Successfully reported this slideshow.
Architecting a Human Spaceflight Program Presentation to PM Challenge Thomas Mcvittie Jet Propulsion Laboratory California...
Agenda <ul><li>What is Architecting </li></ul><ul><li>Constellation “Architecture” </li></ul><ul><li>Human Exploration Arc...
What is Architecture?? <ul><li>Architecture is the fundamental organization of a system, embodied in its components, their...
What Architecture Is Not!! <ul><li>Architecture is not a broad brush effort confined to early development </li></ul><ul><u...
Stakeholders <ul><li>Influential “outside” people with something important to gain or to lose by virtue of project actions...
Stakeholder Objectives  (and Constraints) <ul><li>System costs and benefits born solely of stakeholder concerns  </li></ul...
 
Constellation’s Seven Projects Ares- Launch Vehicle Orion-Crew Exploration Vehicle Extravehicular Activities Mission Opera...
Lunar Crewed Mission Profile MOON EARTH LLO 100 km  Direct or Skip Entry ERO Up to 4 days LEO Loiter EDS Performs TLI on F...
Principles <ul><li>This experience must be distilled into fundamental ideas with broad application (i.e, principles) </li>...
CxP Architectural Principles <ul><li>“ Give overriding priority to crew safety, rather than trade safety against other per...
Apollo Architectural Principles <ul><li>“ I believe this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this de...
CxP Architecture Principles:  Crew Safety <ul><li>Use proven, heritage-based hardware with successful human flight history...
CxP Architecture Principles: Performance <ul><li>Recognize injected mass driven by gear ratios (including non-propellant, ...
CxP Architecture Principles:  Appropriate and Stable Funding <ul><li>Budget profile must provide for adequate funding for ...
Elements of Future Human Missions Beyond LEO Enabling Human Exploration Precursor Knowledge Needed Capabilities Destinatio...
The human-accessible solar system is richer than just the Moon and Mars Various program pathways through these destination...
Human Exploration Framework Team <ul><li>Human Exploration Framework Team (HEFT) provides  decision support  to NASA senio...
Decision Tree Elements for Architecture Analysis  (Representative) <ul><li>DRM’s / Missions  </li></ul><ul><li>DRM-4 </li>...
Making it Affordable is the “Price of Admission” For Public Release
… and begin trade-space discussions with potential International partners The Global Exploration Strategy Scientific Knowl...
The Future of HEFT  (as of 12/3/10) <ul><li>Working with the HEFT Steering Council to define next steps based on new HSF t...
Conclusions <ul><li>For architectures to be successful they need to be constructed with and for sustained stakeholder enga...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Muirhead

14,522 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Muirhead

  1. 1. Architecting a Human Spaceflight Program Presentation to PM Challenge Thomas Mcvittie Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology
  2. 2. Agenda <ul><li>What is Architecting </li></ul><ul><li>Constellation “Architecture” </li></ul><ul><li>Human Exploration Architecture Principles </li></ul><ul><li>New Directions </li></ul><ul><li>Summary </li></ul>
  3. 3. What is Architecture?? <ul><li>Architecture is the fundamental organization of a system, embodied in its components, their relationships to each other and the environment and the principles governing its design and evolution (IEEE Std 1471-2000) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Addresses both technical and programmatic considerations </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Architecture addresses why a system is the way it is and how this understanding of the system is to be sustained </li></ul><ul><ul><li>It underlies the designs ability to meet objectives and satisfy stakeholders </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A design is the embodiment of an architecture. Designs address what is to be built and how </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Stakeholders, many, often with different priorities…. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Architecting links management/programmatics and systems engineering </li></ul></ul><ul><li>As systems become more complex the need for an effective architecting effort becomes essential </li></ul><ul><li>Architectures are fractal </li></ul>Architecture Systems Engineering Management
  4. 4. What Architecture Is Not!! <ul><li>Architecture is not a broad brush effort confined to early development </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dictates what possibilities are allowed, while still remaining faithful to stable concepts selected to fulfill system objectives </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Architecture is not opaque pictures, block diagrams, lists, or other schematic representations of the design </li></ul><ul><li>Architecture is not requirements </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Architecture provides the rationale for requirements </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Architecture is not fickle, or subject to routine refinement </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Architecture provides a stabilizing influence through its well-considered form, expectations, rules, and attention to fundamentals </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Stakeholders <ul><li>Influential “outside” people with something important to gain or to lose by virtue of project actions (i.e. their concerns/priorities) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Weight can draw from many sources (legal, financial, political, etc.) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Not merely titles, groups, or organizations </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Someone architects can talk with </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Includes future developers and operators! </li></ul><ul><li>Vital to get all significant stakeholder factions identified </li></ul><ul><li>Space program/projects have many stakeholders, especially human spaceflight, and their “concerns” are not always aligned or alignable and they can/do change over time </li></ul>
  6. 6. Stakeholder Objectives (and Constraints) <ul><li>System costs and benefits born solely of stakeholder concerns </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The criteria by which success is measured </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The architect’s job is to help stakeholders express these concerns </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Need an actionable form that enables evenhanded evaluation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Objectives are a compromise and must be complete and clear </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Architectures are never better than the quality of their objectives </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Are as broad as the concerns of the stakeholders and includes properties such as: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Whats: Performance, functionality, quality, cost, reliably… </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Hows, e.g. how the system comes together, or is operated, or relates to other developments: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Scalability, testability, operability, maintainability, reusability, composability, modelability, and other “-ilities”. </li></ul></ul></ul>
  7. 8. Constellation’s Seven Projects Ares- Launch Vehicle Orion-Crew Exploration Vehicle Extravehicular Activities Mission Operations Ground Operations Altair Lunar Surface Systems
  8. 9. Lunar Crewed Mission Profile MOON EARTH LLO 100 km Direct or Skip Entry ERO Up to 4 days LEO Loiter EDS Performs TLI on FD5 Nominal Water Landing Crew of 4 + 500 kg cargo Altair performs LOI 100 kg return payload Ares-1 Ascent Target 90 min. launch separation Orion 20.185 t at TLI Orion performs 3 Burn TEI up to 1,492 m/s
  9. 10. Principles <ul><li>This experience must be distilled into fundamental ideas with broad application (i.e, principles) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Engineering: Laws of nature, proven solutions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Architecture: Usually more heuristic </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Principles foster order, structure, elegance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Commitment to fundamentals </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Basis for architectural integrity </li></ul></ul><ul><li>A good principle is… what you really care about </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Well substantiated </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Clear about applicability and application </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Relatively easy to explain, and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The last thing you’re willing to give up </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Principles are used to help make decisions on key trade studies </li></ul>Success Wisdom Experience Mistakes
  10. 11. CxP Architectural Principles <ul><li>“ Give overriding priority to crew safety, rather than trade safety against other performance criteria, such as low cost and reusability” </li></ul><ul><li>Meet Loss of Crew (LOC) and Loss of Mission (LOM) performance, based on analysis supported by testing </li></ul><ul><li>Launch and landing crew survival must be robust </li></ul><ul><li>Human exploration starts beyond LEO and the moon is a key stepping stone </li></ul><ul><li>Establish and maintain adequate performance margins across all mission phases (Note: all margins are not equal) </li></ul><ul><li>Separate cargo from crew and provide significantly more payload than Apollo </li></ul><ul><li>Utilize heavy lift launch vehicles to maximize long term reliability by minimizing the number of needed launches </li></ul><ul><li>Minimize gap between end of Shuttle program and new system </li></ul><ul><li>Maintain and grow existing national aerospace supplier base </li></ul><ul><li>Minimize lifecycle costs for sustainability based on appropriate, stable funding </li></ul>
  11. 12. Apollo Architectural Principles <ul><li>“ I believe this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth” (5/25/61), while this was clearly the prime objective, from a prime stakeholder, from this statement came many of the principles that guided Apollo </li></ul><ul><li>Attend to the economic, political, and the social interfaces with key stakeholders </li></ul><ul><li>Plan well and make decisions rapidly </li></ul><ul><li>Establish and maintain an effective communication system across the program </li></ul><ul><li>To minimize spacecraft complexity, weight, cost, and schedule, the level of redundancy should depend on the factors of criticality, flight experience, and technology maturity </li></ul><ul><li>Share responsibility for achieving reliability between NASA and contractors. Infuse reliability into the design early in the life cycle </li></ul><ul><li>Focus on the nominal and work a limited, smartly chosen set of contingencies based on probabilities of occurrence </li></ul><ul><li>Test to failure to understand margins </li></ul>
  12. 13. CxP Architecture Principles: Crew Safety <ul><li>Use proven, heritage-based hardware with successful human flight history </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ares I first stage based on Shuttle solid rocket boosters </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ares I upper stage J-2X engine based on J-2S engine </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Robust abort capability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Launch abort system available through upper stage engine ignition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>High–aerodynamic load regimes are covered </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Orion provides abort capability after launch abort system (LAS) jettison </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Achieve 10x better loss of crew (LOC) performance than Space Shuttle </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Current ascent LOC estimates from the Space Shuttle Program estimate is one loss of crew event in 160–270 flights </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ares I/Orion estimate is one ascent loss of crew every 2,850 flights </li></ul></ul>Note: CxP is NASA’s first program to formally seek to certify as “human-rated”
  13. 14. CxP Architecture Principles: Performance <ul><li>Recognize injected mass driven by gear ratios (including non-propellant, e.g. tanks, heat shields, etc) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>9:1 to lunar orbit and back to earth (e.g. Crew Exploration Vehicle) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>19:1 to lunar surface and back to earth (e.g. crew) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lunar mission requires the equivalent of ~200 t initial mass in LEO </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mars initial mass in LEO would be in the 375-625 t range in higher, stable LEO orbits </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Need for single launch of 125 t for some elements </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Minimize the number of launches to increase probability of mission success </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Maximize mission reliability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Simplify on-orbit operations </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Need very large payload diameters: 8.5 – 12 m </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Lunar missions drive to 8 m to 10 m diameter </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mars missions drive to 10 m plus diameters plus increased heights above 22 m </li></ul></ul>
  14. 15. CxP Architecture Principles: Appropriate and Stable Funding <ul><li>Budget profile must provide for adequate funding for critical early development risk mitigation, including engineering development units, ground testing, and technology maturation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cx budget reductions of $5.2B since ESAS, through FY10 put the architecture at very serious risk </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inadequate budget to maintain original schedule </li></ul></ul><ul><li>As the Presidential Commission in 2009 reported, to achieve most any human spaceflight objectives beyond LEO (assuming current ISS and STS commitments) in this decade, NASA would most likely need about $3B more per year for the rest of this decade </li></ul>
  15. 16. Elements of Future Human Missions Beyond LEO Enabling Human Exploration Precursor Knowledge Needed Capabilities Destinations of Interest
  16. 17. The human-accessible solar system is richer than just the Moon and Mars Various program pathways through these destinations can build our capabilities Earth LEO ISS Moon Mars Earth-Moon L1 GEO Mars orbit Low lunar orbit Phobos Near Earth asteroids Sun-Earth L4,5 Sun-Mars L4,5 Sun-Earth L1 Sun-Earth L2 For Public Release Space radiation Landing, ascent, surface ops Deep space, long trips Remote EVA ops Gravity well Current capability
  17. 18. Human Exploration Framework Team <ul><li>Human Exploration Framework Team (HEFT) provides decision support to NASA senior leadership for planning how human space flight (HSF) will explore beyond LEO </li></ul><ul><li>Decision support informs potential decisions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Credible, consistent, coherent, and transparent analyses </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Multi-layered team tapped from throughout NASA </li></ul><ul><ul><li>From Strategic Management Council to technical subject matter experts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>From all centers and HQ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Analysis scope includes all architecture aspects: technical, programmatic, and fiscal </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Destinations, operations, elements, performance, technologies, safety, risk, schedule, cost, partnerships, and stakeholder priorities </li></ul></ul><ul><li>HEFT prepares architecture decision packages for NASA senior leadership </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Objective sensitivity analyses, inclusive trade studies, integrated conditional choices </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Draft multi-destination architectures that are affordable and implement stakeholder priorities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Neither “point solution” architectures, decision recommendations, nor decisions </li></ul></ul>For Public Release
  18. 19. Decision Tree Elements for Architecture Analysis (Representative) <ul><li>DRM’s / Missions </li></ul><ul><li>DRM-4 </li></ul><ul><li>“ Easy” NEO </li></ul><ul><li>DRM Lunar </li></ul><ul><li>HEO/GEO </li></ul><ul><li>DRM Mars Orbit / Phobos and Deimos </li></ul><ul><li>Elements / Capabilities Trades </li></ul><ul><li>HLV: SDV, LOX-RP </li></ul><ul><li>CTV: Orion Derived E’ and Ascent/Entry </li></ul><ul><li>Commercial Crew </li></ul><ul><li>In-space Elements: CTV/ SEV / DSH functionality split </li></ul><ul><li>SEP Configuration / Propellant </li></ul><ul><li>Ops Trades </li></ul><ul><li>Others </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>Partnerships – IP & OGA </li></ul><ul><li># of Crew </li></ul><ul><li>Phasing / Flat Budgets </li></ul><ul><li>Affordability: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In-house develop </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Insight/Oversight </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Design to cost </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Strategies </li></ul><ul><li>Fixed initial conditions </li></ul><ul><li>NEA in 2025 </li></ul><ul><li>Capability Driven </li></ul>
  19. 20. Making it Affordable is the “Price of Admission” For Public Release
  20. 21. … and begin trade-space discussions with potential International partners The Global Exploration Strategy Scientific Knowledge For Public Release Economic Expansion Public Engagement Exploration Preparation Global Partnerships
  21. 22. The Future of HEFT (as of 12/3/10) <ul><li>Working with the HEFT Steering Council to define next steps based on new HSF tenets and budget constraints </li></ul><ul><li>Working to define structure and staff for next generation of HEFT </li></ul><ul><li>Continuing preparation of integrated architecture products </li></ul>
  22. 23. Conclusions <ul><li>For architectures to be successful they need to be constructed with and for sustained stakeholder engagement, understanding and support </li></ul><ul><li>There are many and sometimes conflicting architectural drivers for human spaceflight systems but the primary ones are crew safety, performance and resources </li></ul><ul><li>Good architecting is more art than science and does not occur without strong support and commitment from the top </li></ul><ul><li>The robotic and human spaceflight communities are working closely together now and expect to work even closer in the future as the man-machine interface becomes more interdependent and intertwined </li></ul>

×