then evaluated for regulatory compliance. The framework is applied to IESs comprising pressurized or boiling water reactors supplying three levels of thermal and electrical power to industrial customers. Case studies include high-temperature steam electrolysis hydrogen plants of varying capacities and a synthetic fuel production plant. Sensitivity analysis examines piping component failures in the PRA model as a precursor to cost estimation for thermal extraction line design. Additionally, Fussel-Vessely (FV) and risk increase importance (RII) measures identify risk-informed design improvements for the thermal extraction system. FMEA highlights hazards such as loss of offsite power, prompt loss of electrical load, loss of thermal output, and immediate steam diversion, in addition to hydrogen explosions and toxic chemical releases. Both Bauwens and TNT-EM methods suggest maintaining several hundred meters of separation between the NPP and hydrogen facility to mitigate explosion risks. PRA results show a maximum initiating event frequency increase of 1.15% and an overall risk increase of 0.28%. Importance measure analysis identifies upstream pipe leak isolation components as critical. Evaluating the results against safety regulations, it is concluded that hazards and risks can be managed to comply with regulations through risk-informed thermal and electrical connection designs, component selection, maintenance programs, and safe separation distances between NPPs and integrated industrial facilities.

08 - HYDROGEN↗