THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 1 UCB, December 9, 2004 THEMIS Instrument Test Review Instrument Verification Program Overview Ellen Taylor University of California - Berkeley
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 1 UCB, December 9, 2004
THEMIS Instrument Test Review
Instrument Verification Program OverviewEllen Taylor
University of California - Berkeley
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 2 UCB, December 9, 2004
• Performance and Environmental Verification Philosophy• Requirement Development and Verification Process• Mission Requirements Documents (MRD) Verification Status• Environmental Test Matrix (ETM) Verification Status
• Instrument Performance Verification• Instrument System MRD Verification• Instrument MRD Verification Summary
• Instrument Environmental Verification• Instrument Integration and Environmental Test Overview – Jeremy McCauley • Vibration Test Plans, Test Levels and ETU Test Results – Paul Turin• Thermal Test Plans, Test Levels and ETU Test Results – Chris Smith• EMC/MAG Test Plans, Test Levels and ETU Test Results – Michael Ludlam
• Instrument Reliability and Quality Assurance – Ron Jackson• EEE Parts Status – Ron Jackson• Failure Reporting – Ron Jackson• Instrument Test Procedures• Reliability Analyses (FTA, FMEA, PRA) Status
Overview
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 3 UCB, December 9, 2004
Requirement Development and Verification Process
Top-Level requirements developed during Phase A • Concept Study Report (CSR) provides basic mission concept• Outlines top-level requirements imposed by science and programmatic objectives
Mission requirements flown down (to subsystem level), formalized and documented early in Phase B• All elements of CSR concept and mission requirements reviewed by development team• Mission Requirements Database (MRD) developed and reviewed• MRD finalized and put under Configuration Control at System Requirements Review
(SRR), July 2003
Subsystem Interfaces and Component Requirements further detailed in Phase B• Interface Control Documents between Subsystems and Institutions• System and Subsystem Specifications (Board Specifications, SOWs, etc)• Mission Plans and Policies (PAIP, Risk Management Plan, FMECA, etc)• Control Plans (Magnetics, ESC, Contamination)
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 4 UCB, December 9, 2004
Requirement Development and Verification Process
Requirement Verification Plans developed in Phase B and C• Development of Verification Matrix ensures a test or analysis is scheduled for all Mission
Requirements in MRD• Performance Verification and Environmental Test Plans provide launch and space
environments and outlines comprehensive component, subsystem and system level test program
• Environmental Test Matrix (ETM) developed
Requirements Compliance and Verification Matrices completed in Phase D• MRD and ETM evolve into summary of verification and test program as run• Documents Verification and Compliance Status of all Requirements• Provides direct trace-ability from requirements to test procedures and reports
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 5 UCB, December 9, 2004
Performance Verification
Performance Verification Program• Applies to all technical requirements stated in MRD and associated documents• Each item in MRD has field for verification method
Performance Verification Methodology• Verification of requirements is by Inspection (I), Analysis (A), Test (T) or combination• Tasks for each method include: establishing the criteria; preparing plans and procedures;
implementing; and documenting the results.
Performance Verification Levels• Verification will be performed at one or more of following levels: Component, Sub-Assembly,
Assembly, Subsystem, System
Example from THEMIS MRD Verification Matrix:
Org. ID Title Statement Compliance Verification method
Mission Requirements (M-#)Lifetime and RadiationUCB M-3 Total Dose
RadiationTHEMIS shall be designed for a total dose environment of 33 krad/year (66 krad total)
GSFC Radiation analyses performed. Performance Assurance and Implementation Plan (PAIP) for part selection.
A: GSFC Ray Trace Radiation Analysis provides radiation environment for every subsystem and instrument; I/T: Parts selected with known radiation characteristics or total dose radiation tested
Mission DesignUCB M-12 Orbital Plan The selected orbital plan shall achieve greater
than 188 hours of five-probe conjuctions per year during the prime tail observation season
Compliance per Conjunction Analysis A: Conjunction analysis
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 6 UCB, December 9, 2004
MRD Status
Mission Requirements Document (MRD) Status• MRD Rev A released at System Requirements Review (SRR)
• MRD Rev B released prior to Instrument and Subsystem Peer Reviews
• MRD Rev C released at Mission PDR
• MRD Rev D released during Instrument and Subsystem Peer Reviews• Incorporated MPDR RFAs and System Change Notices (SCNs) since PDR
• Added compliance and detailed verification plan (I/A/T) for each requirement
• MRD Rev E released at Mission CDR
• MRD Rev F will be released at Mission PER• Working version of Rev F is used to track verification status of all requirements
• Most Instrument performance requirements have been verified during the ETU development and test w/ all instruments meeting or exceeding required performance
• One waiver is expected for Instrument requirements – SST exceeds magnetic budget allocation
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 7 UCB, December 9, 2004
Environmental Verification
Environmental Test Program• Instrument hardware is tested to environmental requirements using GEVS as a Guideline per
CDRL THM-SYS-005 THEMIS Instrument Payload Verification and Environmental Test Specification and summarized in Environmental Test Matrix (ETM)
Environmental Test Methodology• Each hardware item in ETM has fields for test description, test date, and procedure/report• Applies to all instrument assemblies, subsystems and systems
Example from THEMIS Environmental Test Matrix:
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 8 UCB, December 9, 2004
ETM Status
Environmental Test Matrix (ETM) Status• ETM presented at Mission CDR and delivered to GSFC as CDRL
• ETM has been further reviewed with minor changes to overall plan• No changes at the Instrument or Instrument Suite Level
• ETM has evolved into summary of test program as-run• Working version is used to track test status of all instrument systems
• Most Instruments have successfully completed all environmental tests on ETUs
• ETU Mag Booms have not gone through Thermal Vacuum Testing – expected mid December
• ETU ESA has not gone through Thermal Vacuum Testing – planned for flight unit only due to heritage
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 9 UCB, December 9, 2004
MRD Instrument Payload Requirements• Lifetime and Radiation• Resource Budgets• Thermal• Contamination• Interfaces• Test and Verification
MRD Instrument Requirements• Status of Science Calibration• Performance Tests Completed and Planned• MRD Performance Verification• Changes from ETU to Flight to Improve Performance
Instrument MRD Verification
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 10 UCB, December 9, 2004
Instrument Payload
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 11 UCB, December 9, 2004
Organization
Mission Manager Frank Snow, GSFC
Mission Manager Frank Snow, GSFC
Financial MgrK. Harps, UCBFinancial MgrK. Harps, UCB
Launch Vehicle G. Skrobott, KSC
Launch Vehicle G. Skrobott, KSC
Project Scientist D. Sibeck, GSFC
Project Scientist D. Sibeck, GSFC
THEMIS PI V. Angelopolous, UCB
THEMIS PI V. Angelopolous, UCB
Project Manager P. Harvey, UCB
Project Manager P. Harvey, UCB
Science Co-I’s Science Co-I’s EPO N. Craig, UCB
EPO N. Craig, UCB
SubcontractsJ. Keenan, UCBSubcontracts
J. Keenan, UCBScheduling
D. Meilhan, UCBScheduling
D. Meilhan, UCBQuality Assurance
R. Jackson, UCBQuality Assurance
R. Jackson, UCB
Mission Systems
E. Taylor, UCB
Mission Systems
E. Taylor, UCB
Mechanical/ Thermal Systems
P. Turin, UCBC. Smith, UCB
Mechanical/ Thermal Systems
P. Turin, UCBC. Smith, UCB
Mag Cleanliness
C. Russell, UCLA
Mag Cleanliness
C. Russell, UCLA
Probe/Probe CarrierManagement
UCB Oversight: D. KingSwales Mgr: M. Cully
Probe/Probe CarrierManagement
UCB Oversight: D. KingSwales Mgr: M. Cully
Instruments
M. Ludlam, UCB
Instruments
M. Ludlam, UCB
Ground Segment
M. Bester, UCB
Ground Segment
M. Bester, UCB
Software Systems
D. King, UCB
Software Systems
D. King, UCB
Mission I&T
J. McCauley, UCB
Mission I&T
J. McCauley, UCB
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 12 UCB, December 9, 2004
Organization
InstrumentsInstruments
Electric Field Instrument
(EFI)J. Bonnell
Electric Field Instrument
(EFI)J. Bonnell
ElectroStaticAnalyser
(ESA)C. Carlson
ElectroStaticAnalyser
(ESA)C. Carlson
Solid StateTelescope
(SST)D. Larson
Solid StateTelescope
(SST)D. Larson
InstrumentData Processor
Unit (IDPU)M. Ludlam
InstrumentData Processor
Unit (IDPU)M. Ludlam
FluxgateMag
(FGM)U. Auster
FluxgateMag
(FGM)U. Auster
Search CoilMag
(SCM)A. Roux
Search CoilMag
(SCM)A. Roux
Forrest MozerGreg DeloryArt HullBill DonakowskiGreg DaltonRobert DuckMark PankowDan SchickeleStu HarrisHilary Richard
Forrest MozerGreg DeloryArt HullBill DonakowskiGreg DaltonRobert DuckMark PankowDan SchickeleStu HarrisHilary Richard
Robert AbiadPeter BergHeath BerschDorothy GordonFrank HarveySelda HeavnerJim LewisJeanine PottsChris ScholzNestor Castillo
Robert AbiadPeter BergHeath BerschDorothy GordonFrank HarveySelda HeavnerJim LewisJeanine PottsChris ScholzNestor Castillo
M. MarckwardtBill ElliottRon HermanChris ScholzHeath Bersch
M. MarckwardtBill ElliottRon HermanChris ScholzHeath Bersch
Robert LinDavin LarsonRon CanarioRobert LeeT. Moreau
Robert LinDavin LarsonRon CanarioRobert LeeT. Moreau
Hari DharanY. KimTien TanBill Tyler
Hari DharanY. KimTien TanBill Tyler
TUBS/IWFUli AusterK.H. GlassmeierW. Magnes
TUBS/IWFUli AusterK.H. GlassmeierW. Magnes
CETPAlain RouxBertran de la PorteOlivier Le ContelChristophe CoillotAbdel Bouabdellah
CETPAlain RouxBertran de la PorteOlivier Le ContelChristophe CoillotAbdel Bouabdellah
LASPRobert ErgunAref NammariKen StevensJim Westfall
LASPRobert ErgunAref NammariKen StevensJim Westfall
MagBoomsMag
Booms
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 13 UCB, December 9, 2004
REQUIREMENT VERIFICATION METHOD
IN-1. The Instrument Payload shall be designed for at least a two-year lifetime
I/A: All systems designed to two years and analyzed for two year mission
IN-2. The Instrument Payload shall be designed for a total dose environment of 33 krad/year (66 krad for 2 year mission, behind 5mm of Aluminum, RDM 2)
IN-3. The Instrument Payload shall be Single Event Effect (SEE) tolerant and immune to destructive latch-up
A: GSFC Ray Trace Radiation Analysis provides radiation environment for instrument;
I/T: Parts selected with known radiation characteristics or radiation tested for TID and/or SEE
Lifetime and Radiation
Table 2: Radiation dose levels on sensitive parts
Detector Name Box Wall Thickness
(mil) Phase 1 - All Probes
Dose (krad-Si) Phase 2 - Probe 5
Dose (krad-Si) Total Dose (krad-Si)
IDPU 120 1.99E+00 2.33E+01 2.53E+01 ESA Instr 140 6.73E+00 7.48E+01 8.15E+01
SST1 275 5.88E-01 8.15E+00 8.74E+00 SST2 275 6.13E-01 8.49E+00 9.10E+00 EFI 200 1.67E+00 2.05E+01 2.22E+01
Status• Initial GSFC Radiation Analysis complete. See Table 2 from report below.
• Environment < 33 krad for all instruments except ESA (81.5 krad)• Additional electronics shielding added to ESA
• 100% Instrument Parts screened for TID/SEE requirements. Approx. 20 parts were tested.• No parts that failed radiation testing are being used• LVPS redesign required - reduced supply efficiency
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 14 UCB, December 9, 2004
REQUIREMENT VERIFICATION METHOD
IN-6. The Instrument Payload shall not exceed the total allocated mass budget in THM-SYS-008 THEMIS System Mass Budget.xls
T: Instrument payload will be weighed.
IN-7. No component of the Instrument Payload shall exceed the allocated mass budget in THM-SYS-008 THEMIS System Mass Budget.xls
T: Instruments will be weighed prior to delivery.
Resource Budgets - Mass
INSTRUMENT MASS
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
23.00
24.00
25.00
26.00
27.00
PhaseA
7/03 8/03 9/03 10/03 11/03 12/03 1/04 2/04 3/04 4/04 5/04 6/04 7/04 8/04 9/04 10/04
Date
Mas
s(kg
)
Instrument Allocation
Instrument CBE
Instrument Schedule
CBE: 23.19 kgAllocation: 23.63 kgContingency: 1.9%
Status• Approx. 93% of ETU Instrument Payload has been weighed• Thermal blankets and Flight cables are estimated
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 15 UCB, December 9, 2004
REQUIREMENT VERIFICATION METHOD
IN-8. The Instrument Payload shall not exceed the total power allocated in THM-SYS-009 THEMIS System Power Budget.xls
T: Instrument payload power will be measured.
IN-9. No component of the Instrument Payload shall exceed the power allocated in THM-SYS-009 THEMIS System Power Budget.xls
T: Instrument power will be measured prior to delivery.
Resource Budgets - Power
INSTRUMENT POWER
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00
PhaseA
7/03 8/03 9/03 10/03 11/03 12/03 1/04 2/04 3/04 4/04 5/04 6/04 7/04 8/04 9/04 10/04
Date
Po
wer
(W
)
Instrument CBE+Cont.
Instrument CBE
Instrument Schedule
CBE: 14.27 WAllocation: 14.77 WContingency: 3.5%
Status• Approx. 90% of ETU Instrument Payload power has been measured (all Instruments except ESA)• ~3x power increase between ETU and Flight Actels was estimated and additional resistor load
put on 2.5V line for ETU system
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 16 UCB, December 9, 2004
REQUIREMENT VERIFICATION METHOD
IN-10. The Instrument Payload shall not exceed the allocated data budget of 750Mbits/orbit (uncompressed)
A/T: Analysis of data rates, data budget, system states over an orbit; analysis verified during functional/performance testing
IN-11. The Instrument Payload shall be capable of storing 1 orbit + 1 days worth of Instrument Science and housekeeping data.
A/T: Analysis of storage capability, FSW storage efficiency; analysis verified during functional/performance testing
Resource Budgets - Data
Status• 187.5MB storage is required (750Mbits/orbit +
1 day contingency = 1500Mbits = 187.5MB) • DCB contains 256MB SDRAM for TM storage.
Upper quadrant is devoted to ECC. • Memory analysis using predicted data rates
from Instruments show storage is sufficient for 4 day orbit + 1day contingency at worse-case spin period of 2.7seconds.
Mbytes Packets Raw EfficiencySurvey 105.3 70.5 67%Burst 43.4 30.5 70%Total 148.7 101.0 68%
96 hour Orbit Memory RequirementNominal 3 sec spin period
Mbytes Packets Raw EfficiencySurvey 113.5 76.5 67%Burst 43.4 30.5 70%Total 156.8 107.0 68%
96 hour Orbit + 1 day Survey Memory RequirementNominal 3 sec spin period
Mbytes Packets Raw EfficiencySurvey 125.5 84.6 67%Burst 44.9 31.4 70%Total 170.3 116.0 68%
96 hour Orbit + 1 day Survey Memory RequirementSpin Rate 10% high (2.7 sec period)
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 17 UCB, December 9, 2004
REQUIREMENT VERIFICATION METHOD
IN-13. The Instrument Payload shall survive the temperature ranges provided in the ICDs
A/T: Thermal analysis and modeling provides temperature predictions for Instrument Survival; Instruments are thermally tested to predicts plus margin
IN-14. The Instrument Payload shall perform as designed within the temperature ranges provided in the ICDs
A/T: Thermal analysis and modeling provides temperature predictions for Instrument Science Mode; Instruments are thermally tested to predicts plus margin
Thermal Requirements
Status• ETU Instruments are tested to Thermal Limits +10 degrees• Flight Instruments are tested to Thermal Predicts +10 degrees • Most ETU Instruments have completed Thermal Vacuum Testing, with the exception of:
• ETU Mag Booms – expected mid December• ETU ESA – planned for flight unit only due to heritage. ETU ESA Pre-Amp was
tested in IDPU TV Test. ETU ESA Actuator was tested in separate Release Plate Assembly TV Test.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 18 UCB, December 9, 2004
REQUIREMENT VERIFICATION METHOD
IN-16 The Instrument Payload shall comply with the Magnetics Cleanliness standard described in the THEMIS Magnetics Cleanliness Plan
I/A/T: Verification assured by Magnetics Committee per component budget and requirements provided in THM-SYS-002 Magnetics Control Plan; Components measured prior to Suite Integration in Coil facility.
IN-17 The Instrument Payload shall comply with the THEMIS Electrostatic Cleanliness Plan
I/A/T: Verification per THM-SYS-003 ESC Control Plan; Analysis provides allowable resistance/area and insulator budget; Measurements are made at system level.
IN-18 The Instrument Payload shall comply with the THEMIS Contamination Control Plan
I/A/T: Verification per THM-SYS-004 Contamination Control Plan; Thermal Vacuum Bake-out planned w/ TQCM monitoring.
Contamination Requirements
Status• Worse-case offenders for Magnetics is EFI Booms, SST magnets, IDPU switching frequencies
• ETU EFI Booms w/ mu metal shielding tested at UCLA, meets budget of 0.25 nT @ 2m • SST Magnets analysis and testing show it is extremely difficult to meet 1.25 nT @ 2m.
Waiver likely. • IDPU frequency management plan has implemented in LVPS - switching frequencies
above 100 kHz, separated by 10 kHz to avoid beet frequencies in science range. Noise measurements with SCM sensor were made first week of December 2004. Provisions for synchronization circuit suggested by SWRI implemented in flight LVPS layout, but implementation unlikely given initial SCM testing results.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 19 UCB, December 9, 2004
REQUIREMENT VERIFICATION METHOD
IN-19. All Instruments shall comply with the electrical specifications
T: Requirements provided in THM-IDPU-001 Backplane Specification; interfaces verified during IDPU integration.
IN-20. The Instrument Payload shall be compatible per IDPU-Instrument ICDs
T: Instruments tested to ICD prior to delivery; interfaces verified during I&T of Instruments to IDPU
IN-21. The Instrument Payload shall be compatible per the IDPU-Probe Bus ICD
T: Instrument Payload tested to ICD prior to delivery; interfaces verified I&T of IDPU to Probe
IN-22. The Instrument Payload shall be compatible per Instrument-Probe Bus ICDs
T: Instrument Payload tested to ICD prior to delivery; interfaces verified during I&T of Instrument Payload to Probe
Interface Requirements
Status• All ETU Instrument Boards (DAP, ETC, FGE, DFB, BEB) have been integrated and tested
with ETU IDPU core system (LVPS, DCB and PCB)• Most ETU Instruments (SSTs, ESA Pre-Amp, EFI Pre-Amp, FGM, SCM, Boom Simulators)
have been integrated and tested with ETU IDPU box (Core System and Instrument Boards)• Data Interface between IDPU and Probe BAU has been tested on 3 occasions (UCB-
Swales I/F Tests: July, October, December). Various levels of interface verification completed during each test. Power Interface Test planned for January.
• Mechanical Hi-Fi Instrument Mock-ups provided to Swales for Integration to Hi-Fi Probe. Mass Models to be provided to Swales for Structure Strength and Thermal Testing.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 20 UCB, December 9, 2004
IDPU TV Configuration
SSTETU (2)
3 x 25 pin
GSEPC
IDPU Full Functional / Thermal Vacuum Tank Configuration
I/FP302
IDPU
TV TANK WALL
IDPU PwrSupply
P204-P206
FGSSTMESA Pwr
Supply
NIOS
MAG Sim (2)
P202
ESAPre-Amp
PCB/FGEETU 2
P501-503
1 x 26 pin
P401
LVPSETU
P601-602
P101
Mu Metal Cap
ACT PwrSupply
DAC 6 channels
SCM ETUPre-Amp
P201
AXB Sim (2)
DAPETU 3
SPB Sim (2)
BEB ETU
1 x 25 pin
DFB ETU
x6
P301
DCB/ETCETU 4
1 x 26 pin
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 21 UCB, December 9, 2004
IDPU/Instrument ETU I&T
ETU IDPU Functional Testing
ETU IDPU Thermal Vacuum Testing
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 22 UCB, December 9, 2004
REQUIREMENT VERIFICATION METHOD
IN-23 The Instrument Payload shall verify performance requirements are met per the THEMIS Verification Plan and Environmental Test Specification
I/A/T: Performance Requirements met as documented in MRD Verification Matrix
IN-24 The Instrument Payload shall survive and function prior, during and after exposure to the environments described in the THEMIS Verification Plan and Environmental Test Specification
I/A/T: Environmental Test Requirements met as documented in Environmental Test Matrix (ETM)
Verification and Test
Status• As provided in MRD and ETM and summarized during Review:
• ftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/THEMIS/1 Management/1.3 Systems Engineering/1. Requirements/thm_sys_001f_MRD.pdf
• ftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/THEMIS/1 Management/1.3 Systems Engineering/1. Requirements/thm_sys_005AppA_InstrumentETM.pdf
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 23 UCB, December 9, 2004
Fluxgate Magnetometer (FGM)
• Calibration Status: • 3 ETU’s completed • F4 & F6 test and calibration completed• F1, F2, F3, F5 test and calibration to be completed by February 2005
• Performance Tests performed on ETUs, F4 & F6:• digital functional test• analogue adjustment of FGS and FGE• temperature test of electronics• temperature test of sensor• test of non-linearity• Earth field registration• determination of sensor axis direction• determination of scale value and orthogonally• noise test
Instrument Science and Performance Requirements
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 24 UCB, December 9, 2004
Fluxgate Magnetometer (FGM)
• Verification of MRD Requirements: • All MRD requirements verified on ETU and first flight units• Absolute Stability, Relative Stability, Noise Level, Resolution• Driving Requirement:
• Changes to Flight design from ETU to improve performance:• AD648 to be replaced with LT1013 to improve Absolute Stability measurement• Grounding wire added and feed-back wires replaced with twisted/shielded wires
Instrument Science and Performance Requirements
IN.FGM-5 The FGM noise level @ 1Hz shall be less than 0.03nT/Sqrt(Hz)
noise
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2
[Hz]
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.08
0.09
0.1
[nT
/Sqr
t(H
z)]
0.01nT/Sqrt(Hz)
0.03nT/Sqrt(Hz)
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 25 UCB, December 9, 2004
Search Coil Magnetometer (SCM)
• Calibration Status: • ETU completed, Magnetic Calibration Facility Chambon-la-Foret• F1, F2, F3 test and calibration completed in December 2004• F4, F5 test and calibration to be completed by February 2005
• Performance Tests performed on ETU:• Transfer function measurement• Calibration signal measurement (spectrum, waveform)• Noise and Sensitivity• Orthogonal measurement• Projection (angle between magnetic field source and magnetic axis)
Instrument Science and Performance Requirements
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 26 UCB, December 9, 2004
Search Coil Magnetometer (SCM)
• Verification of MRD Requirements: • All MRD requirements verified on ETU• Transfer Function, Sensitivity, Orthogonality• Driving Requirement:
• Changes to Flight design from ETU to improve performance:• None
Instrument Science and Performance Requirements
IN.SCM-3 The SCM sensitivity shall be better than 1pT/Hz^1/2 @10Hz ,
and 0.1 pT/Hz^1/2 @1 kHz.
Sx Sy Sz
Sensor number 3 2b 1
Sensitivity at 10 Hz pT/sqrt (Hz) 0.73 0.98 0.5
Sensitivity at 100 Hz pT/sqrt (Hz) 0.073 0.069 0.066
Sensitivity at 1 kHz pT/sqrt (Hz) 0.015 0.0154 0.016
Sensitivity at 4 kHz pT/sqrt (Hz) 0.04 0.04 0.04
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 27 UCB, December 9, 2004
Solid State Telescope (SST)
• Calibration Status: • ETU1 completed, ETU2 facility issues • F1 test and calibration December 2004• F2, F3, F4, F5 test and calibration to be completed by January 2005
• Performance Tests performed on ETU:• digital functional test• analog functional test• temperature test of electronics• temperature test of sensor (noise testing over temperature)• magnetic cleanliness test and analysis• noise test• detection thresholds• energy thresholds• off-axis response (including information on the response to scattered particles)• dead time• electron and proton detection efficiency of individual counting rate channels • sun pulse recovery
Instrument Science and Performance Requirements
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 28 UCB, December 9, 2004
Solid State Telescope (SST)
• Verification of MRD Requirements: • All MRD requirements verified on ETU• Resolution, Moments• Driving Requirements:
• Changes to Flight design from ETU to improve performance:• Added capacitors to reduce noise and cross-talk• Flight detectors w/ improved performance characteristics• Changed baseline sun pulse recovery time (added digital logic)• Lowered operating temperature
Instrument Science and Performance Requirements
IN.SST-7 The SST shall measure energetic particles over an energy range of 30-300keV for ions and 30-100keV for electrons found in the magnetotail plasma sheet .
IN.SST-8 The SST energy sampling resolution, dE/E, shall be better than 30% for ions and electrons.
Am241 Source
59.5 keV photons
Test Pulser14 & 17.5 keV photons
<8 keV FWHM Resolution
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 29 UCB, December 9, 2004
Electric Fields Instrument (EFI)
• Calibration Status: • ETU completed• F1 test and calibration December 2004 (SPBs)• F1 test and calibration early January 2005 (AXB)
• Performance Tests performed on ETU:• Quiescent and Operational Currents• DC Tests (Gain, Offset, CMRR, Linearity, 0.1% Matching)• AC Tests (Transfer Function, CMRR, Slew Rate, Linearity)• SPB - Deploy Length, Turns Count, Deploy Rate, Door Actuation, Door Function,
Deploy Currents, Cable Continuity and Isolation• AXB - Deploy Length, Repeatability, Stiffness, Straightness, Deploy Current, Cable
Continuity and Isolation
• EFI/SCM/FGM via DFB Phase Intercalibration - performed using EFI Test/Enable Plugs, SCM Mu-Metal Box, FGM TCU and 12-channel, 16-bit, +/- 10-V National Instruments DAC system – TO BE COMPLETED THIS WEEK
Instrument Science and Performance Requirements
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 30 UCB, December 9, 2004
Electric Fields Instrument (EFI)
• Calibration Status: • ETU completed• F1 test and calibration December 2004 (SPBs)• F1 test and calibration early January 2005 (AXB)
• Performance Tests performed on ETU:• Quiescent and Operational Currents• DC Tests (Gain, Offset, CMRR, Linearity, 0.1% Matching)• AC Tests (Transfer Function, CMRR, Slew Rate, Linearity)• SPB - Deploy Length, Turns Count, Deploy Rate, Door Actuation, Door Function,
Deploy Currents, Cable Continuity and Isolation• AXB - Deploy Length, Repeatability, Stiffness, Straightness, Deploy Current, Cable
Continuity and Isolation
• EFI/SCM/FGM via DFB Phase Intercalibration - performed using EFI Test/Enable Plugs, SCM Mu-Metal Box, FGM TCU and 12-channel, 16-bit, +/- 10-V National Instruments DAC system – TO BE COMPLETED THIS WEEK
Instrument Science and Performance Requirements
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 31 UCB, December 9, 2004
Electric Fields Instrument (EFI)
• Verification of MRD Requirements: • All MRD requirements verified on first flight units• Resolution, Range, Noise Level verified• Driving Requirements:
• Changes to design from ETU to improve performance:• None
Instrument Science and Performance Requirements
IN.EFI-11 The EFI noise level shall be below 10^-4 mV/m/sqrt(Hz).
IN.EFI-13 The EFI shall achieve an accuracy better than 10% or 1mV/m in the SC XY E-field components during times of onset.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 32 UCB, December 9, 2004
THEMIS Instrument Test Review
Integration and Environmental Test Program Overview
Jeremy McCauley
University of California - Berkeley
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 33 UCB, December 9, 2004
Overview
Agenda• Facilities Status – Integration and Environmental
• Instrument I&T Flow
• Instrument Suite I&T Flow
• Current Status (PER topics)
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 34 UCB, December 9, 2004
Facilities - Integration
B20 Cleanroom• Suite Performance and Environment Testing
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 35 UCB, December 9, 2004
Facilities - Integration
RM 125 Cleanroom• Suite Integration and Electrical Verification
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 36 UCB, December 9, 2004
Thermal Chambers• Space Sciences Lab • New Chamber for EFI Booms• Cal Chamber Upgrade for SST
Vibration Facilities• Quanta Labs
EMI/EMC• EMCE Engineering – Freemont
Facilities - Environmental
Available Chambers TypeSLW HiBay L1 TV STEREOSLW HiBay L2 TV STEREOSLW 320 T10 TV STEREOSLW 320 Cal Vac ESA CalSLW 320 “Mini” TV SCM, Bake-outsSLW B20-TV “Bayside” TV EFI PA, SPB, IDPUSLW B20-Large TV TV Payload TVSLW B20-Cal VAC2 Vac SST CalSLW B20-TV “Snout” TV
Comment
SLW 339-TV CalAXB, SST ESA MCPs
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 37 UCB, December 9, 2004
Status – TV Facilities
Bayside Chamber• Currently supporting thermal vacuum needs
• IDPU ETU
• EFI PA ETU and F1-F3
• SPB ETU and subassemblies
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 38 UCB, December 9, 2004
Status – TV Facilities
Bertha Chamber• In final stages of assembly• Undergoing TC calibration• Undergoing bakeout with TQCM and RGA monitoring
• Current baseline 242Hz/hour at 50°C
• Ready for ETU Suite test by January 1
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 39 UCB, December 9, 2004
Status – TV Facilities
Snout Chamber• In final stages of assembly
• Undergoing TC calibration
• Undergoing bakeout with TQCM and RGA monitoring
• Ready for AXB ETU test by December 13
Cal Chamber• Currently supporting SST calibration
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 40 UCB, December 9, 2004
Unit (SPB) Test Flow
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 41 UCB, December 9, 2004
Instrument (EFI) I&T Flow
EFI Pre-AmpThermal
EFI Pre-AmpDelivery
• Swales Spec
EFI RADIAL BOOM (SPB)
EFI PRE-AMP
• 2 cycles
EFI ELECTRONICS(BEB and DFB)
SPBVibration
• Swales Spec
SPBThermal
• 2 cycles T-V• Hot/Cold Deploy
SPBDelivery
EFI Pre-AmpFunctional
IDPU/ESA/SCM Pre-Amp
Vibration
• Without sensors
IDPU/ESAThermal
• 2 cycles T-V
IDPU/ESADelivery
• Swales Spec
AXBVibration
• Swales Spec
AXBThermal
• 2 cycles T-V• Hot/Cold Deploy
AXBDelivery EFI AXIAL BOOM (AXB)
SPBPER
SPB/Pre-AmpFunctional
AXBPER
AXB/Pre-AmpFunctional
IDPUSafe-to-Mate
BEBAcceptance EFI
Functional(Level 0)
• BackplaneDFB
Acceptance
IDPU/ESAPER
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 42 UCB, December 9, 2004
F1 Instrument Suite I&T Flow
FGMFunctional
(CPT)
HarnessBake-out
IDPU-HarnessSafe-to-Mate
PayloadThermal
ESAFunctional
(CPT)
• Feb 24
PayloadVibration
PayloadAcceptance
(PSR) • Workmanship (if necessary)
EFI SPBDeploy
EFIFunctional
(CPT)
PayloadCPT
• Jan 3-4• ETU IDPU
SCMFunctional
(CPT)
SSTFunctional
(CPT)
• Jan 5-6
• Jan 17
• Feb 10-16
InstrumentPER
PayloadEMI/EMC/MAG
PayloadSelf-Compat
• Feb 17-23
• Jan 31 - Feb 1
EFIFunctional
(LPT)
• Jan 7-10 • Jan 11-12
• Jan 13-14 • Jan 18-19 • Jan 20 • Jan 21
• Jan 24
MagAlignment
EFI AXBDeploy
Mag BoomDeploy
Flight IDPUIntegration
• Jan 27-28• Jan 25-26 • Feb 2
• Feb 9 (1 week slack)
• Instrument Suite I&T in order of Instrument Delivery schedule• Based on 5 day work weeks, week-ends considered slack• 1 week slack between finish of Electrical Integration and beginning of Instrument Environmentals• Instrument Suite PSR 3/14/05
EFI/SCM/FGMPhasing
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 43 UCB, December 9, 2004
Integration Set-up
Instruments at SSL integrated on platform same form factor as probe
INSTRUMENT PAYLOAD ASSEMBLY PLATE
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 44 UCB, December 9, 2004
• Schedule – Instrument Payload Delivery• P1: 3/14/05 (Instrument PSR)
• P2: 4/19/05
• P3: 4/19/05
• P4: 5/25/05
• P5: 5/25/05
With each instrument suite we deliver harnesses, GSE computer, booms, sensors in protection boxes.
• Support Instrument GSE• Purge equipment including tubing and regulator
• Degausser
• Magnetometer
• Oxygen sensor
Instrument Delivery to SC
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 45 UCB, December 9, 2004
Flight Instrument Status
Instrument Environmental Testing
ETU F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
EFI PA X X X T
AXB X
SPB X T
SST X
ESA
IDPU X
Mag Booms
T
FGM X T T T
SCM X T T T
Suite
X – Completed, T – Test in Progress
- Board level screening
- PER 12/1/04
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 46 UCB, December 9, 2004
Flight Instrument Status
Instrument Environmental Testing – PER• Required prior to environmental testing of flight units• Topics covered include:
• Status of the Flight Instrument: • A flow chart of testing activities• Review of travelers and QA assessment• List of outstanding deviances from the final flight
configuration (electrical substitutions, mechanical checks, etc.; responsible party)
• Functional tests passed and documented• Assure the unit meets all functional requirements as posed
in the MRD• Assure contamination and cleanliness precautions are
sufficient• Status of Procedures: Vibration Test Procedure, Thermal
Vacuum Cycling Procedure, LPT and CPT procedures
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 47 UCB, December 9, 2004
Flight Instrument Status
Instrument Environmental Testing – PER• Topics covered include:
• Related Risks:
• Outstanding ETU tasks
• Status of action items from previous reviews
• Facilities:
• Is there a suitable spot in the facilities schedule for these test in the near future?
• Is the Facilities Team able to support this test? (resources, configuration, personnel)
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 48 UCB, December 9, 2004
THEMIS Instrument Test Review
Vibration Test ProgramPaul Turin
University of California - Berkeley
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 49 UCB, December 9, 2004
Vibration Testing
• Flight Instruments undergo sine and random vibration testing to the levels called out in Swales TM-2430-RevD6 per UCB Instrument Test Procedures
• ETUs were tested to the levels called out in Swales TM-2508, TM-2510, and TM2575-2• Updated levels in TM-2430 have somewhat higher Grms levels but reflect a
redistribution to higher ASD levels at low frequencies where motion is all rigid body, and lower levels at the 100-300 Hz peak. Thus, Swales does not feel we need to retest any instruments.
• Each test is preceded and followed by a 0.5g sine survey• Each test is compared for significant shifts in peak frequency
• The minimum resonant frequency required for THEMIS instruments is listed below. This will be verified during the sine surveys.
Table 2.1 Minimum Resonant Frequency Components Stowed > 75 Hz
Deployed > 0.25 Hz
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 50 UCB, December 9, 2004
IDPU/ESA ETU
SST ETU
ETU Testing
Test Date Facility Reason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration
Test Result
1 6/9/04 WYLE Baseline Design FAIL: Excessive Deflection. ESA Covers came loose.
2 8/18/04 QUANTA Increased thickness of IDPU connector plate. Replaced out of spec cover pre-load spring.
FAIL: ESA SMA failed
3 10/5/04 QUANTA Changed SMA assembly procedure
PASS
Test Date Facility Reason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration
Test Result
1 6/16/04 QUANTA Baseline Design TEST INADEQUATE: Incorrect notching
(FM1 will be tested to Qual Levels)
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 51 UCB, December 9, 2004
ETU Testing
SCM Sensor ETU
SCM Pre-Amp ETU
FGM Sensor ETU (F6)
Test Date Facility Reason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration
Test Result
1 8/12/04 IAS Baseline Design PASS
Test Date Facility Reason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration
Test Result
1 5/24/04 IAS Baseline Design PASS
Test Date Facility Reason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration
Test Result
1 6/25/04 TIRAVIB Baseline Design PASS
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 52 UCB, December 9, 2004
ETU Testing
SPB ETU
Test Date Facility Reason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration
Test Result
1 6/9/04 QUANTA Baseline Design FAIL: Low first mode frequency; Sphere damaged due to inadequate preload of release doors
2 6/30/04 QUANTA Added Stiffening Brace, Verified Preload during Assembly
PASS
3 10/15/04 QUANTA Retest due to design changes: Added Counterweights to Front Doors; Added Ring Lock Lever.
FAIL: Door released during vibration
4 10/18/04 QUANTA Counterweights removed FAIL: Retaining Ring Lock Lever bent during test
5 11/4/04 QUANTA Counterweights removed; Release Ring Spring added; Removed Ring Lock Lever
PASS
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 53 UCB, December 9, 2004
AXB ETU
MAG BOOM ETU
ETU Testing
Test Date Facility Reason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration
Test Result
1 4/23/04 QUANTA Baseline Design PASS
2 Planned mid-Dec
QUANTA Retest planned due to significant design changes
Test Date Facility Reason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration
Test Result
1 10/8/04 QUANTA Bread Board Design PRELIM TEST: verifying first mode frequency
2 10/29/04 QUANTA Baseline Design TEST INADEQUATE: Not able to perform required notching
(FM1 will be tested to Qual Levels)
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 54 UCB, December 9, 2004
Random Vibration
• All instruments will be tested to the random vibration loads shown in Table 2.4.1 to Table 2.4.10 below. The boundary of inner and outer portion of bottom deck is the interface circle of upper ring.
• Depending on the ETU test history and level of fidelity to the flight models, the FM1 units will be tested to either qualification or acceptance levels, and the subsequent builds to acceptance levels.
EFI SPB, IDPU and ESA, SCM Preamp• All flight units except IDPU FM1 will tested to Acceptance levels. FM1 IDPU
will be tested to Qual levels as the ETU did not have populated boards.
Table 2.4.3 Random Vibration Spec For Components Mounted at Outer Portion of Bottom Deck Includes EFI Radial, IDPU, ESA, Gyro, and Sun Sensor
Frequency (Hz)
Qualification (G^2/Hz)
Protoflight (G^2/Hz)
Acceptance (G^2/Hz)
20 0.02 0.02 0.01
60 – 200 0.12 0.12 0.06 300 – 500 0.08 0.08 0.04
2000 0.02 0.02 0.01
Overall Grms 11.55 11.55 7.09 Duration (mins) 2 1 1
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 55 UCB, December 9, 2004
Random Vibration
Magnetometer Booms, Magnetometers (FGM and SCM)• FM1 booms will be tested to Qualification levels due to changes in the design
and the need to test the mag ETUs on the booms. Based on results seen on FM1 boom, Flight mags may be re-tested on Flight booms. All subsequent FMs will be tested to Acceptance levels.
Table 2.4.4 Random Vibration Spec For FGM and SCM Frequency
(Hz) Qualification
(G^2/Hz) Protoflight (G^2/Hz)
Acceptance (G^2/Hz)
20 0.02 0.02 0.01
40 - 90 0.20 0.20 0.10 110 – 300 0.40 0.40 0.20 400 – 600 0.20 0.20 0.10
1000 - 2000 0.06 0.06 0.03
Overall Grms 16.30 16.30 11.54 Duration (mins) 2 1 1
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 56 UCB, December 9, 2004
Random Vibration
SSTs• FM1 SSTs will be tested to Qualification levels due to out-of-spec notching
that was performed on the ETU. All subsequent FMs will be tested to Acceptance levels.
Table 2.4.5 Random Vibration Spec For SST Frequency
(Hz) Qualification
(G^2/Hz) Protoflight (G^2/Hz)
Acceptance (G^2/Hz)
20 0.02 0.02 0.01
40 –180 0.20 0.20 0.10 210 – 315 0.60 0.60 0.30
450 – 1000 0.08 0.08 0.04 1250 - 2000 0.14 0.14 0.07
Overall Grms 17.67 17.67 12.51
Duration (mins) 2 1 1
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 57 UCB, December 9, 2004
Random Vibration
EFI AXBs• AXBs will be tested to Acceptance levels.
Table 2.4.7 Random Vibration Spec For EFI Axial Frequency
(Hz) Qualification
(G^2/Hz) Protoflight (G^2/Hz)
Acceptance (G^2/Hz)
20 0.02 0.02 0.01
40 – 60 0.40 0.40 0.20 70 – 125 0.60 0.60 0.30
200 – 500 0.08 0.08 0.04 800 - 2000 0.05 0.05 0.025
Overall Grms 13.01 13.01 9.21
Duration (mins) 2 1 1
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 58 UCB, December 9, 2004
Sine Vibration
Table 2.5.5 Qualification Sine Specification For Components Axis Frequency (Hz) Level (g) Sweep Rate
5 - 17.7 0.5" DA 17.7 - 25 8.00
2 oct/min
25 - 35 8.00 0.75 oct/min X,Y
35 - 50 8.00 2 oct/min 5 - 5.4 0.5" DA
5.4 - 10 0.75 10 - 12 32.4 dB/oct 12 - 20 2.00 20 - 25 15.2 dB/oct
2 oct/min
25 - 35 3.50 0.75 oct/min 35 - 40 37.2 dB/oct
Z
40-50 8.00 2 oct/min
• All Instruments will be tested to the sine vibration loads shown in Tables 2.5.5 and 2.5.7.
• IDPU, Magbooms, and SST FM1s will be tested to Qualification Levels
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 59 UCB, December 9, 2004
Sine Vibration
• All other flight units will be tested to Acceptance Levels
Table 2.5.7 Acceptance Sine Specification For Components Axis Frequency (Hz) Level (g) Sweep Rate
5 - 15.8 0.5" DA 15.8 - 25 6.40
4 oct/min
25 - 35 6.40 1.5 oct/min X,Y
35 - 50 6.40 4 oct/min 5 - 10 0.60
10 - 12 32.4 dB/oct 12 - 20 1.60 20 - 25 15.2 dB/oct
4 oct/min
25 - 35 2.80 1.5 oct/min 35 - 40 37.2 dB/oct
Z
40 - 50 6.40 4 oct/min
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 60 UCB, December 9, 2004
THEMIS Instrument Test Review
Thermal Test ProgramChris Smith
University of California - Berkeley
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 61 UCB, December 9, 2004
Thermal Testing Outline
Thermal Vacuum Cycle Accumulation• 2 cycles at instrument level - constrained by schedule• 6 cycles at instrument suite level• 4 cycles at spacecraft level• 12 cycles total for every flight instrument• 4 hour soaks at hot and cold targets
Thermal Balance• Done on one flight or flight like unit only at the instrument level• Instrument level balance verifies conductance, absorptance, and
emittance properties• Instrument thermal design is verified at the probe level on P1
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 62 UCB, December 9, 2004
Thermal Limits
• Eclipse Operation / Turn On limits are for periods where the instrument will be on but need not be calibrated to collect science data
Cold Hot Cold Hot Cold Hot Cold Hot Cold Hot Cold Hot
AXB Mechanical Units -65 65 -25 30 -65 80
EFI PreAmp -65 80 -125 80 -125 80
ESA -30 45 -30 45 -50 55 -35 65 -30 45
IDPU -30 45 -30 45 -50 55
SCM Preamp -30 45 -30 45 -50 55
SST -55 45 -55 40 -55 45
SPB Mechanical Units -45 45 -20 45 -45 45
FGM Sensor -80 65 -100 65 -100 65
FGM Outer Boom -130 100 -40 45 -130 100
FGM Elbow Hinge -130 100 -40 45 -130 100
FGM Frangibolt -65 65 -40 45
SCM Sensor -85 65 -85 65 -85 65
SCM Boom -130 100 -40 45 -130 100
SCM Deck Hinge -130 100 -40 45 -130 100
SCM Frangibolts -65 65 -40 45
Deployment Post DeploymentInstrument
Pre DeploymentScience Operation SurvivalEclipse Operation /
Turn On
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 63 UCB, December 9, 2004
Thermal Verification Levels
•Thermal Analysis results must be 5 degrees inside limits
•Acceptance/ Qualification tests are 10 degrees outside of limits
•Heater duty cycle will be 50% or less in coldest case at lowest voltage
Max Predict
Op
Lim
it s
Min Predict
>5°C
>5°C
10°C
10°C
Qu
alif
ica
ti on
/ A
c ce
pt a
nc e
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 64 UCB, December 9, 2004
ESA/IDPU Thermal Testing Status
• Overcurrent limit on first hot cycle of ETU. Replaced Shotkey diode in LVPS.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 65 UCB, December 9, 2004
FGM Thermal Testing Status
• F4 FGS was not conductively mounted correctly in first qualification test. Retest will be done in air at limits shown
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 66 UCB, December 9, 2004
SCM Thermal Testing Status
• Thin crack in the potting for two antennas during first ETU test. Potting method reworked and retested
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 67 UCB, December 9, 2004
SCM/FGM Boom Thermal Testing Status
• Booms will be balanced with flight or ETU sensors
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 68 UCB, December 9, 2004
SST Thermal Testing Status
• ITO coated silver teflon thermal control tape with 9703 conductive adhesive currently in thermal vac testing
• Testing will measure conductivity over expected temperature ranges and adhesion
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 69 UCB, December 9, 2004
EFI PreAmp Thermal Testing Status
• ETU 1 Preamp had no problems but FR4 board was switched to Thermount 85 NT for ETU 2 and flight
• Six ETU 2 Qual Units went through 24 cycles, Two of those units continue to add cycles and are currently at 30. They are expected to accumulate 36 complete cycles.
• Upper limit recently changed from 65 to 90 after the receipt of optical property testing results.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 70 UCB, December 9, 2004
EFI PreAmp Thermal Testing Setup
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 71 UCB, December 9, 2004
EFI SPB Thermal Testing Status
• Qual ETU motor was a motor only stress test, no problems seen• SPB design changed from flying with doors closed to flying with doors open. ETU was
retested after the small modifications this required• Calibration runs will be done with all of the sphere keyreels to determine release tension
at hot and cold deployment conditions
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 72 UCB, December 9, 2004
EFI AXB Thermal Testing Status
• No problems experienced in deploy tests
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 73 UCB, December 9, 2004
Instrument Suite Thermal Testing Status
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 74 UCB, December 9, 2004
THEMIS Instrument Test Review
EMC/MAG Test ProgramMichael Ludlam
University of California - Berkeley
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 75 UCB, December 9, 2004
EMC Test Plan
EMC levels for E have been calculated by UCB and documented in “THEMIS Environmental Design Specification SAI-SPEC-1148 Revision – A”. H field levels are located in the magnetic test plan (reference on page 7 of these slides). These levels have been fixed since early 2004.
Instrument suite EMC test will be performed at EMCE in Fremont, CA on FM1. Both Radiated and Conducted Emissions and Susceptibility will be measured.
Subsequent EMC testing (on FM2-6) will be done at bench level at UCB – conducted E-field only.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 76 UCB, December 9, 2004
EMC Narrowband E-Field
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1.00E+01 1.00E+02 1.00E+03 1.00E+04 1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07 1.00E+08 1.00E+09 1.00E+10 1.00E+11
Frequency (Hz)
dBm V
/m
20 Hz
Payload Subsystems, Components and Instruments
Payload
1.770 GHz
2.300 GHz
18 GHz
408 MHz
430 MHz
38.5
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 77 UCB, December 9, 2004
EMC Broadband E-Field
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
1.00E+04 1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07 1.00E+08 1.00E+09 1.00E+10 1.00E+11
Frequency (Hz)
dBm V
/m/M
Hz
14 kHz
Payload Subsystems, Components and Instruments
Payload
1.770 GHz
2.300 GHz 18 GHz
65
55
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 78 UCB, December 9, 2004
EMC H-Field
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000
Frequency
dB
pT
Themis Search Coil SensitivityFAST SpecTHEMIS Spec
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 79 UCB, December 9, 2004
ETU Instrument Tests
IDPU ETU is finished initial testing and has also undergone some limited EMC testing on the bench.
Results from these tests show that the EFI instrument is sensitive to noise conducted onto the 28V power rails with a ripple above 500mV p-p.
Initial testing on the SCM instrument indicates that at lower frequencies no disturbance is seen at 200mV p-p. Further testing will be done this week.
No instrument to instrument disturbance has been recorded at ETU level.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 80 UCB, December 9, 2004
Mag Test Plan
DC Fields
Detailed Magnetics Control Plan (ftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/THEMIS/1 Management/1.3 Systems Engineering/1. Requirements/thm_sys_002d_Magnetic Cleanliness.pdf)
Early problem component identification and testing
Modelling of instrument fields
Magnetic mapping of all units before installation onto probes
Deperming of tools for flight model assembly and integration
AC Fields
Careful implementation of Magnetics Control Plan recommendations e.g. twisting of power and return lines in harnesses.
Currently there are no instrument AC fields issues
Final check during S/C EMC test.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 81 UCB, December 9, 2004
Magnetic Coil Facility
Used for instrument mapping and deperming
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 82 UCB, December 9, 2004
THEMIS Instrument Test Review
Reliability and Quality AssuranceRon Jackson
University of California - Berkeley
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 83 UCB, December 9, 2004
Agenda • Responsibilities of Quality Assurance prior to and during Instrument I&T• EEE Parts Status• Failure Reporting• Test Plan and Procedure Status• Design Reliability Analysis Status
Quality Assurance Team• Ron Jackson Mission Assurance Manager• Jorg FisherQuality Assurance Engineer• Chris Scholz Quality Control Engineer• Tom Clemons Quality Control Technician
Overview
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 84 UCB, December 9, 2004
1.) Review and Report on Quality Status for Flight Hardware Build:• Evaluate/Audit contractors facilities for the ability to consistently produce quality flight hardware daily• Equipment calibration, temperature and humidity monitors• Clean room controls• Compliance to ESD requirements• Workmanship procedures/processes• Material handling and shelf life material storage• Data packages and logbooks• Nonconformance reporting / Problem reports• Assembly instruction / BOM• Personnel training and certification to NASA standards
2.) Support Integration and Test Activities:• Verify test set ups at board/instrument and spacecraft levels• Monitor thermal testing at Box/instrument and spacecraft levels• Witness vibration testing at instrument and spacecraft levels• Verify magnetics testing at instrument levels• All European suppliers – UCB shall review Acceptance Package Data / Travelers and inspect
component/Box upon delivery to U.S.
Responsibilities
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 85 UCB, December 9, 2004
3.) Provide electrical and mechanical inspections but not limited to: • Incoming materials• Solder workmanship, through hole and SMT methods (verify coupon acceptance)• Conformal coating and staking applications• Witness board or Box closure• Wire harness build, continuity test, Hi-pot testing and routing• Configuration verification, as designed vs. as built
4.) Monitor UCB Contamination Control:• Class 100k clean room• Air particle count will be monitored• All flight hardware will be placed in clean bags
Responsibilities
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 86 UCB, December 9, 2004
• Current version of PIL THM_ee_parts_rev37.xls on shared database • 100% of EEE Parts have been procured to approved list• 100% of EEE Parts are in stock, except
• HS 508: quantity in stock not sufficient for all flight units, more have been ordered, expected to be in stock by need date for later flight units
• RH1013MH: replacement part for AD648, requested by FGM to improve noise measurements, expected Dec 10, 2004
• 100% of EEE Part Up-Screening has been completed, except 2 capacitors for LVPS (currently at GSFC)
• Parts Issues• RT54SX72S Actel FPGAs: 66 flight FPGAs required for Instrument Flight build.
100 MEC Parts In-house, 20 UMC Parts on-order for spare trade (8 week lead time)
EEE Parts Status
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 87 UCB, December 9, 2004
Failure Reporting
• All failures that occur during flight testing are documented at time of problem using UCB Problem Failure Report (PFR)• PFR documents impact, assesses alternative and provides recommended course of
action• PFR is closed after corrective action has been taken and results reviewed• Mission Assurance Manager (Ron Jackson), Project Manager (Peter Harvey) Mission
Systems Engineer (Ellen Taylor), and Cognizant Engineering sign-off and record date of closure
• 3 PFRs have been logged to date for Instruments• PFR 001: 3 Actels failed on BEB ETU. Analysis for overstress was completed. Flight
design was changed to add termination resistors. Status: CLOSED. • PFR 002: SCM Pre-Amp Cal signal for FM3 was not as expected. Determined problem
was due to wrong resistor value. Pre-Amp will not be re-furbished, but used spare model. Status: CLOSED.
• PFR 003: Overflow of Low Telemetry data occurred during FM1 FGE testing. Corrected by minor change to FPGA. FPGA replaced with new design and tested. Status: CLOSED.
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 88 UCB, December 9, 2004
Instrument Test Procedures
• Assembly Procedures• MAM reviews flight assembly procedures• QA inspection points w/ UCB and GSFC Sign-Off
• Flight Board Functional Test Procedures• MSE reviews flight board functional test procedures• Most flight board functional test procedures are in final form • Flight board testing has started on BEB, DAP, DFB, PCB, DCB (this week), FGE• Test procedures and GSE scripts are run on ETU boards prior to Flight boards
• Environmental Test Procedures• MAM, MSE and PM review Environmental Test Procedures at Instrument PERs• MAM, MSE and Instrument Lead sign-off on Procedures prior to test• Lead Mechanical and Thermal review on Vibration and Thermal Vacuum Levels• To date, one UCB PER has occurred for the flight SPBs
• THM-SPB-PRO-420 Vertical Acceptance Testing of SPB Flight Units: Signed-Off• THM-SPB-PRO-423 Acceptance Vibration Testing of SPB Flight Units: Signed-Off• THM-SPB-PRO-424 Thermal Vacuum Testing of SPB Flight Units
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 89 UCB, December 9, 2004
Reliability EngineeringFault Tree Analysis (thm_sys_016_FTA)
• Current Version provided at Mission CDR
Probability Risk Assessment (thm_sys_017_PRA)• Current Version provided at Mission CDR
Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analyses (thm_sys_007_FMECA)• Additional Analyses performed as identified and tracked in FMECA worksheet
THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 90 UCB, December 9, 2004
Actel Reviews
• Actel Review Status:
Actel Reviewer Status Flight Part Burned?
BEB Baja Engineering Review Complete. Changes Incorporated.
Yes
DFB (3) Baja Engineering Documentation and ETU Testing Complete. Sent to Baja for Review.
No
DCB SWRI Review Complete. Comments being Evaluated.
No
PCB Baja Engineering Review Complete. Changes Incorporated.
No
ETC Baja Engineering Documentation and ETU Testing >95% Complete. Design will be sent mid-Dec.
No
DAP UCB Documentation and ETU Testing Complete. Review started.
No
FGE Internal by TUBS Initial Flight Part Functional Test Complete. Burn-In Testing On-going.
Yes