Space Systems Engineering

Similar documents
Space Systems Engineering

Space Systems Engineering

Space Systems Engineering

Course Overview/Systems Engineering

Mid Term Exam SES 405 Exploration Systems Engineering 3 March Your Name

Understand that technology has different levels of maturity and that lower maturity levels come with higher risks.

Jerome Tzau TARDEC System Engineering Group. UNCLASSIFIED: Distribution Statement A. Approved for public release. 14 th Annual NDIA SE Conf Oct 2011

ARTES Competitiveness & Growth Full Proposal. Requirements for the Content of the Technical Proposal. Part 3B Product Development Plan

Addressing International Lunar Surface Operations Click to edit Master title style

Typical Project Life Cycle

Program Success Through SE Discipline in Technology Maturity. Mr. Chris DiPetto Deputy Director Developmental Test & Evaluation October 24, 2006

Intermediate Systems Acquisition Course. Lesson 2.2 Selecting the Best Technical Alternative. Selecting the Best Technical Alternative

Incorporating a Test Flight into the Standard Development Cycle

System Architecture Module Exploration Systems Engineering, version 1.0

PACE Science Definition Team Kickoff Meeting. Paula Bontempi, Betsy Edwards, Eric Ianson, Hal Maring, Woody

NASA Cost Symposium Multivariable Instrument Cost Model-TRL (MICM-TRL)

NASA Mars Exploration Program Update to the Planetary Science Subcommittee

C. R. Weisbin, R. Easter, G. Rodriguez January 2001

NASA s X2000 Program - an Institutional Approach to Enabling Smaller Spacecraft

A System Maturity Index for Decision Support in Life Cycle Acquisition

Exploration Systems Research & Technology

Space Architecture MARYLAND U N I V E R S I T Y O F. Space Architecture. ENAE 483/788D - Principles of Space Systems Design

PLATO Preliminary Requirements Review Technical Report

The PROBA Missions Design Capabilities for Autonomous Guidance, Navigation and Control. Jean de Lafontaine President

SwissCube Project. 3rd Annual Cubesat Workshop April 27, Prof. Herbert Shea EPFL Microsystems for Space Technologies Laboratory

Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Business Case Considerations An Enabler of Risk Reduction

Challenges and Innovations in Digital Systems Engineering

Human System Integration: Challenges and Opportunities

Committee on Astrobiology & Planetary Science (CAPS) Michael H. New, PhD Astrobiology Discipline Scientist

NASA Space Exploration 1 st Year Report

ARMADILLO: Subsystem Booklet

NASA s Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Programs. May 2, 2007

Manufacturing Readiness Assessment (MRA) Deskbook

Introduction to Software Requirements and Design

Constellation Systems Division

Dan Dvorak and Lorraine Fesq Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. Jonathan Wilmot NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

When Failure Means Success: Accepting Risk in Aerospace Projects NASA Project Management Challenge 2009

GLAST Large Area Telescope:

This document is a preview generated by EVS

Human Exploration Systems and Mobility Capability Roadmap. Chris Culbert, NASA Chair Jeff Taylor, External Chair

launch probability of success

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT FY12 TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION MISSIONS PROGRAM OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TECHNOLOGIST PROPOSALS DUE.

ENGINE TEST CONFIDENCE EVALUATION SYSTEM

TRLs and MRLs: Supporting NextFlex PC 2.0

Technology Readiness for the Smart Grid

Stakeholder Expectations Definition Process

Space Mission Engineering The New Smad Space Technology Library Vol 28

Dream Chaser for European Utilization (DC 4 EU):

DoDI and WSARA* Impacts on Early Systems Engineering

Technology & Manufacturing Readiness RMS

Pterodactyl: Integrated Control Design for Precision Targeting of Deployable Entry Vehicles

Our Acquisition Challenges Moving Forward

UNIT-III LIFE-CYCLE PHASES

Space Technology FY 2013

Manufacturing Readiness Level Deskbook

The Future for CubeSats Present and Coming Launch Opportunities 18th Annual AIAA / USU Conference on Small Satellites CubeSat Workshop

ARTES Competitiveness & Growth Full Proposal. Requirements for the Content of the Technical Proposal

Ground Systems Department

Benefits of Standardization in National Space Activities: ASI and the European Cooperation for Space Standardization (ECSS)

ESA PREPARATION FOR HUMAN LUNAR EXPLORATION. Scott Hovland European Space Agency, HME-HFH, ESTEC,

COTS and automotive EEE parts in Space Programs: Thales Alenia Space Return of Experience

CubeSat Proximity Operations Demonstration (CPOD) Mission Update Cal Poly CubeSat Workshop San Luis Obispo, CA

Technology and Manufacturing Readiness Levels [Draft]

The use of technical readiness levels in planning the fusion energy development

Object-Oriented Design

Systems Engineering Overview. Axel Claudio Alex Gonzalez

Fundamentals of Systems Engineering

Course Overview/Design Project

10/29/2018. Apollo Management Lessons for Moon-Mars Initiative. I Have Learned To Use The Word Impossible With The Greatest Caution.

Design for Affordability in Complex Systems and Programs Using Tradespace-based Affordability Analysis

Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) Deskbook Version 2016

FAA Research and Development Efforts in SHM

The ESA A&R technology R&D

The Aerospace Corporation s Concept Design Center

Introduction to MATE-CON. Presented By Hugh McManus Metis Design 3/27/03

Human Spaceflight Programmes and Possible Greek Participation

ESA UNCLASSIFIED - Releasable to the Public. ESA Workshop: Research Opportunities on the Deep Space Gateway

Section G. Management, Schedule, & Budget

Design and Operation of Micro-Gravity Dynamics and Controls Laboratories

On January 14, 2004, the President announced a new space exploration vision for NASA

CubeSat Standard Updates

Nanosat Deorbit and Recovery System to Enable New Missions

Fault Management Architectures and the Challenges of Providing Software Assurance

Technology Transition Assessment in an Acquisition Risk Management Context

James Bilbro 1, Cornelius Dennehy 2, Prasun Desai 3, Corinne Kramer 4, William Nolte 5, Richard Widman 6, Richard Weinstein 7

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The Planetary Science Technology Review Panel Final Report Summary

Flexibility for in Space Propulsion Technology Investment. Jonathan Battat ESD.71 Engineering Systems Analysis for Design Application Portfolio

The Virtual Spacecraft Reference Facility

The NASA-ESA. Comparative Architecture Assessment

Systems Engineering Process

ESA Human Spaceflight Capability Development and Future Perspectives International Lunar Conference September Toronto, Canada

Planetary CubeSats, nanosatellites and sub-spacecraft: are we all talking about the same thing?

A Case Study of Changing the Tires on the Bus While Moving

Costs of Achieving Software Technology Readiness

NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team Cis-Lunar Analysis. M. Lupisella 1, M. R. Bobskill 2

How to Capture Discrete Cost Risks in Your Project Cost Model

CubeSat Integration into the Space Situational Awareness Architecture

Manufacturing Readiness Assessments of Technology Development Projects

A DEEP SPACE COMPANY BY A WORLD TEAM THE FED EXPRESS OF THE 21ST CENTURY TONY SPEAR OCTOBER 2007

Dave Podlesney Program Director Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company

Transcription:

Background of Systems Engineering NASA program planning phases Scheduled milestones Requirements document Work breakdown structure Technology readiness levels Project management tools Design reference missions and CONOPS Earned value management Risk tracking 1 2009 David L. Akin - All rights reserved http://spacecraft.ssl.umd.edu

Schedule Updates Special lecture Friday 9/4 - Orbital Mechanics 1:00-2:30pm ITV1111 Special lecture Friday 9/11 - Rover Design 2 1:00-2:30pm ITV1111 No lectures on Tuesday 9/15 and Thursday 9/17 - meet with your preliminary design teams! 2

Assigned Groups for Initial Design Project Team Alpha Jayne Breitwieser Andrew Britton Kevin Davis Brandon Hall Marissa Intelisano Leon Manfredi Team Beta Jennifer Donaldson Taylor Feiereisel Zachary Gonnsen Brandon Litt Lauren Puglisi Team Gamma Gregory Holste Rodric Richenberg Ji-Hyoung Woo Wayne Yu Albert Zhou Team Delta James Doggett Justin Hill Samantha Lustig Christopher Mak Robert Wagner Timothy White Team Epsilon Kevin Buckley Ricardo Gutierrez Laura Meyer Elaine Petro Tut Gatyiel 3

Overview of Systems Engineering Developed to handle large, complex systems Geographically disparate Cutting-edge technologies Significant time/cost constraints Failure-critical First wide-spread applications in aerospace programs of the 1950 s (e.g., ICBMs) Rigorous, systematic approach to organization and record-keeping 4

NASA Lifecycle Overview 5

NASA Formulation Stage Overview 6

Space Systems Development Process Pre-Phase A Conceptual Design Phase Development of performance goals and requirements Establishment of Science Working Group (science missions) Trade studies of mission concepts Feasibility and preliminary cost analyses Request for Phase A proposals 7

Space Systems Development Process Pre-Phase A Phase A Preliminary Analysis Phase Proof of concept analyses Mission operations concepts Build vs. buy decisions Payload definition Selection of experimenters Detailed trajectory analysis Target program schedule RFP for Phase B studies 8

Space Systems Development Process Pre-Phase A Phase A Phase B Definition Phase Define baseline technical solutions Create requirements document Significant reviews: Systems Requirements Review Systems Design Review Non-Advocate Review Request for Phase C/D proposals 9

Historical Implications of Study Phases from J. A. Moody, ed., Metrics and Case Studies for Evaluating Engineering Designs Prentice-Hall, 1997 10

Implementation Stage Overview 11

Space Systems Development Process Pre-Phase A Phase A Phase B Phase C/D Development Phase Detailed design process Cutting metal Test and analysis Significant reviews: Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Critical Design Review (CDR) Test Acceptance Review Flight Readiness Review Ends at launch of vehicle 12

The Space Systems Development Pre-Phase A Phase A Phase B Operations and End-of-Life Launch On-orbit Check-out Mission Operations Maintenance and Troubleshooting Failure monitoring End-of-life disposal Phase C/D Phase E/F 13

NASA Project Life Cycle - Milestones from NASA SP-2007-6105 rev. 1, NASA Systems Engineering Handbook 14

NASA Project Life Cycle - Acronyms from NASA SP-2007-6105 rev. 1, NASA Systems Engineering Handbook 15

ASUMD* Program Goals To design a astronaut support vehicle that is compatible with Constellation architecture and supports exploration objectives To design and develop a function prototype of the ASUMD for field testing in support of project design activities To disseminate information on ASUMD feasibility and utility to decision makers at NASA and elsewhere *(feel free come up with a better name...) 16

ASUMD Program Objectives Design a robotic rover capable of performing both autonomous and human-assistant tasks for lunar exploration Examine possible requirements for operational performance (e.g., range, speed, payload, capabilities) to maximize the likelihood of program approval and field utility The rover must be capable of launching on an Altair landing vehicle with minimal impact to critical down-payload 17

Requirements Document The bible of the design and development process Lists (clearly, unambiguously, numerically) what is required to successfully complete the program Requirements flow-down results in successively finer levels of detail May be subject to change as state of knowledge grows Critical tool for maintaining program budgets 18

Akin s Laws of Spacecraft Design - #13 Design is based on requirements. There's no justification for designing something one bit "better" than the requirements dictate. 19

Interface Control Documents Used to clearly specify interfaces (mechanical, electrical, data, etc.) between mating systems Critical since systems may not be fit-checked until assembled on-orbit! Success of a program may be driven by careful choices of interfaces KISS principle holds here ( keep it simple, stupid ) 20

Akin s Laws of Spacecraft Design - #15 (Shea's Law) The ability to improve a design occurs primarily at the interfaces. This is also the prime location for screwing it up. 21

Work Breakdown Structures Detailed outline of all tasks required to develop and operate the system Successively finer levels of detail Program (e.g., Constellation Program) Project (Lunar Exploration) Mission (Lunar Sortie Exploration) System (Pressurized Rover) Subsystem (Life Support System) Assembly (CO 2 Scrubber System) Subassembly, Component, Part,... 22

NASA Standard WBS Levels 1 & 2 23

Standard WBS for JPL Mission WBS Levels 1 2 3 Project Management 01 Project Mgmnt 01.01 Project Sys Eng 02 Project Sys Eng 02.01 Mission Assurance 03 MA Mgmnt 03.01 Science 04 Science Mgmnt 04.01 Project Name Payload 05 P/L Mgmnt 05.01 Flight System 06 Spacecraft Contract 06.00 Mission Ops System 07 Mission Ops Mgmnt 07.01 Launch System 08 Launch Services 08.01 Business Mgmnt 01.02 Mission & Nav Design 02.02 System Safety 03.02 Science Team 04.02 P/L Sys Eng 05.02 Flt Sys Mgmnt 06.01 MOS Sys Eng 07.02 Risk Mgmnt 01.03 Project SW Eng 02.03 Environments 03.03 Sci Data Support 04.03 Instrument 1 05.03 Flt Sys - Sys Eng 06.02 Ground Data Sys 07.03 Project Plng Spt 01.04 Information Systems 02.04 Reliability 03.04 Sci Investigatio & Ops Spt 04.04 Instrument N 05.04 Power Subsys 06.03 Operations 07.04 Review Support 01.05 Config Mgmnt 02.05 EEE Parts Eng 03.05 Sci Environment Characterization 04.05 Common P/L Systems 05.05 Command & Data S/s 06.04 MOS V&V 07.05 Facilities 01.06 Planetary Protection 02.06 HW Q&A 03.06 Education & Outreach 04.06 P/L I&T 05.06 Telecomm Subsys 06.05 Foreign Travel/ITAR 01.07 Launch Sys Eng 02.07 SW Q&A 03.07 Mechanical Subsys 06.06 Project V&V 02.08 Contamination Control 03.08 Thermal Subsys 06.07 SW IV&V 03.09 Propulsion Subsys 06.08 GN&C Subsys 06.09 Spacecraft Flt SW 06.10 24 Testbeds 06.11 Spacecraft assembly test & verification ENAE 483/788D - Principles 06.12of Space Systems Design

Detail in JPL Flight Systems Column 1. Spacecraft Contract 2. Flight Systems Management 3. Flight Systems - Systems Engineering 4. Power Systems 5. Command and Data Handling Systems 6. Telecommunications Systems 7. Mechanical Systems 8. Thermal Systems 9. Propulsion Systems 10.Guidance, Navigation, and Control Systems 11.Spacecraft Flight Software 12.Testbeds 13.Spacecraft Assembly, Test, and Verification 25

Akin s Laws of Spacecraft Design - #24 It's called a "Work Breakdown Structure" because the Work remaining will grow until you have a Breakdown, unless you enforce some Structure on it. 26

Technology Readiness Levels TRL 9 TRL 8 TRL 7 TRL 6 TRL 5 TRL 4 TRL 3 TRL 2 TRL 1 Actual system flight proven through successful mission operations Actual system completed and flight qualified through test and demonstration System prototype demonstration in the real environment System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment Component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environment Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof-of-concept Technology concept and/or application formulated Basic principles observed and reported 27

PERT* Charts Task Title Task Duration Slack Time Earliest Starting Date Earliest Completion Date *Program Evaluation and Review Technique 28

The Critical Path and Slack Time 29

The Critical Path and Slack Time 30

Cascading Slack Time 31

Gantt* Charts ID Task Name D u r a t i o n S t a r t F i n i s h P r e d e c 1 Design Robot 4w Tue 9/3/02 Mon 9/30/02 2 Build Head 6w Tue 10/1/02 Mon 11/11/02 1 3 Build Body 4w Tue 10/1/02 Mon 10/28/02 1 4 Build Legs 3w Tue 10/1/02 Mon 10/21/02 1 5 Assemble 2w Tue 11/12/02 Mon 11/25/02 2,3,4 September O c t o b e r N o v e m b e r 9/1 9/8 9/15 9/22 9/29 10/6 10/13 10/20 10/27 11/3 11/10 11/17 11/24 12/1 *developed by Charles Gantt in 1917 32

Some Pitfalls of Project Management 33

Akin s Laws of Spacecraft Design - #23 The schedule you develop will seem like a complete work of fiction up until the time your customer fires you for not meeting it. 34

Design Reference Missions Description of canonical mission(s) for use in design processes Could take the form of a narrative, storyboard, pictogram, timeline, or combination thereof Greater degree of detail where needed (e.g., surface operations) Created by eventual users of the system ( stakeholders ) very early in development cycle 35

Concept of Operations Description of how the proposed system will accomplish the design reference mission(s) Will appear to be similar to DRM, but is a product of the design, rather than a driving requirement Frequently referred to as CONOPS, showing DOD origins 36

Space Systems Architecture Description of physical hardware, processes, and operations to perform DRM Term is used widely (e.g., software architecture, mission architecture, planning architecture ), but refers to basic configuration decisions Generally result of significant trade studies to compare options 37

ESAS Final Architecture/CONOPS 38

Earned Value Management Consider a simple program with four two-month tasks that are expected to cost various amounts $4 M $10 M $6 M $8 M $2M $7M $8M $7M $4M Planned monthly costs 1 2 3 4 5 Months 39

Program Cost Accounting Traditionally monitored by burn rate - cumulative expenditures with time 25 Costs ($M) 20 15 10 5 Cumulative 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Months 40

Earned Value Management - Month 1 In the first month, you complete 60% of task 1 and 10% of task 2 Actual costs for month 1 = $3 M EV=$3.4 M $4 M EV(1)=0.6*4=$2.4 M $10 M EV(2)=0.1*10=$1 M $6 M $8 M 1 2 3 4 5 Months 41

Earned Value Management - Month 2 In the second month, you complete 100% of task 1 and 60% of task 2 Actual costs for month 2 = $10 M EV=$10 M $4 M EV(1)=1.0*4=$4 M $10 M EV(2)=0.6*10=$6 M $6 M $8 M 1 2 3 4 5 Months 42

Earned Value Management - Month 3 In the third month, you complete 100% of task 1, 80% of task 2, and 40% of task 3 Actual costs for month 3 = $16 M EV=$14.4 M $4 M EV(1)=1.0*4=$4 M $10 M EV(2)=0.8*10=$8 M $6 M EV(3)=0.4*6=$2.4 M $8 M 1 2 3 4 5 Months 43

Program Cost Accounting - Tracking Plotting actual costs vs. time shows how money is spent, but doesn t tell anything about how much work has been accomplished 25 20 Costs ($M) 15 10 5 Cumulative Actual 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Months 44

Program Cost Accounting - Tracking Earned value tracks accomplishments against their planned costs Variation shows schedule performance 25 20 Costs ($M) 15 10 5 Cumulative Earned Value 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Months 45

Program Cost Accounting - Tracking Comparing earned value to actual costs shows apples to apples comparison of money spent and value achieved 25 20 Costs ($M) 15 10 5 Cumulative Earned Value Actual 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Months 46

Decision Analysis Tools A number of different approaches exist, e.g. Pugh Matrices Quality Function Deployment Analytic Hierarchy Process Generally provide a way to make decisions where no single clear analytical metric exists - quantifying opinions Allows use of subjective rankings between criteria to create numerical weightings Not a substitute for rigorous analysis! 47

Risk Matrix 48

References (Available on Web Site) NASA Systems Engineering Handbook - SP-6105 - June, 1995 [2.3 Mb, 164 pgs.] (Obsolete, but nice description of NASA's systems engineering approach) NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements - NPR 7123.1A - March 26, 2007 [3.6 Mb, 97 pgs.] (Current version - pages are almost impossible to read without a magnifying glass) NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements - NPR 7120.5D - March 6, 2007 [2.7 Mb, 50 pgs.] (Current version - pages are almost impossible to read without a magnifying glass) NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements - NPR 7120.5C - March 22, 2005 [1.9 Mb, 174 pgs.] (Older, superceded version, but includes more figures and is readable by mere mortals) NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Procedures and Guidelines: Systems Engineering - GPG 7120.5B - 2002 [1.7 Mb, 31 pgs.] NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Mission Design Processes (The "Green Book") [860 Kb, 54 pgs.] 49