CxPO SE

1
CxPO SEI People, Products Processes
(3Ps) Overview SEI Team Leadership April 13,
2006
2
SEI Key Tenants Challenges

1. Team organization is critical One Team with
   strong SE Management
2. Standards development and disciplined compliance
   is a necessary asset
3. The organizing principle for complex systems is a
   layered architecture that aligns functions,
   requirements, and mission integration
4. Successful complex development requires the right
   overarching system engineering management
   much more than design to specification
5. Complex systems engineering is significantly more
   challenging to execute and manage than
   conventional systems engineering

NASA Will Serve as Lead System Integrator
(LSI) Complex Human Spaceflight system
engineering integration endeavor of this scale
and importance has not tackled within the Agency
since early 60s
3
CxPO SEI 3P Overview

• Agenda
• People
• Organizational Overview
• Current Leadership Profile
• Systems Integration Groups (SIGs)
• Agency-wide Staffing Situation
• Products
• Near-Term Requirements-Focused Product Line
• CxP-allocated NGOs, Level I-allocated
  Requirements, CARD, IRDs, IDDs, Invoked
  Standards, Operational Concepts, FFBDs, FAMs, N2
  Diagrams, Reference Architecture, Trade/Analyses
  results, SRDs, Requirements Achievability
  Assessments, Technical Performance Measures,
  Technical Risk Mitigation Plans, Traceability
  Reports
• Long-term Program-wide Technical Integration
  Foundation Products
• Cx Program Plan, Policy, Process Strategy
  Documents
• Processes
• Requirements Interface Management Processes
• RAC, DAC VAC Analyses/Trades/Modeling Sim
  Processes
• Other SE Processes, Tools and Training
• Emerging Program Boards, Panels WGs
  Structure/Process
• CY06 Challenges Schedule Ahead
• Backup Recommended May Requirements
  Face-to-Face (F2F) U/R

4
CxPO SEI 3P Overview

• Agenda
• People
• Organizational Overview
• Current Leadership Profile
• Systems Integration Groups (SIGs)
• Agency-wide Staffing Situation

5
Team Organization is Crucial

• System Engineering Management is the integrating
  factor
• Synchronize the team
• Integrate the team vertically and horizontally
• Coordinating the activities of multiple SE teams
  through just documentation, reporting, and ICDs
  does not work effectively
• One systems engineering team
• Integrate a distributed virtual team using Top
  Down SE Management authority, integrated tasking,
  and clear accountability
• Support using common networked tools and
  processes that ensure communication of
  information and rapid issue resolution
• Team must deal with all levels of SE issues from
  the design through capabilities/mission
  integration (layered architecture)
• Integrate and train the SE Team
• Train to modern process standards legacy wont
  work for modern, complex SE development
• Must use up-to-date MS/Software/Collabrative
  architectures and tools

6
Horizontal Integration
Vertical Integration
7
CxP Lvl II Systems Engineering and Integration
(SEI)
Updated 4/2/06
Programmatic Integration Support
Horizontal Integration
SEI Director
Program Review Integration
Lvl 3 Project SEI Leads Agency Center SEI
Focals
PPC Scheduling Configuration Mgmt
Human Resources Business Mgmt Risk Mgmt
Prime Focus - SRR success then all CxP
reviews Prime Products - Coordinated
Entry/Exit Criteria - Integrated
agenda/products/tools - SRR Plan Including
Integrated Level II III plan Forcing Function
- Drives product readiness through Pre-Boards
- Virtual Tag-ups with Stakeholders
Drive Integrated Perform./ Efficiency/Effectivenes
s Across SEI, CxPO and Centers
Deputy
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Chief of Staff Organization
Secretary

• Prime Focus
• Driving Technical Excellence
• Major urgent Technical Issues

• Prime Focus
• -Meeting Efficiencies/Focus
• Cost, Sched Action/Trng Tracking
• Coordination w/ PPC

Interface Management
SE Process, Tools, Metrics and Training
Requirements Management
Program Technical Integration
Analyses, Trades Architecture
Modeling Simulation
Prime Focus - Cross Element I/F Def.
Contrl - Internal to Program -
External to Program Prime Products - IDDs -
IRDs - MOUs - Interface Context Diagram -
Interface Control Plan (ICP) Forcing Function
- Interface Control Working Grp
Prime Focus - Lvl I/II III Requirements -
Functional Architecture Prime Products -
CARD - Lvl II Standards - Product Tree -
Lvl II/III Document Tree - Program Requirements
Tree - Functional Analyses FFBDs,
FAMs N2 Diagms - Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP) -
Traceability Reports Forcing Function -
Reqmts Working Group
Prime Focus - Integrated Capability/Functional
ity Across Subsystems, Projects
Missions Prime Products - Highest Quality
Requirements - Each Lead Assigned a set of
CARD, IRD Invoked Standards Reqmts
- Reqmts Achievability Assessments - Risk
Mitigation Plans - TPM Id profiling -
Optimized Integrated Designs -
Commonality/Interoperability/ilities Forcing
Function - System Integration Groups (SIGs)
Prime Focus - Integrated Analyses
Physical Architecture Prime Products -
Integrated Analyses Plan - ADD RAD - Lvl II
Trades - Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan
- Level II III - Performance Assessments
- Gap ID Mitigation - Validated
Requirements Set - Risk Analyses - Support to
Ops APO Forcing Function - Analyses WG
Prime Focus - Program-wide approach
implementation of MS Prime Products - MS
Plans - MS Tools/Standards - Integr MS
Products - Level II III - Support to
SIGs, ATA, TV, APO
Ops Forcing Function - MS WG
Prime Focus - Documented Processes Prime
Products - SEMP - Reqmts Mgmt Database -
RID Tool Rqmts - TPM Tool Rqmts - Risk
Assessment Tool Reqmts - Engineering Database
- SE Metrics Standardization Forcing Function
- Mandatory Training Audits - Organized NARs
8
CxP Lvl II SEI Leadership (1 of 5)
Programmatic Integration Support
Horizontal Integration
SEI Director Chris. L. Hardcastle
Program Review Integration
Lvl 3 Project SEI Leads Agency Center SEI
Focals
PPC Scheduling Roger Jones Configuration
Mgmt Deanna Hackfeld Human Resources Curtis
Collins Business Mgmt Jason Weeks Risk Mgmt
Pedro Curiel
Matt Leonard
David Petri
Deputy Steve Meacham
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Chief of Staff Organization
Tina Cobb
Lee Graham
Jason Weeks (A)
Interface Management
SE Process, Tools, Metrics and Training
Requirements Management
Program Technical Integration
Analyses, Trades Architecture
Modeling Simulation
TBD Chief TBD Deputy
Michele Digiuseppe Chief Debbie Korth Deputy
Steve Fitzgerald Chief Margarita Sampson Dep (A)
Neil Lemmons Chief (A) Dave Forrest Deputy
Don Monell Chief (A) TBD Deputy
Keith Williams Chief TBD Deputy
Majority are Leaders off of Shuttle or ISS
Programs with great attitudes work ethic
Challenges remain in fully understanding,
appreciating and implementing the scale of SEI
required
9
CxP Lvl II SEI Leadership - SIGs (2 of 5)

• Technical Integration Leaders (TIL) and Systems
  Integration Groups (SIGs) Established Around the
  Front-Face of the Cube
• Intended to Bring a Functional Focus to the
  System Engineering Efforts
• Technical Integration Leads are responsible for
  their Functional Area from Cradle-to-Grave and
  Top-to-Bottom
• Assigned specific LVl II CARD, IRD, IDD Invoked
  Standards/ Requirements to manage through the
  life of the Program
• Driving Cross-Systems, Cross-Element,
  Cross-Mission Commonality, Interchangeability,
  Interoperability, Survivability, Supportability,
  Reliability, Maintainability, Affordability into
  the requirements designs with the long term
  objectives in mind
• Stewards the Overarching System Engineering
  Guidance
• 1 Safety and Mission Success
• 2 Programmatic Risk
• 3 Extensibility and Flexibility
• 4 Life Cycle Costs

Common Components, Systems CSCIs
Unique Components, Systems, CSCIs
Data Electric. System
Automat. Robotic System
Propulsion Systems
Structural Mech System
Thermal Systems
Crew Systems
ECLS Systems
GNC
Fluids
Networked
Comm
/Interoperability
Flight Performance(Traj., Prop. Abort, Loads,
Thermal, Mass)
Integrated Loads Structure Mechanisms
Lunar Surface Elements
Networked Battle Command
Software Avionics Interoperability Reuse
Training and Logistics Systems
Cargo Launch Vehicle
LS
Complementary Sys
Networked Lethality
Navigation and Tracking
-
IMS
LCC MCC
Training
Survivability
C3I Interoperability Commonality
UGV
NLOS
Crew Launch Vehicle
UAV
Man Print
LSAM
Maneuver
Affordability, Life Cycle Costs, CAIV
Sustainment
EDS
Crew Module
Supportability/Log/Reliability Maintainability
Service Module
Transportability/
Deployability
Grnd Mission Ops Operations Training
RAM
-
T
Human Factors Human Rating
Environments (nat. induced) and Constraints
Elements Across Missions
Integr. Thermal (pass/active) ECLS (CM, LSAM,
Surf)
Integrated Power Loads, Interop Interchange.
Extravehicular Integration
Functional Performance Capability
Multi-Disciplined Systems Integration Groups
Leveraging the Best of the Projects, the Agency
Contracting Teams
10
CxP Lvl II SEI Leadership - SIGs (3 of 5)
Program Technical Integration Office Chief,
Steve Fitzgerald Margarita Sampson (A)
s only represent no. of CARD reqmts assigned
still have to carve up and allocate standards,
IRD and other Level II reqmts across SIGs
Legend
CARD Rq
SW Avionics Interop and Reuse Matt Barry (M),
JPL TBD
Navigation and Tracking Don Pearson (A),
JSC Mike Moreau (M), GSFC
Flight Performance Doug Whitehead (A), JSC Karen
Frank (M), JSC
Affordability, LCC, CAIV TBD TBD
114
6
79
35
C3I Commonality and Interoperability Steve Rader
(A), JSC John Curry (M), JSC
Thermal (Active/Passive) And ECLS Robyn
Carrasquillo (M), MSFC John Lewis (M), JSC
Integrated Power Loads Interchang/Interop Jim
Soeder (M), GRC Tim Lawrence (M), JSC
51
5
2
Environments and Constraints Dave Cheuvront (A),
JSC Jeff Anderson (M), MSFC
SupportabilityLogistics/ ReliabilityMaintainabil
ity Kevin Watson (A), JSC 1 IDd (M), KSC
Integrated Loads, Struct, and Mechanisms Eli
Rayos (M), JSC ScottHill (M), LaRC
13
35
51
Human Factors and Human Rating Jan Connolly (M),
JSC TBD (M), MSFC
EVA Integration Jeff Davis (M), JSC Lara Kearney
(M), JSC
Ground and Mission Operations/Training Steve
Hirshorn (M), JSC Phil Weber (M), KSC
64
13
71
Responsible for Maturation of Level II
Requirements (CARD, Invoked Standards, Level II
IRDs Assigned Cx Program Plans)
11
CxP Lvl II SEI Leadership SIGs (4 of 5)
12
CxP Lvl II SEI Leadership SIGs (5 of 5) CxPO
SEI Near-Term Needs from each SIG

• Recognize the efficiencies in all SIG doing
  certain aspects of the job the same way
• Leveraging off the same SEI/CxPO Infrastructure
• Using the same processes for repetitive tasks
• Using similar/same tools
• Recognize not all SIGs will look the same
• Sizing/Staffing will vary widely (should be
  dictated by the defined scope of work)
• Some SIGs will get most of the answers from the
  Projects and simply integrate while other may be
  needing to generate a substantial amount of
  data/products at Level II
• Recognize SIGs MUST talk to on another
• There are natural synergies/dependencies
• Recognize we ARE NOT here to DO Level IIIs Job
• Focus on your set of Level II requirements, Cross
  Project Interfaces and the Long-Term Objectives
  of the Program as it relates to minimizing life
  cycle costs while maximizing our collective
  survivability, reliability, maintainability,
  interchangeability, interoperability,
  supportability, commonality, reusability,
  produceability, extensibility and flexibility
• Recognize NOT all requirements are Created equal
  or Mature at the same pace
• Some requirements carry more weight than
  othersso you cant rely on qty count alone
• APO is Chartered to work the out year
  requirements until they reach a certain maturity
  and will be passed on to the appropriate SIG - I
  use to call this bucket of future requirements
  the Growth SIG). We MUST strike a balance how
  APO matures these requirements while leveraging
  and staying Integrated with the appropriate SIGs
• Recognize not all SIGs are at the same level of
  maturity and Key Training ahead is essential for
  our collective success TPMs, CART, ARM, CRADLE,
  
• BEGIN PRODUCING RESULTS with ICPR!!!!!!!!!

Basics to Adhere to shared with the SIG
Leadership in 3/28/06 Offsite
13
SIG Example Metrics
14
Agency-wide SEI Task MappingStatus as of 31 Mar
06

• Over 140 EOIs submitted to SEI
• JSC/Non-JSC Ratio (Preliminary)
• Including LII SEI 4555
• Significant responsibilities emerging for non-JSC
  Centers
• Technical Integration Leads
• LaRC Structures (SIG Co-Lead)
• GSFC Navigation (SIG Co-Lead)
• JPL Software Avionics (SIG Lead)
• MSFC - Thermal and ECLS (SIG Co-Lead)
• MSFC Environments (SIG Co-Lead)
• GRC Integrated Power (SIG Co-Lead)
• KSC - Supportability (SIG Co-Lead)
• KSC Ground/Mission Ops (SIG Co-Lead)
• IRD Book Managers
• LaRC - TPM Lead
• Gaps
• Additional Technical Integration Leads
• Human Rating/Human Factors looking to MSFC
• Affordability, LCC, CAIV MSFC/WYE

Preliminary

• Aggressive Forward Plan
• Completed first iteration of SEI Center
  allocations (4/10)
• Document SEI FY06 funding at each Center (ECD
  4/14)
• Finalize FY06 SEI Center allocations in ITA (ECD
  4/21)
• Update SEI Integrated Master Schedule with
  negotiate FY06 tasks (ECD 4/25)
• Negotiate and document FY07-FY11 SEI Center
  allocations in ITA (ECD 6/2)

Note The SEI Nationwide Leadership Team Meets
Daily _at_ 0730 CST on this and other Priorities as
part of our now established Battle-Rhythm
15
SEI Center GuidelinesPreliminary as of 12 April
06
16
SEI Center GuidelinesPreliminary as of 12 April
06
Will continue to synergize our forecasts with the
Projects via the May POP Follow-on TIM
17
CxPO SEI Staffing Actuals vs NeedsIncluding
Projections for balance of CY06
18
SIG Staffing Status
19
CxPO SEI 3P Overview

• Agenda
• Products
• Near-Term Requirements-Focused Product Line
• CxP-allocated NGOs, Level I-allocated
  Requirements, CARD, IRDs, IDDs, Invoked
  Standards, Operational Concepts, FFBDs, FAMs, N2
  Diagrams, Reference Architecture, Trade/Analyses
  results, SRDs, Requirements Achievability
  Assessments, Technical Performance Measures,
  Technical Risk Mitigation Plans, Traceability
  Reports
• Long-term Program-wide Technical Integration
  Foundation Products
• Cx Program Plan, Policy, Process Strategy
  Documents

20
Requirements Tree Top Level Summary
VSE
NGOs
ESMD Level 0/I
ESAS Results
Operational Concepts/DRMs
Reference Architecture
Functional Analyses Products
CARD
Commonality Standards
Constellation Interface Requirements
DSNE
Project/Element Requirements
HSIR
CEV SRD
C3I Specification
LSAM SRD
EVA SRD
Power Quality Spec
MTV SRD
Fracture Control Requirements for Constellation
Hardware
CLV SRD
CxP Requirements Tree is one of the RID-able
Items for ICPR
CaLV SRD
MS SRD
Gnd Ops SRD
21
Level III vs Level II Lead Roles in Interface
Management
Full SIG Ownership working with Projects
Lower Priority



MTV
PE


Focus relative to Interface Management and lines
of Responsibility
22
Constellation Interface Requirements
Constellation
Interface Requirements
Ground
EVA
/
CEV
MTV
/
CEV
CLV
/
CEV
Mission Systems
/
LSAM
/
CaLV
CEV
/
ISS
Operations
/
CEV
IRD
IRD
IRD
CEV IRD
IRD
IRD
IRD
Ground
EVA
/
CEV
MTV
/
CEV
CLV
/
CEV
Mission Systems
/
LSAM
/
CaLV
CEV
/
ISS
Operations
/
CEV
ICD
ICD
ICD
CEV ICD
ICD
ICD
ICD
EDS//CaLV IRD
LIDS
LSAM
/
EDS
LSAM
/
Ground
CEV
/
EDS
Mission Systems
/
IDD
LSAM
/
EVA
IRD
Operations IRD
IRD
Ground Ops IRD
IRD
EDS/CaLV ICD
LSAM
/
EDS
LSAM
/
Ground
CEV
/
EDS
Mission Systems
/
APAS
LSAM
/
EVA
ICD
Operations ICD
ICD
Ground Ops ICD
IDD
ICD
EVA/Ground Ops IRD
LSAM
/
CEV
LSAM
/
Mission
CLV
/
Mission
CLV
/
Ground
IRD
Systems IRD
Systems IRD
Operations IRD
Need to work these in Priority Order to Support
Lunar Sortie CxP SRR and subsequent Project SRRs
EVA/Ground Ops ICD
EVA/Mission Systems IRD
LSAM
/
CEV
LSAM
/
Mission
CLV
/
Mission
CLV
/
Ground
ICD
Systems ICD
Systems ICD
Operations ICD
EDS//Ground Ops IRD
EVA/Mission Systems ICD
CaLV
/
Ground
CEV
/
Portable
Operations
Equipment
CaLV
/
Mission
IRD
IRD
LSAM
/
Portable
Systems
Equipment IRD
IRD
EDS/Ground Ops ICD
EDS/MS IRD
CaLV
/
Ground
CEV
/
Portable
Operations
Equipment
EDS/MS ICD
CaLV
/
Mission
ICD
ICD
LSAM
/
Portable
Systems
Equipment ICD
ICD
Need Project Support in setting Priority Order by
Book and Within each Book
23
Example CEV CLV Legs of the Requirements Tree
Requirements Tree Covers Level II through Level
III
24
Current CARD Requirements Count Distribution
Quality of the CARD needs focused improvement
While reformatting has been accomplished, breadth
and depth of content as it relates to Level II
requirements requires enhancements based in
Systems Engineering results - This is our Focus
for the Next Four Months Refer to Process
Plans Ahead For Details
25
Continuous Assessment Focused on Critical/At
Risk Requirements
Constellation Analysis and Requirements
Traceability (CART)Will facilitate id of
requirements-focused risks, prioritized TPMs
mitigation plans
Affordability
Tier III
Schedule
Tier II
Performance
Program and group level guidance
Tier I
CART Reports
Trace Reports
Group
System Integration Groups
ARM
Cradle
Program
ARM
Requirements Management
Risk Management
Requirements Documentation
Requirement assessment data maintained in Cradle
Informed Proactive Management
Risk Management

• Trace / CART Reports
• Requirement ownership
• Requirement Parent-Child linkages
• Requirement Criticality
• Requirement Achievability Status
• technical performance, schedule,
  affordability

TPMs - Provide Quantifiable Assessment System
Watch List
TPMs
ARM
Trace Reports, CART Reports, TPMs and
Hard-to-Achieve Requirements Risk Mitigation
Plans have yet to be implemented But are a key
focus of ICPR and the plans through the summer
Critical requirements with compliance
issues (Performance, Schedule, Affordability) feed
s appropriate risk management processes
Program Level Risks
26
CxPDocumentTree
Establishing proper foundation for Cx Program
to build on with set of key Level II Program
Plans, Policies, Processes and Strategies In
Addition to Maturing the Requirements Set
Must Keep this as Simple as Possible.But no
Simpler For a Virtually Distributed Multi B,
Multi-Decade Program
27
CxPO SEI 3P Overview

• Agenda
• Processes
• Requirements Interface Management Processes
• RAC, DAC VAC Analyses/Trades/Modeling Sim
  Processes
• Other SE Processes, Tools and Training
• Emerging Program Boards, Panels WGs
  Structure/Process

28
Standards Development and Compliance is a
Necessary Asset

• Documented, institutionalized and trained
  Standards lead to predictable outcomes that
  reduce risk
• Proprietary, outdated, noncompliant processes
  ultimately compromise team integration
• System engineering project management standards
  have been updated to handle modern, complex
  problems
• NASA 7120.5C
• NASA NPR 7123
• ISO 15288 product life cycle synchronization
• ANSI/IEC 632 system engineering and the
  Enterprise
• IEEE 1471 architecture development using
  multiple frameworks (eg. tailored for CS
  collaborative systems engineering)
• Compliant processes tend to integrate team
  operations
• Communication common across multiple
  organizations and suppliers
• Common expectations of outcomes
• Common validation standards
• Common vocabulary
• Compliance requires vertically integrated SE
  management, diligence, and verification

29
Layered Architectures Organize Complex Systems
Engineering

• Requirements Management, Configuration
  Management, and Change Management quickly lose
  synchronization without a vertically integrating
  top-down organizing mechanism
• Particularly after Prime Contractors have been
  selected
• Complex systems have a layered architecture that
  is the organizing principle for system
  engineering management
• System breakdown structure
• Architectures and flowdown functional analysis
• Requirements derivation and flowdown
• Mission and End Item integration
• Manage configurations and requirements by
  architecture level
• Explicit links to functions, components and
  interfaces on own level (modeled in the
  architecture)
• Explicit links up to functions, components and
  interfaces on the next level derivation and
  realization are explicit
• Use architecture levels to construct schema for
  control in tools and construct products for
  reviews

Horizontal integration
Vertical integration
30
Us vs. Traditional System Engineering
Traditional
Rqmnts Analysis
Functional Analysis Decomp
Customer Reqmts
System Analysis

• System Spec
• Rqmnts Baseline
• System Arch

• Functional Arch
• Functional Spec

• Single Major System
• Serial approach

Config Unit/Item Build
Config Unit/Item Test
Design Synthesis

• Physical Arch
• Design Spec

Integration
Integration Test
Production
Us
CARD/IRDs/ SRDs

• Multiple Major Systems
• Parallel approach

System Analysis
Rqmnts Analysis
Functional Decomp Allocation
Design Synthesis

• System Spec
• Rqmnts Baseline
• System Arch
• Technical Arch

• Physical Arch
• Design Spec

Config Unit/Item Build
Config Unit/Item Test
Integration
Integration Test
Production
Concurrent Engineering is inherent to what we do
on CxP
31
Level II Requirements Enhancement Focus
2005
2006
2007
FY06
FY07
Cx ICPR
Cx SRR
SRR
ICPR
RAC 3
RAC 2
DAC 1
RAC 1
Doc
Sel
Plan
Sel
Plan
Doc
Doc
CxP
Approval
Mid-term
CLV SRR
CEV SRR
GO SRR
MS SRR
EVA SRR
Currently our Eyes are on ICPR Results and the
Path Forward to CxP SRR 1st Season of Project
SRRs
32
Systems Engineering is More Than Design

• In a complex system, design to spec and wait to
  verify is insufficient
• Critical design trades and reengineering occur
  after specifications have been cut and
  contractors selected
• Design-to-cost, design-to-risk, and integration
  across the family of systems requires active SE
  role in managing the contractors
• Systems Engineering Management is the integrating
  factor
• SE Dual VEE Synchronization and Management
• Drives design and development through common
  architecture, integrated systems trades and
  higher level mission milestones
• Process allows the interaction and integration at
  the complex systems development and across
  program levels

33
Level II / Level III System Development Model
34
Key Processes in these SEI Areas
Programmatic Integration Support
Horizontal Integration
SEI Director
Program Review Integration
Lvl 3 Project SEI Leads Agency Center SEI
Focals
PPC Scheduling Configuration Mgmt
Human Resources Business Mgmt Risk Mgmt
Prime Focus - SRR success then all CxP
reviews Prime Products - Coordinated
Entry/Exit Criteria - Integrated
agenda/products/tools - SRR Plan Including
Integrated Level II III plan Forcing Function
- Drives product readiness through Pre-Boards
- Virtual Tag-ups with Stakeholders
Drive Integrated Perform./ Efficiency/Effectivenes
s Across SEI, CxPO and Centers
Deputy
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Chief of Staff Organization
Secretary

• Prime Focus
• Driving Technical Excellence
• Major urgent Technical Issues

• Prime Focus
• -Meeting Efficiencies/Focus
• Cost, Sched Action/Trng Tracking
• Coordination w/ PPC

Interface Management
SE Process, Tools, Metrics and Training
Requirements Management
Program Technical Integration
Analyses, Trades Architecture
Modeling Simulation
Prime Focus - Cross Element I/F Def.
Contrl - Internal to Program -
External to Program Prime Products - IDDs -
IRDs - MOUs - Interface Context Diagram -
Interface Control Plan (ICP) Forcing Function
- Interface Control Working Grp
Prime Focus - Lvl I/II III Requirements -
Functional Architecture Prime Products -
CARD - Lvl II Standards - Product Tree -
Lvl II/III Document Tree - Program Requirements
Tree - Functional Analyses FFBDs,
FAMs N2 Diagms - Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP) -
Traceability Reports Forcing Function -
Reqmts Working Group
Prime Focus - Integrated Capability/Functional
ity Across Subsystems, Projects
Missions Prime Products - Highest Quality
Requirements - Each Lead Assigned a set of
CARD, IRD Invoked Standards Reqmts
- Reqmts Achievability Assessments - Risk
Mitigation Plans - TPM Id profiling -
Optimized Integrated Designs -
Commonality/Interoperability/ilities Forcing
Function - System Integration Groups (SIGs)
Prime Focus - Integrated Analyses
Physical Architecture Prime Products -
Integrated Analyses Plan - ADD RAD - Lvl II
Trades - Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan
- Level II III - Performance Assessments
- Gap ID Mitigation - Validated
Requirements Set - Risk Analyses - Support to
Ops APO Forcing Function - Analyses WG
Prime Focus - Program-wide approach
implementation of MS Prime Products - MS
Plans - MS Tools/Standards - Integr MS
Products - Level II III - Support to
SIGs, ATA, TV, APO
Ops Forcing Function - MS WG
Prime Focus - Documented Processes Prime
Products - SEMP - Reqmts Mgmt Database -
RID Tool Rqmts - TPM Tool Rqmts - Risk
Assessment Tool Reqmts - Engineering Database
- SE Metrics Standardization Forcing Function
- Mandatory Training Audits - Organized NARs
35
SEI Requirements Maturation Process Flow
Define the Scope
SIGs Projects integrated into the development
process
Develop the Functional Architecture
Manage the Requirements Development Process (RWG)
Analysis, Trade Studies, Standards
Develop the Requirements
Stakeholder Feedback
Validate the Requirements
Disciplined and Integrated Approach to Maturing
Our Requirements Set is being Stoop Up
36
Develop Requirements
3.1 Collect document the Requirements
3.2 Define Capture Attributes for Rqmts
Process is designed to capture all of the data
when the requirement is being developed
3.3 Document the rationale for each Rqmt
3.4 Decompose/Allocate Requirements
3.5 Link Requirements to Functional Model
3.6 Link Rqmt to Parent Requirements
3.7 Document how each Rqmt will be verified
3.8 QC Rqmts as they are developed
3.9 Maintain the Database and Document Tree
3.10 Produce Draft Document(s)
No
All Done Ready for Review?
RMO Driving This Process
Yes
37
SEI Requirements Maturation Across Stakeholders
Book Managers
SIG Support
SIGs
Split of Roles Across SEI Offices
38
SEI Requirements Quality Top job for SIGs for
their assigned requirements

• No undefined terms
• Each RID is a single requirement (no duplication)
  a single shall per statement
• Requirement stands alone
• No undefined acronyms
• Subject and verb for each requirement
• Requirement is quantified (can be yes or no)
• Requirement is verifiable see next page
• Performance parameter and value identified
• Requirement context is appropriate to section /
  CxP level
• For section 3.2 The CxP System shall ..
• For Section 3.7 The (prime item name) shall
  ..
• Parent defined and linked
• 3.2 requirements linked to one or more NGOs
  requirements
• 3.7 linked to a 3.2 parent derived 3.7s link to
  their 3.2 parent
• Requirement is valid appropriate in the
  immediate context of the Spec and derived from
  the required capabilities of the NGOs,
  Operational Concepts, Functional Analyses
• MUST have detailed rational behind the
  requirement in CRADLE
• Do not invent requirements they must earn
  their way in
• CRADLE must also capture Horizontal Linkages to
  Functional Analyses Products
• All Derived requirements have appropriate
  Requirement Reference data

Must Maintain a disciplined configuration
management of our requirements and all supporting
data in CRADLE
39
SIGs Facilitate Allocation/Decomposition
Traceability for Level II to Level III
Requirements
SIGs, Reqmts Mgmt, I/F Mgmt working with Projects
MUST ensure vertical horizontal linkage
requirement-by-requirement in CRADLE
X to be replaced with P, M or S
40
SIGs Ensure verifiability of Section 3
requirements and facilitate the writing of
section 4 verification methods strategies
Section 3
Customer
SIGs with TV Leadership Ensure Each shall
statement in verifiable
41
Simple Up-Front Filters to Determining an initial
Verification Method(s)
Section 4s
SIGs with TV Leadership Ensure Each shall
statement has initial Verification Methods
identified and captured in CRADLE
42
Verification Methods ImplementationRelative to
CARD, IRDs, IDDs and SRDs
Level 2
Cx TV Integration Verif. Plans
VCNs
CARD
Level 2
Sec 3
Sec 4
Allocated Requirements
IDD(Existing System C)
Level 2
Level 2
IRD
SRD Sec. 3 call-outs to IRD
Sec 3
Sec 4
Level 2(Drawing Level)
ICDs
VCNs
Level 3
SRD(Element A)
Level 2
Sec 3
Sec 4
Bi-Lateral Integration Verif. Plans BDEALS
Element AVCNs
JointVCNs
Element ATV Plans
Verification Traceability, Methods and Data will
Reside in CRADLE
Level 3
SRD(Element B)
Sec 3
Sec 4
Element B VCNs
Element BTV Plans
43
Interface Management

• The Interface Management Office
• Identifies necessary interface documentation
  (IDD, IRD, etc.) for the element and/or module
  interface being discussed
• Assigns a Book Manager to manage the development
  of the requirements for that interface
• Work with the SIGs, Project Technical Experts and
  other groups to ensure the interface
  documentation is complete and accurate and that
  all interface issues are resolved
• Document and control the requirements and assure
  flow down to the various CxP and Project
  contractors and integrators
• Determines which interfaces are to be controlled
  at the CxP level through work with SIGs and other
  SEI offices, along with the effected Projects.
• This includes assessment of cost impacts, risks,
  and benefits for either controlling or not
  controlling an interface
• Provides forum for interface requirements issue
  discussion, change evaluation and resolution via
  the ICWG
• Proposed interface changes may be identified by
  the Book Managers, the SIGs, interfacing Element
  technical experts, their respective contractors,
  and other Program participants

Key role of CxP SEI is interface management
across Projects
44
Key Processes in these SEI Areas
Programmatic Integration Support
Horizontal Integration
SEI Director
Program Review Integration
Lvl 3 Project SEI Leads Agency Center SEI
Focals
PPC Scheduling Configuration Mgmt
Human Resources Business Mgmt Risk Mgmt
Prime Focus - SRR success then all CxP
reviews Prime Products - Coordinated
Entry/Exit Criteria - Integrated
agenda/products/tools - SRR Plan Including
Integrated Level II III plan Forcing Function
- Drives product readiness through Pre-Boards
- Virtual Tag-ups with Stakeholders
Drive Integrated Perform./ Efficiency/Effectivenes
s Across SEI, CxPO and Centers
Deputy
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Chief of Staff Organization
Secretary

• Prime Focus
• Driving Technical Excellence
• Major urgent Technical Issues

• Prime Focus
• -Meeting Efficiencies/Focus
• Cost, Sched Action/Trng Tracking
• Coordination w/ PPC

Interface Management
SE Process, Tools, Metrics and Training
Requirements Management
Program Technical Integration
Analyses, Trades Architecture
Modeling Simulation
Prime Focus - Cross Element I/F Def.
Contrl - Internal to Program -
External to Program Prime Products - IDDs -
IRDs - MOUs - Interface Context Diagram -
Interface Control Plan (ICP) Forcing Function
- Interface Control Working Grp
Prime Focus - Lvl I/II III Requirements -
Functional Architecture Prime Products -
CARD - Lvl II Standards - Product Tree -
Lvl II/III Document Tree - Program Requirements
Tree - Functional Analyses FFBDs,
FAMs N2 Diagms - Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP) -
Traceability Reports Forcing Function -
Reqmts Working Group
Prime Focus - Integrated Capability/Functional
ity Across Subsystems, Projects
Missions Prime Products - Highest Quality
Requirements - Each Lead Assigned a set of
CARD, IRD Invoked Standards Reqmts
- Reqmts Achievability Assessments - Risk
Mitigation Plans - TPM Id profiling -
Optimized Integrated Designs -
Commonality/Interoperability/ilities Forcing
Function - System Integration Groups (SIGs)
Prime Focus - Integrated Analyses
Physical Architecture Prime Products -
Integrated Analyses Plan - ADD RAD - Lvl II
Trades - Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan
- Level II III - Performance Assessments
- Gap ID Mitigation - Validated
Requirements Set - Risk Analyses - Support to
Ops APO Forcing Function - Analyses WG
Prime Focus - Program-wide approach
implementation of MS Prime Products - MS
Plans - MS Tools/Standards - Integr MS
Products - Level II III - Support to
SIGs, ATA, TV, APO
Ops Forcing Function - MS WG
Prime Focus - Documented Processes Prime
Products - SEMP - Reqmts Mgmt Database -
RID Tool Rqmts - TPM Tool Rqmts - Risk
Assessment Tool Reqmts - Engineering Database
- SE Metrics Standardization Forcing Function
- Mandatory Training Audits - Organized NARs
45
Analysis Trades and Architecture (ATA)

• ATA manages the integrated analysis cycles and
  coordinates across Constellation program ensuring
  completeness of the requirements set

Analyses Working Group (AWG) Is THE integrating
forcing function here vertically Level 1 3
and horizontally (e.g. APO to SEI)
46
Vertical and Horizontal Analysis Integration
The Constellation Analysis Working Group (CxAWG)
integrates analysis efforts vertically from Level
1 to Level 3 and horizontally across Constellation
ESMD
CxPO
SWAvionics SIG
FPSIG
NTSIG
Thermal ECLS SIG
Environments Constraints SIG
APO
OIG
TV
SRQA
? Power Loads SIG
Supportability Logistics, Reliability
Maintainability
EVA
LSAM
CEV
MS
CLV
GO
Human Factors Human Rating SIG
EVA Integration SIG
Gnd and Mssn Ops / Training SIG
Producability Affordability SIG
C3I SIG
? Loads, Struct, Mech SIG
47
Analysis Trades and Architecture (ATA)
Analyses and Trades MUST be justifiable,
prioritized, integrated and resourced such that
Issues (TBDs, TBRs, etc.,) and Issues Resolution
will be managed aggressively and efficiently
48
ATA Technical Issue Resolution Overview
Tracking targeted in CradleTM
Issue resolution database

• Assess
• Categorize
• Prioritize

Identify issue

• TBD/TBR
• Question
• Problem
• Decision
• Definition
• etc.

Issue Resolution
Documentation Type
Assign resources Schedule

• Design note
• Report

• Issue resolution type
• Literature/expert search
• SME panel
• Analysis
• Trade study

Integration AWG
Execute process
Baseline Change
Executive Reviews
Monitor progress via issue tracking database
(metrics)
Approval As Reqd SECB/CxCCB
Not every issue requires a big trade or
analyses All Need Burn-down Plans
49
Common TDS Format
Cx TDS Format

• All Task Description Sheets (TDS) should be
  documented in the Constellation programs format
  documented in the System Integration Analysis
  Plan (SIAP)
• This TDS format is being updated with form date
  and priority
• TDS will be numbered individually according to
  the organization with oversight
• Organization with oversight will place their
  acronym in front of their numbering system
• For example, CEV-, CLV-TS-xx-
• TDS will be prioritized according to the
  following scheme,

50
Integrated Modeling Simulation

• Modeling and Simulations (MS) are Integral to
  every aspect of the ESMD Program (Program gt
  Projects gt Elements)
• Planning
• Requirements Definition
• Technology Evaluation
• Cost Analysis
• Risk Assessments
• Performance
• Test and Verification
• Training
• Effective Management of MS has several key Goals
• Provide Timely Trusted Data for Decision Makers
• Reduce System Lifecycle Cost and Risk
• Better requirements, designs, tests, training
• Minimize Slips in Schedule

Institutionalizing MS Management Practices Early
is Critical to long-term Success
51
CxP IMS Strategy Concept of Operation
De-centralized IMS Development, Use, Execution
Centralized Guidance
IMS Strategy
Level - 1
ESMD IMS
Level - 1
ESMD STAKEHOLDERS

• Architecture Trades
• MS Technology Development
• MS Tool Development

MS and Tools Development,
VVA
MS Standards
Modeling Simulation Resource Repository (MSRR)
IMS Guidance -
Level - 2
IMS Strategy
IMS VVA Process
IMS Strategy
IMS Common Resource Repository

• Environments
• Element Sims
• Common SW Library
• Common Component Sims
• (Thrusters, Engines, etc.)

Level - 2
Systems Level IMS
iSIL SW Tools Development, Management, Use
VVA
IMS SW Tools are shared across entire ESMD
Community
Element Level IMS
Level - 3
CEV MS Support Plan
CEV SIL SW Tools Development, Management, Use
CEV IMS
VVA
CLV MS Support Plan
CLV SIL SW Tools Development, Management, Use
CLV IMS
VVA
GSS SIL SW Tools Development, Management, Use
GSS MS Support Plan
GSS IMS
VVA
52
Integrated Modeling Simulation FY05
Capabilities
ANALYSIS DISCIPLINE
GEOMETRY
AEROTHERMAL
TRAJECTORY
TPS
Risk ModelingCapability
Disciplinary Design/Analysis Capability
CEV ProximityOperations
GroundProcessingSimulations
CEV Final Approach to Dock
53
IMS Documentation Tree(Proposed and in
coordination)
ESMD IMS Management Policy
Level 1 ESMD
ESMD IMS ConOps
ESMD IMS VVA Policy
ESMD Risk Management Plan
ESMD IMS Strategy
ESMD IMS Strategy Executive Summary
ESMD IMS VVA Strategy
ESMD IMS Glossary
ESMD IMS Requirements Document
ESMD IMS Implementation Plan
ESMD IMS Accreditation Plan, Report Process
Specification
ESMD IMS VVA VV Plan Process Specification
ESMD Risk Management Plan IMS Section
ESMD IMS MSSP
ESMD MSRR Implementation Plan
ESMD MSRR Requirements Document
Level 2 Constellation Systems (CS)
CS IMS Implementation Plan
CS MSSP
CS iSIL ConOps
CS IMS Requirements Document
CxP MVVI Plan Child Doc.
CS Risk Management Plan IMS Section
CS iSIL Requirements Document
Level 3 Elements
CEV IMS Implementation Plan
CLV IMS Implementation Plan
CEV SIL ConOps
CLV SIL ConOps
CEV MSSP
CLV MSSP
CLV IMS Requirements Document
CEV IMS Requirements Document
CEV SIL Requirements Document
CLV SIL Requirements Document
CLV Risk Management Plan IMS Section
CEV Risk Management Plan IMS Section
Level 4 Subsystems
CEV LAS MSSP Annex
CLV 1st Stage MSSP Annex
CEV LAS SIL Requirements Document
CLV LAS SIL Requirements Document
CEV CM MSSP Annex
CLV Upper Stage MSSP Annex
CLV CM SIL Requirements Document
CEV CM SIL Requirements Document
CEV SM MSSP Annex
CLV US Engine MSSP Annex
CEV SM SIL Requirements Document
CLV SM SIL Requirements Document
CEV Vehicle Integration MSSP Annex
CLV Vehicle Integration MSSP Annex
Development Responsibility Unknown
54
IMS Approach

• Establish a Unified Paradigm for the Management
  and Use of MS throughout CxP based on Lessons
  Learned from DoD and industry
• Centralized Guidance with Decentralized Execution
  to
• Define Policies (MS and VVA)
• Define Standards (e.g. interface,
  interoperability, data)
• Continue support to Chief Engineers effort in
  developing a NASA MS Standard
• Develop MS Management Roles/Responsibilities to
  be integrated with existing CxPO Management
  Structures
• Develop CxPO and Require Projects to Develop MS
  Support Plans
• Document the Use of MS in support of Program and
  Project Level Activities
• Identify MS Gaps and Overlaps to support future
  development needs/priorities
• Mandate Risk Based VVA Implementation 3 Levels
  (High risk significant VVA)
• Facilitate Communication of MS Capabilities
  across CxP through an MS Resource Repository
  (Metadata of accredited MS)
• Involve Program/Project Stakeholders in
  Establishing the IMS Strategy

Establish Effective and Streamlined Management of
MS across CxP
55
IMS Approach (Cont.)

• Establish a MS Investment Strategy to maximize
  utility of MS
• Utilize common tools were appropriate
• Collaboration tools
• Systems engineering tools
• Data management tools
• Data Presentation
• Minimize development of new capabilities and
  focus on integration of existing capabilities
• Modify existing capabilities when required
• Development likely required in -ilities models
• All development will be based upon explicit and
  documented requirements from stakeholders
• Utilize existing infrastructure and work with CIO
  on necessary fixes and improvements
• CEEs
• NISN
• Windchill
• CRADLE
• Provide single conduit for MS definition and
  interaction with CxPO and project contractors

Establish Effective and Streamlined Management of
MS across CxP
56
Constellation IMSImplementing the Strategy
ESMD/Constellation
Policy
MS Policy
Up-Reach
Test and Verification Bill Arceneaux
SEI C. Hardcastle/S. Meacham
Strategy
MS Strategy
MS Strategy
MS Strategy
MS Strategy
MS Don Monell
Prog Tech Int Steve Fitzgerald
Reqmts Mgmt Keith Williams
Interface Mgmt M. Digiuseppe
Analyses, Trades Architecture Neil Lemmons
SE Process, Tools, Metrics, Training TBD
Services
Reqmts.
MS Strategy
Implementation
Steering Group
Outreach
Panels/Boards
Level 3
Models
WGs
External Relationships
Center OutreachPOCs
IMS Panel

CLV
CEV
SIL WG
VVA WG
LMS
Strategy Implementation NOT Services or
Products Provided
57
Key Processes in these SEI Areas
Programmatic Integration Support
Horizontal Integration
SEI Director
Program Review Integration
Lvl 3 Project SEI Leads Agency Center SEI
Focals
PPC Scheduling Configuration Mgmt
Human Resources Business Mgmt Risk Mgmt
Prime Focus - SRR success then all CxP
reviews Prime Products - Coordinated
Entry/Exit Criteria - Integrated
agenda/products/tools - SRR Plan Including
Integrated Level II III plan Forcing Function
- Drives product readiness through Pre-Boards
- Virtual Tag-ups with Stakeholders
Drive Integrated Perform./ Efficiency/Effectivenes
s Across SEI, CxPO and Centers
Deputy
Chief Of Staff - Tech
Chief of Staff Organization
Secretary

• Prime Focus
• Driving Technical Excellence
• Major urgent Technical Issues

• Prime Focus
• -Meeting Efficiencies/Focus
• Cost, Sched Action/Trng Tracking
• Coordination w/ PPC

Interface Management
SE Process, Tools, Metrics and Training
Requirements Management
Program Technical Integration
Analyses, Trades Architecture
Modeling Simulation
Prime Focus - Cross Element I/F Def.
Contrl - Internal to Program -
External to Program Prime Products - IDDs -
IRDs - MOUs - Interface Context Diagram -
Interface Control Plan (ICP) Forcing Function
- Interface Control Working Grp
Prime Focus - Lvl I/II III Requirements -
Functional Architecture Prime Products -
CARD - Lvl II Standards - Product Tree -
Lvl II/III Document Tree - Program Requirements
Tree - Functional Analyses FFBDs,
FAMs N2 Diagms - Reqmts Mgmt Plan (REMP) -
Traceability Reports Forcing Function -
Reqmts Working Group
Prime Focus - Integrated Capability/Functional
ity Across Subsystems, Projects
Missions Prime Products - Highest Quality
Requirements - Each Lead Assigned a set of
CARD, IRD Invoked Standards Reqmts
- Reqmts Achievability Assessments - Risk
Mitigation Plans - TPM Id profiling -
Optimized Integrated Designs -
Commonality/Interoperability/ilities Forcing
Function - System Integration Groups (SIGs)
Prime Focus - Integrated Analyses
Physical Architecture Prime Products -
Integrated Analyses Plan - ADD RAD - Lvl II
Trades - Prioritize/Integr Trades List/Plan
- Level II III - Performance Assessments
- Gap ID Mitigation - Validated
Requirements Set - Risk Analyses - Support to
Ops APO Forcing Function - Analyses WG
Prime Focus - Program-wide approach
implementation of MS Prime Products - MS
Plans - MS Tools/Standards - Integr MS
Products - Level II III - Support to
SIGs, ATA, TV, APO
Ops Forcing Function - MS WG
Prime Focus - Documented Processes Prime
Products - SEMP - Reqmts Mgmt Database -
RID Tool Rqmts - TPM Tool Rqmts - Risk
Assessment Tool Reqmts - Engineering Database
- SE Metrics Standardization Forcing Function
- Mandatory Training Audits - Organized NARs
58
CxPO Collaborative Environment

• SE Environment
• Standards
• Governance / Management
• Training Education
• SE Technical Development
• Requirements Engineering
• Functional Definition
• Design Synthesis
• Verification and Validation (VV)
• SE Management
• Program Project Planning Control
• Cost Schedule
• Decision-making Risk Management
• SE Information Management
• Workflow Management
• Configuration Management
• Team Collaboration Support
• Knowledge Management
• Decision Analysis Support

Blue text shows shared responsibilities across
CxPO
SEI needs to Lead Collaborative Technical
Integration
59
Cradle CS SEI Dual Vee Process Model
Cx Analysis Simulation
Cx Mission Requirements
Cx Ops
Cx Functional analysis
Cx Validation
Cx Logical Analysis
Cx Verification
Cx Design Synthesis
Cx Test
Element Test
Element Synthesis
Element VV
Cx Process Control
CRADLE Schema and Design Key To Our Collective
and Collaborative Success
Cx SE Management
60
CxP SEI Process, Methods, Tools Environment
(PMTE)
Methods
Process
Integrated NASA IT Operations

• Policies
• Guidelines
• Templates
• Checklists

• NASA Management
• SEI Team
• Level III Teams Contractors
• Suppliers
• Facilitators/Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)

Tools
Management

• Mgmt Guides Procedures
• WBS, Plans
• Workflows
• Issues, Risk

• Cradle / RM / PM / SMA
• Windchill PDM Workflow Apps
• Webinars
• Process Facilitation
• Webinar / Help Desk
• Self-Serve Support

Facilitated, Collaborative Execution
Throughout CxP Program LifeCycle
61
Training Education for SEI Capability Build
Methods Database
Training Apps Information Servers
Web-Based Training Support Network
Process

• NASA Management
• SEI Team
• Level III Contractor Teams
• Process Facilitators, SMEs, and Design
  Management Help Desk Support

. ________ . ________ . ________ . ________ .
________ . ________ . ________

• Policies
• Guidelines
• Templates
• Checklists

. ________ . ________ . ________ . ________ .
________ . ________ . _______

• Webinars
• Process Materials
• Interactive Help Desk
• Self-Serve Training Support

Management

• Mgmt Guides Procedures
• WBS, Plans
• Workflows
• Issues, Risk

Continuous Process Improvement
In-Process Facilitation, Training Guidance

• Lessons-learned improvements
• Progressive automation
• Expanded selection scope of applications
• Extension to include all stakeholders

• Partnership of NASA subcontracted SEI Process
  functional experts
• Expert / Apprentice based work assignments for
  cultivating NASA next-generation SEI leadership
  practitioners
• Interactive Webinar and Self-Service Training
  Performance Support Systems
• On-Line, interactive system supported Help Desk

62
CxP Near-term SEI Process Roadmap
SDR
PDR
SRR
63
Constellation Analysis and Requirements
Traceability (CART)Will facilitate id of
requirements-focused risks, prioritized TPMs
mitigation plans

• Major Objectives of CART
• Provide process and disciplined approach to
  assess, document, and trace Constellation
  requirement achievability through the life of the
  program
• Use existing processes and systems such as Cradle
  and ARM as basis to provide visibility for
  requirement traceability, achievability, and risk
  management based on cost, schedule, and
  technical performance criteria
• Provide systematic means to account for the time
  sensitivity of Constellation requirement
  achievability and proactively manage program and
  group level risk

CART highlights technical performance
achievability and impact of design compliance
gaps / risks
64
Process filter used to establish need for
Technical Performance Measures (TPMs)
Update TPM Filter to ensure current TPMs are
linked to and driven primarily by requirements of
either High Criticality /or at risk relative
to achievability as determined via Achievability
Assessment process involving SIGs
65
Board and Working Group Structures (1 of 2)
Apollo, Shuttle and ISS Boards, Panels and
Working Groups Reviewed in developing this
recommend approach Note that Chief Engineers,
by charter, have been incorporated into the
Control Boards
66
Board and Working Group Structures (2 of 2)
CxSECB
Cx
Interface
Cx
Interface
Cx
Cx
Cx
Cx
Cx
Cx
Cx
Control
Control
Analyses
Analyses
Software
Configuration
Configuration
Requirements
Requirements
Working
Working
Working
Working
Control
Mgt. Control
Mgt. Control
Working
Working
Group
Group
Group
Group
Panel
Working Group
Working Group
Group
Group
(
CxICWG
)
(
CxICWG
)
(
CxAWG
)
(
CxAWG
)
(
CxSCP
)
(
CxCMCWG
)
(
CxCMCWG
)
(
CxRWG
)
(
CxRWG
)
SIGs

SECB is intended to help facilitate control of
the Technical Baseline History has shown fluid
technical baselines on the front-end of
large-scale DDTE Programs can be detrimental
67
Example Relationships for Level II Controlled
Requirements
Rqmts Changes Impacts
Technical Direction Change Approval

• Stakeholders Recommendations from other
  Constellation Boards, Panels, and Working Groups
• Cx Operations Integration (CxOP)
• Cx Safety, Reliability Quality Assurance
  (SRQA)
• Cx Advance Projects Office (APO)
• Cx Program Technical Integrat