1 9/5/2015 12:11:11 PM CxPO SE&I People, Products & Processes (3Ps) Overview SE&I Team Leadership April 13, 2006

1

04/19/23 12:15 PM

CxPO SE&IPeople, Products &

Processes (3Ps)Overview

SE&I Team LeadershipApril 13, 2006

2

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

SE&I Key Tenants & Challenges

1. Team organization is critical – One Team with strong SE Management

2. Standards development and disciplined compliance is a necessary asset

3. The organizing principle for complex systems is a layered architecture that aligns functions, requirements, and mission integration

4. Successful complex development requires the right overarching system engineering management – much more than design to specification

5. Complex systems engineering is significantly more challenging to execute and manage than conventional systems engineering

NASA Will Serve as Lead System Integrator (LSI)Complex Human Spaceflight system engineering & integration endeavor of

this scale and importance has not tackled within the Agency since early 60’s

3

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

CxPO SE&I 3P Overview

Agenda• People

– Organizational Overview– Current Leadership Profile

• Systems Integration Groups (SIGs)

– Agency-wide Staffing Situation• Products

– Near-Term Requirements-Focused Product Line• CxP-allocated NGOs, Level I-allocated Requirements, CARD, IRDs, IDDs, Invoked Standards,

Operational Concepts, FFBDs, FAMs, N2 Diagrams, Reference Architecture, Trade/Analyses results, SRDs, Requirements Achievability Assessments, Technical Performance Measures, Technical Risk Mitigation Plans, Traceability Reports

– Long-term Program-wide Technical Integration Foundation Products• Cx Program Plan, Policy, Process & Strategy Documents

• Processes– Requirements & Interface Management Processes– RAC, DAC & VAC – Analyses/Trades/Modeling & Sim Processes– Other SE Processes, Tools and Training– Emerging Program Boards, Panels & WGs Structure/Process

• CY06 Challenges & Schedule Ahead• Backup – Recommended May “Requirements Face-to-Face (F2F)” U/R

4

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM


Agenda• People



– Agency-wide Staffing Situation

5

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Team Organization is Crucial

• System Engineering Management is the integrating factor

– Synchronize the team

– Integrate the team vertically and horizontally

• Coordinating the activities of multiple SE teams through just documentation, reporting, and ICD’s does not work effectively

• One systems engineering team

– Integrate a distributed virtual team using Top Down SE Management authority, integrated tasking, and clear accountability

– Support using common networked tools and processes that ensure communication of information and rapid issue resolution

– Team must deal with all levels of SE issues from the design through capabilities/mission integration (layered architecture)

• Integrate and train the SE Team

– Train to modern process standards – legacy won’t work for modern, complex SE development

• Must use up-to-date M&S/Software/Collabrative architectures and tools

6

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Roselle

Hanson

(acting)

CEV Project

Office

(JSC)

Steve Cook

Launch

Vehicle

Project

Office

(MSFC)

Tip Talone

Ground

Operations

Project Office

(KSC)

(Vacant)

NASA Provided

Systems

Projects Office

(JSC)

Dennis Webb

Mission

Operations

Project Office

(JSC)

Program Planning &

Control

B. Waddell, Dir

C. Stegemoeller , Dep Dir

ZB

Test & Verification

W. Arceneaux , Acting Dir

Charlie Lundquist, Dep

Dir

ZC

Operations Integration

R. Castle, Acting DirS. Gahring , Dep Dir

ZD

Systems Engineering &

Integration

C. Hardcastle , Acting Dir

S. Meacham, Dep Dir

ZF

Safety, Reliability, &

Quality Assurance

L. Hansen, Dir

Jeff Williams Dep Dir

ZG

Advanced

Projects Office

Carlos Noriega

Lander

Project

Offie

“Resource & Process Police ”

Resource management ($)

Schedules (program)

Configuration Mgt

Business Management

IT

Program Communications (PAO)

Export Control

Action tracking

Programmatic risk assessment

“Verifier ”

Integrated verification planFlight test integration

Software test & verification

“User ”

Mission definition

Conops

“Technical Definition ”

Requirements/Interface Defn

System Analysis

Cross element subsystem leads

Effectiveness ( “-ilities ”)

TPMs/Technical Resource Mgt

Tools & Methods

Stephanie Castillo, LeadAdministrative Office

Admin

Travel

Training

Correspondence

Schedules (conference rooms)

Facilities (space)

IT (SRs)

Jeff Hanley

Program Manager

Mark Geyer

Deputy

Program Mgr

Tip Talone

Associate Program Mgr

KSC

Todd May

Associate Program Mgr

MSFC

Deb Neubek

Chief of Staff,

Technical

STAFF

“Incubator ”

Advanced Design through SDR

Launch & Entry Suit

Lander

Surface EVA suit

Surface systems

Future Common Systems

Integration with Tech Projects & RLEP

Flight ops

Risk Assessment

Safety Policy

Reliability

Quality Assurance Policy

CLV, CaLV, EDS Low Impact Docking Systems (LIDS)

Pyrotechnic Initiators

Flight Crew Equipment

Brenda Ward

Assistant Mgr,

Integration

ISS

Shuttle

Other Government Agencies

Mgr of level II function at KSC Mgr of level II function at MSFC

Note: Functional offices in projects are shown coded to

correspond with functional offices in Program

Marsha Ivins

Special Assistant,

Integration

Comm & Nav Project

Office (GSFC)

ARC, DRFC, GRC, LaRC, MSFC

ARC, GRC, LaRC, JSC, KSC, SSFC

Future

Constellation Program Office

Horizontal Integration

Ver

tical

Int

egra

tion

7

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

CxP Lvl II Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I)

Requirements Management

Chief Of Staff - Tech

Program Technical Integration Interface

Management

Analyses, Trades & Architecture

Horizontal IntegrationSE&I Director

Deputy

Updated 4/2/06

Program Review Integration

Modeling & Simulation

Prime Focus: - Cross Element I/F Def. & Contrl - Internal to Program - External to ProgramPrime Products: - IDDs - IRDs - MOUs - Interface Context Diagram - Interface Control Plan (ICP)Forcing Function: - Interface Control Working Grp

Prime Focus: - Lvl I/II & III Requirements - Functional ArchitecturePrime Products: - CARD - Lvl II Standards - Product Tree - Lvl II/III Document Tree - Program Requirements Tree - Functional Analyses: FFBDs, FAMs & N2 Diagms - Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP) - Traceability ReportsForcing Function: - Reqmts Working Group

Prime Focus: - Integrated Capability/Functionality Across Subsystems, Projects & MissionsPrime Products: - Highest Quality Requirements - Each Lead Assigned a set of CARD, IRD & Invoked Standards Reqmts - Reqmts Achievability Assessments - Risk Mitigation Plans - TPM Id & profiling - Optimized Integrated Designs - Commonality/Interoperability/”ilities”Forcing Function: - System Integration Groups (SIGs)

Prime Focus: - Integrated Analyses & Physical ArchitecturePrime Products: - Integrated Analyses Plan - ADD & RAD - Lvl II Trades - Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan - Level II & III - Performance Assessments - Gap ID & Mitigation - Validated Requirements Set - Risk Analyses - Support to Ops & APOForcing Function: - Analyses WG

Prime Focus: - Documented ProcessesPrime Products: - SEMP - Reqmts Mgmt Database - RID Tool Rqmts - TPM Tool Rqmts - Risk Assessment Tool Reqmts - Engineering Database - SE Metrics StandardizationForcing Function: - Mandatory Training & Audits - Organized NARs

Prime Focus: - SRR success then all CxP reviewsPrime Products: - Coordinated Entry/Exit Criteria - Integrated agenda/products/tools - SRR Plan – Including Integrated Level II & III planForcing Function: - Drives product readiness through “Pre-Boards” - Virtual Tag-ups with Stakeholders

Prime Focus: -Driving Technical Excellence -Major urgent Technical Issues

Drive Integrated Perform./ Efficiency/Effectiveness Across SE&I, CxPO and Centers

Lvl 3 ProjectSE&I Leads & Agency

Center SE&I Focals

Chief of Staff – Organization

Prime Focus: -Meeting Efficiencies/Focus-Cost, Sched & Action/Trng Tracking-Coordination w/ PP&C

Secretary

PP&C – Scheduling: Configuration Mgmt: Human Resources:Business Mgmt: Risk Mgmt:

Programmatic Integration Support

Approved: // Chris L. Hardcastle 4/2/06 //

SE Process, Tools, Metrics and Training

Prime Focus: - Program-wide approach & implementation of M&SPrime Products: - M&S Plans - M&S Tools/Standards - Integr M&S Products - Level II & III - Support to SIGs, ATA, T&V, APO & OpsForcing Function: - M&S WG

8

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

CxP Lvl II SE&I Leadership (1 of 5)




Management


Horizontal Integration SE&I DirectorChris. L. Hardcastle

DeputySteve Meacham



Michele Digiuseppe ChiefDebbie Korth Deputy

Keith Williams ChiefTBD Deputy

Steve Fitzgerald ChiefMargarita Sampson Dep (A)

Neil Lemmons Chief (A)Dave Forrest Deputy

TBD ChiefTBD Deputy

Matt Leonard

Lee Graham

David Petri


Center SE&I Focals


Jason Weeks (A)Tina Cobb

PP&C – Scheduling: Roger JonesConfiguration Mgmt: Deanna HackfeldHuman Resources: Curtis CollinsBusiness Mgmt: Jason WeeksRisk Mgmt: Pedro Curiel




Don Monell Chief (A)TBD Deputy

Majority are Leaders off of Shuttle or ISS Programs with great attitudes & work ethic – Challenges remain in fully understanding, appreciating

and implementing the scale of SE&I required

9

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM




Management


Horizontal Integration SE&I DirectorChris. L. Hardcastle

DeputySteve Meacham



Michele Digiuseppe ChiefDebbie Korth Deputy

Keith Williams ChiefTBD Deputy

Steve Fitzgerald ChiefMargarita Sampson Dep (A)

Neil Lemmons Chief (A)Dave Forrest Deputy

TBD ChiefTBD Deputy

Matt Leonard

Lee Graham

David Petri


Center SE&I Focals

Chief of Staff –Organization

Jason Weeks (A)Tina Cobb

PP&C – Scheduling: Roger JonesConfiguration Mgmt: Deanna HackfeldHuman Resources: Curtis CollinsBusiness Mgmt: Jason WeeksRisk Mgmt: Pedro Curiel



Don Monell Chief (A)TBD Deputy

• Technical Integration Leaders (TIL) and Systems Integration Groups (SIGs) Established Around the Front-Face of “the Cube”

• Intended to Bring a Functional Focus to the System Engineering Efforts

• Technical Integration Leads are responsible for their Functional Area from “Cradle-to-Grave” and “Top-to-Bottom”

– Assigned specific LVl II CARD, IRD, IDD & Invoked Standards/ Requirements to “manage” through the life of the Program

• Driving Cross-Systems, Cross-Element, Cross-Mission Commonality, Interchangeability, Interoperability, Survivability, Supportability, Reliability, Maintainability, Affordability into the requirements & designs with the long term objectives in mind

– Stewards the Overarching System Engineering Guidance

• #1 Safety and Mission Success• #2 Programmatic Risk• #3 Extensibility and Flexibility• #4 Life Cycle Costs

Multi-Disciplined Systems Integration Groups Leveraging the Best of the Projects, the Agency & Contracting Teams

Functional Performance & Capability Elements

Acro

ss Missio

ns

Common Components, Systems & CSCIs

Power Systems

Propulsio

n Syste

ms

Co

mp

lem

enta

ry S

ys

Crew S

ystems

UG

V

UA

V

NL

OS

-L

S

IMS

Data & E

lectric. S

ystem

Thermal S

ystems

Automat. &

Robotic

System

ECLS Systems

Tra

inin

g a

nd

Lo

gis

tics

Sys

tem

s

Car

go

Lau

nch

Veh

icle

Cre

w L

aun

ch V

ehic

le

Cre

w M

od

ule

ED

S LS

AM

Lu

nar

Su

rfac

e E

lem

ents

Unique Components,

Systems, CSCIs

Ser

vice

Mo

du

le

Networked Comm /Interoperability

Networked Battle Command

Networked Lethality

Survivability

Sustainment

Transportability/ Deployability

Training

ManeuverMan Print

RAM -T

C3I Interoperability & Commonality

Affordability, Life Cycle Costs, CAIV

Flight Performance(Traj., Prop. Abort, Loads, Thermal, Mass)

Grnd & Mission Ops Operations & Training

Human Factors & Human Rating

Integr. Thermal (pass/active)& ECLS (CM, LSAM, Surf)

Environments (nat. & induced) and Constraints

Software & Avionics Interoperability & Reuse

Integrated Loads & Structure & Mechanisms

Structu

ral & M

ech System

Navigation and Tracking

Integrated Power Loads, Interop & Interchange.

Supportability/Log/Reliability & Maintainability

GN&C

LC

C &

MC

C

Fluids

Extravehicular Integration

CxP Lvl II SE&I Leadership - SIGs (2 of 5)

10

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Legend

#’s only represent no. of CARD reqmts assigned – still have to carve up and allocate standards, IRD and other Level II reqmts across SIGs

Program Technical Integration Office

Chief, Steve FitzgeraldMargarita Sampson (A)

Program Technical Integration Office

Chief, Steve FitzgeraldMargarita Sampson (A)

SW & Avionics

Interop and ReuseMatt Barry (M), JPL

TBD

SW & Avionics

Interop and ReuseMatt Barry (M), JPL

TBD

Thermal (Active/Passive)And ECLS

Robyn Carrasquillo (M), MSFCJohn Lewis (M), JSC

Thermal (Active/Passive)And ECLS

Robyn Carrasquillo (M), MSFCJohn Lewis (M), JSC

Integrated Loads, Struct,and MechanismsEli Rayos (M), JSCScottHill (M), LaRC

Integrated Loads, Struct,and MechanismsEli Rayos (M), JSCScottHill (M), LaRC

Human Factors andHuman Rating

Jan Connolly (M), JSCTBD (M), MSFC

Human Factors andHuman Rating

Jan Connolly (M), JSCTBD (M), MSFC


Don Pearson (A), JSCMike Moreau (M), GSFC


Don Pearson (A), JSCMike Moreau (M), GSFC

Integrated Power LoadsInterchang/InteropJim Soeder (M), GRC

Tim Lawrence (M), JSC

Integrated Power LoadsInterchang/InteropJim Soeder (M), GRC

Tim Lawrence (M), JSC

Environments andConstraints

Dave Cheuvront (A), JSCJeff Anderson (M), MSFC

Environments andConstraints

Dave Cheuvront (A), JSCJeff Anderson (M), MSFC

EVA Integration

Jeff Davis (M), JSCLara Kearney (M), JSC

EVA Integration

Jeff Davis (M), JSCLara Kearney (M), JSC

Flight Performance

Doug Whitehead (A), JSCKaren Frank (M), JSC

Flight Performance

Doug Whitehead (A), JSCKaren Frank (M), JSC

C3I Commonality andInteroperability

Steve Rader (A), JSCJohn Curry (M), JSC

C3I Commonality andInteroperability

Steve Rader (A), JSCJohn Curry (M), JSC

Supportability&Logistics/Reliability&Maintainability

Kevin Watson (A), JSC1 ID’d (M), KSC

Supportability&Logistics/Reliability&Maintainability

Kevin Watson (A), JSC1 ID’d (M), KSC

Ground and MissionOperations/TrainingSteve Hirshorn (M), JSC

Phil Weber (M), KSC

Ground and MissionOperations/TrainingSteve Hirshorn (M), JSC

Phil Weber (M), KSC

Affordability, LCC, CAIVTBDTBD

Affordability, LCC, CAIVTBDTBD

79

5

13

64

35

2

35

13

114

51

51

71

6

CARD Rq

CxP Lvl II SE&I Leadership - SIGs (3 of 5)

Responsible for Maturation of Level II Requirements (CARD, Invoked Standards, Level II IRDs & Assigned Cx Program Plans)

11

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Test andVerification

SR&QA

Verification Strategy/Methods

Recommendations

Risk Identification& Mitigation

Recommendations

CEV

CLV

MO, GO

ISS

APO (LSAM..)

Reqmts & InterfaceManagement

Ground Ops

Mission Ops

Test andVerification

SR&QA

Analyses, Trades, Arch. & M&S

Life Sciences

Sub

ject

Mat

ter

Exp

erts

Sys

tem

Exp

ertis

eB

ook

/Pla

n Le

ads

Contractors

Typical Membership As Needed

Engineering

Crew Office




Management



Deputy



Prime Focus: - Cross Element I/F Def. & Contrl

- Internal to Program- External to Program

Prime Products: - IDDs- IRDs- MOUs- Interface Context Diagram- Interface Control Plan (ICP)

Forcing Function: - Interface Control Working Grp

Prime Focus: - Lvl I/II & III Requirements

- Functional ArchitecturePrime Products:

- CARD- Lvl II Standards- Product Tree- Lvl II/III Document Tree- Program Requirements Tree- Functional Analyses:

FFBDs, FAMs & N 2 Diagms- Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP)- Traceability Reports

Forcing Function: - Reqmts Working Group

Prime Focus: - Integrated Capability/Functionality

Across Subsystems, Projects & MissionsPrime Products:

- Highest Quality Requirements- Each Lead Assigned a set of CARD,

IRD & Invoked Standards Reqmts- Reqmts Achievability Assessments- Risk Mitigation Plans- TPM Id & profiling- Optimized Integrated Designs

- Commonality/Interoperability/ ”ilities ”Forcing Function:

- System Integration Groups (SIGs)

Prime Focus: - Integrated Analyses &

Physical ArchitecturePrime Products:

- Integrated Analyses Plan- ADD & RAD- Lvl II Trades- Prioritize/ Integr Trades List/Plan

- Level II & III- Performance Assessments

- Gap ID & Mitigation- Validated Requirements Set

- Risk Analyses- Support to Ops & APO

Forcing Function: - Analyses WG

Prime Focus: - Documented Processes

Prime Products: - SEMP- Reqmts Mgmt Database- RID Tool Rqmts- TPM Tool Rqmts- Risk Assessment Tool Reqmts- Engineering Database- SE Metrics Standardization

Forcing Function: - Mandatory Training & Audits- Organized NARs

Prime Focus: - SRR success then all CxP reviews

Prime Products: - Coordinated Entry/Exit Criteria- Integrated agenda/products/tools- SRR Plan – Including Integrated Level II & III plan

Forcing Function:- Drives product readiness through “ Pre- Boards”- Virtual Tag - ups with Stakeholders

Prime Focus: - Driving Technical Excellence - Major urgent Technical Issues

Drive Integrated Perform./ Efficiency/Effectiveness

Across SE&I, CxPO and Centers


Center SE&I Focals

Chief of Staff –Organization

Prime Focus: - Meeting Efficiencies/Focus- Cost, Sched & Action/ Trng Tracking- Coordination w/ PP&C

Secretary




Prime Focus: - Program -wide approach &implementation of M&S

Prime Products: - M&S Plans- M&S Tools/Standards- Integr M&S Products

- Level II & III- Support to SIGs, ATA,

T&V, APO & OpsForcing Function: - M&S WG

Enhance Technical Quality of: Ops Con, Functional AnalysesCARD & Invoked StandardsIRDsTrades/AnalysesPhysical Architecture DescriptionsM&S Tools/ArchitectureCRADLE & Eng. DatabasesCx Program Plan, Policy, Process, Strategy Docs

CxP Lvl II SE&I Leadership – SIGs (4 of 5)

CxSECB

Technical baselineRecommendations & Assessments

- Requirements Achievability Assessments- Key Driving Requirements/Mitigation Recommendations- Technical Performance Measures- Requirements Traceability- Issues/TBD/TBR Burndown Plans

Technical integration for vertical and horizontal alignment

Reference Architecture Functional Analyses

Products

NGOsVSE

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IDDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IDDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

ICDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

ICDs

DSNE

CEV SRDIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDs

CARD

LSAM SRD

Commonality & Standards

Project/ElementRequirements

Constellation Interface

Requirements

EVA SRD

CLV SRD

CaLV SRD

MS SRD

Gnd Ops SRD

HSIR

C3ISpecification

Power Quality Spec

Fracture Control Requirements for

Constellation Hardware

MTV SRD

ESMD Level 0/I

OperationalConcepts/ DRMs

ESAS Results

It is all about “ownership” and enhancement of Level II Reqmts & Program Plans

FFBD/N2FAM

DRMs

CxP MarginsManagement

Plan

FEMA/CIL Methodology

CxP InterfaceControl

Plan

CxP MasterInt. & V er.

Plan

ICE/ WindChillImplementation

Plan

LCC Est.

Cx Life Cycle Cost Containment

Plan

Cx TechnicalPerformanceMeas Plan

CxP CommonGlossary andAcronym List

CxHuman

Rating Plan

CxP Tech.Development

Strategy

Cx SW Mgmt & Policies Plan

ProjectSDP ’s

Cx System

EngineeringManagement

Plan

CxPProject Plans

Cx SupportabilityStrategy

Cx ConfigurationMgmt Plan


COTS & OtherSW Interoper .& Reuse Plan


CxP ProbabilisticRisk Assess Plan

CxPManagement

Plan

CxPSR&QA Plan

CxRequirementsManagement

Plan

CRADLE Database andSchema Plan

CxP Systems Integrated

Analyses Plan

CxP RiskManagement Plan

CxPProduct

Tree

CxP Reqmts ,Specs and

Standards Tree

Cx ReferenceArchitectureDoc. (RAD)

CxOperational

Concepts

CxPIntegratedTest Plan

CxPV&V by

Analyses Plan

CxArchitecture Description

Document (ADD)

CxSW Ar ch Description

Doc. (SADD)

CxPR & M Plan

Cx SupportabilityConcept Document

CxP C31 Strategy Plan

Cx Integrated System Healthmonitor Plan

Cx BaselineMgmt Plan

Cx Data Mgmt Plan

Cx SW ConfigMgmt Plan

Cx SW QAPlan

Cx Phased SWIntegration Plan

Cx SWMeasurement

Plan

Hazards Analyses Methodology

ProjectOps Concepts

FunctionalAnalyses

Results

CxPIntegrated

FlightTest Plan

S/W V&VPlan

Project MasterVerifPlans

Significant Engineering Trees Here! Level I - IIII

CxPDocTree

CxP SRR/Review

Plan

ProjectIAPs

ProjectS/W V&V Plans

Cx BusinessMgmt Plan

Cx Acquisition Plan

SE&I

T&V

OpsIntegration

SR&QAPP&C

Project APO

CxP M&S Implementation

Plan

CxP IntegratedM&S

Requirements

CxP M&SSupport

Plan

ESMD IM&SMgt. Policy

NGOs

Cx IntegratedSR&QA Requirements

PRACA Methodology

PRACA Sys. Reqts.

Cx SWClassification

Matrix

12

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Basics to Adhere to – shared with the SIG Leadership in 3/28/06 “Offsite”

CxP Lvl II SE&I Leadership – SIGs (5 of 5) CxPO SE&I Near-Term Needs from each SIG

• Recognize the efficiencies in all SIG doing certain aspects of “the job” the same way– Leveraging off the same SE&I/CxPO Infrastructure– Using the same processes for repetitive tasks– Using similar/same tools

• Recognize not all SIGs will “look” the same– Sizing/Staffing will vary widely (should be dictated by the defined scope of work)– Some SIGs will get most of the answers from the Projects and simply integrate while other may

be needing to generate a substantial amount of data/products at Level II• Recognize SIGs MUST talk to on another

– There are natural synergies/dependencies• Recognize we ARE NOT here to DO Level III’s Job

– Focus on your set of Level II requirements, Cross Project Interfaces and the Long-Term Objectives of the Program as it relates to minimizing life cycle costs while maximizing our collective survivability, reliability, maintainability, interchangeability, interoperability, supportability, commonality, reusability, produceability, extensibility and flexibility

• Recognize NOT all requirements are Created equal or Mature at the same pace– Some requirements carry more “weight” than others…so you can’t rely on qty count alone– APO is Chartered to work the “out year” requirements until they reach a certain maturity and will

be passed on to the appropriate SIG - I use to call this bucket of “future” requirements the “Growth SIG). We MUST strike a balance how APO matures these requirements while leveraging and staying Integrated with the appropriate SIGs

• Recognize not all SIGs are at the same level of maturity and Key Training ahead is essential for our collective success – TPMs, CART, ARM, CRADLE, …

• BEGIN PRODUCING RESULTS with ICPR!!!!!!!!!

13

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

SIG Example Metrics

CARD IRD Standards Total QC'd Rationale TBDs/TBRs Verification Traced Prioritized Stakeholders Total % Total %

C3I 71 46 0 117

Flight Performance 103 65 0 168

Navigation and Tracking 33 5 0 38

Integrated Loads, Struc, and Mech 11 52 0 63

Integrated Thermal and ECLS 5 34 0 39

Environments and Constraints 34 51 0 85

Human Factors and Human Rating 61 11 0 72

Software and Avionics Interop and Reuse 84 22 0 106

Ground/Mission Operations and Training 63 12 0 75

Supp/Logistics/Reliability/Maint 44 7 0 51

Affordability and Producability 13 1 0 14

EVA Integration 12 0 0 12

Int Power, Loads, Interop, and Inter 3 21 0 24

Requirements Quality Clean Complete

CARD IRD Standards Total Driving Unassessed Watch TPM TPM ID'd ManageRMP

Complete

C3I 71 46 117 51 0 0 0 0 0Flight Performance 103 65 168 114

Navigation and Tracking 33 5 38 35Integrated Loads, Struc, and Mech 11 52 63 13

Integrated Thermal and ECLS 5 34 39 5Environments and Constraints 34 51 85 35

Human Factors and Human Rating 61 11 72 64

Software and Avionics Interop and Reuse 84 22 106 79

Ground/Mission Operations and Training 63 12 75 71

Supp/Logistics/Reliability/Maint 44 7 51 51Affordability and Producability 13 1 14 6

EVA Integration 12 0 12 13Int Power, Loads, Interop, and Inter 3 21 24 2

Requirements Achievability Risk Management

Compliance Level

14

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

SE&I Center Guidelines

LII SE&I

MSFC

DFRCGRCSSCGSFC

JPL

ARC

JSC

KSCLaRC

325.5

362.4

396.7

363.9

399.3

359.5

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11

FTE + WYE

Agency-wide SE&I Task MappingStatus as of 31 Mar 06

• Over 140 EOIs submitted to SE&I• JSC/Non-JSC Ratio: (Preliminary)

– Including LII SE&I: 45:55• Significant responsibilities emerging for non-JSC

Centers– Technical Integration Leads

• LaRC – Structures (SIG Co-Lead)• GSFC – Navigation (SIG Co-Lead)• JPL – Software & Avionics (SIG Lead)• MSFC - Thermal and ECLS (SIG Co-Lead)• MSFC – Environments (SIG Co-Lead)• GRC – Integrated Power (SIG Co-Lead)• KSC - Supportability – (SIG Co-Lead)• KSC – Ground/Mission Ops – (SIG Co-Lead)

– IRD Book Managers– LaRC - TPM Lead

• Gaps– Additional Technical Integration Leads

• Human Rating/Human Factors – looking to MSFC

• Affordability, LCC, CAIV – MSFC/WYE• Supportability & Logistics – looking to KSC

– SRD Book Managers• CLV SRD – looking to MSFC• CaLV SRD – looking to MSFC• Ground Operations SRD – looking to KSC• CEV SRD – looking to JSC• Mission Operations SRD – looking to JSC• EVA SRD – looking to JSC

• Aggressive Forward Plan– Completed first iteration of SE&I Center

allocations (4/10)– Document SE&I FY06 funding at each Center

(ECD 4/14)– Finalize FY06 SE&I Center allocations in ITA

(ECD 4/21)– Update SE&I Integrated Master Schedule with

negotiate FY06 tasks (ECD 4/25)– Negotiate and document FY07-FY11 SE&I Center

allocations in ITA (ECD 6/2)

Note: The SE&I Nationwide Leadership Team Meets Daily @ 0730 CST on this and other Priorities as part of our now established “Battle-Rhythm”

15

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

SE&I Center GuidelinesPreliminary as of 12 April 06

FY07 Total FTE/WYE Guidelines

LII SE&I22.5%

SSC0.6%

MSFC14.2%

LaRC9.3% KSC

0.8%

JSC23.1%

JPL9.6%

GSFC7.1%

GRC8.4%

ARC4.8%

DFRC0.4%

16

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

SE&I Center GuidelinesPreliminary as of 12 April 06

SE&I Center Guidelines

LII SE&I

MSFC

DFRCGRCSSCGSFC

JPL

ARC

JSC

KSCLaRC

325.5

362.4

396.7

363.9

399.3

359.5

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11

FTE + WYE

Will continue to synergize our forecasts with the Projects via

the May POP Follow-on TIM

17

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

CxPO SE&I Staffing Actuals vs NeedsIncluding Projections for balance of CY06

Summary totals for plotting FTE/Matrix

Allocation

FTE

Onboard

FTE

Pending

FTE

Vacant

Matrix

Onboard

Matrix

Pending

Matrix

Vacant

WYE

Allocation

WYE

Onboard

WYE

Vacant

Director Staff 5 3 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 2

Program Review Integration (PRI) 4 1 0 2 0 0 1 4 4 0

Modeling and Simulation (M&S) 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

Program Technical Integration (PTI) 129 2 5 3 23 4 24 119 1 0

Requirements Management Office (RMO) 13 5 0 6 3 1 9 15 11 4

Interface Management Office (IMO) 19 4 3 2 2 0 4 10 3 6

Analysis, Trades and Architecture (ATA) 15 2 0 5 7 1 0 5 3 3

Processes, Tools and Metrics (PTM) 10 1 0 7 4 0 0 10 3 5

Totals 195 18 9 25 41 6 38 165 25 20

18

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

SIG Staffing Status

ID'd Need Total ID'd Need Total ID'd Need Total ID'd Need Total ID'd Need Total ID'd Need Total ID'd Need Total ID'd Need Total ID'd Need Total ID'd Need Total

SIG

Total

C3I11.5 5.6 17.1 2.7 9.55 12.3 0 1 1 7.5 0.25 7.75 13.2 16.1 29.3 2 6.5 8.5 0 2 2 8.1 4.5 12.6 90.4

Flight Performance 2 5.5 7.5 0.5 2.5 3 1 1 3 1 2.5 3.5 1 0 1 1 1.5 2.5 1 0.5 1.5 22

Navigation and Tracking 1 2.9 3.9 1 2.4 3.4 1 2.6 3.6 10.9

Integrated Loads, Struc, and Mech 1 6 7 0 2.8 2.8 1 3.2 4.2 14

Integrated Thermal and ECLS 2.5 2.75 5.25 4.25 1 5.25 2 0 2 0.5 0 0.5 0 0.5 0.5 13.5

Environments and Constraints 1.7 4.3 6 14.4 0 14.4 0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0 0.3 20.9

Human Factors and Human Rating 20.2 0 20.2 2 0 2 2.1 0 2.1 1 0 1 25.3

Software and Avionics Interop and Reuse 1.2 0 1.2 2.4 0 2.4 3.6 0 3.6 3.6 0 3.6 6 0 6 7.2 0 7.2 24

Ground/Mission Operations and Training 1 5 6 0 3 3 1 2 3 0 2 2 14

Supp/Logistics/Reliability/Maint1.5 5.5 7 0 2 2 0.5 2.5 3 0.1 0 0.1 12.1

Affordability and Producability 7 3 10

EVA Integration 9.9 0 9.9 1 0 1 10.9

Int Power, Loads, Interop, and Inter 1.5 0 1.5 0 1 1 9.5 0 9.5 0 1 1 1 0 1 14

Center Totals 55 37.6 99.5 26.3 18.9 45.1 5.6 5.2 14.8 16.2 5.75 22 1 0 1 21.2 20.2 41.4 14 7 21 0 2 2 1.5 5.5 7 18.7 9.6 28.3

JPLKSCSSC GSFC GRC DFRCJSC MSFC LaRC ARC

19

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM


Agenda

• Products– Near-Term Requirements-Focused Product Line

• CxP-allocated NGOs, Level I-allocated Requirements, CARD, IRDs, IDDs, Invoked Standards, Operational Concepts, FFBDs, FAMs, N2 Diagrams, Reference Architecture, Trade/Analyses results, SRDs, Requirements Achievability Assessments, Technical Performance Measures, Technical Risk Mitigation Plans, Traceability Reports


20

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM


Products

NGOsVSE

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IDDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

ICDs

Requirements Tree – Top Level Summary

DSNE

CEV SRDIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

CARD

LSAM SRD




Requirements

EVA SRD

CLV SRD

CaLV SRD

MS SRD

Gnd Ops SRD

HSIR

C3ISpecification

Power Quality Spec



MTV SRD

ESMD Level 0/I

OperationalConcepts/DRMs

ESAS Results

CxP Requirements Tree is one of the RID-able Items for ICPR

= Partial SIG Ownership working w/ Projects= Full SIG Ownership working w/ Projects

21

WWW.NASAWATCH.COMLevel III vs Level II Lead Roles in Interface Management

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , Between Elements a/o Programs

CEV

CLVLSAM CaLVEDS

MTV

ISS

EVA MSGO

APAS

LIDS

etc…

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , w/in Element CEV

etc…

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , w/in ElementCLV

etc…

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , w/in Element CaLV

etc…

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , w/in Element etc…

CxICWGManaged

Project Managed

CM LM LAS SA

FS US Eng

SRB CS CSE

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , Between Elements a/o Programs

CEV

CLVLSAM CaLVEDS

MTV

ISS

EVA MSGO

APAS

LIDS

etc…

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , w/in Element CEV

etc…

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , w/in ElementCLV

etc…

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , w/in Element CaLV

etc…

IRDs/IDDs/ICDs , w/in Element etc…

CxICWGManaged

Project Managed

CM LM LAS SA

FS US Eng

SRB CS CSE

Focus relative to Interface Management and lines of Responsibility

= Full SIG Ownership working with Projects= Lower Priority

**

*

*

PE

MTV

*

22

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

LSAM/CEVIRD

LSAM/CEVICD

EVA/CEVIRD

EVA/CEVICD

MTV/CEVIRD

MTV/CEVICD

CLV/CEVIRD

CLV/CEVICD

LIDSIDD

CaLV/Mission Systems

IRD

CaLV/Mission Systems

ICD

Mission Systems/CEV IRD

Mission Systems/CEV ICD

Ground Operations/CEV

IRD

GroundOperations/CEV

ICD

LSAM/EVAIRD

LSAM/EVAICD

LSAM/CaLVIRD

LSAM/CaLVICD

LSAM/EDSIRD

LSAM/EDSICD

LSAM/Mission Systems IRD

LSAM/Mission Systems ICD

LSAM/GroundOperations IRD

LSAM/GroundOperations ICD

CLV/Mission Systems IRD

CLV/Mission Systems ICD

CLV/Ground Operations IRD

CLV/Ground Operations ICD

CaLV/Ground Operations

IRD

CaLV/Ground Operations

ICD

CEV/ISSIRD

CEV/ISSICD

CEV/Portable Equipment

IRD

CEV/Portable Equipment

ICD

LSAM/PortableEquipment IRD

LSAM/PortableEquipment ICD

CEV/EDSIRD

CEV/EDSICD

Mission Systems/Ground Ops IRD

Mission Systems/Ground Ops ICD

APASIDD

ConstellationInterface Requirements

Constellation Interface Requirements

Need to work these in Priority Order to Support “Lunar

Sortie” CxP SRR and

subsequent Project SRRs

Need Project Support in setting Priority Order by Book and Within each Book

EVA/Ground Ops IRD

EDS/MS IRD

EVA/Mission Systems IRD

EVA/Mission Systems ICD

EVA/Ground Ops ICD

EDS/MS ICD

EDS//Ground Ops IRD

EDS/Ground Ops ICD

EDS//CaLV IRD

EDS/CaLV ICD

CriticalPriority for Lunar Sortie CxP SRR

High

Medium

Low/Not Required

23

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Example: CEV & CLV Legs of the Requirements Tree

CEVLAS Subsytem

Specifications

CEVCM Subsytem

Specifications

CEVSM Subsytem

Specifications

CEV SystemRequirements

Document

CEV CM to LAS IRD

CEV Spacecraft Internal ICD

CEV CM to SM IRD


CEVLaunch Abort

SystemSpecification

CEV Spacecraft

Specification

CEV Command

ModuleSpecification

CEV Service

ModuleSpecification

CEV GSESpecification

CEVSM Subsytem

Specifications

CEV Spacecraft

AdapterSpecification

CEV SM to SA IRD


CEV Cockpit Design

Requirements

CLV SystemRequirements

Document

CLV First Stage /Upper Stage IRD

CLV First Stage /Upper Stage ICD

CLV Upper Stage /Engine IRD

CLV Upper Stage /Engine IRD

CLV First Stage Requirements

Document

CLV Upper Stage Requirements

Document

CLV Engine Requirements

Document

CLV Subsystems

Electromagnetic Characteristics

Requirements

SubsytemSpecifications



Requirements Tree Covers Level II through Level III

24

WWW.NASAWATCH.COMCurrent CARD Requirements Count & Distribution

NUMBER OF REQUIRMENTS ICPR

Kickoff4-Apr-06

CARDSection

134 3.2 Constellation Architecture Requirements8 3.3 Design and Construction

28 3.4 Interfaces0 3.5 Physical Characteristics0 3.6 Reserved

127 3.7.1 CEV109 3.7.2 CLV

44 3.7.3 LSAM25 3.7.4 CaLV/EDS24 3.7.5 Ground Operations18 3.7.6 Mission Systems

1 3.7.7 Mars Transfer Vehicle (MTV)1 3.7.8 DAV0 3.7.9 EVA0 4 Verification

519 CARD Total

CEV SRDSection

355 3.2 CEV

355 CEV SRD Total

CLV SRDSection

110 3.2 CLV 6 3.3 Design and Construction

60 3.7.1 1st Stage131 3.7.2 US50 3.7.3 USE

357 CLV SRD Total

CaLV SRDSection CaLV

141 3.2

141 CaLV SRD Total

Quality of the CARD needs focused improvement – While reformatting has been accomplished, breadth and depth of content as it relates to “Level II” requirements requires enhancements based in Systems Engineering results - This is our Focus

for the Next Four Months – Refer to Process & Plans Ahead For Details

= Full SIG Ownership working with Projects

25

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Critical requirements withcompliance issues

(Performance, Schedule, Affordability)feeds appropriate risk management

processes

Tier III

Tier ITier II

Trace Reports

Affordability

PerformanceSchedule

CART Reports

Requirementassessment data

maintained inCradle

Trace / CART Reports Requirement ownership Requirement: Parent-Child linkages Requirement Criticality Requirement Achievability Status: technical performance, schedule, affordability TPMs

Watch List

ARM

Risk Management

Group

Program

InformedProactive

Management

Program and group level guidance

Trace Reports, CART Reports, TPMs and Hard-to-Achieve

Requirements Risk Mitigation Plans have yet to be implemented – But are a key focus of ICPR and the

plans through the summer

TPMs - Provide Quantifiable Assessment System

Constellation Analysis and Requirements Traceability (CART)Will facilitate id of “requirements-focused” risks, prioritized TPMs & mitigation plans

Continuous Assessment Focused on Critical/At Risk Requirements


Cradle

Requirements Documentation

ARM

Risk Management

System IntegrationGroups


ARM

Program Level Risks

26

WWW.NASAWATCH.COMCxPDocumentTree

FFBD/N2FAM

DRMs

CxP MarginsManagement

Plan

FEMA/CIL Methodology

CxP InterfaceControl

Plan

CxP MasterInt. & V er.

Plan

ICE/WindChillImplementation

Plan

LCC Est.

Cx Life Cycle Cost Containment

Plan

Cx TechnicalPerformanceMeas Plan

CxP CommonGlossary andAcronym List

CxHuman

Rating Plan

CxP Tech.Development

Strategy

Cx SW Mgmt & Policies Plan

ProjectSDP ’s

Cx System Engineering

Management Plan

CxPProject Plans

Cx SupportabilityStrategy





CxP ProbabilisticRisk Assess Plan

CxPManagement

Plan

CxPSR&QA Plan

CxRequirementsManagement

Plan

CRADLE Database andSchema Plan

CxP Systems Integrated

Analyses Plan

CxP RiskManagement Plan

CxPProduct

Tree

CxP Reqmts,Specs and

Standards Tree

Cx ReferenceArchitectureDoc. (RAD)

CxOperational

Concepts

CxPIntegratedTest Plan

CxPV&V by

Analyses Plan

CxArchitecture Description

Document (ADD)

CxSW Ar ch Description

Doc. (SADD)

CxPR & M Plan

Cx SupportabilityConcept Document

CxP C31 Strategy Plan

Cx Integrated System Healthmonitor Plan

Cx BaselineMgmt Plan

Cx Data Mgmt Plan

Cx SW ConfigMgmt Plan

Cx SW QAPlan

Cx Phased SWIntegration Plan

Cx SWMeasurement

Plan

Hazards Analyses Methodology

ProjectOps Concepts

FunctionalAnalysesResults

CxPIntegrated

FlightTest Plan

S/W V&VPlan

Project MasterVerifPlans

Significant Engineering Trees Here! Level I - IIII

CxPDocTree

CxPSRR/Review

Plan

ProjectIAPs

ProjectS/W V&V Plans

Cx BusinessMgmt Plan

Cx Acquisition Plan

SE&I

T&V

OpsIntegration

SR&QAPP&C

Project APO

CxP M&S Implementation

Plan

CxP IntegratedM&S

Requirements

CxP M&SSupport

Plan

ESMD IM&SMgt. Policy

NGOs

Cx IntegratedSR&QA Requirements

PRACA Methodology

PRACA Sys. Reqts.

Cx SWClassification

Matrix

Establishing proper

“foundation” for Cx Program to build on with

set of key Level II Program

Plans, Policies, Processes and Strategies – In

Addition to Maturing the

Requirements Set

Must Keep this as Simple as Possible….But no Simpler For a Virtually Distributed Multi B$, Multi-Decade Program


= Partial SIG Ownership working with Projects

27

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM


Agenda

• Processes– Requirements & Interface Management Processes– RAC, DAC & VAC – Analyses/Trades/Modeling & Sim Processes– Other SE Processes, Tools and Training– Emerging Program Boards, Panels & WGs Structure/Process

28

WWW.NASAWATCH.COMStandards Development and Compliance is a Necessary Asset

• Documented, institutionalized and trained Standards lead to predictable outcomes that reduce risk

• Proprietary, outdated, noncompliant processes ultimately compromise team integration

• System engineering & project management standards have been updated to handle modern, complex problems

– NASA 7120.5C– NASA NPR 7123– ISO 15288 – product life cycle synchronization– ANSI/IEC 632 – system engineering and the Enterprise– IEEE 1471 – architecture development using multiple frameworks (eg. tailored for CS

collaborative systems engineering)• Compliant processes tend to integrate team operations

– Communication common across multiple organizations and suppliers – Common expectations of outcomes– Common validation standards– Common vocabulary

• Compliance requires vertically integrated SE management, diligence, and verification

29

WWW.NASAWATCH.COMLayered Architectures Organize Complex Systems Engineering

•Requirements Management, Configuration Management, and Change Management quickly lose synchronization without a vertically integrating top-down organizing mechanism– Particularly after Prime Contractors have been selected

•Complex systems have a layered architecture that is the organizing principle for system engineering management– System breakdown structure– Architectures and flowdown functional analysis– Requirements derivation and flowdown– Mission and End Item integration

•Manage configurations and requirements by architecture level– Explicit links to functions, components and interfaces on own level (modeled

in the architecture)– Explicit links “up” to functions, components and interfaces on the next level –

derivation and realization are explicit

•Use architecture levels to construct schema for control in tools and construct products for reviews

Vertical integration

Horizontal integration

30

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Us vs. Traditional System Engineering

CustomerReqmts

Config Unit/Item

Build

Config Unit/Item

Test

IntegrationIntegration

TestProduction

System Analysis

Rqmnts Analysis

• System Spec• Rqmnts Baseline• System Arch

Functional Analysis &

Decomp• Functional Arch• Functional Spec

Design Synthesis

• Physical Arch• Design Spec

CARD/IRDs/SRDs

Config Unit/Item

Build

Config Unit/Item

TestIntegration

Integration Test

Production

System Analysis

Rqmnts Analysis

• System Spec• Rqmnts Baseline• System Arch• Technical Arch

Functional Decomp & Allocation

Design Synthesis

• Physical Arch• Design Spec

Us

Traditional

• Single Major System• Serial approach

• Multiple Major Systems• Parallel approach

ConstellationTier 1

Tier 2

Tier N+1 products maturity/feasibility underpins Tier N products maturity/feasibility

TimeTime

Tier 3

Technical Management

Processes

System DesignProcesses

Product RealizationProcesses

Requirements Flow Down – e.g., fromNASA Headquarters/ESMD/SOMD

Realized Products and Feedback – e.g., toNASA Headquarters/ESMD/SOMD

Realized Productse.g., from Projects

Requirements Flow Downe.g., to Projects

System Design Processesapplied to each SBS Component

down and acrosssystem structure

Product Realization Processesapplied to each SBS Component

up and acrosssystem structure

On-GoingFeedback

1. Stakeholder ExpectationsDefinition

2. Technical RequirementsDefinition

3. Logical Decomposition

4. Physical Solution 5. Product Implementation

6. Product Integration

7. Product Verification

8. Product Validation

9. Product Transition

10. Technical Planning

11. Requirements Mgt.

12. Interface Mgt.

13. Tech. Risk Mgt.

18. Issues Mgt.

16. Technical Assessment

17. Decision Analysis

14. Configuration Mgt.

15. Tech. Data Mgt.

Concurrent Engineering is inherent to what we do on CxP

31

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

RAC 1

D J F M M J JA A S O N D J F

CxP

RAC 2

Cx SRR

RAC 3

FY06 FY07

Mid-term

DocSel PlanApproval

DAC 1

Cx ICPR

Sel Plan DocMid-termApproval

SRR

Doc

ICPR

CEV SRR

MS SRR

GO SRR

CLV SRR

EVA SRR

8For NASA Internal Use Only

High-level CxPO SE&I Expectations for CY06

CxP CY06 SRR Expectations:

? Operational concepts baselined? CARD and invoked standards and

requirements (HSIR, NEDD, NESD, Power Quality, Interoperability>..) baselined

? CxP Functional and performance allocations to systems complete to the extent SRDscan be baselined

? Intra- system interfaces described (IRDs, IDDs)

? Verification objectives and strategies documented (Master Verification Plan)

? Architecture Description Document (ADD) baselined

? Design concepts underway? Progressive Performance assessments

integrated and in sync? Engineering plans published (SEMP,

SDP, CMP, RMP,…… ) and training invoked

? Technical Baseline Sync’d with Cost and Schedule Baselines

? Risks identified with mitigation plans in place

ICPR SRR SDR CDR First Mission Set

PDR

VerificationVerification

SystemIntegrationVerification


SubsystemIntegrationVerification


ArmyOperationalValidation


ComponentVerificationComponentVerification

BuildBuild

ORD, O&O,ASR, SEP,CDD


Prime Item & CIDevelopment

Specs

PreliminaryDesign

CI / CSCIs

Verification

Multi-Element/Multi-MissionVerification






AgencyValidation

ComponentVerificationComponentVerification

BuildBuild


Lvl I ReqmtsESAS Results

Prime Item & CI

Specs & ICDs /IRSs/SRSs

PreliminaryDesign

CI / CSCIs

CARDElement-to-ElmmentI/Fs Reqmts

Integration & Verification

Requirements & Design

Notional Responsibilities:

Lvl 0/I

Lvl II

ONE Integrated Requirements Baseline

PreliminaryDesign

SRDs & Intra Element I/Fs Reqmts

Lvl III

Contracting Teams

Level II Requirements Enhancement Focus

2005 2006 2007

Currently our Eyes are on ICPR Results and the Path Forward to CxP

SRR & 1st Season of Project SRRs

32

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Systems Engineering is More Than Design

•In a complex system, “design to spec and wait to verify” is insufficient– Critical design trades and reengineering occur after specifications

have been cut and contractors selected– Design-to-cost, design-to-risk, and integration across the family of

systems requires active SE role in managing the contractors

•Systems Engineering Management is the integrating factor– SE Dual ”VEE” Synchronization and Management– Drives design and development through common architecture,

integrated systems trades and higher level mission milestones– Process allows the interaction and integration at the complex

systems development and across program levels

33

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Level II / Level III System Development Model

CS Level II Level III

, Analysis of User Requirements

Environment and Constraints

Functional Analysis and

Decomposition

Functional Allocation

Concept Design and Developme

nt

Verification of Subsystem Performance

Verification of Element Performance

Verification of Integrated System Performance

Selection and Validation of Preferred System Concept

Reorganization of requirements and V&V objectives by architecture organization and commonality

Allocation to subsystems

Allocation to Element

Concept Baseline

Decomposition Analysis of

Requirements and Determination of V

& V Objectives

34

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Key Processes in these SE&I Areas




Management



Deputy












Center SE&I Focals



Secretary






35

WWW.NASAWATCH.COMSE&I Requirements Maturation Process Flow

Disciplined and Integrated Approach to Maturing Our Requirements Set is

being Stoop Up

Define the Scope

Develop the Functional

Architecture

Develop the Requirements

Validate the Requirements

Stakeholder Feedback

Ma

na

ge

th

e R

eq

uire

me

nts

D

eve

lop

me

nt

Pro

cess

(R

WG

)

Analysis, Trade Studies, & Standards

SIGs & Projects integrated into the

development process

RAC 1

D J F M M J JA A S O N D J FD J F M M J JA A S O N D J F

2005 2006

CxP

RAC 2

2007

Cx SRR

DAC 1

FY06 FY07

Mid-term

DocSel PlanApproval

DAC 2

Cx ICPR

Sel Plan DocMid-termMid-termApprovalApproval

SRR

Doc

ICPR

CEV SRR

MS SRR

GO SRR

CLV SRR

EVA SRR

Define the Scope


Architecture




Manage the Requirements Development Process (RWG)

Analysis, Trade Studies,

& Standards

TILs & Projects integrated into the

development process

Define the Scope


Architecture




Manage the Requirements Development Process (RWG)

Analysis, Trade Studies,

& Standards

TILs & Projects integrated into the

development process

Process Step Process Deliverables

Define Design Pro blem Stakeholder List

Identify Stakeholder Needs Needs, Goals, and Objectives supplied by Constellation Program Management

Develop Operations Concept / DRMs Design Reference Missions and Operations Concept supplied by Ops. Integration Architecture Description Document

Identify System Boundaries Context Diagram

Develop Functional Architecture

Develop Functional Model —System Capabilities

? Functional Model to level sufficient todescribe Operations Concept and identify

System Functions ? F unctionalF lowB lockD ( )iagrams FFBDs

FAMs , and N2 , diagrams Linkage between operational concept and functions

Develop Physical Architecture [ ]Done by System Analysis Group Develop Requirements

Develop System Requirements Write System Requirements System Requirements Document Rationale System Requirements Rationale Link system Requirements to Parent Requirements

Trace between System Requirements and Parent Requirements

/ Link System functional performance requirements to Functional Model ( )System Capabilities

Trace between Element Originating Requirements and Element Functions

Develop Element Originating Requirements

Decompose System Requirements to Element Allocated Requirements

Element Originating Requirements

Document Rationale Element Originating Requir ements Rationale Link System Requirements to Parent Requirements

Trace between System Requirements and Element Originating Requirements

/ Link Element functional performance requirements to Functional M odel ( )Element Capabilities

Trace between Element Originating Requirements and Element Functions

Develop Inter- Element Requirements , IRDs ICDs– supplied by Interface Control Working Group

Produce Draft Documents & Draft CARD SRDs Manage Project Engineering Process Manage Issues ? Issues documented in PE Model

? , When applicable baseline configuration changes identified and submitted to the

( Configuration Management Process see3.10.3)

Manage Risks Risks ide ntified and managed using the Constellation Risk Management Process

= Partial SIG Ownership w/ with Projects & Other SE&I Direct Reports

36

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Develop Requirements

3.1 Collect & document the Requirements

3.3 Document the rationale for each Rqmt

3.4 Decompose/Allocate Requirements

3.5 Link Requirements to Functional Model

3.6 Link Rqmt to Parent Requirements

3.7 Document how each Rqmt will be verified

3.8 QC Rqmts as they are developed

From Develop FA

Conduct Review

3.9 Maintain the Database and Document Tree

3.10 Produce Draft Document(s)

No All Done & Ready for Review?

Yes

3.2 Define & Capture Attributes for Rqmts

Process is designed to capture all of the data when the requirement

is being developed

Process is designed to capture all of the data when the requirement

is being developed

RMO Driving This Process

= Partial SIG Ownership w/ with Projects & Other SE&I Direct Reports

37

WWW.NASAWATCH.COMRequirements Development

Interface

Management

Product

Developers

CxRWG

Stakeholders

CxATA

Rqmts Owners

Manage The Requirements

Define the ScopeDevelop the Functional

Architecture


Validate the RequirementsNGO, Ops Con FFBD, FAM, N2 Draft Docs

Provide Scope Inputs

Provide Inputs

Provide Inputs

Manage the Functional

Architecture Development

Manage the Scope Development

Interface Requirements Development

Request Allocation Trade Allocation Trade Results

N2 Diagrams

Analysis ResultsRequest Analysis

Perform AnalysisPerform Analysis

Provide Candidate Requirements and

associated attributes

Manage the Requirements Development

Requirements Document

Provide Comments

Provide Comments

Provide Comments

Disposition Comments and Coordinate with

Originator

Coordinate Final Resolution

Coordinate & Integrate I /F with Element SRDs

B

ook

Man

ager

s

S

IGs

SE&I Requirements Maturation Across Stakeholders

Split of Roles Across SE&I Offices

SIG

Sup

por

t

38

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

• No undefined terms • Each RID is a single requirement (no duplication) – a single “shall” per statement• Requirement stands alone

– No undefined acronyms– Subject and verb for each requirement

• Requirement is quantified (can be yes or no) • Requirement is verifiable – see next page

– Performance parameter and value identified• Requirement context is appropriate to section / CxP level

– For section 3.2: “The CxP System shall …..”– For Section 3.7: “The (prime item name) shall …..”

• Parent defined and linked – 3.2 requirements linked to one or more NGOs requirements– 3.7 linked to a 3.2 parent; derived 3.7s link to their 3.2 parent

• Requirement is valid – appropriate in the immediate context of the Spec and derived from the required capabilities of the NGOs, Operational Concepts, Functional Analyses

– MUST have detailed rational behind the requirement in CRADLE– Do not “invent” requirements – they must earn their way in– CRADLE must also capture “Horizontal Linkages” to Functional Analyses Products

• All Derived requirements have appropriate Requirement Reference data• No open issues, TBDs or TBRs –without specific burndown plans that support

SE&I Requirements Quality – Top job for SIGs for “their” assigned requirements


Products

NGOsVSE

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IDDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IDDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

ICDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

ICDs

DSNE

CEV SRDIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDsIRDs

IRDs

CARD

LSAM SRD




Requirements

EVA SRD

CLV SRD

CaLV SRD

MS SRD

Gnd Ops SRD

HSIR

C3ISpecification

Power Quality Spec



MTV SRD

ESMD Level 0/I

OperationalConcepts/ DRMs

ESAS Results

= Partial SIG Ownership working w/ Projects= Full SIG Ownership working w/ Projects= Partial SIG Ownership working w/ Projects= Full SIG Ownership working w/ Projects

Must Maintain a disciplined configuration management of our requirements and all supporting data in CRADLE

39

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

SIGs Facilitate Allocation/Decomposition & Traceability for Level II to Level III Requirements

Level 0 , NGO , OpsConReqmts Analysis

3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5

Decomp

3.7.X CARD

Decomp

IRDsICDs

Allocated ReqmtsX.X

X.Y

SRDs

IRDs

Decomp

Specs

Decomp

Specs

Level 0/1

Level 2

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Level 5HQ

CxPO

Projects

Vendor/GFE

X X X XX X X X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

Pre- SRR

Post -SRR

P = PrimeM = MonitorS = Support

ICDs

Element n (3 .7.n)

Draft ICPRB/L CxSRR

Draft CxSRRB/L PrjSRR

Architecture /Integrated Element Level Reqmts

CxPO Controlled

Project Controlled

Vendor or GFE Projects

Subsystems

SIGs, Reqmts Mgmt, I/F Mgmt working with Projects MUST ensure vertical & horizontal linkage requirement-by-requirement in CRADLE

X to be replaced with P, M or S

40

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Coordinate Issues with

Reqm’t Owner

RWG

Proceed to Step 2 of

Verification Process DI-XXX

Measurable

Write SCN No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Review Requirement

For Verifiability (Step 1)

Concise

Shall Statement

Single Reqm't

ORD Intent

SIGs Ensure verifiability of Section 3 requirements and facilitate the writing of section 4 verification methods & strategies

Examples of Ambiguous Wordscapable shall be capable of ability acceptableas a guide shall have the ability normal approximatelyexcessive appropriate sufficient applicabledetrimental compatible with reasonable averageminimize user friendly maximize near termquick response not limited to cost effective adequate

Section 4sIRDs and CARD

IT&VImplementation Plans

IT&V ExecutionAnalysisModeling

SimulationDemonstration

Testing

ComplianceDocumentation

Customer

Section 3

SIGs with T&V Leadership Ensure Each “shall” statement

in verifiable

41

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Simple Up-Front Filters to Determining an initial Verification Method(s)

Is Review of Lower

Level Data Sufficient?

Are Computations Using Lower Level Data

Req’d?

Are Simulations

Using Models/Tools

Required?

Is All Required HW / SW /

Sims Available?

Is Instrumentation

Required to CollectData?

Can Functionality Be Observed with Pass/Fail

Results?

Does Lower Level Data Need to Be

Reviewed for Compliance?

SoS Requirement

Desktop Analysis

Assessment Inspection

Collector Inspection

Can Requirement

Be Completely Closed Without

Additional Analysis?

Test

Demonstration

Can Requirement


Additional Sim/DesktopAnalysis?

A

A

A

Yes

No

Yes Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes Yes

YesNo

Yes

No

Yes Yes

No

Is Test Cost Effective?

Is Demo Cost Effective?

No

Yes

ANo

A

Is Review of Lower


Is Review of Lower



Req’d?


Req’d?

Are Simulations

Using Models/Tools

Required?

Are Simulations

Using Models/Tools

Required?

Is All Required

Available?

Is All Required

Available?

Is Instrumentation


Is Instrumentation



Results?


Results?





SoS RequirementSoS Requirement

Simulation Analysis

Desktop AnalysisDesktop Analysis



Collector InspectionCollector

Inspection

Can Requirement



Can Requirement



TestTest

AA

AA

AA

Yes

No

Yes Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes Yes

YesNo

Yes

No

Yes Yes

No





No

Yes

YesAA

No

AA

Are

Simulations VV&A

For This Purpose?

Available

No

Are

Modify Sim?

Available to

No

Resources:$ and Time

Yes

Yes

Is Review of Lower


Is Review of Lower



Req’d?


Req’d?

Are Simulations

Using Models/Tools

Required?

Are Simulations

Using Models/Tools

Required?

Is All Required HW / SW /

Sims Available?

Is Instrumentation


Is Instrumentation



Results?


Results?










Inspection

Can Requirement



Can Requirement



TestTest

Demonstration

Can Requirement



Can Requirement



AA

AA

AA

Yes

No

Yes Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes Yes

YesNo

Yes

No

Yes Yes

No





No

Yes

AANo

AA

Is Review of Lower


Is Review of Lower



Req’d?


Req’d?

Are Simulations

Using Models/Tools

Required?

Are Simulations

Using Models/Tools

Required?

Is All Required

Available?

Is All Required

Available?

Is Instrumentation


Is Instrumentation



Results?


Results?






Simulation Analysis





Inspection

Can Requirement



Can Requirement



TestTest

AA

AA

AA

Yes

No

Yes Yes

No

No

No

No

Yes Yes

YesNo

Yes

No

Yes Yes

No





No

Yes

YesAA

No

AA

Are

Simulations VV&A

For This Purpose?

Available

No

Are

Modify Sim?

Available to

No

Resources:$ and Time

Yes

Yes

SIGs with T&V Leadership Ensure Each “shall” statement has initial

Verification Methods identified and captured in CRADLE

Section 4’s

42

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

VCNs

Sec 3 Sec 4

CARD

IRD

Sec 3 Sec 4

Sec 3 Sec 4

SRD(Element A)

Allocated Requirements

Sec 3 Sec 4

SRD(Element B)

Level 2

Level 2

Element AT&V Plans

Element AVCNs

Element BT&V Plans

Element B VCNs

JointVCNs

Bi-Lateral Integration Verif. Plans & BDEALS

Cx T&V Integration Verif. Plans

Level 3

Level 3

ICDs

VCNs

Level 2(Drawing

Level)

Level 2

SRD Sec. 3 call-outs to IRD

--

T

Joint

65

43

Side B Cradle

#

63

42

Side A Cradle

#

A

T

Verif. Method (Side B)

T

T

Verif. Method (Side A)

4.5.x

4.2.x

Side BSRD Ref.

4.3.x

4.1.x

Side ASRD Ref.

Verification Method & Implementation

60

40

Cradle Req. #

CEV and CLV Power Quality Interface

3.3.5.3

CEV and CLV Health and Status Data

3.3.4.1

Requirement Title/Subject

IRD Sec. 3 Paragraph

--

T

Joint

65

43

Side B Cradle

#

63

42

Side A Cradle

#

A

T

Verif. Method (Side B)

T

T

Verif. Method (Side A)

4.5.x

4.2.x

Side BSRD Ref.

4.3.x

4.1.x

Side ASRD Ref.

Verification Method & Implementation

60

40

Cradle Req. #

CEV and CLV Power Quality Interface

3.3.5.3

CEV and CLV Health and Status Data

3.3.4.1

Requirement Title/Subject

IRD Sec. 3 Paragraph

Level 2

IDD(Existing

System C)Level 2

Verification Methods & ImplementationRelative to CARD, IRDs, IDDs and SRDs

Verification Traceability, Methods and Data will

Reside in CRADLE

43

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Interface Management

• The Interface Management Office:– Identifies necessary interface documentation

(IDD, IRD, etc.) for the element and/or module interface being discussed

– Assigns a Book Manager to manage the development of the requirements for that interface

• Work with the SIGs, Project Technical Experts and other groups to ensure the interface documentation is complete and accurate and that all interface issues are resolved

• Document and control the requirements and assure flow down to the various CxP and Project contractors and integrators

– Determines which interfaces are to be controlled at the CxP level through work with SIGs and other SE&I offices, along with the effected Projects.

• This includes assessment of cost impacts, risks, and benefits for either controlling or not controlling an interface

– Provides forum for interface requirements issue discussion, change evaluation and resolution via the ICWG

• Proposed interface changes may be identified by the Book Managers, the SIGs, interfacing Element technical experts, their respective contractors, and other Program participants

Key role of CxP SE&I is interface management across Projects

Generate Proposed Interface Document

Submit to ICWG Chair (with Interface Signatories signatures) for review / concurrence

Submit to Interface Signatories for review / concurrence

Incorporate ICWG approved IRN into initial release of interface document

Update interface document based on ICWG coordination recommendation

Submit issue to SECB for issue resolution

Submit ICWG approved document to SECB &/or CxCCB

Concurrence?

Resolution?

Update Required?

IRN?

2

Concurrence?

Conduct ICWG coordination with Interface Signatories (develop recommendation)

1

3

1

2

3

Yes

No

Against Baselined

Doc?

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes Yes

No

No

No

No

No

44

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM




Management



Deputy












Center SE&I Focals



Secretary







45

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Analysis Trades and Architecture (ATA)

•ATA manages the integrated analysis cycles and coordinates across Constellation program ensuring completeness of the requirements set

DAC PlanningAnalysis

Issue ResolutionDocumentation

Products•Master Analysis Plan & Schedule (MAPS)•Initialization Data List

Products•Analysis Reports & Master Summary (ARMS)•New Design Requirements•New Operations Scenarios

Products•Proposed Design or Operational Scenario Updates•Action Item Data Base•Integration Forum Minutes

Products•Analysis Results•Design Issues•Tool & Model Validation•Presentation of results

ReviewResults

DesignReferenceMissions

OperationsConcepts

SystemTechnicalBaseline

SystemRequirements

DAC Objectives

DAC PlanningProcurement

MasterAnalysis Plan

& Schedule(MAPS)

IntegratedSystem

PerformanceAssessments

IssueResolution

TradeStudies

Design Changes/

Ops Changes

DocumentResults

AnalysisProcurement

ReviewResults



OperationsConcepts

OperationsConcepts



SystemRequirements

SystemRequirements

DAC Objectives

DAC Objectives

DAC PlanningProcurementDAC PlanningProcurement

MasterAnalysis Plan

& Schedule(MAPS)

IntegratedSystem

PerformanceAssessments

IssueResolution

TradeStudies

Design Changes/

Ops Changes

DocumentResults

AnalysisProcurement

MCR/MDR SDR

PDR CDR

SRR

Mission DAC

Requirements DAC

SystemDAC

Preliminary

DAC #2Preliminary

DAC #1CriticalDAC #1

CriticalDAC #1

MCR/MDR SDR

PDR CDR

SRR

Mission DAC

Requirements DAC

SystemDAC

Preliminary

DAC #2Preliminary

DAC #1CriticalDAC #1

CriticalDAC #1

Analyses Working Group (AWG) Is “THE” integrating forcing function here – vertically Level 1 – 3 and horizontally (e.g. APO to SE&I)

46

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Vertical and Horizontal Analysis Integration

ESMD

FPSIG

N&TSIG

SW&Avionics SIG

Thermal & ECLS SIG

∫ Power Loads… SIG

Environments & Constraints SIG

Supportability & Logistics, Reliability & Maintainability

Human Factors & Human Rating SIG

EVA Integration SIG

Gnd and Mssn Ops / Training SIG

Producability & Affordability SIG

C3I SIG

∫ Loads, Struct, Mech SIG

CE

V

CL

V

MS

GO

AP

O

OIG

T&

V

SR

&Q

A

EV

A

LS

AM

CxPO

The Constellation Analysis Working Group (CxAWG) integrates analysis efforts vertically from Level 1 to Level 3 and horizontally across Constellation

47

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

DAC/VAC Process

PlanningAnalysis &Model Val.

IssueResolution Documentation

Integration Forum - Horizontal Integration

TechnicalTeams

DAC/VACTeam

Generate &Coordinate

TDS’s

Perform Analysis(DAC/VAC)

Peer Reviews

Publish FinalReports

Publish Abstractsand Catalog

Final Reports

ValidateModels(VAC)

Perform Add’l.Analysis as

Necessary toResolve Issues

SubmitAnalysisAbstracts

Review &Coordinate TDS’s

Generate MasterAnalysis Plan &

Schedule (MAPS)Document

Review Analysisand Identify

Issues

ApproveModel/ToolCertification

CoordinateResolutionof Issues FRR

CoFR

VCNs

DAC/VAC Process

PlanningAnalysis &Model Val.

IssueResolution Documentation

Integration Forum - Horizontal Integration

TechnicalTeams

DAC/VACTeam

Generate &Coordinate

TDS’s

Perform Analysis(DAC/VAC)

Peer Reviews

Publish FinalReports

Publish Abstractsand Catalog

Final Reports

ValidateModels(VAC)

Perform Add’l.Analysis as

Necessary toResolve Issues

SubmitAnalysisAbstracts

Review &Coordinate TDS’s

Generate MasterAnalysis Plan &

Schedule (MAPS)Document

Review Analysisand Identify

Issues

ApproveModel/ToolCertification

CoordinateResolutionof Issues FRR

CoFR

VCNs

Analysis Trades and Architecture (ATA)

Analyses and Trades MUST be justifiable, prioritized, integrated and resourced such that Issues (TBDs, TBRs, etc.,) and Issues Resolution will be managed aggressively and efficiently

48

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

ATA Technical Issue Resolution Overview

Identify issueIdentify issue

•Design note

• Report

•Design note

• Report

Issue Resolution Documentation Type

• Assess• Categorize• Prioritize

• Assess• Categorize• Prioritize

Issue resolution database

Issue resolution database

IntegrationAWGAWG

IntegrationAWGAWG

Monitor progress via issue tracking database (metrics)Monitor progress via issue tracking database (metrics)

• TBD/TBR• Question• Problem• Decision• Definition• etc….

Issue resolution type

• Literature/expert search

• SME panel

• Analysis

• Trade study

Issue resolution type

• Literature/expert search

• SME panel

• Analysis

• Trade study

Assign resources &

Schedule

Assign resources &

Schedule

Executive ReviewsExecutive Reviews

Execute processExecute process

Tracking targeted in CradleTM

Baseline ChangeBaseline Change

Approval As Req’d:

SECB/CxCCBSECB/CxCCB

Approval As Req’d:

SECB/CxCCBSECB/CxCCB

“Not every issue” requires a big trade or analyses – All Need Burn-down Plans

49

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Common TDS Format

• All Task Description Sheets (TDS) should be documented in the Constellation program’s format documented in the System Integration Analysis Plan (SIAP)

– This TDS format is being updated with “form date” and “priority”

• TDS will be numbered individually according to the organization with oversight

– Organization with oversight will place their acronym in front of their numbering system

– For example, CEV-[##], CLV-TS-[xx]-[###]

• TDS will be prioritized according to the following scheme,

Cx TDS Format

50

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Integrated Modeling & Simulation

• Modeling and Simulations (M&S) are Integral to every aspect of the ESMD Program (Program > Projects > Elements)

– Planning – Requirements Definition– Technology Evaluation – Cost Analysis– Risk Assessments– Performance– Test and Verification– Training

• Effective Management of M&S has

several key Goals– Provide Timely Trusted Data for

Decision Makers– Reduce System Lifecycle Cost and

Risk• Better requirements, designs,

tests, training– Minimize Slips in Schedule

IM&S

–Spans All Phases of Analysis

Subjective Assessments• QFD• AHP• System Engineering Tools

Constructive Assessments• Cost – Complete Life-Cycle• Risk – Flight, Development, RMS• Conceptual / Prelim Engineering

Performance Capabilities

Operator in the Loop Assessments• Ground• Flight Sims• Crew• Data Rich Simulation & Visual

Hardware-in-the-Loop Assessments• Test Program Def & Refinement• Hardware & Software Testing• System Integration Modeling

In Service Operations Assessments• Operations Ramp-up Ramp-down• Upgrades and Improvements• Anomaly Resolution

Test

Operations

ManagementSystems Engineers

Systems EngineersSystem AnalystsOperators

Systems EngineersSystem AnalystsOperatorsDesignersManufacturers

Systems EngineersOperatorsDesignersManufacturersTest and Verification

Trades

Design

Analysis, Modeling and Simulation

support evolves throughout the

systems development life

cycle, supporting a wide range of

customers

IM&S

–Spans All Phases of Analysis

Subjective Assessments• QFD• AHP• System Engineering Tools

Constructive Assessments• Cost – Complete Life-Cycle• Risk – Flight, Development, RMS• Conceptual / Prelim Engineering

Performance Capabilities

Operator in the Loop Assessments• Ground• Flight Sims• Crew• Data Rich Simulation & Visual

Hardware-in-the-Loop Assessments• Test Program Def & Refinement• Hardware & Software Testing• System Integration Modeling

In Service Operations Assessments• Operations Ramp-up Ramp-down• Upgrades and Improvements• Anomaly Resolution

Test

Operations

ManagementSystems Engineers

Systems EngineersSystem AnalystsOperators

Systems EngineersSystem AnalystsOperatorsDesignersManufacturers

Systems EngineersOperatorsDesignersManufacturersTest and Verification

Trades

Design

Analysis, Modeling and Simulation

support evolves throughout the

systems development life

cycle, supporting a wide range of

customers

• Key Products:– Organizational “overlay” for M&S that provides integration function across CxPO (e.g.,

working groups, panels, etc.)– M&S Documentation (e.g., VV&A Policies, MSSPs, etc.)– M&S Standards (e.g., interoperability, data modeling, etc.)– M&S VV&A support– M&S Infrastructure:

• Modeling and Simulation Resource Repository

• Common Model Library• Vehicle Master Database

• Distributed simulation architecture (working w/ CIO)

– Data model definition and evolution– Integration of tools, models and simulations– Development of key “common” tools, models and simulations– Data presentation and visualization capabilities– Forum for addressing M&S interactions with contractors– M&S expertise for reviewing proposals, DPDs, etc.

Institutionalizing M&S Management Practices Early is Critical to long-term Success

51

WWW.NASAWATCH.COMCxP IM&S Strategy Concept of Operation

IM&S Policy

IM&S VV&A Policy

IM&S Strategy

IM&S VV&AProcess

IM&SStrategy

:• Environments• Element Sims• Common SW Library• Common Component Sims (Thrusters, Engines, etc.)

IM&S SW & Tools are shared across entire ESMD Community

Systems Level IM&SSystems Level IM&S

IM&S Guidance -

CLV SIL SW & ToolsDevelopment, Management, & Use

CEV SIL SW & ToolsDevelopment, Management, & Use

iSIL SW & ToolsDevelopment, Management, & Use

GSS SIL SW & ToolsDevelopment, Management, & Use

Modeling & Simulation Resource Repository (MSRR)

IM&S Strategy [ Level - 1 ]

[ Level - 2 ]

[ Level - 3 ]Element Level IM&SElement Level IM&S

Centralized Guidance De-centralized IM&S Development, Use, & Execution

CEV IM&S

CLV IM&S

GSS IM&S

VV&A

VV&A

VV&A

IM&S Common Resource Repository

- Systems Engineering for Element-Level- SIL Development & Use- Engineering Analysis

ELEMENT STAKEHOLDERS

- Systems Engineering for Mission-Level

- Integrated SIL (iSIL) Development & Use

- Systems Analysis

SYSTEM STAKEHOLDERS

[ Level - 2 ]

M&SStandards

CEV M&SSupportPlan

CLV M&SSupportPlan

IM&SSupportPlan

[ Level - 1 ]- Architecture Trades- M&S Technology Development- M&S Tool Development

ESMD STAKEHOLDERSESMD IM&S

M&S and ToolsDevelopment, VV&A

GSS M&SSupportPlan

VV&A

IM&SSupportPlan

52

WWW.NASAWATCH.COMIntegrated Modeling & Simulation FY05 Capabilities

GEOMETRY

AEROTHERMAL

TRAJECTORY

TPS

ANALYSIS DISCIPLINE

CEV Final Approach to Dock

CEV ProximityOperations

Risk ModelingCapability

GroundProcessingSimulations

Disciplinary Design/Analysis Capability

53

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

ESMD IM&SManagement

Policy

ESMDIM&S

Strategy

ESMDIM&S

Glossary

ESMDIM&S

ConOps

ESMD IM&SVV&A Policy

ESMD IM&SVV&A

Strategy

ESMD IM&S Accreditation Plan,

Report Process& Specification

ESMD IM&S VV&A V&V Plan &

Process SpecificationESMD MSRR

ImplementationPlan

ESMD IM&SImplementation

Plan

CS IM&SImplementation

Plan

CSMSSP

CS iSILConOps

CEV IM&SImplementation

Plan

CLV IM&SImplementation

Plan

CEVMSSP

CEV LASMSSP Annex

CEV CMMSSP Annex

CEV SMMSSP Annex

CEV Vehicle IntegrationMSSP Annex

CLVMSSP

CLV 1st StageMSSP Annex

CLV Upper StageMSSP Annex

CLV US EngineMSSP Annex

CLV Vehicle IntegrationMSSP Annex

ESMDRisk ManagementPlan IM&S Section

CSRisk ManagementPlan IM&S Section

CLVRisk ManagementPlan IM&S Section

ESMD IM&SMSSP

CEV SILConOps

CLV SILConOps

CEVRisk ManagementPlan IM&S Section

Development Responsibility Unknown

ESMD IM&SStrategy Executive

Summary

Level 1ESMD

Level 2ConstellationSystems (CS)

Level 3Elements

Level 4Subsystems

ESMD Risk Management

Plan

ESMD IM&S Requirements

Document

ESMD MSRRRequirements

Document

CEV SILRequirements

Document

CEV LASSIL Requirements

Document

CEV CMSIL Requirements

Document

CEV SMSIL Requirements

Document

CS iSILRequirements

Document

CLV SILRequirements

Document

CLV LASSIL Requirements

Document

CLV CMSIL Requirements

Document

CLV SMSIL Requirements

Document

CS IM&S Requirements

Document

CLV IM&S Requirements

Document

CEV IM&SRequirements

Document

IM&S Documentation Tree(Proposed and in coordination)

CxP MV&VI Plan& Child Doc.

54

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

IM&S Approach

• Establish a Unified Paradigm for the Management and Use of M&S throughout CxP based on Lessons Learned from DoD and industry– Centralized Guidance with Decentralized Execution to:

• Define Policies (M&S and VV&A) • Define Standards (e.g. interface, interoperability, data)

– Continue support to Chief Engineer’s effort in developing a NASA M&S Standard

• Develop M&S Management Roles/Responsibilities to be integrated with existing CxPO Management Structures

• Develop CxPO and Require Projects to Develop M&S Support Plans– Document the Use of M&S in support of Program and Project Level Activities– Identify M&S Gaps and Overlaps to support future development

needs/priorities– Mandate Risk Based VV&A Implementation – 3 Levels (High risk = significant

VV&A)• Facilitate Communication of M&S Capabilities across CxP through an M&S

Resource Repository (Metadata of accredited M&S)• Involve Program/Project Stakeholders in Establishing the IM&S Strategy

Establish Effective and Streamlined Management of M&S across CxP

55

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

IM&S Approach (Cont.)

• Establish a M&S Investment Strategy to maximize utility of M&S– Utilize common tools were appropriate

• Collaboration tools• Systems engineering tools• Data management tools• Data Presentation

– Minimize development of new capabilities and focus on integration of existing capabilities

• Modify existing capabilities when required• Development likely required in “-ilities” models• All development will be based upon explicit and documented requirements from

stakeholders– Utilize existing infrastructure and work with CIO on necessary fixes and improvements

• CEEs• NISN• Windchill• CRADLE

• Provide single conduit for M&S definition and interaction with CxPO and project contractors

Establish Effective and Streamlined Management of M&S across CxP

56

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Constellation IM&SImplementing the Strategy

ESMD/Constellation

M&SDon Monell

Test and VerificationBill Arceneaux

Steering Group Outreach Panels/Boards Level 3

M&S Strategy

ModelsWGs

CLV CEV

External Relationships

Center Outreach

POCs

Up-Reach

Policy

Strategy

Implementation

IM&S Panel

SIL WG VV&A WG

Prog Tech IntSteve Fitzgerald

Reqmts MgmtKeith Williams

Interface MgmtM. Digiuseppe

Analyses, TradesArchitecture

Neil Lemmons

SE Process, Tools,Metrics, Training

TBD

SE&IC. Hardcastle/S. Meacham

M&S Policy

M&S StrategyM&S Strategy

Services Reqmts.

Strategy Implementation – NOT Services or Products Provided

M&S StrategyM&S Strategy

LMS …

57

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM




Management



Deputy












Center SE&I Focals



Secretary







58

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

CxPO Collaborative Environment

• SE Environment– Standards– Governance / Management– Training & Education

• SE Technical Development– Requirements Engineering– Functional Definition– Design Synthesis– Verification and Validation (V&V)

• SE Management– Program & Project Planning & Control– Cost & Schedule– Decision-making & Risk Management

• SE Information Management– Workflow Management– Configuration Management– Team Collaboration Support– Knowledge Management– Decision Analysis Support

Blue text shows shared responsibilities across CxPO

Systems Engineering

Technical Development

System Engineering

Management

CSE

Systems EngineeringInformation

Management

Collaboration SE Environment

(CxP

Cube )

T&V SRQ&A

CxP Program

CxP SE&I

SE &I Integrated

Master Schedule

SIGS

RM

IM

ATA

SEP

SIAP

SEMP

Integrated Information

Systems

CradleICE

Windchill

MISSION OPS APO

SE Management

SE Information Management

SE Technical Development

Enterprise Architecture

Business Management

Plan

RMP

ICP

ARMRID

TPM

SE&I needs to Lead Collaborative Technical Integration

59

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Cradle CS SEI “Dual Vee” Process Model

Cx LogicalAnalysis

Cx Mission Requirements

Cx DesignSynthesis

Cx Functional analysis

ElementTestElement

Synthesis Element V&V

Cx SEManagement

Cx Analysis& Simulation

Cx Test

Cx Verification

Cx Validation

Cx Ops

Cx Process Control

CRADLE Schema and Design Key To Our Collective and Collaborative

Success

60

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

CxP SE&I Process, Methods, Tools & Environment (PMTE)

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________ NASA Management

SE&I Team Level III Teams

& Contractors Suppliers Facilitators/

Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)

.

.

Management Mgmt Guides & Procedures

WBS, Plans Workflows Issues, Risk

Facilitated, Collaborative Execution – Facilitated, Collaborative Execution – Throughout CxP Program LifeCycleThroughout CxP Program LifeCycle

Integrated Integrated NASA IT NASA IT

OperationsOperations

Process

Coordination

Check Pts

EndStart

Start

Start

End

End

Process Process

Level IV

Level II SE & I

Level III SE&I

MonthWeek 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17

1. Mgmt Innovation Report2. Initial Comm Events 3. Follow-on Comm Events 4. Deployment Readiness Comm Events 5. Training & Education Events

OctoberSeptember November DecemberMonthWeek 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17


OctoberSeptember November DecemberMonthWeek 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26 3 10 17


OctoberSeptember November December

MethodsMethods

Policies Guideline

s Template

s Checklists

ToolsTools Cradle / RM / PM /

S&MA Windchill PDM

& Workflow Apps Webinars Process Facilitation Webinar / Help Desk Self-Serve Support

61

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Training & Education for SE&I Capability Build

Continuous Process Improvement Lessons-learned

improvements Progressive automation Expanded selection & scope

of applications Extension to include all

stakeholders

NASA Management

SE&I Team Level III &

Contractor Teams Process

Facilitators, SMEs, and Design & Management Help Desk Support

Web-Based Web-Based Training & Support Training & Support

NetworkNetwork. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. _______

Management Mgmt

Guides & Procedures

WBS, Plans Workflows Issues,

Risk

Process

Methods DatabaseMethods Database

Policies Guideline

s Template

s Checklist

s

Training Apps & Training Apps & Information ServersInformation Servers

Webinars Process

Materials Interactive

Help Desk Self-Serve

Training & Support

In-Process Facilitation, Training & Guidance Partnership of NASA &

subcontracted SE&I Process & functional experts

Expert / Apprentice based work assignments for cultivating NASA next-generation SE&I leadership & practitioners

Interactive Webinar and Self-Service Training & Performance Support Systems

On-Line, interactive system supported Help Desk

.

.

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

. ________

62

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

CxP Near-term SE&I Process Roadmap

Cradle/PM WindChill

PDM& Workflow Apps

Phase 2Web-automated process, methods, and infrastructure

NASA Management SE&I Team Level III Teams &

Contractors Facilitators/SMEs Manufacturing Suppliers Future Customers

Process Policies Guidelin

es Templat

es Checklis

ts

. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________

. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________

..

Management Mgmt Guides & Procedures

WBS, Plans

Workflows

Issues, Risk

Web automated Webinars and self-serve SE&I screening, training process facilitation – Build SE Profession

Phase 3 Web-Based Collaborative Design & Process Environment

Expanded access via portal to process, methods, tools; expansion of design, and process self-serve resources to expanding group of stakeholders in sync with expanding program scope & life cycle

Webinars Process Facilitation Webinar/Help Desk Self-Serve Support

. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________

. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________. ________

New core systems & applications and legacy systems with workarounds for new process, methods, workflows, etc.

Policies Guideline

s Template

s Checklist

s

Phase 1 Quick-Start Process: Rapid methods, and infrastructure build

“Paper-based” methods for Initial program activities & pre-automation pilots (Cradle, WindChill & others

Pre-Web Automation: Training and work-sessions conducted for SE&I staffing, training & facilitation, and subject matter experts (SME) support activities; no Web based self serve yet!

Web-IntegratedHelpdesk with design andprocess support

Web-accessible portal for automated process, methods, workflows, & training

SRR SDR PDR

63

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Constellation Analysis and Requirements Traceability (CART)Will facilitate id of “requirements-focused” risks, prioritized TPMs & mitigation plans

Major Objectives of CART:• Provide process and disciplined approach to assess, document, and trace

Constellation requirement achievability through the life of the program • Use existing processes and systems such as Cradle and ARM as basis to provide

visibility for requirement traceability, achievability, and risk management based on cost, schedule, and technical performance criteria

• Provide systematic means to account for the time sensitivity of Constellation requirement achievability and proactively manage program and group level risk

CART highlights technical performance achievability and impact of design compliance gaps / risks

Requirement Achievability AssessmentsBased on three Components: Structure, Criticality , Achievability

Links depicted in this diagram are for illustrative purposes only and may not represent permissible linkages

I.2 II.2III.2 PIDS

II.1

II.3

III.1

III.3

I.1

I.3

PIDS

PIDS

Constraints and Interfaces

SubOrbital

FT

I.4

From a requirements perspective, CART Achievability Analysis is based on:• Structure ( “requirements trace ” established in Cradle)

• Team effort led by SIG Leaders and integration groups • Criticality (focus on critical requirements in each trace)

• Criticality of high level requirements determined by appropriat e managers• Criticality of supporting requirements determined by TILs & supporting integration groups

• Achievability (Compliance Likelihood (low, medium, high) for Performance, Schedule, Affordability )

? Tier I Achievabilitybased on assessments of critical supporting Tier II requirements? Tier II achievabilitybased on assessments of critical supporting Tier III requirements

? Tier III achievabilitybased on assessments of critical supporting PIDS to include compliance with all constraints and interfaces

“Compliance Likelihood”Categories for Achieving Threshold Performance Specifications, On Schedule

and Budget

•Verified – Met or Exceeded Threshold Requirement

•Achievable - High Likelihood of Compliance > 80%

•Medium Likelihood of Compliance 50-80%

•Low Likelihood of Compliance < 50%

•Requirement is not feasible

3

Requirement is Unassessed "Gray"

Requirement has not yet been assessed (default Cradle value)

Requirement is Not Feasible "Black"

No technical solution exists X = 0%

Low Likelihood of Compliance "Red"

Requirement understanding, technology, or system integration issues will most likely impact delivery of

performance X < 50%

Medium Likelihood of Compliance "Yellow"

Requirement understanding, technology, or system integration issues may impact delivery of

performance 50 % < X < 80%

High Likelihood of Compliance "Green"

Requirement is well understood. Technology, schedule and budget are in place to meet

requirement performance 80 % < X < 100%

Requirement performance is Compliant: Tested and verified

"Blue"

Requirement has met or exceeded required performance levels X = 100%

Likelihood of Compliance Defined as probability of meeting requirement performance specification on schedule

and within budget

CART Methodology

• Requirement criticality derived from parent traces• Appropriate risk mitigation process based on likelihood of compliance and criticality

“Critical” Requirement Categories: From the programs perspective: C1: Unacceptable impact to Constellation Program C2: Potential major impact to the Constellation Program C3: Potential moderate impact to the Constellation Program C4: Potential minimal to no impact to the Constellation Program

Need to map these criticality categories to existing NASA processes if they exist and are appropriate

CONSEQUENCE

54321

1

2

3

4

5LIKELIHOOD

Risk Matrix

Reqmts Achievability

64

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Update TPM Filter to ensure current TPMs are linked to and

driven primarily by requirements of either “High

Criticality” &/or “at risk relative to achievability” as determined via Achievability Assessment

process involving SIGs

Process filter used to establish need for Technical Performance Measures (TPMs)

Is the proposed TPM a SoSS, PIDS, CI, or PCD requirement?

Is there a performance, schedule or affordability risk

associated with this requirement; or the potential

to develop these risks exist?

Is the requirement quantifiable? a. Numerical thresholds exist andb. Method to incrementally measure

performance exist andc. Inputs are available and d. Can be updated monthly

Is requirement metric predictable and responsive to

design changes?

Yes

Begin TPM development

process

Yes

Yes

Should the functionality represented by this proposed

TPM result in a new SoSS requirement?

Place proposed functionality into

FD/FA process and create a new requirement.

Is this TPM required by management to monitor a

program management issue such as affordability?

Is the requirement mission critical or critical to program

success?

YesYes

Additional justificationrequired to

establish a TPM

Yes

No No No

No

No

No

Is the proposed TPM a SoSS, PIDS, CI, or PCD requirement?

Is there a performance, schedule or affordability risk

associated with this requirement; or the potential

to develop these risks exist?

Is the requirement quantifiable? a. Numerical thresholds exist andb. Method to incrementally measure

performance exist andc. Inputs are available and d. Can be updated monthly

Is requirement metric predictable and responsive to

design changes?

Yes

Begin TPM development

process

Yes

Yes

Should the functionality represented by this proposed

TPM result in a new SoSS requirement?

Place proposed functionality into

FD/FA process and create a new requirement.

Is this TPM required by management to monitor a

program management issue such as affordability?

Is the requirement mission critical or critical to program

success?

YesYes

Additional justificationrequired to

establish a TPM

Yes

No No No

No

No

No

CARD, SRD, IRD Requirement ?

65

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Board and Working Group Structures (1 of 2)

ISS Mission

Management

Team (MMT)

ISS Mission Management

Team (MMT)

Cx System Engineering Control

Board

(CxSECB )

Cx System Engineering Control

Board

(CxSECB )

CxSoftware

Control Panel

(CxSCP )

CxSoftware

Control Panel

(CxSCP )

Constellation Program Control

Board(CxCB )

Constellation Program Control

Board(CxCB )

Range Safety

Panels(LCRSP &

ECRSP)

Range Safety

Panels(LCRSP &

ECRSP)

Daily Mission

Integration Control Board

(DMICB)

Integrated Safety

Engineering

Review Panel(ISERP)

Integrated Safety

Engineering

Review Panel(ISERP)

Cx Safety

and Mission Assurance

Panel

(Cx SMAP)

CxOperations

Panel(CxOP )

CxOperations

Panel(CxOP )

Joint SSP/ISS Cx Program

Requirements Control Board

(JPRCB)



(JPRCB)

Joint ISS/ CxMission

Integration

Control Board(JMICB )

Joint ISS/ CxMission

Integration

Control Board(JMICB )

Flight Operations

Control

Board(FOCB)

Flight Operations

Control

Board(FOCB)

Figure 3.1 -3

Lvl IIIControl

Boards Relative to

Safety

Lvl IIIControl

Boards Relative to

Safety

If it drives

Requirements or Designs

Lvl IIIControl

Boards Relative to H/W & S/W

Lvl IIIControl

Boards Relative to H/W & S/W

Lvl IIIControl Boards

Relative to Operations

Lvl IIIControl Boards

Relative to Operations

SE&I

T&V

Ops Integration

SR&QA

PP&C

Project

APO

Apollo, Shuttle and ISS Boards, Panels and Working Groups Reviewed in developing this recommend approach – Note that Chief Engineers, by charter,

have been incorporated into the Control Boards

66

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Software Interoperability

& ReuseSIG


& ReuseSIG


& ReuseSIG


& ReuseSIG


& ReuseSIG

SIGs

CxAnalyses Working Group

(CxAWG )

CxAnalyses Working Group

(CxAWG )

CxSECB CxSoftware Control Panel

(CxSCP)

CxConfiguration Mgt. Control

Working Group(CxCMCWG )

CxConfiguration Mgt. Control

Working Group(CxCMCWG )

Cx Interface Control Working Group

(CxICWG )


(CxICWG )

CxRequirements

Working Group

(CxRWG )

CxRequirements

Working Group

(CxRWG )

Board and Working Group Structures (2 of 2)

SECB is intended to help facilitate control of the Technical BaselineHistory has shown “fluid” technical baselines on the front-end of large-scale

DDT&E Programs can be detrimental

67

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Example Relationships for Level II Controlled Requirements



(JPRCB)

Cx Requirements

Working Group

(CxRWG)

Cx Analyses Working Group

(CxAWG)


(CxICWG)


(CxICWG)

Co-Chair: Keith Williams (CxSE&I RMO)Co-Chair: Jonette Stecklein (CxT&V)Cx Operations IntegrationCx Safety, Reliability & Quality Assurance (SR&QA)Cx Advance Projects Office (APO)Cx Program Technical IntegrationCx ATACx IMOAstronaut OfficeISS ProgramCx ProjectsESMD HQ

Stakeholders & Recommendations from other Constellation Boards, Panels, and Working Groups

• Cx Operations Integration (CxOP)

• Cx Safety, Reliability & Quality Assurance (SR&QA)

• Cx Advance Projects Office (APO)

• Cx Program Technical Integration (SIGs)

• Astronaut Office• ISS Program• Cx Projects (Level 3 Control

Boards)• ESMD HQ

Interface is through established representatives already on the CxRWG

Stakeholders & Recommendations from other Constellation Boards, Panels, and Working Groups

• Cx Operations Integration (CxOP)

• Cx Safety, Reliability & Quality Assurance (SR&QA)

• Cx Advance Projects Office (APO)

• Cx Program Technical Integration (SIGs)

• Astronaut Office• ISS Program• Cx Projects (Level 3 Control

Boards)• ESMD HQ

Interface is through established representatives already on the CxRWG

• Proposed Rqmts changes• Impacts associated with Rqmts changes• Comments on Drafts

• Drafts for Comment• Proposed Rqmts changes

Analysis Requests

Analysis Requests

CARD/SRDs for I/F IntgCARD/SRDs impacts for I/F Intg

Rqmts Changes &Impacts

Technical DirectionChange Approval

Constellation Program

Control Board

(CxCB)

Cx Systems Engineering

Control Board

(CxSECB)

Rqmts Changes &Impacts

Technical DirectionChange Approval

68

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM


• CY06 Challenges & Schedule Ahead– Execute ICPR and apply results & Lessons Learned to Enhancing Product

Maturities in Priority Order to minimize Program risks at CxP SRR and subsequent Project SRRs

• Roughly 30 Engineering Artifacts (products) being reviewed as a part of ICPR• Roughly 87 Engineering Artifacts to be reviewed leading into and through CxP SRR• The 30 ICPR initial products plus the balance of 57 additional products are all being

looked at relative to:– Priority (based on potential impacts to Projects)– Maturity Required at CxP SRR

– Enhancing the Level II Requirements coming off of ICPR & Cx SECB Project-by-Project “Key Driving Requirements, Reqmts Quality & Gap” presentations in April

• RID/Comment disposition and factoring into May/June/July/August plan• Consolidating SECB findings to facilitate priority setting for work to CxP SRR• Initiating IDAC2 effort to address big issues, TBD & TBRs• Conducting May Functional Analyses Workshop #2 and incorporating results• Conduct intense 10 ten day continuous Requirements F2F session (May 30 – Jun 9)

– Emphasis on Quality of Requirements & Verification• Incorporating results of Follow-on Functional Analyses & IDAC2 Results into

Requirements Set Just-In-Time (JIT) for CxP SRR– Continuing to execute aggressively while staffing smartly

• Training this nation-wide virtual workforce on the tools (e.g., CRADLE, TPMs, ARM, CART, Primavera, Windchill/ICE) and the processes (SE&I, CM/DM, T&V, SR&QA) is crucial to our longer-term technical, cost and schedule performance

2


Agenda• People




– Near-Term Requirements -Focused Product Line• CxP-allocated NGOs, Level I -allocated Requirements, CARD, IRDs , IDDs , Invoked Standards,

Operational Concepts, FFBDs , FAMs , N2 Diagrams, Reference Architecture, Trade/Analyses results, SRDs, Requirements Achievability Assessments, Technical Performance Measures, Technical Risk Mitigation Plans, Traceability Reports


• Processes– Requirements & Interface Management Processes– RAC, DAC & VAC – Analyses/Trades Processes– Emerging Program Boards, Panels & WGs Structure/Process

• CY06 Challenges• Backup – Recommended May “Requirements Face-to-Face (F2F)”

69

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

RID-able products

ICPR Board(CxCB)

Pre-Board(SECB)

RRP ARP pTIP ICRP

CARD

MVIVP

REMP

NGO

RAD

SIAP

C3I Strategy Plan

DSNE

HSIR

Support Concept Document

Software Management

and Policies Plan

ICP

IRDs

SR&QARP

PP&CRP

SR&QA Plan

RMP

PRA

CMP

DMP

PMP

WBS

IMS

Process and Tools

CxOIP

MMP

SRR Annex 2

SEMP

Document Tree

CRADLE Database

Scheme Plan

Ops Con

C3I Interoperability

Plan

HRPRequirements

Tree

Glossary

SRD’s

Board or Panel

Available for Review

RID Disposition Teams & ICPR products

RID Disposition

Team

Base-lined Prior to SRR

30 Artifacts forming a subset of the 87 targeted for CxP SRR

70

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

ICPR Emerging Metrics

71

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

ICPR

KickOff Pgrm Doc’s under SE Control

April May June July Aug. Sept.

Baseline Doc # SRR

CARD, Invoked Standards, IRDs & SRDs Focus Flow

ICPR Board

Level II Requirements Enhancement Focus

ICPR Review Results

Projects ID “Key Driving” Requirements**Level II Post-ICPR Requirements Update + Functional

Analyses Workshop #2Level II “hosted” Requirements “Face-to-Face”Enhancement session – two weeks straight

** Note factoring in SMART Buyer for CEV – via Presentations to SECB Apr 6th

F2F Virtual Follow-on

Factor in IDAC2 Midterm& Functional Analysis WS #3

Factor in IDAC2 Final& Functional Analysis

F2F Homework

SE&I derived Integrated Schedule (~3000 line items) shows approximately a four week threat to this plan – one of the success

criteria for ICPR is to finalize/reconcile this schedule

72

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

High Level Requirements Development ScheduleW

K1

WK

2

WK

3

WK

4

Apr

WK

1

WK

2

WK

3

WK

4

May

WK

1

WK

2

WK

3

WK

4

Jun

WK

1

WK

2

WK

3

WK

4

Jul

WK

1

WK

2

WK

3

WK

4

Aug

WK

1

WK

2

WK

3

WK

4

Sep

WK

1

WK

2

WK

3

WK

4

Oct

WK

1

WK

2

WK

3

WK

4

Nov

WK

1

WK

2

WK

3

WK

4

Dec

Key

C

on

stel

lati

on

Mile

sto

nes

ICPR

IDAC 2

Driving Requirements

SRR

Req

uir

emen

tsD

evel

op

men

tF

un

ctio

nal

A

nal

ysis

Cycle 1 Arch

Vehicle

POP Results

Ops

Arch

Vehicle

Ops

F2F/Arch

Vehicle

Ops

Arch

Vehicle

Ops

Project SRRs

W/S #2 W/S #3

73

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

IDAC-2 Objectives

•The main goal of IDAC-2 is to provide necessary and sufficient analysis results to mature requirements and resolve technical issues necessary for a successful the Constellation Systems Requirements Review (SRR)

•IDAC-2 Objectives– Resolve TBD and TBR in the requirements documents– Determine feasibility and validity of the systems requirements– Develop requirements baseline that supports mission objectives

RAC 1

D J F M M J JA A S O N D J FD J F M M J JA A S O N D J F

Analysis Cycles to SRR2005 2006

CxP

2007

Cx SRRIPSRIPSR

FY06 FY07

IDAC -2

Doc

Sel Plan

Cx ICPR

Sel PlanApprovalApproval

SRR

Doc

ICPR

CEVNASA

Mgt Decisions

CRC 1 1A CEV RAC 2CRC 2

Mid -term

CEV RAC 2A

Doc CEV SRR

IDAC -3

CLV DAC -1 Doc CLV SRRCLV

74

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Constellation IDAC-2 Scope

• Lunar Sortie (Excluding Surface Operations) Mission– Covers Lunar sortie missions through lunar landing and return – Excludes lunar surface operations– Includes: Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV), Cargo Launch Vehicle

(CaLV), Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM) (portions), lunar cargo carrier (portions), Extravehicular Activity (EVA) (portions), Ground Operations (portions), Mission Systems (portions)

• ISS Crew Rotation and Pressurized Cargo Mission– Covers ISS missions including crew rotation, pressurized cargo delivery, and pressurized

cargo return– Includes: Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV), Crew Launch Vehicle (CLV), Cargo Launch Vehicle

(CaLV), Extravehicular Activity (EVA) (portions), Ground Operations (portions), Mission Systems (portions)

• Lunar Sortie (Full Surface Operations) Mission– Covers Lunar Sortie Missions including Sortie: surface operations, habitation, surface

transportation, science, and utilization– Includes: LSAM, lunar cargo carrier, lunar portions of Destination Surface Systems (DSS),

EVA (portions), Ground Ops, Mission Systems (MS) (portions), comm function (portions)

• Lunar Outpost Mission– Covers the Lunar Outpost Missions including Lunar Outpost: surface operations, habitation,

surface transportation, science, and utilization

• Mars Mission– Covers the Mars missions. – Includes: Mars CEV or equivalent, Mars Transfer Vehicle (MTV), Descent/Ascent Stage (for

Mars) (DAS), Mars portions of DSS, next generation heavy lifters, Mars portion of Command, Control, Communication and Information (C3I) function, EVA (portions), Ground Operations (portions), Mission Operations (portions), Martian habitation, Martian surface transportation, Martian infrastructure, science and utilization

Higher

Pri

ori

tyLower

75

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

Some Significant Analysis Topics for IDAC-2

•CEV Landing and Recovery– Water v. Land Landing Trade– Landing Environments & Recovery

•Ascent Aborts– North Atlantic Exclusion Zone

•CEV Docking System / ISS Adapter Delivery Trades•CEV / CLV Integrated Loads and Aerodynamics•Manual Control•LSAM / EDS on-orbit loiter time•CEV Emergency Egress Assessment•LOC / LOM refinement and allocation•Launch Probability / Availability•Comm data rates & ranges

76

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM


Closing Comments•Team is doing exceptional work in light of the staffing & aggressive work load

•Specific areas of SE&I Concern– Large-scale front-end SE&I, Software Engineering and Life Cycle Costs Agency expertise

• Seeking options for additional expertise from multiple potential sources– Booz Allen, Aerospace Corp., Draper, SAIC

– Staffing & Training– CM, DM and detailed integrated scheduling at all levels

• Must continue great dialogue with Projects to Minimize resources and synergize efforts while maintaining that healthy conflict/checks & balances

• Need to consider how to leverage the virtual nationwide experts (by name) to fill voids identified above

– Seven Critical Success Factors of Virtual Teams, from “Mastering Virtual Teams” by Deborah Duarte

• HR Policies, OTJ, Processes, IT, Organizational Culture, Leadership Vision/Support & Team Leader/Member Competencies

2


Agenda• People




– Near-Term Requirements -Focused Product Line• CxP-allocated NGOs, Level I -allocated Requirements, CARD, IRDs , IDDs , Invoked Standards,

Operational Concepts, FFBDs , FAMs , N2 Diagrams, Reference Architecture, Trade/Analyses results, SRDs, Requirements Achievability Assessments, Technical Performance Measures, Technical Risk Mitigation Plans, Traceability Reports


• Processes– Requirements & Interface Management Processes– RAC, DAC & VAC – Analyses/Trades Processes– Emerging Program Boards, Panels & WGs Structure/Process

• CY06 Challenges• Backup – Recommended May “Requirements Face-to-Face (F2F)”

Must reflect our work to go in one integrated, resourced schedule – and manage to it

77

WWW.NASAWATCH.COM

BACKUP – More data on Requirements F2F in June - NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME