diffoot fayful

NASA PM Challenge 2010Glory APS Lessons Learned

Glory Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor

Lessons Learned and Applied, a Government and Contractor

Perspective

Bryan FafaulGlory Project ManagerNASA Goddard Space Flight Center

Roberto DiffootDirector, Glory APS Program

Raytheon Space & Airborne Systems

1Used with Permission


• Introduction / Agenda Fafaul / Diffoot• Glory Mission Overview Fafaul• APS Overview Diffoot• APS Contract Background / Summary Fafaul / Diffoot• APS Lessons Learned and Applied

• NASA’s Perspective Fafaul• Raytheon’s Perspective Diffoot

• Summary / Closure Fafaul / Diffoot• Questions and Answers Fafaul / Diffoot

2

NASA PM Challenge 2010Glory APS Lessons Learned 3

Glory Mission Overview

Bryan FafaulNASA Goddard Space Flight Center


Mission Overview

• Mission Objectives• Increase our understanding of aerosols as

agents of climate change by flying an Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor (APS), and

• Continue measuring the sun’s direct and indirect effects on climate by flying a Total Irradiance Monitor (TIM) Instrument

• Mission Design • 3 years (5 years of consumables)• A-train orbit (705 km Altitude, 98.2

degrees inclination; Sun-synchronous)• November 2010 launch readiness from

Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB)

4


TIM will continue measuring the 31-year record of Total Solar Irradiance (TSI) with improved accuracy and stability to determine its direct and indirect effects on climate

APS will help to quantify the role of aerosols as natural and anthropogenic agents of climate change with much better accuracy than existing instruments

Glory Science Summary

5


The Road To Glory Overview

6


GLORY Observatory

Front Isometric View

S-Band Omni & Mast APS Instrument

GLORY Observatory

Rear Isometric View

TIM System

Instrument Module

Assembly

Star Trackers (x2)

TIM System

GPS Dual

Antenna

Body Mounted

Solar Panel

Glory Observatory Configuration

Cloud Cameras (x2)

7


Glory in the A-Train

• Glory will be formation flying with the Afternoon Constellation (A-Train):• 705 km orbit altitude / 98.2° inclination (sun-synchronous)• Ascending node Mean Local Time (MLT) crossing of ~1:41 pm• Position relative to Aqua (based on nominal control box location)

• ~ 11 minutes behind at MLT crossing• 215 km east offset (on Worldwide Reference System-2 grid) -- along track with CALIPSO

• Coincident science observations with CALIPSO / CALIOP and Aqua / MODIS

8


Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor (APS) Overview

Roberto DiffootRaytheon Space and Airborne Systems (SAS)

9


Glory Aerosol PolarimetrySensor Overview

• The Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor (APS) supports a three year NASA mission

• Measurements of global aerosols in order to reduce the uncertainty in radiative forcing functions

• Initiation of continuous global monitoring of aerosols in the atmosphere

• The APS instrument description• Size: 48 cm x 61 cm x 112 cm• Weight: 61kgs (134.2 lbs)• Operational Power: 55.0 Watts

• The APS instrument scans the earth over a nominal field-of-view of +50/-60 degrees about Nadir

• The APS instrument generates along-track, multiple angle radiometric and polarimetric data with a 5.6 km (8 mrad) circular IFOV

• APS collects data simultaneously in nine VNIR/SWIR spectral bands and four polarization states

• APS includes four on-board calibration sources to maintain high polarimetric and radiometric accuracy on-orbit

Earth ShieldAssembly

Solar Reference Assembly

Alignment CubeAssembly

Scan MotorAssembly

Aperture Door

Assembly

Unpolarized Reference Assembly(internal)

Mainframe and Electronics Module

(internal)

NADIR

Polarized Reference Assembly(internal)

Dark Reference Assembly(internal)

APS will help to quantify the role of aerosols as natural and anthropogenic agents of

climate change

MLI Blankets not shown

10


Aerosol Polarimetry Sensor

Optics & Detectors Module (ODM)

Polarized Reference Assembly (PRA)

Scan Mirror Assembly (SMA)

Dark Reference Assembly (DRA)

Solar Reference Assembly (SRA)

Unpolarized Reference Assembly (URA)

Aperture Door Assembly (ADA)

Electronics Module (EM)

Cryo Radiator Assy (CA)

11


Optics and Detector Module (ODM)

The ODM contains all 36 VNIR and SWIR detectors and 161 of 185 optical elements

ODM Level Test Implemented As Early Risk Mitigation Strategy12

247 mm (9.8 in)

218 mm (8.6 in)

356 mm (14.0 in)



Solar Reference Assembly Door Scan Mirror

Assembly

Main Aperture Door

Earth Shield

EM Connector Interface

Earth Cover

13



14

Solar Reference Assembly Door

Light Baffle Assembly

Earth Shield

EM Connector Interface

EM Radiator

Cryoradiator


APS Integration and Test Flow

15

Mar 08 Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

EM AI&T

90- EM Integration and Test

ODM/EM Int and

Test

EM Rework Complete

7/27

Integrate Cal,Complete

PM

Integ & B/L Tests

EM

PM

APS

5/10

7/31

5/1

Test ReadinessReview (TRR)

Pre-Environment Review (PER)

8/8

4/8 5/10

8/27

4/7

ODM Integration

Dec

Integrated Test Facility (ITF) Top Loader Chamber

Final Int, Vib &

Test

EMC/EMI and

Pre TV Test

Thermal Vacuum

Test

TV Ano-maly

Resolu-tion

O&MShip, Test

Consent to Ship Review (CTSR)

9/9

Jan 09 Feb

Delta(PER)

Mar

Weigh VerificationE2 Cleanroom Vibe Table


APS Contract Background / Summary

Bryan FafaulNASA GSFC


16


APS Contract Background (1)

17

NA

SA

Fund

ing

Impr

oved

/ R

TN S

taffi

ng Is

sues

C

ontin

ue

Inco

nsis

tent

NA

SA

Fund

ing

/ RTN

S

taffi

ng Is

sues

• February 2004 – NASA issues letter contract to Raytheon Santa Barbara Remote Sensing (SBRS) in Goleta California

• February 2005 – Preliminary Design Review (PDR) successfully completed

• February to April 2005 – NASA redirects Glory Project to study possibly flying APS and the Total Irradiance Monitor (TIM) on NPOESS in lieu of stand alone Glory mission

• July 2005 – NASA authorizes Glory as a full stand alone mission• November 2005 – Glory Project Confirmed, launch readiness

set at December 2008 • December 2005 – APS contract definitized with instrument

delivery set for December 2006• January 2006 – NASA Project Manager changed• April 2006 – APS Critical Design Review (CDR) successfully

completed 2 months late• May 2006 - Raytheon Goleta General Manager Changed


Ray

theo

n G

olet

a P

lant

Clo

sure

/ A

PS

Pro

gram

M

oved

to R

ayth

eon

SA

S in

El S

egun

do


• August 2006 – APS Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) held 2 months late and not fully successful

• September 2006 – Rumors of possible plant closure; Raytheon Goleta workforce exodus begins

• September 2006 - Raytheon APS Program Manager changed• October 2006 – Raytheon announces Goleta Plant is closing

and work will be transferred to Space and Airborne Systems in El Segundo; Raytheon Goleta loosing core competency as workforce exodus accelerates

• November 2006 – NASA decision to move APS to El Segundo as quickly as possible; Raytheon Goleta workforce depleted and being augmented with El Segundo personnel

• January 2007 – APS Program move to El Segundo complete• March 2007 – Raytheon APS Program Manager and Civil

Space Director changed• April 2007 – APS Engineering Ownership / Delta CDR

successfully completed18


NA

SA

/ Ray

theo

n Te

am P

erfo

rmin

g as

One

/ A

PS

Inte

grat

ion

and

Test

Team

Ta

kes

Con

trol


• July 2007 - Raytheon APS Program Manager Changed• July 2007 to April 2008 – Significant program replan for both

APS and Glory Mission which included implementations of many descopes; Implementation of early risk mitigation tests

• May 2008 – Optics and Detector Module (ODM) assembly and test (w/flight electronics) completed with excellent performance

• August 2008 – Polarimeter Module (PM) and Electronics Module (EM) assemblies completed

• September 2008 – APS integration complete• October 2008 – APS baseline performance testing completed

with excellent results• February 2009 – APS environmental Testing successfully

completed with excellent instrument performance• March 2009 – APS delivered to NASA • April 2009 – APS successfully integrated on the Spacecraft with

no issues

19


APS Performance Summary

20

• Prior to testing the APS optics we defined expectations for the performance parameters ranging from poor to acceptable, expected and target. Of the 27 parameters evaluated 25 were in the desired target range with 2 in the expected range

• The completed APS has excellent radiometric and polarimetric performance which was maintained throughout environmental testing at Raytheon

• The APS optical performance was tested after installation on the spacecraft at Orbital and showed identical performance to that of a similar pre-ship test at Raytheon

APS Scientific Performance Is Excellent!


APS Integrated w/ Spacecraft


Glory Observatory Fully Integrated


APS Development Lessons Learned and Applied



24


NASA Perspective (1)

• Send the right message early …• provide strong commitment to the program by definitizing the

contract quickly and providing consistent funding, no starts and stops

• Demand “a” team…• recognize early the strengths and weaknesses of the “team”• make necessary personnel changes early and keep the team

together, stability is key• senior leadership “commitment to succeed” is critical in making

good personnel assignments• Stable requirements, strong Systems Engineering, and science

understanding yields good designs…• Systems Engineers must challenge requirements to improve system

complexity, performance, and system reliability• scrub requirements early and often, don’t wait to get in trouble• understand the science, it’s critical to making good system trades;

unlike we are taught, all science requirements are not created equal

25



• Establish performance baseline early and keep the engineers doing engineering…• as soon as the contract is definitized, establish the baseline and get

the team focused on engineering and execution• rebaseline when necessary, sticking with an obsolete baseline too

long hurts everyone• Be prepared for anything and everything…

• open communication between Raytheon and NASA was key for NASA to complete move risk assessment (security, loss of key personnel, schedule, contingency plans, etc) and provide concurrence in a timely manner

• Management anomalies occur more often and linger longer than you think making root cause very difficult to identify and fix• as engineers, we do a great job troubleshooting, fixing, and

regression testing hardware anomalies. The same rigor needs to be employed with program execution or management anomalies

26



• System Engineering, Systems Engineering, Systems Engineering…• understanding the system, requirements, verification is key to

remaining flexible when things go wrong• it’s not just checking the box, characterization is key to making

trades• Timely design closure and critical expert review is key to execution…

• designs that come together late require heroic efforts and may result in mistakes

• follow through on post design review clean-up activities, they are key to staying on plan

• employ the trust but verify philosophy by auditing drawings, procurement packages, and analyses; you can’t execute if the plan is always changing

• Don’t forget the “ilities”, they have the potential to cripple progress…• make sure safety, reliability, and quality analyses are complete

early; failure to do so may result in not meeting requirements, delayed procurements, and late design changes

27



• Planning is king, but don’t go overboard because time is money…• know your instrument and understand how to integrate it• make sure the paper is ready to go, practice makes perfect; the

flight hardware shouldn’t be your first time• Ground Support Equipment is just as or more important than the

flight hardware to keep things moving• Get ready, set, ship it and don’t forget it’s gotta fit…

• ICDs don’t guarantee anything; identify risk reduction activities early and often

• maximize risk reduction every where you can (hardware, software, procedures, test tools, etc)

28


Raytheon’s Perspective (1)

Environmental Tests• Hardware safety is the first priority

• Don’t over-test (know the limits of the hardware)• Ensure the test team is ready for each test phase

• Preparation is key to success• Customer concurrence with the test plan is a “must have”• Rigorous review and analysis of special test equipment is as important

as with the flight hardware• All environmental test engineering work products need an in-depth

reviewed … Specially if not validated• Be sure “best practices” for margin management and safety factors

are implemented• Un-validated work products are prone to discovery during test

• EMI/EMC test driven by local knowledge and tradition• Subject matter experts (customer, contractor and consultants) not fully

aligned on test methodology and implementation• Coordinated test planning, implementation and execution is imperative

29



• Implementation of Raytheon/NASA “Best Practices”– Strong linkage between fabrication and verification activities (over

arching systems engineering approach) – Avoid “not invented here” mentality – use the best personnel,

equipment and processes no matter where it comes from– Optimized fabrication and assembly activities to achieve high

performance margins as a risk mitigation for unknown/unknowns– Take advantage of “lessons learned” from other programs

• NASA programs demands both requirements liquidation and extended characterization – Need to have the flexibility to implement characterization testing

beyond just requirements liquidation• Early integration test events

– Performance verification prior to starting final integration and test sequences

– Fit checks, dry-runs of test procedures and peer reviews – accelerated learning

30



• Implementation of automation tools and inventory control processes– Benefit of electronic data bases – remote access, better archiving and

protection, electronic links – Better suited for mature designs … Some benefits on development

programs– Discipline of process is driven by user– Proper personnel training is a must

• Cross integration of engineering products must be performed during the design and development processes– Design and hardware verification is not completed without the model

validation– You will always have an engineering model

o The question is: Would it be Flight 1? … Plan accordingly!

31



• Implementation of Raytheon/NASA best practices• NASA programs demand both requirements liquidation and extended

characterization• Early integration test events• Implementation of automation tools and inventory control processes• Cross integration of engineering products must be performed during the

design and development processes

32

Be flexible … Early leaning mitigates risk … Careful deployment of new tools … Cross integration of engineering

products and design is a must


Summary / Conclusion


Roberto DiffootRaytheon Space Systems (SAS)

33


Summary / Conclusions

• APS significant cost overruns and schedule delays were due to planning and execution, not technical issues

• Raytheon and NASA teams never quit, senior leadership on both sides were committed to completing APS

• Be prepared for anything, the decision to close the Goleta facility was a significant impact to the program• Loss of key personnel, loss of ownership, loss of corporate

knowledge can be over come, but it requires a good team that is committed to success, lot’s of hard work, and then more hard work

• Don’t be afraid to work together, leverage resources wherever it makes sense, flexibility is critical• Badgeless teams, government furnished equipment and parts, and

streamlined processes • Empower the people. If you have good engineers, use them, don’t

just rely of processes• Don’t be committed to only your way of doing things, there are

many ways to get the job done

34


Summary/Conclusions (2)• Strategically selected risk reduction initiatives can bring major benefits to

the program• Early learning at the proper level of assembly • Maximizes reaction time to fix problems and/or provides for timely

opportunity to leverage results• Establishing trust within the team is pivotal

• Direct, open and honest communication - Say what you are going to do, do what you say

• The first sign of gaining control on a red program is to eliminate surprises – Predictability is a wellness indicator

• Give the team an opportunity to succeed• Challenging but achievable schedule and cost requirements• Be passionate and relentless about what needs to be done • Instill pride on everything your team does … Even during the dark

days … Hardware will make you humble … Never, never give up


A well integrated government / contractor team that values

communication, commitment, and respect is the key to

SUCCESS!


Questions and Answers

http://glory.gsfc.nasa.gov/

diffoot fayful

Technology

orbit glory aps lessons

climateglory aps lessons

overviewglory aps lessons

aps integration

aps instrument scans

role of aerosols aps

train glory

pm position relative