Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “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 307 records · Page 17
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2023

Adaptive Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Reduces Risk of Software Impacting Safety in Artemis Missions

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is asking more of its human spaceflight programs than ever before through the collective Artemis Missions. The NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Program contributes to NASA’s human spaceflight goals by providing IV&V services for NASA’s critical spacecraft and ground software. The IV&V Program is tasked with providing assurance from both individual and integrated mission software perspectives. The Artemis IV&V organization is actively supporting six distinct development efforts: Orion, the Space Launch System (SLS), Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Mission Control Center (MCC), the Lunar Gateway, and the Human Landing System (HLS), representing a wide diversity of developer organizations, management structures, and development approaches. With much of this extremely complex flight and ground software being essential to human safety both on the ground and in space, Artemis IV&V is likewise challenged to provide more value-added assurance to future Artemis missions within a constrained budget. To meet this challenge, Artemis IV&V employs a variety of novel and evolving “Adaptive IV&V” approaches for planning and executing IV&V analysis to increase both the efficiency and effectiveness of the IV&V Program’s assurance activities, and to address the difficulties imposed by assuring software for a large, highly integrated, multi-mission enterprise managed and executed by physically and organizationally distinct programs. Instilling agile principles like iterative planning cycles, self-organizing teams, and regular retrospectives, into IV&V planning and execution has led to a more rapid turnaround of a minimum viable assurance product and allowed for increased alignment of assurance activities with development progress. Adopting an assurance case methodology has led to greater consistency and clearer communication of assurance design and provided a foundation for long-term maintenance of assurance plans, products, and results across missions. The IV&V-developed Assurance / Safety Case Analytical Network (A-SCAN) framework and tool has enabled the quantification and tracking of system/software risk and confidence. These confidence measures provide a means to repeatedly express the impact of planned and completed assurance work and the remaining residual risk. Applied as part of a “Follow-the-Risk” organizational ethos, this allows consistent rightsizing of analysis rigor and intensity commensurate with the perceived risk of defects, as well as appropriate targeting of the highest risk areas of the software to find safety issues before they can manifest. Finally, the development of the IV&V Advanced Risk Reduction Integrated Software Test and Operations Tri-program Lightweight Environment (ARRISTOTLE), an integrated software-only simulation of Orion, SLS, and EGS systems, has made it possible to independently test integrated pad and flight scenarios and inject faults to observe how the Artemis multi-program, mission software behaves in degraded modes and in response to hazards. These adaptive IV&V investments have enabled Artemis IV&V to become more efficient and effective in IV&V planning and execution and respond more readily to changes in the risk landscape, increasing the breadth and depth of risk reduction possible within the available resources. Residual risk tracking allows IV&V to communicate more effectively with stakeholders, both internal and external at all levels, and inform key decision-making personnel. This evolving assurance design approach provides IV&V surety that work is performed in the highest risk, most value-added areas of the software, to keep our astronauts and ground crews safe and ensure mission success.

Gerek A Whitman↗
NASA NTRS2023

Adaptive Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Reduces Risk of Software Impacting Safety in Artemis Missions

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is asking more of its human spaceflight programs than ever before through the collective Artemis Missions. The NASA Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Program contributes to NASA’s human spaceflight goals by providing IV&V services for NASA’s critical spacecraft and ground software. The IV&V Program is tasked with providing assurance from both individual and integrated mission software perspectives. The Artemis IV&V organization is actively supporting six distinct development efforts: Orion, the Space Launch System (SLS), Exploration Ground Systems (EGS), Mission Control Center (MCC), the Lunar Gateway, and the Human Landing System (HLS), representing a wide diversity of developer organizations, management structures, and development approaches. With much of this extremely complex flight and ground software being essential to human safety both on the ground and in space, Artemis IV&V is likewise challenged to provide more value-added assurance to future Artemis missions within a constrained budget. To meet this challenge, Artemis IV&V employs a variety of novel and evolving “Adaptive IV&V” approaches for planning and executing IV&V analysis to increase both the efficiency and effectiveness of the IV&V Program’s assurance activities, and to address the difficulties imposed by assuring software for a large, highly integrated, multi-mission enterprise managed and executed by physically and organizationally distinct programs. Instilling agile principles like iterative planning cycles, self-organizing teams, and regular retrospectives, into IV&V planning and execution has led to a more rapid turnaround of a minimum viable assurance product and allowed for increased alignment of assurance activities with development progress. Adopting an assurance case methodology has led to greater consistency and clearer communication of assurance design and provided a foundation for long-term maintenance of assurance plans, products, and results across missions. The IV&V-developed Assurance / Safety Case Analytical Network (A-SCAN) framework and tool has enabled the quantification and tracking of system/software risk and confidence. These confidence measures provide a means to repeatedly express the impact of planned and completed assurance work and the remaining residual risk. Applied as part of a “Follow-the-Risk” organizational ethos, this allows consistent rightsizing of analysis rigor and intensity commensurate with the perceived risk of defects, as well as appropriate targeting of the highest risk areas of the software to find safety issues before they can manifest. Finally, the development of the IV&V Advanced Risk Reduction Integrated Software Test and Operations Tri-program Lightweight Environment (ARRISTOTLE), an integrated software-only simulation of Orion, SLS, and EGS systems, has made it possible to independently test integrated pad and flight scenarios and inject faults to observe how the Artemis multi-program, mission software behaves in degraded modes and in response to hazards. These adaptive IV&V investments have enabled Artemis IV&V to become more efficient and effective in IV&V planning and execution and respond more readily to changes in the risk landscape, increasing the breadth and depth of risk reduction possible within the available resources. Residual risk tracking allows IV&V to communicate more effectively with stakeholders, both internal and external at all levels, and inform key decision-making personnel. This evolving assurance design approach provides IV&V surety that work is performed in the highest risk, most value-added areas of the software, to keep our astronauts and ground crews safe and ensure mission success.

Gerek Whitman↗
DOE OSTI2026

Development and application of an environmental risk register for marine energy device and project developers

The marine energy industry is steadily advancing as more devices are deployed worldwide. However, several challenges and barriers remain, such as lingering uncertainty regarding the potential environmental effects of marine energy devices on marine animals, habitats, and ecosystems. Concerns have led to difficulty navigating permitting and consenting processes and receiving authorization to deploy devices in the marine environment, including extended timelines and costs. Based on existing risk registers, a novel marine energy environmental risk register was created to help the marine energy industry move beyond these barriers. This risk register aims to aid marine energy device and project developers identify and assess potential environmental risks early in device design or project planning, document and track potential environmental interactions, prioritize risks and determine risk responses, and make decisions throughout device or project development. It can also be used as a tool to assist in communicating with regulators and advisors during permitting processes and to inform stakeholder and community engagement efforts. This paper details the methods and process to develop a risk register specific to environmental effects of marine energy and describes two use cases (one for wave energy and another for tidal energy) to highlight example results. Due to the tool's novelty, the paper showcases its application for the marine energy industry and acknowledges limitations and possible future improvements. Overall, the environmental risk register shows promise to support marine energy developers when identifying, tracking, and addressing potential environmental risks and to help successfully navigate permitting and deploy marine energy devices responsibly.

Environmental effects↗
DOE OSTI2022

Surrogate modeling for efficiently, accurately and conservatively estimating measures of risk

We present a surrogate modeling framework for conservatively estimating measures of risk from limited realizations of an expensive physical experiment or computational simulation. Risk measures combine objective probabilities with the subjective values of a decision maker to quantify anticipated outcomes. Given a set of samples, we construct a surrogate model that produces estimates of risk measures that are always greater than their empirical approximations obtained from the training data. These surrogate models limit over-confidence in reliability and safety assessments and produce estimates of risk measures that converge much faster to the true value than purely sample-based estimates. We first detail the construction of conservative surrogate models that can be tailored to a stakeholder’s risk preferences and then present an approach, based on stochastic orders, for constructing surrogate models that are conservative with respect to families of risk measures. Our surrogate models include biases that permit them to conservatively estimate the target risk measures. We provide theoretical results that show that these biases decay at the same rate as the L 2 error in the surrogate model. Numerical demonstrations confirm that risk-adapted surrogate models do indeed overestimate the target risk measures while converging at the expected rate.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS2011

Understanding Pre-Quantitative Risk in Projects

Standard approaches to risk management in projects depend on the ability of teams to identify risks and quantify the probabilities and consequences of these risks (e.g., the 5 x 5 risk matrix). However, long before quantification does - or even can - occur, and long after, teams make decisions based on their pre-quantitative understanding of risk. These decisions can have long-lasting impacts on the project. While significant research has looked at the process of how to quantify risk, our understanding of how teams conceive of and manage pre-quantitative risk is lacking. This paper introduces the concept of pre-quantitative risk and discusses the implications of addressing pre-quantitative risk in projects.

risk levels.↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2022

Information needs, approaches, and case studies in human health risk communication

This article uses ten case studies to illustrate the information needs, various communication approaches, and the communicator's role in explaining environmental health risks from a variety of hazards, to a variety of audiences, over time frames from days to years, using in person consultation, lectures, zooms, and email formats. Events often had a long history before the communication began and may have had a long tail afterward. Audiences may be public officials, companies, workers, communities, or individuals. Each individual may have their own understanding or mental model regarding the hazard, exposure, and risk. The communicator's role or intention may be to reassure an audience that has unrealistic exaggerated concerns or fears or to protect a client if the fears are realistic. Or it may be altruistic to inform a complacent audience to take the risks it faces more seriously. Although risk assessment research has advanced the techniques for communicating abstruse probabilities to audiences with low numeracy, in my experience, audiences are unimpressed by precise–sounding probability numbers, and are more interested in whether exposure is occurring or may occur and how to stop it. Often audiences have reason to be outraged and may be more concerned about punishing wrong doers than about the hazard itself, particularly when the exposure is past and cannot be undone. Thus, there is a difference between discussing the riskiness of a situation (risk communication) and what you are going to do about the situation (risk management). Risk communication is successful when the audience responds as intended, calming down or taking action. These case studies are drawn from a large number of risk communication experiences that I and my Rutgers colleagues have engaged in over the past four decades. Through the 20th century, New Jersey was the most densely industrialized State in United States. New Jersey experienced growth of the chemical and petrochemical industries and the unfortunately profligate disposal of toxic wastes. Having the most Superfund sites of any state is a dubious distinction, but New Jersey also has the most experience in evaluating and responding to these hazards.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Risk-Informed Approach for Regulatory Approval of Microreactor Transport

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) is addressing the challenges associated with safe transport of microreactors including the development and evaluation of regulatory options. PNNL developed a risk-informed regulatory framework for the licensing of the transportation of microreactors in which irradiated nuclear fuel is part microreactor transportation package. The framework lays out a viable regulatory pathway, including decision points for regulatory options and the supporting technical evaluations for those options in phases from near to long term. A microreactor and its contents will likely not be able to meet all the federal regulatory requirements as a Type B or fissile material transportation package under 10 CFR Part 71 (“Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material”). However, the regulatory framework developed by PNNL lays out a viable risk-informed licensing options that are safe and feasible. Risk assessment such as probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) can be used to show comparable safety to that provided by a Type B or fissile material package for surface transport. The framework includes guidance on applicable regulations and discusses historical precedence in using risk information for transportation licensing. The framework includes guidance for performing a microreactor transportation PRA, use and development of risk evaluation criteria, and factors such of defense-in-depth and safety margin concepts. Key advantages of using the approach are (1) increasing the likelihood of successfully obtaining regulatory transportation package approval, (2) informing the design on the relative risk significance of microreactor containment and shielding, and (3) informing the need for transportation compensatory measures. This paper focuses on two primary elements of the framework which are development of a transportation PRA for microreactor packages and development of the risk acceptance guidelines to assess the results of the PRA for regulatory decision-making.

microreactor, micro nuclear power plant, MNPP, ris↗
DOE OSTI2023

Integrating risk assessment methods for carbon storage: A case study for the quest carbon capture and storage facility

This paper documents how tools developed by the National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) complement the Bowtie risk assessment approach through the demonstration of a risk-based Area of Review (AoR) determination for the Quest Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) facility near Edmonton, Alberta with the NRAP Open-Source Integrated Assessment Model (NRAP Open-IAM). The Bowtie risk assessment for the Quest CCS site was developed by Shell Canada Ltd., who operates the asset on behalf of the Athabasca Oil Sand Project — a joint venture, owned by Canadian Natural Resources Ltd, Chevron Canada and Shell Canada Ltd. The Quest Bowtie treats site risk comprehensively – considering a large set of technical and project risks (e.g., operational risks, above ground infrastructure, public perception, etc.). NRAP tools, methods, and analyses are focused on quantitative assessment of subsurface technical risks. NRAP-Open-IAM was used to evaluate potential groundwater impacts at the Quest site, i.e., a sufficient change above background groundwater quality levels to be measurable, should CO 2 and/or brine leak from the reservoir via a faulty and/or compromised wellbore. Our results show there is a low potential for groundwater impact and support a further reduction (from ~460 to 100 km 2 ) to the established AoR for the Quest site. Integrating both approaches early in the site characterization period could significantly benefit commercial-scale projects by drastically reducing the region over which leakage risks (e.g., legacy wells) need to be evaluated, i.e., the AoR. This is especially true for brownfield sites, which could contain hundreds to thousands of legacy wells. Further, basing monitoring network design on those regions where impacts are most likely to occur has the potential to facilitate more efficient deployment of monitoring technologies and improve the likelihood of detecting a leak should one occur.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Understanding Competing Risks

Highlights: • Clinicians and researchers need to be cognizant of competing risks (ie, the occurrence of an event that precludes future development of the outcome of interest). • Censoring is appropriate when a patient being censored at a particular time (eg, owing to loss to follow-up) is deemed to have approximately the same future risk of developing the outcome of interest as patients still being followed, and when the reason for censoring is not related to events of interest. • Censoring is not appropriate in many scenarios; for example, a dead patient can never develop a future cancer recurrence or late effect. • Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis is commonly used for a time-to-event analysis when the primary outcome (eg, overall survival) has no meaningful competing risk and censoring is appropriate. Cox proportional hazards modeling can be used for multivariable analysis to examine the association between covariates and the primary outcome. • In the presence of competing events, incorrect use of the KM analysis will likely lead to an overestimation of the risk of the outcome of interest and biased estimates from both univariable and multivariable analyses. Therefore, KM usually should not be used to determine local recurrence risk because humanity is always at risk for dying, which is a competing risk. • A competing risk analysis is therefore most appropriate when there are competing events to the primary outcome of interest. The most commonly used multivariable model in these situations is the Fine-Gray model. • Many fundamental questions in radiation oncology—local and regional recurrence, treatment-related toxicity—are best addressed using competing risk methodologies.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Overview and Recommendations for Cyber Risk Assessment in Nuclear Power Plants

Digital instrumentation and control (I&C) systems are being deployed in nuclear power plants (NPPs) for both existing and advanced reactor designs. As I&C systems become more digitized to allow features like near autonomous control and remote operation, they introduce greater cyber risk to NPPs. Cyberattacks targeting industrial control systems (ICSs) are growing in both qualities and capabilities, which indicates that cybersecurity needs to be an integral part of risk assessment in the industry. Although there are some risk assessment methods in traditional information technology (IT) cybersecurity, the differences between IT and ICS cybersecurity make it infeasible to apply these risk assessment methods directly to ICSs. Some research has focused on risk assessment methods for ICSs, but few studies focus on applications to NPPs. Ideal risk frameworks for the nuclear industry are dynamic and account for system dependencies; this survey review focuses on such risk assessment methods both in and outside the nuclear field. In this article, the major challenges in cybersecurity risk assessment research are pointed out, and further research suggestions and considerations for cyber risk assessment in I&C systems are identified.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Preliminary Nuclear Containment Vessel Modeling for Multi-Hazard Probabilistic Risk Assessment under Seismic Hazards and Concrete Degradation

The current practice for natural phenomena hazards (NPH) risk assessment of nuclear facilities is to compute the risk for each hazard independently and then compound the total risk as a combination of single hazard risks. This state of practice does not consider correlations between hazards and the cascading impacts to structures, systems, and components (SSCs), and could thus underestimate the NPH risk or overestimate the nuclear facility safety. Events such as the Fukushima Daiichi accident have highlighted the importance of multi-hazard risk considerations to nuclear power plants (NPPs) that quantify the cascading damage effects to SSCs in the risk models. Moreover, the current fleet of NPPs in the United States is aging; these NPPs are now expected to operate well beyond their initially planned design life. Aging-related deterioration can potentially decrease the capacity of critical structures such as containment vessels to withstand NPH. Such aging considerations may not be adequately accounted for by the current NPH risk assessment guidelines. This paper presents a preliminary modeling and simulation of a representative reinforced concrete containment vessel subjected to seismic mainshock and aftershock considering concrete degradation due to alkali silica reaction. The broader aim is to develop multi-hazard time-dependent fragility functions that could be subsequently used in the probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) model. The multi-hazard component comes into play due to the consideration of damage to the containment vessel under seismic loads and concrete degradation. Consideration of concrete degradation also brings into play the time-dependent nature of the containment vessel response. The response of the containment vessel under varying degrees of concrete degradation to seismic loads is investigated. The results presented are simulated using the Multi-hazard Analysis for STOchastic time-DOmaiN phenomena (MASTODON) software for seismic analysis and the Blackbear software for concrete degradation and damage modeling. Both software are open source and developed within the Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE).

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Understanding the compound flood risk along the coast of the contiguous United States

Abstract. Compound flooding is a type of flood event caused by multiple flood drivers. The associated risk has usually been assessed using statistics-based analyses or hydrodynamics-based numerical models. This study proposes a compound flood (CF) risk assessment (CFRA) framework for coastal regions in the contiguous United States (CONUS). In this framework, a large-scale river model is coupled with a global ocean reanalysis dataset to (a) evaluate the CF exposure related to the coastal backwater effects on river basins, and (b) generate spatially distributed data for analyzing the CF hazard using a bivariate statistical model of river discharge and storm surge. The two kinds of risk are also combined to achieve a holistic understanding of the continental-scale CF risk. The estimated CF risk shows remarkable inter- and intra-basin variabilities along the CONUS coast with more variabilities in the CF hazard over the US west and Gulf coastal basins. Different risk assessment methods present significantly different patterns in a few key regions such as the San Francisco Bay area, the lower Mississippi River, and Puget Sound. Our results highlight the need to weigh different CF risk measures and avoid using single statistics-based or hydrodynamics-based CFRAs. Uncertainty sources in these CFRAs include the use of gauge observations, which cannot account for the flow physics or resolve the spatial variability of risks, and underestimations of the flood extremes and the dependence of CF drivers in large-scale models, highlighting the importance of understanding the CF risks for developing a more robust CFRA.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1997

Landscape characterization of peridomestic risk for Lyme disease using satellite imagery

Remotely sensed characterizations of landscape composition were evaluated for Lyme disease exposure risk on 337 residential properties in two communities of suburban Westchester County, New York. Properties were categorized as no, low, or high risk based on seasonally adjusted densities of Ixodes scapularis nymphs, determined by drag sampling during June and July 1990. Spectral indices based on Landsat Thematic Mapper data provided relative measures of vegetation structure and moisture (wetness), as well as vegetation abundance (greenness). A geographic information system (GIS) was used to spatially quantify and relate the remotely sensed landscape variables to risk category. A comparison of the two communities showed that Chappaqua, which had more high-risk properties (P < 0.001), was significantly greener and wetter than Armonk (P < 0.001). Furthermore, within Chappaqua, high-risk properties were significantly greener and wetter than lower-risk properties in this community (P < 0.01). The high-risk properties appeared to contain a greater proportion of broadleaf trees, while lower-risk properties were interpreted as having a greater proportion of nonvegetative cover and/or open lawn. The ability to distinguish these fine scale differences among communities and individual properties illustrates the efficiency of a remote sensing/GIS-based approach for identifying peridomestic risk of Lyme disease over large geographic areas.

Topography, Medical↗
NASA NTRS2018

Imaging X-Ray Polarimetry Explorer (IXPE) Risk Management

The Imaging X-ray Polarimetry Explorer (IXPE) project is an international collaboration to build and fly a polarization sensitive X-ray observatory. The IXPE Observatory consists of the spacecraft and payload. The payload is composed of three X-ray telescopes, each consisting of a mirror module optical assembly and a polarization-sensitive X-ray detector assembly; a deployable boom maintains the focal length between the optical assemblies and the detectors. The goal of the IXPE Mission is to provide new information about the origins of cosmic X-rays and their interactions with matter and gravity as they travel through space. IXPE will do this by exploiting its unique capability to measure the polarization of X-rays emitted by cosmic sources. The collaboration for IXPE involves national and international partners during design, fabrication, assembly, integration, test, and operations. The full collaboration includes NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), Ball Aerospace, the Italian Space Agency (ASI), the Italian Institute of Astrophysics and Space Planetology (IAPS)/Italian National Institute of Astrophysics (INAF), the Italian National Institute for Nuclear Physics (INFN), the University of Colorado (CU) Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP), Stanford University, McGill University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The goal of this paper is to discuss risk management as it applies to the IXPE project. The full IXPE Team participates in risk management providing both unique challenges and advantages for project risk management. Risk management is being employed in all phases of the IXPE Project, but is particularly important during planning and initial execution-the current phase of the IXPE Project. The discussion will address IXPE risk strategies and responsibilities, along with the IXPE management process which includes risk identification, risk assessment, risk response, and risk monitoring, control, and reporting.

IXPE↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

3D Representation of UAV-obstacle Collision Risk Under Off-nominal Conditions

Safe operations of autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in low-altitude airspace with beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) flights demand robust risk monitoring of airspace as well as of people and property on ground. One of the safety critical factors for UAV flights is the risk of collision with static and dynamic obstacles in proximity to its flight path. This paper presents a detailed formulation of risk of obstacle collision incorporating the effects of off-nominal conditions introduced by component failures, degraded controllability and environmental disturbances such as wind gusts. The risk is represented in terms of a matrix with rows corresponding to the likelihood of occurrence of collision and columns representing severity of collision to the vehicle and surrounding structures. Risk likelihood is generated using a Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) that compiles knowledge from related Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEAs) and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to determine the probability of collision based on on-board sensor measurements indicative of vehicle health and controllability. Risk severity is computed utilizing a point-mass 3D kinematic model of the vehicle in presence of wind. The proposed risk factor is demonstrated on real flight data from experimental flights of an octocopter at NASA Langley Research Center in presence of simulated obstacles and wind conditions. Effect of varying wind conditions, level of controllability and obstacle measurement noise on the risk factor is demonstrated. The proposed approach enables risk-informed decision making for timely mitigation of current and future unsafe events in autonomous systems.

risk analysis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Implementing an Objectives-Driven, Risk-Informed, and Case-Assured Approach to Safety and Mission Success at NASA

NASA is developing a “Standard for Assurance of Space Flight Safety and Mission Success” that implements an objectives-driven, risk-informed, and case-assured approach to safety and mission success (S&MS) for NASA space flight programs and projects. The standard aligns with the philosophy of risk leadership that has recently been established in NASA policy to assure acceptable levels of flight crew safety and mission success risk. It is consistent with existing NASA risk management requirements and is compatible with NASA program management and systems engineering requirements. The methodology described in the standard is presented in terms of an S&MS assurance framework that is designed to allow substantial flexibility in the specific means by which programs and projects achieve acceptable mission S&MS risk. Such flexibility is necessary to accommodate the increasingly broad range of acquisition strategies employed by NASA, including commercial transportation services, as well as to accommodate the increasingly rapid evolution of space flight-related technologies and practices. A key feature of the S&MS assurance framework is the specification of S&MS success criteria for each life-cycle review (LCR). The S&MS assurance case is structured around these criteria, the satisfaction of which indicates that the program/project is adhering to the S&MS risk posture. This enables the evolving S&MS assurance case to be used as a fundamental program/project submittal at each LCR, where its inherent structure of argument, supported by evidence, directly supports the evaluation of the program/project with respect to the S&MS success criteria, and by extension, the S&MS risk posture. As such, the S&MS assurance case is integral to program/project systems engineering, risk management, and S&MS oversight activities, and provides the principal basis for S&MS risk acceptance by the Decision Authority throughout the program/project life cycle.

Risk Posture↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

In-Depth Modeling and Simulation Analysis of Artemis Missions Using the Impact Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool

BACKGROUND The Artemis campaign is a Moon exploration program with a series of six planned missions, five of which will be crewed. These five crewed missions will contain a single mission segment (space flight), or multiple mission segments involving space flight (Orion), lunar landing (LTV) and/or space habitat (Gateway). Each crewed segment faces the risk of unique medical conditions, necessitating medical sets/kits tailored to those specificities. To support and enable a data-driven and evidence-based decision-making process through out a mission’s life cycle, a software tool called IMPACT was developed. Using probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) methodologies, IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a novel tool built for analyzing the possibility of encountering complex medical risks during space flight, and for identifying the medical resources and capabilities needed to treat those potential at-risk medical conditions. IMPACT achieves this by performing hundreds of thousands of Monte Carlo simulations of missions to build aggregate pictures of medical risk. During an extended simulation modeling phase, IMPACT generated analytical results for medical risks, and the medical resources and capabilities to address those risks, for every segment of every crewed Artemis mission. This presentation will highlight the reliability, consistency and validity of IMPACT’s computational modeling techniques and will showcase the library of analytical outcomes generated for the Artemis missions. OVERVIEW During the early stages of IMPACT’s design, architecture and technical requirements collection, “scenarios” (use cases) - achievement goals required for acceptance testing, were identified by stakeholders. IMPACT successfully completed the scenario testing requirements and undertook an extensive operational run phase utilizing a wide range of input combinations with a goal of delivering a cohesive, trustworthy, reliable, vast, and diverse body of evidence. The intent of these modeling runs was to validate consistency in output, ensure solidity of executable operations and to streamline processes by identifying areas requiring efficiency improvements. Using the many missions of Artemis, IMPACT ran variations of operational runs to assess the output for acceptable, as well as unusual characteristics. This rigorous long-term “shakedown” analysis was implemented to help build a collective body of evidence to aid in securing a high level of confidence, reliability, and validity in the output, whether from the applicational components of IMPACT, or the entirety of the operational process. ANTICIPATED ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION This presentation will discuss the various categories of input criteria; the comparisons in the application of these input criteria to various Artemis missions; the preparation and collection of the body of evidence, and reliability of the computational modeling techniques. This paper serves as an initial analytical overview of IMPACT’s probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) medical risk outputs covering Artemis missions and is not intended to be deemed the official medical response for the Artemis campaign.

Crew Composition↗