Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Evolvable Hardware”

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.

At least 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

Component-Level Electronic-Assembly Repair (CLEAR) Operational Concept

This Component-Level Electronic-Assembly Repair (CLEAR) Operational Concept document was developed as a first step in developing the Component-Level Electronic-Assembly Repair (CLEAR) System Architecture (NASA/TM-2011-216956). The CLEAR operational concept defines how the system will be used by the Constellation Program and what needs it meets. The document creates scenarios for major elements of the CLEAR architecture. These scenarios are generic enough to apply to near-Earth, Moon, and Mars missions. The CLEAR operational concept involves basic assumptions about the overall program architecture and interactions with the CLEAR system architecture. The assumptions include spacecraft and operational constraints for near-Earth orbit, Moon, and Mars missions. This document addresses an incremental development strategy where capabilities evolve over time, but it is structured to prevent obsolescence. The approach minimizes flight hardware by exploiting Internet-like telecommunications that enables CLEAR capabilities to remain on Earth and to be uplinked as needed. To minimize crew time and operational cost, CLEAR exploits offline development and validation to support online teleoperations. Operational concept scenarios are developed for diagnostics, repair, and functional test operations. Many of the supporting functions defined in these operational scenarios are further defined as technologies in NASA/TM-2011-216956.

Oeftering, Richard C.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Space Suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 2.0 Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) Testing

Following successful completion of the space suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 1.0 development and testing in 2011, the second system-level prototype, PLSS 2.0, was developed in 2012 to continue the maturation of the advanced PLSS design which is intended to reduce consumables, improve reliability and robustness, and incorporate additional sensing and functional capabilities over the current Space Shuttle/International Space Station Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) PLSS. PLSS 2.0 represents the first attempt at a packaged design comprising first generation or later component prototypes and medium fidelity interfaces within a flight-like representative volume. Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) is carryover terminology from the Space Shuttle Program referring to the series of test sequences used to verify functionality of the EMU PLSS prior to installation into the Space Shuttle airlock for launch. As applied to the PLSS 2.0 development and testing effort, PIA testing designated the series of 27 independent test sequences devised to verify component and subsystem functionality, perform in situ instrument calibrations, generate mapping data to define set-points for control algorithms, evaluate hardware performance against advanced PLSS design requirements, and provide quantitative and qualitative feedback on evolving design requirements and performance specifications. PLSS 2.0 PIA testing was carried out from 3/20/13 - 3/15/14 using a variety of test configurations to perform test sequences that ranged from stand-alone component testing to system-level testing, with evaluations becoming increasingly integrated as the test series progressed. Each of the 27 test sequences was vetted independently, with verification of basic functionality required before completion. Because PLSS 2.0 design requirements were evolving concurrently with PLSS 2.0 PIA testing, the requirements were used as guidelines to assess performance during the tests; after the completion of PIA testing, test data served to improve the fidelity and maturity of design requirements as well as plans for future advanced PLSS functional testing.

Watts, Carly↗
NASA NTRS2016

Space Suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 2.0 Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) Testing

Following successful completion of the space suit Portable Life Support System (PLSS) 1.0 development and testing in 2011, the second system-level prototype, PLSS 2.0, was developed in 2012 to continue the maturation of the advanced PLSS design. This advanced PLSS is intended to reduce consumables, improve reliability and robustness, and incorporate additional sensing and functional capabilities over the current Space Shuttle/International Space Station Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) PLSS. PLSS 2.0 represents the first attempt at a packaged design comprising first generation or later component prototypes and medium fidelity interfaces within a flight-like representative volume. Pre-Installation Acceptance (PIA) is carryover terminology from the Space Shuttle Program referring to the series of test sequences used to verify functionality of the EMU PLSS prior to installation into the Space Shuttle airlock for launch. As applied to the PLSS 2.0 development and testing effort, PIA testing designated the series of 27 independent test sequences devised to verify component and subsystem functionality, perform in situ instrument calibrations, generate mapping data, define set-points, evaluate control algorithms, evaluate hardware performance against advanced PLSS design requirements, and provide quantitative and qualitative feedback on evolving design requirements and performance specifications. PLSS 2.0 PIA testing was carried out in 2013 and 2014 using a variety of test configurations to perform test sequences that ranged from stand-alone component testing to system-level testing, with evaluations becoming increasingly integrated as the test series progressed. Each of the 27 test sequences was vetted independently, with verification of basic functionality required before completion. Because PLSS 2.0 design requirements were evolving concurrently with PLSS 2.0 PIA testing, the requirements were used as guidelines to assess performance during the tests; after the completion of PIA testing, test data served to improve the fidelity and maturity of design requirements as well as plans for future advanced PLSS functional testing.

Anchondo, Ian↗
NASA NTRS2016

A Discussion of Oxygen Recovery Definitions and Key Performance Parameters for Closed-Loop Atmosphere Revitalization Life Support Technology Development

Over the last 55 years, NASA has evolved life support for crewed space exploration vehicles from simple resupply during Project Mercury to the complex and highly integrated system of systems aboard the International Space Station. As NASA targets exploration destinations farther from low Earth orbit and mission durations of 500 to 1000 days, life support systems must evolve to meet new requirements. In addition to having more robust, reliable, and maintainable hardware, limiting resupply becomes critical for managing mission logistics and cost. Supplying a crew with the basics of food, water, and oxygen become more challenging as the destination ventures further from Earth. Aboard ISS the Atmosphere Revitalization Subsystem (ARS) supplies the crew's oxygen demand by electrolyzing water. This approach makes water a primary logistics commodity that must be managed carefully. Chemical reduction of metabolic carbon dioxide (CO2) provides a method of recycling oxygen thereby reducing the net ARS water demand and therefore minimizing logistics needs. Multiple methods have been proposed to achieve this recovery and have been reported in the literature. However, depending on the architecture and the technology approach, "oxygen recovery" can be defined in various ways. This discontinuity makes it difficult to compare technologies directly. In an effort to clarify community discussions of Oxygen Recovery, we propose specific definitions and describe the methodology used to arrive at those definitions. Additionally, we discuss key performance parameters for Oxygen Recovery technology development including challenges with comparisons to state-of-the-art.

Abney, Morgan B.↗
NASA NTRS2017

EVA Systems Technology Gaps and Priorities 2017

Performance of Extra-Vehicular Activities (EVA) has been and will continue to be a critical capability for human space flight. Human exploration missions beyond LEO will require EVA capability for either contingency or nominal activities to support mission objectives and reduce mission risk. EVA systems encompass a wide array of products across pressure suits, life support systems, EVA tools and unique spacecraft interface hardware (i.e. EVA Translation Paths and EVA Worksites). In a fiscally limited environment with evolving transportation and habitation options, it is paramount that the EVA community's strategic planning and architecture integration products be reviewed and vetted for traceability between the mission needs far into the future to the known technology and knowledge gaps to the current investments across EVA systems. To ascertain EVA technology and knowledge gaps many things need to be brought together, assessed and analyzed. This includes an understanding of the destination environments, various mission concept of operations, current state of the art of EVA systems, EVA operational lessons learned, and reference advanced capabilities. A combined assessment of these inputs should result in well-defined list of gaps. This list can then be prioritized depending on the mission need dates and time scale of the technology or knowledge gap closure plan. This paper will summarize the current state of EVA related technology and knowledge gaps derived from NASA's Exploration EVA Reference Architecture and Operations Concept products. By linking these products and articulating NASA's approach to strategic development for EVA across all credible destinations an EVA could be done in, the identification of these gaps is then used to illustrate the tactical and strategic planning for the EVA technology development portfolio. Finally, this paper illustrates the various "touch points" with other human exploration risk identification areas including human health and performance.

Johnson, Brian J.↗
NASA NTRS1984

Energy Efficient Engine combustor test hardware detailed design report

The Energy Efficient Engine (E3) Combustor Development effort was conducted as part of the overall NASA/GE E3 Program. This effort included the selection of an advanced double-annular combustion system design. The primary intent was to evolve a design which meets the stringent emissions and life goals of the E3 as well as all of the usual performance requirements of combustion systems for modern turbofan engines. Numerous detailed design studies were conducted to define the features of the combustion system design. Development test hardware was fabricated, and an extensive testing effort was undertaken to evaluate the combustion system subcomponents in order to verify and refine the design. Technology derived from this development effort will be incorporated into the engine combustion system hardware design. This advanced engine combustion system will then be evaluated in component testing to verify the design intent. What is evolving from this development effort is an advanced combustion system capable of satisfying all of the combustion system design objectives and requirements of the E3. Fuel nozzle, diffuser, starting, and emissions design studies are discussed.

Burrus, D. L.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Ground Software Technologies – Embracing Change: Mission Drivers and Technology Opportunities to Enable Long Lived Missions

Mission lifecycles have proven to extend well beyond their original design. The benefits to this are countless but introduce challenges in today’s rapidly changing ground infrastructure and software technologies used to enable mission success. What remains constant is the risk posture missions maintain when accepting change and the use of new technologies. Larger missions are ready for change in early lifecycle development but near launch and especially in operations, few continue to evolve beyond what is set in place in phase C. This paper will discuss how the Advance Multi-Mission Operations System (AMMOS) intends to address, three driving missions concerns: Maintaining functionality (hardware/software) for decades, rapidly responding to security vulnerabilities in software, and finally the ability to quickly evolve infrastructure and software changes. These driving concerns are briefly described below: 1. Maintaining functionality (hardware/software) for decades. Hardware updates considerably faster than 10 years ago. Expectations that a system can remain in place for more than 10 years is no longer valid. Expecting to find hardware replacements for a system older than 5 years will increasingly become more and more challenging. How than do missions plan for hardware changes for long lived missions? Principle Objective: Provide abstraction by virtualizing and containerizing software abstract away any hardware dependencies and package up the application lightweight units. 2. Rapidly responding to security vulnerabilities in software. Cost is often the main impediment and largely driven by the revalidation and testing of system that undergo change. In todays, environment security updates are a major diver demanding systems remain up to date. How then do missions accept these changes and avoid large testing efforts? Principle Objective: Help reduce the cost of re-testing by automation of testing, deployment, and compartmentalizing change. 3. Ability to quickly evolve infrastructure and software changes. Responding quickly to change is similar to the second concern in this paper regarding security vulnerabilities. In this case, it address broader concerns of updating software and infrastructure on a more realistic timeline. How do missions stay up to date with the most recent versions of software and allowing for improved functionality? Principle Objective: Use continuous integration techniques at the system level to ensure rapid turnaround. This paper explores each of these concerns in more detail. It focuses the AMMOS’s current plans, challenges and current roadmap.

Giovannoni, Brian J.↗
NASA NTRS2013

NASA's Space Launch System: Moving Toward the Launch Pad

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Space Launch System (SLS) Program, managed at the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), is making progress toward delivering a new capability for human space flight and scientific missions beyond Earth orbit. Designed with the goals of safety, affordability, and sustainability in mind, the SLS rocket will launch the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), equipment, supplies, and major science missions for exploration and discovery. Supporting Orion's first autonomous flight to lunar orbit and back in 2017 and its first crewed flight in 2021, the SLS will evolve into the most powerful launch vehicle ever flown via an upgrade approach that will provide building blocks for future space exploration. NASA is working to deliver this new capability in an austere economic climate, a fact that has inspired the SLS team to find innovative solutions to the challenges of designing, developing, fielding, and operating the largest rocket in history. This paper will summarize the planned capabilities of the vehicle, the progress the SLS Program has made in the 2 years since the Agency formally announced its architecture in September 2011, the path it is following to reach the launch pad in 2017 and then to evolve the 70 metric ton (t) initial lift capability to 130-t lift capability after 2021. The paper will explain how, to meet the challenge of a flat funding curve, an architecture was chosen that combines the use and enhancement of legacy systems and technology with strategic new developments that will evolve the launch vehicle's capabilities. This approach reduces the time and cost of delivering the initial 70 t Block 1 vehicle, and reduces the number of parallel development investments required to deliver the evolved 130 t Block 2 vehicle. The paper will outline the milestones the program has already reached, from developmental milestones such as the manufacture of the first flight hardware, to life-cycle milestones such as the vehicle's Preliminary Design Review (PDR). The paper will also discuss the remaining challenges both in delivering the 70-t vehicle and in evolving its capabilities to the 130-t vehicle, and how NASA plans to accomplish these goals. As this paper will explain, SLS is making measurable progress toward becoming a global infrastructure asset for robotic and human scouts of all nations by harnessing business and technological innovations to deliver sustainable solutions for space exploration.

Creech, Stephen D.↗
NASA NTRS2008

The Manufacturing Process for the NASA Composite Crew Module Demonstration Structure

This paper will describe the approaches and methods selected in fabrication of a carbon composite demonstration structure for the Composite Crew Module (CCM) Program. The program is managed by the NASA Safety and Engineering Center with participants from ten NASA Centers and AFRL. Multiple aerospace contractors are participating in the design development, tooling and fabrication effort as well. The goal of the program is to develop an agency wide design team for composite habitable spacecraft. The specific goals for this development project are: a).To gain hands on experience in design, building and testing a composite crew module. b) To validate key assumptions by resolving composite spacecraft design details through fabrication and testing of hardware. This abstract is based on Preliminary Design data..The final design will continue to evolve through the fall of 2007 with fabrication mostly completed by conference date. From a structures perspective, the.CCM can be viewed as a pressure module with variable pressure time histories and a series of both impact and quasi-static, high intensity point, line, and area distributed loads. The portion of the overall space vehicle being designed and. fabricated by the CCM team is just the pressure module and primary loading points. The heaviest point loads are applied and distributed to the pressure module at.an aluminum Service Module/Alternate Launch Abort System (SM/ALAS) fittings and at Main and Drogue Chute fittings. Significant line loads with metal to metal impact is applied at.the Lids ring. These major external point and line loads as well as pressure impact loads (blast and water landing) are applied to the lobed floor though the reentry shield and crushable materials. The pressure module is divided into upper and lower. shells that mate together with a bonded belly band splice joint to create the completed structural assembly. The benefits of a split CCM far outweigh the risks of a joint. These benefits include lower tooling cost and less manufacturing risk. Assembly of the top and bottom halves of the pressure shell will allow access to the interior of the shell throughout remaining fabrication sequence and can also potentially permit extensive installation of equipment and .crew facilities prior to final assembly of the two shell halves. A Pi pre-form is a woven carbon composite material which is provided in pre-impregnated form and frozen for long term storage. The cross-section shape allows the top of the pi to be bonded to a flat or curved surface with a second flat plate composite section bonded between two upstanding legs of the Pi. One of the regions relying on the merits of the Pi pre-form is the backbone. All connections among plates of the backbone structure, including the upper flanges, and to the lobe base of the pressure shell are currently joined by Pi pre-forms. The intersection of backbone composite plates is formed by application of two Pi pre-forms, top flanges and lobed surfaces are bonded with one Pi pre-form. The process of applying the pre-impregnated pi-preform will be demonstrated to include important steps like surface preparation, forming, application of pressure dams, vacuum bagging for consolidation, and curing techniques. Chopped carbon fiber tooling was selected over other traditional metallic and carbon fiber tooling. The requirement of schedule and cost economy for a moderate reuse cure tool warranted composite tooling options. Composite tooling schedule duration of 18 weeks compared favorably against other metallic tooling including invar tooling. Composite tooling also shows significant cost savings over low CTE metallic options. The composite tooling options were divided into two groups and the final decision was based on the cost, schedule, tolerance, temperature, and reuse requirements.

Pelham, Larry↗
NASA NTRS2024

Overview of the International Space Station’s Water and Cabin Air Quality: A Five-Year Status

Since the beginning of the International Space Station (ISS), water and air quality have been monitored to ensure crew health and verify the performance of the regenerative Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) systems. Over the last 25 years, the ISS has evolved greatly with significant changes to operations, crew complement sizes, visiting vehicles, payloads, and upgrades within the regenerative hardware, seen through Technology Demonstration integrations. In particular, better assessment and prevention of volatile organic releases from payloads and crew hygiene products, and implementation of advanced sorbents both on the air and water strings have been successful in reducing contaminant loads. Data on air and water quality for the last five years on ISS will be presented (nominal and contingency air grab samples, in-flight monitoring for air and water quality, and water samples from all segments of the ISS water system), including some notable events. The available data demonstrate the performance of existing ECLS systems and overall status of how the approach to air and water quality have evolved through the new ISS architecture baseline operations.

air quality↗
NASA NTRS1991

Space Station Freedom electric power system evolution analysis status

The ability is examined of the SSF baselined EPS to transition to operate at a greater system capacity beyond the SSF Permanent Manned Capability PMC) milestone. Specifically, a status of a current analysis is discussed concerning additions, modifications, changeout, or combination thereof of baseline EPS hardware and/or software needed to accomplish the power generation, distribution, operation, and use needed to meet evolving SSF mission objectives. This discussion results in several EPS architectural options that facilitate the addition or substitution of new technologies.

Zernic, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS2007

A Piloted Flight to a Near-Earth Object: A Feasibility Study

This viewgraph presentation examines flight hardware elements of the Constellation Program (CxP) and the utilization of the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), Evolvable Expendable Launch Vehicles (EELVs) and Ares launch vehicles for NEO missions.

Landis, Rob↗
NASA NTRS2010

Evolution of the IBDM Structural Latch Development into a Generic Simplified Design

This paper presents the evolution in the development of the structural latch for the International Berthing Docking Mechanism (IBDM, see Figure 1). It reports on the lessons learned since completion of the test program on the engineering development unit of the first generation latching system in 2007. The initial latch design has been through a second generation concept in 2008, and now evolved into a third generation of this mechanism. Functional and structural testing on the latest latch hardware has recently been completed with good results. The IBDM latching system will provide the structural connection between two mated space vehicles after berthing or docking. The mechanism guarantees that the interface seals become compressed to form a leak-tight pressure system that creates a passageway for the astronauts.

DeVriendt, K.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Space Shuttle Abort Evolution

This paper documents some of the evolutionary steps in developing a rigorous Space Shuttle launch abort capability. The paper addresses the abort strategy during the design and development and how it evolved during Shuttle flight operations. The Space Shuttle Program made numerous adjustments in both the flight hardware and software as the knowledge of the actual flight environment grew. When failures occurred, corrections and improvements were made to avoid a reoccurrence and to provide added capability for crew survival. Finally some lessons learned are summarized for future human launch vehicle designers to consider.

Henderson, Edward M.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Design, Analysis and Fabrication of Secondary Structural Components for the Habitat Demonstration Unit-Deep Space Habitat

In support of NASA s Habitat Demonstration Unit - Deep Space Habitat Prototype, a number of evolved structural sections were designed, fabricated, analyzed and installed in the 5 meter diameter prototype. The hardware consisted of three principal structural sections, and included the development of novel fastener insert concepts. The articles developed consisted of: 1) 1/8th of the primary flooring section, 2) an inner radius floor beam support which interfaced with, and supported (1), 3) two upper hatch section prototypes, and 4) novel insert designs for mechanical fastener attachments. Advanced manufacturing approaches were utilized in the fabrication of the components. The structural components were developed using current commercial aircraft constructions as a baseline (for both the flooring components and their associated mechanical fastener inserts). The structural sections utilized honeycomb sandwich panels. The core section consisted of 1/8th inch cell size Nomex, at 9 lbs/cu ft, and which was 0.66 inches thick. The facesheets had 3 plys each, with a thickness of 0.010 inches per ply, made from woven E-glass with epoxy reinforcement. Analysis activities consisted of both analytical models, as well as initial closed form calculations. Testing was conducted to help verify analysis model inputs, as well as to facilitate correlation between testing and analysis. Test activities consisted of both 4 point bending tests as well as compressive core crush sequences. This paper presents an overview of this activity, and discusses issues encountered during the various phases of the applied research effort, and its relevance to future space based habitats.

Smith, Russell W.↗
NASA NTRS1990

Evolution paths for advanced automation

As Space Station Freedom (SSF) evolves, increased automation and autonomy will be required to meet Space Station Freedom Program (SSFP) objectives. As a precursor to the use of advanced automation within the SSFP, especially if it is to be used on SSF (e.g., to automate the operation of the flight systems), the underlying technologies will need to be elevated to a high level of readiness to ensure safe and effective operations. Ground facilities supporting the development of these flight systems -- from research and development laboratories through formal hardware and software development environments -- will be responsible for achieving these levels of technology readiness. These facilities will need to evolve support the general evolution of the SSFP. This evolution will include support for increasing the use of advanced automation. The SSF Advanced Development Program has funded a study to define evolution paths for advanced automaton within the SSFP's ground-based facilities which will enable, promote, and accelerate the appropriate use of advanced automation on-board SSF. The current capability of the test beds and facilities, such as the Software Support Environment, with regard to advanced automation, has been assessed and their desired evolutionary capabilities have been defined. Plans and guidelines for achieving this necessary capability have been constructed. The approach taken has combined indepth interviews of test beds personnel at all SSF Work Package centers with awareness of relevant state-of-the-art technology and technology insertion methodologies. Key recommendations from the study include advocating a NASA-wide task force for advanced automation, and the creation of software prototype transition environments to facilitate the incorporation of advanced automation in the SSFP.

Healey, Kathleen J.↗
NASA NTRS2013

NASA's Space Launch System: Moving Toward the Launch Pad

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA's) Space Launch System (SLS) Program, managed at the Marshall Space Flight Center, is making progress toward delivering a new capability for human space flight and scientific missions beyond Earth orbit. Developed with the goals of safety, affordability, and sustainability in mind, the SLS rocket will launch the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), equipment, supplies, and major science missions for exploration and discovery. Supporting Orion's first autonomous flight to lunar orbit and back in 2017 and its first crewed flight in 2021, the SLS will evolve into the most powerful launch vehicle ever flown, via an upgrade approach that will provide building blocks for future space exploration and development. NASA is working to develop this new capability in an austere economic climate, a fact which has inspired the SLS team to find innovative solutions to the challenges of designing, developing, fielding, and operating the largest rocket in history. This paper will summarize the planned capabilities of the vehicle, the progress the SLS program has made in the 2 years since the Agency formally announced its architecture in September 2011, and the path the program is following to reach the launch pad in 2017 and then to evolve the 70 metric ton (t) initial lift capability to 130-t lift capability. The paper will explain how, to meet the challenge of a flat funding curve, an architecture was chosen which combines the use and enhancement of legacy systems and technology with strategic new development projects that will evolve the capabilities of the launch vehicle. This approach reduces the time and cost of delivering the initial 70 t Block 1 vehicle, and reduces the number of parallel development investments required to deliver the evolved version of the vehicle. The paper will outline the milestones the program has already reached, from developmental milestones such as the manufacture of the first flight hardware and the record-breaking testing of the J-2X engine, to life-cycle milestones such as the vehicle's Preliminary Design Review. The paper will also discuss the remaining challenges in both delivering the 70 t vehicle and in evolving its capabilities to the 130 t vehicle, and how the program plans to accomplish these goals. As this paper will explain, SLS is making measurable progress toward becoming a global infrastructure asset for robotic and human scouts of all nations by harnessing business and technological innovations to deliver sustainable solutions for space exploration

Creech, Stephen D.↗
NASA NTRS2005

On Automating Failure Mode Analysis and Enforcing its Integrity

This paper reports our experience on the development of a design-for-safety (DFS) workbench called Risk Assessment and Management Environment (RAME) for microelectronic avionics systems. Our objective is to transform DFS practice from an ad-hoc, inefficient, error-prone approach to a stringent engineering process such that DFS can keep up with the rapidly growing complexity of avionics systems. In particular, RAME is built upon an information infrastructure that comprises a fault model, a knowledge base, and a failure reporting/tracking system. This infrastructure permits systematic learning from prior projects and enables the automation of failure modes, effects and criticality analysis (FMECA). Among other unique features, the most important advantage of RAME is its capability of directly accepting design source code in hardware description languages (HDLs) for automated failure mode analysis, which enables RAME to be compatible and to evolve with most electronic-computer-aided-design systems. Through an initial experimental evaluation of the RAME prototype, we show that our approach to FMECA automation improves failure mode analysis turn-around-time, completeness, and accuracy.

design for safety↗