6 research outputs found

    Cabin Environment Physics Risk Model

    Get PDF
    This paper presents a Cabin Environment Physics Risk (CEPR) model that predicts the time for an initial failure of Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) functionality to propagate into a hazardous environment and trigger a loss-of-crew (LOC) event. This physics-of failure model allows a probabilistic risk assessment of a crewed spacecraft to account for the cabin environment, which can serve as a buffer to protect the crew during an abort from orbit and ultimately enable a safe return. The results of the CEPR model replace the assumption that failure of the crew critical ECLSS functionality causes LOC instantly, and provide a more accurate representation of the spacecraft's risk posture. The instant-LOC assumption is shown to be excessively conservative and, moreover, can impact the relative risk drivers identified for the spacecraft. This, in turn, could lead the design team to allocate mass for equipment to reduce overly conservative risk estimates in a suboptimal configuration, which inherently increases the overall risk to the crew. For example, available mass could be poorly used to add redundant ECLSS components that have a negligible benefit but appear to make the vehicle safer due to poor assumptions about the propagation time of ECLSS failures

    Comparative Analysis of Static and Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment

    Get PDF
    Implementation of risk-informed design allows the design team to thoroughly explore the risks of a system while iterating the operations concept, design, and requirements until the system meets mission objects and is achievable within constraints. To arrive at a space system design that is likely to meet all constraints placed upon mass, cost, performance and risk, the system requirements must be understood and traded against each other as early as the conceptual design phase. Depending on the project phase and the goals of the risk analysis, various PRA methodologies could be used to produce quantitative risk estimates to enable such a process. In order to better understand the applicability, advantages, and limitations of various PRA methodologies, a comparative analysis of three bottom-up, component-based PRA approaches was performed. The three methods examined are a traditional static fault tree, a fault tree hybrid, and a dynamic Monte Carlo simulation. Each approach was used to assess a generic reaction control system (RCS) thruster pod and mission. The methods are assessed in terms of the process of modeling a system, the actionable information produced for the design team, and the overall fidelity of the quantitative risk evaluation generated. The paper also discusses the applicability of each methodology to the different phases of system development

    Dynamic Simulation Probabalistic Risk Assessment Model for an Enceladus Sample Return Mission

    Get PDF
    Enceladus, a moon of Saturn, has geyser-like jets that spray plumes of material into orbit. These jets could enable a free-flying spacecraft to collect samples and return them to Earth for study to determine if they contain the building blocks of life. The Office of Planetary Protection at NASA requires containment of any unsterilized samples and prohibits destructive impact of the spacecraft upon return to Earth, with a sample release probability of less than 1 in 1,000,000 as a recommended goal. This paper describes a probabilistic risk assessment model that uses dynamic simulation techniques to capture the physics-based, time- and state-dependent interactions between the sample return system and the environment, which drive the risk of sample release. The dynamic approach uses a Monte Carlo-style simulation to integrate the many phases and sources of risk for a sample return mission. The model is used to assess the achievability of the planetary protection reliability goal. This is accomplished by performing sensitivity studies assessing the impact of modeling assumptions to identify where uncertainties drive the risk. These results, in turn, are used to examine the feasibility of meeting key design and performance parameters that are needed to achieve the reliability goal for a given architecture with existing technologies

    Comparative Analysis of Static and Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment

    Get PDF
    This study examines three different methodologies for producing loss-of-mission (LOM) and loss-of-crew (LOC) risks estimates for probabilistic risk assessments (PRA) of crewed spacecraft. The three bottom-up, component-based PRA approaches examined are a traditional static fault tree, a dynamic Monte Carlo simulation, and a fault tree hybrid that incorporates some dynamic elements. These approaches were used to model the reaction control system thruster pod of a generic crewed spacecraft and mission, and a comparative analysis of the methods is presented. The methodologies are assessed in terms of the process of modeling a system, the actionable information produced for the design team, and the overall fidelity of the quantitative risk evaluation generated. The system modeling process is compared in terms of the effort required to generate the initial model, update the model in response to design changes, and support mass-versus-risk trade studies. The results are compared by examining the top-level LOM/LOC estimates and the relative risk driver rankings at the failure mode level. The fidelity of each modeling methodology is discussed in terms of its capability to handle real-world system dynamics such as cold-sparing, changes in mission operations due to loss of redundancy, and common cause failure modes. The paper also discusses the applicability of each methodology to different phases of system development and shows that a single methodology may not be suitable for all of the many purposes of a spacecraft PRA. The fault tree hybrid approach is shown to be best suited to the needs of early assessments during conceptual design phases. As the design begins to mature, the level of detail represented in the risk model must go beyond redundancy and nominal mission operations to include dynamic, time- and state-dependent system responses as well as diverse system capabilities. This is best accomplished using the dynamic simulation approach, since these phenomena are not easily captured by static methods. Ultimately, once the design has been finalized and the goal of the PRA is to provide design validation and requirement verification, more traditional, static fault tree approaches may become as appropriate as the simulation method

    Engineering Risk Assessment of Space Thruster Challenge Problem

    Get PDF
    The Engineering Risk Assessment (ERA) team at NASA Ames Research Center utilizes dynamic models with linked physics-of-failure analyses to produce quantitative risk assessments of space exploration missions. This paper applies the ERA approach to the baseline and extended versions of the PSAM Space Thruster Challenge Problem, which investigates mission risk for a deep space ion propulsion system with time-varying thruster requirements and operations schedules. The dynamic mission is modeled using a combination of discrete and continuous-time reliability elements within the commercially available GoldSim software. Loss-of-mission (LOM) probability results are generated via Monte Carlo sampling performed by the integrated model. Model convergence studies are presented to illustrate the sensitivity of integrated LOM results to the number of Monte Carlo trials. A deterministic risk model was also built for the three baseline and extended missions using the Ames Reliability Tool (ART), and results are compared to the simulation results to evaluate the relative importance of mission dynamics. The ART model did a reasonable job of matching the simulation models for the baseline case, while a hybrid approach using offline dynamic models was required for the extended missions. This study highlighted that state-of-the-art techniques can adequately adapt to a range of dynamic problems

    Conceptual Launch Vehicle and Spacecraft Design for Risk Assessment

    Get PDF
    One of the most challenging aspects of developing human space launch and exploration systems is minimizing and mitigating the many potential risk factors to ensure the safest possible design while also meeting the required cost, weight, and performance criteria. In order to accomplish this, effective risk analyses and trade studies are needed to identify key risk drivers, dependencies, and sensitivities as the design evolves. The Engineering Risk Assessment (ERA) team at NASA Ames Research Center (ARC) develops advanced risk analysis approaches, models, and tools to provide such meaningful risk and reliability data throughout vehicle development. The goal of the project presented in this memorandum is to design a generic launch 7 vehicle and spacecraft architecture that can be used to develop and demonstrate these new risk analysis techniques without relying on other proprietary or sensitive vehicle designs. To accomplish this, initial spacecraft and launch vehicle (LV) designs were established using historical sizing relationships for a mission delivering four crewmembers and equipment to the International Space Station (ISS). Mass-estimating relationships (MERs) were used to size the crew capsule and launch vehicle, and a combination of optimization techniques and iterative design processes were employed to determine a possible two-stage-to-orbit (TSTO) launch trajectory into a 350-kilometer orbit. Primary subsystems were also designed for the crewed capsule architecture, based on a 24-hour on-orbit mission with a 7-day contingency. Safety analysis was also performed to identify major risks to crew survivability and assess the system's overall reliability. These procedures and analyses validate that the architecture's basic design and performance are reasonable to be used for risk trade studies. While the vehicle designs presented are not intended to represent a viable architecture, they will provide a valuable initial platform for developing and demonstrating innovative risk assessment capabilities
    corecore