Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Failure mode and effect 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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1992

Making the Hubble Space Telescope servicing mission safe

This paper will detail how the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) system safety program is conducted. Numerous safety analyses are conducted through the various phases of design, test, and fabrication, and results are presented to NASA management for discussion during dedicated safety reviews. This paper will then address the system safety assessment and risk analysis methodologies used (i.e. hazard analysis, fault tree analysis, and failure modes and effects analysis), and how they are coupled with enginering and test analyses for a 'synergistic picture' of the system. Some preliminary safety analysis results, showing the relationship between hazard identification, control or abatement, and finally control verification, will be presented as examples of this safety process.

Bahr, N. J.↗
NASA NTRS2002

[High Pressure Gas Tanks]

Four high-pressure gas tanks, the basis of this study, were especially made by a private contractor and tested before being delivered to NASA Kennedy Space Center. In order to insure 100% reliability of each individual tank the staff at KSC decided to again submit the four tanks under more rigorous tests. These tests were conducted during a period from April 10 through May 8 at KSC. This application further validates the predictive safety model for accident prevention and system failure in the testing of four high-pressure gas tanks at Kennedy Space Center, called Continuous Hazard Tracking and Failure Prediction Methodology (CHTFPM). It is apparent from the variety of barriers available for a hazard control that some barriers will be more successful than others in providing protection. In order to complete the Barrier Analysis of the system, a Task Analysis and a Biomechanical Study were performed to establish the relationship between the degree of biomechanical non-conformities and the anomalies found within the system on particular joints of the body. This relationship was possible to obtain by conducting a Regression Analysis to the previously generated data. From the information derived the body segment with the lowest percentage of non-conformities was the neck flexion with 46.7%. Intense analysis of the system was conducted including Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA), Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA), and Barrier Analysis. These analyses resulted in the identification of occurrences of conditions, which may be becoming hazardous in the given system. These conditions, known as dendritics, may become hazards and could result in an accident, system malfunction, or unacceptable risk conditions. A total of 56 possible dendritics were identified. Work sampling was performed to observe the occurrence each dendritic. The out of control points generated from a Weighted c control chart along with a Pareto analysis indicate that the dendritics "Personnel not Wearing Proper Protective and Hose/tubing located in high-traffic area" which account for 59.18% of total dendritic frequency need to be addressed to reduce the chance of a hazard from occurring. However, the occurrences of some dendritics are more important than others. As a result immediate, from a Weighted c perspective, corrective action should be taken to ameliorate the cause of the Class A dendritic "Personnel located under suspended or moving loads" rather than just the most commonly occurring dendritics. In any case the vast majority of data obtained indicates that testing operations possess a relatively high degree of safety.

Quintana, Rolando↗
NASA NTRS2016

Reliability and Maintainability Analysis for the Amine Swingbed Carbon Dioxide Removal System

I have performed a reliability & maintainability analysis for the Amine Swingbed payload system. The Amine Swingbed is a carbon dioxide removal technology that has gone through 2,400 hours of International Space Station on-orbit use between 2013 and 2016. While the Amine Swingbed is currently an experimental payload system, the Amine Swingbed may be converted to system hardware. If the Amine Swingbed becomes system hardware, it will supplement the Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly (CDRA) as the primary CO2 removal technology on the International Space Station. NASA is also considering using the Amine Swingbed as the primary carbon dioxide removal technology for future extravehicular mobility units and for the Orion, which will be used for the Asteroid Redirect and Journey to Mars missions. The qualitative component of the reliability and maintainability analysis is a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA). In the FMEA, I have investigated how individual components in the Amine Swingbed may fail, and what the worst case scenario is should a failure occur. The significant failure effects are the loss of ability to remove carbon dioxide, the formation of ammonia due to chemical degradation of the amine, and loss of atmosphere because the Amine Swingbed uses the vacuum of space to regenerate the Amine Swingbed. In the quantitative component of the reliability and maintainability analysis, I have assumed a constant failure rate for both electronic and nonelectronic parts. Using this data, I have created a Poisson distribution to predict the failure rate of the Amine Swingbed as a whole. I have determined a mean time to failure for the Amine Swingbed to be approximately 1,400 hours. The observed mean time to failure for the system is between 600 and 1,200 hours. This range includes initial testing of the Amine Swingbed, as well as software faults that are understood to be non-critical. If many of the commercial parts were switched to military-grade parts, the expected mean time to failure would be 2,300 hours. Both calculated mean times to failure for the Amine Swingbed use conservative failure rate models. The observed mean time to failure for CDRA is 2,500 hours. Working on this project and for NASA in general has helped me gain insight into current aeronautics missions, reliability engineering, circuit analysis, and different cultures. Prior my internship, I did not have a lot knowledge about the work being performed at NASA. As a chemical engineer, I had not really considered working for NASA as a career path. By engaging in interactions with civil servants, contractors, and other interns, I have learned a great deal about modern challenges that NASA is addressing. My work has helped me develop a knowledge base in safety and reliability that would be difficult to find elsewhere. Prior to this internship, I had not thought about reliability engineering. Now, I have gained a skillset in performing reliability analyses, and understanding the inner workings of a large mechanical system. I have also gained experience in understanding how electrical systems work while I was analyzing the electrical components of the Amine Swingbed. I did not expect to be exposed to as many different cultures as I have while working at NASA. I am referring to both within NASA and the Houston area. NASA employs individuals with a broad range of backgrounds. It has been great to learn from individuals who have highly diverse experiences and outlooks on the world. In the Houston area, I have come across individuals from different parts of the world. Interacting with such a high number of individuals with significantly different backgrounds has helped me to grow as a person in ways that I did not expect. My time at NASA has opened a window into the field of aeronautics. After earning a bachelor's degree in chemical engineering, I plan to go to graduate school for a PhD in engineering. Prior to coming to NASA, I was not aware of the graduate Pathways program. I intend to apply for the graduate Pathways program as positions are opened up. I would like to pursue future opportunities with NASA, especially as my engineering career progresses.

Dunbar, Tyler↗
NASA NTRS2001

Assessment of Stirling Technology Has Provided Critical Data Leading Toward Flight Readiness of the Stirling Converter

The NASA Glenn Research Center is supporting the development of a Stirling converter with the Department of Energy (DOE, Germantown, Maryland) for an advanced Stirling Radioisotope Power System (SRPS) to provide spacecraft onboard electric power for NASA space science missions. A key technology assessment completed by Glenn and DOE has led to the SRPS being identified as a high-efficiency power source for such deep space missions as the Europa Orbiter and the Solar Probe. In addition, the Stirling system is now being considered for unmanned Mars rovers, especially where mission profiles may exclude the use of photovoltaic power systems, such as exploration at high Martian latitudes or for missions of long duration. The SRPS efficiency of over 20 percent will reduce the required amount of radioisotope by more than a factor of 3 in comparison to current radioisotope thermoelectric generators. This significantly reduces radioisotope cost, radiological inventory, and system cost, and it provides efficient use of scarce radioisotope resources. In support of this technology assessment, Glenn conducted a series of independent evaluations and tests to determine the technology readiness of a 55-We Stirling converter developed by Stirling Technology Company (Kennewick, Washington) and DOE. Key areas evaluated by Glenn included: 1) Radiation tolerance of materials; 2) Random vibration testing of the Stirling converter in Glenn's Structural Dynamics Lab to simulate operation in the launch environment; 3) Electromagnetic interference and compatibility (EMI/EMC) of the converter operating in Glenn's EMI lab; Independent failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis, and life and reliability 4. Independent failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis, and life and reliability assessment; and 5) SRPS cost estimate. The data from these evaluations were presented to NASA Headquarters and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory mission office by a joint industry/Government team consisting of DOE, Glenn, and Lockheed Martin Astronautics. This team concluded that there are no technical reasons that would rule out using the Stirling converter for deep space missions. As a direct result of the successful testing at Glenn, the DOE/Stirling Technology Company 55-We Stirling converter has been baselined for the SRPS. Glenn is now continuing an in-house project to assist in developing the Stirling converter for readiness for space qualification and mission implementation. As part of this effort, the Stirling converter will be further characterized under launch environment random vibration testing, methods to reduce converter EMI will be developed, and an independent performance verification will be completed. Converter life assessment and permanent magnet aging characterization tasks are also underway. Substitute organic materials for the linear alternator and piston bearing coatings for use in a high-radiation environment have been identified and have now been incorporated in Stirling converters built by Stirling Technology Company for Glenn. Electromagnetic and thermal finite element analyses for the alternator are also being conducted.

Thieme, Lanny G.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the guidance, navigation, and control subsystem

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) is presented. The IOA approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The independent analysis results corresponding to the Orbiter Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) Subsystem hardware are documented. The function of the GNC hardware is to respond to guidance, navigation, and control software commands to effect vehicle control and to provide sensor and controller data to GNC software. Some of the GNC hardware for which failure modes analysis was performed includes: hand controllers; Rudder Pedal Transducer Assembly (RPTA); Speed Brake Thrust Controller (SBTC); Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU); Star Tracker (ST); Crew Optical Alignment Site (COAS); Air Data Transducer Assembly (ADTA); Rate Gyro Assemblies; Accelerometer Assembly (AA); Aerosurface Servo Amplifier (ASA); and Ascent Thrust Vector Control (ATVC). The IOA analysis process utilized available GNC hardware drawings, workbooks, specifications, schematics, and systems briefs for defining hardware assemblies, components, and circuits. Each hardware item was evaluated and analyzed for possible failure modes and effects. Criticality was assigned based upon the severity of the effect for each failure mode.

Trahan, W. H.↗
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↗
NASA NTRS2000

Probabilistic Risk Assessment: A Bibliography

Probabilistic risk analysis is an integration of failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), fault tree analysis and other techniques to assess the potential for failure and to find ways to reduce risk. This bibliography references 160 documents in the NASA STI Database that contain the major concepts, probabilistic risk assessment, risk and probability theory, in the basic index or major subject terms, An abstract is included with most citations, followed by the applicable subject terms.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1972

Reliability analysis based on operational success criteria

Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis Model disregards failures of insignificant components. Assumptions used to establish baselines for reliability prediction and analytical method are listed. Techniques are applicable to any commercial design and can be extended into software or management systems.

Esmond, F. G.↗
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↗
NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Assessment of the mechanical actuation subsystem, volume 2

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 approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine draft failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then compared to the proposed Post 51-L NASA FMEA/CIL baseline that was available. A resolution of each discrepancy from the comparison was provided through additional analysis as required. These discrepancies were flagged as issues, and recommendations were made based on the FMEA data available at the time. This report documents the results of that comparison for the Orbiter Mechanical Actuation System (MAS) hardware. Specifically, the MAS hardware consists of the following components: Air Data Probe (ADP); Elevon Seal Panel (ESP); External Tank Umbilical (ETU); Ku-Band Deploy (KBD); Payload Bay Doors (PBD); Payload Bay Radiators (PBR); Personnel Hatches (PH); Vent Door Mechanism (VDM); and Startracker Door Mechanism (SDM). Criticality was assigned based upon the severity of the effect for each failure mode. Volume 2 continues the presentation of IOA analysis worksheets and contains the potential critical items list, detailed analysis, and NASA FMEA/CIL to IOA worksheet cross reference and recommendations.

Bradway, M. W.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Generation and analysis of large reliability models

An effort has been underway for several years at NASA's Langley Research Center to extend the capability of Markov modeling techniques for reliability analysis to the designers of highly reliable avionic systems. This effort has been focused in the areas of increased model abstraction and increased computational capability. The reliability model generator (RMG), a software tool which uses as input a graphical, object-oriented block diagram of the system, is discussed. RMG uses an automated failure modes-effects analysis algorithm to produce the reliability model from the graphical description. Also considered is the ASSURE software tool, a parallel processing program which uses the ASSIST modeling language and SURE semi-Markov solution technique. An executable failure modes-effects analysis is used by ASSURE. The successful combination of the power of graphical representation, automated model generation, and parallel computation leads to the conclusion that large system architectures can now be analyzed.

Aerospace electronics↗
NASA NTRS1986

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the instrumentation 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 approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The independent analysis results for the Instrumentation Subsystem are documented. The Instrumentation Subsystem (SS) consists of transducers, signal conditioning equipment, pulse code modulation (PCM) encoding equipment, tape recorders, frequency division multiplexers, and timing equipment. For this analysis, the SS is broken into two major groupings: Operational Instrumentation (OI) equipment and Modular Auxiliary Data System (MADS) equipment. The OI equipment is required to acquire, condition, scale, digitize, interleave/multiplex, format, and distribute operational Orbiter and payload data and voice for display, recording, telemetry, and checkout. It also must provide accurate timing for time critical functions for crew and payload specialist use. The MADS provides additional instrumentation to measure and record selected pressure, temperature, strain, vibration, and event data for post-flight playback and analysis. MADS data is used to assess vehicle responses to the flight environment and to permit correlation of such data from flight to flight. The IOA analysis utilized available SS hardware drawings and schematics for identifying hardware assemblies and components and their interfaces. Criticality for each item was assigned on the basis of the worst-case effect of the failure modes identified.

Howard, B. S.↗
NASA NTRS1989

ALS rocket engine combustion devices design and demonstration

Work performed during Phase one is summarized and the significant technical and programmatic accomplishments occurring during this period are documented. Besides a summary of the results, methodologies, trade studies, design, fabrication, and hardware conditions; the following are included: the evolving Maintainability Plan, Reliability Program Plan, Failure Summary and Analysis Report, and the Failure Mode and Effect Analysis.

Arreguin, Steve↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Systems Health Monitoring: Integrating FMEA into Bayesian Networks

The foreseeable high traffic density suggests that a large number of electric propulsion systems will enter the airspace, and that they will also operate at high frequency, e.g., large number of take offs and landings per unit time. The reliability of such critical systems is therefore key to ensure high safety standards in the low-altitude airspace. Diagnostic systems, which aim at identifying incipient faults, can mitigate unexpected failures or lower-than-expected reliability by performing early fault detection by monitoring the systems. A key element of fault diagnosis is fault detection and isolation (FDI), which complexity increases with the complexity of the system itself, namely the number of subsystems and components, interactions among sub-systems, and the number of sensors available. The proposed approach leverages combination of failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) integrated with Bayesian networks, thus introducing dependability structures into a diagnostic framework to aid FDI. Faults and failure events from the FMEA are mapped within a Bayesian network, where network edges replicate the links embedded within FMEAs. The integrated framework enables the fault isolation process by identifying the probability of occurrence of specific faults or root causes given evidence observed through sensor signals. In this work, sub systems of Urban Air Mobility (UAM) type vehicle like avionics, structures, power-train etc. are taken into account to show the approach at the system level. This work integrates early design phase in the development of UAM type vehicles with diagnostic tools, which are often developed later in the product life-cycle, or retrofitted at a later time on systems. Failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) derived for the system in the design phase is embedded within a Bayesian network (BN).

UAM↗
NASA NTRS1987

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the Orbiter Experiment (OEX) 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 approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. This report documents the independent analysis results corresponding to the Orbiter Experiments hardware. Each level of hardware was evaluated and analyzed for possible failure modes and effects. Criticality was assigned based upon the severity of the effect for each failure mode. The Orbiter Experiments (OEX) Program consists of a multiple set of experiments for the purpose of gathering environmental and aerodynamic data to develop more accurate ground models for Shuttle performance and to facilitate the design of future spacecraft. This assessment only addresses currently manifested experiments and their support systems. Specifically this list consists of: Shuttle Entry Air Data System (SEADS); Shuttle Upper Atmosphere Mass Spectrometer (SUMS); Forward Fuselage Support System for OEX (FFSSO); Shuttle Infrared Laced Temperature Sensor (SILTS); Aerodynamic Coefficient Identification Package (ACIP); and Support System for OEX (SSO). There are only two potential critical items for the OEX, since the experiments only gather data for analysis post mission and are totally independent systems except for power. Failure of any experiment component usually only causes a loss of experiment data and in no way jeopardizes the crew or mission.

Compton, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS1988

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

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. This report documents the independent analysis results corresponding to the Orbiter Pyrotechnics hardware. The IOA analysis process utilized available pyrotechnics hardware drawings and schematics for defining hardware assemblies, components, and hardware items. Each level of hardware was evaluated and analyzed for possible failure modes and effects. Criticality was assigned based upon the severity of the effect for each failure mode.

Robinson, W. W.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the rudder/speed brake 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 approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The independent analysis results for the Orbiter Rudder/Speedbrake Actuation Mechanism is documented. The function of the Rudder/Speedbrake (RSB) is to provide directional control and to provide a means of energy control during entry. The system consists of two panels on a vertical hinge mounted on the aft part of the vertical stabilizer. These two panels move together to form a rudder but split apart to make a speedbrake. The Rudder/Speedbrake Actuation Mechanism consists of the following elements: (1) Power Drive Unit (PDU) which is composed of hydraulic valve module and a hydraulic motor-powered gearbox which contains differentials and mixer gears to provide PDU torque output; (2) four geared rotary actuators which apply the PDU generated torque to the rudder/speedbrake panels; and (3) ten torque shafts which join the PDU to the rotary actuators and interconnect the four rotary actuators. Each level of hardware was evaluated and analyzed for possible failures and causes. Criticality was assigned based upon the severity of the effect for each failure mode. Critical RSB failures which result in potential loss of vehicle control were mainly due to loss of hydraulic fluid, fluid contaminators, and mechanical failures in gears and shafts.

Wilson, R. E.↗