Upload
others
View
7
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Overview of:Mission and System Design
Verification and ValidationSDOE 633
Presented by
With our Academic Partner
SDOE 633 Course Overview
The Challenge...
2
The US Forest Service needs a more effective means to detect and monitor potentially dangerous wildfires
Turning this...
Into This...Mission Operations Element
ESA’s Space Operations Center. Courtesy ESA
Communication Architecture. US Fig. 15-11.
Subject Element: Wildfires
Space Element
Orbits & TrajectoriesLaunch Element
3.1 Form shall be...3.2 Fit shall be...3.3 Function shall be...4.1 Form shall be verified by...
System Requirements Document
Valid Baseline Requirements
SDOE 633 Course Overview
The Challenge...
3
3.1 Form shall be...3.2 Fit shall be...3.3 Function shall be...4.1 Form shall be verified by...
System Requirements Document
Valid Baseline Requirements
Turning this... ...into this
While Managing all of this...
VerificationClosure Notices
Test & Verification Requirements (TVRs)
Procedures
Facilities &Equipment
Personnel
Master Verification Plan
SDOE 633 Course Overview
Course Description
SDOE 633 provides hands-on opportunities to apply key principals of space systems engineering. Students are given a set of customer expectations in the form of broad mission objectives. Using state-of-the-industry mission design and analysis tools, students apply systems engineering processes to define top-level system requirements, design key elements, and conclude with a system design review. In V&V, participants experience system realization processes first hand by integrating, verifying, validating, and delivering the shoe box–sized EyasSAT satellite. From the part-level to the system level, participants implement a rigorous assembly, integration, verification, and validation plan on space hardware/software applying “test like you fly, fly like you test” principles.
4
SDOE 633 Course Overview
System Engineering Life-cycle Processes
5
Define,Goals &
Objetctives
DevelopConcept ofOperations
Engineer &Manage
Requirements
CreateFunctional
&Physical
Architectures
DESIGN
IntegrateImplement
Verify &Validate
Transition
NEEDSCAPABILITIES
REALIZEMANAGE
Build-to/Code-to Baseline
Mission
Baseline
System
Baseline
Functional
Baseline
Design-to
Baseline
As-built
Baseline
As-deployed
Baseline
We’ll use this model of Systems Engineering Processes to guide our discussionThe purpose of this course
is to help bridge the gap between the “left side” and “right side” of the SE “V”
SDOE 633 Course Overview
SDOE 633 Part A• Given: a brief Request for Proposal or Announcement of
Opportunity...• Using: Integrated Mission Design Spreadsheet Tool • Satellite Tool Kit• Complete the Conceptual Design for an entire mission...
– Orbit design– Spacecraft design– Launch vehicle selection– Operations Concept– Driving Requirements and Key Performance Parameters
6
3.1 Form shall be...3.2 Fit shall be...3.3 Function shall be...4.1 Form shall be verified by...
System Requirements Document
SDOE 633 Course Overview
SDOE 633 Part A Objectives
• Cultivate a better understanding of the overall space systems engineering process– Technical processes, tools and information available– Interpersonal skills and distributed collaborative efforts
• Enhance space system engineering skills—system engineering management, technical integrity and technical leadership
• Integrate all elements of a successful mission • Explore key trajectory constraints on space mission design• Establish a process to refine requirements and define parameters to
meet mission objectives at acceptable cost and risk• Practical application of the information and processes in a non-
threatening environment• Promote system-thinking by all participants
Start with a blank sheet of paper and develop a detailed Mission Concept Review (MCR) to meet a set of broad objectives
7
SDOE 633 Course Overview
SDOE 633 Part A Description• A learning laboratory for participants to explore and use the
competencies learned on the job and in the Space Mission Analysis and Design, Designing Cost-Effective Space Missions, Understanding Space, and Human Spaceflight courses and workshops – Interpersonal skills– Space system engineering– Collaborative design techniques
• During the design exercise, the team…– Determines the requirements from the customer– Develops an appropriate mission concept to meet the requirements– Completes the conceptual design of a mission and the associated
space and ground assets to provide the necessary products or services to identified customers and users
8
SDOE 633 Course Overview
SDOE 633 Part A Description (cont’d)
• Participants… – Exercise the Space Mission Analysis and Design processes and
use space system engineering fundamentals to create a reasonable science mission opportunity
– Learn the ties between customer requirements, mission and system design and lifecycle cost
– Develop an instinct for the technical concepts and parameters to adjust to make their newly conceived mission more cost-effective
– Learn to think and work by way of a practical, end-to-end example – beginning with customer needs to create a viable space-based product or service
• The design exercise, hence, serves as a concrete and practical means to apply and test system engineering techniques in a non-threatening, real-life environment
9
SDOE 633 Course Overview
SDOE 633 Part A Flow
• Getting Started– Overview of the SE and conceptual mission design processes– Introduction to Space Space Systems Engineering– Conceptual Mission Design– Review of Science Mission & System Design & Operations– Introduce Design Exercise “Announcement of Opportunity”– Firesat case study example– Team assignments– Introduction to Space Mission Analysis and Design (SMAD) and STK software tools
using Firesat example– Begin concurrent design sessions (requirements definition)
• Getting Down to Work– Firesat case study example (cont.)– Concurrent design sessions and status reviews
• Finishing Up– Concurrent design sessions– Working lunch– Team final presentations and feedback (after lunch)– Wrap-up/Critique
10
SDOE 633 Course Overview
Design Tools...The SMAD Spreadsheet
• Integrates 100’s of equations as well as cost and operational complexity models from Space Mission Analysis and Design text to create a fully-integrated Excel-based system modeling tool for rapid trade studies– Shallow learning curve allows students with basic background in
space mission design to quickly begin analyzing trade-offs between
11
SDOE 633 Course Overview
SMAD Spreadsheet Navigator
12
SDOE 633 Course Overview
SMAD Spreadsheet Example Output
13
SDOE 633 Course Overview
SDOE 633 Part B
14
Verification Planning
EyasSAT Exercises
REQUIREMENT VERIFY
METHOD
(LEVEL)
EVENT(S) SUCCESS CRITERIA VALID REQ’T
?
VERIFY
STATUS?
VERIFY
STATUS?
VERIFY
STATUS?
VERIFY
STATUS?
VERIFY
STATUS?
COMMENTS
3.1 System Characteristics: EyasSAT System characteristics shall be as refined by the following:
Inspection
(SYSTEM)
System Acceptance Review
If verification of all characteristic requirements have been successfully completed.
3.1.1. System Definition: EyasSAT system major components shall include the following: (1) Structure & Integration Subsystem (SIS), (2) Electrical Power Subsystem (EPS) Module, (3) Data Handling Subsystem (DHS) Module, (4) Communication Module (Comm), and (5) Attitude Determination & Control Subsystem (ADCS) Module, LED Test Module assembled as per specifications
Inspection
(SYSTEM)
Subsystem Baseline Physical Inspections AND System Baseline Physical Inspection
If all specified major components are included
3.1.2. System Mass: Total system mass shall not exceed 3.0 kg, Subsystem mass is allocated as follows:
Inspection
(SYSTEM)
System Baseline Physical Inspection
If system mass does not exceed 3.0 kg.
3.1.2.1 SIS Mass: SIS mass shall not exceed 1.5 kg.
Inspection
(SUBSYSTEM)
Subsystem Baseline Physical Inspections
If SIS mass does not exceed 1.5 kg
3.1.2.2 EPS Mass: EPS Module mass, including LED Test Module, shall not exceed 0.5 kg.
Inspection
(SUBSYSTEM)
Subsystem Baseline Physical Inspections
If EPS mass does not exceed 0.5 kg
EyasSAT Requirements Verification Matrix
Rev. 8.1 August 21, 2009 1
Requirements Validation
Part-level Verification
Software Verification & Validation
SubsystemVerification
SystemIntegration
• A combination of lecture and extensive hands-on exercises using the EyasSAT Educational Satellite System
– To teach space system verification and validation principles and practices
SDOE 633 Course Overview 15
SDOE 633 Part B Objectives
• At the end of this course you should be able to:– Explain the end-to-end SE process and how it applies to system (and
lower level) requirements definition, allocation, validation and verification.– Describe the purpose and scope of key documents required in the
validation and verification processes, and describe typical errors committed.– Describe various methods of verification, when they are appropriate. and
how they are used as part of a verification plan for a system of interest– Determine appropriate circumstances and applicability of verification
methods to prototype and proto-flight systems. – Analyze representative verification plans, test sequences and activities
for an example system of interest (spacecraft).– Develop, evaluate and implement a master verification plan for a space
system including hardware, software and associated ground support equipment (GSE).
– Apply processes and techniques in a hands-on workshop associated with a system of interest.
– Describe applicable NASA, ECSS, DoD and Industry Standards and lessons learned to support system verification decisions and activities.
SDOE 633 Course Overview
Why Focus on V&V?
16
Mission/Year Mishap Verification & Validation Contributing Factors
Genesis/2004 G-switch installed backwards !parachute not deployed ! hard landing
“no system-level test” (of G-switch)
Columbia/2003 debris damaged thermal tiles ! loss of crew and vehicle
“current [modeling] tools, including the Crater model, are inadequate...”“flight configuration was validated using extrapolated test data...rather than direct testing”
Comet Nucleus Tour (CONTOUR)/2002
overheating of s/c by solid rocket motor plume ! vehicle lost
“Project reliance on analysis by similarity”
Wide Field InfraRed Explorer (WIRE)/1999
electronic startup transient !early cover jettison !cryogen boil-off science mission lost
“failure to correctly identify the source of the signal which caused Electro Explosive Device (EED) Simulator to ‘latch’ upon Pyrotechnics Box power-up during spacecraft integration testing”
Mars Polar Lander/1998
software flaw !descent engine shut-off too soon !vehicle lost
“employed analysis as a substitute for test in the verification and validation of total system performance...tests employed to develop or validate the constituent models were not of adequate fidelity.”
ASSE Table 11-2
SDOE 633 Course Overview
V&V Inputs & Outputs
17
Inputs Verification, Validation & Certification
Activities
Outputs
•Un-validated Requirements Requirements Validation •Validated Requirements
•Un-validated Mission Critical Models•Validated Model Requirements Model Validation
•Validated Models•Model Uncertainty Factors (MUFs)•List of Model idiosyncrasies
•Validated Requirements•Un-verified End Product(s)•Verification Plan (including incompressible test list)•Verification Enabling Products (e.g. validated models)
Product Verification
•Verification Plan (as implemented)•Verified End Product(s)•Verification Products (data, reports, verification closure notices, work products)
•Verified End Product(s)•Customer Expectations (e.g. MOEs and other acceptance criteria)•Operations Concept•Validation Plan•Validation Enabling Products
Product Validation
•Validated Product(s)•Validation Products (e.g. data, test reports, work products)
•Verified & Validated Product(s)•Verification & Validation Product(s)•Real-world Operational Context for End Product(s)
Flight Certification
•Certified Product•Certification Products (e.g. signed DD250, completed functional config. audit (FCA, physical config. audit (PCA), mission rules)
This course will explore the activities and tools needed to achieve these inputs and outputs
SDOE 633 Course Overview 18
SDOE 633 Part B Agenda
LECTURES• Intro to Space Systems Engineering• The EyasSAT System of Interest• Validating Requirements & Models• Verifying Products• Verification of COTS/NDI• Software Verification & Validation• Validating Products and Flight
Certification
Goal: Achieve an ability to analyze, synthesize and critically evaluate V&V plans and real-world implementations through interactive lectures and hands-on exercises
EXERCISES• SRPL• EyasSAT Requirements Validation• EyasSAT Verification Planning• EyasSAT Parts-Level Verification
Events• EyasSAT Software V&V Event• EyasSAT Subsystem Verification
Events• EyasSAT System Verification Events• EyasSAT System Validation Events• EyasSAT System Acceptance Review
SDOE 633 Course Overview
SDOE 633 Admin
• Prerequisites– Completion of SDOE 632 or 635 (or equivalent space mission design
experience)• Grading
– Mission Concept Review, 40%» combined oral presentation and written design package in Powerpoint
– Final Exam (online), 60%» Focused on key concepts and practices in Space System Verification and
19
102
G.3 Mission Concept Review
The MCR affirms the mission need and examines the proposed mission’s objectives and the
concept for meeting those objectives.
Table G-3 – MCR Entrance and Success Criteria
Mission Concept Review
Entrance Criteria Success Criteria
1. Mission goals and objectives.
2. Analysis of alternative concepts to show
at least one is feasible.
3. Concept of operations.
4. Preliminary mission descope options.
5. Preliminary risk assessment, including
technologies and associated risk
management/mitigation strategies and
options.
6. Conceptual test and evaluation strategy.
7. Preliminary technical plans to achieve
next phase.
8. Defined MOEs and MOPs.
9. Conceptual life-cycle support strategies
(logistics, manufacturing, and
operation).
1. Mission objectives are clearly defined and stated and are
unambiguous and internally consistent.
2. The preliminary set of requirements satisfactorily provides a
system that will meet the mission objectives.
3. The mission is feasible. A solution has been identified that is
technically feasible. A rough cost estimate is within an
acceptable cost range.
4. The concept evaluation criteria to be used in candidate
systems evaluation have been identified and prioritized.
5. The need for the mission has been clearly identified.
6. The cost and schedule estimates are credible.
7. An updated technical search was done to identify existing
assets or products that could satisfy the mission or parts of
the mission.
8. Technical planning is sufficient to proceed to the next phase.
9. Risk and mitigation strategies have been identified and are
acceptable based on technical risk assessments.
G.4 System Requirements Review
The SRR examines the functional and performance requirements defined for the system and the
preliminary program or project plan and ensures that the requirements and the selected concept
will satisfy the mission.
Table G-4 – SRR Entrance and Success Criteria
System Requirements Review
Entrance Criteria Success Criteria
1. Successful completion of the MCR and responses made to all MCR
Requests for Actions (RFAs) and Review Item Discrepancies (RIDs).
2. A preliminary SRR agenda, success criteria, and charge to the board
have been agreed to by the technical team, project manager, and
review chair prior to the SRR.
3. The following technical products for hardware and software system
elements are available to the cognizant participants prior to the
review:
a. system requirements document;
b. system software functionality description;
c. updated concept of operations;
d. updated mission requirements, if applicable;
e. baselined SEMP;
f. risk management plan;
g. preliminary system requirements allocation to the next lower level
system;
1. The project utilizes a sound
process for the allocation and
control of requirements
throughout all levels, and a
plan has been defined to
complete the definition activity
within schedule constraints.
2. Requirements definition is
complete with respect to top-
level mission and science
requirements, and interfaces
with external entities and
between major internal
elements have been defined.
3. Requirements allocation and
flow down of key driving
Overview of:Mission and System Design
Verification and ValidationSDOE 633
Presented by
With our Academic Partner