SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Technical Risk Assessment”

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 NTRS2016

Towards a Methodology and Tooling for Model-Based Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA)

A Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) aims to identify and assess potential risks to system technical performance requirements for the purpose of furnishing risk insights into project decisions. PRAs have traditionally been conducted manually using software with an isolated data model. As system complexity rises it becomes difficult to ensure consistency between a PRA, the evolving system design, and other engineering analyses; the techniques for conducting PRAs must evolve to meet this challenge. This work presents progress towards a methodology and tooling for conducting a PRA by leveraging data in the system model, embedded for other purposes and analyses, to conduct a PRA. An approach for identifying the appropriate probabilistic equation for each risk scenario from a standard library is presented, which is a significant step towards the quantification of the likelihood of a risk scenario occurrence. The final calculation of the likelihood of occurrence is left as an item of future work. We also present the development of preliminary tooling to carry out the methodology on a well-formed system model. The information needed to conduct the PRA is embedded in a consistent manner in a system model, so the model-based PRA can be regularly executed as the system model changes. The ability to modify the PRA in concert with lifecycle evolution affords a project the opportunity to track the extent to which system modification impacts compliance with requirements. These aspects of this model-based PRA methodology make it capable of managing risk in increasingly complex technical systems.

Schreiner, Samuel S.↗

NASA NTRS2021

Technology Readiness Level (TRL) as the foundation of Human Readiness Level (HRL)

As space programs became more complex, it became evident to NASA that a means of defining a methodological way to evaluate the maturity of technologies for spacecraft design was needed for risk assessment that could affect technical, cost and schedule. NASA first saw that infusing technology intoNASA programs required some means to assess technology maturity like flight readiness for a mission. Hence, a seven-point technology readiness level scale was developed in the mid-70s by a NASA researcher and later formally defined in 1989 (Sadin et al., 1989) that comprised of seven levels (See Table 1). These levels provided a definitive meaning of what complexity a research and technology development program should be followed. NASA recognized the approach as a useful way of an effective assessment of,and communication regarding the maturity of new technologies, using a simplistic figure of merit, the state of maturity of a technology-particularly, critical technology necessary to meet a mission/application objective

George Salazar↗

NASA NTRS2010

Recent Experiences of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) GN and C Technical Discipline Team (TDT)

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC), initially formed in 2003, is an independently funded NASA Program whose dedicated team of technical experts provides objective engineering and safety assessments of critical, high risk projects. The GN&C Technical Discipline Team (TDT) is one of fifteen such discipline-focused teams within the NESC organization. The TDT membership is composed of GN&C specialists from across NASA and its partner organizations in other government agencies, industry, national laboratories, and universities. This paper will briefly define the vision, mission, and purpose of the NESC organization. The role of the GN&C TDT will then be described in detail along with an overview of how this team operates and engages in its objective engineering and safety assessments of critical NASA projects. This paper will then describe selected recent experiences, over the period 2007 to present, of the GN&C TDT in which they directly performed or supported a wide variety of NESC assessments and consultations.

Dennehy, Cornelius J.↗

DOE OSTI2022

An Integrated Framework for Risk Assessment of High Safety Significant Safety-related Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems in Nuclear Power Plants: Methodology and Demonstration

This report documents the activities performed by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) during Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program, Risk Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway, digital instrumentation and control (DI&C) risk assessment project. In FY 2019, the RISA Pathway initiated a project to develop a risk assessment strategy for delivering a technical basis to support effective and secure DI&C technologies for digital upgrades/designs. A framework was proposed for this strategy, which aims to (1) provide a best-estimate, risk-informed capability to quantitatively and accurately estimate the risk impact of plant modernization, considering the introduction of high safety-significant safety-related (HSSSR) DI&C systems, (2) support and supplement existing risk-informed DI&C design guides by providing quantitative risk information and evidence, (3) offer a capability of design architecture evaluation of various DI&C systems, (4) assure the long-term safety and reliability of HSSSR DI&C systems, and (5) reduce uncertainty in costs and support integration of DI&C systems in the plant. To achieve these technical goals, the framework provides a means to address relevant technical issues by: (1) defining a risk-informed analysis process for DI&C upgrade, that integrates hazard analysis, reliability analysis, and consequence analysis, (2) applying risk-informed tools to address common cause failures (CCFs) and quantify corresponding failure probabilities for DI&C technologies, particularly software CCFs, (3) evaluating the impact of digital failures at the component level, system level, and plant level, and (4) providing insights and suggestions on designs to manage the risks, thus to support the development and deployment of advanced DI&C technologies on nuclear power plant (NPPs).

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

NASA NTRS1980

Risk to the public from carbon fibers released in civil aircraft accidents

Because carbon fibers are strong, stiff, and lightweight, they are attractive for use in composite structures. Because they also have high electrical conductivity, free carbon fibers settling on electrical conductors can cause malfunctions. If released from the composite by burning, the fibers may become a hazard to exposed electrical and electronic equipment. As part of a Federal study of the potential hazard associated with the use of carbon fibers, NASA assessed the public risk associated with crash fire accidents of civil aircraft. The NASA study projected a dramatic increase in the use of carbon composites in civil aircraft and developed technical data to support the risk assessment. Personal injury was found to be extremely unlikely. In 1993, the year chosen as a focus for the study, the expected annual cost of damage caused by released carbon fibers is only $1000. Even the worst-case carbon fiber incident simulated (costing $178,000 once in 34,000 years) was relatively low-cost compared with the usual air transport accident cost. On the basis of these observations, the NASA study concluded that exploitation of composites should continue, that additional protection of avionics is unnecessary, and that development of alternate materials specifically to overcome this problem is not justified.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2005

Evaluation of a Shuttle Derived Vehicle (SDV) for Cargo Transportation

In this new era of space exploration, a host of launch vehicles are being examined for possible use in transporting cargo and crew to low Earth orbit and beyond. Launch vehicles derived from the Space Shuttle Program (SSP), known as Shuttle Derived Vehicles (SDVs), are prime candidates for heavy-lift duty because of their potential to minimize non-recurring costs and because the Shuttle can leverage off proven high-performance flight systems with established ground and flight support. To determine the merits of SDVs, a detailed evaluation was performed. This evaluation included a trade study and risk assessment of options based on performance, safety reliability, cost, operations, and evolution. The purpose of this paper is to explain the approach, processes, and tools used to evaluate launch vehicles for heavy lift cargo transportation. The process included defining the trade space, characterizing the concepts, analyzing the systems, and scoring the options. The process also included a review by subject experts from NASA and industry to compare past and recent study data and assess the risks. A set of technical performance measures (TPMs) was generated based on the study requirements and constraints. Tools such as INTROS and POST were used to calculate performance, FIRST was used for prediction of reliability, and other software packages, both commercial and NASA-owned, were applied to study the trade space. By following a clear process and using the right tools a thorough assessment was performed. An SDV can be classified as either a side-mount vehicle (SMV) or an in-line vehicle OLV). An SMV is a Space Shuttle where the Orbiter is replaced by a cargo carrier. An ILV is comprised of a modified Shuttle External Tank (ET) with engines mounted to the bottom and cargo mounted atop. For both families of vehicles, Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) are attached to the ET. The first derivate of Shuttle is defined as the vehicle with minimum changes necessary to transform the Space Shuttle into an SDV. Deltas from the first derivate were also formulated to study more SDV options. Examples of deltas include replacing the SRBs with larger and/or more SRBs, adding an upper stage, increasing the size of the ET, changing the engines, and modifying the elements. Challenges for SDV range from tailoring infrastructure to meeting the exploration schedule. Although SDV is based on the Space Shuttle, it still includes development risk for designing and building a Cargo Carrier. There are also performance challenges in that Shuttle is not optimized for cargo-only missions, but it is a robust system built on reusability. Balancing the strengths and weaknesses of the Shuttle to meet Lunar and Mars mission objectives provides the framework for an informative trade study. SDV was carefully analyzed and the results of the study provide invaluable data for use in the new exploration initiative.

Roman, Jose M.↗

NASA NTRS2009

Learning from Experience Case Studies of the Hyper-X Project

The Hyper-X project (X-43A) provides a number of "lessons learned" which can be applied to other aerospace project. The specific areas examined were the selection of the goals of the Hyper-X. How the technical unknowns and assumptions were handled. The final lesson was the ambiguous nature of risk assessment, and how trying to remove a technical unknown can have unintended consequences.

Peebles, Curtis↗

NASA NTRS2015

TA-13: Ground and Launch Systems, 2015 NASA Technology Roadmaps

This presentation is a summary of new content contained in the 2015 update of Technology Area-13, Ground and Launch Systems technology roadmap beyond the content contained in the 2010 version. Also included are brief assessments of benefits, alignments, challenges, technical risk and reasonableness, sequencing and timing, and time and effort to achieve goals. This presentation is part of overall presentations of new content only for the 2015 update of the 15 NASA Technology Roadmaps that will be conducted in a public forum managed by the National Research Council on September 28-29, 2015. The 15 roadmaps have already been publically released via the STI process.

decision-making tools↗

NASA NTRS2020

Lessons Learned from Recent Space Flight Assessments

This paper highlights four space flight assessments, each with an important lesson. The first assessment points to the challenge of material substitution for weight saving. Space Shuttle’s external tank stringers were changed from Al 2024 to Al 2090 without comprehensive analysis. Lack of understanding the low Short-Transverse (S-T) strength associated with Al 2090 led to widespread cracking. The second assessment addresses the failure to understand that time-dependent relationships and loading interactions of multiple disciplines can lead to non-conservative results. An aerodynamic test article of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) Launch Abort System (LAS) was analyzed for worst-case single discipline loads, showing positive structural margins. When disciplines were combined with time dependent loading, the analysis resulted in negative margins. The third assessment highlights the pitfalls of putting blind trust in historical architecture. The MPCV re-entry heat shield adopted the Apollo design approach despite fundamental differences between the two designs (e.g., the underlying substructure design, material differences, scale, and geometry). Manufacturing resulted in cracking along seams of the cured MPCV heat shield and produced lower mechanical properties of the Avcoat witness panels. Subsequently, the design was changed to a block architecture, which introduced unperceived technical, cost, and schedule risk. The fourth assessment shows how the lack of a comprehensive investigation of design modifications and inappropriate Finite Element Analyses (FEA) can lead to trouble. A mass reduction campaign eliminated highly critical internal struts on the ISS Node-1 pressurized module based on inadequate and uncorrelated FEA. High strains were noted and ignored as a modeling aberration. A system level high fidelity FEA discovered large plastic strains in the gussets of all four radial ports. These findings initiated a full-scale test campaign, new test correlated assembly-level FEA, and significant design modifications.

James P Smith↗

DOE OSTI2025

Technical Background and Validation Report on the Residential Water Inhalation Risk Calculator Presented in the Risk Assessment Information System

Indoor air quality (IAQ) is critical for human health. Poor IAQ is linked to respiratory issues, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer. Indoor pollutants are emitted by typical household items such as cleaning products, personal care items, building materials, and tap water - an understudied volatile organic compound (VOC) source. This document presents the Residential Water Inhalation Risk Calculator (RWIRC), which estimates daily VOC exposure concentrations from various household water uses, such as showering and dishwashing, to assess exposure risks for the most vulnerable occupant. Integrated into the Risk Assessment Information System (RAIS) and sponsored by the US Department of Energy (DOE), the calculator divides a house into three compartments: shower, bathroom, and other spaces, accounting for daily water usage patterns and calculating VOC concentrations. Exposure data generated using the calculator can assist health assessors in estimating excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) and hazard index (HI) from VOC inhalation. Unlike traditional exposure models that utilize Andelman’s constant, the RWIRC continuously assesses variability in VOC concentrations and environmental conditions using differential equations to track VOC concentrations and air exchange between compartments. The calculator also provides unique volatilization fractions for each chemical and appliance, enhancing accuracy of the exposure concentration estimation. The RWIRC is accessible online and allows users to customize parameters (i.e., number of bathrooms, water temperature, and exhaust fan conditions) and input VOC characteristics (i.e., tap water and ambient air concentrations). This document provides a step-by-step guide on implementing the calculator. It also provides comparisons with the ATSDR-SHOWER calculator, using eight VOCs with varying physicochemical properties to reveal differences in algorithms and output concentrations. Simulations also assess how bathroom door positions and exhaust fan usage affect VOC exposure. The calculator results can enhance EPA risk screening levels for inhalation exposure to VOCs from tap water, offering a sophisticated tool for assessing inhalation risks and improving public health protection.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS1999

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g. manufacturing and systems operations). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographically distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across the Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗

NASA NTRS2000

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g., manufacturing and systems operation). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost, risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographical distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗

NASA NTRS2022

Aggregate Risk Tool for Human Space Flight

This tool utilizes Data fusion capabilities developed from the 2020-2022 Information Fusion (IFDA) IRAD to enhance functionality of a Human Spaceflight (HSF) Aggregate Risk Product developed by the JSC Flight Safety Office. The tool compiles and present risk data from multiple Program and Commercial Provider sources to provide a holistic assessment for Program Managers and Technical Authorities to evaluate residual risk prior to HSF Launches. The aggregation, or coupling of risks from multiple sources (Ex: PRA, variances, anomaly data bases, CRM data, technical review board minutes, Hazard Analysis, etc.) identifies areas of elevated risk in components, systems or mission phases that would otherwise be undetected by non-integrated program risk management tools and possesses. Data is then displayed in an interactive user interface/dashboard that enables users to see potential areas of concern requiring more in-depth analysis.

Patrick M Huckaby↗

DOE OSTI2021

Site 300 (Facility ID N-472) Toxic Emissions Inventory Plan

The Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act (AB 2588 or the “Act”) was enacted in September 1987. Under the Act, stationary sources are required to report the types and quantities of certain toxic substances their facilities routinely release into the air. AB 2588 is designed to provide information to state and local agencies and to the general public on the extent of airborne emissions from stationary sources and the potential public health impacts of those emissions. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (the District) is mandated by the State to implement AB 2588. On March 6, 2015, The State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) adopted changes to the Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. These revisions were designed to incorporate three technical support documents and to provide enhanced protection of children as required under state law (SB 25, Escutia, 1999). Due to these recent changes, and the corresponding potential increases in calculated health risk, the District notified LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATL SECURITY, LLC that we must be re-evaluated under AB 2588. Pursuant to the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act of 1987, we have prepared a comprehensive, site-specific Toxics Emissions Inventory Plan. The plan specifies in detail how LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATL SECURITY, LLC will inventory our facility's emissions of all toxic substances on the list of substances subject to the Act. The plan provides a comprehensive and detailed description of the methods that will be used to quantify air releases or potential air releases of listed substances from all points of release. The plan also includes quantification methods which result in accurate and comprehensive characterization of releases and comply with all applicable requirements of the “Hot Spots” regulation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLCSite 300: Toxic Emissions Inventory Plan for ABA 2588 California Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (Revision 3.0)

The Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act (AB 2588 or the “Act”) was enacted in September 1987. Under the Act, stationary sources are required to report the types and quantities of certain toxic substances their facilities routinely release into the air. AB 2588 is designed to provide information to state and local agencies and to the general public on the extent of airborne emissions from stationary sources and the potential public health impacts of those emissions. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (the District) is mandated by the State to implement AB 2588. On March 6, 2015, The State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) adopted changes to the Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for the Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. These revisions were designed to incorporate three technical support documents and to provide enhanced protection of children as required under state law (SB 25, Escutia, 1999). Due to these recent changes, and the corresponding potential increases in calculated health risk, the District notified LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL SECURITY, LLC that we must be re-evaluated under AB 2588. Pursuant to the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act of 1987, we have prepared a comprehensive, site-specific Toxics Emissions Inventory Plan. The plan specifies in detail how LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL SECURITY, LLC will inventory our facility's emissions of all toxic substances on the list of substances subject to the Act. The plan provides a comprehensive and detailed description of the methods that will be used to quantify air releases or potential air releases of listed substances from all points of release. The plan also includes quantification methods which result in accurate and comprehensive characterization of releases and comply with all applicable requirements of the “Hot Spots” regulation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2013

NASA Earned Value Management (EVM) Update

Earned Value Management (EVM) is an integrated management control system for assessing, understanding and qualifying what a project is achieving with the resoures. EVM integrates technical cost and schedules with risk management. It allows objective assessment and quantification of current project performance, and helps predict future performance-based trents.

Kerby, Jerald↗

NASA NTRS1997

Risk Management of NASA Projects

Various NASA Langley Research Center and other center projects were attempted for analysis to obtain historical data comparing pre-phase A study and the final outcome for each project. This attempt, however, was abandoned once it became clear that very little documentation was available. Next, extensive literature search was conducted on the role of risk and reliability concepts in project management. Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) techniques are being used with increasing regularity both in and outside of NASA. The value and the usage of PRA techniques were reviewed for large projects. It was found that both civilian and military branches of the space industry have traditionally refrained from using PRA, which was developed and expanded by nuclear industry. Although much has changed with the end of the cold war and the Challenger disaster, it was found that ingrained anti-PRA culture is hard to stop. Examples of skepticism against the use of risk management and assessment techniques were found both in the literature and in conversations with some technical staff. Program and project managers need to be convinced that the applicability and use of risk management and risk assessment techniques is much broader than just in the traditional safety-related areas of application. The time has come to begin to uniformly apply these techniques. The whole idea of risk-based system can maximize the 'return on investment' that the public demands. Also, it would be very useful if all project documents of NASA Langley Research Center, pre-phase A through final report, are carefully stored in a central repository preferably in electronic format.

Sarper, Hueseyin↗

NASA NTRS1999

The Role of Independent Assessment in the International Space Station Program

This paper presents the role of Independent Assessment in the International Space Station (ISS) Program. Independent Assessment is responsible for identifying and specifying technical and programmatic risks that may impact development, launch, and on-orbit assembly and operations of the ISS. The various phases of the assessment process are identified and explained. This paper also outlines current and future participation by Independent Assessment in Human Exploration and Development of Space projects including the X-38 Space Plane, Mars mission scenarios, and applications of Nanotechnology. This paper describes how Independent Assessment helps the shuttle, ISS, and other programs to safely achieve mission goals now and into the next century.

Strachan, Russell L.↗