Application of management and systems engineering to student projects The example of the Auburn University Student Space Program.

Application of management and systems engineering to student

projects

The example of the Auburn University Student Space

Program

Outline

1. What is the Auburn University Student Space Program (AUSSP)?

2. Lessons learned after 5 years

3. Corrective steps taken and preliminary results

What is AUSSP?

• Member of the National Space Grant Student Satellite Program

• Involves about 35 undergraduate students any time in three-five teams– Auburn High-Altitude Balloonning (AHAB) team– AubieSat-I (CubeSat) team– AubieSat-II (NanoSat) team– Mars team– Management team

National Space Grant Student Satellite Program

Crawl – Walk – Run – Fly

From model rockets to Mars

http://ssp.arizona.edu/sgsatellites

“CRAWL”

BalloonSat Programs

CanSat Programs

“WALK”

CubeSat ProgramsSounding Rocket Programs

“RUN”

Arizona State UniversityASUSat 1

Colorado Space Grant’s Citizen Explorer 1

Colorado, Arizona, and NewMexico: Three-Corner Sat

Nanosat Programs

“FLY”To the Moon and Mars

External support & opportunities to get involved…

Some Suggested activities:

Science analysisSoftware tools for data storage, handling, accessProject ManagementSystems EngineeringMission OperationsSpacecraft subsystemsDesign, build, test, calibration, operations, performance maintenanceCommunications, PowerStructures, Mechanisms, Thermal Science, InstrumentsAttitude, orbitAerial mobility (Flyers), Surface Mobility (Rovers)Prototyping/developing applicable technologiesPublic InformationK-12 programs (ed. Modules, teacher training, etc.)

Why Student Projects?

• Aging Workforce

• Inspire & Retain– Pipeline issue– Attract and keep best students in STEM

• Active learning

• Job training: learning process

The AHAB Program

• Crawl level• Freshmen and Sophomores• Class: Physics of the World Around Us

(3 Credits)• Launch payloads to the edge of space

(altitude range 80,000 - 100,000 feet)• Max weight: 16 lbs

The AHAB Program

GOALS

• Reliable launcher

• Importance of control: cut-down system

• Shielding

• Outreach program for K-12

• Science experiments

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Troubleshooting!

<= Mooring

AS-I CubeSat

• Walk level• Juniors and Seniors• Class: Physics of the World Around Us (3

Credits)• Use COTS• Science mission being defined• Mass ≤ 1-kg; Cube of 10-cm sides

AS-I CubeSat

GOALS• Students develop technical as well as

systems engineering and management skills designing, building, testing and operating a CubeSat

• Put first AU satellite in LEO• AS-I performs successfully in space• Develop a steady student satellite capability

at AU

AS-II NanoSat

• Run level• Exceptional Juniors and Seniors• Potential students are working on AS-I• Mass ≤ 50-kg; Max linear dimension: 45-cm• Submit proposal to AFOSR: deadline for

submission: 15 October• Radiation mitigation experiment

Mars Student Activities

• Fly level• Magnetic Investigation of Mars by Interacting

Consortia (MIMIC)– Work with JPL and 10 SG Consortia– AUSSP in charge of science and instruments for the mission– Measuring the remnant magnetic field of Mars => loss of

atmosphere => loss of liquid surface water => impact on potential life

– Mission abandoned: NASA launcher scrapped– AU: six participating students, two spent Summer 04 at JPL

Mars Student Activities

• AU students @ JPL during summer– Luther Richardson - 2003– Ben Spratling and Eric Massey - 2004– Jason Stewart - 2005– Eric Grimes - 2006

• INSPIRATION in 2006: a robotic weather station on surface of Mars (11 SG students: 2 from Alabama)

• Eric Grimes in charge of instruments

Management Team

• Students from non-technical majors: finance, business, accounting, nutrition, journalism, history, etc.

• No class credit in physics• Student Program Manager• Positions: CFO, HRO, PRO, ITO• Meetings twice a week• Support program and tech teams

Management Team

• Program support– Budget, purchasing, accounting– Fund raising & visibility on campus and beyond– Recruitment– Contact information– Class rolls/participation– Wiki and website– Certificates and awards– Longitudinal tracking– Socials– SEDS

Program history

• Program started in Fall 2001• Immediately started both a CubeSat

and a Ballooning program• First balloon launch with recovery in

Nov. 2001• Added a Mars mission in Fall 2003• Added a NanoSat project in 2006

Program evaluation - Pros• Over 100 students participated• Five students to JPL Summer Programs• One student at least with a NASA job• Two students presently “co-oping” with NASA• Six balloon launches• A CubeSat partially designed and the structure built• Tested CubeSat ejection from P-Pod in C-9• Four HS experiments ready for balloon flight• Learned from a large number of mistakes

Program evaluation - Cons

• Only six balloon flights of which four were not found the day of launch

• No final design yet of AS-I after five years

• Non-productive AHAB teams in 2005: one year without a launch

• Year wasted with insufficient students for AS-I in Fall 2005 and Spring 2006

Analysis

• We could not make a purely student-led program work

• Need to teach and implement process: – Management– Systems Engineering

• We were not successful in getting enough students to commit

• Lack of support of engineering over years

Lessons learned - 1• Faculty mentor

– Used to work through student team manager– Now directly involved in all activities– Sets the tone right from the beginning– Runs team activities as a laboratory– Is now seen as the captain of the boat

• Student manager– Used to run the labs– Now helps mentor manage the lab meetings, learns

management and takes on increasing responsibilities with time

• Student systems engineer– Learns skills form mentor and experts in and outside labs

Lessons learned - 2

• Process– Used to be pointed out on an as needed basis– “Building fever” kills process and produces failure– Process now taught to - and immediately applied by

-the whole team in the first weeks of the semester

• Recruitment– High turn-over rates– Learning curve– Need to recruit top students – Recruitment strategy that works

Lesson learned - 3

• Student commitment– Strong mentor leadership => students feel more

secure– Responsibility matrix signed– Make sure students have a job they can do and

like to do– Certificates– Summer jobs expanded– Participation in conferences– NASA and AE industry contacts for jobs

Lessons learned - 4

• Student participation– Participate in project objectives, requirements and

tasks definition: take ownership of project– Each student has a responsibility matrix - no more

watching the few gung-ho students work and getting disconnected

• Documentation– No lab exit before activities are documented– Last week of semester is documentation week– Documentation is significant part of grade

Learning Management - 1

• Each semester’s work is defined as a project• Students are presented the status of the

system they are to work on• The mentor has defined the vision, mission, a

few broad goals, milestones and deliverables for the semester

• The students having learned the basics of the system are ready to work out the objectives for each goal

Learning Management - 2

• The students work out:– The objectives for each goal– The system’s operational requirements– The subsystems’ requirements– The tasks to be performed based on the

objectives and requirements

• The tasks are organized as a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

Learning Management - 3

• The WBS includes duration of tasks• A network diagram reveals the order in which

tasks are to be accomplished• The critical path is identified• A Gantt Chart represents the schedule• Students do an inventory of materials• Students make a list of needed tools and

materials• Students are now ready to start building

Learning Management - 4

• Each lab session starts with– A quick status of project – A look at the Gantt Chart

• A comparison of the two is made and corrective action is defined

• The goals of the session are set• Lab work proceeds: design and/or building is

done, tests are performed• Results are documented before leaving the lab

Important ingredients

• Discipline

• Flexibility

• Reviews

Systems Engineering - 1

• Plans and guides the engineering effort

• Focuses on system as a whole

• Bridges traditional engineering disciplines

• Necessary due to specialization and complexity of modern systems

Systems Engineering - 2

• Hierarchical elements of a system:– Mission Architecture => Balloon, Rigging, Tracking

Box, Payload, Launch Team, Ground Station, Tracking Teams, Path Determination, Outreach

– System => Tracking Box– Subsystems => Structure & Rigging, Primary

Tracking, Secondary Tracking, Power, Cut-Down– Components => Transceivers, GPS, TNC, Cut-

Down Board– Parts => batteries, cables

System Life Cycle

Post Development

Engineering Development

Concept Development

Operational deficiencies

Technical opportunities

System functional specifications

Defined system concept

Production specifications

Production system Installed operation system

Operation & maintenance documentation

Source: Systems Engineering, Principles and Practice, Alexander Kossiakoff and William N. Sweet, Wiley-Interscience 2003

PHASE

Step Needs

Analysis Concept

Exploration Concept

Definition Advanced

Development Engineering

Design Integration

& Evaluation

Requirements Analysis

Analyze needs Analyze

operational requirements

Analyze performance requirements

Analyze functional

requirements

Analyze design requirements

Analyze requirements

Functional Definition

Define System Functions

Define subsystem functions

Define component functions

Define subcomponent

functions

Define part functions

Define functional

tests

Physical Definitions

Visualize subsysems, technology

Visualize components, architectures

Select components, architectures

Specify component construction

Specify subcomponent construction

Specify test equipment

Design Validation

Validate needs,

feasibility

Validate performance requirements

Simulate, validate system

effectiveness

Test critical subsystems

Validate component construction

Test & evaluate system

Source: Systems Engineering, Principles and Practice, Alexander Kossiakoff and William N. Sweet, Wiley-Interscience 2003

Systems Engineering Method over Life Cycle

Results - 1

• Started August 24• Extraordinary difference from past

– Student participation– Eagerness to work– Confidence– Learning– Two students spent 7 hours doing inventory!

Results - 2

• In three weeks, both Balloon and CubeSat have:– Defined semester objectives– Worked out requirements: mission, system,

subsystem– Developed their WBS at work session level– Established a schedule– Established status of system– Done a full inventory– Started work on subsystems– Ordered components

Conclusions

Some requirements for a successful student program– Full faculty involvement with whole team– Full student participation in project and work definitions– Clearly defined process– Students learning and applying management and systems

engineering principles, tools and techniques– Each student has responsibilities and work load well defined– Fast track tech skills development– Technical expertise provided– Develop camaraderie between team members