Transcript Document

CxPO SE&I
People, Products &
Processes (3Ps)
Overview
SE&I Team Leadership
April 13, 2006
7/7/2015 1:15:11 PM
1
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
2
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
3
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxPO SE&I 3P Overview
Agenda
• People
– Organizational Overview
– Current Leadership Profile
• Systems Integration Groups (SIGs)
– Agency-wide Staffing Situation
4
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
5
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Constellation Program Office
Jeff Hanley
Program Manager
STAFF
Brenda Ward
Assistant Mgr,
Integration
Program Planning &
Control
B. Waddell, Dir
C. Stegemoeller, Dep Dir
ZB
“Resource & Process Police”
Resource management ($)
Schedules (program)
Configuration Mgt
Business Management
IT
Program Communications (PAO)
Export Control
Action tracking
Programmatic risk assessment
Roselle
Hanson
(acting)
CEV Project
Office
(JSC)
Deb Neubek
Chief of Staff,
Technical
Todd May
Associate Program Mgr
MSFC
Mgr of level II function at KSC
Mgr of level II function at MSFC
Test & Verification
W. Arceneaux, Acting Dir
Charlie Lundquist, Dep
Dir
ZC
“Verifier”
Integrated verification plan
Flight test integration
Software test & verification
Steve Cook
Launch
Vehicle
Project
Office
(MSFC)
ARC, DRFC, GRC, LaRC, MSFC
ISS
Shuttle
Other Government Agencies
Tip Talone
Associate Program Mgr
KSC
Operations Integration
R. Castle, Acting Dir
S. Gahring, Dep Dir
ZD
“User”
Mission definition
Conops
Tip Talone
Ground
Operations
Project Office
(KSC)
CLV, CaLV, EDS
ARC, GRC, LaRC, JSC, KSC, SSFC
Note: Functional offices in projects are shown coded to
correspond with functional offices in Program
Vertical Integration
Marsha Ivins
Special Assistant,
Integration
Stephanie Castillo, Lead
Administrative Office
Mark Geyer
Deputy
Program Mgr
Systems Engineering &
Integration
C. Hardcastle, Acting Dir
S. Meacham, Dep Dir
ZF
Safety, Reliability, &
Quality Assurance
L. Hansen, Dir
Jeff Williams Dep Dir
ZG
“Technical Definition”
Requirements/Interface Defn
System Analysis
Cross element subsystem leads
Effectiveness (“-ilities”)
TPMs/Technical Resource Mgt
Tools & Methods
Risk Assessment
Safety Policy
Reliability
Quality Assurance Policy
Horizontal Integration
Dennis Webb
Mission
Operations
Project Office
(JSC)
Flight ops
Comm & Nav Project
Office (GSFC)
(Vacant)
NASA Provided
Systems
Projects Office
(JSC)
Admin
Travel
Training
Correspondence
Schedules (conference rooms)
Facilities (space)
IT (SRs)
Advanced
Projects Office
Carlos Noriega
“Incubator”
Advanced Design through SDR
Launch & Entry Suit
Lander
Surface EVA suit
Surface systems
Future Common Systems
Integration with Tech Projects & RLEP
Lander
Project
Offie
Low Impact Docking Systems (LIDS)
Pyrotechnic Initiators
Flight Crew Equipment
6
Future
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxP Lvl II Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I)
Updated 4/2/06
Programmatic Integration Support
Lvl 3 Project
SE&I Leads & Agency
Center SE&I Focals
Chief of Staff –
Organization
Horizontal Integration
Program Review Integration
Drive Integrated Perform./
Efficiency/Effectiveness
Across SE&I, CxPO and Centers
SE&I Director
Deputy
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Secretary
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
-Meeting Efficiencies/Focus
-Driving Technical Excellence
-Cost, Sched & Action/Trng Tracking -Major urgent Technical Issues
-Coordination w/ PP&C
Program Technical
Integration
Requirements
Management
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Integrated Capability/Functionality
- Lvl I/II & III Requirements
Across Subsystems, Projects & Missions - Functional Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- Highest Quality Requirements
- CARD
- Each Lead Assigned a set of CARD,
- Lvl II Standards
IRD & Invoked Standards Reqmts
- Product Tree
- Reqmts Achievability Assessments
- Lvl II/III Document Tree
- Risk Mitigation Plans
- Program Requirements Tree
- TPM Id & profiling
- Functional Analyses:
- Optimized Integrated Designs
FFBDs, FAMs & N2 Diagms
- Commonality/Interoperability/”ilities”
- Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP)
Forcing Function:
- Traceability Reports
- System Integration Groups (SIGs)
Forcing Function:
- Reqmts Working Group
Approved:
Interface
Management
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
PP&C – Scheduling:
Configuration Mgmt:
Prime Focus:
Human Resources:
- SRR success then all CxP reviews
Business Mgmt:
Prime Products:
Risk Mgmt:
- 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
Analyses, Trades &
Architecture
Modeling &
Simulation
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Program-wide approach &
- Integrated Analyses &
implementation of M&S
Physical Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- M&S Plans
- Integrated Analyses Plan
- M&S Tools/Standards
- ADD & RAD
- Integr M&S Products
- Lvl II Trades
- Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan - Level II & III
- Support to SIGs, ATA,
- Level II & III
T&V, APO & Ops
- Performance Assessments
Forcing Function:
- Gap ID & Mitigation
- Validated Requirements Set - M&S WG
- Risk Analyses
- Support to Ops & APO
Forcing Function:
- Analyses WG
SE Process, Tools,
Metrics and Training
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
// Chris L. Hardcastle 4/2/06 //
7
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxP Lvl II SE&I Leadership (1 of 5)
Programmatic Integration Support
Lvl 3 Project
SE&I Leads & Agency
Center SE&I Focals
Chief of Staff –
Organization
Jason Weeks (A)
Program Technical
Integration
Steve Fitzgerald Chief
Margarita Sampson Dep (A)
Horizontal Integration
David Petri
Program Review Integration
SE&I Director
Chris. L. Hardcastle
Matt Leonard
Deputy
Steve Meacham
Chief Of Staff - Tech
PP&C – Scheduling: Roger Jones
Configuration Mgmt: Deanna Hackfeld
Human Resources: Curtis Collins
Business Mgmt: Jason Weeks
Risk Mgmt: Pedro Curiel
Tina Cobb
Lee Graham
Requirements
Management
Keith Williams Chief
TBD Deputy
Interface
Management
Michele Digiuseppe Chief
Debbie Korth Deputy
Analyses, Trades &
Architecture
Neil Lemmons Chief (A)
Dave Forrest Deputy
Modeling &
Simulation
Don Monell Chief (A)
TBD Deputy
SE Process, Tools,
Metrics and Training
TBD Chief
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
Approved:
// Chris L. Hardcastle 4/2/06 //
8
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxP Lvl II SE&I Leadership - SIGs (2 of 5)
Programmatic Integration Support
Jason Weeks (A)
Program Technical
Integration
Steve Fitzgerald Chief
Margarita Sampson Dep (A)
Program Review Integration
SE&I Director
Chris. L. Hardcastle
Matt Leonard
Deputy
Steve Meacham
Chief Of Staff - Tech
PP&C – Scheduling: Roger Jones
Configuration Mgmt: Deanna Hackfeld
Human Resources: Curtis Collins
Business Mgmt: Jason Weeks
Risk Mgmt: Pedro Curiel
Tina Cobb
Lee Graham
Requirements
Management
Keith Williams Chief
TBD Deputy
Interface
Management
Michele Digiuseppe Chief
Debbie Korth Deputy
Analyses, Trades &
Architecture
Neil Lemmons Chief (A)
Dave Forrest Deputy
Modeling &
Simulation
Don Monell Chief (A)
TBD Deputy
Common Components,
Systems & CSCIs
SE Process, Tools,
Metrics and Training
TBD Chief
TBD Deputy
Integrated Loads & Structure & Mechanisms
Networked
Navigation
andLethality
Tracking
Training
Survivability
C3I Interoperability
& Commonality
Man Print
Maneuver
Affordability,Sustainment
Life Cycle Costs, CAIV
Supportability/Log/Reliability & Maintainability
Transportability/
Deployability
Grnd &
Mission Ops Operations
& Training
RAM
-T
Human Factors
& Human
Rating
Environments (nat. & induced) and Constraints
Integr. Thermal (pass/active)& ECLS (CM, LSAM, Surf)
Integrated Power Loads, Interop & Interchange.
Extravehicular Integration
Functional Performance & Capability
Service Module
Networked
Battle
Command & Reuse
Software
& Avionics
Interoperability
Crew Launch Vehicle
UGV
EDS
NLOS - LS
Flight Performance
(Traj., Prop.
Abort, Loads, Thermal, Mass)
Networked Comm
/Interoperability
Training and Logistics Systems
Lunar Surface Elements
Chief of Staff –
Organization
Horizontal Integration
David Petri
Cargo Launch Vehicle
Sys
Complementary
LCC & MCC
Lvl 3 Project
SE&I Leads & Agency
Center SE&I Focals
• 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
9
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxP Lvl II SE&I Leadership - SIGs (3 of 5)
Program Technical
Integration Office
Legend
Chief, Steve Fitzgerald
Margarita Sampson (A)
SW & Avionics
Interop and Reuse
Navigation and Tracking
Matt Barry (M), JPL
TBD
Don Pearson (A), JSC
Mike Moreau (M), GSFC
79
35
#’s only represent no. of CARD
reqmts assigned – still have to
carve up and allocate standards,
IRD and other Level II reqmts
across SIGs
CARD Rq
Flight Performance
Affordability, LCC, CAIV
TBD
TBD
Doug Whitehead (A), JSC
Karen Frank (M), JSC
114
6
Thermal (Active/Passive)
And ECLS
Integrated Power Loads
Interchang/Interop
C3I Commonality and
Interoperability
Robyn Carrasquillo (M), MSFC
John Lewis (M), JSC
5
Jim Soeder (M), GRC
Tim Lawrence (M), JSC
Steve Rader (A), JSC
John Curry (M), JSC
Integrated Loads, Struct,
and Mechanisms
Eli Rayos (M), JSC
ScottHill (M), LaRC
13
2
Environments and
Constraints
Dave Cheuvront (A), JSC
Jeff Anderson (M), MSFC 35
Supportability&Logistics/
Reliability&Maintainability
Kevin Watson (A), JSC
51
1 ID’d (M), KSC
Human Factors and
Human Rating
EVA Integration
Ground and Mission
Operations/Training
Jan Connolly (M), JSC
TBD (M), MSFC
Jeff Davis (M), JSC
Lara Kearney (M), JSC
Steve Hirshorn (M), JSC
Phil Weber (M), KSC
64
13
51
71
Responsible for Maturation of Level II Requirements (CARD, Invoked
Standards, Level II IRDs & Assigned Cx Program Plans)
10
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxP Lvl II SE&I Leadership – SIGs (4 of 5)
VSE
ESAS
Results
Reference
Architecture
CxSECB
SR&QA
CxP Tech.
Development
Strategy
Cx Life Cycle
Cost Containment
Plan
CxP Margins
Management
Plan
CxP
Integrated
Test Plan
CxP
V&V by
Analyses Plan
Cx
Requirements
Management
Plan
Cx Technical
Performance
Meas Plan
Cx
Human
Rating Plan
CRADLE
Database and
Schema Plan
CxP Interface
Control
Plan
CxP SRR/
Review
Plan
Cx Integrated
SR&QA Requirements
CxP Risk
Management Plan
CxP Probabilistic
Risk Assess Plan FEMA/CIL Hazards Analyses PRACA
Methodology Methodology
Methodology
LSAM SRD
EVA SRD
Technical baseline
Recommendations & Assessments
- Requirements Achievability Assessments
- Key Driving Requirements/Mitigation Recommendations
- Technical Performance Measures
- Requirements Traceability
- Issues/TBD/TBR Burndown Plans
Fracture Control
Requirements for
Constellation
Hardware
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
ICDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IDDs
CxP Systems
Integrated
Analyses Plan
Functional
Analyses
Results
CxP
Product
Tree
CxP
Doc
Tree
CxP Reqmts, Cx Reference
Specs and
Architecture
Standards Tree Doc. (RAD)
Cx
Operational
Concepts
PRACA
Sys. Reqts.
DRMs
Project Master
Verif
Plans
Project
IAPs
S/W
V&V
Plan
FAM
FFBD/N2
Significant Engineering
Trees Here! Level I-IIII
CxP M&S
CxP M&S CxP Integrated
M&S
Implementation Support
Requirements
Plan
Plan
Project
S/W V&V Plans
Cx Integrated
System Health
monitor Plan
Cx
Architecture Description
Project
Document (ADD)
Ops Concepts
Cx
SW Ar ch Description
Doc. (SADD)
Cx Supportability
Strategy
CxP C31
Strategy Plan
Cx SW Mgmt &
Policies Plan
Cx Configuration
Mgmt Plan
CLV SRD
CxP
R & M Plan
CaLV SRD
Cx Supportability
Concept Document
MS SRD
Cx Baseline
Mgmt Plan
Cx Data
Mgmt Plan
ICE/WindChill
Implementation
Plan
Cx SW Config Cx SW QA
Plan
Mgmt Plan
COTS & Other
SW Interoper.
& Reuse Plan
Cx Phased SW
Cx SW
Integration Plan Classification
Matrix
Project
SDP’s
Cx SW
Measurement
Plan
Gnd Ops SRD
It is all about “ownership” and enhancement
of Level II Reqmts & Program Plans
Enhance Technical Quality of:
Ops Con, Functional Analyses
CARD & Invoked Standards
IRDs
Trades/Analyses
Physical Architecture Descriptions
M&S Tools/Architecture
CRADLE & Eng. Databases
Cx Program Plan, Policy,
Process, Strategy Docs
Verification Strategy/
Methods
Recommendations
Subject Matter Experts
Crew Office
Cx Acquisition
Plan
Programmatic Integration Support
Engineering
Mission Ops
CxP
SR&QA Plan
Cx Business
Mgmt Plan
ESMD IM&S
Mgt. Policy
MTV SRD
Contractors
Ground Ops
CxP Common
Glossary and
Acronym List
CxP
Integrated
Flight
Test Plan
Power
Quality Spec
System Expertise
ISS
APO
LCC
Est.
Project/Element
Requirements
CEV SRD
CLV
APO (LSAM..)
Project
CxP Master
Int. & V er.
Plan
Constellation
Interface
Requirements
C3I
Specification
SR&QA
CxP
Project Plans
Functional Analyses
Products
CARD
HSIR
CEV
MO, GO
Operational
Concepts/DRMs
PP&C
CxP
Management
Plan
NGOs
Cx System
Engineering
Management
Plan
T&V
Commonality &
Standards
DSNE
Book /Plan Leads
Test and
Verification
NGOs
ESMD
Level 0/I
Reqmts & Interface
Management
Analyses, Trades,
Arch. & M&S
Ops
Integration
SE&I
Typical Membership
As Needed
Test and
Verification
Lvl 3 Project
SE&I Leads & Agency
Center SE&I Focals
Chief of Staff –
Organization
Horizontal Integration
Program Review Integration
Drive Integrated Perform./
Efficiency/Effectiveness
Across SE&I, CxPO and Centers
SE&I Director
Deputy
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Secretary
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
-Meeting Efficiencies/Focus
-Driving Technical Excellence
-Cost, Sched & Action/Trng Tracking -Major urgent Technical Issues
-Coordination w/ PP&C
Program Technical
Integration
Requirements
Management
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Integrated Capability/Functionality
- Lvl I/II & III Requirements
Across Subsystems, Projects & Missions - Functional Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- Highest Quality Requirements
- CARD
- Each Lead Assigned a set of CARD,
- Lvl II Standards
IRD & Invoked Standards Reqmts
- Product Tree
- Reqmts Achievability Assessments
- Lvl II/III Document Tree
- Risk Mitigation Plans
- Program Requirements Tree
- TPM Id & profiling
- Functional Analyses:
- Optimized Integrated Designs
FFBDs, FAMs & N2 Diagms
- Commonality/Interoperability/”ilities”
- Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP)
Forcing Function:
- Traceability Reports
- System Integration Groups (SIGs)
Forcing Function:
- Reqmts Working Group
Interface
Management
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
PP&C – Scheduling:
Configuration Mgmt:
Prime Focus:
Human Resources:
- SRR success then all CxP reviews
Business Mgmt:
Prime Products:
Risk Mgmt:
- 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
Analyses, Trades &
Architecture
Modeling &
Simulation
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Program-wide approach &
- Integrated Analyses &
implementation of M&S
Physical Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- M&S Plans
- Integrated Analyses Plan
- M&S Tools/Standards
- ADD & RAD
- Integr M&S Products
- Lvl II Trades
- Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan - Level II & III
- Support to SIGs, ATA,
- Level II & III
T&V, APO & Ops
- Performance Assessments
Forcing Function:
- Gap ID & Mitigation
- Validated Requirements Set - M&S WG
- Risk Analyses
- Support to Ops & APO
Forcing Function:
- Analyses WG
SE Process, Tools,
Metrics and Training
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
Risk Identification
& Mitigation
Recommendations
SR&QA
Technical integration for vertical
and horizontal alignment
Life Sciences
11
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
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
–
–
–
•
Recognize not all SIGs will “look” the same
–
–
•
•
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
–
–
•
There are natural synergies/dependencies
Recognize we ARE NOT here to DO Level III’s Job
–
•
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
–
•
Leveraging off the same SE&I/CxPO Infrastructure
Using the same processes for repetitive tasks
Using similar/same tools
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!!!!!!!!!
Basics to Adhere to – shared with the SIG Leadership in 3/28/06 “Offsite”
12
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SIG Example Metrics
Requirements
Quality
CARD
IRD
Standards
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
QC'd
Rationale
Driving
Unassessed
TBDs/TBRs Verification
Requirements
CARD
IRD
Standards
Clean
Traced
Prioritized Stakeholders
Total
Achievability
Total
C3I
71
46
117
51
Flight Performance
103
65
168
114
Navigation and Tracking
33
5
38
35
Integrated Loads, Struc, and Mech
11
52
63
13
Integrated Thermal and ECLS
5
34
39
5
Environments 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
51
Affordability and Producability
13
1
14
6
EVA Integration
12
0
12
13
Int Power, Loads, Interop, and Inter
3
21
24
2
0
0
Complete
Total
%
Risk Management
Compliance Level
0
%
Watch
0
TPM
TPM ID'd
Manage
RMP
Complete
0
13
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Agency-wide SE&I Task Mapping
Status as of 31 Mar 06
SE&I Center Guidelines
450
399.3
396.7
400
363.9
362.4
359.5
350
FTE + WYE
• 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
LaRC
KSC
325.5
300
JSC
250
ARC
200
100
GSFC
SSC
GRC
DFRC
MSFC
50
LII SE&I
JPL
150
0
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
• 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”
14
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SE&I Center Guidelines
Preliminary as of 12 April 06
FY07 Total FTE/WYE Guidelines
ARC
4.8%
LII SE&I
22.5%
DFRC
0.4%
GRC
8.4%
GSFC
7.1%
SSC
0.6%
JPL
9.6%
MSFC
14.2%
LaRC
9.3%
KSC
0.8%
JSC
23.1%
15
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SE&I Center Guidelines
Preliminary as of 12 April 06
SE&I Center Guidelines
450
399.3
396.7
400
FTE + WYE
350
363.9
362.4
359.5
LaRC
KSC
325.5
300
JSC
250
ARC
JPL
200
100
GSFC
SSC
GRC
DFRC
MSFC
50
LII SE&I
150
Will continue to synergize our
forecasts with the Projects via
the May POP Follow-on TIM
0
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY09
FY10
FY11
16
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxPO SE&I Staffing Actuals vs Needs
Including Projections for balance of CY06
Summary totals for plotting
FTE/Matrix FTE
Allocation Onboard
FTE
Pending
FTE
Vacant
Matrix
Onboard
Matrix
Pending
Matrix
Vacant
WYE
WYE
Allocation 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
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
195
18
9
25
41
6
38
165
25
20
Program Technical Integration (PTI)
Totals
17
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SIG Staffing Status
JSC
MSFC
LaRC
ARC
SSC
GSFC
GRC
DFRC
KSC
JPL
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
C3I 11.5 5.6 17.1 2.7 9.55 12.3
Flight Performance
2
5.5
7.5
Navigation and Tracking
1
2.9
3.9
Integrated Loads, Struc, and Mech
1
6
7
Integrated Thermal and ECLS
2.5
Environments and Constraints
1.7
Human Factors and Human Rating 20.2
2.75 5.25 4.25
1
5.25
4.3
6
14.4
0
14.4
0
20.2
2
0
2
2.4
0
2.4
0
1.2
Ground/Mission Operations and Training
1
5
6
5.5
7
Affordability and Producability
0
2
1
1
7.5
1
1
3
1
1
3.2
0
9.9
Int Power, Loads, Interop, and Inter 1.5
0
1.5
55
0.25 7.75
2.5
3.5
13.2 16.1 29.3
1
0
1
1
1.5
2.5
1
2.4
3.4
0
6.5
8.5
1
0.5
1.5
0
2
2
8.1
4.5
12.6
3.6
22
1
2.6
3.6
0
2
0.5
2.1
0
2.1
3.6
0
3.6
0
3
3
6
0.2
0
0
0.5
1
0.2
6
2
0.5
0.5
13.5
0.3
0
0.3
20.9
1
0
1
25.3
7.2
0
7.2
24
14
1
2
3
0
2
2
0.5
2.5
3
0.1
0
0.1
5.6
5.2
14.8 16.2 5.75
12.1
10
1
37.6 99.5 26.3 18.9 45.1
10.9
0
3
0
90.4
14
0
3.6
2
4.2
2
7
EVA Integration 9.9
Center Totals
3
2.8
1.2
0
2.5
2.8
Software and Avionics Interop and Reuse
Supp/Logistics/Reliability/Maint 1.5
0.5
0
SIG
Total
22
1
0
1
21.2 20.2 41.4
1
0
1
9.5
0
9.5
14
7
21
10.9
0
2
2
0
1
1
1
0
1
1.5
5.5
7
18.7
9.6
28.3
14
18
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxPO SE&I 3P Overview
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
– Long-term Program-wide Technical Integration Foundation Products
• Cx Program Plan, Policy, Process & Strategy Documents
19
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Requirements Tree – Top Level Summary
VSE
NGOs
ESMD
Level 0/I
ESAS
Results
Reference
Architecture
Operational
Concepts/DRMs
Functional Analyses
Products
CARD
Constellation
Interface
Requirements
Commonality &
Standards
DSNE
Project/Element
Requirements
HSIR
CEV SRD
C3I
Specification
LSAM SRD
EVA SRD
Power
Quality Spec
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
ICDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IDDs
MTV SRD
Fracture Control
Requirements for
Constellation
Hardware
CLV SRD
CaLV SRD
CxP Requirements Tree is one
of the RID-able Items for ICPR
MS SRD
= Partial SIG Ownership working w/ Projects
= Full SIG Ownership working w/ Projects
Gnd Ops SRD
20
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Level III vs Level
II Lead Roles in
Interface Management
*
= Full SIG Ownership
working with Projects
= Lower Priority
CxICWG
Managed
IRDs/IDDs/ICDs, Between Elements a/o Programs
CEV
EVA
ISS
Project
Managed
MTV
PE
LSAM
*
*
GO
EDS
CLV
US
Eng
APAS
LAS
SA
CaLV
*
*
etc…
IRDs/IDDs/ICDs, w/in Element
etc…
etc…
IRDs/IDDs/ICDs, w/in Element
CaLV
IRDs/IDDs/ICDs, w/in Element
CEV
LM
MTV
LIDS
IRDs/IDDs/ICDs, w/in Element
CLV
FS
CM
MS
etc…
SRB
CS
CSE
etc…
Focus relative to Interface Management and lines of Responsibility
21
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Constellation Interface Requirements
Priority for Lunar Sortie CxP SRR
Critical
Medium
Constellation
Interface Requirements
High
CEV/ISS
IRD
LSAM/CaLV
IRD
CLV/CEV
IRD
CEV/ISS
ICD
LIDS
IDD
LSAM/CaLV
ICD
LSAM/EDS
IRD
Mission Systems/
CEV IRD
CLV/CEV
ICD
CEV/EDS
IRD
Ground
Operations/CEV
IRD
Mission Systems/
Ground Ops IRD
EVA/CEV
IRD
Ground
Operations/CEV
ICD
Mission Systems/
CEV ICD
Low/Not Required
MTV/CEV
IRD
EVA/CEV
ICD
LSAM/Ground
Operations IRD
MTV/CEV
ICD
EDS//CaLV
IRD
LSAM/EVA
IRD
EDS/CaLV
ICD
APAS
IDD
LSAM/EDS
ICD
LSAM/CEV
IRD
CEV/EDS
ICD
LSAM/Mission
Systems IRD
Mission Systems/
Ground Ops ICD
CLV/Mission
Systems IRD
LSAM/Ground
Operations ICD
LSAM/EVA
ICD
EVA/Ground
Ops IRD
CLV/Ground
Operations IRD
EVA/Ground
Ops ICD
LSAM/CEV
ICD
LSAM/Mission
Systems ICD
CLV/Mission
Systems ICD
EVA/Mission
Systems IRD
EVA/Mission
Systems ICD
CEV/Portable
Equipment
IRD
EDS//Ground
Ops IRD
CaLV/Ground
Operations
IRD
CaLV/Mission
Systems
IRD
LSAM/Portable
Equipment IRD
CLV/Ground
Operations ICD
EDS/Ground
Ops ICD
EDS/MS
IRD
CEV/Portable
Equipment
ICD
LSAM/Portable
Equipment ICD
EDS/MS
ICD
CaLV/Mission
Systems
ICD
Need Project Support in setting Priority Order by Book
and Within each Book
CaLV/Ground
Operations
ICD
Need to
work these
in Priority
Order to
Support
“Lunar
Sortie” CxP
SRR and
subsequent
Project
SRRs
22
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Example: CEV & CLV Legs of the Requirements Tree
CLV System
Requirements
Document
CEV System
Requirements
Document
CEV CM to LAS
IRD
CEV Spacecraft
Internal ICD
CEV CM to SM
IRD
CEV Spacecraft
Internal ICD
CEV Cockpit
Design
Requirements
CEV SM to SA
IRD
CEV Spacecraft
Internal ICD
CLV First Stage/
Upper Stage IRD
CLV First Stage/
Upper Stage ICD
CLV Upper Stage/
Engine IRD
CLV Upper Stage/
Engine IRD
CEV GSE
Specification
CEV Spacecraft
Specification
CEV
Launch Abort
System
Specification
CEV Command
Module
Specification
CEV Service
Module
Specification
CEV Spacecraft
Adapter
Specification
CEV
LAS Subsytem
Specifications
CEV
CM Subsytem
Specifications
CEV
SM Subsytem
Specifications
CEV
SM Subsytem
Specifications
CLV Subsystems
Electromagnetic
Characteristics
Requirements
CLV First Stage
Requirements
Document
CLV Upper Stage
Requirements
Document
CLV Engine
Requirements
Document
Subsytem
Specifications
Subsytem
Specifications
Subsytem
Specifications
Requirements Tree Covers Level II through Level III
23
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Current CARD Requirements Count & Distribution
= Full SIG Ownership
working with Projects
NUMBER OF REQUIRMENTS
ICPR
Kickoff
4-Apr-06
CARD
CEV SRD
Section
134
8
28
0
0
127
109
44
25
24
18
1
1
0
0
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
Constellation Architecture Requirements
Design and Construction
Interfaces
Physical Characteristics
Reserved
3.7.1
CEV
3.7.2
CLV
3.7.3
LSAM
3.7.4
CaLV/EDS
3.7.5
Ground Operations
3.7.6
Mission Systems
3.7.7
Mars Transfer Vehicle (MTV)
3.7.8
DAV
3.7.9
EVA
4 Verification
519 CARD Total
Section
355
3.2 CEV
355 CEV SRD Total
CLV SRD
Section
110
6
60
131
50
3.2 CLV
3.3 Design and Construction
3.7.1
1st Stage
3.7.2
US
3.7.3
USE
357 CLV SRD Total
CaLV SRD
Section
141
CaLV
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
24
Constellation AnalysisWWW.NASAWATCH.COM
and Requirements Traceability (CART)
Will facilitate id of “requirements-focused” risks, prioritized TPMs & mitigation plans
= Full SIG Ownership
working with Projects
Affordability
Schedule
Performance
Tier III
Tier II
Tier I
Trace Reports
CART Reports
System
Integration
ARM
Cradle
Requirements
Documentation
Program and group
level guidance
Groups
Requirement
assessment data
maintained in
Cradle
Requirements
Risk
Management
Continuous Assessment Focused
Trace / CART Reports
on Critical/At Risk Requirements
Requirement ownership
 Requirement: Parent-Child linkages
 Requirement Criticality
 Requirement Achievability Status:
technical performance, schedule, affordability
Group
Program
ARM
Informed
Risk
Proactive
Management
Management
TPMs - Provide Quantifiable
Assessment System
Watch List
TPMs
ARM
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
Critical requirements with
compliance issues
(Performance, Schedule, Affordability)
feeds appropriate risk management
processes
Program
Level Risks
25
CxP
Document
Tree
Ops
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SE&I
Cx System
Engineering
Management
Plan
T&V
PP&C
SR&QA
Project
APO
CxP
Management
Plan
NGOs
Integration
CxP
SR&QA Plan
Cx Business
Mgmt Plan
ESMD IM&S
Mgt. Policy
Cx Acquisition
Plan
CxP
Project Plans
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
= Full SIG Ownership
working with Projects
= Partial SIG Ownership
working with Projects
CxP Master
Int. & V er.
Plan
CxP Common
Glossary and
Acronym List
CxP Tech.
Development
Strategy
Cx Life Cycle
Cost Containment
Plan
CxP Margins
Management
Plan
Cx Technical
Performance
Meas Plan
Cx
Human
Rating Plan
LCC
Est.
CxP
Integrated
Test Plan
CxP
V&V by
Analyses Plan
CRADLE
Database and
Schema Plan
Cx
Requirements
Management
Plan
CxP Interface
Control
Plan
CxP SRR/
Review
Plan
CxP Risk
Management Plan
Cx Integrated
SR&QA Requirements
CxP Probabilistic
Risk Assess Plan FEMA/CIL Hazards Analyses PRACA
Methodology Methodology
Methodology
CxP
Integrated
Flight
Test Plan
CxP Systems
Integrated
Analyses Plan
Functional
Analyses
Results
CxP
Product
Tree
CxP
Doc
Tree
CxP Reqmts, Cx Reference
Specs and
Architecture
Standards Tree Doc. (RAD)
Cx
Operational
Concepts
PRACA
Sys. Reqts.
DRMs
Project Master
Verif
Plans
Project
IAPs
S/W
V&V
Plan
CxP M&S
CxP M&S CxP Integrated
M&S
Implementation Support
Requirements
Plan
Plan
Project
S/W V&V Plans
Cx Integrated
System Health
monitor Plan
Significant Engineering
Trees Here! Level I-IIII
FAM
FFBD/N2
Cx Supportability
Strategy
CxP
R & M Plan
Cx Supportability
Concept Document
Cx
Architecture Description
Project
Document (ADD)
Ops Concepts
Cx
SW Ar ch Description
Doc. (SADD)
Cx SW Mgmt &
Policies Plan
Cx Configuration
Mgmt Plan
CxP C31
Strategy Plan
Cx Baseline
Mgmt Plan
Must Keep this as Simple as Possible….But no Simpler
For a Virtually Distributed Multi B$, Multi-Decade Program
Cx Data
Mgmt Plan
ICE/WindChill
Implementation
Plan
Cx SW Config Cx SW QA
Plan
Mgmt Plan
COTS & Other
SW Interoper.
& Reuse Plan
Cx Phased SW
Cx SW
Integration Plan Classification
Matrix
Project
SDP’s
Cx SW
Measurement
Plan
26
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxPO SE&I 3P Overview
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
27
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Standards 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
28
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Layered 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
Horizontal–
integration
Explicit links to functions, components and interfaces on own level (modeled
in the architecture)
Vertical – Explicit links “up” to functions, components and interfaces on the next level
integration – derivation and realization are explicit
• Use architecture levels to construct schema for control in tools and
construct products for reviews
29
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Us vs. Traditional System Engineering
Traditional
Customer
Reqmts
System
Analysis
Rqmnts
Analysis
• System Spec
• Rqmnts Baseline
• System Arch
Config
Unit/Item
Build
Design
Synthesis
Functional
Analysis &
Decomp
• Functional Arch
• Functional Spec
• Single Major System
• Serial approach
Config
Unit/Item
Test
Requirements Flow Down – e.g., from
NASA Headquarters/ESMD/SOMD
Technical Management
Processes
Realized Products and Feedback – e.g., to
NASA Headquarters/ESMD/SOMD
10. Technical Planning
System Design
Processes
11. Requirements Mgt.
Product Realization
Processes
12. Interface Mgt.
• Physical Arch
• Design Spec
1. Stakeholder Expectations
Definition
13. Tech. Risk Mgt.
18. Issues Mgt.
2. Technical Requirements
Definition
9. Product Transition
8. Product Validation
14. Configuration Mgt.
15. Tech. Data Mgt.
7. Product Verification
3. Logical Decomposition
16. Technical Assessment
6. Product Integration
17. Decision Analysis
4. Physical Solution
Integration
Test
Integration
5. Product Implementation
Production
Requirements Flow Down
e.g., to Projects
System Design Processes
applied to each SBS Component
down and across
system structure
On-Going
Feedback
Realized Products
e.g., from Projects
Product Realization Processes
applied to each SBS Component
up and across
system structure
Us
CARD/IRDs/
SRDs
• Multiple Major Systems
• Parallel approach
Tier 1
System
Analysis
Functional
Decomp &
Allocation
Rqmnts
Analysis
Constellation
•
•
•
•
Time
Tier 2
System Spec
Rqmnts Baseline
System Arch
Technical Arch
Design
Synthesis
• Physical Arch
• Design Spec
Tier 3
Tier N+1 products maturity/feasibility underpins Tier N products maturity/feasibility
Config
Unit/Item
Build
Config
Unit/Item
Test
Integration
Integration
Test
Concurrent Engineering is inherent to what we do on CxP
Production
30
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Level II Requirements Enhancement Focus
2005
D
J
F
M
A
FY06
M
2006
J
J
A
S
Cx ICPR
O
Doc
J
2007
F
SRR
RAC 3
RAC 2
RAC 1
D
Cx SRR
ICPR
Sel Plan
Sel Plan
Doc
Approval
Mid-term
DAC 1
Doc
Mid-term
Approval
High-level CxPO SE&I Expectations for CY06
CLV SRR
CxP CY06 SRR Expectations:
Lvl
ORD,
I Reqmts
O&O,
ASR,Results
SEP,
ESAS
CDD
ts
&
SRDs & Intra
Preliminary
Element
I/Fs
Design
Reqmts
n
me
re
ui
Ve
rif
ica
CARD
Element-toElmment I/Fs
Reqmts
tio
n
Army
Agency
Operational
Validation
Validation
q
Re
Prime Item
Item &
& CI
CI
Prime
Development
Specs
& ICDs/
Specs
IRSs/SRSs
&
sig
De
n
 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 SRDs can 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
In
te
gr
at
io
n
CxP
FY07
N
Preliminary
Design
Multi-Element/
Multi-Mission
Verification
GO SRR
System
Integration
Verification
MS SRR
Subsystem
Integration
Verification
Component
Verification
CI / CSCIs
CEV SRR
Notional Responsibilities:
Lvl 0/I
EVA SRR
Lvl II
Build
Build
ICPR
SRR
SDR
PDR
Lvl III
Contracting Teams
CDR
First
Mission
Set
ONE Integrated Requirements Baseline
For NASA Internal Use Only
8
Currently our Eyes are on ICPR
Results and the Path Forward to
CxP SRR & 1st Season of Project
SRRs
31
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
32
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Level II / Level III System Development Model
Analysis of User
Requirements
Environment and
Constraints
,
Decomposition
Analysis of
Requirements and
Determination of V & V
Objectives
Functional
Analysis and
Decomposition
Selection and
Validation of
Preferred System
Concept
Reorganization of
requirements and V&V
objectives by architecture
organization and commonality
Verification of
Integrated System
Performance
Allocation to
Element
Verification of
Element
Performance
Verification of
Subsystem
Performance
Allocation to
subsystems
Functional Allocation
Concept
Design and
Development
CS Level II
Concept
Baseline
Level III
33
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Key Processes in these SE&I Areas
Programmatic Integration Support
Lvl 3 Project
SE&I Leads & Agency
Center SE&I Focals
Chief of Staff –
Organization
Horizontal Integration
Program Review Integration
Drive Integrated Perform./
Efficiency/Effectiveness
Across SE&I, CxPO and Centers
SE&I Director
Deputy
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Secretary
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
-Meeting Efficiencies/Focus
-Driving Technical Excellence
-Cost, Sched & Action/Trng Tracking -Major urgent Technical Issues
-Coordination w/ PP&C
Program Technical
Integration
Requirements
Management
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Integrated Capability/Functionality
- Lvl I/II & III Requirements
Across Subsystems, Projects & Missions - Functional Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- Highest Quality Requirements
- CARD
- Each Lead Assigned a set of CARD,
- Lvl II Standards
IRD & Invoked Standards Reqmts
- Product Tree
- Reqmts Achievability Assessments
- Lvl II/III Document Tree
- Risk Mitigation Plans
- Program Requirements Tree
- TPM Id & profiling
- Functional Analyses:
- Optimized Integrated Designs
FFBDs, FAMs & N2 Diagms
- Commonality/Interoperability/”ilities”
- Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP)
Forcing Function:
- Traceability Reports
- System Integration Groups (SIGs)
Forcing Function:
- Reqmts Working Group
Approved:
Interface
Management
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
PP&C – Scheduling:
Configuration Mgmt:
Prime Focus:
Human Resources:
- SRR success then all CxP reviews
Business Mgmt:
Prime Products:
Risk Mgmt:
- 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
Analyses, Trades &
Architecture
Modeling &
Simulation
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Program-wide approach &
- Integrated Analyses &
implementation of M&S
Physical Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- M&S Plans
- Integrated Analyses Plan
- M&S Tools/Standards
- ADD & RAD
- Integr M&S Products
- Lvl II Trades
- Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan - Level II & III
- Support to SIGs, ATA,
- Level II & III
T&V, APO & Ops
- Performance Assessments
Forcing Function:
- Gap ID & Mitigation
- Validated Requirements Set - M&S WG
- Risk Analyses
- Support to Ops & APO
Forcing Function:
- Analyses WG
SE Process, Tools,
Metrics and Training
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
// Chris L. Hardcastle 4/2/06 //
34
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SE&I Requirements Maturation
Process Flow
= Partial SIG Ownership
w/ with Projects &
Other SE&I Direct Reports
Process Step
Manage the Requirements
Development Process (RWG)
Define the
Scope
SIGs & Projects
integrated into the
development process
Develop the
Functional
Architecture
Develop the
Requirements
Analysis,
Trade Studies,
& Standards
Validate the
Requirements
Stakeholder
Feedback
2005
D
Define Design Problem
Identify Stakeholder Needs
2006
J
F
M
A
FY06
M
J
A
S
O
Sel Plan
ApprovalDefine the
TILs & Projects
integrated into the
development process
Develop the
Requirements
Analysis,
Trade Studies,
& Standards
Validate the
Requirements
Stakeholder
Feedback
Manage the Requirements
Development Process (RWG)
Manage the Requirements
Development Process (RWG)
Develop the
Functional
Architecture
Doc
D
J
F
SRR
DAC 1
RAC 2
RAC 1
FY07
N
Cx SRR
ICPR
Define the
Scope
Identify System Boundaries
Develop Functional Architecture
Develop Functional Model—System
Capabilities
2007
J
Cx ICPR
CxP
Develop Operations Concept / DRMs
Scope
Develop the
Functional
Architecture
Doc
Mid-term
Sel Plan
DAC 2
Doc
Develop Physical Architecture
Develop Requirements
Develop System Requirements
Write System Requirements
Document Rationale
Link system Requirements to
Parent Requirements
Link System functional/performance
requirements to Functional Model
(System Capabilities)
Develop Element Originating
Requirements
Decompose System Requirements
to Element Allocated Requirements
Document Rationale
Link System Requirements to Parent
Requirements
Link Element functional/performance
requirements to Functional Model
(Element Capabilities)
Develop Inter-Element Requirements
Produce Draft Documents
Manage Project Engineering Process
Manage Issues
Mid-term
Approval
TILs & Projects
integrated into the
development process
Manage Risks
CLV SRR
Develop the
Requirements
Analysis,
Trade Studies,
& Standards
Validate the
Requirements
Stakeholder
Feedback
Process Deliverables
Stakeholder List
Needs, Goals, and Objectives supplied by
Constellation Program Management
Design Reference Missions and Operations
Concept supplied by Ops. Integration
Architecture Description Document
Context Diagram

Functional Model to level sufficient to
describe Operations Concept and identify
System Functions
 Functional Flow Block Diagrams (FFBDs)
FAMs, and N2 diagrams, Linkage between
operational concept and functions
[Done by System Analysis Group]
System Requirements
System Requirements Rationale
Trace between System Requirements and
Parent Requirements
Trace between Element Originating
Requirements and Element Functions
Element Originating Requirements
Element Originating Requirements Rationale
Trace between System Requirements and
Element Originating Requirements
Trace between Element Originating
Requirements and Element Functions
IRDs, ICDs – supplied by Interface Control
Working Group
Draft CARD & SRDs


Issues documented in PE Model
When applicable, baseline configuration
changes identified and submitted to the
Configuration Management Process (see
3.10.3)
Risks identified and managed using the
Constellation Risk Management Process
CEV SRR
GO SRR
MS SRR
EVA SRR
Disciplined and Integrated Approach to
Maturing Our Requirements Set is
being Stoop Up
35
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
= Partial SIG Ownership
w/ with Projects &
Other SE&I Direct Reports
Develop Requirements
From Develop FA
3.1 Collect & document the
Requirements
3.2 Define & Capture Attributes
for Rqmts
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
3.9 Maintain the Database and
Document Tree
3.10 Produce Draft Document(s)
Process is designed to
capture all of the data
when the requirement
is being developed
3.8 QC Rqmts as they are
developed
No
RMO Driving This Process
Conduct Review
All Done & Ready
for Review?
Yes
36
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SE&I Requirements Maturation Across Stakeholders
CxATA
Requirements Development
Perform Analysis
Request Allocation Trade
Perform Analysis
Allocation Trade Results
Request Analysis
Analysis Results
Manage the Scope
Development
Stakeholders
SIGs
Rqmts
Owners
Product
Book
Developers
Managers
Define the Scope
Provide Scope
Inputs
NGO, Ops Con
Develop the
Functional
Architecture
FFBD, FAM, N2
Develop the
Requirements
Draft Docs
Validate the Requirements
Manage the
Functional
Architecture
Development
Manage the
Requirements
Development
Provide
Comments
Coordinate Final
Resolution
Provide Inputs
Provide Candidate
Requirements and
associated
attributes
Provide
Comments
Disposition
Comments and
Coordinate with
Originator
Interface
Requirements
Development
Requirements
Document
Provide
Comments
Provide Inputs
N2 Diagrams
Interface
Management
SIG Support
CxRWG
Manage The Requirements
Coordinate &
Integrate I/F with
Element SRDs
Split of Roles Across
SE&I Offices
37
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SE&I Requirements Quality –
Top job for SIGs for “their” assigned requirements
• 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
VSE
NGOs
ESMD
Level 0/I
ESAS
Results
Reference
Architecture
Operational
Concepts/DRMs
Functional Analyses
Products
CARD
Constellation
Interface
Requirements
Commonality &
Standards
DSNE
Project/Element
Requirements
HSIR
CEV SRD
C3I
Specification
LSAM SRD
EVA SRD
Power
Quality Spec
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
ICDs
IRDs
IRDs
IRDs
IDDs
MTV SRD
Fracture Control
Requirements for
Constellation
Hardware
CLV SRD
CaLV SRD
MS SRD
= 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
Gnd Ops SRD
38
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SIGs Facilitate Allocation/Decomposition &
Traceability for Level II to Level III Requirements
X
X
X
X
Reqmts Analysis
Level 0, NGO, OpsCon
Draft ICPR
B/L CxSRR
3.2
X
X
X
X
X
X
3.3
3.4
3.5
Level0/1
Decomp
X
Architecture/Integrated Element Level Reqmts
Level 2
X
3.7.X
CARD
ICDs
Element n (3.7.n)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
IRDs
CxPO Controlled
Draft CxSRR
B/L PrjSRR
Level 2
Allocated Reqmts
X.X
ICDs
Decomp
IRDs
X.Y
X
X
X
X
X
X
SRDs
X
Project Controlled
Level 3
X
Decomp
Specs
X
Vendor or GFE Projects
Level 4
X
X
X
X
Vendor/GFE
HQ
X
X
Projects
X
X
X
CxPO
X
X
Pre-SRR
Post-SRR
P = Prime
M = Monitor
S = Support
X to be replaced with P, M or S
Decomp
SIGs, Reqmts Mgmt, I/F MgmtSpecs
working with Projects
MUST ensure vertical & horizontal linkage
Subsystems
requirement-by-requirement
in CRADLE
Level 5
39
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
SIGs Ensure verifiability of Section 3 requirements and facilitate
the writing of section 4 verification methods & strategies
Section 3
No
Review
Requirement
For Verifiability
(Step 1)
Section 4s
IRDs and CARD
Customer
ORD
Intent
IT&V
Implementation Plans
Yes
No
Shall
Statement
IT&V Execution
Analysis
Modeling
Simulation
Demonstration
Testing
Yes
Coordinate
Issues with
Reqm’t
Owner
No
Single
Reqm't
Yes
Write SCN
No
Concise
capable
as a guide
excessive
detrimental
minimize
quick response
Examples of Ambiguous Words
shall be capable of
ability
shall have the ability normal
appropriate
sufficient
compatible with
reasonable
user friendly
maximize
not limited to
cost effective
acceptable
approximately
applicable
average
near term
adequate
Compliance
Documentation
Yes
RWG
No
Measurable
Yes
Proceed to
Step 2 of
Verification
Process
DI-XXX
SIGs with T&V Leadership
Ensure Each “shall” statement
in verifiable
40
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Simple Up-Front Filters to Determining an
initial Verification Method(s)
SoS Requirement
A
A
Section 4’s
No
No
Is
Instrumentation
Required to
Collect
Data?
Yes
Is All
Required
HW / SW /
Sims
Available?
Can
Requirement
Be Completely
Closed Without
Additional
Sim/Desktop
Analysis?
Yes
Yes
No
Can
Functionality
Be Observed
with Pass/Fail
Results?
Yes
No
A
Can
Requirement
Be Completely
Closed Without
Additional
Analysis?
Is Test Cost
Effective?
Yes
Yes
Test
No
No
A
A
Are
Simulations
Using
Models/Tools
Required?
Yes
Are
VV&A
Simulations
Available
For This
Purpose?
No
Are
Computations
Using Lower
Level Data
Req’d?
No
Yes
No
Is Demo Cost
Effective?
Demonstration
Yes
Are
Resources:
$ and Time
Available to
Modify
Sim?
Desktop
Analysis
Yes
Yes
Does Lower
Level Data
Need to Be
Reviewed for
Compliance?
Simulation
Analysis
No
No
Is Review
of Lower
Level Data
Sufficient?
Yes
Yes
Assessment
Inspection
SIGs with T&V Leadership Ensure
Each “shall” statement has initial
Verification Methods identified and
captured in CRADLE
No
Collector
Inspection
41
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Verification Methods & Implementation
Relative to CARD, IRDs, IDDs and SRDs
Level 2
Level 2
Allocated
Requirements
CARD
Sec 3
Sec 4
IRD
Sec 3
Verification Method & Implementation
Sec 4
IRD Sec. 3
Paragraph
Level 2
(Drawing
Level)
VCNs
IDD
(Existing
System C)
Level 2
Level 2
SRD Sec. 3
call-outs to IRD
Cx T&V
Integration
Verif. Plans
ICDs
3.3.4.1
3.3.5.3
VCNs
Cradle
Req. #
40
60
Requirement
Title/Subject
Side A
SRD
Ref.
Side A
Cradle
#
Side B
SRD
Ref.
Side B
Cradle
#
Verif.
Method
(Side A)
Verif.
Method
(Side B)
Joint
CEV and CLV
Health and
Status Data
4.1.x
42
4.2.x
43
T
T
T
CEV and CLV
Power Quality
Interface
4.3.x
63
4.5.x
65
T
A
--
Level 3
SRD
(Element A)
Sec 3
Level 2
Sec 4
Element A
VCNs
Joint
VCNs
Element A
T&V Plans
Level 3
SRD
(Element B)
Sec 3
Sec 4
Element B
VCNs
Bi-Lateral
Integration
Verif. Plans
& BDEALS
Verification Traceability,
Methods and Data will
Reside in CRADLE
Element B
T&V Plans
42
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
Generate Proposed Interface
Document
Submit to Interface Signatories
for review / concurrence
No
Concurrence?
• 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
2
Yes
Conduct ICWG coordination
with Interface Signatories
(develop recommendation)
Submit to ICWG Chair
(with Interface
Signatories signatures)
for review / concurrence
3
No
Resolution?
1
Update
Required?
Yes
No
3
Yes
No
IRN?
Submit issue to
SECB for issue
resolution
Yes
No
Concurrence?
Yes
1
Update interface
document based on ICWG
coordination
recommendation
2
Against
Baselined
Doc?
Yes
Submit ICWG
approved document to
SECB &/or CxCCB
No
Incorporate ICWG
approved IRN into
initial release of
interface document
Key role of CxP SE&I is interface
management across Projects
43
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Key Processes in these SE&I Areas
Programmatic Integration Support
Lvl 3 Project
SE&I Leads & Agency
Center SE&I Focals
Chief of Staff –
Organization
Horizontal Integration
Program Review Integration
Drive Integrated Perform./
Efficiency/Effectiveness
Across SE&I, CxPO and Centers
SE&I Director
Deputy
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Secretary
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
-Meeting Efficiencies/Focus
-Driving Technical Excellence
-Cost, Sched & Action/Trng Tracking -Major urgent Technical Issues
-Coordination w/ PP&C
Program Technical
Integration
Requirements
Management
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Integrated Capability/Functionality
- Lvl I/II & III Requirements
Across Subsystems, Projects & Missions - Functional Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- Highest Quality Requirements
- CARD
- Each Lead Assigned a set of CARD,
- Lvl II Standards
IRD & Invoked Standards Reqmts
- Product Tree
- Reqmts Achievability Assessments
- Lvl II/III Document Tree
- Risk Mitigation Plans
- Program Requirements Tree
- TPM Id & profiling
- Functional Analyses:
- Optimized Integrated Designs
FFBDs, FAMs & N2 Diagms
- Commonality/Interoperability/”ilities”
- Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP)
Forcing Function:
- Traceability Reports
- System Integration Groups (SIGs)
Forcing Function:
- Reqmts Working Group
Approved:
Interface
Management
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
PP&C – Scheduling:
Configuration Mgmt:
Prime Focus:
Human Resources:
- SRR success then all CxP reviews
Business Mgmt:
Prime Products:
Risk Mgmt:
- 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
Analyses, Trades &
Architecture
Modeling &
Simulation
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Program-wide approach &
- Integrated Analyses &
implementation of M&S
Physical Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- M&S Plans
- Integrated Analyses Plan
- M&S Tools/Standards
- ADD & RAD
- Integr M&S Products
- Lvl II Trades
- Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan - Level II & III
- Support to SIGs, ATA,
- Level II & III
T&V, APO & Ops
- Performance Assessments
Forcing Function:
- Gap ID & Mitigation
- Validated Requirements Set - M&S WG
- Risk Analyses
- Support to Ops & APO
Forcing Function:
- Analyses WG
SE Process, Tools,
Metrics and Training
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
// Chris L. Hardcastle 4/2/06 //
44
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 Planning
Products
•Master Analysis Plan
& Schedule (MAPS)
•Initialization Data List
Products
•Analysis Reports &
Master Summary (ARMS)
•New Design
Requirements
•New Operations Scenarios
Documentation
Analysis
Products
•Analysis Results
•Design Issues
•Tool & Model Validation
•Presentation of results
Products
•Proposed Design or
Operational Scenario Updates
•Action Item Data Base
•Integration Forum Minutes
Requirements
DAC
Mission
DAC
MCR/MDR
Preliminary
Preliminary
DAC #1
DAC #2
System
DAC
SDR
SRR
Critical
DAC #1
Critical
DAC #1
CDR
PDR
Design
Reference
Missions
Design
Changes/
Ops Changes
Operations
Concepts
Integrated
System
Performance
Assessments
System
Technical
Baseline
Master
Analysis Plan
& Schedule
(MAPS)
System
Requirements
Review
Results
Issue
Resolution
Trade
Studies
Document
Results
DAC
Objectives
Issue Resolution
DAC Planning
Procurement
Analysis
Procurement
Analyses Working Group (AWG) Is “THE” integrating forcing function here
– vertically Level 1 – 3 and horizontally (e.g. APO to SE&I)
45
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Vertical and Horizontal Analysis Integration
The Constellation Analysis Working
Group (CxAWG) integrates analysis
efforts vertically from Level 1 to Level 3
and horizontally across Constellation
ESMD
APO
OIG
T&V
SR&QA
CxPO
SW&Avionics SIG
FPSIG
N&TSIG
Thermal & ECLS SIG
Environments & Constraints SIG
EVA
Supportability & Logistics, Reliability & Maintainability
Human Factors & Human Rating SIG
LSAM
∫ Power Loads… SIG
EVA Integration SIG
Gnd and Mssn Ops / Training SIG
Producability & Affordability SIG
C3I SIG
GO
MS
CEV
CLV
∫ Loads, Struct, Mech SIG
46
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Analysis Trades and Architecture (ATA)
Planning
Technical
Teams
Generate &
Coordinate
TDS’s
Analysis &
Model Val.
Perform Analysis
(DAC/VAC)
Peer Reviews
Issue
Resolution
Perform Add’l.
Analysis as
Necessary to
Resolve Issues
Validate
Models
(VAC)
Documentation
Publish Final
Reports
Submit
Analysis
Abstracts
Integration Forum - Horizontal Integration
Review &
Coordinate TDS’s
DAC/
VAC
Team
Generate Master
Analysis Plan &
Schedule (MAPS)
Document
Review Analysis
and Identify
Issues
Coordinate
Resolution
of Issues
Publish Abstracts
and Catalog
Final Reports
FRR
V
C
N
s
Approve
Model/Tool
Certification
C
o
F
R
DAC/VAC Process
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
47
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
ATA Technical Issue Resolution Overview
Tracking targeted in CradleTM
Identif
y issue
• TBD/TBR
• Question
• Problem
• Decision
• Definition
• etc….
Issue resolution
database
Issue Resolution
Issue resolution type
• Literature/expert search
• SME panel
• Analysis
• Trade study
Assign
resources &
Schedule
• Assess
• Categorize
• Prioritize
Documentation Type
•Design note
• Report
Execute
process
Executive Reviews
Monitor progress via issue tracking database (metrics)
Integration
AWG
Baseline
Change
Approval As
Req’d:
SECB/CxCCB
“Not every issue” requires a big trade or analyses – All Need Burn-down Plans
48
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Common TDS Format
Cx 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,
49
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
• Key Products:
– Organizational “overlay” for M&S that provides integration function across CxPO (e.g.,
– Training
working groups, panels, etc.)
Subjective Assessments
• QFD
• AHP
• System Engineering Tools
Management
Systems Engineers
Constructive Assessments
• Cost – Complete Life-Cycle
• Risk – Flight, Development, RMS
• Conceptual / Prelim Engineering
Performance Capabilities
IM
&
S
–S
pa
ns
Analysis, Modeling
and Simulation
support evolves
throughout the
systems
development life
cycle, supporting a
wide range of
customers
• 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
–
–
–
–
Systems Engineers
System Analysts
Operators
es
of
An
al
ys
i
s
n
sig
De
Operator in the Loop Assessments
• Ground
• Flight Sims
• Crew
• Data Rich Simulation & Visual
Ph
as
es
ad
Systems Engineers
System Analysts
Operators
Designers
Manufacturers
Hardware-in-the-Loop Assessments
• Test Program Def & Refinement
• Hardware & Software Testing
• System Integration Modeling
st
Te
Systems Engineers
Operators
Designers
Manufacturers
Test and Verification
In Service Operations Assessments
• Operations Ramp-up Ramp-down
• Upgrades and Improvements
• Anomaly Resolution
ra
pe
O
ns
tio
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:
•
•
•
•
–
–
–
–
–
–
Al
l
Tr
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
50
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxP IM&S Strategy Concept of Operation
De-centralized IM&S Development, Use, & Execution
Centralized Guidance
IM&S Strategy [ Level - 1 ]
IM&S
Policy
IM&S
IM&S
Strategy
Strategy
IM&S
VV&A
Policy
IM&S
VV&A
Process
ESMD IM&S [ Level - 1 ]
IM&S
Support
Plan
M&S
Standards
M&S and Tools
Development,
VV&A
Modeling & Simulation
Resource Repository (MSRR)
IM&S
Guidance -
[ Level - 2 ]
Systems Level IM&S [ Level - 2 ]
SYSTEM STAKEHOLDERS
- Systems Engineering for
Mission-Level
- Integrated SIL (iSIL)
Development & Use
- Systems Analysis
IM&S
Support
Plan
iSIL SW & Tools
Development,
Management, & Use
VV&A
IM&S Common Resource
Repository
:
• Environments
• Element Sims
• Common SW Library
• Common Component Sims
(Thrusters, Engines, etc.)
IM&S SW & Tools are shared across entire ESMD Community
Element Level IM&S
ELEMENT STAKEHOLDERS
- Systems Engineering for
Element-Level
- SIL Development & Use
- Engineering Analysis
ESMD STAKEHOLDERS
- Architecture Trades
- M&S Technology Development
- M&S Tool Development
[ Level - 3 ]
CEV
M&S
Support
Plan
CEV SIL SW & Tools
Development,
Management, & Use
VV&A
CEV IM&S
CLV
M&S
Support
Plan
CLV SIL SW & Tools
Development,
Management, & Use
VV&A
CLV IM&S
GSS
M&S
Support
Plan
GSS SIL SW & Tools
Development,
Management, & Use
VV&A
GSS IM&S
51
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Integrated Modeling & Simulation
FY05 Capabilities
ANALYSIS
DISCIPLINE
GEOMETRY
AEROTHERMAL
TRAJECTORY
TPS
Disciplinary
Design/Analysis Capability
Ground
Processing
Simulations
Risk Modeling
Capability
CEV Proximity
Operations
CEV Final Approach to Dock
52
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
IM&S Documentation
Tree
(Proposed and in coordination)
ESMD IM&S
Management
Policy
Level 1
ESMD
ESMD
IM&S
ConOps
ESMD IM&S
VV&A Policy
ESMD
IM&S
Strategy
ESMD
IM&S
Glossary
ESMD IM&S
Strategy Executive
Summary
ESMD Risk
Management
Plan
ESMD IM&S
VV&A
Strategy
ESMD IM&S
Requirements
Document
ESMD IM&S
Implementation
Plan
ESMD
Risk Management
Plan IM&S Section
ESMD MSRR
Implementation
Plan
Level 2
Constellation
Systems (CS)
CS iSIL
ConOps
ESMD MSRR
Requirements
Document
ESMD IM&S
MSSP
CS IM&S
Implementation
Plan
CS
MSSP
CS IM&S
Requirements
Document
CS
Risk Management
Plan IM&S Section
Level 3
Elements
CEV SIL
ConOps
CLV SIL
ConOps
CEV IM&S
Implementation
Plan
CLV IM&S
Implementation
Plan
CLV
MSSP
CEV IM&S
Requirements
Document
CEV
Risk Management
Plan IM&S Section
CLV IM&S
Requirements
Document
CEV SIL
Requirements
Document
CLV
Risk Management
Plan IM&S Section
CEV LAS
MSSP Annex
CLV 1st Stage
MSSP Annex
CEV CM
MSSP Annex
CLV Upper Stage
MSSP Annex
CEV SM
MSSP Annex
CLV US Engine
MSSP Annex
CEV Vehicle Integration
MSSP Annex
Development Responsibility Unknown
ESMD IM&S
Accreditation Plan,
Report Process
& Specification
CxP MV&VI Plan
& Child Doc.
CS iSIL
Requirements
Document
CEV
MSSP
Level 4
Subsystems
ESMD IM&S
VV&A V&V Plan &
Process
Specification
CLV Vehicle Integration
MSSP Annex
CLV SIL
Requirements
Document
CEV LAS
SIL Requirements
Document
CLV LAS
SIL Requirements
Document
CEV CM
SIL Requirements
Document
CLV CM
SIL Requirements
Document
CEV SM
SIL Requirements
Document
CLV SM
SIL Requirements
Document
53
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
54
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
55
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Constellation IM&S
Implementing the Strategy
ESMD/Constellation
Policy
M&S Policy
Up-Reach
Test and Verification
Bill Arceneaux
SE&I
C. Hardcastle/S. Meacham
M&S Strategy
M&S Strategy
M&S Strategy
M&S Strategy
Analyses, Trades
Architecture
Neil Lemmons
M&S
Don Monell
Prog Tech Int Reqmts Mgmt Interface Mgmt
Steve Fitzgerald Keith Williams M. Digiuseppe
Services
SE Process, Tools,
Metrics, Training
TBD
Reqmts.
M&S Strategy
Steering Group
Outreach
Center
Outreach
POCs
Strategy
Implementation
Panels/Boards
External
Relationships
WGs
SIL WG
VV&A WG
Level 3
IM&S
Panel
Models
CLV
CEV
LMS
…
Strategy Implementation – NOT Services or Products Provided
56
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Key Processes in these SE&I Areas
Programmatic Integration Support
Lvl 3 Project
SE&I Leads & Agency
Center SE&I Focals
Chief of Staff –
Organization
Horizontal Integration
Program Review Integration
Drive Integrated Perform./
Efficiency/Effectiveness
Across SE&I, CxPO and Centers
SE&I Director
Deputy
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Secretary
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
-Meeting Efficiencies/Focus
-Driving Technical Excellence
-Cost, Sched & Action/Trng Tracking -Major urgent Technical Issues
-Coordination w/ PP&C
Program Technical
Integration
Requirements
Management
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Integrated Capability/Functionality
- Lvl I/II & III Requirements
Across Subsystems, Projects & Missions - Functional Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- Highest Quality Requirements
- CARD
- Each Lead Assigned a set of CARD,
- Lvl II Standards
IRD & Invoked Standards Reqmts
- Product Tree
- Reqmts Achievability Assessments
- Lvl II/III Document Tree
- Risk Mitigation Plans
- Program Requirements Tree
- TPM Id & profiling
- Functional Analyses:
- Optimized Integrated Designs
FFBDs, FAMs & N2 Diagms
- Commonality/Interoperability/”ilities”
- Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP)
Forcing Function:
- Traceability Reports
- System Integration Groups (SIGs)
Forcing Function:
- Reqmts Working Group
Approved:
Interface
Management
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
PP&C – Scheduling:
Configuration Mgmt:
Prime Focus:
Human Resources:
- SRR success then all CxP reviews
Business Mgmt:
Prime Products:
Risk Mgmt:
- 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
Analyses, Trades &
Architecture
Modeling &
Simulation
Prime Focus:
Prime Focus:
- Program-wide approach &
- Integrated Analyses &
implementation of M&S
Physical Architecture
Prime Products:
Prime Products:
- M&S Plans
- Integrated Analyses Plan
- M&S Tools/Standards
- ADD & RAD
- Integr M&S Products
- Lvl II Trades
- Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan - Level II & III
- Support to SIGs, ATA,
- Level II & III
T&V, APO & Ops
- Performance Assessments
Forcing Function:
- Gap ID & Mitigation
- Validated Requirements Set - M&S WG
- Risk Analyses
- Support to Ops & APO
Forcing Function:
- Analyses WG
SE Process, Tools,
Metrics and Training
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
// Chris L. Hardcastle 4/2/06 //
57
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxPO Collaborative Environment
Collaboration SE
Environment
Systems
Engineering
Technical
Development
System
Engineering
Management
CSE
Systems Engineering
Information
Management
• 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
Enterprise Architecture
CxP
Program
SRQ&A
T&V
MISSION OPS
APO
CxP SE&I
SE
Management
SE Technical
Development
IM
SE&I
Integrated
Master
Schedule
SEMP
SEP
ICP
Business
Management
Plan
SIGS
RM
RMP
ATA
(CxP
Cube)
SIAP
Integrated
Information
Systems
RID
ARM
Cradle
ICE
Windchill
TPM
SE Information
Management
Blue text shows shared responsibilities across CxPO
SE&I needs to Lead Collaborative Technical Integration
58
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Cradle CS SEI “Dual Vee” Process Model
Cx Analysis
& Simulation
Cx Mission Requirements
Cx Ops
Cx Functional
analysis
Cx Logical
Analysis
Cx Validation
Cx Verification
Cx Design
Synthesis
Cx Test
Element
Synthesis
Element
Test
Element V&V
Cx Process Control
CRADLE Schema and Design Key
To Our Collective and Collaborative
Success
Cx SE
Management
59
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxP SE&I Process, Methods, Tools & Environment (PMTE)
Process
Level II SE & I
Start
Level III SE&I
End
Coordination
End
Start
Check Pts
Level IV
Start
End
Methods
Process
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
________
________
________
________
. ________
________
. ________
________
. ________
________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
Management
.
.




Integrated
NASA IT
Operations
Policies
Guidelines
Templates
Checklists
 NASA
Management
 SE&I Team
 Level III Teams &
Contractors
 Suppliers
 Facilitators/Subject
Matter Experts
(SMEs)
Tools
 Mgmt
Guides &
Procedures
 WBS, Plans
 Workflows
 Issues, Risk
 Cradle / RM / PM / S&MA
 Windchill PDM
& Workflow Apps
 Webinars
 Process Facilitation
 Webinar / Help Desk
 Self-Serve Support
Facilitated, Collaborative Execution –
Throughout CxP Program LifeCycle
Month
Week
1. Mgmt Innovation Report
2. Initial Comm Events
3. Follow-on Comm Events
4. Deployment Readiness Comm Events
5. Training & Education Events
3
September
10
17
24
1
October
8
15
November
December
September
Month
22
29
5 Week
12
19
26
3 3 1010 1717
1. Mgmt Innovation Report
2. Initial Comm Events
3. Follow-on Comm Events
4. Deployment Readiness Comm Events
5. Training & Education Events
24
1
October
8
15
November
December
September
Month
22
29
5 Week
12
19
26
33 1010 1717
1. Mgmt Innovation Report
2. Initial Comm Events
3. Follow-on Comm Events
4. Deployment Readiness Comm Events
5. Training & Education Events
24
1
October
8
15
22
29
5
November
12
19
26
December
3
10
17
60
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Training & Education for SE&I Capability Build
Methods Database
Training Apps &
Information Servers
Process
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. _______




Policies
Guidelines
Templates
Checklists
Management

.
.



Mgmt
Guides &
Procedures
WBS, Plans
Workflows
Issues, Risk
Continuous Process Improvement
 Lessons-learned improvements
 Progressive automation
 Expanded selection & scope
of applications
 Extension to include all
stakeholders
 Webinars
 Process Materials
 Interactive
Help Desk
 Self-Serve
Training & Support
Web-Based
Training & Support
Network
 NASA
Management
 SE&I Team
 Level III &
Contractor Teams
 Process Facilitators,
SMEs, and Design &
Management Help
Desk Support
In-Process Facilitation, Training &
Guidance
 Partnership of NASA & subcontracted
SE&I Process & functional experts
 Expert / Apprentice based work
assignments for cultivating NASA nextgeneration SE&I leadership &
practitioners
 Interactive Webinar and Self-Service
Training & Performance Support
Systems
 On-Line, interactive system supported
Help Desk
61
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxP Near-term SE&I Process Roadmap
Phase 1
Phase 2
Web-automated
process, methods, and
infrastructure
Quick-Start Process:
Rapid methods, and
infrastructure build
Web-accessible
portal for automated
process, methods,
workflows, & training
New core systems &
applications and legacy
systems with
workarounds for new
process, methods,
workflows, etc.
“Paper-based”
methods for Initial
program activities
& pre-automation
pilots (Cradle,
WindChill & others
PDR
SDR
SRR
Process

. ________

. ________
. ________
.
________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________ 
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________
. ________ 
Management

.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
.________
Pre-Web Automation:
Training and worksessions conducted
for SE&I staffing,
training & facilitation,
and subject matter
experts (SME)
support activities; no
Web based self serve
yet!




Policies
Guidelines
Templates
Checklists
.
.





Cradle/PM
WindChill
PDM
& Workflow
Apps
Policies
Guideline
s
Template
s
Checklist
s
Mgmt
Guides &
Procedures
WBS,
Plans
Workflows
Issues,
Risk




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
Web automated Webinars
and self-serve SE&I
screening, training process
facilitation – Build SE
Profession
Web-Integrated
Helpdesk with
design and
process support
Phase 3
Web-Based
Collaborative
Design & Process
Environment
 NASA Management
 SE&I Team
 Level III Teams &
Contractors
 Facilitators/SMEs
 Manufacturing
 Suppliers
 Future Customers
62
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
Requirement Achievability Assessments
Based on three Components: Structure, Criticality, Achievability
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 appropriate managers
• Criticality of supporting requirements determined by TILs & supporting integration groups
• Achievability (Compliance Likelihood (low, medium, high) for Performance, Schedule, Affordability)
 Tier I Achievability based on assessments of critical supporting Tier II requirements
 Tier II achievability based on assessments of critical supporting Tier III requirements
 Tier III achievability based 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
Sub
Orbital
FT
I.1
II.1
I.2
II.2
I.3
II.3
III.1
PIDS
III.2
PIDS
III.3
PIDS
• Achievable - High Likelihood of Compliance > 80%
• Medium Likelihood of Compliance 50-80%
• Low Likelihood of Compliance < 50%
• Requirement is not feasible
I.4
Constraints and Interfaces
Links depicted in this diagram are for illustrative purposes
only and may not represent permissible linkages
CART Methodology
• Requirement criticality derived from parent traces
• Appropriate risk mitigation process based on
RiskAchievability
Matrix
Reqmts
likelihood of compliance and criticality
Likelihood of Compliance
Defined as probability of meeting requirement performance specification on schedule
and within budget
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%
“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
L
I
K
E
L
I
H
O
O
D
5
4
3
2
1
1
2
3
4
5
CONSEQUENCE
Need to map these criticality
categories to existing NASA
processes if they exist and
are appropriate
3
CART highlights technical performance achievability and
impact of design compliance gaps / risks
63
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Process filter used to establish need for Technical
Performance Measures (TPMs)
Is the proposed TPM a
SoSS,
CARD,PIDS,
SRD, CI, or
IRD Requirement
?
PCD
require ment?
No
Should the functionality
represented by this proposed
TPM result in a ne w SoSS
require ment?
No
Is this TPM required by
manage ment to monitor a
program management issue
such as affordability?
No
Additional
justification
required to
establish a TPM
Yes
Is the require ment
mission critical or
critical to program
success?
Yes
Yes
Is there a performance,
schedule or affordability risk
associated with this
require ment; or the potential
to develop these risks exist?
Yes
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
Place proposed
functionality into
FD/FA process and
create a new
require ment.
No
Is the require ment quantifiable?
a. Numerical thresholds exist and
b. Method to incre mentally measure
performance exist and
c. Inputs are available and
d. Can be updated monthly
Yes
No
Is requirement metric
predictable and responsive to
design changes?
No
Yes
Begin TPM
development
process
64
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Board and Working Group Structures (1 of 2)
SE&I
Ops Integration
T&V
SR&QA
PP&C
APO
Joint SSP/ISS
Cx Program
Requirements
Control Board
(JPRCB)
Constellation
Program
Control
Board
(CxCB)
ISS Mission
Management
Team
(MMT)
Project
Cx Safety
and Mission
Assurance
Panel
(Cx SMAP)
Cx System
Engineering Control
Board
(CxSECB)
Joint ISS/Cx
Mission
Integration
Control Board
(JMICB )
Flight
Operations
Control
Board
(FOCB)
Daily Mission
Integration
Control Board
(DMICB)
If it drives
Requirements or Designs
Lvl III
Control
Boards
Relative to
Safety
Integrated
Safety
Engineering
Review Panel
(ISERP)
Figure 3.1-3
Lvl III
Control
Boards
Relative to
H/W & S/W
Cx
Software
Control
Panel
(CxSCP)
Cx
Operations
Panel
(CxOP)
Range
Safety
Panels
(LCRSP &
ECRSP)
Lvl III
Control
Boards
Relative to
Operations
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
65
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Board and Working Group Structures (2 of 2)
Cx
Configuration
Mgt. Control
Working Group
(CxCMCWG )
Cx
Requirements
Working
Group
(CxRWG )
Cx Interface
Control
Working
Group
(CxICWG )
CxSECB
Cx
Analyses
Working
Group
(CxAWG )
Cx
Software
Control
Panel
(CxSCP )
Software
SIGs
Interoperability
Software
& Reuse
Interoperability
Software
SIG
& Reuse
Interoperability
Software
SIG
& Reuse
Interoperability
Software
SIG
& Reuse
Interoperability
SIG
& Reuse
SIG
SECB is intended to help facilitate control of the Technical Baseline
History has shown “fluid” technical baselines on the front-end of large-scale
DDT&E Programs can be detrimental
66
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Example Relationships for Level II Controlled Requirements
Joint SSP/ISS
Cx Program
Requirements
Control Board
Constellation
Program
Control Board
(CxCB)
(JPRCB)
Rqmts
Changes &
Impacts
Cx Systems
Engineering
Control Board
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
Technical Direction
Change Approval
(CxSECB)
• Proposed Rqmts changes
• Impacts associated with Rqmts changes
• Comments on Drafts
• Drafts for Comment
• Proposed Rqmts changes
Rqmts
Changes &
Impacts
Technical Direction
Change Approval
Cx
Requirements
Working
Group
(CxRWG)
Co-Chair: Keith Williams (CxSE&I RMO)
Co-Chair: Jonette Stecklein (CxT&V)
Cx Operations Integration
Cx Safety, Reliability & Quality Assurance
(SR&QA)
Cx Advance Projects Office (APO)
Cx Program Technical Integration
Cx ATA
Cx IMO
Astronaut Office
ISS Program
Cx Projects
ESMD HQ
Cx Analyses
Working
Group
(CxAWG)
Cx Interface
Control
Working
Group
(CxICWG)
67
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxPO SE&I 3P Overview
Agenda
• People
– Organizational Overview
– Current Leadership Profile
• Systems Integration Groups (SIGs)
CxPO SE&I 3P Overview
– 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 Processes
– Emerging Program Boards, Panels & WGs Structure/Process
• CY06 Challenges
• Backup – Recommended May “Requirements Face-to-Face (F2F)”
2
• 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-byProject “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
68
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
RID Disposition Teams
& ICPR products
Board or Panel
Available for
Review
Pre-Board
(SECB)
RID
Disposition
Team
RRP
ARP
pTIP
SR&QA
RP
ICRP
Base-lined
Prior to
SRR
RID-able
products
ICPR Board
(CxCB)
PP&C
RP
Process and
Tools
CxOIP
CARD
RAD
C3I Strategy
Plan
ICP
SR&QA
Plan
CMP
MMP
REMP
SIAP
C3I
Interoperability
Plan
IRDs
RMP
DMP
SRR
Annex 2
PRA
PMP
SEMP
NGO
DSNE
MVIVP
HSIR
WBS
Document Tree
Requirements
Tree
HRP
IMS
CRADLE
Database
Scheme Plan
Glossary
Support Concept
Document
SRD’s
Software
Management
and Policies Plan
Ops Con
30 Artifacts forming a subset of the 87
targeted for CxP SRR
69
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
ICPR Emerging Metrics
70
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Level II Requirements Enhancement Focus
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
ICPR
KickOff
ICPR
Pgrm Doc’s under Board
Baseline Doc #
SRR
SE Control
April
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
ICPR Review Results
Projects ID “Key Driving” Requirements**
Level II Post-ICPR Requirements Update + Functional
Analyses Workshop #2
Level II “hosted” Requirements “Face-to-Face”
F2F Homework
Enhancement session – two weeks straight
F2F Virtual Follow-on
Factor in IDAC2 Midterm
& Functional Analysis WS #3
Factor in IDAC2 Final
& Functional Analysis
CARD, Invoked Standards, IRDs & SRDs Focus Flow
** Note factoring in SMART Buyer for CEV – via Presentations to SECB Apr 6th
71
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
High Level Requirements Development Schedule
WK4
WK3
WK2
WK1
WK4
WK3
WK2
WK1
WK4
WK3
WK2
WK1
WK4
Dec
Nov
SRR
Driving Requirements
Project SRRs
IDAC 2
F2F/Arch
POP Results
Arch
Vehicle
Vehicle
Ops
Functional
Analysis
Oct
WK3
WK2
WK1
Sep
WK4
WK3
WK2
WK1
Aug
WK4
WK3
WK2
WK1
Jul
WK4
WK3
WK2
WK1
WK4
WK3
WK2
WK1
Jun
ICPR
Key
Constellation
Milestones
Requirements
Development
May
WK4
WK3
WK2
WK1
Apr
Cycle 1
Arch
Ops
Arch
W/S #3
W/S #2
Vehicle
Vehicle
Ops
Ops
72
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
Analysis Cycles to SRR
2005
D
2006
FY06
J
F
M
A
J
M
Cx ICPR
IPSR
RAC 1
Doc Sel Plan
J
A
S
O
N
D
J
F
Cx SRR
ICPR
CxP
2007
FY07
Doc SRR
IDAC-2
Sel Plan
IDAC-3
Approval
Mgt Decisions
Mid-term
Doc
CEV
NASA
CLV
CRC 1
1A
CRC 2
CEV RAC 2
CLV DAC-1
CEV SRR
CEV RAC 2A
Doc
CLV SRR
73
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
Constellation IDAC-2 Scope
Higher
• 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)
Priority
• 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
Lower
– 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
74
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
75
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
CxPO SE&I 3P Overview
Agenda
• People
– Organizational Overview
– Current Leadership Profile
• Systems Integration Groups (SIGs)
CxPO SE&I 3P Overview
– 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 Processes
– Emerging Program Boards, Panels & WGs Structure/Process
• CY06 Challenges
• Backup – Recommended May “Requirements Face-to-Face (F2F)”
2
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
Must reflect our work to go in one integrated, resourced schedule – and manage to it
76
WWW.NASAWATCH.COM
BACKUP –
More data on Requirements F2F in June
- NOT READY FOR PRIME TIME
77