SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
The safety of NASA's in house microelectronics facility is addressed. Industrial health standards, facility emission control requirements, operation and safety checklists, and the disposal of epitaxial vent gas are considered.
Two basic ways in which NASA-generated technology is being used by the fire safety community are described. First, improved products and systems that embody NASA technical advances are entering the marketplace. Second, NASA test data and technical information related to fire safety are being used by persons concerned with reducing the hazards of fire through improved design information and standards. The development of commercial fire safety products and systems typically requires adaptation and integration of aerospace technologies that may not have been originated for NASA fire safety applications.
As new technologies and procedures are introduced into the National Airspace System, whether they are intended to improve efficiency, capacity, or safety level, the quantification of potential changes in safety levels is of vital concern. Applications of technology can improve safety levels and allow the reduction of separation standards. An excellent example is the Precision Runway Monitor (PRM). By taking advantage of the surveillance and display advances of PRM, airports can run instrument parallel approaches to runways separated by 3400 feet with the same level of safety as parallel approaches to runways separated by 4300 feet using the standard technology. Despite a wealth of information from flight operations and testing programs, there is no readily quantifiable relationship between numerical safety levels and the separation standards that apply to aircraft on final approach. This paper presents a modeling approach to quantify the risk associated with reducing separation on final approach. Reducing aircraft separation, both laterally and longitudinally, has been the goal of several aviation R&D programs over the past several years. Many of these programs have focused on technological solutions to improve navigation accuracy, surveillance accuracy, aircraft situational awareness, controller situational awareness, and other technical and operational factors that are vital to maintaining flight safety. The risk assessment model relates different types of potential aircraft accidents and incidents and their contribution to overall accident risk. The framework links accident risks to a hierarchy of failsafe mechanisms characterized by procedures and interventions. The model will be used to assess the overall level of safety associated with reducing separation standards and the introduction of new technology and procedures, as envisaged under the Free Flight concept. The model framework can be applied to various aircraft scenarios, including parallel and in-trail approaches. This research was performed under contract to NASA and in cooperation with the FAA's Safety Division (ASY).
A U.S. governmental interagency space reactor standards working group (SWG) was convened in April 2021 with a memo from the NASA Chief Engineer to address the limited standards and regulations in place specifically for space reactor design and safety. The convening memo requested support from the Standards Executives of six other federal agencies. The Standards Executives agreed to support a 6-month study to assess the need for consensus standards and identified SWG representatives from each agency. This report summarizes the SWG’s study, their findings, and their recommendations.
It is common for aircraft to conduct visual and instrument final approaches to a single runway or multiple parallel runways. Useful, nonexcessive safety alerts on aircraft conducting visual approaches are helpful to air traffic controllers, though pilots are responsible for separation with the preceding aircraft. A variety of visual approaches to various runway configurations are studied, and a set of safety alert thresholds is proposed. Fast-time simulations with recorded real-world air traffic data of mostly visual approach flights are performed on a prototype tactical separation assurance system for terminal airspace. Alerts are generated -- with both the standard separation thresholds and the proposed safety alert thresholds -- and compared with those from the Conflict Alert (CA) functionality in the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS). The results show that the number of Mode-C Intruder alerts generated was reduced 76% as compared to STARS CA. The nuisance alerts generated by assuming visual to be instrument approaches was reduced by 92% when the proposed safety alert thresholds were used and visual approaches were assumed.A set of safety alert thresholds, which allow safety alerts to be provided to the controllers for aircraft conductingvisual approaches to a single runway or multiple parallel runways, has been proposed based on input from SubjectMatter Experts as well as visual approach procedures and common practices. The goal is to maximize the thresholdswithin the guidance of the procedures and common practices and to minimize the number of nuisance alerts and totalnumber of alerts with the support of flight intent information. Tests have been performed using a recently developedprototype tactical separation assurance system for terminal airspace, called Terminal Tactical Separation-AssuredFlight Environment (T-TSAFE). The input was a full day of air traffic data from Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW) TRACONwith most arriving flights conducting visual approaches. The results compare favorably with those of the ConflictAlert (CA) functionality of the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS).When fast-time simulation experiment was performed using T-TSAFE with all arriving flights assumed to conductinstrument approaches, the expected large number of separation alerts were observed. When compared with STARSCA, the conflict pairs common to both T-TSAFE and STARS CA was only 21% of the total STARS CA alerts. As aresult, the nuisance-alert rate for STARS CA was estimated to be about 70%, which is comparable to a similar previously estimation of 80% nuisance-alert rate for CARTS (Common Automated Radar Terminal System) CA. The Mode-CIntruder (MCI) alerts were also reduced by 76% as compared to STARS CA.Examination of the common conflict pairs between T-TSAFE and STARS CA shows that they are valid separationconflicts with good alert lead times for T-TSAFE. However, many of them would still be considered nuisance alertsif the aircraft were conducting visual approaches. This was confirmed by another visual approach fast-time simulationT-TSAFE experiment, in which all DFW arriving flights were assumed to be on visual approaches and our proposedsafety alert thresholds were used and tested. The result of the experiment showed that the number of non-MCI alertswas less by 92% as compared to the number when all DFW arrivals were assumed to be conducting instrumentapproaches. The common conflict pairs involving aircraft conducting visual approaches to parallel runways werereduced by 93% as well. Thus, the flight intent information and the safety alert thresholds are effective in reducingnuisance alerts.T-TSAFE can thus provide separation and safety conflict alerts seamlessly in the real-world environment of mixedterminal operations with arriving flights of both visual and instrument approaches. Compared with STARS CA, TTSAFEhas fewer false alerts, larger alert lead time, and larger alert thresholds. While the nuisance alerts are reducedsignificantly with the safety alert thresholds, further work is needed to study if the alert lead time for safety alerts issufficient.
This NASA Technical Standard provides medical requirements and clinical procedures designed to ensure crew health and safety and occupational longevity of NASA career astronauts. This NASA Technical Standard used for selection and annual recertification of astronauts reflects the medical requirements to successfully complete specific mission tasks and the multifaceted training and performance required of a NASA astronaut. These include, but are not limited to, flying in high performance aircraft, exposure to hypobaric and hyperbaric conditions, exposure to unique environments (e.g., microgravity), and conducting specialized operations (e.g., extra-vehicular activities, robotic arm operations). NASA policy for establishing standards to protect the health and safety of crew and for providing health and medical programs for astronauts during all phases of space flight is authorized by NPD 1000.3 - The NASA Organization, and by NPD 8900.5B - NASA Health and Medical Policy for Human Space Exploration. This document includes medical evaluations for private astronauts and NASA Suborbital Research Specialist (NSRS). Private astronauts are defined as a crew member who is not a NASA career (U.S. government) astronaut or international partner astronaut. NASA Suborbital Research Specialist is an individual who is employed by NASA or funded by NASA to conduct research, technology testing, training, or other activities onboard a sub-orbital vehicle. This excludes those individuals who are the commercially employed crew of the suborbital vehicle. This NASA Technical Standard also provides mission specific medical evaluations which include both clinical and occupational requirements that may be tailored for future missions.
The inability to establish appropriate assurance methods for AI/ML components in safety critical systems leaves us unable to effectively manage the risks and benefits of such systems. It drives cost of development for systems with AI/ML components uneconomically high, it delays the adoption of systems with AI/ML components at scale, and it can result in catastrophic consequences in terms of the safety of systems with AI/ML components. In this presentation we will explore what constitutes sufficient scientific-based evidence to substantiate a safety claim related to an AI/ML component performing a safety-critical function.
NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC) / Flight Design and Dynamics Division (DM) has prototyped the use of Open Source middleware technology for building its next generation spacecraft mission support system. This is part of a larger initiative to use open standards and open source software as building blocks for future mission and safety critical systems. JSC is hoping to leverage standardized enterprise architectures, such as Java EE, so that its internal software development efforts can be focused on the core aspects of their problem domain. This presentation will outline the design and implementation of the Trajectory system and the lessons learned during the exercise.
The JPL chamber certification process for ensuring that test chambers used to test flight hardware meet a minimum standard is critical to the safety of the hardware and personnel. Past history has demonstrated that this process is important due to the catastrophic incidents that could occur if the chamber is not set up correctly. Environmental testing is one of the last phases in the development of a subsystem, and it typically occurs just before integration of flight hardware into the fully assembled flight system. A seemingly insignificant -miscalculation or missed step can necessitate rebuilding or replacing a subsystem due to over-testing or damage from the test chamber. Conversely, under-testing might fail to detect weaknesses that might cause failure when the hardware is in service. This paper describes the process that identifies the many variables that comprise the testing scenario and screening of as built chambers, the training of qualified operators, and a general "what-to-look-for" in minimum standards.
The JPL chamber certification process for ensuring that test chambers used to test flight hardware meet a minimum standard is critical to the safety of the hardware and personnel. Past history as demonstrated that this process is important due to the catastrophic incidents that could occur if the chamber is not set up correctly. Environmental testing is one of the last phases in the development of a subsystem, and it typically occurs just before integration of flight hardware into the fully assembled flight system. A seemingly insignificant -miscalculation or missed step can necessitate rebuilding or replacing a subsystem due to over-testing or damage from the test chamber. Conversely, under-testing might fail to detect weaknesses that might cause failure when the hardware is in service. This paper describes the process that identifies the many variables that comprise the testing scenario and screening of as built chambers, the training of qualified operators, and a general "what-to-look-for" in minimum standards.
Software-intensive aviation systems are typically developed in accordance with recognized development process, safety analysis, and software development standards such as SAE ARP4754A, SAE ARP4761, and RTCA DO-178C. Efforts to streamline assurance processes and make them flexible enough to handle future assurance challenges have produced the Overarching Properties (OPs) for airworthiness approval. Each of the three OPs is a property systems must possess to be certifiable. There is no mandated means of documenting possession of the OPs. To explore possible means, we have prepared retrospective documentation showing that a specimen software system possesses the OPs. The specimen system, Safeguard, enforces geofencing restrictions on unmanned aerial vehicles. Our OP-possession case for its airborne component comprises eight arguments in the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN): a main argument for each OP and five cross-cutting auxiliary arguments. We present this argument as an example for discussion and further research, e.g., into means of assessing OP possession.
This document is being provided as part of ITT's NASA Glenn Research Center Aerospace Communication Systems Technical Support (ACSTS) contract: "New ATM Requirements--Future Communications, C-Band and L-Band Communications Standard Development." ITT has completed a safety hazard analysis providing a preliminary safety assessment for the proposed C-band (5091- to 5150-MHz) airport surface communication system. The assessment was performed following the guidelines outlined in the Federal Aviation Administration Safety Risk Management Guidance for System Acquisitions document. The safety analysis did not identify any hazards with an unacceptable risk, though a number of hazards with a medium risk were documented. This effort represents an initial high-level safety hazard analysis and notes the triggers for risk reassessment. A detailed safety hazards analysis is recommended as a follow-on activity to assess particular components of the C-band communication system after the profile is finalized and system rollout timing is determined. A security risk assessment has been performed by NASA as a parallel activity. While safety analysis is concerned with a prevention of accidental errors and failures, the security threat analysis focuses on deliberate attacks. Both processes identify the events that affect operation of the system; and from a safety perspective the security threats may present safety risks.
Significant data have been generated through various spacecraft propulsion system projects involving the use of pyrotechnically operated valves (pyrovalves). These data need to be analyzed, interpreted, summarized, associated, and formatted so they can be made available for spacecraft propulsion system design involving pyrovalves and used to specify test procedures in the performance evaluation and qualification of these systems. To meet this need, a Pyrovalve Handbook is being developed at the NASA White Sands Test Facility. Standards of performance for pyrovalve applications are being formulated under the sponsorship of the NASA Technical Standards Program, as are pyrovalve testing standards under the sponsorship of the NASA Safety and Risk Management Program. The ultimate goal is to have the Handbook adopted as a voluntary standard under the guidance of the AIAA Energetic Components and Systems Technical Committee and, in a more restrictive format, become an integral part of ISO standards for Explosive Systems and Devices Used on Space Vehicles. Feedback from both Government and industry is encouraged and will be the focus of the presentation. It is especially critical that feedback be received on content and formatting of the Handbook to maximize benefit to the technical community. Submission of validated data from organizations outside of NASA is also encouraged.
Work to develop and demonstrate the technology of structural ceramics for automotive engines and similar applications is described. Long-range technology is being sought to produce gas turbine engines for automobiles with reduced fuel consumption and reduced environmental impact. The Advanced Turbine Technology Application Project (ATTAP) test bed engine is designed such that, when installed in a 3,000 pound inertia weight automobile, it will provide low emissions, 42 miles per gallon fuel economy on diesel fuel, multifuel capability, costs competitive with current spark ignition engines, and noise and safety characteristics that meet Federal standards.
This document contains the proceedings of the Second NASA Workshop on Wiring for Space Applications held at NASA LeRC in Cleveland, OH, 6-7 Oct. 1993. The workshop was sponsored by NASA Headquarters Code QW Office of Safety and Mission Quality, Technical Standards Division and hosted by NASA LeRC, Power Technology Division, Electrical Components and Systems Branch. The workshop addressed key technology issues in the field of electrical power wiring for space applications. Speakers from government, industry, and academia presented and discussed topics on arc tracking phenomena, wiring system design, insulation constructions, and system protection. Presentation materials provided by the various speakers are included in this document.
This document contains the proceedings of the First NASA Workshop on Wiring for Space Applications held at NASA Lewis Research Center in Cleveland, OH, July 23-24, 1991. The workshop was sponsored by NASA Headquarters Code QE Office of Safety and Mission Quality, Technical Standards Division and hosted by the NASA Lewis Research Center, Power Technology Division, Electrical Components and Systems Branch. The workshop addressed key technology issues in the field of electrical power wiring for space applications. Speakers from government, industry and academia presented and discussed topics on arc tracking phenomena, wiring applications and requirements, and new candidate insulation materials and constructions. Presentation materials provided by the various speakers are included in this document.
At the NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field (formerly the Lewis Research Center), experimental research in aircraft and space propulsion systems is conducted in more than 100 test cells and laboratories. These facilities are supported by a central process air system that supplies high-volume, high-pressure compressed air and vacuum at various conditions that simulate altitude flight. Nearly 100,000 square feet of metalworking and specialized fabrication shops located on-site produce prototypes, models, and test hardware in support of experimental research operations. These activities, comprising numerous individual noise sources and operational scenarios, result in a varied and complex noise exposure environment, which is the responsibility of the Glenn Research Center Noise Exposure Management Program. Hearing conservation, community noise complaint response and noise control engineering services are included under the umbrella of this Program, which encompasses the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standard on occupational noise exposure, Sec. 29CFR 1910.95, as well as the more stringent NASA Health Standard on Hearing Conservation. Prior to 1994, in the absence of feasible engineering controls, strong emphasis had been placed on personal hearing protection as the primary mechanism for assuring compliance with Sec. 29CFR 1910.95 as well as NASA's more conservative policy, which prohibits unprotected exposure to noise levels above 85 dB(A). Center policy and prudent engineering practice required, however, that these efforts be extended to engineered noise controls in order to bring existing work areas into compliance with Sec. 29CFR 1910.95 and NASA's own policies and to ensure compliance for new installations. Coincident with the establishment in 1995 of a NASA wide multi-year commitment of funding for environmental abatement projects, the Noise Exposure Management Program was established, with its focus on engineering approaches to reducing occupational and community noise exposure. The organization and mission of this Program were documented shortly after its inception, and individual programmatic components have been the subject of subsequent papers. This paper summarizes the status and accomplishments of the engineering aspects of the Program from a five-year retrospective viewpoint and includes a review of retrofit noise control solution strategies, which have not been previously documented.
Numerical analysis has shown that the SLS nozzle environmental barrier (nozzle plug) design is inadequate for the prelaunch condition, which consists of two dominant loads: 1) the main engines startup pressure and 2) an environmentally induced pressure. Efforts to reduce load conservatisms included a dynamic analysis which showed a 31% higher safety factor compared to the standard static analysis. The environmental load is typically approached with a deterministic method using the worst possible combinations of pressures and temperatures. An alternate probabilistic approach, utilizing the distributions of pressures and temperatures, resulted in a 54% reduction in the environmental pressure load. A Monte Carlo simulation of environmental load that used five years of historical pressure and temperature data supported the results of the probabilistic analysis, indicating the probabilistic load is reflective of a 3-sigma condition (1 in 370 probability). Utilizing the probabilistic load analysis eliminated excessive conservatisms and will prevent a future overdesign of the nozzle plug. Employing a similar probabilistic approach to other design and analysis activities can result in realistic yet adequately conservative solutions.