SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Human systems PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment: a) Provides quantitative measures of probability, consequence, and uncertainty; and b) Communicates risk and informs decision-making. Human health risks rated highest in ISS PRA are based on 1997 assessment of clinical events in analog operational settings. Much work remains to analyze remaining human health risks identified in Bioastronautics Roadmap.
NASA Engineering requested a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to compare the difference in the risk of Loss of Crew (LOC) and Loss of Mission (LOM) between different designs of a fluid assembly. They were concerned that the configuration favored by the design team was more susceptible to leakage than a second proposed design, but realized that a quantitative analysis to compare the risks between the two designs might strengthen their argument. The analysis showed that while the second design did help improve the probability of LOC, it did not help from a probability of LOM perspective. This drove the analysis team to propose a minor design change that would drive the probability of LOM down considerably. The analysis also demonstrated that there was another major risk driver that was not immediately obvious from a typical engineering study of the design and was therefore unexpected. None of the proposed alternatives were addressing this risk. This type of trade study demonstrates the importance of performing a PRA in order to completely understand a system's design. It allows managers to use risk as another one of the commodities (e.g., mass, cost, schedule, fault tolerance) that can be traded early in the design of a new system.
Risk assessment is an important part of many NASA activities. In August 2019, the White House issued NSPM-20, which defines acceptable levels of risk for nuclear launches, but does not prescribe the particular methodologies or metrics that are to be used for comparison to the defined acceptance criteria. There are a variety of metrics that are possible and can be readily generated by a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA). This paper will explore alternative metrics that can be provided, along with some discussion of their characteristics and important factors to consider during a space fission reactor risk analysis.
NASA has a world-class capability for quantitatively assessing the risk of highly-complex, isolated engineering structures operated in extremely hostile environments. In particular, the International Space Station (ISS) represents a reasonable risk analog for High Pressure, High Temperature drilling and production operations on deepwater rigs. Through a long-term U.S. Government Interagency Agreement, BSEE has partnered with NASA to modify NASA's Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) capabilities for application to deepwater drilling and production operations. The immediate focus of the activity will be to modify NASA PRA Procedure Guides and Methodology Documents to make them applicable to the Oil &Gas Industry. The next step will be for NASA to produce a PRA for a critical drilling system component, such as a Blowout Preventer (BOP). Subsequent activities will be for NASA and industry partners to jointly develop increasingly complex PRA's that analyze other critical drilling and production system components, including both hardware and human reliability. In the presentation, NASA will provide the objectives, schedule, and current status of its PRA activities for BSEE. Additionally, NASA has a Space Act Agreement with Anadarko Petroleum Corporation to develop a PRA for a generic 20K BOP. NASA will summarize some of the preliminary insights gained to date from that 20K BOP PRA as an example of the distinction between quantitative versus qualitative risk assessment.
The INTEGRITY Program will design and operate a test bed facility to help prepare for future beyond-LEO missions. The purpose of INTEGRITY is to enable future missions by developing, testing, and demonstrating advanced human space systems. INTEGRITY will also implement and validate advanced management techniques including risk analysis and mitigation. One important way INTEGRITY will help enable future missions is by reducing their risk. A risk analysis of human space missions is important in defining the steps that INTEGRITY should take to mitigate risk. This paper describes how a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) of human space missions will help support the planning and development of INTEGRITY to maximize its benefits to future missions. PRA is a systematic methodology to decompose the system into subsystems and components, to quantify the failure risk as a function of the design elements and their corresponding probability of failure. PRA provides a quantitative estimate of the probability of failure of the system, including an assessment and display of the degree of uncertainty surrounding the probability. PRA provides a basis for understanding the impacts of decisions that affect safety, reliability, performance, and cost. Risks with both high probability and high impact are identified as top priority. The PRA of human missions beyond Earth orbit will help indicate how the risk of future human space missions can be reduced by integrating and testing systems in INTEGRITY.
The Human Research Program's next generation risk model, the Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT), provides researchers with estimates of astronaut medical and health risk. MEDPRATs Susceptibility Inference Network (SIN) facilitates the dynamic component of this tool. The SIN provides MEDPRAT with a "memory" that allows the system to use knowledge of what simulation events have occurred to alter the representative probability that future simulation events will occur during a given trial. The SIN allows for the medical events being simulated to be related to, and influence the likelihood of one another, providing a more robust risk estimate. We present initial work of our efforts to mathematically quantify and represent these dependent relationships between medical events.
A probabilistic method is used to evaluate the structural reliability and risk of select metallic and composite structures. The method is a multiscale, multifunctional and it is based on the most elemental level. A multifactor interaction model is used to describe the material properties which are subsequently evaluated probabilistically. The metallic structure is a two rotor aircraft engine, while the composite structures consist of laminated plies (multiscale) and the properties of each ply are the multifunctional representation. The structural component is modeled by finite element. The solution method for structural responses is obtained by an updated simulation scheme. The results show that the risk for the two rotor engine is about 0.0001 and the composite built-up structure is also 0.0001.
A probabilistic method is used to evaluate the structural reliability and risk of select metallic and composite structures. The method is a multiscale, multifunctional and it is based on the most elemental level. A multi-factor interaction model is used to describe the material properties which are subsequently evaluated probabilistically. The metallic structure is a two rotor aircraft engine, while the composite structures consist of laminated plies (multiscale) and the properties of each ply are the multifunctional representation. The structural component is modeled by finite element. The solution method for structural responses is obtained by an updated simulation scheme. The results show that the risk for the two rotor engine is about 0.0001 and the composite built-up structure is also 0.0001.
Mission planners, systems engineers, and clinicians that support crew health and performance face very difficult choices on upcoming exploration missions. Given that there will be a heavily constrained mass and volume allocation for a medical system on these missions, what medical capability should be manifested to minimize both medical risk and mission risk? Given that not all promising research and technology proposals can be funded, how can proposals be prioritized so that those funded research investments produce the maximum benefit in reducing overall medical risk? The Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces (IMPACT) project seeks to answer these kinds of questions and others to support upcoming exploration missions. IMPACT enables risk-informed and evidence-based trade space analysis for future space vehicles, missions, and systems. This presentation will discuss the long-term HRP and ExMC vision for the larger ecosystem of tools, which include an updated medical database (consisting of an Evidence Library for medical conditions and a medical item database (MedID) for medical resources), dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) capabilities, System Modeling Language (SysML) models, and contextual data visualizations of output data. IMPACT is the result of a multi-center collaborative effort. The trade space analyses performed by IMPACT can directly inform mission, vehicle, and habitat development by quantifying medical risk, given a design reference mission, crew attributes and a set of medical capabilities. This presentation will update the audience on the development status of the tool suite, its constituent parts and the plans for when it will deploy as an operational product, currently scheduled for the end of FY22. Recent development successes on the IMPACT project include the ability to cluster medical resources into medical capabilities and mutually-dependent bundles, the ability to perform trade analyses on different medical sets, different DRMs, and different crew complements, and the ability to specify mission segments as periods of time assigned to one or more members of the crew during which unique mission events occur (e.g., extravehicular activities, surface operations, gravity well adaptations, etc.). IMPACT is gearing up for its verification and validation phase to compile the data package necessary for a successful Transition to Operations (TtO), per the guidance in NPR 8900.1B .
Enceladus, a moon of Saturn, has geyser-like jets that spray plumes of material into orbit. These jets could enable a free-flying spacecraft to collect samples and return them to Earth for study to determine if they contain the building blocks of life. The Office of Planetary Protection at NASA requires containment of any unsterilized samples and prohibits destructive impact of the spacecraft upon return to Earth, with a sample release probability of less than 1 in 1,000,000 as a recommended goal. This paper describes a probabilistic risk assessment model that uses dynamic simulation techniques to capture the physics-based, time- and state-dependent interactions between the sample return system and the environment, which drive the risk of sample release. The dynamic approach uses a Monte Carlo-style simulation to integrate the many phases and sources of risk for a sample return mission. The model is used to assess the achievability of the planetary protection reliability goal. This is accomplished by performing sensitivity studies assessing the impact of modeling assumptions to identify where uncertainties drive the risk. These results, in turn, are used to examine the feasibility of meeting key design and performance parameters that are needed to achieve the reliability goal for a given architecture with existing technologies.
Various NASA Langley Research Center and other center projects were attempted for analysis to obtain historical data comparing pre-phase A study and the final outcome for each project. This attempt, however, was abandoned once it became clear that very little documentation was available. Next, extensive literature search was conducted on the role of risk and reliability concepts in project management. Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) techniques are being used with increasing regularity both in and outside of NASA. The value and the usage of PRA techniques were reviewed for large projects. It was found that both civilian and military branches of the space industry have traditionally refrained from using PRA, which was developed and expanded by nuclear industry. Although much has changed with the end of the cold war and the Challenger disaster, it was found that ingrained anti-PRA culture is hard to stop. Examples of skepticism against the use of risk management and assessment techniques were found both in the literature and in conversations with some technical staff. Program and project managers need to be convinced that the applicability and use of risk management and risk assessment techniques is much broader than just in the traditional safety-related areas of application. The time has come to begin to uniformly apply these techniques. The whole idea of risk-based system can maximize the 'return on investment' that the public demands. Also, it would be very useful if all project documents of NASA Langley Research Center, pre-phase A through final report, are carefully stored in a central repository preferably in electronic format.
Understanding the early mission risk and progression of risk as a vehicle gains insights through flight is important: . a) To the Shuttle Program to understand the impact of re-designs and operational changes on risk. . b) To new programs to understand reliability growth and first flight risk. . Estimation of Shuttle Risk Progression by flight: . a) Uses Shuttle Probabilistic Risk Assessment (SPRA) and current knowledge to calculate early vehicle risk. . b) Shows impact of major Shuttle upgrades. . c) Can be used to understand first flight risk for new programs.
One approach to quantifying spaceflight risk at NASA makes use event driven probabilistic techniques. The Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT) is such a tool that estimates medical risk metrics via simulation and enables optimization of medical resources subject to mission constraints [1]. Previous analyses have informed medical set composition, exercise countermeasures, and water intake, where each analysis quantifies the risk associated with proposed variations in system design. As future mission profiles extend beyond Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) and lengthen in duration, understanding these risks and contributing factors is critical. MEDPRAT employs Monte Carlo sampling techniques to simulate missions and track the occurrence of medical events. These events follow fault-tree-like progressions through levels of severity and mitigation via medical treatment to many possible outcomes and these are reported throughout the mission. Making this possible, are the medical databases that contain evidence gathered by the Human Research Program (HRP). Quantifying the impact of uncertainty or variability in the input data is an important step in evaluating the credibility of modeling and simulation results. In this work, we investigate the sensitivity of medical risk metrics with respect to the condition incidence parameters within the Evidence Library (EL) [2] as the medical database input for MEDPRAT. The medical conditions, contained in the EL, are equipped with incidence rates that describe the likelihood that the condition will occur. These incidence rates reflect historical spaceflight data or when appropriate, terrestrial data. In this presentation, we will explore how uncertainty in these rates propagate to the medical risk described by MEDPRAT. These results identify the conditions and parameters with the largest contribution to medical risks.
An effort is underway to establish a Crew Health and Performance system (CHP) tradespace tool using a Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling and simulation system. The goal of the CHP-PRA effort is to provide a means of quantifying the integrated influence of CHP functions and capabilities on risk outcome metrics associated with health, performance, and long-term health. These metrics can then be used to establish potential risk-based trades on CHP system designed functionality and capabilities. Previously, our team demonstrated a proof-of-concept PRA approach that estimated the integrated influence of exercise countermeasures on 8 human system risks (Figure 1a) with outcomes associated with health and medical risk metrics. We reported that the change in the integrated relative health risk was small (Figure 1b) and that the small change in overall risk resulted from compounding and competing contribution levels of the individual risks. This interesting observation illustrates the emergent complexity of even straightforward representations of the human health and performance risk space and the ability of PRA models to capture this balance of global risk concerns. A key question that is not addressed in the initial analysis is “even though the global risk is relatively nominal, do any of the local risks become unacceptable?” In essence, we seek to determine what relative change in the human system risks are contributing to the relatively muted sensitivity of the proof-of-concept model combined risk assessments. Evaluations at the component risk level should elucidate if any individual risk reaches a high level that is subsequentially balanced by reductions in other areas. To further understand the relative changes in the component risks in the proof-of-concept model, and to elucidate how future refinements can be targeted, a means of establishing the contributions of the robustness of the proof-of-concept approach will be demonstrated.
ObjectiveDevelop an evidence-based, probabilistic risk forecasting model that can help guide mission planning, requirements development, and align science with engineering technology development.
This slide presentation reviews risk assessment and its role in risk-informed decision making. It includes information on probabilistic risk assessment, typical risk management process, origins of risk matrix, performance measures, performance objectives and Bayes theorem.
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).
Once a project obtains approval, decision makers have to consider a variety of alternative paths for completing the project and meeting the project objectives. How decisions are made involves a variety of elements including: cost, experience, current technology, ideologies, politics, future needs and desires, capabilities, manpower, timing, available information, and for many ventures management needs to assess the elements of risk versus reward. The use of high level Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Models during conceptual design phases provides management with additional information during the decision making process regarding the risk potential for proposed operations and design prototypes. The methodology can be used as a tool to: 1) allow trade studies to compare alternatives based on risk, 2) determine which elements (equipment, process or operational parameters) drives the risk, and 3) provide information to mitigate or eliminate risks early in the conceptual design to lower costs. Creating system models using conceptual design proposals and generic key systems based on what is known today can provide an understanding of the magnitudes of proposed systems and operational risks and facilitates trade study comparisons early in the decision making process. Identifying the "best" way to achieve the desired results is difficult, and generally occurs based on limited information. PRA provides a tool for decision makers to explore how some decisions will affect risk before the project is committed to that path, which can ultimately save time and money.