1 / 14

Aerospace Testing 2006

Aerospace Testing 2006. A Centralized Approach To Ground Support Software To Reduce Technical Risk and Overall Mission Costs. Thomas Hauck GSE Software, Inc. hauck@gseos.com. Stephen E. Jaskulek Applied Physics Laboratory Johns Hopkins University Steve.jaskulek@jhuapl.edu.

katelynn-victory
Download Presentation

Aerospace Testing 2006

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. Aerospace Testing 2006 A Centralized Approach To Ground Support Software To Reduce Technical Risk and Overall Mission Costs Thomas Hauck GSE Software, Inc. hauck@gseos.com Stephen E. Jaskulek Applied Physics Laboratory Johns Hopkins University Steve.jaskulek@jhuapl.edu

  2. New Horizons Case study of the New Horizons Mission to Pluto Launch: Jan. 19, 2006 Pluto Encounter: 2015

  3. Mission Life Cycle

  4. Pros of Decentralized Approach • Each instrument team is autonomous in the choice of their test and development system. • Potential re-use of existing test equipment and familiarity with existing development tools. • Administrative and budget structure often supports/dictates splitting the responsibilities at ICD level.

  5. Cons of Decentralized Approach • Duplication of interface implementation effort. • Payload integration has to account for interface problems. • TLM&CMD changes are not adopted quickly and concurrently by instrument teams • Higher level test tools like STOL (Spacecraft Test and Operations Language) are usually not feasible to develop on instrument level • Little or no cross-instrument data visibility

  6. Coordinated GSE

  7. Coordinated GSE • Reduced mission wide development effort • Payload integration can be performed more efficiently • High level test environments like STOL interpreters are feasible • Telemetry and command databases can be converted into GSE configuration • The instrument customization can be reused through bench testing, payload integration, and flight operations • Cross-team data access • Compact hardware configuration. One PC can run all instrument GSEs simultaneously

  8. GSEOS • Rapid Development Tool for GSE • Quick Look System • Simple bit level telemetry definition • Dynamic data modeling with custom decoders • Archiving/Playback • STOL Emulator • Version Control • Extremely portable

  9. User Interface

  10. Block Concept

  11. Block Hierarchy

  12. New Horizons GSE • ExcelTM based TLM & CMD definitions • Zero-Impact Conversion Tools • STOL Emulator • Common MOC (Mission Operation Control) Interface • Configuration Control • Cross-team Telemetry Visibility

  13. Mission Benefits • Enhanced GSE capabilities • Reduced code duplication (20%) • Reduced technical risk (30%) • Reduced scheduling risk (50%) • Reduced hardware costs (50%) • Reduced overall mission costs

  14. Discussion/Questions ?

More Related