SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Hazard Fault Tree”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2022

Failure Mechanism Traceability and Application in Human System Interface of Nuclear Power Plants using RESHA

In recent years, there has been considerable effort to modernize existing and new nuclear power plants with digital instrumentation and control systems (DI&C). However, there has also been considerable concern both by industry and regulatory bodies for the risk and consequence analysis of these systems. Of particular concern are digital common cause failures (CCFs) specifically related to software defects. These “misbehaviors” by the software can occur in both the control and monitoring of a system. While many new methods have been proposed to identify potential software failure modes, such as Systems-theoretic Process Analysis (STPA), Hazard and Consequence Analysis for Digital Systems (HAZCADS), etc., these methods are focused primarily on the control action pathway of a system. In contrast, the information feedback pathway lacks unsafe control actions (UCAs), which are typically related to software basic events; thus, assessment of software basic events in such systems is unclear. In this work, we present the idea of intermediate processors and unsafe information flow (UIF) to help safety analysts trace failure mechanisms in the feedback pathway and how they can be integrated into a fault tree for improved assessment capability. The concepts presented are demonstrated in two comprehensive case studies, a smart sensor integrated platform for unmanned autonomous vehicles and another on a representative advanced human system interface (HSI) for safety critical plant monitoring. The qualitative software basic events are identified, and a fault tree analysis is conducted based on a modified Redundancy-guided Systems-theoretic Hazard Analysis (RESHA) methodology. The case studies demonstrate the use of UIF and intermediate processors in the fault tree to improve traceability of software failures in highly complex digital instrumentation feedback. The improved method can also clarify fault tree construction when multiple component dependencies are present in the system.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Failure Mechanism Traceability and Application in Human System Interface of Nuclear Power Plants using RESHA

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

NASA NTRS2000

Fault Tree Analysis: A Bibliography

Fault tree analysis is a top-down approach to the identification of process hazards. It is as one of the best methods for systematically identifying an graphically displaying the many ways some things can go wrong. This bibliography references 266 documents in the NASA STI Database that contain the major concepts. fault tree analysis, risk an probability theory, in the basic index or major subject terms. An abstract is included with most citations, followed by the applicable subject terms.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1991

Chemical hazards database and detection system for Microgravity and Materials Processing Facility (MMPF)

The ability to identify contaminants associated with experiments and facilities is directly related to the safety of the Space Station. A means of identifying these contaminants has been developed through this contracting effort. The delivered system provides a listing of the materials and/or chemicals associated with each facility, information as to the contaminant's physical state, a list of the quantity and/or volume of each suspected contaminant, a database of the toxicological hazards associated with each contaminant, a recommended means of rapid identification of the contaminants under operational conditions, a method of identifying possible failure modes and effects analysis associated with each facility, and a fault tree-type analysis that will provide a means of identifying potential hazardous conditions related to future planned missions.

Steele, Jimmy↗

NASA NTRS2011

Risk Acceptance Personality Paradigm: How We View What We Don't Know We Don't Know

The purpose of integrated hazard analyses, probabilistic risk assessments, failure modes and effects analyses, fault trees and many other similar tools is to give managers of a program some idea of the risks associated with their program. All risk tools establish a set of undesired events and then try to evaluate the risk to the program by assessing the severity of the undesired event and the likelihood of that event occurring. Some tools provide qualitative results, some provide quantitative results and some do both. However, in the end the program manager and his/her team must decide which risks are acceptable and which are not. Even with a wide array of analysis tools available, risk acceptance is often a controversial and difficult decision making process. And yet, today's space exploration programs are moving toward more risk based design approaches. Thus, risk identification and good risk assessment is becoming even more vital to the engineering development process. This paper explores how known and unknown information influences risk-based decisions by looking at how the various parts of our personalities are affected by what they know and what they don't know. This paper then offers some criteria for consideration when making risk-based decisions.

Massie, Michael J.↗

NASA NTRS1974

Operations analysis (study 2.1). Contingency analysis

Future operational concepts for the space transportation system were studied in terms of space shuttle upper stage failure contingencies possible during deployment, retrieval, or space servicing of automated satellite programs. Problems anticipated during mission planning were isolated using a modified 'fault tree' technique, normally used in safety analyses. A comprehensive space servicing hazard analysis is presented which classifies possible failure modes under the catagories of catastrophic collision, failure to rendezvous and dock, servicing failure, and failure to undock. The failure contingencies defined are to be taken into account during design of the upper stage.

Source record↗

DOE OSTI2022

Weapon Systems Risk-Assessment Tool Review

To anticipate, and potentially mitigate, future problems in aging weapon systems, four unique riskassessment techniques were analyzed, including root-cause analysis tools, six-sigma problemsolving approaches, and lean six-sigma tools. Identifying the most efficient process, or tool, is crucial for successful application to current and future weapon systems, subsystems, and components. The following processes were reviewed: Fault Tree Analysis, Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, Bow-Tie Analysis, and Hazard and Operability Study. A systematic assessment was performed to determine the most desirable method, and included investigating qualitative versus quantitative characteristics, scope, process durations, advantages, and limitations. Presented results will outline the study findings and further illustrate a capacity to identify future issues and/or concerns, and ultimately, reduce risk.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗

NASA NTRS2019

Hazards Analysis and Failure Modes and Effects Criticality Analysis (FMECA) of Four Concept Vehicle Propulsion Systems

The primary objective of this research effort is to identify failure modes and hazards associated with the concept vehicles and to perform functional hazard analyses (FHA) and failure modes and effects criticality analyses (FMECA) for each. Boeing also created a Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) for each of the concept vehicles, as the FTA contains the connectivity between systems and is an accepted, top-down method to analyze the safety of an air-vehicle. Conceptual design of notional powertrain configuration for each of four (4) NASA RVLT (Revolutionary Vertical Lift Technology) Concept Vehicles were developed in as much detail as was necessary to support the reliability and safety analysis for this project. Functional block diagrams from each of the conceptual powertrain configurations were created and used to order the FHA, FMECA, and FTA. Hazards were identified and the severity of each were categorized in the FHA for use in a follow-up FMECA. The FTA took inputs from the FMECA and the functional block diagrams to develop the connectivity and develop a quantitative architecture that could be used to perform sensitivity studies, as related to vehicle safety.Guidelines for reliability targets for both the air vehicle and the operation in the UAM (Urban Air Mobility) mission are discussed. An industry literature search was performed in order to assess gaps in existing government regulations and industry specifications. The industry literature search led to air-vehicle and operational reliability discussions, as related to Distributed Electric/Hybrid-Electric Propulsion (DE/HEP) system operating in the UAM role. A discussion of results and recommendations for future work is also provided.

Hazards Analysis↗

NASA NTRS2006

Another Approach to Enhance Airline Safety: Using Management Safety Tools

The ultimate goal of conducting an accident investigation is to prevent similar accidents from happening again and to make operations safer system-wide. Based on the findings extracted from the investigation, the "lesson learned" becomes a genuine part of the safety database making risk management available to safety analysts. The airline industry is no exception. In the US, the FAA has advocated the usage of the System Safety concept in enhancing safety since 2000. Yet, in today s usage of System Safety, the airline industry mainly focuses on risk management, which is a reactive process of the System Safety discipline. In order to extend the merit of System Safety and to prevent accidents beforehand, a specific System Safety tool needs to be applied; so a model of hazard prediction can be formed. To do so, the authors initiated this study by reviewing 189 final accident reports from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) covering FAR Part 121 scheduled operations. The discovered accident causes (direct hazards) were categorized into 10 groups Flight Operations, Ground Crew, Turbulence, Maintenance, Foreign Object Damage (FOD), Flight Attendant, Air Traffic Control, Manufacturer, Passenger, and Federal Aviation Administration. These direct hazards were associated with 36 root factors prepared for an error-elimination model using Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), a leading tool for System Safety experts. An FTA block-diagram model was created, followed by a probability simulation of accidents. Five case studies and reports were provided in order to fully demonstrate the usefulness of System Safety tools in promoting airline safety.

Lu, Chien-tsug↗

DOE OSTI2020

Limitations of traditional tools for beyond design basis external hazard PRA

Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) is being used increasingly by the nuclear industry for safety during normal operations as well as for the protection against external hazards. Computation of total risk in an external hazard PRA is dependent on hazard assessment, fragility assessment, and systems analysis. A systems analysis for propagation of component fragilities is conducted using event and fault trees. The event and fault trees for an actual power plant can be fairly large in size, which imposes computational challenges. Hence, certain assumptions are employed for computational efficiency. These assumptions typically represent the conditions imposed during the design basis (DB) scenario. The traditional PRA tools based on these assumptions are also widely applied to perform risk assessment in the context of beyond design basis (BDB) scenarios. However, some of these assumptions may not be valid for certain BDB scenarios. In addition, the probability of dependent failures also increases in BDB scenarios due to common cause failures (CCF) which usually results from design modifications, human errors, etc. In this manuscript, a simple and a relatively more complex illustrative examples are used to show the limitation of these assumptions in the numerical quantification of risk for the case of BDB conditions. Case studies with CCF events across multiple fault trees are also presented to illustrate the effect of these assumptions when traditional approach is used in BDB risk assessment. It is shown that the assumptions are valid for the case of DB conditions but may lead to excessively conservative risk estimates in the case of BDB conditions. Finally, a Bayesian network based top-down algorithm is proposed as an alternative tool for accurate numerical quantification of total risk in systems analysis.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Global Landslide Hazard Assessment for Situational Awareness (LHASA) Version 2: New Activities and Future Plans

A remote sensing-based system has been developed to characterize the potential for rainfall-triggered landslides across the globe in near real-time. The Landslide Hazard Assessment for Situational Awareness (LHASA) model uses a decision tree framework to combine a static susceptibility map derived from information on slope, rock characteristics, forest loss, distance to fault zones and distance to road networks with satellite precipitation estimates from the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) mission. Since 2016, the LHASA model has been providing near real-time and retrospective estimates of potential landslide activity. Results of this work are available at https://landslides.nasa.gov. In order to advance LHASA’s capabilities to characterize landslide hazards and impacts dynamically, we have implemented a new approach that leverages machine learning, new parameters, and new inventories. LHASA 2.0 uses the XGBoost machine learning model to bring in dynamic variables as well as additional static variables to better represent landslide hazard globally. Global rainfall forecasts are also being evaluated to provide a 1-3 day forecast of potential landslide activity. Additional factors such as recent seismicity and burned areas are also being considered to represent the preconditioning or changing interactions with subsequent rainfall over affected areas. A series of parameters are being tested within this structure using NASA’s Global Landslide Catalog as well as many other event-based and multi-temporal inventories mapped by the project team or provided by project partners. In addition to estimates of landslide hazard, LHASA Version 2 will incorporate dynamic estimates of exposure including population, roads and infrastructure to highlight the potential impacts that rainfall-triggered landslides. The ultimate goal of LHASA Version 2.0 is to approximate the relative probabilities of landslide hazard and exposure across different space and time scales to inform hazard assessment retrospectively over the past 20 years, in near real-time, and in the future. In addition to the hazard. This presentation will outline the new activities for LHASA Version 2.0 and present some next steps for this system.

Dalia Kirschbaum↗

NASA NTRS2020

Enabling Assurance in the MBSE Environment

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

Evans, John W.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Methodology for Designing Fault-Protection Software

A document describes a methodology for designing fault-protection (FP) software for autonomous spacecraft. The methodology embodies and extends established engineering practices in the technical discipline of Fault Detection, Diagnosis, Mitigation, and Recovery; and has been successfully implemented in the Deep Impact Spacecraft, a NASA Discovery mission. Based on established concepts of Fault Monitors and Responses, this FP methodology extends the notion of Opinion, Symptom, Alarm (aka Fault), and Response with numerous new notions, sub-notions, software constructs, and logic and timing gates. For example, Monitor generates a RawOpinion, which graduates into Opinion, categorized into no-opinion, acceptable, or unacceptable opinion. RaiseSymptom, ForceSymptom, and ClearSymptom govern the establishment and then mapping to an Alarm (aka Fault). Local Response is distinguished from FP System Response. A 1-to-n and n-to- 1 mapping is established among Monitors, Symptoms, and Responses. Responses are categorized by device versus by function. Responses operate in tiers, where the early tiers attempt to resolve the Fault in a localized step-by-step fashion, relegating more system-level response to later tier(s). Recovery actions are gated by epoch recovery timing, enabling strategy, urgency, MaxRetry gate, hardware availability, hazardous versus ordinary fault, and many other priority gates. This methodology is systematic, logical, and uses multiple linked tables, parameter files, and recovery command sequences. The credibility of the FP design is proven via a fault-tree analysis "top-down" approach, and a functional fault-mode-effects-and-analysis via "bottoms-up" approach. Via this process, the mitigation and recovery strategy(s) per Fault Containment Region scope (width versus depth) the FP architecture.

Barltrop, Kevin↗

NASA NTRS2022

A Dynamic Landslide Hazard Monitoring Framework for the Lower Mekong Region

The Lower Mekong region is one of the most landslide-prone areas of the world. Despite the need for dynamic characterization of landslide hazard zones within the region, it is largely understudied for several reasons. Dynamic and integrated understanding of landslide processes requires landslide inventories across the region, which have not been available previously. Computational limitations also hamper regional landslide hazard assessment, including accessing and processing remotely sensed information. Finally, open-source software and modelling packages are required to address regional landslide hazard analysis. Leveraging an open-source data-driven global Landslide Hazard Assessment for Situational Awareness model framework, this study develops a region-specific dynamic landslide hazard system leveraging satellite-based Earth observation data to assess landslide hazards across the lower Mekong region. A set of landslide inventories were prepared from high-resolution optical imagery using advanced image-processing techniques. Several static and dynamic explanatory variables (i.e., rainfall, soil moisture, slope, relief, distance to roads, distance to faults, distance to rivers) were considered during the model development phase. An extreme gradient boosting decision tree model was trained for the monsoon period of 2015–2019 and the model was evaluated with independent inventory information for the 2020 monsoon period. The model performance demonstrated considerable skill using receiver operating characteristic curve statistics, with Area Under the Curve values exceeding 0.95. The model architecture was designed to use near-real-time data, and it can be implemented in a cloud computing environment (i.e., Google Cloud Platform) for the routine assessment of landslide hazards in the Lower Mekong region. This work was developed in collaboration with scientists at the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center as part of the NASA SERVIR Program’s Mekong hub. The goal of this work is to develop a suite of tools and services on accessible open-source platforms that support and enable stakeholder communities to better assess landslide hazard and exposure at local to regional scales for decision making and planning.

Nishan Kumar Biswas↗

NASA NTRS2005

Knowledge Representation Standards and Interchange Formats for Causal Graphs

In many domains, automated reasoning tools must represent graphs of causally linked events. These include fault-tree analysis, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA), planning, procedures, medical reasoning about disease progression, and functional architectures. Each of these fields has its own requirements for the representation of causation, events, actors and conditions. The representations include ontologies of function and cause, data dictionaries for causal dependency, failure and hazard, and interchange formats between some existing tools. In none of the domains has a generally accepted interchange format emerged. The paper makes progress towards interoperability across the wide range of causal analysis methodologies. We survey existing practice and emerging interchange formats in each of these fields. Setting forth a set of terms and concepts that are broadly shared across the domains, we examine the several ways in which current practice represents them. Some phenomena are difficult to represent or to analyze in several domains. These include mode transitions, reachability analysis, positive and negative feedback loops, conditions correlated but not causally linked and bimodal probability distributions. We work through examples and contrast the differing methods for addressing them. We detail recent work in knowledge interchange formats for causal trees in aerospace analysis applications in early design, safety and reliability. Several examples are discussed, with a particular focus on reachability analysis and mode transitions. We generalize the aerospace analysis work across the several other domains. We also recommend features and capabilities for the next generation of causal knowledge representation standards.

Throop, David R.↗

NASA NTRS2013

Practical Application of PRA as an Integrated Design Tool for Space Systems

This paper presents the application of the first comprehensive Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) during the design phase of a joint NASA/NOAA weather satellite program, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite Series R (GOES-R). GOES-R is the next generation weather satellite primarily to help understand the weather and help save human lives. PRA has been used at NASA for Human Space Flight for many years. PRA was initially adopted and implemented in the operational phase of manned space flight programs and more recently for the next generation human space systems. Since its first use at NASA, PRA has become recognized throughout the Agency as a method of assessing complex mission risks as part of an overall approach to assuring safety and mission success throughout project lifecycles. PRA is now included as a requirement during the design phase of both NASA next generation manned space vehicles as well as for high priority robotic missions. The influence of PRA on GOES-R design and operation concepts are discussed in detail. The GOES-R PRA is unique at NASA for its early implementation. It also represents a pioneering effort to integrate risks from both Spacecraft (SC) and Ground Segment (GS) to fully assess the probability of achieving mission objectives. PRA analysts were actively involved in system engineering and design engineering to ensure that a comprehensive set of technical risks were correctly identified and properly understood from a design and operations perspective. The analysis included an assessment of SC hardware and software, SC fault management system, GS hardware and software, common cause failures, human error, natural hazards, solar weather and infrastructure (such as network and telecommunications failures, fire). PRA findings directly resulted in design changes to reduce SC risk from micro-meteoroids. PRA results also led to design changes in several SC subsystems, e.g. propulsion, guidance, navigation and control (GNC), communications, mechanisms, and command and data handling (C&DH). The fault tree approach assisted in the development of the fault management system design. Human error analysis, which examined human response to failure, indicated areas where automation could reduce the overall probability of gaps in operation by half. In addition, the PRA brought to light many potential root causes of system disruptions, including earthquakes, inclement weather, solar storms, blackouts and other extreme conditions not considered in the typical reliability and availability analyses. Ultimately the PRA served to identify potential failures that, when mitigated, resulted in a more robust design, as well as to influence the program's concept of operations. The early and active integration of PRA with system and design engineering provided a well-managed approach for risk assessment that increased reliability and availability, optimized lifecyc1e costs, and unified the SC and GS developments.

Kalia, Prince↗

DOE OSTI2021

Failure prediction and estimation of failure parameters

Machine-learning methods and apparatus are disclosed to determine frictional state or other parameters in an earthquake zone or other failing medium, using acoustic emission, seismic waves, or other detectable indicators of microscopic processes. Predictions of future failures are demonstrated in different regimes. A classifier is trained using time series of acoustic emission data along with historic data of frictional state or failure events. In disclosed examples, random forests and gradient boost trees are used, and grid-search or EGO procedures are used for hyperparameter tuning. Once trained, the classifier can be applied to testing or live data in order to assess a frictional state, assess seismic hazard, or make predictions regarding a future failure event. The technology has been developed in a double direct shear apparatus, but can be widely applied to seismic faults, other terrestrial failures, or failures in man-made structures. Variations are disclosed.

Johnson, Paul Allan↗

DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Human-System Interface Risk Analysis Based on Redundancy-guided Systems-theoretic Hazard Analysis and Human Reliability Analysis

Human-system interfaces (HSIs) play an important role in enabling operators to communicate with the nuclear power plant (NPP) side. Getting the information required to understand a NPP’s current status or perform necessary actions for responding to a given operational context are representative operator tasks performed using HSIs. To date, HSIs have been mainly evaluated in the context of human reliability analysis (HRA). However, the current HSI evaluation that occurs during HRA may be challengeable on two fronts: (1) reflecting the unique characteristics of HSI systems and (2) considering situations in which HSIs are poorly operated due to software/hardware malfunctions. Accordingly, this study proposes an approach for specifically evaluating HSIs for digital instrumentation and controls (DI&C) systems, using Redundancy-guided Systems-theoretic Hazard Analysis (RESHA) and HRA. RESHA is a method for analyzing DI&C systems with redundancy features. In this study, we investigate how HSIs are evaluated in existing HRA methods, and what challenges exist in the current approaches. To better evaluate HSIs for DI&C systems, this study modifies the existing HSI evaluation process by additionally modeling the HSI back- and front- ends. In this paper, a HSI fault tree for the APR1400 DI&C system is introduced through a piping and instrumentation diagram. It then touches upon what aspects of the suggested method must be further researched.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗