SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Risk quantification”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of the occurrences of injury during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crewmembers and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80 individual crew landings has been collected through this study. Injuries are classified as either contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), and Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3 %). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), and then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings. The MDRI is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI also vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it will be important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles, and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning.

N Newby↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crewmembers and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80 individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of 2021. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3 %) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

N Newby↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crew members and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of September 2023. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3%) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

N Newby↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Soyuz Landing Risk Characterization

INTRODUCTION United States On-orbit Segment (USOS) astronauts have been returning to Earth from the International Space Station (ISS) aboard the Russian Soyuz vehicle since 2003. The energetics associated with Soyuz landings are comparable to our next generation of US space vehicles (Orion, Crew Dragon, and Starliner). Soyuz also lands crew in a similar state of spaceflight deconditioning that is anticipated using the future vehicles. A number of injuries have now been observed during these Soyuz landings. Currently it is unknown how Soyuz landing accelerations and the numbers and types of associated injuries relate to the new occupant protection requirements levied upon future space vehicles. Understanding this relationship will allow better quantification of the risk of injury for future spacecraft designs. METHODS An estimate of injury occurrence during Soyuz landings has been determined using data contained in NASA flight medicine databases and supplemented with data collected from crewmembers and flight surgeons. At the time of this abstract, 96 USOS astronauts have returned to Earth in the Soyuz (59 US, 31 International Partner, and 6 spaceflight participants). Of that total, data from 80 individual crew landings has been collected through this study as of September 2023. Injuries are classified either as contusions/abrasions, Class I (minor, no medical follow-up), Class II (moderate, medical follow-up necessary), Class III (severe), or Class IV (life threatening). Current NASA occupant protection standards are primarily based on the Multi-axial Dynamic Response Index (MDRI), which is a simple lumped-parameter spring, mass, damper model tuned to human impact responses in three orthogonal axes. RESULTS Using what is known about Soyuz landing dynamics from airborne and drop test data, the MDRI predicts essentially no Class IV or III injuries, < 1% Class II injuries, and < 5% Class I injuries. Approximately one-third of all USOS crewmembers for whom data has been gathered have suffered some sort of injury related to landing in the Soyuz vehicle. Most of these injuries fall into the contusion/abrasion category (21.3 %) (n.b. This is the percent for whom contusion/abrasion was the worst injury. Those with class I or II injuries typically also received contusions/abrasions). Class I injuries have been sustained by 5.0% of all crew, and Class II injuries have been observed in 3.8%. No Class III or IV injuries have been sustained to date. Forty-three injuries have been documented, with some crewmembers sustaining more than one injury in a single landing. The knee was the most likely area of injury (n=9), followed by the back (n=8), then the arm (n=7). CONCLUSION Soyuz landing dynamics are the most comparable analog environment for the anticipated loads associated with Orion and commercial crew vehicle landings. The MDRI under predicts the percentage of Class II injuries experienced during Soyuz landings, but it is better at predicting Class I injury occurrences. However, if contusions/abrasions are included in the minor injury Class I category, then the MDRI vastly under predicts those injuries as well. Given this data, it is important to re-evaluate the expected injury rates for future vehicles and work toward improving the predictive tools for spaceflight use. Spaceflight deconditioning may account for some of the under prediction, and work is ongoing to assess the relationship between landing injuries and impact tolerance changes due to spaceflight deconditioning. Future work includes expanding this study to involve private space missions on new vehicles to better characterize the effects of time in flight, suit and seat design, and vehicle dynamics.

P Greenhalgh↗

DOE OSTI2021

BETO 2021 Peer Review - Feasibility Study of Utilizing Electricity to Produce Intermediates from CO2 and Biomass

Capturing and converting CO2 generated from bioethanol facilities into valuable products, leveraging renewable electricity as the primary energy input, could increase overall biorefinery carbon utilization by as much as 40% and provide a means to decarbonize fuels and chemicals production. However, significant uncertainty exists around the costs, carbon intensity, risks, and technical challenges associated with electron-driven CO2 reduction. Thus, the overarching objective of this project is to guide existing and future research and development efforts by addressing these knowledge gaps for utilizing renewable electricity and CO2 to improve biorefinery economics and carbon utilization. By September 2023, this project will develop and publish a comprehensive design report for the integration of CO2 utilization into two existing conceptual biorefinery designs, which will include conceptual process models, pioneer and nth plant economics, identification and quantification of technological risks, and projections for future cost reductions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

NASA NTRS1998

Risk Management

This presentation focuses on the identification of risk management, risk management processes such as: quantification and prioritization; mitigation planning; implementation of risk reduction; and tracking process. It develops examples and answers questions about Risk Management.

Lloyd Thomas↗

NASA NTRS2023

EVA Task and 3D Pose Recognition from Video

Extravehicular Activity (EVA) has been known to involve potential risks of biomechanical stresses and injuries to crewmembers. Gathering of EVA motion patterns is necessary for risk analysis and mitigation. However, many existing techniques, such as motion capture systems, are not only cost-prohibitive but are impractical for retrospective analysis of past missions. In this work, a software tool was developed, which can estimate the 3D poses of a spacesuit from photographs or videos, without using special sensors or equipment. The tool is based on the state-of-the-art artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) system, which was trained by studying and capturing motion patterns of past and current spacesuit test data. The AI/ML tool was further enhanced using synthetically generated data, in which the suit postures, backgrounds, camera angles and illumination conditions were parametrically adjusted and rendered for training. The tool, incorporated the methodologies of Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), was trained, and tested in the cloud computing environment. The trained model was then applied on new imagery and video to extract estimated joint positions and suit outlines. The joint positions were further processed to capture activity (“digging”), pose labels (“bending”), and other useful downstream information. The model performance on new imagery and video was successfully assessed for accuracy and reliability. This AI/ML based posture recognition tool thus allows for the quantification of injury risk and task performance characterization for both current and past missions and training, which can immensely help to improve EVA task and suit design.

Kyung Han Kim↗

DOE OSTI2024

Accelerating uncertainty quantification in incremental dynamic analysis using dimension reduction-based surrogate modeling

We propose a surrogate modeling framework based on dimension reduction to facilitate the quantification of seismic risk of structural systems in performance-based earthquake engineering. The framework adopts incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) for addressing hazard variability, and promotes significant computational efficiency improvement for propagating epistemic uncertainties associated with the structural models. It utilizes both linear and nonlinear dimension reduction approaches, equipped with inverse mappings, to learn a functional between the input parameter space (e.g., the epistemic uncertainties of the structure) to the high-dimensional output space created through the IDA implementation across different ground motions and seismic intensity levels. Polynomial chaos expansion is adopted as the surrogate model to learn this functional in the reduced space. A nine-story steel moment-resisting frame with uncertain structural properties is used as a testbed. Furthermore, we select the seismic fragility curves as a measure of the structure’s seismic performance, since it provides an estimate of the probability of entering specified damage states for given levels of ground shaking.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2023

Design and requirements of a hydrogen component reliability database (HyCReD)

Hydrogen technologies are expected to play a key role in the decarbonization of several sectors including energy storage and transportation. Rigorous investigation and quantification of the risk and reliability issues associated with hydrogen technologies will be critical to ensuring both their wider adoption and safe, economical operations. Quantitative risk assessment (QRA) is an important tool that has been used to enable the safe deployment of many engineering systems, including hydrogen fueling stations and hydrogen storage systems. However, QRA studies require reliability data which is currently lacking for expanding applications of hydrogen systems. Here, to address this gap, we present a new structure for a hydrogen component reliability database (HyCReD) that can be used to generate reliability data to be used in QRA, reliability, safety studies, maintenance planning, and more. Building on our previous work examining four major hydrogen safety data collection tools (West et al., 2022) [1], our approach in this work was to consult scientific literature on reliability data collection as well as a number of existing reliability engineering databases in the oil & gas, chemical processing, and nuclear power plant sectors. The evaluation of these databases led to identifying best practices to be implemented in a data collection framework for a hydrogen component reliability database. Based on these best practices, a set of 24 requirements for the proposed database are presented, covering its characteristics and the types of data to be collected. We define the structure of the HyCReD database and 25 data elements to be collected, spanning system description, failure, shutdown, or near-miss events, and maintenance events. The data elements are then defined according to international standards used in the safety and reliability practice and potential choice lists are provided for each field. Since this database is being piloted for hydrogen fueling stations, a generic station component hierarchy developed by West (2021) [2] is used to standardize system data. Finally, we demonstrate populating the database with information extracted from five narrative reports on hydrogen fueling station incidents.

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2021

DAKOTA (Design Analysis Kit for Optimization and Terascale) v.6.14

Sandia's Dakota software supports science and engineering transformation through advanced exploration of simulations. Specifically, Dakota manages and analyzes ensembles of simulations to provide broader and deeper perspective for analysts and decision makers. This enables them to: (1) enhance understanding of risk, (2) improve products, and (3) assess simulation credibility. In its simplest mode, Dakota can automate typical parameter variation studies through a generic interface to a computational model. Dakota also delivers advanced parametric analysis techniques enabling design exploration, optimization, model calibration, risk analysis, and quantification of margins and uncertainty with such models. It directly supports verification and validation activities. The algorithms implemented in Dakota aim to address challenges in performing these analyses with complex science and engineering models from desktop to high performance computers. Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525 SAND2021-10468 O

Adams, BrianM.↗

DOE OSTI2021

DAKOTA (Design Analysis Kit for Optimization and Terascale) v.6.16

Adams, BrianM.↗

DOE OSTI2021

Coupling of regional geophysics and local soil-structure models in the EQSIM fault-to-structure earthquake simulation framework

Accurate understanding and quantification of the risk to critical infrastructure posed by future large earthquakes continues to be a very challenging problem. Earthquake phenomena are quite complex and traditional approaches to predicting ground motions for future earthquake events have historically been empirically based whereby measured ground motion data from historical earthquakes are homogenized into a common data set and the ground motions for future postulated earthquakes are probabilistically derived based on the historical observations. This procedure has recognized significant limitations, principally due to the fact that earthquake ground motions tend to be dictated by the particular earthquake fault rupture and geologic conditions at a given site and are thus very site-specific. Historical earthquakes recorded at different locations are often only marginally representative. There has been strong and increasing interest in utilizing large-scale, physics-based regional simulations to advance the ability to accurately predict ground motions and associated infrastructure response. However, the computational requirements for simulations at frequencies of engineering interest have proven a major barrier to employing regional scale simulations. In a U.S. Department of Energy Exascale Computing Initiative project, the EQSIM application development is underway to create a framework for fault-to-structure simulations. This framework is being prepared to exploit emerging exascale platforms in order to overcome computational limitations. This article presents the essential methodology and computational workflow employed in EQSIM to couple regional-scale geophysics models with local soil-structure models to achieve a fully integrated, complete fault-to-structure simulation framework. Here, the computational workflow, accuracy and performance of the coupling methodology are illustrated through example fault-to-structure simulations.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

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↗

DOE OSTI2023

Assessing Low-Temperature Geothermal Play Types: Relevant Data and Play Fairway Analysis Methods

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) is supporting the Geothermal Heating and Cooling Geospatial Datasets and Analysis project conducted by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) as part of a broader effort to demonstrate the multi-faceted value of integrating geothermal power and geothermal heating and cooling (GHC) technologies into national decarbonization plans and community energy plans. Currently, there is a need to establish baseline low-temperature geothermal resource datasets and evaluate methods for deploying these technologies to provide the basis for supporting private sector investment. This project is focused on collecting baseline datasets, updating conceptual models, and creating Play Fairway Analysis (PFA) workflows for low-temperature (<150 degrees Celsius) geothermal resources of different geothermal play types (i.e., sedimentary basin, orogenic belts, and radiogenic geothermal play types) that could be used for geothermal heating and cooling (GHC), combined heat and power (CHP), and other geothermal direct uses (GDU) applications. Low-temperature geothermal resources are defined as reservoirs - natural or engineered - with temperatures <150 degrees Celsius. While the focus in the NREL effort is on GHC, resources at the upper end of this temperature range can also be used for small-scale power generation. This project does not include Ground Source Heat Pumps (GSHPs) technologies because they can be effectively developed almost anywhere. Low-temperature geothermal resources have not been studied as extensively as higher- to medium-temperature geothermal resources, but there is recent interest in improving understanding of these types of resources with an uptick of interest in geothermal technologies for decarbonizing heating and cooling systems. In addition, Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) and other emerging technologies for exploiting petrothermal resources have opened the possibility of utilizing deep sedimentary basin systems, where porous media provide permeability and high temperatures can be reached at great depths. This project takes the approach of classifying low- temperature geothermal resources by geothermal play type (GPT). We defined and characterized three major classes of low-temperature GPT: sedimentary basins, orogenic systems, and radiogenic systems. We develop methodologies for evaluating and analyzing the potential for these resources building off the PFA approach to de-risking geothermal exploration and characterization. The proposed PFA approach for low-temperature geothermal resources includes: 1) identifying relevant data (e.g., datasets such bottom-hole temperatures from oil and gas wells, heat flow data, Quaternary faults and stress field data, geophysical data, etc.); 2) grouping and weighting of relevant datasets into PFA criteria (e.g., geological, risk, and economic criteria); 3) uncertainty quantification; 4) developing favorability or common risk maps for low-temperature geothermal resources to identify potential locations for more focused data collection; and 5) estimating electric power generation and heating potential at those locations using the GeoRePORT Resource Size Assessment Tool (RSAT). This project should facilitate future deployment of GHC, CHP, and GDU by providing data, tools, and a workflow applicable to low-temperature geothermal resources. Increased deployment of GHC and GDU will help achieve national and local decarbonization goals.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS2011

Analogs and the BHP Risk Reduction Strategy for Future Spaceflight Missions

In preparation for future exploration missions to distant destinations (e.g., Moon, Near Earth Objects (NEO), and Mars), the NASA Human Research Program s (HRP) Behavioral Health and Performance Element (BHP) conducts and supports research to address four human health risks: Risk of Behavioral Conditions; Risk of Psychiatric Conditions; Risk of Performance Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team; and Risk of Performance Errors due to Sleep Loss, Fatigue, Circadian Desynchronization, and Work Overload (HRP Science Management Plan, 2008). BHP Research, in collaboration with internal and external research investigators, as well as subject matter experts within NASA operations including flight surgeons, astronauts, and mission planners and others within the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD), identifies knowledge and technology gaps within each Risk. BHP Research subsequently manages and conducts research tasks to address and close the gaps, either through risk assessment and quantification, or the development of countermeasures and monitoring technologies. The resulting deliverables, in many instances, also support current Medical Operations and/or Mission Operations for the International Space Station (ISS).

Whitmire, Sandra↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Standard measures in Analogs of Spaceflight

Standard measures are defined as research measures (physiological, performance, or otherwise) that quantify the subject’s health and performance before, during, and after a spaceflight or a spaceflight analog mission. The Standard Measures Cross-Cutting Project (SMCCP) collects and analyzes standard measures that support assessment and quantification of health risks and efficacy of countermeasures and technologies required to prevent or mitigate adverse outcomes from exposure to the spaceflight environment. SMCCP uses the following spaceflight analogs: - Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) in Houston, TX: 4-person isolation/confinement; nominal mission duration of 45 days; run by the Human Research Program (HRP). SMCCP uses weekly questionnaires to gather data on the crewmembers’ emotional and mental state and collects blood samples biweekly to measure crewmembers’ serum cortisol levels at the start, middle, and end of the mission. - Institute for Biomedical Problems (IBMP) Ground-Based Experimental Complex, called NEK, in Moscow, Russia: 6-person isolation/confinement; duration of 8 months; run by IBMP. Standard measures data collected during NEK are the same as for HERA above. - :envihab in Cologne, Germany: 12-person bed rest facility; closed environment; 30 to 60-day campaigns; run by the German Aerospace Center (DLR). For bedrest studies, SMCCP uses the international standard measures as documented in the International Academy of Astronautics publication titled Guidelines for Standardization of Bed Rest Studies in the Spaceflight Context (June 2014). These international standard measures evaluate potential changes in bone, muscle, cardiovascular, and visual systems, as well as changes in psychology and nutrition. The international standard measures complement those collected during studies by individual investigators and allow comparison of responses across different bed rest and countermeasures durations. In this presentation, we will review available SMCCP data collected during the recent isolation studies in HERA (C6) and NEK (SIRIUS-21), and during the SANS (SM1, SM2) bed rest studies in :envihab. These standard measures datasets are made available to concurrent investigators in the given mission or campaign via data sharing agreements and/or data sharing plans and to other investigators that have been granted retrospective access to the data (researchers with IRB approved protocols, risk custodians) to advance understanding of physiological and behavioral risks associated with these spaceflight analogs.

Standard Measures↗

DOE OSTI2024

Machine Learning Application for CCUS Carbon Storage: Fracture Analysis and Mapping in The Illinois Basin

This is the conference paper accompanying an oral presentation at the 58th US Rock Mechanics/Geomechanics Symposium (ARMA) June 23 to 26 in Golden, CO. The paper highlights using machine learning to quantify fracture network for carbon storage and is part of the SMART Initiative project applications.

Liu, Guoxiang↗

NASA NTRS2019

The Missing Economic Risks in Assessments of Climate Change Impacts

Economic assessments of the potential future risks of climate change have been omitting or grossly underestimating many of the most serious consequences for lives and livelihoods because these risks are difficult to quantify precisely and lie outside of human experience. Political and business leaders need to understand the scale of these ‘missing risks’ because they could have drastic and potentially catastrophic impacts on citizens, communities and companies. Scientists are growing in confidence about the evidence for the largest potential impacts of climate change and the rising probability that major thresholds in the Earth’s climate system will be breached as global mean surface temperature rises, particularly if warming exceeds 2°C above the pre-industrial level. These impacts include: (1) Destabilisation of ice sheets and glaciers and consequent sea level rise. (2) Stronger tropical cyclones. (3) Extreme heat impacts. (4) More frequent and intense floods and droughts. (5) Disruptions to oceanic and atmospheric circulation. (6) Destruction of biodiversity and collapse of ecosystems. Many of these impacts will grow and occur concurrently across the world as global temperature climbs. Some of these impacts involve thresholds in the climate system beyond which major impacts accelerate, or become irreversible and unstoppable. When a threshold is breached, it might cause one or more other thresholds to be exceeded as well, leading to a cascade of impacts. Many of these impacts could exceed the capacity of human populations to adapt, and would significantly affect and disrupt the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people worldwide. These impacts would also undermine economic growth and development, exacerbate poverty and destabilise communities. Economic assessments fail to take account of the potential for large concurrent impacts across the world that would cause mass migration, displacement and conflict, with huge loss of life. Economic assessments that are expressed solely in terms of effects on output (e.g. gross domestic product), or that only extrapolate from past experience, or that use inappropriate discounting, do not provide a clear indication of the potential risks to lives and livelihoods. It is likely that there are additional risks that we are not yet anticipating simply because scientists have not yet detected their possibility, as we have entered a period of climate change that is unprecedented in human history. Some advances are being made in improving economic assessments of climate change impacts but much more progress is required if assessments are to offer reliable guidance for political and business leaders on the biggest risks. The lack of firm quantifications is not a reason to ignore these risks, and when the missing risks are taken into account, the case for strong and urgent action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions becomes even more compelling.

DeFries, Ruth↗