Solar Probe Plus FIELDS Quarterly Management June 18, 2013 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Solar Probe Plus FIELDS Quarterly Management June 18, 2013 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Solar Probe Plus FIELDS Quarterly Management June 18, 2013

play fullscreen
1 / 47
Solar Probe Plus FIELDS Quarterly Management June 18, 2013
155 Views
Download Presentation
devika
Download Presentation

Solar Probe Plus FIELDS Quarterly Management June 18, 2013

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

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

  2. QUARTERLY MGMT AGENDA • Project Overview • Project Organization • Spacecraft Accommodation/Instrument Suite Measurements • Technical Status • Special Topics: Antenna Status, RFS Status, EM.v.FM I&T • 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 FIELDS Quarterly Management

  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 • PDR Complete • Funding • Definitized Contract Value: $37.17 M • Definitized Funding Value (mod 25):$15.95 M • Unallocated Future Expense : $ 0.70 M • End Date: 9/29/2018 • Current EAC: $37.17 M • Milestones (Phase C) • FIELDS CPT#1 Oct 2014 • MEP TV CompleteDec 2014 • FIELDS Boards Fabricated May 2015 • SCM&MAG Fabricated Sep 2015 • SCM & MAG Tested Dec 2015 • Antenna TestedJan 2016 • FIELDS Board Tested Feb 2016 • FIELDS Components at I&T Feb 2016 FIELDS Quarterly Management

  4. FIELDS Organization FIELDS Quarterly Management

  5. The FIELDS Sensors - Five voltage sensors - Two Fluxgate magnetometers - One search-coil magnetometer - Main Electronics Package V1-V4 electric antennas MAGi, MAGo SCM V1-V4 electric antennas V5 electric antenna FIELDS Quarterly Management

  6. FIELDS Block Diagram • Two Sides • Each has Spacecraft I/F • Each has Magnetometer • Each has Antenna Elect. • Each has Power Supply • FIELDS1 also has • Radio FreqSpect./DCB • Digital Fields Board • SCM Calib Control • Absolute Time Sequencer • TDS I/F • FIELDS2 also has • Time Domain Sampler • DCB I/F • SWEAP I/F FIELDS Quarterly Management

  7. Mass MASS Tracking Estimates have been stable since PDR FIELDS Quarterly Management

  8. Power Power Tracking • Required SCM Heater Power remains higher than allocation • FPGA power rises as temperature increases. • MEP Thermal Vacuum will use flight-like FPGAs FIELDS Quarterly Management

  9. Preamp Development Preamp breadboard • Preamp • EM Preamps V1-V4 offer improved performance over breadboard design • EM Preamp V5 added to the instrument complement • Layouts complete • Ready for Review/Fab V5 Layout V1-V4 Layout FIELDS Quarterly Management

  10. AEB Development • Antenna Electronics Board • AEB1 and AEB2 designs on common PWB • 1 AEB1 and 2 AEB2 boards in Assembly AEB single channel breadboard AEB1 Engineering Model in Assembly FIELDS Quarterly Management

  11. DCB Development • Data Controller Board • DCB EM1 Completed and in I&T facility • DCB EM2 in Final Layout • RTAX Daughterboard Layout Complete Daughterboard Engineering Model Layout Complete DCB EM2 Engineering Model in Layout FIELDS Quarterly Management

  12. DFB Development Status • DFB work proceeding well • EM1 tested and characterization in-process • Xilinx FPGA Daughter Board complete and integrated with EM1 • EM2 development moving into layout, schematic review held last Friday, 6/13 • SIDECAR ASIC screening complete on FM parts, in-process on remaining EM part • FPGA development continues on remaining modules: Triggers, Burst Memory, and Spectra/Cross-Spectra • EEE Parts approved by PCB, and procurements nearing completion • All known orders for EM2 and FM complete, with most parts are in house • ASIC CGA attachment PO placed with BAE Systems • 1st article inspection ~ 5 weeks, Eng& QA on-site inspection • Three mechanical parts for vibe and ‘practice’ for board assembly; and one part for EM2 • After EM2 board assembly and testing, will turn-on attachment of two FM parts • Closed 7 of 8 Peer Review actions items, • 8th response in review by SPF team; no I-PDR or M-PDR action items assigned to DFB • Risk mitigation plans are proceeding and trending downward • ASIC screening confirms parts are viable flight candidates • Board deflection analysis indicates positive margin, vibration testing to confirm FIELDS Quarterly Management

  13. DFB Development Road Map SIDECAR Evaluation Board Prototype DFB Xilinx FPGA DB EM2 Schematic Review complete 6/13 Notional Layout Shown Flight DFB EM2-Flatsat FPGA DB • EMs and FM DFBs can accommodate all variations of FPGA DB: Xilinx, ProASIC, ProtoRTAX, FM RTAX EM1 FIELDS Quarterly Management

  14. DFB EM1 • EM1 bench testing complete • FPGA testing and characterization of DFB (including ASIC) starting ASIC FPGA DB • FPGA DB with programmable Xilinx, upward compatible code with ProASIC/RTAX FPGAs • SIDECAR ASIC in a socket with PCB structural enhancement cap FIELDS Quarterly Management

  15. DFB FPGA DIAGRAM DBM Spectra & X-Spectra Spectra & X-Spectra FIELDS Quarterly Management

  16. DFB Test Lab Configurations EM1 Testing Configuration SIDECAR ASIC Thermal Screening DFB bench-level testing and characterization set-up • FPGA loads and science analysis continue for next couple months • ASIC characterization included • Thermal testing while EM2 is in layout/fab/assembly SIDECAR ASIC screening • Both FM and spare selected • Remaining EM part screening in-process FIELDS Quarterly Management

  17. DFB Schedule • Critical path is thru EMs • Reserve held @ 1mnth/year • Schedule threat is CGA attachment and EM2 assembly • Work-around is use of EM1 until EM2 is ready EM1 EM2 6/18/2014 FIELDS Quarterly Management

  18. SCM SCM • Preamp ETU Completed • Thermal Modeling Completed. Converted to NASTRAN and delivered to APL. • SCM Sensor Delivery Advanced to October 2014 for EM I&T Functional Tests • SCM Thermal Verifications in France Nov 2014 SCM ETU Preamp Circuit (Pre-3DPlus) SCM ETU Structure FIELDS Quarterly Management

  19. MAG MAG • The EQM Mag-netometer board (see photo) tuning is complete with excellent frequency response. Roll-off filters were adjusted to nominal values. • The FPGA has been checked out and verified as correct. It is currently being soldered down (i.e., socket being removed) to the EQM board in preparation for the next level of laboratory tests. FIELDS Quarterly Management

  20. MAG MAG • The thin shell calibration shows that the alignment accuracy of the new SPP MAG sensor mechanical design is very good (see 0.1% fit shown in plot). • Optics Branch personnel have started the support of the upcoming thermal test for the Mag prototype sensor (see photo). FIELDS Quarterly Management

  21. MAG • Other: • The first thermal cycling on the EQM board (-40 °C to +80 °C) at ambient pressure has been completed. • The SPP Mag thermal blanket model is complete and has been sent to the GSFC blanket lab for MLI blanket design. • The Mag cover shell molds are complete and have been sent to the GSFC Composites Lab to begin fab of shells. • We have started assembly of the FPGA-based data simulator. This is a command and data simulator that may be used in EQM testing (vibration, TVAC, etc) for use in FIELDS tests. It provides all command functions and telemetry messages using simulated vector and analog housekeeping data. It has the same mass and power dissipation as a "real" MAG board. • GSEOS development (screens and Python scripts) continues. FIELDS Quarterly Management

  22. EM I&T Facility is Ready • All ESD Benches • Plentiful Power and Internet drops • Parts/Equipment Cabinets • Tool Chest • In 214B Now: • DCB ETU1 FIELDS Quarterly Management

  23. FIELDS Schedule Keys to Next 2 Quarters (to iCDR) • Verify Antenna Optical Properties (SAO, July) • Verify MEP Low Noise Operation (I&T CPT, EMC) • Verify MEP Thermal Design (I&T TV) FIELDS Quarterly Management

  24. EM I&T Schedule What is wrong with our current I&T plan? [1] PROTO-RTAX is expensive ($7K/device + $3K/assembly) x 3 boards [2] Fairly Complex communications and timing between DCB, TDS and DFB [3] Strongly desire some integration before committing to PROTO RTAX [4] Sequence: Burn PROTO, Assemble at APL, Board Tests at LASP, UCB, UMN [5] Estimating the PROTO step will take 5 weeks (3 weeks assembly, 2 in test) [6] The current schedule forces peer reviews too close to iCDR. FIELDS Quarterly Management

  25. EM I&T Schedule Alternate Plan #1: Overlap Peer Reviews with PROTO fab/assy Alternate Plan #2: Perform Calibration, EMC, Staking before PROTOs are available FIELDS Quarterly Management

  26. FIELDS Instrument Risks Status 5 RETIRE RISK 4 3 PS F9 Likelihood of Occurrence (probability) 2 P P P P F6 F1 F2 F7 P CS P P CS P F17 F16 F12 F11 F10 F18 1 1 2 3 4 5 Consequence of Occurrence (Impact) High Medium Low (Criticality) FIELDS Quarterly Management

  27. FIELDS Instrument Risks Status • F1-P: S/C Conducted and Radiated Noise Contamination • Note: When the TWTA power system is changed to and EMC conforming system then this risk can lowered to a likelihood of 1. Mission CDR is the latest this could be resolved. • F12-P: Magnetic Cleanliness • Note: A swing test could be done to give us a good characterization of the remnant DC FIELDS. This would allow the likelihood to be decreased. • F17-P: Inboard/Outboard Magnetic Sensor Interference • RETIRE RISK based on final boom length determination and extensive sensor interference study. • F6-P: Magnetic Sensor Interference • Decreased likelihood from ‘4’ to ‘3’ based on the final determination of magnet sensor locations on the MAG Boom. FIELDS Quarterly Management

  28. FIELDS EVM FIELDS Quarterly Management

  29. FIELDS Funding FIELDS Quarterly Management

  30. FIELDS UCB Labor Labor cumulative .v. budget is +6%. Labor Hrs is +3%. FIELDS Quarterly Management

  31. FIELDS Subcontracts FIELDS Quarterly Management

  32. PDR RFA’s FIELDS Quarterly Management

  33. Backup FIELDS Quarterly Management

  34. F1-P:S/C Conducted and Radiated Noise Contamination A A2 25 20 Risk Grade 15 B 10 5 C Plan Actual FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  35. F2-P: Plasma Wake Effects 25 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 A Plan Actual FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  36. F6-P: Magnetic Sensor Interference A 25 D B c 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  37. F7-P: Electro-Static Contamination A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 Plan Actual FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  38. F9-FS: Magnetic Sensor Qualification A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 10 5 Plan Actual FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  39. F10-PS: Antenna Qualification A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C D 10 Plan Actual 5 FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  40. F11-S: SCM Dependence on Solar Orbiter A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 D Plan Actual FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  41. F12-P: Magnetic Cleanliness A2 A 25 B 20 Risk Grade 15 C 10 5 D Plan Actual FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

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

  43. F17-P: Inboard/Outboard Magnetic Sensor Interference A 25 C B 20 Risk Grade 15 RETIRE RISK 06/13/2014 10 5 Plan Actual FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  44. F18-P: Antenna Thermal Environment 25 20 Risk Grade 15 B 10 5 A Plan Actual FIELDS Quarterly Management * Grade = Likelihood x Consequence ** Assessment is the remaining risk assessed after successful event completion

  45. Digital Fields BoardBlock Diagram Analog Filters / Gain stages 26 signals digitized @ 150 kS/s • Generates time domain • and spectral domain • data products (DC – 75kHz) • Implementation includes: • - Programmable gain states • Burst memory • Flexible configurations • Search coil cal. signal • Low mass, low power ADC 9 inputs: 5 E-field antennas 4 search coil channels FPGA processing

  46. DFB Risk Mitigation Proceeding 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 the SIDECARs. These parts have prior electrical burn-in testing hence characterization and environmental tests will demonstrate good rigor to retire the risk.  Risk rating: Probability 2, Impact 3; not likely to occur based on successful burn-in testing completed by 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. If the DFB PWBA experiences too high of structural deflection, then the assembled components may experience package stresses, with respective workmanship and/or reliability issues. The primary concern is the SIDECAR CGAs. This potential could warrant possible redesign of the PWB layout, structural stiffness design, or reduction in DFB capability due to replacing the SIDECAR/other components to stay within mass and power constraints. Analysis and part modeling in process now. Risk mitigationplan is to perform vibration testing to SPF-MEP vibration levels on an EM PWB with representative components and mass models.Analysis and modeling, along with vibration testing, must prove the PWBA design and demonstrate good rigor to retire the risk Risk rating: Probability 2, Impact 3; not likely to occur based on analysis and modeling and good design practices of the PWBA. Consequences now lowered with addition of ASIC Al cap which lowers structural deflection in areas of concern. Analysis complete, vibe test pre-CDR, cap in place on EM1.

  47. DFB Related Action Items DFB Peer Review held Nov 4-5th, materials available on SPF site Action Items from this and other Peer reviews included here (SCM Peer Review Sept 4-5, 2013) No DFB actions assigned at I-PDR or M-PDR