SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “risk informed design”

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

Functional Task Tests in Partial Gravity During Parabolic Flight

BACKGROUND Critical mission tasks required by crews immediately after landing on a planetary surface include walking, jumping, and egressing from a seat. Understanding how these functional tasks are performed in partial gravity such as on the moon or Mars is necessary to define effective and comprehensive countermeasure strategies for preserving crew performance during exploration-class missions. We propose to study the performance of these tasks during the partial gravity phases of parabolic flight. These tasks will be performed using the same equipment and procedures as those used with astronauts returning from spaceflight and with ground-based subjects after prolonged axial body unloading during bed rest (sensorimotor standard measures). HYPOTHESIS We hypothesize that partial gravity during parabolic flight will cause acute changes in vestibular, proprioceptive, and sensorimotor functions, and these changes will impact the performance of mission critical tasks such as standing, walking, and jumping. The largest changes in performance are expected at the lowest gravity level (0.25g) because subjects will no longer be able to use the gravitational reference for the perception of upright. Ultimately, this information could be used to assess performance risks and inform the design of countermeasures for NASA exploration-class human missions. METHODS Twelve subjects will be tested during three flights of 30 parabolas, including 10 parabolas at 0.25g, 10 parabolas at 0.5g, and 10 parabolas at 0.75g. Subjects also will perform tests in 1g between parabolas. The tasks will be the same as those tested on astronauts returning from spaceflight: sit-to-stand with obstacle walk, tandem rail balance, jump down, and recovery from fall. Measurements will include: (a) time to test completion (sit-to-stand with obstacle walk, recovery from fall); (b) time elapsed between the start of motion and the stabilization of upright posture (recovery from fall, jump down); (c) mean sway speed during quiet standing (recovery from fall, jump down); (d) changes in heart rate and blood pressure (recovery from fall); (e) balance time and torso accelerations (tandem rail balance); (f) cone of stability (jump down); and (g) severity of motion sickness symptoms. RELEVANCE Although gravitational dose-response curves have been obtained for some biochemical systems in animals, these dose-responses are unknown for most human physiologic systems. Our study will compare the outcomes of four functional task tests in 0.25g, 0.5g, 0.75g, and 1g with those previously obtained in ground-based subjects after prolonged axial body unloading and in astronauts immediately after spaceflight. These comparisons will help us understand the true extent of functional task performance deficits in partial gravity. The dose-response relationship between gravity level and task performance decrement also will help determining the gravity threshold for these functional tasks. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work is supported by the NASA’s Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element.

T. R. Macaulay↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Functional Task Tests in Partial Gravity During Parabolic Flight

BACKGROUND Understanding how critical mission tasks are performed in partial gravity such as on the moon or Mars is necessary to define effective and comprehensive countermeasure strategies for preserving crew performance during exploration missions. We studied the performance of tasks such as standing, walking, and jumping during the partial gravity phases of parabolic flight. We hypothesized that the acute effects of partial gravity on vestibular, proprioceptive, and sensorimotor functions would negatively impact performance. METHODS Twelve subjects were tested over three flights of 30 parabolas each, including 10 parabolas at 0.25g, 10 parabolas at 0.5g, and 10 parabolas at 0.75g. Subjects also performed tests in 1g between parabolas. During the sit-to-stand with obstacle walk task, subjects rose from a seated position and walked as quickly as possible straight ahead towards a cone (4 m distance), walked around the cone making a 180° left turn, returned, and sat in the chair. On the way to and from the cone, subjects stepped over a 30 cm high obstacle. For the recovery from fall task, subjects lay prone for the pull-up phase and initial 10 sec of the parabola. Then they were asked to rise as quickly as possible and maintain a quiet stance for 10 sec. The tandem rail balance task involved standing with both feet on a 4.5 cm wide rail. The time ended when subjects either stepped off the rail or grabbed on to support straps. The jump down task started with the subjects standing on a 30 cm high platform, then the subjects were instructed to step off the platform, land with both feet simultaneously, and settle in a quiet stance. The cone of stability task involved subjects leaning about the ankles as far as they could in the anterior, posterior, and lateral directions without unfolding their arms or taking a step. The center of pressure distance between endpoints was calculated. Data were collected using inertial measurement units (Opal V2, APDM, Portland, OR) worn on the head and trunk, heart rate monitors (RS800CX, Polar, Kempele, Finland), and a force plate (Bertec, Columbus, OH). RESULTS Gravity level had a significant effect on performance, with the greatest changes from 1g tending to be at the 0.25g level (Table 1). Lower gravity levels were associated with increased times to complete the sit-to-stand obstacle walk task and the recovery from fall task, decreased change in heart rate during the recovery from fall task, decreased rail balance times, and increased cone of stability distance in the anterior-posterior direction. Table 1. Functional task performance at different gravity levels during parabolic flight. Measure0.25g0.5g0.75g1gp-valueSit-to-stand with obstacle walk time (sec)9.8 ±1.4*7.2 ±0.76.9 ±0.8*7.4 ±0.9<0.001Recovery from fall time to settle (sec)5.3 ± 0.9*4.6 ± 0.84.2 ± 0.64.3 ± 0.70.002Recovery from fall change in heart rate (bpm)6.0 ± 7.3*11.2 ± 6.5*14.9 ± 4.915.9 ± 6.5<0.001Rail balance with eyes open time (sec)2.7 ±0.8*4.8 ±2.16.6 ±4.78.4 ±6.70.031Rail balance with eyes closed time (sec)1.6 ±0.4*2.1 ±0.42.4 ±0.62.6 ±0.8<0.001Jump down time to settle (sec)2.1 ± 0.41.9 ± 0.42.0 ± 0.31.8 ± 0.30.328Cone of stability –anterior-posterior (cm)20.8 ±2.7*18.8 ±2.218.6 ±1.717.9 ±2.00.039Cone of stability –lateral (cm)26.8 ±6.624.4 ±2.123.0 ±2.123.8 ±2.30.215p-value: one-way repeated measures analysis of variance; *Significant pairwise difference from 1g (p<0.05). DISCUSSION These data suggest that there is a dose-response relationship between gravity level and functional task performance. The largest changes in performance were expected at the lowest gravity level (0.25g) because subjects would no longer be able to use the gravitational reference for the perception of upright. Understanding the extent of performance deficits informs the risks and design of countermeasures for exploration spaceflight missions. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work is supported by NASA’s Human Research Program Human Health Countermeasures Element.

T R Macaulay↗

NASA NTRS2025

Functional Task Tests in Partial Gravity During Parabolic Flight

T R Macaulay↗

DOE OSTI2024

Data Analytics and Visualization of Energy Systems for Critical Infrastructure Insights

Modernization of energy systems including transportation facilities provides opportunities for increased efficiency, expansion of commerce and meeting industry and federal goals. A significant increase in electrical demand is projected to meet these needs, which concentrates at facilities such as airports. For example, Xcel Energy working with two airports in their service area recently published information projecting an up to fivefold increase in electricity demand in the next 25 years [1]. Concurrently, the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently surveyed 30 commercial service airports identifying more than 300 outages of more than 5 minutes between 2015 and 2022 [2]. Power, reliability, and resilience planning becomes more important to safely maintain operations and the flow of commerce with fewer energy carriers providing necessary energy to safely move passengers and goods. NREL proposes to develop methodologies to allow owners, utilities, and federal agencies to dynamically analyze, forecast, and manage energy loads at airports, focused upon maintaining the flow of commerce in an efficient, sustainable, and resilient way. To address these energy challenges, a suite of technologies and methodologies can be leveraged to validate concepts, inform design, de-risk solutions and optimize energy management during deployment. These technologies include digitalization of energy systems, microgrid methodologies, and related energy technologies for building and vehicle loads. [1] Electrifying Airport Ecosystems - https://www.enterprisemobility.com/content/dam/enterpriseholdings/marketing/innovation-in-mobility/vehicle-innovation/airport-electrification-study-full-report-2024.pdf [2] Airport Infrastructure: Selected Airport's Efforts to Enhance Electrical Resilience https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105203.

critcal infrastructure↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Improving Quantification of Medical Evacuation Risk for Human Spaceflight in the IMPACT Model

Traditionally, mission planners have used a heuristic and qualitative approach to design medical systems based on prior experience however this approach may result in high variability and implicit bias to design and could put missions and crewmembers at risk. The Informing Mission Planning through Analysis of Complex Tradespaces (IMPACT) tool is a probabilistic risk assessment tool designed by NASA to model medical risk in long duration missions outside of low earth orbit (LEO). This tool can quantify risk metrics such as risk of crewmember death, loss of crew task time, and the need for medical evacuation to better inform and augment the more traditional approach to medical system design. The risk metric of Return to Definitive Care (RTDC) represents the likelihood of requiring medical evacuation and has been difficult to quantify in a reliable and standardized manner. Initial development of the RTDC metric was constrained due to the complexity of a medical evacuation decision and the lack of prior spaceflight data and this presentation will discuss the review and improvement process used to increase model accuracy and fidelity.

Prashant Parmar↗

DOE OSTI2025

Failure Analysis–Informed Risk Assessment Framework for Geological Carbon Storage Using Numerical Simulation and Machine Learning

Geological carbon storage (GCS) is recognized as a critical technology for achieving large-scale reductions in anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions. Ensuring long-term containment and safety requires robust risk assessment frameworks that account for geological uncertainty and identify potential failure scenarios. Among various indicators, the area of review (AoR) serves as a key metric for evaluating storage performance, regulatory compliance, and monitoring design, as it delineates the spatial extent impacted by pressure buildup and plume migration. However, conventional AoR-based risk assessments typically perturb parameters within narrow uncertainty bounds, potentially overlooking rare but high-impact events arising from extreme geological conditions. In this study, we present a failure analysis–informed risk assessment framework for large-scale GCS projects to improve site prescreening and monitoring design. A suite of 300 numerical simulations was generated using stochastic geological models that vary five key parameters: net-to-gross ratio, anisotropy azimuth, porosity multiplier, permeability multiplier, and vertical-to-horizontal permeability ratio. Among these, 200 realizations represent normal geological uncertainty, while 100 additional cases explore extreme yet plausible conditions for failure-case analysis. The AoR was simulated and computed from pressure and CO 2 saturation fields, where the baseline AoR boundary, representing the extent predicted under typical geological uncertainty, was defined as the union of 200 normal-range simulations, and failure was identified when extreme-range cases exceeded this baseline. Results show that incorporating broader parameter uncertainty produces significantly larger AoR extents, underscoring the potential underestimation of risk under conventional uncertainty ranges. Furthermore, spatial probability maps derived from failure-induced AoR exceedance identify regions requiring enhanced monitoring attention. Various machine learning (ML)–based classifiers were developed to predict failure occurrence from geological parameters, with the random forest model achieving the highest performance (F1-score of 0.986). Consistent findings from correlation coefficient, feature importance, and Sobol sensitivity analyses reveal that low net-to-gross ratios and permeability multipliers are the dominant risk drivers, reflecting reduced reservoir connectivity and limited pressure dissipation. Altogether, these results provide a novel framework for risk-informed site prescreening and monitoring design that explicitly considers rare but high-impact geological scenarios in GCS projects.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

NASA NTRS2013

PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessments) Participation versus Validation

Probabilistic Risk Assessments (PRAs) are performed for projects or programs where the consequences of failure are highly undesirable. PRAs primarily address the level of risk those projects or programs posed during operations. PRAs are often developed after the design has been completed. Design and operational details used to develop models include approved and accepted design information regarding equipment, components, systems and failure data. This methodology basically validates the risk parameters of the project or system design. For high risk or high dollar projects, using PRA methodologies during the design process provides new opportunities to influence the design early in the project life cycle to identify, eliminate or mitigate potential risks. Identifying risk drivers before the design has been set allows the design engineers to understand the inherent risk of their current design and consider potential risk mitigation changes. This can become an iterative process where the PRA model can be used to determine if the mitigation technique is effective in reducing risk. This can result in more efficient and cost effective design changes. PRA methodology can be used to assess the risk of design alternatives and can demonstrate how major design changes or program modifications impact the overall program or project risk. PRA has been used for the last two decades to validate risk predictions and acceptability. Providing risk information which can positively influence final system and equipment design the PRA tool can also participate in design development, providing a safe and cost effective product.

DeMott, Diana↗

DOE OSTI2022

Risk-Informed Approach for Regulatory Approval of Microreactor Transport

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) is addressing the challenges associated with safe transport of microreactors including the development and evaluation of regulatory options. PNNL developed a risk-informed regulatory framework for the licensing of the transportation of microreactors in which irradiated nuclear fuel is part microreactor transportation package. The framework lays out a viable regulatory pathway, including decision points for regulatory options and the supporting technical evaluations for those options in phases from near to long term. A microreactor and its contents will likely not be able to meet all the federal regulatory requirements as a Type B or fissile material transportation package under 10 CFR Part 71 (“Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material”). However, the regulatory framework developed by PNNL lays out a viable risk-informed licensing options that are safe and feasible. Risk assessment such as probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) can be used to show comparable safety to that provided by a Type B or fissile material package for surface transport. The framework includes guidance on applicable regulations and discusses historical precedence in using risk information for transportation licensing. The framework includes guidance for performing a microreactor transportation PRA, use and development of risk evaluation criteria, and factors such of defense-in-depth and safety margin concepts. Key advantages of using the approach are (1) increasing the likelihood of successfully obtaining regulatory transportation package approval, (2) informing the design on the relative risk significance of microreactor containment and shielding, and (3) informing the need for transportation compensatory measures. This paper focuses on two primary elements of the framework which are development of a transportation PRA for microreactor packages and development of the risk acceptance guidelines to assess the results of the PRA for regulatory decision-making.

microreactor, micro nuclear power plant, MNPP, ris↗

NASA NTRS2009

Human Research Program Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (SRP)

The Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (SRP) evaluated 22 gaps and 39 tasks in the three risk areas assigned to the SHFE Project. The area where tasks were best designed to close the gaps and the fewest gaps were left out was the Risk of Reduced Safety and Efficiency dire to Inadequate Design of Vehicle, Environment, Tools or Equipment. The areas where there were more issues with gaps and tasks, including poor or inadequate fit of tasks to gaps and missing gaps, were Risk of Errors due to Poor Task Design and Risk of Error due to Inadequate Information. One risk, the Risk of Errors due to Inappropriate Levels of Trust in Automation, should be added. If astronauts trust automation too much in areas where it should not be trusted, but rather tempered with human judgment and decision making, they will incur errors. Conversely, if they do not trust automation when it should be trusted, as in cases where it can sense aspects of the environment such as radiation levels or distances in space, they will also incur errors. This will be a larger risk when astronauts are less able to rely on human mission control experts and are out of touch, far away, and on their own. The SRP also identified 11 new gaps and five new tasks. Although the SRP had an extremely large quantity of reading material prior to and during the meeting, we still did not feel we had an overview of the activities and tasks the astronauts would be performing in exploration missions. Without a detailed task analysis and taxonomy of activities the humans would be engaged in, we felt it was impossible to know whether the gaps and tasks were really sufficient to insure human safety, performance, and comfort in the exploration missions. The SRP had difficulty evaluating many of the gaps and tasks that were not as quantitative as those related to concrete physical danger such as excessive noise and vibration. Often the research tasks for cognitive risks that accompany poor task or information design addressed only part, but not all, of the gaps they were programmed to fill. In fact the tasks outlined will not close the gap but only scratch the surface in many cases. In other cases, the gap was written too broadly, and really should be restated in a more constrained way that can be addressed by a well-organized and complementary set of tasks. In many cases, the research results should be turned into guidelines for design. However, it was not clear whether the researchers or another group would construct and deliver these guidelines.

Wichansky, Anna↗

NASA NTRS2015

Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment - How They Play Together

Since the Space Shuttle Challenger accident in 1986, NASA has extensively used probabilistic analysis methods to assess, understand, and communicate the risk of space launch vehicles. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA), used in the nuclear industry, is one of the probabilistic analysis methods NASA utilizes to assess Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) risk for launch vehicles. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment that uses a combination of fault trees, event trees, event sequence diagrams, and probability distributions to analyze the risk of a system, a process, or an activity. It is a process designed to answer three basic questions: 1) what can go wrong that would lead to loss or degraded performance (i.e., scenarios involving undesired consequences of interest), 2) how likely is it (probabilities), and 3) what is the severity of the degradation (consequences). Since the Challenger accident, PRA has been used in supporting decisions regarding safety upgrades for launch vehicles. Another area that was given a lot of emphasis at NASA after the Challenger accident is reliability engineering. Reliability engineering has been a critical design function at NASA since the early Apollo days. However, after the Challenger accident, quantitative reliability analysis and reliability predictions were given more scrutiny because of their importance in understanding failure mechanism and quantifying the probability of failure, which are key elements in resolving technical issues, performing design trades, and implementing design improvements. Although PRA and reliability are both probabilistic in nature and, in some cases, use the same tools, they are two different activities. Specifically, reliability engineering is a broad design discipline that deals with loss of function and helps understand failure mechanism and improve component and system design. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment process intended to assess the risk scenarios that could lead to a major/top undesirable system event, and to identify those scenarios that are high-risk drivers. PRA output is critical to support risk informed decisions concerning system design. This paper describes the PRA process and the reliability engineering discipline in detail. It discusses their differences and similarities and how they work together as complementary analyses to support the design and risk assessment processes. Lessons learned, applications, and case studies in both areas are also discussed in the paper to demonstrate and explain these differences and similarities.

Safie, Fayssal↗

DOE OSTI2024

Regulatory Treatment of Low Frequency External Events under a Risk-Informed Performance-Based Licensing Pathway: Enhanced SPRA-based Margins Assessment

Recently there has been development in the field of risk-informed performance-based (RIPB) design and licensing approaches, which leverage detailed risk assessments and performance-based metrics to allow flexibility and innovation. These RIPB approaches include the probabilistic treatment of external hazards, including low frequency events that are beyond the design basis. However, there are certain challenges that have been identified to the probabilistic treatment of low frequency external events, primarily due to uncertainty in the hazard curve and the associated plant response to rare, severe events. The NRC is currently developing 10 CFR Part 53 that would establish a technology-inclusive regulatory framework for use by applicants for new commercial advanced nuclear reactors. By examining the regulatory safety criteria contained within draft 10 CFR Part 53 and associated draft RIPB seismic design guidance, potential challenges were identified in demonstrating satisfaction of the safety criteria for low frequency external events, with specific difficulties associated with demonstrating compliance with the quantitative health objectives (QHOs). Non-LWRs are expected to utilize the direct calculation of offsite consequence, rather than use surrogates, for comparison to the QHOs, which can be particularly challenging as the previously identified uncertainties are compounded by uncertainties in the response of the neighboring population. The central recommendation from this effort is that it is necessary to develop an approach for demonstrating compliance with the safety criteria in draft Part 53 that addresses the key challenges while providing flexibility to applicants. This paper summarizes key findings, establishes a series of high-level goals, and reviews a newly developed approach to address the major challenges associated with assessing compliance with QHOs, with avenues to demonstrate compliance based on either the estimated consequence or the available margin to event occurrence, while also building on existing experience of seismic margins assessments. The paper also provides examples to demonstrate the application of the approach, as well as recommendations and potential future work.

external hazards↗

DOE OSTI2021

Treatment of uncertainties for security-related design aspects of advanced reactors when using a risk-informed licensing approach

Sabotage of nuclear plants and theft of special nuclear material are different from many other issues potentially affecting public health and safety, and some of those differences drive the content of the present report. A high-level indication of these differences is provided in the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Safety Goal Policy. Promulgated in the mid-1980’s, when it had become reasonably clear that risk analysis had improved to the point where it was possible to understand the risks associated with plant operation, the Safety Goal Policy articulates qualitative safety goals and quantitative health objectives that are meant to guide regulatory and risk management activities, with the following key exceptions noted in the original policy statement: The possible effects of sabotage or diversion of nuclear material are also not presently included in the safety goals. At present there is no basis on which to provide a measure of risk on these matters. It is the Commission’s intention that everything that is needed will be done to keep these types of risks at their present very low level; and it is the Commission’s expectation that efforts on this point will continue to be successful. With these exceptions, it is the Commission’s intent that the risks from all the various initiating mechanisms be considered to the best of the capability of current evaluation techniques. The present report discusses extensions of classical risk management to address some of the special issues that arise in the context of security. Although the present emphasis is on physical security, some attention will be paid to cyber security. A particular focus of the report is on quantitative framework to manage and address uncertainties. This framework is demonstrated via a couple of hypothetical examples.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2022

MODULARITY-AT-SCALE FOR COST COMPETITIVE DEPLOYMENT OF NUCLEAR ENERGY

Modularity options have been limited for traditional nuclear energy deployment due to the conventional light water reactor (LWR) safety requirements, such as high pressure retaining heavy and robust containment structures. However, a relatively new regulatory approach called ‘Functional Containment’ has potential to allow less expensive and more flexible designs for non LWRs. Functional containment provides flexibility in design and deployment based on risk informed and performance-based criteria, so that reactors are not over-designed. Non-nuclear industry has successfully used modular design approaches in automotive, aerospace, chemical processing, building construction, and ship building. These industries have shown that modular construction reduces construction time by around 30% - 50% compared to the conventional stick built approach. The nuclear industry can use similar approaches to reduce construction time and costs, balanced with safety requirements, using the functional containment approach. This paper discussing the background of modularity in nuclear energy, examples of less learned, modularity approaches in non-nuclear industries and the potential of cost and schedule savings through the emerging regulatory design flexibilities potentially enabling combination of modular deployment at different scales.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Regulatory Treatment of Non-Core Sources of Radioactivity for Advanced Reactor Designs

The recent resurgence in advance (non-light water) reactor development has been paralleled by the development of risk-informed performance-based (RIPB) licensing pathways. Specifically, the creation of the RIPB Licensing Modernization Project (LMP) approach and subsequent endorsement by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) now provides advanced reactor vendors with a defined RIPB method to develop an affirmative safety case for licensing. In addition, the Technology Inclusive Content of Applications Project (TICAP) has published guidance on developing a license application based on the LMP approach. To support the utilization of risk information as part of advanced reactor design and licensing efforts, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)/American Nuclear Society (ANS) Joint Committee on Nuclear Risk Management (JCNRM) has developed a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) standard for advanced reactors. The standard, which was formerly approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) in 2021 and recently endorsed by the NRC in trial use Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.247, is an integral standard, covering from initiating events to offsite consequence. A major feature of the standard is that it permits the inclusion of any source of radioactivity material at the site within the plant PRA. Therefore, non-core sources of radioactivity, such as fuel storage, fuel processing, and purification systems, can be included within a single comprehensive plant PRA. For those advanced reactor vendors utilizing a RIPB licensing approach, there is an opportunity to include the non-core sources of radioactivity within the RIPB framework for licensing decision-making, such as the categorization of events, classification of structures, systems, and components (SSCs), and evaluation of the adequacy of defense-in-depth (DID). For advanced reactor designs that contain multiple non-core sources of radioactivity, or for monolithic plant sites that include associated fuel facilities, this approach could potentially simplify licensing applications through the use of a single, uniform, and consistent decision-making framework across all radioactive sources at the site. In addition, a RIPB approach could provide additional insights regarding plant behavior, flexibility regarding licensing decision-making, and potentially allow the use of risk information as part of the plant oversight process. Risk-informing these aspects of advanced reactor licensing would also be consistent with the NRC’s risk policy statement. However, there is diverse regulation and guidance regarding the licensing of non-core sources of radioactivity and generally limited experience using RIPB approaches for the evaluation as part of licensing.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

NASA NTRS1996

Optical System Design for the Next Generation Space Telescope

This report provides considerations and suggested approaches for design of the Optical Telescope Assembly and the segmented primary mirror of a Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST). Based on prior studies and hardware development, we provide data and design information on low-risk materials and hardware configurations most likely to meet low weight, low temperature and long-life requirements of the nominal 8-meter aperture NGST. We also provide preliminary data for cost and performance trades, and recommendations for technology development and demonstration required to support the system design effort.

Solomon, Leonard H.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Probabilistic Risk Analysis and Margin Process for a Flexible Thermal Protection System

Atmospheric entry vehicle thermal protection systems are margined due to the uncertainties that exist in entry aeroheating environments and the thermal response of the materials and structures. Entry vehicle thermal protections systems are traditionally over-margined for the heat loads that are experienced along the entry trajectory by designing to survive stacked worst-case scenarios. Additionally, the conventional heat shield design and margin process offers very little insight into the risk of over-temperature during flight and the corresponding reliability of the heat shield performance. A probabilistic margin process can be used to appropriately margin the thermal protection system based on rigorously calculated risk of failure. This probabilistic margin process allows engineers to make informed aeroshell design, entry-trajectory design, and risk trades while preventing excessive margin from being applied. This study presents the methods of the probabilistic margin process and how the uncertainty analysis is used to determine the reliability of the entry vehicle thermal protection system and associated risks of failure.

Tobin, Steven A.↗

DOE OSTI2021

Risk-Informed Analysis for Enhanced Resilient Nuclear Power Plant with Initiatives including ATF, FLEX, and Advanced Battery Technology

This report documents the activities performed by the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) during fiscal year (FY) 2021 for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program, Risk-Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway, Enhanced Resilient Plant (ERP) Systems research. The purpose of the RISA Pathway research and development is to support plant owner-operator decisions with the aim to improve the economics, reliability, and maintain the high levels of safety of current nuclear power plants over periods of extended plant operations. The concept of ERP refers to the combinations of accident-tolerant fuel (ATF), optimal use of diverse and flexible coping strategy (FLEX), enhancements to plant components and systems, the incorporation of augmented or new passive cooling systems, the advanced battery technology with extended capacity, as well as improved fuel cycle efficiency. The objective of the ERP research effort is to use the RISA methods and toolkit in industry applications, including methods development and early demonstration of technologies, in order to enhance existing reactors? safety features and to substantially reduce operating costs through risk-informed approaches to plant design modifications to the plant and their characterization. The ERP R&D efforts in FY 2021 are focused on three industry initiatives, including accident-tolerant fuel (ATF), optimal use of diverse and flexible coping strategy (FLEX), and advanced battery technology with extended capacity.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Regulatory Treatment of Low Frequency External Events under a Risk-Informed Performance-Based Licensing Pathway: Safety Criteria Evaluation

There has been recent progress in the development of risk-informed performance-based (RIPB) design and licensing approaches, which leverage the insights gained from detailed risk assessments and utilize performance-based metrics to permit flexibility and innovation. The RIPB approaches have included the probabilistic treatment of external hazards, including low frequency events that are beyond the design basis. A preceding study conducted in FY21 noted that there are certain challenges to the probabilistic treatment of low frequency external events, which are primarily the result of uncertainty in the hazard curve and the associated plant response to rare, severe events. The current work expands on the previous study by examining the regulatory safety criteria contained within draft 10 CFR Part 53 and associated draft RIPB seismic design guidance. The evaluation identified potential challenges in demonstrating satisfaction of the safety criteria for low frequency external events, with specific difficulties associated with demonstrating compliance with cumulative safety criteria metrics, such as the quantitative health objectives (QHOs). Non-LWRs are expected to utilize the direct calculation of offsite consequence, rather than use surrogates, for comparison to the QHOs, which can be particularly challenging as the previously identified uncertainties are compounded by uncertainties in the response of the neighboring population. The current work details this evaluation and key findings. The central recommendation from this effort is that it is necessary to develop an approach for demonstrating compliance with the safety criteria in draft Part 53 that addresses the key challenges while providing flexibility to applicants.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗