Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Risk Informed Decision Making”

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
DOE OSTI2024

Development and Demonstration of a Risk Assessment Approach for Approval of a Transportation Package of a Transportable Nuclear Power Plant for Domestic Highway Shipment

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO) has tasked PNNL to address the regulatory challenges associated with confirming the safe transport of Transportable Nuclear Power Plants (TNPPs) containing irradiated nuclear fuel. A previous report—Proposed Risk-Informed Regulatory Framework for Approval of Microreactor Transportation Packages (PNNL-31867)—determined that the expected radioactive inventory in the irradiated fuel of a TNPP would likely require shipment in an NRC-approved Type B package (or spent nuclear fuel cask) but that a TNPP “package” is unlikely to meet the entire suite of NRC requirements set forth in Part 71 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for a Type B package. It was therefore concluded that shipment of this initial TNPP transportation package, as well as possibly others, under existing regulations would likely require NRC approval using the 10 CFR 71.12 (“Specific exemptions”) process that relies on risk-informed decision making supported by quantitative risk assessment (i.e., Probabilistic Risk Assessment).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2025

First-of-a-Kind Risk-Informed Digital Twin for Operational Decision Making

A digital twin (DT) is a digital model or a collection of models of a physical entity. DTs in the nuclear arena can be used from plant design through decommissioning. Decisions are typically a priori or made offline. Risk-informed decision making is identifying what can go wrong, its frequency, and the consequences of its failure. Ideally risk-informed decision making reflects the current state of the plant and provides a decision in real time. Traditionally, probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) evaluate the failures of safety systems, the risk of core damage, and the offsite dose as the consequence. However, this DT evaluates the decisions on the control side rather than the protection side. It uses the same risk methods to probabilistically inform the decision-making process but in a different way. Rather than evaluating the risk of core damage, this DT evaluates the likelihood of avoiding a trip set point while maintaining plant safety. Performance-based assessments are identified via its probabilistic evaluation of operational alternatives based on system status. Because the purpose of the control system is to maintain system variables within prescribed operating ranges, upsets or challenges that can exceed a trip set point resulting in a plant transient and a challenge to plant mitigating systems based on actual plant conditions, are evaluated to safely maintain the plant within the operating ranges. The probabilistic portion of the model is autonomously and automatically adjusted, and the metric of interest (i.e. likelihood of avoiding a trip set point) is recalculated. The digital representation of the physical system (i.e. the DT) performs a deterministic performance–based assessment of the probabilistically identified alternatives identified to validate the probabilistic assessment. A decision-making algorithm selects the appropriate option based on the probabilistic and deterministic assessments and transmits a control signal to a component(s) to initiate a corrective action or informs an operator of its decision.

digital twin↗
DOE OSTI2026

Developing a Process for Collaboration-Based Siting of a Federal Consolidated Interim Storage Facility in the United States: Learning from Communities Living with Legacy Waste

In June of 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) announced the selection of its Collaboration-Based Siting (CBS) Consortia, a group of 12 awardees, including the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP) (led by Vanderbilt University) to assist DOE-NE with the development of its process for siting a federal consolidated interim storage facility (FCISF) for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) storage. At this time, DOE NE is not soliciting interested host communities, rather the CBS Consortia are tasked with in-depth engagement, mutual learning, and capacity building to provide DOE NE with feedback on the CBS process. CRESP’s objective is to engage communities in two regions (the Pacific Northwest and the Southeast) with sites currently storing defense- and research-related SNF to foster learning concerning the best and worst practices in community participation in risk-informed decision making. This includes learning from existing structures for public input in radioactive waste management decision making [e.g. citizen advisory boards (CABs)] and other local parties about how to build and sustain trust among the parties. CRESP has been working to engage stakeholders and Tribes surrounding two DOE sites historically differing in receptiveness to engaging with DOE and trusting in DOE to accomplish its missions. CRESP’s approach to date has consisted of (1) engaging voluntarily members and former members of the DOE Office of Environmental Management’s CABs to develop a mutual understanding of their perspectives, values, and experiences related to risk and participatory decision making; (2) engaging members of those communities that would likely be part of any radioactive waste management discussions and who may provide valuable feedback for the development of the CBS process; and in the longer term, (3) engaging communities to foster knowledge sharing on understanding and definitions of risk and how risk is factored into community decision making. Our emphasis is to identify opportunities for improving risk communication frameworks, strategies, and decision making. The selection of a future FCISF site is likely to result in the creation of a structure similar to a CAB composed of members of the local community. We anticipate that these insights can help DOE NE learn from existing participatory risk communication structures in place at sites storing defenseor research-related SNF to understand best practices for fostering enduring and participatory relationships with future CABs. Within this paper, we (1) describe CRESP’s overall approach to assisting DOE NE with maturing the CBS process; (2) present a summary of preliminary phase 1 project results, including the development of a body of knowledge (describing available resources to support community engagement, risk communica tion, and participatory decision making) and community ecosystem information (leveraging demographic, social, economic, and environmental attribute mapping and advanced sentiment analysis of social media data); and (3) based on these results, provide observations for future research opportunities to support the development of CBS processes for radioactive waste management facilities, generally.

collaboration-based siting↗
DOE OSTI2020

Choosing the Best Modeling Platform for Radiological Risk Assessment Models - 20468

Radiological risk assessments, in the form of performance or safety assessments, are often required under regulations or guidance for remediation of contaminated land, decommissioning of contaminated buildings or structures, and radioactive waste disposal. These risk assessments are usually supported by fate and transport models that address decay and ingrowth of radionuclides, as well as their movement through engineered systems and the natural environment. These models are often projected thousands, or more, years into the future, largely because the radioactive species change through decay and ingrowth, and hence the magnitude of the radioactive effect changes with time. There are many computer codes that are available to address this type of modeling. They range from addressing specific pathways or processes such as infiltration of water, groundwater, surface water, air, biota, diffusion and advection of water and gases, to those that try to couple all processes together to evaluate the impact of fate and transport through the entire system to places in space and time to which access is assumed. These different types of codes are sometimes separated with the monikers process-level and systems-level codes, although it is often not clear that this separation does justice to the capabilities of the many codes that are available to evaluate fate and transport of radionuclides. The focus of this paper is the latter group of modeling codes. Several systems level modeling codes exist and are used. There are differences between these codes in terms of utility, flexibility, complexity and cost. The purpose of this paper is to compare a few of these codes in the context of work currently being performed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Modeling and Data for Radiological Impact Assessments (MODARIA) II Working Group 1 (WG1). The MODARIA II WG1's main focus is how stakeholder engaged decision analysis can, or should, be applied to radiological contamination problems so that better, longstanding, sustainable, solutions are reached. However, the WG1 also recognizes the potential impact of the modeling tools that are chosen to address radiological risk, which is often a primary objective of decision making for radiological problems. Other objectives might also be important, such as constraining costs, obtaining financing, minimizing impact on ecosystems, saving cultural resources, saving jobs, farmland, environmental justice, etc., in a full decision analysis for a given radiological contamination problem, but none of these other objectives have the same types of complex modeling needs as minimize radiological dose. Consequently, a further focus of WG1 is to evaluate the potential impacts on decision making of the choice of fate and transport, and risk assessment, modeling codes that are used to support decision making. The WG1 will produce a report at the end of 2020 that will focus on an approach to effective decision making and stakeholder engagement. The report will also consider the role that performance assessment modeling should play in the decision-making process, including the impact of the choice of modeling tools or computer codes on risk-informed decision making. Several sites around the World have been made available by Member States for these model comparisons, and several modeling tools have been considered. However, the focus of this paper is on two of the sites, one in Belgium and one in Ukraine, and on three of the tools: NORMALYSA (NORM And Legacy Site Assessment); GoldSim{sup C}, and AMBER{sup C}. The final report from this working group will also cover other modeling tools, including RESRAD, and PC-Cream{sup R}. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Medical Capability Science and Research Overview and Update

The mission of the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element is to advance medical system design and risk-informed decision making for exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit to promote human health and performance in space. To accomplish this mission, ExMC focuses on several key areas: • Investigating specific risks that are relevant for human exploration spaceflight, including in-flight medical conditions, degraded or toxic medications, and renal stones • Developing medical probabilistic risk analysis tools that are integrated with systems engineering processes to inform the medical system trade space and support the development of robust requirements • Demonstrating and defining requirements for a prototype clinical decision support system • Developing and demonstrating novel medical technologies that will improve future medical capabilities in space This presentation will focus on selected scientific and technical conceptual drivers for the Element and its current and future research risks and gaps while providing an overview of the Element’s progress in 2021 and areas of focus for 2022.

Benjamin Easter↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Risk Assessment of Obstacle Collision for UAVs under Off-nominal Conditions

Enabling operations of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in low-altitude airspace demands the need of robust risk monitoring framework for assessing the safety of airspace, ground structures and people. As widespread applications emerge, the need of risk assessment becomes increasingly important for UAV flights beyond visual line-of-sight, especially subjected to off-nominal conditions introduced by component failures, degraded controllability or environmental disturbances such as wind gusts in an urban canyon. From a safety perspective, collision with obstacles can be detrimental not only to the vehicle and payload, but also to the structure and people on ground. Although it is safe to assume that approved UAVs would be equipped with collision avoidance systems, risk of collision which can be predicted for a flight trajectory even before the UAV encounters any obstacle is beneficial to resolve contingencies in its decision-making under off-nominal conditions. In this paper, a framework is presented for computing the risk of collision with obstacle based on a UAV’s predicted trajectory, proximity to static and dynamic obstacles, sub-system state-of-health and external wind conditions. The conditional probability of trajectory deviation is generated using a Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) based on on-board sensor measurements. Further, a kinematic 3-DOF model is implemented to compute deviation in UAV’s trajectory subjected to one case study of off-nominal condition i.e. wind gusts. Finally, the integrated risk factor is demonstrated on real data from experimental flights of an octocopter at NASA Langley Research Center, in presence of simulated obstacles and wind conditions. The proposed approach would enable risk-informed decision making process for timely mitigation of current and future unsafe events.

Bayesian network↗
NASA NTRS2011

Risk Management Issues - An Aerospace Perspective

Phased-approach for implementation of risk management is necessary. Risk management system will be simple, accessible and promote communication of information to all relevant stakeholders for optimal resource allocation and risk mitigation. Risk management should be used by all team members to manage risks--risk office personnel. Each group is assigned Risk Integrators who are facilitators for effective risk management. Risks will be managed at the lowest-level feasible, elevate only those risks that require coordination or management from above. Risk reporting and communication is an essential element of risk management and will combine both qualitative and quantitative elements.. Risk informed decision making should be introduced to all levels of management. Provide necessary checks and balances to insure that risks are caught/identified and dealt with in a timely manner, Many supporting tools, processes & training must be deployed for effective risk management implementation. Process improvement must be included in the risk processes.

Perera, Jeevan S.↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA's Risk Management System

Leadership is key to success. Phased-approach for implementation of risk management is necessary. Risk management system will be simple, accessible and promote communication of information to all relevant stakeholders for optimal resource allocation and risk mitigation. Risk management should be used by all team members to manage risks -- risk office personnel. Each group is assigned Risk Integrators who are facilitators for effective risk management. Risks will be managed at the lowest-level feasible, elevate only those risks that require coordination or management from above. Risk reporting and communication is an essential element of risk management and will combine both qualitative and quantitative elements. Risk informed decision making should be introduced to all levels of management. Provide necessary checks and balances to insure that risks are caught/identified and dealt with in a timely manner. Many supporting tools, processes & training must be deployed for effective risk management implementation. Process improvement must be included in the risk processes.

Perera, Jeevan S.↗
NASA NTRS2013

NASA's Risk Management System

Phased‐approach for implementation of risk management is necessary. Risk management system will be simple, accessible and promote communication of information to all relevant stakeholders for optimal resource allocation and risk mitigation. Risk management should be used by all team members to manage risks - not just risk office personnel. Each group/department is assigned Risk Integrators who are facilitators for effective risk management. Risks will be managed at the lowest‐level feasible, elevate only those risks that require coordination or management from above. Risk informed decision making should be introduced to all levels of management.  Provide necessary checks and balances to insure that risks are caught/identified and dealt with in a timely manner. Many supporting tools, processes & training must be deployed for effective risk management implementation. Process improvement must be included in the risk processes.

Perera, Jeevan S.↗
NASA NTRS2011

How Can You Support RIDM/CRM/RM Through the Use of PRA

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is one of key Risk Informed Decision Making (RIDM) tools. It is a scenario-based methodology aimed at identifying and assessing Safety and Technical Performance risks in complex technological systems.

DoVemto. Tpmu↗
NASA NTRS2009

A Corrosion Risk Assessment Model for Underground Piping

The Pressure Systems Manager at NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) has embarked on a project to collect data and develop risk assessment models to support risk-informed decision making regarding future inspections of underground pipes at ARC. This paper shows progress in one area of this project - a corrosion risk assessment model for the underground high-pressure air distribution piping system at ARC. It consists of a Corrosion Model of pipe-segments, a Pipe Wrap Protection Model; and a Pipe Stress Model for a pipe segment. A Monte Carlo simulation of the combined models provides a distribution of the failure probabilities. Sensitivity study results show that the model uncertainty, or lack of knowledge, is the dominant contributor to the calculated unreliability of the underground piping system. As a result, the Pressure Systems Manager may consider investing resources specifically focused on reducing these uncertainties. Future work includes completing the data collection effort for the existing ground based pressure systems and applying the risk models to risk-based inspection strategies of the underground pipes at ARC.

Datta, Koushik↗
NASA NTRS2020

NASA Risk Management: Speaking the Format of Risk

NASA's Risk Management Program is designed to communicate risk at all levels of the Agency. This presentation serves as an introduction to NASA Risk Management principles and risk-informed decision making. The contents of this presentation are intended to familiarize attendees of NASA's Quality Leadership Forum with how to incorporate risk communication into their practices.

Dacko, Taylor↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

3D Representation of UAV-obstacle Collision Risk Under Off-nominal Conditions

Safe operations of autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in low-altitude airspace with beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) flights demand robust risk monitoring of airspace as well as of people and property on ground. One of the safety critical factors for UAV flights is the risk of collision with static and dynamic obstacles in proximity to its flight path. This paper presents a detailed formulation of risk of obstacle collision incorporating the effects of off-nominal conditions introduced by component failures, degraded controllability and environmental disturbances such as wind gusts. The risk is represented in terms of a matrix with rows corresponding to the likelihood of occurrence of collision and columns representing severity of collision to the vehicle and surrounding structures. Risk likelihood is generated using a Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) that compiles knowledge from related Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEAs) and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to determine the probability of collision based on on-board sensor measurements indicative of vehicle health and controllability. Risk severity is computed utilizing a point-mass 3D kinematic model of the vehicle in presence of wind. The proposed risk factor is demonstrated on real flight data from experimental flights of an octocopter at NASA Langley Research Center in presence of simulated obstacles and wind conditions. Effect of varying wind conditions, level of controllability and obstacle measurement noise on the risk factor is demonstrated. The proposed approach enables risk-informed decision making for timely mitigation of current and future unsafe events in autonomous systems.

risk analysis↗
NASA NTRS2023

Earth Observations into Action: Systemic Integration of Earth Observation Applications into National Risk Reduction Decision Structures

As stated in the United Nations Global Assessment Report 2022 Concept Note, decision makers everywhere need data and statistics that are accurate, timely, sufficiently disaggregated, relevant, accessible, and easy to use. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate scalable and replicable methods to advance and integrate the use of Earth observation, specifically ongoing efforts within the Group on Earth Observations Work Programme and the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites Work Plan, to support risk-informed decision making, based on documented national and subnational needs and requirements.

earth observations↗
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 OSTI2020

Risk-Informed MultiPphysics BestEestimate Plus Uncertainties (BEPU) Application Development of RELAP5-3D Perturbation Model

The United States nuclear industry is facing a strong challenge to ensure maximum safety while enhancing economic benefit. Safety is a key parameter to all aspects related to light water reactor (LWR) nuclear power plants (NPPs), especially cost savings. Since the goal is to extend the lifetimes of these NPPs, the traditional deterministic safety concept may not guarantee a current economic asset. The Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program has been promoting a wide range of research and development (R&D) in this field to maximize the safety, economics, and performance of these NPPs through improved scientific understanding. One of the best practices to achieve this goal is to identify and optimize safety margins, which can lead to cost reduction. To do this, under the LWRS framework, the Risk-Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway will focus on the optimization of safety margin and minimization of uncertainties to ensure both safety and economics at the highest level. The RISA Pathway will provide enhanced capabilities for analyzing and characterizing LWR systems performance by developing and demonstrating methods, tools, and data to enable risk-informed margins management (RIMM). The goals of the RISA Pathway are twofold: (1) deploy the risk-informed tools and methods that enable better representation of safety margins and factors that contribute to cost and safety; and (2) conduct advanced risk assessment applications with industry to support margin management strategies that enable more cost-effective plant operation. The tools and methods provided by the RISA Pathway will support effective margin management for both active and passive safety systems, structures, and components (SSC) of an NPP. The tools and methods used in the RISA Pathway should have high confidence and highest technical maturity for and implementation to industry at its current setting. They should also have a capability to support risk-informed decision making for both probabilistic and deterministic elements of safety. The RISA Pathway will, therefore, perform a comprehensive assessment of verification and validation (V&V) status of RISA Toolkit to enhance credibility RISA Toolkit which be used by industry. This report summarizes RELAP5-3D development activities for best estimated and uncertainty (BEPU) capability to support ongoing RISA Pathway pilot projects for risk informed uncertainty quantification applications. Work scope includes (1) development of initial perturbation model for selected closure laws and (2) testing of suitable probability distribution functions (PDF) for the selected correlations. Developed BEPU modules are tested with selected separate effect cases and compared with conventional thermal-hydraulics model.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
NASA NTRS2015

Statistical Engineering in Air Traffic Management Research

NASA is working to develop an integrated set of advanced technologies to enable efficient arrival operations in high-density terminal airspace for the Next Generation Air Transportation System. This integrated arrival solution is being validated and verified in laboratories and transitioned to a field prototype for an operational demonstration at a major U.S. airport. Within NASA, this is a collaborative effort between Ames and Langley Research Centers involving a multi-year iterative experimentation process. Designing and analyzing a series of sequential batch computer simulations and human-in-the-loop experiments across multiple facilities and simulation environments involves a number of statistical challenges. Experiments conducted in separate laboratories typically have different limitations and constraints, and can take different approaches with respect to the fundamental principles of statistical design of experiments. This often makes it difficult to compare results from multiple experiments and incorporate findings into the next experiment in the series. A statistical engineering approach is being employed within this project to support risk-informed decision making and maximize the knowledge gained within the available resources. This presentation describes a statistical engineering case study from NASA, highlights statistical challenges, and discusses areas where existing statistical methodology is adapted and extended.

Wilson, Sara R.↗