The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between and the effects of hard and soft safety verifications. Initially, the terminology should be defined and clarified. A hard safety verification is datum which demonstrates how a safety control is enacted. An example of this is relief valve testing. A soft safety verification is something which is usually described as nice to have but it is not necessary to prove safe operation. An example of a soft verification is the loss of the Solid Rocket Booster (SRB) casings from Shuttle flight, STS-4. When the main parachutes failed, the casings impacted the water and sank. In the nose cap of the SRBs, video cameras recorded the release of the parachutes to determine safe operation and to provide information for potential anomaly resolution. Generally, examination of the casings and nozzles contributed to understanding of the newly developed boosters and their operation. Safety verification of SRB operation was demonstrated by examination for erosion or wear of the casings and nozzle. Loss of the SRBs and associated data did not delay the launch of the next Shuttle flight.


    Zugriff

    Zugriff über TIB

    Verfügbarkeit in meiner Bibliothek prüfen


    Exportieren, teilen und zitieren



    Titel :

    Hard and Soft Safety Verifications


    Beteiligte:
    J. Wetherholt (Autor:in) / B. Anderson (Autor:in)

    Erscheinungsdatum :

    2012


    Format / Umfang :

    6 pages


    Medientyp :

    Report


    Format :

    Keine Angabe


    Sprache :

    Englisch




    Hard and Soft Safety Verifications

    Wetherholt, Jon / Anderson, Brenda | NTRS | 2012


    Hard and Soft Verifications

    Wetherholt, Jon / Anderson, Brenda | NTRS | 2012


    Modelisation et verifications comportementales. Behavioural modelling and verifications

    Cicchetti, R. / Poncelet, P. / Teisseire, M. et al. | British Library Conference Proceedings | 1997