Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “COMPONENT RELIABILITY”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2001

Reliability Assessment for COTS Components in Space Flight Applications

Systems built for space flight applications usually demand very high degree of performance and a very high level of accuracy. Hence, the design engineers are often prone to selecting state-of-art technologies for inclusion in their system design. The shrinking budgets also necessitate use of COTS (Commercial Off-The-Shelf) components, which are construed as being less expensive. The performance and accuracy requirements for space flight applications are much more stringent than those for the commercial applications. The quantity of systems designed and developed for space applications are much lower in number than those produced for the commercial applications. With a given set of requirements, are these COTS components reliable? This paper presents a model for assessing the reliability of COTS components in space applications and the associated affect on the system reliability. We illustrate the method with a real application.

Krishnan, G. S.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Developing Reliable Life Support for Mars

A human mission to Mars will require highly reliable life support systems. Mars life support systems may recycle water and oxygen using systems similar to those on the International Space Station (ISS). However, achieving sufficient reliability is less difficult for ISS than it will be for Mars. If an ISS system has a serious failure, it is possible to provide spare parts, or directly supply water or oxygen, or if necessary bring the crew back to Earth. Life support for Mars must be designed, tested, and improved as needed to achieve high demonstrated reliability. A quantitative reliability goal should be established and used to guide development t. The designers should select reliable components and minimize interface and integration problems. In theory a system can achieve the component-limited reliability, but testing often reveal unexpected failures due to design mistakes or flawed components. Testing should extend long enough to detect any unexpected failure modes and to verify the expected reliability. Iterated redesign and retest may be required to achieve the reliability goal. If the reliability is less than required, it may be improved by providing spare components or redundant systems. The number of spares required to achieve a given reliability goal depends on the component failure rate. If the failure rate is under estimated, the number of spares will be insufficient and the system may fail. If the design is likely to have undiscovered design or component problems, it is advisable to use dissimilar redundancy, even though this multiplies the design and development cost. In the ideal case, a human tended closed system operational test should be conducted to gain confidence in operations, maintenance, and repair. The difficulty in achieving high reliability in unproven complex systems may require the use of simpler, more mature, intrinsically higher reliability systems. The limitations of budget, schedule, and technology may suggest accepting lower and less certain expected reliability. A plan to develop reliable life support is needed to achieve the best possible reliability.

life support↗
NASA NTRS1969

Exact minimal-state system reliability analysis

System reliability equation, an exact function of component reliabilities, for a system with a finite number of points is derived from the minimal states which are found by logical analysis of the configuration. The numerical value is obtained by substituting the component reliabilities or unreliabilities.

Locks, M. O.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Fracture mechanics concepts in reliability analysis of monolithic ceramics

Basic design concepts for high-performance, monolithic ceramic structural components are addressed. The design of brittle ceramics differs from that of ductile metals because of the inability of ceramic materials to redistribute high local stresses caused by inherent flaws. Random flaw size and orientation requires that a probabilistic analysis be performed in order to determine component reliability. The current trend in probabilistic analysis is to combine linear elastic fracture mechanics concepts with the two parameter Weibull distribution function to predict component reliability under multiaxial stress states. Nondestructive evaluation supports this analytical effort by supplying data during verification testing. It can also help to determine statistical parameters which describe the material strength variation, in particular the material threshold strength (the third Weibull parameter), which in the past was often taken as zero for simplicity.

Manderscheid, Jane M.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Probabilistic Structural Analysis Methods (PSAM) for select space propulsion system components, part 2

The technical effort and computer code enhancements performed during the sixth year of the Probabilistic Structural Analysis Methods program are summarized. Various capabilities are described to probabilistically combine structural response and structural resistance to compute component reliability. A library of structural resistance models is implemented in the Numerical Evaluations of Stochastic Structures Under Stress (NESSUS) code that included fatigue, fracture, creep, multi-factor interaction, and other important effects. In addition, a user interface was developed for user-defined resistance models. An accurate and efficient reliability method was developed and was successfully implemented in the NESSUS code to compute component reliability based on user-selected response and resistance models. A risk module was developed to compute component risk with respect to cost, performance, or user-defined criteria. The new component risk assessment capabilities were validated and demonstrated using several examples. Various supporting methodologies were also developed in support of component risk assessment.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1982

JPL preferred parts list: Reliable electronic components

The JPL Preferred Parts List was prepared to provide a basis for selection of electronic parts for JPL spacecraft programs. Supporting tests for the listed parts were designed to comply with specific spacecraft environmental requirements. The list tabulates the electronic, magnetic, and electromechanical parts applicable to all JPL electronic equipment wherein reliability is a major concern. The parts listed are revelant to equipment supplied by subcontractors as well as fabricated at the laboratory.

Covey, R. E.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Reliability Effects of Surge Current Testing of Solid Tantalum Capacitors

Solid tantalum capacitors are widely used in space applications to filter low-frequency ripple currents in power supply circuits and stabilize DC voltages in the system. Tantalum capacitors manufactured per military specifications (MIL-PRF-55365) are established reliability components and have less than 0.001% of failures per 1000 hours (the failure rate is less than 10 FIT) for grades D or S, thus positioning these parts among electronic components with the highest reliability characteristics. Still, failures of tantalum capacitors do happen and when it occurs it might have catastrophic consequences for the system. This is due to a short-circuit failure mode, which might be damaging to a power supply, and also to the capability of tantalum capacitors with manganese cathodes to self-ignite when a failure occurs in low-impedance applications. During such a failure, a substantial amount of energy is released by exothermic reaction of the tantalum pellet with oxygen generated by the overheated manganese oxide cathode, resulting not only in destruction of the part, but also in damage of the board and surrounding components. A specific feature of tantalum capacitors, compared to ceramic parts, is a relatively large value of capacitance, which in contemporary low-size chip capacitors reaches dozens and hundreds of microfarads. This might result in so-called surge current or turn-on failures in the parts when the board is first powered up. Such a failure, which is considered as the most prevalent type of failures in tantalum capacitors [I], is due to fast changes of the voltage in the circuit, dV/dt, producing high surge current spikes, I(sub sp) = Cx(dV/dt), when current in the circuit is unrestricted. These spikes can reach hundreds of amperes and cause catastrophic failures in the system. The mechanism of surge current failures has not been understood completely yet, and different hypotheses were discussed in relevant literature. These include a sustained scintillation breakdown model [1-3]; electrical oscillations in circuits with a relatively high inductance [4-6]; local overheating of the cathode [5,7, 8]; mechanical damage to tantalum pentoxide dielectric caused by the impact of MnO2 crystals [2,9, 10]; or stress-induced-generation of electron traps caused by electromagnetic forces developed during current spikes [11]. A commonly accepted explanation of the surge current failures is that at unlimited current supply during surge current conditions, the self-healing mechanism in tantalum capacitors does not work, and what would be a minor scintillation spike if the current were limited, becomes a catastrophic failure of the part [l, 12]. However, our data show that the scintillation breakdown voltages are significantly greater that the surge current breakdown voltages, so it is still not clear why the part, which has no scintillations, would fail at the same voltage during surge current testing (SCT).

Teverovsky, Alexander↗
NASA NTRS1980

Future challenges in V/STOL flight propulsion control integration

A survey of propulsion control requirements forming part of an advanced V/STOL control requirements study has to date determined, among other findings: (1) that the dependence of V/STOL flying qualities on propulsive lift makes it necessary to identify propulsion control requirements early in a development program; (2) that V/STOL controls of the future should relieve the pilot of control functions and elevate him to the position of a flight operations manager, with substantial gains in capability and/or safety; and (3) that research is required to define the V/STOL control system reliability requirements and specific component reliability allocations. An interactive, integrated design process for the realization of these objectives is also described.

Roth, S. P.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Design and dynamic testing of an instrumented spacecraft component

Details relating to the design and subsequent vibration and shock tests of a spacecraft component for a severe vibration and shock environment are presented. The design process and analysis method involve the use of finite element analysis coupled with the Modal Strain Energy method with risk graphs to determine the adequacy of the design. The vibration levels experienced by box parts are reduced by the application of passive constrained layer viscoelastic treatments that significantly improve component reliability. All significant internal components were fully instrumented in both the random vibration and shock tests, the latter being done on a mechanical impact pyro simulator. Correlation between analysis and test data is good, validating the modeling and analysis techniques.

Dwyer, Thomas J.↗
NASA NTRS1993

SP-100 control drive assembly development

The SP-100 is an electrical generating nuclear power system for space operation. This paper describes the nuclear reactor control systems and the methods used to assure reliable performance for the 10-year design life. Reliable performance is achieved by redundancy and by selecting highly reliable components and design features. Reliability is quantified by analysis using established reliability data. Areas lacking reliability data are identified for development testing. A specific development test description is provided as an example to demonstrate how this process is meeting the system reliability goals.

Gleason, Thomas↗