WordPress Websites for Engineers: Elevate Your Brand
Vellinga joe
1. PM Challenge 2007
STARDUST
Bringing a Comet Home
Lockheed Martin Space Systems
Civil Space
Space Exploration Systems
Joe Vellinga
Project Management Challenge 2007
February 6, 2007
Discovery 4 PI Don Brownlee Managing Industrial
Mission @ Univ of Wash Agency Partner
1
3. PM Challenge 2007
Trajectory Overview
Earth
Gravity Earth Comet Wild-2
Assist Return Orbit
01/15/01 01/15/06
Launch
02/07/99*
Loop 1
3 Loops
2&3
Annefrank
11/02/02
Earth V inf=7.2 km/s X Ecliptic
Orbit Rsun=2.3 AU J2000
Wild-2 REarth=2.3 AU
Encounter A
01/02/04
V inf=6.1 km/s 1 Heliocentric Loops 1, 2 and 3
Rsun=1.9 AU Feb 99-Jan 01, -Jul 03, -Jan 06
REarth=2.6 AU B
4 Interstellar Particle Collection
A-B: Feb-May 00, Aug-Dec 02
2 Deep Space Maneuvers
1: Jan 2000, 2: Jan 2002
3: Jun 2003, 4: Feb 2004
* second day of launch period
Interstellar Particle
Stream
3
23. PM Challenge 2007
Wild 2 Trail
M. Ishiguro, et al, The Astrophysical Journal, 589:L101–L104, 2003 June 1,
DISCOVERY OF THE DUST TRAIL OF THE STARDUST COMET SAMPLE
RETURN MISSION TARGET: 81P/WILD 2
23
24. PM Challenge 2007
Wild-2 Flyby Geometry
Wild-2 Encounter Geometry XS
closest approach: 01/02/2004 19:22:59.1 UTC
SPE angle Earth Sun
17 deg 2.60 AU 1.86 AU
Wild 2 V=26.4 km/sec 73 deg
S/C Attitude
+x // Vinf
SD V=21.7 km/sec +y = ToEarth X Vinf
V • = 6.12 km/s 230 km Flyby on +z = +x X +y
Approach Phase Angle 73 deg Sunside +z is “rolled” 1.9 deg above
the flyby plane for Earth point
YS nucleus radius ~ 2.7 km
coma radius ~100,000 km
Earth is 16.7 degrees from XS and 1.9 degrees above the flyby plane
Vinf points 2.8 degrees below the eclipitic
Flyby plane coordinates (xs,ys,zs) defined by Vinf and Sun Vector Wild-2 heliocentric speed is 26.4 km, s/c is 21.7 km/s
24
25. PM Challenge 2007
Wild 2 17 November 2003
• Windowed frame • Wild 2 in a 15 sec exposure
25
81. PM Challenge 2007
Pit-Spall Craters
• The pit/spall zone morphology is common for microcraters
on lunar rocks (strength dominated)
• It is unknown on larger bodies (Escape vel. Wild2 ~1 m/s)
81
82. PM Challenge 2007
Wild 2’s Spires
(Monument Valley in dirty ice)
spire shadow
spire
82
83. PM Challenge 2007
White Spot
A dust jet above the surface?
Transient condensates?
3 views from different angles Blow-up
83
85. PM Challenge 2007
The Importance of Sample Return Missions
• Science is done on the ground
• Instrumentation is state-of-the-art and future SOA
• Ultimate in precision & sensitivity
• Not limited by mass, power, cost or reliability
• Results can be confirmed by independent methods
• Instruments can be calibrated before and after
• Analysis strategies can be iterative
• Samples are a resource for long into the future
85
93. PM Challenge 2007
Helicopter for Recovery
Night Sun
UHF Antenna
IR Camera
93
94. PM Challenge 2007
SRC Recovery Operations Environment
Full Moon Rise: 5:47 pm (MST) Jan 14
SRC Entry: 2:57 am
SRC Lands: 3:12 am
Sun Rise: 7:55 am
Moon Set: 9:05 am
Sun Set: 5:31 pm
• Average Minimum Temperature: 18.3 Deg F
• Average Maximum Temperature: 34.4 Deg F
• Mean Wind: 3.92 MPH (3.4 Knots)
Recovery Team
Prepared, Equipped
and Trained For
Worst Case
Recovery
Environment
UTTR Jan 13, 2005 UTTR Feb 4, 1998
94
109. PM Challenge 2007
Olivine (Forsterite) Particle
This particle, a type of olivine called forsterite, was brought to Earth in the
Stardust sample-return capsule. The grain, encased in melted aerogel, is
about 2-millionths of a meter across.
109
110. PM Challenge 2007
Don Brownlee at Science Workshop
Comet Particle Composition – many built like loose dirt-clods
• large strong rocks
• very fine powdery materials
Remarkable Range of Minerals
• Some of these particles contain minerals that form only at extremely
high temperatures – similar to "refractory" materials that formed in the
hottest, innermost regions of the disk of gas and dust that formed the
Sun and planets, or prior stars
• Olivine (iron - primarily magnesium) and high-temperature minerals
rich in calcium, aluminum and titanium
Isotope ratios show:
– Some formed around prior stars
– Some formed inside the orbit of Mercury during formation of our
Solar System
110
111. PM Challenge 2007
Stardust Web Site
http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/
Stardust is a NASA Discovery Project, managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Don
Brownlee of the University of Washington is the Principal Investigator. JPL provided
the Navigation Camera and performed mission design, navigation and DSN
communications and tracking. Images and art work used in this presentation can be
found on the JPL Stardust web site above.
111
112. PM Challenge 2007
What Did We Do?, Technically:
PLAN ACTUAL
• Launch on 2/6/99 • Launch 2/7/99 (LV Delay)
– Recovered from LV Error (312 kg
instead of 366 kg)
• Self Despin (1 kg Hydrazine)
• Go to 2.7 AU on Solar Power • Went to 2.7 AU with no Problems
– Invented S/A Switching Unit
• Collect Interstellar Particles for • Collected Interstellar Particles for
> 150 days 195 days
• Encounter Wild 2 on 1/2/04 • Dry Run Encounter at Asteroid
– Collect > 1000 >15µ Particles Annefrank 11/2/02 (at no cost ↑)
– Survive up to 1 cm Rocks • Encounter 1/2/04
– More than Enough; Many Broke up
– 7 ‘Rocks’ ≥ 0.3 cm w/o Damage
• Return to Earth @ 12.8 km/sec • Returned @ 12.8 km/sec
– Fastest Ever Man Made Object
– New Heatshield Material → Orion 112
113. PM Challenge 2007
What Did We Do?, Programmatically:
PLAN ACTUAL
• Mid Feb 1999 Launch • Ready for Launch at Opening of
Window 2/6/99
– Met All Commitment Dates to
Environmental Facilities and Arrival
@ KSC
• $164.6 M Phases A-E • < $164.6 M Through 2004
– 12% Reserve Ph C/D – Consumed 11.2% of Reserve Ph C/D
• Return & Recovery Critical • NASA Added Return & Recovery
Event Readiness Reviews Risk Reviews in 2005 for $10 M
Planned – CAIB Report:
• Stardust Shift from Mission Success
→ Fail Safe
• All Risks Known & Communicated
to NASA Management
– Genesis MIB Recommendations
113
114. PM Challenge 2007
How Did We Do It On Time & In Cost?
• KISS
• Attitude
• Requirements ≤ Capability
• NO!!! Requirements Creep
• Team Partnership
• Virtual Co-Location
• Good Enough
• EVM +
• Risk Management
• Dedication of Team
114
115. PM Challenge 2007
KISS
• ’94 Proposal Kept to Focused Science Mission
• Primary Science:
– Interstellar Dust Collection – Hence the name: Stardust
– Cometary Particle Collection
– Sample Return
• Secondary & Tertiary Science
– In-Situ Particle Analysis with Mass Spectrometer
• Contributed Instrument from Germany
– Dust Flux Monitor
– Nucleus Images using Navigation Camera
Mission had been Offered as ≈$800M Program
but NOT Sold. Now we Offered it at 1/4th the Cost
115
116. PM Challenge 2007
Attitude
• No Overrun!! → Termination (for Real!)
– Mark Saunders, NASA HQ Discovery Program Manager:
• No Question or Doubt of Termination if EVM Projected >
Committed Cost
• PI Had to Declare Team Couldn’t Do It
– NO!!! 15% NASA Overrun Allowance
• Team Believed we Could and Would Do It In Cost
– Designed to Cost: Stayed Within Capability of Available
Hardware
– Prepared to Make any Compromises Necessary to Do It –
However, Never Needed to Compromise or Descope
– How We Would Do It was Up to Us
– Manage Reserve to Stay in Committed Cost
You have to Believe You Can Do It.
116
117. PM Challenge 2007
Requirements ≤ Capability
• Phase B SRR was “Capability & Requirements
Review”
– Culmination of Design to Cost
– Each CAM Presented Cost Commitment
– Learned of LV Capability Error During Dry Run (366 kg →
312 kg)
• Short Schedule (28 month Phase C/D) = Buy
Components & Make Program Fit
– Committed $7M of Major Subcontracts Before PDR
Design to ≤ Cost
117
118. PM Challenge 2007
NO!!! Requirements Creep
• Mantra: “Do Not Allow Requirements Creep Camel to
get his Nose Under the Tent”
– PI, Don Brownlee, Gave Ken Atkins, Development Project
Manager, Toy Camel at Ken’s Retirement in Commemoration
• Turned Down Improvement ‘Opportunities’
– Addition of Volatiles Capture Mechanism Pushed by Science
Team
• Concept Study Done
• Unknown Risks if Development Approved
– TPS Instrumentation
• Pushed by ARC Up Through NASA HQ
• Unknown Additional Risk in New Heatshield that was Already
Highest Risk in Program
• One Improvement Incorporated: Variable Density
Aerogel @ No Additional Cost
When Cost is Committed, Requirements ARE FROZEN
118
119. PM Challenge 2007
Team Partnership
Partners: NASA, PI, Agent (JPL), Industrial Partner (LM)
• 4 Party Agreement Signed by All: Committed Science
to be Accomplished, Schedule & Cost
• PI Participated in All Major Reviews & Meetings –
Maintained Cognizance Throughout
• JPL Managed Project & Provided Camera, Navigation,
DSMS & Mission Ops with LM
– Participated in LM Activity but Small Team Limited
Oversight/Insight
• LM Developed Spacecraft & Capsule, Conducted
Mission with JPL, Lead Recovery
– All Activity Open to JPL & PI
– Operated with Independence but Full JPL Knowledge
– Risks Mitigated by Investment of Excess Reserve
Partnership Works
119
120. PM Challenge 2007
Virtual Co-Location
• Replicating Servers Through Fire Walls
• Telecons with Each End Pulling Briefing or other
Material Off Their Own Server
• Periodic Face-to-Face Meetings
– Need to Know Partners
Lose Your Frequent Flyer Status!
120
121. PM Challenge 2007
Good Enough
During Development I was Often Asked How do you
do FBC, What do you Leave Out of Program
Answer: Nothing Left Out, But Less Depth
• Bounding Analyses, Particularly EDL
– As Built Analyses Not Done if Still ‘In Box’
• Good Enough
– Entry Flight Path Angle Didn’t Use all of UTTR
– One Spacecraft Test Lab
Find the Good Enough for Project Environment
121
122. PM Challenge 2007
EVM +
• Baselined Schedule & Resources in 3rd Month of Phase C/D
– Entire Program Through Launch
– Microsoft Project for Schedule
– Margin: ≥ 1 mo Delivery to ATLO; ATLO 2 mo in Denver; 1 mo
at KSC – All in Resource Baseline (Funded)
– About 9000 Milestones in LM Schedule
• Earned Value Determined Each Month
– CAMS at Subsystem Level
– EVM Integrity = Definitive Milestones + Honesty in Assessing
Intermediate Status
– Focused on Early Identification of Problems
– Quickly Developed Workaround Plans
• Biggest Challenges:
– Staffing Up
– Late Deliveries to ATLO
– Electronic Parts – Forced Five Openings of Spacecraft
– Heatshield (TRL 4 to Flight in About 2 Years)
122
123. PM Challenge 2007
EVM + (continued)
Staffing Slower than Planned
STARDUST ENGRG STAFFING PLAN, BUDGET & ACTUALS-9/7/97 PDO Reqs-Open
² <<PDR CDR ² Project Reqs-Open
140
ENGRG BUDGET BASELINE REV-6/1/97
CDR PDO Reqs-Firm
Project Reqs-Firm
PDO - On Board
Project-On Board
120
ACTUALS THRU 9/7/97
100
80
60
40
20
0
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
1996 1997
123
125. PM Challenge 2007
EVM + (continued)
• Independent Milestone Count – Good Agreement with EVM
At Apr 26, 1998 Planned = 8723 Actuals = 8382 96.1%
1.1
(Act/Base)
0.9
CUM
0.7
0.5
MAY
MAR
FEB
JUL
SEP
NOV
APR
AUG
DEC
JAN
JUN
OCT
1000 10000
900 9000
800 8000
CUM EVENTS
700 7000
600 6000
500 5000
400 4000
300 3000
200 2000
100 1000
0 0
DEC
DEC
JUN
JUN
JAN
MAR
JUL
JAN
MAR
JUL
NOV
APR
MAY
AUG
NOV
APR
MAY
AUG
OCT
SEP
OCT
SEP
FEB
FEB
FY 97 | FY 98
Baseline Plan Current Schedule Completed
CUM Baseline CUM Current Plan CUM Actuals
125
126. PM Challenge 2007
EVM + (continued)
• ATLO Schedule Margin Tracked Daily
ASSEMBLY & TEST SCHEDULE MARGIN PLAN
45
40 Post-Bus
GREEN
35 Functional
DAYS OF MARGIN
3/18/98
30 Delayed
Move to MTF
25
YELLOW
20
* Pre-Ship
15
10/6/98
10
RED
5
0
Feb-98
Aug-98
Oct-98
Sep-98
Nov-98
Jun-98
Jan-98
Apr-98
May-98
Jul-98
Mar-98
MONTHS
EVM – Must Do BUT at Value Added Level 126
127. PM Challenge 2007
Risk Management
• Identified Risks Early
• TPMs to Track Technical Status & Identify Risks
Spacecraft (3 mo to Launch):
11.5 kg Wet Mass Margin including thermal liens;
Mass G
Margin allows launch with full tank & ΔV Margin;
and ²V
Actual Weight 0.4 kg < CBE
19.2% at Aphelion (24 watts)
Power G Powered On Testing (~10 watt additional margin)
Thermal Mods Liens TBD
Propellant G ΔV
5.3% margin to ²V Budget (377mps)
CPU Throughput G 62% Processor Utilization at Encounter
DRAM Memory G 128 Mbytes - 28 FSW; 75 N-Cam; 13 CIDA; 2 DFM;
10 Downlink
40% Margin (3 Mbytes Prom) Contains
EEPROM Memory G
Entire FSW Load
Software Maturity Y 61% ATP Dry Run and 40% ATP Complete
Sequence Testing SPT #1, #2, #3 Complete
Fault Protection Testing In-Work
127
128. PM Challenge 2007
Risk Management (continued)
SRC (3 months to Launch)
Mass 45.7 kg weighed Vs 44 to 46 Rqmt
G
(+0.2 kg Parachute Lid Mod)
Power 100% Margin; Redundant Batteries
G
Stability 6 DOF Simulations Verify Stability at
G
Spin Rate, X/D & b; > 3 s Entries within
Design Limits (99.86% Successful out of
3000 Cases)
Mass Properties X/D =.348 Vs. .351 Requirement
G
Spin Rate 12 rpm with failed spring Vs.
12 - 18 rpm Rqmt
b = 59 Vs. 60 kg/m2 Rqmt
Landing Footprint 61 km x 23 km (3 Sigma) Vs. 84 x 30 km
G
UTTR Rqmt (6 DOF Sims)
Parachute Performance Mortar Deploy Tests by Pioneer
G
UTTR Balloon Drop Test (impact speed < 15fps)
PICA Performance 30% Thickness Margin Based on PICA to
G
Structure Bondline T = 250°C
128
129. PM Challenge 2007
Risk Management (continued)
Project Fever Summary (7 months to Launch)
Technical Schedule Resources
M ar Apr M ay M ar Apr M ay M ar Apr M ay
G G G G G Y G G G
DEC JAN FEB MAR APR JUN
PROJECT Y Y Y Y Y Y
Cost G G G G G G Reserves Look OK
Key Agreements R R Y G G G
NEPA-EA G G G G G G FONSI signed and published
FLIGHT SYSTEM
Cost vs Budget G G G G G G
Staffing G G Y Y G G Staff Rolling Off
Schedule (To Atlo) Y Y Y Y G G
Schedule (To Launch) G G G G Y Y 21 Days Pre-Ship margin remains
Performance G G G G G G C&DH (PACI) - Interface Robustness being worked as backup
Margins G G G G G G
Interfaces Y Y Y Y Y G Plan Working to Gain Robustness -- R/R Buy of FPGA's
Sample Return Capsule G G G G G G
ACS Starcam Procure Y Y G G G G Delivered
ACS IMU Procurement R R Y Y Y G
Flight Software G G G G G G
Pre-ATLO Testing-SMTS G G G G G G
SCIENCE:
Aerogel & Collector R R R Y Y Y Flight Production & Gradient Density Qual.
CIDA Y Y G G G G
Dust Flux Monitor G G G G G G
MISSION G G G G G G
NavCam Y Y Y G Y G Delivered & Installed
Navigation G G G G G G
Mission Design & Plan G G G G G G
Operations Development G G G G G G Facility Operational @ JPL
Launch Vehicle G G G Y Y G Boeing swap made in fab flow. Progress OK 129
131. PM Challenge 2007
Risk Management (Continued)
• Invested Reserve > 10% To Go in Risk Mitigation
– Electronics Board & Box Test Sets
– ATLO Test Units (C&DH and PCA)
– Soft Sim
Work Risk Hard from Beginning to End
Invest Excess Reserve Wisely 131
132. PM Challenge 2007
Dedication of Team
• People Like Working Science Programs
• Fast Programs are Very Appealing
• Almost No Attrition
– A Few Retirements
• People Move from Development to Mission
Operation back to Development
• Team Very Committed to Stardust
– Proving that it was Working Properly
– Done on Time or Acceptable Work Around
Esprit de Corps is Worth a Lot
132
