National Aeronautics   and   Space Administration   Jet Propulsion   Laboratory   California Institute of   Technology   P...
National AeronauticsandSpace AdministrationJet PropulsionLaboratoryCalifornia Institute ofTechnologyPasadena, California  ...
National Aeronautics and                                       Current Environment -           Space Administration       ...
Pre-Phase A and Formulation Phase Life Cycle                                                                              ...
National Aeronautics      and                                               Review Detail      Space Administration      J...
National Aeronautics and                                       Additional Improvements and           Space Administration ...
National Aeronautics                                  Absent: a Common Language for        and        Space Administration...
What’s in a Mission      National Aeronautics      and      Space Administration      Jet Propulsion      Laboratory      ...
National Aeronautics       and                                 Elements of a Concept       Space Administration       Jet ...
National Aeronautics      and      Space Administration                                A Powerful Communication Tool      ...
Summary CML Matrix                                                                                                        ...
National Aeronautics          and          Space Administration          Jet Propulsion                                   ...
Pre-Phase A and Formulation Phase Life        National Aeronautics        and        Space Administration        Jet Propu...
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Charles.leising
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Charles.leising

13,590 views
13,586 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
13,590
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Charles.leising

  1. 1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California Increasing the Robustness of Flight Project Concepts Project Manager Challenge C.J. Leising B. Sherwood Dr. M. Adler Dr. R. Wessen Dr. F. Naderi February 9, 2010Copyright 2009 CaliforniaInstitute of Technology.Government sponsorshipacknowledged. Used with permission
  2. 2. National AeronauticsandSpace AdministrationJet PropulsionLaboratoryCalifornia Institute ofTechnologyPasadena, California “A Tale of Two Cities”
  3. 3. National Aeronautics and Current Environment - Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Concept Development Technology Pasadena, California• Lack of insight, resources, workforce or time to assess all significant risks• Inability to communicate concept maturity• Minimum guidelines on how to incorporate or evaluate concept “robustness”• Competitive, cost capped environment• Fewer new starts, desire to win and unwarranted optimism2/9/2010 PM Challenge 3
  4. 4. Pre-Phase A and Formulation Phase Life Cycle (Updated 10.26.2009) Advanced Concept Step 1 Step 2 Phase BProject Preliminary Design andPhase Studies Development Proposal Proposal Technology Completion • Identify & Develop New • Develop Innovative • Develop Step 1 • Develop Step 2 Concept Study • Validate • Develop Final Sys Reqts Concepts Mission Concepts for Proposal, With Report, With Final Mission & Implementation • Develop Prelim Design • Perform Advanced Studies Rapid Proposal Response Recommended Sci Reqts, S/C Concept, Approach • Develop Baseline Project • Assess Sci Drivers • Identify Driving Level 1 Reqts, Technology Assessment, Cost • Develop Prelim Plan and PIP • Identify Technology Options Requirements S/C Concept, & Schedule Project Plan & • Develop Phase C/D Plan • Perform Technology Cost & Sched • Assemble Project Team PIP Evaluation Draft AO Down Site Project AO release Select Visit Selection KDP-C Major PIs identify mission concepts Step 1 Step 2 Project Gates & Concept Portfolio Cost Baseline Commitment Proposal Proposal CSR Reviews Review Gate Preview Commitment Review/Gate Gate/Proposal Implementation Reviews Submitted Risk Review Submitted PMSR PDR Advanced Studies Pre-Phase A Phase A Phase BProject Concept Development Concept & Technology Preliminary Design andPhase Development Technology Completion • Identify & Develop New • Develop Draft Mission Reqts • Develop Prelim Sys Reqts • Develop Final Sys Reqts Concepts • Perform Mission and S/C Studies and • Complete Technology Assessment • Develop Prelim Mission and S/C Design • Perform Advanced Studies Technology Evaluation • Baseline Mission and S/C Concepts • Develop Baseline Project Plan & PIP • Assess Sci Drivers • Propose Baseline Mission Concept • Develop Prelim Project Plan, PIP and & • Develop Phase C/D Plan • Identify Technology Options • Develop Phase A Plan Final Technology Development Plan • Demonstrate Technology Form/Fit/Function • Develop Phase B Plan • Assemble Project Team Science Advisory Initiate Science Instrument Acquisition Group Pre-Project Definition KDP-A AO Strategy Meeting KDP-B KDP-C Team Major Project Milestones Mission & Reviews Study Report MCR SRR MDR PDR2/9/2010 PM Challenge 4
  5. 5. National Aeronautics and Review Detail Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California Project Advanced Concept Step 1 Step 2 Phase Studies Development Proposal Proposal Draft AO Down AO Release Select PI’s identify mission Major concepts Step 1 Step 2 Project Gates & Reviews Concept Portfolio Cost Baseline Commitment Proposal Review Gate Preview Commitment Gate/Proposal Implementation Review/Gate Submitted Risk Review CML 1 2 3 4 5 - CML tied to a life cycle milestone - CML that occurs between life cycle milestones2/9/2010 PM Challenge 5
  6. 6. National Aeronautics and Additional Improvements and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Innovations Technology Pasadena, California • New Metric - Concept Maturity Levels • New P4 document that quantifies requirements and guidelines • New tools and templates • Increased Formulation Team support • Organizational improvements • New training for pre-phase A community2/9/2010 PM Challenge 6
  7. 7. National Aeronautics Absent: a Common Language for and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory Concepts California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California • Planetary Projects are overrunning their budgets during development - Concept baselines are the basis for establishing project costs • Need a common language to assess a concept’s completeness, robustness and maturity Trades Alternatives and Selections Comments Launch vehicle Atlas V Delta IV-Heavy Ares V Ares V considered acceptable only for sample return concepts launched post 2020. Cruise propulsion SEP + GAs Chemical + GAs Propulsive only Good performance from Chemical+Gravity How Assists (GAs). SEP+GAs warrants further consideration, but new optimized trajectory search is needed. Capture into Saturn system Titan aerocapture Propulsive capture Aerogravity assist saves mass and also saves at (aerogravity assist) least several months in pumpdown . Uranus Satellites Pump-down mission design Enceladus/Titan Multiple moon GAs Multiple moon REP+GAs Other options found to be too high delta-V or GAs only only propulsively- flight time. mature is leveraged GAs RPS type MMRTG ARPS (advanced ARPS specific power higher, efficiency much Interior higher (less Pu needed). Guidelines allowed Interior Stirling) Magnetic Energetic Surface Surface Structure ARPS as acceptable and available option for Atmosphere Structure Field Particles Structure Composition (Gravity Field) (Gravity Field) flagship studies. Orbiter implementation Enceladus Orbiter Low-Energy High-Energy Enceladus Multiple- Enceladus Multiple- Flyby (Saturn Flyby (Saturn Orbiter) Orbiter) Lg. Circ. Vertical Release of your Priority placed on having in-situ measurements Sm. Conv. Structure Internal Heat Lander/Probe implementation Fly-Through Rough Landers Soft Landers Orbi-Landers Probes and from surface. Impactors Number of landers None One Three (regional Five (larger-scale distribution) distribution and/or Fly-By redundancy) Lander lifetime/duration Short-lived (~2 Long-lived (~1 year concept? weeks on primary on RPS) battery or fuel cell) Polar Orbiter Lander mobility type Stationary Locally mobile (~10 Regionally mobile Globally mobile Considered propulsive "hopper" type concepts km) (~100 km) for soft landers. Equatorial Orbiter Acceptable and evaluated in this Legend: study Atm. Probe Acceptable but not evaluated in this study Lander Unacceptable A Enceladus orbiter with multiple B Enceladus orbiter with multiple D Enceladus orbiter becoming a (flybys) with multiple short-lived Relative Goal Science Value E Enceladus orbiter with single (flybys) with a single long-lived Mass Comparison Summary - Launch Mass and Sub-Elements G High energy Saturn orbiter H Low energy Saturn orbiter F Low energy Saturn orbiter Free-Flying I Low energy Saturn orbiter C Enceladus orbiter alone Instruments 6,000 8000 short lived landers long-lived landers long-lived lander long-lived lander Delta IV-Heavy C3=16 km^2/s^2 (flybys) alone (flybys) alone 7000 5,000 Cassini landers lander 6000 4,000 Science Goals, Enceladus Mission Science Assessment - 0-10, 10 best 5000 Atlas 551 C3=16 km^2/s^2 $FY06M Mass (kg) 1. What is the heat source, what drives the plume 10 6 7 4 5 5 2 1 3 6 1 3,000 TMC 4000 2.Lander(s) the plume production rate, and does it vary What is 8 8 9 8 9 9 7 3 8 7 3 3000 3.Orbiter are the effects of the plume on the structure and What 2,000 composition of Enceladus? 5 8 9 6 7 7 4 3 5 8 2 2000 4.Aerocapturethe interaction effects of the plume on the What are System Cruise/Prop Stage Saturnian system 3 7 7 7 6 6 8 7 8 7 1,000 7 1000 5. Does the composition and/or existence of the plume give - 0 us clues to the origin and evolution of the solar system 7 7 7 6 7 7 7 5 7 7 3 Option A Option B Option C Option D Option E Option F Option G Option H Option I A B C D E F G H I 6. Does the plume source environment provide the conditions necessary (or sufficient) to sustain biotic or pre- biotic chemistry 5 8 8 6 7 8 6 5 7 8 3 7. Are other similar bodies (Dione, Tethys, Rhea) also active, and if not, why not? 6 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 8 5 Value by Architecture, summed 52 55 45 49 50 42 31 46 51 24 Value by Architecture, weighted, summed, normalized 0.46 0.493 0.393 0.439 0.446 0.353 0.246 0.393 0.449 0.1872/9/2010 PM Challenge 7
  8. 8. What’s in a Mission National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory Concept? California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California Management Elements Engineering Elements Proposal Concepts are composed of engineering and management elements2/9/2010 PM Challenge 8
  9. 9. National Aeronautics and Elements of a Concept Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CaliforniaEngineering Elements Management Elements• Mission Objectives & Requirements • Acquisition Approach• Mission Design • Project Organization• Spacecraft System Design • Schedules & Margins• Ground System Design • Cost, Cost Risks & Reserves• Technical Risk Assessment & Mitigation • Implementation Plans• Technical Maturity • Subsystem Make-Buy• Inheritance • Work Breakdown Structure• Master Equipment List • Testbeds, Models & Spares• Technical Margins • Coordinated Cost, Schedule & Scope• Trade Space• Mission Assurance Approach• Modeling & Simulation Approach• Launch Vehicle Options• Planetary Protection Approach 2/9/2010 PM Challenge 9
  10. 10. National Aeronautics and Space Administration A Powerful Communication Tool Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California Mission Prelim CML 7 Integrated B/L Definition Review I nitial Design CML 6 Preliminary Step 1 Design Concept Baseline CML 5 Proposal Review (PDR) Preferred Design Point within CML 4 Trade Space Trade Space CML 3 I nitial Feasibility F=ma CML 2 Cocktail Napkin CML 1CMLs measure concept maturity in the same way TRLs measure technology readiness2/9/2010 PM Challenge 10
  11. 11. Summary CML Matrix November 2, 2009Name Cocktail Initial Trade Space Point Design within Concept Baseline Initial Design Prelim Cost- Napkin Feasibility Trade Space Sched-Design Integ B/LCML 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Organization PI needed for Partnering options identified Pre-Project Manager & Pre- Co-I(s), rest of Science team & Project Manager identified; Remaining Core Project Team Core project team in Earth and Project Scientist appointed key partners identified Roles & responsibilities of key identified place Astrophysics (assigned); Implementation partners defined; Draft org chart concepts mode trades performed developedSchedule Documented to Rough (or required) launch Variations and risks to 1-page top-level Gantt chart 1-page Gantt Chart expanded Top-level Gantt Chart & draft Preliminary Integrated approximate half- year and mission duration development schedule and generated; Schedule compared to 1-month resolution with key IMS (with critical path and Master Schedule decade documented impacts to mission duration to Schedule Rules-of-Thumb deliverables, system reviews, funded schedule reserve) produced documented guidelines and critical path updatedCost Cost estimated by Cost estimates using Division Cost sensitivities across trade Model-based estimate iterated A cost comparison table with at Cost estimate is a combination Signed-off grass roots analogy (scatter- 3X costing models generated space as a function of major using models with subsystem least 3 reconciled model-based of grass roots and model- cost estimated by plot model) (e.g., MC2, ROMMIT, CoMET, drivers determined level functionality; Team X estimates produced (e.g., Price, based cost estimates organizations Rapid Costing Tool, etc.) ) model-based cost estimate SEER, etc.); Input parameters responsible for for each model identified completing the workScience Prime science, Objectives quantified to levels Objectives broadened to include End-to-end approach for Science Traceability Matrix Level 2 & 3 driving Final PLRA submitted; exploration & that allow comparison with acceptable alternatives; Cost and achieving science documented; produced requirements documented Preliminary Level 2 & technology previous investigations; risk sensitivities to varying levels Distinction between baseline & 3 requirements objectives Internal draft Level 1 of science return quantified threshold (floor) success criteria documented documented requirements documented documented;Mission High level Rudimentary calculations & Alternative sets of mission Driving requirements, initial high- Mission operational phases Expanded description of Key driving mission description of comparisons to mission architectures vs. science level scenarios, timelines and documented to level needed for mission phases to illustrate scenarios, timelines mission analogues to demonstrate objectives, cost, & risk operational modes documented illustrating how science critical s/c/ ground functions and modes documented feasibility documented documented & evaluated objectives will be met documented documented in detailSpacecraft High-level Key flight elements, design Alternate flight system System architecture and Subsystem & instrument Initial system and subsystem System and description of parameters and performance architectures and payloads vs. instrument design described by designs described; design documented subsystem design,System spacecraft requirements documented; science/mission objectives, cost mech. config. drawings and block instrument accommodations open issues and documented High-level comparison to and risk documented & evaluated diagrams; recommended external I/F similar flight systems heritage and descope options documented documentedGround None at this time Mission ops approach Mission ops drivers and Ops concept documented; Major MOS responsibilities, MOS diagrams with proposed MOS implementation documented; High-level sensitivities documented MOS/GDS/ operations support block diagrams, facilities and inheritance documented w/ mission uniqueSystem comparison to similar ground architecture based on complexity I/Fs with science community items documented systems documented of ops scenarios quantified documentedTechnical What is How to implement new Mitigation/ development options A 5 × 5 matrix with relevant risk Selected mitigation/ Risk list expanded to include Project risk unprecedented? functionality; Initial risk drivers for risks characterized and drivers (include selected development options into second tier subsystem and/or management processRisks and developments documented mitigation/ development options) baseline detailed; Strategies for instrument risks implemented documented used control, allocation and release of tech margins and cost reserves documented
  12. 12. National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Science CML Matrix Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CaliforniaScience Prime Objectives Objectives End-to-end Science Level 2 & 3 Final PLRA science, quantified to broadened to approach for Traceability driving submitted; exploration levels that include achieving Matrix requirements Preliminary & allow acceptable science produced documented Level 2 & 3 technology comparison alternatives; documented; requirements objectives with previous Cost and risk Distinction documented documented investigations; sensitivities to between baseline Internal draft varying levels of & threshold Level 1 science return (floor) success requirements quantified criteria documented documented; 2/9/2010 PM Challenge 12
  13. 13. Pre-Phase A and Formulation Phase Life National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory Cycle (Updated 10.26.2009) California Institute of Technology Pasadena, California Advanced Concept Step 1 Step 2 Phase B Project Preliminary Design & Phase Studies Development Proposal Proposal Technology Completion Draft AO Down Site Project AO release Select Visit Selection KDP-C Major PIs identify mission concepts Step 1 Step 2 Project Gates & Concept Portfolio Cost Baseline Commitment Proposal Proposal CSR Reviews Review Gate Preview Commitment Gate/Proposal Implementation Reviews Submitted PMSR PDR Review/Gate Submitted Risk Review CML 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Advanced Pre-Phase A Phase A Phase B Project Concept Development Concept & Technology Preliminary Design & Phase Studies Development Technology Completion Science Advisory Initiate Science Instrument Acquisition Group Pre-Project Definition KDP-A AO Strategy Meeting KDP-B KDP-C Team Major Project Milestones Mission & Reviews Study Report MCR SRR MDR PDR CML 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 - CML tied to a life cycle milestone - CML that occurs between life cycle milestones2/9/2010 PM Challenge 13

×