Results for “risks” | Engineering Papers

NASA NTRS2014

2013 Space Radiation Standing Review Panel Status Review for: The Risk of Acute and Late Central Nervous System Effects from Radiation Exposure, The Risk of Acute Radiation Syndromes Due to Solar Particle Events (SPEs), The Risk Of Degenerative Tissue Or Other Health Effects From Radiation Exposure, and The Risk of Radiation Carcinogenesis

The Space Radiation Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) was impressed with the strong research program presented by the scientists and staff associated with NASA's Space Radiation Program Element and National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI). The presentations given on-site and the reports of ongoing research that were provided in advance indicated the potential Risk of Acute and Late Central Nervous System Effects from Radiation Exposure (CNS) and were extensively discussed by the SRP. This new data leads the SRP to recommend that a higher priority should be placed on research designed to identify and understand these risks at the mechanistic level. To support this effort the SRP feels that a shift of emphasis from Acute Radiation Syndromes (ARS) and carcinogenesis to CNS-related endpoints is justified at this point. However, these research efforts need to focus on mechanisms, should follow pace with advances in the field of CNS in general and should consider the specific comments and suggestions made by the SRP as outlined below. The SRP further recommends that the Space Radiation Program Element continue with its efforts to fill the vacant positions (Element Scientist, CNS Risk Discipline Lead) as soon as possible. The SRP also strongly recommends that NASA should continue the NASA Space Radiation Summer School. In addition to these broad recommendations, there are specific comments/recommendations noted for each risk, described in detail below.

Source record↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Systems Risk Network - A Ranking Analysis of Risks

INTRODUCTION The Human Systems Risk Board (HSRB) is responsible for understanding, managing, and mitigating the risks associated with spaceflight. For a particular mission, the HSRB assigns each human system risk a rating on a 5x5 grid assessing its likelihood and consequence, which is ultimately used to compare and rank the risks. The HSRB approaches risk management by primarily establishing the context of each human system risk individually with the understanding that mitigating one risk might affect the likelihood, consequence, and mitigation approaches of another. To support this effort the HSRB, subject matter experts, and risk custodian teams created directed acyclic graphs (DAG), often called a causal graph, for the twenty-nine risks. In this presentation, we propose a new ranking algorithm for the risks which includes the downstream influence of each risk according to the information in the DAGs and provide an application of graph theoretic tools. METHODS In 2014, Mindock and Klaus proposed a taxonomy for human system risk influences which we have adopted to categorize the nodes in each DAG. Analyzing the nodes that correspond to the risks in this taxonomy allows us to analyze and understand how each risk influences the others. We construct an auxiliary network, which we call the Primary Risk Network (PRN), where the nodes are the twenty-nine space flight risks and, a directed edge connects Risk A to Risk B if Risk A has some influence on the likelihood or consequence of Risk B as described in the DAGS. We perform a variety of graph theoretic ranking methods on the nodes (or risks) in the PRN, including Katz centrality. RESULTS We rank the nodes in the PRN using the Katz centrality score. The ten risks with the highest score are pictured in Figure 1, colored (light to dark) according to their score. We analyze other centrality measures like betweenness centrality, eigenvector centrality, and the Estrada index, and provide the meaning of the corresponding rankings in terms of the risks. Future work includes analyzing the other categories in the taxonomy defined by Mindock and Klaus [1]. For example, we are interested in analyzing the nodes that are labeled as countermeasures or capabilities and perform similar analysis to measure their effect on certain medical conditions.

dag↗

NASA NTRS2022

Directed Acyclic Graphs: A Tool for Understanding the NASA Human Spaceflight System Risks - Human System Risk Board

For over a decade, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has tracked and configuration-managed approximately 30 risks to astronaut health and performance that occur before, during and after spaceflight. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB), a Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Board at NASA Johnson Space Center, is the entity responsible for identifying, assessing, analyzing, and monitoring the official understanding of the risk or risk posture for each of the Human System Risks and determining – based on evaluation of the available evidence – when that risk posture changes. The ultimate purpose of tracking and researching these risks is to find ways to reduce the risk that astronaut crews face during spaceflight. Historically, research, development and operations relevant to one risk have been conducted in isolation from other risks; these individual risk ‘silos’ enabled initial characterization of each specific risk. In spaceflight however, the impact of exposure to risk for astronaut crews is cumulative, and not independent of exposures or other risks, as all the adverse effects of the spaceflight environment begin at launch, continue throughout the duration of the mission and in some cases across the lifetime of the crews. In January of 2020, the HSRB at NASA embarked on a pilot project designed to assess the potential value of causal diagramming as a tool to facilitate understanding of these cumulative and interdependent effects as applied within Human System Risk management. This process uses directed acyclic graphs as a means of formalizing a shared mental model of the causal flow of risk among Risk Board stakeholders. Initially this model was to improve communication among those stakeholders, but the potential value exceeds communication alone. The causal diagrams are formulated as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to function as a type of knowledge graph for reference for the board and its stakeholders. This document is a sister document to NASA/TM 20220006812 Directed Acyclic Graph Guidance Documentation (1). In that document, the basic guidance for creating and standardizing directed acyclic graphs as tools for cross-risk analysis is provided. This document contains the initial configuration managed DAGs that were created as a result of applying those principles. These initial versions were accepted by the HSRB in January of 2022. Each of the Human System Risks are represented by a DAG that has been reviewed by the larger Human Health and Performance community at NASA including life scientists, physical scientists, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, exercise specialists and more. These results show the starting point for Human System Risk DAGs as shared mental models and communication aids across the boundaries of the various expertise needed to understand and mitigate the human risks in spaceflight. Because they are a starting point, each of these DAGs can be expected to change over time as new or refined evidence becomes available. The process for updating these DAGs can be found in the JSC-66705 Human System Risk Management Plan (2) that is publicly available on the NASA Technical Reports Server.

Erik L. Antonsen↗

NASA NTRS2011

Shuttle Risk Progression: Use of the Shuttle Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to Show Reliability Growth

It is important to the Space Shuttle Program (SSP), as well as future manned spaceflight programs, to understand the early mission risk and progression of risk as the program gains insights into the integrated vehicle through flight. The risk progression is important to the SSP as part of the documentation of lessons learned. The risk progression is important to future programs to understand reliability growth and the first flight risk. This analysis uses the knowledge gained from 30 years of operational flights and the current Shuttle PRA to calculate the risk of Loss of Crew and Vehicle (LOCV) at significant milestones beginning with the first flight. Key flights were evaluated based upon historical events and significant re-designs. The results indicated that the Shuttle risk tends to follow a step function as opposed to following a traditional reliability growth pattern where risk exponentially improves with each flight. In addition, it shows that risk can increase due to trading safety margin for increased performance or due to external events. Due to the risk drivers not being addressed, the risk did not improve appreciably during the first 25 flights. It was only after significant events occurred such as Challenger and Columbia, where the risk drivers were apparent, that risk was significantly improved. In addition, this paper will show that the SSP has reduced the risk of LOCV by almost an order of magnitude. It is easy to look back afte r 30 years and point to risks that are now obvious, however; the key is to use this knowledge to benefit other programs which are in their infancy stages. One lesson learned from the SSP is understanding risk drivers are essential in order to considerably reduce risk. This will enable the new program to focus time and resources on identifying and reducing the significant risks. A comprehensive PRA, similar to that of the Shuttle PRA, is an effective tool quantifying risk drivers if support from all of the stakeholders is given.

Hamlin, Teri L.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Systemic Risk From the Perspective of Climate, Environmental and Disaster Risk Science and Practice

Understanding and managing systemic risk is more important than ever due to our immense global connectivity (e.g., between sectors, such as food-health-water-energy, countries and continents, down to individuals). Despite the fact that the notion of systemic risk is several decades old, the term is used in diverse ways across different disciplines (e.g., financial systems, medicine, earth system sciences, disaster risk research and climate science). Triggered by the repercussions of the global financial crisis of the late 2000s, and more recently the COVID-19 pandemic, which are clear realization of systemic risk, the perception of systemic risk has often been focused on global and catastrophic or even existential risks. Systemic risk, however, can be seen as a feature of systems at all possible scales (e.g., global, national, regional, local) with system boundaries varying depending on the context. Addressing current societal challenges, such as climate change, in terms of systemic risk requires integrating different systems perspectives and fostering system thinking, while implementing key intergovernmental agendas, such as the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Sustainable Development Goals. Based on insights gained and knowledge collected from an expert workshop, literature review and expert elicitation, we give an integrated perspective of climate, environmental and disaster risk science and practice on systemic risk as summarized in a Briefing Note to the International Science Council. We provide an overview of concepts of systemic risk that have evolved over time and identify commonalities across terminologies and perspectives associated with systemic risk used in different contexts. Key attributes of systemic risk are outlined without prescribing a single definition, and information and data requirements are discussed that are essential for a better and more actionable understanding of the systemic nature of risk. Finally, the opportunities to connect research and policy for addressing systemic risk are highlighted.

systemic risk↗

NASA NTRS2017

Cross-Cutting Risk Framework: Mining Data for Common Risks Across the Portfolio

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) defines risk management as an integrated framework, combining risk-informed decision making and continuous risk management to foster forward-thinking and decision making from an integrated risk perspective. Therefore, decision makers must have access to risks outside of their own project to gain the knowledge that provides the integrated risk perspective. Through the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Flight Projects Directorate (FPD) Business Change Initiative (BCI), risks were integrated into one repository to facilitate access to risk data between projects. With the centralized repository, communications between the FPD, project managers, and risk managers improved and GSFC created the cross-cutting risk framework (CCRF) team. The creation of the consolidated risk repository, in parallel with the initiation of monthly FPD risk managers and risk governance board meetings, are now providing a complete risk management picture spanning the entire directorate. This paper will describe the challenges, methodologies, tools, and techniques used to develop the CCRF, and the lessons learned as the team collectively worked to identify risks that FPD programs projects had in common, both past and present.

risk-informed decision making↗

NASA NTRS2005

Managing Space Radiation Risks On Lunar and Mars Missions: Risk Assessment and Mitigation

Radiation-induced health risks are a primary concern for human exploration outside the Earth's magnetosphere, and require improved approaches to risk estimation and tools for mitigation including shielding and biological countermeasures. Solar proton events are the major concern for short-term lunar missions (<60 d), and for long-term missions (>60 d) such as Mars exploration, the exposures to the high energy and charge (HZE) ions that make-up the galactic cosmic rays are the major concern. Health risks from radiation exposure are chronic risks including carcinogenesis and degenerative tissue risks, central nervous system effects, and acute risk such as radiation sickness or early lethality. The current estimate is that a more than four-fold uncertainty exists in the projection of lifetime mortality risk from cosmic rays, which severely limits analysis of possible benefits of shielding or biological countermeasure designs. Uncertainties in risk projections are largely due to insufficient knowledge of HZE ion radiobiology, which has led NASA to develop a unique probabilistic approach to radiation protection. We review NASA's approach to radiation risk assessment including its impact on astronaut dose limits and application of the ALARA (As Low as Reasonably Achievable) principle. The recently opened NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) provides the capability to simulate the cosmic rays in controlled ground-based experiments with biological and shielding models. We discuss how research at NSRL will lead to reductions in the uncertainties in risk projection models. In developing mission designs, the reduction of health risks and mission constraints including costs are competing concerns that need to be addressed through optimization procedures. Mitigating the risks from space radiation is a multi-factorial problem involving individual factors (age, gender, genetic makeup, and exposure history), operational factors (planetary destination, mission length, and period in the solar cycle), and shielding characteristics (materials, mass, and topology). We review optimization metrics for radiation protection including scenarios that integrate biophysics models of radiation risks, operational variables, and shielding design tools needed to assess exploration mission designs. We discuss the application of a crosscutting metric, based on probabilistic risk assessment, to lunar and Mars mission trade studies including the assessment of multi-factorial problems and the potential benefits of new radiation health research strategies or mitigation technologies.

Cucinotta, F. A.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Managing Space Radiation Risks on Lunar and Mars Missions: Risk Assessment and Mitigation

Radiation-induced health risks are a primary concern for human exploration outside the Earth's magnetosphere, and require improved approaches to risk estimation and tools for mitigation including shielding and biological countermeasures. Solar proton events are the major concern for short-term lunar missions (<60 d), and for long-term missions (>60 d) such as Mars exploration, the exposures to the high energy and charge (HZE) ions that make-up the galactic cosmic rays are the major concern. Health risks from radiation exposure are chronic risks including carcinogenesis and degenerative tissue risks, central nervous system effects, and acute risk such as radiation sickness or early lethality. The current estimate is that a more than four-fold uncertainty exists in the projection of lifetime mortality risk from cosmic rays, which severely limits analysis of possible benefits of shielding or biological countermeasure designs. Uncertainties in risk projections are largely due to insufficient knowledge of HZE ion radiobiology, which has led NASA to develop a unique probabilistic approach to radiation protection. We review NASA's approach to radiation risk assessment including its impact on astronaut dose limits and application of the ALARA (As Low as Reasonably Achievable) principle. The recently opened NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) provides the capability to simulate the cosmic rays in controlled ground-based experiments with biological and shielding models. We discuss how research at NSRL will lead to reductions in the uncertainties in risk projection models. In developing mission designs, the reduction of health risks and mission constraints including costs are competing concerns that need to be addressed through optimization procedures. Mitigating the risks from space radiation is a multi-factorial problem involving individual factors (age, gender, genetic makeup, and exposure history), operational factors (planetary destination, mission length, and period in the solar cycle), and shielding characteristics (materials, mass, and topology). We review optimization metrics for radiation protection including scenarios that integrate biophysics models of radiation risks, operational variables, and shielding design tools needed to assess exploration mission designs. We discuss the application of a crosscutting metric, based on probabilistic risk assessment, to lunar and Mars mission trade studies including the assessment of multi-factorial problems and the potential benefits of new radiation health research strategies or mitigation technologies.

Cucinotta, F. A.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Exploration Health Risks: Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Maintenance of human health on long-duration exploration missions is a primary challenge to mission designers. Indeed, human health risks are currently the largest risk contributors to the risks of evacuation or loss of the crew on long-duration International Space Station missions. We describe a quantitative assessment of the relative probabilities of occurrence of the individual risks to human safety and efficiency during space flight to augment qualitative assessments used in this field to date. Quantitative probabilistic risk assessments will allow program managers to focus resources on those human health risks most likely to occur with undesirable consequences. Truly quantitative assessments are common, even expected, in the engineering and actuarial spheres, but that capability is just emerging in some arenas of life sciences research, such as identifying and minimize the hazards to astronauts during future space exploration missions. Our expectation is that these results can be used to inform NASA mission design trade studies in the near future with the objective of preventing the higher among the human health risks. We identify and discuss statistical techniques to provide this risk quantification based on relevant sets of astronaut biomedical data from short and long duration space flights as well as relevant analog populations. We outline critical assumptions made in the calculations and discuss the rationale for these. Our efforts to date have focussed on quantifying the probabilities of medical risks that are qualitatively perceived as relatively high risks of radiation sickness, cardiac dysrhythmias, medically significant renal stone formation due to increased calcium mobilization, decompression sickness as a result of EVA (extravehicular activity), and bone fracture due to loss of bone mineral density. We present these quantitative probabilities in order-of-magnitude comparison format so that relative risk can be gauged. We address the effects of conservative and nonconservative assumptions on the probability results. We discuss the methods necessary to assess mission risks once exploration mission scenarios are characterized. Preliminary efforts have produced results that are commensurate with earlier qualitative estimates of risk probabilities in this and other operational contexts, indicating that our approach may be usefully applied in support of the development of human health and performance standards for long-duration space exploration missions. This approach will also enable mission-specific probabilistic risk assessments for space exploration missions.

Rhatigan, Jennifer↗

NASA NTRS2006

Managing Space Radiation Risks on Lunar and Mars Missions: Risk Assessment and Mitigation

Radiation-induced health risks are a primary concern for human exploration outside the Earth's magnetosphere, and require improved approaches to risk estimation and tools for mitigation including shielding and biological countermeasures. Solar proton events are the major concern for short-term lunar missions (<60 d), and for long-term missions (>60 d) such as Mars exploration, the exposures to the high energy and charge (HZE) ions that make-up the galactic cosmic rays are the major concern. Health risks from radiation exposure are chronic risks including carcinogenesis and degenerative tissue risks, central nervous system effects, and acute risk such as radiation sickness or early lethality. The current estimate is that a more than four-fold uncertainty exists in the projection of lifetime mortality risk from cosmic rays, which severely limits analysis of possible benefits of shielding or biological countermeasure designs. Uncertainties in risk projections are largely due to insufficient knowledge of HZE ion radiobiology, which has led NASA to develop a unique probabilistic approach to radiation protection. We review NASA's approach to radiation risk assessment including its impact on astronaut dose limits and application of the ALARA (As Low as Reasonably Achievable) principle. The recently opened NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) provides the capability to simulate the cosmic rays in controlled ground-based experiments with biological and shielding models. We discuss how research at NSRL will lead to reductions in the uncertainties in risk projection models. In developing mission designs, the reduction of health risks and mission constraints including costs are competing concerns that need to be addressed through optimization procedures. Mitigating the risks from space radiation is a multi-factorial problem involving individual factors (age, gender, genetic makeup, and exposure history), operational factors (planetary destination, mission length, and period in the solar cycle), and shielding characteristics (materials, mass, and topology). We review optimization metrics for radiation protection including scenarios that integrate biophysics models of radiation risks, operational variables, and shielding design tools needed to assess exploration mission designs. We discuss the application of a crosscutting metric, based on probabilistic risk assessment, to lunar and Mars mission trade studies including the assessment of multi-factorial problems and the potential benefits of new radiation health research strategies or mitigation technologies.

Cucinotta, F. A.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Ensemble Cancer Risk Model for Astronaut Risk Assessment

A new approach to NASA space radiation risk modeling has successfully extended the current NASA probabilistic cancer risk model to an ensemble framework able to consider sub-model parameter uncertainty (e.g. uncertainty in a radiation quality parameter) as well as model-form uncertainty associated with differing theoretical or empirical formalisms (e.g. combined dose-rate and radiation quality effects). Ensemble methodologies are already widely used in weather prediction, modeling of infectious disease outbreaks, and certain terrestrial radiation protection applications to better understand how uncertainty may influence risk decision-making. Applying ensemble methodologies to space radiation risk projections offers the potential to efficiently incorporate emerging research results, allow for the incorporation of future (including international) models, improve uncertainty quantification for underlying sub-models developed against sparse experimental data, and reduce the impact of subjective bias on risk projections. Moreover, risk forecasting across an ensemble of multiple predictive models can provide stakeholders additional information on risk acceptance if current health/medical standards cannot be met or the level of knowledge doesn’t permit a specific risk or exposure limit to be developed for future space exploration missions. In this work, ensemble risk projections implementing multiple sub-models of radiation quality, dose and dose-rate effectiveness factors, excess risk, and latency as ensemble members are presented. Initial consensus methods for ensemble model weights and correlations to account for individual model bias are discussed. In these analyses, the ensemble forecast compares well to results from NASA's current operational cancer risk projection model used to assess permissible exposure limits and permissible mission durations for astronauts. However, a large range of projected risk values are obtained at the upper 95th confidence level where models must extrapolate beyond available biological data sets; closer agreement is seen at the median + one sigma due to the inherent similarities in available models. Future work, including the addition of new models and methods for statistical correlation between predictive members are discussed to define alternate ways of thinking about risk and ‘acceptable’ uncertainty with respect to NASA’s current permissible exposure limits.

Lisa C Simonsen↗

NASA NTRS1995

Risk cross sections and their application to risk estimation in the galactic cosmic-ray environment

Radiation risk cross sections (i.e. risks per particle fluence) are discussed in the context of estimating the risk of radiation-induced cancer on long-term space flights from the galactic cosmic radiation outside the confines of the earth's magnetic field. Such quantities are useful for handling effects not seen after low-LET radiation. Since appropriate cross-section functions for cancer induction for each particle species are not yet available, the conventional quality factor is used as an approximation to obtain numerical results for risks of excess cancer mortality. Risks are obtained for seven of the most radiosensitive organs as determined by the ICRP [stomach, colon, lung, bone marrow (BFO), bladder, esophagus and breast], beneath 10 g/cm2 aluminum shielding at solar minimum. Spectra are obtained for excess relative risk for each cancer per LET interval by calculating the average fluence-LET spectrum for the organ and converting to risk by multiplying by a factor proportional to R gamma L Q(L) before integrating over L, the unrestricted LET. Here R gamma is the risk coefficient for low-LET radiation (excess relative mortality per Sv) for the particular organ in question. The total risks of excess cancer mortality obtained are 1.3 and 1.1% to female and male crew, respectively, for a 1-year exposure at solar minimum. Uncertainties in these values are estimated to range between factors of 4 and 15 and are dominated by the biological uncertainties in the risk coefficients for low-LET radiation and in the LET (or energy) dependence of the risk cross sections (as approximated by the quality factor). The direct substitution of appropriate risk cross sections will eventually circumvent entirely the need to calculate, measure or use absorbed dose, equivalent dose and quality factor for such a high-energy charged-particle environment.

NASA Discipline Radiation Health↗

NASA NTRS2021

Perceptions of Climate Risk and Use of Climate Risk Information by Natural Resource Conservation Stakeholders Participating in ADVANCE Projects in Asia and Latin America

Integrating climate risk information into resilience-building activities in the field is important to ensure that adaptation is based on the best available science. Despite this, many challenges exist when developing, communicating, and incorporating climate risk information. There are limited resources on how stakeholders perceive risks, use risk information, and what barriers exist to limit knowledge integration. This paper seeks to define the following: 1) What do conservation stakeholders consider to be the most significant climate risks they face now and possibly in the future? 2) What have been the most significant barriers to their using climate risk information? 3) What sources and types of knowledge would be most useful for these managers to overcome these barriers? A survey was conducted among stakeholders (n = 224) associated with World Wildlife Fund projects in tropical and subtropical countries. A very high proportion of stakeholders used climate risk information and yet faced integration-related challenges, which included too much uncertainty and the lack of a relevant scale for planning. The main factors preventing the use of climate risk information in decision-making were unavailability of climate risk information, no or limited financial or human resources available to respond, lack of organizational mandate or support, and no or limited institutional incentives. Comparing perceived current and future risks revealed a decline in concern for some future climate hazards. Survey respondents identified scientific reports, climate scientists, and online sources as the most useful information sources of climate risk information, while (i) maps and illustrations; (ii) scenarios format; and (iii) data tables, graphs, and charts were identified as user-friendly formats.

Climate risk↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

High Value Risk Targets in Human System Risk

The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) has the overall responsibility for tracking the evolution of the top ~30 human system risks that it has identified to be associated with human spaceflight. The Board is also charged with maintaining a consistent, integrated process to mitigate those risks, and developing evidence-based risk posture recommendations. Each Risk Custodian Team (RCT) identifies High Value Risk Mitigation Targets (HVRMT) that have the highest likelihood or greatest impact in reducing their risk. These typically include areas where there are major gaps in knowledge or capability; or other targets that promise to yield returns worthy of investments in time, money and other resources by stakeholders interested in reducing Human System Risk. As part of the review of each risk the Board members consider and discuss the HVRMT statements, which are then approved by the Board Chair. High Value Risk Mitigation Targets can include research activities funded by the Human Research Program, but often involve recommending standards, monitoring, or other operational goals to reduce risk. This presentation will discuss common themes and highlights of the approved HVRTs to inform IWS attendees and the wider research community.

D M Buckland↗

NASA NTRS2002

Application of Risk Assessment Tools in the Continuous Risk Management (CRM) Process

Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is currently implementing the Continuous Risk Management (CRM) Program developed by the Carnegie Mellon University and recommended by NASA as the Risk Management (RM) implementation approach. The four most frequently used risk assessment tools in the center are: (a) Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), Hazard Analysis (HA), Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), and Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA). There are some guidelines for selecting the type of risk assessment tools during the project formulation phase of a project, but there is not enough guidance as to how to apply these tools in the Continuous Risk Management process (CRM). But the ways the safety and risk assessment tools are used make a significant difference in the effectiveness in the risk management function. Decisions regarding, what events are to be included in the analysis, to what level of details should the analysis be continued, make significant difference in the effectiveness of risk management program. Tools of risk analysis also depends on the phase of a project e.g. at the initial phase of a project, when not much data are available on hardware, standard FMEA cannot be applied; instead a functional FMEA may be appropriate. This study attempted to provide some directives to alleviate the difficulty in applying FTA, PRA, and FMEA in the CRM process. Hazard Analysis was not included in the scope of the study due to the short duration of the summer research project.

Paul S. Ray↗

NASA NTRS2005

Managing Lunar and Mars Mission Radiation Risks: Cancer Risks, Uncertainties, and Shielding Effectiveness - Part 1

This document addresses calculations of probability distribution functions (PDFs) representing uncertainties in projecting fatal cancer risk from galactic cosmic rays (GCR) and solar particle events (SPEs). PDFs are used to test the effectiveness of potential radiation shielding approaches. Monte-Carlo techniques are used to propagate uncertainties in risk coefficients determined from epidemiology data, dose and dose-rate reduction factors, quality factors, and physics models of radiation environments. Competing mortality risks and functional correlations in radiation quality factor uncertainties are treated in the calculations. The cancer risk uncertainty is about four-fold for lunar and Mars mission risk projections. For short-stay lunar missins (<180 d), SPEs present the most significant risk, but one effectively mitigated by shielding. For long-duration (>180 d) lunar or Mars missions, GCR risks may exceed radiation risk limits. While shielding materials are marginally effective in reducing GCR cancer risks because of the penetrating nature of GCR and secondary radiation produced in tissue by relativisitc particles, polyethylene or carbon composite shielding cannot be shown to significantly reduce risk compared to aluminum shielding. Therefore, improving our knowledge of space radiobiology to narrow uncertainties that lead to wide PDFs is the best approach to ensure radiation protection goals are met for space exploration.

Cucinotta, Francis A.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Risky Business: The Science and Art of Radiation Risk Communication in the High Risk Context of Space Travel

Successfully communicating the complex risks associated with radiation exposure is a difficult undertaking; communicating those risks within the high-risk context of space travel is uniquely challenging. Since the potential risks of space radiation exposure are not expected to be realized until much later in life, it is hard to draw comparisons between other spaceflight risks such as hypoxia and microgravity-induced bone loss. Additionally, unlike other spaceflight risks, there is currently no established mechanism to mitigate the risks of incurred radiation exposure such as carcinogenesis. Despite these challenges, it is the duty of the Space Radiation Analysis Group (SRAG) at NASA's Johnson Space Center to provide astronauts with the appropriate information to effectively convey the risks associated with exposure to the space radiation environment. To this end, astronauts and their flight surgeons are provided with an annual radiation risk report documenting the astronaut's individual radiation exposures from space travel, medical, and internal radiological procedures throughout the astronaut's career. In an effort to improve this communication and education tool, this paper critically reviews the current report style and explores alternative report styles to define best methods to appropriately communicate risk to astronauts, flight surgeons, and management.

Elgart, Shona Robin↗

NASA NTRS1998

Program Risk Planning with Risk as a Resource

The current focus of NASA on cost effective ways of achieving mission objectives has created a demand for a change in the risk management process of a program. At present, there is no guidelines as to when risk taking is justified due to high cost for a marginal improvement in risk. As a remedial step, Dr. Greenfield of NASA, developed a concept of risk management with risk as a resource. In the report, the following topics are addressed: (1) the risk management approach; (2) planning risk and program life cycle; (3) key components of a typical program; (4) the risk trading methodology; (5) review and decision process; (6) merits of the proposed risk planning approach; and (7) recommendations.

Ray, Paul S.↗