Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Risk Assessment”

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 NTRS2002

Application of Risk Assessment Tools in the Continuous Risk Management (CRM) Process

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is currently implementing the Continuous Risk Management (CRM) Program developed by the Carnegie Mellon University and recommended by NASA as the Risk Management (RM) implementation approach. The four most frequently used risk assessment tools in the center are: (a) Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), Hazard Analysis (HA), Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), and Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA). There are some guidelines for selecting the type of risk assessment tools during the project formulation phase of a project, but there is not enough guidance as to how to apply these tools in the Continuous Risk Management process (CRM). But the ways the safety and risk assessment tools are used make a significant difference in the effectiveness in the risk management function. Decisions regarding, what events are to be included in the analysis, to what level of details should the analysis be continued, make significant difference in the effectiveness of risk management program. Tools of risk analysis also depends on the phase of a project e.g. at the initial phase of a project, when not much data are available on hardware, standard FMEA cannot be applied; instead a functional FMEA may be appropriate. This study attempted to provide some directives to alleviate the difficulty in applying FTA, PRA, and FMEA in the CRM process. Hazard Analysis was not included in the scope of the study due to the short duration of the summer research project.

Paul S. Ray↗
NASA NTRS2015

Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment - How They Play Together

PRA methodology is one of the probabilistic analysis methods that NASA brought from the nuclear industry to assess the risk of LOM, LOV and LOC for launch vehicles. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment that uses a combination of fault trees, event trees, event sequence diagrams, and probability and statistical data to analyze the risk of a system, a process, or an activity. It is a process designed to answer three basic questions: What can go wrong? How likely is it? What is the severity of the degradation? Since 1986, NASA, along with industry partners, has conducted a number of PRA studies to predict the overall launch vehicles risks. Planning Research Corporation conducted the first of these studies in 1988. In 1995, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) conducted a comprehensive PRA study. In July 1996, NASA conducted a two-year study (October 1996 - September 1998) to develop a model that provided the overall Space Shuttle risk and estimates of risk changes due to proposed Space Shuttle upgrades. After the Columbia accident, NASA conducted a PRA on the Shuttle External Tank (ET) foam. This study was the most focused and extensive risk assessment that NASA has conducted in recent years. It used a dynamic, physics-based, integrated system analysis approach to understand the integrated system risk due to ET foam loss in flight. Most recently, a PRA for Ares I launch vehicle has been performed in support of the Constellation program. Reliability, on the other hand, addresses the loss of functions. In a broader sense, reliability engineering is a discipline that involves the application of engineering principles to the design and processing of products, both hardware and software, for meeting product reliability requirements or goals. It is a very broad design-support discipline. It has important interfaces with many other engineering disciplines. Reliability as a figure of merit (i.e. the metric) is the probability that an item will perform its intended function(s) for a specified mission profile. In general, the reliability metric can be calculated through the analyses using reliability demonstration and reliability prediction methodologies. Reliability analysis is very critical for understanding component failure mechanisms and in identifying reliability critical design and process drivers. The following sections discuss the PRA process and reliability engineering in detail and provide an application where reliability analysis and PRA were jointly used in a complementary manner to support a Space Shuttle flight risk assessment.

Safie, Fayssal M.↗
NASA NTRS2011

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

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

Stamatelatos,Michael↗
DOE OSTI2025

TCCSP Task 6 Risk Assessment Report

For this Risk Assessment Plan, TCCSP has conducted a site-based risk assessment that quantifies the risk of CO 2 and/or brine leakage as a result of CO 2 injection at TCCSP. The risk assessment covers project planning, construction, injection, post-injection periods and closure of TCCSP. Key technical and non-technical Project risks are identified as part of the Risk Workshop and include a thorough evaluation of related scenarios. Mitigation strategies for the identified risk scenarios are defined to develop a scientifically sound, and community acceptable CO 2 storage Project.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Large-scale Hydrogen Storage Risk Assessment

This project investigated risks involved in deploying a large-scale hydrogen storage system at the Port of Seattle (hereafter, the Port) for its on-terminal and maritime applications in an urban industrial setting. Alongside, the project attempted to address some of the barriers to risk assessment such as need for an exact system design for a systematic investigation, direct access to surrounding communities to gauge their perceptions, and an integrated software required to undertake a full-fledged risk assessment. These barriers were overcome using illustrative reference station designs, engaging with community-facing agencies through Port support, and pooling national laboratory capabilities available for risk assessments. The project identified relevant public safety risk metrics, compared various hydrogen carriers, engaged with community-facing agencies, and explored potential gaps in existing safety codes and standards. The primary impacts of this project include the development of risk assessment guidance for ports and utilities, informing them of the trade-offs in the choice of hydrogen carriers, and the ability to increase public capacity for dialog and engagement. This paves the way toward decarbonization of the Port activities, bringing about awareness around jobs in the market for risk assessments, and the need to ramp up community engagement long before any hydrogen system deployment is undertaken.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2025

Risk Assessment in a Chemical Laboratory Following an Explosive Incident Involving a Novel Diazonium Compound: Retrospective Analysis and Lessons Learned

Diazonium compounds are synthetically useful in the production of dyes and textiles, however they are highly explosive under dry conditions. Explosion prevention becomes more difficult when new diazonium compounds are synthesized, because while some syntheses include a counterion to increase their stability, this is not always a reliable method to prevent an explosive incident. Due to the uncertainty surrounding the explosiveness of different diazonium compounds, it is important to understand how to safely clean up after an incident and how to determine when it is safe to return a laboratory to typical operational use, particularly when the incident involves a novel compound where a standard does not exist for instrument calibration. Here, an explosive event is discussed involving the synthesis of 4-bromo-benzenediazonium-2-carboxylate. Following the explosive incident and 3-step cleanup, which involved a precautionary neutralization step, samples were collected from the fume hood where the incident occurred. Because the incident involved an unstable, novel compound that is not commercially available and was deemed unsafe to resynthesize for instrument calibration, we assessed the risk of further explosion by analyzing for the stable decomposition products. Mass spectrometry analysis confirmed that the residue in the fume hood contained 5-bromosalicylic acid, a decomposition product of 4-bromo-benzenediazonium-2-carboxylate. Samples were taken from multiple points in the fume hood and analyzed to estimate the spatial distribution of the decomposition product. Based on this analysis, we inferred that the primary decomposition product was far more abundant than residual energetic, indicating the energetic had been consumed or neutralized to a trace quantity where the risk of further explosion was low. Furthermore, the steps presented here─specifically, initial neutralization and then analyzing the spatial distribution of expected decomposition products to assess risk when a novel explosive material is detonated in a confined space─were our approach to assess further risk following an explosion due to a novel diazonium compound without the need for any further handling or resynthesis of the energetic. Here, we present our approach and critically analyze these steps by discussing retrospective lessons learned and alternative analytical approaches.

Computer simulations↗
DOE OSTI2025

Dynamic probabilistic risk assessment and game theory for cyber security risk analysis in nuclear power plants

Nuclear Power Plants and energy systems have become more prone to cyber-attacks with their digitalization and the increased use of smart equipment. Hence, it is important to quantify the risk associated with cyber-attacks in such systems. Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment which involves studying the evolution of a system due to random events and operator and attacker actions during a cyber-attack by employing a physics-based model of the system is a suitable framework to quantify cybersecurity risk in nuclear power plants. In addition to the plant dynamics, it is also important to model the strategies of the attackers and plant operators for an effective cybersecurity risk assessment. Game theory provides a set of necessary tools to model such strategic interactions. In this research, a framework that integrates dynamic probabilistic risk assessment with game theory for cybersecurity risk analysis in nuclear power plants is presented. The mathematical formulation is derived based on the theory of continuous event trees. We propose a game theory based action model, that utilizes physics-based rewards to define the strategies of attackers and operators at every decision epoch. As a case study, the risk associated with cyber-attacks on the digital components in the secondary side of a pressurized water reactor is studied using a reduced order model. A set of attacker actions and a set of operator actions are defined for the system. The operator and attacker interactions were modelled using simultaneous game, their action policies were computed using the concept of mixed strategy Nash equilibrium and the evolution of the system was studied.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2016

Humans vs Hardware: The Unique World of NASA Human System Risk Assessment

Understanding spaceflight risks to crew health and performance is a crucial aspect of preparing for exploration missions in the future. The research activities of the Human Research Program (HRP) provide substantial evidence to support most risk reduction work. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB), acting on behalf of the Office of Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO), assesses these risks and assigns likelihood and consequence ratings to track progress. Unfortunately, many traditional approaches in risk assessment such as those used in the engineering aspects of spaceflight are difficult to apply to human system risks. This presentation discusses the unique aspects of risk assessment from the human system risk perspective and how these limitations are accommodated and addressed in order to ensure that reasonable inputs are provided to support the OCHMO's overall risk posture for manned exploration missions.

Anton, W.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Public Risk Assessment Program

The Public Entry Risk Assessment (PERA) program addresses risk to the public from shuttle or other spacecraft re-entry trajectories. Managing public risk to acceptable levels is a major component of safe spacecraft operation. PERA is given scenario inputs of vehicle trajectory, probability of failure along that trajectory, the resulting debris characteristics, and field size and distribution, and returns risk metrics that quantify the individual and collective risk posed by that scenario. Due to the large volume of data required to perform such a risk analysis, PERA was designed to streamline the analysis process by using innovative mathematical analysis of the risk assessment equations. Real-time analysis in the event of a shuttle contingency operation, such as damage to the Orbiter, is possible because PERA allows for a change to the probability of failure models, therefore providing a much quicker estimation of public risk. PERA also provides the ability to generate movie files showing how the entry risk changes as the entry develops. PERA was designed to streamline the computation of the enormous amounts of data needed for this type of risk assessment by using an average distribution of debris on the ground, rather than pinpointing the impact point of every piece of debris. This has reduced the amount of computational time significantly without reducing the accuracy of the results. PERA was written in MATLAB; a compiled version can run from a DOS or UNIX prompt.

Mendeck, Gavin↗
NASA NTRS2010

Risk Assessment and Integration Team (RAIT) Portfolio Risk Analysis Strategy

Impact at management level: Qualitative assessment of risk criticality in conjunction with risk consequence, likelihood, and severity enable development of an "investment policy" towards managing a portfolio of risks. Impact at research level: Quantitative risk assessments enable researchers to develop risk mitigation strategies with meaningful risk reduction results. Quantitative assessment approach provides useful risk mitigation information.

Edwards, Michelle↗
NASA NTRS1992

The application of integrated knowledge-based systems for the Biomedical Risk Assessment Intelligent Network (BRAIN)

One of NASA's goals for long duration space flight is to maintain acceptable levels of crew health, safety, and performance. One way of meeting this goal is through BRAIN, an integrated network of both human and computer elements. BRAIN will function as an advisor to mission managers by assessing the risk of inflight biomedical problems and recommending appropriate countermeasures. Described here is a joint effort among various NASA elements to develop BRAIN and the Infectious Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) prototype. The implementation of this effort addresses the technological aspects of knowledge acquisition, integration of IDRA components, the use of expert systems to automate the biomedical prediction process, development of a user friendly interface, and integration of IDRA and ExerCISys systems. Because C language, CLIPS and the X-Window System are portable and easily integrated, they were chosen ss the tools for the initial IDRA prototype.

Loftin, Karin C.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Assessment, Planning, and Execution Considerations for Conjunction Risk Assessment and Mitigation Operations

An operational Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis (CARA) concept is the real-time process of assessing risk posed by close approaches and reacting to those risks if necessary. The most effective way to completely mitigate conjunction risk is to perform an avoidance maneuver. The NASA Goddard Space Flight Center has implemented a routine CARA process since 2005. Over this period, considerable experience has been gained and many lessons have been learned. This paper identifies and presents these experiences as general concepts in the description of the Conjunction Assessment, Flight Dynamics, and Flight Operations methodologies and processes. These general concepts will be tied together and will be exemplified through a case study of an actual high risk conjunction event for the Aura mission.

Frigm, Ryan C.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Towards a Methodology and Tooling for Model-Based Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA)

A Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) aims to identify and assess potential risks to system technical performance requirements for the purpose of furnishing risk insights into project decisions. PRAs have traditionally been conducted manually using software with an isolated data model. As system complexity rises it becomes difficult to ensure consistency between a PRA, the evolving system design, and other engineering analyses; the techniques for conducting PRAs must evolve to meet this challenge. This work presents progress towards a methodology and tooling for conducting a PRA by leveraging data in the system model, embedded for other purposes and analyses, to conduct a PRA. An approach for identifying the appropriate probabilistic equation for each risk scenario from a standard library is presented, which is a significant step towards the quantification of the likelihood of a risk scenario occurrence. The final calculation of the likelihood of occurrence is left as an item of future work. We also present the development of preliminary tooling to carry out the methodology on a well-formed system model. The information needed to conduct the PRA is embedded in a consistent manner in a system model, so the model-based PRA can be regularly executed as the system model changes. The ability to modify the PRA in concert with lifecycle evolution affords a project the opportunity to track the extent to which system modification impacts compliance with requirements. These aspects of this model-based PRA methodology make it capable of managing risk in increasingly complex technical systems.

Schreiner, Samuel S.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment - How They Play Together

Since the Space Shuttle Challenger accident in 1986, NASA has extensively used probabilistic analysis methods to assess, understand, and communicate the risk of space launch vehicles. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA), used in the nuclear industry, is one of the probabilistic analysis methods NASA utilizes to assess Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) risk for launch vehicles. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment that uses a combination of fault trees, event trees, event sequence diagrams, and probability distributions to analyze the risk of a system, a process, or an activity. It is a process designed to answer three basic questions: 1) what can go wrong that would lead to loss or degraded performance (i.e., scenarios involving undesired consequences of interest), 2) how likely is it (probabilities), and 3) what is the severity of the degradation (consequences). Since the Challenger accident, PRA has been used in supporting decisions regarding safety upgrades for launch vehicles. Another area that was given a lot of emphasis at NASA after the Challenger accident is reliability engineering. Reliability engineering has been a critical design function at NASA since the early Apollo days. However, after the Challenger accident, quantitative reliability analysis and reliability predictions were given more scrutiny because of their importance in understanding failure mechanism and quantifying the probability of failure, which are key elements in resolving technical issues, performing design trades, and implementing design improvements. Although PRA and reliability are both probabilistic in nature and, in some cases, use the same tools, they are two different activities. Specifically, reliability engineering is a broad design discipline that deals with loss of function and helps understand failure mechanism and improve component and system design. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment process intended to assess the risk scenarios that could lead to a major/top undesirable system event, and to identify those scenarios that are high-risk drivers. PRA output is critical to support risk informed decisions concerning system design. This paper describes the PRA process and the reliability engineering discipline in detail. It discusses their differences and similarities and how they work together as complementary analyses to support the design and risk assessment processes. Lessons learned, applications, and case studies in both areas are also discussed in the paper to demonstrate and explain these differences and similarities.

Safie, Fayssal↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Safety Hazards Risk Assessment Tool for Uncrewed Aircraft System Traffic Management during Preflight Planning

Tremendous growth in the uncrewed and remotely piloted vehicle market is expected in low-altitude, uncontrolled airspace, resulting in potential decreases in safety without systems that support monitoring, assessing, and mitigating risk. At NASA, the System-Wide Safety (SWS) project has been developing a suite of data-driven tools to predict hazards so that the potential risks that these hazards pose can be mitigated. Services to predict various hazards have been developed, including battery capacity, proximity to static obstacles, population risks, global positioning system signal strength, radio frequency spectrum interference risk, and vertiport congestion. These services can monitor hazards along a flight path and if any risks posed by these hazards exceed a threshold, the uncrewed aircraft system (UAS) fleet manager can be alerted to mitigate the risk by modifying the flight path, changing the scheduled departure or arrival times, and/or diverting the vehicle to an alternate vertiport. These services were originally developed to monitor and assess risks during flight, but they have been adapted to assess hazard risks prior to departure so that a fleet manager can evaluate the potential risks for a fleet of UAS along their planned flight paths. These services have been integrated into a prototype tool called the Supplemental Data Service Provider-Consolidated Dashboard (SDSP-CD), developed at NASA Ames Research Center. The tool consists of a dashboard which provides a comprehensive overview for a number of risks and a map display that shows the details of the hazards along each flight’s path. Based on the findings from three previous studies, the SDSP-CD has been updated with new design elements and functions. In this paper, we describe lessons learned from the previous studies, changes made to the interface, and the feedback received during a follow-up usability study. Overall, participants reported that there is a substantial benefit of having a fleet manager use a consolidated dashboard to assess hazards for the vehicles in their fleet and to provide situational awareness to potential risks so that they can be mitigated prior to flight. Once the SDSP-CD matures, it will need to be integrated into flight and mission planning tools. Some initial thoughts on how this integration should be accomplished are shared in this paper. Finally, the functional differences between preflight vs. in-flight risk assessment and the differences in fleet manager vs. UAS pilot roles that may require different information and user interactions are discussed.

preflight↗