Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Probabilistic Risk 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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1978

Costing the satellite power system

The paper presents a methodology for satellite power system costing, places approximate limits on the accuracy possible in cost estimates made at this time, and outlines the use of probabilistic cost information in support of the decision-making process. Reasons for using probabilistic costing or risk analysis procedures instead of standard deterministic costing procedures are considered. Components of cost, costing estimating relationships, grass roots costing, and risk analysis are discussed. Risk analysis using a Monte Carlo simulation model is used to estimate future costs.

Hazelrigg, G. A., Jr.↗
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 NTRS2017

Methods for Probabilistic Uncertainty Analysis and Bayesian Analysis with Examples of Statistically Analyzing Data to Revise MMOD Risk Estimates and Compare Models

Probabilistic methods are presented for characterizing and quantifying uncertainties in models and model predictions. Techniques are given for constructing specific uncertainty distributions based on available information. Alternative techniques are given for propagating uncertainties in model inputs to obtain the uncertainty in the model result or prediction. Bayesian techniques are also described for utilizing data and information to update and revise model results and predictions. The focus is on applications with numerous specific examples given. The use of data to revise Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris (MMOD) risk prediction models are among the examples given.

Risk↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Impact Real World System Validation

Introduction NASA has developed a new evidence-based data-driven probabilistic risk assessment and tradespace analysis tool as a successor to the Integrated Medical Model. This updated decision support tool is known as IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces). IMPACT estimates the frequency and consequences of medical conditions that might arise during exploration missions. A validation analysis of IMPACT was performed with respect to a set of International Space Station (ISS) and Shuttle Transportation System (STS) real world system (RWS) referent data due to the limited referent data available from exploration missions. Methods Observed mission and crew characteristics from STS and ISS missions were used as model inputs within MEDPRAT (Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool). For each mission, two hundred thousand simulations were generated. For each mission, model outputs included occurrence counts for each condition, total medical events (TME), and the probability of loss of crew life (LOCL). These simulated model outputs were compared to the RWS referent data. Results The predicted number of total medical events exceeded the total RWS medical events for ISS missions and combined ISS and STS missions and fell within the 90% confidence interval for STS missions. For the 32 ISS missions simulated by IMPACT, the number of total medical events was overpredicted for 19 missions and fell within the 90% confidence interval for 13 missions. For the 21 STS missions, the total number of medical events was overpredicted for 3 missions, fell within the 90% confidence interval for 16 missions, and was underpredicted for 2 missions. Combined, 29 missions were in range, 22 were overpredicted, and 2 were underpredicted. The predicted LOCL probability for the 32 ISS missions, the 21 STS missions, and the combined ISS and STS missions was consistent with the zero LOCL events observed in the RWS referent data. The validation analysis included a comparison of the number of medical events predicted by IMPACT and the number of medical events observed in the RWS data on a condition-by-condition basis. For ISS missions, 50 conditions were in range, 52 conditions were statistically underpowered (not enough observed sample to draw any conclusions on precision), 8 conditions were overpredicted, and 9 conditions were underpredicted. Overall, only 14% (17/119) of conditions were out of range for STS missions, 40 conditions were in range, 59 conditions were statistically underpowered, 10 conditions were overpredicted, and 10 conditions were underpredicted. Overall, only 17% (20/119) of conditions were out of range. For combined ISS and STS missions, 11 conditions were overpredicted, and 11 conditions were underpredicted. Overall, only 18% (22/119) of conditions were out of range. For combined ISS and STS missions, 49 conditions were in range, 46 conditions were statistically underpowered, 18 conditions were overpredicted, and 8 conditions were underpredicted. Overall, 21% (26/121) of conditions were out of range. Conclusion The results of this validation analysis should not be interpreted as a pass/fail test of the validity of IMPACT. Instead, this validation analysis should be used to assess some of the IMPACT outcomes in terms of consistencies and inconsistencies with the ISS and STS RWS referent data.

L. Boley↗
NASA NTRS1995

Probabilistic risk assessment of the Space Shuttle. Phase 3: A study of the potential of losing the vehicle during nominal operation. Volume 5: Auxiliary shuttle risk analyses

Volume 5 is Appendix C, Auxiliary Shuttle Risk Analyses, and contains the following reports: Probabilistic Risk Assessment of Space Shuttle Phase 1 - Space Shuttle Catastrophic Failure Frequency Final Report; Risk Analysis Applied to the Space Shuttle Main Engine - Demonstration Project for the Main Combustion Chamber Risk Assessment; An Investigation of the Risk Implications of Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster Chamber Pressure Excursions; Safety of the Thermal Protection System of the Space Shuttle Orbiter - Quantitative Analysis and Organizational Factors; Space Shuttle Main Propulsion Pressurization System Probabilistic Risk Assessment, Final Report; and Space Shuttle Probabilistic Risk Assessment Proof-of-Concept Study - Auxiliary Power Unit and Hydraulic Power Unit Analysis Report.

Fragola, Joseph R.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Uncertainty analysis for Ulysses safety evaluation report

As part of the effort to review the Ulysses Final Safety Analysis Report and to understand the risk of plutonium release from the Ulysses spacecraft General Purpose Heat Source-Radioisotope Thermal Generator, the Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel (INSRP) performed an integrated, quantitative analysis of the uncertainties of the calculated risk of plutonium release from Ulysses. Using state-of-art probabilistic risk assessment technology, the uncertainty analysis accounted for both variability and uncertainty of the key parameters of the risk analysis. The results show that INSRP had high confidence that risk of fatal cancers from potential plutonium release associated with calculated launch and deployment accident scenarios is low.

Frank, Michael V.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Assessment and Control of Spacecraft Charging Risks on the International Space Station

Electrical interactions between the F2 region ionospheric plasma and the 160V photovoltaic (PV) electrical power system on the International Space Station (ISS) can produce floating potentials (FP) on the ISS conducting structure of greater magnitude than are usually observed on spacecraft in low-Earth orbit. Flight through the geomagnetic field also causes magnetic induction charging of ISS conducting structure. Charging processes resulting from interaction of ISS with auroral electrons may also contribute to charging albeit rarely. The magnitude and frequency of occurrence of possibly hazardous charging events depends on the ISS assembly stage (six more 160V PV arrays will be added to ISS), ISS flight configuration, ISS position (latitude and longitude), and the natural variability in the ionospheric flight environment. At present, ISS is equipped with two plasma contactors designed to control ISS FP to within 40 volts of the ambient F2 plasma. The negative-polarity grounding scheme utilized in the ISS 160V power system leads, naturally, to negative values of ISS FP. A negative ISS structural FP leads to application of electrostatic fields across the dielectrics that separate conducting structure from the ambient F2 plasma, thereby enabling dielectric breakdown and arcing. Degradation of some thermal control coatings and noise in electrical systems can result. Continued review and evaluation of the putative charging hazards, as required by the ISS Program Office, revealed that ISS charging could produce a risk of electric shock to the ISS crew during extra vehicular activity. ISS charging risks are being evaluated in ongoing ISS charging measurements and analysis campaigns. The results of ISS charging measurements are combined with a recently developed detailed model of the ISS charging process and an extensive analysis of historical ionospheric variability data, to assess ISS charging risks using Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) methods. The PRA analysis (estimated frequency of occurrence and severity of the charging hazards) are then used to select the hazard control strategy that provides the best overall safety and mission success environment for ISS and the ISS crew. This paper presents: 1) a summary of ISS spacecraft charging analysis, measurements, observations made to date, 2) plans for future ISS spacecraft charging measurement campaigns, and 3) a detailed discussion of the PRA strategy used to assess ISS spacecraft charging risks and select charging hazard control strategies

Koontz, Steve↗
NASA NTRS1991

Risk analysis of an RTG on the Space Shuttle

As part of the effort to review the Ulysses Final Safety Analysis Report and to understand the risk of plutonium release from the Ulysses spacecraft General Purpose Heat Source-Radioisotope Thermal Generator (GPHS-RTG), the Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel (INSRP) and the author performed an integrated, quantitative analysis of the uncertainties of the calculated risk of plutonium release from Ulysses. Using state-of-the-art probabilistic risk assessment technology, the uncertainty analysis accounted for both variability and uncertainty of the key parameters of the risk analysis. The results show tht INSRP had high confidence that risk of fatal cancers from potential plutonium release associated with calculated launch and deployment accident scenarios is low.

Frank, Michael V.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Monte Carlo Simulation of Markov, Semi-Markov, and Generalized Semi- Markov Processes in Probabilistic Risk Assessment

A standard tool of reliability analysis used at NASA-JSC is the event tree. An event tree is simply a probability tree, with the probabilities determining the next step through the tree specified at each node. The nodal probabilities are determined by a reliability study of the physical system at work for a particular node. The reliability study performed at a node is typically referred to as a fault tree analysis, with the potential of a fault tree existing.for each node on the event tree. When examining an event tree it is obvious why the event tree/fault tree approach has been adopted. Typical event trees are quite complex in nature, and the event tree/fault tree approach provides a systematic and organized approach to reliability analysis. The purpose of this study was two fold. Firstly, we wanted to explore the possibility that a semi-Markov process can create dependencies between sojourn times (the times it takes to transition from one state to the next) that can decrease the uncertainty when estimating time to failures. Using a generalized semi-Markov model, we studied a four element reliability model and were able to demonstrate such sojourn time dependencies. Secondly, we wanted to study the use of semi-Markov processes to introduce a time variable into the event tree diagrams that are commonly developed in PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) analyses. Event tree end states which change with time are more representative of failure scenarios than are the usual static probability-derived end states.

English, Thomas↗
NASA NTRS2007

Design for Reliability and Safety Approach for the New NASA Launch Vehicle

The United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is in the midst of a space exploration program intended for sending crew and cargo to the international Space Station (ISS), to the moon, and beyond. This program is called Constellation. As part of the Constellation program, NASA is developing new launch vehicles aimed at significantly increase safety and reliability, reduce the cost of accessing space, and provide a growth path for manned space exploration. Achieving these goals requires a rigorous process that addresses reliability, safety, and cost upfront and throughout all the phases of the life cycle of the program. This paper discusses the "Design for Reliability and Safety" approach for the NASA new launch vehicles, the ARES I and ARES V. Specifically, the paper addresses the use of an integrated probabilistic functional analysis to support the design analysis cycle and a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) to support the preliminary design and beyond.

Safie, Fayssal M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Baseline Medical System Translation for the Impact Medical Database

NASA has developed a new evidence-based data-driven probabilistic risk assessment and tradespace analysis tool as a successor to the Integrated Medical Model (IMM). This updated decision support tool is known as IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces). Whereas IMM focuses on the resources and risks associated with International Space Station (ISS) and Low Earth Orbit (LEO) missions, IMPACT estimates the frequency and consequences of medical conditions that might arise during exploration missions. One of the services offered by IMM is a series of generic or baseline medical systems associated with typical mission types or DRMs (Design Reference Missions), such that requestors may prioritize questions pertaining to the mission itself over the medical supplies indicated by the model outputs for that DRM. In a mission focused request, the appropriate baseline medical system is used in place of a prepared or optimized medical kit. In preparation, an effort was undertaken to create baseline systems of medical resources within IMPACT suitable for typical DRMs. Using an existing baseline medical system within IMM’s Integrated Medical Evidence Database (iMED) as a starting point, the resources found within the medical kit were compared to and substituted for equivalent resources available within the IMPACT MD (Medical Database). In consultation with clinicians with knowledge of IMPACT’s MD, each resource was matched as closely as possible to a similarly purposed resource in IMPACT, seeking to preserve the treatment capabilities and procedures offered by the IMM medical system while reconciling the differences in modeled resources and medical conditions between the models. To demonstrate the efficacy of this work, a prototype ISS medical system in IMPACT was translated from the baseline used in the IMM. The appropriate medical system was then run through its associated medical model to compare and validate the resultant risks and risk mitigation provided by each baseline ISS medical kit.

S Schwartz↗
NASA NTRS1991

Probabilistic structural analysis algorithm development for computational efficiency

The PSAM (Probabilistic Structural Analysis Methods) program is developing a probabilistic structural risk assessment capability for the SSME components. An advanced probabilistic structural analysis software system, NESSUS (Numerical Evaluation of Stochastic Structures Under Stress), is being developed as part of the PSAM effort to accurately simulate stochastic structures operating under severe random loading conditions. One of the challenges in developing the NESSUS system is the development of the probabilistic algorithms that provide both efficiency and accuracy. The main probability algorithms developed and implemented in the NESSUS system are efficient, but approximate in nature. In the last six years, the algorithms have improved very significantly.

Wu, Y.-T.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Probability of failure and risk assessment of propulsion structural components

The probabilistic structural analysis method (PSAM) was developed to analyze the effects of fluctuating loads, variable material properties, and uncertain analytical models especially for high performance structures such as the Space Shuttle Main Engine turbopump blades. Risk is calculated after expensive service experience. However, probabilistic structural analysis provides a rational alternative method to quantify uncertainties in the structural performance and durability. NESSUS (Numerical Evaluation of Stochastic Structures Under Stress) was developed as a probabilistic structural analysis computer code which integrates finite element methods and reliability algorithms, capable to predicting the probability distributions of structural response variables such as stress, displacement, natural frequencies, and buckling loads. This computer code is detailed.

Shiao, Michael C.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Impact Outputs for A Representative Extended Duration Artemis Mission

BACKGROUND: As NASA and private industry begin preparation for long-duration spaceflight, quantifying the impact that potential human health and performance capabilities have on crew health outcomes is imperative for medical risk mitigation. NASA’s Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces tool (IMPACT) applies Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) methodology to estimate these outcomes. OVERVIEW: As NASA prepares to return to the Moon, medical system planning has already begun for extended Artemis missions, which will see humans spending months at a time in cis-lunar space and on the surface of the Moon. The Long Duration Lunar Orbital and Lunar Surface (LDLOLS) design reference mission (DRM) lasts 9 months, including 3 months on the lunar surface, and involves 2 male and 2 female crewmembers. LDLOLS assumes no extravehicular activities (EVAs) in orbit, but, while on the lunar surface, involves 2-4 EVAs/month in a pressurized rover and 2-4 EVAs/month in an unpressurized rover or on foot. This DRM assumes a physician level Crew Medical Officer with commensurate knowledge, skills, and abilities. The IMPACT tool was utilized to estimate in-flight medical risk for this mission. More specifically, 100,000 simulations of this DRM were modeled, and overall estimates for loss of crew life (LOCL), need for evacuation (RTDC; return to definitive care), and crew task time lost (TTL; a measure of disability) were calculated. A recommended medical capability set, with appropriate mass and volume constraints, was also generated. DISCUSSION: This abstract reviews the IMPACT-derived risk for these mission outcomes with and without treatment, a macroscopic look at the total mass and volume necessary for full diagnostic and treatment capability, and how these change with input mission parameters.

J G Steller↗
NASA NTRS2016

Pharmaceuticals Exposed to the Space Environment: Problems and Prospects

The NASA Human Research Program (HRP) Health Countermeasures Element maintains ongoing efforts to inform detailed risks, gaps, and further questions associated with the use of pharmaceuticals in space. Most recently, the Pharmacology Risk Report, released in 2010, illustrates the problems associated with maintaining pharmaceutical efficacy. Since the report, one key publication includes evaluation of pharmaceutical products stored on the International Space Station (ISS). This study shows that selected pharmaceuticals on ISS have a shorter shelf-life in space than corresponding terrestrial controls. The HRP Human Research Roadmap for planetary exploration identifies the risk of ineffective or toxic medications due to long-term storage during missions to Mars. The roadmap also identifies the need to understand and predict how pharmaceuticals will behave when exposed to radiation for long durations. Terrestrial studies of returned samples offer a start for predictive modeling. This paper shows that pharmaceuticals returned to Earth for post-flight analyses are amenable to a Weibull distribution analysis in order to support probabilistic risk assessment modeling. The paper also considers the prospect of passive payloads of key pharmaceuticals on sample return missions outside of Earth's magnetic field to gather additional statistics. Ongoing work in radiation chemistry suggests possible mitigation strategies where future work could be done at cryogenic temperatures to explore methods for preserving the strength of pharmaceuticals in the space radiation environment, perhaps one day leading to an architecture where pharmaceuticals are cached on the Martian surface and preserved cryogenically.

pharmacology↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Improving the Fidelity of Capability & Resource Weighting in A Probalistic Risk Assessment Model for Spaceflight

INTRODUCTION NASA’s Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces (IMPACT) tool uses Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to provide an evidence-based, data-driven estimate of how medical system capabilities affect mission outcomes. IMPACT maps condition incidence to available resources thereby facilitating the calculation of outcome metrics that allow the estimation of mission medical risk. Conditions can be nominally categorized as either treated or untreated depending on the availability of necessary diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. This categorization enables IMPACT to estimate the effect of various medical system configurations on mission outcomes such as crew mortality, disability, crew member down-time, return to duty/recovery, and need for evacuation. IMPACT currently employs an equal weighting, “partial credit” approach to define treatment in which each of the capabilities associated with a given condition contributes an equal amount to management of the condition. This feature enables IMPACT to report values in between “fully untreated” and “fully treated” based on the proportion of capabilities available within the model. However, as is normal in medical/clinical practice, not all individual capabilities contribute equally to medical care. For example, the ability to provide intramuscular epinephrine during an anaphylactic episode contributes more likelihood of overall management success than does the administration of oral diphenhydramine. We hypothesize that weighting the relative contribution of each capability to each specific condition will improve outcome prediction and therefore will better provide mission planners with more nuanced and accurate options when designing space medical systems. METHODS Using a five-point Fibonacci scaling sequence (1, 2, 3, 5, 8) subject matter experts from NASA’s Exploration Medical Capabilities (ExMC) element assigned relative contribution weighting values to each identified capability within IMPACT. Since the relative importance of each capability varies depending on the specific condition, the resulting “partial” weighting was completed for more than 1,600 individual weighting assignments for 666 capabilities across 121 conditions. Each assignment required three-physician concurrence based on the overall importance of the capability to the diagnosis and management of the condition being considered and the difficulty with which it could be improvised by the crew. Once complete, 100,000 IMPACT simulations were run for a 6-month Lunar mission with a 30-day surface stay to evaluate the effect of this modification of the model. RESULTS Partial weighting significantly decreased predicted task time loss (TTL), evacuation, and loss of crew life without causing significant changes to the recommended medical system design. CONCLUSIONS The paucity of real-world referent data to support long-duration space missions of this type limits the ability to judge one predictive analytics method as superior to another. However, since the proposed method significantly reduces and optimizes outcome risks—without changing the medical system design—incorporating a partial weighting methodology is likely to provide a more accurate and operationally-relevant representation of medical risk without compromising IMPACTs ability to inform overarching medical system requirements.

Steller JG↗
NASA NTRS2008

Modeling the Risk of Fire/Explosion Due to Oxidizer/Fuel Leaks in the Ares I Interstage

A significant flight hazard associated with liquid propellants, such as those used in the upper stage of NASA's new Ares I launch vehicle, is the possibility of leakage of hazardous fluids resulting in a catastrophic fire/explosion. The enclosed and vented interstage of the Ares I contains numerous oxidizer and fuel supply lines as well as ignition sources. The potential for fire/explosion due to leaks during ascent depends on the relative concentrations of hazardous and inert fluids within the interstage along with other variables such as pressure, temperature, leak rates, and fluid outgasing rates. This analysis improves on previous NASA Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) estimates of the probability of deflagration, in which many of the variables pertinent to the problem were not explicitly modeled as a function of time. This paper presents the modeling methodology developed to analyze these risks.

Ring, Robert W.↗
NASA NTRS2016

[MaRS Project]

The Space Exploration Division of the Safety and Mission Assurances Directorate is responsible for reducing the risk to Human Space Flight Programs by providing system safety, reliability, and risk analysis. The Risk & Reliability Analysis branch plays a part in this by utilizing Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) and Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) tools to identify possible types of failure and effective solutions. A continuous effort of this branch is MaRS, or Mass and Reliability System, a tool that was the focus of this internship. Future long duration space missions will have to find a balance between the mass and reliability of their spare parts. They will be unable take spares of everything and will have to determine what is most likely to require maintenance and spares. Currently there is no database that combines mass and reliability data of low level space-grade components. MaRS aims to be the first database to do this. The data in MaRS will be based on the hardware flown on the International Space Stations (ISS). The components on the ISS have a long history and are well documented, making them the perfect source. Currently, MaRS is a functioning excel workbook database; the backend is complete and only requires optimization. MaRS has been populated with all the assemblies and their components that are used on the ISS; the failures of these components are updated regularly. This project was a continuation on the efforts of previous intern groups. Once complete, R&M engineers working on future space flight missions will be able to quickly access failure and mass data on assemblies and components, allowing them to make important decisions and tradeoffs.

Aruljothi, Arunvenkatesh↗