Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Probabilistic risk assessment”

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 19 records
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 NTRS2016

Towards a Methodology and Tooling for Model-Based Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA)

A Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) aims to identify and assess potential risks to system technical performance requirements for the purpose of furnishing risk insights into project decisions. PRAs have traditionally been conducted manually using software with an isolated data model. As system complexity rises it becomes difficult to ensure consistency between a PRA, the evolving system design, and other engineering analyses; the techniques for conducting PRAs must evolve to meet this challenge. This work presents progress towards a methodology and tooling for conducting a PRA by leveraging data in the system model, embedded for other purposes and analyses, to conduct a PRA. An approach for identifying the appropriate probabilistic equation for each risk scenario from a standard library is presented, which is a significant step towards the quantification of the likelihood of a risk scenario occurrence. The final calculation of the likelihood of occurrence is left as an item of future work. We also present the development of preliminary tooling to carry out the methodology on a well-formed system model. The information needed to conduct the PRA is embedded in a consistent manner in a system model, so the model-based PRA can be regularly executed as the system model changes. The ability to modify the PRA in concert with lifecycle evolution affords a project the opportunity to track the extent to which system modification impacts compliance with requirements. These aspects of this model-based PRA methodology make it capable of managing risk in increasingly complex technical systems.

Schreiner, Samuel S.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hazards and Probabilistic Risk Assessments of Advanced Nuclear Reactors Coupled with Industrial Facilities

This report provides a roadmap and tool kit for site specific risk assessments across a broad range of industrial customers co-located with advanced nuclear power plants (ANPP) that are not currently built and operating in the U.S. This report builds upon the body of work sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE) Integrated Energy Systems Pathway that has produced industrial requirements studies and techno-economic assessments on the topics of feasibility of ANPP supported industrial processes. This report also leverages the DOE Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) program that has presented hazards assessment and generic probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) for the addition of a heat extraction system (HES) to light-water reactors (LWRs) co-located with hydrogen production facilities. Many of the hazard assessments and risk assessments performed for the LWRS report are agnostic to whether the nuclear reactor is an ANPP or were adapted to the ANPP focus. The report performs hazards assessments to include industrial facilities: an oil refinery, a methanol plant, a synthetic fuel (synfuel) plant, the production of synthetic gas (syngas) as part of the methanol and synfuel plants, wood pulp and paper mills, and hydrogen production. Hydrogen production facilities are assessed in depth through prior reports in the LWRS program and the results are leveraged in this report. All these facilities are specified through industrial process and requirements research performed by national laboratories, universities, and interaction with industry. Many of the processes used in this report are pre-conceptual designs to use for decarbonization of the current technology facilities. A process of failure modes and effects analysis (what can go wrong) and accidentology (what has historically gone wrong) was used to determine the hazards presented to the nuclear power plant by the addition of the HES and the industrial customer. Chemical properties of feedstocks and products are summarized as part of the hazards assessment. Example analysis procedures are provided for each of the hazard types identified. These deterministic analyses can be used to assess adherence to licensing criteria. They can also be used to meet other safety goals like protection of the public, workers, or industrial facility equipment. A modular high temperature gas-cooled reactor (MHTGR) PRA only existing on paper was modeled and verified in modern PRA software. This will provide a tool for representative ANPP probabilistic analyses for future research.

10 SYNTHETIC FUELS↗
NASA NTRS2000

Probabilistic Risk Assessment: A Bibliography

Probabilistic risk analysis is an integration of failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA), fault tree analysis and other techniques to assess the potential for failure and to find ways to reduce risk. This bibliography references 160 documents in the NASA STI Database that contain the major concepts, probabilistic risk assessment, risk and probability theory, in the basic index or major subject terms, An abstract is included with most citations, followed by the applicable subject terms.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2013

PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessments) Participation versus Validation

Probabilistic Risk Assessments (PRAs) are performed for projects or programs where the consequences of failure are highly undesirable. PRAs primarily address the level of risk those projects or programs posed during operations. PRAs are often developed after the design has been completed. Design and operational details used to develop models include approved and accepted design information regarding equipment, components, systems and failure data. This methodology basically validates the risk parameters of the project or system design. For high risk or high dollar projects, using PRA methodologies during the design process provides new opportunities to influence the design early in the project life cycle to identify, eliminate or mitigate potential risks. Identifying risk drivers before the design has been set allows the design engineers to understand the inherent risk of their current design and consider potential risk mitigation changes. This can become an iterative process where the PRA model can be used to determine if the mitigation technique is effective in reducing risk. This can result in more efficient and cost effective design changes. PRA methodology can be used to assess the risk of design alternatives and can demonstrate how major design changes or program modifications impact the overall program or project risk. PRA has been used for the last two decades to validate risk predictions and acceptability. Providing risk information which can positively influence final system and equipment design the PRA tool can also participate in design development, providing a safe and cost effective product.

DeMott, Diana↗
NASA NTRS2025

Assessment of Model Outcomes Between the Integrated Medical Model (IMM) and the Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT)

The Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT) is a computational model that provides human health and medical risk predictions for crewed spaceflight missions. MEDPRAT utilizes discrete event modeling and dynamic probabilistic simulation to predict critical mission outcomes (total medical events, crew health index, quality time lost, loss of crew life, removal to definitive care), condition occurrences, and resource consumption. Input parameters for MEDPRAT include crew attributes (e.g., sex), types of mission activities (e.g., whether and where crew members perform an extravehicular activity (EVA)), available resources, treatment information, and probability distributions for medical conditions. As an evolution of the Integrated Medical Model (IMM), MEDPRAT provides enhanced capabilities and higher fidelity, and incorporates more appropriate assumptions for long-duration spaceflight. IMM is the currently accepted standard for quantifying spaceflight mission medical risk in NASA operations that uses a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) approach. MEDPRAT builds on the same logical foundation as IMM but implements the model architecture through highly optimized Monte Carlo sampling methods. An analysis is performed comparing the outputs from IMM with those from MEDPRAT V1.0 and V2.0 for the same reference missions in order to quantify similarities and differences in the model outcomes. The juxtaposition between IMM and MEDPRAT V1.0 and 2.0 shown in this report demonstrates that these two models generate very similar results; where differences in outcomes are shown, these are in accordance with the underlying assumptions and differences in the model architectures. This validation effort further establishes the credibility and reliability of the MEDPRAT software.

Matthew T Prelich↗
NASA NTRS1995

Probabilistic risk assessment of the Space Shuttle. Phase 3: A study of the potential of losing the vehicle during nominal operation. Volume 5: Auxiliary shuttle risk analyses

Volume 5 is Appendix C, Auxiliary Shuttle Risk Analyses, and contains the following reports: Probabilistic Risk Assessment of Space Shuttle Phase 1 - Space Shuttle Catastrophic Failure Frequency Final Report; Risk Analysis Applied to the Space Shuttle Main Engine - Demonstration Project for the Main Combustion Chamber Risk Assessment; An Investigation of the Risk Implications of Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster Chamber Pressure Excursions; Safety of the Thermal Protection System of the Space Shuttle Orbiter - Quantitative Analysis and Organizational Factors; Space Shuttle Main Propulsion Pressurization System Probabilistic Risk Assessment, Final Report; and Space Shuttle Probabilistic Risk Assessment Proof-of-Concept Study - Auxiliary Power Unit and Hydraulic Power Unit Analysis Report.

Fragola, Joseph R.↗
DOE OSTI2025

A systematic decision-making methodology to formalize the selection of degree of realism in screening analysis of probabilistic risk assessment

In the nuclear power domain, Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is used to inform decision-making for Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs). Recently, there has been an increase in the utilization of modeling and simulation (M&S) to support the estimation of PRA inputs. Risk analysts should carefully select the PRA items that require M&S and their degree of realism (DoR) with consideration of the required resources. To support this selection, this article formulates a systematic decision-making approach for the DoR selection. The DoR selection is made based on two predictive decision-making attributes: the predicted differences in safety risk estimate (ΔSaRi) and the cost of analysis (ΔCAN). This research also develops and quantifies causal models to estimate ΔSaRi and ΔCAN. The causal model-based prediction of ΔSaRi and ΔCAN helps reduce the trial-and-error nature of the DoR selection in the PRA screening analysis and provides insights for DoR selection and the gradual refinements of PRA realism. This approach is demonstrated for a case study on fire PRA of NPPs, where an adequate DoR is selected from two fire models: an engineering correlation and a zone model.

Alkhatib, Sari [Department of Nuclear, Plasma, and↗
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 NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis Missions Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) & Reliability Assessment Overview

To show how NASA’s Moon-to-Mars (M2M) program can use hardware reliability assessments and comprehensive Probabilistic Risk Assessments (PRAs) to estimate risk of future missions and manage risk via safety and mission success requirements from the top down, so that this risk can be balanced with other program metrics like cost and schedule. These PRAs and reliability assessments can be used during the concept, design, and operational phases of development. This presentation also provides some thoughts on how the NASA process can be utilized for a lunar surface power grid development.

PRA↗
NASA NTRS2006

Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA): A Practical and Cost Effective Approach

The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is the first mission of the Robotic Lunar Exploration Program (RLEP), a space exploration venture to the Moon, Mars and beyond. The LRO mission includes spacecraft developed by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and seven instruments built by GSFC, Russia, and contractors across the nation. LRO is defined as a measurement mission, not a science mission. It emphasizes the overall objectives of obtaining data to facilitate returning mankind safely to the Moon in preparation for an eventual manned mission to Mars. As the first mission in response to the President's commitment of the journey of exploring the solar system and beyond: returning to the Moon in the next decade, then venturing further into the solar system, ultimately sending humans to Mars and beyond, LRO has high-visibility to the public but limited resources and a tight schedule. This paper demonstrates how NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Mission project office incorporated reliability analyses in assessing risks and performing design tradeoffs to ensure mission success. Risk assessment is performed using NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 8705.5 - Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Procedures for NASA Programs and Projects to formulate probabilistic risk assessment (PRA). As required, a limited scope PRA is being performed for the LRO project. The PRA is used to optimize the mission design within mandated budget, manpower, and schedule constraints. The technique that LRO project office uses to perform PRA relies on the application of a component failure database to quantify the potential mission success risks. To ensure mission success in an efficient manner, low cost and tight schedule, the traditional reliability analyses, such as reliability predictions, Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), and Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), are used to perform PRA for the large system of LRO with more than 14,000 piece parts and over 120 purchased or contractor built components.

Lee, Lydia L.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment - How They Play Together

Since the Space Shuttle Challenger accident in 1986, NASA has extensively used probabilistic analysis methods to assess, understand, and communicate the risk of space launch vehicles. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA), used in the nuclear industry, is one of the probabilistic analysis methods NASA utilizes to assess Loss of Mission (LOM) and Loss of Crew (LOC) risk for launch vehicles. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment that uses a combination of fault trees, event trees, event sequence diagrams, and probability distributions to analyze the risk of a system, a process, or an activity. It is a process designed to answer three basic questions: 1) what can go wrong that would lead to loss or degraded performance (i.e., scenarios involving undesired consequences of interest), 2) how likely is it (probabilities), and 3) what is the severity of the degradation (consequences). Since the Challenger accident, PRA has been used in supporting decisions regarding safety upgrades for launch vehicles. Another area that was given a lot of emphasis at NASA after the Challenger accident is reliability engineering. Reliability engineering has been a critical design function at NASA since the early Apollo days. However, after the Challenger accident, quantitative reliability analysis and reliability predictions were given more scrutiny because of their importance in understanding failure mechanism and quantifying the probability of failure, which are key elements in resolving technical issues, performing design trades, and implementing design improvements. Although PRA and reliability are both probabilistic in nature and, in some cases, use the same tools, they are two different activities. Specifically, reliability engineering is a broad design discipline that deals with loss of function and helps understand failure mechanism and improve component and system design. PRA is a system scenario based risk assessment process intended to assess the risk scenarios that could lead to a major/top undesirable system event, and to identify those scenarios that are high-risk drivers. PRA output is critical to support risk informed decisions concerning system design. This paper describes the PRA process and the reliability engineering discipline in detail. It discusses their differences and similarities and how they work together as complementary analyses to support the design and risk assessment processes. Lessons learned, applications, and case studies in both areas are also discussed in the paper to demonstrate and explain these differences and similarities.

Safie, Fayssal↗
NASA NTRS2011

Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Shuttle Decision Making Process

This slide presentation reviews the use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to assist in the decision making for the shuttle design and operation. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) is a comprehensive, structured, and disciplined approach to identifying and analyzing risk in complex systems and/or processes that seeks answers to three basic questions: (i.e., what can go wrong? what is the likelihood of these occurring? and what are the consequences that could result if these occur?) The purpose of the Shuttle PRA (SPRA) is to provide a useful risk management tool for the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) to identify strengths and possible weaknesses in the Shuttle design and operation. SPRA was initially developed to support upgrade decisions, but has evolved into a tool that supports Flight Readiness Reviews (FRR) and near real-time flight decisions. Examples of the use of PRA for the shuttle are reviewed.

Boyer, Roger L.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hazards and Probabilistic Risk Assessments of a Light-Water Reactor Coupled with Industrial Facilities

This report provides a roadmap and toolkit for site-specific risk assessments across a broad range of industrial customers co-located with nuclear power plants (NPPs). This report builds upon the body of work sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE) Light-Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Flexible Plant Operation and Generation Pathway that presented hazards assessment and generic probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) for the addition of a heat extraction system (HES) to light-water reactors co-located with hydrogen production facilities. The report expands the hazards assessments to include other industrial facilities: an oil refinery, a methanol plant, a synthetic fuel (synfuel) plant, the production of synthetic gas (syngas) as part of the methanol and synfuel plants, and wood pulp and paper mills. All these facilities are specified through industrial process and requirements research performed by national laboratories, universities, and interaction with industry. Many of the processes used in this report are pre-conceptual designs to use for decarbonization of the current technology facilities. A process of failure modes and effects analysis (what can go wrong) and accidentology (what has historically gone wrong) was used to determine the hazards presented to the NPP by the addition of the HES and the industrial customer. Chemical properties of feedstocks and products are summarized as part of the hazards assessment. Example analysis procedures are provided for each of the hazard types identified. These deterministic analyses can be used to assess adherence to licensing criteria. They can also be used to meet other safety goals like protection of the public, workers, or industrial facility equipment. The probabilistic analysis consisted of three sizes of HESs modeled in a PRA to assess the impact on the initiating events (IE) and results of the PRA. The PRA results conclude that the resulting increases in IE frequencies are below the limits required for small changes to existing NPPs under 10 CFR 50.59.

08 HYDROGEN↗
NASA NTRS2001

Overview of Probabilistic Risk Assessment at NASA: Past, Present and Future

PRA (Probabilistic Risk Assessment) adds the "probability" dimension to the traditional "deterministic" dimension of engineering and safety analyses. Although PRA, as a discipline, has been the evolutionary product of only the last couple of decades, much of the underlying methodology has been in use for a long time. In fact, the concept of probability for describing the likelihood that rare events happen is ancient and dates from Ancient Greece. Our vision is for NASA to achieve world-class state-of-the-art capability in performing and using PRA in technical and management decisions. Since NASA is a leader in many technical fields in which it is involved, we hope, before long, to see NASA become a leader in this field also.

Stamatelatos, Michael G.↗
NASA NTRS2018

Estimating Software Reliability for Space Launch Vehicles in Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA)

It is acutely recognized in the Probabilistic Risk assessment (PRA) field that software plays a defining role in overall system reliability for all modern systems across a wide variety of industries. Regardless if the software is embedded firmware for working components or elements, part of a Human-Machine-Interface, or automated command and control logic, the success of the software to fulfill its function under nominal and off-nominal environments will be a dominant contributor to system reliability. It is also recognized that software reliability prediction and estimation is one of the more challenging and questionable aspects of any PRA or system analyses due to the nature of software and its integration with physics based systems. Irrespective of this dichotomy, any incorporation of software reliability methods requires that the contributions are accountable, quantitative, and tractable. This paper provides a brief overview of software reliability methods, establishes some minimum requirements that the methods should incorporate for completeness, and provides a logic structure for applying software reliability. Model resolution will be discussed that supports current testing plans and trade studies. We will provide initial recommendations for use in the NASA PRA and present a future dynamic option for software and PRA. Space Launch Vehicle Software is recognized to be reliable in static conditions, yet relatively vulnerable to a set of failure modes in changing environments/flight phases. Two quantitative methods were chosen to incorporate software reliability into a Space Launch Vehicle PRA accounting for phase adjustments. One method predicts latent software failure using statistical methods, and the second provides estimates of coding errors and software operating system failures based on test and historical data, respectively. Software uncertainty will also be discussed. We determined that recommendations for PRA software reliability should be modeled at the software module level where multiple software components compose a module and combinations of the software architecture can lead to a functional failure.

Novack, Steven↗
NASA NTRS2018

Estimating Software Reliability for Space Launch Vehicles in Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA)

It is acutely recognized in the Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) field that software plays a defining role in overall system reliability for all modern systems across a wide variety of industries. Regardless of whether the software is embedded firmware for working components or elements, part of a Human-Machine-Interface, or automated command and control logic, the success of the software to fulfill its function under nominal and off-nominal environments will be a dominant contributor to system reliability. It is also recognized that software reliability prediction and estimation is one of the more challenging and questionable aspects of any PRA or system analyses due to the nature of software and its integration with physics based systems. Irrespective of this dichotomy, any incorporation of software reliability methods requires that the contributions are accountable, quantitative, and tractable. This paper provides a brief overview of software reliability methods, establishes some minimum requirements that the methods should incorporate for completeness, and provides a logic structure for applying software reliability. Model resolution will be discussed that supports current testing plans and trade studies. We will provide initial recommendations for use in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) PRA and present a future dynamic option for software and PRA. Space Launch Vehicle software is recognized to be reliable in static conditions, yet relatively vulnerable to a set of failure modes in changing environments/flight phases. Two quantitative methods were chosen to incorporate software reliability into a Space Launch Vehicle PRA accounting for phase adjustments. One method predicts latent software failure using statistical methods, and the second provides estimates of coding errors and software operating system failures based on test and historical data. Software uncertainty will also be discussed. It is determined that recommendations for PRA software reliability should be modeled at the software module level where multiple software components compose a module and combinations of the software architecture can lead to a functional failure.

Steven D. Novack↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Future of Integrated Performance Modeling in the Crew Health and Performance – Probabilistic Risk Assessment Project

The NASA engineering community utilizes event-driven and fault-tree probabilistic techniques to classify risks in the space environment by taking advantage of the inherent knowledge of complex spaceflight system design and testing to quantify failure risk. In harmonizing the risk of human space flight, answering the question of ‘How do we balance health, performance and resource risks with other engineering risks on long duration space missions?’ remains a deeply challenging and largely qualitative practice. The Human Research Program’s Medical Extensible Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment Tool (MEDPRAT) was a significant step forward in efforts to robustly quantify the risk to crew health for exploration missions. However, there remains a significant gap in the ability to comprehensively assess and characterize risk across the disparate functionalities and capabilities which comprise the Crew Health and Performance (CHP) system. The Crew Health and Performance – Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CHP-PRA) project seeks to characterize CHP risks by expanding beyond the foundation established by its PRA predecessors like IMM and MEDPRAT, that simulate medical risk metrics like loss of crew life and evacuations. One of the new risk measures in the CHP-PRA system is embodied in our Performance Risk Model (PRisM). PRisM provides a novel way of assessing crew performance on mission tasks, using a generalized framework which relates back to NASA-STD-3001. This approach allows PRisM to capture and integrate data from a variety of different domains into a single, unified, reproducible representation of astronaut performance. In this presentation, we discuss the motivation for the CHP-PRA work and give a high level overview of the goals of the project, outline the forward work for PRisM, and discuss collaboration opportunities for the community who might explore if their domain knowledge and data could be represented, integrated, and quantified with these tools, whose outcomes are metrics useful for supporting operational mission planning and decision making.

Lauren McIntyre↗