Building Communities of Engineers                   to Share Technical Expertise                           Daria E. Topous...
https://nen.nasa.gov                                  Agenda                                                              ...
https://nen.nasa.gov         Driver: Distributed GeographyPM Challenge February 2012                     3
https://nen.nasa.gov                Driver: Columbia Accident                             “NASA has not                   ...
https://nen.nasa.gov                  Driver: Evolving MissionPM Challenge February 2012                            5
https://nen.nasa.gov                  NASA Engineering Network                                                      NASA  ...
https://nen.nasa.gov          A community of practice is…                             A group of people who “share a      ...
https://nen.nasa.gov                              Role of the NESCThe NESC performs value-added independent testing, analy...
https://nen.nasa.gov                  Developing Online CoPs                                                              ...
https://nen.nasa.govCommunities   Engineering   ManagementPM Challenge February 2012                     10
https://nen.nasa.gov          Establishing a New CommunityPhase 1                                 Phase 2                 ...
https://nen.nasa.gov                   Standard Look and FeelPM Challenge February 2012                            12
https://nen.nasa.govGettingExpert InputPM Challenge February 2012                     13
https://nen.nasa.gov   Technical Exchange: MATLAB ScriptsPM Challenge February 2012                     14
https://nen.nasa.gov                       Facilities InformationPM Challenge February 2012                               ...
https://nen.nasa.gov        Webcasts (Partnership with NESC)PM Challenge February 2012                      16
https://nen.nasa.gov               Other Knowledge Sharing        One of a kind documents        Discussion Forums        ...
Fault Management and Autonomous Rendezvous & Docking   BUILDING COMMUNITIES FOR   COALESCING DISCIPLINESPM Challenge Febru...
https://nen.nasa.gov                             FM CoP DomainPM Challenge February 2012                               19
https://nen.nasa.gov                    Recent FM Developments                        2008                          2009  ...
https://nen.nasa.gov   FM Handbook – Table of Contents                             1. Scope                             2....
https://nen.nasa.gov                  Fault Management Products                                     Lessons LearnedNASA Ha...
https://nen.nasa.gov                 Fault Management BlogCaptures latestactivities in FMcommunityAllows CoP Lead to“get...
https://nen.nasa.gov                      Fault Management PollSolicit input from across the communityProvide a forum fo...
https://nen.nasa.gov     Upcoming Workshop: April 2012PM Challenge February 2012                     25
https://nen.nasa.gov               Summary of FM Community                     Objectives   Establish online              ...
https://nen.nasa.gov                     AR&D CoP Background• Autonomous/Automated Vehicle Rendezvous and Docking (AR&D) w...
https://nen.nasa.gov  Autonomous Rendezvous & Docking           (AR&D) CoP• Formed in May 2010 to enable                • ...
https://nen.nasa.gov                              AR&D CoP Purpose• Promote cross-directorate communication on AR&D in ord...
https://nen.nasa.gov                           AR&D Community Products                                               Visio...
• Developed by the core community to  describe our vision of an approach to  ensure a sufficiently technically  advanced a...
32
https://nen.nasa.gov     Key Tenants of the AR&D CoP’s Strategy Focuses on development of an AR&D capability suite, which...
https://nen.nasa.govAR&D CoP Creates, Vets, and Disseminates       Best Practices ProductsPM Challenge February 2012      ...
https://nen.nasa.govVision Navigation System (VNS) EDU for Ground Test/Flight Test                                        ...
https://nen.nasa.gov   AR&D CoP Formulated Multi-Program/Project Team           Partnership for VNS EDU Effort        Grou...
https://nen.nasa.gov                         AR&D Community Success: Founded Upon A                          Common Strate...
https://nen.nasa.gov                             Conclusion        Engineers are sharing what they know        Knowledge i...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Topousis dennehyfesq

19,054 views
19,045 views

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
19,054
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
24
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Changing missions – closeout of Shuttle, search for new direction for Agency through Augustine Commission etc. Preparing Agency for that work through some of these coalescing disciplines, but also capturing knowledge as we go. Also preserving knowledge for commercial partners.
  • It includes a ready group of technical specialists who conduct independent assessments.Technical Fellows are senior technical experts who lead technical discipline teams and champion communities of practice.
  • Fault Management is also one of the disciplines included in AR&D.
  • Have it on site if they want a copy
  • Communicating to colleagues and NASA decision-makers that AR&D is a critical enabler for human and large-scale space exploration and satellite servicing/rescue
  • Mention URL and encourage people to participate
  • Topousis dennehyfesq

    1. 1. Building Communities of Engineers to Share Technical Expertise Daria E. Topousis (JPL) (daria.topousis@jpl.nasa.gov) Cornelius J. Dennehy (NESC) (cornelius.j.dennehy@nasa.gov) Lorraine M. Fesq (JPL) (lorraine.m.fesq@jpl.nasa.gov) PM Challenge 2012Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology.Copyright 2011 California Institute of Technology. Government sponsorship acknowledged.
    2. 2. https://nen.nasa.gov Agenda Autonomous Examples of Fault What are Rendezvous & Background technical Management communities? Docking exchange Community CommunityPM Challenge February 2012 2
    3. 3. https://nen.nasa.gov Driver: Distributed GeographyPM Challenge February 2012 3
    4. 4. https://nen.nasa.gov Driver: Columbia Accident “NASA has not demonstrated the characteristics of a learning organization.” -Columbia Accident Investigation Board, 2003PM Challenge February 2012 4
    5. 5. https://nen.nasa.gov Driver: Evolving MissionPM Challenge February 2012 5
    6. 6. https://nen.nasa.gov NASA Engineering Network NASA Engineering Network (NEN) Office of the Engineering Communities Lessons Chief Engineer Search Organization of Practice Learned content Charts NASAFirewall PM Challenge February 2012 6
    7. 7. https://nen.nasa.gov A community of practice is… A group of people who “share a concern, a set of problems or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis.” -Etienne WengerPM Challenge February 2012 7
    8. 8. https://nen.nasa.gov Role of the NESCThe NESC performs value-added independent testing, analysis, andassessments of NASAs high-risk projects to ensure safety andmission success.NASA Technical Fellows, appointed by the OCE, lead most of thecommunities of practice. PM Challenge February 2012 8
    9. 9. https://nen.nasa.gov Developing Online CoPs 2011-present: 2009-2010: 15 Focus on new CoPs growth 2006-2008: First 6 CoPs 2004-2005: NEN Developed and 2003: CAIB Implemented ReportPM Challenge February 2012 9
    10. 10. https://nen.nasa.govCommunities Engineering ManagementPM Challenge February 2012 10
    11. 11. https://nen.nasa.gov Establishing a New CommunityPhase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 • NASA’s core • Communication • Community-driven competencies • Encourage more content • NEN team and Tech user input • Experts answer Fellow collect key • Interactive online questions resources content • Tech Fellow • List center-by- • Allow users to join a champions, but not center info community sole source of • Share papers content PM Challenge February 2012 11
    12. 12. https://nen.nasa.gov Standard Look and FeelPM Challenge February 2012 12
    13. 13. https://nen.nasa.govGettingExpert InputPM Challenge February 2012 13
    14. 14. https://nen.nasa.gov Technical Exchange: MATLAB ScriptsPM Challenge February 2012 14
    15. 15. https://nen.nasa.gov Facilities InformationPM Challenge February 2012 15
    16. 16. https://nen.nasa.gov Webcasts (Partnership with NESC)PM Challenge February 2012 16
    17. 17. https://nen.nasa.gov Other Knowledge Sharing One of a kind documents Discussion Forums BlogsPM Challenge February 2012 17
    18. 18. Fault Management and Autonomous Rendezvous & Docking BUILDING COMMUNITIES FOR COALESCING DISCIPLINESPM Challenge February 2012 18
    19. 19. https://nen.nasa.gov FM CoP DomainPM Challenge February 2012 19
    20. 20. https://nen.nasa.gov Recent FM Developments 2008 2009 2010 2006-2008: FM Apr ’08: SMD/PSD Mar ’09: FM Jul ’09: NASA OCE endorses causes cost sponsors S/C FM Workshop White white paper; directs to overruns and Workshop Paper published “Coalesce the field” schedule slips on (J. Adams) (M. Ryschkewitsch) * multiple missions 2010 Jul ’08: Constellation (CxP) identifies Dec ’09: CxP publishes Jan’10: CxP FM as potential risk; forms FM FMAAT Position Papers establishes FM Assessment/Advisory Team (FMAAT) addressing key FM Team within Level 2 (B. Muirhead) issues SE org (M. Goforth) 2011 2012 Apr ’10: NESC/SMD launch Oct ’10: FM CoP Jul ’11: FM Handbook Draft Apr ’12: SMD/PSD FM Handbook – robotic established on OCE’s delivered to NESC/SMD and sponsors 2nd S/C* focus NEN website – NTSPO and Centers for review FM Workshop nen.nasa.gov (J. Adams) (L. Johnson/N. Dennehy) (L. Fesq) PM Challenge February 2012 20
    21. 21. https://nen.nasa.gov FM Handbook – Table of Contents 1. Scope 2. Applicable Documents 3. Acronyms and Definitions 4. Concepts and Guiding Principles 5. Organization, Roles and Responsibilities 6. Process 7. Requirements Development 8. Design and Architecture 9. Assessment and Analysis (TBS) 10. Verification and Validation 11. Operations and Maintenance (TBS) 12. Review and Evaluation 13. Conclusion 14. Future Directions (TBS) Appendix A: References Appendix B: Work Product Templates (TBS) Appendix C: Relevant NASA Lessons Learned Appendix D: Acknowledgements, historical backgroundPM Challenge February 2012 21
    22. 22. https://nen.nasa.gov Fault Management Products Lessons LearnedNASA Handbook Networking • Lessons • Hyperlinked list • Contact list Learned of all FM- • Conferences • Process for related lessons with FM focus developing FM • Robotic and • Suggested systems human training courses • Guidance and spaceflight • 2nd FM options to lessons Workshop: address April 2012 technical issuesPM Challenge February 2012 22
    23. 23. https://nen.nasa.gov Fault Management BlogCaptures latestactivities in FMcommunityAllows CoP Lead to“get the word out”quicklyPM Challenge February 2012 23
    24. 24. https://nen.nasa.gov Fault Management PollSolicit input from across the communityProvide a forum for differing opinionsGoal: move toward consensus on definitions of FM terms PM Challenge February 2012 24
    25. 25. https://nen.nasa.gov Upcoming Workshop: April 2012PM Challenge February 2012 25
    26. 26. https://nen.nasa.gov Summary of FM Community Objectives Establish online Capture FM NASA-wide consensusforum for knowledge approaches at NASA on FM nomenclature sharing and other orgs Share latest Educate FM engineers developmentsPM Challenge February 2012 26
    27. 27. https://nen.nasa.gov AR&D CoP Background• Autonomous/Automated Vehicle Rendezvous and Docking (AR&D) was identified as an Agency-level technical cross-cutting issue at December 2007 BPR meeting at NASA HQ – Tech Cross-cutting Issue Description: “This a critical exploration technology in that it enables two vehicles to perform autonomous/automated docking with at least one vehicle without humans present. Supports cargo transport and robotic sample return. The US is behind where we need to be. Russia, Europe and Japan have operational systems. Internationally, the technology is still a high risk as has been demonstrated by the Issues/lessons learned from Progress/Mir docking (Russia), ETS-VII (Japan) and XSS- 11, DART and Orbital Express (USA). A more robust development and validation strategy in needed.”• To close this issue, the NESC, OCE, and the AR&D engineering organizations across the Agency jointly establish the AR&D CoP in May 2010.• Active participants from ARC, DFRC, GRC, GSFC, JSC, JPL, LaRC, MSFC, NESC, and the HQ Office of the Chief Engineer (OCE) PM Challenge February 2012 27
    28. 28. https://nen.nasa.gov Autonomous Rendezvous & Docking (AR&D) CoP• Formed in May 2010 to enable • AR&D Systems engineering collaboration across the Agency and • AR&D Systems integration develop the relationships to utilize the • Relative navigation sensor design experience, expertise, and skills of each and development center. • Relative navigation algorithms• Established as a peer network of AR&D • 6 Degree-of-Freedom relative technical practitioners and subject control algorithms matter experts • Docking mechanisms• Hold monthly CoP telecons and an annual face-to-face meeting Formation driver was the need for cross- AR&D CoP is Multidisciplinary encompassing Agency collaboration on RFI responses and GN&C, Fault Management, Software, Avionics, technology proposals Mechanisms disciplinesPM Challenge February 2012 28
    29. 29. https://nen.nasa.gov AR&D CoP Purpose• Promote cross-directorate communication on AR&D in order to facilitate maximum leverage of agency resources for technology road-mapping and informal peer reviews• Develop an Agency AR&D strategy• Steer AR&D technologies and developments in the future• Provide a source of independent technical expert support at formal design reviews and for anomalies• Enable simple periodic sharing of data, lessons learned and best engineering practices• Leverage Agency hardware and/or software/algorithms across directorates• Increase awareness of partnership, collaboration, and cost- leveraging opportunities inside and outside the Agency PM Challenge February 2012 29
    30. 30. https://nen.nasa.gov AR&D Community Products Vision Navigation Sensor EDU Products & ToolsStrategy White Paper • NASA and U.S. space • Goal was an in-space • Relative navigation industry need to relative navigation sensors database develop mainstream sensor technology • Catalog of AR&D AR&D capability demonstration on ISS algorithms to share suite as part of DPP • AR&D test facility • Proposes strategy • Initiated by CoP, database • Used to explain and sponsored by NESC promote AR&D • Low-cost way to mature relative navigation sensor component technology PM Challenge February 2012 30
    31. 31. • Developed by the core community to describe our vision of an approach to ensure a sufficiently technically advanced and affordable AR&D technology base is available to support future NASA missions.• The goal of this strategy is to create an environment exploiting reusable technology elements for an AR&D system design and development process which is: • Lower-Risk • More Versatile/Scalable • Reliable & Crew-Safe • More Affordable PM Challenge February 2012 31
    32. 32. 32
    33. 33. https://nen.nasa.gov Key Tenants of the AR&D CoP’s Strategy Focuses on development of an AR&D capability suite, which primarily involves fourspecific subsystems that can enable AR&D and its required integration for all thesemissions. The focus is not on the development of a single complete AR&D package capable ofbeing wired into a spacecraft which supports all mission types (“AR&D-in-a-box”). The four subsystems most impacted by adding an AR&D requirement to a vehicle:  Relative navigation sensors and integrated communications  Robust AR&D GN&C & real-time FSW  Docking/capture mechanisms  Mission/system managers for Autonomy/Automation The AR&D capability suite would be populated with various solutions for each of thesefour areas, and all solutions would have standardized interfaces.  The recently agreed-to “International Docking System Standard” is an excellent example. Each mission would then pick-and-choose which solutions in the AR&D suite are mostuseful for implementing their design. 33
    34. 34. https://nen.nasa.govAR&D CoP Creates, Vets, and Disseminates Best Practices ProductsPM Challenge February 2012 34
    35. 35. https://nen.nasa.govVision Navigation System (VNS) EDU for Ground Test/Flight Test  Vision Navigation System (VNS) is the Relative Navigation Flash LIDAR rendezvous sensor baselined for Orion Multi Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV)  The NASA AR&D Community of Practice led the cross-Agency effort to build, calibrate, and test VNS EDU an existing Orion “on the shelf” VNS EDU Bench Test hardware at Ball  A more advanced version of the STORRM VNS Argon Testbed unit was flown on STS-134 in April 2011Argon Testbed with VNS EDU  Will be a shared asset for the AR&D CoP Target  Delivered on October 2011  First use in GSFC’s Spacecraft Servicing Capabilities Program Argon ground testbed  Currently searching for on-orbit flight test opportunity for VNS EDUPM Challenge February 2012 35
    36. 36. https://nen.nasa.gov AR&D CoP Formulated Multi-Program/Project Team Partnership for VNS EDU Effort Group InvestmentOrion • Provide existing “on the shelf” VNS EDU components • Allow use of VNS emulator and other GSESatellite • Provide integration of VNS onto DPPServicing • Perform system testing (now ground testing)CapabilitiesProgram • Provide operations planning/ supportFlagship • Provide Civil Servant FTEs for AR&D “science”Technology • Provide Civil Servant travel fundingDevelopmentProgramBall Aerospace • Early integration activities • Make components flight-readyNASA Engineering • Provide funding to Ball to assemble, test and calibrateandChallenge February 2012 PM Safety Center VNS EDU H/W and complete embedded flight software36
    37. 37. https://nen.nasa.gov AR&D Community Success: Founded Upon A Common Strategy, Trusting Relationships,A Common Communications, and Sharing AR&D Strategy Team collaborates on proposals Sharing knowledge across centers Communication about importance of AR&DPM Challenge February 2012 37
    38. 38. https://nen.nasa.gov Conclusion Engineers are sharing what they know Knowledge is captured and stored Center barriers are more porous Enabling key fields to coalescePM Challenge February 2012 38

    ×