Failure Containment vs Resource Sharing
Embed dynamic isolation mechanisms so shared resources deliver efficiency during nominal operations but segment automatically upon fault detection.
CyberTRIZ analysis · Space contradiction RMA028 · one of 8,235 worked contradictions published by CyberTRIZ.AI
Regulations
Business Context
Sharing power, processing, communications, sensors, and other spacecraft resources can reduce mass and improve utilization. However, shared resources create pathways through which a local fault can affect multiple functions. Complete isolation improves containment but can eliminate many of the efficiencies created through integration.
Space TRIZ Resolution
Resources can remain shared during nominal operations while incorporating mechanisms that create isolation when abnormal behavior occurs. Switchable interfaces, partitioned software, current limiting, network segmentation, configurable routing, and independent protection zones allow the architecture to transition from efficient sharing to controlled separation when required.
Applicable TRIZ Principles
Principle 15 – Dynamics changes resource connectivity according to system condition.
Principle 2 – Taking Out disconnects malfunctioning elements from shared resources.
Principle 5 – Merging retains resource-sharing benefits during normal operation.
Expected Outcome
Efficient resource sharing
Improved fault containment
Reduced failure propagation
Lower hardware duplication
Decision Indicators
Early indicators include:
Shared-resource failures affect several spacecraft functions.
Isolation requires permanent duplication of major resources.
Systems cannot disconnect faulty users dynamically.
Integration increases common failure exposure.
Resource sharing and fault containment are treated as mutually exclusive design choices.