Results for “CaSe” — Page 7

NASA NTRS1959

Welded Titanium Case for Space-Probe Rocket Motor

Early in 1958, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory of the California Institute of Technology was requested to participate in a lunar-probe mission code-named Juno II which would place a 15-lb Instrumented payload (Pioneer IV) in the vicinity of the moon. The vehicle was to use the same high-speed upper-stage assembly as flown on the successful Jupiter-C configuration; however, the first-stage booster was to be a Jupiter rather than a Redstone. An analysis of the intended flight and payload configuration Indicated that the feasibility of accomplishing the mission was questionable and that additional performance would have to be obtained if the mission was to be feasible. Since the most efficient way of Increasing the performance of a staged vehicle is to increase the performance of the last stage, a study of possible ways of doing this was made.. Because of the time schedule placed on this effort It was decided to reduce the weight of the fourth-stage rocket-motor case by substituting the annealed 6Al--4V titanium alloy for the Type 410 stainless steel. Although this introduced an unfamiliar material, It reduced the changes in design and fabrication techniques. This particular titanium alloy was chosen on the basis of previous tests which proved the suitability of the alloy as a pressure-vessel material when used at an annealed yield strength of about 120, 000 psi. The titanium-case fourth stage of Juno U is shown with the payload and on the missile in Fig. 1; the stainless-steel motor cases used in the Jupiter-C vehicle are shown in Fig. 2. The fourth-stage motor case has a diameter of 6 in., a length of approximately 38 in. center dot and a nominal cylindrical wall thickness of 0.025 in. As shown in Fig. 1, the case serves as the structural support of the payload and is aligned to the upper stage assembly through an alignment ring. The nozzle is threaded into the end of the motor case, and is of the ceramic-coated steel design. Figure 3 shows a comparison of the components used to make the stainless steel and the 6A1--4V titanium alloy cases. The forward dome and aft fitting for the stainless steel assembly were fabricated from a combination of forged, spun and machined parts.. In order to facilitate the fabrication of the titanium alloy motor ) these components were machined from a large-diameter billet.

Brothers, A. J.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Understanding and Evaluating Assurance Cases

Assurance cases are a method for providing assurance for a system by giving an argument to justify a claim about the system, based on evidence about its design, development, and tested behavior. In comparison with assurance based on guidelines or standards (which essentially specify only the evidence to be produced), the chief novelty in assurance cases is provision of an explicit argument. In principle, this can allow assurance cases to be more finely tuned to the specific circumstances of the system, and more agile than guidelines in adapting to new techniques and applications. The first part of this report (Sections 1-4) provides an introduction to assurance cases. Although this material should be accessible to all those with an interest in these topics, the examples focus on software for airborne systems, traditionally assured using the DO-178C guidelines and its predecessors. A brief survey of some existing assurance cases is provided in Section 5. The second part (Section 6) considers the criteria, methods, and tools that may be used to evaluate whether an assurance case provides sufficient confidence that a particular system or service is fit for its intended use. An assurance case cannot provide unequivocal "proof" for its claim, so much of the discussion focuses on the interpretation of such less-than-definitive arguments, and on methods to counteract confirmation bias and other fallibilities in human reasoning.

Rushby, John↗

NASA NTRS2017

Summary of Propagation Cases of the Second AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop

A summary is provided for the propagation portion of the second AIAA Sonic Boom Workshop held January 8, 2017 in conjunction with the AIAA SciTech 2017 conference. Near-field pressure waveforms for two cases were supplied and ground signatures at multiple azimuthal angles as well as their corresponding loudness metrics were requested from 10 participants, representing 3 countries. Each case had some required runs, as well as some optional runs. The required cases included atmospheric profiles with measured data including winds, using Radiosonde balloon data at multiple geographically spread locations, while the optional cases included temperature and pressure profiles from the US Standard atmosphere. The humidity profiles provided for the optional cases were taken from ANSI guidance, as the authors were unaware of an accepted standard at the time the cases were released to the participants. Participants provided ground signatures along with the requested data, including some loudness metrics using their best practices, which included lossy as well as lossless schemes. All the participants' submissions, for each case, are compared and discussed. Noise or loudness measures are calculated and detailed comparisons and statistical analyses are performed and presented. It has been observed that the variation in the loudness measures and spread between participants' submissions increased as the computation proceeded from under-track locations towards the lateral cut-off. Lessons learned during this workshop are discussed and recommendations are made for potential improvements and possible subsequent workshops as we collectively attempt to refine our analysis methods.

Rallabhandi, Sriram↗

NASA NTRS2020

IV&V Assurance Case Design for Artemis II

As human-rated missions like those in NASA’s Artemis program continue to grow in both size and complexity, and the role of software in achieving mission objectives expands dramatically, NASA’s Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Teams face evolving challenges in assuring the safety and performance of the safety- and mission-critical embedded software that is essential to landing astronauts on the surface of the Moon by 2024. Key among these challenges is IV&V’s desire to present a cohesive, integrated assurance statement to its stakeholders that encapsulates and summarizes our assurance positions across the integrated Artemis systems and their combined role in support of a safe and successful flight. In order to meet this challenge, the IV&V Teams have begun a transition to using formal assurance case concepts and documentation in the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) to build an argument in support of software assurance. IV&V recognizes significant benefits to the logical argumentation structure provided by assurance cases and GSN over our current practices for documenting and managing assurance claims. In order to reap these benefits, IV&V is integrating the use of assurance case concepts with our paradigm of follow-the-risk capability based assurance. Because of this, assurance cases created and used by IV&V are distinct from the sort of assurance case created by a development project or embedded software assurance organization. IV&V’s assurance cases depend much less upon standards and regulations, and more on evidence captured by IV&V regarding the environment, requirements, design, and implementation. IV&V constructs an independent network of claims based on an independent decomposition of arguments. Based upon the risk posture of these claims and their associated software and software artifacts, IV&V then develops and executes engineering analyses and testing, which provide evidence to either support or refute the claim. This emerging risk-informed assurance case methodology is being put into practice as IV&V plans for support of the Artemis II mission, the first flight of the Orion capsule and Space Launch System with astronauts on board.

Gerek Whitman↗

NASA NTRS2020

IV&V Assurance Case Design for Artemis II

As human-rated missions like those in NASA's Artemis program continue to grow in both size and complexity, and the role of software in achieving mission objectives expands dramatically, NASA's Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Teams face evolving challenges in assuring the safety and performance of the safety- and mission-critical embedded software that is essential to landing astronauts on the surface of the Moon by 2024. Key among these challenges is IV&V's desire to present a cohesive, integrated assurance statement to its stakeholders that encapsulates and summarizes our assurance positions across the integrated Artemis systems and their combined role in support of a safe and successful flight. In order to meet this challenge, the IV&V Teams have begun a transition to using formal assurance case concepts and documentation in the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) to build an argument in support of software assurance. IV&V recognizes significant benefits to the logical argumentation structure provided by assurance cases and GSN over our current practices for documenting and managing assurance claims. In order to reap these benefits, IV&V is integrating the use of assurance case concepts with our paradigm of follow-the-risk capability based assurance. Because of this, assurance cases created and used by IV&V are distinct from the sort of assurance case created by a development project or embedded software assurance organization. IV&V's assurance cases depend much less upon standards and regulations, and more on evidence captured by IV&V regarding the environment, requirements, design, and implementation. IV&V constructs an independent network of claims based on an independent decomposition of arguments. Based upon the risk posture of these claims and their associated software and software artifacts, IV&V then develops and executes engineering analyses and testing, which provide evidence to either support or refute the claim. This emerging risk-informed assurance case methodology is being put into practice as IV&V plans for support of the Artemis II mission, the first flight of the Orion capsule and Space Launch System with astronauts on board.

Whitman, Gerek↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Summary of Propagation Cases of the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop

A summary is provided for the propagation portion of the Third AIAA Sonic Boom Prediction Workshop held January 5, 2020 in conjunction with the AIAA SciTech 2020 conference. Near-field pressure waveforms for two cases were supplied at multiple azimuthal angles. Ground signatures across the breadth of the sonic boom primary carpet and their corresponding loudness metrics were requested. Each case had some required, as well as some optional, runs. The required cases included atmospheric profiles with measured data including winds. Optional cases included a level-acceleration sonic boom focusing case as well as prediction under standard atmospheric conditions. Participants provided ground signatures along with several loudness metrics using their best sonic boom prediction practices. All the participants' submissions are compared and discussed for each case. Noise or loudness measures are calculated and detailed comparisons and statistical analyses are performed and presented. Compared to previous workshops, the selected cases in the current workshop have much lower boom loudness levels. As was observed in the past workshops, the variation in the loudness measures and spread between participants' submissions increased as the computation proceeded from under-track locations towards the lateral cut-off. Lessons learned during this workshop are discussed and recommendations are made for potential improvements and possible subsequent workshops as we collectively attempt to refine our analysis methods.

SBPW3↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Identification and Study of Validation Level Test Cases for Computational Modeling of Non-Charring Ablators

Computational modeling of Thermal Protection System (TPS) materials, used for aerospace applications, provides numerous advantages in preliminary selection and design of a heatshield material and shape for atmospheric entry vehicles. However, to serve as a reliable tool for prediction of material thermal and ablative behavior, the modeling approach needs to be validated against real experimental and flight data, preferably at a range of applied conditions. The validation study is typically very complex as it requires reliable measured data not only for the material thermal response and surface recession, but also well characterized environmental conditions. The validation problem becomes even more complex when the material thermal response is dictated by multi-physics effects such as solid conduction, in-depth thermal decomposition, pyrolysis gas flow and chemical reactions. The multi-physics effects complicate not only the modeling effort, but also the experimental measurement for validation of various aspects of the highly coupled problem. In this study, an attempt is made to identify suitable experimental data that could serve as a source for validation of material thermal response modeling tools. To reduce the computational complexity, this study focuses only on non-charring ablators, where the material thermal response could be modeled with a single governing equation for solid conduction and the ablation is limited only to the surface of the material. With a well characterized and publicly available experimental data being sparse, the study is limited in presenting test cases for only three materials: camphor, graphite and FiberForm® in the sequence of increased modeling complexity. Graphite is a commonly used TPS material for aerospace applications, both for leading edges of high-speed vehicles and internal insulation of solid rocket motors. FiberForm® is a porous carbon pre-form used in preparation of the well known PICA material Tran et al. [1996]. Inclusion of camphor into the list is conditioned with the relative simplicity in modeling the material thermal and chemical response and the low-enthalpy flow environment. In addition, camphor has been used as a simple test material for study of flow transition behavior by Stock and Ginoux [1973] and assessment of a heatshield shape change at flight relevant conditions by Rotondi et al. [2022]. In this work, the identified experimental data was extracted from the public literature and test cases that yet have been published. As it was found from the review, not a single test case contains an exhaustive set of data that would validate every aspect of the material physics. However, in the data collected, various aspects of the material behavior can be still validated, such as surface and in-depth temperature, amount of recession and a shape change. The identified experimental data for each case is accompanied with a characterized flow environment and simulated boundary conditions predicted by a Data-Parallel Line Relaxation (DPLR) code Wright et al. [1998]. In addition, material thermal response numerical simulations in each test case are performed with Kentucky Aerothermodynamics and Thermal Response System (KATS-MR) Zibitsker et al. [2022] providing a comparative study and a sanity check for the proposed validation data. Sample results from the performed numerical study are shown below. Figure 1 shows distribution of surface heat flux and pressure values on a hemi-cylinder model made of FiberForm® and tested in HyMETS arc-jet facility. The results are shown for the high pressure condition among the two tests. Flow simulation was performed with DPLR code on a quarter of original geometry. In the figure, the quarter shape was mirrored across zx and xy planes to show the complete distribution. Figure 2 shows the material response results for the high pressure case (7500 Pa), simulated with KATS-MR and a comparison to the experimental data for the surface temperature and shape shape. The simulation was performed on a 2-D slice, extracted in the xy plane at the middle of the sample. Figure 3 shows the material response simulation for the low pressure case (3500 Pa) and a comparison to the experimental data for surface temperature and shape change.

ablation↗

DOE OSTI2020

Simulating current flow through a well casing and an induced fracture

A system includes a receiver component that receives a model of a well system, the model comprising a representation of an electrically energized well casing and/or a fracture as a transmission line that leaks electric current as the current traverses the well casing and/or fracture. The receiver component also receives a value that indicates an amount of the current that is applied to the well casing and a location of a source of the current on the well casing. The system further includes an electromagnetic field calculator component that calculates an estimated electromagnetic field at at least one location on the surface of the earth based at least in part upon the representation of the electrically energized well casing and/or fracture, the value that indicates the amount of current that is applied to the well casing, and the location of the source of the current on the well casing.

02 PETROLEUM↗

DOE OSTI2022

Performance Assessment of High-Efficiency Refrigerated Display Cases with Low-GWP Refrigerants: Preprint

As California policy makers enforce new regulations such as SB 1383 to achieve state greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals, it will be critical to understand the energy efficiency implications of low global warming potential (GWP) refrigerants in commercial refrigeration applications. The goal of this research project, funded by Commonwealth Edison was to assess the energy performance of two high efficiency medium-temperature, self-contained, reach-in display cases that utilized natural refrigerant propane (R-290), and hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) drop-in hydrofluoroolefin R-513a, respectively. Performance of these display cases were compared to a baseline fixture using HFC (R-134a) under equal conditions in a controlled environment chamber. These display cases were selected due to their widespread use in convenience stores, and small supermarkets. The high efficiency cases were equipped with energy efficient lighting, improved panel insulation, high efficiency evaporator and condenser fan motors, and high effectiveness heat exchangers. The test method used in this project was foundationally inspired by the ANSI/ASHRAE 72-2018 standard method to evaluate each case under equivalent conditions. However, minor modifications to this methodology were implemented to better represent more realistic operation of the units. While maintaining target product temperature, the energy efficient fixtures containing R-290 and R-513a consumed 61.8% to 32.6% less energy, respectively, than a baseline case using R-134a refrigerant. The daily energy consumption of the R-290, R-513a, and baseline display cases at the upper limit of environmental conditions was 4.30, 7.59, and 11.26 kWh/day, respectively.

alternative refrigerants↗

DOE OSTI2022

Performance Assessment of High-Efficiency Refrigerated Display Cases With Low Global Warming Potential Refrigerants

As California policy makers enforce new regulations such as SB 1383 to achieve state greenhouse gas reduction goals, it will be critical to understand the energy efficiency implications of low global warming potential (GWP) refrigerants in commercial refrigeration applications. The goal of this research project, funded by Commonwealth Edison, was to assess the energy performance of two high-efficiency medium-temperature, self-contained, reach-in display cases that utilized natural refrigerant propane (R-290, GWP = 3), and hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) drop-in hydrofluoroolefin R-513A (GWP = 573). Performance of these display cases was compared to a baseline fixture using HFC (R-134A, GWP = 1301) under equal conditions in a controlled environment chamber. These display cases were selected due to their widespread use in convenience stores and small supermarkets. The high-efficiency cases were equipped with energy-efficient lighting, improved panel insulation, high-efficiency evaporator and condenser fan motors, and high-effectiveness heat exchangers. The test method used in this project was foundationally inspired by the ANSI/ASHRAE 72-2018 standard method to evaluate each case under equivalent conditions (ASHRAE 2018). However, minor modifications to this methodology were implemented to better represent more realistic operation of the units. While maintaining equivalent target product temperature, the energy-efficient fixtures A (containing R-290, improved insulation, heat exchangers with a higher overall heat transfer coefficient (higher UA), and more efficient lighting and fan motors) and B (containing R-513A, improved fans, and higher UA-heat exchangers, and more efficient lighting and fan motors) consumed 61.8% to 32.6% less energy, respectively, than a baseline case using R-134A refrigerant. The daily energy consumption of the R-290, R-513A, and baseline display cases at the upper limit of environmental conditions was 4.30, 7.59, and 11.26 kWh/day, respectively.

alternative refrigerants↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Adopting an Objectives-Driven Assurance Case Approach for Achieving Space Flight Mission Planetary Protection Objectives

Traditionally, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has utilized prescriptive technical and process requirements to ensure safety and mission assurance performance objectives for planetary protection are achieved during space flight missions. While prescriptive requirements may be easier to communicate and manage throughout the systems engineering process, the highly constrained nature of prescriptive requirements can limit the ability to take advantage of cost-saving opportunities and offer limited ability to explore other options or alternative designs, processes, and methods. It can also be difficult to develop prescriptive requirements for objectives that are probabilistic in nature or that cannot be satisfied by direct verification. In contrast, the development of an assurance case allows for a compelling, comprehensible, and valid argument to be developed with supporting evidence that shows safety and mission assurance objectives have been satisfied. Analogous to how patent applications are constructed for inventions, an assurance case has a high-level claim of meeting a safety and mission assurance objective, followed by a more specific set of sub-claims and technical evidence which supports the claims. The objectives-driven assurance case approach allows for a better understanding and exploration of the trade space, more flexibility to balance trades, and the ability to realize and implement technical and process innovations for resource, time, and cost savings. The assurance case is a living case that evolves over the entire program life cycle. Recently, NASA’s Office of Planetary Protection (OPP) has adopted the assurance case approach as an acceptable methodology for demonstrating avoidance of contamination of target solar system bodies explored by NASA space flight missions. This methodology has been incorporated into NASA’s new technical standard for planetary protection and is currently being utilized by the Mars Sample Return campaign for safe sample containment during sample return.

Assurance Case↗

DOE OSTI2022

Case studies of robots and automation as health/safety interventions in small manufacturing enterprises

This article reviews the experiences of 63 case studies of small businesses (<250 employees) with manufacturing automation equipment acquired through a health/safety intervention grant program. The review scope included equipment technologies classified as industrial robots (n = 17), computer numerical control (CNC) machining (n = 29), or other programmable automation systems (n = 17). Descriptions of workers' compensation (WC) claim injuries and identified risk factors that motivated the acquisition of the equipment were extracted from grant applications. Other aspects of the employer experiences, including qualitative and quantitative assessment of effects on risk factors for musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), effects on productivity, and employee acceptance of the intervention were summarized from the case study reports. Case studies associated with a combination of large reduction in risk factors, lower cost per affected employee, and reported increases in productivity were CNC stone cutting system, CNC/vertical machining system, automated system for bottling, CNC/routing system for plastics products manufacturing, and a CNC/Cutting system for vinyl/carpet. Six case studies of industrial robots reported quantitative reductions in MSD risk factors in these diverse manufacturing industries: snack foods; photographic film, paper, plate, and chemical; machine shops; leather goods and allied products; plastic products; and iron and steel forging. Furthermore, this review of health/safety intervention case studies indicates that advanced (programmable) manufacturing automation, including industrial robots, reduced workplace musculoskeletal risk factors, and improved process productivity in most cases.

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRS2014

An Analysis of Earth Science Data Analytics Use Cases

The increase in the number and volume, and sources, of globally available Earth science data measurements and datasets have afforded Earth scientists and applications researchers unprecedented opportunities to study our Earth in ever more sophisticated ways. In fact, the NASA Earth Observing System Data Information System (EOSDIS) archives have doubled from 2007 to 2014, to 9.1 PB (Ramapriyan, 2009; and https:earthdata.nasa.govaboutsystem-- performance). In addition, other US agency, international programs, field experiments, ground stations, and citizen scientists provide a plethora of additional sources for studying Earth. Co--analyzing huge amounts of heterogeneous data to glean out unobvious information is a daunting task. Earth science data analytics (ESDA) is the process of examining large amounts of data of a variety of types to uncover hidden patterns, unknown correlations and other useful information. It can include Data Preparation, Data Reduction, and Data Analysis. Through work associated with the Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP) Federation, a collection of Earth science data analytics use cases have been collected and analyzed for the purpose of extracting the types of Earth science data analytics employed, and requirements for data analytics tools and techniques yet to be implemented, based on use case needs. ESIP generated use case template, ESDA use cases, use case types, and preliminary use case analysis (this is a work in progress) will be presented.

data analytics↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Stall Margin Improvement in a Transonic Compressor with a Casing Treatment: Flow Mechanism

Effects of casing treatments for improved stall margin in transonic compressors are investigated. Two types of compressor casing treatments, circumferential grooves and axial slots casing treatments, are studied in detail. The primary objective of the current paper is to identify the underlying fluid mechanics that change the stall margin of transonic compressors with these two casing treatments. Large eddy simulation (LES) is applied to calculate the compressor flow fields with these two types of casing treatments. Calculated flow fields are first compared with measured experimental data to validate the LES simulation. Details of the calculated unsteady flow structures are examined to unearth the underlying flow mechanism for the improved stall margin. Further possible design optimization of the casing treatment for the stall margin extension without any performance penalty near the design condition is also explored.

compressor↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Application of Objectives-Driven Assurance Cases to System Development in an Evolving Acquisition Model

System properties such as “safety” and “dependability” cannot, in practice, be proven, and must be argued in an “assurance case” aimed at supporting risk-acceptance decisions that have to be made by system acquirers and/or regulatory authorities. The paper is concerned with applications of the “assurance case” idea early in design and development of new systems, when (apart from dedicated testing) the only available operating experience information derives from previous (non-identical) systems. Much of the discussion is based on an evolving acquisition model at the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration; previously, most major systems were developed in-house, but some major systems will now be developed by and acquired from commercial providers. Key points discussed include the following. (1) By promoting a particular kind of focused discussion between acquirers and providers, the use of assurance cases should be particularly valuable under the new acquisition model. (2) In principle, objectives-driven (sometimes called “performance-based”) approaches to assurance of performance have significant advantages in cases where they are applicable. (3) For truly novel systems, completeness of the safety analysis is a significant issue; it is important for the assurance case to include a commitment by the provider (or applicant) to seriously pursue analysis of operating experience, so that previously unrecognized hazards can be identified and addressed. (4) Inquiries into major accidents often point to deficiencies in management oversight in all parts of the life cycle; management processes need to be addressed in the formulation and the implementation of an assurance case. Under the new acquisition model, these considerations imply a serious reconsideration of the way in which the development process is managed by both providers and acquirers.

Objectives-driven↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Guiding Integration of Formal Verification in Assurance Cases

Assurance cases are being increasingly acknowledged as away to build trust in complex systems with autonomous capabilities. An assurance case is a comprehensive, defensible, and valid justification that a system will function as intended for a specific mission and operating environment. Formal verification is often reserved for the most critical components of such systems. However, formal verification tools are often complex, and their usage is subject to many constraints and contextual dependencies. This can raise challenges both for performing the verification as well as reflecting the verification results appropriately in the assurance case, especially for non-expert users of the verification tool. To address these challenges, we present a tool-supported methodology for integrating formal verification results in an assurance case by capturing key verification method information in a rigorously constructed assurance case. In particular, we capture the tool specification in terms of its inputs, outputs, and assurance constraints as assumptions over inputs and guarantees provided over its outputs. The tool specification is parametrized over the inputs and outputs to both guide the intended application of the tool, as well as to check that the tool has been applied following the stated assumptions and that the guarantees hold. We define a generic tool assurance argument pattern that enables integration of the verification results in the assurance case by allowing custom refinement and automated instantiation for each tool use. We demonstrate our methodology on two formal verification tools and their applications to the verification of neural network properties for the aircraft domain.

Assurance Cases↗

DOE OSTI2022

APPLICATION OF OBJECTIVES-DRIVEN ASSURANCE CASES TO SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT IN AN EVOLVING ACQUISITION MODEL

System properties such as “safety” and “dependability” cannot, in practice, be proven, and must be argued in an “assurance case” aimed at supporting risk-acceptance decisions that have to be made by system acquirers and/or regulatory authorities. The paper is concerned with applications of the “assurance case” idea early in design and development of new systems, when (apart from dedicated testing) the only available operating experience information derives from previous (non-identical) systems. Much of the discussion is based on an evolving acquisition model at the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration; previously, most major systems were developed in-house, but some major systems will now be developed by and acquired from commercial providers. Key points discussed include the following. (1) By promoting a particular kind of focused discussion between acquirers and providers, the use of assurance cases should be particularly valuable under the new acquisition model. (2) In principle, objectives-driven (sometimes called “performance-based”) approaches to assurance of performance have significant advantages in cases where they are applicable. (3) For truly novel systems, completeness of the safety analysis is a significant issue; it is important for the assurance case to include a commitment by the provider (or applicant) to seriously pursue analysis of operating experience, so that previously unrecognized hazards can be identified and addressed. (4) Inquiries into major accidents often point to deficiencies in management oversight in all parts of the life cycle; management processes need to be addressed in the formulation and the implementation of an assurance case. Under the new acquisition model, these considerations imply a serious reconsideration of the way in which the development process is managed by both providers and acquirers.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Application of Objectives-Driven Assurance Cases to System Development in an Evolving Acquisition Model

System properties such as “safety” and “dependability” cannot, in practice, be proven, and must be argued in an “assurance case” aimed at supporting risk-acceptance decisions that have to be made by system acquirers and/or regulatory authorities. The paper is concerned with applications of the “assurance case” idea early in design and development of new systems, when (apart from dedicated testing) the only available operating experience information derives from previous (non-identical) systems. Much of the discussion is based on an evolving acquisition model at the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration; previously, most major systems were developed in-house, but some major systems will now be developed by and acquired from commercial providers. Key points discussed include the following. (1) By promoting a particular kind of focused discussion between acquirers and providers, the use of assurance cases should be particularly valuable under the new acquisition model. (2) In principle, objectives-driven (sometimes called “performance-based”) approaches to assurance of performance have significant advantages in cases where they are applicable. (3) For truly novel systems, completeness of the safety analysis is a significant issue; it is important for the assurance case to include a commitment by the provider (or applicant) to seriously pursue analysis of operating experience, so that previously unrecognized hazards can be identified and addressed. (4) Inquiries into major accidents often point to deficiencies in management oversight in all parts of the life cycle; management processes need to be addressed in the formulation and the implementation of an assurance case. Under the new acquisition model, these considerations imply a serious reconsideration of the way in which the development process is managed by both providers and acquirers.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗