Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “risk communication”

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 109 records · Page 6

Bridging the Divide between Safety and Risk Management for your Project or Program

This presentation will bridge the divide between these separate but overlapping disciplines and help explain how to use Risk Management as an effective management decision support tool that includes safety. Risk Management is an over arching communication tool used by management to prioritize and effectively mitigate potential problems before they concur. Risk Management encompasses every kind of potential problem that can occur on a program or project. Some of these are safety issues such as hazards that have a specific likelihood and consequence that need to be controlled and included to show an integrated picture of accepted) mitigated, and residual risk. Integrating safety and other assurance disciplines is paramount to accurately representing a program s or projects risk posture. Risk is made up of several components such as technical) cost, schedule, or supportability. Safety should also be a consideration for every risk. The safety component can also have an impact on the technical, cost, and schedule aspect of a given risk. The current formats used for communication of safety and risk issues are not consistent or integrated. The presentation will explore the history of these disciplines, current work to integrate them, and suggestions for integration for the future.

Lutomski, Mike↗

Microbial growth and physiology in space - A review

An overview of microbial behavior in closed environments is given with attention to data related to simulated microgravity and actual space flight. Microbes are described in terms of antibiotic sensitivity, subcellular structure, and physiology, and the combined effects are considered of weightlessness and cosmic radiation on human immunity to such microorganisms. Space flight results report such effects as increased phage induction, accelerated microbial growth rates, and the increased risk of disease communication and microbial exchange aboard confining spacecraft. Ultrastructural changes are also noted in the nuclei, cell membranes, and cytoplasmic streaming, and it appears that antibiotic sensitivity is reduced under both actual and simulated conditions of spaceflight.

Cioletti, Louis A.↗

Passive intermodulation generation in wire mesh deployable reflector antennas

Deployable reflector antennas represent a proven technology with obvious benefits for mobile satellite applications. Harris Corporation has provided deployable reflector antennas for NASA's Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS). These antennas utilize a rigid, radial rib unfurlable reflector with a wire mesh surface. This type of mesh has been identified as a potential design risk for multichannel communications applications based on the potential for generation of Passive Intermodulation (PIM). These concerns are based on the existence of numerous, nonpermanent metal to metal contacts that are inherent to the mesh design. To address this issue, Harris has an ongoing IR&D program to characterize mesh PIM performance. This paper presents the results of the investigation into mesh PIM performance to date and provides background information on the design and performance of the Harris radial rib deployable reflector.

Turner, Gregory M.↗

Contamination Sources Effects Analysis (CSEA) - A Tool to Balance Cost/Schedule While Managing Facility Availability

A CSEA is similar to a Failure Modes Effects Analysis (FMEA). A CSEA tracks risk, deterrence, and occurrence of sources of contamination and their mitigation plans. Documentation is provided spanning mechanical and electrical assembly, precision cleaning, thermal vacuum bake-out, and thermal vacuum testing. These facilities all may play a role in contamination budgeting and reduction ultimately affecting test and flight. With a CSEA, visibility can be given to availability of these facilities, test sequencing and trade-offs. A cross-functional team including specialty engineering, contamination control, electrostatic dissipation, manufacturing, testing, and material engineering participate in an exercise that identifies contaminants and minimizes the complexity of scheduling these facilities considering their volatile schedules. Care can be taken in an efficient manner to insure correct cleaning processes are employed. The result is reduction in cycle time ("schedule hits"), reduced cost due to rework, reduced risk and improved communication and quality while achieving adherence to the Contamination Control Plan.

Wilcox, Margaret↗

Purpose, Principles, and Challenges of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center

NASA formed the NASA Engineering and Safety Center in 2003 following the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. It is an Agency level, program-independent engineering resource supporting NASA's missions, programs, and projects. It functions to identify, resolve, and communicate engineering issues, risks, and, particularly, alternative technical opinions, to NASA senior management. The goal is to help ensure fully informed, risk-based programmatic and operational decision-making processes. To date, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) has conducted or is actively working over 600 technical studies and projects, spread across all NASA Mission Directorates, and for various other U.S. Government and non-governmental agencies and organizations. Since inception, NESC human spaceflight related activities, in particular, have transitioned from Shuttle Return-to-Flight and completion of the International Space Station (ISS) to ISS operations and Orion Multi-purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), Space Launch System (SLS), and Commercial Crew Program (CCP) vehicle design, integration, test, and certification. This transition has changed the character of NESC studies. For these development programs, the NESC must operate in a broader, system-level design and certification context as compared to the reactive, time-critical, hardware specific nature of flight operations support.

Gilbert, Michael G.↗

Model Based Mission Assurance: NASA's Assurance Future

Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is seeing increased application in planning and design of NASA’s missions. This suggests the question: what will be the corresponding practice of Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA)? Contemporaneously, NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) is evaluating a new objectives based approach to standards to ensure that the Safety and Mission Assurance disciplines and programs are addressing the challenges of NASA’s changing missions, acquisition and engineering practices, and technology. MBSE is a prominent example of a changing engineering practice. We use NASA’s objectives-based strategy for Reliability and Maintainability as a means to examine how MBSE will affect assurance. We surveyed MBSE literature to look specifically for these affects, and find a variety of them discussed (some are anticipated, some are reported from applications to date). Predominantly these apply to the early stages of design, although there are also extrapolations of how MBSE practices will have benefits for testing phases. As the effort to develop MBMA continues, it will need to clearly and unambiguously establish the roles of uncertainty and risk in the system model. This will enable a variety of uncertainty-based analyses to be performed much more rapidly than ever before and has the promise to increase the integration of CRM (Continuous Risk Management) and PRA (Probabilistic Risk Analyses) even more fully into the project development life cycle. Various views and viewpoints will be required for assurance disciplines, and an over-arching viewpoint will then be able to more completely characterize the state of the project/program as well as (possibly) enabling the safety case approach for overall risk awareness and communication.

Evans, John↗

Major Design Choices and Challenges that Enabled the Success of the Ejectable Data Recorder System

The Ejectable Data Recorder (EDR) subsystem was added to the Crew Module (CM) of the Ascent Abort 2 (AA-2) test flight due to a risk that the communications architecture would be insufficient to downlink all the data to the ground during the test flight. Since the EDR subsystem was a secondary system for data collection, AA-2 management enabled the team to take a different approach to hardware development that was more agile-like. This paper discusses key design decisions, technical challenges, and lessons learned that enabled the success of the EDR system during its flight on July 2, 2019.

Jeff Hagen↗

System Safety Analysis of Complex NASA Systems with Model-Based Engineering

The emergence of model-based engineering is transforming design and analysis methodologies [5]. A recognized benefit of model-based engineering is the existence of a “single source of truth” about the system that becomes the authoritative source of data and information for designers, analysts, and developers. This promotes consistency and efficiency as the design emerges and can be used to further optimize the design. Integrating System Safety Engineers to the “single source of truth” will ensure that the outputs of their assessments and analyses are relevant to the design as it evolves. Use of an integrated system model enables near immediate evaluation of a design change as well as development of operational processes for risk assessment and communication. Such models can enable efficient and timely analysis of system hazards (e.g., hazard fault tree analysis and procedure simulations) and produce complete, accurate, and more consistent products (e.g., hazard reports and safety requirement evaluations). Therefore, an agency-sponsored team at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) recently completed a System Safety Study of modeling and testing capabilities as part of a Model-Based Safety and Mission Assurance Initiative (MBSMAI). Using an existing model developed for reliability analyses [1], GSFC modeling and system safety experts performed system safety analysis/modeling and produced safety products. The team evaluated model-based feasibility to support System Safety Engineering, developed safety analysis modeling processes, and identified tool capability advancement/development needs. These study results indicate model-based engineering is valid and useable for System

NASA↗

System Safety Analysis of Complex NASA Systems with Model Based Engineering

The emergence of model-based engineering is transforming design and analysis methodologies [5]. A recognized benefit of model-based engineering is the existence of a “single source of truth” about the system that becomes the authoritative source of data and information for designers, analysts, and developers. This promotes consistency and efficiency as the design emerges and can be used to further optimize the design. Integrating System Safety Engineers to the “single source of truth” will ensure that the outputs of their assessments and analyses are relevant to the design as it evolves. Use of an integrated system model enables near immediate evaluation of a design change as well as development of operational processes for risk assessment and communication. Such models can enable efficient and timely analysis of system hazards (e.g., hazard fault tree analysis and procedure simulations) and produce complete, accurate, and more consistent products (e.g., hazard reports and safety requirement evaluations). Therefore, an agency-sponsored team at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) recently completed a System Safety Study of modeling and testing capabilities as part of a Model-Based Safety and Mission Assurance Initiative (MBSMAI). Using an existing model developed for reliability analyses [1], GSFC modeling and system safety experts performed system safety analysis/modeling and produced safety products. The team evaluated model-based feasibility to support System Safety Engineering, developed safety analysis modeling processes, and identified tool capability advancement/development needs. These study results indicate model-based engineering is valid and useable for System

Model Based Engineering↗

System Safety Analysis of Complex NASA Systems with Model-Based Engineering (REV B)

The emergence of model-based engineering is transforming design and analysis methodologies. A recognized benefit of model-based engineering is the existence of a “single source of truth” about the system that becomes the authoritative source of data and information for designers, analysts, and developers. This promotes consistency and efficiency as the design emerges and can be used to further optimize the design. Integrating System Safety Engineers to the “single source of truth” will ensure that the outputs of their assessments and analyses are relevant to the design as it evolves. Use of an integrated system model enables near immediate evaluation of a design change as well as development of operational processes for risk assessment and communication. Such models can enable efficient and timely analysis of system hazards (e.g., hazard fault tree analysis and procedure simulations) and produce complete, accurate, and more consistent products (e.g., hazard reports and safety requirement evaluations). Therefore, an agency-sponsored team at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) recently completed a System Safety Study of modeling and testing capabilities as part of a Model-Based Safety and Mission Assurance Initiative (MBSMAI). Using an existing model developed for reliability analyses, GSFC modeling and system safety experts performed system safety analysis/modeling and produced safety products. The team evaluated model-based feasibility to support System Safety Engineering, developed safety analysis modeling processes, and identified tool capability advancement/development needs. These study results indicate model-based engineering is valid and useable for System Safety Engineering for NASA if adequate modeling processes and environment are established.

NASA↗

Pacific Northwest Health & Air Quality: Monitoring Trends in Air Quality During a Drought Case Study to Improve Public Health Response to Drought Threats

Recent studies have documented a correlation between air quality and drought in the United States, which has been linked with increased aerosols including airborne particulate matter (PM) during drought conditions. This study partnered with local health departments to evaluate trends in air quality in the Pacific Northwest during the evolution of drought conditions using aerosol optical depth (AOD) observations collected by NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) sensor aboard the Terra and Aqua satellites. These satellite data were analyzed in conjunction with ground-based PM2.5 and PM10 data sourced from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s network of ground-based monitors and the Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) drought index. Based on recommendations by local health departments, this study examined air quality trends between 2015 and 2022 in 12 counties within Oregon and Washington that reflected diversity in population density, drought exposure, rural and urban status, and data availability from EPA monitors. Overall, results indicated variation in relationships among drought, satellite, and ground-based air quality data across the study area. This study did not control for the impact of wildfire events on air quality and also did not investigate shorter SPEI aggregation periods, both of which are avenues for future research. This project supplemented research into links between drought and human health and provided health departments with an objective foundation from which they can communicate public health risks to local communities.

Abby Sgan↗

Systems engineering and integration: Cost estimation and benefits analysis

Space Transportation Avionics hardware and software cost has traditionally been estimated in Phase A and B using cost techniques which predict cost as a function of various cost predictive variables such as weight, lines of code, functions to be performed, quantities of test hardware, quantities of flight hardware, design and development heritage, complexity, etc. The output of such analyses has been life cycle costs, economic benefits and related data. The major objectives of Cost Estimation and Benefits analysis are twofold: (1) to play a role in the evaluation of potential new space transportation avionics technologies, and (2) to benefit from emerging technological innovations. Both aspects of cost estimation and technology are discussed here. The role of cost analysis in the evaluation of potential technologies should be one of offering additional quantitative and qualitative information to aid decision-making. The cost analyses process needs to be fully integrated into the design process in such a way that cost trades, optimizations and sensitivities are understood. Current hardware cost models tend to primarily use weights, functional specifications, quantities, design heritage and complexity as metrics to predict cost. Software models mostly use functionality, volume of code, heritage and complexity as cost descriptive variables. Basic research needs to be initiated to develop metrics more responsive to the trades which are required for future launch vehicle avionics systems. These would include cost estimating capabilities that are sensitive to technological innovations such as improved materials and fabrication processes, computer aided design and manufacturing, self checkout and many others. In addition to basic cost estimating improvements, the process must be sensitive to the fact that no cost estimate can be quoted without also quoting a confidence associated with the estimate. In order to achieve this, better cost risk evaluation techniques are needed as well as improved usage of risk data by decision-makers. More and better ways to display and communicate cost and cost risk to management are required.

Dean, ED↗

Risk Management Issues - An Aerospace Perspective

Phased-approach for implementation of risk management is necessary. Risk management system will be simple, accessible and promote communication of information to all relevant stakeholders for optimal resource allocation and risk mitigation. Risk management should be used by all team members to manage risks--risk office personnel. Each group is assigned Risk Integrators who are facilitators for effective risk management. Risks will be managed at the lowest-level feasible, elevate only those risks that require coordination or management from above. Risk reporting and communication is an essential element of risk management and will combine both qualitative and quantitative elements.. Risk informed decision making should be introduced to all levels of management. Provide necessary checks and balances to insure that risks are caught/identified and dealt with in a timely manner, Many supporting tools, processes & training must be deployed for effective risk management implementation. Process improvement must be included in the risk processes.

Perera, Jeevan S.↗

NASA's Risk Management System

Leadership is key to success. Phased-approach for implementation of risk management is necessary. Risk management system will be simple, accessible and promote communication of information to all relevant stakeholders for optimal resource allocation and risk mitigation. Risk management should be used by all team members to manage risks -- risk office personnel. Each group is assigned Risk Integrators who are facilitators for effective risk management. Risks will be managed at the lowest-level feasible, elevate only those risks that require coordination or management from above. Risk reporting and communication is an essential element of risk management and will combine both qualitative and quantitative elements. Risk informed decision making should be introduced to all levels of management. Provide necessary checks and balances to insure that risks are caught/identified and dealt with in a timely manner. Many supporting tools, processes & training must be deployed for effective risk management implementation. Process improvement must be included in the risk processes.

Perera, Jeevan S.↗

Concurrent System Engineering and Risk Reduction for Dual-Band (RF/optical) Spacecraft Communications

This paper describes a system engineering approach to examining the potential for combining elements of a deep-space RF and optical communications payload, for the purpose of reducing the size, weight and power burden on the spacecraft and the mission. Figures of merit and analytical methodologies are discussed to conduct trade studies, and several potential technology integration strategies are presented. Finally, the NASA Integrated Radio and Optical Communications (iROC) project is described, which directly addresses the combined RF and optical approach.

Fielhauer, Karl, B.↗

Incorporation of Human Risk Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAG) With Mishap Investigations to Un-Silo Knowledge

NASA’s Human System Risk Board (HSRB) has been a central driver in efforts to understand, mitigate, and communicate the 29 human systems risks monitored by the board. As a result of the collaboration between research, operations, and technical authorities, large bodies of knowledge have been collected and digested to represent the current understanding of the risks. As a part of these bodies of knowledge, directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) have been developed to communicate the current understanding of the causal relationship of the hazards, contributing factors, countermeasures, other risks, and outcomes that contribute to the overall risk. This risk knowledge is applied in a theoretical sense for potential incidents during exploration even while informed by surveillance data. However, there have been mishaps and close calls during past space exploration that intersect with one or more of the Human System Risks DAGs and knowledge bases. The purpose of this exercise was to un-silo this risk knowledge and connect it to the close call of EVA 23 through the development of a DAG representing the intersection of the HSRB Risks and the events of the close call. The development of the DAG occurred through an iterative process, with each iteration expanding and/or refining the nodes and connections described by the source materials. In addition to the risk documentation developed by the HSRB, lessons learned and other mishap investigation documents were utilized to understand the events that led to water entering the helmet of a crewmember on the EVA. New nodes specific to the events of EVA 23 were interconnected with existing HSRB DAG nodes and edges. Nodes within the DAG were defined within a “DAG-tionary” with any updates to a definition that may have previously existed from the HSRB DAGs, and edges were recorded in a matrix. Both the DAG-tionary and matrix describe where nodes and edges are present across the Risk and Mishap DAG. This DAG will then be reviewed by experts outside of HSRB and HRP to confirm that interpretations of the non-health related events (such as the engineering nodes) are represented accurately. DISCUSSION This process highlighted a method by which the knowledge generated among the contributing members of the HSRB Risks can be effectively adapted and utilized through the tools employed by the Risk Custodian teams. By leveraging these tools, new context and insights to the information at hand can be brought forward to address current spaceflight challenges. Moreover, un-siloing this knowledge through future DAGs and other efforts can drive interprofessional collaboration and foster communication. This will enable teams to work together more effectively, leveraging their diverse expertise to tackle the complex challenges of space exploration and human research. Ultimately, this collaboration will bring NASA closer to achieve agency goals and contribute to the overall shared mission and vision.

Samuel Jacobs↗

Proceedings of the Advanced Communications Technology Satellite (ACTS) Conference 2000

The ACTS experiments program, which began in December 1993 and consisted of 103 different experiments, has made significant contributions to minimizing the risk of advanced satellite communications technology. The ACTS Conference 2000 (AC2000) was held to report the results of the program since the last ACTS conference was held in 1995 and to celebrate the end of a very successful satellite program. The conference was held on May 31, 2000, as part of the 6th Ka-band Utilization Conference in Cleveland, Ohio. Approximately 280 representatives of industry, academia, and government attended. The conference was organized into two parts: a technical session during the day and an evening reception. During the day, a series of five technical sessions included presentations of 17 papers covering the results of the experiment activity and technical performance of the satellite. In the evening, a reception was held to celebrate the end of the ACTS Experiments Program on one of NASA's most successful experimental communications satellite. These proceedings were developed to capture the entire event, including the evening reception.

Bauer, Robert↗