Dealing with ISAs in the Problem Reporting System (PRS)
No abstract available
Incident, Surprise, Anomaly (ISA)↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Problem Reporting System (PRS)”
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.
Improving operations: Metrics to Results
As a result of the mission failure of the Mars Climate Orbiter (MCO) spacecraft in 1999, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) initiated the development of a Mission Operations Assurance (MOA) program to be implemented across all flight projects managed by JPL. One of the initiatives undertaken in 2001 was the collection of data on command file errors occurring in the operational phase of the mission. This paper defines command file errors and how and where they occur in the operations process. It also describes the problem reporting system (PRS) in use for mission operations at JPL. We examine the recent modifications to the PRS that enable the collection of metrics, specifically on command file errors. This paper discusses what the data show us since metrics have been collected for the operational missions conducted by JPL. We examine the evolution of an operational working group initiative to evaluate proximate, contributing, and root causes for the errors. As part of this discussion we see what the metrics have indicated over a decade. At the macro level, we can say that the aggregate command file error rate has been cut to roughly one third of the initial 2001 level by the end of 2011. Additionally, we explore efficient and innovative means to continually integrate the findings and recommendations from the working group back into the flight operations environment.
command file errors↗
Problem Reporting System
The Problem Reporting System (PRS) is a Web application, running on two Web servers (load-balanced) and two database servers (RAID-5), which establishes a system for submission, editing, and sharing of reports to manage risk assessment of anomalies identified in NASA's flight projects. PRS consolidates diverse anomaly-reporting systems, maintains a rich database set, and incorporates a robust engine, which allows tracking of any hardware, software, or paper process by configuring an appropriate life cycle. Global and specific project administration and setup tools allow lifecycle tailoring, along with customizable controls for user, e-mail, notifications, and more. PRS is accessible via the World Wide Web for authorized user at most any location. Upon successful log-in, the user receives a customizable window, which displays time-critical 'To Do' items (anomalies requiring the user s input before the system moves the anomaly to the next phase of the lifecycle), anomalies originated by the user, anomalies the user has addressed, and custom queries that can be saved for future use. Access controls exist depending on a user's role as system administrator, project administrator, user, or developer, and then, further by association with user, project, subsystem, company, or item with provisions for business-to-business exclusions, limitations on access according to the covert or overt nature of a given project, all with multiple layers of filtration, as needed. Reporting of metrics is built in. There is a provision for proxy access (in which the user may choose to grant one or more other users to view screens and perform actions as though they were the user, during any part of a tracking life cycle - especially useful during tight build schedules and vacations to keep things moving). The system also provides users the ability to have an anomaly link to or notify other systems, including QA Inspection Reports, Safety, GIDEP (Government-Industry Data Exchange Program) Alert, Corrective Actions, and Lessons Learned. The PRS tracking engine was designed as a very extensible and scalable system, able to support additional applications, with future development possibilities already discussed, including Incident Surprise Anomalies (for anomalies occurring during Operations phases of NASA Flight projects), GIDEP and NASA Alerts, and others.
Potter, Don↗
Modeling to Improve the Risk Reduction Process for Command File Errors
The Jet Propulsion Laboratory has learned that even innocuous errors in the spacecraft command process can have significantly detrimental effects on a space mission. Consequently, such Command File Errors (CFE), regardless of their effect on the spacecraft, are treated as significant events for which a root cause is identified and corrected. A CFE during space mission operations is often the symptom of imbalance or inadequacy within the system that encompasses the hardware and software used for command generation as well as the human experts and processes involved in this endeavor. As we move into an era of increased collaboration with other NASA centers and commercial partners, these systems become more and more complex. Consequently, the ability to thoroughly model and analyze CFEs formally in order to reduce the risk they pose is increasingly important. In this paper, we summarize the results of applying modeling techniques previously developed to the DAWN flight project. The original models were built with the input of subject matter experts from several flight projects. We have now customized these models to address specific questions for the DAWN flight project and formulating use cases to address their unique mission needs. The goal of this effort is to enhance the project's ability to meet commanding reliability requirements for operations and to assist them in managing their Command File Errors.
spacecraft↗