Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “HAZARD ANALYSIS”

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

Lunar mission safety and rescue: Hazards analysis and safety requirements

The results are presented of the hazards analysis which was concerned only with hazards to personnel and not with loss of equipment or property. Hazards characterization includes the definition of a hazard, the hazard levels, and the hazard groups. The analysis methodology is described in detail. The methodology was used to prepare the top level functional flow diagrams, to perform the first level hazards assessment, and to develop a list of conditions and situations requiring individual hazard studies. The 39 individual hazard study results are presented in total.

Source record↗

Grid-scale Energy Storage Hazard Analysis & Design Objectives for System Safety

Battery based energy storage systems are becoming a critical part of a modernized, resilient power system. However, batteries have a unique combination of hazards that can make design and engineering of battery systems difficult. This report presents a systematic hazard analysis of a hypothetical, grid scale lithium-ion battery powerplant to produce sociotechnical "design objectives" for system safety. We applied system's theoretic process analysis (STPA) for the hazard analysis which is broken into four steps: purpose definition, modeling the safety control structure, identifying unsafe control actions, and identifying loss scenarios. The purpose of the analysis was defined as to prevent event outcomes that can result in loss of battery assets due to fires and explosions, loss of health or life due to battery fires and explosions, and loss of energy storage services due to non- operational battery assets. The STPA analysis resulted in identification of six loss scenarios, and their constituent unsafe control actions, which were used to define a series of design objectives that can be applied to reduce the likelihood and severity of thermal events in battery systems. These design objectives, in all or any subset, can be utilized by utilities and other industry stakeholders as "design requirements" in their storage request for proposals (RFPs) and for evaluation of proposals. Further, these design objectives can help to protect firefighters and bring a system back to full functionality after a thermal event. We also comment on the hazards of flow battery technologies.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Space Propulsion Hazards Analysis Manual (SPHAM), volume 2

The Space Propulsion Hazards Analysis Manual (SPHAM) contains an exhaustive bibliography, hazardous properties information on selected space propulsion commodities, and system descriptions of various launch vehicles, upper stages, and spacecrafts.

Becker, Dorothy L.↗

Supporting Hazard Analysis for Wildfire Response Using fmdtools and MIKA

The System Wide Safety (SWS) Safety Demonstrator (SD) Series drives development of an increasingly capable In-Time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) focusing on humanitarian applications, starting with wildfire response (SD-1). The goals of this report are to (1) provide an early hazard analysis and mitigation evaluation of wildfire response to support these efforts and (2) provide a demonstration of capabilities of the Fault Model Design Tools (fmdtools) and Manager for Intelligent Knowledge Access (MIKA) tools. fmdtools provides a modeling, simulation, and resiliency analysis framework in which a wildfire response model, the System Modeling and Analysis of Resiliency in Scalable Traffic Management for Emergency Response Operations (SMARt-STEReO), is built. MIKA is an intelligent knowledge manager with several capabilities, including assisting in hazard analysis by extracting and analyzing hazards from historical incident reports. The following topics are covered in the report: Understanding Wildfire Hazard Dynamics. We provide a description and simulated examples of how hazards occur in the SMARt-STEReO model of wildfire response and their effect on its outcome. This provides a common mental model and focuses the analysis presented in the remainder of the report. Wildfire Hazard Identification. MIKA identifies wildfire hazards from three relevant datasets: the ICS-209-PLUS, SAFECOM, and SAFENET. Hazards are manually organized into a taxonomy and MIKA analyzes each hazard’s effects, likelihood, severity, and risk. Evaluating Mitigation Strategies. The SMARt-STEReO wildfire response model built in fmdtools evaluates a subset of identified hazards. Specifically, we simulate the effect of communications faults and equipment faults on operator safety, the effect of changing winds and flammability, and a scenario with multiple ignition points and heavy smoke. Tool Limitations and Usage Considerations. We provide a discussion of appropriate tool use cases as well as limitations and considerations for usage. The tool findings are used to synthesize recommendations for wildfire response operations, which can be captured as part of an IASMS. Key recommendations are as follows: Hazards are identified from a broad spectrum of sources including aircraft subsystems, operational sources, and ground crew operations. Highest risk operational environment hazards identified are Evacuations. The highest risk manned aerial operations hazard categorized is Jumper Operations Mishap. Ground crew hazards that are highest risk are Burns, Cargo Operations Overhead, Dehydration, Entrapment, Falling Objects, Heart Attacks, Heat Exhaustion, Inadequate Training or Certification, Vehicle Breakdown, and Vehicle Collision. Modelled containment failures arise from a mismatch between the difficulty of the firefighting scenario and the capacity (e.g., speed, effectiveness, awareness) of the response. In firefighting scenarios where containment is possible (e.g., because the fire does not spread too quickly), these mismatches can occur because of a change in environmental conditions (e.g., wind, flammability, etc) or because of planning, equipment, or communications faults. Improvements to communications increase the capacity of the firefighting response by reducing the time needed to respond to the fire. While surveillance does not increase this capacity by itself, it increases operator safety by increasing state awareness, enabling firefighters to evade approaching fires. Increasing both has a synergistic effect. In general, these performance and resilience increases generalize over fault scenarios as well as unforeseen changes to circumstances (i.e., wind, aridity, etc.). However, these improvements need to be designed so as not to make the system prone to persistent large-scale communications outages, which can reduce performance.

Hazard analysis↗

Hazard Analysis for the Mark III Space Suit Assembly (SSA) Used in One-g Operations

This Hazard Analysis document encompasses the Mark III Space Suit Assembly (SSA) and associated ancillary equipment. It has been prepared using JSC17773, "Preparing Hazard Analyses for JSC Ground Operation", as a guide. The purpose of this document is to present the potential hazards involved in ground (23 % maximum O2, One-g) operations of the Mark III and associated ancillary support equipment system. The hazards listed in this document are specific to suit operations only; each supporting facility (Bldg. 9, etc.) is responsible for test specific Hazard Analyses. A "hazard" is defined as any condition that has the potential for harming personnel or equipment. This analysis was performed to document the safety aspects associated with manned use of the Mark III for pressurized and unpressurized ambient, ground-based, One-g human testing. The hazards identified herein represent generic hazards inherent to all standard JSC test venues for nominal ground test configurations. Non-standard test venues or test specific configurations may warrant consideration of additional hazards analysis prior to test. The cognizant suit engineer is responsible for the safety of the astronaut/test subject, space suit, and suit support personnel. The test requester, for the test supported by the suit test engineer and suited subject, is responsible for overall safety and any necessary Test Readiness Reviews (TRR).

Mitchell, Kate↗

Applying Qualitative Hazard Analysis to Support Quantitative Safety Analysis for Proposed Reduced Wake Separation Conops

This paper describes a scenario-driven hazard analysis process to identify, eliminate, and control safety-related risks. Within this process, we develop selective criteria to determine the applicability of applying engineering modeling to hypothesized hazard scenarios. This provides a basis for evaluating and prioritizing the scenarios as candidates for further quantitative analysis. We have applied this methodology to proposed concepts of operations for reduced wake separation for closely spaced parallel runways. For arrivals, the process identified 43 core hazard scenarios. Of these, we classified 12 as appropriate for further quantitative modeling, 24 that should be mitigated through controls, recommendations, and / or procedures (that is, scenarios not appropriate for quantitative modeling), and 7 that have the lowest priority for further analysis.

Shortle, John F.↗

Using Qualitative Hazard Analysis to Guide Quantitative Safety Analysis

Quantitative methods can be beneficial in many types of safety investigations. However, there are many difficulties in using quantitative m ethods. Far example, there may be little relevant data available. This paper proposes a framework for using quantitative hazard analysis to prioritize hazard scenarios most suitable for quantitative mziysis. The framework first categorizes hazard scenarios by severity and likelihood. We then propose another metric "modeling difficulty" that desc ribes the complexity in modeling a given hazard scenario quantitatively. The combined metrics of severity, likelihood, and modeling difficu lty help to prioritize hazard scenarios for which quantitative analys is should be applied. We have applied this methodology to proposed concepts of operations for reduced wake separation for airplane operatio ns at closely spaced parallel runways.

Shortle, J. F.↗

Guidance for Designing Safety into Urban Air Mobility: Hazard Analysis Techniques

The national airspace system is exceptionally safe, specifically in terms of commercial air traffic operations. The introduction of innovative aircraft (such as electric vertical takeoff and landing vehicles) undergoing novel operations (such as for an urban air passenger carrying mission) is a potential disruptor to the current means of regulating and ensuring the safety of air travel. The aviation industry and associated regulatory bodies are adapting their approaches to assuring system safety to enable these new paradigms. However, any system safety analysis requires that a hazard assessment be performed. In this work, we consider the Functional Hazard Assessment (FHA) and Systems Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) techniques for hazard assessment and evaluate whether they can be used in a complementary fashion for regulatory approval purposes. We perform an FHA and an STPA on an electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) vehicle undergoing an urban air mobility (UAM) passenger carrying reference scenario and present excerpts of this analysis. We then draw parallels between the techniques and highlight elements where they naturally reinforce to each other’s results, specifically in the consideration of hazard severity with respect to flight phases, the design of hazard mitigations, and the applicability of the results to all types of regulatory approvals (e.g., type certification, operational approval, and crew training).

Mallory S Graydon↗

Host-region parameters for an adjustable model for crustal earthquakes to facilitate the implementation of the backbone approach to building ground-motion logic trees in probabilistic seismic hazard analysis

The backbone approach to constructing a ground-motion logic tree for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) can address shortcomings in the traditional approach of populating the branches with multiple existing, or potentially modified, ground-motion models (GMMs) by rendering more transparent the relationship between branch weights and the resulting distribution of predicted accelerations. To capture epistemic uncertainty in a tractable manner, there are benefits in building the logic tree through the application of successive adjustments for differences in source, path, and site characteristics between the host region of the selected backbone GMM and the target region for which the PSHA is being conducted. The implementation of this approach is facilitated by selecting a backbone GMM that is amenable to such host-to-target adjustments for individual source, path, and site characteristics. The NGA-West2 GMM of Chiou and Youngs (CY14) has been identified as a highly adaptable model for crustal seismicity that is well suited to such adjustments. Rather than using generic source, path, and site characteristics assumed appropriate for the host region, the final suite of adjusted GMMs for the target region will be better constrained if the host-region parameters are defined specifically on the basis of their compatibility with the CY14 backbone GMM. To this end, making use of a recently developed crustal shear-wave velocity profile consistent with CY14, we present an inversion of the model to estimate the key source and path parameters, namely the stress parameter and the anelastic attenuation. With these outputs, the effort in constructing a ground-motion logic tree for any PSHA dealing with crustal seismicity can be focused primarily on the estimation of the target-region characteristics and their associated uncertainties. The inversion procedure can also be adapted for any application in which different constraints might be relevant.

Stafford, Peter J.↗

User-Centered Software Design in the All Hazards Analysis Application

To design good software, you must always keep the end user in mind. Some benefits of incorporating the user-centered design process include saving users time and effort and helping them to utilize all capabilites of an application. In my work on the All Hazards Analysis (AHA) application, I employed principles of user-centered design to make the application easier for new users to navigate. This poster describes user-centered software design in general and showcases some of my user-centered design work on the AHA application.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

Hazard Analysis to Support Fusion Systems Safety Assessments

Reliability, safety, and performance are vital aspects of any nuclear operation. Fusion technology continues to grow in public, private, and research interest, and coupled with rapidly growing energy needs, fusion technology research is poised for fast progress. The development of a Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF) is seen as stepping stone for demonstrating long-cycle fusion. Naturally, such operation requires systems that are available, reliable, and safe. This work provides a novel demonstration of systems theory coupled with traditional hazard analysis to provide insights into the risk priority of components and systems found within the FNSF. The results of this work are a set of identified hazards that should be considered for the risk-informed design and development of the FNSF.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Hazard analysis for identifying common cause failures of digital safety systems using a redundancy-guided systems-theoretic approach

Replacing the existing aging analog instrumentation and control (I&C) systems with modern safety control and protection, digital technology offers one of the foremost means of performance improvements and cost reductions for the existing nuclear power plants (NPPs). However, the qualification of digital I&C systems remains a challenge, especially considering the issue of software common-cause failures (CCFs), which are difficult to address. With the application and upgrades of advanced digital I&C systems, software CCFs have become a potential threat to plant safety because most redundant designs use similar digital platforms or software in the operating and application systems. With complex designs of multilayer redundancy to meet the single-failure criterion, digital I&C safety systems (e.g., engineered safety-features actuation system [ESFAS]) are of a particular concern in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing procedures. Here, this paper applies a modularized approach to conduct redundancy-guided systems-theoretic hazard analysis for an advanced digital ESFAS with multilevel redundancy designs. Systematic methods and risk-informed tools are incorporated to address both hardware and software CCFs, which provide guidance to eliminate the causal factors of potential single points of failure in the design of digital safety systems in advanced plant designs.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Analyzing Distributed Functions in an Integrated Hazard Analysis

Large scale integration of today's aerospace systems is achievable through the use of distributed systems. Validating the safety of distributed systems is significantly more difficult as compared to centralized systems because of the complexity of the interactions between simultaneously active components. Integrated hazard analysis (IHA), a process used to identify unacceptable risks and to provide a means of controlling them, can be applied to either centralized or distributed systems. IHA, though, must be tailored to fit the particular system being analyzed. Distributed systems, for instance, must be analyzed for hazards in terms of the functions that rely on them. This paper will describe systems-oriented IHA techniques (as opposed to traditional failure-event or reliability techniques) that should be employed for distributed systems in aerospace environments. Special considerations will be addressed when dealing with specific distributed systems such as active thermal control, electrical power, command and data handling, and software systems (including the interaction with fault management systems). Because of the significance of second-order effects in large scale distributed systems, the paper will also describe how to analyze secondary functions to secondary functions through the use of channelization.

Morris, A. Terry↗

Hazard analysis of Clostridium perfringens in the Skylab Food System

The Skylab Food System presented unique microbiological problems because food was warmed in null-gravity and because the heat source was limited to 69.4 C (to prevent boiling in null-gravity). For these reasons, the foods were manufactured using critical control point techniques of quality control coupled with appropriate hazard analyses. One of these hazard analyses evaluated the threat from Clostridium perfringens. Samples of food were inoculated with C. perfringens and incubated for 2 h at temperatures ranging from 25 to 55 C. Generation times were determined for the foods at various temperatures. Results of these tests were evaluated taking into consideration: food-borne disease epidemiology, the Skylab food manufacturing procedures, and the performance requirements of the Skylab Food System. Based on this hazard analysis, a limit for C. perfringens of 100/g was established for Skylab foods.

Bourland, C. T.↗

Resources Available for Hazards Analysis of Aerospace Fluids

In recent years, the legislative and executive branches of the federal government have pushed to make government more efficient and responsive to the needs of the marketplace. One of these initiatives, Public Law 104-113, also known as the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), is designed to accelerate technology transfer to industry and promote government-industry partnership. Summarized, NTTAA states that '... all Federal agencies and departments shall use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as a means to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies and departments. Government agencies must now determine if their in-house requirement-setting activities are sufficiently unique that no public interest is served by having them adopted by a voluntary consensus organization (VCO), or if not, to use or develop voluntary consensus standards. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is chartered by the law to monitor federal agency progress and report the results to Congress. In response to NTTAA, agency-wide oxygen and hydrogen safety standards sponsored by the NASA Headquarters (HQ) Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) were obvious choices for early adoption by VCOs. In 1996, HQ sought assistance from the Johnson Space Center (JSC) White Sands Test Facility (WSTF), the technical lead for development of these safety standards, to evaluate their adoption by VCOs. At that time, WSTF-developed propellant hazards manuals were likewise identified for possible VCO adoption. Subsequently, WSTF was asked to represent NASA for development of an international ISO safety standard for hydrogen use. Concurrent with these WSTF standards activities are related efforts to develop and publish propellant hazards analysis protocols and safety courses for the industrial, propellant use of oxygen, hydrogen, and hypergols. This paper reports on these efforts and describes WSTF's overall voluntary consensus standards program to coordinate the interchange of NASA's propellant hazards and safety information with industry.

Woods, S. S.↗