The document provides an overview of the requirements and processes needed to successfully pass Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and Key Decision Point C (KDP C) under NASA Procedural Requirements 7120.5D. It first discusses categorizing a project based on cost and complexity to determine the appropriate decision authority and governing documents. It then outlines the phases of formulation and implementation in the project lifecycle and the major reviews and decision gates including PDR, which provides approval to proceed to implementation phases. Examples from the Juno project are given to demonstrate how to address the requirements to have a successful PDR while still accomplishing the primary work.
The document discusses terminology and relationships related to managing project reserves, including risk posture, scope margin, and de-scoping plans. It provides a high-level flow for establishing scope margin, beginning with establishing level 1 requirements and defining descope options. The progression to Key Decision Point C is shown, including establishing baseline requirements and success criteria, and refining requirements and updating risk/reserve posture. Budget and reserve estimates are also discussed, including the progression from pre-phase A through phase B and to KDP-C, as well as different types of reserve calculations.
1. SAIC and ePM used simulation techniques to model and optimize the manufacturing process for the Upper Stage Simulator for the Ares I-X rocket.
2. The simulation results showed that the manufacturing process is highly sensitive to the number of fabricators and welders, and recommended a baseline of 8 fabricators and 6 welders per shift.
3. The investigation of non-destructive inspection factors found that the manufacturing process duration is most impacted by the defect rate during inspections. Higher defect rates significantly increase the overall duration.
The Environmental Responsible Aviation (ERA) Project aims to select promising aircraft concepts and technologies by 2025 to simultaneously reduce fuel burn, noise, and emissions. Technologies will be matured from TRL 3 to 5/6 through integrated systems research. Risk management is challenging due to the technical nature of technology development projects and independent sub-projects. ERA's risk management process developed a contribution factor based on expert input to assess each technology's potential to meet ERA goals, which improves identification of risks to project success compared to traditional approaches.
This document provides an overview of NASA and JPL's project lifecycle and design practices for flight projects. It describes the phases and key decision points in the project lifecycle. It also outlines JPL's design principles, flight project practices, and processes for managing technical, schedule, and budget margins. Additionally, it introduces the Certification of Flight Readiness process to document adherence to development practices and assess residual risk for mission success.
The document discusses NASA's status on the GAO's high-risk list for acquisition management and the initiatives NASA is taking to address this issue. It outlines NASA's definition of success, including maintaining cost and schedule performance for projects. It also discusses the impact on project management, such as defining supporting measures, implementing reporting processes, and increasing management oversight to monitor performance against the goals.
The document introduces the Project Management Toolkit (PPME Toolkit) developed by NASA's Glenn Research Center (GRC) to provide a standardized set of project planning and execution tools. The PPME Toolkit aims to facilitate life cycle project management from proposal development through project control and reporting. It was developed using a rapid prototyping approach and has been piloted with five GRC space flight projects. Version 1 of the Toolkit will be deployed across GRC's space flight portfolio in 2011, and Version 2 will include additional capabilities and an enterprise server solution to enable true portfolio management.
This document discusses managing integrated project work across geographically dispersed NASA teams. It provides a case study of the Orion project, which involved collaboration between 10 NASA centers. Key challenges of geographic dispersion include different organizational cultures, time zones, and the need to be part of a larger distributed team. Suggested paths for success include frequent communication, building trust, establishing common goals and processes, and travel to facilitate in-person interactions. Geographic dispersion will continue as NASA relies more on distributed teams, but success requires focus on open communication and shared objectives.
LDAC-1 developed a minimum functionality lunar lander design using a risk-informed approach to meet basic mission requirements. LDAC-2 then focused on reducing risks to crew safety by adding redundancy and reliability upgrades. The goal was to design a lander that provided adequate safety for crew with a design optimized for mass.
The document discusses terminology and relationships related to managing project reserves, including risk posture, scope margin, and de-scoping plans. It provides a high-level flow for establishing scope margin, beginning with establishing level 1 requirements and defining descope options. The progression to Key Decision Point C is shown, including establishing baseline requirements and success criteria, and refining requirements and updating risk/reserve posture. Budget and reserve estimates are also discussed, including the progression from pre-phase A through phase B and to KDP-C, as well as different types of reserve calculations.
1. SAIC and ePM used simulation techniques to model and optimize the manufacturing process for the Upper Stage Simulator for the Ares I-X rocket.
2. The simulation results showed that the manufacturing process is highly sensitive to the number of fabricators and welders, and recommended a baseline of 8 fabricators and 6 welders per shift.
3. The investigation of non-destructive inspection factors found that the manufacturing process duration is most impacted by the defect rate during inspections. Higher defect rates significantly increase the overall duration.
The Environmental Responsible Aviation (ERA) Project aims to select promising aircraft concepts and technologies by 2025 to simultaneously reduce fuel burn, noise, and emissions. Technologies will be matured from TRL 3 to 5/6 through integrated systems research. Risk management is challenging due to the technical nature of technology development projects and independent sub-projects. ERA's risk management process developed a contribution factor based on expert input to assess each technology's potential to meet ERA goals, which improves identification of risks to project success compared to traditional approaches.
This document provides an overview of NASA and JPL's project lifecycle and design practices for flight projects. It describes the phases and key decision points in the project lifecycle. It also outlines JPL's design principles, flight project practices, and processes for managing technical, schedule, and budget margins. Additionally, it introduces the Certification of Flight Readiness process to document adherence to development practices and assess residual risk for mission success.
The document discusses NASA's status on the GAO's high-risk list for acquisition management and the initiatives NASA is taking to address this issue. It outlines NASA's definition of success, including maintaining cost and schedule performance for projects. It also discusses the impact on project management, such as defining supporting measures, implementing reporting processes, and increasing management oversight to monitor performance against the goals.
The document introduces the Project Management Toolkit (PPME Toolkit) developed by NASA's Glenn Research Center (GRC) to provide a standardized set of project planning and execution tools. The PPME Toolkit aims to facilitate life cycle project management from proposal development through project control and reporting. It was developed using a rapid prototyping approach and has been piloted with five GRC space flight projects. Version 1 of the Toolkit will be deployed across GRC's space flight portfolio in 2011, and Version 2 will include additional capabilities and an enterprise server solution to enable true portfolio management.
This document discusses managing integrated project work across geographically dispersed NASA teams. It provides a case study of the Orion project, which involved collaboration between 10 NASA centers. Key challenges of geographic dispersion include different organizational cultures, time zones, and the need to be part of a larger distributed team. Suggested paths for success include frequent communication, building trust, establishing common goals and processes, and travel to facilitate in-person interactions. Geographic dispersion will continue as NASA relies more on distributed teams, but success requires focus on open communication and shared objectives.
LDAC-1 developed a minimum functionality lunar lander design using a risk-informed approach to meet basic mission requirements. LDAC-2 then focused on reducing risks to crew safety by adding redundancy and reliability upgrades. The goal was to design a lander that provided adequate safety for crew with a design optimized for mass.
The document discusses the Business Operating Success Strategies (BOSS), a new initiative at Kennedy Space Center Launch Services Program to standardize and improve consistency in mission management. It provides an overview of BOSS, including its purpose to align activities with requirements and increase accountability. It outlines how compliance will be achieved through checklists and schedules. Responsibility for implementation and updates is assigned, and next steps are to obtain feedback and measure BOSS' effectiveness.
The document describes the Orion project's plans to streamline the Critical Design Review (CDR) process compared to the previous Preliminary Design Review (PDR). Key aspects of the streamlined CDR include dividing design documentation reviews into focused subgroups, improving the quality and efficiency of identifying and resolving issues through the review process, and reducing the overall number of participants. The goal is to make the CDR process more effective while reducing costs to about one-third of the PDR costs.
The DART mission was intended to demonstrate autonomous rendezvous technology. However, it faced significant cost overruns, schedule delays, and technical risks. At the critical design review, 300 problems were identified. NASA management then reclassified it as a lower-risk, higher-priority mission for commercial resupply. In light of the identified issues, NASA called for a risk review on proceeding. Key risks included limited engineering resources, late changes to key systems, and tight budgets. Groups discussed whether to proceed to the next design review or cancel the mission, weighing risks and potential mitigation strategies. The case study aimed to help managers make risk-informed decisions.
The document discusses the Ares I-X test flight conducted by NASA in October 2009. It provides background on the objectives and significance of the flight test. It highlights that healthy tension between the flight test's Mission Management Office and Technical Authorities was important to the flight test's success. It then discusses NASA's governance model and how technical authority is implemented. Specifically, it notes the Chief Engineer and Chief of Safety and Mission Assurance represented their communities and helped achieve an appropriate balance between constraints and risk. Information flow between groups was a key factor for the multi-center team's cooperation and success.
The document provides an overview of the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Project from a project management perspective. It discusses the GPM mission objectives of improving understanding of the global water cycle and precipitation forecasts. It describes the GPM observatory and spacecraft, including instruments and ground assets. It also summarizes the project management approach, including the use of an integrated master schedule, earned value management, and joint confidence level analysis to manage schedule and costs.
This document discusses the systems engineering approach used for the Orion Pad Abort-1 (PA-1) flight test. It outlines how the project gathered requirements from multiple stakeholders, organized teams across different organizations into a single project-centric culture, and defined the system architecture and verification process. The presentation provides lessons learned on transitioning from separate organizational cultures to an integrated project approach and the need for community organizers to advocate for the project. It aims to serve as a future reference for applying systems engineering principles.
The document discusses upcoming changes to NASA's independent review policies and processes. Some of the key changes include standardizing terms of reference, implementing a 1-step or 2-step review timeline, updating required lifecycle products, revising review criteria and maturity tables, and changes to review team composition and decision memos. The changes aim to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of NASA's review processes.
This document recommends an insight/oversight model for NASA's Commercial Crew Program. It suggests using technical expert engagement similar to other programs, with a focus on high-risk subsystems. The model includes discrete oversight at key decision points rather than continuous oversight. Insight teams would provide expertise and recommendations, while the Program Office makes oversight decisions.
The document discusses integrated testing plans for the Constellation program at KSC. It describes plans to conduct Multi-Element Integrated Tests (MEITs) to test interactions between Constellation flight elements launched on different vehicles before they are integrated in space. MEITs found significant problems in previous programs that could have impacted safety and mission objectives. The tests are intended to reduce risks by identifying issues early.
The document summarizes the purpose and activities of the Planetary Science Technology Review Panel. The panel was tasked with assessing NASA's planetary technology development programs and providing recommendations. The panel's activities included briefings with NASA executives, interviews with technology programs and flight projects, and discussions with other organizations involved in technology development. The panel identified major issues in NASA's strategic approach, processes, resources, and culture regarding technology development. These issues center around the lack of an overall technology development strategy and accountability, unclear paths for maturing technologies, unstable budgets, and insufficient communication and risk-taking.
The document describes the Max Launch Abort System (MLAS) project which developed an alternative launch abort system design for Orion as a risk mitigation effort. The MLAS project aimed to identify the simplest design that maximized nominal ascent performance using off-the-shelf parts where possible. A key part of the project was a pad abort flight test to validate models and tools. The document discusses the MLAS flight test vehicle configuration, the flight test itself, opportunities for resident engineers, skill development experiences of the resident engineers, and technical lessons learned from the project.
This document discusses the JPL Media Search Project, a multimedia search tool developed by JPL and Owl Insight LLC to index and search audio/video files. It can perform semantic searches to find relevant content without knowing exact search terms. The tool was piloted on a set of 1700 files. Plans are described to scale the system and apply it to larger collections like the NASA Engineering Network repository containing over 1 million files. The goal is to help NASA effectively capture and retrieve engineering best practices and expertise contained in multimedia files.
The document summarizes an NSC Audits and Assessments Workshop from September 2009-2010. It discusses the background and purpose of different types of NASA safety audits conducted by the NSC Audits and Assessments Office. The document analyzes audit findings from 2007-2010 and identifies potential systemic safety issues across multiple NASA centers, particularly in electrical safety, inspection records, and probabilistic risk assessment. Action plans were developed to address these issues and improve safety audit processes.
The document discusses the NASA approach to prioritizing software verification and validation (IV&V) tasks. It describes the Software Integrity Level Assessment Process (SILAP) used to determine the risk level of software components and identify the appropriate set of IV&V tasks. SILAP involves assessing the consequence of potential defects and error potential of software based on factors like developer experience and complexity. The resulting risk scores map to specific IV&V tasks to establish confidence in software fitness for purpose.
This document summarizes the findings of a NASA survey of various centers regarding compliance with Office of the Chief Engineer (OCE) policy. It describes the survey objectives, methodology, elements reviewed, and schedule. Some key findings included inconsistent implementation of configuration management, risk management, and technical authority across centers. Strengths identified included lessons learned processes and software engineering at JPL. Opportunities for improvement included updating directives, validating Earned Value Management Systems, and clarifying the roles of technical authority and systems engineering.
This document provides an overview of NASA's Exploration Systems Development program, which is developing the Space Launch System (SLS), Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), and associated ground systems. It discusses the analysis of alternatives that was conducted to select these systems and an incremental approach to deliver beyond low Earth orbit exploration capabilities. Key decisions included validating Orion as the crew vehicle and selecting a heavy-lift launch vehicle concept using hydrogen and rocket propellant technologies.
This document summarizes the role and responsibilities of the Systems and Software Engineering Directorate within the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology. The Directorate provides independent technical advice and oversight to programs, establishes acquisition policy and guidance, and works to advance systems engineering practices. It sees opportunities to improve how programs apply systems engineering early in the acquisition lifecycle to better define requirements and manage risks.
The document provides an overview of critical path method (CPM) scheduling presented at the First Annual NASA Project Management Conference. It includes a scheduling awareness quiz, types of schedules and networks, precedence diagramming methods, task durations, forward and backward passes to calculate early and late start/finish dates, and total float. The purpose is to introduce essential CPM scheduling concepts and techniques.
The document summarizes changes made in the latest revisions of two NASA policy documents: NPR 7120.5 Rev E regarding space flight programs and projects, and NPR 7120.7 regarding IT and infrastructure. For NPR 7120.5 Rev E, key changes included streamlining requirements, establishing clear objectives for project reviews, and empowering project managers. Major topics of change in the latest revision included applicability, tailoring, compliance matrices, and project formulation agreements. The document provides an overview of the objectives and history of revisions to both policy documents.
The document discusses an update to NASA's software engineering requirements in NPR 7150.2. It provides an overview of the topics to be covered, including the NPD/NPR architecture, lessons learned from the previous NPR, updates to NPR 7150.2, and future work. It then summarizes lessons learned from developing the original NPR 7150.2, such as forming a strong core team, selecting the target audience wisely, understanding where the NPR fits in directives, setting inclusion/exclusion criteria early, and getting professional help. The document outlines changes between the 2004 and 2009 versions, including some added and deleted requirements. It concludes by noting innovations incorporated in the updated NPR 7150.2
NASA has implemented CMMI models to improve software engineering processes. Key impacts include reduced risk, more accurate cost estimates, and finding defects earlier. NASA requires a minimum CMMI level for contractors depending on software class. Lessons learned are that preparation is critical, tools help achieve compliance, and cultural changes have significantly improved practices. CMMI provides a proven approach to manage performance if defined processes are used, results measured, and continuous improvements made.
1 NPP VIIRS Pre-Launch Performance and SDR Validation- IGARSS 2011.pptxgrssieee
The document discusses the pre-launch performance and planned validation of sensor data records (SDRs) from the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) instrument onboard the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (NPP) satellite. It describes VIIRS' spectral, spatial, and radiometric characteristics based on pre-launch testing, and outlines the calibration/validation team and process for validating and improving the SDR products using techniques such as ground/aircraft comparisons, lunar observations, and satellite-to-satellite comparisons to MODIS following launch. The goal is to achieve stable, validated SDRs through ongoing calibration updates and performance monitoring over the lifetime of the NPP mission.
The document discusses the Business Operating Success Strategies (BOSS), a new initiative at Kennedy Space Center Launch Services Program to standardize and improve consistency in mission management. It provides an overview of BOSS, including its purpose to align activities with requirements and increase accountability. It outlines how compliance will be achieved through checklists and schedules. Responsibility for implementation and updates is assigned, and next steps are to obtain feedback and measure BOSS' effectiveness.
The document describes the Orion project's plans to streamline the Critical Design Review (CDR) process compared to the previous Preliminary Design Review (PDR). Key aspects of the streamlined CDR include dividing design documentation reviews into focused subgroups, improving the quality and efficiency of identifying and resolving issues through the review process, and reducing the overall number of participants. The goal is to make the CDR process more effective while reducing costs to about one-third of the PDR costs.
The DART mission was intended to demonstrate autonomous rendezvous technology. However, it faced significant cost overruns, schedule delays, and technical risks. At the critical design review, 300 problems were identified. NASA management then reclassified it as a lower-risk, higher-priority mission for commercial resupply. In light of the identified issues, NASA called for a risk review on proceeding. Key risks included limited engineering resources, late changes to key systems, and tight budgets. Groups discussed whether to proceed to the next design review or cancel the mission, weighing risks and potential mitigation strategies. The case study aimed to help managers make risk-informed decisions.
The document discusses the Ares I-X test flight conducted by NASA in October 2009. It provides background on the objectives and significance of the flight test. It highlights that healthy tension between the flight test's Mission Management Office and Technical Authorities was important to the flight test's success. It then discusses NASA's governance model and how technical authority is implemented. Specifically, it notes the Chief Engineer and Chief of Safety and Mission Assurance represented their communities and helped achieve an appropriate balance between constraints and risk. Information flow between groups was a key factor for the multi-center team's cooperation and success.
The document provides an overview of the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) Project from a project management perspective. It discusses the GPM mission objectives of improving understanding of the global water cycle and precipitation forecasts. It describes the GPM observatory and spacecraft, including instruments and ground assets. It also summarizes the project management approach, including the use of an integrated master schedule, earned value management, and joint confidence level analysis to manage schedule and costs.
This document discusses the systems engineering approach used for the Orion Pad Abort-1 (PA-1) flight test. It outlines how the project gathered requirements from multiple stakeholders, organized teams across different organizations into a single project-centric culture, and defined the system architecture and verification process. The presentation provides lessons learned on transitioning from separate organizational cultures to an integrated project approach and the need for community organizers to advocate for the project. It aims to serve as a future reference for applying systems engineering principles.
The document discusses upcoming changes to NASA's independent review policies and processes. Some of the key changes include standardizing terms of reference, implementing a 1-step or 2-step review timeline, updating required lifecycle products, revising review criteria and maturity tables, and changes to review team composition and decision memos. The changes aim to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of NASA's review processes.
This document recommends an insight/oversight model for NASA's Commercial Crew Program. It suggests using technical expert engagement similar to other programs, with a focus on high-risk subsystems. The model includes discrete oversight at key decision points rather than continuous oversight. Insight teams would provide expertise and recommendations, while the Program Office makes oversight decisions.
The document discusses integrated testing plans for the Constellation program at KSC. It describes plans to conduct Multi-Element Integrated Tests (MEITs) to test interactions between Constellation flight elements launched on different vehicles before they are integrated in space. MEITs found significant problems in previous programs that could have impacted safety and mission objectives. The tests are intended to reduce risks by identifying issues early.
The document summarizes the purpose and activities of the Planetary Science Technology Review Panel. The panel was tasked with assessing NASA's planetary technology development programs and providing recommendations. The panel's activities included briefings with NASA executives, interviews with technology programs and flight projects, and discussions with other organizations involved in technology development. The panel identified major issues in NASA's strategic approach, processes, resources, and culture regarding technology development. These issues center around the lack of an overall technology development strategy and accountability, unclear paths for maturing technologies, unstable budgets, and insufficient communication and risk-taking.
The document describes the Max Launch Abort System (MLAS) project which developed an alternative launch abort system design for Orion as a risk mitigation effort. The MLAS project aimed to identify the simplest design that maximized nominal ascent performance using off-the-shelf parts where possible. A key part of the project was a pad abort flight test to validate models and tools. The document discusses the MLAS flight test vehicle configuration, the flight test itself, opportunities for resident engineers, skill development experiences of the resident engineers, and technical lessons learned from the project.
This document discusses the JPL Media Search Project, a multimedia search tool developed by JPL and Owl Insight LLC to index and search audio/video files. It can perform semantic searches to find relevant content without knowing exact search terms. The tool was piloted on a set of 1700 files. Plans are described to scale the system and apply it to larger collections like the NASA Engineering Network repository containing over 1 million files. The goal is to help NASA effectively capture and retrieve engineering best practices and expertise contained in multimedia files.
The document summarizes an NSC Audits and Assessments Workshop from September 2009-2010. It discusses the background and purpose of different types of NASA safety audits conducted by the NSC Audits and Assessments Office. The document analyzes audit findings from 2007-2010 and identifies potential systemic safety issues across multiple NASA centers, particularly in electrical safety, inspection records, and probabilistic risk assessment. Action plans were developed to address these issues and improve safety audit processes.
The document discusses the NASA approach to prioritizing software verification and validation (IV&V) tasks. It describes the Software Integrity Level Assessment Process (SILAP) used to determine the risk level of software components and identify the appropriate set of IV&V tasks. SILAP involves assessing the consequence of potential defects and error potential of software based on factors like developer experience and complexity. The resulting risk scores map to specific IV&V tasks to establish confidence in software fitness for purpose.
This document summarizes the findings of a NASA survey of various centers regarding compliance with Office of the Chief Engineer (OCE) policy. It describes the survey objectives, methodology, elements reviewed, and schedule. Some key findings included inconsistent implementation of configuration management, risk management, and technical authority across centers. Strengths identified included lessons learned processes and software engineering at JPL. Opportunities for improvement included updating directives, validating Earned Value Management Systems, and clarifying the roles of technical authority and systems engineering.
This document provides an overview of NASA's Exploration Systems Development program, which is developing the Space Launch System (SLS), Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV), and associated ground systems. It discusses the analysis of alternatives that was conducted to select these systems and an incremental approach to deliver beyond low Earth orbit exploration capabilities. Key decisions included validating Orion as the crew vehicle and selecting a heavy-lift launch vehicle concept using hydrogen and rocket propellant technologies.
This document summarizes the role and responsibilities of the Systems and Software Engineering Directorate within the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology. The Directorate provides independent technical advice and oversight to programs, establishes acquisition policy and guidance, and works to advance systems engineering practices. It sees opportunities to improve how programs apply systems engineering early in the acquisition lifecycle to better define requirements and manage risks.
The document provides an overview of critical path method (CPM) scheduling presented at the First Annual NASA Project Management Conference. It includes a scheduling awareness quiz, types of schedules and networks, precedence diagramming methods, task durations, forward and backward passes to calculate early and late start/finish dates, and total float. The purpose is to introduce essential CPM scheduling concepts and techniques.
The document summarizes changes made in the latest revisions of two NASA policy documents: NPR 7120.5 Rev E regarding space flight programs and projects, and NPR 7120.7 regarding IT and infrastructure. For NPR 7120.5 Rev E, key changes included streamlining requirements, establishing clear objectives for project reviews, and empowering project managers. Major topics of change in the latest revision included applicability, tailoring, compliance matrices, and project formulation agreements. The document provides an overview of the objectives and history of revisions to both policy documents.
The document discusses an update to NASA's software engineering requirements in NPR 7150.2. It provides an overview of the topics to be covered, including the NPD/NPR architecture, lessons learned from the previous NPR, updates to NPR 7150.2, and future work. It then summarizes lessons learned from developing the original NPR 7150.2, such as forming a strong core team, selecting the target audience wisely, understanding where the NPR fits in directives, setting inclusion/exclusion criteria early, and getting professional help. The document outlines changes between the 2004 and 2009 versions, including some added and deleted requirements. It concludes by noting innovations incorporated in the updated NPR 7150.2
NASA has implemented CMMI models to improve software engineering processes. Key impacts include reduced risk, more accurate cost estimates, and finding defects earlier. NASA requires a minimum CMMI level for contractors depending on software class. Lessons learned are that preparation is critical, tools help achieve compliance, and cultural changes have significantly improved practices. CMMI provides a proven approach to manage performance if defined processes are used, results measured, and continuous improvements made.
1 NPP VIIRS Pre-Launch Performance and SDR Validation- IGARSS 2011.pptxgrssieee
The document discusses the pre-launch performance and planned validation of sensor data records (SDRs) from the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) instrument onboard the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (NPP) satellite. It describes VIIRS' spectral, spatial, and radiometric characteristics based on pre-launch testing, and outlines the calibration/validation team and process for validating and improving the SDR products using techniques such as ground/aircraft comparisons, lunar observations, and satellite-to-satellite comparisons to MODIS following launch. The goal is to achieve stable, validated SDRs through ongoing calibration updates and performance monitoring over the lifetime of the NPP mission.
Presentation from Master of Science thesis defense (Evaluation of Rapid Impact Compaction for Transportation Infrastructure Applications; July 15, 2011)
IGARSS 2011 - RCM, The Making of (AC) (Short).pptgrssieee
The document summarizes the RADARSAT Constellation Mission (RCM) which consists of three small SAR satellites to support operational requirements of the Canadian government. Key points are that it provides improved coverage over RADARSAT-1/2 with a responsive ground segment. The design parameters were driven by continuity of C-band SAR data, improved revisit rates, and a more cost efficient and reliable small satellite design. The project involves phases for definition, implementation, and commissioning, with MDA Systems as the prime contractor and support from Canadian industry.
This document provides an outline for a presentation on achieving IT project success using NASA standards 7120 and 7123. It discusses key project elements like lifecycles, work breakdown structures, work products, stakeholder outreach, timelines, and an example NASA project. The outline also describes work products generated at different phases for project management, system engineering, subsystems, integration and validation, and deployment/operations. A table shows time-phased work products mapped to project phases and key decision points.
The document summarizes the SARAA project which developed an unmanned aerial system to provide video reconnaissance for search and rescue missions. It reviews the application of the systems engineering process from concept development through engineering development. In the needs analysis phase, requirements were developed through user interviews and validated. Concept exploration further developed subsystem requirements and identified key components. The concept of operations document provides background on SAR missions and outlines SARAA's operational concept.
The document discusses plans to recover from the loss of the Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) mission by developing a replacement mission called OCO-2. It outlines a tailored 8-month formulation period to ready OCO-2 for a key decision point and 28-month development cycle to launch by 2016. The approach leverages existing OCO work and plans to address all NASA requirements to minimize risk to the accelerated schedule and budget.
The document discusses the use of probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) in decision making for the Space Shuttle program. It provides background on the development of the Shuttle PRA since 1987. Key information for management includes clearly presenting the PRA analysis and assumptions, limitations, and estimates of uncertainty to support risk-informed decisions.
1) The document discusses systems engineering concepts for spacecraft development, including the system engineering (SE) process, V-chart, and phased project planning (PPP).
2) SE is defined as an interdisciplinary approach that transforms requirements into a system solution. The SE process involves requirements definition, design, integration, verification, and operation of a system.
3) PPP involves dividing a project into phases for feasibility, definition, design, manufacturing, and operation. Each phase has objectives like defining requirements or completing subsystem design.
This document provides a template and outline for an Air Force program review briefing. The template includes sections for a bottom line up front, program description, concept of operations, requirements, affordability, schedule, funding, risks, and recommendations. It emphasizes key information to include in each section, such as decisions being requested of leadership, outstanding issues, cost and schedule drivers, and risk mitigation activities. The template is intended to guide briefers in concisely summarizing essential information about the program under review.
The document provides an overview of NASA's Software Engineering Initiative from 2002 to 2008. The initiative aimed to advance software engineering practices across NASA to improve schedule, cost, quality and delivered functionality. It established groups and policies to improve processes, provide training, infuse new technologies, and increase collaboration. Key impacts included improved planning, use of best practices by contractors, and a foundation for disciplined software development through shared process assets.
This document discusses the benefits and applications of phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) weld inspection. It describes how PAUT uses multiple independently controlled transducer elements to focus and steer ultrasound beams, providing improved detection, characterization and sizing of weld defects compared to conventional UT. Key benefits outlined include 30% improved probability of detection, 40% improved sizing precision, 20% faster inspections, real-time results, and expanded inspection capabilities with fewer limitations and hazards compared to radiography. PAUT is increasingly used for inspections in power, chemical, aerospace and other industries.
An ASAP Validation Implementation Approach by Qualit Consultingaesww
The document outlines key principles for good documentation practices in a regulated environment:
1. Documentation should be permanent, legible, accurate, prompt, clear, consistent, complete, direct, and truthful.
2. Key attributes of good documentation include that it cannot be changed, erased, or washed off; is easily readable; has correct calculations and carefully recorded information; has information recorded in a timely manner; has the same meaning for all readers; uses standardized formats to avoid confusion; includes all required information; records information directly rather than indirectly; and truthfully represents what occurred to the author's knowledge.
3. The document provides guidelines for documentation in compliance with Good Documentation Practices (GDP) regulations.
The CoNNeCT project faced several major challenges that threatened its schedule. Requirements were not fully defined, which led to rework. Structural analysis found weak margins, requiring a redesign with more testing. A heritage gimbal design was not suitable and needed significant redesign to meet safety requirements, causing cost growth and schedule delays. Solutions included workshops to finalize requirements, structural testing and redesign, and co-developing a redesigned gimbal with added simulators to prevent schedule impacts. These issues are common on projects and understanding them can help others face similar problems.
The document discusses challenges faced in re-engineering the Mission Operations Directorate's (MOD) Flight Production Process (FPP). Key challenges include: 1) Building support for adopting Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) and Enterprise Architecture (EA) methodologies, 2) Resource limitations, 3) Maintaining management support, and 4) Establishing tools for MBSE and EA development. The FPP must be redesigned as an integrated system to address issues like duplication, data errors, and lack of interoperability between its separate processes for Space Shuttle and ISS programs.
This document discusses the process for developing Joint Confidence Level (JCL) assessments of cost and schedule estimates for programs and projects. It outlines the roles of programs/projects and the independent review board (SRB) in developing probabilistic cost estimates, risk analyses, and JCL assessments to present at key decision points. Both the program/project and SRB will develop their own analyses, then reconcile differences through iterative reviews and updates until agreeing on a final JCL assessment to report out. The goal is for estimates to have a 70% confidence level that costs and schedules will be equal to or less than predicted.
The document provides an overview of the transition and retirement of the Space Shuttle Program. It discusses developing a strategy based on benchmarking other large program retirements. A Strategic Capabilities Assessment was conducted to determine what capabilities need to be retained and when. Governance boards were established for oversight. Implementation involves functions like workforce retention, property disposition, and environmental management. The goal is to safely complete the mission manifest and support exploration goals while retiring unneeded capabilities.
This document provides an overview of project scheduling from NASA's perspective. It discusses NASA's large, complex projects and the requirements for project scheduling. The presentation covers key project scheduling processes including activity definition, sequencing, duration estimating, schedule development, status accounting, and performance reporting. It provides examples and definitions for these processes. The goal is to give attendees a basic understanding of project scheduling as it relates to NASA projects.
The document provides a summary of the candidate's work experience and skills. It includes:
1) Over 4 years of experience in software validation and verification for avionics systems. Current role involves unit testing of flight software for a compact head-up display system.
2) Experience with requirements management, design, testing and verification activities over multiple aerospace projects. Skills include requirements tracing, test case development, defect resolution and client communication.
3) Proficient with tools like DOORS, VectorCAST, Wind River emulator and programming languages like C/C++. Background includes work on systems like automatic flight control and secondary power distribution for aircraft.
The document compares the operational complexity and costs of the Space Shuttle versus the Sea Launch Zenit rocket. [1] The Space Shuttle was designed for performance but not operational efficiency, resulting in costly ground, mission planning, and flight operations. [2] In contrast, the Zenit rocket was designed from the start to have automated and robust processes to keep operations simple and costs low. [3] The key lesson is that designing a launch system with operational requirements in mind from the beginning leads to much more efficient operations long-term.
The document provides an overview of project management and procurement at NASA. It discusses the key skills required for project managers, including acquisition management. It notes that 80-85% of NASA's budget is spent on contracts, and procurement processes are complex and constantly changing. The document outlines some common contract types and how they allocate risk between the government and contractor. It also discusses the relationship between contracting officers and project managers, and how successful procurement requires effective communication rather than direct control or authority.
The document introduces the NASA Engineering Network (NEN), which was created by the Office of the Chief Engineer to be a knowledge management system connecting NASA's engineering community. The NEN integrates various tools like a content management system, search engine, and collaboration tools. It provides access to key knowledge resources like NASA's Lessons Learned database and engineering databases. The NEN is working to expand by adding more communities, engineering disciplines, and knowledge repositories.
Laptops were first used in space in 1983 on the Space Shuttle, when Commander John Young brought the GRiD Compass portable computer on STS-9. Laptops are now widely used on the Space Shuttle and International Space Station for tasks like monitoring spacecraft systems, tracking satellites, inventory management, procedures viewing, and videoconferencing. Managing laptops in space presents challenges around cooling, power, and software/hardware compatibility in the harsh space environment.
Laptops were first used in space in 1983 on the Space Shuttle, when Commander John Young brought the GRiD Compass portable computer on STS-9. Laptops are now widely used on the Space Shuttle and International Space Station for tasks like monitoring spacecraft systems, planning rendezvous and proximity operations, inventory management, procedure reviews, and communication between space and ground via software like WorldMap and DOUG. Managing laptops in space presents challenges around hardware durability, cooling, and software/data management in the space environment.
This document discusses the use of market-based systems to allocate scarce resources for NASA missions and projects. It provides examples of how market-based approaches were used for instrument development for the Cassini mission, manifesting secondary payloads on the space shuttle, and mission planning for the LightSAR Earth imaging satellite project. The document finds that these applications of market-based allocation benefited or could have benefited from a decentralized, incentive-based approach compared to traditional centralized planning methods. However, it notes that resistance to new approaches and loss of managerial control are barriers to adoption of market-based systems.
The Stardust mission collected samples from comet Wild 2 and interstellar dust particles. It launched in February 1999 and encountered Wild 2 in January 2004, collecting dust samples in aerogel. It returned the samples to Earth safely in January 2006. The spacecraft used an innovative Whipple shield to protect itself from comet dust impacts during the encounter. Analysis of the Stardust samples has provided insights about comet composition and the early solar system.
This document discusses solutions for integrating schedules on NASA programs. It introduces Stuart Trahan's company, which provides Earned Value Management (EVM) solutions using Microsoft Office Project that comply with OMB and ANSI requirements. It also introduces a partner company, Pinnacle Management Systems, that specializes in enterprise project management solutions including EVM, project portfolio management, and enterprise project resource management, with experience in the aerospace, defense, and other industries. The document defines schedule integration and describes some methods including importing to a centralized Primavera database for review or using Primavera ProjectLink for updates, and challenges including inconsistent data formats and levels of detail across sub-schedules.
The document discusses NASA's implementation of earned value management (EVM) across its Constellation Program to coordinate work across multiple teams. It outlines the organizational structure, current target groups, and an EVM training suite. It also summarizes lessons learned and the need for project/center collaboration to integrate schedules horizontally and vertically.
This document summarizes a presentation about systems engineering processes for principle investigator (PI) mode missions. It discusses how PI missions face special challenges due to cost caps and lower technology readiness levels. It then outlines various systems engineering techniques used for PI missions, including safety compliance, organizational communication, design tools, requirements management, and lessons learned from past missions. Specific case studies from NASA's Explorers Program Office are provided as examples.
This document discusses changes to NASA's business practices for managing projects, including adopting a new acquisition strategy approach and implementing planning, programming, and budget execution (PPBE). The new acquisition strategy involves additional approval meetings at the strategic planning and project levels to better integrate acquisition with strategic and budgetary planning. PPBE focuses on analyzing programs and infrastructure to align with strategic goals and answer whether proposed programs will help achieve NASA's mission. The document also notes improvements in funds distribution and inter-center transfers, reducing the time for these processes from several weeks to only a few days.
Spaceflight Project Security: Terrestrial and On-Orbit/Mission
The document discusses security challenges for spaceflight projects, including protecting space assets from disruption, exploitation, or attack. It highlights national space policy principles of protecting space capabilities. It also discusses trends in cyber threats, including the increasing capabilities of adversaries and how even unskilled attackers can compromise terrestrial support systems linked to space assets if defenses are not strong. Protecting space projects requires awareness of threats, vulnerabilities, and strategies to defend, restore, and increase situational awareness of space assets and supporting systems.
Humor can positively impact many aspects of project management. It can improve communication, aid in team building, help detect team morale issues, and influence leadership, conflict management, negotiation, motivation, and problem solving. While humor has benefits, it also has risks and not all uses of humor are positive. Future research is needed on humor in multicultural teams, its relationship to team performance, how humor is learned, and determining optimal "doses" of humor. In conclusion, humor is a tool that can influence people and projects, but must be used carefully and spontaneously for best effect.
The recovery of Space Shuttle Columbia after its loss in 2003 involved a massive multi-agency effort to search a wide debris field, recover crew remains and evidence, and compensate local communities. Over 25,000 people searched over 680,000 acres, recovering 38% of Columbia's weight. Extensive engineering investigations were conducted to identify the causes of failure and implement changes to allow the safe return to flight of Discovery in 2005.
This document summarizes research on enhancing safety culture at NASA. It describes a survey developed to assess NASA's safety culture based on principles of high reliability organizations. The survey was tailored specifically for NASA and has been implemented to provide feedback and identify areas for improvement. It allows NASA to benchmark its safety culture within and across other industries pursuing high reliability.
This document summarizes a presentation about project management challenges at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. The presentation outlines a vision for anomaly management, including establishing consistent problem reporting and analysis processes across all missions. It describes the current problem management approach, which lacks centralized information sharing. The presentation aims to close this gap by implementing online problem reporting and trend analysis tools to extract lessons learned across missions over time. This will help improve spacecraft design and operations based on ongoing anomaly experiences.
This document discusses leveraging scheduling productivity with practical scheduling techniques. It addresses scheduling issues such as unwieldy schedule databases and faulty logic. It then discusses taming the schedule beast through using a scheduler's toolkit, schedule templates, codes to manipulate MS Project data, common views/filters/tables, limiting constraints, and other best practices. The document provides examples of using codes and custom views/filters to effectively organize and display schedule information.
This document describes Ball Aerospace's implementation of a Life Cycle and Gated Milestone (LCGM) process to improve program planning, execution, and control across its diverse portfolio. The LCGM provides a standardized yet flexible framework that maps out program activities and products across phases. It was developed through cross-functional collaboration and introduced gradually across programs while allowing flexibility. Initial results showed the LCGM supported improved planning and management while aligning with Ball Aerospace's entrepreneurial culture.
This document discusses the importance of situation awareness (SA) for project team members. It defines SA as having three levels: perception of elements in the current situation, comprehension of the current situation, and projection of the future status. Good team SA is achieved by turning individual SAs into shared SA through communication. Teams with strong SA prepare more, focus on comprehending and projecting, and maintain awareness through techniques like questioning assumptions and seeking additional information.
This document discusses theories of leadership and how a project manager's leadership style may impact project success depending on the type of project. It outlines early hypotheses that a PM's competence, including leadership style, is a success factor on projects. It presents a research model linking PM leadership competencies to project success, moderated by factors like project type. Initial interviews found that leadership style is more important on complex projects, and different competencies are needed depending on if a project is technical or involves change. Certain competencies like communication skills and cultural sensitivity were seen as important for different project types and contexts.
Have you ever been confused by the myriad of choices offered by AWS for hosting a website or an API?
Lambda, Elastic Beanstalk, Lightsail, Amplify, S3 (and more!) can each host websites + APIs. But which one should we choose?
Which one is cheapest? Which one is fastest? Which one will scale to meet our needs?
Join me in this session as we dive into each AWS hosting service to determine which one is best for your scenario and explain why!
For the full video of this presentation, please visit: https://www.edge-ai-vision.com/2024/06/temporal-event-neural-networks-a-more-efficient-alternative-to-the-transformer-a-presentation-from-brainchip/
Chris Jones, Director of Product Management at BrainChip , presents the “Temporal Event Neural Networks: A More Efficient Alternative to the Transformer” tutorial at the May 2024 Embedded Vision Summit.
The expansion of AI services necessitates enhanced computational capabilities on edge devices. Temporal Event Neural Networks (TENNs), developed by BrainChip, represent a novel and highly efficient state-space network. TENNs demonstrate exceptional proficiency in handling multi-dimensional streaming data, facilitating advancements in object detection, action recognition, speech enhancement and language model/sequence generation. Through the utilization of polynomial-based continuous convolutions, TENNs streamline models, expedite training processes and significantly diminish memory requirements, achieving notable reductions of up to 50x in parameters and 5,000x in energy consumption compared to prevailing methodologies like transformers.
Integration with BrainChip’s Akida neuromorphic hardware IP further enhances TENNs’ capabilities, enabling the realization of highly capable, portable and passively cooled edge devices. This presentation delves into the technical innovations underlying TENNs, presents real-world benchmarks, and elucidates how this cutting-edge approach is positioned to revolutionize edge AI across diverse applications.
Conversational agents, or chatbots, are increasingly used to access all sorts of services using natural language. While open-domain chatbots - like ChatGPT - can converse on any topic, task-oriented chatbots - the focus of this paper - are designed for specific tasks, like booking a flight, obtaining customer support, or setting an appointment. Like any other software, task-oriented chatbots need to be properly tested, usually by defining and executing test scenarios (i.e., sequences of user-chatbot interactions). However, there is currently a lack of methods to quantify the completeness and strength of such test scenarios, which can lead to low-quality tests, and hence to buggy chatbots.
To fill this gap, we propose adapting mutation testing (MuT) for task-oriented chatbots. To this end, we introduce a set of mutation operators that emulate faults in chatbot designs, an architecture that enables MuT on chatbots built using heterogeneous technologies, and a practical realisation as an Eclipse plugin. Moreover, we evaluate the applicability, effectiveness and efficiency of our approach on open-source chatbots, with promising results.
For the full video of this presentation, please visit: https://www.edge-ai-vision.com/2024/06/how-axelera-ai-uses-digital-compute-in-memory-to-deliver-fast-and-energy-efficient-computer-vision-a-presentation-from-axelera-ai/
Bram Verhoef, Head of Machine Learning at Axelera AI, presents the “How Axelera AI Uses Digital Compute-in-memory to Deliver Fast and Energy-efficient Computer Vision” tutorial at the May 2024 Embedded Vision Summit.
As artificial intelligence inference transitions from cloud environments to edge locations, computer vision applications achieve heightened responsiveness, reliability and privacy. This migration, however, introduces the challenge of operating within the stringent confines of resource constraints typical at the edge, including small form factors, low energy budgets and diminished memory and computational capacities. Axelera AI addresses these challenges through an innovative approach of performing digital computations within memory itself. This technique facilitates the realization of high-performance, energy-efficient and cost-effective computer vision capabilities at the thin and thick edge, extending the frontier of what is achievable with current technologies.
In this presentation, Verhoef unveils his company’s pioneering chip technology and demonstrates its capacity to deliver exceptional frames-per-second performance across a range of standard computer vision networks typical of applications in security, surveillance and the industrial sector. This shows that advanced computer vision can be accessible and efficient, even at the very edge of our technological ecosystem.
Taking AI to the Next Level in Manufacturing.pdfssuserfac0301
Read Taking AI to the Next Level in Manufacturing to gain insights on AI adoption in the manufacturing industry, such as:
1. How quickly AI is being implemented in manufacturing.
2. Which barriers stand in the way of AI adoption.
3. How data quality and governance form the backbone of AI.
4. Organizational processes and structures that may inhibit effective AI adoption.
6. Ideas and approaches to help build your organization's AI strategy.
Introduction of Cybersecurity with OSS at Code Europe 2024Hiroshi SHIBATA
I develop the Ruby programming language, RubyGems, and Bundler, which are package managers for Ruby. Today, I will introduce how to enhance the security of your application using open-source software (OSS) examples from Ruby and RubyGems.
The first topic is CVE (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures). I have published CVEs many times. But what exactly is a CVE? I'll provide a basic understanding of CVEs and explain how to detect and handle vulnerabilities in OSS.
Next, let's discuss package managers. Package managers play a critical role in the OSS ecosystem. I'll explain how to manage library dependencies in your application.
I'll share insights into how the Ruby and RubyGems core team works to keep our ecosystem safe. By the end of this talk, you'll have a better understanding of how to safeguard your code.
5th LF Energy Power Grid Model Meet-up SlidesDanBrown980551
5th Power Grid Model Meet-up
It is with great pleasure that we extend to you an invitation to the 5th Power Grid Model Meet-up, scheduled for 6th June 2024. This event will adopt a hybrid format, allowing participants to join us either through an online Mircosoft Teams session or in person at TU/e located at Den Dolech 2, Eindhoven, Netherlands. The meet-up will be hosted by Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e), a research university specializing in engineering science & technology.
Power Grid Model
The global energy transition is placing new and unprecedented demands on Distribution System Operators (DSOs). Alongside upgrades to grid capacity, processes such as digitization, capacity optimization, and congestion management are becoming vital for delivering reliable services.
Power Grid Model is an open source project from Linux Foundation Energy and provides a calculation engine that is increasingly essential for DSOs. It offers a standards-based foundation enabling real-time power systems analysis, simulations of electrical power grids, and sophisticated what-if analysis. In addition, it enables in-depth studies and analysis of the electrical power grid’s behavior and performance. This comprehensive model incorporates essential factors such as power generation capacity, electrical losses, voltage levels, power flows, and system stability.
Power Grid Model is currently being applied in a wide variety of use cases, including grid planning, expansion, reliability, and congestion studies. It can also help in analyzing the impact of renewable energy integration, assessing the effects of disturbances or faults, and developing strategies for grid control and optimization.
What to expect
For the upcoming meetup we are organizing, we have an exciting lineup of activities planned:
-Insightful presentations covering two practical applications of the Power Grid Model.
-An update on the latest advancements in Power Grid -Model technology during the first and second quarters of 2024.
-An interactive brainstorming session to discuss and propose new feature requests.
-An opportunity to connect with fellow Power Grid Model enthusiasts and users.
Northern Engraving | Nameplate Manufacturing Process - 2024Northern Engraving
Manufacturing custom quality metal nameplates and badges involves several standard operations. Processes include sheet prep, lithography, screening, coating, punch press and inspection. All decoration is completed in the flat sheet with adhesive and tooling operations following. The possibilities for creating unique durable nameplates are endless. How will you create your brand identity? We can help!
Essentials of Automations: Exploring Attributes & Automation ParametersSafe Software
Building automations in FME Flow can save time, money, and help businesses scale by eliminating data silos and providing data to stakeholders in real-time. One essential component to orchestrating complex automations is the use of attributes & automation parameters (both formerly known as “keys”). In fact, it’s unlikely you’ll ever build an Automation without using these components, but what exactly are they?
Attributes & automation parameters enable the automation author to pass data values from one automation component to the next. During this webinar, our FME Flow Specialists will cover leveraging the three types of these output attributes & parameters in FME Flow: Event, Custom, and Automation. As a bonus, they’ll also be making use of the Split-Merge Block functionality.
You’ll leave this webinar with a better understanding of how to maximize the potential of automations by making use of attributes & automation parameters, with the ultimate goal of setting your enterprise integration workflows up on autopilot.
HCL Notes und Domino Lizenzkostenreduzierung in der Welt von DLAUpanagenda
Webinar Recording: https://www.panagenda.com/webinars/hcl-notes-und-domino-lizenzkostenreduzierung-in-der-welt-von-dlau/
DLAU und die Lizenzen nach dem CCB- und CCX-Modell sind für viele in der HCL-Community seit letztem Jahr ein heißes Thema. Als Notes- oder Domino-Kunde haben Sie vielleicht mit unerwartet hohen Benutzerzahlen und Lizenzgebühren zu kämpfen. Sie fragen sich vielleicht, wie diese neue Art der Lizenzierung funktioniert und welchen Nutzen sie Ihnen bringt. Vor allem wollen Sie sicherlich Ihr Budget einhalten und Kosten sparen, wo immer möglich. Das verstehen wir und wir möchten Ihnen dabei helfen!
Wir erklären Ihnen, wie Sie häufige Konfigurationsprobleme lösen können, die dazu führen können, dass mehr Benutzer gezählt werden als nötig, und wie Sie überflüssige oder ungenutzte Konten identifizieren und entfernen können, um Geld zu sparen. Es gibt auch einige Ansätze, die zu unnötigen Ausgaben führen können, z. B. wenn ein Personendokument anstelle eines Mail-Ins für geteilte Mailboxen verwendet wird. Wir zeigen Ihnen solche Fälle und deren Lösungen. Und natürlich erklären wir Ihnen das neue Lizenzmodell.
Nehmen Sie an diesem Webinar teil, bei dem HCL-Ambassador Marc Thomas und Gastredner Franz Walder Ihnen diese neue Welt näherbringen. Es vermittelt Ihnen die Tools und das Know-how, um den Überblick zu bewahren. Sie werden in der Lage sein, Ihre Kosten durch eine optimierte Domino-Konfiguration zu reduzieren und auch in Zukunft gering zu halten.
Diese Themen werden behandelt
- Reduzierung der Lizenzkosten durch Auffinden und Beheben von Fehlkonfigurationen und überflüssigen Konten
- Wie funktionieren CCB- und CCX-Lizenzen wirklich?
- Verstehen des DLAU-Tools und wie man es am besten nutzt
- Tipps für häufige Problembereiche, wie z. B. Team-Postfächer, Funktions-/Testbenutzer usw.
- Praxisbeispiele und Best Practices zum sofortigen Umsetzen
HCL Notes und Domino Lizenzkostenreduzierung in der Welt von DLAU
Richard.grammier
1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Getting to be a Successful PDR
Under NPR 7120.5D
Richard S. Grammier
Juno Project Manager
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
2. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Introduction
• For purposes of this presentation, it is assumed that your project has
passed Key Decision Point B (KDP B) and is now beginning Phase B
• We will first discuss NPR 7120.5D requirements and processes
necessary to successfully pass PDR and KDP C, providing approval to
proceed with the implementation (Phases C and D)
• We will then use examples from Juno’s Phase B activities to
demonstrate how you can address these requirements and processes
and still accomplish the primary work necessary for a successful PDR
1/31/2008 2
3. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Space Flight Project Lifecycle
NASA Life FORMULATION Approval for IMPLEMENTATION
Cycle Phases Implementation Operations
Pre-Systems Acquisition Systems Acquisition Decommissioning
Project Pre-Phase A: Phase A: Phase B: Phase C: Phase D: Phase E: Phase F:
Life Cycle Concept Concept & Technology Preliminary Design & Final Design & System Assembly, Operations Closeout
Phases Studies Development Technology Completion Fabrication Int & Test, Launch & Sustainment
Project KDP A KDP B KDP C KDP D KDP E KDP F
Final Archival
Life Cycle FAD Launch End of Mission of Data
Gates & Preliminary Baseline
Draft Project
Major Events Requirements Project Plan Project Plan7
Agency
Reviews ASP5 ASM5
Human Space
Flight Project MCR SRR SDR PDR CDR / SIR SAR ORR FRR PLAR CERR3 End of DR
Reviews1 (PNAR) (NAR) PRR2 Inspections and Flight
Re-flights Refurbishment
Re-enters appropriate life cycle phase if
modifications are needed between flights6 PFAR
Robotic
Mission Project
Reviews1
SRR MDR4 PDR CDR / SIR ORR FRR PLAR CERR3 DR
Launch MCR
(PNAR) (NAR) PRR2
Readiness SMSR, LRR
(LV), FRR (LV)
Reviews
Supporting Peer Reviews, Subsystem PDRs, Subsystem CDRs, and System Reviews
Reviews
FOOTNOTES ACRONYMS
1. Flexibility is allowed in the timing, number, and content of reviews as long as the ASP—Acquisition Strategy Planning Meeting
ASM—Acquisition Strategy Meeting ORR—Operational Readiness Review
equivalent information is provided at each KDP and the approach is fully PDR—Preliminary Design Review
documented in the Project Plan. These reviews are conducted by the project for CDR—Critical Design Review
CERR—Critical Events Readiness Review PFAR—Post-Flight Assessment Review
the independent SRB. See Section 2.5 and Table 2-6. PLAR—Post-Launch Assessment Review
2. PRR needed for multiple (≥4) system copies. Timing is notional. DR—Decommissioning Review
FAD—Formulation Authorization Document PNAR—Preliminary Non-Advocate Review
3. CERRs are established at the discretion of Program Offices. PRR—Production Readiness Review
4. For robotic missions, the SRR and the MDR may be combined. FRR—Flight Readiness Review
KDP—Key Decision Point SAR—System Acceptance Review
5. The ASP and ASM are Agency reviews, not life-cycle reviews. SDR—System Definition Review
6. Includes recertification, as required. LRR—Launch Readiness Review
MCR—Mission Concept Review SIR—System Integration Review
7. Project Plans are baselined at KDP C and are reviewed and updated as SMSR—Safety and Mission Success Review
required, to ensure project content, cost, and budget remain consistent. MDR—Mission Definition Review
NAR—Non-Advocate Review SRR—System Requirements Review
1/31/2008 3
4. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Obtain Your Project’s Categorization
(Table 2-1, NPR 7120.5D)
Request your categorization via your Program
Office to the appropriate Mission Directorate at HQ
LCC > $1B, use of nuclear
power source, or human
Priority Level LCC < $250M $250M ≤ LCC ≤ $1B space flight
High Category 2 Category 2 Category 1
Medium Category 3 Category 2 Category 1
Low Category 3 Category 2 Category 1
Note: The threshold values in Table 2-1 are updated annually as part of the Agency's strategic planning guidance.
1/31/2008 4
5. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Know Your Decision Authority (DA) and Governing
Program Management Council (PMC)
(Table 2-2, NPR 7120.5D)
The DA is the Agency’s responsible individual who authorizes the
transition at a KDP to the next life-cycle phase. For Category 1 projects,
the DA is the NASA Associate Administrator(AA). For Category
2 and 3 projects, the DA is the MDAA.
Agency PMC Mission Directorate PMC
Programs
Category 1 Projects
Category 2 Projects
Category 3 Projects
Indicates governing PMC Indicates PMC evaluation
1/31/2008 5
6. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
What is KDP C?
• The event where the DA determines the readiness of the project to
progress from Phase B (Formulation) to Phase C (Implementation)
– Life cycle phases always end with a KDP
– The KDP is preceded by one or more reviews, including the governing
PMC (see following slide)
– Reference: Paragraph 2.4.5, NPR 7120.5D
• To support the decision process, supporting materials are presented to
the DA (Reference: Paragraph 2.4.6, NPR 7120.5D)
– Governing PMC recommendation
– Standing Review Board Report
– The MDAA recommendation (for Category 1 Projects)
– Recommendations from the Program Manager and Project Manager
– The Center Management Council (CMC)
– Project documents that are ready for signature
1/31/2008 6
7. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Reviews Leading to KDP C
(An Example for a Category 1 Project)
• SRR/MDR (for AO driven projects)
• Inheritance Reviews
• Subsystem PDRs
• Instrument PDRs
• System level PDRs (e.g., Flight System, Mission System, Payload
System, etc.)
• Project PDR
• ICAs and ICEs, and Project reconciliation
• SRB Report to CMC and Program Office, Project Response
• Brief to MDAA
• Brief to governing PMC (Agency PMC)
• Agency PMC recommendation to Decision Authority (NASA AA)
• DA makes KDP C decision
1/31/2008 7
8. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
KDP C Criteria
• The DA considers a number of factors:
– Relevance to Agency strategic needs, goals and objectives
– Continued cost affordability wrt the Agency’s resources
– Project’s viability and readiness to proceed to the next phase
– Remaining project risk (cost, schedule, technical, management and safety)
• For Projects going to KDP C, the PDR independent life cycle review is
conducted by the Standing Review Board (SRB) using the following
criteria (Ref: paragraph 2.5.2.1, NPR 7120.5D):
– Alignment with and contributing to Agency needs, goals and objectives
– Adequacy of technical approach, as defined by NPR 7123.1 entrance and success
criteria (and Center standards)
– Adequacy of schedule
– Adequacy of estimated costs, including Independent Cost Analyses (ICAs) and
Independent Cost Estimates (ICEs), against approved budget resources
– Adequacy/availability of resources other than budget
– Adequacy of risk management approach and risk ID/mitigation
– Adequacy of management approach
Shouldn’t be anything new here!
1/31/2008 8
9. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Independent Life Cycle Reviews
• Independent life cycle reviews may or may not precede the
KDPs (in our case, the PDR is such a review that precedes
KDP C). Ref: paragraph 2.5 of NPR 7120.5D
– These reviews are conducted by an SRB, under documented
Agency and Center review processes
– Projects document in their Project Plans their approach to
conducting internal reviews and how they will support the
independent life cycle reviews
• Terms of Reference (ToR) for each independent life cycle
review
– Approval and concurrence depends on Project Category
– For instance, Category 1 Projects include approval of the NASA
AA, MDAA, NASA CE (concur), Center Director, and AA for
PA&E
– Contains review success criteria, SRB membership, etc.
1/31/2008 9
10. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Standing Review Board
• The SRB’s role is advisory to the project and convening authorities
– SRB does not have authority over any project content
– Should offer recommendations to improve performance and/or reduce risk
– Its outputs are briefed to the project under review prior to being reported
to higher level management
• SRB Membership
– Chairperson
– Review Manager (from PA&E or Technical Authority, depending on
Project category)
– Members responsible for ICAs and ICEs (may be IPAO provided)
– Chair organizes SRB and submits names of proposed members to the
convening authority for approval
– Board members must be independent of the project, and some members
must be independent of the project’s Center
1/31/2008 10
11. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Phase B Activities Guidance
• Paragraph 4.5 of NPR 7120.5D provides specific guidance
regarding Phase B activities
• Required activities include
– Support HQ and program related activities such as
• Launch vehicle selection
• Baseline program requirements on the project (i.e., Level 1
requirements and mission success criteria)
– Perform Technical Activities such as
• System, sub-system and lower level requirements generation
• Preliminary design
• Baseline mission operations concept
– Perform project planning, costing and scheduling activities such as
• Generation of the integrated baseline
• Preparations for implementation of earned value requirements
• Life cycle cost estimates, including reserves
1/31/2008 11
12. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Phase B Activities Guidance (cont’d)
Tables 4-3 and 4-4 of NPR 7120.5 D provide guidance on
required gate products (with maturity level) and project
control plans, respectively, required for KDP C
Pre-Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase D Phase E
Products
§
Phase A
KDP A KDP B KDP C KDP D KDP E KDP F
Headquarters and Program Products
1. FAD Approved Pre-Phase A Phase A Phase B Phase C Phase D Phase E
2. Program Requirements on the Project (from the Program Draft Baseline Update NPR 7120.5D
Plan) KDP A KDP B KDP C KDP D KDP E KDP F
3. ASM minutes Baseline Project Plan -
4. NEPA compliance documentation Environmental
Assessment or Control Plans
Environmental
Impact Statement (if 1. Technical, Schedule, and Cost Preliminary Baseline
required) *
Control Plan
5. Interagency & International Agreements Baseline
2. Safety and Mission Assurance Plan Preliminary Baseline
Project Technical Products
1. Mission Concept Report Preliminary Baseline 3. Risk Management Plan Preliminary Baseline
2. System Level Requirements Preliminary Baseline 4. Acquistion Plan Preliminary Baseline
3. Preliminary Design Report Baseline 5. Technology Development Plan Baseline
4. Missions Operations Concept Preliminary Baseline
6. Systems Engineering Management Baseline
5. Technology Readiness Assessment Report Baseline
6. Missile System Pre-Launch Safety Package Preliminary Baseline Update
Plan
7. Detailed Design Report Baseline 7. Software Management Plan Preliminary Baseline
8. As-built Hardware and Software Documentation Baseline 8. Review Plan Preliminary Baseline
9. Verification and Validation Report Baseline 9. Missions Operations Plan Preliminary Baseline
10. Operations Handbook Preliminary Baseline
10. Environmental Management Plan Baseline
11. Orbital Debris Assessment Initial Preliminary Baseline
12. Mission Report Final
Project Planning, Cost, and Schedule Products 11. Logistics Plan Preliminary Baseline
1. Work Agreements for next phase Baseline** Baseline Baseline Baseline Baseline 12. Science Data Management Plan Preliminary Baseline
2. Integrated Baseline Draft Preliminary Baseline 13. Information and Configuration Preliminary Baseline
3. Project Plan Preliminary Baseline
Management Plan
4. CADRe Preliminary Baseline Update Update
14. Security Plan Preliminary Baseline
5. Planetary Protection Plan Planetary Protection Baseline
Certification 15. Export Control Plan Preliminary Baseline
6. Nuclear Safety Launch Approval Plan Baseline (mission has
nuclear materials)
7. Business Case Analysis for Infrastructure Preliminary Baseline
8. Range Safety Risk Management Plan Preliminary Baseline
9. Systems Decommissioning/Disposal Plan Preliminary Baseline
KDP Readiness Products
1. Standing Review Board Report (SRB) Final Final Final Final Final Final
2. Project Manager Recommendation (includes response to SRB Final Final Final Final Final Final
Report, as applicable)
3. CMC Recommendation Final Final Final Final Final Final
4. Program Manager Recommendation Final Final Final Final Final Final
5. MD-PMC Recommendation (for Category I projects only) Final Final Final Final Final Final
6. Governing PMC Recommendation Final Final Final Final Final Final
* See Section 4.5.2 a. (2) for exceptions. § See footnote 15 in Section 4.4 for competed mission exceptions
1/31/2008 12
13. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Juno Phase B Activities
• So now that we’ve briefly explored NPR 7120.5D’s rules of
engagement for Phase B activities leading up to and including KDP C,
let’s take a look at how the Juno Project is addressing some of these
areas
• The following slides are an excerpt of a presentation given to NASA
SMD in November 2006
• As a way of introduction, it is the PM’s assertion that Phase B
activities are focused upon risk reduction in order to show at KDP C
that the project has adequate cost, schedule and technical resources to
get the job done, with appropriate margin ⇒ the project has a low risk
posture
– These activities also ensure your preliminary design will mature
and that the appropriate gate products for KDP C are generated
1/31/2008 13
14. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Risk Reduction in Phase B
• The next section deals with risk reduction activities addressed in Phase B, both
nominal and those added to take advantage of the extended Phase B
– This is not a comprehensive list of all Phase B activities, but is representative of the
work being accomplished
• The content is as follows:
– High Level Risk Mitigation approaches
• Communications
• Cultural Differences and Expectation Mismatches
– Risk Mitigation approaches in key areas
• Requirements
• Inheritance
• Operational Environments
• Science Instrument Developments
• Mission Operations
• Margins/Reserves
– Specific Activities
• Key Trade Studies
• Key Technical Risks
• Examples of specific risk reduction activities
– Cost Estimates & EVMS
1/31/2008 14
15. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Communications
• Risk: Complex organization and multiple interfaces result in lack of
communications and miscommunications
• Activities
– Integrated Management and Engineering Team (IMET)
– Project Systems Engineering Team (PSET)
– Individual System Engineering and Management Teams
– Bi-Monthly Management Review (BMR, every two weeks)
– Risk Management process
– Data Management
• Indicators: Project’s command, control and communications (C3) functions up
and running at full speed
• See following slide
1/31/2008 15
16. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Engineering & Management
Team’s Meeting Structure
PI, PM, DPM, PSE, FSE, P/L SE, SYS Mgrs, MA, Bus. Mgr, IMs
Integrated Management
& Engineering Team (IMET)
(Weekly, Bi-weekly)
Information
Project Systems Science Sharing
Engineering Team (PSET) Team Repository:
(Weekly) DocuShare
Library
Project
Flight System Juno Payload Mission Design Mission Ops System Information
Design Team (FSDT) Engineering Team (JPET) Team (MDT) Design Team (MOSDT) Mgmt. System
(Weekly) (Weekly) (Weekly) (Weekly)
(PIMS)
PI, PM, NFPO, HQ PE Action Items
Bi-Monthly Risk Data Base
Management Reviews
(BMRs)
Bus. Team PSE FLT Sys P/L Sys Msn Sys MA Instruments SOC
Monthly Risk
Review
1/31/2008 16
17. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Requirements
• Risk: Requirements are not well defined or understood in Phase B
• Activities:
– Early requirements definition (with rationale) and flow down to identify
key, driving requirements at subsystem level
– Significant involvement of science community to understand science
requirements rationale and implementation consequences
– Identify and resolve key project system trades
– Identify requirements unnecessarily driving the design or driving designs
away from inheritance
– Early definition of mission operations concept in order to drive out hidden
requirements
• Indicators:
– Juno PLR (Level 1 requirements) draft already generated & in
coordination
– Lower level requirements already very close to PMSR level
– Trades identified and being worked
– Capability and Requirements Review (CRR)
– Requirements maturity at PMSR and PDR
1/31/2008 17
18. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Inheritance
• Risk: Overly optimistic assumptions regarding level of inheritance and
obsolescence issues (due to 2 year delay), result in significant
increased development, analyses and test costs
• Activities:
– Identify potential parts/material obsolescence and procure early
– Early identification of requirements driving design changes and pushing
back
– Robust inheritance review process across all systems prior to PDR
• Indicators:
– Early procurements of FPGAs, Li-ion battery materials, telecom Small
Deep Space Transponder (SDST)
– Process in place to continually monitor for other obsolescence issues
– CRR addressed early look at inheritance issues and requirements driving
changes to inheritance
– Inheritance review schedule (see Reviews Schedule)
1/31/2008 18
19. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Mission Operations Planning
• Risk: Mission operations planning is not synchronous with the rest of
project planning in Phase B, resulting in poor operability and hidden
costs that don’t become evident until Phase D
• Activities:
– Mission phase scenarios working group to identify additional
requirements and ensure operability
– Early generation and review of operations concept
– Participation in Level 2 requirements working groups
– Identification of critical operations trades
– Early definition of key interfaces with, and requirements upon, JSOC
• Indicators:
– Integrated schedule synchronized with flight system activities
– Detailed Phase C/D/E grass roots cost estimates
– Resolution of MOS/GDS trades
– Identification of unique issues associated with length of mission
1/31/2008 19
20. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Understanding Margins
• Risk: If you simply follow the margin guidelines (technical, cost and
schedule) and think you are fine at this early stage, you will be in trouble in
Phase C/D (if not at PDR)
• Activities:
– Complete critical trades early and assess impacts to margins
– Retire key risks early and assess impacts to margins
– Create a system to track opportunities as well as threats to all margins and report
frequently
– Implement strong risk management process
• Indicators:
– Schedule workshops to understand critical path and margins
– All margins reported every other week at BMRs
– Risk Management system and process in place
– CRR results used to reassess schedule margins and budget reserve posture
– Early Phase C/D grass roots estimates
– Project’s budget reserve and schedule margin exceeds guidelines in almost all areas
1/31/2008 20
21. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Phase C/D Cost Estimates
• Risk: Phase C/D/E grass roots estimates delivered late in formulation (just
prior to PDR) and inadequate integrated financial/schedule system in place for
Phase C/D
• Actions:
– Early grass roots cost exercise 11/06 through 05/07, including the system
contractor
– Second grass roots cost exercise begins 8 months before PDR
– System contractor final Phase C/D proposal due 4 months prior to PDR (typically
it’s been 1 month)
– Developing integrated plan for CADRe, IBR and Earned Value implementation to
support PDR, NAR and Confirmation Review
• Indicators:
– Early grass roots exercise currently in progress
– Integrated schedule for CADRe, IBR and EV implementation (see following slide)
– Lockheed Martin already taking earned value on selected Phase B tasks
1/31/2008 21
22. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
DRAFT
EVMS Implementation Plan - Phase C/D
• Full EVMS criteria will apply to LM, JPL, and instruments where applicable
once we move into Phase C/D
• “Preliminary” IBR, ICE and NAR window planned between 4/08 – 8/08
– Why Preliminary IBR?
• Costing currently will begin 8 to 10 months prior to PDR – any earlier would drive greater
likelihood of inaccuracies in the baseline plan.
• CADRe isn’t available until 4/13/08, PDR planned for 5/13/08.
• Must allow time for final costing of flight system and instruments, fact finding, technical
evaluation, and negotiation of LM Phase C/D contract prior to final baseline being set.
– These activities may change the preliminary EVMS baseline.
• This baselining activity is planned to happen concurrently with PDR activities at the system
and instrument levels – very busy time.
• “Final” or formal IBR window planned for 9/08 – 11/08
• Based on 60 days to establish formal baseline after KDP-C and allowing
1 to 2 months of reporting against formal EVMS baseline
1/31/2008 22
23. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Summary
• Navigating NPR 7120.5D can appear difficult, but
hopefully this presentation makes it easier
– Similar guidance in the NPR for other life cycle phases
• The NPR is not so onerous that you can’t get the “real
work” done
• Your project planning needs to account for the additional
reviews leading to any of the KDPs
1/31/2008 23