1 / 140

SM4 Readiness Review

SM4 Readiness Review. Tuesday, 9 September 2008, 9:00am -12:40pm Welcome Hubble Mission Office SMOV Program Carl Biagetti, 9-9:30am Proposal Processing Status Denise Taylor, 9:30-9:45am Long Range Planning David Adler, 9:45-10am

vega
Download Presentation

SM4 Readiness Review

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. SM4 Readiness Review • Tuesday, 9 September 2008, 9:00am -12:40pm • Welcome Hubble Mission Office • SMOV Program Carl Biagetti, 9-9:30am • Proposal Processing Status Denise Taylor, 9:30-9:45am • Long Range Planning David Adler, 9:45-10am • Contingency Plans for STIS/ACS Neill Reid, 10 - 10:15am • Planning & Scheduling Merle Reinhart & George Chapman, 10:15-10:45am • …Break for 15 minutes… • Commanding Alan Welty, 11-11:15am • Data Processing and Archiving Faith Abney, 11:15-11:45am • Calibration Pipeline Processing Warren Hack, 11:45-12:05pm • Operational Readiness Al Holm, 12:05-12:25pm • Infrastructure Contingency Plans Doris McClure, 12:25-12:40pm

  2. SM4 Readiness Review • Wednesday, 10 September 2008, 9:00-12:30: • SM4 Observatory Support Chris Long • WFC3 Readiness John MacKenty • COS and STIS Readiness Alessandra Aloisi • ACS Readiness Linda Smith • NICMOS Readiness Tommy Wiklind • FGS and OTA Readiness Ed Nelan and Matt Lallo • OPO and ERO Readiness Mario Livio and Keith Noll

  3. SMOV4 Planning Readiness Carl Biagetti System Engineering Branch - OED

  4. SMOV4 Plan Overview …1 • SMOV4 Plan • Provides for the timely commissioning of the Observatory for science following SM4 • Commissions the newly SIs on channel-by-channel basis • Introduces GO science on a channel-by-channel basis as SMOV progresses • Recommissions the restored SIs on channel-by-channel basis • Recommissions serviced Observatory Systems • Performs Early Release Observations (EROs) • Satisfies theSMOV4 requirements of 21 March 2007 • Plan presented, reviewed, and approved 12 Oct. 2007 (SMR-4029, CCR 5248)

  5. Generic SMOV Processfollowing each HST Servicing Early Release Observations New/Revived Instruments Spacecraft Subsystems Commissioning PCS/EPS/TCS… HST Release from Shuttle SMOV Start Focus/Alignment of SI Optics Instruments Science Calibrations GO Science Ramp-up As Instruments/Channels Are commissioned Instrument Preps Engineering Check-Outs Outgassing Cooldown

  6. SMOVs 2 – 4EXTERNAL ORBITSHISTORICAL COMPARISON Notes: 1. STIS and NICMOS required more orbits than planned because of the NICMOS thermal shortand theopto-coupler resets in both SIs. 2. SMOV4 seems to be the most complex in terms of realtime interactions and in-line analyses.

  7. SMOV4 Plan Overview …2 • SMOV4 Plan satisfies the following drivers • Perform EROs in time for Jan. AAS release • i.e., schedule observations in early December 2008 • Minimize excess FGS3 usage by timely commissioning of FGS2R2

  8. SMOV4 Plan Overview …3 • SMOV4 Plan satisfies the following constraints • Long intervals for outgassing and contaminants dissipation • Bright Earth Avoidance (for 21 days from Release) • to avoid UV-induced polymerization of exposed optics (WFC3 POM) • COS NUV = 10 days from Release (per model) to allow internal pressure below 20 uTORR, before detector activation • COS FUV = 15 days from Release (per model) to allow internal pressure below 10 uTORR, before detector activation • WFC3 = 21 days from Release before cal lamp usage and TEC cooldown • Careful, incremental initial high-voltage ramp-ups • COS NUV/FUV • STIS NUV/FUV • ACS SBC

  9. SMOV4 Plan Overview …4 • SMOV4 Plan prioritizes SMOV activities to allow schedule flexibility • Prioritization (High, Medium, Low) • Based on realistic assumptions about scheduling rates (external orbits) • Accommodates ERO schedule and other key dates • Accommodates non-SMOV (eg., GO, ERS) programs before SMOV completion

  10. Prioritization of SMOV activities • High Priority = activities needed to enable EROs in early Dec. • Medium Priority = activities needed for enabling GO science • Low Priority = all other activities • Needed to satisfy all other SMOV4 requirements and reference file generation • Needed for handbook inputs in spring

  11. SMOV Prioritization: COS • High Priority Activities (EROs) • Through NUV and FUV Alignment and Focus • Medium Priority Activities (Science enable) • All FUV cals beyond alignment/focus and target acq test • The rest of NUV wavelength scale calibration • Low Priority Activities • Low 1 – needed for reference files and handbook inputs (data needed by Feb. 1) • Low 2 – desirable but not required for handbook inputs • Low 3 – All others

  12. SMOV Prioritization: WFC3 • High Priority Activities (EROs) • Through UVIS & IR Fine Alignment • In parallel with EROs • UVIS/IR/FGS alignment, UVIS/IR plate scales • Medium Priority Activities(for “Easy” GO science) • Internal flats, flat-field uniformity, photometric zero-points • Low Priority Activities(for “Hard” GO science) • UVIS/IR image quality, PSF wings, UVIS PSF Core Modulation (shutter test), pointing stability, IR grisms

  13. SMOV Prioritization: ACS • High Priority Activities (EROs) • WFC Optimization Campaign (OC), image quality, sensitivity • SBC turn-on, UV monitor • Medium Priority Activities (GO science) • SBC PSF • HRC image quality, sensitivity, geometric distortion, coronagraph commissioning • Low Priority Activities • None remaining, but assume the option to delay HRC commissioning in favor of WFC/SBC in early SMOV

  14. SMOV Prioritization: STIS & NICMOS • NICMOS • High Priority Activities (EROs) • Through Aperture Location activity • Medium Priority Activities (GO science) • Through Aperture Location activity and SIAF update • Aperture knowledge without SIAF may be sufficient • STIS • High = STIS External Focus Check • Medium = NUV Optical Format Verification, FUV Image Quality • Low = CCD Spectroscopic Throughput, Image/Pointing Stability, NUV Image Quality

  15. COS NUV SCI ENABLE WFC3 UVIS/IR “HARD “SCI ENABLE ACS SBC SCI ENABLE ACS HRC SCI ENABLE UV IR COS FUV SCI ENABLE, WFC3 IR “EASY” SCI ENABLE WFC3 UVIS/IR ERO ENABLE, UVIS “EASY” SCIENCE ENABLE, NIC SCIENCE ENABLE, COS FUV ERO ENABLE STIS SCI & ERO ENABLE ACS WFC SCI & ERO ENABLE, NIC ERO ENABLE, FGS2R2 GUIDING ENABLE

  16. Critical Operations & Operational Challenges in SMOV • HV Ramp-ups for STIS and COS • Focus & Alignments for COS & WFC3 • Iterative processes for each SI in the same weeks • Realtime Commanding • GENSLEWs (Use Offsets) • Used in several proposals for pointing updates before aperture data (SIAF) is in place • Needed to meet ERO schedule • Table uploads, Event flag mgmt, etc. • Fast Data Turnaround (FASTRACK) • Needed in several places for in-line analyses

  17. Critical Operations and Operational Challenges in SMOV Weeks 1-7 Yellow indicate times of high activity FTn = Fastrack data delivery requested by n proposals

  18. Organization, Management, Reporting during SMOV • SMOV Team • Consists of STScI & Project science & engineering staff • Lead personnel identified for each critical activity • Team to meet regularly (“morning meeting”) • Daily, for 1st couple of weeks, then at a slowly decreasing frequency • To assess daily progress, review daily plans • Determine replans • Contributions from each SI and subsystem teams • Daily minutes/reports to be published Project-wide • SMOV TTRB • To assess replan requests • Make recommendations to HST MO and Project

  19. SMOV4 Contingency Planning • High-level contingency plans are being worked for each SI/subsystem • Including SMOV OTA focus contingency

  20. SMOV PROPOSAL IMPLEMENTATION TEAM (PIT) EARNED VALUE (EV) as of 4Sep08 • 10 EV points/proposal • 3 pts for prop submit • 2 pts for 1st PIT mtg • 2 pts for 2nd PIT mtg • 3 pts for prop complete 165 SMOV4 PROPOSALS = 1650 total EV points - 163 PROPOSALS PIT-APPROVED PIT PROGRESS - 100 %PLANNED EARNED VALUE for Aug. 31 - 99.0 %ACTUAL EARNED VALUE as of Sep 4

  21. Credit goes to dozens and dozens of people - STScI, GSFC, COS & WFC3 Teams For a very good SMOV4 Plan

  22. Proposal Processing Status Denise Taylor, Observation Planning Branch - OED

  23. Proposal Processing Status • SMOV Proposals • 153 proposals (not including ERO) • 35 COS props (164 ext. orb., 111 int. orb.) - 7 props still working • 31 ACS props (38 ext. orb., 493 int. orb.) - 1 props still working • 42 WFC3 props (163 ext. orb., 370 int. orb.) - All ready • 25 STIS props (21 ext. orb., 174 int. orb.) - All ready • 12 NIC props (34 ext. orb., 136 int. orb.) - All ready • 2 PCS props (24 ext. orb., 26 int. orb.) - All ready • 6 FGS props (57 ext. orb.) - All ready

  24. Proposal Processing Status • SMOV Proposals (continued) • 145 are ready for flight. • 8 are being worked: • 1 ACS + 1 COS props need to be resubmitted, reprocessed and re-reviewed • 6 COS props need CS reviews

  25. Proposal Processing Status • ERO Proposals • 9 proposals for ERO • 4 are ready for flight (16 orbits): • One WFPC2 ERO • One STIS ERO • One ACS ERO • One COS ERO • 4 have been submitted and are being worked (need CS reviews) (20 orbits): • One COS ERO • One WFC3 ERO • One COS ERO • One WFC3 ERO • 1 has not been submitted (? orbits)

  26. Proposal Processing Status • Early Science Proposals (132 orbits possible for execution before 31 January 2009) • COS/GTO • 11520 - QSO Absorbers, Galaxies and Large-scale Structures in the Local Universe (26/39 orbits) • 11534 - Atmosphere of a Transiting Planet (20/20 orbits) GO • 11566 - Imaging Saturn’s Equinoctal Auroras (6/12 orbits) • 11612 - Eta Carinae’s Continuing Instability and Recovery - the 2009 Event (9/16 orbits) • 11706 - The Parallax of the Planet Host Star XO-3 (1/6 orbits) • 11788 - The Architecture of Exoplanetary Systems (11/63 orbits) • 11789 - An Astrometric Calibration of Population II Distance Indicators (11/33 orbits) ERS • 11359 - Panchromatic WFC3 Survey of Galaxies at Intermediate z (28/104 orbits) • 11360 - Star Formation in Nearby Galaxies (20/110 orbits)

  27. Proposal Processing Status • Cycle 17 General Observer Pool • 197 GO proposals including those from HST Cycle 17 TAC, Chandra TAC, and previous HST TACs, for 3627 orbits. • 16 SNAP proposals, for 1417 orbits. • 24 GTO/COS proposals for 291 orbits. • 3 GTO/ACS proposals for 24 orbits. • 2 ERS proposals for 214 orbits. • 3 GO/PAR proposals for 410 orbits.

  28. Proposal Processing Status • Cycle 17 General Observer Pool (continued) • Program Coordinators (PCs) are processing observations in the general pool: ~ 6000 orbits. • Instrument teams have begun reviewing these observations and will have most done before SM4. Remaining will be done according to Long Range Plan schedule. • Currently 9% unschedulable, mostly due to incompatibility of requested scheduling constraints (orients, guide stars, timing links, etc.). This is typical for early ingest; PCs will resolve these issues throughout the coming months. • Final processing steps will wait until after SM4, when the ground system is reconfigured for 3 gyro mode.

  29. Proposal Processing Status • After SM4 • SMOV proposals and science proposals will be reworked as needed during SMOV. • Remaining Cycle 15 and Cycle 16 proposals will be reworked for 3-gyro scheduling. • Cycle 17 pool will continue processing as usual, to execute observations according to the Long Range Plan. • Begin processing Cycle 17 calibration proposals (Calibration review on 9/25/08; Phase II deadline TBD).

  30. The Long Range Plan David Adler Science & Mission Scheduling Branch - OED

  31. Long Range Planning Group (LRPG) Activity Summary • Remainder of Cycle 16: • 173 orbits before SM4, 441 orbits after SM4 in Cycle 16 “tail.” • The LRPG is monitoring remaining Cycle 16 WFPC2 observations. • all but one 3-orbit ToO follow-up should be completed by SM4. • PI of that program will put in a request to change SI if needed. • The LRPG has incorporated SMOV, SI commissioning, ERO, ERS, and GTO constraints into the Cycle 17 planning process. • A preliminary Cycle 17 LRP has been built and verified. • The LRPG has identified/developed plans for managing SM4 contingencies in Cycle 17 planning.

  32. Preliminary Cycle 17 Plan Highlights • December/January priorities: • High priority SMOV • EROs • ERS/GTOs • Time-critical Cycle 17 science • Medium/low priority SMOV • Cycle 16 GO science • Cycle 16 planning information for Oct-Dec programs is being maintained in case of launch slip. • All cycle 16 science planned for Oct-Dec can be replanned for 2009. • Under-subscription in early 2009 – LRPG is leaving space for Cycle 17 calibration programs, Target of Opportunity programs, DD, HOPR repeats, etc.

  33. Preliminary Cycle 17 LRP – Oct-Feb launch BEA SM4 ACS SBC COS NUV SI commissioning milestones ACS WFC/HRC NIC WFC3 UVIS/IR “hard” COS FUV WFC3 IR “easy” STIS WFC3 UVIS “easy”

  34. LRPG Transition from SMOV to Cycle 17 Science • Preliminary Cycle 17 plan is built • Statistics: • 4200 orbits – Cycle 16 and 17 science in working LRP • +600 orbits - SMOV/ERO (not in plan) • +850 orbits - “unplanned” – 2 orbits a day of calibration, HOPR, ToO, etc • --------------- • 5650 orbits in Cycle 17 • -650 orbits - cycle 17 tail – beyond Dec 31, 2009 • =5000 orbits from 10/20/08 – 12/31/09 = 11.42 orbits/day = 80 orb/week • Plan will not be released to the public until a couple of weeks after deployment when the state of the observatory is known.

  35. LRPG Contingency Plans • If there’s a launch slip: • Long Range Plan will be rebuilt to reflect the change. • For a 1 - 4 week slip, the following can fill the gap: • Existing Cycle 16 science programs • Cycle 17 NIC science that can schedule in 2-Gyro • Cycle 15/16 Snaps • Cycle 17 NIC Snaps that can schedule in 2-Gyro • 5 + week slip: • Existing science and Snaps, as described above; studies are ongoing to see how far out this can be extended. • If more science is needed, LRPG will consult with the Science Policies Group (SPG) for a course of action.

  36. Summary - LRPG Readiness for SM4 • Transition plan between Cycle 16 – SM4 – SMOV – Cycle 17 is in place. • Preliminary Cycle 17 LRP has been built and is ready for execution. It is currently on-hold pending the outcome of SM4. • The LRP incorporates all constraints/HST orbit resource requirements of all SMOV (including SI commissioning) and ERO/ERS activities. • Process/policies are in place for updating the Cycle 17 plan in response to SM4 contingencies. • The LRPG is ready for SM4!

  37. Contingency plan if STIS and/or ACS are not available • The C17 TAC recommended programs based on the assumption that SM4 would be fully successful, i.e., both STIS and ACS would be repaired • STIS and ACS are scheduled for repair after COS and WFC3 and their repair is more challenging • Therefore STIS and ACS carry a higher risk of not being available in C17 than COS and WFC3

  38. Instrument Contingencies Neill Reid Science Mission Office

  39. C17 allocation by orbit: • STIS: 8% of total; includes imaging and spectroscopy • ACS: 25% of total; includes 1% of SBC use (currently operational) • Numbers include parallels but no snapshots (1357 snapshot targets awarded in C17; STIS: 140; ACS: 518)

  40. C17 proposers were required to address whether their programs could be switched to a different instrument if STIS/ACS were not available • Using this information, the TAC endorsed or rejected an instrument switch and made a recommendation to the Director

  41. STIS • Moderate-resolution UV spectroscopy can often be switched to COS • Imaging can almost always be done with WFC3 or ACS • Optical spectroscopy, spatially resolved spectroscopy, high-resolution spectroscopy, etc., need STIS • ~40% of all orbits using STIS can be switched • The Long Range Planning Group has run simulations showing that when STIS observations are removed, science with other SIs can be front-loaded in the Cycle 17 long range plan

  42. ACS • Standard broad- and narrow-band imaging can be switched to WFC3 in most cases • SBC observations continue to be available • Optical coronagraphy, polarimetry, high-resolution imaging, etc., need ACS • ~85% of all orbits using ACS can be switched • The Long Range Planning Group has run simulations showing that when ACS observations are removed, science with other SIs can be front-loaded in the Cycle 17 long range plan

  43. Impact if STIS/ACS are not available • Using the TAC recommendation as a guide-line and after additional STScI review, PI’s will be notified whether instruments can be switched • Process similar to that used when ACS failed and observations were switched to WFPC2/NICMOS • PIs may appeal to the TTRB if switch was rejected • Switch can be done quickly (1 – 2 months) • Scheduling impact: ≤10% of the total orbits (sum of all C17 orbits) will be lost because the science requirements preclude an instrument switch • Orbits can be replaced, e.g., by snapshots

  44. Planning & Scheduling Merle Reinhart and George Chapman System Engineering Branch - OED

  45. Overview • Merle Reinhart • What is Planning and Scheduling? • SMOV Database Management • P&S Procedures and Tools • George Chapman • Rendezvous Intercept SMS Process • Ephemeris Management • Deploy SMS Process • SMOV Calendar/SMS Build Process • P&S Team Readiness • Pending Changes • Items Still in Work

  46. Proposals PRD SCIOPSDB Instructions TRANS SPIKE C&C List SPSS PASS HST/TDRS Ephemeris CCS SCS NGSS MOSS SMS FDF PRD GSC Orbit File What is Planning and Scheduling?Long Range Planning, Short Term Scheduling & PASS

  47. DatabaseNSSC-1 Flight Software • NSSC-1 FSW updates are required to support SM4 • NSSC-1 8.6 supports full complement of SIs during SM4 • This will be installed Sep. 10 during SMS 252 (SMS 254 is first use) • Avoids software changes during SM4 • NSSC-1 9.0 removes support for COSTAR and WFPCII • This will be installed immediately after SM4 during the H&S SMS

  48. DatabasePRD/SCIOPSDB • OPSPRD 7.0 has been deployed to SMS 254 • First used after NSSC-1 8.6 FSW is loaded • PR 60745: TFPF JWOSCPRM for oscilloscope mode parameters • Planned Updates • PR 60655, 60781: PLCP PIPHTHET, PIHETPHT, PISAFFLT needed for WFC3 • After SM4 rendezvous, but prior to deployment • PRD & SCIOPSDB updates for SMOV4 are included in the OPS/SM4 database merge (described later) • Other planned updates for use on initial H&S SMS • PR 60663: PLCP PJSAFHLD for ACS safing recovery including TEC commanding • PR 60739: AGCF and SCHF parameters for switch to 3-gyro mode • PR 60742: Table ODB for NSSC-1 9.0 FSW • Freeze Waivers will be requested for each update

  49. DatabaseSMOV Preparation Environment • SMOV4 development utilizes the same methodology that was successfully used for all previous Servicing Missions. • Use a separate database and disk space from Operations, but the same machines/servers. • spss_sm4 database for SMOV4 development • spss database for current SPSS Operations • Uses the operational software and tools, but utilizes different PRD/SCIOPSDB and SMS Instructions • Allows simultaneous Flight Operations and SMOV development • Two environments are isolated • The spss_sm4 database is managed in the same way as the SPSS Operations database. • This SMOV4 environment is used to: • Prepare the SMOV proposals for execution • Create the SMGT products • Create the SMOV4 representative products • Post-SM4 DRM Planning and Scheduling exercise

  50. DatabaseThe Merge Process • SMOV environment gets merged into the Operations environment after rendezvous and berthing occurs. • Unload all the SMOV4 and housekeeping proposals from the spss_sm4 database • This stores the proposals on disk as an sql load file • This part of the process nominally occurs right around launch time and takes about a day • Get a backup of the spss database • This allows us to easily restore to pre-launch if necessary • Database Administrator moves the contents of specified tables from the spss_sm4 database into the spss database • This transfers the PRD/SCIOPSDB information and the Instructions needed post-SM4 • Load the SMOV4 and housekeeping proposals into the spss database • Database Administrator will rebuild the table indices to ensure good database performance

More Related