Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “failure modes effects and criticality analysis”

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

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

At least 127 records · Page 7

Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) for the Space Shuttle solid rocket motor

The recertification of the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) and Solid Rocket Motor (SRM) has included an extensive rewriting of the Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL). The evolution of the groundrules and methodology used in the analysis is discussed and compared to standard FMEA techniques. Especially highlighted are aspects of the FMEA/CIL which are unique to the analysis of an SRM. The criticality category definitions are presented and the rationale for assigning criticality is presented. The various data required by the CIL and contribution of this data to the retention rationale is also presented. As an example, the FMEA and CIL for the SRM nozzle assembly is discussed in detail. This highlights some of the difficulties associated with the analysis of a system with the unique mission requirements of the Space Shuttle.

Russell, D. L.↗

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): CIL issues resolution report, volume 1

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. This report contains IOA assessment worksheets showing resolution of outstanding IOA CIL issues that were summarized in the IOA FMEA/CIL Assessment Interim Report, dated 9 March 1988. Each assessment worksheet has been updated with CIL issue resolution and rationale. The NASA and Prime Contractor post 51-L FMEA/CIL documentation assessed is believed to be technically accurate and complete. No assessment issues remain that has safety implications. Volume 1 contain worksheets for the following sybsystems: Landing and Deceleration Subsystem; Purge, Vent and Drain Subsystem; Active Thermal Control and Life Support Systems; Crew Equipment Subsystem; Instrumentation Subsystem; Data Processing Subsystem; Atmospheric Revitalization Pressure Control Subsystem; Hydraulics and Water Spray Boiler Subsystem; and Mechanical Actuation Subsystem.

Urbanowicz, Kenneth J.↗

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): CIL issues resolution report, volume 2

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes And Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. This report contains IOA assessment worksheets showing resolution of outstanding IOA CIL issues that were summarized in the IOA FMEA/CIL Assessment Interim Report, dated 9 March 1988. Each assessment worksheet has been updated with CIL issue resolution and rationale. Volume 2 contains the worksheets for the following subsystems: Nose Wheel Steering Subsystem; Remote Manipulator Subsystem; Atmospheric Revitalization Subsystem; Extravehicular Mobility Unit Subsystem; Power Reactant Supply and Distribution Subsystem; Main Propulsion Subsystem; and Orbital Maneuvering Subsystem.

Source record↗

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) CIL issues resolution report, volume 3

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items List (CIL) are presented. This report contains IOA assessment workshets showing resolution of outstanding IOA CIL issues that were summarized in the IOA FMEA/CIL Assessment Interim Report, dated 9 March 1988. Each assessment worksheet has been updated with CIL issue rsolution and rationale. Volume 3 contains the worksheets for the Reaction Control Subsystem and the Communications and Tracking Subsystem.

Source record↗

System safety as applied to Skylab

Procedural and organizational guidelines used in accordance with NASA safety policy for the Skylab missions are outlined. The basic areas examined in the safety program for Skylab were the crew interface, extra-vehicular activity (EVA), energy sources, spacecraft interface, and hardware complexity. Fire prevention was a primary goal, with firefighting as backup. Studies of the vectorcardiogram and sleep monitoring experiments exemplify special efforts to prevent fire and shock. The final fire control study included material review, fire detection capability, and fire extinguishing capability. Contractors had major responsibility for system safety. Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and equipment criticality categories are outlined. Redundancy was provided on systems that were critical to crew survival (category I). The five key checkpoints in Skylab hardware development are explained. Skylab rescue capability was demonstrated by preparations to rescue the Skylab 3 crew after their spacecraft developed attitude control problems.

Kleinknecht, K. S.↗

An Independent Evaluation of the FMEA/CIL Hazard Analysis Alternative Study

The present instruments of safety and reliability risk control for a majority of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) programs/projects consist of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA), Hazard Analysis (HA), Critical Items List (CIL), and Hazard Report (HR). This extensive analytical approach was introduced in the early 1970's and was implemented for the Space Shuttle Program by NHB 5300.4 (1D-2. Since the Challenger accident in 1986, the process has been expanded considerably and resulted in introduction of similar and/or duplicated activities in the safety/reliability risk analysis. A study initiated in 1995, to search for an alternative to the current FMEA/CIL Hazard Analysis methodology generated a proposed method on April 30, 1996. The objective of this Summer Faculty Study was to participate in and conduct an independent evaluation of the proposed alternative to simplify the present safety and reliability risk control procedure.

Ray, Paul S.↗

Bio-project “derisking” through development of systematic methodologies and frameworks for risk assessment

One of the primary hindrances to producing a viable, sustainable domestic biomass industry for renewable biofuels, bio-products and bio-power is the lack of understanding and quantification of the risks associated with both the biomass supply chain and preprocessing and conversion technologies. Currently a consistent method for assessing, comparing, and quantifying risks in biomass supply chains does not exist, creating a major investment barrier to bioenergy projects in the U.S. The lack of a standardized approach has resulted in bioenergy stakeholders independently using inconsistent approaches and evaluation criteria, leading to unreliable and incomparable assessments of risks and financing barriers to bio-project development. Along with the challenges of inconsistent risk assessment for supply chain risk, technology specific risks based on variability in biomass properties are not fully understood and can pose significant unforeseen challenges for bioenergy projects. In many cases these properties have not yet been identified and the impacts on the proposed technology and products unquantified. This is particularly challenging for emerging preprocessing and conversion technologies. Without a firm understanding of the preprocessing/conversion technology-specific critical properties, the risk of a proposed bio-project cannot be fully evaluated. To address inconsistent risk evaluation in the biomass supply chain supporting project financing, a Biomass Supply Chain Risk Standards (BSCRS) framework was developed. The BSCRS framework includes a comprehensive list of known and perceived risks (Risk Indicators) to the supply chain developed through 100’s of interviews with bioenergy industry experts spanning from feedstock growers and suppliers to representatives from the financial sector. These risks have been organized into a manageable hierarchy of Risk Categories and Risk Factors that can be practically assessed. This BSCRS framework also provides mitigation strategies for multiple Risk Indicators from best available industry practices and research findings. Additionally, a risk quantification methodology for each Risk Factor, Risk Category, and the bio-project as a whole was developed to enable capital markets to assess feedstock risk more efficiently and more accurately. Multiple case studies representing existing bio-projects have been used to evaluate and verify the BSCRS framework and scoring methodology. To address technological risk along with the supply chain risk captured in the developed BSCRS framework, this work also focuses on development of a systematic criticality assessment tool using well-accepted, quantitative risk analysis methods to evaluate bioenergy feedstock critical properties impacting system unit operations. The proposed Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) approach uses a team of subject area experts (SAEs) for each targeted unit operation within a system. Collectively, the team will develop and use a quantitative scoring system to assess the material attributes, process parameters, and quality attributes for key unit operations that have already been identified. The FMEA process generates Risk Priority Numbers (RPNs) for the various failures and predominant causes for each material/process unit/product combination resulting in a semi-quantitative, standardized methodology for assessing technological risk and biomass properties contributing to that risk.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Analyzing Potential Failures and Effects in a Pilot-Scale Biomass Preprocessing Facility for Improved Reliability

This study demonstrates a failure identification methodology applied to a preprocessing facility generating conversion-ready feedstocks from biomass meeting conversion process critical quality attribute (CQA) specifications. Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) was used as an industrially relevant risk analysis approach to evaluate a logging residue preprocessing system to prepare feedstock for pyrolysis conversion. Risk evaluations considered both system-level and operation unit-level assessments considering process efficiency, product quality, cost, sustainability, and safety. Key outputs included estimations of semi-quantitative risk scores for each failure, identification of the failure impacts, identification of failure causes associated with material attributes and process parameters, ranking success rates of failure detection methods, and speculation of potential mitigation strategies for decreasing failure risk scores. Results showed that deviations from moisture specifications had cascading consequences for other CQAs along with process safety implications. Failures linked to fixed carbon specifications carried the highest risk scores for product quality and process efficiency impacts. As increased throughput can be inversely related to meeting product quality specifications; achieving throughput and other material-based CQAs simultaneously will likely require system optimization or prioritization based on system economics. Ultimately, this work successfully demonstrates FMEA as a risk analysis approach for other bioenergy process systems.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis for a Photovoltaic Inverter

While PV panel reliability continues to increase, PV inverters become the limiting factor for PV system reliability. Consequently, it is critical to have a generic tool from a third party for PV inverter reliability assessment to help 1) utilities/PV farm operators schedule maintenance in advance, and 2) inverter developers improve the next-generation design. However, these two things cannot be accomplished without first understanding the reasons behind inverter failure. Following this idea, as the first step, it is essential to identify and investigate the most failure-prone components within a PV inverter system. After all, any system is only as reliable as the components that are contained within it. This motivates the failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) work presented for this workshop. The FMEA is conducted as follows: first, the overview of the methodology on the development of the FMEA is presented; then, based on a top-down approach starting from the PV inverter system, critical inverter components with high failure rates are identified and summarized; afterward, a thorough FMEA study at a component-level is performed and its results, including failure modes, failure mechanisms, and critical stressors, are tabulated; finally, according to three rankings (chance of occurrence, severity of occurrence, and ease of detection prior to failure) for each failure mechanism provided by the FMEA, risk priority numbers are calculated and the failure mechanisms along with the critical stressors are ranked in terms of their potentially detrimental effect on the PV inverter.

Brown, Buck↗

Service Life Extension of the Propulsion System of Long-Term Manned Orbital Stations

One of the critical non-replaceable systems of a long-term manned orbital station is the propulsion system. Since the propulsion system operates beginning with the launch of station elements into orbit, its service life determines the service life of the station overall. Weighing almost a million pounds, the International Space Station (ISS) is about four times as large as the Russian space station Mir and about five times as large as the U.S. Skylab. Constructed over a span of more than a decade with the help of over 100 space flights, elements and modules of the ISS provide more research space than any spacecraft ever built. Originally envisaged for a service life of fifteen years, this Earth orbiting laboratory has been in orbit since 1998. Some elements that have been launched later in the assembly sequence were not yet built when the first elements were placed in orbit. Hence, some of the early modules that were launched at the inception of the program were already nearing the end of their design life when the ISS was finally ready and operational. To maximize the return on global investments on ISS, it is essential for the valuable research on ISS to continue as long as the station can be sustained safely in orbit. This paper describes the work performed to extend the service life of the ISS propulsion system. A system comprises of many components with varying failure rates. Reliability of a system is the probability that it will perform its intended function under encountered operating conditions, for a specified period of time. As we are interested in finding out how reliable a system would be in the future, reliability expressed as a function of time provides valuable insight. In a hypothetical bathtub shaped failure rate curve, the failure rate, defined as the number of failures per unit time that a currently healthy component will suffer in a given future time interval, decreases during infant-mortality period, stays nearly constant during the service life and increases at the end when the design service life ends and wear-out phase begins. However, the component failure rates do not remain constant over the entire cycle life. The failure rate depends on various factors such as design complexity, current age of the component, operating conditions, severity of environmental stress factors, etc. Development, qualification and acceptance test processes provide rigorous screening of components to weed out imperfections that might otherwise cause infant mortality failures. If sufficient samples are tested to failure, the failure time versus failure quantity can be analyzed statistically to develop a failure probability distribution function (PDF), a statistical model of the probability of failure versus time. Driven by cost and schedule constraints however, spacecraft components are generally not tested in large numbers. Uncertainties in failure rate and remaining life estimates increase when fewer units are tested. To account for this, spacecraft operators prefer to limit useful operations to a period shorter than the maximum demonstrated service life of the weakest component. Running each component to its failure to determine the maximum possible service life of a system can become overly expensive and impractical. Spacecraft operators therefore, specify the required service life and an acceptable factor of safety (FOS). The designers use these requirements to limit the life test duration. Midway through the design life, when benefits justify additional investments, supplementary life test may be performed to demonstrate the capability to safely extend the service life of the system. An innovative approach is required to evaluate the entire system, without having to go through an elaborate test program of propulsion system elements. Evaluating every component through a brute force test program would be a cost prohibitive and time consuming endeavor. ISS propulsion system components were designed and built decades ago. There are no representative ground test articles for some of the components. A 'test everything' approach would require manufacturing new test articles. The paper outlines some of the techniques used for selective testing, by way of cherry picking candidate components based on failure mode effects analysis, system level impacts, hazard analysis, etc. The type of testing required for extending the service life depends on the design and criticality of the component, failure modes and failure mechanisms, life cycle margin provided by the original certification, operational and environmental stresses encountered, etc. When specific failure mechanism being considered and the underlying relationship of that mode to the stresses provided in the test can be correlated by supporting analysis, time and effort required for conducting life extension testing can be significantly reduced. Exposure to corrosive propellants over long periods of time, for instance, lead to specific failure mechanisms in several components used in the propulsion system. Using Arrhenius model, which is tied to chemically dependent failure mechanisms such as corrosion or chemical reactions, it is possible to subject carefully selected test articles to accelerated life test. Arrhenius model reflects the proportional relationship between time to failure of a component and the exponential of the inverse of absolute temperature acting on the component. The acceleration factor is used to perform tests at higher stresses that allow direct correlation between the times to failure at a high test temperature to the temperatures to be expected in actual use. As long as the temperatures are such that new failure mechanisms are not introduced, this becomes a very useful method for testing to failure a relatively small sample of items for a much shorter amount of time. In this article, based on the example of the propulsion system of the first ISS module Zarya, theoretical approaches and practical activities of extending the service life of the propulsion system are reviewed with the goal of determining the maximum duration of its safe operation.

Kamath, Ulhas↗

General Failure Modes and Effects Analysis for Accelerator and Detector Magnet Design at JLab

The aim of this article is to develop a risk management procedure, which could be applied to the magnet design process, for both superconducting and normal magnets at the Jefferson Laboratory (JLab). This procedure allowed us to identify the key risks at each of the critical phases of design and propose procedures, tests, and checks to mitigate each risk. In this article, we present a qualitative and quantitative risk management procedure commonly referred to a “failure modes and effects analysis.” As part of this procedure, we calculated a risk priority number (RPN) for each activity of the process, identified the most critical activities and proposed mitigation activities, which in turn resulted in a revised RPN. Additionally, another benefit of this procedure was the identification of appropriate “control and hold” points within the design process, which allowed one to review and approve a particular outcome before proceeding to the next sequential activity.

75 CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS, SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND↗

New method for critical failure prediction of complex systems

Rigorous analytical technique, called criticality determination methodology /or CD technique/ determines the probability that a given complex system will successfully achieve stated objectives. The CD technique identifies critical elements of the system by a failure mode and effects analysis.

Cox, C. T.↗

Failure Modes and Effects Analysis of Biorefinery Pathways

This talk provides an overview of failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) development and implementation as a systematic criticality and risk assessment tool for biorefinery pathways within the FCIC. This supports a quality by design (QbD) approach, and this talk provides a high-level overview of the results for the FMEA evaluation focused on the generation of pine residue materials for high-temperature pyrolysis conversion. the FMEA interviews included two approaches. The first approach was based around the entire system of unit operations giving a wholistic system level view. The second approach used detailed interviews from individual unit operation within the system allowing for specific failures for individual system components. These two approaches provide different resolutions of information about the reliability and risk. The FMEA results focused on failures associated with meeting critical quality attributes (CQAs) identified for the high temperature conversion of loblolly pine residues and were supplemented with experimental data supporting process upsets and reliability also collected within the consortium. Estimations of risk scores for meeting each given CQA specification, identification of the impacts for not meeting a CQA specification, capturing causes associated with material attributes and process parameters for each failure, identification of current detection methods, and speculation of potential mitigation strategies for decreasing a failure’s risk score were gathered through the FMEA interviews, and were combined to understand the overall process risk metrics and where technology, process, and knowledge improvements are needed in order to de-risk emerging biorefineries.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Feedstock-Conversion Interface Consortium: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Summary Report (FY2022)

This report provides an overview of the development of failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) and its implementation as a systematic criticality and risk assessment tool supporting a quality by design (QbD) approach for FCIC research. This report also provides a high-level overview of the results for the FMEA evaluation of two feedstock preprocessing system configurations: (1) generation of pine residue materials for high-temperature pyrolysis conversion and (2) generation of corn stover materials for low-temperature conversion using deacetylation and disc mechanical refining pretreatment for fermentation to hydrocarbons. For the results presented in this report, our FMEA interviews included two approaches. The first approach was to perform FMEA interviews for the entire system of unit operations giving a wholistic system level view. The second approach consisted of detailed interviews for each individual unit operation within the system allowing for a “deep dive” into the specific failures for the individual components within the configuration. These two approaches provide different resolutions of information. The FMEA results of this report were focused on failures associated with meeting critical quality attributes (CQAs) identified for the target conversion processes for each processed feedstock type. The information gathered through the FMEA interviews include estimations of risk scores for meeting each given CQA specification, identification of the impacts for not meeting a CQA specification, capturing causes associated with material attributes and process parameters for each failure, identification of current detection methods, and speculation of potential mitigation strategies for decreasing a failure’s risk score. The complete results of all FMEA interviews are provided in the Appendices of this report.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis Summary Report

This report provides an overview of the development of failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) and its implementation as a systematic criticality and risk assessment tool supporting a quality by design (QbD) approach for FCIC research. This report also provides a high-level overview of the results for the FMEA evaluation of two feedstock preprocessing system configurations: (1) generation of pine residue materials for high-temperature pyrolysis conversion and (2) generation of corn stover materials for low-temperature conversion using deacetylation and disc mechanical refining pretreatment for fermentation to hydrocarbons. For the results presented in this report, our FMEA interviews included two approaches. The first approach was to perform FMEA interviews for the entire system of unit operations giving a wholistic system level view. The second approach consisted of detailed interviews for each individual unit operation within the system allowing for a “deep dive” into the specific failures for the individual components within the configuration. These two approaches provide different resolutions of information. The FMEA results of this report were focused on failures associated with meeting critical quality attributes (CQAs) identified for the target conversion processes for each processed feedstock type. The information gathered through the FMEA interviews include estimations of risk scores for meeting each given CQA specification, identification of the impacts for not meeting a CQA specification, capturing causes associated with material attributes and process parameters for each failure, identification of current detection methods, and speculation of potential mitigation strategies for decreasing a failure’s risk score. The complete results of all FMEA interviews are provided in the Appendices of this report.

conversion↗

Initial Criticality Assessments to Guide FMEAs on Rocket Engine Hot Fire Testing

Presented is an explanation of the use of the Initial Criticality Assessment (ICA) technique, a triage process for prioritizing required Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEAs), for the European Service Module's main propulsion system's hot-fire test bed at White Sands New Mexico. Rather than instinctively performing many FMEAs of subsystems, or one large system level FMEA where every subcomponent is analyzed, the ICA guided an informed analysis of only the hardware that had a large impact to hazards. The low criticality hardware was documented via the ICA and no FMEA was performed; the work could then focus on the high criticality hardware. Thus a savings of Program resources was achieved. The experiences gained in creating these ICAs for this international collaborative project confirmed that the need for continuous communication across the technical teams is one of the greatest areas of emphasis. The European Space Agency (ESA) is developing the European Service Module (ESM), with its primary contractor, Airbus Defence and Space in Germany, for delivery to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The module will be equipped with a total of 21 engines to support NASA’s Orion spacecraft: one U.S. Space Shuttle Orbital Maneuvering System-Engine (OMS-E), eight auxiliary thrusters and 12 smaller RCS (Reaction Control System) thrusters. The main ESM propulsion system, used for large translational maneuvers, consists of one OMS-E... To qualify the design of the ESM propulsion subsystem (PSS) an all-steel Propulsion Qualification Module (PQM) structure is used to test the propulsion systems on Orion, including “hot firing” of the OMS engine, thrusters, and RCS. The PQM has been developed as a hot-fire test bed to be tested at the NASA White Sands Test Facility (WSTF). One of the objectives of the testing is to assure that the OMS-E can be safely operated with the PQM. Testing will also demonstrate that the PQM can set the proper upstream pressures and temperatures for the OMS-E to operate nominally given the PQM has never been tested in hot-fire operation with OMS-E before. In order to safely conduct the test campaign, hardware such as the engine subassembly, fluid feed lines, valves, electrical power lines, instrumentation, stiff links, installation Ground Support Equipment (GSE), and diffuser [whose objectives are to collect the exhaust of the OMS-E to actively cool down the exhaust gases, reduce thermal exchanges, and create a vacuum at OMS-E level before igniting], had to be analyzed for any hazards and failure modes.

Fault Tolerance↗

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the DPS subsystem

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis/Critical Items List (FMEA/CIL) is presented. The IOA approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to independently determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. The independent analysis results corresponding to the Orbiter Data Processing System (DPS) hardware are documented. The DPS hardware is required for performing critical functions of data acquisition, data manipulation, data display, and data transfer throughout the Orbiter. Specifically, the DPS hardware consists of the following components: Multiplexer/Demultiplexer (MDM); General Purpose Computer (GPC); Multifunction CRT Display System (MCDS); Data Buses and Data Bus Couplers (DBC); Data Bus Isolation Amplifiers (DBIA); Mass Memory Unit (MMU); and Engine Interface Unit (EIU). The IOA analysis process utilized available DPS hardware drawings and schematics for defining hardware assemblies, components, and hardware items. Each level of hardware was evaluated and analyzed for possible failure modes and effects. Criticality was assigned based upon the severity of the effect for each failure mode. Due to the extensive redundancy built into the DPS the number of critical items are few. Those identified resulted from premature operation and erroneous output of the GPCs.

Lowery, H. J.↗

Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA): Analysis of the atmospheric revitalization pressure control subsystem

The results of the Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis/Critical Items List (FMEA/CIL) are presented. The IOA approach features a top-down analysis of the hardware to determine failure modes, criticality, and potential critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was accomplished without reliance upon the results contained within the NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The independent analysis results corresponding to the Orbiter Atmospheric Revitalization and Pressure Control Subsystem (ARPCS) are documented. The ARPCS hardware was categorized into the following subdivisions: (1) Atmospheric Make-up and Control (including the Auxiliary Oxygen Assembly, Oxygen Assembly, and Nitrogen Assembly); and (2) Atmospheric Vent and Control (including the Positive Relief Vent Assembly, Negative Relief Vent Assembly, and Cabin Vent Assembly). The IOA analysis process utilized available ARPCS hardware drawings and schematics for defining hardware assemblies, components, and hardware items. Each level of hardware was evaluated and analyzed for possible failure modes and effects. Criticality was assigned based upon the severity of the effect for each failure mode.

Saiidi, M. J.↗