SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Risk-Informed Analysis”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2010

Space Shuttle Probabilistic Risk Assessment (SPRA) Iteration 3.2

The Shuttle is a very reliable vehicle in comparison with other launch systems. Much of the risk posed by Shuttle operations is related to fundamental aspects of the spacecraft design and the environments in which it operates. It is unlikely that significant design improvements can be implemented to address these risks prior to the end of the Shuttle program. The model will continue to be used to identify possible emerging risk drivers and allow management to make risk-informed decisions on future missions. Potential uses of the SPRA in the future include: - Calculate risk impact of various mission contingencies (e.g. late inspection, crew rescue, etc.). - Assessing the risk impact of various trade studies (e.g. flow control valves). - Support risk analysis on mission specific events, such as in flight anomalies. - Serve as a guiding star and data source for future NASA programs.

Boyer, Roger L.↗

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↗

NASA NTRS2011

NASA Accident Precursor Analysis Handbook, Version 1.0

Catastrophic accidents are usually preceded by precursory events that, although observable, are not recognized as harbingers of a tragedy until after the fact. In the nuclear industry, the Three Mile Island accident was preceded by at least two events portending the potential for severe consequences from an underappreciated causal mechanism. Anomalies whose failure mechanisms were integral to the losses of Space Transportation Systems (STS) Challenger and Columbia had been occurring within the STS fleet prior to those accidents. Both the Rogers Commission Report and the Columbia Accident Investigation Board report found that processes in place at the time did not respond to the prior anomalies in a way that shed light on their true risk implications. This includes the concern that, in the words of the NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP), "no process addresses the need to update a hazard analysis when anomalies occur" At a broader level, the ASAP noted in 2007 that NASA "could better gauge the likelihood of losses by developing leading indicators, rather than continue to depend on lagging indicators". These observations suggest a need to revalidate prior assumptions and conclusions of existing safety (and reliability) analyses, as well as to consider the potential for previously unrecognized accident scenarios, when unexpected or otherwise undesired behaviors of the system are observed. This need is also discussed in NASA's system safety handbook, which advocates a view of safety assurance as driving a program to take steps that are necessary to establish and maintain a valid and credible argument for the safety of its missions. It is the premise of this handbook that making cases for safety more experience-based allows NASA to be better informed about the safety performance of its systems, and will ultimately help it to manage safety in a more effective manner. The APA process described in this handbook provides a systematic means of analyzing candidate accident precursors by evaluating anomaly occurrences for their system safety implications and, through both analytical and deliberative methods used to project to other circumstances, identifying those that portend more serious consequences to come if effective corrective action is not taken. APA builds upon existing safety analysis processes currently in practice within NASA, leveraging their results to provide an improved understanding of overall system risk. As such, APA represents an important dimension of safety evaluation; as operational experience is acquired, precursor information is generated such that it can be fed back into system safety analyses to risk-inform safety improvements. Importantly, APA utilizes anomaly data to predict risk whereas standard reliability and PRA approaches utilize failure data which often is limited and rare.

Groen, Frank↗

NASA NTRS2012

An Altair Overview: Designing a Lunar Lander for 21st Century Human Space Exploration

Altair, the lunar lander element of NASA's Constellation program, was conducted in a different design environment than many other NASA projects of similar scope. Because of this relatively unique approach, there are a number of significant success stories that should be considered during the development of any future lunar landers or human spacecraft. This paper is divided into two separate themes; the first is the approach used during the conceptual design studies, including the systematic analysis cycles and the decision making process associated with each: and the second is a summary of the resulting lessons learned that were compiled after looking back at the lifetime of the Project. Altair was terminated before entering Phase B of its design, and was often criticized for being a very heavy and very large vehicle. While there was specific rationale for all of the decisions that led up to that configuration, future design cycles were specifically planned to re-address the mass challenge. Had the project continued, the deliberate, stepwise design process would have converged on an optimized lander design that balanced mass, risk, cost and capabilities. Some of the specific items that will be addressed in this paper include project development strategy, organizational approach and team dynamics, risk-informed design process, mission architecture constraints, mission key driving requirements, model-based systems engineering process, configuration studies, contingency considerations, subsystem overviews and key trade studies. The paper will conclude with a summary of the lessons identified during the Altair project and make suggestions for application to future studies.

Brown, Kendall K.↗

NASA NTRS2015

NASA System Safety Handbook. Volume 2: System Safety Concepts, Guidelines, and Implementation Examples

This is the second of two volumes that collectively comprise the NASA System Safety Handbook. Volume 1 (NASASP-210-580) was prepared for the purpose of presenting the overall framework for System Safety and for providing the general concepts needed to implement the framework. Volume 2 provides guidance for implementing these concepts as an integral part of systems engineering and risk management. This guidance addresses the following functional areas: 1.The development of objectives that collectively define adequate safety for a system, and the safety requirements derived from these objectives that are levied on the system. 2.The conduct of system safety activities, performed to meet the safety requirements, with specific emphasis on the conduct of integrated safety analysis (ISA) as a fundamental means by which systems engineering and risk management decisions are risk-informed. 3.The development of a risk-informed safety case (RISC) at major milestone reviews to argue that the systems safety objectives are satisfied (and therefore that the system is adequately safe). 4.The evaluation of the RISC (including supporting evidence) using a defined set of evaluation criteria, to assess the veracity of the claims made therein in order to support risk acceptance decisions.

Safety Case↗

NASA NTRS2016

Assurance of Fault Management: Risk-Significant Adverse Condition Awareness

Fault Management (FM) systems are ranked high in risk-based assessment of criticality within flight software, emphasizing the importance of establishing highly competent domain expertise to provide assurance for NASA projects, especially as spaceflight systems continue to increase in complexity. Insight into specific characteristics of FM architectures seen embedded within safety- and mission-critical software systems analyzed by the NASA Independent Verification Validation (IVV) Program has been enhanced with an FM Technical Reference (TR) suite. Benefits are aimed beyond the IVV community to those that seek ways to efficiently and effectively provide software assurance to reduce the FM risk posture of NASA and other space missions. The identification of particular FM architectures, visibility, and associated IVV techniques provides a TR suite that enables greater assurance that critical software systems will adequately protect against faults and respond to adverse conditions. The role FM has with regard to overall asset protection of flight software systems is being addressed with the development of an adverse condition (AC) database encompassing flight software vulnerabilities.Identification of potential off-nominal conditions and analysis to determine how a system responds to these conditions are important aspects of hazard analysis and fault management. Understanding what ACs the mission may face, and ensuring they are prevented or addressed is the responsibility of the assurance team, which necessarily should have insight into ACs beyond those defined by the project itself. Research efforts sponsored by NASAs Office of Safety and Mission Assurance defined terminology, categorized data fields, and designed a baseline repository that centralizes and compiles a comprehensive listing of ACs and correlated data relevant across many NASA missions. This prototype tool helps projects improve analysis by tracking ACs, and allowing queries based on project, mission type, domain component, causal fault, and other key characteristics. The repository has a firm structure, initial collection of data, and an interface established for informational queries, with plans for integration within the Enterprise Architecture at NASA IVV, enabling support and accessibility across the Agency. The development of an improved workflow process for adaptive, risk-informed FM assurance is currently underway.

Software Verification & Validation↗

NASA NTRS2017

Risk-Significant Adverse Condition Awareness Strengthens Assurance of Fault Management Systems

As spaceflight systems increase in complexity, Fault Management (FM) systems are ranked high in risk-based assessment of software criticality, emphasizing the importance of establishing highly competent domain expertise to provide assurance. Adverse conditions (ACs) and specific vulnerabilities encountered by safety- and mission-critical software systems have been identified through efforts to reduce the risk posture of software-intensive NASA missions. Acknowledgement of potential off-nominal conditions and analysis to determine software system resiliency are important aspects of hazard analysis and FM. A key component of assuring FM is an assessment of how well software addresses susceptibility to failure through consideration of ACs. Focus on significant risk predicted through experienced analysis conducted at the NASA Independent Verification & Validation (IV&V) Program enables the scoping of effective assurance strategies with regard to overall asset protection of complex spaceflight as well as ground systems. Research efforts sponsored by NASAs Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) defined terminology, categorized data fields, and designed a baseline repository that centralizes and compiles a comprehensive listing of ACs and correlated data relevant across many NASA missions. This prototype tool helps projects improve analysis by tracking ACs and allowing queries based on project, mission type, domain/component, causal fault, and other key characteristics. Vulnerability in off-nominal situations, architectural design weaknesses, and unexpected or undesirable system behaviors in reaction to faults are curtailed with the awareness of ACs and risk-significant scenarios modeled for analysts through this database. Integration within the Enterprise Architecture at NASA IV&V enables interfacing with other tools and datasets, technical support, and accessibility across the Agency. This paper discusses the development of an improved workflow process utilizing this database for adaptive, risk-informed FM assurance that critical software systems will safely and securely protect against faults and respond to ACs in order to achieve successful missions.

IV&V↗

NASA NTRS2017

Risk-Significant Adverse Condition Awareness Strengthens Assurance of Fault Management Systems

As spaceflight systems increase in complexity, Fault Management (FM) systems are ranked high in risk-based assessment of software criticality, emphasizing the importance of establishing highly competent domain expertise to provide assurance. Adverse conditions (ACs) and specific vulnerabilities encountered by safety- and mission-critical software systems have been identified through efforts to reduce the risk posture of software-intensive NASA missions. Acknowledgement of potential off-nominal conditions and analysis to determine software system resiliency are important aspects of hazard analysis and FM. A key component of assuring FM is an assessment of how well software addresses susceptibility to failure through consideration of ACs. Focus on significant risk predicted through experienced analysis conducted at the NASA Independent Verification Validation (IVV) Program enables the scoping of effective assurance strategies with regard to overall asset protection of complex spaceflight as well as ground systems. Research efforts sponsored by NASA's Office of Safety and Mission Assurance defined terminology, categorized data fields, and designed a baseline repository that centralizes and compiles a comprehensive listing of ACs and correlated data relevant across many NASA missions. This prototype tool helps projects improve analysis by tracking ACs and allowing queries based on project, mission type, domaincomponent, causal fault, and other key characteristics. Vulnerability in off-nominal situations, architectural design weaknesses, and unexpected or undesirable system behaviors in reaction to faults are curtailed with the awareness of ACs and risk-significant scenarios modeled for analysts through this database. Integration within the Enterprise Architecture at NASA IVV enables interfacing with other tools and datasets, technical support, and accessibility across the Agency. This paper discusses the development of an improved workflow process utilizing this database for adaptive, risk-informed FM assurance that critical software systems will safely and securely protect against faults and respond to ACs in order to achieve successful missions.

Fault management↗

NASA NTRS2014

An Integrated Reliability and Physics-Based Risk Modeling Approach for Assessing Human Spaceflight Systems

This paper presents an integrated reliability and physics-based risk modeling approach for assessing human spaceflight systems. The approach is demonstrated using an example, end-to-end risk assessment of a generic-crewed space transportation system during a reference mission to the International Space Station. The behavior of the system is modeled using analysis techniques from multiple disciplines in order to properly capture the dynamic time- and state- dependent consequences of failures encountered in different mission phases. We discuss how to combine traditional reliability analyses with Monte Carlo simulation methods and physics-based engineering models to produce loss-of- mission and loss-of-crew risk estimates supporting risk-based decision-making and requirement verification. This approach facilitates risk-informed design by providing more realistic representation of system failures and interactions; identifying key risk-driving sensitivities, dependencies, and assumptions; and tracking multiple figures of merit within a single, responsive assessment framework that can readily incorporate evolving design information throughout system development.

Risk assessment↗

NASA NTRS2014

Comparative Analysis of Static and Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Implementation of risk-informed design allows the design team to thoroughly explore the risks of a system while iterating the operations concept, design, and requirements until the system meets mission objects and is achievable within constraints. To arrive at a space system design that is likely to meet all constraints placed upon mass, cost, performance and risk, the system requirements must be understood and traded against each other as early as the conceptual design phase. Depending on the project phase and the goals of the risk analysis, various PRA methodologies could be used to produce quantitative risk estimates to enable such a process. In order to better understand the applicability, advantages, and limitations of various PRA methodologies, a comparative analysis of three bottom-up, component-based PRA approaches was performed. The three methods examined are a traditional static fault tree, a fault tree hybrid, and a dynamic Monte Carlo simulation. Each approach was used to assess a generic reaction control system (RCS) thruster pod and mission. The methods are assessed in terms of the process of modeling a system, the actionable information produced for the design team, and the overall fidelity of the quantitative risk evaluation generated. The paper also discusses the applicability of each methodology to the different phases of system development.

Probablistic↗

NASA NTRS2018

NASA’s Mid-Atlantic Communities and Areas at Intensive Risk Demonstration: Translating Compounding Hazards to Societal Risk

Remote sensing provides a unique perspective on our dynamic planet, tracking changes and revealing the course of complex interactions. Long term monitoring and targeted observation combine with modeling and mapping to provide increased awareness of hydro-meteorological and geological hazards. Disasters often follow hazards and the goal of NASA’s Disasters Program is to look at the earth as a highly coupled system to reduce risk and enable resilience. Remote sensing and geospatial science are used as tools to help answer critical questions that inform decisions. Data is not the same as information, nor does understanding of processes necessarily translate into decision support for disaster preparedness, response and recovery. Accordingly, NASA is engaging the scientific and decision-support communities to apply remote sensing, modeling, and related applications in Communities and Areas at Intensive Risk (CAIR). In 2017, NASA’s Applied Sciences Disasters Program hosted a regional workshop to explore these issues with particular focus on coastal Virginia and North Carolina. The workshop brought together partners in academia, emergency management, and scientists from NASA and partnering federal agencies to explore capabilities among the team that could improve understanding of the physical processes related to these hazards, their potential impact to changing communities, and to identify methodologies for supporting emergency response and risk mitigation. The resulting initiative, the mid-Atlantic CAIR project, demonstrates the ability to integrate satellite derived earth observations and physical models into actionable, trusted knowledge. Severe storms and associated storm surge, sea level rise, and land subsidence coupled with increasing populations and densely populated, aging critical infrastructure often leave coastal regions and their communities extremely vulnerable. The integration of observations and models allow for a comprehensive understanding of the compounding risk experienced in coastal regions and enables individuals in all positions make risk-informed decisions. This initiative uses a representative storm surge case as a baseline to produce flood inundation maps. These maps predict building level impacts at current day and for sea level rise (SLR) and subsidence scenarios of the future in order to inform critical decisions at both the tactical and strategic levels. To accomplish this analysis, the mid-Atlantic CAIR project brings together Federal research activities with academia to examine coastal hazards in multiple ways: 1) reanalysis of impacts from 2011 Hurricane Irene, using numerical weather modeling in combination with coastal surge and hydrodynamic, urban inundation modeling to evaluate combined impact scenarios considering SLR and subsidence, 2) remote sensing of flood extent from available optical imagery, 3) adding value to remotely sensed flood maps through depth predictions, and 4) examining coastal subsidence as measured through time-series analysis of synthetic aperture radar observations. Efforts and results are published via ArcGIS story maps to communicate neighborhoods and infrastructure most vulnerable to changing conditions. Story map features enable time-aware flood mapping using hydrodynamic models, photographic comparison of flooding following Hurricane Irene, as well as visualization of heightened risk in the future due to SLR and land subsidence.

Rogers, Laura↗

NASA NTRS2013

TPSAS-NF1676L-17243-DND

This presentation captures ERA Project's effort in using integrated cost-schedule-risk analysis tool, identifying and capturing explicit relationships between program funds, schedule, and discrete risks. The project team merged a myriad of cost and schedule data for timely, objective, uncertainty analysis of the ITD's budget and schedule. The project team conducted detailed schedule uncertainty analysis showing schedule activities and how their interrelationships were impacted, representing an impressive advance beyond routine Gantt charts. Furthermore, the ERA Project collected discrete risk events including their impacts to costs and/or schedule and interwove these risks into cost and schedule logic networks, providing the foundation to conduct cost and schedule analyses. The team integrated this data into the analysis model, providing probabilistic results that were then used by the ERA Project's senior management for decision-making purposes. The ERA Project management team, through technical and pathfinder expertise in integrating cost, schedule, risk, and technical content, consistently provided risk-informed recommendations to Implementing Centers and ISRP senior management which ultimately ensured the successful ARMD Key Decision Point (KDP) review of the ERA Phase 2 ITD Portfolio and increased the likelihood of achieving technical objectives within cost and schedule constraints.

Gaudy M Bezos-O'Connor↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Risk Assessment of Obstacle Collision for UAVs under Off-nominal Conditions

Enabling operations of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in low-altitude airspace demands the need of robust risk monitoring framework for assessing the safety of airspace, ground structures and people. As widespread applications emerge, the need of risk assessment becomes increasingly important for UAV flights beyond visual line-of-sight, especially subjected to off-nominal conditions introduced by component failures, degraded controllability or environmental disturbances such as wind gusts in an urban canyon. From a safety perspective, collision with obstacles can be detrimental not only to the vehicle and payload, but also to the structure and people on ground. Although it is safe to assume that approved UAVs would be equipped with collision avoidance systems, risk of collision which can be predicted for a flight trajectory even before the UAV encounters any obstacle is beneficial to resolve contingencies in its decision-making under off-nominal conditions. In this paper, a framework is presented for computing the risk of collision with obstacle based on a UAV’s predicted trajectory, proximity to static and dynamic obstacles, sub-system state-of-health and external wind conditions. The conditional probability of trajectory deviation is generated using a Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) based on on-board sensor measurements. Further, a kinematic 3-DOF model is implemented to compute deviation in UAV’s trajectory subjected to one case study of off-nominal condition i.e. wind gusts. Finally, the integrated risk factor is demonstrated on real data from experimental flights of an octocopter at NASA Langley Research Center, in presence of simulated obstacles and wind conditions. The proposed approach would enable risk-informed decision making process for timely mitigation of current and future unsafe events.

Bayesian network↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

3D Representation of UAV-obstacle Collision Risk Under Off-nominal Conditions

Safe operations of autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in low-altitude airspace with beyond visual line-of-sight (BVLOS) flights demand robust risk monitoring of airspace as well as of people and property on ground. One of the safety critical factors for UAV flights is the risk of collision with static and dynamic obstacles in proximity to its flight path. This paper presents a detailed formulation of risk of obstacle collision incorporating the effects of off-nominal conditions introduced by component failures, degraded controllability and environmental disturbances such as wind gusts. The risk is represented in terms of a matrix with rows corresponding to the likelihood of occurrence of collision and columns representing severity of collision to the vehicle and surrounding structures. Risk likelihood is generated using a Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) that compiles knowledge from related Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEAs) and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to determine the probability of collision based on on-board sensor measurements indicative of vehicle health and controllability. Risk severity is computed utilizing a point-mass 3D kinematic model of the vehicle in presence of wind. The proposed risk factor is demonstrated on real flight data from experimental flights of an octocopter at NASA Langley Research Center in presence of simulated obstacles and wind conditions. Effect of varying wind conditions, level of controllability and obstacle measurement noise on the risk factor is demonstrated. The proposed approach enables risk-informed decision making for timely mitigation of current and future unsafe events in autonomous systems.

risk analysis↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Exploration Medical Capability Science and Research Overview and Update

The mission of the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element is to advance medical system design and risk-informed decision making for exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit to promote human health and performance in space. To accomplish this mission, ExMC focuses on several key areas: • Investigating specific risks that are relevant for human exploration spaceflight, including in-flight medical conditions, degraded or toxic medications, and renal stones • Developing medical probabilistic risk analysis tools that are integrated with systems engineering processes to inform the medical system trade space and support the development of robust requirements • Demonstrating and defining requirements for a prototype clinical decision support system • Developing and demonstrating novel medical technologies that will improve future medical capabilities in space This presentation will focus on selected scientific and technical conceptual drivers for the Element and its current and future research risks and gaps while providing an overview of the Element’s progress in 2021 and areas of focus for 2022.

Benjamin Easter↗

NASA NTRS2020

Electromagnetic Compatibility Test and Analysis Campaign of NASA's Mars 2020 Rover Final Submission

NASA's Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover—with a launch window opening July 2020, and landing expected February 2021—has mission objectives to look for evidence of habitability, seek biosignatures of past life, collect and cache samples for possible future return to Earth, and prepare for future human missions to Mars. The Rover platform is similar to the previous Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) “Curiosity” rover that landed in 2012 but contains a new suite of scientific instruments and upgrades to existing functionality: seven new and/or upgraded scientific payloads, an upgraded arm and sampling system, and a Helicopter demonstration. These changes—along with new efficiency goals to operate more Rover subsystems concurrently and thus collect more science—presented new electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) challenges. In this paper, we will describe the campaign to ensure Mars 2020 mission success from an electromagnetic environment perspective: 1) confirming existing MSL heritage subsystems and EMC requirements were compatible with the new Mars 2020 mission objectives, 2) engaging with engineers and scientists early in the project to identify and evaluate risks before hardware assembly and performing ambitious risk reduction tests, 3) undertaking a comprehensive subsystem qualification test program based on tailored MIL-STD-461F requirements, occasionally leading to redesign, 4) synthesizing the data collected to perform detailed analyses toward the goal of making risk-informed decisions at a system level. The spacecraft successfully completed all three planned system level tests, demonstrating self-compatibility with minimal impact to operations from electromagn

Gonzales, Edward C↗

NASA NTRS2020

Electromagnetic Compatibility Test and Analysis Campaign of NASA's Mars 2020 Rover

NASA's Mars 2020 Rover—with a launch window opening July 2020, and landing expected February 2021—has mission objectives to look for evidence of habitability, seek biosignatures of past life, collect and cache samples for possible future return to Earth, and prepare for future human missions. The Rover platform is similar to the previous Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) “Curiosity” rover that landed in 2012 but contains a new suite of scientific instruments and upgrades to existing functionality. The scientific payload includes a trio of chemical analysis tools (PIXL, SHERLOC, SuperCam), a ground penetrating radar (RIMFAX), an upgraded weather station (MEDA), upgraded high resolution camera (MastCam-Z), and an oxygen-producing experiment (MOXIE). These changes—along with new efficiency goals to operate more Rover subsystems concurrently and thus collect more science—presented new electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) challenges. In this paper, we will describe the campaign to ensure Mars 2020 mission success from an electromagnetic environment perspective: 1) confirming existing MSL heritage subsystems and EMC requirements were compatible with the new Mars 2020 mission objectives, 2) engaging with engineers and scientists early in the project to identify and evaluate risks before hardware assembly and performing ambitious risk reduction tests, 3) undertaking a comprehensive subsystem qualification test program based on tailored MIL-STD-461F requirements, occasionally leading to redesign, 4) synthesizing the data collected to perform detailed analyses toward the goal of making risk-informed decisions at a system level. The spacecraft has successfully completed all three planned system level tests, demonstrating self-compatibility with minimal impact to operations from electromagnetic interference in all mission phases.

Gonzales, Edward C↗

DOE OSTI2025

Important Human Actions for Advanced Reactors: Implications for Human Factors

As advanced reactor platforms continue to develop and gain traction in the energy sector there is a need for risk-informed, scalable regulations that match that progress. This is a core component of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s proposed Part 53 Rule Making; the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act; and other efforts that seek to update nuclear power regulations. This paper covers one key aspect of that regulatory evolution: Important Human Actions (IHA). In this paper, we discuss how the understanding and definitions of IHAs have changed and what that means for human factors engagement through the process of developing these technologies. Instead of a narrow focus on control actions that led to an increase in core damage risk, the new focus is on IHAs is “wherever they occur.” What this means is that having a highly automated or passive safety system does not eliminate IHAs. Rather, it shifts the focus point to all the actions that enable these systems. Everything from maintenance, to design, to training can be considered an IHA and that dramatically shifts the efforts and level of engagement necessary for human factors to enable these technologies. We discuss the notions of risk-informed human factors that underpin these efforts, give several examples, and briefly describe the risk assessment methodologies that will be needed. In the past, IHAs were identified and then became a focus point of human factors engineering (HFE) activities to ensure a robust evaluation of the task was completed. The future is less clear. HFE for nuclear energy will need to evolve and become more integrated in technology development than ever before.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗