Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA)”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 127 records · Page 7

Assessment and Control of Spacecraft Charging Risks on the International Space Station

The International Space Station (ISS) operates in the F2 region of Earth's ionosphere, orbiting at altitudes ranging from 350 to 450 km at an inclination of 51.6 degrees. The relatively dense, cool F2 ionospheric plasma suppresses surface charging processes much of the time, and the flux of relativistic electrons is low enough to preclude deep dielectric charging processes. The most important spacecraft charging processes in the ISS orbital environment are: 1) ISS electrical power system interactions with the F2 plasma, 2) magnetic induction processes resulting from flight through the geomagnetic field and, 3) charging processes that result from interaction with auroral electrons at high latitude. Recently, the continuing review and evaluation of putative ISS charging hazards required by the ISS Program Office revealed that ISS charging could produce an electrical shock hazard to the ISS crew during extravehicular activity (EVA). ISS charging risks are being evaluated in an ongoing measurement and analysis campaign. The results of ISS charging measurements are combined with a recently developed model of ISS charging (the Plasma Interaction Model) and an exhaustive analysis of historical ionospheric variability data (ISS Ionospheric Specification) to evaluate ISS charging risks using Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) methods. The PRA combines estimates of the frequency of occurrence and severity of the charging hazards with estimates of the reliability of various hazard controls systems, as required by NASA s safety and risk management programs, to enable design and selection of a hazard control approach that minimizes overall programmatic and personnel risk. The PRA provides a quantitative methodology for incorporating the results of the ISS charging measurement and analysis campaigns into the necessary hazard reports, EVA procedures, and ISS flight rules required for operating ISS in a safe and productive manner.

Koontz, Steve↗

Uncertainty Considerations for Ballistic Limit Equations

The overall risk for any spacecraft system is typically determined using a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA). A PRA attempts to determine the overall risk associated with a particular mission by factoring in all known risks (and their corresponding uncertainties, if known) to the spacecraft during its mission. The threat to mission and human life posed by the mircro-meteoroid & orbital debris (MMOD) environment is one of the risks. NASA uses the BUMPER II program to provide point estimate predictions of MMOD risk for the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station. However, BUMPER II does not provide uncertainty bounds or confidence intervals for its predictions. With so many uncertainties believed to be present in the models used within BUMPER II, providing uncertainty bounds with BUMPER II results would appear to be essential to properly evaluating its predictions of MMOD risk. The uncertainties in BUMPER II come primarily from three areas: damage prediction/ballistic limit equations, environment models, and failure criteria definitions. In order to quantify the overall uncertainty bounds on MMOD risk predictions, the uncertainties in these three areas must be identified. In this paper, possible approaches through which uncertainty bounds can be developed for the various damage prediction and ballistic limit equations encoded within the shuttle and station versions of BUMPER II are presented and discussed. We begin the paper with a review of the current approaches used by NASA to perform a PRA for the Space Shuttle and the International Space Station, followed by a review of the results of a recent sensitivity analysis performed by NASA using the shuttle version of the BUMPER II code. Following a discussion of the various equations that are encoded in BUMPER II, we propose several possible approaches for establishing uncertainty bounds for the equations within BUMPER II. We conclude with an evaluation of these approaches and present a recommendation regarding which of them would be the most appropriate to follow.

Schonberg, W. P.↗

Uncertainty Considerations for Ballistic Limit Equations

The overall risk for any spacecraft system is typically determined using a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA). A PRA determines the overall risk associated with a particular mission by factoring in all known risks to the spacecraft during its mission. The threat to mission and human life posed by the micro-meteoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) environment is one of the risks. NASA uses the BUMPER II program to provide point estimate predictions of MMOD risk for the Space Shuttle and the ISS. However, BUMPER II does not provide uncertainty bounds or confidence intervals for its predictions. In this paper, we present possible approaches through which uncertainty bounds can be developed for the various damage prediction and ballistic limit equations encoded within the Shuttle and Station versions of BUMPER II.

Schonberg, W. P.↗

Knowledge Representation Standards and Interchange Formats for Causal Graphs

In many domains, automated reasoning tools must represent graphs of causally linked events. These include fault-tree analysis, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA), planning, procedures, medical reasoning about disease progression, and functional architectures. Each of these fields has its own requirements for the representation of causation, events, actors and conditions. The representations include ontologies of function and cause, data dictionaries for causal dependency, failure and hazard, and interchange formats between some existing tools. In none of the domains has a generally accepted interchange format emerged. The paper makes progress towards interoperability across the wide range of causal analysis methodologies. We survey existing practice and emerging interchange formats in each of these fields. Setting forth a set of terms and concepts that are broadly shared across the domains, we examine the several ways in which current practice represents them. Some phenomena are difficult to represent or to analyze in several domains. These include mode transitions, reachability analysis, positive and negative feedback loops, conditions correlated but not causally linked and bimodal probability distributions. We work through examples and contrast the differing methods for addressing them. We detail recent work in knowledge interchange formats for causal trees in aerospace analysis applications in early design, safety and reliability. Several examples are discussed, with a particular focus on reachability analysis and mode transitions. We generalize the aerospace analysis work across the several other domains. We also recommend features and capabilities for the next generation of causal knowledge representation standards.

Throop, David R.↗

Taking the Risk Out of Risk Assessment

The ability to understand risks and have the right strategies in place when risky events occur is essential in the workplace. More and more organizations are being confronted with concerns over how to measure their risks or what kind of risks they can take when certain events transpire that could have a negative impact. NASA is one organization that faces these challenges on a daily basis, as effective risk management is critical to the success of its missions especially the Space Shuttle missions. On July 29, 1996, former NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin charged NASA s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance with developing a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) tool to support decisions on the funding of Space Shuttle upgrades. When issuing the directive, Goldin said, "Since I came to NASA [in 1992], we've spent billions of dollars on Shuttle upgrades without knowing how much they improve safety. I want a tool to help base upgrade decisions on risk." Work on the PRA tool began immediately. The resulting prototype, the Quantitative Risk Assessment System (QRAS) Version 1.0, was jointly developed by NASA s Marshall Space Flight Center, its Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, and researchers at the University of Maryland. QRAS software automatically expands the reliability logic models of systems to evaluate the probability of highly detrimental outcomes occurring in complex systems that are subject to potential accident scenarios. Even in its earliest forms, QRAS was used to begin PRA modeling of the Space Shuttle. In parallel, the development of QRAS continued, with the goal of making it a world-class tool, one that was especially suited to NASA s unique needs. From the beginning, an important conceptual goal in the development of QRAS was for it to help bridge the gap between the professional risk analyst and the design engineer. In the past, only the professional risk analyst could perform, modify, use, and perhaps even adequately understand PRA. NASA wanted to change this by developing a PRA tool that would be friendlier, more understandable, and more useful to the broader engineering community. This concept ultimately led to the look, feel, and functionality that QRAS has today.

Source record↗

Derivation of Failure Rates and Probability of Failures for the International Space Station Probabilistic Risk Assessment Study

National Aeronautics and Space Administration s (NASA) International Space Station (ISS) Program uses Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) as part of its Continuous Risk Management Process. It is used as a decision and management support tool to not only quantify risk for specific conditions, but more importantly comparing different operational and management options to determine the lowest risk option and provide rationale for management decisions. This paper presents the derivation of the probability distributions used to quantify the failure rates and the probability of failures of the basic events employed in the PRA model of the ISS. The paper will show how a Bayesian approach was used with different sources of data including the actual ISS on orbit failures to enhance the confidence in results of the PRA. As time progresses and more meaningful data is gathered from on orbit failures, an increasingly accurate failure rate probability distribution for the basic events of the ISS PRA model can be obtained. The ISS PRA has been developed by mapping the ISS critical systems such as propulsion, thermal control, or power generation into event sequences diagrams and fault trees. The lowest level of indenture of the fault trees was the orbital replacement units (ORU). The ORU level was chosen consistently with the level of statistically meaningful data that could be obtained from the aerospace industry and from the experts in the field. For example, data was gathered for the solenoid valves present in the propulsion system of the ISS. However valves themselves are composed of parts and the individual failure of these parts was not accounted for in the PRA model. In other words the failure of a spring within a valve was considered a failure of the valve itself.

Vitali, Roberto↗

Simulation Assisted Risk Assessment: Blast Overpressure Modeling

A probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) approach has been developed and applied to the risk analysis of capsule abort during ascent. The PRA is used to assist in the identification of modeling and simulation applications that can significantly impact the understanding of crew risk during this potentially dangerous maneuver. The PRA approach is also being used to identify the appropriate level of fidelity for the modeling of those critical failure modes. The Apollo launch escape system (LES) was chosen as a test problem for application of this approach. Failure modes that have been modeled and/or simulated to date include explosive overpressure-based failure, explosive fragment-based failure, land landing failures (range limits exceeded either near launch or Mode III trajectories ending on the African continent), capsule-booster re-contact during separation, and failure due to plume-induced instability. These failure modes have been investigated using analysis tools in a variety of technical disciplines at various levels of fidelity. The current paper focuses on the development and application of a blast overpressure model for the prediction of structural failure due to overpressure, including the application of high-fidelity analysis to predict near-field and headwinds effects.

Lawrence, Scott L.↗

Design for Reliability and Safety Approach for the New NASA Launch Vehicle

The United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is in the midst of a space exploration program intended for sending crew and cargo to the international Space Station (ISS), to the moon, and beyond. This program is called Constellation. As part of the Constellation program, NASA is developing new launch vehicles aimed at significantly increase safety and reliability, reduce the cost of accessing space, and provide a growth path for manned space exploration. Achieving these goals requires a rigorous process that addresses reliability, safety, and cost upfront and throughout all the phases of the life cycle of the program. This paper discusses the "Design for Reliability and Safety" approach for the NASA new launch vehicles, the ARES I and ARES V. Specifically, the paper addresses the use of an integrated probabilistic functional analysis to support the design analysis cycle and a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) to support the preliminary design and beyond.

Safie, Fayssal M.↗

Probabilistic Risk Model for Organ Doses and Acute Health Effects of Astronauts on Lunar Missions

Exposure to large solar particle events (SPEs) is a major concern during EVAs on the lunar surface and in Earth-to-Lunar transit. 15% of crew times may be on EVA with minimal radiation shielding. Therefore, an accurate assessment of SPE occurrence probability is required for the mission planning by NASA. We apply probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) for radiation protection of crews and optimization of lunar mission planning.

Kim, Myung-Hee Y.↗

The Importance of HRA in Human Space Flight: Understanding the Risks

Human performance is critical to crew safety during space missions. Humans interact with hardware and software during ground processing, normal flight, and in response to events. Human interactions with hardware and software can cause Loss of Crew and/or Vehicle (LOCV) through improper actions, or may prevent LOCV through recovery and control actions. Humans have the ability to deal with complex situations and system interactions beyond the capability of machines. Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) is a method used to qualitatively and quantitatively assess the occurrence of human failures that affect availability and reliability of complex systems. Modeling human actions with their corresponding failure probabilities in a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) provides a more complete picture of system risks and risk contributions. A high-quality HRA can provide valuable information on potential areas for improvement, including training, procedures, human interfaces design, and the need for automation. Modeling human error has always been a challenge in part because performance data is not always readily available. For spaceflight, the challenge is amplified not only because of the small number of participants and limited amount of performance data available, but also due to the lack of definition of the unique factors influencing human performance in space. These factors, called performance shaping factors in HRA terminology, are used in HRA techniques to modify basic human error probabilities in order to capture the context of an analyzed task. Many of the human error modeling techniques were developed within the context of nuclear power plants and therefore the methodologies do not address spaceflight factors such as the effects of microgravity and longer duration missions. This presentation will describe the types of human error risks which have shown up as risk drivers in the Shuttle PRA which may be applicable to commercial space flight. As with other large PRAs of complex machines, human error in the Shuttle PRA proved to be an important contributor (~12 percent) to LOCV. An existing HRA technique was adapted for use in the Shuttle PRA, but additional guidance and improvements are needed to make the HRA task in space-related PRAs easier and more accurate. Therefore, this presentation will also outline plans for expanding current HRA methodology to more explicitly cover spaceflight performance shaping factors.

Hamlin, Teri↗

The Importance of Human Reliability Analysis in Human Space Flight: Understanding the Risks

HRA is a method used to describe, qualitatively and quantitatively, the occurrence of human failures in the operation of complex systems that affect availability and reliability. Modeling human actions with their corresponding failure in a PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) provides a more complete picture of the risk and risk contributions. A high quality HRA can provide valuable information on potential areas for improvement, including training, procedural, equipment design and need for automation.

Hamlin, Teri L.↗

Risk Informed Design as Part of the Systems Engineering Process

This slide presentation reviews the importance of Risk Informed Design (RID) as an important feature of the systems engineering process. RID is based on the principle that risk is a design commodity such as mass, volume, cost or power. It also reviews Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) as it is used in the product life cycle in the development of NASA's Constellation Program.

Deckert, George↗

Assessment and Control of Spacecraft Charging Risks on the International Space Station

Electrical interactions between the F2 region ionospheric plasma and the 160V photovoltaic (PV) electrical power system on the International Space Station (ISS) can produce floating potentials (FP) on the ISS conducting structure of greater magnitude than are usually observed on spacecraft in low-Earth orbit. Flight through the geomagnetic field also causes magnetic induction charging of ISS conducting structure. Charging processes resulting from interaction of ISS with auroral electrons may also contribute to charging albeit rarely. The magnitude and frequency of occurrence of possibly hazardous charging events depends on the ISS assembly stage (six more 160V PV arrays will be added to ISS), ISS flight configuration, ISS position (latitude and longitude), and the natural variability in the ionospheric flight environment. At present, ISS is equipped with two plasma contactors designed to control ISS FP to within 40 volts of the ambient F2 plasma. The negative-polarity grounding scheme utilized in the ISS 160V power system leads, naturally, to negative values of ISS FP. A negative ISS structural FP leads to application of electrostatic fields across the dielectrics that separate conducting structure from the ambient F2 plasma, thereby enabling dielectric breakdown and arcing. Degradation of some thermal control coatings and noise in electrical systems can result. Continued review and evaluation of the putative charging hazards, as required by the ISS Program Office, revealed that ISS charging could produce a risk of electric shock to the ISS crew during extra vehicular activity. ISS charging risks are being evaluated in ongoing ISS charging measurements and analysis campaigns. The results of ISS charging measurements are combined with a recently developed detailed model of the ISS charging process and an extensive analysis of historical ionospheric variability data, to assess ISS charging risks using Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) methods. The PRA analysis (estimated frequency of occurrence and severity of the charging hazards) are then used to select the hazard control strategy that provides the best overall safety and mission success environment for ISS and the ISS crew. This paper presents: 1) a summary of ISS spacecraft charging analysis, measurements, observations made to date, 2) plans for future ISS spacecraft charging measurement campaigns, and 3) a detailed discussion of the PRA strategy used to assess ISS spacecraft charging risks and select charging hazard control strategies

Koontz, Steve↗

Modeling the Risk of Fire/Explosion Due to Oxidizer/Fuel Leaks in the Ares I Interstage

A significant flight hazard associated with liquid propellants, such as those used in the upper stage of NASA's new Ares I launch vehicle, is the possibility of leakage of hazardous fluids resulting in a catastrophic fire/explosion. The enclosed and vented interstage of the Ares I contains numerous oxidizer and fuel supply lines as well as ignition sources. The potential for fire/explosion due to leaks during ascent depends on the relative concentrations of hazardous and inert fluids within the interstage along with other variables such as pressure, temperature, leak rates, and fluid outgasing rates. This analysis improves on previous NASA Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) estimates of the probability of deflagration, in which many of the variables pertinent to the problem were not explicitly modeled as a function of time. This paper presents the modeling methodology developed to analyze these risks.

Ring, Robert W.↗

The Use of the Integrated Medical Model for Forecasting and Mitigating Medical Risks for a Near-Earth Asteroid Mission

Introduction The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) is a decision support tool that is useful to space flight mission managers and medical system designers in assessing risks and optimizing medical systems. The IMM employs an evidence-based, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) approach within the operational constraints of space flight. Methods Stochastic computational methods are used to forecast probability distributions of medical events, crew health metrics, medical resource utilization, and probability estimates of medical evacuation and loss of crew life. The IMM can also optimize medical kits within the constraints of mass and volume for specified missions. The IMM was used to forecast medical evacuation and loss of crew life probabilities, as well as crew health metrics for a near-earth asteroid (NEA) mission. An optimized medical kit for this mission was proposed based on the IMM simulation. Discussion The IMM can provide information to the space program regarding medical risks, including crew medical impairment, medical evacuation and loss of crew life. This information is valuable to mission managers and the space medicine community in assessing risk and developing mitigation strategies. Exploration missions such as NEA missions will have significant mass and volume constraints applied to the medical system. Appropriate allocation of medical resources will be critical to mission success. The IMM capability of optimizing medical systems based on specific crew and mission profiles will be advantageous to medical system designers. Conclusion The IMM is a decision support tool that can provide estimates of the impact of medical events on human space flight missions, such as crew impairment, evacuation, and loss of crew life. It can be used to support the development of mitigation strategies and to propose optimized medical systems for specified space flight missions. Learning Objectives The audience will learn how an evidence-based decision support tool can be used to help assess risk, develop mitigation strategies, and optimize medical systems for exploration space flight missions.

Kerstman, Eric↗

Improving Safety on the International Space Station: Transitioning to Electronic Emergency Procedure Books on the International Space Station

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) originally designed the International Space Station (ISS) to operate until 2015, but have extended operations until at least 2020. As part of this very dynamic Program, there is an effort underway to simplify the certification of Commercial ]of ]the ]Shelf (COTS) hardware. This change in paradigm allows the ISS Program to take advantage of technologically savvy and commercially available hardware, such as the iPad. The iPad, a line of tablet computers designed and marketed by Apple Inc., was chosen to support this endeavor. The iPad is functional, portable, and could be easily accessed in an emergency situation. The iPad Electronic Flight Bag (EFB), currently approved for use in flight by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), is a fraction of the cost of a traditional Class 2 EFB. In addition, the iPad fs ability to use electronic aeronautical data in lieu of paper in route charts and approach plates can cut the annual cost of paper data in half for commercial airlines. ISS may be able to benefit from this type of trade since one of the most important factors considered is information management. Emergency procedures onboard the ISS are currently available to the crew in paper form. Updates to the emergency books can either be launched on an upcoming visiting vehicle such as a Russian Soyuz flight or printed using the onboard ISS printer. In both cases, it is costly to update hardcopy procedures. A new operations concept was proposed to allow for the use of a tablet system that would provide a flexible platform to support space station crew operations. The purpose of the system would be to provide the crew the ability to view and maintain operational data, such as emergency procedures while also allowing Mission Control Houston to update the procedures. The ISS Program is currently evaluating the safety risks associated with the use of iPads versus paper. Paper products can contribute to the flammability risk and require manual updates that take time away from research tasks. The ISS program has recently purchased three iPads for the astronauts and the certification has been approved. The crew is currently using the iPads onboard. The results of this analysis could be used to discern whether the iPad is a viable option for use in emergencies by assessing the risk posture through the development of a quantitative probabilistic risk assessment (PRA).

Carter-Journet, Katrina↗