Summary of Analysis Methodology Results of the Nuclear Security Assessment Methodologies (NUSAM) Coordinated Research Project.
Abstract not provided.
Snell, Mark K.↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “methodology”
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.
Summary of Analysis Methodology Results of the Nuclear Security Assessment Methodologies (NUSAM) Coordinated Research Project.
Abstract not provided.
Snell, Mark K.↗
Comparison of Accelerated Life Test Plans Based on Exact Small-Sample Methodology and Asymptotic Large-Sample Methodology.
Abstract not provided.
King, Caleb↗
Comparison of Accelerated Life Test Plans Based on Exact Small-Sample Methodology and Asymptotic Large-Sample Methodology.
Abstract not provided.
King, Caleb↗
Payload training methodology study
The results of the Payload Training Methodology Study (PTMS) are documented. Methods and procedures are defined for the development of payload training programs to be conducted at the Marshall Space Flight Center Payload Training Complex (PCT) for the Space Station Freedom program. The study outlines the overall training program concept as well as the six methodologies associated with the program implementation. The program concept outlines the entire payload training program from initial identification of training requirements to the development of detailed design specifications for simulators and instructional material. The following six methodologies are defined: (1) The Training and Simulation Needs Assessment Methodology; (2) The Simulation Approach Methodology; (3) The Simulation Definition Analysis Methodology; (4) The Simulator Requirements Standardization Methodology; (5) The Simulator Development Verification Methodology; and (6) The Simulator Validation Methodology.
Source record↗
Suggested criteria for evaluating systems engineering methodologies
Systems engineering is the application of mathematical and scientific principles to practical ends in the life-cycle of a system. A methodology for systems engineering is a carefully developed, relatively complex procedure or process for applying these mathematical and scientific principles. There are many systems engineering methodologies (or possibly many versions of a few methodologies) currently in use in government and industry. These methodologies are usually designed to meet the needs of a particular organization. It has been observed, however, that many technical and non-technical problems arise when inadequate systems engineering methodologies are applied by organizations to their systems development projects. Various criteria for evaluating systems engineering methodologies are discussed. Such criteria are developed to assist methodology-users in identifying and selecting methodologies that best fit the needs of the organization.
Gates, Audrey↗
An improved approach for flight readiness certification: Methodology for failure risk assessment and application examples, volume 1
An improved methodology for quantitatively evaluating failure risk of spaceflight systems to assess flight readiness and identify risk control measures is presented. This methodology, called Probabilistic Failure Assessment (PFA), combines operating experience from tests and flights with engineering analysis to estimate failure risk. The PFA methodology is of particular value when information on which to base an assessment of failure risk, including test experience and knowledge of parameters used in engineering analyses of failure phenomena, is expensive or difficult to acquire. The PFA methodology is a prescribed statistical structure in which engineering analysis models that characterize failure phenomena are used conjointly with uncertainties about analysis parameters and/or modeling accuracy to estimate failure probability distributions for specific failure modes. These distributions can then be modified, by means of statistical procedures of the PFA methodology, to reflect any test or flight experience. Conventional engineering analysis models currently employed for design of failure prediction are used in this methodology. The PFA methodology is described and examples of its application are presented. Conventional approaches to failure risk evaluation for spaceflight systems are discussed, and the rationale for the approach taken in the PFA methodology is presented. The statistical methods, engineering models, and computer software used in fatigue failure mode applications are thoroughly documented.
Moore, N. R.↗
An improved approach for flight readiness certification: Methodology for failure risk assessment and application examples. Volume 2: Software documentation
An improved methodology for quantitatively evaluating failure risk of spaceflight systems to assess flight readiness and identify risk control measures is presented. This methodology, called Probabilistic Failure Assessment (PFA), combines operating experience from tests and flights with engineering analysis to estimate failure risk. The PFA methodology is of particular value when information on which to base an assessment of failure risk, including test experience and knowledge of parameters used in engineering analyses of failure phenomena, is expensive or difficult to acquire. The PFA methodology is a prescribed statistical structure in which engineering analysis models that characterize failure phenomena are used conjointly with uncertainties about analysis parameters and/or modeling accuracy to estimate failure probability distributions for specific failure modes, These distributions can then be modified, by means of statistical procedures of the PFA methodology, to reflect any test or flight experience. Conventional engineering analysis models currently employed for design of failure prediction are used in this methodology. The PFA methodology is described and examples of its application are presented. Conventional approaches to failure risk evaluation for spaceflight systems are discussed, and the rationale for the approach taken in the PFA methodology is presented. The statistical methods, engineering models, and computer software used in fatigue failure mode applications are thoroughly documented.
Moore, N. R.↗
An improved approach for flight readiness certification: Methodology for failure risk assessment and application examples. Volume 3: Structure and listing of programs
An improved methodology for quantitatively evaluating failure risk of spaceflight systems to assess flight readiness and identify risk control measures is presented. This methodology, called Probabilistic Failure Assessment (PFA), combines operating experience from tests and flights with engineering analysis to estimate failure risk. The PFA methodology is of particular value when information on which to base an assessment of failure risk, including test experience and knowledge of parameters used in engineering analyses of failure phenomena, is expensive or difficult to acquire. The PFA methodology is a prescribed statistical structure in which engineering analysis models that characterize failure phenomena are used conjointly with uncertainties about analysis parameters and/or modeling accuracy to estimate failure probability distributions for specific failure modes. These distributions can then be modified, by means of statistical procedures of the PFA methodology, to reflect any test or flight experience. Conventional engineering analysis models currently employed for design of failure prediction are used in this methodology. The PFA methodology is described and examples of its application are presented. Conventional approaches to failure risk evaluation for spaceflight systems are discussed, and the rationale for the approach taken in the PFA methodology is presented. The statistical methods, engineering models, and computer software used in fatigue failure mode applications are thoroughly documented.
Moore, N. R.↗
An improved approach for flight readiness certification: Probabilistic models for flaw propagation and turbine blade failure. Volume 1: Methodology and applications
An improved methodology for quantitatively evaluating failure risk of spaceflight systems to assess flight readiness and identify risk control measures is presented. This methodology, called Probabilistic Failure Assessment (PFA), combines operating experience from tests and flights with analytical modeling of failure phenomena to estimate failure risk. The PFA methodology is of particular value when information on which to base an assessment of failure risk, including test experience and knowledge of parameters used in analytical modeling, is expensive or difficult to acquire. The PFA methodology is a prescribed statistical structure in which analytical models that characterize failure phenomena are used conjointly with uncertainties about analysis parameters and/or modeling accuracy to estimate failure probability distributions for specific failure modes. These distributions can then be modified, by means of statistical procedures of the PFA methodology, to reflect any test or flight experience. State-of-the-art analytical models currently employed for designs failure prediction, or performance analysis are used in this methodology. The rationale for the statistical approach taken in the PFA methodology is discussed, the PFA methodology is described, and examples of its application to structural failure modes are presented. The engineering models and computer software used in fatigue crack growth and fatigue crack initiation applications are thoroughly documented.
Moore, N. R.↗
A systematic approach to the analysis of double faults within design basic accident methodology - 14501
Within the UK there is a general trend towards adopting Design Basis Accident (DBA) methodology for the assessment of radiological hazards, including criticality. DBA is a single fault methodology and comprises identifying the initiating event, its frequency and consequence. A fault with a very low initiating event frequency will not require further analysis. A fault sequence that terminates in a sub-critical configuration would also not require further analysis; although the identified passive features ensuring sub-criticality are subjected to engineering substantiation. Where faults do not pass this initial screening, two safety measures are generally required to ensure the fault does not progress to a criticality incident. This methodology provides a robust approach to single faults ensuring that an appropriate level and range of plant measures are identified and subjected to appropriate substantiation. However, a criticality is a cliff-edge effect and is dependent on multiple parameters. It is entirely possible under DBA to evaluate several single fault sequences and conclude that no measures are required because the single faults terminate in a sub-critical configuration. Importantly, for criticality safety, under DBA, there is no requirement to prevent important parameters from deviating from normal or upper bound 'safe' levels leaving the plant at greater risk in the event that further faults initiate. The combination of two faults could lead to a criticality incident but there is no current driver within DBA methodology to analyze these coincident or double faults. There is, therefore, potential to significantly under estimate the risk of criticality. This understanding is embodied within other methodologies such as the Double Contingency Principle. However, within the UK the DBA methodology has so significantly improved the analysis of single faults that, in some instances, consideration of double faults has taken a back seat. This is despite the UK regulator stating that 'criticality safety cases should employ the double contingency approach'. This paper presents a systematic approach to ensure that the potential for double faults or multiple parameter deviations to result in a criticality is effectively evaluated within the wider DBA methodology. The methodology determines which faults may be screened out from double fault analysis on the grounds of being 'unlikely' to initiate and being present for a 'short' duration. For those faults screened into double fault analysis, this guidance sets out the potential means of determining acceptable risk. These means include the specific evaluation of the risk of two criticality control parameters deviating simultaneously, the definition of additional safety measures and the definition of the boundary of safety for multiple parameters and the risk of exceeding this boundary. (authors)
42 ENGINEERING↗
Methodology for inferring reactor core power distribution from an optical fiber based gamma thermometer array
Here, a 4-step data analytic methodology has been devised for the purpose of inferring the distribution of power in a reactor core, based on the response of an array of optical fiber based gamma thermometers (OFBGTs). This data analytic methodology is crucial for the development of a system of OFBGTs for the purpose of calibrating local power range monitors in boiling water reactors. Such a system would be an improvement to the present calibration system in boiling water reactors, in terms of safety, efficiency, and permanence. The first step of this methodology is to establish an energy balance method. In this method, one uses MCNP to determine response functions, which allow one to convert from gamma thermometer response to power. The gamma thermometers and the reactor core are segmented, such that each gamma thermometer segment provides an estimate of power for each reactor core segment. The estimates of power for the reactor core segments (hereafter referred to as fuel assembly segments) are calculated based on the measured response of the gamma thermometers. The second step of the methodology is to employ a weighting scheme to combine the estimates of the power of the various fuel assembly segments, based on the response of the various OFGBT segments and the incremental dose rates of the various fuel assembly segments to the OFBGT segments. The third step is to iteratively calculate the estimates of the power of the fuel assembly segments, until a convergence criterion is met, which indicates that the calculation has converged. The fourth and final step of the methodology is to estimate the uncertainty of the power for each fuel assembly segment. The mathematical basis for this step is not the focus of this paper. We have used a 3-D homogeneous reactor model to demonstrate the data analytic methodology; and have found that the data analytic methodology operates as intended.
73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
Methodology to design a municipal solid waste generation and composition map: A case study
Highlights: • To draw a waste generation and composition map of a town a lot of factors must be taken into account. • The methodology proposed offers two different depending on the available data combined with geographical information systems. • The methodology has been applied to a Spanish city with success. • The methodology will be a useful tool to organize the municipal solid waste management. - Abstract: The municipal solid waste (MSW) management is an important task that local governments as well as private companies must take into account to protect human health, the environment and to preserve natural resources. To design an adequate MSW management plan the first step consist in defining the waste generation and composition patterns of the town. As these patterns depend on several socio-economic factors it is advisable to organize them previously. Moreover, the waste generation and composition patterns may vary around the town and over the time. Generally, the data are not homogeneous around the city as the number of inhabitants is not constant nor it is the economic activity. Therefore, if all the information is showed in thematic maps, the final waste management decisions can be made more efficiently. The main aim of this paper is to present a structured methodology that allows local authorities or private companies who deal with MSW to design its own MSW management plan depending on the available data. According to these data, this paper proposes two ways of action: a direct way when detailed data are available and an indirect way when there is a lack of data and it is necessary to take into account bibliographic data. In any case, the amount of information needed is considerable. This paper combines the planning methodology with the Geographic Information Systems to present the final results in thematic maps that make easier to interpret them. The proposed methodology is a previous useful tool to organize the MSW collection routes including the selective collection. To verify the methodology it has been successfully applied to a Spanish town.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Proposed Risk-Informed Seismic Hazard Periodic Reevaluation Methodology for Complying with DOE Order 420.1C
Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities must comply with DOE Order 420.1C Facility Safety, which requires that all such facilities review their natural phenomena hazards (NPH) assessments no less frequently than every ten years. The Order points the reader to Standard DOE-STD-1020-2012. In addition to providing a discussion of the applicable evaluation criteria, the Standard references other documents, including ANSI/ANS-2.29-2008 and NUREG-2117. These documents provide supporting criteria and approaches for evaluating the need to update an existing probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). All of the documents are consistent at a high level regarding the general conceptual criteria that should be considered. However, none of the documents provides step-by-step detailed guidance on the required or recommended approach for evaluating the significance of new information and determining whether or not an existing PSHA should be updated. Further, all of the conceptual approaches and criteria given in these documents deal with changes that may have occurred in the knowledge base that might impact the inputs to the PSHA, the calculated hazard itself, or the technical basis for the hazard inputs. Given that the DOE Order is aimed at achieving and assuring the safety of nuclear facilities—which is a function not only of the level of the seismic hazard but also the capacity of the facility to withstand vibratory ground motions—the inclusion of risk information in the evaluation process would appear to be both prudent and in line with the objectives of the Order. The purpose of this white paper is to describe a risk-informed methodology for evaluating the need for an update of an existing PSHA consistent with the DOE Order. While the development of the proposed methodology was undertaken as a result of assessments for specific SDC-3 facilities at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), and it is expected that the application at INL will provide a demonstration of the methodology, there is potential for general applicability to other facilities across the DOE complex. As such, both a general methodology and a specific approach intended for INL are described in this document. The general methodology proposed in this white paper is referred to as the “seismic hazard periodic review methodology,” or SHPRM. It presents a graded approach for SDC-3, SDC-4 and SDC-5 facilities that can be applied in any risk-informed regulatory environment by once risk-objectives appropriate for the framework are developed. While the methodology was developed for seismic hazard considerations, it can also be directly applied to other types of natural hazards.
58 GEOSCIENCES↗
Proposed Risk-Informed Seismic Hazard Periodic Reevaluation Methodology for Complying with DOE Order 420.1C
Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities must comply with DOE Order 420.1C Facility Safety, which requires that all such facilities review their natural phenomena hazards (NPH) assessments no less frequently than every ten years. The Order points the reader to Standard DOE-STD-1020-2012. In addition to providing a discussion of the applicable evaluation criteria, the Standard references other documents, including ANSI/ANS-2.29-2008 and NUREG-2117. These documents provide supporting criteria and approaches for evaluating the need to update an existing probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA). All of the documents are consistent at a high level regarding the general conceptual criteria that should be considered. However, none of the documents provides step-by-step detailed guidance on the required or recommended approach for evaluating the significance of new information and determining whether or not an existing PSHA should be updated. Further, all of the conceptual approaches and criteria given in these documents deal with changes that may have occurred in the knowledge base that might impact the inputs to the PSHA, the calculated hazard itself, or the technical basis for the hazard inputs. Given that the DOE Order is aimed at achieving and assuring the safety of nuclear facilities—which is a function not only of the level of the seismic hazard but also the capacity of the facility to withstand vibratory ground motions—the inclusion of risk information in the evaluation process would appear to be both prudent and in line with the objectives of the Order. The purpose of this white paper is to describe a risk-informed methodology for evaluating the need for an update of an existing PSHA consistent with the DOE Order. While the development of the proposed methodology was undertaken as a result of assessments for specific SDC-3 facilities at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), and it is expected that the application at INL will provide a demonstration of the methodology, there is potential for general applicability to other facilities across the DOE complex. As such, both a general methodology and a specific approach intended for INL are described in this document. The general methodology proposed in this white paper is referred to as the “seismic hazard periodic review methodology,” or SHPRM. It presents a graded approach for SDC-3, SDC-4 and SDC-5 facilities that can be applied in any risk-informed regulatory environment once risk-objectives appropriate for the framework are developed. While the methodology was developed for seismic hazard considerations, it can also be directly applied to other types of natural hazards.
21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
Using Modern Methodologies with Maintenance Software
Jet Propulsion Laboratory uses multi-mission software produced by the Mission Planning and Sequencing (MPS) team to process, simulate, translate, and package the commands that are sent to a spacecraft. MPS works under the auspices of the Multi-Mission Ground Systems and Services (MGSS). This software consists of nineteen applications that are in maintenance. The MPS software is classified as either class B (mission critical) or class C (mission important). The scheduling of tasks is difficult because mission needs must be addressed prior to performing any other tasks and those needs often spring up unexpectedly. Keeping track of the tasks that everyone is working on is also difficult because each person is working on a different software component. Recently the group adopted the Scrum methodology for planning and scheduling tasks. Scrum is one of the newer methodologies typically used in agile development. In the Scrum development environment, teams pick their tasks that are to be completed within a sprint based on priority. The team specifies the sprint length usually a month or less. Scrum is typically used for new development of one application. In the Scrum methodology there is a scrum master who is a facilitator who tries to make sure that everything moves smoothly, a product owner who represents the user(s) of the software and the team. MPS is not the traditional environment for the Scrum methodology. MPS has many software applications in maintenance, team members who are working on disparate applications, many users, and is interruptible based on mission needs, issues and requirements. In order to use scrum, the methodology needed adaptation to MPS. Scrum was chosen because it is adaptable. This paper is about the development of the process for using scrum, a new development methodology, with a team that works on disparate interruptible tasks on multiple software applications.
Scrum↗
Adaptation of EVIAVE methodology for monitoring and follow-up when evaluating the environmental impact of landfills
Treatment and final disposal of Municipal Solid Waste can have a significant role in the generation of negative environmental impacts. As a prevention strategy, such activities are subjected to the process of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Still, the follow-up of Environmental Management Plans or mitigation measures is limited, for one due to a lack of methodological approaches. In searching for possibilities, the University of Granada (Spain) developed a diagnostic methodology named EVIAVE, which allows one to quantify, by means of indexes, the environmental impact of landfills in view of their location and the conditions of exploitation. EVIAVE is applicable within the legal framework of the European Union and can be adapted to the environmental and legal conditions of other countries. This study entails its adaptation in Colombia, for the follow-up and control of the EIA process for landfills. Modifications involved inclusion of the environmental elements flora and fauna, and the evaluation of the environmental descriptors in agreement with the concept of vulnerability. The application of the modified EVIAVE in Colombian landfills allowed us to identify the elements affected by the operating conditions and maintenance. It may be concluded that this methodology is viable and effective for the follow-up and environmental control of EIA processes for landfills, and to analyze the associated risks, as it takes into account related environmental threats and vulnerabilities. - Highlights: • A modified methodology is used to monitor and follow-up environmental impacts in landfills. • The improved methodology includes the Vulnerability of Flora and Fauna to evaluate environmental impact of landfills. • The methodology serves to identify and evaluate the sources of risk generated in the construction and siting of landfills. • Environmental vulnerability indicators improve effectiveness of the control and follow-up phases of landfill management. • The follow-up of environmental management plans may help diminish the implementation gap in Environmental Impact Assessment.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Physics-informed hybrid modeling methodology for building infiltration
Infiltration is responsible for one-third to one-half of the space conditioning load of a typical residential home, but the modeling of infiltration for building energy modeling is either represented by over-simplified equations or dependent on over-generalized rules of thumb. Here, this paper develops a physics-informed data-driven methodology for modeling infiltration using building-specific empirical measurements. The developed hybrid methodology combines machine-learning categorization and grey-box sub-modeling to improve the accuracy and generalization of commonly used grey-box infiltration models. The developed methodology excels at predicting infiltration by improving the ability to predict infiltration under unseen environmental conditions using machine learning algorithms with physical significance. In a case study conducted using the iUnit, a modular studio apartment experimental test facility located at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, we use empirical airtightness measurements to fit an infiltration model using the developed methodology. We find that the developed methodology can improve the overall model accuracy by 43% and improve extrapolation by 38%, compared with the model based on the common grey-box infiltration equation. We also notice that the selected features can improve the performance of a pure machine-learning model, indicating that our methodology identifies the features with the most physical significance to infiltration modeling.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗