GLAST LAT Project
Gamma-ray Large
Area Space
Telescope
DOE Rebaseline Review , February 13, 2005
GLAST Large Area Telescope:
System Engineering
Project Controls
Risk management
Lowell A. Klaisner
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Chief Engineer
Klaisner@slac.stanford.edu
650-926-2726
1
GLAST LAT Project
DOE Rebaseline Review , February 13, 2005
System Engineering
• Coordination & tracking of LAT instrument requirements, subsystem
designs, tests, and test interfaces.
• Functional and performance testing of LAT not covered in
subsystem plans; includes system trades & audits, concept of
operations, and development of system metrics.
• Audit efforts related to maintaining, certifying, tracking and reporting
on parts.
• Risk analysis of the LAT instrument and ground systems.
• Maintain documentation and data libraries
• Manage configuration of the instrument and ground systems.
2
GLAST LAT Project
DOE Rebaseline Review , February 13, 2005
Project Controls
• Provide project control to maintain instrument project master
schedule and budget.
• Track actual costs and schedule performance of all subsystems
and institutions
• Analyze performance via the Project Management Control System
(PMCS).
• Develop and maintain tools to track progress on the end game on a
weekly basis
• Prepare reports for project management and funding sponsors.
• Develop and implement approved changes in the baseline plan.
3
GLAST LAT Project
DOE Rebaseline Review , February 13, 2005
Deliverable Risk Assessment
DAQ cost & schedule delivery risk is driven by three factors:
Flight Parts: Unexpected parts inspection failures or Government-Industry Data
Exchange Program (GIDEP) alerts requiring late change in planned flight
parts, new order for alternate parts, delay in box assembly or re-work of box.
Box Assembly Delays: Box assembly subcontractors do not execute as required
to achieve the delivery schedule.
Box Test Failure: Unexpected failure of box qualification and/or acceptance tests
requiring re-work and retest.
4
GLAST LAT Project
DOE Rebaseline Review , February 13, 2005
Deliverable Risk Assessment
Risk/Rank
Flight Parts Moderate
Box Assembly
Delays –
Low
Box Test FailureLow
Description
Mitigation
BAE Rad750 CPU –Industry wide GIDEP. Internal
heat-sinks to be re-worked. Omnirel regulator
replacement Over 60 units industry wide with priority
given to defense projects. SLAC need date is April
05,
SIB EEPROM – Austin EEPROMs did not pass
GSFC/NASA inspection. Review of part quality
issues ongoing. SLAC need date is April 05.
- RAD750 has GSFC Project
emphasis
Delivery is dependent on board level and box level
assembly by subcontractors qualified to fabricate
space flight quality hardware.
General Technology Corporation: TEM and TPS.
Aeroflex : PDU and GASU.
Cicon: Harness construction.
Remaining components are planned to be selected
by March 05
- On site quality inspector
provides daily insight
- Regular reporting
milestones
- Senior management
interface to ensure
priorities maintained
Failure of structural, thermal EMI/EMC, electrical or
functional tests prior to completion of the fabrication
effort is possible.
Any significant test failure could result in schedule
delay
- Engineering model test
program completed.
- Lessons learned
incorporated into flight
design.
- Test approach has been
reviewed to ensure that an
over-test condition does
not occur
- Alternate LOT identified
5
GLAST LAT Project
DOE Rebaseline Review , February 13, 2005
LAT Top risks
ID #
Proj
Mgt 002
Proj
Mgt 004
Risk
Rank
Moderate
Moderate
Risk Description
If ASICs fail to meet
qualification requirements;
then schedule impact will
occur
If TEM Power supply fails
qualification; then final
implementation may exceed
schedule impacting delivery
to I&T
Risk Mitigation
Status
•Focused review & test. Margin for
re-runs protected where possible
•Individual risks Identified by
subsystem
•Extensive use of DAQ test bed to
drive out system issues
•Cal/ACD ASIC’s continued
testing
•Key focus item identified for DAQ
• TEM/PS extensive EM use as
EGSE
• Implementation plan in place
and proceeding
•Fuse audit completed
•Functional tests complete,
environmental tests to be
completed in February
•Test Bed operating
•No new issues
6
GLAST LAT Project
DOE Rebaseline Review , February 13, 2005
Top risks
ID #
SE-007
Risk
Rank
Moderate
Risk Description
If a critical component fails post
LAT integration; then deintegration will result in cost &
schedule impact
If target hardware, requirement
development or manpower is
delayed; Then Flight-Software
development schedule will be
impacted
Elec004
Moderate
Risk Mitigation
Status
•Extensive use of EM test bed to
support flight H/W & S/W
development
•Thorough qualification and
acceptance tests
•Pre planned I&T actions for deintegration
•Qual & acceptance
planning in-place
•Detailed incremental development
program
•Adapting monthly
demos
•Ensure sufficient software test on
target hardware during development
to drive out any requirement
disconnects.
•Tracking EGSE
resource utilization
• Include adequate peer reviews
before each spiral cycle prior to
release
•Demo frequency
increased from
monthly to
approximately
weekly
•Include monthly Demos to verify
functionality/measure progress
•I&T developing rework contingency
plans.
•Integration plan
baselined
•Updated detailed test
plan released
7
GLAST LAT Project
DOE Rebaseline Review , February 13, 2005
Top risks
ID #
Proj
Mgt 005
Risk
Rank
Moderate
Risk Description
If parts and vendor orders are
delayed or bids exceed
expectations; then flight production
costs & delivery schedule will be
impacted
Risk Mitigation
•Manufacturing engineer
added to expedite minimum
cost closure
•Clarification and purchase
package review to ensure
accurate bids
•Increase production
management staff
Status
•Purchase order
tracking/monitoring system
in place to highlight
roadblocks
•Design documentation
release plan prioritized by
vendor selection and
component fabrication need
dates
•Workarounds implemented
for late parts
•Hired additional head to
manage production
IT 006
Moderate
If logistic or facility integration issues
are found during LAT environmental
test program; then re-work will delay
schedule
•LAT I&T to plan a roadmap of
activities from LAT building 33
to completion of environmental
testing
•Follow up Environmental
Planning TIM held on 1
October at SLAC, I&T driving
AIs to conclusion
•LAT I&T to consider and
develop opportunities to path
find key activities required
prior to LAT shipment to NRL
•Continuing periodic TIMS
8
GLAST LAT Project
DOE Rebaseline Review , February 13, 2005
Managing schedule
•
•
•
•
Detailed list of milestones is posted on the website
Progress toward these milestones is monitored weekly
Detailed production schedules are also on the website
Manufacturing engineer reports the progress against those
schedule to the Project Manager twice a week.
• The Project Manager contacts senior management at the
vendor when significant deviations are detected
9