esa cdf
play

ESA CDF Concurrent Engineering applied to Space Mission Design - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mar 27, 2024 •488 likes •760 views

ESA CDF Concurrent Engineering applied to Space Mission Design Massimo Bandecchi ESA/ ESTEC 23 May 2018 ESA UNCLASSI FI ED Releasable to the Public ESA Project life cycle - CDF record I N D I ndustrial U Industrial Study /

  1. ESA CDF Concurrent Engineering applied to Space Mission Design Massimo Bandecchi – ESA/ ESTEC 23 May 2018 ESA UNCLASSI FI ED – Releasable to the Public

  2. ESA Project life cycle - CDF record I N D I ndustrial U Industrial Study / Activity Study S T R Design Design Design Design Y work work work work Phase φ B1 φ C/ D φ A φ B2 0 3 0 System PRR SRR PDR CDR Requirem ents 6 2 5 4 CDF ? or Study Contractual Update SRD Update SRD Package 5 6 2 0 0 Stakeholders (eg. Science Community) Generation of Mission Ideas = CDF application / quantity ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  3. ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  4. CE for complex systems Development / AIV Launch Design (conceptual to DD) Ground segment Operations EoM Disposal ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  5. Why do we need Concurrent Engineering? ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  6. Alternative approaches to system design Centralised Design Concurrent Design ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  7. CDF infrastructure evolution Nov. 1998… …2000-2007… since 2008… ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  8. Design is an interactive process Mission Software Requirem ents & Constraints Instruments Attitude Study Objectives determination Data Results & control Environment handling S/C Design Lifetime S/C Configuration Telemetry Electrical Payload tracking & power Launcher command Reliability Risk Mission Schedule analysis Cost Thermal Technology control Operations Dry Simulation & ground Budget mass systems Programmatics Propulsion Options Study Requirem ents Wet Products mass Structure Study Level Propellant mass Planning Conceptual model of Launch Adapter mass Resources mission & spacecraft design process ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  9. CE is an iterative process The Spiral Model Mission analysis Mission requirements analysis Sub-system design Design verification Cost analysis Risk assessment Key Parameters ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  10. CE is Model Based – what is a model? e.g. IDM Subsystem-1 Domain Specific Large Data Tools & Structures DBs Programmatics Data Exchange (scalars ) Risk Data Parking (matrices) Cost Presentation Sheets Calculation Sheets Outputs Sheet System Inputs Sheet Subsystem-n ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  11. ESA-CDF new current model: Open Concurrent Design Tool (OCDT) Domain 1 ConCORDE PostgreSQL Protocol http(s) REST protocol over TCP/ IP (on standard ports 80 or 443) Domain 2 JSON content ConCORDE Persistent Data Store (PostgreSQL RDBMS) ConCORDE Firewall (optional) Web Services Processor (nodejs on Google V8) DST Domain 3 (Domain Specific Tool) ConCORDE OCDT Server OCDT Clients Domain N ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  12. CD enabling IT, design technology and tools New design technologies are used to foster efficient cross-disciplinary analysis, experim entation, and representation of new product designs, e.g.: • three-dim ensional ( 3 -D) com puter-aided design ( CAD) • sim ulation • digital m ock-up • rapid prototyping ( RP) • stereo projection. Their 3 -D rendering: - allow s the expert to interpret design features, - im proving com m unication, - reducing m isunderstandings, - helping to find solutions For CE to be successful, inform ation and interpretation “asym m etries” am ong the experts m ust be avoided, w henever possible ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  13. CD is on-line, real time, highly interactive design Methodology: Approach: - iterative presentations - Multidisciplinary - debate - Holistic - consensus - Systematic - system awareness - Centralized - … - focus on Customer ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use expectations SESSION - …

  14. Process Elements – Conducted in sessions plenary m eeting w here representatives of all space – engineering dom ains participate from early phases ( requirem ent analysis) to end of design ( costing) – 6 to 1 0 session / study, 4 hour / session, bi-w eekly frequency – team leader ( or facilitator) co-ordination – custom er participation Model driven – – On-line design – Highly co-operative & interactive – I terations Design options com parison and trade-offs – ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  15. CDF dynamics – Centralised architecture Process:  Specialist “k” performs Discipline i an estimate and shares data in CR  Data is available to other specialists  Each specialist can use this data to perform calculations and share the results … Discipline j x. System makes budgets Cost y. Overall process iterates … z. Final design done, all information available in Central Repository (CR) CR System “Data” Discipline k ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  16. Benefits • Perform ances: • Quality im provem ent , providing quick, consistent (for typical pre-Phase A study) and complete mission design, incl. technical feasibility, risk, • Study duration (Prel. programmatics, cost design phase): 3-6 weeks (cp. 6-9 months!) Technical report becom es • part of the specs for • Factor 4 reduction in industrial activity tim e Note: Cost report remains the ESA independent reference Factor 2 reduction in • cost (for the Customer) Capitalisation of corporate • know ledge for further reusability • I ncreased nr of studies per year, compatibly with Requirem ent consolidation • max 2 parallel studies ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  17. Benefits • Perform ances: Quality im provem ent , • (for typical pre-Phase A study) providing quick, consistent and complete mission design, • Study duration (Prel. incl. technical feasibility, risk, design phase): 3-6 weeks programmatics, cost (cp. 6-9 months!) • Technical report becom es • Factor 4 reduction in part of the specs for tim e industrial activity Note: Cost report remains the Factor 2 reduction in • ESA independent reference cost (for the Customer) • Capitalisation of corporate know ledge for further reusability • I ncreased nr of studies per year, compatibly with max 2 parallel studies • Requirem ent consolidation • CDF: an essential tool to support ESA Decision Making & Risk Managem ent processes ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  18. Concurrent Design Centres in European Space Sector The Netherlands United Kingdom • CDF at ESA/ESTEC , Noordwijk • CDF at Univ. of Strathclyde , Glasgow • SDO at Airbus/Astrium , Stevenage • CDF at Univ. of Southampton , Southampton Germany • CDF at Harwell Institute , Oxford • CEF at DLR , Bremen • SDO at Airbus DS , Friedrichshafen France Legend: • CDF at ISU , Strasbourg Agency • PASO at CNES , Toulouse Industry • SDO at Airbus DS , Toulouse University • CDF at Thales Alenia Space , Cannes Switzerland • CDF at EPFL , Lausanne Italy • COSE at Thales Alenia Space , Torino • ISDEC at Thales Alenia Space , Roma Portugal • CDF at La Sapienza Univ. , Roma • CDF at Univ. Técnica de Lisboa , Lisbon • CEF at ASI , Roma ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  19. ESA Institutional partners (F, D) DLR (Bremen) CEF Inauguration 8 Dec. 2008 CNES – CIC Inauguration Nov. 2005 ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  20. ESA Institutional partners (It) ASI CEF First implementation: 13 July 2008 New facility inaugurated: 25 Nov. 2013 ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  21. Space Industry TAS-I & F (Torino, Roma, Cannes) - CDF ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  22. Academia (EU) ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  23. Academia (non EU) ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  24. CDF for techno Infusion / ‘push’ Techno Techno infusion push CDF • Mission enablers • Techno programmes • Potentials at s/ s, unit level • Break-through • Technical domain initiative • Disruptive technologies • Techno programme • Innovative ideas proposal • … • System level impact (e.g. SEP) • Validation and verification at system level • Different technologies combined effect • Cross coupling interaction, interference ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  25. CDF for techno derivation / ‘pull’ Mission pull Derivation (demand pull) CDF • Selection process of techno • Mission needs to be developed • Identification of: • Strategic lines • Enabling technologies • Road maps • Techno requirements • Techno programmes • Enhanced performances preparation: • etc. • GSP • TRP • GSTP • Artes All CDF reports incl. dedicated paragraphs on technology requirements for each technical domain. ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

  26.  Thanks for your attention!  Any Question? massimo.bandecchi@esa.int www.esa.int/ cdf Slide 26 ESA UNCLASSIFIED - For Official Use

Recommend

More recommend