Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “HAZARD”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

Lidar Sensor Performance in Closed-Loop Flight Testing of the Morpheus Rocket-Propelled Lander to a Lunar-Like Hazard Field

For the first time, a suite of three lidar sensors have been used in flight to scan a lunar-like hazard field, identify a safe landing site, and, in concert with an experimental Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GN&C) system, help to guide the Morpheus autonomous, rocket-propelled, free-flying lander to that safe site on the hazard field. The lidar sensors and GN&C system are part of the Autonomous Precision Landing and Hazard Detection and Avoidance Technology (ALHAT) project which has been seeking to develop a system capable of enabling safe, precise crewed or robotic landings in challenging terrain on planetary bodies under any ambient lighting conditions. The 3-D imaging Flash Lidar is a second generation, compact, real-time, aircooled instrument developed from a number of components from industry and NASA and is used as part of the ALHAT Hazard Detection System (HDS) to scan the hazard field and build a 3-D Digital Elevation Map (DEM) in near-real time for identifying safe sites. The Flash Lidar is capable of identifying a 30 cm hazard from a slant range of 1 km with its 8 cm range precision (1-s). The Flash Lidar is also used in Hazard Relative Navigation (HRN) to provide position updates down to a 250m slant range to the ALHAT navigation filter as it guides Morpheus to the safe site. The Navigation Doppler Lidar (NDL) system has been developed within NASA to provide velocity measurements with an accuracy of 0.2 cm/sec and range measurements with an accuracy of 17 cm both from a maximum range of 2,200 m to a minimum range of several meters above the ground. The NDLâ€"TM"s measurements are fed into the ALHAT navigation filter to provide lander guidance to the safe site. The Laser Altimeter (LA), also developed within NASA, provides range measurements with an accuracy of 5 cm from a maximum operational range of 30 km down to 1 m and, being a separate sensor from the Flash Lidar, can provide range along a separate vector. The LA measurements are also fed into the ALHAT navigation filter to provide lander guidance to the safe site. The flight tests served as the culmination of the TRL 6 journey for the ALHAT system and included launch from a pad situated at the NASA-Kennedy Space Center Shuttle Landing Facility (SLF) runway, a lunar-like descent trajectory from an altitude of 250m, and landing on a lunar-like hazard field of rocks, craters, hazardous slopes, and safe sites 400m down-range just off the North end of the runway. The tests both confirmed the expected performance and also revealed several challenges present in the flight-like environment which will feed into future TRL advancement of the sensors. Guidance provided by the ALHAT system was impeded in portions of the trajectory and intermittent near the end of the trajectory due to optical effects arising from air heated by the rocket engine. The Flash Lidar identified hazards as small as 30 cm from the maximum slant range of 450 m which Morpheus could provide; however, it was occasionally susceptible to an increase in range noise due to scintillation arising from air heated by the Morpheus rocket engine which entered its Field-of-View (FOV). The Flash Lidar was also susceptible to pre-triggering, during the HRN phase, on a dust cloud created during launch and transported down-range by the wind. The NDL provided velocity and range measurements to the expected accuracy levels yet it was also susceptible to signal degradation due to air heated by the rocket engine. The LA, operating with a degraded transmitter laser, also showed signal attenuation over a few seconds at a specific phase of the flight due to the heat plume generated by the rocket engine.

Roback, V. Eric↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

On the Moral Hazard of Autonomy

This paper describes the concept of moral hazard as applied to technologies that incorporate automation and autonomy. Moral hazard is said to exist when a party to a transaction feels more comfortable taking undue risks because another party will bear the costs if things go badly. As opposed to regular physical hazards, a moral hazard comes from within a person. In this paper, we reveal two categories of moral hazards related to autonomy. The first category of moral hazard occurs when the owner of the autonomy introduces an autonomous system without accepting the full responsibility for improper operation thereby shifting the risks from one party to another party. This category of moral hazard is similar to moral hazards experienced in other industries and can often be addressed through appropriate policy and establishing liability for irresponsible behavior. The issue becomes more complicated in cases where the operator of the autonomy may not have a full understanding of the system behavior. In the second category of moral hazard, risks are shifted from people to autonomy. In this category, the humans in proximity to the autonomous system begin to trust its behavior. Their behavior may change in that they may believe they are more insulated from harm and subsequently exhibit more risky behavior towards increasingly autonomous technologies. Mitigating this type of moral hazard may require the autonomy to possess certain design features to discourage this type of harmful human behavior so that humans do not suffer needlessly in their interactions with autonomous systems by placing inappropriate trust where that trust is neither warranted nor deserved.

Cybernetics↗
DOE OSTI2021

Dysfunctionality Hazard Curve: Risk-Based Tool to Support the Resilient Design of Systems Subjected to Multihazards

While resilience metrics have been proposed and studied given a functionality recovery curve, they have not emphasized enough on accounting for the uncertainties in the multihazard occurrences and intensities. Moreover, these resilience metrics are not risk-based (i.e., they do not express the system's resilience loss as a frequency of exceedance), leading to inconsistencies in system performance description when compared to performance-based engineering frameworks. A risk-based tool termed dysfunctionality hazard curve is proposed to assess the resilience of systems subjected to single hazards or multihazards with inter-event dependencies. Dysfunctionality hazard curve expresses system resilience performance as frequency of exceedance of time to full functionality. In doing so, it characterizes system recovery as a sequence of repair activities and also considers the uncertainties in the multihazard occurrences and intensities. Dysfunctionality hazard curve is demonstrated for a residential building susceptible to earthquake and hurricane hazards. Results indicate that Dysfunctionality hazard curve for earthquakes is greater than that for hurricane winds under single hazards. Under multihazards, considering inter-event dependencies during system recovery leads to larger dysfunctionality hazard curve than ignoring them. Finally, the concept of dysfunctionality hazard curve is also extended to a system-of-systems consisting of residential and commercial buildings.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS2022

Preliminary Approach to Assess the Seismic Hazard on a Lunar Site

The passive seismic network deployed on the Moon during the Apollo missions operated for eight years and allowed the observation of seismic activity. More than 12500 seismic events were registered, where 28 were classified as shallow moonquakes with moment magnitudes up to 4.1. Seismic events of this nature pose a significant risk to future long-term lunar habitats; thus, these events must be carefully studied and considered in the seismic design of these structures. This paper proposes a preliminary seismic hazard assessment imposed by shallow moonquakes. The hazard assessment is performed using the Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) methodology, considering previous studies and theories regarding the seismic environment of the Moon. The study zone covers ~860 km2 of the Taurus-Littrow Valley, containing the Apollo 17 landing site and the Lee-Lincoln lobate scarp as the considered seismic source. The seismic hazard is quantified in terms of peak ground acceleration (PGA) and spectral acceleration (5% damped pseudo-acceleration, PSA). Seismic hazard deaggregation scenarios, Uniform Hazard Spectra (UHS) for different hazard levels, and a Conditional Mean Spectrum (CMS) for a target period of 0.2 s are obtained to quantify the seismic hazard on a specific site on the Moon. The developed seismic hazard assessment provides a preliminary approach for realistic scenarios to conduct structural designs that ensure the seismic performance of fully operational long-term lunar structures.

Moonquake↗
DOE OSTI2020

Multi-Mechanism Flood Hazard Assessment: Critical Review of Current Practice and Approaches

This report documents the initial findings from the Nuclear Regulatory commission (NRC)-sponsored research project Methods for Estimating Joint Probabilities of Coincident and Correlated Flooding Mechanisms for Nuclear Power Plant Flood Hazard Assessments.1 This research project is a part of NRC’s Probabilistic Flood Hazard Assessment (PFHA) Research Program and will aid the development of guidance on the use of PFHA methods to evaluate infrastructure safety for existing and proposed US nuclear power plants (NPPs). More specifically, this project intends to provide technical background for the development of flood hazard curves for multi-mechanism floods (MMFs). MMFs are flood events caused by more than one flooding mechanism (e.g., flood events due to the simultaneous occurrence of precipitation-induced river flooding and storm surge). Project activities include three main tasks: Task 1—Survey of current concepts and methods in assessing MMF hazards; Task 2—Critical assessment of selected methods and approaches for quantifying probabilistic MMF hazard risk; Task 3—Development of example case studies to illustrate best practices for quantifying probabilistic MMF hazard risk The initial findings from Tasks 1 and 2 are documented in this report. Task 1 comprised a survey of approaches and methods that have been applied to understand and assess flood hazards due to MMFs. Task 2 involved a critical review of the selected approaches and methods. To that end, the scope of this report includes documentation of (1) a reconnaissance-level survey of the current state of concepts and practice for MMF hazard assessment; (2) a generalized MMF assessment framework to address the distinctions among various types of flood-forcing phenomena, flood mechanisms (grouped into three mechanism types), and flood severity metrics; (3) a wide-ranging survey of approaches and methods that have been applied to various flooding phenomena and settings; and (4) a critical assessment of MMF hazard assessment methods. Studies were identified involving MMFs related to coastal flooding mechanisms, fluvial (rivers/streams) flooding mechanisms, and associated combinations of coastal and fluvial flooding mechanisms. Studies were also identified that address MMFs involving coastal and fluvial flooding mechanisms as well as coastal flooding mechanisms along with extreme precipitation (without specific attribution to fluvial or pluvial mechanisms). The studies identified for review in this report included assessments at varying spatial scales (from local to global) with differing geographic regions of focus using both observed and synthetic data. The majority of studies identified and reviewed were site-specific assessments focusing on relatively short return periods. Studies considered a range of flood severity metrics, made differing assumptions regarding the occurrence of extrema, and used multiple statistical techniques; the use of copulas for the development of joint distributions was a particularly popular analysis technique. The literature review highlighted the differences among existing studies relative to terminology used, means of presenting results, framework and techniques employed, and level of sophistication regarding the number and types of variables considered. Despite the significant diversity in existing studies, the review identified several promising techniques that will be considered in future work under this project, including the development of joint distributions for MMFs using copula and Bayesian-motivated approaches.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
NASA NTRS1971

Lunar mission safety and rescue: Hazards analysis and safety requirements

The results are presented of the hazards analysis which was concerned only with hazards to personnel and not with loss of equipment or property. Hazards characterization includes the definition of a hazard, the hazard levels, and the hazard groups. The analysis methodology is described in detail. The methodology was used to prepare the top level functional flow diagrams, to perform the first level hazards assessment, and to develop a list of conditions and situations requiring individual hazard studies. The 39 individual hazard study results are presented in total.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

GO/NO-GO - When is medical hazard mitigation acceptable for launch?

Medical support of spaceflight missions is composed of complex tasks and decisions that dedicated to maintaining the health and performance of the crew and the completion of mission objectives. Spacecraft represent one of the most complex vehicles built by humans, and are built to very rigorous design specifications. In the course of a Flight Readiness Review (FRR) or a mission itself, the flight surgeon must be able to understand the impact of hazards and risks that may not be completely mitigated by design alone. Some hazards are not mitigated because they are never actually identified. When a hazard is identified, it must be reduced or waivered. Hazards that cannot be designed out of the vehicle or mission, are usually mitigated through other means to bring the residual risk to an acceptable level. This is possible in most engineered systems because failure modes are usually predictable and analysis can include taking these systems to failure. Medical support of space missions is complicated by the inability of flight surgeons to provide "exact" hazard and risk numbers to the NASA engineering community. Taking humans to failure is not an option. Furthermore, medical dogma is mostly comprised of "medical prevention" strategies that mitigate risk by examining the behaviour of a cohort of humans similar to astronauts. Unfortunately, this approach does not lend itself well for predicting the effect of a hazard in the unique environment of space. This presentation will discuss how Medical Operations uses an evidence-based approach to decide if hazard mitigation strategies are adequate to reduce mission risk to acceptable levels. Case studies to be discussed will include: 1. Risk of electrocution risk during EVA 2. Risk of cardiac event risk during long and short duration missions 3. Degraded cabin environmental monitoring on the ISS. Learning Objectives 1.) The audience will understand the challenges of mitigating medical risk caused by nominal and off-nominal mission events. 2.) The audience will understand the process by which medical hazards are identified and mitigated before launch. 3.) The audience will understand the roles and responsibilities of all the other flight control positions in participating in the process of reducing hazards and reducing medical risk to an acceptable level.

Hamilton, Douglas R.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Hazard Analysis for the Mark III Space Suit Assembly (SSA) Used in One-g Operations

This Hazard Analysis document encompasses the Mark III Space Suit Assembly (SSA) and associated ancillary equipment. It has been prepared using JSC17773, "Preparing Hazard Analyses for JSC Ground Operation", as a guide. The purpose of this document is to present the potential hazards involved in ground (23 % maximum O2, One-g) operations of the Mark III and associated ancillary support equipment system. The hazards listed in this document are specific to suit operations only; each supporting facility (Bldg. 9, etc.) is responsible for test specific Hazard Analyses. A "hazard" is defined as any condition that has the potential for harming personnel or equipment. This analysis was performed to document the safety aspects associated with manned use of the Mark III for pressurized and unpressurized ambient, ground-based, One-g human testing. The hazards identified herein represent generic hazards inherent to all standard JSC test venues for nominal ground test configurations. Non-standard test venues or test specific configurations may warrant consideration of additional hazards analysis prior to test. The cognizant suit engineer is responsible for the safety of the astronaut/test subject, space suit, and suit support personnel. The test requester, for the test supported by the suit test engineer and suited subject, is responsible for overall safety and any necessary Test Readiness Reviews (TRR).

Mitchell, Kate↗
NASA NTRS2022

Idaho Wildfires II: Assessing the Relationship Between Drought Indicators and Wildfire Risk to Enhance Hazard Modeling and Inform Mitigation Planning

The western United States has experienced twenty years of increased and prolonged drought which have exacerbated wildfire hazards. These jeopardize population centers through increased risks to ecosystem services, local economies, and livelihoods. The Idaho Office of Emergency Management, Water Resources, and Department of Lands are seeking methods to dynamically monitor these conditions and update models that inform hazard mitigation planning and resource allocation. Towards this, these agencies partnered with NASA DEVELOP to produce drought-enhanced wildfire hazard models. Part of a two-term project, the two teams revised the state’s static wildfire hazard model with refined data layers and remotely-sensed data to reflect dynamic ecosystem responses to drought conditions and wildfire potential. Our team distinguished between rangeland and forestland ecosystems, and investigated relationships between drought metrics and vegetation condition using TerrSet Earth Trends Modeler. This analysis determined that total precipitation at a 5-month lag interval (r 2 = 0.72) along with the Evaporative Stress Index (r 2 = 0.69); and precipitation at a 5-month interval (r 2 = 0.42) were important drivers in rangeland and forestland, respectively. These driver variables were incorporated into a temporally dynamic wildfire hazard map. Our team used linear regression to correlate hazard ratings with wildfire frequency. For the year 2020, neither the enhanced hazard model (p < 0.10, r 2 = 0.01) nor the state’s static model (p < 0.05, r 2 = 0.03) were strongly correlated with actual wildfire frequency as they expressed an inverse relationship between wildfire hazard and frequency. This suggests wildfire occurrence is complex and not necessarily driven by the variables used.

Wildfire↗
DOE OSTI2023

Potential Benefits in Remapping the Special Flood Hazard Area: Evidence from the U.S. Housing Market

A typical U.S. homebuyer's understanding of whether a property faces flood risk is based on whether the property is located inside the National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP) Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). The SFHA boundary, however, may bias homebuyers’ perceptions of flood risk relative to unobserved true risk because the SFHA is an incomplete, and sometimes inaccurate, representation of flood hazards. Using a national dataset of property transactions, flood hazard data from the First Street Foundation, state-level measures of flood disclosure laws, and a spatially restricted triple-difference design, we distinguish capitalization effects of policy-driven (SFHA) versus quasi-objective (First Street) indicators of flood hazard. We identify these effects by assessing thousands of local spatial interactions between property SFHA designations, measures of quasi-objective flood hazard, and being in a state that mandates flood history disclosures. Being inside the SFHA generates a risk discount, but the signal is muted relative to underlying hazard exposure. Further, the SFHA signal can result in inefficient discounts for properties erroneously mapped in the SFHA. Disclosure requirements about flood history accentuate price effects for hazardous properties and result in more adequate risk internalization. In the absence of disclosures, however, we find either no or a weak risk signal for houses outside the SFHA that face flood hazard. Our results highlight potential benefits of updating SFHA boundaries to include all houses that may experience flooding, and argue in favor of requiring flood-related disclosures from sellers to improve the market's ability to internalize flood risk.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1998

Wake-Vortex Hazards During Cruise

Even though the hazard posed by lift-generated wakes of subsonic transport aircraft has been studied extensively for approach and departure at airports, only a small amount of effort has gone into the potential hazard at cruise altitude. This paper reports on a studio of the wake-vortex hazard during cruise because encounters may become more prevalent when free-flight becomes available and each aircraft, is free to choose its own route between destinations. In order to address the problem, the various fluid-dynamic stages that vortex wakes usually go through as they age will be described along with estimates of the potential hazard that each stage poses. It appears that a rolling-moment hazard can be just as severe at cruise as for approach at airports, but it only persists for several minutes. However, the hazard posed by the downwash in the wake due to the lift on the generator aircraft persists for tens of minutes in a long narrow region behind the generating aircraft. The hazard consists of severe vertical loads when an encountering aircraft crosses the wake. A technique for avoiding vortex wakes at cruise altitude will be described. To date the hazard posed by lift-generated vortex wakes and their persistence at cruise altitudes has been identified and subdivided into several tasks. Analyses of the loads to be encounter and are underway and should be completed shortly. A review of published literature on the subject has been nearly completed (see text) and photographs of vortex wakes at cruise altitudes have been taken and the various stages of decay have been identified. It remains to study and sort the photographs for those that best illustrate the various stages of decay after they are shed by subsonic transport aircraft at cruise altitudes. The present status of the analysis and the paper are described.

Rossow, Vernon J.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Applications of a Forward-Looking Interferometer for the On-board Detection of Aviation Weather Hazards

The Forward-Looking Interferometer (FLI) is a new instrument concept for obtaining measurements of potential weather hazards to alert flight crews. The FLI concept is based on high-resolution Infrared (IR) Fourier Transform Spectrometry (FTS) technologies that have been developed for satellite remote sensing, and which have also been applied to the detection of aerosols and gases for other purposes. It is being evaluated for multiple hazards including clear air turbulence (CAT), volcanic ash, wake vortices, low slant range visibility, dry wind shear, and icing, during all phases of flight. Previous sensitivity and characterization studies addressed the phenomenology that supports detection and mitigation by the FLI. Techniques for determining the range, and hence warning time, were demonstrated for several of the hazards, and a table of research instrument parameters was developed for investigating all of the hazards discussed above. This work supports the feasibility of detecting multiple hazards with an FLI multi-hazard airborne sensor, and for producing enhanced IR images in reduced visibility conditions; however, further research must be performed to develop a means to estimate the intensities of the hazards posed to an aircraft and to develop robust algorithms to relate sensor measurables to hazard levels. In addition, validation tests need to be performed with a prototype system.

West, Leanne↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using remotely sensed information to support landslide hazard and exposure assessment throughout the disaster lifecycle

The global coverage and temporal frequency that satellites provide offers a unique opportunity to estimate landslide hazard and exposure throughout the disaster lifecycle, from pre-event planning and forecasting to post-event mapping and impact assessment, and finally to recovery and mitigation. The relevance of satellite-derived data and model products is largely contingent on the spatiotemporal sampling, the hazard characteristics, and the needs from the research or applications community. This work presents an advanced Landslide Hazard Assessment for Situational Awareness (LHASA) framework that brings together satellite and model products with new machine learning techniques and global inventory data to better model landslide hazard and exposure. We present several new ways to map, model, and assess landslide hazard using a range of satellite data. Two new thrusts of this work are to better account for the exacerbating impacts of fires and to provide a multi-day forecast of potential hazard. Together, these additional components blend information from a suite of satellite and model sources to improve early warning of potentially hazardous areas, identify landslide occurrence and impacts in near real-time, and better characterize the spatiotemporal patterns of landslide hazard and exposure more broadly for future awareness and planning. This suite of tools and products is open to the public and provides information to better assess the potential occurrence and impacts of landslides within different regions of the world. This presentation explores both the architecture behind this framework and examples of how the model components and products have been used by different stakeholders around the world.

Thomas Stanley↗
NASA NTRS2023

Machine Learning Framework for Hazard Extraction and Analysis of Trends (HEAT) in Wildfire Response

This research proposes a natural language processing enabled risk analysis framework, named Hazard Extraction andAnalysis of Trends (HEAT), and applies the framework to the ICS-209-PLUS data set of wildfire incident responseforms. The HEAT framework produces safety- and risk- relevant analyses, consisting of: (1) a set of hazards extractedfrom text data, (2) a primary analysis using hazard-relevant metrics, such as rate and severity, to form an FMEA-styletable and risk matrix, (3) a time series analysis of metric trends, and (4) a secondary analysis examining potentialpredictors for hazards. Results from HEAT provide quantitative risk-relevant information for high-level hazards doc-umented in existing-state operations. Because of the generalizability of the steps and limited data requirements, HEATcan be applied to any dataset containing narrative text, thus providing a framework for data-driven machine learning-enabled quantitative risk analysis across a variety of domains. To demonstrate HEAT in a case study, we apply theframework to the ICS-209-PLUS dataset of wildland fire incident response forms. Hazards identified in wildfire re-sponse arise from environmental conditions, the mission, and the wildland urban interface. The resulting risk matrixidentifies evacuations as high-risk hazards, while all other identified hazards are medium or serious risk.

natural language processing↗
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 NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Safety Hazards Risk Assessment Tool for Uncrewed Aircraft System Traffic Management during Preflight Planning

Tremendous growth in the uncrewed and remotely piloted vehicle market is expected in low-altitude, uncontrolled airspace, resulting in potential decreases in safety without systems that support monitoring, assessing, and mitigating risk. At NASA, the System-Wide Safety (SWS) project has been developing a suite of data-driven tools to predict hazards so that the potential risks that these hazards pose can be mitigated. Services to predict various hazards have been developed, including battery capacity, proximity to static obstacles, population risks, global positioning system signal strength, radio frequency spectrum interference risk, and vertiport congestion. These services can monitor hazards along a flight path and if any risks posed by these hazards exceed a threshold, the uncrewed aircraft system (UAS) fleet manager can be alerted to mitigate the risk by modifying the flight path, changing the scheduled departure or arrival times, and/or diverting the vehicle to an alternate vertiport. These services were originally developed to monitor and assess risks during flight, but they have been adapted to assess hazard risks prior to departure so that a fleet manager can evaluate the potential risks for a fleet of UAS along their planned flight paths. These services have been integrated into a prototype tool called the Supplemental Data Service Provider-Consolidated Dashboard (SDSP-CD), developed at NASA Ames Research Center. The tool consists of a dashboard which provides a comprehensive overview for a number of risks and a map display that shows the details of the hazards along each flight’s path. Based on the findings from three previous studies, the SDSP-CD has been updated with new design elements and functions. In this paper, we describe lessons learned from the previous studies, changes made to the interface, and the feedback received during a follow-up usability study. Overall, participants reported that there is a substantial benefit of having a fleet manager use a consolidated dashboard to assess hazards for the vehicles in their fleet and to provide situational awareness to potential risks so that they can be mitigated prior to flight. Once the SDSP-CD matures, it will need to be integrated into flight and mission planning tools. Some initial thoughts on how this integration should be accomplished are shared in this paper. Finally, the functional differences between preflight vs. in-flight risk assessment and the differences in fleet manager vs. UAS pilot roles that may require different information and user interactions are discussed.

preflight↗
DOE OSTI2022

Increasing risk of cascading hazards in the central Himalayas

Cascading hazards are becoming more prevalent in the central Himalayas. Primary hazards (e.g., earthquakes, avalanches, and landslides) often trigger secondary hazards (e.g., landslide dam, debris flow, and flooding), compounding the risks to human settlements, infrastructures, and ecosystems. Risk management strategies are commonly tailored to a single hazard, leaving human and natural systems vulnerable to cascading hazards. In this commentary, we characterize diverse natural hazards in the central Himalayas, including their cascading mechanisms and potential impacts. A scientifically sound understanding of the cascading hazards, underlying mechanisms, and appropriate tools to account for the compounding risks are crucial to informing the design of risk management strategies. Here, we also discuss the need for an integrated modeling framework, reliable prediction and early warning system, and sustainable disaster mitigation and adaptation strategies.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Expansion of Hazards and Probabilistic Risk Assessments of a Light-Water Reactor Coupled with Electrolysis Hydrogen Production Plants

This report builds upon the body of work sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE) Light-Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Flexible Power Operation and Generation (FPOG) program that presented generic probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) for the addition of a heat extraction system (HES) to light-water reactors to support the co-location of a high temperature hydrogen electrolysis facility (HTEF). Probabilistic and deterministic hazards assessments and risk analyses are leveraged throughout this report. Several improvements and new analyses are included in this report. First, higher amounts of detail in the specifications of the generic HTEFs are used to produce scaled results for a 100, 500, and 1000 MW nominal hydrogen production facility. An additional hazard assessment of 1000 kg of hydrogen storage is performed. The facility hazards and footprint are assessed to determine the safe distance required for placement near the nuclear power plant (NPP). Second, specific designs for corresponding HESs for the different levels of support required by the HTEFs are analyzed in the PRA model. Third, a hazards analysis of the specified HTEFs leads not only to effects of the quantified risk assessment for the NPP, but also qualitative hazards assessment for the community. Finally, a seismic analysis and a high winds analysis have each been added to the PRA. The results investigate the applicability of the potential licensing approaches which do not require a full United States (U.S.) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing review. The PRAs are generic and include listed assumptions. The HTEF design built for this project has further eliminated many conservative assumptions from the prior PRAs in this series. The PRA results indicate that the 10 CFR 50.59 licensing approach is justified due to the minimal increase in initiating event frequencies for all design basis accidents, with none exceeding 7.7%. The PRA results for core damage frequency and large early release frequency support the use of NRC Regulation Guide 1.174 as further risk information that supports a change without a full licensing amendment review. The hazard analyses and PRA confirm the need for engineered blast barriers of storage tanks and the common production header leaving the HTEF. The hazards analyses and PRA also confirm with high confidence that using the assumptions of design in this report that the safety case for licensing an HES addition and an HTEF sited with its unprotected high-pressure stage components 187 meters from the NPP’s transmission towers (the most fragile structure, system, and component) is strong.

08 HYDROGEN↗