NGAO Team Meeting
Management
Peter Wizinowich
March 19, 2009
Presentation Sequence / Schedule
•
•
•
Build-to-Cost (B2C) Review Results
B2C Design Changes
Preliminary Design Status vs SDR Plan
– Why?
•
Next Steps
2
1st Draft B2C Reviewer Report
Good Job!!
B2C study has been an extremely efficient, cooperative, and
productive response to the SSC’s request
Compelling Science
• Preserved science cases seem very compelling
• Committee finds elimination in wide-field, d-IFU capability tolerable
• Science cost/benefits analysis shows that B2C changes preserve
(and sometimes improve) excellence of narrow-field science
4
Credible Technical Approach
•
•
•
Technical approach is a sound simplification of SDR concept
Science instrument concept now needs to catch up
We would like to understand…
–
–
–
–
–
Cost of additional instrument feeds
Cost tradeoff between combined and separate imager + IFS
More detailed study of imager capabilities and requirements (multiple plate scale?)
Potential performance (and future upgrades) for shorter wavelengths below 800 nm
Cost of implementing a fixed pupil mode
5
Credible Contingency
•
•
Good bottoms-up approach to computing contingency
Committee recognizes some persistent uncertainties
–
–
–
•
Functional contingency options should be developed if cost contingency remains
uncertain
–
–
•
Laser operating in a variable gravity environment (pending results of ESO Preliminary design
studies)
MEMS (pending demonstration of 64x64 device)
RTC? (recommend revisiting NFIRAOS comparison
Develop a risk register, with decision points, and track it at each review
Possible examples include laser power, order of MEMS, phased introduction of tip/tilt
sensors and PAS lasers
Lab Integration / Test Schedule may also need greater contingency (pending
development of schedule)
6
Unsolicited Advice
•
Phased approach should be considered for the PDR
– Can sky coverage capability be phased?
– Can Strehl ratio (e.g. laser power) be phased?
•
•
Can a unique science phase space be defined for KNGAO relative to TMT
(not JWST)?
More importantly, KNGAO is ready to proceed to PDR completion at the
$60M cap
7
NGAO System Architecture
Key AO Elements:
• Configurable laser tomography
• Closed loop LGS AO for low
order correction over a wide field
• Narrow field MOAO (open loop)
for high Strehl science, NIR TT
correction & ensquared energy
X
8
Revised NGAO System Architecture
Key Changes:
1. No wide field science instrument 
• Fixed narrow field tomography
• TT sharpening with single LGS AO
• 75W instead of 100W
• Narrow field relay not reflected
2. Cooled AO enclosure smaller
3. Lasers on elevation ring
4. Combined imager/IFU instrument
& no OSIRIS
5. Only one TWFS
9
AO Design Changes Summary
A. Architectural changes allowed by no deployable multi-IFS instrument
1. LGS asterism & WFS architecture
2. Narrow field relay location
B. New design choices that don’t impact the requirements
1. Laser location
2. AO optics cooling enclosure
C. Design choices with modest science implications
1.
2.
3.
4.
Reduced field of view for the wide field relay (120” vs 150” dia.)
Direct pick-off of TT stars
Truth wavefront sensor (one visible instead of 1 vis & 1 NIR)
Reduced priority on NGS AO science
– Fixed sodium dichroic, no ADC for NGS WFS & fewer NGS WFS subaperture
scales (2 vs 3)
5. No ADC implemented for LOWFS (but design for mechanical fit)
6. OSIRIS role replaced by new IFS
10
Science Instrument Design Changes
• NGAO Proposal had three science instruments ($20M in FY06 $)
– Deployable multi IFS instrument
– NIR imager
– Visible imager
• For the SDR we included OSIRIS integration with NGAO
• Science instrument design changes that impact the science
capabilities
–
–
–
–
–
No deployable multi IFS instrument
Addition of single channel NIR IFS
Removal of OSIRIS (science capabilities covered by NIR IFS)
No visible imager
Extension of NIR imager & IFS to 800 nm
11
AO Optics Relay & Switchyard
•
150” dia SDR FOV reduced to 120” with new assumptions
Visible Imager focal plane
Science
Instrument
OAP4
FSM
NGS WFS
TWFS focal
plane
LOWFS Boxes
FSM
NGS WFS
OAP3
Tweeter DM
OAP2
K-mirror
rotator,
upper level
25mm tweeter DM
NIR Imager focal
plane
Fold
down
140 mm
Woofer DM
Switchyard mirror
LGS WFS
100 mm
Woofer DM
K-mirror
OAP1,
upper
level
OAP4
OAP3
LGS WFS focal
plane
OAP1
LOWFS/dIFS focal
plane
OAP2
12
Revised Cost Estimate
Including all proposed cost reductions & new cost estimates:
• Inflation assumption = 2.0% in FY09 & 3.5%/yr in FY10 to 15
NGAO System
System Design
Preliminary Design
Detailed Design
Full Scale Development
Delivery & Commissioning
Contingency (24%)
NGAO Total =
IFS Design
Imager and IFS Instrument
Contingency (10/30%)
NGAO Instrument Total =
Overall Total =
Actuals ($k)
Plan (Then-Year $k)
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13
739
495
214
1240
1492
1600
5500
978
400
500
7415
8715
739
739
709
709
1240
51
123
17
192
1432
466
1741
3014
3958
6000 10134 11729
229
78
443
4284
4264
486
67
1309
1279
146
739
5670
5544
632
4697 11670 15678 12361
FY14
FY15
5262
1764
3119
10145
1825
611
2436
12
4
15
10161
0
2436
Total
1234
2946
8078
22293
3589
8951
47090
358
9613
2822
12793
59883
13
Revised Cost Estimate AO Labor Hours
Including all proposed cost reductions & new cost estimates:
Labor Only
Actuals (hrs)
NGAO System
FY07 FY08 FY09
Preliminary Design
2335 15000
Detailed Design
Full Scale Development
Delivery & Commissioning
NGAO Total =
2335 15000
Plan (hrs)
FY11 FY12 FY13
FY10
FY14 FY15
15872
12495 40000 19529
20000 40000 20336
16306 16306
28367 40000 39529 40000 36642 16306
Total
33207
72024
80336
32612
218179
NGAO Labor (excluding instruments)
45000
40000
Labor Hours
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
Fiscal Year
FY13
FY14
FY15
14
Cost Changes by WBS
Labor
hrs
PY
4
4.1
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
4.2.5
4.2.6
4.2.7
4.2.8
4.2.9
4.2.10
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.3.3
4.4.1
4.4.2
4.4.3
4.4.4
4.4.5
4.4.6
4.4.7
4.4.8
4.5.1
4.5.2
4.6
AO System Development
AO Enclosure
0
AO Support Structure
0
Rotator
0
Optical Relays
0
Optical Switchyard
2544
LGS Wavefront Sensor Assembly
994
NGS WFS / TWFS Assembly
952
Low Order Wavefront Sensor Assembly 0
Tip/Tilt Vibration Mitigation
0
Acquisition Cameras
0
Atmospheric Dispersion Correctors 864
Simulator
0
System Alignment Tools
0
Atmospheric Profiler
0
AO Controls Infrastructure
0
AO Sequencer
0
Motion Control SW
1500
Device Control SW
0
Motion Control Electronics
0
Non-RTC Electronics
0
Lab I&T System
0
Acquisition, Guiding, and Offloading Control
0
Real-time Control Processor
0
DM's and Tip/Tilt Stages
0
AO System Lab I&T
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.6
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$k
Trips Labor Non-labor Travel Conting
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
149
66
55
0
0
0
42
0
0
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
150
0
0
0
191
327
80
55
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
74
0
0
0
126
-225
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
27
0
0
0
102
170
30
24
0
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
30
0
28
0
0
0
35
-45
0
Use largest change as an example of cost spreadsheet
177
0
0
0
442
562
165
79
0
0
53
0
0
0
0
0
110
0
102
0
0
0
162
-270
0
B2
C2+
A1
C3,C4
C3
C4,C5+
A1,C2
A1,C2
A1
C1, MEMS
15
Cost Changes by WBS
Labor
hrs
PY
$k
Trips Labor Non-labor Travel Conting
5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
Laser System Development
Laser Enclosure
Laser
Laser Launch Facility
Laser Safety Systems
Laser System Control
Laser System Lab I&T
7
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
Labor
$k
hrs
PY Trips Labor Non-labor Travel Conting
Telescope & Summit Engineering
Telescope Performance
0
0.0
0
0
0
0
0
Infrastructure Mods for AO
316
0.2
0
17
150
0
43
Infrastructure Mods for Laser
358
0.2
0
19
19
0
8
OSIRIS Modifications
1200
0.7
0
90
46
0
17
Interferometer and OHANA Mods
0
0.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1526
0
0
0
400
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
144
0
0
0
24
0
-26
146
0
0
20
0
31
0
0
0
0
0
-614
47
0
0
12
Total
0
-465
193 A1
0
0
56
Total
0
211 B2
46
153
0
16
Preliminary Design Status vs SDR Plan
•
$3479k PD phase budget
–
–
•
Through Feb. ~21% complete vs 46% expected to be complete in SDR plan
–
•
•
$455k FY08, $2000k FY09, $1024k FY10, includes $449k of contingency
36,000 work hours
This does not include science instrument design
Through Jan. we have spent $437k or 14% of budget excluding contingency
versus 18% of work completed
Why?
–
Unplanned tasks that have required management attention
•
•
•
•
–
Personnel availability (only X of planned Y hrs spent)
•
•
–
NFIRAOS cost comparison
B2C guidance
MRI & ATI proposals
Addition of science instruments
Departing or unavailable personnel (DLM, RF, JZ, MB)
Less senior management than planned
Unclear direction in some areas
•
Primarily because of B2C
17
18
Actuals through Feb/09
19
Plan through Feb/09
Next Steps
•
Revise & complete requirements (SCRD, SRD & FRD)
–
•
Produce a plan to get from now to the PDR
–
–
–
–
•
FRD process defined in next presentation
Identify priorities & milestones
Incorporate instrument design
Include commitments from personnel & their management
Begin with revision we had produced in Aug/08 prior to new B2C direction (MS
project plan & KAON)
Manage the plan (post B2C review)
–
–
–
–
–
Ensure tasks are defined & agreed on
Systems engineering team needs to manage requirements & interfaces, & address
systems issues to ensure tasks & process are well defined
Task leads & teams need to manage their task to produce deliverables, meet
requirements on schedule & within budget
TSIP monthly reports to monitor progress & identify issues (technical, schedule,
budget)
Bi-monthly team video meetings with some face-to-face working meetings
20
Preliminary Design Objectives & Deliverables 1
•
•
•
•
Science Case Requirements Document
Observing Operations Concept Document
System Requirements Document
Functional Requirements & Interface Control Document(s)
– AO system, laser system, science operations tools, science instruments
– Managed within Contour database
• Preliminary Design Manual (the document to read to understand the
design & performance of the NGAO facility – will start by generating TOC at
sufficient level to define deliverables)
– Flowdown of requirements to design
– Solidworks & Zemax model(s)
– Software design (RTC, non-RTC & science ops tools)
– Performance Budget Reports (wavefront, EE, astrometry, contrast, …)
– Science Performance Analysis Report
• Science Instrument Design Manual
22
Preliminary Design Objectives & Deliverables 2
• Risk Assessment & Management Report
• Systems Engineering Management Plan
–
–
–
–
Project plan to completion, including a detailed schedule & budget
Phased implementation option(s)
Cost estimation
Justification for any procurements during DD
23
NGAO SDR PD Milestones
Year
Month
NGAO Project Milestone
2008
May
2008
October
2009
March
2009
April
External Interface Document Release 1
2009
February
Internal Interface Document Release 1
2009
May
Software & Controls Architectures PD complete
2009
May
LGS WFS Assembly PD complete
2009
June
Laser vendor identified & contract ready
2009
June
Optical relay/switchyard PD complete
2009
September
RTC Processing Requirements complete
2009
November
Laser Launch Facility PD complete
2009
December
LOWFS Assembly PD complete
2010
February
Preliminary Design phase begins
Functional Requirements PD Release 1
April/09
Operations Concept Document Release 1
Preliminary Design Review
April/09
Jan/10
April/10?
24
New NGAO PD Milestones?
SDR Plan
2008
May
2009
March
2008 October
2009 Feb & Apr
2009
May
2009
June
2009
May
2009 September
2009 December
2009 November
2010
February
Replan Dates?
2008
May
2008 November
2009
March
2009
March
2009
April
2009
May
2009
May
2009
June
2009
July
2009
August
2009 September
2009 December
2010 January
2010 February
2010 February
2010
April
Milestone
Preliminary Design phase begins
NFIRAOS Cost Comparison
Build-to-Cost Review
Operations Concept Document Release 1
Laser Risk Reduction Contracts Issued
Requirements PD Release 1
Interface Document Release 1
Software & Controls Architectures PD complete
Optical relay/switchyard PD complete
LGS WFS Assembly PD complete
RTC Processing Requirements complete
Laser Preliminary Designs complete
LOWFS Assembly PD complete
Laser Launch Facility PD complete
NGAO IFU SD & Imager PD complete
Preliminary Design Review
25
Instrument Development
• Imager and IFS for ~800 nm
to 2.4 µm
26
Imager PD Phase
27
Imager PD Phase
28
Imager PD Phase
29
IFS SD Phase
30