Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Risk Assessment Tool”

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 145 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Architecture for Integrated Medical Model Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is a modeling tool used to predict potential outcomes of a complex system based on a statistical understanding of many initiating events. Utilizing a Monte Carlo method, thousands of instances of the model are considered and outcomes are collected. PRA is considered static, utilizing probabilities alone to calculate outcomes. Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment (dPRA) is an advanced concept where modeling predicts the outcomes of a complex system based not only on the probabilities of many initiating events, but also on a progression of dependencies brought about by progressing down a time line. Events are placed in a single time line, adding each event to a queue, as managed by a planner. Progression down the time line is guided by rules, as managed by a scheduler. The recently developed Integrated Medical Model (IMM) summarizes astronaut health as governed by the probabilities of medical events and mitigation strategies. Managing the software architecture process provides a systematic means of creating, documenting, and communicating a software design early in the development process. The software architecture process begins with establishing requirements and the design is then derived from the requirements.

Probability Theory↗
NASA NTRS2011

Risk Acceptance Personality Paradigm: How We View What We Don't Know We Don't Know

The purpose of integrated hazard analyses, probabilistic risk assessments, failure modes and effects analyses, fault trees and many other similar tools is to give managers of a program some idea of the risks associated with their program. All risk tools establish a set of undesired events and then try to evaluate the risk to the program by assessing the severity of the undesired event and the likelihood of that event occurring. Some tools provide qualitative results, some provide quantitative results and some do both. However, in the end the program manager and his/her team must decide which risks are acceptable and which are not. Even with a wide array of analysis tools available, risk acceptance is often a controversial and difficult decision making process. And yet, today's space exploration programs are moving toward more risk based design approaches. Thus, risk identification and good risk assessment is becoming even more vital to the engineering development process. This paper explores how known and unknown information influences risk-based decisions by looking at how the various parts of our personalities are affected by what they know and what they don't know. This paper then offers some criteria for consideration when making risk-based decisions.

Massie, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Bayesian Inference for NASA Probabilistic Risk and Reliability Analysis

This document, Bayesian Inference for NASA Probabilistic Risk and Reliability Analysis, is intended to provide guidelines for the collection and evaluation of risk and reliability-related data. It is aimed at scientists and engineers familiar with risk and reliability methods and provides a hands-on approach to the investigation and application of a variety of risk and reliability data assessment methods, tools, and techniques. This document provides both: A broad perspective on data analysis collection and evaluation issues. A narrow focus on the methods to implement a comprehensive information repository. The topics addressed herein cover the fundamentals of how data and information are to be used in risk and reliability analysis models and their potential role in decision making. Understanding these topics is essential to attaining a risk informed decision making environment that is being sought by NASA requirements and procedures such as 8000.4 (Agency Risk Management Procedural Requirements), NPR 8705.05 (Probabilistic Risk Assessment Procedures for NASA Programs and Projects), and the System Safety requirements of NPR 8715.3 (NASA General Safety Program Requirements).

Dezfuli, Homayoon↗
NASA NTRS2024

Quantifying Risk to Improve Medical System Design for Long Duration Artemis Missions: A Demonstration of NASA's IMPACT Tradespace Analysis Tool

BACKGROUND NASA’s human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in-mission medical care. A greater distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and constraints on the evacuation of ill or injured crew. Mass, volume, and power will be limited while higher demands will be placed on the crews to manage medical events. NASA’s Moon to Mars exploration strategy outlines increasingly complex Artemis missions both in terms of duration and operations. In these more challenging deep space missions, it is important to quantitatively estimate the human system risk attributable to medical conditions and use these estimates to advance medical system design. METHODS IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) and tradespace analysis tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design. IMPACT v1.0 includes a novel evidence library baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; a large increase in the number of medical resources and the flexibility of their use; and the ability for rapid and iterative analysis. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life, consideration of the need for return to definitive care (medical evacuation), and an estimate of crew time affected due to medical conditions. A notional long duration lunar orbit and lunar surface design reference mission (DRM) was chosen with a 4-astronaut crew to mimic a foundational exploration Artemis mission. The DRM profile includes outbound transit on Orion, Gateway space station rendezvous in lunar orbit, 6 months on the Lunar surface with extravehicular activity (EVA), return rendezvous with Gateway, and transit back to Earth. RESULTS/DISCUSSION: Overall, IMPACT successfully quantified medical risk and derived an optimal medical system to support crew on a long duration lunar mission. In this DRM, the calculated loss of crew life from a medical event was 0.008 events per mission, risk of potential need for evacuation was 0.30 events per mission, and cumulative crew time affected by medical conditions was 103 days. The medical conditions that most contributed to medical risk were decompression sickness, trauma, and respiratory failure. The conditions that had the largest effects on crew performance included musculoskeletal injuries and lunar dust exposure. The IMPACT-generated medical system included resources that target the most common and highest risk conditions and performed as expected. This demonstrates the value of the IMPACT tool in medical system design for human exploration spaceflight missions.

Arian Anderson↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Selection of Next Priority IMPACT Medical Conditions Based on Available Terrestrial and Spaceflight Data

BACKGROUND: As the era of exploration class missions begins, identification of medical conditions that may occur and require management becomes essential for the modeling of medical risk. To this end, NASA has developed IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces), a suite of tools to assist in assessment of medical risk analysis. It has incorporated an initial list of the 120 conditions of highest concern, labeled the IMPACT condition list 1.0 (ICL 1.0). This abstract describes a method for prioritizing the 92 conditions included on the Proposed Future Conditions List (PFCL) for inclusion in future iterations of the ICL. OVERVIEW: To construct the Prioritized Proposed Future Conditions List (P-PFCL), each condition on the PFCL was scored as “low,” “medium,” or “high” on each of four variables: incidence, likelihood of significant task impairment, diagnostic and treatment complexity, and treatment futility. Qualitative assessment using clinical judgement was utilized to score complexity, futility, and likelihood of impairment. Incidence was assessed quantitatively using spaceflight data and/or analog populations where available then assigned a score using established cutoffs. Logarithmic numerical values were assigned to each category label. A Prioritization Score was generated for each condition by taking the product of incidence and likelihood of task impairment (risk) divided by the product of complexity and futility (difficulty of care), with higher values corresponding to higher priority for future inclusion in the ICL. DISCUSSION: The described methods allow for the generation of a ranked P-PFCL to act as a decision support tool for selection of the next generation of modeled medical conditions. Some of the conditions ranked highly on the P-PFCL include EVA-related upper and lower extremity sprain/strain, iron deficiency, delirium, and hypertension, among others. While this effort does not attempt to quantify the absolute risk associated with each condition, it does attempt to semi-quantitatively estimate the risk of each condition relative to the other possible conditions. This tool in concert with subject matter expert opinion could optimize the future use of limited resources thereby producing a more accurate medical risk model, which will be essential to the upcoming exploration class missions.

Michael Pohlen↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evaluating the Relationships Between Supine Propriorception Assessments With Upright Functional Mobility and Balance Tests

- Sensorimotor adaptations during spaceflight can result in impaired posture and locomotion upon return to Earth. - In-flight sensorimotor countermeasures and assessment tools are needed to mitigate risks associated with mission-critical task performance upon return to Earth or arrival to Mars. - The tilt board (Fig. 1) is proposed as an inflight proprioceptive countermeasure and will be tested in an upcoming bed rest study. - Proprioceptive assessments on the tilt board may also help predict post-flight and post-bedrest functional task performance.

Rachel F. Bellisle↗
NASA NTRS2011

Empirical Tests of the Predicted Footprint for Uncontrolled Satellite Reentry Hazards

A number of statistical tools have been developed over the years for assessing the risk of reentering object to human populations. These tools make use of the characteristics (e.g., mass, material, shape, size) of debris that are predicted by aerothermal models to survive reentry. The statistical tools use this information to compute the probability that one or more of the surviving debris might hit a person on the ground and cause one or more casualties. The statistical portion of the analysis relies on a number of assumptions about how the debris footprint and the human population are distributed in latitude and longitude, and how to use that information to arrive at realistic risk numbers. Because this information is used in making policy and engineering decisions, it is important that these assumptions be tested using empirical data. This study uses the latest database of known uncontrolled reentry locations measured by the United States Department of Defense. The predicted ground footprint distributions of these objects are based on the theory that their orbits behave basically like simple Kepler orbits. However, there are a number of factors in the final stages of reentry - including the effects of gravitational harmonics, the effects of the Earth s equatorial bulge on the atmosphere, and the rotation of the Earth and atmosphere - that could cause them to diverge from simple Kepler orbit behavior and possibly change the probability of reentering over a given location. In this paper, the measured latitude and longitude distributions of these objects are directly compared with the predicted distributions, providing a fundamental empirical test of the model assumptions.

Matney, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2011

Statistical Issues for Uncontrolled Reentry Hazards Empirical Tests of the Predicted Footprint for Uncontrolled Satellite Reentry Hazards

A number of statistical tools have been developed over the years for assessing the risk of reentering objects to human populations. These tools make use of the characteristics (e.g., mass, material, shape, size) of debris that are predicted by aerothermal models to survive reentry. The statistical tools use this information to compute the probability that one or more of the surviving debris might hit a person on the ground and cause one or more casualties. The statistical portion of the analysis relies on a number of assumptions about how the debris footprint and the human population are distributed in latitude and longitude, and how to use that information to arrive at realistic risk numbers. Because this information is used in making policy and engineering decisions, it is important that these assumptions be tested using empirical data. This study uses the latest database of known uncontrolled reentry locations measured by the United States Department of Defense. The predicted ground footprint distributions of these objects are based on the theory that their orbits behave basically like simple Kepler orbits. However, there are a number of factors in the final stages of reentry - including the effects of gravitational harmonics, the effects of the Earth s equatorial bulge on the atmosphere, and the rotation of the Earth and atmosphere - that could cause them to diverge from simple Kepler orbit behavior and possibly change the probability of reentering over a given location. In this paper, the measured latitude and longitude distributions of these objects are directly compared with the predicted distributions, providing a fundamental empirical test of the model assumptions.

Matney, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2016

Statistical Issues for Calculating Reentry Hazards

A number of statistical tools have been developed over the years for assessing the risk of reentering object to human populations. These tools make use of the characteristics (e.g., mass, shape, size) of debris that are predicted by aerothermal models to survive reentry. This information, combined with information on the expected ground path of the reentry, is used to compute the probability that one or more of the surviving debris might hit a person on the ground and cause one or more casualties. The statistical portion of this analysis relies on a number of assumptions about how the debris footprint and the human population are distributed in latitude and longitude, and how to use that information to arrive at realistic risk numbers. This inevitably involves assumptions that simplify the problem and make it tractable, but it is often difficult to test the accuracy and applicability of these assumptions. This paper builds on previous IAASS work to re-examine many of these theoretical assumptions, including the mathematical basis for the hazard calculations, and outlining the conditions under which the simplifying assumptions hold. This study also employs empirical and theoretical information to test these assumptions, and makes recommendations how to improve the accuracy of these calculations in the future.

Matney, Mark↗
NASA NTRS2016

Statistical Issues for Calculating Reentry Hazards

A number of statistical tools have been developed over the years for assessing the risk of reentering object to human populations. These tools make use of the characteristics (e.g., mass, shape, size) of debris that are predicted by aerothermal models to survive reentry. This information, combined with information on the expected ground path of the reentry, is used to compute the probability that one or more of the surviving debris might hit a person on the ground and cause one or more casualties. The statistical portion of this analysis relies on a number of assumptions about how the debris footprint and the human population are distributed in latitude and longitude, and how to use that information to arrive at realistic risk numbers. This inevitably involves assumptions that simplify the problem and make it tractable, but it is often difficult to test the accuracy and applicability of these assumptions. This paper builds on previous IAASS work to re-examine one of these theoretical assumptions.. This study employs empirical and theoretical information to test the assumption of a fully random decay along the argument of latitude of the final orbit, and makes recommendations how to improve the accuracy of this calculation in the future.

Bacon, John B.↗
NASA NTRS2019

"Making Safety Happen" Through Probabilistic Risk Assessment at NASA

NASA is using Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) as one of the tools in its Safety & Mission Assurance (S&MA) tool belt to identify and quantify risks associated with human spaceflight. This paper discusses some of the challenges and benefits associated with developing and using PRA for NASA human space programs. Some programs have entered operation prior to developing a PRA, while some have implemented PRA from the start of the program. It has been observed that the earlier a design change is made in the concept or design phase, the less impact it has on cost and schedule. Not finding risks until the operation phase yields much costlier design changes and major delays, which can result in discussions of just accepting the risk. Risk contributors identified by PRA are not just associated with hardware failures. They include but are not limited to crew fatality due to medical causes, the environment the vehicle and crew are exposed to, the software being used, and the reliability of the crew performing required actions. Some programs have entered operation prior to developing a PRA, and while PRA can still provide a benefit for operations and future design trades, the benefit of implementing PRA from the start of the program provides the added benefit of informing design and reducing risk early in program development. Currently, NASA’s International Space Station (ISS) program is in its 20th year of on-orbit operations around the Earth and has several new programs in the design phase preparing to enter the operation phase all of which have active (or living) PRAs. These programs incorporate PRA as part of their Risk-Informed, Decision-Making (RIDM) process. For new NASA human spaceflight programs discussion begins with mission concept, establishing requirements, forming the PRA team, and continues through the design cycles into the operational phase. Several examples of PRA related applications and observed lessons are included.

Applications↗
NASA NTRS2004

Risk Management Implementation Tool

Continuous Risk Management (CM) is a software engineering practice with processes, methods, and tools for managing risk in a project. It provides a controlled environment for practical decision making, in order to assess continually what could go wrong, determine which risk are important to deal with, implement strategies to deal with those risk and assure the measure effectiveness of the implemented strategies. Continuous Risk Management provides many training workshops and courses to teach the staff how to implement risk management to their various experiments and projects. The steps of the CRM process are identification, analysis, planning, tracking, and control. These steps and the various methods and tools that go along with them, identification, and dealing with risk is clear-cut. The office that I worked in was the Risk Management Office (RMO). The RMO at NASA works hard to uphold NASA s mission of exploration and advancement of scientific knowledge and technology by defining and reducing program risk. The RMO is one of the divisions that fall under the Safety and Assurance Directorate (SAAD). I worked under Cynthia Calhoun, Flight Software Systems Engineer. My task was to develop a help screen for the Continuous Risk Management Implementation Tool (RMIT). The Risk Management Implementation Tool will be used by many NASA managers to identify, analyze, track, control, and communicate risks in their programs and projects. The RMIT will provide a means for NASA to continuously assess risks. The goals and purposes for this tool is to provide a simple means to manage risks, be used by program and project managers throughout NASA for managing risk, and to take an aggressive approach to advertise and advocate the use of RMIT at each NASA center.

Wright, Shayla L.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Validation and Norms of Cognition and Spaceflight Assessments with Senior Military Leaders

Spaceflight hazards include risks to cognitive performance. NASA requires sensitive neuropsychological screening tools to determine changes to cognitive risks to crew health and performance. Currently, NASA uses WinSCAT (Spaceflight Cognitive Assessment Tool for Windows) for neurocognitive screening and to monitor the status of astronauts during spaceflight. The CognitionTest Battery was recently developed by NASA-funded researchers at UPenn as part of the Behavioral Health and Performance component of NASA Standard Measures. This research provides independently validated norms and psychometric properties to compare WinSCAT to Cognition using a military population who operates in high demand, extreme environments similar to those experienced by astronauts (deployments, isolation, extreme environments).

Williams, T. J.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Improving Our Odds: Success through Continuous Risk Management

Launching a rocket, running a business, driving to work and even day-to-day living all involve some degree of risk. Risk is ever present yet not always recognized, adequately assessed and appropriately mitigated. Identification, assessment and mitigation of risk are elements of the risk management component of the "continuous improvement" way of life that has become a hallmark of successful and progressive enterprises. While the application of risk management techniques to provide continuous improvement may be detailed and extensive, the philosophy, ideals and tools can be beneficially applied to all situations. Experiences with the use of risk identification, assessment and mitigation techniques for complex systems and processes are described. System safety efforts and tools used to examine potential risks of the Ares I First Stage of NASA s new Constellation Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV) presently being designed are noted as examples. Recommendations from lessons learned are provided for the application of risk management during the development of new systems as well as for the improvement of existing systems. Lessons learned and suggestions given are also examined for applicability to simple systems, uncomplicated processes and routine personal daily tasks. This paper informs the reader of varied uses of risk management efforts and techniques to identify, assess and mitigate risk for improvement of products, success of business, protection of people and enhancement of personal life.

Greenhalgh, Phillip O.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Void Management in MEPHISTO and Other Space Experiments

The second flight of NASA's Shuttle Flight experiment program known as MEPHISTO suffered from a void in the liquid portion of the sample, even though a piston arrangement was in place to keep the ampoule filled. In preparations for the next flight of the MEPHISTO furnace an animated computer program, called MEPHISTO Volume Visualizer (MVV), was written to help avoid the formation of unwanted voids. A piston system on MEPHISTO has the ability to move approximately 5 mm in compression, to accommodate expansion of the solid during heating; then from the completely compressed position, the piston can move up to 25 mm in towards the sample, effectively making the ampoule smaller and hopefully eliminating any voids. Due to the nature of the piston design and ampoule and sample arrangement, the piston has gotten stuck during normal directional solidification; this creates the risk of a void. To eliminate such a void, the liquid in the hot zones of the furnace can be heated, thereby expanding the liquid and consuming any void. The problem with this approach is that if the liquid is heated too much an overpressure could result, breaking the ampoule and ending the experiment catastrophically. The MVV has been found to be a useful tool in the assessment of the risks associated with the formation of a void and the additional heating of the liquid in the hot zone of this Bridgman type furnace. The MVV software will be discussed and copies available; it is written in the Delphi 2 programming language and runs under Windows 95 and NT. The strategies used in other flight experiments, such as the Isothermal Dendritic Growth Experiment, will also be presented.

deGroh, Henry C., III↗
NASA NTRS2024

The NASA Orbital Debris Program Office - In Service of Space Safety

Since the NASA Orbital Debris Program Office’s (ODPO) founding in 1979 at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, it has been at the forefront of orbital debris research, modeling, and policy development. The ODPO has worked in collaboration with NASA and other U.S. government missions since the 1980s to mitigate the growth of the orbital debris environment and protect the population of the Earth. Two main products from the ODPO, the Orbital Debris Engineering Model (ORDEM) and the Debris Assessment Software (DAS), are frequently among the top three most-downloaded software packages from the NASA Software Catalog. These products are provided free of charge to the public in furtherance of the goal to ensure that new space missions, in compliance with NASA’s orbital debris mitigation requirements, are developed, operated, and disposed of responsibly. In addition to these external-facing software tools, the ODPO maintains high-fidelity internal tools for reentry simulation (the Object Reentry Survival Analysis Tool, ORSAT), short-term risk assessment for robotic and human spaceflight missions (the Satellite Breakup Risk Assessment Module, SBRAM), among others. Using data from the ORDEM model, as well as using the Meteoroid Environment Model (MEM) developed by the Meteoroid Environment Office (MEO) at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, the Hypervelocity Impact Technology (HVIT) team uses the BUMPER code to assess penetration risk to space vehicles in Earth orbit and beyond. This paper will discuss the services that the ODPO and HVIT provide, from mission concept development through end-of-mission, for NASA-related and commercial missions.

Chris Ostrom↗
NASA NTRS2017

Micrometeoroid and Orbital Debris Risk Assessment With Bumper 3

The Bumper 3 computer code is the primary tool used by NASA for micrometeoroid and orbital debris (MMOD) risk analysis. Bumper 3 (and its predecessors) have been used to analyze a variety of manned and unmanned spacecraft. The code uses NASA's latest micrometeoroid (MEM-R2) and orbital debris (ORDEM 3.0) environment definition models and is updated frequently with ballistic limit equations that describe the hypervelocity impact performance of spacecraft materials. The Bumper 3 program uses these inputs along with a finite element representation of spacecraft geometry to provide a deterministic calculation of the expected number of failures. The Bumper 3 software is configuration controlled by the NASA/JSC Hypervelocity Impact Technology (HVIT) Group. This paper will demonstrate MMOD risk assessment techniques with Bumper 3 used by NASA's HVIT Group. The Permanent Multipurpose Module (PMM) was added to the International Space Station in 2011. A Bumper 3 MMOD risk assessment of this module will show techniques used to create the input model and assign the property IDs. The methodology used to optimize the MMOD shielding for minimum mass while still meeting structural penetration requirements will also be demonstrated.

Hyde, J.↗