Innovative Management of StudentRun

1
Innovative Management of Student-Run Space
Research Projects PI Dr. Jeffrey A. Hoffman
Professor of Aerospace Engineering - MIT Co-I
Col. John Keesee Research Staff Paul
Wooster Graduate Student James
Whiting Presentation at 1st CPMR Fellows
Conference 20 January, 2005 Columbia, MD
2
Presentation Outline

• Background and Motivation
• Mars Gravity Project
• Survey of Student Space Projects
• Evaluation of NASA Processes
• Suggestions for a NASA-wide Student Space
  Research Program
• Future Plans

3
Background and Motivation

• MIT has had significant student involvement in
  space projects
• CDIO Capstone Courses (SPHERES, ARGOS, EMFF)

4
SPHERES on KC-135 (Feb. 2000)
5
3 DOF Testing of Multiple SPHERES on MSFC Flat
Floor (Oct. 2004)
6
Background and Motivation

• MIT has had significant student involvement in
  space projects
• CDIO Capstone Courses (SPHERES, ARGOS, EMFF)
• MIT Rocket Team "formed in an effort to become
  the first student group to launch a rocket into
  space. Begun in 1998, the team has developed a
  new type of rocket engine, and is currently in
  the process of testing the engine design."

7
MIT Rocket Team
8
Background and Motivation

• MIT has had significant student involvement in
  space projects
• CDIO Capstone Courses (SPHERES, ARGOS, EMFF)
• MIT Rocket Team "formed in an effort to become
  the first student group to launch a rocket into
  space. Begun in 1998, the team has developed a
  new type of rocket engine, and is currently in
  the process of testing the engine design.
• Mars Gravity Biosatellite Project

9
Mars Gravity Biosatellite
10
Mars Gravity Biosatellite
To investigate the effects of Martian gravity on
mammals

• Biosatellite carrying 15 mice, in 0.38g
  artificial gravity environment
• Five week mission in low Earth orbit launching
  in mid-2008
• Reentry with rapid land-based recovery for
  post-flight analysis

• First prolonged investigation of mammalian
  adaptation to partial gravity
• Initially a joint effort among MIT, the
  University of Washington, and the University of
  Queensland, with increased industry partner
  involvement as program has developed
• Superb educational value - over 300 students
  involved to date
• Total mission cost estimated at approximately 30
  million

11
Mission Profile
12
Mars Mission Bone Mineral Density
18 months _at_ unknown rate
BMD-Bone Mineral Density SD-Standard Deviation
(Looker, 1998 De Laet et al., 1997 Hoffman
Kaplan, 1997, Cummings et al, 2002)
13
Scientific Objectives

• In a suitable mammalian model, quantify the
  extent of the following effects seen as a result
  of extended exposure to Mars-equivalent levels of
  artificial gravity
• Bone loss
• Muscular atrophy
• Neurovestibular adaptation
• Immunology radiation effects
• as compared to both microgravity and 1-g
  physiology, wherever possible.

14
Science Design

• Female BALB/cByJ mice
• Individually housed
• Adults, 15-20 weeks old
• 15 animals for 35 days
• Provides 90 statistical power for
  representative skeletal parameters
• 2 hour recovery planned
• Ground controls
• Vivarium
• Spacecraft Simulated
• Rotational
• Static

15
Ongoing Development

• Partial Load Suspension
• Novel ground model for musculoskeletal adaptation
  to partial gravity
• Correlates histology and in vivo strain data
• Leverages collaborations with SUNY Stony Brook
  and NASA Ames
• Murine Automated Urine Sampler
• Extends NASA CPG urine preservative for
  autonomous animal waste collection
• Post-flight biochemical analysis reveals time
  course of musculoskeletal adaptation
• Development in conjunction with Payload Systems
  Inc. through SBIR-Phase I grant
• Gondola Centrifuge
• Vestibular effects of chronic rotation
• Demonstrated feasibility of S/C spin-rate

16
Centrifuge Study
r 36 cm

• Key Parameters
• 8 Rotating, 8 Control mice
• 6 week study
• Adaptation vs. desensitization
• Otolith vs. canal effects
• General health condition

? 34 rpm
1.07g
Demonstrated no significant contraindications for
chronic 35-rpm rotation in female BALB/cByJ mice
65
1.07g
17
Flight System Overview
1.2 m
18
Payload Layout
19
Animal Support Module

• Waste Removal
• Video Monitoring
• Water/Food Supply
• 60 Air Changes/Hour
• 12 Hour Lighting Cycle
• Airflow Monitoring
• Contaminant Control
• Contingency Euthanasia

20
Air Circulation Loop

• Test Objectives
• Theoretical flow model verification
• Rates and evenness of flow measurements
• Pressure drops and optimal blower power
  measurements
• Component weights, interface, and space
  constraints determination

21
Entry, Descent, and Landing
Aft faring
Main chute
Drogue chute
Heat shield
Mortar Pilot chute
Payload housing
Airbag arrangement (conceptual only)
22
EDL Flight Phases
Mortar deployment of pilot chute (18km alt)
Drogue chute slows vehicle to 30m/s
Drogue chute deployed by pilot and
mortar detachment
Main chute deployed by drogue detachment (1500m
alt)
TPS separated at main chute deployment
Inflation of airbag landing system
Landing of payload at Woomera
23
Spacecraft Bus
24
Thermal Load Path
To Sun
Internal Support Truss
Light Band Separation System
Side Panel Radiator
Baseplate Radiator
25
Propulsion/ACS/GNC

• 3-axis attitude maneuvering capability using
  small hydrazine thrusters and sensor suite
• GPS receiver for orbit determination

• De-orbit
• 180 m/s delta-v
• 3-axis control
• Spin-stabilization being considered
• Burn time of 5-8 minutes
• 15-18 minutes from burn initiation to atmospheric
  interface at approx. 100km
• Current pointing accuracy of 0.75º sufficient to
  deorbit into landing zone

26
CDH/Communications/Power

• Monitor all systems and transfer information
• Communicate with ground stations using S-band
  antennas (max 6 hours between contacts)
• Generate power with 4 solar panels
• Provide power storage via Li-ion batteries

Universal Space Network Coverage 130º Cone Angle
27
Diverse Student Team

• Approximately 300 students involved to-date

• Strong participation of women and other
  minorities traditionally underrepresented in
  Science and Technology

28
Workforce Development

• Design courses
• Undergraduate research
• Graduate education
• International exchanges
• Summer internship program
• Leadership training
• Interdisciplinary advising
• Joint Mass./Wash. Space Grant Initiative
• Over 300 students involved to date
• Over 50 advisors actively involved from academia,
  government, and industry

29
Education/Public Outreach

• Exciting and informing the public are key
  elements of our mission
• Approximately 1,500 students and public
  participants reached to date
• Department Open Houses
• Lectures at New England AIAA and National Space
  Society Boston Chapter
• Alumni Club Talks
• City Year Boston Spring Break Program
• Cub Scout Pack Meetings
• Pierce School Science Fest
• Elementary and High School Visits
• Scouting Merit Badge Workshops
• MIT Mars Week Presentations
• Yuris Night Events
• Considerable media coverage and internet interest
• Students inspiring students

30
Incredible Opportunity

• Major contribution to human Mars exploration
• Tremendous opportunity for workforce development
  and public inspiration
• Low overall cost
• Rapid science return

• A step we can take right now

31
New Developments for Mars Gravity Biosatellite
Project

• Space Exploration Vision makes Mars Gravity
  Biosatellite much more important to NASAs core
  mission.

32
Keys to Exploration
Understanding partial-g artificial gravity

• Requirements specification for spacecraft radius,
  angular velocity

Understanding Marshypogravity effects

• Countermeasure development for surface operations
• Rehabilitation scope

33
New Developments for Mars Gravity Biosatellite
Project

• Space Exploration Vision makes Mars Gravity
  Biosatellite much more important to NASAs core
  mission.
• Cheaper access to space seems like it may
  actually happen, which will make student
  satellites much more affordable.

34
FALCON I Rocket
35
Launch Vehicle

• Payload unique requirements
• Access less than 48 hours prior to launch
• Active during pre-launch and launch operations
• Launch mass and volume
• 500 kg to 400km, i 31º (for AU reentry)
• 1.2m diameter by 2m tall cylinder
• Launch from Cape Canaveral
• Secondary ELV not likely due to unique reqs
• SpaceX Falcon I (6M) is baseline launch vehicle
• Engineering to have launch option on OSP Minotaur
  (20M)
• Co-primary on larger vehicle also possible

36
Our Dilemma

• How should Mars Gravity Biosatellite
• be managed if it is to become a real flight
• project?
• Risk Identification and Mitigation
• Continuity
• Other Project Management Skills

37
3 Major Types of Student Space Projects

• Projects managed through a class structure
• (at MIT CDIO projects, like SPHERES)

38
3 Major Types of Student Space Projects

• Projects managed through a class structure
• (at MIT CDIO projects, like SPHERES)
• Projects with indefinite schedules
• (at MIT Rocket Club)

39
3 Major Types of Student Space Projects

• Projects managed through a class structure
• (at MIT CDIO projects, like SPHERES)
• Projects with indefinite schedules
• (at MIT Rocket Club)
• Projects where professionals and students play
  significant roles
• (at MIT Mars Gravity Biosatellite)

40
3 Major Types of Student Space Projects

• Projects managed through a class structure
• (at MIT CDIO projects, like SPHERES)
• Projects with indefinite schedules
• (at MIT Rocket Club)
• Projects where professionals and students play
  significant roles
• (at MIT Mars Gravity Biosatellite)
• Also many examples of students playing minor
  roles in major satellite projects (e.g. through
  internships, co-ops, etc.)

41
Typical Challenges for Student Space Projects

• Personnel turnover
• Skill Base
• Documentation
• Risk Assessment and Mitigation
• Proper mixture and integration of professionals
  and students
• Funding
• Lack of experience in project management

42
Survey of Student Space Research Projects

• Terriers (Boston University)
• FalconSat (USAF Academy)
• SNOE (U. Colo.)
• CATSAT (UNH)
• Bayernsat (Tech. Univ. Munich)
• MIMIC (National Space Grant Project, w/ JPL)
• MIT Rocket Team
• Mars Gravity Biosatellite
• MIT CDIO Projects

43
Questions on Survey

• Personnel
• Documentation
• Reviews
• Risk Assessment
• Testing
• Schedules
• Cost
• Success

44
Questions on Survey

• Personnel
• Mix of students, professionals
• Technical
• Science
• Management
• Student commitment
• Volunteer
• Paid
• Credit
• Average duration of work commitment
• Percentage of turnover every semester/year

45
Lessons from SNOE - 1Design of a Low Cost
Satellite

• Try to do it like a rocket experiment
• Use project management experience from earlier
  projects
• Choose important, focused scientific objectives
• Collect the minimum amount of data necessary to
  achieve objectives
• Use instruments that have been developed
• Use a simple, spinning satellite
• Use subsystems with lots of heritage, but use
  modern computer hardware

46
Lessons from SNOE - 2Areas of maximum student
participation

• Computer-aided drawing, design and analysis
• Design and testing of flight computer software
• Design, assembly and testing of solar panels and
  batteries
• Testing and calibration of instruments using
  computers
• Testing of integrated spacecraft using computer
  software
• Operation of satellite in orbit using same
  computer S/W

47
Lessons from SNOE - 3 Personnel

• LASP Professionals
• 3 Scientists
• 10 Engineers (3 near full-time, 7 part-time)
• 2 entry-level professionals (former CU students)
• Various support personnel
• Students
• 15 Graduate, 19 Undergraduate
• Attrition
• 7 students graduated, 19 hired since CDR
• 9 left by graduation, several others moved to
  other projects
• No resignations

48
Lessons from FalconSat -1

• Project done as part of course requirement for
  cadets (Students get credit but no pay.)
• 34 students (different majors)
• 3 Management
• 2 Computer Science
• 3 Physics
• 6 Space Operations
• 20 Astronautical Engineering
• Faculty support/oversight 3 Physics, 8
  Astronautical Engineering
• Paid support personnel 1 full-time machinist, 2
  part-time electrical engineering technicians

49
Lessons from FalconSat -2

• Complete student turnover every year (new senior
  class)
• No transition - cadets interview for jobs during
  1st class, are selected by 3rd class and usually
  are very knowledgeable about their positions by
  mid-term. Keep jobs in spring semester.
• Student managers are from the management
  department (interview for management vs.
  technical positions)
• Typical time commitment 15 hr per week
• Motto Cadets learn space by doing space.
• Cadets do the work, and the supervisors look
  over their shoulders.

50
Lessons from FalconSat -3

• Documentation
• Cadets really learn the importance of
  documentation, since all knowledge has to be
  passed from class to class.
• All documents kept on web page/network drive.
  Documents are reviewed by the faculty for
  thoroughness.
• Reviews
• Cadet teams must give internal reviews every 5
  lessons.
• All major program reviews (PDR, CDR, TRR, etc.)
  held with outside visitors.
• For all major reviews, have management review
  meeting and chief engineer meeting every 2 weeks
  with launch provider/government
  oversight/integrating contractor (Boeing)

51
Lessons from FalconSat -4

• Management Tools
• Quicken for ordering and budget analysis
• Microsoft Project for schedule
• PowerPoint/Word for presentations and reports
• Web page and shared network drive for
  programmatic information
• Main information problem - keeping files neatly
  organized
• Testing and Prototyping
• Conceptual and Preliminary Designs were
  theoretical
• Prototyping started with engineering model, used
  for testing in each of subsequent phases.
• Satellites were thermal vacuum and vibration
  tested to flight loads.
• Thorough testing was the main risk mitigation
  strategy.
• Cost was never an issue finances were adequate
  no overruns

52
Lessons from FalconSat -5

• Success - FalconSat 1 was launched as a secondary
  payload on an expendable and operated
  successfully. FalconSat 2 was designed for the
  Shuttle, and its launch is uncertain.
• Main Purpose of Satellites - To test future
  systems
• New avionics
• Gravity Gradient boom
• Micropulsed plasma thruster
• Shock ring to dampen launch loads
• Plasma sensors

53
Not all student projects are successfulCATSAT

• UNH-led collaboration (part of UNEX program, as
  was SNOE)
• Work done by students as part of coursework, as
  was FalconSat however, management did not
  succeed in achieving continuity of effort.
  (Insufficient documentation)
• No work outside academic year. Slow progress.
  (Insufficient faculty resources? Lack of military
  discipline?!)
• Eventually got help from MIT Center for Space
  Research, but too late to recover schedule.
• GSFC brought in to rescue project, but
  additional 20M cost estimate was too high, and
  project was cancelled.

54
BayernSat - 1

• Collaboration of Technical University of Munich
  and German aerospace industry.
• Started January, 2004 launch 2006-2007
• Primary Purpose - Technology Testbed
• Public Outreach component
• Extensive use of telepresence
• BayernSat takes pictures of the Earth and sends
  them via a relay satellite to the Earth, where
  they are published on television and on the
  Internet. Internet users are allowed to remotely
  control the cameras of BayernSat.
• 40 cm. Cubic shell, 50 kg.
• Work together with industry
• Industries build new H/W and give to TUM for
  testing
• Standard H/W (e.g. gyros) must be bought

55
BayernSat - 2

• Personnel
• At any time, 15-20 people at TUM working on
  project
• Some doing semester work (if students dont show
  up, they are dropped).
• Some doing Diploma-Thesis work (MS)
• These people work full-time for 8-12 months.
  They are backbone of project.
• 3 students using BayernSat as Ph.D. thesis
  expect 3-4 year commitment.
• Project lead is a Post-Doc, hired for 6 years
• Quality Control
• Project lead responsible for QC
• Phase A,B,C,D reviews, just like normal
  projects
• Industry and other universities invited for
  reviews

56
BayernSat - 3

• Paperwork
• A living document system is kept on server so
  everyone can contribute.
• Configuration control is responsibility of
  project lead
• Industry Participation - Industry is pushing
  project, because they will benefit
• BayernSat Project Partners Astrium GmbH CAM
  Computer Anwendung für Management GmbH Diehl VA
  Systeme DLR DomoTV IABGmbH Kayser Threde
  GmbH OES Optische und Elektronische Systeme
  GmbH Rolf Heine Hochfrequenztechnik Firma
  Spinner GmbH STT SystemTechnik GmbH Tecnotron
  GmbH

57
Documentation and Risk Managementin Successful
Student Projects

• All projects had progressive reviews.
• PDR, CDR, TRR, LRR,
• Phase A, B, C, D,

58
Documentation and Risk Managementin Successful
Student Projects

• All projects had progressive reviews.
• PDR, CDR, TRR, LRR,
• Phase A, B, C, D,
• All projects developed a system of documentation
  to ensure continuity and traceability.

59
Documentation and Risk Managementin Successful
Student Projects

• All projects had progressive reviews.
• PDR, CDR, TRR, LRR,
• Phase A, B, C, D,
• All projects developed a system of documentation
  to ensure continuity and traceability.
• All projects had a risk management and testing
  program.

60
Documentation and Risk Managementin Successful
Student Projects

• All projects had progressive reviews.
• PDR, CDR, TRR, LRR,
• Phase A, B, C, D,
• All projects developed a system of documentation
  to ensure continuity and traceability.
• All projects had a risk management and testing
  program.
• BUT

61
Documentation and Risk Managementin Successful
Student Projects

• All projects had progressive reviews.
• PDR, CDR, TRR, LRR,
• Phase A, B, C, D,
• All projects developed a system of documentation
  to ensure continuity and traceability.
• All projects had a risk management and testing
  program.
• BUT
• The reviews, documentation, reliability and
  testing programs were tailored to the individual
  projects. One size doesnt fit all!

62
Documentation and Risk Managementin Successful
Student Projects

• All projects had progressive reviews.
• PDR, CDR, TRR, LRR,
• Phase A, B, C, D,
• All projects developed a system of documentation
  to ensure continuity and traceability.
• All projects had a risk management and testing
  program.
• BUT
• The reviews, documentation, reliability and
  testing programs were tailored to the individual
  projects.
• This flexibility is a challenge for traditional
  NASA management.

63
Evaluation of NASA Processes - 1

• Document referred to is SMEX Safety, Reliability,
  and Quality Assurance Requirements, prepared by
  the NASA/GSFC Explorer Program Office in support
  of the Small Explorer (SMEX) Announcement of
  Opportunity Process, issued 27 December, 2002.
• Fundamental philosophy is The Principal
  Investigators will be responsible for all aspects
  of their missions, including Safety, Reliability,
  and Quality Assurance (SRQA).
• This approach maximizes the use of existing and
  proven PI team processes, procedures, and
  methodologies. Recognizes a wide variation in
  complexity, size, and technology for the mission,
  which can affect program risks and costs. In
  addition, the capabilities of investigators and
  their partners and subcontractors vary widely.
• Although these words were aimed at professional
  research groups, they definitely apply to
  student-run projects.

64
Evaluation of NASA Processes - 2

• Positive Aspects of the Guidelines
• It is the responsibility of the Principal
  Investigator to plan and implement a
  comprehensive SRQA program for all flight
  hardware, software, Ground Support Equipment
  (GSE), and mission operations.
• Only limited mission assurance insight is planned
  by the Explorer Program Office.
• Deliverable documentation will be significantly
  reduced.
• The Explorer Program Office is prepared to assist
  the Principal Investigator in any aspect of
  mission assurance, and to be the PIs focus for
  ready and regular access to the Goddard Space
  Flight Centers mission assurance expertise.

65
Evaluation of NASA Processes - 3

• Problem - Implementation is not always consistent
  with philosophy
• It is intended that Principal Investigators
  tailor their SRQA programs in accordance with
  ISO 9001 series standards. - large impact on
  small group questionable cost/benefit ratio
• Subtle shift in language A Continuous Risk
  Management (CRM) methodology must be used that
  identifies existing or emergent technical and
  programmatic risks, statuses them in the format
  established by GSFC management, evaluates
  mitigation efforts, and retires them or carries
  residual risks forward. - control clearly rests
  with NASA, with limited PI flexibility.
• Frequency and Number of Reports Assurance
  Status Reports will be part of the regular,
  monthly reporting by the Principal Investigator
  to the Explorer Program Office and will summarize
  the status of all assurance activities and report
  on any discrepancies (including corrective
  actions) that could affect the performance of the
  investigation. - overly frequent reporting can
  devastate small projects. Reporting requirements
  should be aligned to size and complexity of
  project.
• Audits The Principal Investigator is required
  to plan and conduct audits of his/her internal
  mission assurance systems and those of his/her
  subcontractors and suppliers, examining
  documentation, operations and products. The
  Principal Investigator is required to generate
  and maintain a report for each audit. - audits
  are a recognized, valuable activity, but again,
  frequency and number must be appropriate for size
  and complexity of project.

66
Evaluation of NASA Processes - 4

• Risk Management - Closeout of Hazard Reports
• HETE2 example (requirement for full documentation
  vs. qualified engineering judgment)
• Reviews
• ? Requirements Review
• ? Concept Review
• ? Preliminary Design Review
• ? Critical Design Review
• ? Pre-Environmental Review
• ? Pre-Ship Review
• Operations Readiness Review
• Flight Readiness Review
• Additional Reviews
• Independent NASA IIRT reviews, now including the
  Red Team review activity
• Confirmation Review
• Control clearly with NASA. Experience shows
  strong resistance to PI flexibility within NASA.

67
Evaluation of NASA Processes - 5

• True flexibility in the relationship between NASA
  and student groups is even more critical than
  between NASA and PIs. The nature of the
  relationship is different, because of the reduced
  experience students have compared to typical PIs.
  However, the basic goal of reducing the paperwork
  for research groups is every bit as important,
  perhaps more so in view of the constrained
  budgets and personnel most student groups have to
  work with.
• NASA needs to recognize two goals for student
  space projects scientific and educational. To
  the extent that student projects are serving an
  educational purpose, the cost in terms of
  potential failure of assuming a higher level of
  risk should be book kept as an educational
  expense. However, increased paperwork does not
  universally translate into a lower risk, and the
  need for increased flexibility for small space
  science experiments applies both to PI and to
  student projects.

68
How is the Mars Gravity Biosatellite Project
Dealing with these Issues?
69
Project History

• Project inception August 2001
• Less than 750K spent to date, while completing
  three engineering reviews (9/02, 1/03, 8/03),
  two science reviews (11/01, 4/03), and
  significant hardware prototyping and testing
• Assembled a large, dedicated team of primarily
  volunteer students (300 involved to date)
• Raised 1.4M in funding and in-kind donations
• Secured 2.25M commitment for launch on-board
  SpaceX Falcon I
• Transitioning from primarily student effort to
  combined effort of students and professionals

70
Student and Professional Collaboration

• The MIT Space Systems Laboratory (SSL) and
  Payload Systems, Inc. (PSI), have successfully
  conducted a series of space missions involving a
  mix of students and professionals
• This experience has shown
• Initially the work should be performed primarily
  by students with a small amount of professional
  advising
• As a mission moves into detailed design and
  hardware fabrication, the level of professional
  involvement should increase
• The Mars Gravity program is drawing from this
  experience and adopting a similar approach

71
Phase C,D,E Project Organization
NASA Exploration Systems
Project Director David Miller-SSL
Project Advisory Board (From Major Partners)
Project Manager Paul Wooster-SSL
Science PIs
Business Mgmt Bill Mayer-CSR
Project Scientist Erika Wagner-MVL
Project Engineer Bob Goeke-CSR
Information Systems
Reliability and Q/A Manager Brian Klatt-CSR
GNC, EDL VV Piero Miotto-CSDL
Finance and Procurement
Education/Public Outreach
Operations de Luis-PSI
Payload Parrish-PSI Heafitz-SSL
S/C Bus Doty-CSR
EDLS Morgan-UQCH
Launch Vehicle SpaceX
SSL MIT Space Systems Lab MVL MIT
Man-Vehicle Lab CSR MIT Center for Space
Research PSI Payload Systems, Inc. ARA
Applied Research Associates CSDL C.S. Draper
Laboratory UQCH Univ. of Queensland Centre for
Hypersonics
72
Programmatic Risk Mitigation

• Unproven Falcon Launch Vehicle
• Falcon will have launched prior to our flight
• Have fall-back option using Minotaur (proven,
  although has cost and schedule impact)
• Distributed team with substantial student
  involvement
• Involving professionals with spaceflight
  experience directly in design and integration
• Team has experience in using students effectively
  in space systems development and working in
  multi-institution setting
• Inherent cost and schedule uncertainty
• Use HETE-based streamlined management process
• Develop more detailed schedule, budget estimate
  for mission implementation during next phase

73
Benefits to NASA

• The Mars Gravity Biosatellite mission, in a
  cost-effective manner, helps NASA to
• Gather initial data on effects of Martian gravity
  on mammals, preparing for human Mars missions
• Determine need for additional 0.38g research and
  potential reduced gravity countermeasure
  development
• Inform decisions on role of artificial gravity
  for Project Constellation Spiral II and beyond
• Provide a rapid, tangible response tothe
  Presidents exploration agenda
• Inspire the next generation and trainthe NASA
  workforce of tomorrow

74
Student Space Research Program - 1

• Purpose of SSRP Enable more student space
  research projects
• Workforce development through student involvement
  in research
• Allow students to touch space.
• Take advantage of expected low-cost launchers to
  increase research and development
• Provide assistance to students in 4 key areas
• Starting new projects
• Project Management
• Funding
• Collaboration and Advising

75
Research Project 5Cross Cutting Theme
Challenges Education vehicle for PPM training at
the University level (undergraduate/graduate)

• How does education and value-added of existing,
  new, tool sets and methodology create better PPM
  ?
• Research, tool validation
• Education and training
• Develop Standardized Systems Management

Objective

• Education vehicle for PPM training at the
  University level (undergraduate/graduate)
• Curriculum development to address
• Impact of Government/industry sponsorship of
  University projects
• Appropriate interaction between experiential
  education versus formal education
• What are the best ways to integrate PPM lessons
  into hands-on projects
• Metrics involved in tracking/measuring
  effectiveness of PPM training

Rationale

• To impact and affect continued education,
  including individual growth via education and
  training with insight and viability into the
  decision-making process

76
Recommendation 2 Rank High
Priority Challenge Recruitment, motivation,
and training of a diverse range of young project
managers and systems engineers into the NASA,
contractor, and international space working
environment. Research Objectives/Questions
Track career choices of young post-docs and
post-grads who are recipients of such experience.
Identify reasons why they do or do not emerge as
candidate PM/SMs in NASA (and ESA) space
missions. Consider the cost effectiveness and
timeliness of this potential training route.
Rationale Small mission, space science
instrumentation programs and balloon experiments
provide a fertile training ground in the
university sector (and in research departments of
national laboratories and NASA Centers). The age
profile of the NASA and DOD cadre of PM/SMs
indicates that the shortage of this skill base
will become acute within the current decade.
77
Recommendation 3 Rank High
Priority Challenge Recruitment, motivation and
training of the new generation with good project
management skills. Research Objectives/Questions
What types of programs are most effective at
training good PMs? What types of incentives can
be provided to motivate the necessary persons to
participate in these programs? Rationale If
NASA is to successfully meet its staffing needs
in the future, it will need to attract more
people into the aerospace industry than are
currently self-selected. Research into which
programs are most effective for recruiting in
each key age group where career decisions are
made is important. We identified 5 stages k-6,
7-12, undergraduate, post-grad, career. Action
for USRA We also noted that the first 2 stages
are beyond the USRA/APPL scope, but the issue of
exciting young people in science and engineering
through projects should be addressed within the
context of NASAs EPO effort. We also note that
engineering is under represented in current EPO
programs. Interface to NASA Education
Directorate.
78
Student Space Research Program - 2

• Starting new projects
• Organize and provide Starter Kit - information
  about
• Recruiting students
• Finding funding
• Managing students
• Managing information
• Access to lessons learned
• Provide Management Education (CPMR goal)
• Short courses
• Internships
• Mentors

79
Student Space Research Program - 3

• Project Management Assistance
• Information management tools - essential to
  handle high student turnover, which can lead to
  loss of information. (Many students are more
  interested in working with hardware than with
  management.)
• SSRP maintains data base of all documentation for
  projects it supports. This will facilitate review
  by NASA and outside advisors.
• To the extent permissible for proprietary
  reasons, reviews of documents and suggestions
  could be circulated among other participating
  student teams as part of the educational process.
  
• NASA should be able to procure commercial project
  management software more economically for a large
  number of student groups.

80
Student Space Research Program - 4

• Create a Funding Ladder
• Multi-level funding to encourage large number of
  projects.
• Small funding for large number of projects
• Progressively larger funding for smaller number
  of projects
• Require student participation in NASA management
  seminars and internships for progression to
  higher funding level
• Assist teams in soliciting in-kind support from
  private industry.
• Organize IDIQ supply chain for standard
  hardware
• Open-source development network for space
  projects (similar to the open-source software
  development worlds sourceforge.net)

81
Student Space Research Program - 5

• Collaboration and Advising
• SSRP organizes network of experienced NASA
  advisors
• Encourage private industry to provide advisors
  integrate into same network.
• Industry will benefit from developing student
  management experience.
• Identify good students for internships and
  full-time hiring
• Encourage cooperation among universities
• Support flexibility in requirements imposed on
  student projects.

82
Student Space Research Program - 6

• Project Selection
• SSRP could generate a list of research projects
  of interest to various NASA programs.
• Smaller projects than satellites could provide
  introductory management experience for groups
  without previous spaceflight experience.
• Note Many NASA programs already aim at these
  goals. What is missing is an across-the-board,
  concentrated emphasis on the project management
  aspects of student research projects.

83
Future Plans - 1

• CPMR can play an important role in introducing
  management as an element in NASAs student
  research programs.
• We believe that our Phase I results can assist
  CPMR in this effort, and we look forward to
  helping.

84
Future Plans - 1

• CPMR can play an important role in introducing
  management as an element in NASAs student
  research programs.
• We believe that our Phase I results can assist
  CPMR in this effort, and we look forward to
  helping.
• By itself, there is not enough research potential
  in this area to warrant pursuing a Phase II award
  solely to look at more student space research
  projects. Therefore, we do not intend to propose
  on our own for Phase II.

85
Future Plans - 1

• CPMR can play an important role in introducing
  management as an element in NASAs student
  research programs.
• We believe that our Phase I results can assist
  CPMR in this effort, and we look forward to
  helping.
• By itself, there is not enough research potential
  in this area to warrant pursuing a Phase II award
  solely to look at more student space research
  projects. Therefore, we do not intend to propose
  on our own for Phase II.
• However

86
Future Plans - 2

• We believe that the research on Modeling,
  Analyzing and Engineering NASAs Safety Culture
  being carried out by our MIT colleagues, Nancy
  Leveson and Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld, is relevant
  to student space research projects. CPMR should
  apply this research into any efforts to support
  student projects.
• The challenge will be to provide tools for
  student groups to increase reliability and
  safety.
• Adapting a systems safety model from a
  large-scale project like the Shuttle to small,
  student projects would be a good test case.
• Having students use cutting-edge safety tools
  will help them carry an appropriate safety
  philosophy and experience into their future jobs.