Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “systemic risk”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2010

From Process to Product: Your Risk Process at Work

The Space Life Sciences Directorate (SLSD) and Human Research Program (HRP) at the NASA/Johnson Space Center work together to address and manage the human health and performance risks associated with human space flight. This includes all human system requirements before, during, and after space flight, providing for research, and managing the risk of adverse long-term health outcomes for the crew. We previously described the framework and processes developed for identifying and managing these human system risks. The focus of this panel is to demonstrate how the implementation of the framework and associated processes has provided guidance in the management and communication of human system risks. The risks of early onset osteoporosis, CO2 exposure, and intracranial hypertension in particular have all benefitted from the processes developed for human system risk management. Moreover, we are continuing to develop capabilities, particularly in the area of information architecture, which will also be described. We are working to create a system whereby all risks and associated actions can be tracked and related to one another electronically. Such a system will enhance the management and communication capabilities for the human system risks, thereby increasing the benefit to researchers and flight surgeons.

Kundrot, Craig E.↗
NASA NTRS2024

Integrated Systems Engineering, Safety, Reliability and Risk Management – Minimizing Black Swan Events

This paper examines key barriers that can possibly inhibit safe and reliable mission execution and, in the worst case, result in loss of human life due to many unknown contributory factors that can lead to Black Swan events. Some of the representative contributory factors include decision errors, overconfidence and a host of common causes including cultural and human factors. Decisions are always easy to criticize in hindsight when more information is available after a major accident. Depending on the type and complexity of the project and/or mission, the catastrophic risks of drifting into failure can be alleviated by implementing uniquely and strategically tailored Integrated-System-of-Systems, dynamic, risk-informed decision management processes. This paper presents some of the lessons learned from James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), NASA’s Human Space Flight program, and industry that provide motivation to organizations working on mega-complex missions to prudently accomplish targeted mission success. These lessons are important for future human Lunar, Mars and Beyond missions planned to be pursued by NASA through a public-private partnership using nimble but effective safety-conscious, proven sound engineering practices including implementation of integrated risk mitigation practices.

SLS↗
NASA NTRS2016

Risk Reduction for the System Design of an Enhanced MMRTG

Engineering of an enhanced Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (eMMRTG) began 3 years ago with agreement between the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The Jet Propulsion Laboratory is leading the transfer of skutterudite thermoelectric couple technology to industry and leading the systems engineering of the proposed eMMRTG. Should NASA fund the flight development of an eMMRTG, the DOE would lead the flight system development. The analytical models and design of the MMRTG have been enhanced to use skutterudite couples developed at Jet Propulsion Laboratory over the last two decades. This required a thorough evaluation of the MMRTG design, and concurrent engineering of an enhanced MMRTG to shed light on potential design issues or risks. At the end of the U.S. fiscal year (FY) 2015, a complete catalog of risks was produced. Tests, hardware development, and analyses have now been put in place to mitigate those risks to acceptable levels. Few risks can ever be truly eliminated unless a design is modified to eliminate specific risks and not introduce more severe risks. The design imperative for the eMMRTG is to change only a few MMRTG features; therefore, risks can largely only be mitigated, not eliminated, through design changes. However, many risks can be effectively - though not totally - eliminated without design changes. This paper briefly describes some of the documented risks and mitigations or reduction approaches to be applied in the coming 3 years, on the way to completing the eMMRTG concept.

eMMRTG↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Strategy for Risk Quantification of Spaceflight Crew Health and Performance Using Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment

At NASA, the Crew Health and Performance (CHP) system represents the span of countermeasures, capabilities, interventions, and tested processes and procedures that in combination work to mitigate the human component of spaceflight mission risk. Across the varying NASA mental models of the CHP system, the different functionalities needed to meet human flight systems standards can be broken down into specific categories (i.e. medical capability, environmental health, behavioral health). These categories can be further broken down into specific subgroups generally associated with the CHP functionalities meant to mitigate or buy down individual human system risks. Taking a similar development approach we seek to leverage dynamic probabilistic risk assessment as a means to quantify and relatively assess the human risk state within the crew health and performance domain. By utilizing existing tools as integrators, we propose a rapid development strategy for incorporating research and operational data that represent the influence of the CHP system functionalities, in order to provide order of magnitudes estimates of the influence on most human system risks outcomes. The model system utilizes a modest cumulative risk approach and that limits the scope to primary paths of influence between the CHP functionalities and human system risks, thus enabling quick prototypes of the integrative effects of CHP functional combinations to solicit valuable feedback from stakeholders and customers on the data, relationship, and structure of the integration.

Drayton Munster↗
NASA NTRS2000

A Model-based Framework for Risk Assessment in Human-Computer Controlled Systems

The rapid growth of computer technology and innovation has played a significant role in the rise of computer automation of human tasks in modem production systems across all industries. Although the rationale for automation has been to eliminate "human error" or to relieve humans from manual repetitive tasks, various computer-related hazards and accidents have emerged as a direct result of increased system complexity attributed to computer automation. The risk assessment techniques utilized for electromechanical systems are not suitable for today's software-intensive systems or complex human-computer controlled systems. This thesis will propose a new systemic model-based framework for analyzing risk in safety-critical systems where both computers and humans are controlling safety-critical functions. A new systems accident model will be developed based upon modem systems theory and human cognitive processes to better characterize system accidents, the role of human operators, and the influence of software in its direct control of significant system functions. Better risk assessments will then be achievable through the application of this new framework to complex human-computer controlled systems.

Hatanaka, Iwao↗
NASA NTRS1988

Artificial intelligence costs, benefits, risks for selected spacecraft ground system automation scenarios

In response to a number of high-level strategy studies in the early 1980s, expert systems and artificial intelligence (AI/ES) efforts for spacecraft ground systems have proliferated in the past several years primarily as individual small to medium scale applications. It is useful to stop and assess the impact of this technology in view of lessons learned to date, and hopefully, to determine if the overall strategies of some of the earlier studies both are being followed and still seem relevant. To achieve that end four idealized ground system automation scenarios and their attendant AI architecture are postulated and benefits, risks, and lessons learned are examined and compared. These architectures encompass: (1) no AI (baseline), (2) standalone expert systems, (3) standardized, reusable knowledge base management systems (KBMS), and (4) a futuristic unattended automation scenario. The resulting artificial intelligence lessons learned, benefits, and risks for spacecraft ground system automation scenarios are described.

Truszkowski, Walter F.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Artificial intelligence costs, benefits, and risks for selected spacecraft ground system automation scenarios

In response to a number of high-level strategy studies in the early 1980s, expert systems and artificial intelligence (AI/ES) efforts for spacecraft ground systems have proliferated in the past several years primarily as individual small to medium scale applications. It is useful to stop and assess the impact of this technology in view of lessons learned to date, and hopefully, to determine if the overall strategies of some of the earlier studies both are being followed and still seem relevant. To achieve that end four idealized ground system automation scenarios and their attendant AI architecture are postulated and benefits, risks, and lessons learned are examined and compared. These architectures encompass: (1) no AI (baseline); (2) standalone expert systems; (3) standardized, reusable knowledge base management systems (KBMS); and (4) a futuristic unattended automation scenario. The resulting artificial intelligence lessons learned, benefits, and risks for spacecraft ground system automation scenarios are described.

Truszkowski, Walter F.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS) Technology Demonstration and Risk Reduction Updates FY23-FY24

The Next STEP Phase BTrash Compaction Processing System (TCPS) is being developed for a technology demonstration on the International Space Station(ISS) to process common spacecraft consumables trash such as food packaging and clothing to reduce trash storage volume, recover water, safen(e.g. reduce biological activity), and shape the trash for storage, jettison, reuse (e.g.,radiation shielding) and/or recycling. Sierra Space is developing the flight demonstration hardware and National Aeronautics and Space Administration(NASA) continues to conduct risk reduction activities to exploreoperational scenarios, setting the stage for successful on-orbit tests. After the flight demonstration on ISS, the TCPS becomes available to be infused into NASA short-and long-term missions.This paper will discuss the rationale for the updated requirement definitions outlined in the 2023 International Conference on Environmental System TCPS paper and the ongoing risk reduction activities. In addition, drawing from lessons learned in the development of the TCPS, a discussion of other compression technologies will be introduced for various mission types.

Trash Compaction Processing System↗
NASA NTRS2002

Decomposition-Based Failure Mode Identification Method for Risk-Free Design of Large Systems

When designing products, it is crucial to assure failure and risk-free operation in the intended operating environment. Failures are typically studied and eliminated as much as possible during the early stages of design. The few failures that go undetected result in unacceptable damage and losses in high-risk applications where public safety is of concern. Published NASA and NTSB accident reports point to a variety of components identified as sources of failures in the reported cases. In previous work, data from these reports were processed and placed in matrix form for all the system components and failure modes encountered, and then manipulated using matrix methods to determine similarities between the different components and failure modes. In this paper, these matrices are represented in the form of a linear combination of failures modes, mathematically formed using Principal Components Analysis (PCA) decomposition. The PCA decomposition results in a low-dimensionality representation of all failure modes and components of interest, represented in a transformed coordinate system. Such a representation opens the way for efficient pattern analysis and prediction of failure modes with highest potential risks on the final product, rather than making decisions based on the large space of component and failure mode data. The mathematics of the proposed method are explained first using a simple example problem. The method is then applied to component failure data gathered from helicopter, accident reports to demonstrate its potential.

Tumer, Irem Y.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Exploration Ground Systems Program: Technology Demonstrations and Risk Reduction for Sustainable Surface Operations

This presentation discusses NASA’s Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) Program Technology Infusion Strategy and the results from EGS technology demonstration projects, including Integrated Health Management capabilities for Condition Based and Predictive Maintenance, conservation of cryogenic fluids, and logistics management/commonality of maintenance equipment, tools, and consumables. The presentation also discusses how technologies and capabilities implemented for ground systems (i.e. automated/ autonomous operations and maintenance) can be leveraged to help reduce risk for sustainable lunar surface operations.

Technology Infusion↗
NASA NTRS2014

Exploration Systems Development (ESD) Approach to Enterprise Risk Management

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Exploration Systems Development (ESD) Division has implemented an innovative approach to Enterprise Risk Management under a unique governance structure and streamlined integration model. ESD's mission is to design and build the capability to extend human existence to deep space. The Enterprise consists of three Programs: Space Launch System (SLS), Orion, and Ground Systems Development and Operations (GSDO). The SLS is a rocket and launch system that will be capable of powering humans, habitats, and support systems to deep space. Orion will be the first spacecraft in history capable of taking humans to multiple destinations within deep space. GSDO is modernizing Kennedy's spaceport to launch spacecraft built and designed by both NASA and private industry. ESD's approach to Enterprise Risk Management is commensurate with affordability and a streamlined management philosophy. ESD Enterprise Risk Management leverages off of the primary mechanisms for integration within the Enterprise. The Enterprise integration approach emphasizes delegation of authority to manage and execute the majority of cross-program activities and products to the individual Programs, while maintaining the overall responsibility for all cross-program activities at the Division. The intent of the ESD Enterprise Risk Management approach is to improve risk communication, to avoid replication and/or contradictory strategies, and to minimize overhead process burden. This is accomplished by the facilitation and integration of risk information within ESD. The ESD Division risks, Orion risks, SLS risks, and GSDO risks are owned and managed by the applicable Program. When the Programs have shared risks with multiple consequences, they are jointly owned and managed. When a risk is associated with the integrated system that involves more than one Program in condition, consequence, or mitigation plan, it is considered an Exploration Systems Integration (ESI) Risk. An ESI risk may require visibility and risk handling by multiple organizations. The Integrated Risk Working Group (IRWG) is a small team of Risk experts that are responsible for collaborating and communicating best practices. In addition, the forum facilitates proper integration of risks across the Enterprise. The IRWG uses a Continuous Risk Management approach for facilitating the identification, analysis, planning, tracking, and controlling of ESI Risks. The ESD Division, Programs, and Integrated Task Teams identify ESI Risks. The IRWG maintains a set of metrics for understanding Enterprise Risk process and the overall Risk Posture. The team is also actively involved in the modeling of risk for Enterprise Performance Management. With the Enterprise being constrained in Schedule and Budget, and with significant technical complexity, the appropriate use of Risk Management techniques is crucial to the success of the Enterprise. The IRWG achieves this through the modified approach, providing a forum for collaboration on risks that cross boundaries between the separate entities.

Bauder, Stephen P.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Trash Compaction Processing System (TCPS) Technology Demonstration and Risk Reduction Updates FY23-FY24 Presentation

The Next STEP Phase BTrash Compaction Processing System (TCPS) is being developed for a technology demonstration on the International Space Station(ISS) to process common spacecraft consumables trash such as food packaging and clothing to reduce trash storage volume, recover water, safen(e.g. reduce biological activity), and shape the trash for storage, jettison, reuse (e.g.,radiation shielding) and/or recycling. Sierra Space is developing the flight demonstration hardware and National Aeronautics and Space Administration(NASA) continues to conduct risk reduction activities to exploreoperational scenarios, setting the stage for successful on-orbit tests. After the flight demonstration on ISS, the TCPS becomes available to be infused into NASA short-and long-term missions.This paper will discuss the rationale for the updated requirement definitions outlined in the 2023 International Conference on Environmental System TCPS paper and the ongoing risk reduction activities. In addition, drawing from lessons learned in the development of the TCPS, a discussion of other compression technologies will be introduced for various mission types.

Trash Compaction Processing System↗
NASA NTRS2015

2015 Advanced Environmental Health/Advanced Food Technology Standing Review Panel

The 2015 Advanced Environmental Health/Advanced Food Technology (AEH/AFT) Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) met for a site visit in Houston, TX on December 14 - 15, 2015. The SRP met with representatives from the Space Human Factors and Habitability (SHFH) Element and members of the Human Research Program (HRP) to review the updated research plans for the Risk of Adverse Health Effects Due to Host-Microorganism Interactions (MicroHost Risk) and the Risk of Performance Decrement and Crew Illness due to an Inadequate Food System (Food Risk). During the meeting, the SRP also met with the vehicle engineers to discuss possible food storage options. The SRP would like to commend Dr. Oubre and Dr. Douglas for their detailed presentations, as well the frank, refreshing, and comprehensive engineering presentation. This gave much needed perspective to the food storage issues and reassured the committee about NASA's approach to the problem. In terms of critiques, the SRP remains unconvinced about the rationale for probiotic use other than for specific applications supported by the literature. It is not clear what gap or problem is being addressed by the use of probiotics, and the rationale for their use needs to be clearly rooted in the available literature. The SRP thinks that if low-Earth orbit is associated with immune system impairment, then there may additional risks linked with the use of probiotics. It is not clear to the SRP how NASA will determine if probiotics are having their intended beneficial effect. A similar concern is raised as to what gaps or problems are being addressed by "functional foods". Mixed infections, rather than single species infections, which can augment severity of disease, also represent a significant concern. Overall, the SRP considers this to be a strong program that is well-organized, well-coordinated and generates valuable data.

Steinberg, Susan↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Capabilities Assessments for Autonomous Missions: A Multi-Team Research Effort to Reduce Risk in the Human-System Integration Architecture for Future Deep-Space Missions

In future exploration missions beyond low earth-orbit, crew will have to execute complex operations and respond to off-nominal events, without real-time support from Mission Control. It is anticipated that increased reliance on automated systems, including human-centric vehicle and information architecture, will need to be designed to support the crew; increased risk to performance, health, and safety may occur if these are not implemented appropriately. The Human Factors and Behavioral Performance Element (HFBP) in the NASA Human Research Program supports research to characterize and mitigate such human health and performance risks, including the Risk of Adverse Outcome Due to Inadequate Human Systems Integration Architecture (HSIA). The HSIA risk addresses the integration of onboard capability and the crew roles and responsibilities necessary to enable the crew to respond effectively and efficiently in the increasingly autonomous mission operations environment. In 2017, HFBP released the “Human Capabilities Assessments for Autonomous Missions” (HCAAM) research topic to address HSIA related questions. HCAAM is a major NASA research effort that has assembled a multidisciplinary team from seven institutions to work closely with design and engineering efforts on research towards developing and refining human performance standards, guidelines and automation tools. The scientific focus is on quantitative assessment of human capabilities relevant to future deep-space missions during which earth/spacecraft communication is so delayed and intermittent that the crew must be able to function autonomously. The integrated strategy of the HCAAM project characterizes human capabilities and limitations related to potential performance decrements during long duration exploration mission spaceflight as relevant to both routine and complex task performance; defines system characteristics that reduce the likelihood or impact of potential decrements in human performance capabilities; performs integrated assessment of intelligent system responses within the context of an operational environment with relevant NASA tools, systems, and data structures in order to determine positive or negative interactions and validate recommended approaches; and proposes specific updates to existing standards and guidelines for inclusion in NASA handbooks for the design of future spacecraft intelligent systems that provide crew performance assessment/feedback, and to also serve as decision-support aids for the onboard crew (i.e., NASA-STD-3001, and NASA/SP-Human Integration Design Handbook (HIDH)). The scientific research vectors being addressed by the seven HCAAM teams include: - crew task performance (accuracy, efficiency) (crew + automation) - crew performance (accuracy, efficiency) - crew Situation Awareness - procedure design and multi-modal enhancement - concurrent tasking (mixed manual + some level of autonomy) - task handover - crew self-planning and time-lining - task design - trust in automation, real-time calibration - human multi-sensory feedback and guidance - human trust in on-board software-based intelligent assistants - virtual assistants The presentation will highlight plans and progress made in each of these research areas as well as the methods by which surrogate astronaut crews in the NASA JSC HERA spaceflight analog facility will function as human test subjects for all of the HCAAM research projects.

HCAAM VNSCOR↗
NASA NTRS2001

Aviation System Safety and Pilot Risk Perception: Implications for Enhancing Decision-Making Skills

This research explores risk perception in a defined population of flight instructors and the implications of these views for flight training. Flight instructors and students engaged in collegiate aviation flight training were interviewed for this qualitative study. Thirty-three percent of the instructors interviewed reported that flying is not a risky activity. This is important because research identifies risk perception as one factor influencing instructional choices. These choices can then impact the subsequent decision-making processes of flight students. Facilitating pilot decision-making through the use of an appropriate type of learning that incorporates the modeling of consensually validated cognitive procedures and risk management processes is discussed.

Green, Mavis F.↗