Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “problem failure report (PFR)”

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.

4 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1974

Reliability inputs to Mariner 9 data explosion

This paper describes the prelaunch and post-launch reliability functions which contributed to the success of the Mariner 9 spacecraft. Examples are included to illustrate how each reliability activity was a vital part of each phase of the project. Prelaunch reliability functions included: (1) establishing, negotiating, and monitoring system and subsystem requirements, (2) participating in spacecraft system and subsystem design/hardware reviews, (3) monitoring preparation of failure mode effects and criticality analyses (FMECA), (4) establishing and managing a problem failure reporting (PFR) system for the spacecraft and its support equipment, (5) monitoring electronic parts activities, and (6) participating in spacecraft reviews. Particular emphasis is placed on mission operations reliability assurance activities, which included: (1) spacecraft problem/failure reporting, (2) managing an integrating failure reporting system which covered all mission operations activities, (3) real-time analysis of spacecraft anomalies, and (4) risk assessment.

Macgregor, D. S.↗
NASA NTRS2008

JPL Test Effectiveness Analysis

1) The pilot study provided meaningful conclusions that are generally consistent with the earlier Test Effectiveness work done between 1992 and 1994: a) Analysis of pre-launch problem/failure reports is consistent with earlier work. b) Analysis of post-launch early mission anomaly reports indicates that there are more software issues in newer missions, and the no-test category for identification of post-launch failures is more significant than in the earlier analysis. 2) Future work includes understanding how differences in Missions effect these analyses: a) There are large variations in the number of problem reports and issues that are documented by the different Projects/Missions. b) Some missions do not have any reported environmental test anomalies, even though environmental tests were performed. 3) Each project/mission has different standards and conventions for filling out the PFR forms, the industry may wish to address this issue: a) Existing problem reporting forms are to document and track problems, failures, and issues (etc.) for the projects, to ensure high quality. b) Existing problem reporting forms are not intended for data mining.

failure cause↗