Results for “Probabilistic risk” — Page 14

DOE OSTI2025

Risks and Benefits of Pressurized Water Reactor Coupling to Energy Storage and Water Desalination

This research explored potential options to improve nuclear pressurized water reactors’ (PWRs) operational flexibility through integration with thermal energy storage (TES) and water desalination technologies. Benefits and challenges of TES technologies were reviewed, which includes sensible heat storage systems, latent heat storage systems, and thermochemical storage systems. Water desalination technologies were reviewed and compared, which includes multi-stage flash, reverse osmosis, and multi-effect distillation. The multi-effect distillation technology was selected to be coupled with a generic PWR. Risk of this cogeneration was quantified using the probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) methodology. Results suggest that nuclear-desalination cogeneration can be done safely because the additional risk to the PWR is trivial, and even in certain cases the PWR risk is decreased. This cogeneration operation is expected to improve efficiency of thermal utilization and the nuclear plant’s revenues. In summary, this study supports the potential of nuclear-desalination cogeneration systems to address water scarcity while optimizing nuclear energy use and managing safety.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Modeling FLEX Human Actions Using the EMRALD Dynamic Risk Assessment Tool

Most current efforts have modified and applied existing human reliability analysis (HRA) methods to treat human actions related to beyond-design-basis external events in which diverse and flexible coping strategies (FLEX) equipment would be deployed. However, many questions remain regarding the suitability of legacy HRA methods to address FLEX human actions, sparking the need for a new method of reasonably evaluating them. In this context, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) researched a relatively new approach to treating FLEX human actions via Event Modeling Risk Assessment Using Linked Diagrams (EMRALD) software. EMRALD was developed to support the increasing need for dynamic probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) models that can respond to evolving plant conditions during simulations. A couple benefits were identified when analyzing FLEX human actions through this software. In general, it is especially useful for evaluating a strategy’s feasibility, including FLEX human actions that require a relatively long time to perform. In this paper, we suggest how FLEX human actions can be modeled using the EMRALD software. Two different HRA modeling approaches using EMRALD are introduced: (1) procedure-based modeling and (2) PRA/HRA-based modeling. The former approach was introduced in the authors’ previous paper, whereas this paper mainly discusses how the latter approach works for an extended loss of AC power (ELAP) scenario with relevant procedures and PRA models. A hybrid method combining the two modeling approaches is introduced at the paper’s conclusion.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

NASA NTRS1992

Risk-based Spacecraft Fire Safety Experiments

Viewgraphs on risk-based spacecraft fire safety experiments are presented. Spacecraft fire risk can never be reduced to a zero probability. Probabilistic risk assessment is a tool to reduce risk to an acceptable level.

Apostolakis, G.↗

NASA NTRS2018

Bridging the Engineering and Medicine Gap

A primary challenge NASA faces is communication between the disparate entities of engineers and human system experts in life sciences. Clear communication is critical for exploration mission success from the perspective of both risk analysis and data handling. The engineering community uses probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) models to inform their own risk analysis and has extensive experience managing mission data, but does not always fully consider human systems integration (HSI). The medical community, as a part of HSI, has been working 1) to develop a suite of tools to express medical risk in quantitative terms that are relatable to the engineering approaches commonly in use, and 2) to manage and integrate HSI data with engineering data. This talk will review the development of the Integrated Medical Model as an early attempt to bridge the communication gap between the medical and engineering communities in the language of PRA. This will also address data communication between the two entities in the context of data management considerations of the Medical Data Architecture. Lessons learned from these processes will help identify important elements to consider in future communication and integration of these two groups.

Walton, M.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

IMPACT-ing Exploration Spaceflight Risk Prediction and Medical System Design

Human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in-mission medical care. Compared with the ISS, the greater distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and significant limitations on the evacuation of ill or injured crew. Spacecraft mass, volume, and power will be curtailed while higher demands will be placed on the crew’s knowledge, skills, and abilities. In this higher risk environment, it is important to: a) quantitatively estimate human system risk attributable to medical conditions, a process known as Probabilistic Risk Analysis, and b) use these estimates to inform medical system design. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a PRA and medical trade space analysis tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design. IMPACT improves upon and will soon replace NASA’s existing tool, the Integrated Medical Model, with: a novel evidence base baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 120 medical conditions; a significant increase in the number of medical resources that can be utilized and in the flexibility of their use; and the modelling of time lost performing mission-specific tasks due to medical conditions. IMPACT provides evidence-based, mission-specific PRA estimates of in-flight medical risk and an initial list of clinical capabilities and medical resources/hardware to be considered. In addition, sophisticated trade space capabilities estimate how human system risk varies with changes to the mission architecture or medical capability set (e.g., if the system mass constraint decreases by 10% or ultrasound is removed). This panel will provide an overview of IMPACT, its intended use cases, and future development plans. The panel will be the first public presentation of IMPACT results, including medical risk estimates for extended duration Artemis missions, the medical conditions most influencing medical risk metrics, and the clinical capabilities that have the largest effect on medical risk.

Ben Easter↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preliminary Medical Risk Estimates and Clinical Capability Needs for Artemis IV

BACKGROUND Human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in- mission medical care. Compared with the ISS, the greater distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and significant limitations on the evacuation of ill or injured crew. Spacecraft mass, volume, and power will be curtailed while higher demands will be placed on the crew’s knowledge, skills, and abilities. In this higher risk environment, it is important to: a) quantitatively estimate human system risk attributable to medical conditions, a process known as Probabilistic Risk Analysis, and b) use these estimates to inform medical system design. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a PRA and medical trade space analysis tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design. IMPACT v1.0 improves upon and will soon replace NASA’s existing tool, the Integrated Medical Model, with: a novel evidence base baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; a significant increase in the number of medical resources that can be utilized and in the flexibility of their use; and the modelling of time lost performing mission-specific tasks due to medical conditions. METHODOLOGY: This abstract will present IMPACT estimates of medical system risk and clinical capability needs for the Artemis IV mission. Artemis IV is currently scheduled for 2026 and will visit the Gateway space station in lunar orbit prior to the second lunar landing of the Artemis program. The baseline Artemis IV mission that was modeled was 28 days in duration with phases including Orion outbound, 4 days on the Gateway space station in lunar orbit, 2 crew on the surface of the Moon for approximately one week, an additional 5 days on Gateway, and then return to Earth. This baseline was compared to two alternative 34-day design reference missions (DRMs) that shifted the lunar sortie earlier or later in the mission profile. Assumptions included 2 female and 2 male crew and a notional medical system mass of 25 kg. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life (LOCL), consideration of medical evacuation (known as return to definitive care – RTDC), and an estimate of crew time lost due to medical conditions (Task Time Lost – TTL). The presentation will also describe the medical conditions that are the greatest drivers of risk as well as the clinical capabilities and resources that have the largest effect on risk. RESULTS: All three DRMs had very low probability of LOCL from medical conditions, primarily due to short duration. RTDC was also similar across the DRMs. In contrast, TTL was higher in the early lunar sortie DRM due to earlier occurrence of EVA-related medical conditions. Taken as a whole, there was no clinically significant difference in medical risk across the three missions. Results for clinical capabilities and an example medical equipment list will be discussed but were similar across DRMs.

D Hilmers↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Medical Risk Estimates and Clinical Capability Needs for A Long Duration Artemis Mission

BACKGROUND Human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in-mission medical care. Compared with the ISS, the greater distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and significant limitations on the evacuation of ill or injured crew. Spacecraft mass, volume, and power will be curtailed while higher demands will be placed on the crew’s knowledge, skills, and abilities. In this higher risk environment, it is important to: a) quantitatively estimate human system risk attributable to medical conditions, a process known as Probabilistic Risk Analysis, and b) use these estimates to inform medical system design. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a PRA and medical trade space analysis tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design. IMPACT v1.0 improves upon and will soon replace NASA’s existing tool, the Integrated Medical Model, with: a novel evidence base baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; a significant increase in the number of medical resources that can be utilized and in the flexibility of their use; and the modelling of time lost performing mission-specific tasks due to medical conditions. DISCUSSION: This abstract will present IMPACT estimates of medical system risk and clinical capability needs for an extended duration Artemis mission of approximately 9 months, with phases including outbound transit, 3 months on the Lunar Gateway space station, 3 months on the Lunar surface with EVAs, 3 months on Gateway (simulating the return phase of a Mars mission), and transit back to Earth. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life (LOCL), consideration of medical evacuation (known as return to definitive care – RTDC), and an estimate of crew time lost due to medical conditions (Task Time Lost – TTL). The presentation will also describe the medical conditions that are the greatest drivers of risk as well as the clinical capabilities and resources that have the largest effect on risk.

W Thompson↗

NASA NTRS2022

Medical Risk Estimates and Clinical Capability Needs for a Late Artemis Mission

BACKGROUND Human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in-mission medical care. Compared with the ISS, the greater distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and significant limitations on the evacuation of ill or injured crew. Spacecraft mass, volume, and power will be curtailed while higher demands will be placed on the crew’s knowledge, skills, and abilities. In this higher risk environment, it is important to: a) quantitatively estimate human system risk attributable to medical conditions, a process known as Probabilistic Risk Analysis, and b) use these estimates to inform medical system design. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a PRA and medical trade space analysis tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design. IMPACT v1.0 improves upon and will soon replace NASA’s existing tool, the Integrated Medical Model, with: a novel evidence base baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; a significant increase in the number of medical resources that can be utilized and in the flexibility of their use; and the modelling of time lost performing mission-specific tasks due to medical conditions. DISCUSSION: This abstract will present IMPACT estimates of medical system risk and clinical capability needs for an extended duration Artemis mission of approximately 9 months, with phases including outbound transit, 3 months on the Lunar Gateway space station, 3 months on the Lunar surface with EVAs, 3 months on Gateway (simulating the return phase of a Mars mission), and transit back to Earth. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life (LOCL), consideration of medical evacuation (known as return to definitive care –RTDC), and an estimate of crew time list due to medical conditions (Task Time Lost –TTL). The presentation will also describe the medical conditions that are the greatest drivers of risk as well as the clinical capabilities and resources that have the largest effect on risk.

A Anderson↗

NASA NTRS2024

Preliminary Medical Risk Estimates and Clinical Capability Needs for Late Artemis Missions

BACKGROUND Human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in- mission medical care. Compared with the ISS, the greater distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and significant limitations on the evacuation of ill or injured crew. Spacecraft mass, volume, and power will be curtailed while higher demands will be placed on the crew’s knowledge, skills, and abilities. In this higher risk environment, it is important to: a) quantitatively estimate human system risk attributable to medical conditions, a process known as Probabilistic Risk Analysis, and b) use these estimates to inform medical system design. IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a PRA and medical trade space analysis tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design. IMPACT v1.0 improves upon and will soon replace NASA’s existing tool, the Integrated Medical Model, with: a novel evidence base baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; a significant increase in the number of medical resources that can be utilized and in the flexibility of their use; and the modelling of time lost performing mission-specific tasks due to medical conditions. METHODOLOGY: This abstract will present IMPACT estimates of medical system risk and clinical capability needs for the Artemis IV mission. Artemis IV is currently scheduled for 2026 and will visit the Gateway space station in lunar orbit prior to the second lunar landing of the Artemis program. The baseline Artemis IV mission that was modeled was 28 days in duration with phases including Orion outbound, 4 days on the Gateway space station in lunar orbit, 2 crew on the surface of the Moon for approximately one week, an additional 5 days on Gateway, and then return to Earth. This baseline was compared to two alternative 34-day design reference missions (DRMs) that shifted the lunar sortie earlier or later in the mission profile. Assumptions included 2 female and 2 male crew and a notional medical system mass of 25 kg. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life (LOCL), consideration of medical evacuation (known as return to definitive care – RTDC), and an estimate of crew time lost due to medical conditions (Task Time Lost – TTL). The presentation will also describe the medical conditions that are the greatest drivers of risk as well as the clinical capabilities and resources that have the largest effect on risk. RESULTS: All three DRMs had very low probability of LOCL from medical conditions, primarily due to short duration. RTDC was also similar across the DRMs. In contrast, TTL was higher in the early lunar sortie DRM due to earlier occurrence of EVA-related medical conditions. Taken as a whole, there was no clinically significant difference in medical risk across the three missions. Results for clinical capabilities and an example medical equipment list will be discussed but were similar across DRMs.

D. Hilmers↗

DOE OSTI2021

Physics-Informed Machine Learning-Aided System Space Discretization

Decision-making is the process of identifying and choosing alternatives based on an agreed-upon set of metrics and preferences established by the decision-maker. There are options to be considered during the decision-making process and each option offers a different trajectory and associated success profile in moving from a given system state to the desired system state. The decision-making process typically involves uncertainties associated with the current component and system states. In this sense, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) can be an analytical method and tool for accomplishing the probabilistic aspect of the decision-making process. Dynamic PRA is an evolution of conventional PRA methodology in which driving forces on modeled plant elements and the element behaviors are explicitly modeled over time. In the recent past, risk assessment methodologies have evolved to address risk issues in a continuously evolving environment and a novel probabilistic dynamics framework in continuous time and state-space discretization forms has been proposed. While state-space discretization has shown its strength in both consequence and causal reasoning modes, several challenges, including the computational requirement and physically meaningful system state identification, exist. Conventional system space discretization has usually been done by either the equal width discretization method or a data-driven method. Those methods naturally possess challenges coming from the physical understanding of discretized system space (i.e., system state) and the trajectory moving from a given system state to another system state. The purpose of this paper is to present a physics-based and data-driven system state discretization method such that one can justify what the discretized system space implies and understand the state trajectory from the viewpoint of operational actions.

Kim, Junyung↗

NASA NTRS2005

Uncertainty Considerations for Ballistic Limit Equations

The overall risk for any spacecraft system is typically determined using a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA). A PRA attempts to determine the overall risk associated with a particular mission by factoring in all known risks (and their corresponding uncertainties, if known) to the spacecraft during its mission. The threat to mission and human life posed by the mircro-meteoroid & orbital debris (MMOD) environment is one of the risks. NASA uses the BUMPER II program to provide point estimate predictions of MMOD risk for the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station. However, BUMPER II does not provide uncertainty bounds or confidence intervals for its predictions. With so many uncertainties believed to be present in the models used within BUMPER II, providing uncertainty bounds with BUMPER II results would appear to be essential to properly evaluating its predictions of MMOD risk. The uncertainties in BUMPER II come primarily from three areas: damage prediction/ballistic limit equations, environment models, and failure criteria definitions. In order to quantify the overall uncertainty bounds on MMOD risk predictions, the uncertainties in these three areas must be identified. In this paper, possible approaches through which uncertainty bounds can be developed for the various damage prediction and ballistic limit equations encoded within the shuttle and station versions of BUMPER II are presented and discussed. We begin the paper with a review of the current approaches used by NASA to perform a PRA for the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station, followed by a review of the results of a recent sensitivity analysis performed by NASA using the shuttle version of the BUMPER II code. Following a discussion of the various equations that are encoded in BUMPER II, we propose several possible approaches for establishing uncertainty bounds for the equations within BUMPER II. We conclude with an evaluation of these approaches and present a recommendation regarding which of them would be the most appropriate to follow.

Schonberg, W. P.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Uncertainty Considerations for Ballistic Limit Equations

The overall risk for any spacecraft system is typically determined using a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA). A PRA determines the overall risk associated with a particular mission by factoring in all known risks to the spacecraft during its mission. The threat to mission and human life posed by the micro-meteoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) environment is one of the risks. NASA uses the BUMPER II program to provide point estimate predictions of MMOD risk for the Space Shuttle and the ISS. However, BUMPER II does not provide uncertainty bounds or confidence intervals for its predictions. In this paper, we present possible approaches through which uncertainty bounds can be developed for the various damage prediction and ballistic limit equations encoded within the Shuttle and Station versions of BUMPER II.

Schonberg, W. P.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

MEDPRAT Segments: Medical Risk and Capabilities on Multi-Crew, Multi-Vehicle Missions

The Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT) is a computational model used to help quantify the medical component of spaceflight medical risk.

Lawrence Leinweber↗

DOE OSTI2023

Physics-informed machine learning for fault-leakage reduced-order modeling

Geologic carbon storage (GCS) is a promising technology for mitigating CO 2 emissions. The overall success of GCS depends on safe operations that are informed by risk assessment and have proper mitigation plans in place. Performing quantitative probabilistic risk assessment for a GCS site using traditional reservoir simulators can be challenging due to the high computational costs. To overcome this challenge, the US Department of Energy’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) project has developed an integrated assessment modeling approach that utilizes computationally efficient reduced-order models (ROM) for simulating various parts of a GCS storage site to quantify uncertainty. Here, in this study, we develop a reduced-order model for fault leakage risk assessment. We use a deep learning approach to build the reduced-order model. We perform a sensitivity analysis and find that the deep learning model yields high accuracy with a much smaller computational cost than full-physics simulation. We also evaluate the performance of the model in scenarios where simulations are not possible to run, providing analysis not previously performed in fault-leakage ROM analyses. Based on a sensitivity analysis of the model, we suggest a simplified conceptual model for fault leakage and site monitoring.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Risk Importance Ranking of Fire Data Parameters to Enhance Fire PRA Model Realism

Fire is historically and analytically a significant contributor to nuclear power plant risk. The level of fire risk and the methods, tools and data for modeling this risk is highly debated by experts. One area of debate is the input data used in fire modeling and how to deal with this data’s high uncertainty. This report outlines initial work performed for determining the key parameters causing this uncertainty and how it propagates into nuclear power plant models. This research paves the way for the development of methods to reduce fire data uncertainty used in modeling. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has mandated that nuclear power plants perform fire risk modeling. However, there are several issues with the current risk modeling implementation that affect the results. Approved modeling methods can be overly conservative and often do not match plant experience. Also, the data used in the modeling can have high uncertainties and is influenced by expert judgement. To evaluate input data uncertainty, researchers performed an initial review of several fire experiments done at Sandia National Laboratories. Uncertainties for fire data can come from many sources, such as experiment design constraints, environmental conditions, or other plant-specific aspects. There are many different significant and insignificant parameters driving the uncertainty. Additionally, the uncertainty of the different input data used in the fire modeling could have a significant or insignificant effect on the entire plant risk. A four-step methodology was developed to perform Integrated Probabilistic Risk Assessment Importance Ranking. A demonstration case using these steps was set up and three of the four steps were completed in fiscal year (FY) 2019 and the fourth step done FY 2020. These steps are: 1. The qualitative analysis of potential sources was conducted with the following items identified for the demonstration. • Maximum heat release rate • Time to maximum heat release rate • Duration of max heat release rate • Time to decay • Thermal conductivity of concrete • Specific heat of concrete • Density of concrete • Cable jacket thickness 2. A quantitative characterization of dominant sources of uncertainty was performed. A list of distributions and determined values of the dominant sources is shown in Appendix A. 3. A quantitative screening of the potential sources of uncertainty using Morris Elementary Effects Analysis was completed. An experimental model using the physics-based fire modeling tool Fire Dynamics Simulator was developed and coupled with the Risk Analysis Virtual Environment. The Morris analysis identified at least two parameters that can be eliminated as significant contributors (specific heat of concrete and cable jacket thickness). 4. Global importance measure (Global IM) analysis to generate a comprehensive ranking based on their influence on the plant risk. In this research, a moment-independent Global IM is used since it can address (a) uncertainty in the input parameters of the fire model, (b) uncertainty in the risk outputs, and (c) non-linearity and interactions among input parameters in the fire model, more accurately than the correlation-based and variance-based global methods. The observations from the research showed that, depending on the initial and boundary conditions of the fire scenarios, fire-induced damage could have a very small probability and could be dominated by the tail of the uncertainty distribution; hence, the accuracy of the correlation-based and variance-based methods is questionable. The moment-independent Global IM analysis in this research provides a better understanding of how experimental uncertainty data affects industry’s plant models and where improvements in that data will have the largest benefit for improving fire modeling accuracy in causing core damage. Among the five unscreened parameters obtained from the Morris EE analysis, the Global IM analysis results for the case study indicated that max heat release rate and fire location are the most important parameters. The report also outlines benefits of using a unified computational platform that integrates the underlying simulations (e.g., a fire progression model), quantitative screening (using the Morris EE method), and the Global IM analysis. A unified platform can (i) facilitate the ranking of input parameters considering multiple key fire scenarios simultaneously, rather than considering one scenario at a time, (ii) contribute to more explicit and accurate treatment of dependencies at multiple levels of Fire PRA, (iii) facilitate the sampling-based uncertainty quantification for Fire PRA, and (iv) help generating both “industry-wide” and "plant-specific" ranking of uncertainty sources in Fire PRA. Future research should be done to include additional parameters such as detection/suppression or cable fire spread. Adding a PRA software such as SAPHIRE to the RAVEN platform would help with plant model integration and improve treatment of fire-induced dependency. The I-PRA risk importance ranking methodology offered in this report can provide valuable information for efficiently (a) enhancing the realism of Fire PRA for existing plants and (b) supporting the development of Dynamic Fire PRA for advanced reactors and new plants.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS1991

Uncertainty analysis for Ulysses safety evaluation report

As part of the effort to review the Ulysses Final Safety Analysis Report and to understand the risk of plutonium release from the Ulysses spacecraft General Purpose Heat Source-Radioisotope Thermal Generator, the Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel (INSRP) performed an integrated, quantitative analysis of the uncertainties of the calculated risk of plutonium release from Ulysses. Using state-of-art probabilistic risk assessment technology, the uncertainty analysis accounted for both variability and uncertainty of the key parameters of the risk analysis. The results show that INSRP had high confidence that risk of fatal cancers from potential plutonium release associated with calculated launch and deployment accident scenarios is low.

Frank, Michael V.↗

NASA NTRS2016

[MaRS Project]

The Space Exploration Division of the Safety and Mission Assurances Directorate is responsible for reducing the risk to Human Space Flight Programs by providing system safety, reliability, and risk analysis. The Risk & Reliability Analysis branch plays a part in this by utilizing Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) and Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) tools to identify possible types of failure and effective solutions. A continuous effort of this branch is MaRS, or Mass and Reliability System, a tool that was the focus of this internship. Future long duration space missions will have to find a balance between the mass and reliability of their spare parts. They will be unable take spares of everything and will have to determine what is most likely to require maintenance and spares. Currently there is no database that combines mass and reliability data of low level space-grade components. MaRS aims to be the first database to do this. The data in MaRS will be based on the hardware flown on the International Space Stations (ISS). The components on the ISS have a long history and are well documented, making them the perfect source. Currently, MaRS is a functioning excel workbook database; the backend is complete and only requires optimization. MaRS has been populated with all the assemblies and their components that are used on the ISS; the failures of these components are updated regularly. This project was a continuation on the efforts of previous intern groups. Once complete, R&M engineers working on future space flight missions will be able to quickly access failure and mass data on assemblies and components, allowing them to make important decisions and tradeoffs.

Aruljothi, Arunvenkatesh↗

NASA NTRS2018

Modeling the Risk of U.S. Offshore Oil & Gas Exploration-Well Drilling, Commercial Nuclear Plants, and Human Spaceflight

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) has been applied in different industries for many years. Each industry and technology area presents varying challenges and priorities, and the risk models therefore need to be somewhat different. This paper compares aspects of risk modeling of offshore drilling, nuclear plant operation, and human spaceflight. Risk models in all three technology areas have certain high-level similarities: (1) they employ redundancy and diversity in their means to prevent or mitigate risk, including a mix of active and passive systems designed to respond to off-normal evolutions; (2) they are affected by human reliability; (3) their models require consideration of coupling between scenario structure and scenario phenomenology. But in examining the models in more detail, one sees important differences in methodology and emphasis. For purposes of comparison, this paper discusses aspects of a risk model of an offshore drilling operation in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, focusing on where such a development differs in important ways from models of commercial U.S. nuclear plants and models developed for human spaceflight.

Boyer, Roger L.↗