SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Risk acceptability”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2009

Extreme Programming: Maestro Style

"Extreme Programming: Maestro Style" is the name of a computer programming methodology that has evolved as a custom version of a methodology, called extreme programming that has been practiced in the software industry since the late 1990s. The name of this version reflects its origin in the work of the Maestro team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory that develops software for Mars exploration missions. Extreme programming is oriented toward agile development of software resting on values of simplicity, communication, testing, and aggressiveness. Extreme programming involves use of methods of rapidly building and disseminating institutional knowledge among members of a computer-programming team to give all the members a shared view that matches the view of the customers for whom the software system is to be developed. Extreme programming includes frequent planning by programmers in collaboration with customers, continually examining and rewriting code in striving for the simplest workable software designs, a system metaphor (basically, an abstraction of the system that provides easy-to-remember software-naming conventions and insight into the architecture of the system), programmers working in pairs, adherence to a set of coding standards, collaboration of customers and programmers, frequent verbal communication, frequent releases of software in small increments of development, repeated testing of the developmental software by both programmers and customers, and continuous interaction between the team and the customers. The environment in which the Maestro team works requires the team to quickly adapt to changing needs of its customers. In addition, the team cannot afford to accept unnecessary development risk. Extreme programming enables the Maestro team to remain agile and provide high-quality software and service to its customers. However, several factors in the Maestro environment have made it necessary to modify some of the conventional extreme-programming practices. The single most influential of these factors is that continuous interaction between customers and programmers is not feasible.

Norris, Jeffrey↗

NASA NTRS2011

Chance-Constrained Guidance With Non-Convex Constraints

Missions to small bodies, such as comets or asteroids, require autonomous guidance for descent to these small bodies. Such guidance is made challenging by uncertainty in the position and velocity of the spacecraft, as well as the uncertainty in the gravitational field around the small body. In addition, the requirement to avoid collision with the asteroid represents a non-convex constraint that means finding the optimal guidance trajectory, in general, is intractable. In this innovation, a new approach is proposed for chance-constrained optimal guidance with non-convex constraints. Chance-constrained guidance takes into account uncertainty so that the probability of collision is below a specified threshold. In this approach, a new bounding method has been developed to obtain a set of decomposed chance constraints that is a sufficient condition of the original chance constraint. The decomposition of the chance constraint enables its efficient evaluation, as well as the application of the branch and bound method. Branch and bound enables non-convex problems to be solved efficiently to global optimality. Considering the problem of finite-horizon robust optimal control of dynamic systems under Gaussian-distributed stochastic uncertainty, with state and control constraints, a discrete-time, continuous-state linear dynamics model is assumed. Gaussian-distributed stochastic uncertainty is a more natural model for exogenous disturbances such as wind gusts and turbulence than the previously studied set-bounded models. However, with stochastic uncertainty, it is often impossible to guarantee that state constraints are satisfied, because there is typically a non-zero probability of having a disturbance that is large enough to push the state out of the feasible region. An effective framework to address robustness with stochastic uncertainty is optimization with chance constraints. These require that the probability of violating the state constraints (i.e., the probability of failure) is below a user-specified bound known as the risk bound. An example problem is to drive a car to a destination as fast as possible while limiting the probability of an accident to 10(exp -7). This framework allows users to trade conservatism against performance by choosing the risk bound. The more risk the user accepts, the better performance they can expect.

FROM↗

NASA NTRS2004

Software for Analyzing Laminar-to-Turbulent Flow Transitions

Software assurance is the planned and systematic set of activities that ensures that software processes and products conform to requirements, standards, and procedures. Examples of such activities are the following: code inspections, unit tests, design reviews, performance analyses, construction of traceability matrices, etc. In practice, software development projects have only limited resources (e.g., schedule, budget, and availability of personnel) to cover the entire development effort, of which assurance is but a part. Projects must therefore select judiciously from among the possible assurance activities. At its heart, this can be viewed as an optimization problem; namely, to determine the allocation of limited resources (time, money, and personnel) to minimize risk or, alternatively, to minimize the resources needed to reduce risk to an acceptable level. The end result of the work reported here is a means to optimize quality-assurance processes used in developing software. This is achieved by combining two prior programs in an innovative manner

Chang, Chau-Lyan↗

NASA NTRS2004

Software for Optimizing Quality Assurance of Other Software

Feather, Martin↗

NASA NTRS2011

Technology Development to Support Human Health and Performance in Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit

In the course of defining the level of risks and mitigating the risks for exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit, NASA s Human Research Program (HRP) has identified the need for technology development in several areas. Long duration missions increase the risk of serious medical conditions due to limited options for return to Earth; no resupply; highly limited mass, power, volume; and communication delays. New space flight compatible medical capabilities required include: diagnostic imaging, oxygen concentrator, ventilator, laboratory analysis (saliva, blood, urine), kidney stone diagnosis & treatment, IV solution preparation and delivery. Maintenance of behavioral health in such an isolated, confined and extreme environment requires new sensory stimulation (e.g., virtual reality) technology. Unobtrusive monitoring of behavioral health and treatment methods are also required. Prolonged exposure to weightlessness deconditions bone, muscle, and the cardiovascular system. Novel exercise equipment or artificial gravity are necessary to prevent deconditioning. Monitoring of the degree of deconditioning is required to ensure that countermeasures are effective. New technologies are required in all the habitable volumes (e.g., suit, capsule, habitat, exploration vehicle, lander) to provide an adequate food system, and to meet human environmental standards for air, water, and surface contamination. Communication delays require the crew to be more autonomous. Onboard decision support tools that assist crew with real-time detection and diagnosis of vehicle and habitat operational anomalies will enable greater autonomy. Multi-use shield systems are required to provide shielding from solar particle events. The HRP is pursuing the development of these technologies in laboratories, flight analog environments and the ISS so that the human health and performance risks will be acceptable with the available resources.

Kundrot, C.E.↗

NASA NTRS2012

The Effect of Faster Engine Response on the Lateral Directional Control of a Damaged Aircraft

The integration of flight control and propulsion control has been a much discussed topic, especially for emergencies where the engines may be able to help stabilize and safely land a damaged aircraft. Previous research has shown that for the engines to be effective as flight control actuators, the response time to throttle commands must be improved. Other work has developed control modes that accept a higher risk of engine failure in exchange for improved engine response during an emergency. In this effort, a nonlinear engine model (the Commercial Modular Aero-Propulsion System Simulation 40k) has been integrated with a nonlinear airframe model (the Generic Transport Model) in order to evaluate the use of enhanced-response engines as alternative yaw rate control effectors. Tests of disturbance rejection and command tracking were used to determine the impact of the engines on the aircraft's dynamical behavior. Three engine control enhancements that improve the response time of the engine were implemented and tested in the integrated simulation. The enhancements were shown to increase the engine s effectiveness as a yaw rate control effector when used in an automatic feedback loop. The improvement is highly dependent upon flight condition; the airframe behavior is markedly improved at low altitude, low speed conditions, and relatively unchanged at high altitude, high speed.

May, Ryan D.↗

NASA NTRS2012

Influence of Natural Environments in Spacecraft Design, Development, and Operation

The natural environment has a great influence on the ability of spacecraft to perform according to mission design specification. Compatibility with the natural environment is a primary factor in determining the functional lifetime of the spacecraft. The spacecraft being designed and developed today are growing in complexity. In many instances, the increased complexity also increases its sensitivity to environmental effects. Sensitivities to the natural environment can be tempered through appropriate design measures, mitigation strategies, and/or the acceptance of known risk. The design engineer must understand the effects of the natural environment on the spacecraft and its components; while having an in-depth knowledge of mitigation strategies. Too much protection incurs unnecessary expense, and often times excessive mass; while too little protection can easily lead to premature mission loss. This presentation will provide a brief overview of both the natural environment and its effects and provide some insight into mitigation strategies.

Edwards, David L.↗

NASA NTRS2012

On the Transition and Migration of Flight Functions in the Airspace System

Since ~400 BC, when man first replicated flying behavior with kites, up until the turn of the 20th century, when the Wright brothers performed the first successful powered human flight, flight functions have become available to man via significant support from man-made structures and devices. Over the past 100 years or so, technology has enabled several flight functions to migrate to automation and/or decision support systems. This migration continues with the United States NextGen and Europe s Single European Sky (a.k.a. SESAR) initiatives. These overhauls of the airspace system will be accomplished by accommodating the functional capabilities, benefits, and limitations of technology and automation together with the unique and sometimes overlapping functional capabilities, benefits, and limitations of humans. This paper will discuss how a safe and effective migration of any flight function must consider several interrelated issues, including, for example, shared situation awareness, and automation addiction, or over-reliance on automation. A long-term philosophical perspective is presented that considers all of these issues by primarily asking the following questions: How does one find an acceptable level of risk tolerance when allocating functions to automation versus humans? How does one measure or predict with confidence what the risks will be? These two questions and others will be considered from the two most-discussed paradigms involving the use of increasingly complex systems in the future: humans as operators and humans as monitors.

Morris, Allan Terry↗

NASA NTRS2008

Oxygen and Metals Processing on the Moon: Will Materials Science Change Our Future in Space?

As part of an In-Situ Resource Utilization infrastructure on the lunar surface, the production of oxygen and metals by various technologies is under development within NASA projects. Such an effort reflects the ambition to change paradigms in space exploration to enable human presence for the long-term. Sustaining such presence involves the acceptance of a new concept in space activities; crews must be able to generate some of their consumables from local resources. The balance between accepting early development risks and reducing long-term mission risks is at the core of the technology development approach. We will present an overview of the technologies involved and present their possible impact on the future of human expansion in the solar system.

Sibille, Laurent↗

NASA NTRS2013

NASA Activity Update for the 2013 Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (UVSI) Yearbook

This year s report offers a high level perspective on some of the UAS related activities in which NASA is involved, both internal and external to the agency. Internally, NASA issued UAS operational policy on certification of NASA UAS and aircrew. A team of NASA UAS experts and operators analyzed all current procedures and best practices to design the policy. An update to the agencies Aircraft Operations Management Manual incorporated a new chapter to address UAS planning, preflight operations, flight operations, flight crew requirements, airworthiness and flight safety reviews. NASA UAS are classified into three categories based on weight and airspeed. Aircrews, including observers, are classified by how they interface with the UAS, and the policy defines qualifications, training, and currency. The NASA flight readiness approval process identifies risks and mitigations in order to reduce the likelihood and/or consequence of the risk to an acceptable level. The UAS operations process incorporates all aspects of airworthiness, flight standards and range safety exactly the same processes used for NASA manned aircraft operations. NASA has two internal organizations that routinely operate UAS. The Science Mission Directorate utilizes UAS as part of its Airborne Science Program and is the most frequent operator of NASA UAS in both national and international airspace. The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate conducts UAS flight operations in addition to conducting research important to the UAS community. This past year the Science Mission Directorate supported the Hurricane and Severe Storm Sentimental (HS3) Mission with two NASA Global Hawk platforms. HS3 is a five-year mission specifically targeted to investigate the processes that underlie hurricane formation. During the 2012 portion of this mission the Global Hawk overflew hurricanes Leslie and Nadine in the Atlantic Ocean completing 6 flights and accumulating more than 148 flight hours. Another multi-year mission was initiated last year when the Sensor Integrated Environmental Remote Research Aircraft (SIERRA) UAS began surveying faults in California s Surprise Valley. A team of scientists and engineers from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), NASA Ames Research Center, Central Washington University, and Carnegie Mellon University will measure magnetic fields using ground surveys and the SIERRA to map the geophysics below the surface of Surprise Valley. The data collected will be used to generate 3D maps of the geophysical data of the area. The Aeronautics Mission Directorate continues its collaboration with Boeing to conduct UAS flight operations of the X-48C, a modified version of the X-48B originally built by Cranfield Aerospace, United Kingdom. The Aeronautics Mission Directorate utilizes vehicles of this size for a wide variety of research studies. Most of these operations are conducted within restricted airspace. The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate also sponsors the UAS in the National Airspace System (NAS) Project, which is working in close cooperation with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to address critical challenges associated with routine UAS operations in civil airspace. The project is focused on separation assurance and collision avoidance systems and algorithms, command and control for non-military operations including spectrum allocation requirements, human system interaction issues, and safety and certification topics.

Bauer, Jeffrey E.↗

NASA NTRS2013

An Atmospheric Variability Model for Venus Aerobraking Missions

Aerobraking has proven to be an enabling technology for planetary missions to Mars and has been proposed to enable low cost missions to Venus. Aerobraking saves a significant amount of propulsion fuel mass by exploiting atmospheric drag to reduce the eccentricity of the initial orbit. The solar arrays have been used as the primary drag surface and only minor modifications have been made in the vehicle design to accommodate the relatively modest aerothermal loads. However, if atmospheric density is highly variable from orbit to orbit, the mission must either accept higher aerothermal risk, a slower pace for aerobraking, or a tighter corridor likely with increased propulsive cost. Hence, knowledge of atmospheric variability is of great interest for the design of aerobraking missions. The first planetary aerobraking was at Venus during the Magellan mission. After the primary Magellan science mission was completed, aerobraking was used to provide a more circular orbit to enhance gravity field recovery. Magellan aerobraking took place between local solar times of 1100 and 1800 hrs, and it was found that the Venusian atmospheric density during the aerobraking phase had less than 10% 1 sigma orbit to orbit variability. On the other hand, at some latitudes and seasons, Martian variability can be as high as 40% 1 sigmaFrom both the MGN and PVO mission it was known that the atmosphere, above aerobraking altitudes, showed greater variability at night, but this variability was never quantified in a systematic manner. This paper proposes a model for atmospheric variability that can be used for aerobraking mission design until more complete data sets become available.

Tolson, Robert T.↗

NASA NTRS2014

The Influence of Free Space Environment in the Mission Life Cycle: Material Selection

The natural space environment has a great influence on the ability of space systems to perform according to mission design specification. Understanding the natural space environment and its influence on space system performance is critical to the concept formulation, design, development, and operation of space systems. Compatibility with the natural space environment is a primary factor in determining the functional lifetime of the space system. Space systems being designed and developed today are growing in complexity. In many instances, the increased complexity also increases its sensitivity to space environmental effects. Sensitivities to the natural space environment can be tempered through appropriate design measures, material selection, ground processing, mitigation strategies, and/or the acceptance of known risks. The design engineer must understand the effects of the natural space environment on the space system and its components. This paper will discuss the influence of the natural space environment in the mission life cycle with a specific focus on the role of material selection.

Edwards, David L.↗

NASA NTRS2016

In-Space Structural Assembly: Applications and Technology

As NASA exploration moves beyond earth's orbit, the need exists for long duration space systems that are resilient to events that compromise safety and performance. Fortunately, technology advances in autonomy, robotic manipulators, and modular plug-and-play architectures over the past two decades have made in-space vehicle assembly and servicing possible at acceptable cost and risk. This study evaluates future space systems needed to support scientific observatories and human/robotic Mars exploration to assess key structural design considerations. The impact of in-space assembly is discussed to identify gaps in structural technology and opportunities for new vehicle designs to support NASA's future long duration missions.

Belvin, W. Keith↗

NASA NTRS2017

Real-Time Prediction of Safety Margins in the National Airspace

Underlying all operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) is the concept of safety. Safety, as defined by acceptable levels of risk, is to be maintained at all times. The real-time safety monitoring (RTSM) framework is under development to provide an automated system to quantify safety in the NAS, estimate the current level of safety, and predict the future evolution of safety and the occurrence of events that pose an increased risk to flights so that these occurrences can be managed strategically rather than mitigated reactively. This paper presents the mathematical framework, the models, and the monitoring and prediction algorithms used to achieve this. RTSM computes safety as expressed through a set of safety margins based on user-defined safety metrics, thresolds, and events. Sources of uncertainty are modeled and propagated through the predictions in order to compute the probabilistic evolution of safety and the probability of events that introduce increased risk to operations. A prototype implementation is discussed and results demonstrating feasibility are presented. The results highlight the kinds of predictions that can be computed and the fidelity that is currently achieved.

national airspace system↗

NASA NTRS2018

Safe2Ditch Autonomous Crash Management System for Small Unmanned Aerial Systems: Concept Definition and Flight Test Results

Small unmanned aerial systems (sUAS) have the potential for a large array of highly-beneficial applications. These applications are too numerous to comprehensively list, but include search and rescue, fire spotting, precision agriculture, etc. to name a few. Typically sUAS vehicles weigh less than 55 lbs and will be performing flight operations in the National Air Space (NAS). Certain sUAS applications, such as package delivery, will include operations in the close proximity of the general public. The full benefit from sUAS is contingent upon the resolution of several technological areas in order to provide an acceptable level of risk for widespread sUAS operations. Operations of sUAS vehicles pose risks to people and property on the ground as well as manned aviation. Several of the more significant sUAS technological areas include, but are not limited to: autonomous sense and avoid and deconfliction of sUAS from other sUAS and manned aircraft, communications and interfaces between the vehicle and human operators, and the overall reliability of the sUAS and constituent subsystems. While all of the technological areas listed contribute significantly to the safe execution of the sUAS flight operations, contingency or emergency systems can greatly contribute to sUAS risk mitigations to manage situations where the vehicle is in distress. The Safe2Ditch (S2D) system is an autonomous crash management system for sUAS. Its function is to enable sUAS to execute emergency landings and avoid injuring people on the ground, damaging property, and lastly preserving the sUAS and payload. A sUAS flight test effort was performed to test the integration of sub-elements of the S2D system with a representative sUAS multi-rotor.

Glaab, Louis J.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Gateway Modeling and Simulation Plan

This plan institutes direction across the Gateway Program and the Element Projects to ensure that Cross Program M&S are produced in a manner that (1) generate the artifacts required for NASA-STD-7009 compliance, (2) ensures interoperability of M&S exchanged and integrated across the program and, (3) drives integrated development efforts to provide cross-domain integrated simulation of the Gateway elements, space environment, and operational scenarios. This direction is flowed down via contractual enforcement to prime contractors and includes both the GMS requirements specified in this plan and the NASASTD- 7009 derived requirements necessary for compliance. Grounding principles for management of Gateway Models and Simulations (M&S) are derived from the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) report and the Diaz team report, “A Renewed Commitment to Excellence.” As an outcome of these reports, and in response to Action 4 of the Diaz team report, the NASA Standard for Models and Simulations, NASA-STD-7009 was developed. The standard establishes M&S requirements for development and use activities to ensure proper capture and communication of M&S pedigree and credibility information to Gateway program decision makers. Through the course of the Gateway program life cycle M&S will be heavily relied upon to conduct analysis, test products, support operations activities, enable informed decision making and ultimately to certify the Gateway with an acceptable level of risk to crew and mission. To reduce risk associated with M&S influenced decisions, this plan applies the NASA-STD-7009 requirements to produce the artifacts that support credibility assessments and ensure the information is communicated to program management.

NASA-STD-7009↗

NASA NTRS2020

Artemis Sustained Translational Acceleration Limits: Human Tolerance Evidence from Apollo to ISS

The designers of the next generation of lunar landers may adopt novel, crew-body orientations outside of our flight history or applied to flight durations and environments outside of our experience. Current sustained translational acceleration requirements in NASA-STD-3001 are applicable only to crewmembers in a seated posture and are thus inadequate to address human tolerance in non-seated configurations. Initial designs for the Apollo Lunar Module (LM) included seats for both commander and pilot; however, these were subsequently removed from the vehicle due to mass constraints and a willingness to accept the unknown risks for short-duration missions given the limited human physiologic data at the time. In the years since Apollo, our evidence base has grown immensely. Initial Artemis mission timelines under consideration will be longer than the longest Apollo mission, by a significant margin, with timeframes more analogous to longer Space Shuttle missions. Given the incidence of postflight orthostatic intolerance following shuttle missions, a significant risk may exist for lander design(s) pursuing a standing crew configuration similar to Apollo LM. New sustained translational acceleration limits developed to address this risk are presented herein. These limits were derived from evaluations of Apollo biomedical and flight profile data during lunar descent and ascent operations, Soyuz and Space Shuttle flight profile and post-landing biomedical data, and analogue bed rest post-exposure data on orthostatic intolerance.

James M. Pattarini↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Introduction to the IMPACT Probabilistic Risk and Tradespace Analysis Tool for Medical System Design

Background: Probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) is a method for estimating risk in complex engineered systems that, at a basic level, focuses on what can go wrong and the likelihood and consequences of those occurrences. NASA has used PRA as an integral component of medical system risk estimation and design for spaceflight. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a novel tool to meet these goals for exploration missions. Overview: IMPACT performs hundreds of thousands of Monte Carlo simulations of missions to build aggregate pictures of medical risk. These simulations are based on 120 possible medical conditions (the IMPACT Condition List) selected in a consensus-based process because they are of highest likelihood and/or consequence for exploration spaceflight. The conditions are then tied to clinical capabilities which can be used for management (e.g., inserting an IV) and then to over 600 specific resources needed to deliver a capability (e.g., an angiocath or an ultrasound). Different mission profiles can be simulated with user-specified inputs such as mission duration, destination, number of crew and pre-existing medical conditions, and EVA frequency. While the IMPACT evidence base is designed for exploration environments, these user inputs allow the tool to be used across a broad range of missions. IMPACT’s primary outcome metrics include loss of crew life (LOCL, a measure of in-flight mortality due to medical conditions), need for evacuation (RTDC, return to definitive care), and crew disability (TTL, task time lost based on how medical conditions impact the ability to perform over 1000 specific exploration mission crew tasks). In addition to modeling medical risk, IMPACT also accepts user-specified constraints, such as limitations of mass or volume, and will output a recommended clinical capability set and specific medical resources that meet the mission constraints. Discussion: This abstract will provide an introduction to IMPACT and describe the nature of the underlying medical evidence. It will also detail potential use cases for how this tool can be utilized by NASA or commercial spaceflight providers.

Ben Easter↗