1. Application of management and systems engineering to student projects The example of the Auburn University Student Space Program

2. Outline 1.What is the Auburn University Student Space Program (AUSSP)? 2.Lessons learned after 5 years 3.Corrective steps taken and preliminary results

3. What is AUSSP? Member of the National Space Grant Student Satellite Program Involves about 35 undergraduate students any time in three-five teams –Auburn High-Altitude Balloonning (AHAB) team –AubieSat-I (CubeSat) team –AubieSat-II (NanoSat) team –Mars team –Management team

4. National Space Grant Student Satellite Program Crawl – Walk – Run – Fly From model rockets to Mars http://ssp.arizona.edu/sgsatellites

5. “CRAWL” BalloonSat Programs CanSat Programs

6. “WALK” CubeSat Programs Sounding Rocket Programs

7. “RUN” Arizona State University ASUSat 1 Colorado Space Grant’s Citizen Explorer 1 Colorado, Arizona, and New Mexico: Three-Corner Sat Nanosat Programs

8. “FLY” To the Moon and Mars External support & opportunities to get involved…

9. Some Suggested activities: Science analysis Software tools for data storage, handling, access Project Management Systems Engineering Mission Operations Spacecraft subsystems Design, build, test, calibration, operations, performance maintenance Communications, Power Structures, Mechanisms, Thermal Science, Instruments Attitude, orbit Aerial mobility (Flyers), Surface Mobility (Rovers) Prototyping/developing applicable technologies Public Information K-12 programs (ed. Modules, teacher training, etc.)

10. Why Student Projects? Aging Workforce Inspire & Retain –Pipeline issue –Attract and keep best students in STEM Active learning Job training: learning process

11. The AHAB Program Crawl level Freshmen and Sophomores Class: Physics of the World Around Us (3 Credits) Launch payloads to the edge of space (altitude range 80,000 - 100,000 feet) Max weight: 16 lbs

12. The AHAB Program GOALS Reliable launcher Importance of control: cut-down system Shielding Outreach program for K-12 Science experiments

15. Troubleshooting! <= Mooring

17. AS-I CubeSat Walk level Juniors and Seniors Class: Physics of the World Around Us (3 Credits) Use COTS Science mission being defined Mass ≤ 1-kg; Cube of 10-cm sides

18. AS-I CubeSat GOALS Students develop technical as well as systems engineering and management skills designing, building, testing and operating a CubeSat Put first AU satellite in LEO AS-I performs successfully in space Develop a steady student satellite capability at AU

20. AS-II NanoSat Run level Exceptional Juniors and Seniors Potential students are working on AS-I Mass ≤ 50-kg; Max linear dimension: 45-cm Submit proposal to AFOSR: deadline for submission: 15 October Radiation mitigation experiment

21. Mars Student Activities Fly level Magnetic Investigation of Mars by Interacting Consortia (MIMIC) –Work with JPL and 10 SG Consortia –AUSSP in charge of science and instruments for the mission –Measuring the remnant magnetic field of Mars => loss of atmosphere => loss of liquid surface water => impact on potential life –Mission abandoned: NASA launcher scrapped –AU: six participating students, two spent Summer 04 at JPL

22. Mars Student Activities AU students @ JPL during summer –Luther Richardson - 2003 –Ben Spratling and Eric Massey - 2004 –Jason Stewart - 2005 –Eric Grimes - 2006 INSPIRATION in 2006: a robotic weather station on surface of Mars (11 SG students: 2 from Alabama) Eric Grimes in charge of instruments

23. Management Team Students from non-technical majors: finance, business, accounting, nutrition, journalism, history, etc. No class credit in physics Student Program Manager Positions: CFO, HRO, PRO, ITO Meetings twice a week Support program and tech teams

24. Management Team Program support –Budget, purchasing, accounting –Fund raising & visibility on campus and beyond –Recruitment –Contact information –Class rolls/participation –Wiki and website –Certificates and awards –Longitudinal tracking –Socials –SEDS

25. Program history Program started in Fall 2001 Immediately started both a CubeSat and a Ballooning program First balloon launch with recovery in Nov. 2001 Added a Mars mission in Fall 2003 Added a NanoSat project in 2006

26. Program evaluation - Pros Over 100 students participated Five students to JPL Summer Programs One student at least with a NASA job Two students presently “co-oping” with NASA Six balloon launches A CubeSat partially designed and the structure built Tested CubeSat ejection from P-Pod in C-9 Four HS experiments ready for balloon flight Learned from a large number of mistakes

27. Program evaluation - Cons Only six balloon flights of which four were not found the day of launch No final design yet of AS-I after five years Non-productive AHAB teams in 2005: one year without a launch Year wasted with insufficient students for AS-I in Fall 2005 and Spring 2006

28. Analysis We could not make a purely student-led program work Need to teach and implement process: –Management –Systems Engineering We were not successful in getting enough students to commit Lack of support of engineering over years

29. Lessons learned - 1 Faculty mentor –Used to work through student team manager –Now directly involved in all activities –Sets the tone right from the beginning –Runs team activities as a laboratory –Is now seen as the captain of the boat Student manager –Used to run the labs –Now helps mentor manage the lab meetings, learns management and takes on increasing responsibilities with time Student systems engineer –Learns skills form mentor and experts in and outside labs

30. Lessons learned - 2 Process –Used to be pointed out on an as needed basis –“Building fever” kills process and produces failure –Process now taught to - and immediately applied by -the whole team in the first weeks of the semester Recruitment –High turn-over rates –Learning curve –Need to recruit top students –Recruitment strategy that works

31. Lesson learned - 3 Student commitment –Strong mentor leadership => students feel more secure –Responsibility matrix signed –Make sure students have a job they can do and like to do –Certificates –Summer jobs expanded –Participation in conferences –NASA and AE industry contacts for jobs

32. Lessons learned - 4 Student participation –Participate in project objectives, requirements and tasks definition: take ownership of project –Each student has a responsibility matrix - no more watching the few gung-ho students work and getting disconnected Documentation –No lab exit before activities are documented –Last week of semester is documentation week –Documentation is significant part of grade

33. Learning Management - 1 Each semester’s work is defined as a project Students are presented the status of the system they are to work on The mentor has defined the vision, mission, a few broad goals, milestones and deliverables for the semester The students having learned the basics of the system are ready to work out the objectives for each goal

34. Learning Management - 2 The students work out: –The objectives for each goal –The system’s operational requirements –The subsystems’ requirements –The tasks to be performed based on the objectives and requirements The tasks are organized as a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

35. Learning Management - 3 The WBS includes duration of tasks A network diagram reveals the order in which tasks are to be accomplished The critical path is identified A Gantt Chart represents the schedule Students do an inventory of materials Students make a list of needed tools and materials Students are now ready to start building

36. Learning Management - 4 Each lab session starts with – A quick status of project –A look at the Gantt Chart A comparison of the two is made and corrective action is defined The goals of the session are set Lab work proceeds: design and/or building is done, tests are performed Results are documented before leaving the lab

37. Important ingredients Discipline Flexibility Reviews

38. Systems Engineering - 1 Plans and guides the engineering effort Focuses on system as a whole Bridges traditional engineering disciplines Necessary due to specialization and complexity of modern systems

39. Systems Engineering - 2 Hierarchical elements of a system: –Mission Architecture => Balloon, Rigging, Tracking Box, Payload, Launch Team, Ground Station, Tracking Teams, Path Determination, Outreach –System => Tracking Box – Subsystems => Structure & Rigging, Primary Tracking, Secondary Tracking, Power, Cut-Down –Components => Transceivers, GPS, TNC, Cut- Down Board –Parts => batteries, cables

40. System Life Cycle Post Development Engineering Development Concept Development Operational deficiencies Technical opportunities System functional specifications Defined system concept Production specifications Production systemInstalled operation system Operation & maintenance documentation Source: Systems Engineering, Principles and Practice, Alexander Kossiakoff and William N. Sweet, Wiley-Interscience 2003

41. Systems Engineering Method over Life Cycle

42. Results - 1 Started August 24 Extraordinary difference from past –Student participation –Eagerness to work –Confidence –Learning –Two students spent 7 hours doing inventory!

43. Results - 2 In three weeks, both Balloon and CubeSat have: –Defined semester objectives –Worked out requirements: mission, system, subsystem –Developed their WBS at work session level –Established a schedule –Established status of system –Done a full inventory –Started work on subsystems –Ordered components

45. Conclusions Some requirements for a successful student program –Full faculty involvement with whole team –Full student participation in project and work definitions –Clearly defined process –Students learning and applying management and systems engineering principles, tools and techniques –Each student has responsibilities and work load well defined –Fast track tech skills development –Technical expertise provided –Develop camaraderie between team members