Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “STPA”

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.

6 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Application of System-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) to a NASA Concept Electric Aircraft Battery System

System-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) is a systems-based hazard analysis method that identifies unsafe interactions and control deficiencies in complex systems but has been rarely used for NASA programs in favor of more well-established hazard analyses. To evaluate its applicability, a NASA Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) team applied the STPA method to an early-stage hybrid electrified aircraft concept, focusing on the energy storage system and electric powertrain. Objectives include assessing STPA’s value relative to traditional methods and its suitability for early design phases. Activities include team training, system review, detailed STPA execution, and comparison with traditional analyses. Findings show STPA provides a structured, comprehensive hazard evaluation and can identify additional risks by expanding analysis boundaries. However, traditional methods can yield similar results when applied rigorously, though they typically require more mature designs. Overall, STPA is a valuable addition, particularly for early development, informing safety requirements and supporting preliminary hazard analyses. Further pilot applications are recommended.

Electric Aviation↗
NASA NTRS2022

Run Time Assurance for Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing Aircraft

NASA is conducting research to demonstrate and evaluate the application of Run Time Assurance (RTA) as a means to assure safety in Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) aircraft with highly automated or autonomous flight capability supervised by a single onboard pilot. The work described in this report demonstrates an application of RTA and examines the implications for design and analysis of aircraft functions and systems; aircraft safety hazards; safety assurance; development assurance; and pilot tasks and performance. This research effort also seeks to assess the efficacy of the combined application of traditional Functional Hazard Analysis (FHA) and the more modern System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) techniques to perform hazard analyses on aircraft with complex automated and autonomous systems and an onboard pilot. During the research effort we developed architectural designs of two alternate eVTOL aircraft, generally following the process characterized in the SAE standards ARP4754 and ARP4761. The design has focused on the control architectures of these aircraft, which are identical except that one incorporates RTA techniques to reduce the criticality of some key software components. Artifacts of this process include a taxonomy of aircraft-level functions, aircraft-level architecture diagrams, aircraft-level functional hazard assessments (AFHA), function allocations onto aircraft systems and subsystems, functional block diagrams for a select set of control-related functions, and system-level functional hazard assessments (SFHA) for those functions. This project has highlighted the notion that DAL D is something of a sweet spot for low-confidence controllers in an RTA-based design. Among the many activities described in DO-178C, the activities related to requirement verifiability, algorithmic accuracy, and test coverage can be the most challenging for the kinds of advanced control techniques that may be desirable in novel UAM designs, such as adaptive control, machine-learning, artificial intelligence, numerical search, and Monte Carlo based algorithms. Moreover, the standard requires that development teams demonstrate that errors leading to unacceptable failure conditions have been removed from the software. The RTA architecture, which cordons off the low-confidence function, makes it much easier to show this for these kinds of algorithms. With regard to the use of STPA and FHA as complementary hazard analysis techniques, our research effort led us to the conclusion that STPA should be used to derive requirements for hardware and software systems and/or components. Also, STPA is a natural complement to other processes in ARP4754A involving design studies and iteration.

Run-time assurance↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Guidance for Designing Safety into Urban Air Mobility: Hazard Analysis Techniques

The national airspace system is exceptionally safe, specifically in terms of commercial air traffic operations. The introduction of innovative aircraft (such as electric vertical takeoff and landing vehicles) undergoing novel operations (such as for an urban air passenger carrying mission) is a potential disruptor to the current means of regulating and ensuring the safety of air travel. The aviation industry and associated regulatory bodies are adapting their approaches to assuring system safety to enable these new paradigms. However, any system safety analysis requires that a hazard assessment be performed. In this work, we consider the Functional Hazard Assessment (FHA) and Systems Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) techniques for hazard assessment and evaluate whether they can be used in a complementary fashion for regulatory approval purposes. We perform an FHA and an STPA on an electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) vehicle undergoing an urban air mobility (UAM) passenger carrying reference scenario and present excerpts of this analysis. We then draw parallels between the techniques and highlight elements where they naturally reinforce to each other’s results, specifically in the consideration of hazard severity with respect to flight phases, the design of hazard mitigations, and the applicability of the results to all types of regulatory approvals (e.g., type certification, operational approval, and crew training).

Mallory S Graydon↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

System-Theoretic Analysis of Unsafe Collaborative Control in Teaming Systems

The interactions that occur in human-teaming are inspiring novel aerospace designs aimed at improving how humans and machines, or multiple machines, work together. Unfortunately, current Systems Engineering processes are ill-equipped to handle these complex relationships and are unable to design and assure the safety for these systems. To close part of this gap, this paper introduces a novel system-theoretic analytical process to identify unsafe collaborative control actions. It is part of a broader set of techniques that extend the state-of-the-art in hazard analysis, System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA), to systematically address collaboration. The method rigorously expresses the different ways multiple commands may be unsafe together. Using Systems Theory, it employs abstraction to manage the combinatorial complexity in enumerating control contributions from multiple collaborating components. An algorithm integrates these concepts into an end-to-end process and is supported by automation to enumerate, refine, prune, and prioritize unsafe combinations of control actions. The output of the method feeds the specification of system requirements to implement safety-guided design starting early in concept development. The process is demonstrated on a manned-unmanned aircraft teaming case study and finds new causal factors that were not previously found in a past hazard analysis of the same system.

System Safety↗
NASA NTRS2018

A Prognostic Launch Vehicle Probability of Failure Assessment Methodology for Conceptual Systems Predicated on Human Causal Factors

Create an improved method to calculate reliability of a conceptual launch vehicle system prior to fabrication by using historic data of actual root causes of failures. While failures have unique "proximate causes", there are typically a finite amount of common "root causes". Heretofore launch vehicle reliability evaluation typically hardware-centric statistical analyses, while most root causes of failures are been shown to be human-centric. A method based on human-centric root causes can be used to quantify reliability assessments and focus proposed actions to mitigate problems. Existing methods have been optimistic in their projections of launch vehicle reliability compared to actuals. Hypothesis: reliability of a conceptual launch vehicle can be more accurately evaluated based on a rational, probabilistic approach using past failure assessment teams' findings predicated on human-centric causes."Human Reliability Analysis Methods Selection Guidance for NASA"Chandler F.T., et al., NASA HQ/OSMA study group, July 2006. Outside HRA experts from academia, other federal labs, and the private sector. 50 system reliability methods considered, fourteen selected for further study, four finally selected as best suited for human spaceflight. Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) + Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) enabled incorporating effects and probabilities of human errors. While four down-selected methods deemed appropriate for failure assessment, it did not appear that these methods could be concisely applied to perform major system-wide assessment of probability of failure of a conceptual design without becoming unwieldy."Engineering a Safer World", Detailed, comprehensive study external to NASA Leveson N. G., MIT, 2011.Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP). All-encompassing accident model based on systems theory analyzed accidents after they occurred and created approaches to prevent occurrence in developing systems not focused on failure prevention per se, but rather reducing hazards by influencing human behavior through use of constraints, hierarchical control structures, and process models to improve system safetySystem Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) addresses predictive part of problem (a "hazard analysis"). Includes all causal factors identified in STAMP: "...design errors, software flaws, component interaction accidents, cognitively complex human decision-making errors, and social organizational and management factors contributing to accidents" can guide design process rather than require it to exist before-hand did not appear capable of concise application for system-wide assessment of probability of failure of a conceptual design without becoming unwieldy.

Williams, Craig H.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Safety-Driven Approach to Exploring and Comparing Air Traffic Management Concepts for Enabling Urban Air Mobility

There is broad recognition that the high tempo and density of Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations will require identifying new Air Traffic Management (ATM) concepts to safely integrate UAM air traffic into the airspace alongside existing air traffic. However, the simulation models used to compare ATM concepts today are difficult to apply during the early stages of concept development and do not offer enough support in identifying potential new concepts. In addition, they have limited ability to evaluate ATM concepts in terms of safety, security, and other key emergent properties. Instead of using simulation to evaluate ATM concepts, this paper demonstrates how a safety-driven systems engineering approach based on Systems-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP) can be used to design properties such as safety into an ATM system from the earliest stages of development. Using a hazard analysis technique called Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA), system requirements and the desired ATM behavior are derived. As an example, two possible ATM concepts to implement that behavior are compared to identify their safety-related benefits and tradeoffs. This new approach enables (1) systematic exploration of alternative ATM concepts and (2) identification of the safety-related tradeoffs between concepts as early as possible in the development process.

system safety↗