themis & rhessi nrc irvine 2/01/2005 rhessi and themis pi mode experience feb 1 2005
Post on 15-Jan-2016
216 views
TRANSCRIPT
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI and THEMIS
PI Mode Experience Feb 1 2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
AGENDA
1:00 UCB Missions R. Lin, UCB Director
1:15 RHESSI R. Lin, PI, UCB
1:30 THEMIS V. Angelopoulos, PI, UCB
1:45 PI Mode Experience P. Harvey, PM, UCB
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
SPACE SCIENCES LABORATORYBackground• Initiated in 1958 by Drs. Teller and Seaborg• Multidisciplinary organization• Connecting campus research to space efforts• Facility opened in 1966• New facilities added in 1998Research Efforts Involving• Balloons• Sounding rockets• Satellite instruments & science complements• Complete satellites• Mission & Science Operations• Ground Station OperationsAgencies Involved• NASA, NSF, NSBF, USAF, DOE• ESA, ISAS, IKI, PSI, etc.• $50M/yr (>90% NASA, <10% other.)
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Facilities
• 55000 sq. ft. Office and Laboratory Space
• Employing 420 Scientists, Engineers, Staff
• On-Site Machine Shop
• Clean Room Facilities to Class 100
• Thermal Vacuum Facilities up to 3m diameter
• Spacecraft Integration Facility
• 4-story High Bay
• Radiation Sources Laboratory
• Mission Operations Centers
• Science Operations Centers
• 11 Meter S-Band Satellite Antenna
• Secure High Speed Communications to NASA
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Operational Flight InstrumentsRHESSIFASTIMAGE FUV, WICGALEX detectorsCHIPSPolar EFIWind 3DPCluster II EFW, CISMars Global Surveyor ERROCSAT 2 - ISUALUlysses LANFUSE detectorsSOHO UVCS & SUMER detectorsKITSAT SPEAR
Under DevelopmentHUBBLE - COSSTEREO – IMPACTTHEMIS
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
SSL PERSONNEL
107 Scientific Researchers
133 Professional/Technical/Support Staff
150 Graduate and Undergarduate Students
SPACE PHYSICS RESEARCH GROUP (136 total personnel)
46 Scientific Researchers
25 involved in Magnetospheric Physics
46 Engineering & Technical Staff
37 Graduate & Undergraduate Students
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Operations Components• Mission Operations Center• Science Operations Center• 11-meter S-Band Antenna with X-band capability• High Speed Communications to NASA Ground Network• Network Security• Autonomous Operations Pass Supports Orbit Determination & Tracking Spacecraft Command & Control Emergency Response System Self Checking
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
FAST AURORAL SNAPSHOT
• Science Package Electric Field Instruments Particle Instruments Electronics• Mission Operations• Science Operations Launched on 21 Aug 1996Mission Continuing through 2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Lunar Prospector (1st competed Discovery Mission)
PI Dr. Alan Binder
Magnetometer/Electron Reflectometer InstrumentDr. R. P. Lin
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Imager for Magnetopause-to-Aurora Global Exploration (IMAGE) MIDEX
PI Dr James Burch SWRI
Far UltraViolet (FUV) Imager Instrument Dr. Stephen Mende UCB-SSL
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RAMATY HIGH ENERGY SOLAR SPECTROSCOPIC IMAGER
RHESSI: A NASA Small Explorer (SMEX)PI: Prof. Robert P. Lin UCB-SSL• Project Management• Spacecraft Bus• Science Package Imager Spectrometer Electronics• Mission Operations• Science Operations• Ground Data Systems Launched February 5, 2002Mission continuing through 2006-7
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Cosmic Hot Interstellar Plasma Spectrometer (CHIPS)A NASA University-Class Explorer (UNEX)
PI Dr. Mark Hurwitz UCB-SSL
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
TIME HISTORY OF EVENTS AND MACROSCALE INTERACTIONS DURING SUBSTORMS
THEMIS: A Middle Class Explorer (MIDEX#5)
PI: Dr. Vassilis Angelopoulos UCB-SSL• Project Management• Spacecraft Bus• Science Package• Mission Operations• Science Operations• Ground Data Systems Launch: October 19, 2006Nominal Lifetime: 2 years
Production Mode Development ofFlight Boards (Here: SST Front-End)
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Overview
Dr. Robert P. Lin
Principal Investigator
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Prime Responsibilities
UC Berkeley (PI institution) Germanium detectors & cryostat Instrument electronics Integration & Test Ground station & MOC/SOCGSFC Grids, CryocoolerPSI (Switzerland) Telescope & aspect system
Spectrum Astro
Spacecraft
A1309.013
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Imager - Top View
RHESSI Imager - Side View
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Detectors and Cryostat
SPACEFLIGHT NOWPosted: June 4, 2001
X-43A launch failure
Next Pegasus rocket launch delayed in X-43A aftermath
The High Energy Solar Spectroscopic Imager, or HESSI satellite, was scheduled to rocket into space on Thursday aboard an air-launched Orbital Sciences Pegasus XL booster.
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Orbit (~600 km altitude)
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
23 July 2002 Flare
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: 23 July 2002 flare nuclear de-excitation lines (Smith et al. 2003)
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Energetic Particles at the Sun:
2.2 MeV line flux >1380+-11 518+-84.4 MeV >91+-11 35+-72.2/4.4 ratio 15.2 14.8
Power law index 3.8 3.8Np (>30 MeV) >7.2x1033 2.7x1033
Solar Energetic Particles at 1 AU:
Power law index (integrated fluence) 3.4 3.4Np (>30 MeV) 1.8x1034 9.1x1032
RHESSI: Oct 28, 2003 Nov 2, 2003
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI: Microflares fromActive Regions Krucker et al. 2002
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI as a Polarimeter (20 – 100 keV)RHESSI as a Polarimeter (20 – 100 keV)
A small (3 cm diam by 3.5 cm high) cylinder of Be serves as a Compton scattering element.
The Ge detectors measure the distribution of the scattered radiation.
The rotation of the spacecraft rotation provides an effective method for fine sampling of the scatter distribution.
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
X4.8 Flare of 23-July-2002X4.8 Flare of 23-July-2002
20 - 40 keV Polarization
6000
4000
2000
0
Counts
360°300°240°180°120°60°0°
Azimuthal Scatter Angle
FLR2072301 : 20 - 40 keV
µfit = 0.11µ100 0.55
š 20%
6000
4000
2000
0
Counts
360°300°240°180°120°60°0°
Azimuthal Scatter Angle
FLR2072301 : 20 - 40 keV
µfit = 0.11µ100 0.55
š 20%
Flare location : S13E72
≈ 20% ≈72° ± 5°
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI X-ray imaging during HXR peak of 20 Jan 05 X7 flare:
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RHESSI Mission Overview
Peter Harvey
Project Manager
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
RAMATY HIGH ENERGY SOLAR SPECTROSCOPIC IMAGER (RHESSI)
PurposeTo understand particle acceleration andexplosive energy release in the magnetized plasmas at the Sun.
Capabilities•Will provide the first hard X-ray imaging spectroscopy of the Sun;•Will provide the first high-resolution spectroscopy of solar -ray lines;•Will provide the first Solar imaging above 100 keV;•Will provide the first imaging of solar -ray lines.
Collaborating Institutions•University of California (UCB,UCLA)•Goddard Space Flight Center•Paul Scherrer Institute (Switzerland)•Spectrum Astro Incorporated •Lawrence Berkeley Nat’l Laboratory •Jet Propulsion Laboratory•Montana State University•University of Alabama at Huntsville•Nat’l Oceanic and Atmospheric Adm.(NOAA)•Institute of Astronomy ETHZ in Switzerland•University of Glasgow, Scotland, •National Astronomical Observatory, Japan•Observatoire de Paris-Meudon, France
RHESSI: Purpose and Team
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Launch to Orbit Orbit : 600 km CircularInclination: 38 degreesOrbit Period: 96 minutesS/C Attitude: Sun Pointed, Spin StabilizedS/C Spin Rate: 12-15 rpm
Operations
Phases: Launch and Early Orbit Checkout (30 days) Minimum Mission Operations (6 months) Baseline Operations (18 months) Crab Observations (1 week each July) Anneal Period (1 week every 2 years)
RHESSI: MISSION PARAMETERS
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
• PI Mode1
PI Team Provides Space, Ground and Data Analysis SegmentsPI Team Provides Cost, Schedule, Performance Assurance Management
• Launch Vehicle•Vehicle : "SELVS II" ( Pegasus XL ) selected after HESSI CDR.
• Cost and Schedule CapsIncludes Spacecraft, Ground and Data Analysis (Phases A through E)Launch no later than 3 years from Contract Start.Project terminated if not launched on time or if cost to complete exceeds cap.
• Resulting Implementation StrategyDesign Using Off the Shelf Items as much as possibleLimit OptimizationHold Wide Margins
[1] Not PI Mode as of 5/2000.
RHESSI: KEY PROGRAMMATIC ASPECTS
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Explorers Office Frank Snow, Mission Mgr
Explorers Office Frank Snow, Mission Mgr
DOE ( LBNL )Detectors
DOE ( LBNL )Detectors
TecometGrids
TecometGridsMontana State Univ
Ground CoordinationMontana State Univ
Ground Coordination
vanBeek ConsultancyGrids
vanBeek ConsultancyGrids
Spectrum AstroSpacecraft Bus
Spectrum AstroSpacecraft Bus
HESSI Organization ChartMajor Subcontracts & Suppliers
U.C. BerkeleyRobert Lin, PI
Peter Harvey, Project Manager
U.C. BerkeleyRobert Lin, PI
Peter Harvey, Project Manager
KSCLaunch VehicleManagement
Ground BasedObservatoriesGround BasedObservatories
GSFCGrid Processing, Cooler
Brian Dennis, co-I
GSFCGrid Processing, Cooler
Brian Dennis, co-I
Paul Scherrer InstituteImaging Systems
Paul Scherrer InstituteImaging Systems
JPLGridsJPLGrids
EMP / Allied SignalGround Antenna
EMP / Allied SignalGround Antenna
EG&G OrtecGermanium Crystals
EG&G OrtecGermanium Crystals
OSCPegasus XL
OSCPegasus XL
Hernandez Eng.Safety
Hernandez Eng.Safety
JPLEnvironmental Tests
JPLEnvironmental Tests
SpaceWorksSpacecraft Support
SpaceWorksSpacecraft Support
RHESSI: ORGANIZATION
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
HESSI ProjectHESSI Project
1.1 ManagementPeter Harvey
1.1 ManagementPeter Harvey
1.2 ScienceDr. Robert Lin
1.2 ScienceDr. Robert Lin
1.3 Systems EngineeringDavid Curtis
1.3 Systems EngineeringDavid Curtis
2. Spacecraft Bus2. Spacecraft Bus 3. InstrumentSubsystems
3. InstrumentSubsystems
4. Mission I&T4. Mission I&T 5. Ground Systems
5. Ground Systems
3.1 ImagerAlex Zehnder
3.1 ImagerAlex Zehnder
3.2 SpectrometerPaul Turin
3.2 SpectrometerPaul Turin
3.3 IDPUDavid Curtis
3.3 IDPUDavid Curtis
4.1 Spacecraft I&TRick Sterling
4.1 Spacecraft I&TRick Sterling
4.2 Operations PreparationsChris Smith
4.2 Operations PreparationsChris Smith
1. Management,Science,
Systems Eng.
1. Management,Science,
Systems Eng.
2.1 Management Rick Wanner2.1 Management Rick Wanner
2.2 Spacecraft BusJohn Jordan
2.2 Spacecraft BusJohn Jordan
2.3 Bus I&TJeff Jackson
2.3 Bus I&TJeff Jackson
HESSI Work Breakdown Structure (Phase D2)
5.1 SOCTim Quinn
5.1 SOCTim Quinn
5.2 MOC/Ground Antenna and Site
Manfred Bester
5.2 MOC/Ground Antenna and Site
Manfred Bester
RHESSI: WBS
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
ID Task Name
1 Requirements Review
2 Concept Review
3 Pre-Preliminary Design Review
4 Preliminary Design Review
5 Confirmation Review
6 Critical Design Review
7 L-1 Year Review
8 Pre-Environmental Review
9 Recovery Review 1
10 Reconfirmation Assessment Review
11 ReConfirmation Readiness Review
12 Reconfirmation Review
13 Red Team Review I
14 Pre Environmental Review 2
15 Pre Ship Review
16 Red Team Review II
17 Phase A Concept
18 Phase B Design
19 Phase C Fabrication
20 Phase D Integration
21 Phase D Qual-to-Mishap
22 Phase D2 Recovery & ReIntegration
23 Phase D2 Qual (JPL)
24 Phase D2 Final Prep (VAFB 836)
25 Phase D2 LV Processing (VAFB 1555)
12/15
2/2
6/24
7/29
8/17
11/19
6/18
2/29
4/4
5/16
6/29
8/4
10/24
10/30
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
95%
0
N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J1998 1999 2000 20
ID Task Name
1 Requirements Review
2 Concept Review
3 Pre-Preliminary Design Review
4 Preliminary Design Review
5 Confirmation Review
6 Critical Design Review
7 L-1 Year Review
8 Pre-Environmental Review
9 Recovery Review 1
10 Reconfirmation Assessment Review
11 ReConfirmation Readiness Review
12 Reconfirmation Review
13 Red Team Review I
14 Pre Environmental Review 2
15 Pre Ship Review
16 Red Team Review II
17 Phase A Concept
18 Phase B Design
19 Phase C Fabrication
20 Phase D Integration
21 Phase D Qual-to-Mishap
22 Phase D2 Recovery & ReIntegration
23 Phase D2 Qual (JPL)
24 Phase D2 Final Prep (VAFB 836)
25 Phase D2 LV Processing (VAFB 1555)
12/15
2/2
6/24
7/29
8/17
11/19
6/18
2/29
4/4
5/16
6/29
8/4
10/24
10/30
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
95%
0
N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J1998 1999 2000 20
SCHEDULE MANAGEMENTPersonnel Required : 1 FTE at Project Level; 1/2 FTE at S/C, 1/2 at GSFC, 1/2 at PSI.Integrated at Project Level. All Project98.
RHESSI: SCHEDULE
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS Overview
Dr. Vassilis Angelopoulos
Principal Investigator
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
TIME HISTORY OF EVENTS AND MACROSCALE
INTERACTIONS DURING SUBSTORMS (THEMIS)
RESOLVING THE PHYSICS OF ONSET AND EVOLUTION OF SUBSTORMS
Science Team
Principal InvestigatorVassilis Angelopoulos, UCB
EPO LeadNahide Craig, UCB
Program ManagerPeter Harvey, UCB
Industrial PartnerSWALES Aerospace, Inc., Beltsville MD
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Primary:“How do substorms operate?”– One of the oldest and most important
questions in Geophysics– A turning point in our understanding of the
dynamic magnetosphere
First bonus science:“What accelerates storm-time ‘killer’ electrons?”– A significant contribution to space weather science
Second bonus science:“What controls efficiency of solar wind – magnetosphere coupling?”– Provides global context of
Solar Wind – Magnetosphere interaction
THEMIS: Science Goals
AuroraCurrent disruption
Reconnection
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Mission Elements
Probe conjunctions along Sun-Earth line recur once per 4 days over North America.
Ground based observatories completely cover North American sector; can
determine auroral breakup within 1-5s …
… while THEMIS’s space-based probes determine onset of Current Disruption and
Reconnection each within <10s.
: Ground Based Observatory
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS Mission Overview
Peter R. Harvey
Project Manager
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Instrument Payload
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Probe Bus Design
Power positive in all attitudes with instruments off (launch, safe hold modes)
Passive thermal design using MLI and thermostatically controlled heaters tolerant of longest shadows (3 hours)
– Spin stabilized probes orbit within 13° of ecliptic plane have inherently stable thermal environment
S-Band communication system always in view of earth every orbit at nominal attitude. In view for greatest part of orbit in any attitude
Passive spin stability achieved in all nominal and off-nominal conditions
Monoprop blow down RCS (propulsion) system is self balancing on orbit
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Standard Delta 10 ft. Fairing Static Envelope
3712 PAF
Probe Carrier Assembly (PCA = 5 Probes + Probe Carrier) on L/V
Probe Carrier Assembly (PCA = 5 Probes + Probe Carrier) on L/V
THEMIS Launch Configuration
THEMIS Launch Configuration
Probe Carrier Assembly (PCA) on Delta 3rd StageProbe Carrier Assembly (PCA) on Delta 3rd Stage
Launch Configuration
Dedicated launch accommodated within standard Delta 7925-10 vehicle configuration and services
10’ Composite Fairing required to accommodate five Probes on the Probe Carrier in the “Wedding Cake” configuration
PC stays attached to Delta 3rd stage after probe dispense
Each probe dispense from the PCA is coordinated with but independent of the other probes
No single probe anomaly precludes dispense of remaining probes
Star 48 3rd Stage
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Ground System Block Diagram
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Programmatic Overview
Programmatic Overview– PI Mode
PI Team Provides Space, Ground, Data SegmentsPI Team Provides Cost, Schedule, Performance AssurancePI Team Provides Education/Public Outreach
– Cost and Schedule CapsSingle Cost Cap for the Mission Launch no later than March 2007
– Performance AssuranceMIDEX Quality Requirements
Implementation StrategyUse Heritage InstrumentationCoordinate Common Buy Parts Keep Probe/Probe Carrier Simple and Robust
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
Explorers Office Frank Snow, Mission Mgr
Explorers Office Frank Snow, Mission Mgr
U.Colo/LASPBob Ergun
U.Colo/LASPBob Ergun
TU-BSUli Auster
TU-BSUli Auster
Swales AerospaceMike Cully
Swales AerospaceMike Cully
THEMIS Organization ChartSubcontracts/Agreements
Phases BCD
U.C. BerkeleyVassilis Angelopoulos, PI
Peter Harvey, PM
U.C. BerkeleyVassilis Angelopoulos, PI
Peter Harvey, PM
KSCGarrett Skrobot,
Mission Integ Mgr
KSCGarrett Skrobot,
Mission Integ Mgr
CETPAlain Roux
B. De la Porte
CETPAlain Roux
B. De la Porte
GSFC/GNCDKaren Richon
GSFC/GNCDKaren Richon
UCLAChris Russell
UCLAChris Russell
Univ of CalgaryEric Donovan
Univ of CalgaryEric Donovan
Univ of AlbertaJ. Samson
Univ of AlbertaJ. Samson
IWFWerner Magnes
IWFWerner Magnes
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
THEMIS ProjectTHEMIS Project
1.1 Management1.1 Management
1.2 Science1.2 Science
1.3 Systems Engineering
1.3 Systems Engineering
2. SpaceSegment
Development
2. SpaceSegment
Development
3. GroundSegment
Development
3. GroundSegment
Development
4. Mission Ops& Data Analysis4. Mission Ops
& Data Analysis5. Education &
Public Outreach5. Education &
Public Outreach
3.1 Mission Operations Center
3.1 Mission Operations Center
3.2 Science Operations Center
3.2 Science Operations Center
3.3 Ground Based
Observatories
3.3 Ground Based
Observatories
4.1 Mission Operations4.1 Mission Operations
4.2 Data Analysis4.2 Data Analysis
1. Management,Science,
Systems Eng.
1. Management,Science,
Systems Eng.
2.1 Instruments2.1 Instruments
2.2 Spacecraft2.2 Spacecraft
THEMIS Work Breakdown Structure
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
Management, Science and Systems Engineering
Management, Science and Systems Engineering
Management SupportK. Harps FinancesM. Larson PurchasingM. Giordano DocumentationD. Meilhan SchedulingA. Shutkin Administration
Management SupportK. Harps FinancesM. Larson PurchasingM. Giordano DocumentationD. Meilhan SchedulingA. Shutkin Administration
UCB Sponsored ProjectsD. Weldon ContractingUCB Sponsored ProjectsD. Weldon Contracting
Systems Engineering
Ellen Taylor
Systems Engineering
Ellen Taylor
ScienceV. Angelopoulos
ScienceV. Angelopoulos
Science SupportBonnell, JohnCarlson, ChuckDelory, GregoryFrey, HaraldHull, ArtLarson, DavinLin, RobertMende, StevenMoreau, ThomasMozer, ForrestParks, GeorgePeticolas, LauraPhan, TaiTemerin, Michael
Science SupportBonnell, JohnCarlson, ChuckDelory, GregoryFrey, HaraldHull, ArtLarson, DavinLin, RobertMende, StevenMoreau, ThomasMozer, ForrestParks, GeorgePeticolas, LauraPhan, TaiTemerin, Michael
Program Management
Peter Harvey
Program Management
Peter Harvey
Electrical Ellen Taylor
Electrical Ellen Taylor
Mechanical /ThermalPaul Turin
Chris Smith
Mechanical /ThermalPaul Turin
Chris Smith
EMC/ESC/MAGRobert Snare (UCLA)
EMC/ESC/MAGRobert Snare (UCLA)
THEMIS WBS 1.0
Facility SupportJ. Cooks ContractsJ. Keenan PurchasingG. Davis Accounting J. Williams TravelJ. Jones Personnel
Facility SupportJ. Cooks ContractsJ. Keenan PurchasingG. Davis Accounting J. Williams TravelJ. Jones Personnel Quality & Safety
Ron JacksonQuality & Safety
Ron Jackson
PartsJorg Fischer
PartsJorg Fischer
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
InstrumentsInstruments
Electric Field Instrument
(EFI)
Electric Field Instrument
(EFI)
ElectroStaticAnalyser
(ESA)
ElectroStaticAnalyser
(ESA)
Solid StateTelescope
(SST)
Solid StateTelescope
(SST)
InstrumentI&T
Rick Sterling
InstrumentI&T
Rick Sterling
InstrumentData Processor
Unit (IDPU)
InstrumentData Processor
Unit (IDPU)
THEMIS WBS 2.1
FluxgateMag
(FGM)
FluxgateMag
(FGM)
Search CoilMag
(SCM)
Search CoilMag
(SCM)
Forrest MozerJohn BonnellGreg DeloryArt HullBill DonakowskiGreg DaltonRobert DuckMark PankowDan SchickeleStu HarrisHilary Richard
Forrest MozerJohn BonnellGreg DeloryArt HullBill DonakowskiGreg DaltonRobert DuckMark PankowDan SchickeleStu HarrisHilary Richard
Robert AbiadPeter BergHeath BerschDorothy GordonFrank HarveySelda HeavnerJim LewisJeanine PottsChris ScholzKathy Walden
Robert AbiadPeter BergHeath BerschDorothy GordonFrank HarveySelda HeavnerJim LewisJeanine PottsChris ScholzKathy Walden
Charles CarlsonM. MarckwardtBill ElliottRon Herman
Charles CarlsonM. MarckwardtBill ElliottRon Herman
Robert LinDavin LarsonRon CanarioRobert LeeT. Moreau
Robert LinDavin LarsonRon CanarioRobert LeeT. Moreau
Hari DharanY. KimTien TanBill Tyler
Hari DharanY. KimTien TanBill Tyler
TUBS/IWFUli AusterK.H. GlassmeierW. Magnes
TUBS/IWFUli AusterK.H. GlassmeierW. Magnes
CETPAlain RouxBertran de la PorteOlivier Le ContelChristophe CoillotAbdel Bouabdellah
CETPAlain RouxBertran de la PorteOlivier Le ContelChristophe CoillotAbdel Bouabdellah
LASPRobert ErgunAref NammariKen StevensJim Westfall
LASPRobert ErgunAref NammariKen StevensJim Westfall
MagBoomsMag
Booms
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Organization
Ground SegmentGround Segment
Mission Ops Science Ops
(Mission Planning)
Mission Ops Science Ops
(Mission Planning)
THEMIS WBS 3
Ground Based ObservatoriesGround Based Observatories
Manfred BesterMark LewisTim QuinnSabine FreyTai PhanJohn BonnellLaura Peticolas
Manfred BesterMark LewisTim QuinnSabine FreyTai PhanJohn BonnellLaura Peticolas
Stephen MendeStu HarrisSteve GellerHarald Frey
Stephen MendeStu HarrisSteve GellerHarald Frey
UCLAChris RussellJoe MeansDave Pierce
UCLAChris RussellJoe MeansDave Pierce
All Sky ImagersAll Sky Imagers
Ground Magnetometers
Ground Magnetometers
Fielding & Operation
(UC&UA)
Fielding & Operation
(UC&UA)
UCEric DonovanUCEric Donovan
GSFC/GCNDDavid SibeckMark BeckmanBob DeFazioDavid FoltaRick Harman
GSFC/GCNDDavid SibeckMark BeckmanBob DeFazioDavid FoltaRick Harman
UAJ. SamsonUAJ. Samson
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Top Level Schedule (from PDR)
CY 2005MILESTONES
CY 2004CY 2003
THEMIS TOP LEVEL SCHEDULE STATUS AS OF: 11/06/03
GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER MISSION MGR. : FRANK SNOW
1
MAJOR REVIEWS
IDPU DEVELOPMENT
IDPU ETU DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O
CY 2006
2 EFI SPB / AXB DEVELOPMENT
EFI SPB & AXB DESIGN, FAB, I&T
3 ESA DEVELOPMENT
ESA ETU DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
4 SST DEVELOPMENT
SST ETU DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
5 FGM DEVELOPMENT
6 SCM DEVELOPMENT
SCM EM DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
8
INSTRUMENT I&T
ETU & FLIGHT 1 - 5 INTEGRATION & TEST
DSG COMPL..
DSG COMPL.
FLT I&T COMPL
BOX ASSY
ETU I&TDSG COMPL.
ETU FAB
ETU TESTS
DSG COMPL.ETU FAB
ETU I&T
FLT 1-6 FAB COMPL.
FLT I&T COMPL
ETU PROC/FAB
FGE ETU I&T
FLT 1-5 FGE FAB & TEST FLT I&T COMPL
FLT I&T COMPL
ETU I&T
ETU FAB
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6
2-31
11/30
FGM ETU DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
8/184/164/0112/08
FLT I&T COMPL
DSG COMPL..
10/1211/26
11/027/063/021/0612/16
10/185/3112/299/29
10/259/244/161/21
1/26 7/26
FLT 1-2
8/06 8/249/10
9/2810/15
1 2 3 4 5
7/13 7/288/04
8/11
1 2 3 4 5
3/052/27
7/21
6/08
1
9/287/06 8/03 8/31
2 3 4 5
FLT I&T COMPL4/30
H/W FAB
6/25 8/27
FLT ASSY 1-6
1/0612/23
11/3011/16 1/20
10/26
9
PROBE CARRIER
PROBE CARRIER DESIGN, FAB, TEST
12
PROBE CARRIER ASSY I & T
INTEGRATION & ENVIRINMENTAL TESTS
13
LAUNCH OPERATIONS
LAUNCH PROCESSING/LAUNCH
DSG & PROCURE FAB COMPL..
I&T COMPLETE
10
SPACECRAFT PROBESLONG LEAD PROCUREMENT, SUBSYSTEM DESIGN, FAB & BUS I&T
F1 F2-3 F4 F5
8/036/242/16 8/10
9/158/096/2711
PROBE & INSTRUMENT I&T
PROBE I&T with INSTRUMENTS F1 F2-3 F4 F5
11/2310/198/25 12/05
3/15
8/21
PROBE F1 SLACK (60 days)
PDR.
11/12-14CDR.
4/06-07
PROBE F5SLACK (40 days)
SRR.
7/16
7 SCM/FGM BOOM DEVELOPMENT
SCM EM DESIGN, FAB, I&T & FLIGHT
DSG COMPL..
FLT I&T COMPL
FAB HINGES & TUBES 41
6/1412/10 8/24
2 3 5 6
SHIP & LAUNCH PROCESSING
INSTRUMENT DELIVERY TO SWALES
6/296/06
5/044/06
3/10
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
MCRR12/08-09
CONF. REV (HQ)
1/15
5/11 10/05
F5 SLACK (120 days)F1 SLACK (95 days)
6
6
F1 SLACK (40 days)F5 SLACK (64 days)
9/285/04
6
4-6
3-5
1-6
1/22
DSG COMPL..
8/319/07
9/149/21
9/28
ETU TEST
2/12
2/23
ETU TEST (GERM.)
3/08
ETU I&T
PROBE CARRIER SLACK (60 days)
FLT 1-6 FAB COMPL.
7/30
ETU I&T
7/13
MISSION SLACK (60 days)
5/25
INSTRUMENT SLACK --
PROBE CARRIER & BUS SLACK
MISSION SLACK --
Slack Legend
--
1 2 3 4 5 6
9/289/14
8/318/17 10/12
8/03
14
FLIGHT PLATFORM & HARNESS FLT HARNESS COMPL
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
PI Mode Experience
Peter R. Harvey
Project Manager
Space Sciences Laboratory
University of California, Berkeley
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Tasks
(1) examine and assess the selection process and objectives for PI-led missions, including the balance between science objectives and cost and management criteria,
(2) examine the roles, relationships, and authority among members of the PI-team (e.g., PI, university, industry, field center) in past missions,
(3) identify lessons learned from the scientific and technical performance of previous PI-led missions,
(4) investigate and analyze the factors contributing to cost overruns of missions, including any requirements that are imposed on PI-led projects during their development,
(5) identify opportunities for knowledge transfer to new PIs and sustained technical management experience throughout the program, and
(6) identify lessons learned and recommend practices and incentives for improving the overall conduct of future PI-led missions.
SSB Subcommittee Tasks
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Questions
1. Please list those problems and challenges that were distinct from a program-led mission that you have faced/are facing in your effort to accomplish your proposed PI-led project. What is the status of each or what was the outcome?
2. What were the responsibilities of the program manager, project manager, and PI?
3. Comments on communications and interactions among the PI, PM (project manager), NASA, industry, and other key players?
4. What aspects of the PI program do you think facilitated your work and getting the mission done on time and on budget, and what do you consider the most significant obstacles in achieving mission success?
5. What changes would you make to the way PI-led missions are defined and/or executed to improve them at the proposal, development, and/or implementation phases;
6. Please comment on lessons learned from your experience managing a PI mission(s).
7. Would you do it again, why or why not?
SSB Subcommittee Questions
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
• PI mode is cost-capped but PL mode is not operating under strict cost cap.
– Problems and challenges same in both, but solutions are different
– PI mode provides flexibility not available in PL mode; this helps both science and costs
RHESSI ExamplesPL mode view PI mode view
HESSI cryocooler challenging Buy expensive ($$) Buy many and test
Support with in-house development
JPL vibration table broke HESSI Major overrun ($$) SAI w/ UCB joint rebuilt
I&T at UCB
HESSI launch before solar max When we can (sci) Can do now: simplify spacecraft
HESSI Grids Buy one and monitor ($$) Parallel path
HESSI Operations expensive OK, nominal ($$) Build UCB antenna, use automation
Q1. PI vs. PL mode:Problems and Challenges
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS ExamplesPL mode view PI mode view
THEMIS SST too noisy Relax requirements (SCI) Develop in-house
THEMIS schedule risk Delay launch ($$, SCI) Change I&T venue (org-chart)
THEMIS mass growth Send help ($$) or accept (sci) Instruments accommodate a new tank
THEMIS thermal/power Restrict s/c attitudes (risk) Instrument-bus personnel work together
THEMIS cost projection OK, it was tough to do ($$) Reorganize team to recover costs
IIRT reports to center Natural Driven not by cost/schedule but only risk
Authority over PM, PL, PI, and Science
Defies PI mode – and notion of cost cap
Extra reviews (ITA, Code500) Bring them on Same as above
Q1. PI vs. PL mode:Problems and Challenges
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Status and Outcome: All problems retired successfully due to flexibility of the PI mode, relative to PL mode
Notable positive attributes of PI mode (should be strengthened):One contract and a clear line of authority to PI-PM allows team to:
• Trade effectively between science, mission design, schedule and cost
• Exercise parallel paths and implement at critical junctures
• Re-organize team efficiently when in trouble
• Work as a single-team with instruments accommodating spacecraft and vice-versa
Technically experienced PI institution ensures science goals are met at cost by having:
• Good technical insight into mission elements and capability to determine risks early
• Capability to line-up in-house or new partner solutions when critical to mission success
Notable risks of PI mode as implemented currentlyLine of authority to PI-PM that goes with responsibility to stay on cost is threatened:
• IIRT, AETD, Code 500, ITA (technical reviews) which have power over PI-PM
Q1. PI vs. PL mode:Problem Status and Outcome
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
AO-01-OSS-03 (Same for RHESSI and THEMIS)
•Explorer program:•Designed to utilize streamlined and efficient management approaches•Seeks PIs who commit to cost limits, control business and technical processes
•The responsibility for implementing a selected investigation rests with the Principal Investigator (PI) and the investigation team, which will have a large degree of freedom with which to accomplish its proposed objectives with appropriate NASA oversight to ensure mission success.
•GSFC is responsible for NASA's fiduciary responsibility to ensure that Explorer missions are achieved in compliance with the cost, schedule, performance, reliability, and safety requirements committed to by the PI. GSFC's involvement in this role may vary from mission to mission, depending on the implementing organization and other programmatic considerations.
Q2. Responsibilities (Explorer AO)
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
THEMIS selection letterMarch 22, 2003.From: AA for Space ScienceTo: THEMIS PI
“The Explorer Program Office, located at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in Greenbelt, Maryland, is responsible for overall management of the Explorer program, while explorer program definition and project selection remain at NASA Headquarters. For your investigation, project management is assigned to the University of California at Berkeley as outlined in your proposal. The project will be required to regularly report status to the Explorer Program Office and to the GSFC Program Management Council (PMC).”
Q2. Responsibilities at THEMIS CSRplan review, THEMIS selection (2003)
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
ResponsibilitiesMission Manager (Frank Snow, GSFC)• Works with KSC for Launch Vehicle, Launch Services• Works with HQ for ODA and International Agreements, Status• Works with GSFC engineering for variety of support items• Works with JPL for Environmental Test Finances
Project Manager (Peter Harvey, UCB)• Works with S/C Contractor • Works with Instrument developers• Works with Ground Based Observatory developers• Works with Ground Station Developer (RHESSI)
Principal Investigators (Robert Lin, Vassilis Angelopoulos, UCB)• Works with Science Team to define Measurement Requirements• Works with Operations Team to define Mission Profile• Works with Instrument Teams to detail capabilities
Q2. THEMIS Roles and Responsibilities
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Sets Explorer Guidelines,(based on GSFC practices),reports to GPMC and HQEnsures adherence to margins,resources and requirements committed to by PI (e.g., INST-001). If margins are threatened, GSFC recommends action, offers resources, takes on more active role in technical decisions and resource management.
Review teams:Peer, IIRT
Q2. THEMIS proposed authority lines
IIRT (formal): Ensures, for MM, technical,schedule and cost margins are met. Recommendsbut does not enforce actions to PM.An asset for both MM and PM.Disposition of actions within PM authority.
Peer (informal): Ferrets out issues before theybecome problems. Disposition within subsystem.Ultimate closure of issues by PM.
Day-to-day program managementfor the PI, within allocated resources.Science/Technical decisions involvePI. Reports resource trends and marginsto PI and Explorers office.
Responsibility and authority to conductinvestigation withinproposed resources.Delegates daily management to PM.Reports to GSFC (resource and sciencemargins) and HQ (decisions that affect L1).
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
•THEMIS Confirmation Letter,May 4, 2004From: AA for Space Science, Ed WeilerTo: GSFC Director, Al Diaz
“Based on the THEMIS project’s presentation on April 22, 2004, to the Enterprise Program Management Council, I approve THEMIS to proceed into mission implementation.
…This is a cost-capped mission requiring tight control in order to maintain
cost and international schedule commitments for launch in October 2006. The project in conjunction with the Explorer Program Office and GSFC’s engineering directorate shall provide status on the development and conduct schedule reviews of the spacecraft every 2 months. This oversight will serve to facilitate early detection and correction of problems thereby improving mission success.”
Q2. Responsibilitiesat THEMIS confirmation (May 4, 2004)
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. THEMIS actual authority linessince confirmation (2004+)
SMO office
UCBPI, PM, MSE…
Science, Resource, Costor Subsystem (Swales, Instr.)
Explorers OfficeMM, OM, other
IIRT
Peer ReviewPanel
GPMC
GSFC Director
HQ
GSFC Code 500
Engr Review Team
RAO
ITA
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Reason for change:GSFC is told by HQ that the it has responsibility for project success. Therefore, it is natural that GSFC will assume the authority to ensure mission success, treating THEMIS as any GSFC mission, implemented in accordance with its own management practices and heritage.
Effects:• Mitigation plans require review and approval if not proposed in CSR
• Organization changes take a long time to make and are perceived risky
• GSFC involved with subsystems•Involvement often construed as direction•GSFC a stake-holder in status quo, reluctance towards alternate paths
• GPMC using own PL-mode management practices and heritage• Cost adherence no longer a priority (HQ picked mission!)• Risk-adversity addressed thru formal review channels drives decisions• Resources and trades discussed openly with subs, outside of PI sphere
Q2. Line of authority evolution:reason for PI mode change and effects
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Practical Resolution:
• Constant, open, direct communications between PI-PM and Explorers office
• Amicable working relationship and capable team members
• Strong UCB ties with Explorers and GSFC allow efficient interaction
Q2. Line of authority evolution:day-to-day implementation
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q2. Line of authority evolutionrisks and recommendations
Risks:
• Possible misunderstanding of sub-contractors• Line of authority confused• Top-down decisions may risk science• Bottom-up decisions take long time to review and implement (inefficient)• Management practices at UCB and GSFC different• Who is committed to cost (PI, GSFC, both)? Unclear HQ guidance.• Who is responsible for science adherence? Unclear HQ guidance.
Recommendation:
• Authority and responsibility must lie at the same place• That place should be same for technical resources and science• The appropriate place is where the science is conducted unless delegated• PI flexibility to trade science, cost and technical resources depends on that
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q3. Communications
Obstacles to WorkTeaming Arrangements UCB was and is Prime on RHESSI and THEMIS. Spectrum Astro / Swales Aerospace are the Spacecraft Subcontractors In Both Projects, GSFC Generally Ignores Relationship between UCB and S/C GSFC Review Teams & Engineers Often Direct Effort at S/C Contractor S/C Contractor Uses This to Explain Cost Overruns
NASA GSFC
UCB
S/CContractor
Contractual Arrangement
NASA GSFC
UCB S/C Contractor
Effective Arrangement
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q3. Communications
Facilitators to Efficient CommunicationsHow PI deals with current situation (I.e., effective PI mode arrangement)
Recognize GSFC holds the contract and go with the flow
Emphasize team-effort and strategic (as opposed to tactical) success
Agree with s/c contractor and GSFC on “terms of engagement” (even if moot point)
Information is key: obtain from both GSFC and subcontractors
Extract information when not provided, utilize agreement above
Open and honest communication between PI-PM and MM (parallel paths, costs, and outlook)
Pick main battles where it matters: on technical and science issues
Call out and tabulate out-of-scope items; insist only on heavy-hitters
Recognize that Explorers Program is on the same boat, change is coming from further above !
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q4. PI Mode Aspects
Aspects Facilitating WorkFlexibility in implementing technical and organizational workarounds
• Full trade space at the disposal of science under cost • Parallel paths available even though not called out at proposal
Direct Involvement of PI with Spacecraft & Instrument Developers• Instruments Have Been Defined Well and Early• Full Authority to Improve Spacecraft Design
Obstacles to WorkGPMC and Explorers office assuming more direct role in management
• Have different management style more in line with PL mode (not capped)
NASA IIRT• Action Items Not Constrained by Cost or Schedule
ITAR• NASA Declines to Provide Interface to State Dept for PI• University Pressures Team to Steer Clear of ITAR required activities• Project Has to Work Around ITAR Rules (Change Flow, Personnel, etc)
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q5. PI Mode Improvements, #1
PI Mode Definition• Recognize that under GSFC management, PI mode under cost cap a challenge
• Mission Can Be PI Mode, or GSFC Mode (=PL Mode), but Not Both• Unless GSFC is the proposing PI institution
• HQ must take responsibility for PI mode mission selection. Not GSFC.
• HQ must clarify that PI institution has the responsibility and authority:• Authority and responsibility for both science and implementation must be
at same place, and this should be the place committed to deliver on cost
• Place triggers for GSFC involvement in management• If cost to complete or technical resources are threatened
• GSFC should ensure commitments by PI institution are met• Ensures science and L1 commitments are on track• Informs HQ of progress and projections• Ensures processes and parts are in line with NASA expectations• A resource for PI institution to get back on track if problems arise
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Phase A
•Make Phase A Non-Competitive
•Allows Project to Develop Team Members
•Allows Team to Fully Explore (Detail) Cost Estimate
•HESSI Cost was Estimated Better than THEMIS
Implementation
•Give PI Authority over the Project
•Do not Change Rules-of-the-Road Mid-Course
•Remove IIRT or Have it Report to the PI
•Remove the Mission Signoff Requirement from GSFC
Development
•Discourage Developments During a Project
•Fund Development Efforts for Future Projects.
Q5. PI Mode Improvements, #2
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q6. PI Mode Lessons
Lessons Learned
Technology Development Very High Risk to Depend Upon Development. Always Have a Descope Position. HESSI Developed a Backup Supplier of the 20 micron grids and Needed it. HESSI Developed a Backup Roll Angle Sensor and Needed it THEMIS Developed Backup Detectors and Needed them THEMIS Is Currently Developing Multiple Backup SystemsRECOMMENDATION : PI Team Should Substantially Fund Backups
Proposal Development HESSI was Proposed Multiple Times. Partner Selection Process Involved 7 Companies Selected a Small Growing Company Who Needed HESSI to Work. HESSI S/C partner performance was considered Very Good.RECOMMENDATION : Select Partner Who Has a Huge Interest in Project Success
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q6. PI Mode Lessons
Lessons Learned
University Infrastructure Very Small, Independent Research Groups Attached to Dean Personnel Are Hired into Career Positions at Lower-than-Average Salary with Good
Benefits. Engineers are Motivated and Enthusiastic About Scientific Research. Typical Manager is a Willing Engineer No Centralized Training Program for Managers, Engineers, or Technicians Internal Cost and Schedule Practices Only. Minimal Subcontracting Work (SOW, RFP, Contracts, Termination Liability, Rate
Changes, Requirement Flow Downs, Monitoring Technical Progress, etc...) RECOMMENDATION(s)[1] Invest in Training Programs for Personnel. [2] Investigate Supplemental Aerospace Support (e.g. Thermal, Contamination...)[3] Hire Project Contracting Officer, Scheduler, Accountant [4] Train Your Engineers to Be Subcontract Technical Monitors
THEMIS & RHESSI NRC Irvine 2/01/2005
Q7. The Future
Would You Do it Again?Will there be more PI-Missions?• Yes; based upon their success• Definitely cost effective• SMEX/MIDEX Provide Science
results as well as large missions
Do it Again?• As Long as THEMIS gets on a
chart like this one.
Mission Grade PI ModeRHESSI 8.8 YesCluster 8.5IMAGE 7.2 YesACE 7.2TIMED 7.1Polar 6.8Voyager 6.7Ulysses 6.3TRACE 5.9 YesFAST 5.9 YesWind 4.7Exodus 3.8SAMPEX 3.7 Yes
Src: SEC Senior Review (Aug 2003)