Integration and Test

1. Integration and Test Michael Ludlam (EFW Systems Engineer) Space Sciences Lab University of California, Berkeley

2. Integration and TestOutline Requirements, Plan Environmental Matrix Test Flows Calibrations, Deployments, Interface Tests Environmental Tests Alignments Contamination Facilities Documentation Operating Hours Observatory-level Tests

3. Requirements Verify Instrument Requirements per IRD (RBSP_EFW_SYS_001) Meet/Verify Quality Requirements per 7417-9096 (Matrix) Meet/Verify Contamination Requirements per RBSP_EFW_PA_005 Verify Environmental Requirements (ERTRD) per 7417-9019 Verify EMC Requirements (EMECP) per 7417-9018 Verify Spacecraft Interface Requirements per ICD 7417-9083 Verify EMFISIS Interface Requirements per ICD 7417-9089 Verify Performance Requirements per IRD Approach Described in RBSP EFW Verification, Validation, Test, and Calibration Plan RBSP_EFW_TE_001

4. Integration and Test Plan Philosophy: Requirements are verified as early as possible at a low level Verifies subsystems, Retires risk Requirements are verified at the highest level of assembly possible Often involves verifying a requirement at several levels Maintain flexibility in test sequencing to maintain schedule Tests on ETU and two Flight Units Subset of tests on ETU to qualify the design where practical and possible. Full tests on Flight units Except EMC testing is limited on second unit per 7417-9018 Typical Test Levels: Subassembly (circuit board): functional Component (AXB, SPB, IDPU): functional, mass properties, vibration, TV, deployments, magnetics Instrument: functional, calibration, interface, EMC, TV

5. Environmental Test Matrix

6. Environmental Test Matrix

7. Environmental Test Matrix

8. Planned ETU Integration and Test Flow

9. Actual ETU Integration and Test Flow CE Measurements still to be done TVAC reduced to Thermal Test for BEB and LVPS Due to connector change IDPU Vibration was not done – Qual needed for FM PCB section of LVPS still to be tested

10. Rationale for ETU Test Plan IDPU Vibration New connector requires IDPU to be qualified at FM. RBSP IDPU very similar to THEMIS IDPU for board mounting, board size and design that response to vibration is well known. IDPU Chassis was vibrated at ETU level, no issues. IDPU Thermal Vacuum to BEB and LVPS Thermal BEB not a thermal issue (no need for vacuum), although there is a desire to characterize it’s response over temperature. LVPS has higher dissipating components than other IDPU boards and some thermal testing would be helpful, but fildelity of parts on supply and setup issues with full Thermal Vacuum would prevent timely input to the LVPS flight design. Thermal chamber test presents best chance at spotting design issues to keep LVPS on schedule. DCB and DFB: main reason for Thermal test is for timing, but FPGA parts are not rated to temperature extremes. Margin testing on ETU DCB and early thermal tests on DFB are used to mitigate lack of test at ETU level. Power Control Board (PCB) Circuit Verification Will be done in September 2009. EMC CE Test Will be done in October 2009.

11. FM Integration and Test Flow

12. Validation All instrument requirements are captured in IRD. IRD contains columns detailing how and where the requirement is met. IRD doubles as verification cross reference matrix. Systems Engineer is responsible for verifying test procedures meet requirements and responsible for verifying that all requirements are met by following test plan.

13. Procedures Each test shall be documented by a Test Procedure Test procedure shall identify IRD requirements to be verified by the test Test procedure shall include pass/fail criteria System Engineer, QA, Subsystem lead to sign off on proc before use System Engineer, QA to sign off on completed as-run proc QA to ensure Red-lines to be transferred into proc before next use Each completed test to be documented by a Test Report ETU and subassembly test reports may be a combination of the as-run proc and lab notebook System Engineer to sign off on test reports, and determine if test adequately verifies associated requirements Discrepancies found during tests to be documented in a Problem Failure Report (PFR) Starting with first functional tests at flight subassembly level Includes any problem (including software) not immediately identified as a test setup or operator problem which cannot stress the flight article QA will track PFRs to closure with concurrence of the Failure Review Board (includes APL)

14. Calibrations Four calibration tests verify the EFW instrument performance Performed one time for each flight unit prior to environmental tests. Science Calibration (SciCal) Verifies DC gain and offset and AC gain and phase for the sensors and bias channels Verifies the DAC calibration for the bias channels Done at the subassembly level, and involves boom pairs plus the BEB board. Fields Timing and Phasing (FTP) Verifies the absolute and relative timing and phasing (polarity and shift) amongst EFW, MSC, MAG. Done at the Instrument level, with partially deployed EFW sensors and simulators for MSC and MAG. A simplified version of this test (SFTP), not requiring partial EFW boom deployment, shall be done at the Observatory level of integration using the flight EMFISIS instruments and a common EFW-provided stimulation GSE source verify instrument relative timing between EFW and EMFISIS. Omnibus DFB Spectral Data Test Verifies end-to-end function of the DFB spectral and derived data quantities Requires the same configuration and FTP a similar test is run at the DFB level Slew Rate and DC and AC CMRR Test Verifies the instrument slew rate and common mode rejection ratio in an integrated instrument configuration (a similar test is run at the DFB level) Requires the same configuration as FTP

15. Boom Deployments Boom deployment testing takes place at the component level (AXB, SPB). A minimum of 2 full deployments will take place on each unit prior to the start of the environmental test program. In addition, during component level thermal vacuum tests, there will be one deployment at hot and one at cold. Special GSE and conditions are required for these deployments which are typically inconsistent with deployments at the Instrument or Observatory levels. During functional tests at the instrument and Observatory level, actuator simulators shall be used to verify the ability of the system to run the deployment of the booms. A frangibolt (for AXB) and pin puller (for SPB) will be fired using the IDPU on each flight unit to verify that it can successfully actuate the device. Hi-fidelity motor simulators will be used to verify the IDPU can deploy the booms correctly. SPB must be partially deployed (walk-out) for calibrations at Instrument level and for Spacecraft level EMC compatibility testing Requires removal from the spacecraft to re-stow the booms.

16. Interface Tests Interface tests verify interfaces meet requirements from ICD and/or specifications. EFW ETU to be tested with APL hardware test bed Verify ICD functionality Q4 2009 EFW ETU tested with EMFISIS ETU Detailed in next slide At other times (prior to Observatory I&T) interfaces simulated with GSE Board, Component level tests performed with Board Interface Simulation GSE Instrument-level tests performed with: APL-provided spacecraft emulator Command and Telemetry GSE software Stimulation GSE or internal test signal EMFISIS simulator Deployment actuator simulators GSE functionality, design described in GSE section

17. EFW & EMFISIS Interface Test – August 2009 EFW traveled to University of Iowa in mid August 2009 with completed ETU instrument for interface tests with EMFISIS instrument. Interface Verified voltage levels, pinouts, harnessing, circuit compatibility. Flow of data through instruments verifed. Interface Performance tested but not verified Performance verification happens on FM Details (when, where, how) need to be worked out with EMFISIS team.

18. Mechanical Tests Tests Per 7417-9019 Environmental Spec (ERTRD) as described in the mechanical section.

19. Thermal Tests Tests Per 7417-9019 Environmental Spec: 1 survival and 6 operational thermal vacuum cycles Temperatures range detailed in thermal presentation. Per RBSP_EFW_TE_001 Plan: 1 survival and 4 operational cycles at the component level Boom units to be deployed once each at hot and cold operational limits IDPU Comprehensive Performance Test & BEB Characterization. 2 operational cycles at the Instrument level (plus bakeout) No actual deployments, but actuator simulators used Preamps get 1 survival and 6 operational cycles at subassembly level Deployed preamp temperatures are much wider than deployment mechanism temperatures AXB Whip and stacer are Thermal Vac’d separately. No Instrument or Component level Thermal Balance Test All components thermally coupled to the spacecraft deck Observatory-level thermal balance test

20. EME Tests (1) Tests Per 7417-9018 EME Spec: Deep Dielectric Discharge Test Interfaces Only for IDPU (Shielded) - Passed All points on Preamp (<350 mils equivalent shielding) - Passed DC Magnetics (sniff test) ETU and Flight Units, Component level Target <5nT DC, <0.1nT AC At Magnetometer (for whole S/C) Results of sniff test reported to Magnetics Working Group for analysis and possible mitigations Test to be performed by EMFISIS MAG personnel Deployment motors have permanent magnets, are shielded Configuration tested for THEMIS Test data provided to EMFISIS MAG

21. EME Tests (2) Surface Charging / Electrostatic Cleanliness Measure resistance between exposed surfaces (FM1 and FM2) Requirement <105 ohms per square to chassis ground Some surfaces may be covered with thermal blankets blanket testing needs to be done at Observatory level repeated late in the flow Ground Bonding and Isolation Chassis bonding < 2.5 milliohms between adjacent chassis elements < 5 milliohms box to chassis Ground Isolation >1Mohm primary to secondary (chassis) ground Measured at Instrument-level EMC testing ETU, FM1, and FM2 Turn On/Off Transients Inrush and transient current profile limits per EME spec Measure Inrush current and transient profile at Instrument-level EMC ETU, FM1, FM2 CE, CS, RE, RS Tests as detailed in EMECP. ETU and FM2 only get CE measurements

22. Alignment EFW Boom unit alignment achieved by bolt-hole tolerance Verified to meet IRD alignment requirements by EFW analysis No observatory-level alignment measurement required EFW AXB run-out measurement verifies deployed AXB meets straightness (alignment) requirement at Component level testing (before delivery to APL)

23. Contamination RBSP EFW Contamination Control Plan (RBSP_EFW_PA_005) documents how EFW will be Project contamination control requirements The only significant EFW contamination sensitivity is the sensor surfaces Will be enclosed in caging mechanisms through most of I&T Special handling/cleaning procedures apply when sensors exposed No purge requirement Instrument I&T will be in Class 100,000 facility at UCB Subassemblies / Components delivered to I&T will be inspected and cleaned as needed prior to integration into components When Instrument is not in a Class 100,000 environment the unit will be bagged Flight units will be baked out per RBSP_EFW_PA_007 Bakeout plan prior to delivery to APL Vacuum bakeout at max survival temp for at least 48 hours with TQCM

24. Facilities Component and Instrument I&T will take place at the University of California, Berkeley Space Sciences Laboratory (SSL) Instrument integration will take place in a Class 100,000 clean room at SSL SSL has several Thermal Vacuum chambers Some can be equipped for boom deployment tests TQCM available for bakeouts Fixture developed to hold instrument suite on single plate. SSL can perform Conducted Emissions tests to 50MHz Adequate for ETU and FM2 EMC testing Full EMC suite testing on FM1 will be at a subcontractor facility Vibration testing at near-by commercial facilities (Quanta) Thermal Vacuum Fixture.

25. Facilities Cleanroom (with 5 THEMIS probes) ‘Bertha’ TVac Chamber SPB Deploy GSE in TVac ‘Snout’ TVac Chamber (AXB deploy)

26. Operating Hours RBSP Matrix requirement is: Instrument teams shall demonstrate a period of 300 hours of total powered test time, 100 hours of which are consecutive failure-free operation in its simulated mission orbital environment (thermal vacuum), at the conclusion of their verification program prior to delivery to the observatory. Hours include component-level and instrument-level test time Operating hours excludes deployment system operation Deployment systems shall be demonstrated at least 4 times prior to delivery twice on the bench, once hot and once cold in thermal vac To achieve this number of hours without impacting schedule requires intervals of several days of 24-hour operation In addition to hours accumulated during normal tests Early testing will always be manned by an operator who can monitor operations Later, after the system has been adequately rung out, operating hours will be accumulated in flight-like, unattended operations GSE shall monitor and safe the instrument GSE shall page an operator in case of limit violation

27. Observatory-Level Tests EFW and APL have discussed S/C level testing in detail at ‘End to End’ Test Meeting, June 2009. EFW has internal stimulus to support CPT functional testing – no GSE required GSE will be required for a System-level Phasing and EFW/EMFISIS interface test to simultaneously stimulate EFW and EMFISIS One-time test AXB will not be deployed at Spacecraft level Too hard to implement off-load GSE at spacecraft level AXB Whip will be deployed after vibration. SPB will be partially deployed at Spacecraft EMC To allow EFW to measure spacecraft radiated emissions Allows a test of SPB deployment circuits Sensors are walked out and placed in holders by EFW personnel SPB units must be removed from the spacecraft to re-stow the boom Sensors inspected and cleaned if required by EFW personnel prior to re-stowing Actuator simulators will be provided to perform simulated boom deployments simulators contain flight-like motors and actuators (or equivalent loads) simulators attach to boom unit enable plug Simulators will be used at spacecraft-level Thermal Vac

28. Backup Thermal Profiles EMC Test Levels

29. Thermal Profiles Example

30. Thermal Profiles

31. EME Tests Conducted Emissions CE01, CE03, CE07 Performed at Instrument EMC test ETU, FM1, FM2 Test power lines and Harnesses (common mode) Differential Mode Limit Common Mode Limit

32. Integration and Test EME Tests Radiated Emissions RE01, RE02 Performed at Instrument-level EMC test on FM1 only RE02 Low Frequency Limits RE01 Limits RE02 High Frequency Limits

33. EME Tests Conducted Susceptibility CS01, CS02, CS06 Performed at Instrument-level EMC test on FM1 only 1Vp-p 30Hz – 400MHz 10V spikes Radiated Susceptibility RS03 Performed at Instrument-level EMC test on FM1 only

34. This page intentionally almost blank