Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Safety assurance”

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 91 records · Page 5

Autonomous Assessment and Predictive Capabilities for Low-Altitude Urban Flight Operations

The integration of unmanned aerial vehicles in the national airspace will introduce new vehicle types, technologies, and operational paradigms for which safety must be maintained and hazards mitigated. One approach is to attempt to design for possible hazards and unsafe incidents that can occur at different phases of flight (pre-flight, in-flight, and post-flight) and during ground operations. Another is to mitigate safety incidents by implementing changes to policies, procedures, regulations, and design to cover personnel, equipment, and aircraft during operations. These and other techniques, not described herein, are typically conservative or adhoc in that they reduce the likelihood of risk after safety incidents have occurred. In this work, the goal is to develop a more predictive capability to monitor and mitigate risk and hazards to safety “in-time” enough for decisions to be made. In line with NASA’s Aeronautics Mission Directorate Strategic Thrust 5 [1] (In-Time System-Wide Safety Assurance), the System-Wide Safety (SWS) project under which this work falls, is developing and demonstrating innovative and safety-oriented solutions that enable modernization and aviation transformation. To that effect, this work will detail data-driven efforts on the SWS project to develop a number of safety-critical services for in-time monitoring and mitigation of hazards to low-altitude flight operations. First, hazards to these operations are identified based on previous work by NASA [2,3] and others in the aerospace industry. These hazards include (i) unsafe proximity to other vehicles, property, and people on the ground, (ii) critical system failures such as communication signal/GPS loss, unexpected propulsion system degradation, engine/power failure, and (iii) operational/environmental issues such as severe weather and gusty winds. For these hazards, safety metrics, which can be quantified and assessed are defined, models to monitor and predict them are developed, and flight test data is generated to develop, validate, and test these models, considering the complex interplay of the different hazards that define them [4-6]. In addition, the uncertainty in the non-deterministic effects that cannot be modeled nor predicted and unknown unknowns that arise after design/testing and during operations must be handled in rigorous manner. As a result, for each of the developed safety metrics, their dependencies on one another are characterized and a framework for handling the uncertainties inherent in the modeling, algorithms, and measurements required for prediction is also developed [7]. To that effect, this presentation will describe the safety metrics and services already developed and underway under the System-Wide Safety project that utilize data-driven techniques for the identification of anomalies, precursors, and trends (APTs) to monitor and mitigate hazards to safety, in-time, for urban flight operations in low-altitude airspace.

Okolo, Wendy A.↗

Final Report of the NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance Agile Benchmarking Team

To ensure that the NASA Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) community remains in a position to perform reliable Software Assurance (SA) on NASAs critical software (SW) systems with the software industry rapidly transitioning from waterfall to Agile processes, Terry Wilcutt, Chief, Safety and Mission Assurance, Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) established the Agile Benchmarking Team (ABT). The Team's tasks were: 1. Research background literature on current Agile processes, 2. Perform benchmark activities with other organizations that are involved in software Agile processes to determine best practices, 3. Collect information on Agile-developed systems to enable improvements to the current NASA standards and processes to enhance their ability to perform reliable software assurance on NASA Agile-developed systems, 4. Suggest additional guidance and recommendations for updates to those standards and processes, as needed. The ABT's findings and recommendations for software management, engineering and software assurance are addressed herein.

Software Assurance↗

The SMART-NAS Testbed

The SMART-NAS Testbed for Safe Trajectory Based Operations Project will deliver an evaluation capability, critical to the ATM community, allowing full NextGen and beyond-NextGen concepts to be assessed and developed. To meet this objective a strong focus will be placed on concept integration and validation to enable a gate-to-gate trajectory-based system capability that satisfies a full vision for NextGen. The SMART-NAS for Safe TBO Project consists of six sub-projects. Three of the sub-projects are focused on exploring and developing technologies, concepts and models for evolving and transforming air traffic management operations in the ATM+2 time horizon, while the remaining three sub-projects are focused on developing the tools and capabilities needed for testing these advanced concepts. Function Allocation, Networked Air Traffic Management and Trajectory Based Operations are developing concepts and models. SMART-NAS Test-bed, System Assurance Technologies and Real-time Safety Modeling are developing the tools and capabilities to test these concepts. Simulation and modeling capabilities will include the ability to assess multiple operational scenarios of the national airspace system, accept data feeds, allowing shadowing of actual operations in either real-time, fast-time and/or hybrid modes of operations in distributed environments, and enable integrated examinations of concepts, algorithms, technologies, and NAS architectures. An important focus within this project is to enable the development of a real-time, system-wide safety assurance system. The basis of such a system is a continuum of information acquisition, analysis, and assessment that enables awareness and corrective action to detect and mitigate potential threats to continuous system-wide safety at all levels. This process, which currently can only be done post operations, will be driven towards "real-time" assessments in the 2035 time frame.

Trajectory Based Operations↗

Psychophysiological Methods to Assess Pilot Productive Safety Behaviors

The NASA System-Wide Safety (SWS) Project is focused on developing new technologies and operational concepts for the aviation industry to meet the increasing global demand while maintaining the current ultra-safe system safety levels. To achieve this, the SWS Project is developing research priorities, including In-time System-wide Safety Assurance (ISSA) and In-time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS; Ellis et al., 2019). A critical component of the IASMS is the human as pilot and in other roles in aviation operations as demonstrated by SWS human factors research on rare occurrences of human error and the far more prevalent human safety producing behaviors (e.g., Hollnagel, 2016). The talk presented by Chad Stephens of NASA Langley Research Center and NASA SWS Project will describe the history of human factors research involving psychophysiological and biocybernetics methods supporting aviation safety conducted at NASA. Specific examples of recent NASA crew state monitoring research focused on a psychophysiological assessment method and system to enable Training for Attention Management will be demonstrated. Current SWS research including the SWS Operations and Technologies for Enabling Resilient In-Time Assurance (SOTERIA) flight simulation study and a data testbed created to enable study of Human Contributions to Safety (HC2S) will be presented. Ongoing collaborative research efforts with Boeing researchers will be highlighted and opportunities for further collaboration will be discussed.

psychophysiology↗

Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance Integration - the Future of Safe Deep Space Human Exploration

As a foundational element of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Artemis Campaign, the Gateway is an incrementally built cislunar spacecraft that will serve as a platform for deep space human exploration, science, and technology demonstration. The Gateway will be a unifying catalyst for international partners around the world to establish sustained deep space scientific investigations, lunar surface access, and missions to Mars. As human exploration moves farther away from Earth, spacecraft designs must prioritize and optimize mass and volume allocations, while minimizing human and spacecraft risk. To accomplish this objective, the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance functions develop, implement, and ensure compliance with requirements, in concert with the accurate characterization and transparent communication of residual hazard risks, for integrated safety, reliability and maintainability and quality assurance. Safety and Mission Assurance was a key contributor during Gateway program pre-formulation and formulation activities where safety and reliability analysis was embedded in the Gateway Systems Engineering and Integration team. During these early program stages, a preliminary Gateway Integrated Hazard Analysis and Preliminary Gateway Probabilistic Risk Assessment assisted in Gateway architectural and operational definition as part of a risk-informed design process. As the deep space architecture has matured, the integrated Safety and Mission Assurance analyses have matured, new safety review processes have been developed, and requirements have been refined to ensure compliance with integrated safety and mission assurance objectives. The Gateway Program is currently concluding the preliminary design review informed milestone, where the primary objectives included: - Ensured completeness and consistency of the preliminary design, including the meeting of all requirements within appropriate margins and acceptable risk posture. - Identification of any major issues moving forward to the Critical Design phase. At this milestone, Safety and Mission Assurance provided numerous products, including Gateway Top Risks and Risk Mitigation Plans, updated integrated hazard analyses, updated probabilistic risk assessment, Crew Survival Analysis Report, and updated Safety and Mission Assurance Requirements and Plans. These products provide a many-faceted perspective on the inherent risk and available mitigations involved in flying the current proposed vehicle design and anticipated stack configurations. In addition, Safety and Mission Assurance identified top technical, process and workforce concerns to be addressed as the program progresses toward the critical design phase. This paper will detail the evolution of the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance integration functions, provide its current status and lessons learned for future human spaceflight programs. Throughout this paper the key tenets of the Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance will be discussed: - Application of a risk-informed approach to identify and mitigate areas of highest risk. - Leverage of valuable processes and lessons learned from earlier spaceflight programs. - Development of Safety and Mission Assurance products to inform design risk trades. - Utilization of common Safety and Mission Assurance practices to identify safety risks for multiple perspectives: top-down, bottom-up, and across lines of integration. - Approval of safety hazards at the appropriate level of authority, keeping most deliberation closest to design expertise and elevating risks of greatest concern for program-level consideration. - Championing of Safety and Mission Assurance processes and forums to foster a pervasive safety culture that is transparent, inclusive, and collaborative between all partners. These tenets have allowed the Gateway Safety and Mission Assurance function to play a key role in optimized vehicle design evolution, and early identification and mitigation of Gateway program and Artemis mission risk.

Helen Vaccaro↗

Safety Related Considerations in Autonomy

In this talk I will describe NASA strategy and research efforts to provide safety assurance for increasingly autonomous systems used in aviation. In the near future, autonomy will play an important role in civil aviation, and its applications will range from vehicles and platforms (UAVs, transport-class, including supersonic to hypersonic, aircraft) to airspace operations, or health management systems. This infusion of autonomy is driven by a need for optimizing airspace operations to accommodate increasing traffic density (e.g., adaptive trajectory-based operations, autonomous tugs, close parallel runways, and dynamic separation assurance), reducing operation costs to ensure that US operators can compete with emergent countries, and enabling new business models (e.g., fire fighting, UAS-based package delivery and precise aerial photography). In essence virtually every component of the National Airspace System will become increasingly autonomous. Yet we need to do so in a safe manner and have techniques and processes in place to ensure the safety of the public. This talk describes NASA plans to address this problem

Air Traffic Management↗

Evidence Theory Representations for Properties Associated With Weak Link/Strong Link Systems, Part 2: Failure Time and Failure Temperature

The use of evidence theory and associated cumulative plausibility functions (CPFs), cumulative belief functions (CBFs), cumulative distribution functions (CDFs), complementary cumulative plausibility functions (CCPFs), complementary cumulative belief functions (CCBFs), and complementary cumulative distribution functions (CCDFs) in the analysis of loss of assured safety (LOAS) for weak link (WL)/strong link (SL) systems is introduced and illustrated. Article content includes cumulative and complementary cumulative belief, plausibility, and probability for (i) time at which LOAS occurs for a one WL/two SL system, (ii) time at which a two-link system fails, (iii) temperature at which a two-link system fails, and (iv) temperature at which LOAS occurs for a one WL/two SL system. The presented results can be generalized to systems with more than one WL and two SLs.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Safety and Mission Assurance Knowledge Management Retention: Managing Knowledge for Successful Mission Operations

Knowledge Management is a proactive pursuit for the future success of any large organization faced with the imminent possibility that their senior managers/engineers with gained experiences and lessons learned plan to retire in the near term. Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) is proactively pursuing unique mechanism to ensure knowledge learned is retained and lessons learned captured and documented. Knowledge Capture Event/Activities/Management helps to provide a gateway between future retirees and our next generation of managers/engineers. S&MA hosted two Knowledge Capture Events during 2005 featuring three of its retiring fellows (Axel Larsen, Dave Whittle and Gary Johnson). The first Knowledge Capture Event February 24, 2005 focused on two Safety and Mission Assurance Safety Panels (Space Shuttle System Safety Review Panel (SSRP); Payload Safety Review Panel (PSRP) and the latter event December 15, 2005 featured lessons learned during Apollo, Skylab, and Space Shuttle which could be applicable in the newly created Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV)/Constellation development program. Gemini, Apollo, Skylab and the Space Shuttle promised and delivered exciting human advances in space and benefits of space in people s everyday lives on earth. Johnson Space Center's Safety & Mission Assurance team work over the last 20 years has been mostly focused on operations we are now beginning the Exploration development program. S&MA will promote an atmosphere of knowledge sharing in its formal and informal cultures and work processes, and reward the open dissemination and sharing of information; we are asking "Why embrace relearning the "lessons learned" in the past?" On the Exploration program the focus will be on Design, Development, Test, & Evaluation (DDT&E); therefore, it is critical to understand the lessons from these past programs during the DDT&E phase.

Johnson, Teresa A.↗

Evidence Theory Representations for Properties Associated With Weak Link/Strong Link Systems, Part 3: Margins for Failure Time and Failure Temperature

The use of evidence theory and associated cumulative plausibility functions (CPFs), cumulative belief functions (CBFs), cumulative distribution functions (CDFs), complementary cumulative plausibility functions (CCPFs), complementary cumulative belief functions (CCBFs), and complementary cumulative distribution functions (CCDFs) in the analysis of time and temperature margins associated with loss of assured safety (LOAS) for one weak link (WL)/two strong link (SL) systems is illustrated. Article content includes cumulative and complementary cumulative belief, plausibility, and probability for (i) SL/WL failure time margins defined by (time at which SL failure potentially causes LOAS) – (time at which WL failure potentially prevents LOAS), (ii) SL/WL failure temperature margins defined by (the temperature at which SL failure potentially causes LOAS) – (the temperature at which WL failure potentially prevents LOAS), and (iii) SL/SL failure temperature margins defined by (the temperature at which SL failure potentially causes LOAS) – (the temperature of SL whose failure potentially causes LOAS at the time at which WL failure potentially prevents LOAS).

42 ENGINEERING↗

Towards Run-time Assurance of Advanced Propulsion Algorithms

This paper covers the motivation and rationale for investigating the application of run-time assurance methods as a potential means of providing safety assurance for advanced propulsion control systems. Certification is becoming increasingly infeasible for such systems using current verification practices. Run-time assurance systems hold the promise of certifying these advanced systems by continuously monitoring the state of the feedback system during operation and reverting to a simpler, certified system if anomalous behavior is detected. The discussion will also cover initial efforts underway to apply a run-time assurance framework to NASA's model-based engine control approach. Preliminary experimental results are presented and discussed.

run time assurance↗

Rebuilding a safety culture

The development of a culture of safety and NASA since the Challenger accident is reviewed. The technical elements of the strengthened NASA safety program are described, including problem reporting, risk/assessment/risk management, operational safety, and safety assurance are addressed. Future directions in the development of safety are considered.

Rodney, George A.↗

Technical Excellence and Communication: The Cornerstones for Successful Safety and Mission Assurance Programs

The paper describes the role of technical excellence and communication in the development and maintenance of safety and mission assurance programs. The Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) organization is used to illustrate philosophies and techniques that strengthen safety and mission assurance efforts and that contribute to healthy and effective organizational cultures. The events and conditions leading to the development of the MSFC S&MA organization are reviewed. Historic issues and concerns are identified. The adverse effects of resource limitations and risk assessment roles are discussed. The structure and functions of the core safety, reliability, and quality assurance functions are presented. The current organization s mission and vision commitments serve as the starting points for the description of the current organization. The goals and objectives are presented that address the criticisms of the predecessor organizations. Additional improvements are presented that address the development of technical excellence and the steps taken to improve communication within the Center, with program customers, and with other Agency S&MA organizations.

Malone, Roy W.↗

Replacement of Legacy Analytical Codes at the Advanced Test Reactor

For each operating cycle of the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at Idaho National Laboratory, a Core Safety Assurance Package (CSAP) is necessary to demonstrate compliance with the safety basis approved by the United State Department of Energy (DOE). Certain computer codes are used in CSAP development, most of them developed in-house. This work describes replacement of a large set of these codes and updates previous work. Replacement of legacy codes is necessary due to computer hardware failure but also has generally improved user-friendliness.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

Replacement of Legacy Analytical Codes at the Advanced Test Reactor

For each operating cycle of the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at Idaho National Laboratory, a Core Safety Assurance Package (CSAP) is necessary to demonstrate compliance with the safety basis approved by the United State Department of Energy (DOE). Certain computer codes are used in CSAP development, most of them developed in-house. This work describes replacement of a large set of these codes and updates previous work. Replacement of legacy codes is necessary due to computer hardware failure but also has generally improved user-friendliness.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

Implementing an Objectives-Driven, Risk-Informed, and Case-Assured Approach to Safety and Mission Success at NASA

NASA is developing a “Standard for Assurance of Space Flight Safety and Mission Success” that implements an objectives-driven, risk-informed, and case-assured approach to safety and mission success (S&MS) for NASA space flight programs and projects. The standard aligns with the philosophy of risk leadership that has recently been established in NASA policy to assure acceptable levels of flight crew safety and mission success risk. It is consistent with existing NASA risk management requirements and is compatible with NASA program management and systems engineering requirements. The methodology described in the standard is presented in terms of an S&MS assurance framework that is designed to allow substantial flexibility in the specific means by which programs and projects achieve acceptable mission S&MS risk. Such flexibility is necessary to accommodate the increasingly broad range of acquisition strategies employed by NASA, including commercial transportation services, as well as to accommodate the increasingly rapid evolution of space flight-related technologies and practices. A key feature of the S&MS assurance framework is the specification of S&MS success criteria for each life-cycle review (LCR). The S&MS assurance case is structured around these criteria, the satisfaction of which indicates that the program/project is adhering to the S&MS risk posture. This enables the evolving S&MS assurance case to be used as a fundamental program/project submittal at each LCR, where its inherent structure of argument, supported by evidence, directly supports the evaluation of the program/project with respect to the S&MS success criteria, and by extension, the S&MS risk posture. As such, the S&MS assurance case is integral to program/project systems engineering, risk management, and S&MS oversight activities, and provides the principal basis for S&MS risk acceptance by the Decision Authority throughout the program/project life cycle.

Risk Posture↗

AdvoCATE - User Guide

The basic vision of AdvoCATE is to automate the creation, manipulation, and management of large-scale assurance cases based on a formal theory of argument structures. Its main purposes are for creating and manipulating argument structures for safety assurance cases using the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN), and as a test bed and proof-of-concept for the formal theory of argument structures. AdvoCATE is available for Windows 7, Macintosh OSX, and Linux. Eventually, AdvoCATE will serve as a dashboard for safety related information and provide an infrastructure for safety decisions and management.

Safety Case↗

Software assurance standard

This standard specifies the software assurance program for the provider of software. It also delineates the assurance activities for the provider and the assurance data that are to be furnished by the provider to the acquirer. In any software development effort, the provider is the entity or individual that actually designs, develops, and implements the software product, while the acquirer is the entity or individual who specifies the requirements and accepts the resulting products. This standard specifies at a high level an overall software assurance program for software developed for and by NASA. Assurance includes the disciplines of quality assurance, quality engineering, verification and validation, nonconformance reporting and corrective action, safety assurance, and security assurance. The application of these disciplines during a software development life cycle is called software assurance. Subsequent lower-level standards will specify the specific processes within these disciplines.

Source record↗