Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “hazard and risk assessment”

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 NTRS2018

Understanding Risk Tolerance and Building an Effective Safety Culture

Estimates range from 65-90 percent of catastrophic mishaps are due to human error. NASA's human factors-related mishaps causes are estimated at approximately 75 percent. As much as we'd like to error-proof our work environment, even the most automated and complex technical endeavors require human interaction... and are vulnerable to human frailty. Industry and government are focusing not only on human factors integration into hazardous work environments, but also looking for practical approaches to cultivating a strong Safety Culture that diminishes risk. Industry and government organizations have recognized the value of monitoring leading indicators to identify potential risk vulnerabilities. NASA has adapted this approach to assess risk controls associated with hazardous, critical, and complex facilities. NASA's facility risk assessments integrate commercial loss control, OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) Process Safety, API (American Petroleum Institute) Performance Indicator Standard, and NASA Operational Readiness Inspection concepts to identify risk control vulnerabilities.

Loyd, David↗
NASA NTRS2019

Extravehicular Activity Micormeteoroid and Orbital Debris Risk Assessment Methodology

A well-known hazard associated with exposure to the space environment is the risk of vehicle failure due to an impact from an micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) particle. Among the vehicles of importance to NASA is the extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) “spacesuit” used while performing a US extravehicular activity (EVA). An EMU impact is of great concern as a large leak could prevent an astronaut from safely reaching the airlock in time resulting in a loss of life. For this reason, a risk assessment is provided to the EVA office at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) prior to certification of readiness for each US EVA. To assess the risk of failure, a detailed finite element model (FEM) of the EMU has been created which has regions for the various shielding configurations. Each shielding configuration is based on the layers and materials over the innermost bladder layer that maintains the acceptable atmospheric environment for the astronaut. Ballistic limit equations (BLE) for each shielding configuration have been determined from hypervelocity impact testing of samples of the EMU layup.

Hoffman, K. D.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Extravehicular Activity Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris Risk Assessment Methodology

A well-known hazard associated with exposure to the space environment is the risk of vehicle failure due to an impact from a micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) particle. Among the vehicles of importance to NASA is the extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) “spacesuit” used while performing a US extravehicular activity (EVA). An EMU impact is of great concern as a large leak could prevent an astronaut from safely reaching the airlock in time resulting in a loss of life. For this reason, a risk assessment is provided to the EVA office at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) prior to certification of readiness for each US EVA.

Hoffman, Kevin D.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Strategies to Mitigate Ammonia Release on the International Space Station

International Space Station (ISS) is crucial to its continuous operation. Off-nominal situations can arise from virtually any aspect of ISS operations. One situation of particular concern is the inadvertent release of a chemical into the ISS atmosphere. In sufficient quantities, a chemical release can render the ISS uninhabitable regardless of the chemical s toxicity as a result of its effect on the hardware used to maintain the environment. This is certainly true with system chemicals which are integral components to the function and purpose of the system. Safeguards, such as design for minimum risk, multiple containment, hazard assessments, rigorous safety reviews, and others, are in place to minimize the probability of a chemical release to the ISS environment thereby allowing the benefits of system chemicals to outweigh the risks associated with them. The thermal control system is an example of such a system. Heat generated within the ISS is transferred from the internal thermal control system (ITCS) to the external thermal control system (ETCS) via two, single-barrier interface heat exchangers (IFHX). The ITCS and ETCS are closed-loop systems which utilize water and anhydrous ammonia, respectively, as heat-transfer fluids. There is approximately 1200 lbs. (208 gallons) of anhydrous ammonia in the ETCS circulating through the two heat exchangers, transferring heat from the ITCS water lines. At the amounts present in the ETCS, anhydrous ammonia is one system chemical that can easily overwhelm the station atmosphere scrubbing capabilities and render the ISS uninhabitable in the event of a catastrophic rupture. Although safeguards have certainly minimized the risk of an ammonia release into the Station atmosphere, credible release scenarios and controls to manage these scenarios are examined.

Macatangay, Ariel V.↗
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 NTRS2005

Enhancing the Design Process for Complex Space Systems through Early Integration of Risk and Variable-Fidelity Modeling

An important enabler of the new national Vision for Space Exploration is the ability to rapidly and efficiently develop optimized concepts for the manifold future space missions that this effort calls for. The design of such complex systems requires a tight integration of all the engineering disciplines involved, in an environment that fosters interaction and collaboration. The research performed under this grant explored areas where the space systems design process can be enhanced: by integrating risk models into the early stages of the design process, and by including rapid-turnaround variable-fidelity tools for key disciplines. Enabling early assessment of mission risk will allow designers to perform trades between risk and design performance during the initial design space exploration. Entry into planetary atmospheres will require an increased emphasis of the critical disciplines of aero- and thermodynamics. This necessitates the pulling forward of EDL disciplinary expertise into the early stage of the design process. Radiation can have a large potential impact on overall mission designs, in particular for the planned nuclear-powered robotic missions under Project Prometheus and for long-duration manned missions to the Moon, Mars and beyond under Project Constellation. This requires that radiation and associated risk and hazards be assessed and mitigated at the earliest stages of the design process. Hence, RPS is another discipline needed to enhance the engineering competencies of conceptual design teams. Researchers collaborated closely with NASA experts in those disciplines, and in overall space systems design, at Langley Research Center and at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. This report documents the results of this initial effort.

Mavris, Dimitri↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing and Testing Two Interfaces for Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP) Tools to Support UAS Traffic Management (UTM)

Researchers conducted a usability study using two graphical user interfaces (GUIs) to explore how individuals interpret and interact with different preflight information displays, and to inform the development of Uncrewed Aircraft System (UAS) preflight planning predictive support tools to assess and mitigate flight hazards and risks. A series of preflight risk-assessment tasks were developed to evaluate participant performance using the Supplemental Data Service Provider-Consolidated Dashboard (SDSP-CD) and the Human Automation Team Interface System (HATIS) GUIs. Participants were trained to use both interfaces and their performance was evaluated. These evaluations focused on participants’ preflight planning activities. Objective data on performance tasks across different scenarios involving multi-UASs, as well as self-reports of interactions and subjective experiences using the GUIs were collected. Scores on the system usability scale (SUS) and on a simple task set were examined, as well as user feedback on open-ended questions, to inform development and identify potential improvements to the interfaces.

sUAAV interfaces↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing and Testing Two Interfaces for Supplemental Data Service Provider (SDSP) Tools to Support UAS Traffic Management (UTM)

Researchers conducted a usability study using two graphical user interfaces (GUIs) to explore how individuals interpret and interact with different preflight information displays, and to inform the development of Uncrewed Aircraft System (UAS) preflight planning predictive support tools to assess and mitigate flight hazards and risks. A series of preflight risk-assessment tasks were developed to evaluate participant performance using the Supplemental Data Service Provider-Consolidated Dashboard (SDSP-CD) and the Human Automation Team Interface System (HATIS) GUIs. Participants were trained to use both interfaces and their performance was evaluated. These evaluations focused on participants’ preflight planning activities. Objective data on performance tasks across different scenarios involving multi-UASs, as well as self-reports of interactions and subjective experiences using the GUIs were collected. Scores on the system usability scale (SUS) and on a simple task set were examined, as well as user feedback on open-ended questions, to inform development and identify potential improvements to the interfaces.

sUAAV interfaces↗
NASA NTRS2012

Risk Assessment and Scaling for the SLS LH2 ET

In this report the main physics processes in LH2 tank during prepress and rocket flight are studied. The goal of this investigation is to analyze possible hazards and to make risk assessment in proposed LH2 tank designs for SLS with 5 engines (the situation with 4 engines is less critical). For analysis we use the multinode model (MNM) developed by us and presented in a separate report and also 3D ANSYS simulations. We carry out simulation and theoretical analysis the physics processes such as (i) accumulation of bubbles in LH2 during replenish stage and their collapsing in the liquid during the prepress; (ii) condensation-evaporation at the liquid-vapor interface and tank wall, (iv) heating the liquid near the interface and wall due to condensation and environment heat, (v) injection of hot He during prepress and of hot GH2 during flight, (vi) mixing and cooling of the injected gases due to heat transfer between the gases, liquid and the tank wall. We analyze the effects of these physical processes on the thermo- and fluid gas dynamics in the ullage and on the stratification of temperature in the liquid and assess the associated hazards. A special emphasize is put on the scaling predictions for the larger SLS LH2 tank.

Hafiychuk, Halyna↗
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 NTRS2010

Onboard Processing of Multispectral and Hyperspectral Data of Volcanic Activity for Future Earth-Orbiting and Planetary Missions

Autonomous onboard processing of data allows rapid response to detections of dynamic, changing processes. Software that can detect volcanic eruptions from thermal emission has been used to retask the Earth Observing 1 spacecraft to obtain additional data of the eruption. Rapid transmission of these data to the ground, and the automatic processing of the data to generated images, estimates of eruption parameters and maps of thermal structure, has allowed these products to be delivered rapidly to volcanologists to aid them in assessing eruption risk and hazard. Such applications will enhance science return from future Earth-orbiting spacecraft and also from spacecraft exploring the Solar System, or beyond, which hope to image dynamic processes. Especially in the latter case, long communication times between the spacecraft and Earth exclude a rapid response to what may be a transient process - only using onboard autonomy can the spacecraft react quickly to such an event.

Jupiter↗
NASA NTRS2019

LTF/Fluid and Cryogenic Systems Branch

Functions of the Branch: Cross-Cutting Fluids Engineering; Research and Technology Development of Cryogenic Fluid Management (CFM) Systems; Component and System level; Design, Development Test and Evaluation (DDT&E) for Fluid, CFM, Propellant and Gaseous Systems; Fluid Component Specification and Selection; Code Compliance of Pressurized Systems; Fluid/Cryogenic System Performance Analysis and Trade Studies; Hazards Analysis and Risk Assessment of Fluidic Systems; Fluids Modeling and Simulation Capabilities

Fluid↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Model-Based Systems Engineering Evaluation of the Evolution to an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System

In 2018, as result of a recommendation from the National Academies, NASA began to prototype an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS). The purpose of the IASMS is to enable innovative aviation operations and greater heterogeneity of the overall National Airspace (NAS) by automating much of the safety monitoring, assessment, and risk and hazard mitigation function present in today’s Safety Management Systems (SMS). NASA has worked together with early industry collaborators to understand how such a system might work and has published several early Concepts of Operation (ConOps) and other technical memoranda that illustrate the primary considerations for selected aviation domains. The shift from an SMS to an IASMS is predicated on several assumptions, including: 1.) automating safety functions will decrease the amount of time necessary for risk and hazard identification and analysis, making it more likely that safety concerns are understood ‘in-time’ to mitigate them, and 2.) an IASMS will allow easier tailoring of safety management processes to the particular risks and hazards inherent to that aviation operation. In this paper, we begin to validate these assumptions through the use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE).

IASMS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Model-Based Systems Engineering Evaluation of the Evolution to an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System

In 2018, as result of a recommendation from the National Academies, NASA began to prototype an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System(IASMS). The purpose of the IASMS is to enable innovative aviation operations and greater heterogeneity of the overall National Airspace (NAS) by automating much of the safety monitoring, assessment, and risk and hazard mitigation functionspresent in today’s Safety Management Systems (SMS). NASA has worked together with early industry collaborators to understand how such a system might work and has published several early Concepts of Operation (ConOps) and other technical memoranda that illustrate the primary considerations for selected aviation domains. The shift from an SMS to an IASMS is predicated on several assumptions, including: 1.) automating safety functions will decrease the amount of time necessary for risk and hazard identification and analysis, making it more likely that safety concerns are understood ‘in-time’ to mitigate them, and 2.) an IASMS will allow easier tailoring of safety management processes to the particular risks and hazards inherent to that aviation operation. In this paper, we begin to validate these assumptions through the use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE).

In-time Aviation Safety Management System↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Assessment of Irrigated Agriculture and Drought-related Hazard Risks for the Aral Sea Region

This was part of a larger UNDP/Uzbekistan project on the Aral Sea Region, which is a prominent ecological disaster caused by water diversion and unsustainable land use management. Columbia University CCSR and the Climate Impacts Group are working with the UNDP to explore climate change impacts on irrigated agriculture in the region, particularly with regards to yield changes and drought risk for wheat and cotton systems in the Amu Darya River Basin. My talk described our project plan and described the types of data that we would need from project partners in the country in order to connect our global satellites and models to local conditions.

Irrigated agriculture↗
NASA NTRS2019

Understanding the Impact of Meteorological Spatiotemporal Variability on Distant Focusing Overpressure Risk

Since the 1950s, the amplification of blast energy from explosions has been understood to be a significant hazard to public safety at launch ranges. Historically, the risk assessment of the Distant Focusing Overpressure (DFO) hazard started with a single temperature and wind profile (e.g., a radiosonde launch) as input to acoustic 1-D ray tracing models. By analyzing rays propagation and performing ray tracing, population centers under high DFO risk can be identified. Although this method is useful, less is known about how the blast waves can be focused when the spatiotemporal variability of the input profiles are considered. In summary, this work aims to consider how realistic atmospheric boundary layer variability (e.g., turbulence, land-surface contrasts) may affect blast waves propagation and focusing and, as a result, DFO risk assessment results.

Blumberg, W. Greg↗
NASA NTRS1993

Incorporating biologically based models into assessments of risk from chemical contaminants

The general approach to assessment of risk from chemical contaminants in drinking water involves three steps: hazard identification, exposure assessment, and dose-response assessment. Traditionally, the risks to humans associated with different levels of a chemical have been derived from the toxic responses observed in animals. It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that further information is needed if risks to humans are to be assessed accurately. Biologically based models help clarify the dose-response relationship and reduce uncertainty.

Review, Tutorial↗