1 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Particles and Fields Package Weekly Team Meeting, SSL October 26, 2009 Dave Curtis, PFP PM

2 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Logistics Project Documents held at GSFC is the ‘MIS’ system –Access controlled –A new method for gaining access (NAMS) seems to be limited to NASA centers – TBR –Register at Frank Snow is our sponsor. PFP controlled documents are on-line at: –ftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/MAVEN/ftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/MAVEN/ –ITAR-controlled documents (including the CSR) are available for SSL team members via SSH on Apollo at: /home/dwc/MAVEN/ITAR The MAVEN meet-me conferencing line is – –For now, ask me if you want to use it –We should consider a system like WebEx for these meetings

3 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Project Status Systems Requirements Assessment completed 8/12 –IRT-hosted review –No significant issues Phase RR completed 9/30/2009, now in Phase B –SSL is on a no-cost extension to our Phase RR contract while our Phase B/C/D contract is in negotiations; expect to be under contract in November Next major milestone PDR –Mission PDR scheduled the week of July –PFP PDR will be ~1 month before that –Subsystem (instrument) peer reviews the month before that

4 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Schedule We are currently working to the CSR schedule, shifted one month to the left to add 1 month to I&T at LM –PDR 7/2010 –CDR 7/2011 –FM PFP Suite I&T starts 5/2012 Followed by environmental tests –FM PFP to LM 9/2012 –Launch 11/18/2013 Meetings Nov 3 and 18/19 with Project to identify top level milestones (to be held by Project) –After that we flesh out and maintain lower level schedules at each institution –Because of EVM, schedules will be closely tied to budgets Full time scheduler at SSL starting January

5 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Meetings Many Project-level meetings –Mostly handled by me –MAG and ESC working groups (Connerney, Delory) Quarterly Project Meetings starting January –Plan is to rotate locations –Second day SWG added –First Science Working SSL Nov 2,3 Monthly PFP Status Review –Project (Frank Snow) comes to SSL (and LASP) –Coordinate with weekly team meetings Weekly internal PFP team meetings at SSL –Mondays 2PM PDT (?) –Keep it short, just items of common interest Instrument-level meetings to be organized by Instrument Leads –~ Weekly (Mondays?) –LPW already started –I would like to be involved in these Regular PFP (SSL) Science meeting? –Has been happening sporadically the last few months –Share ideas, knowledge amongst instrument leads –Discuss implementation, accommodation, operations issues

6 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 SSL Manpower DPI, PM, Instrument Leads in place, plus some of the STATIC development team (part time) –running at ~5 FTE Expect to ramp up to ~15 FTE in December, ~18 FTE in January –Increased participation by people already in place ~9 FTE –People transitioning off of existing projects Agreements in place, but priority may be an issue in a few cases (until RBSP delivers) ~7 FTE –A few new hires expected.

7 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Key Personnel Deputy PI, PFP Lead – Bob Lin PF Package Manager / Systems – Dave Curtis Instrument Leads: –STATIC – Jim McFadden –SWEA – Dave Mitchell Mazelle, Sauvaud (CESR) - Analyzer –SWIA – Jasper Halekas –SEP – Davin Larson – LPW – Bob Ergun (LASP) Jim Westfall (LASP) - PM Greg Delory (SSL) - Booms/Sensors Frank Eparvier (LASP) - EUVM –MAG – Jack Connerney (GSFC) Mechanic Lead – Paul Turin Thermal – Chris Smith PFDPU, FPGAs – Dorothy Gordon Flight Software – Peter Harvey GSE – Tim Quinn QA – Ron Jackson / Jorg Fisher Financial – Kate Harps Schedule - TBD

8 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Top Risks Delays in RBSP or acceleration of MAVEN leads to manpower conflicts at SSL –Mitigation: Hire new people to take routine tasks off A-team Disconnects between baseline SSL MAIP and Software Development Plan and eventual agreements could result in cost increases, distraction of key personnel into low value added activities –Mitigation: Get MAIP, SDP reviewed and negotiations started Loss of STATIC risks mission success –Mitigation: Second STATIC (under study) Detailed instrument performance requirements result in resource growth –For example, increased count rate capability for SWEA and SWIA results in a significant power growth –Mitigation: Get instrument specifications nailed down soon so resource estimates can mature

9 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Changes from CSR Baseline Plan Schedule moved up 1 month –Reflected in submitted SSL Phase B/C/D budget –Manpower ramp-up in December 2009 –Detailed schedule not yet generated SSL EEE parts purchased by GSFC –Keeps SSL under the 20M EVM threshold –Budgeted that way in the SSL Phase B/C/D proposal EUVM added diode, door Changing SWIA to look more like STATIC than SWEA –Since SWIA built at SSL, get more benefit from commonality with STATIC –Deflector optics need to look like STATIC rather than SWEA –Mostly a cosmetic change – basic instrument unchanged –More on this at SWG

10 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Ongoing Work Supporting Project planning process Supporting ERD, ICD development Supporting MAG, ESC, Payload, SDT working groups Preliminary SSL MAIP, SDP, Parts list provided –Waiting on comments Work on PFP SEMP, CMP, RMP to start shortly (CDRLs) Level 4/5 requirements in work –Instrument specifications (Instrument leads) –Flight Software Requirements –Instrument FPGA Requirements –Power Converter Requirements –Internal ICDs STATIC prototype in integration –Hope to have it in the chamber next month –Determine pressure (density) danger limit STATIC RAM density enhancement modeling –Important in determining how low into the atmosphere STATIC can operate

11 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Ongoing Trades Second STATIC under consideration –Non-redundant, Mission critical instrument –Identical copy relatively inexpensive SSL should be able to stay under the $20M EVM cap threshold –If operated simultaneously, enhances science Mechanical attenuator for STATIC, SWIA –Enhanced dynamic range –Science justification to be presented at SWG Faster preamps for SWEA and SWIA –Enhanced dynamic range –SWIA justification to be presented at SWG –SWEA still under consideration; may be discussed at SWG –Adds ~0.5W for SWIA, ~0.3W for SWEA Analyses to determine STATIC threshold to damage in atmosphere –How low can we go in deep dips, and how to protect STATIC –Potential real-time data from spacecraft accelerometers –RAM density enhancement PFDPU processor selection trades –Heritage vs processing margins and ease of development Software/Hardware Trades –Determining how much of data processing done in instruments, how much by PFDPU FSW Science Actuator switching architecture (SEP attenuator, EUVM door, etc) GSE Design trades –Make/buy options for instrument & PFDPU simulators

12 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Science Working Team Meeting November 2,3 at SSL Draft Agenda sent out –Bruce’s , 9/28/2009 Instrument Leads have an average of 20 minutes each to present instrument status –Only changes since CSR –Some instruments have little to report, leaves more time for others –Emphasize science justification for any proposed changes

13 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 PFP System Engineering

14 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Key Design Documents Mission Requirements Document (MIS) Environmental Requirements Document (MIS) Mission Assurance Requirements Document (MIS) PF SSL Mission Assurance Implementation Plan (SSL) PF Requirements Document (MIS and SSL) PF to Spacecraft ICD (MIS, in work) PFDPU to Instruments ICD (SSL) PFDPU FSW Requirements (pending, SSL) SSL ‘Common’ EEE parts list (SSL) Instrument Specifications (pending, Instrument Leads) Tech Notes (SSL) –Feel free to forward me any analysis or other document you would like to past as a tech note for reference

15 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Functional Block Diagram

16 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 Physical Block Diagram

17 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 PFDPU Power Distribution Redundant REG power boards generate regulated switched/limited 28V services REG board directly powers associated Data Controller Board (DCB) Power services to instruments wire-ORed to instruments on the Instrument Interface Board (IIB)

18 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 PFDPU Instrument Interfaces Redundant Data Controller Boards (DCB) interface to instruments over serial interfaces using cold spare drivers / receivers Serial interfaces wire-ORed on Instrument Interface Board (IIB), then routed to instruments Serial interfaces pre PFDPU to Instrument ICD (on SSL web site) Instruments designed to operate with little processor intervention

19 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 PFDPU Responsibilities SSL provides trays for all cards (including MAG and LPW) SSL provides Instrument Interface Board (IIB), which includes SEP, MAG, LPW secondary converters PFDPU Flight Software provided by SSL –Requirements in development, to be signed off by instrument leads PFDPU simulator GSE to be provided by SSL to instrument teams –Common instrument interface design Heater power, temp sensors, 1-time actuators controlled by spacecraft, harnessed directly to the instruments –LM to provide PRT temp sensors –LM software-controlled heaters based on temp sensor measurements –MAG controls its own AC heater Circuit location in PFDPU TBD Attenuators (SEP, EUVM, STATIC?, SWIA?) controlled by PFDPU –Switch location TBD

20 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 PFDPU Form Factor Baseline plan is a stack of 160 by 200mm boards –STEREO form factor –‘stack’ rather than ‘slide in’ design Baseline interconnect is a 120-pin stacking connector We need to verify that these size board are adequate –Question for MAG, SEP, LPW instrument teams

21 PFP Team Meeting, 10/26/2009 ‘Archive’ Telemetry Scheme PFDPU includes a large FLASH memory which will record high resolution instrument data continuously –Instruments need to provide normal ‘Survey’ data plus high rate ‘Archive’ data –No trigger –Memory sized for ~5-10x survey telemetry rate for ~7 days –Data is recorded in circular buffer, continuously over-writing old data All ‘Survey’ data is sent to the spacecraft to be recorded and dumped to the ground every ~3-4 days. Selected segments of Archive data are selected from the ground to be played out –Selected by time and ApID –Uses telemetry space saved by data compression (by PFDPU) –Requires a ‘Tohban’ on the ground to monitor Survey data and select Archive data with quick turn-around (few days)