Solar B - EIS

 

MULLARD SPACE SCIENCE LABORATORY

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON

Author:  A Smith

 

SOLAR B - EIS  RISK ASSESSMENT

 

Document Number:  MSSL/SLB-EIS/AD/005.01  9 June 2000

 

Distribution:

 

NRL

G Doschek

 

 

C Korendyke

 

 

S Myers

 

 

C Brown

 

 

K Dere

 

 

J Mariska

 

 

 

 

NAOJ

H Hara

 

 

T Watanabe

 

 

 

 

RAL

J Lang

 

 

B Kent

 

 

D Pike

 

BU

C Castelli

 

 

S Mahmoud

 

 

G Simnett

 

Mullard Space Science Laboratory

J L Culhane

 

 

A Smith

 

 

A James

 

 

L Harra

.

 

A McCalden

 

 

C McFee

 

 

R Chaudery

 

 

P Thomas

 

 

W Oliver

 

 

P Coker

 

 

R Gowen

 

 

K Al Janabi

 

 

M Whillock

 

       SLB-EIS Project Office

A Dibbens

  Orig

 

Author:

 

Date:

 

 

 

 

 

Authorised By

 

Date:

 

 

 

 

 

Distributed:

 

Date:

 


 

 

CHANGE RECORD

 

 

ISSUE

   DATE

    PAGES CHANGED

 COMMENTS

01

9 June 2000

All New

Document re-issued in new numbering system.  A major review of risks has been conducted in preparation for the EIS UK PDR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

 

1.  SCOPE

 

2.  APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

 

3.  DISCUSSION

 

4.  PROGRAMMATIC RISK

            4.1  System Level

            4.2  Sub-system Level

           

5.  OPERATIONAL RISK

            5.1  System Level

            5.2  Sub-system Level

 

 


1.  SCOPE

This document constitutes the central element of the Solar-B EIS Risk Management Process. Here programmatic (i.e. risks to the delivery for flight of the EIS instrument within the schedule and budget constraints) and operational risks (i.e. risks to the quality and in-flight performance of the delivered instrument) are covered.

 

Risks are characterised in terms of their nature, likelihood, origin and ownership.

 

2.  APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

MSSL/SLB-EIS/SP007                   EIS Science Requirements

MSSL/SLB-EIS/SP011                   EIS System Definition

EIS Work Break-down Structure            EIS-sys-eng-wbs

Management Plan                              EIS-man-manplan

 

 

3.  DISCUSSION

This document contains a risk analysis for the Solar-B EUV Imaging Spectrometer (EIS) at system and sub-system level. Its purpose is to record the sources of risk and their degree for EIS and its subsystems, and the means to reduce them to acceptable levels. Operational and Programmatic risks are considered.

 

The applicable versions of the systems documents are:

EIS Science Requiements                 MSSL/SLB-EIS/SP007.01            June 00

EIS System Definition                      MSSL/SLB-EIS/SP011.01            June 00

Work Breakdown Structure                      EIS-sys-eng-wbs            2            12 July 99

 

The probability of risks is described in a qualitative way using the following Scheme:

Term

Notation

Impossible

0

Very unlikely

1

Unlikely

2

Moderately Unlikely

4

Moderately Probable

6

Probable

8

Very Probable

9

Certain

10

Unknown

99

 

Risks are numbered for reference, according to type.

·        PE : Programmatic EIS (system or Mission) risk

·        PS : Programmatic Subsystem risk

·        OE : Operational (i.e. post-launch) EIS (system or Mission) risk

·        OS: Operational Subsystem risk.

Each of the above risk types are described in separate section of this document.

The risk Category is the WBS code of the origin of the risk. 1000 = EIS instrument, 0000 = Solar‑B mission.

Ownership indicates the institute that will be responsible for management of the risk.

 

 


4.  PROGRAMMATIC RISK

4.1  System level (PE)

Sources of programmatic risk to the project as a whole are considered first.

Category

Element

Risk #

Prob

Owner

Event

Effect

Management

Notes

0000

Solar-B

PE3

1

ISAS

Launch Delay

Extra costs

Revise schedule

Has occurred once. Considered unlikely to occur again.

1000

EIS

PE4

 

 

 

PE4.1

PE4.2

PE4.3

PE4.4

PE4.5

PE4.6

2-4

 

 

 

4

4

2

4

4

2

MSSL

 

 

 

MSSL

MSSL

MSSL

MSSL

MSSL

MSSL

Incompatibility of sub-system  interfaces at pre delivery integration

 

Mechanical interfaces

Thermal interfaces

Optical interfaces

Electrical interfaces

Cleanliness interfaces

PA interfaces

 

 

Failure to integrate hardware or software. Delay and/or additional costs of re-work

 

 

Rigorous attention to interface management procedures. Regular system design team meetings. Early integration checks, walkthroughs, configuration management. Allow schedule margin.

 

 

 

1000

EIS

PE6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PE6.1

PE6.2

PE6.3

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2

2

2

MSSL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BU

MSSL

MSSL

System failure during environmental testing

 

 

 

 

 

 

MTM/TTM

EM

FM

Delay in delivery whilst reworks and retests occur

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Design margins and derating of components. AIV schedule to include contingency for such events. Items which are both critical and particularly susceptible to have spares available - within budgetary constraints.

 

Each subsystem item should have been qualified to appropriate levels by analogy, analysis or test prior to system test. Lessons learned during EM and STM environmental tests should allow us to identify the susceptible items.

1000

EIS

PE7

 

 

 

 

PE7.1

PE7.2

PE7.3

 

2-4

 

 

 

 

3

2

2

MSSL

 

 

 

 

BU

MSSL

MSSL

incompatibility with spacecraft discovered during integration

 

 

 

MTM/TTM

EM

FM

Delays to entire mission. Increased costs of support of rework in Japan. Possibility that instrument performance be compromised.

Close co-operation with the spacecraft design teams. Identification and control of comprehensive interface specification.

This would arise from inadequacy of interface management between the EIS and spacecraft teams. There is a vital need for prompt and reliable exchange of accurate interface information with the spacecraft teams.

1000

EIS

PE8

 

 

 

 

 

PE8.1

PE8.2

PE8.3

4-6

 

 

 

 

 

6

4

4

MSSL

 

 

 

 

 

BU

MSSL

MSSL

Late delivery of instrument

 

 

 

 

 

MTM/TTM

EM

FM

Schedule impact on spacecraft programme

Establish and agree realistic delivery schedule

Establish and agree realistic requirements for each model

Rigorously control internal schedules

 

 


4.2  Sub-system level (PS)

Programmatic risks are now considered for major WBS items in the Hardware (WBS Code 1000) and AIV (3000) branches.

Category

Element

Risk #

Prob

Owner

Event

Effect

Management

Notes

1100

Structure

PS1

4

BU

Composite material shows excessive out-gassing

Contamination of optical components

Select and evaluate materials.  Plan out-gassing paths

 

1300

Optics

PS2

99

NRL

Multilayer coating fails to provide adequate reflectivity or other property

Instrument throughput threatened.

Seek to fully understand the coating technology and the sources of variation of performance. Consider possibility of re-coating or provision of uncoated spares. Allow contingency for this. Consider alternative coating technologies.

This is mainly an issue with the so-called EIS-400 wavelength range coating, range 6 in EIS Science Notes (EIS-sci-notes), operating near 400 Ĺ, which is baselined to use the relatively unknown Si/Sc multilayer pair. This risk also pertains to the ageing properties of coatings.

1300

Optics

PS3

2

NRL

Optic inadequately figured or polished

Poor focusing properties leading to loss of spatial and spectral resolution. Possible need for re-work.

Form an error budget for each optical surface, allowing the system PSF to be estimated. Measure samples to validate the error budget. Unit level test.

1300

Optics

PS4

99

NRL

Grating manufacturing faults

Loss of throughput.

Error budget, with quantified error sources, is required.  Test of grating performance prior to multilayer coating.

All comments also apply as per PS2

1300

Optics

PS5

2

NRL

Proposed mechanism fails to meet spacecraft disturbance torque requirement

Other Solar-B instrumentation jeopardised.

Seek alternative mechanisms (mass penalties are likely), or propose spacecraft-level observation (i.e. mechanism) control protocol. Seek to avoid this risk in the early stages of the programme. Another alternative would be to omit the mechanism in question.

This is an important requirement for the successful operation of Solar-B SOT. The nature of the mechanisms is dependant on the telescope type selection.

1600

Shutter

PS6

2

NRL

Motor unavailable

Shutter redesign, possible life test program (costs & schedule affected)

Explore likelihood of this, if necessary study replacement options.

The shutter design currently baselined, which has substantial spaceflight heritage, uses a specific (brushless) motor.

1400

Filters

PS7

6

NRL

Accidental breakage of filter

Possible debris in the instrument - as well as the big hole

non-flight protective covers, spares, design for exchange procedures (including cleaning)

With thin foils (1500 Ĺ Al is being considered) this is a moderately probable event.

1500

Slit

PS8

2

NRL

Slit exchange mechanism fails disturbance torque criteria

Mechanism cannot be used.

Choose a single slit (or slit/slot) that gives best all-round performance, or seek alternative mechanisms.

See also the comments on PS2 – PS6

1710

CCD

PS9

6

MSSL

Loss of device due to (e.g.) static discharge

Replacement needed

Provide for (in contract) adequate test-grade devices during development programme and spares of flight devices. Design for late replacement of CCD. Consider static discharge protection procedures.

Simulators may be used for many test purposes.

1730

ROE

PS10

2

MSSL

High power consumption of readout electronics

Exceed instrument power budget

carefully engineer for low power. Demonstrate at breadboard level

Possible tradeoff between readout rate and power consumption

1922

Radiator

PS11

6

MSSL

Radiator cannot provide necessary CCD cooling

Radiation damage (see Operational Risks - 1740 CCD) causes unacceptable performance degradation

Seek to minimise CCD radiation damage by alternative clocking regimes and/or shielding. Consider radiator designs that avoid viewing the Earth.

The orbit and spacecraft configuration mean that Earthshine becomes a problem for efficient thermal design with a simple radiator.

3410

Electronic Ground Support Equipment (EGSE)

PS12

1

MSSL

EGSE software not ready for AIV programme caused by lack of continuity of Norwegian effort

AIV cannot be accomplished

Design for interoperability with sub-system EGSE. Specify early delivery of an EGSE version which is capable of supporting a subset of functions for test use.

3420

Mechanical Ground Support Equipment (MGSE)

PS13

1

BU

Gas purge equipment - contaminates instrument

Dismantle, clean and reassemble structure and optics

Obtain certificates of purity or equip with in-line gas analysers

A purged structure is considered to be considerably easier to produce than a vacuum vessel (especially given the Solar-B mass constraints).

3800

Calibration

PS14

6

RAL + MSSL

Insufficient time to complete calibration

Poor knowledge of in-flight performance - value of science data reduced

Allow schedule contingency at this stage of the programme. Rehearse calibration procedures prior to arrival of FM instrument.

1100

Structure

PS15

8

BU

Non-delivery of suitable structure

Catastrophic

BU to commission expert help in design and manufacture of composites.

BU may need to solicit additional funding.

1710

CCD

PS16

4

MSSL

CCD quality poor

Degraded science performance

Take out option to purchase further devices

Contract for CCD foresees this possibility

 

Sub-system

 

Structure

Camera

ICU

QCM

Optics/Mech’

MHC

Software

GSE

PS17

 

PS17.1

PS17.2

PS17.3

PS17.4

PS17.5

PS17.6

PS17.7

PS17.8

2-6

 

6

4

4

2

3

4

4

3

See below

BU

MSSL

MSSL

RAL

NRL

MSSL

MSSL

Var

Late delivery of subsystem for integration

Schedule delay

Establish realistic schedule and then rigorously enforce.

 

 

 

MHC

PS18

4

MSSL

NRL software not transferable to flight standard

Schedule delay through need for extra work

Close Liaison between NRL and MSSL

Issue raised at NASA PDR

 


    5.  OPERATIONAL RISK

     

5.1  System Level (OE)

Category

Element

Risk #

Prob

Owner

Event

Effect

Management

Notes

1000

EIS

OE2

6

RAL

Contamination - optics or detector

Progressive loss of sensitivity and ultimate loss of instrument, uncertainty in intensity calibration

Contamination control plan, Front door closure, Purging, QCM, CCD Heater, venting paths

1000

EIS

OE3

99

MSSL

Electronic Component failure

Possible loss of instrument or reduced scientific return

Appropriate component quality, fault tolerant design, redundant interfaces

Failure mode analysis to unit, board or component level will be carried out as the designs mature.

1000

EIS

OE4

2

MSSL

“bad command”

ranges from severe (damage to hardware?) to nearly benign (although an observation could be missed).

Identify hazardous states of the instrument. Do not allow these to be reached without operator confirmation. Allow detection of such conditions (e.g. by recording all tele-commands).

A bit error in a command sequence should be detected by checksum mechanisms incorporated into the data link protocols. This risk concerns the possibility that the operator sends a valid command that nevertheless is not the intended or appropriate one.

1000

EIS

OE5

8

MSSL

on-board software error

control program halt, output data error, & effects in "bad command"

Allow detection and reboot, periodically compare memory checksum with nominal value

probable cause: SEU

 


 

5.2  Sub-system level (OS)

Risks associated with individual WBS elements are considered.

Category

Element

Risk #

Prob

Owner

Event

Effect

Management

Notes

1200

Door

OS1

2

BU

Clamshell Door(s) mechanism failure

Fail closed - Loss of instrument. Fail open - possible contamination during thruster firings.

Life-test programme Redundant heaters in actuators

 

1300

Optics

OS2

99

NRL

Ageing of multilayer coatings

Instrument throughput reduced.

Perform life tests on coatings whose ageing properties are unknown.

 

1300

Optics

OS3

2

NRL

Scanning mechanism failure

Loss of scanning and alignment compensation

Life test programme.  No possibility to move outside of functional position. Monitoring and management of movements during mission.

1300

Optics

OS4

2

NRL

Grating focus mechanism failure

(fail in focussed position) Flat-fielding of detector no longer possible.  (fail in de-focussed position) loss of science

Life test programme.  Redundant actuators.

1600

Shutter

OS5

1

NRL

Shutter failure

(fail closed) Loss of instrument (fail open) image smearing

Select proven technology.   Life test

 

1400

Filters

OS6

1

NRL

meteoroid strike on front filter

possible debris in the instrument. White light ingress to detector - worsens SNR. Heat input to instrument - thermal stresses and consequent misalignment

Recess filter in exterior baffle.  Use segmented filter design to limit area od breakage.

1500

Slit

OS7

99

NRL

Slit exchange mechanism fails

Fail in a nominal slit position - loss of rapid imaging facility Fails in viewfinder position - loss of spectroscopy in intermediate position - some spectroscopy retained

Select proven technology.  Life test.

(assuming mechanism with one or more spectroscopy slit and a wide viewfinder slit)

1710

CCD

OS8

8

MSSL

Radiation Damage to CCD

1. Dark current distribution 2. CTE change 3. clock bias drift 4. no longer operates (output FET latch-up)

Appropriate shielding to ensure life commensurate with mission Monitor dark current distribution periodically. Provide means to adjust operating temperature and clocking rate. Provide ability to adjust the clock bias levels.

 

ICU/MHU

OS9

4

MSSL

Radiation Damage to electrical component

Data degradation

Latch-up – loss of function

Component selection to be rad hard to required level. Local shielding as required.