SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Advancements to DOE WPTO funded Hydropower Cybersecurity Value-at-Risk Framework application allows stakeholder to translate risk-based assessments to quantitative scores allowing to better decision making for cybersecurity investments.
One of the primary hindrances to producing a viable, sustainable domestic biomass industry for renewable biofuels, bio-products and bio-power is the lack of understanding and quantification of the risks associated with both the biomass supply chain and preprocessing and conversion technologies. Currently a consistent method for assessing, comparing, and quantifying risks in biomass supply chains does not exist, creating a major investment barrier to bioenergy projects in the U.S. The lack of a standardized approach has resulted in bioenergy stakeholders independently using inconsistent approaches and evaluation criteria, leading to unreliable and incomparable assessments of risks and financing barriers to bio-project development. Along with the challenges of inconsistent risk assessment for supply chain risk, technology specific risks based on variability in biomass properties are not fully understood and can pose significant unforeseen challenges for bioenergy projects. In many cases these properties have not yet been identified and the impacts on the proposed technology and products unquantified. This is particularly challenging for emerging preprocessing and conversion technologies. Without a firm understanding of the preprocessing/conversion technology-specific critical properties, the risk of a proposed bio-project cannot be fully evaluated. To address inconsistent risk evaluation in the biomass supply chain supporting project financing, a Biomass Supply Chain Risk Standards (BSCRS) framework was developed. The BSCRS framework includes a comprehensive list of known and perceived risks (Risk Indicators) to the supply chain developed through 100’s of interviews with bioenergy industry experts spanning from feedstock growers and suppliers to representatives from the financial sector. These risks have been organized into a manageable hierarchy of Risk Categories and Risk Factors that can be practically assessed. This BSCRS framework also provides mitigation strategies for multiple Risk Indicators from best available industry practices and research findings. Additionally, a risk quantification methodology for each Risk Factor, Risk Category, and the bio-project as a whole was developed to enable capital markets to assess feedstock risk more efficiently and more accurately. Multiple case studies representing existing bio-projects have been used to evaluate and verify the BSCRS framework and scoring methodology. To address technological risk along with the supply chain risk captured in the developed BSCRS framework, this work also focuses on development of a systematic criticality assessment tool using well-accepted, quantitative risk analysis methods to evaluate bioenergy feedstock critical properties impacting system unit operations. The proposed Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) approach uses a team of subject area experts (SAEs) for each targeted unit operation within a system. Collectively, the team will develop and use a quantitative scoring system to assess the material attributes, process parameters, and quality attributes for key unit operations that have already been identified. The FMEA process generates Risk Priority Numbers (RPNs) for the various failures and predominant causes for each material/process unit/product combination resulting in a semi-quantitative, standardized methodology for assessing technological risk and biomass properties contributing to that risk.
This presentation considers the decisions which go into planning the Mars Sample Return Mission (i.e. spacecraft design) and how these choices affect concerns about the safe handling of any sample returns. Topics covered include: 'being there' trades, 'getting home' trades, quantitative functions and risk assessments.
Since the Shuttle Challenger accident in 1986, communities across NASA have been developing and extensively using quantitative reliability and risk assessment methods in their decision making process. This paper discusses several reliability engineering applications that NASA has used over the year to support the design, development, and operation of critical space flight hardware. Specifically, the paper discusses several reliability engineering applications used by NASA in areas such as risk management, inspection policies, components upgrades, reliability growth, integrated failure analysis, and physics based probabilistic engineering analysis. In each of these areas, the paper provides a brief discussion of a case study to demonstrate the value added and the criticality of reliability engineering in supporting NASA project and program decisions to fly safely. Examples of these case studies discussed are reliability based life limit extension of Shuttle Space Main Engine (SSME) hardware, Reliability based inspection policies for Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) turbine disc, probabilistic structural engineering analysis for reliability prediction of the SSME alternate turbo-pump development, impact of ET foam reliability on the Space Shuttle System risk, and reliability based Space Shuttle upgrade for safety. Special attention is given in this paper to the physics based probabilistic engineering analysis applications and their critical role in evaluating the reliability of NASA development hardware including their potential use in a research and technology development environment.
NASA, as an organization, takes risk management (RM) seriously, and for most projects, the risk management process is exemplar. There can be challenges, though, with defining RM processes. For example, many different risk analysis methodologies are available, they can be applied with varying degrees of rigor, and they can have different value depending on how projects use them. In particular, risk analysis methodologies vary considerably in the level of quantitative detail, with more probabilistic techniques encouraged in some situations. We discussed these processes and methodologies with ten project managers (PM) at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Our intent was not to prove with some level of statistical significance that some are more helpful than others, but rather to obtain a general understanding of how projects are identifying, and thinking, about risks. This paper describes some of the available risk processes and methodologies, and provides some insights about the benefits that can gained from their use. We provide an in-depth discussion of one quantitative methodology, Probabilistic Risk Assessments (PRAs), and conclude with a few insights from observed best practices.
The Accelerator Operations and Technology Instrumentation and Controls Group (AOT IC) at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center (LANSCE) has established a comprehensive risk-based system upgrade planning strategy which has been utilized as a tool to prioritize system upgrade projects for the past several years. A challenge with the current system is that the group often lacks the data to quantify the probability and impact of system failures, so the group often relies instead on qualitative risk assessments as well as evaluations of a potential upgrade project’s alignment with group strategy and vision to prioritize projects. A proposed framework to enable quantitative risk probability and impact assessments has been developed and tested on three pilot systems chosen to broadly represent the types and conditions of equipment used by the group. The proposed framework incorporates availability data gathered from the LANSCE control room logbooks and the LANSCE work control system, as well as a system health evaluation which is conducted from a variety of resources to assess the probability of equipment failure. The impact of system failure is viewed from the perspective of impact on mission and schedule, where spares status, system documentation status, and the functional distribution of deployed systems are used to quantify these impacts.
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.
This topical report summarizes the integration of qualitative and quantitative aspects of the risk management workflow for the Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration (SWP) Phase III Demonstration Project, located near the community of Farnsworth in northernmost Texas. Detail on some aspects of this subject has been previously provided in internal project reports on qualitative risk assessment processes, in a published paper summarizing quantitative risk modeling, and in many other published papers on specific risk modeling efforts. These prior documents are cited but the details are not repeated here. The report documents work undertaken for Task 7.4.1 of U.S. Department of Energy award number DE- FC26-05NT42591.
Digital instrumentation and control (DI&C) systems at nuclear power plants (NPPs) have many advantages over analog systems. They are proven to be more reliable, cheaper, and easier to maintain given obsolescence of analog components. However, they also pose new engineering and technical challenges, such as possibility of common cause failures (CCFs) unique to digital systems. Here this paper proposes a Platform for Risk Assessment of DI&C (PRADIC) that is developed by Idaho National Laboratory (INL). A methodology for evaluation of software CCFs in high safety-significant safety-related DI&C systems of NPPs was developed as part of the framework. The framework integrates three stages of a typical risk assessment—qualitative hazard analysis and quantitative reliability and consequence analyses. The quantified risks compared with respective acceptance criteria provide valuable insights for system architecture alternatives allowing design optimization in terms of risk reduction and cost savings. A comprehensive case study performed to demonstrate the framework's capabilities is documented here in this paper. Results show that the PRADIC is a powerful tool capable to identify potential digital-based CCFs, estimate their probabilities, and evaluate their impacts on system and plant safety.
An improved methodology for quantitatively evaluating failure risk for a spaceflight system in order to assess flight readiness is presented. This methodology is of particular value when information relevant to failure prediction, including test experience and knowledge of parameters used in engineering analyses of failure phenomena, is limited. In this approach, engineering analysis models that characterize specific failure modes based on the physics and mechanics of the failure phenomena are used in a prescribed probabilistic structure to generate a failure probability distribution that is modified by test and flight experience in a Bayesian statistical procedure. The probabilistic structure and statistical methodology are generally applicable to any failure mode for which quantitative engineering analysis can be employed to characterize the failure phenomenon and are particularly well suited for use under the constraints on information availability that are typical of such spaceflight systems as the Space Shuttle and planetary spacecraft.
This paper summarizes the results of the risk analysis and characterization of the CO 2 and brine leakage potential of Farnsworth Unit (FWU) site wells. The study is part of the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) program, which aims to quantitatively evaluate long-term environmental risks under conditions of significant geologic uncertainty and variability. To achieve this, NRAP utilizes risk assessment and computational tools specifically designed to quantify uncertainties and calculate the risk associated with geologic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) sequestration. For this study, we have developed a workflow that utilizes physics-based reservoir simulation results as input to perform leakage calculations using NRAP Tools, specifically NRAP-IAM-CS and RROM-Gen. These tools enable us to conduct leakage risk analysis based on ECLIPSE reservoir simulation results and to characterize wellbore leakage at the Farnsworth Unit Site. We analyze the risk of leakage from both individual wells and the entire field under various wellbore integrity distribution scenarios. The results of the risk analysis for the leakage potential of FWU wells indicate that, when compared to the total amount of CO 2 injected, the highest cemented well integrity distribution scenario (FutureGen high flow rate) exhibits approximately 0.01% cumulative CO 2 leakage for a 25-year CO 2 injection duration at the end of a 50-year post-injection monitoring period. In contrast, the highest possible leakage scenario (open well) shows approximately 0.1% cumulative CO 2 leakage over the same time frame.
This presentation reviews four typical spacecraft battery designs and discusses the benefits and drawbacks of each with respect to the NASA Orbital Debris Mitigation Requirements. These requirements address, among other things, accidental explosion probability while on orbit and reentry ground casualty risk. These probabilities, except for post-mission explosion, must be evaluated against quantitative thresholds. Ground casualty risk resulting from reentry can be assessed quantitatively using reentry demisability models. Some missions establish compliance with explosion probability limits using typical component or assembly reliability figures, while others cite more-restrictive certifications or similarity with past successful projects. NASA encourages – and seeks – standards and information exchange to aid end-users in estimating the probability of accidental explosion.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has repeatedly expressed a desire to increase the use of risk in its decision-making. The Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Policy Statement published in 1995 formalized the Commission’s commitment to risk-informed regulation through the expanded use of PRA. While a great deal of work has been done to incorporate risk insights into the regulatory framework for at-power nuclear reactors. Far less progress has been made to risk inform the dry-casks and nuclear waste transportation areas of the nuclear fuel cycle. INL was tasked with incorporating the information from the two completed dry cask PRAs as well as any additional available information into a tool that helps the NRC use those insights to identify levels of risk at various stages in the nuclear waste cycle. The first task was to address the License Amendment Request (LAR) Process for Dry Cask storage, the second task is for the incorporate transportation into the tool, and the third and final task will be incorporate any additional regulatory applications for dry cask storage. This report covers the first task of the tool and will eventually incorporate the remaining two tasks may be completed in the future and built off the model described here. Task 1 specifically asked to incorporate the risk insights into the process for determining and prioritizing review of license amendment changes related to storage applications by outlining a resource allocation strategy and defining recommendations of for the depth and breadth of the LAR review. It was requested that the tool be similar in design to the SDP notebooks/worksheets and contain quantitative, qualitative, or semi-quantitative approaches to assessing the risk of the change. The final tool that was selected by INL to be developed was a flowchart and associated rationale document that allows the reviewer to quickly assess potential LAR changes and their associated risks as well as the rationale behind the risk categorization. This risk categorization will lead to specific actionable recommendations to expect from a change of that specific category. This allows for a more consistent review process as well as improving the overall efficiency of the review itself.
The National User Resource for Biological Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (User Resource) will provide isotopic analysis (primarily radiocarbon or 14C) by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) for NIH- funded researchers across the United States and will be the only User Resource of its type in the United States. The User Resource will provide measurement capability and expertise to a research community that requires highly sensitive, quantitative isotope analyses. Since commissioning a new accelerator mass spectrometer in June 2014, we have measured over 4000 samples a year for collaborators and service users. The User Resource will enable us to continue to meet these research needs, as well as provide for new users whose research programs would benefit from AMS as a measurement tool. The User Resource’s forte will be ultra-high sensitivity quantitation of radiocarbon and selected other radioisotopes for research studies where isotopes are required. Radioisotope labeling studies have been and will continue to be an important tool for addressing many complex biomedical science problems. AMS is a specialized and unique type of mass spectrometry that provides absolute quantitation of radiocarbon and other relevant radioisotopes with extreme sensitivity, having limits of detection in real samples on the order of a few attomol/mg of sample at measurement precisions of ~3%. It is the only instrumental method capable of quantifying radioisotope-labeled agents routinely in real-world samples with such precision and sensitivity. The sensitivity of AMS allows for the quantification of radiolabeled metabolites in extremely complex matrices of cells and organisms at very low concentrations and in small samples. AMS allows studies to be conducted without perturbing metabolism leading to more relevant quantification of metabolic rates and pathways. In addition, it enables quantification of pharmacokinetic and metabolic properties of toxicants at environmentally relevant concentrations in model systems as well as the ability to quantify pharmacokinetics and other molecular endpoints directly in humans. Such quantitative assessments can 1) improve risk assessment for toxicants, 2) address safety and efficacy considerations for therapeutic entities, 3) deepen understanding of xenobiotic and intermediary metabolism, 4) help understand the interactions between critical molecular pathways, and 5) improve efforts to model and predict various metabolic and biological states. These capabilities have been applied in a number of areas including research in carcinogenesis, toxicology, nutrition, pharmacology/drug development and basic biological science. As a NIGMS National Resource the National User Resource for Biological Accelerator Mass Spectrometry will help NIH funded scientists achieve a deeper understanding of the etiology of human health concerns by (1) enabling the quantification of pharmacokinetics and other molecular endpoints directly in humans; (2) offering the ability to conduct quantitative studies using biologics such as proteins or lipids, and thereby reducing the amount of radioisotope usage in biomedical labs; and (3) enabling more relevant studies of metabolic pathways in health and disease through the use of much lower, more biologically-relevant, concentrations of metabolic substrates in cells and intact organisms. Such studies support NIGMS’s basic biomedical research areas that contribute to the understanding of fundamental cellular and physiological principles and enable research supported by the Biophysics, Biomedical Technology, and Computational Biosciences (BBCB); Genetics and Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology (GMCDB); Pharmacology, Physiology, Biological Chemistry (PPBC) and Training, Workforce Development, and Diversity (TWD) Divisions.
The National User Resource for Biological Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (User Resource) will provide isotopic analysis (primarily radiocarbon or 14C) by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) for NIH- funded researchers across the United States and will be the only User Resource of its type in the United States. The User Resource will provide measurement capability and expertise to a research community that requires highly sensitive, quantitative isotope analyses. Since commissioning a new accelerator mass spectrometer in June 2014, we have measured over 4000 samples a year for collaborators and service users. The User Resource will enable us to continue to meet these research needs, as well as provide for new users whose research programs would benefit from AMS as a measurement tool. The User Resource’s forte will be ultra-high sensitivity quantitation of radiocarbon and selected other radioisotopes for research studies where isotopes are required. Radioisotope labeling studies have been and will continue to be an important tool for addressing many complex biomedical science problems. AMS is a specialized and unique type of mass spectrometry that provides absolute quantitation of radiocarbon and other relevant radioisotopes with extreme sensitivity, having limits of detection in real samples on the order of a few attomol/mg of sample at measurement precisions of ~3%. It is the only instrumental method capable of quantifying radioisotope-labeled agents routinely in real-world samples with such precision and sensitivity. The sensitivity of AMS allows for the quantification of radiolabeled metabolites in extremely complex matrices of cells and organisms at very low concentrations and in small samples. AMS allows studies to be conducted without perturbing metabolism leading to more relevant quantification of metabolic rates and pathways. In addition, it enables quantification of pharmacokinetic and metabolic properties of toxicants at environmentally relevant concentrations in model systems as well as the ability to quantify pharmacokinetics and other molecular endpoints directly in humans. Such quantitative assessments can 1) improve risk assessment for toxicants, 2) address safety and efficacy considerations for therapeutic entities, 3) deepen understanding of xenobiotic and intermediary metabolism, 4) help understand the interactions between critical molecular pathways, and 5) improve efforts to model and predict various metabolic and biological states. These capabilities have been applied in a number of areas including research in carcinogenesis, toxicology, nutrition, pharmacology/drug development and basic biological science. As a NIGMS National Resource the National User Resource for Biological Accelerator Mass Spectrometry will help NIH funded scientists achieve a deeper understanding of the etiology of human health concerns by (1) enabling the quantification of pharmacokinetics and other molecular endpoints directly in humans; (2) offering the ability to conduct quantitative studies using biologics such as proteins or lipids, and thereby reducing the amount of radioisotope usage in biomedical labs; and (3) enabling more relevant studies of metabolic pathways in health and disease through the use of much lower, more biologically-relevant, concentrations of metabolic substrates in cells and intact organisms. Such studies support NIGMS’s basic biomedical research areas that contribute to the understanding of fundamental cellular and physiological principles and enable research supported by the Biophysics, Biomedical Technology, and Computational Biosciences (BBCB); Genetics and Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology (GMCDB); Pharmacology, Physiology, Biological Chemistry (PPBC) and Training, Workforce Development, and Diversity (TWD) Divisions. Over the next five years, our goals are to: 1. Improve the efficiency of operation for AMS measurements through installation of new interfaces to our AMS systems, technical modifications to improve gas accepting ion source efficiency and upgrading our data analysis software for improved ease of use and data reporting. 2. Increase the accessibility and visibility of ultra-sensitive 14C measurements for the biomedical research community by training of new investigators and expanding our national user base. 3. Provide high throughput, ultra-sensitive 14C analysis for the NIGMS and NIH user community.
In the Fall of 2016 a workshop was held which brought together over 50 scientists from the ecological and radiological fields to discuss feasibility and challenges of reintegrating ecosystem science into radioecology. There is a growing desire to incorporate attributes of ecosystem science into radiological risk assessment and radioecological research more generally, fueled by recent advances in quantification of emergent ecosystem attributes and the desire to accurately reflect impacts of radiological stressors upon ecosystem function. This work is a synthesis of the discussions and consensus of the workshop participant's responses to three primary questions, which were: 1) How can ecosystem science support radiological risk assessment? 2) What ecosystem level endpoints potentially could be used for radiological risk assessment? and 3) What inference strategies and associated methods would be most appropriate to assess the effects of radionuclides on ecosystem structure and function? The consensus of the participants was that ecosystem science can and should support radiological risk assessment through the incorporation of quantitative metrics that reflect ecosystem functions which are sensitive to radiological contaminants. The participants also agreed that many such endpoints exit or are thought to exit and while many are used in ecological risk assessment currently, additional data need to be collected that link the causal mechanisms of radiological exposure to these endpoints. Finally, the participants agreed that radiological risk assessments must be designed and informed by rigorous statistical frameworks capable of revealing the causal inference tying radiological exposure to the endpoints selected for measurement.
Current decision making involves numerous possible combinations of technology elements, safety and health issues, operational aspects and process considerations to satisfy program goals. Identifying potential risk considerations as part of the management decision making process provides additional tools to make more informed management decision. Adapting and using risk assessment methodologies can generate new perspectives on various risk and safety concerns that are not immediately apparent. Safety and operational risks can be identified and final decisions can balance these considerations with cost and schedule risks. Additional assessments can also show likelihood of event occurrence and event consequence to provide a more informed basis for decision making, as well as cost effective mitigation strategies. Methodologies available to perform Risk Assessments range from qualitative identification of risk potential, to detailed assessments where quantitative probabilities are calculated. Methodology used should be based on factors that include: 1) type of industry and industry standards, 2) tasks, tools, and environment 3) type and availability of data and 4) industry views and requirements regarding risk & reliability. Risk Assessments are a tool for decision makers to understand potential consequences and be in a position to reduce, mitigate or eliminate costly mistakes or catastrophic failures.
The National User Resource for Biological Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (User Resource) will provide isotopic analysis (primarily radiocarbon or 14C) by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) for NIH- funded researchers across the United States and will be the only User Resource of its type in the United States. The User Resource will provide measurement capability and expertise to a research community that requires highly sensitive, quantitative isotope analyses. Since commissioning a new accelerator mass spectrometer in June 2014, we have measured over 4000 samples a year for collaborators and service users. The User Resource will enable us to continue to meet these research needs, as well as provide for new users whose research programs would benefit from AMS as a measurement tool. The User Resource’s forte will be ultra-high sensitivity quantitation of radiocarbon and selected other radioisotopes for research studies where isotopes are required. Radioisotope labeling studies have been and will continue to be an important tool for addressing many complex biomedical science problems. AMS is a specialized and unique type of mass spectrometry that provides absolute quantitation of radiocarbon and other relevant radioisotopes with extreme sensitivity, having limits of detection in real samples on the order of a few attomol/mg of sample at measurement precisions of ~3%. It is the only instrumental method capable of quantifying radioisotope-labeled agents routinely in real-world samples with such precision and sensitivity. The sensitivity of AMS allows for the quantification of radiolabeled metabolites in extremely complex matrices of cells and organisms at very low concentrations and in small samples. AMS allows studies to be conducted without perturbing metabolism leading to more relevant quantification of metabolic rates and pathways. In addition, it enables quantification of pharmacokinetic and metabolic properties of toxicants at environmentally relevant concentrations in model systems as well as the ability to quantify pharmacokinetics and other molecular endpoints directly in humans. Such quantitative assessments can 1) improve risk assessment for toxicants, 2) address safety and efficacy considerations for therapeutic entities, 3) deepen understanding of xenobiotic and intermediary metabolism, 4) help understand the interactions between critical molecular pathways, and 5) improve efforts to model and predict various metabolic and biological states. These capabilities have been applied in a number of areas including research in carcinogenesis, toxicology, nutrition, pharmacology/drug development and basic biological science.