Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “value at risk”

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 NTRSDate not supplied

High Value Risk Targets in Human System Risk

The Human System Risk Board (HSRB) has the overall responsibility for tracking the evolution of the top ~30 human system risks that it has identified to be associated with human spaceflight. The Board is also charged with maintaining a consistent, integrated process to mitigate those risks, and developing evidence-based risk posture recommendations. Each Risk Custodian Team (RCT) identifies High Value Risk Mitigation Targets (HVRMT) that have the highest likelihood or greatest impact in reducing their risk. These typically include areas where there are major gaps in knowledge or capability; or other targets that promise to yield returns worthy of investments in time, money and other resources by stakeholders interested in reducing Human System Risk. As part of the review of each risk the Board members consider and discuss the HVRMT statements, which are then approved by the Board Chair. High Value Risk Mitigation Targets can include research activities funded by the Human Research Program, but often involve recommending standards, monitoring, or other operational goals to reduce risk. This presentation will discuss common themes and highlights of the approved HVRTs to inform IWS attendees and the wider research community.

D M Buckland↗
NASA NTRS1986

Risk and value analysis of SETI

The risks, values, and costs of the SETI project are evaluated and compared with those of the Viking project. Examination of the scientific values, side benefits, and costs of the two projects reveal that both projects provide equal benefits at equal costs. The probability of scientific and technical success is analyzed.

Billingham, J.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Human Health Risk Assessment Simulations in a Distributed Environment for Shuttle Launch

During the launch of a rocket under prevailing weather conditions, commanders at Cape Canaveral Air Force station evaluate the possibility of whether wind blown toxic emissions might reach civilian and military personnel in the near by area. In our model, we focused mainly on Hydrogen chloride (HCL), Nitrogen oxides (NOx) and Nitric acid (HNO3), which are non-carcinogenic chemicals as per United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) classification. We have used the hazard quotient model to estimate the number of people at risk. It is based on the number of people with exposure above a reference exposure level that is unlikely to cause adverse health effects. The risk to the exposed population is calculated by multiplying the individual risk and the number in exposed population. The risk values are compared against the acceptable risk values and GO or NO-go situation is decided based on risk values for the Shuttle launch. The entire model is simulated over the web and different scenaria can be generated which allows management to choose an optimum decision.

Thirumalainambi, Rajkumar↗
NASA NTRS1990

Risk and value analysis of SETI

This paper attempts to apply a traditional risk and value analysis to the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence--SETI. In view of the difficulties of assessing the probability of success, a comparison is made between SETI and a previous search for extraterrestrial life, the biological component of Project Viking. Our application of simple Utility Theory, given some reasonable assumptions, suggests that SETI is at least as worthwhile as the biological experiment on Viking.

NASA Program Exobiology↗
NASA NTRS1994

Applying Costs, Risks and Values Evaluation (CRAVE) methodology to Engineering Support Request (ESR) prioritization

Given limited budget, the problem of prioritization among Engineering Support Requests (ESR's) with varied sizes, shapes, and colors is a difficult one. At the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), the recently developed 4-Matrix (4-M) method represents a step in the right direction as it attempts to combine the traditional criteria of technical merits only with the new concern for cost-effectiveness. However, the 4-M method was not adequately successful in the actual prioritization of ESRs for the fiscal year 1995 (FY95). This research identifies a number of design issues that should help us to develop better methods. It emphasizes that given the variety and diversity of ESR's one should not expect that a single method could help in the assessment of all ESR's. One conclusion is that a methodology such as Costs, Risks, and Values Evaluation (CRAVE) should be adopted. It also is clear that the development of methods such as 4-M requires input not only from engineers with technical expertise in ESR's but also from personnel with adequate background in the theory and practice of cost-effectiveness analysis. At KSC, ESR prioritization is one part of the Ground Support Working Teams (GSWT) Integration Process. It was discovered that the more important barriers to the incorporation of cost-effectiveness considerations in ESR prioritization lie in this process. The culture of integration, and the corresponding structure of review by a committee of peers, is not conducive to the analysis and confrontation necessary in the assessment and prioritization of ESR's. Without assistance from appropriately trained analysts charged with the responsibility to analyze and be confrontational about each ESR, the GSWT steering committee will continue to make its decisions based on incomplete understanding, inconsistent numbers, and at times, colored facts. The current organizational separation of the prioritization and the funding processes is also identified as an important barrier to the pursuit of cost-effectiveness. Perhaps the greatest barrier is that, at the working level, KSC's culture is so preoccupied with technical concerns that it seems almost oblivious to any cost concerns, let alone cost-effectiveness concerns. It is recommended that we must urgently begin to change that culture and seek a better balance between these two concerns.

Joglekar, Prafulla N.↗
NASA NTRS1974

Space shuttle/payload interface analysis. (Study 2.4) Volume 4: Business Risk and Value of Operations in Space (BRAVO). Part 2: User's manual

The BRAVO User's Manual is presented which describes the BRAVO methodology in terms of step-by-step procedures, so that it may be used as a tool for a team of analysts performing cost effectiveness analyses on potential future space applications. BRAVO requires a relatively general set of input information and a relatively small expenditure of resources. For Vol. 1, see N74-12493; for Vol. 2, see N74-14530.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1974

Space shuttle/payload interface analysis. Volume 4: Business Risk and Value of Operations in Space (BRAVO). Part 3: Workbook

A collection of blank worksheets for use on each BRAVO problem to be analyzed is supplied, for the purposes of recording the inputs for the BRAVO analysis, working out the definition of mission equipment, recording inputs to the satellite synthesis computer program, estimating satellite earth station costs, costing terrestrial systems, and cost effectiveness calculations. The group of analysts working BRAVO will normally use a set of worksheets on each problem, however, the workbook pages are of sufficiently good quality that the user can duplicate them, if more worksheet blanks are required than supplied. For Vol. 1, see N74-12493; for Vol. 2, see N74-14530.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1975

Shuttle user analysis (study 2.2). Volume 3: Business risk and value of operations in space (BRAVO). Part 5: Analysis of GSFC Earth Observation Satellite (EOS) system mission model using BRAVO techniques

Cost comparisons were made between three modes of operation (expend, ground refurbish, and space resupply) for the Earth Observation System (EOS-B) to furnish data to NASA on alternative ways to use the shuttle/EOS. Results of the analysis are presented in tabular form.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1974

Shuttle user analysis (study 2.2). Volume 3: Business risk and value of operations in space (BRAVO). Part 2: User's manual

The purpose of the BRAVO User's Manual is to describe the BRAVO methodology in terms of step-by-step procedures. The BRAVO methodology then becomes a tool which a team of analysts can utilize to perform cost effectiveness analyses on potential future space applications with a relatively general set of input information and a relatively small expenditure of resources. An overview of the BRAVO procedure is given by describing the complete procedure in a general form.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1974

Shuttle user analysis (study 2.2): Volume 3. Business Risk And Value of Operations in space (BRAVO). Part 4: Computer programs and data look-up

Computer program listings as well as graphical and tabulated data needed by the analyst to perform a BRAVO analysis were examined. Graphical aid which can be used to determine the earth coverage of satellites in synchronous equatorial orbits was described. A listing for satellite synthesis computer program as well as a sample printout for the DSCS-11 satellite program and a listing of the symbols used in the program were included. The APL language listing for the payload program cost estimating computer program was given. This language is compatible with many of the time sharing remote terminals computers used in the United States. Data on the intelsat communications network was studied. Costs for telecommunications systems leasing, line of sight microwave relay communications systems, submarine telephone cables, and terrestrial power generation systems were also described.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2018

Potential Advantages of Conducting Short Duration Visits to the Martian Surface

Recent NASA concepts for human missions to Mars, including the Evolvable Mars Campaign and Design Reference Architecture 5.0, have focused on the conduct of missions with long duration stays on the Martian surface. The decision to focus on long duration missions (typically to a single site) is driven by a desire to increase the perceived sustainability of the human Mars campaign, predicated on the assumption that sustainability is best achieved by maximizing the level of activity on the surface, providing for continuous growth in operations, and promoting pioneering of Mars. However, executing a series of long duration missions to a single site is not the only option for human exploration of Mars that has been proposed. Other architectures have been evaluated that focus on missions with short duration surface stays, with each mission visiting a separate site on the surface. This type of architecture is less efficient in that elements are not typically reused from one mission to the next but requires a far less complex surface architecture. There are potentially valid arguments to be made that a short duration, multiple site approach could result in different types of advantages when compared to the long duration, single site approach to Mars exploration, particularly for initial human missions to Mars. These arguments revolve around four areas: Achieved Value, Risk Mitigation, Developmental Affordability, and Operational Affordability & Flexibility. The question of Achieved Value relates to the prioritization of goals for Martian exploration. As discussed, goals related to pioneering and expanding human presence are often referenced as justifications for the long duration approach. However, there are other competing goals, including science and exploration. While there is not a clear consensus among planetary scientists, many have argued that the value of being able to visit multiple sites could outweigh the value of continually visiting a single site. Risk Mitigation is a major concern for initial human missions to Mars. There are a number of hazards related to operating on the Martian surface that are not well characterized. It may be desirable to conduct a series of short duration missions to better understand the nature of these risks prior to committing to a long duration mission. Developmental Affordability relates to the ability of NASA and its partners to develop and deploy the proposed architecture. Any human missions to Mars will be among the most complex endeavors ever undertaken. The capabilities that must be developed to enable any human Mars missions are extremely challenging. The total design, development, test, and evaluation (DDT&E) budget required to develop just the essential capabilities alone will be substantial. If additional surface capabilities are required to support long duration surface stays, the development effort could be unaffordable. Operational Affordability & Flexibility relates to the continued costs to execute the Mars campaign. Long duration missions, even with some amount of in-situ resource utilization, require a significant level of resupply for every mission. This requires additional launches and in-space transportation assets, increasing the operational complexity and total operational cost. This paper will explore each of the four potential advantages of short duration missions in detail. The authors will present comparisons between proposed long duration and short duration architectures through an evaluation of relevant performance, cost, and risk metrics.

Stromgren, Chel↗
NASA NTRS1987

Relationships between coronary heart disease risk factors and serum ionized calcium in Kennedy Space Center Cohort

Kennedy Space Center (KSC) employees are reported to be at high risk for coronary heart disease (CHD). Risk factors for CHD include high serum total cholesterol levels, low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLC), elevated triglyceride, smoking, inactivity, high blood pressure, being male, and being older. Higher dietary and/or serum calcium Ca(++) may be related to a lower risk for CHD. Fifty men and 37 women participated. Subjects were tested in the morning after fasting 12 hours. Information relative to smoking and exercise habits was obtained; seated blood pressures were measured; and blood drawn. KCS men had higher risk values than KCS women as related to HDLC, triglycerides, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure. Smoking and nonsmoking groups did not differ for other risk factors or for serum Ca(++) levels. Exercise and sedentary groups differed in total cholesterol and triglyceride levels. Serum Ca(++) levels were related to age, increasing with age in the sedentary group and decreasing in the exercisers, equally for men and women. It is concluded that these relationships may be significant to the risk of CHD and/or the risk of bone demineralization in an aging population.

Goodwin, Lisa Ann↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lower neck injury criteria for THOR and Hybrid III dummies in rear impact

The objectives of the study are to derive lower-neck-injury probability curves under rear impact loading from matched pair Hybrid III and THOR dummy tests. Methods: Twelve whole-body and 15 isolated head-neck rear-impact sled tests were conducted using the 2 dummies. They were positioned on a rigid seat that was attached to an acceleration sled. The dummies were positioned with the head parallel to the ground, torso against the seat back, and legs stretched such that there was no axial rotation. The acceleration pulse matched the previous in-house human cadaver tests. The 6-axis lower-neck load cell was used in both dummies. For the isolated rear-impact tests,the head-neck was excised from the dummies, and the lower-neck load cell was mounted to the top of the sled with the head parallel to the ground and such that the acceleration vector was in the rear impact mode. Lower-neck loads and lower-neck-injury criteria (LNij) were obtained using the load cell data and survival analysis to develop injury-assessment-risk values and curves for both dummies. The LNij criteria were determined for both dummies using the intercept value corresponding to the 90% probability level for the forces and moments. Results: The log normal and Weibull distributions were the optimal distributions for the Hybrid III and THOR devices. At the 50% risk level, the mean LNij of 1.1 and NCIS was 0.77 for the Hybrid III, and 1.5 NCIS was 0.30 for the THOR device. The quality indices were in the fair range and good range for the 2 dummies, respectively, at this risk level. Conclusions: The lower-neck-based IARCs and IARVs serve as the first dataset for injury assessments, and the THOR may be a better test device for assessing injures in rear impact environments.

Narayan Yoganandan↗
NASA NTRS2020

Ensemble Methodologies for Astronaut Cancer Risk Assessment in the face of Large Uncertainties

A new approach to NASA space radiation risk modeling has successfully extended the current NASA probabilistic cancer risk model to an ensemble framework able to consider sub-model parameter uncertainty (e.g. uncertainty in a radiation quality parameter) as well as model-form uncertainty associated with differing theoretical or empirical formalisms (e.g. combined dose-rate and radiation quality effects). Ensemble methodologies are already widely used in weather prediction, modeling of infectious disease outbreaks, and certain terrestrial radiation protection applications to better understand how uncertainty may influence risk decision-making. Applying ensemble methodologies to space radiation risk projections offers the potential to efficiently incorporate emerging research results, allow for the incorporation of future (including international) models, improve uncertainty quantification for underlying sub-models developed against sparse experimental data, and reduce the impact of subjective bias on risk projections. Moreover, risk forecasting across an ensemble of multiple predictive models can provide stakeholders additional information on risk acceptance if current health/medical standards cannot be met or the level of knowledge doesn’t permit a specific risk or exposure limit to be developed for future space exploration missions. In this work, ensemble risk projections implementing multiple sub-models of radiation quality, dose and dose-rate effectiveness factors, excess risk, and latency as ensemble members are presented. Initial consensus methods for ensemble model weights and correlations to account for individual model bias are discussed. In these analyses, the ensemble forecast compares well to results from NASA's current operational cancer risk projection model used to assess permissible exposure limits and permissible mission durations for astronauts. However, a large range of projected risk values are obtained at the upper 95th confidence level where models must extrapolate beyond available biological data sets; closer agreement is seen at the median + one sigma due to the inherent similarities in available models. Future work, including the addition of new models and methods for statistical correlation between predictive members are discussed to define alternate ways of thinking about risk and ‘acceptable’ uncertainty with respect to NASA’s current permissible exposure limits.

space radiation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Ensemble Cancer Risk Model for Astronaut Risk Assessment

A new approach to NASA space radiation risk modeling has successfully extended the current NASA probabilistic cancer risk model to an ensemble framework able to consider sub-model parameter uncertainty (e.g. uncertainty in a radiation quality parameter) as well as model-form uncertainty associated with differing theoretical or empirical formalisms (e.g. combined dose-rate and radiation quality effects). Ensemble methodologies are already widely used in weather prediction, modeling of infectious disease outbreaks, and certain terrestrial radiation protection applications to better understand how uncertainty may influence risk decision-making. Applying ensemble methodologies to space radiation risk projections offers the potential to efficiently incorporate emerging research results, allow for the incorporation of future (including international) models, improve uncertainty quantification for underlying sub-models developed against sparse experimental data, and reduce the impact of subjective bias on risk projections. Moreover, risk forecasting across an ensemble of multiple predictive models can provide stakeholders additional information on risk acceptance if current health/medical standards cannot be met or the level of knowledge doesn’t permit a specific risk or exposure limit to be developed for future space exploration missions. In this work, ensemble risk projections implementing multiple sub-models of radiation quality, dose and dose-rate effectiveness factors, excess risk, and latency as ensemble members are presented. Initial consensus methods for ensemble model weights and correlations to account for individual model bias are discussed. In these analyses, the ensemble forecast compares well to results from NASA's current operational cancer risk projection model used to assess permissible exposure limits and permissible mission durations for astronauts. However, a large range of projected risk values are obtained at the upper 95th confidence level where models must extrapolate beyond available biological data sets; closer agreement is seen at the median + one sigma due to the inherent similarities in available models. Future work, including the addition of new models and methods for statistical correlation between predictive members are discussed to define alternate ways of thinking about risk and ‘acceptable’ uncertainty with respect to NASA’s current permissible exposure limits.

Lisa C Simonsen↗