Results for “FAILURE MODES” — Page 23

NASA NTRS1988

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): FMEA/CIL assessment

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. Direction was given by the Orbiter and GFE Projects Office to perform the hardware analysis and assessment using the instructions and ground rules defined in NSTS 22206. The IOA analysis features a top-down approach to determine hardware failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, the anlaysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA and prime contractor FMEA/CIL documentation. The assessment process compares the independently derived failure modes and criticality assignments to the proposed NASA Post 51-L FMEA/CIL documentation. When possible, assessment issues are discussed and resolved with the NASA subsystem managers. The assessment results for each subsystem are summarized. The most important Orbiter assessment finding was the previously unknown stuck autopilot push-button criticality 1/1 failure mode, having a worst case effect of loss of crew/vehicle when a microwave landing system is not active.

Saiidi, Mo J.↗

DOE OSTI2015

FMEA on the superconducting torus for the Jefferson Lab 12 GeV accelerator upgrade

As part of the Jefferson Lab 12GeV accelerator upgrade project, Hall B requires two conduction cooled superconducting magnets. One is a magnet system consisting of six superconducting trapezoidal racetrack-type coils assembled in a toroidal configuration and the second is an actively shielded solenoidal magnet system consisting of 5 coils. Both magnets are to be wound with Superconducting Super Collider-36 NbTi strand Rutherford cable soldered into a copper channel. This paper describes the various failure modes in torus magnet along with the failure modes that could be experienced by the torus and its interaction with the solenoid which is located in close proximity.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-F-T-248: FMEA Risk Analysis Implementation (AAPM TG-100) in Total Skin Electron Irradiation Technique

Purpose: Total Skin Electron Irradiation (TSEI) is a radiotherapy treatment which involves irradiating the entire body surface as homogeneously as possible. It is composed of an extensive multi-step technique in which quality management requires high consumption of resources and a fluid communication between the involved staff, necessary to improve the safety of treatment. The TG-100 proposes a new perspective of quality management in radiotherapy, presenting a systematic method of risk analysis throughout the global flow of the stages through the patient. The purpose of this work has been to apply TG-100 approach to the TSEI procedure in our institution. Methods: A multidisciplinary team specifically targeting TSEI procedure was formed, that met regularly and jointly developed the process map (PM), following TG-100 guidelines of the AAPM. This PM is a visual representation of the temporal flow of steps through the patient since start until the end of his stay in the radiotherapy service. Results: This is the first stage of the full risk analysis, which is being carried out in the center. The PM provides an overview of the process and facilitates the understanding of the team members who will participate in the subsequent analysis. Currently, the team is implementing the analysis of failure modes and effects (FMEA). The failure modes of each of the steps have been identified and assessors are assigning a value of severity (S), frequency of occurrence (O) and lack of detection (D) individually. To our knowledge, this is the first PM made for the TSEI. The developed PM can be useful for those centers that intend to implement the TSEI technique. Conclusion: The PM of TSEI technique has been established, as the first stage of full risk analysis, performed in a reference center in this treatment.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2012

Weighting and Bayes Nets for Rollup of Surveillance Metrics

The LANL IKE team proposes that the surveillance metrics for several data stream that are used to detect the same failure mode be weighted. Similarly, the failure mode metrics are weighted to obtain a subsystem metric.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS1980

Orbiter subsystem hardware/software interaction analysis. Volume 8: AFT reaction control system, part 2

The orbiter subsystems and interfacing program elements which interact with the orbiter computer flight software are analyzed. The failure modes identified in the subsystem/element failure mode and effects analysis are examined. Potential interaction with the software is examined through an evaluation of the software requirements. The analysis is restricted to flight software requirements and excludes utility/checkout software. The results of the hardware/software interaction analysis for the forward reaction control system are presented.

Becker, D. D.↗

NASA NTRS1991

Reusable rocket engine intelligent control system framework design, phase 2

Elements of an advanced functional framework for reusable rocket engine propulsion system control are presented for the Space Shuttle Main Engine (SSME) demonstration case. Functional elements of the baseline functional framework are defined in detail. The SSME failure modes are evaluated and specific failure modes identified for inclusion in the advanced functional framework diagnostic system. Active control of the SSME start transient is investigated, leading to the identification of a promising approach to mitigating start transient excursions. Key elements of the functional framework are simulated and demonstration cases are provided. Finally, the advanced function framework for control of reusable rocket engines is presented.

Nemeth, ED↗

DOE OSTI2020

A Quantitative Failure Analysis on Capacity Fade in Rechargeable Lithium Metal Cells

Rechargeable lithium battery (RLB) technology is transforming portable devices, vehicle electrification, and grid modernization. To make RLB durable, reliable and safe, conducting failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA) to identify failure mechanism under the operating conditions is very desirable. However, this ability is often overlooked or even lacking. The failure analysis (FA) is often conducted by laboratory testing and postmortem analysis, and the knowledge typically empirical. Here we present a quantitative approach for FMEA that can reveal how failure modes and effects reduce the capacity of a RLB. This approach is based on the state of the battery for FMEA, contrary to the conventional approach based on operating or testing conditions. The key aspect of this FMEA method is to convert the experimental results to a state-of-charge (SOC)-based analytic methodology. Such a conversion can separate the thermodynamic and kinetic attributes of capacity fade based on compositional correspondence in the electrode, so the loss and the decreased utilization of the active materials can be determined respectively.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2016

TU-FG-201-11: Evaluating the Validity of Prospective Risk Analysis Methods: A Comparison of Traditional FMEA and Modified Healthcare FMEA

Purpose: To examine the ability of traditional Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and a light version of Healthcare FMEA (HFMEA), called Scenario analysis of FMEA (SAFER) by comparing their outputs in terms of the risks identified and their severity rankings. Methods: We applied two prospective methods of the quality management to surface image guided, linac-based radiosurgery (SIG-RS). For the traditional FMEA, decisions on how to improve an operation are based on risk priority number (RPN). RPN is a product of three indices: occurrence, severity and detectability. The SAFER approach; utilized two indices-frequency and severity-which were defined by a multidisciplinary team. A criticality matrix was divided into 4 categories; very low, low, high and very high. For high risk events, an additional evaluation was performed. Based upon the criticality of the process, it was decided if additional safety measures were needed and what they comprise. Results: Two methods were independently compared to determine if the results and rated risks were matching or not. Our results showed an agreement of 67% between FMEA and SAFER approaches for the 15 riskiest SIG-specific failure modes. The main differences between the two approaches were the distribution of the values and the failure modes (No.52, 54, 154) that have high SAFER scores do not necessarily have high FMEA RPN scores. In our results, there were additional risks identified by both methods with little correspondence. In the SAFER, when the risk score is determined, the basis of the established decision tree or the failure mode should be more investigated. Conclusion: The FMEA method takes into account the probability that an error passes without being detected. SAFER is inductive because it requires the identification of the consequences from causes, and semi-quantitative since it allow the prioritization of risks and mitigation measures, and thus is perfectly applicable to clinical parts of radiotherapy.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS1990

A methodology for probabilistic prediction of structural failures of launch vehicle propulsion systems

A quantitative methodology for estimating the probability of occurrence of critical structural failure modes of launch vehicle propulsion systems during mission operation is presented. In this approach, engineering analysis models that characterize specific failure modes based on the physics and mechanics of the failure phenomenon are used in a prescribed probabalistic structure in which quantified uncertainty in the information used in the analysis and quantified uncertainty of the engineering analysis models themselves are both considered in estimating failure risk. The methodology is applicable to high cycle fatigue, low cycle fatigue, flaw propagation stress rupture, and other failure modes of launch vehicle propulsion systems and other space-flight systems. The probabalistic failure assessment presented provides the capability of performing quantitative analyses to rank options to improve reliability, thereby enabling limited financial resources of development and improvement programs to be more effectively allocated.

Moore, N.↗

DOE OSTI2016

WE-G-BRC-00: Experiences with TG100 in Clinical Use

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) originated as an industrial engineering technique used for risk management and safety improvement of complex processes. In the context of radiotherapy, the AAPM Task Group 100 advocates FMEA as the framework of choice for establishing clinical quality management protocols. However, there is concern that widespread adoption of FMEA in radiation oncology will be hampered by the perception that implementation of the tool will have a steep learning curve, be extremely time consuming and labor intensive, and require additional resources. To overcome these preconceptions and facilitate the introduction of the tool into clinical practice, the medical physics community must be educated in the use of this tool and the ease in which it can be implemented. Organizations with experience in FMEA should share their knowledge with others in order to increase the implementation, effectiveness and productivity of the tool. This session will include a brief, general introduction to FMEA followed by a focus on practical aspects of implementing FMEA for specific clinical procedures including HDR brachytherapy, physics plan review and radiosurgery. A description of common equipment and devices used in these procedures and how to characterize new devices for safe use in patient treatments will be presented. This will be followed by a discussion of how to customize FMEA techniques and templates to one’s own clinic. Finally, cases of common failure modes for specific procedures (described previously) will be shown and recommended intervention methodologies and outcomes reviewed. Learning Objectives: Understand the general concept of failure mode and effect analysis Learn how to characterize new equipment for safety Be able to identify potential failure modes for specific procedures and learn mitigation techniques Be able to customize FMEA examples and templates for use in any clinic.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

WE-G-BRC-01: Risk Assessment for Radiosurgery

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) originated as an industrial engineering technique used for risk management and safety improvement of complex processes. In the context of radiotherapy, the AAPM Task Group 100 advocates FMEA as the framework of choice for establishing clinical quality management protocols. However, there is concern that widespread adoption of FMEA in radiation oncology will be hampered by the perception that implementation of the tool will have a steep learning curve, be extremely time consuming and labor intensive, and require additional resources. To overcome these preconceptions and facilitate the introduction of the tool into clinical practice, the medical physics community must be educated in the use of this tool and the ease in which it can be implemented. Organizations with experience in FMEA should share their knowledge with others in order to increase the implementation, effectiveness and productivity of the tool. This session will include a brief, general introduction to FMEA followed by a focus on practical aspects of implementing FMEA for specific clinical procedures including HDR brachytherapy, physics plan review and radiosurgery. A description of common equipment and devices used in these procedures and how to characterize new devices for safe use in patient treatments will be presented. This will be followed by a discussion of how to customize FMEA techniques and templates to one’s own clinic. Finally, cases of common failure modes for specific procedures (described previously) will be shown and recommended intervention methodologies and outcomes reviewed. Learning Objectives: Understand the general concept of failure mode and effect analysis Learn how to characterize new equipment for safety Be able to identify potential failure modes for specific procedures and learn mitigation techniques Be able to customize FMEA examples and templates for use in any clinic.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

WE-G-BRC-02: Risk Assessment for HDR Brachytherapy

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) originated as an industrial engineering technique used for risk management and safety improvement of complex processes. In the context of radiotherapy, the AAPM Task Group 100 advocates FMEA as the framework of choice for establishing clinical quality management protocols. However, there is concern that widespread adoption of FMEA in radiation oncology will be hampered by the perception that implementation of the tool will have a steep learning curve, be extremely time consuming and labor intensive, and require additional resources. To overcome these preconceptions and facilitate the introduction of the tool into clinical practice, the medical physics community must be educated in the use of this tool and the ease in which it can be implemented. Organizations with experience in FMEA should share their knowledge with others in order to increase the implementation, effectiveness and productivity of the tool. This session will include a brief, general introduction to FMEA followed by a focus on practical aspects of implementing FMEA for specific clinical procedures including HDR brachytherapy, physics plan review and radiosurgery. A description of common equipment and devices used in these procedures and how to characterize new devices for safe use in patient treatments will be presented. This will be followed by a discussion of how to customize FMEA techniques and templates to one’s own clinic. Finally, cases of common failure modes for specific procedures (described previously) will be shown and recommended intervention methodologies and outcomes reviewed. Learning Objectives: Understand the general concept of failure mode and effect analysis Learn how to characterize new equipment for safety Be able to identify potential failure modes for specific procedures and learn mitigation techniques Be able to customize FMEA examples and templates for use in any clinic.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

WE-G-BRC-03: Risk Assessment for Physics Plan Review

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) originated as an industrial engineering technique used for risk management and safety improvement of complex processes. In the context of radiotherapy, the AAPM Task Group 100 advocates FMEA as the framework of choice for establishing clinical quality management protocols. However, there is concern that widespread adoption of FMEA in radiation oncology will be hampered by the perception that implementation of the tool will have a steep learning curve, be extremely time consuming and labor intensive, and require additional resources. To overcome these preconceptions and facilitate the introduction of the tool into clinical practice, the medical physics community must be educated in the use of this tool and the ease in which it can be implemented. Organizations with experience in FMEA should share their knowledge with others in order to increase the implementation, effectiveness and productivity of the tool. This session will include a brief, general introduction to FMEA followed by a focus on practical aspects of implementing FMEA for specific clinical procedures including HDR brachytherapy, physics plan review and radiosurgery. A description of common equipment and devices used in these procedures and how to characterize new devices for safe use in patient treatments will be presented. This will be followed by a discussion of how to customize FMEA techniques and templates to one’s own clinic. Finally, cases of common failure modes for specific procedures (described previously) will be shown and recommended intervention methodologies and outcomes reviewed. Learning Objectives: Understand the general concept of failure mode and effect analysis Learn how to characterize new equipment for safety Be able to identify potential failure modes for specific procedures and learn mitigation techniques Be able to customize FMEA examples and templates for use in any clinic.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Simulation of Dynamic Crushing Behavior of Simulated Carbon/Epoxy Stanchions Using MAT58 and MAT213 in LS-DYNA

Carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites have shown promise as a material for structures designed to absorb energy in crush-style impact loading. In complementing the lightweight and tailorable characteristics of CFRP structures, the benefits of impact energy absorption are particularly interesting in aerospace vehicles that require excellent crashworthiness performance. However, simulating the behavior of CFRP structures in dynamic, crushing-style impact loading is challenging because of the many damage and failure modes that are essential to capture in the model. For the present investigation, CFRP stanchions were tested using a crash sled experimental test rig. The stanchions were designed by the Composite Materials Handbook-17 (CMH-17) Crashworthiness Working Group for the purpose of comparing experimental crash sled tests to corresponding simulations of the tests. The stanchions are C-channel shaped and represent a geometry common in the interior of aerospace vehicle structures. Explicit simulations in LSDYNA were performed using a well-established composite material model (MAT58) and a next-generation material model (MAT213). Fully integrated shell elements were utilized instead of 3D solid elements to limit computation time. In all models, each of the sixteen plies were represented with individual layers of shell elements with tiebreak contact between each adjacent ply pair to simulate interlaminar fracture. Simulating the crushing of the stanchions occurred in two phases. First, the material models were calibrated using flat specimens that were manufactured with the same layup as the stanchions. While the original goal was calibration of material-related properties, meshdependent behavior was observed in simulations with either material model, and an unstructured mesh was selected to remediate undesirable mesh-dependent failure modes. Additionally, for both the MAT58 and MAT213 models, it was found that either the crush force or the failure mode could be modeled accurately, but no set of parameters could be identified to attain both results in the same model. Once satisfactory calibration was achieved, the same material parameters were applied to the stanchion crush simulations. The stanchion simulations showed that MAT213 more accurately predicted the experimentally determined crush force, and both material models predicted key aspects of the experimentally observed failure modes.

Composite Materials↗

NASA NTRS1980

Orbiter subsystem hardware/software interaction analysis. Volume 8: Forward reaction control system

The results of the orbiter hardware/software interaction analysis for the AFT reaction control system are presented. The interaction between hardware failure modes and software are examined in order to identify associated issues and risks. All orbiter subsystems and interfacing program elements which interact with the orbiter computer flight software are analyzed. The failure modes identified in the subsystem/element failure mode and effects analysis are discussed.

Becker, D. D.↗

NASA NTRS1979

Testing of containers made of glass-fiber reinforced plastic with the aid of acoustic emission analysis

Acoustic emission analysis as a quasi-nondestructive test method makes it possible to differentiate clearly, in judging the total behavior of fiber-reinforced plastic composites, between critical failure modes (in the case of unidirectional composites fiber fractures) and non-critical failure modes (delamination processes or matrix fractures). A particular advantage is that, for varying pressure demands on the composites, the emitted acoustic pulses can be analyzed with regard to their amplitude distribution. In addition, definite indications as to how the damages occurred can be obtained from the time curves of the emitted acoustic pulses as well as from the particular frequency spectrum. Distinct analogies can be drawn between the various analytical methods with respect to whether the failure modes can be classified as critical or non-critical.

Wolitz, K.↗

DOE OSTI2015

Deep geothermal: The ‘Moon Landing’ mission in the unconventional energy and minerals space

Deep geothermal from the hot crystalline basement has remained an unsolved frontier for the geothermal industry for the past 30 years. This poses the challenge for developing a new unconventional geomechanics approach to stimulate such reservoirs. While a number of new unconventional brittle techniques are still available to improve stimulation on short time scales, the astonishing richness of failure modes of longer time scales in hot rocks has so far been overlooked. These failure modes represent a series of microscopic processes: brittle microfracturing prevails at low temperatures and fairly high deviatoric stresses, while upon increasing temperature and decreasing applied stress or longer time scales, the failure modes switch to transgranular and intergranular creep fractures. Accordingly, fluids play an active role and create their own pathways through facilitating shear localization by a process of time-dependent dissolution and precipitation creep, rather than being a passive constituent by simply following brittle fractures that are generated inside a shear zone caused by other localization mechanisms. Here, we lay out a new theoretical approach for the design of new strategies to utilize, enhance and maintain the natural permeability in the deeper and hotter domain of geothermal reservoirs. The advantage of the approach is that, rather than engineering an entirely new EGS reservoir, we acknowledge a suite of creep-assisted geological processes that are driven by the current tectonic stress field. Such processes are particularly supported by higher temperatures potentially allowing in the future to target commercially viable combinations of temperatures and flow rates.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS1986

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the rudder/speed brake subsystem

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. The IOA approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The independent analysis results for the Orbiter Rudder/Speedbrake Actuation Mechanism is documented. The function of the Rudder/Speedbrake (RSB) is to provide directional control and to provide a means of energy control during entry. The system consists of two panels on a vertical hinge mounted on the aft part of the vertical stabilizer. These two panels move together to form a rudder but split apart to make a speedbrake. The Rudder/Speedbrake Actuation Mechanism consists of the following elements: (1) Power Drive Unit (PDU) which is composed of hydraulic valve module and a hydraulic motor-powered gearbox which contains differentials and mixer gears to provide PDU torque output; (2) four geared rotary actuators which apply the PDU generated torque to the rudder/speedbrake panels; and (3) ten torque shafts which join the PDU to the rotary actuators and interconnect the four rotary actuators. Each level of hardware was evaluated and analyzed for possible failures and causes. Criticality was assigned based upon the severity of the effect for each failure mode. Critical RSB failures which result in potential loss of vehicle control were mainly due to loss of hydraulic fluid, fluid contaminators, and mechanical failures in gears and shafts.

Wilson, R. E.↗