SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Engineering Risk Management”

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 235 records · Page 13

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2015

Human System Risk Management for Space Flight

This brief abstract reviews the development of the current day approach to human system risk management for space flight and the development of the critical components of this process over the past few years. The human system risk management process now provides a comprehensive assessment of each human system risk by design reference mission (DRM) and is evaluated not only for mission success but also for long‐term health impacts for the astronauts. The discipline of bioastronautics is the study of the biological and medical effects of space flight on humans. In 1997, the Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) initiated the Bioastronautics Roadmap (Roadmap) as the "Critical Path Roadmap", and in 1998 participation in the roadmap was expanded to include the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI) and the external community. A total of 55 risks and 250 questions were identified and prioritized and in 2000, the Roadmap was base-lined and put under configuration control. The Roadmap took into account several major advisory committee reviews including the Institute of Medicine (IOM) "Safe Passage: Astronaut care for Exploration Missions", 2001. Subsequently, three collaborating organizations at NASA HQ (Chief Health and Medical Officer, Office of Space Flight and Office of Biological & Physical Research), published the Bioastronautics Strategy in 2003, that identified the human as a "critical subsystem of space flight" and noted that "tolerance limits and safe operating bands must be established" to enable human space flight. These offices also requested a review by the IOM of the Roadmap and that review was published in October 2005 as "A Risk Reduction Strategy for Human Exploration of Space: A Review of NASA's Bioastronautics Roadmap", that noted several strengths and weaknesses of the Roadmap and made several recommendations. In parallel with the development of the Roadmap, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) began a process in 2004 of evaluating the tolerance limits and safe operating bands called for in the Bioastronautics Strategy. Over the next several years, the concept of the "operating bands" were turned into Space Flight Human System Standards (SFHSS), developed by the technical resources of the SLSD at the NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC). These standards were developed and reviewed at the SLSD and then presented to the OCHMO for acceptance. The first set of standards was published in 2007 as the NASA‐STD‐3001, Volume 1, Crew Health that elaborated standards for several physiological areas such as cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, radiation exposure and nutrition. Volume 2, Human Factors, Habitability and Human Health was published in 2011, along with development guidance in the Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH). Taken together, the SFHSS Volumes 1 and 2, and the HIDH replaced the NASA‐STD‐3000 with new standards and revisions of the older document. Three other changes were also taking place that facilitated the development of the human system risk management approach. In 2005, the life sciences research and development portfolio underwent a comprehensive review through the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) that resulted in the reformulation of the Bioastronautics Program into Human Research Program (HRP) that was focused on appropriate mitigation results for high priority human health risks. The baseline HRP budget was established in August 2005. In addition, the OCHMO formulated the Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) in 2006 that established the position of the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) at the NASA JSC along with other key technical disciplines, and the OCHMO became the responsible office for the SFHSS as noted above. The final change was the establishment in 2008 of the Human System Risk Board (HSRB), chaired by the CMO with representation from the HRP, SLSD management and technical experts. The HSRB then began to review all human system risks, established a comprehensive risk management and configuration management plan and data sharing policy. These major developments of standards, the HRP, the HMTA and a forum for review of human system risks (HSRB) facilitated the integration of human research, medical operations, systems engineering and many other disciplines in the comprehensive review of human system risks. The HSRB began a comprehensive review of all potential inflight medical conditions and events and over the course of several reviews consolidated the number of human system risks to 30 where the greatest emphasis is placed for investing program dollars for risk mitigation. The HSRB considers all available evidence from human research, medical operations and occupational surveillance in assessing the risks for appropriate mitigation and future work. All applicable DRMs (low earth orbit 6 and 12 months, deep space sortie for 30 days and 1 year, a one year lunar mission, and a planetary mission for 3 years) are considered as human system risks are modified by the hazards associated with space flight such as microgravity, exposure to radiation, distance from the earth, isolation and a closed environment. Each risk has a summary assessment representing the state of knowledge/evidence base for that risk, the available risk mitigations, traceability to the SFHSS and program requirements, and future work required. These data then can drive coordinated budgets across the HRP, the International Space Station, Crew Health and Safety and Advanced Exploration System budgets. These risk assessments were completed for 6 DRMs in December of 2014 and serve as the baseline for which subsequent research and technology development and crew health care portfolios can be assessed. The HSRB will review each risk at least annually and especially when new information is available that must be considered for effective risk mitigation. The current status of each risk can be reported to program management for operations, budget reviews and general oversight of the human system risk management program.

Davis, Jeffrey↗

NASA NTRS2026

NASA Agile Community of Practice 2024-2026 Report

This 2024-2026 report provides a summary of the products and activities executed by the NASA Agile Community of Practice (CoP) during its second and third years. Building on the foundation established in its inaugural year, the CoP continued to advance Agile values and principles across NASA centers. The report highlights key initiatives, including specialized framework training, AI integration in Agile toolkits, and active participation in agency-wide project management and systems engineering workshops.

Agile↗

NASA NTRS2019

Trends in Human Spaceflight: Failure Tolerance, High Reliability and Correlated Failure History

In a half century of human spaceflight, NASA has continuously refined agency safety and reliability requirements in response to mission demands, critical failures, and technology development. Early spacecraft, including Mercury, Gemini and Apollo vehicles, were highly reliant on dissimilar redundancy and demonstrated test margins. Later programs, such as the reusable Space Transportation System (STS) and International Space Station (ISS), introduced probabilistic studies and isolated two-failure tolerance to improve robustness at the expense of added complexity. More recently, the Orion Multi-Program Crew Vehicle (MPCV) program adopted universal single-failure tolerance with two categorical exceptions; Zero-Failure Tolerant (0FT) and Design for Minimum Risk (DFMR) hardware. Failure tolerance variances are defined and managed in accordance with agency human-rating requirements, and require concurrence from program Technical Authorities (TA) as well as the MPCV Safety and Mission Assurance Safety and Engineering Review Panel (MSERP). To understand and reaffirm standards applied to Apollo, Space Shuttle and Orion vehicles, Orion and Deep Space Gateway Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) representatives conducted accelerated research to compare unique safety and reliability criteria against ground and flight anomalies, based on information contained in post-mission reports and the Problem Reporting and Corrective Action (PRACA) database. In some cases, high-profile failures and narrow escapes have reinforced decisions to maintain or adapt safety requirements. In others, empirical trends have highlighted the need for vigilance and innovative safety guidelines. Given the inability to achieve absolute compliance with evolving safety and reliability requirements, the team conducted a targeted review of DFMR and 0FT propulsion elements within the framework of changing system design, inspection, materials and process developments to formulate conclusions on technological maturity, failure density, and net changes in safety risk. Based on the aggregate performance of high-reliability and failure-tolerant systems, the authors have attempted to establish best practices and guidelines to inform future program decisions. On a somewhat cautionary note, this study is not intended to direct a universal set of requirements for future missions based on prior lessons learned. Spacecraft safety is a multi-variable problem, and attempts to mitigate past failures will not guarantee future success. However, this assessment offers a retrospective review of policy changes, implementation and effectiveness. In the future, NASA, European Space Agency (ESA) and industry partners may benefit from a more robust correlation between requirements and performance, as space-faring nations work toward more challenging, complex and long-duration commercial and deep-space ventures.

Green, Carrie↗

DOE OSTI2025

Process and environmental safety of thermochemical conversion of biomass

Biomass presents a promising opportunity for converting waste into valuable energy, fuels, and chemicals through various thermochemical processes, including hydrothermal carbonization, hydrothermal liquefaction, pyrolysis, gasification, and combustion. However, these processes operate under extreme conditions, introducing significant safety hazards that necessitate meticulous management to prevent accidents. This review discusses potential hazards, risk mitigation strategies, and safety management practices, emphasizing the importance of integrated safety measures into the design and operation of these processes. It also highlights the critical need for robust safety engineering and environmental management strategies tailored to each thermo-chemical process. As these processes transition from laboratory to industrial scale, there is an imperative to develop a clear and concise pathway for emerging industries to achieve regulatory compliance, achieve safety certification, and enable effective stewardship of potential fugitive emissions. By addressing safety and environmental concerns, stakeholders can optimize economic benefits, rural development, and achieve sustained domestic energy generation benefits offered by biomass conversion technologies. Further research on plant design optimization, operational safety, environmental evaluation standardization, and innovative waste management solutions will support the safe and effective scaling of these technologies, ultimately contributing to sustainable management and resource recovery.

09 - BIOMASS FUELS↗

NASA NTRS1987

Evaluation of cryogenic system test options for the OTV on-orbit propellant depot

Future space missions to geosynchronous, lunar, and planetary orbits will require an orbital depot for stockpiling propellants. This depot will provide long-term storage of cryogens, requiring new technologies for fluid management in microgravity and further development of thermal management technologies for minimization of cryogen boiloff. Preliminary evaluations have been made to define a test program approach for reducing technical risk through verifying performance models and building a base of engineering data for depot design. A number of testing options were defined and evaluated, leading to selection of ground testing combined with an orbital systems test. Ground testing is inadequate because of critical microgravity concerns; extending testing aboard the Space Station was eliminated because the data would not be available soon enough to benefit the propellant depot design. The orbital test would either be a short-term test carried out in the cargo bay of the Space Shuttle Orbiter using a nonhazardous cryogen or a longer term test carried out with hydrogen aboard a free-flying experiment orbited with an expendable launch vehicle.

Schuster, John R.↗

NASA NTRS2020

Enabling Assurance in the MBSE Environment

A number of specific benefits that fit within the hallmarks of effective development are realized with implementation of model-based approaches to systems and assurance. Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) enabled by standardized modeling languages (e.g., SysML®) is at the core. These benefits in the context of spaceflight system challenges can include [1]: • Improved management of complex development • Reduced risk in the development process • Improved cost management • Improved design decisions With appropriate modeling techniques the assurance community also can improve early oversight and insight into project development. NASA has shown the basic constructs of SysML in an MBSE environment offer several key advantages, within a Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA) initiative [2, 3]. These include the following: • Model viewpoints that promote rapid and systematic assessment of requirements coverage, hazard tagging and risk management • Embedded safety assessments for launch vehicles • Deployment of model assisted development of reliability products - Failure Modes and Effects Analyses (FMEAs) and Fault Trees • Test Planning • Validation and Verification of complex functions • Support of Assurance Case development for complex systems In addition, while there are benefits to be harvested, there is a realization that these do not come without effort and cost. Enabling model-based approaches requires structure, not only in an organizational context, but in a modeling context as well. There can be a steep learning curve and costs associated to train skilled modelers. But, on the other hand, not all of the assurance community need to be modelers. Models themselves must conform to ontologies that enable assurance. This places constraints upon the models and modelers. Optimums have yet to be developed where resources and constraints on modeling must be traded off in the organization and modeling efforts for projects. A number of barriers need to be overcome, as well, which pose challenges to the developers of the software that supports MBSE/MBMA. Information and data must be made to flow seamlessly through the life cycle. Because there is a wide variety of tools used in the community, to avoid the problems of the past of silos, delays, and diverging interests, information should flow among these tools to support the “single source of truth” paradigm of MBSE. This will greatly facilitate MBMA and advancement of assurance functions.

Evans, John W.↗

NASA NTRS2024

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center In-Space Cryogenic Propulsion Capabilities and Applications to Human Exploration

The current focus on lunar exploration and future human missions to Mars is driving in-space propulsion system requirements toward higher performance cryogenic systems with long-duration storage and operational capabilities. Not only do these systems offer higher performance than storable propellant options, but they also enable the potential for in-situ propellant production. Future Mars transit systems are envisioned to utilize either high-thrust nuclear thermal propulsion (with liquid hydrogen propellant), or hybrid systems with both cryogenic chemical systems (likely LOX/CH4) for high acceleration maneuvers and nuclear electric systems for long duration high Isp maneuvers. Exploration architectures based on either of these options require the use of high-performance cryogenic propellants with long-duration storage capabilities for both in-space transportation as well as planetary descent and ascent functions. Current efforts focusing on lunar exploration also rely on cryogenic propellants (either LOX/LCH4 or LOX/LH2) for lunar transit and descent/ascent transportation functions. In-space cryogenic propulsion systems pose numerous technology challenges with respect to long-duration propellant storage and usage, including advanced insulation, tank stratification and pressure management, cryogenic refrigeration to reduce propellant loss through boil off, low leakage cryogenic valves, low temperature liquid acquisition, and cryogenic propellant transfer. NASA has invested in technology development efforts, demonstrating individual technologies and systems-level operations. NASA Marshal Space Flight Center has also invested in multiple test facilities and modular test rigs that allow ground demonstration of numerous integrated technologies and systems concepts of operations. Additional investments have been made to mature analytical capabilities and design tools. These capabilities, both test/demonstration & engineering design/analysis, are available to support internal efforts and industrial partners in the development of exploration and science mission systems. With this increased interest, it is critical to understand the current state of in-space cryogenic propulsion technology, determine risks to its successful application to human exploration, and prepare the engineering, test, and evaluation capabilities to support the ambitious plans for future systems. This paper provides a survey of recent developments in in-space cryogenic propulsion and cryogenic propellant management technologies, as well as facilities and engineering/analytical capabilities ready to support current and future exploration efforts.

Cryogenic propulsion, cryogenic fluid management, ↗

NASA NTRS2024

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center In-Space Cryogenic Propulsion Capabilities and Applications to Human Exploration

Cryogenic propulsion, cryogenic fluid management, ↗

NASA NTRS2024

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center In-Space Cryogenic Propulsion Capabilities and Applications to Human Exploration

The current focus on lunar exploration and future human missions to Mars is driving in-space propulsion system requirements toward higher performance cryogenic systems with long-duration storage and operational capabilities. Not only do these systems offer higher performance than storable propellant options, but they also enable the potential for in-situ propellant production. Future Mars transit systems are envisioned to utilize either high-thrust nuclear thermal propulsion (with liquid hydrogen propellant), or hybrid systems with both cryogenic chemical systems (likely LOX/CH 4 ) for high acceleration manoeuvres and nuclear electric systems for long duration high Isp manoeuvres. Exploration architectures based on either of these options require the use of high-performance cryogenic propellants with long-duration storage capabilities for both in-space transportation as well as planetary descent and ascent functions. Current efforts focusing on lunar exploration also rely on cryogenic propellants (either LOX/LCH 4 or LOX/LH 2 ) for lunar transit and descent/ascent transportation functions. In-space cryogenic propulsion systems pose numerous technology challenges with respect to long-duration propellant storage and usage, including advanced insulation, tank stratification and pressure management, cryogenic refrigeration to reduce propellant loss through boil off, low leakage cryogenic valves, low temperature liquid acquisition, and cryogenic propellant transfer. NASA has invested in technology development efforts, demonstrating individual technologies and systems-level operations. NASA Marshal Space Flight Center has also invested in multiple test facilities and modular test rigs that allow ground demonstration of numerous integrated technologies and systems concepts of operations. Additional investments have been made to mature analytical capabilities and design tools. These capabilities (both test/demonstration & engineering design/analysis) are available to support both internal efforts and industrial partners in the development of exploration and science mission systems. With this increased interest, it is critical to understand the current state of in-space cryogenic propulsion technology, determine risks to its successful application to human exploration, and prepare the engineering, test, and evaluation capabilities to support the ambitious plans for future systems. This paper provides a survey of recent developments in in-space cryogenic propulsion and cryogenic propellant management technologies, as well as facilities and engineering/analytical capabilities ready to support current and future exploration efforts.

Cryogenic propulsion↗

NASA NTRS2024

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center In-Space Cryogenic Propulsion Capabilities and Applications to Human Exploration

The current focus on lunar exploration and future human missions to Mars is driving in-space propulsion system requirements toward higher performance cryogenic systems with long-duration storage and operational capabilities. Not only do these systems offer higher performance than storable propellant options, but they also enable the potential for in-situ propellant production. Future Mars transit systems are envisioned to utilize either high-thrust nuclear thermal propulsion (with liquid hydrogen propellant), or hybrid systems with both cryogenic chemical systems (likely LOX/CH 4 ) for high acceleration manoeuvres and nuclear electric systems for long duration high Isp manoeuvres. Exploration architectures based on either of these options require the use of high-performance cryogenic propellants with long-duration storage capabilities for both in-space transportation as well as planetary descent and ascent functions. Current efforts focusing on lunar exploration also rely on cryogenic propellants (either LOX/LCH 4 or LOX/LH 2 ) for lunar transit and descent/ascent transportation functions. In-space cryogenic propulsion systems pose numerous technology challenges with respect to long-duration propellant storage and usage, including advanced insulation, tank stratification and pressure management, cryogenic refrigeration to reduce propellant loss through boil off, low leakage cryogenic valves, low temperature liquid acquisition, and cryogenic propellant transfer. NASA has invested in technology development efforts, demonstrating individual technologies and systems-level operations. NASA Marshal Space Flight Center has also invested in multiple test facilities and modular test rigs that allow ground demonstration of numerous integrated technologies and systems concepts of operations. Additional investments have been made to mature analytical capabilities and design tools. These capabilities (both test/demonstration & engineering design/analysis) are available to support both internal efforts and industrial partners in the development of exploration and science mission systems. With this increased interest, it is critical to understand the current state of in-space cryogenic propulsion technology, determine risks to its successful application to human exploration, and prepare the engineering, test, and evaluation capabilities to support the ambitious plans for future systems. This paper provides a survey of recent developments in in-space cryogenic propulsion and cryogenic propellant management technologies, as well as facilities and engineering/analytical capabilities ready to support current and future exploration efforts.

Cryogenic propulsion↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Controls for Electrified Aircraft Propulsion

Advanced electrified aircraft propulsion (EAP) concepts with integrated power, propulsion, and thermal systems require the development of equally sophisticated controllers to fly safe and efficient missions. Hybrid electric aircraft utilize electric machines mechanically coupled to the engine shafts to extract and insert power for a variety of purposes. Additionally, electric machines may drive propulsive fans pulling from a combination of on-board energy storage devices and engine extracted power. NASA’s investment in hybrid electric aircraft hardware-in-the-loop testing enables controls research on representative engine models using a novel emulation and scaling methodology. High-voltage, high-power electrical powertrain presents several technical risks at altitude. High-power requires high efficiency to minimize losses. Superconducting electric machines and power distribution research at NASA has identified key challenges with potential controls solutions. These risks necessitate the development of controllers robust to model uncertainty, disturbances, and fault conditions. System health management and fault detection schemes play an important role in a multi-layer controls approach that utilizes a supervisor which oversees inner loops for the highly coupled power, propulsion, and thermal systems. Such a supervisory controller enables coordinates energy transfer between engines, energy storage devices, electric machines, propulsors, and heat exchangers. Existing methods have shown an improvement in engine operability using the hybrid electric powertrain.

Halle E Buescher↗

NASA NTRS2012

Spinoff 2011

Topics include: Bioreactors Drive Advances in Tissue Engineering; Tooling Techniques Enhance Medical Imaging; Ventilator Technologies Sustain Critically Injured Patients; Protein Innovations Advance Drug Treatments, Skin Care; Mass Analyzers Facilitate Research on Addiction; Frameworks Coordinate Scientific Data Management; Cameras Improve Navigation for Pilots, Drivers; Integrated Design Tools Reduce Risk, Cost; Advisory Systems Save Time, Fuel for Airlines; Modeling Programs Increase Aircraft Design Safety; Fly-by-Wire Systems Enable Safer, More Efficient Flight; Modified Fittings Enhance Industrial Safety; Simulation Tools Model Icing for Aircraft Design; Information Systems Coordinate Emergency Management; Imaging Systems Provide Maps for U.S. Soldiers; High-Pressure Systems Suppress Fires in Seconds; Alloy-Enhanced Fans Maintain Fresh Air in Tunnels; Control Algorithms Charge Batteries Faster; Software Programs Derive Measurements from Photographs; Retrofits Convert Gas Vehicles into Hybrids; NASA Missions Inspire Online Video Games; Monitors Track Vital Signs for Fitness and Safety; Thermal Components Boost Performance of HVAC Systems; World Wind Tools Reveal Environmental Change; Analyzers Measure Greenhouse Gasses, Airborne Pollutants; Remediation Technologies Eliminate Contaminants; Receivers Gather Data for Climate, Weather Prediction; Coating Processes Boost Performance of Solar Cells; Analyzers Provide Water Security in Space and on Earth; Catalyst Substrates Remove Contaminants, Produce Fuel; Rocket Engine Innovations Advance Clean Energy; Technologies Render Views of Earth for Virtual Navigation; Content Platforms Meet Data Storage, Retrieval Needs; Tools Ensure Reliability of Critical Software; Electronic Handbooks Simplify Process Management; Software Innovations Speed Scientific Computing; Controller Chips Preserve Microprocessor Function; Nanotube Production Devices Expand Research Capabilities; Custom Machines Advance Composite Manufacturing; Polyimide Foams Offer Superior Insulation; Beam Steering Devices Reduce Payload Weight; Models Support Energy-Saving Microwave Technologies; Materials Advance Chemical Propulsion Technology; and High-Temperature Coatings Offer Energy Savings.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS2006

NASA Crew Launch Vehicle Approach Builds on Lessons from Past and Present Missions

The United States Vision for Space Exploration, announced in January 2004, outlines the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) strategic goals and objectives, including retiring the Space Shuttle and replacing it with a new human-rated system suitable for missions to the Moon and Mars. The Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) that the new Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) lofts into space early next decade will initially ferry astronauts to the International Space Station and be capable of carrying crews back to lunar orbit and of supporting missions to Mars orbit. NASA is using its extensive experience gained from past and ongoing launch vehicle programs to maximize the CLV system design approach, with the objective of reducing total lifecycle costs through operational efficiencies. To provide in-depth data for selecting this follow-on launch vehicle, the Exploration Systems Architecture Study was conducted during the summer of 2005, following the confirmation of the new NASA Administrator. A team of aerospace subject matter experts used technical, budget, and schedule objectives to analyze a number of potential launch systems, with a focus on human rating for exploration missions. The results showed that a variant of the Space Shuttle, utilizing the reusable Solid Rocket Booster as the first stage, along with a new upper stage that uses a derivative of the RS-25 Space Shuttle Main Engine to deliver 25 metric tons to low-Earth orbit, was the best choice to reduce the risks associated with fielding a new system in a timely manner. The CLV Project, managed by the Exploration Launch Office located at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, is leading the design, development, testing, and operation of this new human-rated system. The CLV Project works closely with the Space Shuttle Program to transition hardware, infrastructure, and workforce assets to the new launch system . leveraging a wealth of lessons learned from Shuttle operations. The CL V is being designed to reduce costs through a number of methods, ranging from validating requirements to conducting trades studies against the concept design. Innovations such as automated processing will build on lessons learned from the Shuttle, other launch systems, Department of Defense operations experience, and subscale flight tests such as the Delta Clipper-Experimental Advanced (DCXA) vehicle operations that utilized minimal touch labor, automated cryogen ic propellant loading , and an 8-hour turnaround for a cryogenic propulsion system. For the CLV, the results of hazard analyses are contributing to an integrated vehicle health monitoring system that will troubleshoot anomalies and determine which ones can be solved without human intervention. Such advances will help streamline the mission operations process for pilots and ground controllers alike. In fiscal year 2005, NASA invested approximately $4.5 billion of its $16 bill ion budget on the Space Shuttle. The ultimate goal of the CLV Project is to deliver a safe, reliable system designed to minimize lifecycle costs so that NASA's budget can be invested in missions of scientific discovery. Lessons learned from developing the CLV will be applied to the growth path for future systems, including a heavy lift launch vehicle.

Dumbacher, Daniel L.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Probabilistic Risk Assessment Procedures Guide for NASA Managers and Practitioners (Second Edition)

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is a comprehensive, structured, and logical analysis method aimed at identifying and assessing risks in complex technological systems for the purpose of cost-effectively improving their safety and performance. NASA's objective is to better understand and effectively manage risk, and thus more effectively ensure mission and programmatic success, and to achieve and maintain high safety standards at NASA. NASA intends to use risk assessment in its programs and projects to support optimal management decision making for the improvement of safety and program performance. In addition to using quantitative/probabilistic risk assessment to improve safety and enhance the safety decision process, NASA has incorporated quantitative risk assessment into its system safety assessment process, which until now has relied primarily on a qualitative representation of risk. Also, NASA has recently adopted the Risk-Informed Decision Making (RIDM) process [1-1] as a valuable addition to supplement existing deterministic and experience-based engineering methods and tools. Over the years, NASA has been a leader in most of the technologies it has employed in its programs. One would think that PRA should be no exception. In fact, it would be natural for NASA to be a leader in PRA because, as a technology pioneer, NASA uses risk assessment and management implicitly or explicitly on a daily basis. NASA has probabilistic safety requirements (thresholds and goals) for crew transportation system missions to the International Space Station (ISS) [1-2]. NASA intends to have probabilistic requirements for any new human spaceflight transportation system acquisition. Methods to perform risk and reliability assessment in the early 1960s originated in U.S. aerospace and missile programs. Fault tree analysis (FTA) is an example. It would have been a reasonable extrapolation to expect that NASA would also become the world leader in the application of PRA. That was, however, not to happen. Early in the Apollo program, estimates of the probability for a successful roundtrip human mission to the moon yielded disappointingly low (and suspect) values and NASA became discouraged from further performing quantitative risk analyses until some two decades later when the methods were more refined, rigorous, and repeatable. Instead, NASA decided to rely primarily on the Hazard Analysis (HA) and Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) methods for system safety assessment.

Stamatelatos,Michael↗

DOE OSTI2024

Connected and Learning Based Optimal Freight Management for Efficiency

The management of the future heterogenous fleet is a complex decision-making problem. The heterogenous fleet is emerging as decarbonization technologies are deployed by fleets toward lowering the freight operation emissions in Medium and Heavy-duty vehicles. Traditionally, in fleets characterized by a homogeneous Diesel Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) powertrain, the process of fleet planning and operational optimization unfolds sequentially without the necessity to account for powertrain and vehicle-specific characteristics during dispatch decisions. Fleets with trucks less than 5 years old tend to maintain stable vehicle efficiency with minimal operational reliability risks for fleet managers. However, the landscape changes with the incorporation of emerging powertrain technologies, which lack extensive operational data and service experiences. This includes technologies like hybrid, Electric, Fuel Cell, or alternative fuel ICE. Operational decisions for fleets featuring heterogeneous powertrain technologies and facing limited access to alternative fueling and charging stations become intricate, requiring careful consideration and optimization at each dispatch. The difference in efficiency characteristics of emerging technologies, their range limitations, and the restricted availability of charging/alternative fueling infrastructure, coupled with sensitivity to driving conditions (e.g., EV range reduction in low temperatures) and their impact on component aging (such as batteries), become pivotal factors influencing the reliable and efficient freight transportation. To make the path toward low emission freight transportation efficient and reliable, an AI-assisted fleet management software is developed in this project to help fleet managers in optimizing both adoption of emerging powertrain decarbonization, connected and automated technologies and also operating the fleet after such technologies are deployed as schematically. Freight transportation requirements are different depending on the cargos to be shipped, customer requirements and regions of operations. This further highlights the need for software and digital solutions to tailor deployment and operation of emerging powertrain, connectivity, and automation technologies toward the specific fleet operation requirements. The fleet management optimizer was also integrated with a model of the fleet to simulate the operation of the fleet over 1 year of the baseline fleet operation (250,000+ shipments) indicating the significance of day-to-day variations on emissions and energy consumption of a freight transportation fleet. The results demonstrate ≥20% improvement in freight efficiency in terms of WTW CO2 per ton-mile of cargo shipments while all fleet operation constraints are enforced, and the cost (CapEx and OpEx) is minimized.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Analysis of Input from Wildfire Incident Experts to Identify Key Risks and Hazards in Wildfire Emergency Response

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) describes wildland fires as, “a force of nature that can be nearly as impossible to prevent, and as difficult to control, as hurricanes, tornadoes and floods.” Existing challenges in managing wildland fires often put first responders’ lives at risk. The emergence of drones and their capabilities to supplement human efforts could alleviate some, if not all, of those risks that first responders face during wildfire management efforts. However, the process of adding drones to wildfire response has come with its own challenges as well. NASA’s System-Wide Safety Project is working towards overcoming these challenges to enable routine transfer of risk from responders to aviation assets. The concept of operations and model-based systems engineering (MBSE) effort for this shift is underway. To inform and to validate the MBSE effort, we delivered a questionnaire to wildland firefighting experts on the hazards they currently face. This questionnaire has given us insight and a better understanding of the challenges related to the use of drones from a first responder’s point of view. We are using this information to better address responders’ concerns, develop a safety management system, and eliminate the roadblocks that prevent the use of drones in wildfire management.

Wildfire↗

NASA NTRS2005

Learning Lessons from the X-37 Project

The X-37 was planned as an automated vehicle capable of flight-testing new aerospace technologies in combined environments that are beyond the capability of existing ground or flight platforms. Flight demonstration with the X-37 architecture and configuration in relevant environments was planned to reduce the risk of developing launch vehicle technologies for sustainable, affordable exploration and other aerospace applications. Current plans are for the X-37 Approach and Landing Test Vehicle (ALTV) to be atmospheric tested in 2005 from Scaled Composite s White Knight carrier aircraft at up to 40,000 feet over California's Mojave Spaceport, with landing and turnaround maintenance performed. The Flight Operations Control Center will conduct the mission, using a streamlined operations concept. Taxi-tow and captive-carry tests will be conducted prior to the atmospheric-test series. Sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) with NASA participation, technical objectives are to: (1) mature Computed Air Data System/Remote Pressure Sensor technology, (2) manage energy during Terminal Area Energy Management/Heading Alignment Cone maneuvers, and (3) validate the aerodatabase. The X-37 Project began in 1999 under a cooperative agreement as an element of NASA's Future X Program and transitioned to a NASA Research Announcement under the Space Launch Initiative. In mid-2004, NASA transferred ownership to DARPA, with its heritage of performing high-risk, high-payoff research and development (R&D). NASA contributes technical expertise, including risk analysis and system integration. The Boeing Company is the prime contractor, with nationwide suppliers. This partnership exemplifies the synergy attainable when NASA Centers, other Government agencies, and industry work together toward a common goal - contributing to the knowledge base for U.S. exploration and other aerospace endeavors. The X-37 team represents a range of space transportation disciplines - from engineering to management. Some members have been with the project since its inception. All have gained priceless experience during the design, manufacturing, and testing of the ALTV, as well as through developing advanced orbital flight technologies, such as state-of-the-art Thermal Protection Systems and hot structures. Throughout this process, the X-37 Project team captures lessons that are directly applicable to other such efforts. The upcoming ALTV flights offer another dimension of data and first-hand experience that will prove invaluable to those designing new generations of reusable spacecraft. And ongoing technology developments will expand the aerospace knowledge base. Delivering prototype hardware is always a risky proposition. During the course of this effort, the X-37 team has experienced many challenging opportunities, delivering significant accomplishments and learning numerous lessons in the process. The ability to manage the risk landscape is key to overcoming obstacles, especially technical hurdles that are encountered in progressing hardware from design to flight. The approach to managing risk under this partnership is evolving but, in general, the team allocates resources to reduce the likelihood of severe-consequence risks, thus maximizing mission success and ensuring that the X-37 Project delivers value to its stakeholders. As the team sharpens its focus on operations, it continues to contribute knowledge to those who would undertake high-risk, high-payoff R&D and provides valuable experience to implement the Vision for Space Exploration.

Turner, Susan↗

NASA NTRS2015

Fault Management Architectures and the Challenges of Providing Software Assurance

The satellite systems Fault Management (FM) is focused on safety, the preservation of assets, and maintaining the desired functionality of the system. How FM is implemented varies among missions. Common to most is system complexity due to a need to establish a multi-dimensional structure across hardware, software and operations. This structure is necessary to identify and respond to system faults, mitigate technical risks and ensure operational continuity. These architecture, implementation and software assurance efforts increase with mission complexity. Because FM is a systems engineering discipline with a distributed implementation, providing efficient and effective verification and validation (VV) is challenging. A breakout session at the 2012 NASA Independent Verification Validation (IVV) Annual Workshop titled VV of Fault Management: Challenges and Successes exposed these issues in terms of VV for a representative set of architectures. NASA's IVV is funded by NASA's Software Assurance Research Program (SARP) in partnership with NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) to extend the work performed at the Workshop session. NASA IVV will extract FM architectures across the IVV portfolio and evaluate the data set for robustness, assess visibility for validation and test, and define software assurance methods that could be applied to the various architectures and designs. This work focuses efforts on FM architectures from critical and complex projects within NASA. The identification of particular FM architectures, visibility, and associated VVIVV techniques provides a data set that can enable higher assurance that a satellite system will adequately detect and respond to adverse conditions. Ultimately, results from this activity will be incorporated into the NASA Fault Management Handbook providing dissemination across NASA, other agencies and the satellite community. This paper discusses the approach taken to perform the evaluations and preliminary findings from the research including identification of FM architectures, visibility observations, and methods utilized for VVIVV.

Fault Management↗