Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Software and System Safety”

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 NTRS2015

Infusing Reliability Techniques into Software Safety Analysis

Software safety analysis for a large software intensive system is always a challenge. Software safety practitioners need to ensure that software related hazards are completely identified, controlled, and tracked. This paper discusses in detail how to incorporate the traditional reliability techniques into the entire software safety analysis process. In addition, this paper addresses how information can be effectively shared between the various practitioners involved in the software safety analyses. The author has successfully applied the approach to several aerospace applications. Examples are provided to illustrate the key steps of the proposed approach.

FTA↗
NASA NTRS2007

2006 NASA Range Safety Annual Report

Throughout 2006, Range Safety was involved in a number of exciting and challenging activities and events, from developing, implementing, and supporting Range Safety policies and procedures-such as the Space Shuttle Launch and Landing Plans, the Range Safety Variance Process, and the Expendable Launch Vehicle Safety Program procedures-to evaluating new technologies. Range Safety training development is almost complete with the last course scheduled to go on line in mid-2007. Range Safety representatives took part in a number of panels and councils, including the newly formed Launch Constellation Range Safety Panel, the Range Commanders Council and its subgroups, the Space Shuttle Range Safety Panel, and the unmanned aircraft systems working group. Space based range safety demonstration and certification (formerly STARS) and the autonomous flight safety system were successfully tested. The enhanced flight termination system will be tested in early 2007 and the joint advanced range safety system mission analysis software tool is nearing operational status. New technologies being evaluated included a processor for real-time compensation in long range imaging, automated range surveillance using radio interferometry, and a space based range command and telemetry processor. Next year holds great promise as we continue ensuring safety while pursuing our quest beyond the Moon to Mars.

TenHaken, Ron↗
NASA NTRS2010

Obtaining Valid Safety Data for Software Safety Measurement and Process Improvement

We report on a preliminary case study to examine software safety risk in the early design phase of the NASA Constellation spaceflight program. Our goal is to provide NASA quality assurance managers with information regarding the ongoing state of software safety across the program. We examined 154 hazard reports created during the preliminary design phase of three major flight hardware systems within the Constellation program. Our purpose was two-fold: 1) to quantify the relative importance of software with respect to system safety; and 2) to identify potential risks due to incorrect application of the safety process, deficiencies in the safety process, or the lack of a defined process. One early outcome of this work was to show that there are structural deficiencies in collecting valid safety data that make software safety different from hardware safety. In our conclusions we present some of these deficiencies.

Basili, Victor r.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Intelligent Hardware-Enabled Sensor and Software Safety and Health Management for Autonomous UAS

Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) can only be deployed if they can effectively complete their mission and respond to failures and uncertain environmental conditions while maintaining safety with respect to other aircraft as well as humans and property on the ground. We propose to design a real-time, onboard system health management (SHM) capability to continuously monitor essential system components such as sensors, software, and hardware systems for detection and diagnosis of failures and violations of safety or performance rules during the ight of a UAS. Our approach to SHM is three-pronged, providing: (1) real-time monitoring of sensor and software signals; (2) signal analysis, preprocessing, and advanced on-the- y temporal and Bayesian probabilistic fault diagnosis; (3) an unobtrusive, lightweight, read-only, low-power hardware realization using Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) in order to avoid overburdening limited computing resources or costly re-certi cation of ight software due to instrumentation. No currently available SHM capabilities (or combinations of currently existing SHM capabilities) come anywhere close to satisfying these three criteria yet NASA will require such intelligent, hardwareenabled sensor and software safety and health management for introducing autonomous UAS into the National Airspace System (NAS). We propose a novel approach of creating modular building blocks for combining responsive runtime monitoring of temporal logic system safety requirements with model-based diagnosis and Bayesian network-based probabilistic analysis. Our proposed research program includes both developing this novel approach and demonstrating its capabilities using the NASA Swift UAS as a demonstration platform.

Robotics↗
NASA NTRS1999

Practical Issues in Implementing Software Reliability Measurement

Many ways of estimating software systems' reliability, or reliability-related quantities, have been developed over the past several years. Of particular interest are methods that can be used to estimate a software system's fault content prior to test, or to discriminate between components that are fault-prone and those that are not. The results of these methods can be used to: 1) More accurately focus scarce fault identification resources on those portions of a software system most in need of it. 2) Estimate and forecast the risk of exposure to residual faults in a software system during operation, and develop risk and safety criteria to guide the release of a software system to fielded use. 3) Estimate the efficiency of test suites in detecting residual faults. 4) Estimate the stability of the software maintenance process.

Nikora, Allen P.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Generalized implementation of software safety policies

As part of a research program in the engineering of software for safety-critical systems, we are performing two case studies. The first case study, which is well underway, is a safety-critical medical application. The second, which is just starting, is a digital control system for a nuclear research reactor. Our goal is to use these case studies to permit us to obtain a better understanding of the issues facing developers of safety-critical systems, and to provide a vehicle for the assessment of research ideas. The case studies are not based on the analysis of existing software development by others. Instead, we are attempting to create software for new and novel systems in a process that ultimately will involve all phases of the software lifecycle. In this abstract, we summarize our results to date in a small part of this project, namely the determination and classification of policies related to software safety that must be enforced to ensure safe operation. We hypothesize that this classification will permit a general approach to the implementation of a policy enforcement mechanism.

Knight, John C.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Range Safety for an Autonomous Flight Safety System

The Range Safety Algorithm software encapsulates the various constructs and algorithms required to accomplish Time Space Position Information (TSPI) data management from multiple tracking sources, autonomous mission mode detection and management, and flight-termination mission rule evaluation. The software evaluates various user-configurable rule sets that govern the qualification of TSPI data sources, provides a prelaunch autonomous hold-launch function, performs the flight-monitoring-and-termination functions, and performs end-of-mission safing

Lanzi, Raymond J.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Modeling in the State Flow Environment to Support Launch Vehicle Verification Testing for Mission and Fault Management Algorithms in the NASA Space Launch System

Analysis methods and testing processes are essential activities in the engineering development and verification of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) new Space Launch System (SLS). Central to mission success is reliable verification of the Mission and Fault Management (M&FM) algorithms for the SLS launch vehicle (LV) flight software. This is particularly difficult because M&FM algorithms integrate and operate LV subsystems, which consist of diverse forms of hardware and software themselves, with equally diverse integration from the engineering disciplines of LV subsystems. M&FM operation of SLS requires a changing mix of LV automation. During pre-launch the LV is primarily operated by the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO) organization with some LV automation of time-critical functions, and much more autonomous LV operations during ascent that have crucial interactions with the Orion crew capsule, its astronauts, and with mission controllers at the Johnson Space Center. M&FM algorithms must perform all nominal mission commanding via the flight computer to control LV states from pre-launch through disposal and also address failure conditions by initiating autonomous or commanded aborts (crew capsule escape from the failing LV), redundancy management of failing subsystems and components, and safing actions to reduce or prevent threats to ground systems and crew. To address the criticality of the verification testing of these algorithms, the NASA M&FM team has utilized the State Flow environment6 (SFE) with its existing Vehicle Management End-to-End Testbed (VMET) platform which also hosts vendor-supplied physics-based LV subsystem models. The human-derived M&FM algorithms are designed and vetted in Integrated Development Teams composed of design and development disciplines such as Systems Engineering, Flight Software (FSW), Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) and major subsystems and vehicle elements such as Main Propulsion Systems (MPS), boosters, avionics, Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C), Thrust Vector Control (TVC), liquid engines, and the astronaut crew office. Since the algorithms are realized using model-based engineering (MBE) methods from a hybrid of the Unified Modeling Language (UML) and Systems Modeling Language (SysML), SFE methods are a natural fit to provide an in depth analysis of the interactive behavior of these algorithms with the SLS LV subsystem models. For this, the M&FM algorithms and the SLS LV subsystem models are modeled using constructs provided by Matlab which also enables modeling of the accompanying interfaces providing greater flexibility for integrated testing and analysis, which helps forecast expected behavior in forward VMET integrated testing activities. In VMET, the M&FM algorithms are prototyped and implemented using the same C++ programming language and similar state machine architectural concepts used by the FSW group. Due to the interactive complexity of the algorithms, VMET testing thus far has verified all the individual M&FM subsystem algorithms with select subsystem vendor models but is steadily progressing to assessing the interactive behavior of these algorithms with LV subsystems, as represented by subsystem models. The novel SFE applications has proven to be useful for quick look analysis into early integrated system behavior and assessment of the M&FM algorithms with the modeled LV subsystems. This early MBE analysis generates vital insight into the integrated system behaviors, algorithm sensitivities, design issues, and has aided in the debugging of the M&FM algorithms well before full testing can begin in more expensive, higher fidelity but more arduous environments such as VMET, FSW testing, and the Systems Integration Lab7 (SIL). SFE has exhibited both expected and unexpected behaviors in nominal and off nominal test cases prior to full VMET testing. In many findings, these behavioral characteristics were used to correct the M&FM algorithms, enable better test coverage, and develop more effective test cases for each of the LV subsystems. This has improved the fidelity of testing and planning for the next generation of M&FM algorithms as the SLS program evolves from non-crewed to crewed flight, impacting subsystem configurations and the M&FM algorithms that control them. SFE analysis has improved robustness and reliability of the M&FM algorithms by revealing implementation errors and documentation inconsistencies. It is also improving planning efficiency for future VMET testing of the M&FM algorithms hosted in the LV flight computers, further reducing risk for the SLS launch infrastructure, the SLS LV, and most importantly the crew.

Trevino, Luis↗
NASA NTRS1974

A guide for performing system safety analysis

A general guide is presented for performing system safety analyses of hardware, software, operations and human elements of an aerospace program. The guide describes a progression of activities that can be effectively applied to identify hazards to personnel and equipment during all periods of system development. The general process of performing safety analyses is described; setting forth in a logical order the information and data requirements, the analytical steps, and the results. These analyses are the technical basis of a system safety program. Although the guidance established by this document cannot replace human experience and judgement, it does provide a methodical approach to the identification of hazards and evaluation of risks to the system.

Brush, J. M.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploring Requirements for Software that Learns: A Research Preview

Context & motivation: The development of software that learns has revolutionized how many systems perform. For the most part, these systems are neither safety- nor mission-critical. However, as technology and aspirations advance, there is an increased desire and need for Machine Learning (ML) software in safety- and mission-critical systems, e.g., driverless cars or autonomous space robotics. Problem: In these domains, reliability is crucial and systems have to undergo much scrutiny in terms of both the developed artefacts and the adopted development process. Central to the development of such systems is the elicitation and definition of software requirements that are used to guide the design and verification process. The addition of software components that learn, and the associated capability for unforeseen behavior, makes defining detailed software requirements especially difficult. Principal ideas/results: In this paper, we identify unique characteristics of software requirements that are specific to ML components. To this end, we collect and examine requirements from both academic and industrial sources. Contribution: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that presents real-life, industrial patterns of requirements for ML components. Furthermore, this paper identifies key characteristics and provides a foundation for developing a taxonomy of requirements for software that learns.

Probabilistic requirements↗
NASA NTRS2016

Assurance of Fault Management: Risk-Significant Adverse Condition Awareness

Fault Management (FM) systems are ranked high in risk-based assessment of criticality within flight software, emphasizing the importance of establishing highly competent domain expertise to provide assurance for NASA projects, especially as spaceflight systems continue to increase in complexity. Insight into specific characteristics of FM architectures seen embedded within safety- and mission-critical software systems analyzed by the NASA Independent Verification Validation (IVV) Program has been enhanced with an FM Technical Reference (TR) suite. Benefits are aimed beyond the IVV community to those that seek ways to efficiently and effectively provide software assurance to reduce the FM risk posture of NASA and other space missions. The identification of particular FM architectures, visibility, and associated IVV techniques provides a TR suite that enables greater assurance that critical software systems will adequately protect against faults and respond to adverse conditions. The role FM has with regard to overall asset protection of flight software systems is being addressed with the development of an adverse condition (AC) database encompassing flight software vulnerabilities.Identification of potential off-nominal conditions and analysis to determine how a system responds to these conditions are important aspects of hazard analysis and fault management. Understanding what ACs the mission may face, and ensuring they are prevented or addressed is the responsibility of the assurance team, which necessarily should have insight into ACs beyond those defined by the project itself. Research efforts sponsored by NASAs Office of Safety and Mission Assurance defined terminology, categorized data fields, and designed a baseline repository that centralizes and compiles a comprehensive listing of ACs and correlated data relevant across many NASA missions. This prototype tool helps projects improve analysis by tracking ACs, and allowing queries based on project, mission type, domain component, causal fault, and other key characteristics. The repository has a firm structure, initial collection of data, and an interface established for informational queries, with plans for integration within the Enterprise Architecture at NASA IVV, enabling support and accessibility across the Agency. The development of an improved workflow process for adaptive, risk-informed FM assurance is currently underway.

Software Verification & Validation↗
NASA NTRS1994

Formal Methods Demonstration Project for Space Applications

Requirements and design specifications are a high priority candidate for better software engineering techniques. Most hazardous software safety errors found during system integration and test of two NASA spacecraft were the result of requirements discrepancies or interface specifications. The highest density of major defects found through the use of software inspections was during the requirements phase. This was seven times higher than the density of major defects found in code inspections. Requirements errors are between 10 and 100 times more costly to fix at later phases of the software lifecycle than at the requirements phase itself. One study found that early lifecycle errors are the most likely to lead to catastrophic failures.

critical↗
NASA NTRS2015

Software Assurance Challenges for the Commercial Crew Program

This paper will provide a description of some of the challenges NASA is facing in providing software assurance within the new commercial space services paradigm, namely with the Commercial Crew Program (CCP). The CCP will establish safe, reliable, and affordable access to the International Space Station (ISS) by purchasing a ride from commercial companies. The CCP providers have varying experience with software development in safety-critical space systems. NASA's role in providing effective software assurance support to the CCP providers is critical to the success of CCP. These challenges include funding multiple vehicles that execute in parallel and have different rules of engagement, multiple providers with unique proprietary concerns, providing equivalent guidance to all providers, permitting alternates to NASA standards, and a large number of diverse stakeholders. It is expected that these challenges will exist in future programs, especially if the CCP paradigm proves successful. The proposed CCP approach to address these challenges includes a risk-based assessment with varying degrees of engagement and a distributed assurance model. This presentation will describe NASA IV&V Program's software assurance support and responses to these challenges.

Commercial Crew↗
NASA NTRS2015

Planning the Unplanned Experiment: Assessing the Efficacy of Standards for Safety Critical Software

We need well-founded means of determining whether software is t for use in safety-critical applications. While software in industries such as aviation has an excellent safety record, the fact that software aws have contributed to deaths illustrates the need for justi ably high con dence in software. It is often argued that software is t for safety-critical use because it conforms to a standard for software in safety-critical systems. But little is known about whether such standards `work.' Reliance upon a standard without knowing whether it works is an experiment; without collecting data to assess the standard, this experiment is unplanned. This paper reports on a workshop intended to explore how standards could practicably be assessed. Planning the Unplanned Experiment: Assessing the Ecacy of Standards for Safety Critical Software (AESSCS) was held on 13 May 2014 in conjunction with the European Dependable Computing Conference (EDCC). We summarize and elaborate on the workshop's discussion of the topic, including both the presented positions and the dialogue that ensued.

Graydon, Patrick J.↗