Results for “probability risk analysis” — Page 4

NASA NTRS2019

Satellite Conjunction Assessment Risk Analysis for "Dilution Region" Events: Issues and Operational Approaches

An important activity within Space Traffic Management is the detection and prevention of possible on-orbit collisions between space objects. The principal parameter for assessing collision likelihood is the probability of collision, which is widely accepted among conjunction assessment practitioners; but it possesses a known deficiency in that it can produce a false sense of safety when the orbital position uncertainties for the conjuncting objects are high. The probability of collision is said to be “diluted” in such a situation and to understate the possible risk; certain approaches have been recommended by researchers to provide (largely conservative) risk estimates and remediation methodologies in these cases. The present analysis explores two of the main proposals for quantifying and remediating possible risk in the dilution region and quantifies their operational implications. These implications with regard to imputed additional workload are considerable, especially in anticipating the conjunction event levels expected with the deployment of the USAF Space Fence radar. This effort has been undertaken as part of a larger enterprise that seeks to clarify the philosophical and statistical underpinnings of the conjunction risk assessment process. The analysis presented herein argues that a form of hypothesis testing is implicitly used in conjunction assessment risk analysis, and that there are a number of conceptual and practical reasons for constructing the associated null hypothesis to counsel against a satellite conjunction remediation action. In short, it is concluded that, for the purposes of determining whether a conjunction remediation action should be pursued, dilution-region probabilities of collision should be treated no differently from those produced under other circumstances.

Probability of collision↗

NASA NTRS2019

Satellite Conjunction "Probability," "Possibility," and "Plausibility": A Categorization of Competing Conjunction Assessment Risk Assessment Paradigms

A number of different conjunction assessment (CA) risk analysis methods and metrics have been proposed in the critical literature, and they vary widely in purport and form. However, they tend to be proposed individually and episodically, so that it is difficult for a CA practitioner to take stock of the possibilities, under- stand their fundamental differences, and make informed choices for their particular CA risk assessment enterprise. The present study seeks to collect the major proposals for risk assessment methods and parameters and organize them categorically, under the proposed divisions of “probability,” “plausibility,” and “possibility,” as well as formulate what appears for each to be its fundamental question and, where applicable, null hypothesis. This activity can, through a bottom-up approach, provide some of the building blocks for an overarching CA philosophy, as well as establish concepts and terminology potentially useful to the broader discussion of these topics.

Hejduk, M. D.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Public Risk Assessment Program

The Public Entry Risk Assessment (PERA) program addresses risk to the public from shuttle or other spacecraft re-entry trajectories. Managing public risk to acceptable levels is a major component of safe spacecraft operation. PERA is given scenario inputs of vehicle trajectory, probability of failure along that trajectory, the resulting debris characteristics, and field size and distribution, and returns risk metrics that quantify the individual and collective risk posed by that scenario. Due to the large volume of data required to perform such a risk analysis, PERA was designed to streamline the analysis process by using innovative mathematical analysis of the risk assessment equations. Real-time analysis in the event of a shuttle contingency operation, such as damage to the Orbiter, is possible because PERA allows for a change to the probability of failure models, therefore providing a much quicker estimation of public risk. PERA also provides the ability to generate movie files showing how the entry risk changes as the entry develops. PERA was designed to streamline the computation of the enormous amounts of data needed for this type of risk assessment by using an average distribution of debris on the ground, rather than pinpointing the impact point of every piece of debris. This has reduced the amount of computational time significantly without reducing the accuracy of the results. PERA was written in MATLAB; a compiled version can run from a DOS or UNIX prompt.

Mendeck, Gavin↗

NASA NTRS2007

Risk Management: A Practical Design Tool For Space Systems and Technology Development

Over the past two decades, risk management and risk analysis have emerged throughout the business community in the United States (US) as prominent planning and development strategies used to mitigate risk of failure and ensure a high return on investment (ROI) for business endeavors (financial and otherwise). They are generic tools that can be applied to any business regardless of the sector (i.e., government, university, private) and have been used by the Federal government in the form of institutional practices aimed at maximizing the probability of success in business activities. One US Federal agency that incorporates risk management and analysis techniques into business and/or engineering activities is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The present work is a discussion on mission, spacecraft and instrument design (as well as technology development) and the role of risk management, analysis and mitigation as a fundamental tool in the design process.

Silk, Eric A.↗

NASA NTRS2001

A Probabilistic Approach to Model Update

Finite element models are often developed for load validation, structural certification, response predictions, and to study alternate design concepts. In rare occasions, models developed with a nominal set of parameters agree with experimental data without the need to update parameter values. Today, model updating is generally heuristic and often performed by a skilled analyst with in-depth understanding of the model assumptions. Parameter uncertainties play a key role in understanding the model update problem and therefore probabilistic analysis tools, developed for reliability and risk analysis, may be used to incorporate uncertainty in the analysis. In this work, probability analysis (PA) tools are used to aid the parameter update task using experimental data and some basic knowledge of potential error sources. Discussed here is the first application of PA tools to update parameters of a finite element model for a composite wing structure. Static deflection data at six locations are used to update five parameters. It is shown that while prediction of individual response values may not be matched identically, the system response is significantly improved with moderate changes in parameter values.

Horta, Lucas G.↗

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

An Analysis of Exploration Capability Gaps for Future Habitation Systems to Inform Risk Assessment and Development Priorities

Within NASA, exploration capability gaps are defined as the difference between the current state-of-the-art in capabilities and the anticipated needs of future human spaceflight architectures. As NASA and its partners’ capabilities for human exploration of deep space continue to mature, it is necessary to understand the capability gaps that require closure to support future habitation systems, such as the Lunar Surface Habitat (SH) and Mars Transit Habitat (TH) currently in concept development. This paper will identify high-priority capability gaps for exploration habitation and show potential options for gap closure through investment in technology, development, and testing. High-priority capability gaps are divided into the following general taxonomy areas: human health/life support/habitation systems, flight computing and avionics, power and energy storage, communications and navigation, thermal management systems, human exploration destination systems, autonomous systems, sensors and instruments, GNC (guidance, navigation, and control), robotic systems, ground and uncrewed surface systems, and materials/structures/mechanical systems/manufacturing. In the gap identification process, teams of discipline experts from across NASA reviewed the latest habitation architecture needs against current capabilities to understand where gaps may exist. The results of the assessment established a basis for the current state-of-the-art within each gap and identified the capability needs of the proposed exploration missions the gap links to. An assessment of how each test platform (e.g., Ground, International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Destinations, Gateway) may be leveraged to mature capabilities and potentially provide a route to gap closure will be discussed. The notional timeline for gap closure to support reference missions and impacts to overall schedule are also assessed where appropriate. Based on the capability gap analysis described above, the paper summarizes important technology maturation considerations for human exploration architectures, with a focus on the Mars TH. The previously published NASA habitation ground rules and assumptions document is used as the basis to classify gaps as enabling, enhancing, or “push” opportunities for a particular architecture. Stepwise technology maturation plans/considerations are presented for some selected critical gaps. Overall, the analysis in this paper is intended to help influence development priorities for habitation systems, where high-priority, critical gaps are those currently assessed as having a low probability of closure by the anticipated need date. Capability gap analysis also informs the risk register for exploration habitation systems and mitigation strategies to ensure readiness of key technologies to support future mission timelines. Linkage between capability gaps for Moon and Mars is noted, as closure of a gap at a Lunar destination may subsequently enable or enhance Mars TH architectures.

technology development↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An Analysis of Exploration Capability Gaps for Future Habitation Systems to Inform Risk Assessment and Development Priorities

Within NASA, exploration capability gaps are defined as the difference between the current state-of-the-art in capabilities and the anticipated needs of future human spaceflight architectures. As NASA and its partners’ capabilities for human exploration of deep space continue to mature, it is necessary to understand the capability gaps that require closure to support future habitation systems, such as the Lunar Surface Habitat (SH) and Mars Transit Habitat (TH) currently in concept development. This paper will identify high-priority capability gaps for exploration habitation and show potential options for gap closure through investment in technology, development, and testing. High-priority capability gaps are divided into the following general taxonomy areas: human health/life support/habitation systems, flight computing and avionics, power and energy storage, communications and navigation, thermal management systems, human exploration destination systems, autonomous systems, sensors and instruments, GNC (guidance, navigation, and control), robotic systems, ground and uncrewed surface systems, and materials/structures/mechanical systems/manufacturing. In the gap identification process, teams of discipline experts from across NASA reviewed the latest habitation architecture needs against current capabilities to understand where gaps may exist. The results of the assessment established a basis for the current state-of-the-art within each gap and identified the capability needs of the proposed exploration missions the gap links to. An assessment of how each test platform (e.g., Ground, International Space Station (ISS), Commercial Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Destinations, Gateway) may be leveraged to mature capabilities and potentially provide a route to gap closure will be discussed. The notional timeline for gap closure to support reference missions and impacts to overall schedule are also assessed where appropriate. Based on the capability gap analysis described above, the paper summarizes important technology maturation considerations for human exploration architectures, with a focus on the Mars TH. The previously published NASA habitation ground rules and assumptions document is used as the basis to classify gaps as enabling, enhancing, or “push” opportunities for a particular architecture. Stepwise technology maturation plans/considerations are presented for some selected critical gaps. Overall, the analysis in this paper is intended to help influence development priorities for habitation systems, where high-priority, critical gaps are those currently assessed as having a low probability of closure by the anticipated need date. Capability gap analysis also informs the risk register for exploration habitation systems and mitigation strategies to ensure readiness of key technologies to support future mission timelines. Linkage between capability gaps for Moon and Mars is noted, as closure of a gap at a Lunar destination may subsequently enable or enhance Mars TH architectures.

technology development↗

NASA NTRS2011

Ares I-X First Flight Loss of Vehicle Probability Analysis

As part of the Constellation (Cx) Program development effort, several test flights were planned to prove concepts and operational capabilities of the new vehicles being developed. The first test, involving the Eastern Test Range, is the Ares I-X launched in 2009. As part of this test, the risk to the general public was addressed to ensure it is within Air Force requirements. This paper describes the methodology used to develop first flight estimates of overall loss of vehicle (LOV) failure probability, specifically for the Ares I-X. The method described in this report starts with the Air Force s generic failure probability estimate for first flight and adjusts the value based on the complexity of the vehicle as compared to the complexity of a generic vehicle. The results estimate a 1 in 9 probability of failure. The paper also describes traditional PRA methods used in this assessment, which were then combined with the updated first flight risk methodology to generate inputs required by the malfunction turn analysis to support estimate of casualty (Ec) calculations as part of the Final Flight Data Package (FFDP) delivered to the Eastern Range for Final Flight Plan Approval.

Bigler, Mark A.↗

NASA NTRS2021

Spatiotemporal Associations Between Social Vulnerability, Environmental Measurements, and COVID-19 in the Conterminous United States

This study summarizes the results from fitting a Bayesian hierarchical spatiotemporal model to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and deaths at the county level in the United States for the year 2020. Two models were created, one for cases and one for deaths, utilizing a scaled Besag, York, Mollié model with Type I spatial-temporal interaction. Each model accounts for 16 social vulnerability and 7 environmental variables as fixed effects. The spatial pattern between COVID-19 cases and deaths is significantly different in many ways. The spatiotemporal trend of the pandemic in the United States illustrates a shift out of many of the major metropolitan areas into the United States Southeast and Southwest during the summer months and into the upper Midwest beginning in autumn. Analysis of the major social vulnerability predictors of COVID-19 infection and death found that counties with higher percentages of those not having a high school diploma, having non-White status and being Age 65 and over to be significant. Among the environmental variables, above ground level temperature had the strongest effect on relative risk to both cases and deaths. Hot and cold spots, areas of statistically significant high and low COVID-19 cases and deaths respectively, derived from the convolutional spatial effect show that areas with a high probability of above average relative risk have significantly higher Social Vulnerability Index composite scores. The same analysis utilizing the spatiotemporal interaction term exemplifies a more complex relationship between social vulnerability, environmental measurements, COVID-19 cases, and COVID-19 deaths.

spatial epidemiology↗

NASA NTRS1972

American Airlines Propeller STOL Transport Economic Risk Analysis

A Monte Carlo risk analysis on the economics of STOL transports in air passenger traffic established the probability of making the expected internal rate of financial return, or better, in a hypothetical regular Washington/New York intercity operation.

Ransone, B.↗

NASA NTRS2016

BBN-Based Portfolio Risk Assessment for NASA Technology R&D Outcome

The NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) vision falls into six strategic thrusts that are aimed to support the challenges of the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). In order to achieve the goals of the ARMD vision, the Airspace Operations and Safety Program (AOSP) is committed to developing and delivering new technologies. To meet the dual challenges of constrained resources and timely technology delivery, program portfolio risk assessment is critical for communication and decision-making. This paper describes how Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) is applied to assess the probability of a technology meeting the expected outcome. The network takes into account the different risk factors of technology development and implementation phases. The use of BBNs allows for all technologies of projects in a program portfolio to be separately examined and compared. In addition, the technology interaction effects are modeled through the application of object-oriented BBNs. The paper discusses the development of simplified project risk BBNs and presents various risk results. The results presented include the probability of project risks not meeting success criteria, the risk drivers under uncertainty via sensitivity analysis, and what-if analysis. Finally, the paper shows how program portfolio risk can be assessed using risk results from BBNs of projects in the portfolio.

Geuther, Steven C.↗

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

Probabilistic Design Analysis (PDA) Approach to Determine the Probability of Cross-System Failures for a Space Launch Vehicle

Quantifying the probability of significant launch vehicle failure scenarios for a given design, while still in the design process, is critical to mission success and to the safety of the astronauts. Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) is chosen from many system safety and reliability tools to verify the loss of mission (LOM) and loss of crew (LOC) requirements set by the NASA Program Office. To support the integrated vehicle PRA, probabilistic design analysis (PDA) models are developed by using vehicle design and operation data to better quantify failure probabilities and to better understand the characteristics of a failure and its outcome. This PDA approach uses a physics-based model to describe the system behavior and response for a given failure scenario. Each driving parameter in the model is treated as a random variable with a distribution function. Monte Carlo simulation is used to perform probabilistic calculations to statistically obtain the failure probability. Sensitivity analyses are performed to show how input parameters affect the predicted failure probability, providing insight for potential design improvements to mitigate the risk. The paper discusses the application of the PDA approach in determining the probability of failure for two scenarios from the NASA Ares I project

Shih, Ann T.↗

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↗

NASA NTRS1999

Continuous Risk Management at NASA

NPG 7120.5A, "NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements" enacted in April, 1998, requires that "The program or project manager shall apply risk management principles..." The Software Assurance Technology Center (SATC) at NASA GSFC has been tasked with the responsibility for developing and teaching a systems level course for risk management that provides information on how to comply with this edict. The course was developed in conjunction with the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University, then tailored to the NASA systems community. This presentation will briefly discuss the six functions for risk management: (1) Identify the risks in a specific format; (2) Analyze the risk probability, impact/severity, and timeframe; (3) Plan the approach; (4) Track the risk through data compilation and analysis; (5) Control and monitor the risk; (6) Communicate and document the process and decisions. This risk management structure of functions has been taught to projects at all NASA Centers and is being successfully implemented on many projects. This presentation will give project managers the information they need to understand if risk management is to be effectively implemented on their projects at a cost they can afford.

Hammer, Theodore F.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Continuous Risk Management: A NASA Program Initiative

NPG 7120.5A, "NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements" enacted in April, 1998, requires that "The program or project manager shall apply risk management principles..." The Software Assurance Technology Center (SATC) at NASA GSFC has been tasked with the responsibility for developing and teaching a systems level course for risk management that provides information on how to comply with this edict. The course was developed in conjunction with the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University, then tailored to the NASA systems community. This presentation will briefly discuss the six functions for risk management: (1) Identify the risks in a specific format; (2) Analyze the risk probability, impact/severity, and timeframe; (3) Plan the approach; (4) Track the risk through data compilation and analysis; (5) Control and monitor the risk; (6) Communicate and document the process and decisions.

Hammer, Theodore F.↗

NASA NTRS1999

Continuous Risk Management: An Overview

Software risk management is important because it helps avoid disasters, rework, and overkill, but more importantly because it stimulates win-win situations. The objectives of software risk management are to identify, address, and eliminate software risk items before they become threats to success or major sources of rework. In general, good project managers are also good managers of risk. It makes good business sense for all software development projects to incorporate risk management as part of project management. The Software Assurance Technology Center (SATC) at NASA GSFC has been tasked with the responsibility for developing and teaching a systems level course for risk management that provides information on how to implement risk management. The course was developed in conjunction with the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University, then tailored to the NASA systems community. This is an introductory tutorial to continuous risk management based on this course. The rational for continuous risk management and how it is incorporated into project management are discussed. The risk management structure of six functions is discussed in sufficient depth for managers to understand what is involved in risk management and how it is implemented. These functions include: (1) Identify the risks in a specific format; (2) Analyze the risk probability, impact/severity, and timeframe; (3) Plan the approach; (4) Track the risk through data compilation and analysis; (5) Control and monitor the risk; (6) Communicate and document the process and decisions.

Rosenberg, Linda↗