Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Probabilistic risk”

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 NTRS2013

Method and system for dynamic probabilistic risk assessment

The DEFT methodology, system and computer readable medium extends the applicability of the PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) methodology to computer-based systems, by allowing DFT (Dynamic Fault Tree) nodes as pivot nodes in the Event Tree (ET) model. DEFT includes a mathematical model and solution algorithm, supports all common PRA analysis functions and cutsets. Additional capabilities enabled by the DFT include modularization, phased mission analysis, sequence dependencies, and imperfect coverage.

Dugan, Joanne Bechta↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Expectation vs. Reality: The Sunrise Problem Applied to Probabilistic Risk Assessment

The Sunrise Problem is succinctly stated as a question: “what is the probability that the sun will rise tomorrow?” Attempts to answer this seemingly simple question reveal unexpected incongruities between statistical/probabilistic estimates and “real-world” expectations. Rather than being a purely philosophical problem, similar incongruities can be found in reliability and probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) analyses. These differences between statistical predictions and demonstrated reliability can result in analysis shortcomings that should be addressed and resolved. This presentation will begin by discussing the nature of the Sunrise Problem and how it applies to PRA and reliability. Examples of the Sunrise Problem in a PRA estimate will also be included, along with tips to identify and resolve the shortcomings that result from these anomalous situations.

Sunrise Problem↗
NASA NTRS2009

Probabilistic Risk Assessment for Decision Making During Spacecraft Operations

Decisions made during the operational phase of a space mission often have significant and immediate consequences. Without the explicit consideration of the risks involved and their representation in a solid model, it is very likely that these risks are not considered systematically in trade studies. Wrong decisions during the operational phase of a space mission can lead to immediate system failure whereas correct decisions can help recover the system even from faulty conditions. A problem of special interest is the determination of the system fault protection strategies upon the occurrence of faults within the system. Decisions regarding the fault protection strategy also heavily rely on a correct understanding of the state of the system and an integrated risk model that represents the various possible scenarios and their respective likelihoods. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling is applicable to the full lifecycle of a space mission project, from concept development to preliminary design, detailed design, development and operations. The benefits and utilities of the model, however, depend on the phase of the mission for which it is used. This is because of the difference in the key strategic decisions that support each mission phase. The focus of this paper is on describing the particular methods used for PRA modeling during the operational phase of a spacecraft by gleaning insight from recently conducted case studies on two operational Mars orbiters. During operations, the key decisions relate to the commands sent to the spacecraft for any kind of diagnostics, anomaly resolution, trajectory changes, or planning. Often, faults and failures occur in the parts of the spacecraft but are contained or mitigated before they can cause serious damage. The failure behavior of the system during operations provides valuable data for updating and adjusting the related PRA models that are built primarily based on historical failure data. The PRA models, in turn, provide insight into the effect of various faults or failures on the risk and failure drivers of the system and the likelihood of possible end case scenarios, thereby facilitating the decision making process during operations. This paper describes the process of adjusting PRA models based on observed spacecraft data, on one hand, and utilizing the models for insight into the future system behavior on the other hand. While PRA models are typically used as a decision aid during the design phase of a space mission, we advocate adjusting them based on the observed behavior of the spacecraft and utilizing them for decision support during the operations phase.

dynamic fault trees↗
NASA NTRS2010

Constellation Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA): Design Consideration for the Crew Exploration Vehicle

Managed by NASA's Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, a pilot probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) of the NASA Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) was performed in early 2006. The PRA methods used follow the general guidance provided in the NASA PRA Procedures Guide for NASA Managers and Practitioners'. Phased-mission based event trees and fault trees are used to model a lunar sortie mission of the CEV - involving the following phases: launch of a cargo vessel and a crew vessel; rendezvous of these two vessels in low Earth orbit; transit to th$: moon; lunar surface activities; ascension &om the lunar surface; and return to Earth. The analysis is based upon assumptions, preliminary system diagrams, and failure data that may involve large uncertainties or may lack formal validation. Furthermore, some of the data used were based upon expert judgment or extrapolated from similar components~systemsT. his paper includes a discussion of the system-level models and provides an overview of the analysis results used to identify insights into CEV risk drivers, and trade and sensitivity studies. Lastly, the PRA model was used to determine changes in risk as the system configurations or key parameters are modified.

Prassinos, Peter G.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis Missions Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) & Reliability Assessment Overview

To show how NASA’s Moon-to-Mars (M2M) program can use hardware reliability assessments and comprehensive Probabilistic Risk Assessments (PRAs) to estimate risk of future missions and manage risk via safety and mission success requirements from the top down, so that this risk can be balanced with other program metrics like cost and schedule. These PRAs and reliability assessments can be used during the concept, design, and operational phases of development. This presentation also provides some thoughts on how the NASA process can be utilized for a lunar surface power grid development.

PRA↗
NASA NTRS1995

Probabilistic risk assessment of the Space Shuttle. Phase 3: A study of the potential of losing the vehicle during nominal operation. Volume 2: Integrated loss of vehicle model

The application of the probabilistic risk assessment methodology to a Space Shuttle environment, particularly to the potential of losing the Shuttle during nominal operation is addressed. The different related concerns are identified and combined to determine overall program risks. A fault tree model is used to allocate system probabilities to the subsystem level. The loss of the vehicle due to failure to contain energetic gas and debris, to maintain proper propulsion and configuration is analyzed, along with the loss due to Orbiter, external tank failure, and landing failure or error.

Fragola, Joseph R.↗
NASA NTRS2020

Bayesian Framework For Bioburden Density Calculations To Perform Planetary Protection Probabilistic Risk Assessment

The planetary protection discipline aims to minimize the microbial contamination on spacecraft to prevent the inadvertent contamination of other planetary bodies, known as forward planetary protection (PP). Planetary protection probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) relies on two core methodologies-the contamination probability event tree analysis and statistical parameter estimation. Planetary protection engineers combine several techniques to estimate the bioburden present on spacecraft components. A direct assay to enumerate CFU (colony forming units) is the preferred methodology, but given a similar processing environment the bioburden present on certain components is inferred using: (1) a NASA defined bioburden estimate based upon the biological cleanliness of the manufacturing/assembly environment or (2) sampled data from a similar spacecraft component. The paper presents an empirical Bayesian framework to systematically treat bioburden estimation and its uncertainties on different levels starting with measurement procedures to combining different components to subsystems and whole spacecraft. It is shown that the Bayesian approach can effectively handle estimations and their uncertainties at different levels and produce a reliable estimate for bioburden to be used to evaluate the probability of contamination.

Seuylemezian, Arman↗
NASA NTRS2010

2009 Space Shuttle Probabilistic Risk Assessment Overview

Loss of a Space Shuttle during flight has severe consequences, including loss of a significant national asset; loss of national confidence and pride; and, most importantly, loss of human life. The Shuttle Probabilistic Risk Assessment (SPRA) is used to identify risk contributors and their significance; thus, assisting management in determining how to reduce risk. In 2006, an overview of the SPRA Iteration 2.1 was presented at PSAM 8 [1]. Like all successful PRAs, the SPRA is a living PRA and has undergone revisions since PSAM 8. The latest revision to the SPRA is Iteration 3. 1, and it will not be the last as the Shuttle program progresses and more is learned. This paper discusses the SPRA scope, overall methodology, and results, as well as provides risk insights. The scope, assumptions, uncertainties, and limitations of this assessment provide risk-informed perspective to aid management s decision-making process. In addition, this paper compares the Iteration 3.1 analysis and results to the Iteration 2.1 analysis and results presented at PSAM 8.

Hamlin, Teri L.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Trade Studies of Space Launch Architectures using Modular Probabilistic Risk Analysis

A top-down risk assessment in the early phases of space exploration architecture development can provide understanding and intuition of the potential risks associated with new designs and technologies. In this approach, risk analysts draw from their past experience and the heritage of similar existing systems as a source for reliability data. This top-down approach captures the complex interactions of the risk driving parts of the integrated system without requiring detailed knowledge of the parts themselves, which is often unavailable in the early design stages. Traditional probabilistic risk analysis (PRA) technologies, however, suffer several drawbacks that limit their timely application to complex technology development programs. The most restrictive of these is a dependence on static planning scenarios, expressed through fault and event trees. Fault trees incorporating comprehensive mission scenarios are routinely constructed for complex space systems, and several commercial software products are available for evaluating fault statistics. These static representations cannot capture the dynamic behavior of system failures without substantial modification of the initial tree. Consequently, the development of dynamic models using fault tree analysis has been an active area of research in recent years. This paper discusses the implementation and demonstration of dynamic, modular scenario modeling for integration of subsystem fault evaluation modules using the Space Architecture Failure Evaluation (SAFE) tool. SAFE is a C++ code that was originally developed to support NASA s Space Launch Initiative. It provides a flexible framework for system architecture definition and trade studies. SAFE supports extensible modeling of dynamic, time-dependent risk drivers of the system and functions at the level of fidelity for which design and failure data exists. The approach is scalable, allowing inclusion of additional information as detailed data becomes available. The tool performs a Monte Carlo analysis to provide statistical estimates. Example results of an architecture system reliability study are summarized for an exploration system concept using heritage data from liquid-fueled expendable Saturn V/Apollo launch vehicles.

Mathias, Donovan L.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment - How They Play Together

Since the Space Shuttle Challenger accident in 1986, NASA has extensively used probabilistic analysis methods to assess, understand, and communicate the risk of space launch vehicles. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA), used in the nuclear industry, is one of the probabilistic analysis methods NASA utilizes to assess Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) risk for launch vehicles. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment that uses a combination of fault trees, event trees, event sequence diagrams, and probability distributions to analyze the risk of a system, a process, or an activity. It is a process designed to answer three basic questions: 1) what can go wrong that would lead to loss or degraded performance (i.e., scenarios involving undesired consequences of interest), 2) how likely is it (probabilities), and 3) what is the severity of the degradation (consequences). Since the Challenger accident, PRA has been used in supporting decisions regarding safety upgrades for launch vehicles. Another area that was given a lot of emphasis at NASA after the Challenger accident is reliability engineering. Reliability engineering has been a critical design function at NASA since the early Apollo days. However, after the Challenger accident, quantitative reliability analysis and reliability predictions were given more scrutiny because of their importance in understanding failure mechanism and quantifying the probability of failure, which are key elements in resolving technical issues, performing design trades, and implementing design improvements. Although PRA and reliability are both probabilistic in nature and, in some cases, use the same tools, they are two different activities. Specifically, reliability engineering is a broad design discipline that deals with loss of function and helps understand failure mechanism and improve component and system design. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment process intended to assess the risk scenarios that could lead to a major/top undesirable system event, and to identify those scenarios that are high-risk drivers. PRA output is critical to support risk informed decisions concerning system design. This paper describes the PRA process and the reliability engineering discipline in detail. It discusses their differences and similarities and how they work together as complementary analyses to support the design and risk assessment processes. Lessons learned, applications, and case studies in both areas are also discussed in the paper to demonstrate and explain these differences and similarities.

Safie, Fayssal↗
NASA NTRS2003

A Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) of Human Space Missions for the Advanced Integration Matrix (AIM)

The Advanced Integration Matrix (AIM) Project u7ill study and solve systems-level integration issues for exploration missions beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO), through the design and development of a ground-based facility for developing revolutionary integrated systems for joint human-robotic missions. This paper describes a Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) of human space missions that was developed to help define the direction and priorities for AIM. Risk analysis is required for all major NASA programs and has been used for shuttle, station, and Mars lander programs. It is a prescribed part of early planning and is necessary during concept definition, even before mission scenarios and system designs exist. PRA cm begin when little failure data are available, and be continually updated and refined as detail becomes available. PRA provides a basis for examining tradeoffs among safety, reliability, performance, and cost. The objective of AIM's PRA is to indicate how risk can be managed and future human space missions enabled by the AIM Project. Many critical events can cause injuries and fatalities to the crew without causing loss of vehicle or mission. Some critical systems are beyond AIM's scope, such as propulsion and guidance. Many failure-causing events can be mitigated by conducting operational tests in AIM, such as testing equipment and evaluating operational procedures, especially in the areas of communications and computers, autonomous operations, life support, thermal design, EVA and rover activities, physiological factors including habitation, medical equipment, and food, and multifunctional tools and repairable systems. AIM is well suited to test and demonstrate the habitat, life support, crew operations, and human interface. Because these account for significant crew, systems performance, and science risks, AIM will help reduce mission risk, and missions beyond LEO are far enough in the future that AIM can have significant impact.

Jones, Harry W.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Probabilistic Risk Model for Organ Doses and Acute Health Effects of Astronauts on Lunar Missions

Exposure to large solar particle events (SPEs) is a major concern during EVAs on the lunar surface and in Earth-to-Lunar transit. 15% of crew times may be on EVA with minimal radiation shielding. Therefore, an accurate assessment of SPE occurrence probability is required for the mission planning by NASA. We apply probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) for radiation protection of crews and optimization of lunar mission planning.

Kim, Myung-Hee Y.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Methodology for Developing a Probabilistic Risk Assessment Model of Spacecraft Rendezvous and Dockings

In 2007 NASA was preparing to send two new visiting vehicles carrying logistics and propellant to the International Space Station (ISS). These new vehicles were the European Space Agency s (ESA) Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), the Jules Verne, and the Japanese Aerospace and Explorations Agency s (JAXA) H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV). The ISS Program wanted to quantify the increased risk to the ISS from these visiting vehicles. At the time, only the Shuttle, the Soyuz, and the Progress vehicles rendezvoused and docked to the ISS. The increased risk to the ISS was from an increase in vehicle traffic, thereby, increasing the potential catastrophic collision during the rendezvous and the docking or berthing of the spacecraft to the ISS. A universal method of evaluating the risk of rendezvous and docking or berthing was created by the ISS s Risk Team to accommodate the increasing number of rendezvous and docking or berthing operations due to the increasing number of different spacecraft, as well as the future arrival of commercial spacecraft. Before the first docking attempt of ESA's ATV and JAXA's HTV to the ISS, a probabilistic risk model was developed to quantitatively calculate the risk of collision of each spacecraft with the ISS. The 5 rendezvous and docking risk models (Soyuz, Progress, Shuttle, ATV, and HTV) have been used to build and refine the modeling methodology for rendezvous and docking of spacecrafts. This risk modeling methodology will be NASA s basis for evaluating the addition of future ISS visiting spacecrafts hazards, including SpaceX s Dragon, Orbital Science s Cygnus, and NASA s own Orion spacecraft. This paper will describe the methodology used for developing a visiting vehicle risk model.

Farnham, Steven J., II↗
NASA NTRS2014

International Space Station End-of-Life Probabilistic Risk Assessment

The International Space Station (ISS) end‐of‐life (EOL) cycle is currently scheduled for 2020, although there are ongoing efforts to extend ISS life cycle through 2028. The EOL for the ISS will require deorbiting the ISS. This will be the largest manmade object ever to be de‐orbited therefore safely deorbiting the station will be a very complex problem. This process is being planned by NASA and its international partners. Numerous factors will need to be considered to accomplish this such as target corridors, orbits, altitude, drag, maneuvering capabilities etc. The ISS EOL Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) will play a part in this process by estimating the reliability of the hardware supplying the maneuvering capabilities. The PRA will model the probability of failure of the systems supplying and controlling the thrust needed to aid in the de‐orbit maneuvering.

Duncan, Gary W.↗
NASA NTRS2014

International Space Station End-of-Life Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Although there are ongoing efforts to extend the ISS life cycle through 2028, the International Space Station (ISS) end-of-life (EOL) cycle is currently scheduled for 2020. The EOL for the ISS will require de-orbiting the ISS. This will be the largest manmade object ever to be de-orbited, therefore safely de-orbiting the station will be a very complex problem. This process is being planned by NASA and its international partners. Numerous factors will need to be considered to accomplish this such as target corridors, orbits, altitude, drag, maneuvering capabilities, debris mapping etc. The ISS EOL Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) will play a part in this process by estimating the reliability of the hardware supplying the maneuvering capabilities. The PRA will model the probability of failure of the systems supplying and controlling the thrust needed to aid in the de-orbit maneuvering.

Duncan, Gary↗
NASA NTRS2005

Monte Carlo Simulation of Markov, Semi-Markov, and Generalized Semi- Markov Processes in Probabilistic Risk Assessment

A standard tool of reliability analysis used at NASA-JSC is the event tree. An event tree is simply a probability tree, with the probabilities determining the next step through the tree specified at each node. The nodal probabilities are determined by a reliability study of the physical system at work for a particular node. The reliability study performed at a node is typically referred to as a fault tree analysis, with the potential of a fault tree existing.for each node on the event tree. When examining an event tree it is obvious why the event tree/fault tree approach has been adopted. Typical event trees are quite complex in nature, and the event tree/fault tree approach provides a systematic and organized approach to reliability analysis. The purpose of this study was two fold. Firstly, we wanted to explore the possibility that a semi-Markov process can create dependencies between sojourn times (the times it takes to transition from one state to the next) that can decrease the uncertainty when estimating time to failures. Using a generalized semi-Markov model, we studied a four element reliability model and were able to demonstrate such sojourn time dependencies. Secondly, we wanted to study the use of semi-Markov processes to introduce a time variable into the event tree diagrams that are commonly developed in PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) analyses. Event tree end states which change with time are more representative of failure scenarios than are the usual static probability-derived end states.

English, Thomas↗