1 / 53

Solar Probe Plus FIELDS Quarterly Management July 18, 2013

Solar Probe Plus FIELDS Quarterly Management July 18, 2013. QUARTERLY MGMT AGENDA. Project Overview Project Organization Spacecraft Accommodation/Instrument Suite Measurements Technical Status Special Topics: Antenna TRL 6 Status, Frequency Plan Project Schedule

vevina
Download Presentation

Solar Probe Plus FIELDS Quarterly Management July 18, 2013

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Solar Probe Plus FIELDS Quarterly Management July 18, 2013

  2. QUARTERLY MGMT AGENDA • Project Overview • Project Organization • Spacecraft Accommodation/Instrument Suite Measurements • Technical Status • Special Topics: Antenna TRL 6 Status, Frequency Plan • Project Schedule • Project Risk (Summary; Detail Description of any New, Yellow, or Red Risks; UFE threats/liens) • Total Cumulative Project Cost • Project Labor: Prime and Major Subs • Subcontractor Summary • Issues and Concerns • Lunch

  3. FIELDS Overview UCB Electric Field Antenna Observations • Measure electric and magnetic fields and waves • Measure pointing flux, absolute plasma density and electron temperature, S/C floating potential and density fluctuations, and radio emissions Measurements • Magnetic field vectors DC-64kHz • Electric field vectors DC-1MHz • Plasma waves 5Hz to 1MHz • Quasi-thermal Noise 10 kHz to 2.5MHz • Radio emissions 1MHz to 20 MHz GSFC Fluxgate Magnetometer (MAG) LPC2E Search-Coil Magnetometer (SCM) • Project Status Update • System Reliability Redesign Complete • Internal ICD Drafts Complete • Funding • Definitized Contract Value: $13.65 M • Definitized Funding Value (mod 17):$ 7.56 M • Unallocated Future Expense : $ 0.61 M • End Date: 3/14/2014 • Current EAC: $13.65 M • Milestones (Phase B) • FIELDS Specification Dev (L2) Oct, 2012 • MEP Specification Dev (L3)Jan, 2013 • DCB & AEB Detailed Dsn Sep 2013 • RFS Detailed Dsn Oct 2013 • FPGA Reviews Oct 2013 • IPDR Nov 19, 2013

  4. FIELDS Organization UCB Advisors FIELDS PI Stuart Bale LASP SAG: A. Balogh, J.-L.Bougeret, P.J. Kellogg, F.S. Mozer UMN GSFC LPC2E FIELDS Science Team Various FIELDS PM P. Harvey FIELDS DPM L. Hayes Parts A. Le SMA J. Fischer Mechanical P. Turin Thermal M. D. Aguado Electrical K. Goetz Scheduling D. Meilhan Finances M. Willer Antennas D. Glaser MEP W. Donakowski DCB/RFS M. Pulupa D. Gordon D. Seitz TDS/LNPS K. Goetz DFB R. Ergun MAG R. MacDowall SCM V. Krasnosselskikh Preamps D. Seitz AEB J. Bonnell S. Heavner

  5. FIELDS Overview Electric Field Antennas 2.3 m Tip-to-Hinge Preamps located at Hinge Main Electronics Package (2 parts): • Data Controller Board (DCB) – UCB • Radio Frequency Spectrometer (RFS) - UCB • Time Domain Sampler (TDS) - UMinn • Digital Fields Board (DFB) - LASP • 2 Antenna Electronics Boards (AEB) – UCB • 2 MAG Electronics Boards (MAG) – GSFC • 2 Low Noise Power Supplies (LNPS) - UMinn Main Electronics Package (MEP) V5 MagBoom * MAG (Inboard) MAG (Outboard) SCM *: SCM at end of boom

  6. System Redesign

  7. System Redesign MEP Stack Up • Side 1 • LNPS1 • MAGo (Outboard) • DCB/RFS • AEB1 • DFB • Side 2 • AEB2 • TDS • MAGi (Inboard) • LNPS2 • Every other slice is bolted to S/C Panel (June meeting AI)

  8. Mass MASS Tracking System Redesign • Two AEB’s • Two LNPS’s • TDS w/ SC I/F

  9. Power Power Tracking

  10. TRL6 Status See : 130718 SPP Fields ANT TRL6 Review_w_Backup_Slides

  11. Preamp / RFS Development Preamp breadboard • Preamp • Parts selection completed • Dual input JFET will require qual and screening • SQPL JFETs are available in same package, as backup plan (4x poorer noise performance • All other components are SQPL • Breadboard complete • Testing is under way • RFS Analog Breadboard • Reconfigured analog chain • Breadboard design and layout completed • All components are SQPL RFS Analog breadboard

  12. FPGA Daughter Board Development • FPGA ETU Daughter board schematics and layout completed • This board houses the Actel/Microsemi reprogrammable FPGA (ProASIC3000) • Fabrication and population scheduled to accommodate integration with DCB-RFS_ADC ETU1 • HDLP Connectors delivery expected in September, 2013 • Used by DCB, TDS, and DFB Daughter board de-insertion hardware ETU FPGA Daughter board layout

  13. DCB/RFS_ADC ETU1 Development • DCB_RFS-ADC Schematics Completed • Schematic Review held in June, 2013 • BOM released and parts have been ordered • DCB_RFS-ADC PCB Layout Completed Boards can be driven by the RFS Frontend ETU1 boards (will be eventually integrated during the ETU2 stage) Instrument & LNPS I/Fs S/C I/F RFS ADCs and Data Buffers RFS Memory (SRAM) We are checking the layout & expect to have boards in August, 2013. FPGA Daughter Bd CPU Memory: SRAM, EEPROM & PROM FLASH

  14. AEB Development • Antenna Electronics Board • Parts list Complete, 1 to qualify (from RBSP) • Breadboard in test (1 channel) • Common ICD to DCB/TDS in process AEB single channel breadboard in testing

  15. UMN Activity • Preliminary designs are moving along • Breadboarding is advanced • Parts identification is moving along • PEM obtained and in up-screening process (starting with a DPA) • Embraced the FPGA daughter board concept • Redundancy/Reliability trade issues resolved • FIELDS now separated into two halves • FIELDS1/DCB and FIELDS2/TDS • No single point FIELDS failure • UMN split single LNPS into two pieces • UMN added a S/C interface to the TDS • Systems Engineering has moved to UMN

  16. TDS FPGA Block Diagram

  17. UMN Activity TDS BB2 – being populated FPGA daughter board outlline ProASIC3000 flash-based FPGA (in BGA) LNPS BB1 demonstration

  18. SPP Fields DFB DFB Science: • Finalized Sensor inputs; gain states, band-pass (except SCM – in process) • Defined: Coordinated Burst implementation, Digital Burst Memory (size & no of buffers and channels), Spectra and Cross-Spectra DFB Prototype: • Prototype design complete, layout review Tues 7/16, quick turn fab planned • All FPGA modules for prototype bring-up complete • Board will be used for most of early development and then for testing/characterization of Sidecar ASICs after moving to ETU board DFB ETU: • Schematic in process for Xilinx FPGA Daughter Card • FPGA development status shown in separate slides DFB Flight: • Received Sidecar ASICs; EIDP/workmanship deviation released this week, risk added • Continued EEE parts submittal to PCB for approval, no known issues at this time SPP Quarterly Review 7/18/13

  19. DFB Sidecar Risk 5 If the Sidecar experiences latent failure and/or has reliability issues, then the lack of a complete EIDP and respective workmanship could hinder the debug/troubleshooting, and have the potential to degrade performance and warrant possible redesign which could increase needed mass and power.Risk mitigationplan is to perform characterization and environmental testing on Sidecars. These parts have prior electrical burn-in testing hence characterization and environmental tests will demonstrate good rigor to retire the risk.  4 3 F-DFB01 Likelihood of Occurrence (probability) PM 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 Consequence of Occurrence (Impact) Risk rating: Probability 2, Impact 3; not likely to occur based on successful burn-in testing completed by vendor [GSFC/Teledyne]; consequences slightly higher based on possibility of reverting to backup plan of discrete ADCs. Proposed/heritage ADCs are not as rad-tolerant, require more board space (mass increases), more power, and/or could drive science return. Newer, more viable, ADCs identified but require radiation testing. High Medium Low (Criticality) SPP Quarterly Review 7/18/13

  20. DFB Block Diagram SPP Quarterly Review 7/18/13

  21. DFB FPGA Architecture SPP Quarterly Review 7/18/13

  22. DFB FPGA Development Status SPP Quarterly Review 7/18/13

  23. SPP MAG Status • Some scheduled MAG activities have slipped; however, we are now in receipt of most information (ICDs, etc.) and materials needed, and we have a clear understanding of the path to PDR. • The AC Heater (ACHE) PCBs have been laid out and procured. They will arrive next week and will be populated and tested ASAP. • Macor bobbins and other procurements are nearing completion, facilitating the build up of the ETUs. • Significant progress with thermal modeling for the MAG sensors has allowed a better understanding of constraints and mitigations of the thermal range; we are interested in results from Gail Martin on any additional power available. • Thermal testing (-50 to +50 C) of GSE sensor (Macor base) is currently being conducted in a non-windowed thermal vacuum chamber (see photo on next slide). First goal is to determine how fast we can cycle. • Design of a composite base for the ETU MAG sensors is completed. • Ongoing concerns include: MAG sensor placement on boom relative to spacecraft, power, etc., available to increase low end MAG sensor temperature, alignment error budget numbers, boom harness plan, conclusion of L4 requirements & ICDs

  24. MAG thermal vacuum chamber #1 • Chamber shown at right permits operating over a large temperature range (order of -100 to +100 C) at < 10^-5 torr. (Same aluminum cylinder is also the “insert” for the windowed TV chambers.) • Currently instrumented (8 thermistors) and being used to determine the rate at which we can cycle the MAG “GSE” sensor temperature, which has consequences for all future thermal testing. • Since chamber has no windows, the sensor alignment inside chamber cannot be determined, i.e., no calibration over temperature. • We can calibrate zero levels, etc., before and after thermal cycling. If they do not change, then we can conclude that calibration as a function of temperature will be possible – adequate for PDR. TVC #1 working in GSFC Mag Lab.

  25. FIELDS Schedule Summary of FIELDS Activities • Worked ICD’s between MEP boards • Built Breadboards • Reviewed Parts lists with PMPCB • Coordinated Reviews of Project documents • Tested Antenna Thermal Test Model (France) • Completed Optical properties tests • Conducted Distortion tests • MAG TVAC Chamber Completed • Breadboard Tests in Progress • MEP ETU Frame designs • Accommodating AEB and RFS • Planned Peer Reviews with Team (SPF_MGMT_011F_ReviewMatrix.xls) Keys to Next Quarter (to Nov 2013) • Level 4 Instrument Requirements • Peer Reviews Complete • Layouts Nearing Completion • Pre-IPDR Documents Complete • Antenna at TRL 6 • FIELDS Phase CDE Proposal

  26. FIELDS Schedule Peer Review Schedules

  27. FIELDS Schedule FIELDS iPDR Readiness Schedule

  28. CRITICAL PATH ETU I&T FLT I&T iCDR ETU DFB FLT ANTs

  29. FIELDS Instrument Risks Status 5 4 3 PS F9 Likelihood of Occurrence (probability) 2 P P P P P F6 F5 F1 F2 F7 S P CS CS P F11 F12 F10 F14 F16 1 1 2 3 4 5 Consequence of Occurrence (Impact) High Medium Low (Criticality) Mitigation Plans in Place for All FIELDS Risks

  30. FIELDS Funding Spending : -15% Runout : Sept. 2013

  31. FIELDS UCB Labor Labor cumulative over budget by 6%

  32. FIELDS Subcontracts

  33. FIELDS Issues & Concerns Technical • Parts Approvals are all “Provisional” stuck awaiting “radiation evaluation.” • MEP 65C requirement remains a power and parts concern • MAG Level 3 (PAY-37) needs “5 nT accuracy” term defined better (recommend “1 degree”) Cost • Adding Redundancy may add cost, complexity and schedule Schedule • ICON selection caused temporary loss of manpower: only 1 spot remains to be filled Retired (Listed last quarter) • AEB circuitry having trouble fitting on a 6”x9” board. • SCM funding was approved in France • GSFC backup SCM must begin soon to be ready for iPDR • FIELDS Frequency plan is a real struggle, may have power/tm impacts

  34. Backup

  35. F1-P:Risk Burn Down A 25 20 Risk Grade 15 B 10 5 C Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  36. F2-P: Risk Burn Down 25 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 A Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  37. F3-CS: Risk Burn Down A 20 15 Risk retired on 12/12/12 - Replaced with risk F15 Risk Grade 10 B 5 Plan Actual C D E * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  38. F5-P: Risk Burn Down 25 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 AB D Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  39. F6-P: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  40. F7-P: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  41. F8-PSM: Risk Burn Down Risk Retired A 25 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  42. F9-FS: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  43. F10-PS: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C D 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  44. F11-S: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 D Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  45. F12-P: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 D Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  46. F13-P: Risk Burn Down A 25 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  47. F14-S: Phase B Contract A B 25 20 Risk Grade 15 Retired 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  48. F15-CS: Risk Burn Down A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 Retired 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  49. F16-P: MEP Thermal Environment A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  50. Risk Notes: April 2013 F5 – Survival Thermal Environment (chart 7) - new data elevates risk over concern regarding the MAG thermal model (probability increase to 3). May need more heater power then what is allocated - believe an updated thermal model is needed to proceed in lowering this risk F15 – SCM Funding (chart 17) - FIELDS had a discussion with the Backup SCM lead at GSFC; it was determined that the heritage SCM is larger and heavier than the French device. - Thus, substantial redesign work will be required to accommodate the GSFC unit. - On the plus side, though, GSFC is available to support SPP on this effort, with a baseline schedule beginning in June 2013 (if needed) - believe an updated thermal model is needed to proceed in lowering this risk

More Related