Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA)”

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 NTRS2016

Architecture for Integrated Medical Model Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is a modeling tool used to predict potential outcomes of a complex system based on a statistical understanding of many initiating events. Utilizing a Monte Carlo method, thousands of instances of the model are considered and outcomes are collected. PRA is considered static, utilizing probabilities alone to calculate outcomes. Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment (dPRA) is an advanced concept where modeling predicts the outcomes of a complex system based not only on the probabilities of many initiating events, but also on a progression of dependencies brought about by progressing down a time line. Events are placed in a single time line, adding each event to a queue, as managed by a planner. Progression down the time line is guided by rules, as managed by a scheduler. The recently developed Integrated Medical Model (IMM) summarizes astronaut health as governed by the probabilities of medical events and mitigation strategies. Managing the software architecture process provides a systematic means of creating, documenting, and communicating a software design early in the development process. The software architecture process begins with establishing requirements and the design is then derived from the requirements.

Probability Theory↗
DOE OSTI2020

Linking classical PRA models to a dynamic PRA

Here, this paper presents a series of methods designed to incorporate classical Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) models such as Event Trees (ETs) and Fault Trees (FTs) into dynamic PRA. In contrast to classical PRA, dynamic PRA couples stochastic methods with system simulators to determine the risks associated with complex systems such as nuclear power plants. Compared with classical PRA methods, they can evaluate with higher resolution the safety impact of timing and sequencing of events on the progression of the accident. As part of a dynamic PRA analysis, it is not uncommon that parts of the system to be analyzed might not require a computationally expensive simulation model. These parts could be in fact modeled by employing classical PRA models (e.g., a FT). Here, we present a set of methods and tools that can be used to link the most common classical PRA models (ETs, FTs, reliability block diagrams and Markov models) to simulation codes such as RELAP5-3D: creating a “hybrid PRA.” In order to show the potential of such an hybrid PRA we employ this method to verify ET modeling assumptions (e.g., success criteria) using a large break loss of coolant accident initiating event as a test case. In this respect, we link a set of FTs from the original PRA to the RELAP5-3D code and perform a hybrid PRA. The FTs are employed to model the control logic of several safety systems and to propagate component failures throughout the system. Provided the generated dynamic PRA data, we show how conservative assumptions in the original PRA can be identified and how such original PRA can be modified by updating success criteria captured by the set of RELAP5-3D simulation runs.

97 - MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2018

Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) of a Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) Dynamic Positioning System (DPS)

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) has been utilized by NASA in a variety of space oriented projects. It has served as one of the primary risk identification and ranking tools. Recent developments in the oil and gas industry have presented opportunities for NASA to lend their PRA expertise to both ongoing and developmental projects within the industry. As a result, NASA has entered into an agreement with Anadarko Petroleum Company (APC) to collaboratively develop PRAs for different aspects of the subsea drilling and completion process of well development. This paper documents how PRA was applied to estimate the probability that a Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) equipped with a generically configured Dynamic Positioning System (DPS) loses location and needs to initiate an emergency disconnect. Since this project was in essence a pilot project, the PRA described in this paper is intended to be generic such that the vessel meets the general requirements of an International Maritime Organization (IMO) Maritime Safety Committee (MSC)/Circ. 645 Class 3 dynamically positioned vessel. The results of this analysis are not intended to be applied to any specific drilling vessel, although provisions were made to allow the analysis to be configured to a specific vessel if required.

Thigpen, Eric B.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Predictive Modeling to Assess and Address Challenges and Limitations Associated with Clinical Care and Decision Support in Deep Space

Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) is a method for assessing and integrating the risk of failure in a multivariate system. While it is often applied by engineers designing complex machines, it could also be applied to humans to assess the probability of a health “failure” treating diseases as the multiple “variables” and the human as the “complex machine.” The Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT) was developed to apply PRA to assess medical risk for exploration spaceflight and inform the design of medical systems for space flight. The NASA engineering community utilizes event-driven and fault tree probabilistic techniques to classify risk in the space flight environment by leveraging the inherent knowledge of complex space flight system design and testing to quantify risk. However, in harmonizing the risk of human space flight, answering the question of “How do we balance astronaut health, performance and resource risks with other engineering risks on exploration space missions?” remains a profoundly challenging and largely qualitative practice. The Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT) is one aspect of the Human Research Program’s efforts to represent space fight human health and performance risks quantitatively.

L Mcintyre↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Use of Preliminary PRA to Inform Decisions During Initial NASA Gateway Development

How do you use Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to support a program in development before designs are even known? Traditional PRAs require detailed design information and early in a program life cycle such information is not available. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) developed a preliminary PRA for the Gateway Program based upon NASA reference designs utilizing data and models from pervious PRA studies as surrogates for the Gateway systems. Gateway will be a lunar outpost that supports missions to the moon and includes several elements/modules developed by NASA and International Partners. NASA SMA began supporting Gateway in fall 2017 during initial formulation and continues to support the Gateway Program today. This paper will explore how the NASA SMA developed preliminary PRA was used to inform Gateway Program decisions with specific examples provided.

PRA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Use of Preliminary PRA to Inform Decisions During Initial NASA Gateway Development

How do you use Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to support a program in development before designs are even known? Traditional PRAs require detailed design information and early in a program life cycle such information is not available. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) developed a preliminary PRA for the Gateway Program based upon NASA reference designs utilizing data and models from previous PRA studies as surrogates for the Gateway systems. Gateway will be a lunar outpost that supports missions to the moon and includes several elements/modules developed by NASA and International Partners. NASA SMA began supporting Gateway in fall 2017 during initial formulation and continues to support the Gateway Program today. This paper will explore how the NASA SMA developed preliminary PRA was used to inform Gateway Program decisions with specific examples provided.

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 1

This document is the Executive Summary of a technical report on a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) of the Space Shuttle vehicle performed under the sponsorship of the Office of Space Flight of the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration. It briefly summarizes the methodology and results of the Shuttle PRA. The primary objective of this project was to support management and engineering decision-making with respect to the Shuttle program by producing (1) a quantitative probabilistic risk model of the Space Shuttle during flight, (2) a quantitative assessment of in-flight safety risk, (3) an identification and prioritization of the design and operations that principally contribute to in-flight safety risk, and (4) a mechanism for risk-based evaluation proposed modifications to the Shuttle System. Secondary objectives were to provide a vehicle for introducing and transferring PRA technology to the NASA community, and to demonstrate the value of PRA by applying it beneficially to a real program of great international importance.

Fragola, Joseph R.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Identifying human failure events (HFEs) for external hazard probabilistic risk assessment

In recent years, several advancements in nuclear power plant (NPP) probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) have been driven by increased understanding of external hazards, plant response, and uncertainties. However, major sources of uncertainty associated with external hazard PRA remain. One important source is how risk-significant human actions that are carried out to enable plant response and recovery from natural hazards cause the close coupling of physical impacts on plants and overall plant risk during these hazard events. This makes human reliability and human-plant interactions important elements to consider in resolving PRA gaps in external hazards. One of the challenges in considering human response in external hazard probabilistic risk assessment (XHPRA) is that most existing human reliability analysis (HRA) models were not developed for assessing actions outside the control room (termed ex-control room actions) and hazard response. To support this new scope, HRA models will need to be developed or modified to support identification of human activities, causal factors, and uncertainties inherent in external hazard response, thereby providing insights regarding event timing and physical event conditions as they relate to human performance. In this study, there are two main objectives: (1) evaluate the applicability of an existing cognitive-based HRA method, Phoenix, to ex-control room actions, and (2) identify sources of uncertainty to be characterized or reduced in order to make this method suitable for XHPRA. The first step of such work is performed by assessing the suitability of existing HRA methods to support identifying human failure events (HFEs) for human response to flooding hazards. These HFEs are human actions or inactions that are involved in human responses to flooding hazards and could contribute to the loss of a critical function for the plant in the scenario being examined. Here, in this work, decomposition analyses using the cognitive-based Phoenix HRA model are used to identify HFEs. The Phoenix method was found to be suitable for analyzing ex-control room actions as well as identifying specific HFEs and underlying crew failure modes (CFMs). However, the method's suitability for use in ex-control room actions would benefit from expanding the available CFMs to accommodate a larger variety of physical and communication tasks.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS2004

PSRP Approach to PRA

There have been two scenarios in which the Payload Safety Review Panel (PSRP) has considered a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) a viable tool. For use in considering trade-offs during the initial design. When in a waiver condition to explain rationale for acceptance. The PSRP would consider the use of PRA in other applications where credible.

Stewart, Christine↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

CHP-PRA Proof-of-Concept [Simulation] Sensitivity Assessment

An effort is underway to establish a Crew Health and Performance system (CHP) tradespace tool using a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling and simulation system. The goal of the CHP-PRA effort is to provide a means of quantifying the integrated influence of CHP functions and capabilities on risk outcome metrics associated with health, performance, and long-term health. These metrics can then be used to establish potential risk-based trades on CHP system designed functionality and capabilities. Previously, our team demonstrated a proof-of-concept PRA approach that estimated the integrated influence of exercise countermeasures on 8 human system risks (Figure 1a) with outcomes associated with health and medical risk metrics. We reported that the change in the integrated relative health risk was small (Figure 1b) and that the small change in overall risk resulted from compounding and competing contribution levels of the individual risks. This interesting observation illustrates the emergent complexity of even straightforward representations of the human health and performance risk space and the ability of PRA models to capture this balance of global risk concerns. A key question that is not addressed in the initial analysis is “even though the global risk is relatively nominal, do any of the local risks become unacceptable?” In essence, we seek to determine what relative change in the human system risks are contributing to the relatively muted sensitivity of the proof-of-concept model combined risk assessments. Evaluations at the component risk level should elucidate if any individual risk reaches a high level that is subsequentially balanced by reductions in other areas. To further understand the relative changes in the component risks in the proof-of-concept model, and to elucidate how future refinements can be targeted, a means of establishing the contributions of the robustness of the proof-of-concept approach will be demonstrated.

astronaut health↗
NASA NTRS2013

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

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

Kalia, Prince↗
NASA NTRS2010

Risk-Informed Safety Assurance and Probabilistic Assessment of Mission-Critical Software-Intensive Systems

This report validates and documents the detailed features and practical application of the framework for software intensive digital systems risk assessment and risk-informed safety assurance presented in the NASA PRA Procedures Guide for Managers and Practitioner. This framework, called herein the "Context-based Software Risk Model" (CSRM), enables the assessment of the contribution of software and software-intensive digital systems to overall system risk, in a manner which is entirely compatible and integrated with the format of a "standard" Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA), as currently documented and applied for NASA missions and applications. The CSRM also provides a risk-informed path and criteria for conducting organized and systematic digital system and software testing so that, within this risk-informed paradigm, the achievement of a quantitatively defined level of safety and mission success assurance may be targeted and demonstrated. The framework is based on the concept of context-dependent software risk scenarios and on the modeling of such scenarios via the use of traditional PRA techniques - i.e., event trees and fault trees - in combination with more advanced modeling devices such as the Dynamic Flowgraph Methodology (DFM) or other dynamic logic-modeling representations. The scenarios can be synthesized and quantified in a conditional logic and probabilistic formulation. The application of the CSRM method documented in this report refers to the MiniAERCam system designed and developed by the NASA Johnson Space Center.

Guarro, Sergio B.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Probabilistic Risk Assessment Procedures Guide for NASA Managers and Practitioners (Second Edition)

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is a comprehensive, structured, and logical analysis method aimed at identifying and assessing risks in complex technological systems for the purpose of cost-effectively improving their safety and performance. NASA's objective is to better understand and effectively manage risk, and thus more effectively ensure mission and programmatic success, and to achieve and maintain high safety standards at NASA. NASA intends to use risk assessment in its programs and projects to support optimal management decision making for the improvement of safety and program performance. In addition to using quantitative/probabilistic risk assessment to improve safety and enhance the safety decision process, NASA has incorporated quantitative risk assessment into its system safety assessment process, which until now has relied primarily on a qualitative representation of risk. Also, NASA has recently adopted the Risk-Informed Decision Making (RIDM) process [1-1] as a valuable addition to supplement existing deterministic and experience-based engineering methods and tools. Over the years, NASA has been a leader in most of the technologies it has employed in its programs. One would think that PRA should be no exception. In fact, it would be natural for NASA to be a leader in PRA because, as a technology pioneer, NASA uses risk assessment and management implicitly or explicitly on a daily basis. NASA has probabilistic safety requirements (thresholds and goals) for crew transportation system missions to the International Space Station (ISS) [1-2]. NASA intends to have probabilistic requirements for any new human spaceflight transportation system acquisition. Methods to perform risk and reliability assessment in the early 1960s originated in U.S. aerospace and missile programs. Fault tree analysis (FTA) is an example. It would have been a reasonable extrapolation to expect that NASA would also become the world leader in the application of PRA. That was, however, not to happen. Early in the Apollo program, estimates of the probability for a successful roundtrip human mission to the moon yielded disappointingly low (and suspect) values and NASA became discouraged from further performing quantitative risk analyses until some two decades later when the methods were more refined, rigorous, and repeatable. Instead, NASA decided to rely primarily on the Hazard Analysis (HA) and Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) methods for system safety assessment.

Stamatelatos,Michael↗
DOE OSTI2023

Causal CCF Parameter Estimations 2020

This report documents the quantitative results of the causal common-cause failure (CCF) parameter estimations for the failure cause groups “component,” “design,” “environment,” “human,” and “other,” based on CCF data through 2020 in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) CCF database: https://rads.inl.gov/Pages/CCF.aspx. This report utilizes the same data period (2006–2020) and CCF templates as INL/EXT-21-62940, Revision 1, CCF Parameter Estimations, 2020 Update. The 2015 causal CCF prior distributions for the specific failure cause groups (instead of the 2015 generic CCF prior distributions) were used in this report to estimate the associated causal CCF parameters. All the 2015 causal CCF prior distributions and generic CCF prior distributions were developed in INL/EXT-21-43723, Developing Generic Prior Distributions for Common Cause Failure Alpha Factors and Causal Alpha Factors, using CCF data from 1997 to 2015. These quantitative results were developed to support the causal alpha factor model and should be used as appropriate in probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) studies such as the NRC Significance Determination Process for commercial nuclear power plants in the United States.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Integrating static PRA information with risk informed safety margin characterization (RISMC) simulation methods

The overall objective of the project was to develop a computationally feasible and user-friendly mechanized process to integrate traditional probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) and dynamic PRA (DPRA) results. Starting with the systematic identification of items in an existing PRA that need dynamic augmentation, the project used a generic 4-loop pressurized reactor (PWR) and 3-loop PWR as example plants. Station blackout (SBO) and large break loss of coolant accident SBLOCA) were selected as the example initiating events. Using the traditional event-tree (ET)/fault-tree (FT) methodology augmented by dynamic evet tree approach, the potential consequences of the initiating events were simulated with RELAP-3D and MELCOR/RASCAL codes to cover Level 1 through Level 3 of PRA. RAVEN and ADAPT software were used to generate Level 1 simulations with RELAP-3D and Level 2/3 simulations with MELCOR (Level 2)/RASCAL (Level 3), respectively. Example branching conditions (BCs) for SBO included AC power recovery time, valve repair failure time, reactor coolant pump leak time/break size and emergency power supply duration to a total of 9. Example BCs for LOCA included off-site power recovery time, diesel generator power recovery time, auxiliary feed water system operation time, safety relief valve failure to open upon demand, reactor coolant pump seal break time and size to a total of 21. Each RELAP-3D simulation (9,587 scenarios) was labelled OK or Core Damage based on the maximum allowed peak clad temperature (2,100oF). Each MELCOR simulation (4610 scenarios) was labeled as Bin over 10rem or Bin 0-10rem based on the dose at the site boundary. The scenarios were clustered based on the criteria above using the mean shift methodology. Classical PRA (CPRA) and DPRA results were compared to identify the ET sequences that need DPRA augmentation. Several approaches were proposed for the incorporation of these sequences into CPRA using clustering with the mean shift methodology, restructuring the CPRA ETs by adding new BCs/sequences, and using the concept of a limit surface. Procedures for decision making regarding the possible consequences of an initiating event (e.g. core damage or not, site evacuation or not) were developed using a convolutional neural network (CNN), a recurrent neural network (RNN) and a transformer neural network (TNN). The project has led to two PhD degrees, three archival journal papers and five refereed conference proceedings.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
NASA NTRS2001

Probabilistic Approaches for Evaluating Space Shuttle Risks

The objectives of the Space Shuttle PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) are to: (1) evaluate mission risks; (2) evaluate uncertainties and sensitivities; (3) prioritize contributors; (4) evaluate upgrades; (5) track risks; and (6) provide decision tools. This report discusses the significance of a Space Shuttle PRA and its participants. The elements and type of losses to be included are discussed. The program and probabilistic approaches are then discussed.

William Vesely↗
NASA NTRS2021

Risk Assessment Metrics for NASA Fission Reactor Applications

Risk assessment is an important part of many NASA activities. In August 2019, the White House issued NSPM-20, which defines acceptable levels of risk for nuclear launches, but does not prescribe the particular methodologies or metrics that are to be used for comparison to the defined acceptance criteria. There are a variety of metrics that are possible and can be readily generated by a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA). This paper will explore alternative metrics that can be provided, along with some discussion of their characteristics and important factors to consider during a space fission reactor risk analysis.

Probabilistic Risk Assessment↗
NASA NTRS2014

Quantitative Risk Modeling of Fire on the International Space Station

The International Space Station (ISS) Program has worked to prevent fire events and to mitigate their impacts should they occur. Hardware is designed to reduce sources of ignition, oxygen systems are designed to control leaking, flammable materials are prevented from flying to ISS whenever possible, the crew is trained in fire response, and fire response equipment improvements are sought out and funded. Fire prevention and mitigation are a top ISS Program priority - however, programmatic resources are limited; thus, risk trades are made to ensure an adequate level of safety is maintained onboard the ISS. In support of these risk trades, the ISS Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) team has modeled the likelihood of fire occurring in the ISS pressurized cabin, a phenomenological event that has never before been probabilistically modeled in a microgravity environment. This paper will discuss the genesis of the ISS PRA fire model, its enhancement in collaboration with fire experts, and the results which have informed ISS programmatic decisions and will continue to be used throughout the life of the program.

Castillo, Theresa↗