The document discusses developing requirements for NASA's next generation space suit for the Constellation program. It covers the importance of establishing clear requirements early, as validated requirements are key to managing project risk and preventing cost overruns and schedule delays. The document outlines NASA's process for developing requirements for the Constellation space suit, including lessons learned and areas for improvement in the requirements development and management process.
These economically challenging times present an added dimension to the opinion forming process facing auditors when they form audit opinions on financial statements. This practical session blends the theory and the technicality of the standards and the guidance documents with the practicality of actual opinions formed.
Audit Opinion Dilemmas forms part of the Essential Advisors Mix which is also available online. When you purchase this course as part of the Essential Advisors Mix you get 10 Hours Online CPD for just €150.00.
These economically challenging times present an added dimension to the opinion forming process facing auditors when they form audit opinions on financial statements. This practical session blends the theory and the technicality of the standards and the guidance documents with the practicality of actual opinions formed.
Audit Opinion Dilemmas forms part of the Essential Advisors Mix which is also available online. When you purchase this course as part of the Essential Advisors Mix you get 10 Hours Online CPD for just €150.00.
Optimizing Fire3 and Gas System Design Using the ISA Technical Report ISA TR8...Kenexis
Fire and Gas Detection and Suppression Systems (FGS) have long been successfully employed as a safeguard in the process industries. Unfortunately, design methods for determining the quantity and placement of detectors have historically been less than satisfactory. Design practices based on rules of thumb and experiences have often resulted in design inconsistencies, and achievement of tolerable risk cannot be ascertained. Rule-based methods often place detectors where they are not needed and leave high risk areas unnecessarily exposed. ISA released technical report TR 84.00.07 to address this problem. This technical report explains the metrics, such as detector coverage, and techniques that can be applied to the design of FGS which results in optimal designs that are safer and more repeatable. This paper will provide an overview of the contents of the technical report, and also provide some case study examples that show how these performance-based methods result in superior designs to currently used techniques such as grid-based approaches.
This is a program description for the Integrated Sensor is Structure (ISIS), a airship carrying massive sensors for the US military. DARPA, which is sponsoring the project, provided this overview briefing on ISIS to contractors, with it updated for the last time on 5 March 2009.
The Importance of Integration of subsurface with surface facilities designRiley Smith
OPC's David Gorsuch and INTECSEA's John Harley recently delivered this presentation at the 9th Annual Offshore Production Technology Summit in London. The presentation highlights the importance of integration between the subsurface and surface facility design teams in achieving optimal field development plans for oil & gas assets.
Enchancing adoption of Open Source Libraries. A case study on Albumentations.AIVladimir Iglovikov, Ph.D.
Presented by Vladimir Iglovikov:
- https://www.linkedin.com/in/iglovikov/
- https://x.com/viglovikov
- https://www.instagram.com/ternaus/
This presentation delves into the journey of Albumentations.ai, a highly successful open-source library for data augmentation.
Created out of a necessity for superior performance in Kaggle competitions, Albumentations has grown to become a widely used tool among data scientists and machine learning practitioners.
This case study covers various aspects, including:
People: The contributors and community that have supported Albumentations.
Metrics: The success indicators such as downloads, daily active users, GitHub stars, and financial contributions.
Challenges: The hurdles in monetizing open-source projects and measuring user engagement.
Development Practices: Best practices for creating, maintaining, and scaling open-source libraries, including code hygiene, CI/CD, and fast iteration.
Community Building: Strategies for making adoption easy, iterating quickly, and fostering a vibrant, engaged community.
Marketing: Both online and offline marketing tactics, focusing on real, impactful interactions and collaborations.
Mental Health: Maintaining balance and not feeling pressured by user demands.
Key insights include the importance of automation, making the adoption process seamless, and leveraging offline interactions for marketing. The presentation also emphasizes the need for continuous small improvements and building a friendly, inclusive community that contributes to the project's growth.
Vladimir Iglovikov brings his extensive experience as a Kaggle Grandmaster, ex-Staff ML Engineer at Lyft, sharing valuable lessons and practical advice for anyone looking to enhance the adoption of their open-source projects.
Explore more about Albumentations and join the community at:
GitHub: https://github.com/albumentations-team/albumentations
Website: https://albumentations.ai/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/100504475
Twitter: https://x.com/albumentations
Sudheer Mechineni, Head of Application Frameworks, Standard Chartered Bank
Discover how Standard Chartered Bank harnessed the power of Neo4j to transform complex data access challenges into a dynamic, scalable graph database solution. This keynote will cover their journey from initial adoption to deploying a fully automated, enterprise-grade causal cluster, highlighting key strategies for modelling organisational changes and ensuring robust disaster recovery. Learn how these innovations have not only enhanced Standard Chartered Bank’s data infrastructure but also positioned them as pioneers in the banking sector’s adoption of graph technology.
Communications Mining Series - Zero to Hero - Session 1DianaGray10
This session provides introduction to UiPath Communication Mining, importance and platform overview. You will acquire a good understand of the phases in Communication Mining as we go over the platform with you. Topics covered:
• Communication Mining Overview
• Why is it important?
• How can it help today’s business and the benefits
• Phases in Communication Mining
• Demo on Platform overview
• Q/A
Dr. Sean Tan, Head of Data Science, Changi Airport Group
Discover how Changi Airport Group (CAG) leverages graph technologies and generative AI to revolutionize their search capabilities. This session delves into the unique search needs of CAG’s diverse passengers and customers, showcasing how graph data structures enhance the accuracy and relevance of AI-generated search results, mitigating the risk of “hallucinations” and improving the overall customer journey.
GDG Cloud Southlake #33: Boule & Rebala: Effective AppSec in SDLC using Deplo...James Anderson
Effective Application Security in Software Delivery lifecycle using Deployment Firewall and DBOM
The modern software delivery process (or the CI/CD process) includes many tools, distributed teams, open-source code, and cloud platforms. Constant focus on speed to release software to market, along with the traditional slow and manual security checks has caused gaps in continuous security as an important piece in the software supply chain. Today organizations feel more susceptible to external and internal cyber threats due to the vast attack surface in their applications supply chain and the lack of end-to-end governance and risk management.
The software team must secure its software delivery process to avoid vulnerability and security breaches. This needs to be achieved with existing tool chains and without extensive rework of the delivery processes. This talk will present strategies and techniques for providing visibility into the true risk of the existing vulnerabilities, preventing the introduction of security issues in the software, resolving vulnerabilities in production environments quickly, and capturing the deployment bill of materials (DBOM).
Speakers:
Bob Boule
Robert Boule is a technology enthusiast with PASSION for technology and making things work along with a knack for helping others understand how things work. He comes with around 20 years of solution engineering experience in application security, software continuous delivery, and SaaS platforms. He is known for his dynamic presentations in CI/CD and application security integrated in software delivery lifecycle.
Gopinath Rebala
Gopinath Rebala is the CTO of OpsMx, where he has overall responsibility for the machine learning and data processing architectures for Secure Software Delivery. Gopi also has a strong connection with our customers, leading design and architecture for strategic implementations. Gopi is a frequent speaker and well-known leader in continuous delivery and integrating security into software delivery.
Climate Impact of Software Testing at Nordic Testing DaysKari Kakkonen
My slides at Nordic Testing Days 6.6.2024
Climate impact / sustainability of software testing discussed on the talk. ICT and testing must carry their part of global responsibility to help with the climat warming. We can minimize the carbon footprint but we can also have a carbon handprint, a positive impact on the climate. Quality characteristics can be added with sustainability, and then measured continuously. Test environments can be used less, and in smaller scale and on demand. Test techniques can be used in optimizing or minimizing number of tests. Test automation can be used to speed up testing.
Unlocking Productivity: Leveraging the Potential of Copilot in Microsoft 365, a presentation by Christoforos Vlachos, Senior Solutions Manager – Modern Workplace, Uni Systems
Pushing the limits of ePRTC: 100ns holdover for 100 daysAdtran
At WSTS 2024, Alon Stern explored the topic of parametric holdover and explained how recent research findings can be implemented in real-world PNT networks to achieve 100 nanoseconds of accuracy for up to 100 days.
Maruthi Prithivirajan, Head of ASEAN & IN Solution Architecture, Neo4j
Get an inside look at the latest Neo4j innovations that enable relationship-driven intelligence at scale. Learn more about the newest cloud integrations and product enhancements that make Neo4j an essential choice for developers building apps with interconnected data and generative AI.
Observability Concepts EVERY Developer Should Know -- DeveloperWeek Europe.pdfPaige Cruz
Monitoring and observability aren’t traditionally found in software curriculums and many of us cobble this knowledge together from whatever vendor or ecosystem we were first introduced to and whatever is a part of your current company’s observability stack.
While the dev and ops silo continues to crumble….many organizations still relegate monitoring & observability as the purview of ops, infra and SRE teams. This is a mistake - achieving a highly observable system requires collaboration up and down the stack.
I, a former op, would like to extend an invitation to all application developers to join the observability party will share these foundational concepts to build on:
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesLaura Byrne
Clients don’t know what they don’t know. What web solutions are right for them? How does WordPress come into the picture? How do you make sure you understand scope and timeline? What do you do if sometime changes?
All these questions and more will be explored as we talk about matching clients’ needs with what your agency offers without pulling teeth or pulling your hair out. Practical tips, and strategies for successful relationship building that leads to closing the deal.
Encryption in Microsoft 365 - ExpertsLive Netherlands 2024Albert Hoitingh
In this session I delve into the encryption technology used in Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Purview. Including the concepts of Customer Key and Double Key Encryption.
GridMate - End to end testing is a critical piece to ensure quality and avoid...ThomasParaiso2
End to end testing is a critical piece to ensure quality and avoid regressions. In this session, we share our journey building an E2E testing pipeline for GridMate components (LWC and Aura) using Cypress, JSForce, FakerJS…
Monitoring Java Application Security with JDK Tools and JFR Events
Wheatcraft hill.lou terry
1. Developing Requirements for
Constellation’s Next Generation
Space Suit
Presented at PM Challenge 2010
Presenter's:
Terry Hill, NASA/JSC
Lou Wheatcraft,
Compliance Automation
February 2010
Used with Permission
2. Overview
Part 1: The Basics
Risk and Requirements
Requirement Validation
Part 2: Application Case Study
CxP Suit Requirement Development Process
Results
CxP Suit Continuing Requirement Management
Process
What we could have done better
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 2
3. Risk and Requirements
WHAT’S COMING NEXT
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 3
4. NASA OIG
“NASA must be vigilant in its process of establishing and
validating project requirements.”
“Program risks increase when NASA awards contracts
before developing a sound business case and clearly
defining requirements;”
Placing “the project at risk of significant cost overruns, schedule
delays, and performance shortfalls.”
“Effective risk management, safety, and mission
assurance controls are key to supporting robust and
reliable operations in the context of very challenging
launch and mission schedules.”
NASA’s Most Serious Management
and Performance
Challenges – Nov 2008
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 4
5. GAO
“The start of product development represents the point at which
program managers make a commitment to provide a product that
will perform as required and be delivered on time and within
estimated costs.”
“Programs are more likely to succeed if program managers are able
to achieve a match between user needs, which eventually become
requirements, and resources (technology, design and production
knowledge, money, and time) at the start of product development.”
“Conversely, if they do not match requirements with resources, cost
overruns and schedule delays are likely to occur, reducing the
organization’s buying power in other areas.”
GAO-03-598
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 5
6. Effect Of Requirements Definition
Investment On Program Costs
200
OMV
180
GRO 78
160 GALL Why are you running so fast
TDRSS
when you don’t know where
Actual – Target Cost
140
CEN
IRAS HST you are going?
120
Target Cost
100 GOES I-M
TETH German proverb
MARS
LAND 76
MAG
80
ACT STS LAND 78
ERB 77 COBE
60
ERB 80
40 SEASAT
UARS GRO 82 HEA
VOYAGER
EUVE/EP ISEE
20
DE
SMM ULYSSES IUE
PION/VEN
5 10 15 20 25 30
Requirements Definition and Preliminary Design
Target Total Cost
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 6
7. Cost to fix requirement defects
1,000-
1000
70
60-
50-
40- 40 40
30- 30
20-
15
10
10-
6
1 3
0-
Requirements Design Coding Development Acceptance Operations
Phase Phase Phase Testing Testing
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 7
8. Importance of Best Requirement Practices on
Project Success
“The companies using best requirements practices will estimate a
project at $3 million and better than half the time will spend $3
million on that project. Including all failures, scope creep, and
mistakes across the entire portfolio of projects, this group will spend,
on average, $3.63 million per project.”
“The companies using poor requirements practices will estimate a
project at $3 million and will be on budget less than 20% of the time.
50% of time, the overrun on the project both in time and budget will
be massive. Across the entire portfolio of successes and failures,
this company with poor requirements practices will (on average) pay
$5.87 million per project.”
2008 Study by Keith Ellis, IAG Consulting of 100
companies with projects in excess of $250,000
9. Setting Yourself Up for Failure
Project success is “improbable” for 68% of the companies Ellis
studied
“Projects might succeed – but not by design. Based on the
competencies present, these companies are statistically unlikely to
have a successful project.”
While these companies indicated they recognized that requirements
are important to project success, they still failed to take effective
actions to insure a good set of requirements.
By doing so, they tripled their chances of project failure
2008 Study by Keith Ellis, IAG Consulting of 100
companies with projects in excess of $250,000
10. What Needs to be Done
“Organizations understand conceptually that
requirements are important, but do not internalize this
understanding and change their behavior as a result.
The most successful of companies do not view
requirements as a document which either existed or
didn’t at the beginning of a project, they view it as a
process of requirements discovery.
Only companies that focus on both the process and the
deliverables are consistently successful at changing
project success rates.”
2008 Study by Keith Ellis, IAG Consulting of 100
companies with projects in excess of $250,000
11. No Surprises
People who write bad requirements
should not be surprised
when they get bad products…
but they always are.
Ivy Hooks
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 11
12. Words of Wisdom
“Putting forth the same effort, or
using the same approach, then
expecting different results
is...insanity”
- Charles Bolden,
NASA Administrator, July 2009
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 12
13. A Winning Product
Delivers what’s needed
Within budget
Within schedule
With desired quality
Risk: Anything that can
prevent you from delivering
a winning product!
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 13
14. Requirement Validation
WHAT’S COMING NEXT
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14
15. Requirement Validation vs. Verification
Requirement validation Verification confirms that
confirms the the designed and
completeness and built product meets the
correctness of the requirements
requirements
Done after design and build
Starts with first requirement
and continues through life
cycle
Requirement validation
makes sure you are Verification makes sure
building the right thing. you built it right.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 15
16. Requirement Validation
Helps ensure our requirements are:
Needed, verifiable, achievable
Clear, concise
Correct, consistent, and complete
Two types
Continuous
Discrete
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 16
17. Continuous Validation Process
Requirement Writer:
Write requirement and attributes
Check requirements against standards
Submit to gatekeeper for review in “chunks”
Gatekeeper (person or inspection points)
One or more experts
Reviews requirements against standards
Accepts defect-free requirements for input to
database or document
Return requirements to author if defects found
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 17
18. Who Does Requirement Validation?
Writers Managers
Everyone is
accountable
Developers Reviewers
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 18
19. Continuous Validation Process
Continuous validation holds everyone
responsible
Requires standards and checklists
Requires training
Management has to enforce discipline and
accountability
Benefits
Stops the creation of BIG bad documents
Most effective way to realize process improvement
Reduces time for milestone reviews
Prevents lost time due to rework
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 19
20. Discrete Validation Process
Key milestone that requires Effective IF
time and resources The right people are involved
Formal process The products are ready for review
Complete document The participants know what to do
Involves a wide range of Management ensures
stakeholders compliance
Requires standards and
feedback mechanisms
Requires training
Management has to ensure
responsiveness
SRR results in a requirement
baseline
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 20
21. System Requirement Review (SRR)
Scope
Requirements
Design
MCR Manufacture
or Code
Verification
SRR
Operations
SDR
Upgrade/
PDR Maintain
CDR
TRR
MCR: Mission Concept Review
Baseline requirements SRR: System Requirements Review
Assess feasibility SDR: System Definition Review
PDR: Preliminary Design Review
Set expectations CDR: Critical Design Review
TRR: Test Readiness Review
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 21
22. CxP Suit Element Requirement
Development Process
WHAT’S COMING NEXT
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 22
23. Background: Case Study
Shuttle / ISS Extra Mobility Unit (EMU)
Shuttle was designed to be a shirt sleeve environment
not requiring space suits of any kind.
EMU developed after Shuttle was designed to address a
late in design possible failure scenario with the Shuttle –
risk that payload bad doors would not close and would
have to do it manually.
Suit dimensions were driven by Shuttle hatch sizes.
Many, many requirements and later functionality of the suit were
not addressed or defined early in the process.
The Shuttle EMU was later augmented and recertified to
work at and around the ISS to perform station assembly
and repair.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 23
24. Shuttle/ISS EMU Case Study –
Design and Development Cycles
Pre-declared Cert.
Initial Cert.
Re-Certification
and Ops Con &
Requirements
evolved
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 24
25. Background: EMU Case Study
Lessons Learned
Any little design change will take you into some
level of re-certification.
Always larger and more expensive and takes longer
than ever planned.
The better the ConOps is thought through in the
beginning allows the writing of better and more
comprehensive requirements eliminating many
re-certification cycles later and thus saving Life
Cycle dollars.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 25
26. Background: CxP Suit Element
Requirement Development Challenge
The Task
The team was asked to develop a CxP Initial
Capability (and Lunar requirements when common
hardware would be used) requirement set for the
Space Suit Element in time to support the CxP Suit
Element SRR and for release with the RFP for a
prime contractor in mid-fall.
Schedule
Very Short Schedule – 3 Months from initiation of
requirements generation to Major Project Milestone
review and 5 months to baseline set of functional
requirements.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 26
27. Background: CxP Suit Element
Requirement Development Challenge
The Philosophy
Learn from past projects mistakes in how and when
requirement are written
Clean sheet approach to developing a space suit and
writing the requirements
Exercise the text book methodology of Systems
Engineering and Requirement generation in a NASA
project
Produce quality requirements that are verifiable in a
cost effective manner that address the functionality
defined in the CxP EVA System Operations Concept
and EVA Systems Architecture documents.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 27
28. Background: CxP Suit Requirement
Development Schedule
Planned Schedule for 2007:
May 31-Jun 5 – Requirement Training and Kick-off
Jun 1-22 – Suit Element Requirements Generation Activities
June 25-29 – Suit Element SRR Doc(s) review
July 2-6 – Suit Element SRR Doc(s) update & SRR final prep.
July 10 – Suit & Vehicle Interface Elements SRR Kick-off
July 10-20 – Suit/VI Element SRR Doc review & RID submittal
July 22-Aug. 7 – Suit/VI Element SRR Panels and Boards.
Aug. 9-Oct 20 – Close SRR Actions and update ERD
Oct. 23 – Suit ERD for Baselining at EVA PCB.
Oct. 29 – Suit ERD rev. A draft submitted to EVA CM for pre-blackout CSSS
Tech. Library drop for Prime contract RFP release
* Final outcome, Element SRR slipped one week to ensure
quality of products where ready for review. Review
revealed products were ready and of the appropriate
fidelity by EVA project management.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 28
29. Background: CxP Suit Requirement Development
Approach: Ground rules
Co-located the team off-site in a conference Requirements meet the criteria for good
room facility to enable a concentrated effort requirements in the Checklist for Good
– this reduces the risk of day-to-day Requirements,
distractions which is a risk to product quality
Rationale for each requirement, no copying
and schedule.
parent requirement with a noun change,
Provided task training in requirement
All requirements verifiable, clear, concise
development and writing processes – this
and if it can be interpreted in more than one
reduces the risk to quality.
way, it is not ready for acceptance.
Reduce risk of requirement development by
contracting out the training and using
consultation which provided standard
training as provided to CxP, and an
independent “fresh set of eyes” on how
requirements could be interpreted and
implemented – this reduces the risk to
quality.
Used CRADLE tool to develop requirements
prior to baseline. Post baseline, the
requirements were managed out of
CRADLE, but draft revisions were handled
outside of CRADLE until change approval.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 29
30. Putting Requirement Risk in the Proper
Perspective
Not to put too much pressure on you….
The Requirements Document is probably the single most influential
piece of paper that we have control over in the entire Constellation
Program.
This is our chance to make sure that we are asking for what we
really want. Let’s get it right.
This is a big, fat, hairy deal. If we don’t get this right, folks 20 years
from now will be shaking their heads and saying, “What were those
yahoos thinking?”
I’ll be around and don’t want to go to that meeting.
CxP EVA Suit PGS Team Requirement Kickoff
Meeting 5/2007
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 30
32. Subsystem Teams
Responsible for the drafting & modifying requirements
Four independent teams
Suit Element-level (integrated across subsystems)
Subsystems
Pressure Garment, Crew Survival, Power-Comm & Avionics, Life
Support, (Ground Support Equipment team was after the initial
requirement generation effort)
Each team consisted of:
Functional Lead
NASA Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)
“Core” Scrub team
Teams given training during kick off meeting
Briefed in the Goal, Schedule and Process
Checklist for Good Requirements
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 32
33. Scrub Team
“Core” Scrub Team:
SE&I representative
Compliance Automation representative – independent “goodness
assessment”, and guidance in requirement development.
Tech Writer
CRADLE Operator
Review requirements from the Subsystem Teams
Edit & “clean” Requirements based on Checklist for Good Requirements
If they could “fix” requirement & verify the intent was understood, would do
so & pass onto the CRADLE Board
If intent not understood and the requirement needed more work,
representatives from appropriate Requirement Team were called in for
clarification.
Kept list of common defects and briefed Requirement Teams daily
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 33
34. CRADLE Board
Had three functions:
Determined if requirements where technically traceable and
appropriate
Determined if requirements where technically appropriate and
the correct mission phases applied
And determine any outstanding issues were resolved as the
CRADLE Board was used as a dry-run for final approval.
Base Team:
SE&I representative
Subsystem representative or subject matter expert
Secondary Team:
Project Management
Subsystem Leads
Focus Meetings a.k.a. Offline
Resolves outstanding issues
Membership as required
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 34
35. Approval Board
Function: Team Consensus/Final Approval for requirement to be
included in ERD
Base Team:
SE&I representative
Project Management
Subsystem Leads
CRADLE operation
Subject matter expert
If discussions proceeded for longer than 15 minutes, the
requirement and discussion were sent to a Focus Meeting for
resolution. The idea was that if a requirement was not clear enough
to convey the intent and importance in 15 minutes of discussion,
then it was not written correctly.
Focus Meetings a.k.a. Offline
Resolves outstanding issues
Membership as required
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 35
36. Results
WHAT’S COMING NEXT
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 36
37. Results in Project Reviews
For the Suit ERD SRR, a ratio of 0.38 Review Item Descriptions
(RIDs) were received per requirement.
In comparison, the parent document had a 2.94 RID/requirement ratio at
its SRR.
Potential bidders for the “… the most comprehensive and of the highest
development of the Suit Element
stated that the ERD was: quality they ever remember seeing.”
“I can't say enough about how amazed I am by
The JSC Engineering Directorate this set of requirements documents. As far as I
Crew and Thermal Systems
Division Chief was also very know, no other Cx project has allocated and
impressed with the quality of the decomposed anywhere near to this level of
Suit ERD, saying: depth. You are the first. I have also never seen
anything like these from previous programs.”
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 37
38. CxP Suit Continuing
Requirement Management Process
WHAT’S COMING NEXT
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 38
39. Post-baseline Requirement
Development and Validation
As a result of the extremely compressed requirement development
schedule, there remained several areas that needed more work and
issues that needed to be resolved prior to preliminary design taking
place.
These open areas included:
resolving TBDs/TBRs in the requirement set,
finishing the verification requirements,
defining the internal interfaces and maturing applicable interface requirements
and adding Ground Support Equipment (GSE) requirements to the ERD.
Therefore there was requirement development and maturation
process needed to continue this process.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 39
41. Requirement Review Process Post-
ERD Baseline: SEIWG
The SEIWG (Systems Engineering and Integration Working Group)
Meets once a week to discuss new and existing requirements and/or
requirements issues, such as TBDs/TBRs, action items, allocations, etc.,
Serves as the SE&I pre-coordination for the Suit Control Board.
SEIWG Procedure
Step 1:
All potential changes must be submitted via a change request form.
Step 2:
Scheduled SEIWG meeting to present/discuss change and any final modification
of the draft FROM/TO language.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 41
42. Suit Control Board
Functions:
Detailed review of proposed FROM/TO language to
go into the ERD.
A minimum of a 2 business day review by board members
prior to the Suit Control Board meeting.
Functions as the official forum of stakeholder review,
concurrence or rejection
Functions as the final approval gate for base-lined
requirements.
Note: Since Baselineing of ERD the SCB closed
approximately 180 TBD/Rs prior to levying the
document on the prime contractor.
43. Wrap up
WHAT’S COMING NEXT
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 43
44. What we could have done better
Challenging schedule resulted in a lot of open work post baselining
of ERD.
Large number of TBDs/TBRs
Interfaces identification and definition incomplete
Some of the external interfaces just didn’t exist due to sister projects were
evolving in parallel and at times without the same rigor demonstrated in the
Suit Element effort.
Traceability incomplete
Verification requirements
GSE requirements
Difficult to keep requirements at the right level
Some requirements may not have been needed
Some requirements reflected or assumed a design where NASA was
clear there was only one desirable functional solution.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 44
45. Parting Thoughts
Address Requirement Risk at the beginning of
your project
Develop a formal requirement development
process that includes continuous requirement
validation
Include continuous requirement validation into
your requirement management process
Train your team
Enforce the process
Allocate the time and resources needed to do
the job right – the first time!!
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 45
47. Terry Hill
NASA/JSC Constellation Space Suit System Engineering Project Manager
Terry Hill is NASA’s Johnson Space Center’s Engineering Project Manager and deputy CxP EVA Suit
Lead for the CxP Suit Element, responsible for the development of the functional, performance, and
quality requirements and preliminary design of NASA’s next generation space suit system.
Terry has a BS in Aerospace Engineering and a MS in Guidance, Navigation & Control Theory with a
minor in Orbital Mechanics and Mathematics from the University of Texas at Austin.
He began his career at NASA while working on his masters thesis
project in developing banks of simplified Kalman filters integrated
into an artificial neural network to obtain an optimal state solution for
precision landing on Mars.
While at NASA ,Terry has worked on projects and programs
spanning verification of ISS navigation software, Shuttle Design
Test Objectives (DTO) and back room mission support, X-38 Crew
Return Vehicle navigation algorithm development, Space Launch
Initiative technology development, Orbital Space Plane project
office ISS-Prime integration, STS-107 Return to Flight Tile Repair
capability development, to Constellation Program Space Suit
System leadership.
In leading the CxP Suit Element engineering team, Terry has
facilitated the development of system requirements for space suit
development and a clean-sheet design approach that has widely
recognized within and outside of NASA.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 47
48. Lou Wheatcraft
Compliance Automation – Senior Consultant Trainer
Lou Wheatcraft is a senior consultant/instructor for Compliance Automation, who has over
40 years experience in the aerospace industry, including 22 years in the United States Air
Force. Lou has taught over 120 seminars in requirement development and management
for NASA’s APPEL Program and industry over the past nine years. He has worked with,
and provided intact team training and consultation to multiple NASA project teams at many
of the NASA Centers.
Lou has had articles published in the International Council of Systems Engineering
(INCOSE) INSIGHT magazine and in DoD’s magazine, CrossTalk. Lou has made
presentations at NASA’s PM Challenge, INCOSE’s International Symposium, and at the
local Project Management Institute (PMI) Chapter Meetings.
Lou has a BS degree in Electrical Engineering, an MA degree in Computer Information
Systems, an MS degree in Environmental Management, and has completed the course
work for an MS degree in Studies of the Future.
Lou is a member of INCOSE, co-chair of the INCOSE Requirements Working Group, a
member of PMI, the Software Engineering Institute, the World Futures Society, and the
National Honor Society of Pi Alpha Alpha. Lou is the recipient of NASA’s Silver Snoopy
Award and Public Service Medal and was nominated for the Rotary Stellar Award for his
significant contributions to the Nation’s Space Program.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 48