Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “model based mission assurance”

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

Model Based Mission Assurance in a Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Framework: State-of-the-Art Assessment

This report explores the current state of the art of Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) in projects that have shifted towards Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). Its goal is to provide insight into how NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) should respond to this shift. In MBSE, systems engineering information is organized and represented in models: rigorous computer-based representations, which collectively make many activities easier to perform, less error prone, and scalable. S&MA practices must shift accordingly. The “Objective Structure Hierarchies” recently developed by OSMA provide the framework for understanding this shift. Although the objectives themselves will remain constant, S&MA practices (activities, processes, tools) to achieve them are subject to change. This report presents insights derived from literature studies and interviews. The literature studies gleaned assurance implications from reports of space-related applications of MBSE. The interviews with knowledgeable S&MA and MBSE personnel discovered concerns and ideas for how assurance may adapt. Preliminary findings and observations are presented on the state of practice of S&MA with respect to MBSE, how it is already changing, and how it is likely to change further. Finally, recommendations are provided on how to foster the evolution of S&MA to best fit with MBSE.

Aerospace engineering↗
NASA NTRS2016

Model Based Mission Assurance: NASA's Assurance Future

Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is seeing increased application in planning and design of NASA’s missions. This suggests the question: what will be the corresponding practice of Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA)? Contemporaneously, NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) is evaluating a new objectives based approach to standards to ensure that the Safety and Mission Assurance disciplines and programs are addressing the challenges of NASA’s changing missions, acquisition and engineering practices, and technology. MBSE is a prominent example of a changing engineering practice. We use NASA’s objectives-based strategy for Reliability and Maintainability as a means to examine how MBSE will affect assurance. We surveyed MBSE literature to look specifically for these affects, and find a variety of them discussed (some are anticipated, some are reported from applications to date). Predominantly these apply to the early stages of design, although there are also extrapolations of how MBSE practices will have benefits for testing phases. As the effort to develop MBMA continues, it will need to clearly and unambiguously establish the roles of uncertainty and risk in the system model. This will enable a variety of uncertainty-based analyses to be performed much more rapidly than ever before and has the promise to increase the integration of CRM (Continuous Risk Management) and PRA (Probabilistic Risk Analyses) even more fully into the project development life cycle. Various views and viewpoints will be required for assurance disciplines, and an over-arching viewpoint will then be able to more completely characterize the state of the project/program as well as (possibly) enabling the safety case approach for overall risk awareness and communication.

Evans, John↗
NASA NTRS2016

Model Based Mission Assurance: Emerging Opportunities for Robotic Systems

The emergence of Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) in a Model Based Engineering framework has created new opportunities to improve effectiveness and efficiencies across the assurance functions. The MBSE environment supports not only system architecture development, but provides for support of Systems Safety, Reliability and Risk Analysis concurrently in the same framework. Linking to detailed design will further improve assurance capabilities to support failures avoidance and mitigation in flight systems. This also is leading new assurance functions including model assurance and management of uncertainty in the modeling environment. Further, the assurance cases, a structured hierarchal argument or model, are emerging as a basis for supporting a comprehensive viewpoint in which to support Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA).

Mission Assurance↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

SmallSat / Model-Based Mission Assurance Session Overview

SmallSat state of the art report advanced avionics section updates. Systematic CubeSat radiation hardening assurance using the SEAM platforms. Building ontologies for AI-integrated prognostic health management of spacecraft avionics.

Rebekah Austin↗
NASA NTRS2017

Mission Assurance: A Model-Based Approach

The purpose of Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA) at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory is to ensure mission safety and success. As the complexity of technical systems increases, the tools, processes, and infrastructure used to facilitate SMA activities must evolve. A transition from a document-centric approach to a data-driven, model-based architecture is critical in allowing SMA efforts to grapple with complex system designs. This work describes how a sample subset of existing SMA processes can be executed in a model-based environment, while also describing ways in which a model-based architecture can further augment SMA efforts. One key aspect is supporting the complex interplay between the different SMA processes and the systems engineering effort to provide additional insight into the system from an SMA perspective. The proposed architecture for model-based mission assurance provides an avenue for assuring mission safety and success in increasingly complex systems.

Schreiner, Samuel S.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

From BERTopic to SysML: Informing Model-Based Failure Analysis With Natural Language Processing for Complex Aerospace Systems

The development of emerging complex aerospace systems will require new approaches for capturing safety incident scenarios as early as possible in the design phase. However, for novel systems, relevant data available is limited. In this work, we propose a framework informing model-based mission assurance activities with historical incident reports, lessons learned, or other relevant engineering documents using natural language processing. In doing so, we investigate whether there is useful information in data sets that are relevant, if not identical, to the system under design and whether, through rigorous systems engineering practice, this information can be effectively leveraged through model-based failure analysis. In a worked case study, we apply state-of-the-art topic modeling techniques to two data sets, a mission relevant data set and a system relevant data set. The sets of topics are merged and interpreted to form a preliminary list of failure topics that can be used to inform the identification of off-nominal modes in the model-based failure modes and effects analysis development. Once data from the system in operation is available, it can be used to update the topics identified. By extracting information about likely failures from relevant historical data sets and utilizing model-based mission assurance to ensure relevance and rigor, unanticipated failures can be reduced, and projects can more effectively learn from past missions.

Failure Analysis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

From BERTopic to SysML: Informing Model-Based Failure Analysis With Natural Language Processing for Complex Aerospace Systems

The development of emerging complex aerospace systems will require new approaches for capturing safety incident scenarios as early as possible in the design phase. However, for novel systems, relevant data available is limited. In this work, we propose a framework informing model-based mission assurance activities with historical incident reports, lessons learned, or other relevant engineering documents using natural language processing. In doing so, we investigate whether there is useful information in data sets that are relevant, if not identical, to the system under design and whether, through rigorous systems engineering practice, this information can be effectively leveraged through model-based failure analysis. In a worked case study, we apply state-of-the-art topic modeling techniques to two data sets, a mission relevant data set and a system relevant data set. The sets of topics are merged and interpreted to form a preliminary list of failure topics that can be used to inform the identification of off-nominal modes in the model-based failure modes and effects analysis development. Once data from the system in operation is available, it can be used to update the topics identified. By extracting information about likely failures from relevant historical data sets and utilizing model-based mission assurance to ensure relevance and rigor, unanticipated failures can be reduced, and projects can more effectively learn from past missions.

Failure Analysis↗
NASA NTRS2020

Enabling Assurance in the MBSE Environment

A number of specific benefits that fit within the hallmarks of effective development are realized with implementation of model-based approaches to systems and assurance. Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) enabled by standardized modeling languages (e.g., SysML®) is at the core. These benefits in the context of spaceflight system challenges can include [1]: • Improved management of complex development • Reduced risk in the development process • Improved cost management • Improved design decisions With appropriate modeling techniques the assurance community also can improve early oversight and insight into project development. NASA has shown the basic constructs of SysML in an MBSE environment offer several key advantages, within a Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA) initiative [2, 3]. These include the following: • Model viewpoints that promote rapid and systematic assessment of requirements coverage, hazard tagging and risk management • Embedded safety assessments for launch vehicles • Deployment of model assisted development of reliability products - Failure Modes and Effects Analyses (FMEAs) and Fault Trees • Test Planning • Validation and Verification of complex functions • Support of Assurance Case development for complex systems In addition, while there are benefits to be harvested, there is a realization that these do not come without effort and cost. Enabling model-based approaches requires structure, not only in an organizational context, but in a modeling context as well. There can be a steep learning curve and costs associated to train skilled modelers. But, on the other hand, not all of the assurance community need to be modelers. Models themselves must conform to ontologies that enable assurance. This places constraints upon the models and modelers. Optimums have yet to be developed where resources and constraints on modeling must be traded off in the organization and modeling efforts for projects. A number of barriers need to be overcome, as well, which pose challenges to the developers of the software that supports MBSE/MBMA. Information and data must be made to flow seamlessly through the life cycle. Because there is a wide variety of tools used in the community, to avoid the problems of the past of silos, delays, and diverging interests, information should flow among these tools to support the “single source of truth” paradigm of MBSE. This will greatly facilitate MBMA and advancement of assurance functions.

Evans, John W.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Electrical, Electronic and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts in the New Space Paradigm: When is Better the Enemy of Good Enough?

As the space business rapidly evolves to accommodate a lower cost model of development and operation via concepts such as commercial space and small spacecraft (aka, CubeSats and swarms), traditional EEE parts screening and qualification methods are being scrutinized under a risk-reward trade space. In this presentation, two basic concepts will be discussed: (1) The movement from complete risk aversion EEE parts methods to managing and/or accepting risk via alternate approaches; and, (2) A discussion of emerging assurance methods to reduce overdesign as well emerging model based mission assurance (MBMA) concepts. center dot Example scenarios will be described as well as consideration for trading traditional versus alternate methods.

LaBel, Kenneth A.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Enabling Assurance in the MBSE Environment

A number of specific benefits that fit within the hallmarks of effective development are realized with implementation of model-based approaches to systems and assurance. Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) enabled by standardized modeling languages (e.g., SysML®) is at the core. These benefits in the context of spaceflight system challenges can include: Improved management of complex development, Reduced risk in the development process, Improved cost management, Improved design decisions. With appropriate modeling techniques the assurance community can improve early oversight and insight into project development. NASA has shown the basic constructs of SysML in an MBSE environment offer several key advantages, within a Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA) initiative.

Evans, John W.↗
NASA NTRS2021

Systems Engineering and Assurance Modeling (SEAM): A Web-Based Solution for Integrated Mission Assurance

We present an overview of the Systems Engineering and Assurance Modeling (SEAM) platform, a web-browser-based tool which is designed to help engineers evaluate the radiation vulnerabilities and develop an assurance approach for electronic parts in space systems. The SEAM framework consists of three interconnected modeling tools, a SysML compatible system description tool, a Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) visual argument tool, and Bayesian Net and Fault Tree extraction and export tools. The SysML and GSN sections also have a coverage check application that ensures that every radiation fault identified on the SysML side is also addressed in the assurance case in GSN. The SEAM platform works on space systems of any degree of radiation hardness but is especially helpful for assessing radiation performance in systems with commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) electronic components.

SEAM↗