An Heritage Approach to Aerospace Risk Based Design: With ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Design Definition Reliability Mitigation Trade / Optimization Expansion Reliability Model Catastrophic Frequency Event Scenarios Event Mitigation (+) False Positives (-) Shutdown Frequency Event Scenarios New Design Requirements: • Red-line Logic and Sensors • Health Monitoring Sensors and Data Acquisition • Inspection Ports • Maintainability Features Reliability Mitigation Design Loop – What mitigations are effective? • Postulate Mitigation Alternatives • Model Tasks and frequencies • Determine Human Error Probabilities • Identify solutions that meet reliability requirements Human Error Probabilities: Catastrophic/ Benign SD/Fail to Detect Mitigation Process (RCM) Support Tasks: Requirements Frequency Operability Model Mitigation Processes ! Health Monitoring – Reduces the probability of flying an engine with a component failure without human intervention ! Red Lines – Convert catastrophic failure to Shutdown – Add False positives ! Inspection/ Life Limits: – Reduce the probability of component failure – Add support tasks • Introduces human error • Adds requirements for maintainability features 28-29 October 2002 Slide 6 of 42 A Heritage Approach to Aerospace Risk Based Design: With Application Day 1 Afternoon
Make It Cost Effective Design Definition Baseline tasks required to keep engine operable Mitigation Process (RCM) Reliability Model Support Tasks/ Frequency Equipment Reliability Human Error Probabilities: Introduces Catastrophic / Benign SD or Fail to Detect Critical Failure Condition Requirements Definition Operability Model Task Analysis • Man Power Loading • Materials • Human Error Events • Probabilistic Failure Logic Constraints Task Schedule Design Modifications Top Level Criteria Cost Time Operability Criteria Criteria Met? No Evaluate alternative concepts Yes Maintainability/Supportability Optimization Design Loop • Do support costs and schedule meet requirements? Evaluate Turn Around Time and Cost • Identify Drivers, Optimize Process • If Criteria not met: Identify alternative solutions that meet cost requirements – Modify tasks: Streamline Operations / Reduce human error / Facilitate maintenance tasks – Modify design: Reduce maintenance requirements (robustness) / Optimize design for ease of maintenance (Simplicity) / Facilitate maintenance tasks (RCM) 28-29 October 2002 Slide 7 of 42 A Heritage Approach to Aerospace Risk Based Design: With Application Day 1 Afternoon
Page 1 and 2: An Heritage Approach to Aerospace R
Page 3 and 4: Three Pillars of Good Design • Ma
Page 5: Make It Safe Design Definition Good
Page 9 and 10: Develop Risk-focused WBS • Trim h
Page 11 and 12: Top Level of Shuttle PRA 1995 Study
Page 13 and 14: Shuttle PRA Restructured for Multis
Page 15 and 16: RLV Loss of Vehicle (LOV) Model (Bi
Page 17 and 18: Shuttle PRA Expanded to Included Cr
Page 19 and 20: STS PRA Generalization Functional
Page 21 and 22: Input Table Parameters From Mission
Page 23 and 24: Potential Impact of Candidate Techn
Page 25 and 26: Earth Entry Vehicle PRELIMINARY wor
Page 27 and 28: OS Configuration Sample Canister Li
Page 29 and 30: Risk-Based Design for Independent F
Page 31 and 32: Risk-based Magazine Concept Lid Mag
Page 33 and 34: Detail of Risk-Based Sealing Magazi
Page 35 and 36: Phase 7: Hypersonic Entry WAS: •
Page 37 and 38: Phase 1: Above Safe Orbit • No CN
Page 39 and 40: Impact Velocities The Impact Veloci
Page 41 and 42: Mission Probability of CNA 1.E+00 1

An Heritage Approach to Aerospace Risk Based Design: With ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?