Full report

Original page 1

NASA/TM—2006–214271 The Vehicle Integrated Performance Analysis Experience—Reconnecting With Technical Integration D.S. McGhee Marshall Space Flight Center, Marshall Space Flight Center, Alabama January 2006

Original page 2

The NASA STI Program Office…in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the advancement of aeronautics and space science. The NASA Scientific and Technical Information (STI) Program Office plays a key part in helping NASA maintain this important role. The NASA STI Program Office is operated by Langley Research Center, the lead center for NASA’s scientific and technical information. The NASA STI Program Office provides access to the NASA STI Database, the largest collection of aeronautical and space science STI in the world. The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional mechanism for disseminating the results of its research and development activities. These results are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report Series, which includes the following report types: • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of completed research or a major significant phase of research that present the results of NASA programs and include extensive data or theoretical analysis. Includes compilations of significant scientific and technical data and information deemed to be of continuing reference value. NASA’s counterpart of peerreviewed formal professional papers but has less stringent limitations on manuscript length and extent of graphic presentations. • TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific and technical findings that are preliminary or of specialized interest, e.g., quick release reports, working papers, and bibliographies that contain minimal annotation. Does not contain extensive analysis. • CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and technical findings by NASA-sponsored contractors and grantees. • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected papers from scientific and technical conferences, symposia, seminars, or other meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA. • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, technical, or historical information from NASA programs, projects, and mission, often concerned with subjects having substantial public interest. • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English-language translations of foreign scientific and technical material pertinent to NASA’s mission. Specialized services that complement the STI Program Office’s diverse offerings include creating custom thesauri, building customized databases, organizing and publishing research results…even providing videos. For more information about the NASA STI Program Office, see the following: • Access the NASA STI Program Home Page at http://www.sti.nasa.gov • E-mail your question via the Internet to help@sti.nasa.gov • Fax your question to the NASA Access Help Desk at 301–621–0134 • Telephone the NASA Access Help Desk at 301–621–0390 • Write to: NASA Access Help Desk NASA Center for AeroSpace Information 7121 Standard Drive Hanover, MD 21076–1320 301–621–0390

Original page 3

NASA/TM—2006–214271 The Vehicle Integrated Performance Analysis Experience—Reconnecting With Technical Integration D.S. McGhee Marshall Space Flight Center, Marshall Space Flight Center, Alabama Natonal Aeronautcs and Space Admnstraton Marshall Space Flght Center • MSFC, Alabama 35812 January 2006 

Original page 4

TRADEMARKS Trade names and trademarks are used n ths report for dentfcaton only. Ths usage does not consttute an offcal endorsement, ether expressed or mpled, by the Natonal Aeronautcs and Space Admnstraton. Avalable from: NASA Center for AeroSpace Informaton 7121 Standard Drve Hanover, MD 21076–1320 301–621–0390  Natonal Techncal Informaton Servce 5285 Port Royal Road Sprngfeld, VA 22161 703–487–4650

Original page 5

TAblE of ConTEnTS 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 2. HISTORY........................................................................................................................................ 2 3. VEHICLE INTEGRATED PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS FOUNDATION ................................ 3 4. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL INTEGRATION.............................................. 4 4.1 T-Model for Techncal Integraton .......................................................................................... 4 4.2 General Model......................................................................................................................... 6 5. PEOPLE, ExPERIENCE, CHALLENGE, PROCESS, AND TOOLS.......................................... 8 6. SELECTED RESULTS................................................................................................................... 9 7. SUPPORTING THE NEw NASA.................................................................................................. 10 8. V-MODEL....................................................................................................................................... 11 9. CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................... 13 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 15 

Original page 6

v

Original page 7

lIST of fIGURES 1. VIPA hstory ......................................................................................................................... 2 2. T-Model for techncal ntegraton ......................................................................................... 5 3. Relatonshp between VIPA models ..................................................................................... 6 4. VIPA s about people ............................................................................................................ 8 5. Saturn V exercse: sample results ......................................................................................... 9 6. VIPA V-Model ...................................................................................................................... 11 v

Original page 8

v

Original page 9

lIST of ACRonyMS ELV expendable launch vehcle IATR Interm Archtecture and Technology Revew OSP Orbtal Space Plane SLI Space Launch Intatve TM Techncal Memorandum TP Techncal Publcaton VAC vehcle analyss cycle VIPA Vehcle Integrated Performance Analyss v

Original page 10

v

Original page 11

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM ThE VEhIClE InTEGRATED PERfoRMAnCE AnAlySIS ExPERIEnCE— REConnECTInG WITh TEChnICAl InTEGRATIon 1. InTRoDUCTIon Today’s NASA s facng sgnfcant challenges and changes—mprovng nsght, safety, and techncal ntegraton; cultural changes; and fndng new ways of dong busness. Early recognton and foresght nto these changes ntated the Vehcle Integrated Performance Analyss (VIPA) team. The purpose of ths team was to reconnect the ndvdual engneerng dscplnes nto a team capable of performng system-level techncal assessments n support of future program decsons. Ths Techncal Memorandum (TM) descrbes the VIPA experence and outlnes ts hstory. VIPA’s foundatons are thoroughly revewed and ts relatonshp to systems engneerng from the project to the engneerng dscplne level are detaled. Contrbutons of the VIPA process to the new NASA objectves are outlned. 1

Original page 12

1. hISToRy Very early n the Space Launch Intatve (SLI) program, a small team of engneers was asked to propose a process for performng a system-level assessment of a launch vehcle. The request was amed prmarly at provdng techncal nsght and makng NASA a smart buyer of a second-generaton launch archtecture. Out of ths effort, the VIPA team was created. Durng the frst half of 2002, VIPA supported the SLI program wth ndependent techncal nsght and partcpaton n ts techncal revews. The second half of 2002 brought a transton of the SLI program to the Orbtal Space Plane (OSP) program. Durng ths transton, the VIPA team was permtted to contnue developng ts capabltes for future support of the OSP program. VIPA also worked on valdatng processes and tools aganst realstc data from the Saturn V program. As the OSP program started, VIPA was asked to provde techncal assessments of several OSP concepts launched on exstng expendable launch vehcles (ELVs). VIPA was able to provde a substantal amount of objectve system performance data enablng nformed program decsons. Recently, after a bref hatus, the VIPA team was reassembled to provde addtonal techncal nsght n support of the Space Exploraton Intatve’s heavy-lft launch vehcle trade studes. Fgure 1 shows the hstory of VIPA. CY01 CY02 CY03 CY04 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 SLI Program Orbital Space Plane 1/9 7/24 0/1 12/30 2/10 6/16 VAC–01 Purpose: Maintain VAC–00 Project Constellation VAC–02 Purpose: Assess Feasibility of OSP Spacecraft Concepts on EELVs Duration: ≈4 mo Peak Headcount: ≈25 Outcome: Evaluated 8 OSP+ELV Configurations, Identified Single Feasible Concept 3/10 4/19 Team, Validate Models VAC–03 Purpose: Form Team and Prepare for IATR Duration: ≈3 mo Duration: ≈7 mo Peak Headcount: ≈40 Peak Headcount: ≈100 Outcome: Validated Models, Performed Outcome: Developed System-Level Trades Models and Processes, Identified Technical Risks Purpose: Conceptual Design and Evaluation of Shuttle- Derived Vehicle Duration: ≈1 mo Peak Headcount: ≈45 Outcome: Successful Design Fgure 1. VIPA hstory. 2

Original page 13

1. VEhIClE InTEGRATED PERfoRMAnCE AnAlySIS foUnDATIon Durng the ntal formulaton of the VIPA process, there was a strong desre to ncorporate the lessons of the past. It was realzed that the area of techncal ntegraton s where the majorty of system or to the VIPA effort, a NASA Techncal Publcaton (TP)1 was wrtten and problems are rooted. Just pr publshed by several well-respected NASA engneerng leaders. Ths TP captured many of the past lessons n ths area and became the bass of much of the VIPA process. Reference 1 was used as a pont-of-departure and focal pont for all dscussons wth the dfferent techncal dscplnes durng the VIPA process formulaton. It descrbes how vehcles were desgned and analyzed n the past. VIPA was establshed to exercse and mprove the desgn and analyss process. Much of the framework of reference 1 was retaned, however, the nsghts ganed durng ths formulaton enabled the nvolved dscplnes to see ther work n a dfferent, more systemc way. The nvolved dscplnes, va ths more systemc vew, were then able to focus more actvtes on system nteractons, senstvtes, margns, and dentfcaton of techncal rsks. Ths further enabled them to defne mproved dscplne processes that allowed for quck trade studes and dentfcaton of system mpacts. The VIPA process now provdes for more detaled and ntegrated analyses earler n the desgn process, whch enables better decsons. Two of the man conceptual models of reference 1—the T-Model and the General Model—emerged as the most sgnfcant concepts enablng ths systemc vew and wll be descrbed n followng sectons. 3

Original page 14

1. SySTEMS EnGInEERInG AnD TEChnICAl InTEGRATIon The dscusson of techncal ntegraton and systems engneerng can get, by engneerng standards, emotonal. Ths s prmarly due to the broad defnton of the subject and ts dverse meanng to dfferent groups of engneers and engneerng management. Reference 2 defnes systems engneerng as “an nterdscplnary engneerng management process that evolves and verfes an ntegrated, lfe-cycle balanced set of system solutons that satsfy customer needs.” Techncal ntegraton s defned by reference 1 as: The interactive activity among all participants in the design process, whereby the compartmentalized parts reintegrate into a balanced, successful total design. Technical integration is enabled by formal and informal information flow methods, by a system focus of all participants on how their part affects the total system, and by leadership that continually ensures that interactive aspects of design are being addressed and balanced. Both references acknowledge the very broad defntons of systems engneerng and techncal ntegraton and that most engneers nvolved can clam to be performng some part of ths process. If anythng, the defnton of techncal ntegraton s broader. However, both references allude to a further dvson of ths process. Reference 1 refers explctly to a “formal” and “nformal” nformaton flow, whle reference 2 ndcates that systems engneerng s a management process, whch mples formalty. Ths dfference between “formal” and “nformal” s most lkely at the crux of the dffculty for productve dscussons between engneerng and engneerng management. The T-Model for techncal ntegraton s useful for explorng ths dfference. 4.1 T-Model for Technical Integration Fgure 2 shows the representaton of the T-Model from reference 1. The model s dvded nto three dstnct levels. All three levels are vtal to the total ntegraton, and all three wll overlap. The vertcal legs represent the dscplne or component engneerng functons that generally requre a more ntense, self-centered vew to adequately desgn, analyze, and understand specfc techncal ssues. It s recognzed that these dscplne functons should mantan awareness of the ntegrated system. However, t s stll far to say that the deeper one goes nto a dscplne or specalty the less system focus there s. Engneerng dscplnes have a long hstory of study and formalzed educaton programs. There should be no need, and lttle beneft, n redefnng terms n ths area. The topmost half of the horzontal bar represents the formal aspects of techncal ntegraton. Accordng to references 1 and 2, ths level’s focus and responsblty s on the overall techncal management and certfcaton of the system. The project and project leader are the prmary facltators of ths level. Reference 1 further states that the leader accomplshes goals wth the support of “the tools and functons of the systems engneerng dscplne.” These functons are defned by reference 1 as “plannng, control, and documentaton.” Ths renforces the formal nature of ths level and ts prmary concern wth leadng, montorng, and controllng the total techncal ntegraton, .e., all three levels. 4

Original page 15

T-Model for Technical Integration • Systems • Formal • Top Level • Discipline • Component – 1 • Specific Discipline to Specific Discipline • Informal • In-Depth • Discipline • Component – 2 Integration is Everyone’s Responsibility Fgure 2. T-Model for techncal ntegraton. Ths formal system engneerng, lke dscplne engneerng, has been wrtten about and studed extensvely from the formal project management pont-of-vew of plannng and control. The defnton quoted from reference 2 above s a good defnton. The mddle level, or lowermost half of the horzontal bar, s the prmary focus of the VIPA process. Ths level s characterzed by the nformal ntegraton of the dscplne and component functons. Ths s where the dscplne and component efforts are brought together nto a system analyss of the product to ensure that a vable, techncally ntegrated product can be acheved. It s at ths level that dscplne/component dscovered senstvtes and nteractons are assessed together as a system. Also at ths level, requrements are valdated, performance s verfed, and more mportantly, derved requrements are uncovered. Most dscplne engneers consder ths nformal ntegraton, or ntegrated systems analyss, as the essence of systems engneerng, whch conflcts wth the more formal management defnton. There should be a new term to defne ths level of ntegraton n order to reduce confuson and allow more productve dscussons. The term “nformal” s nadequate consderng the amount of effort that occurs n ths ntegraton and partcularly snce the VIPA effort has attempted to add “process” to ths level. The followng defnton s proposed based n part on the reference 1 defnton of nformal ntegraton: Analytcal Integraton—A communcaton and analyss actvty that conssts of nteractons among dscplne and desgn functons. The focus of ths actvty conssts of data exchange, ntegraton, and physcs-based analyss to assess the behavor of the functons as an ntegrated system. Ths system behavor s nfluenced by physcal attrbutes, nteractons, senstvtes, and uncertantes brought forward by the dscplne and desgn functons. 5

Original page 16

The VIPA process focuses on ths level of nformal ntegraton because NASA’s capabltes n formal systems engneerng and dscplne expertse are already well establshed. The process encourages engneerng dscplnes to nteract and focus less on dscplne analyss and more on analytcal ntegraton and system nteractons. The depth of penetraton nto any dscplne s drven by the senstvtes and uncertantes. 4.2 General Model Reference 1 defnes General Model as a “generalzed descrpton of the vehcle (system) that s evolved through synthess/analyss actvtes drected toward overall vehcle (system) performance.” VIPA uses the development of ths model as the catalyst to focus the dscplnes on the system nteractons rather than detaled dscplne assessments. Each nvolved dscplne s encouraged to develop dscplne-specfc or specalzed models that feed nto ths General Model for a system-wde analyss cycle (fg. 3). Ths effectvely forces each dscplne to determne ts true drvers. It also forces the dscplnes to stay consstent wth the level of defnton approprate for the project phase. Ths allows the correct model fdelty to perform the necessary trade and senstvty analyses requred for that phase. Once these drvers are determned, they can then be assessed for system senstvtes and uncertantes. These ntegraton ssues are the factors that wll drve the system desgn and derve further system requrements. Specialized Models Start Analysis General Model Cycle Indicator Models Discipline-Specific Models Constraints Issues Documented No Design Meets Capability Yes ? Design Acceptable Capability Fgure 3. Relatonshp between VIPA models. VIPA work to date has been on launch vehcle systems. For ths purpose, a gudance and trajectory smulaton code was chosen as the backbone to the General Model. Ths s the most sensble choce for launch vehcles. For other applcatons the sensble choce may be somethng dfferent. A habtat module system may dctate a msson operaton tmelne be chosen; a deep space probe may dctate an orbtal mechancs smulaton; or an n-space assembly may dctate a mockup and manufacturng 6

Original page 17

assembly smulaton. whle the choce of the backbone s mportant—t s not crtcal. The crtcal factor s that a backbone be chosen and used to focus the entre team on dscplne nteracton ssues. VIPA has successfully brought forward the use of smplfed ndcator models that have been tradtonally used n flght smulaton. It has also apprecably progressed n ncorporatng addtonal detaled data recovery modules for aeroheatng, structural loads, and stress. Havng the objectve of such a smulaton provdes the necessary ntegraton focus to the team and needs further development. 7

Original page 18

1. PEoPlE, ExPERIEnCE, ChAllEnGE, PRoCESS, AnD ToolS The General Model descrbed s not an all-encompassng nterdscplnary software tool that nstantaneously assesses any system. It s a collecton of varous tools and models constructed by each dscplne for ths current system at ts current stage of evoluton. The true nsght nto any system s ganed n the effort of workng as a team to construct ths model. In fact, VIPA’s emphass s on the people n the process as llustrated n fgure 4. Experenced people faced wth a challenge wll develop a process and generate tools that enable that process. By nvolvng new people, productvty can be ncreased whle they gan experence wth the tools. They can then be challenged and they wll mprove the process and the tools. It s truly the people that make a system work, and the VIPA process not only assesses the system but also develops the people along the way. Fgure 4. VIPA s about people. In the past, all attempts to automate the process have focused on the tools, not the process or the people. VIPA was the frst attempt to use the tools to focus the people, experence, and process. 8

Original page 19

1. SElECTED RESUlTS The VIPA team has produced an overwhelmng amount of data durng ts vehcle analyss cycles (VACs). The ntegraton process demands that these data be generated and shared. The data generated durng the Saturn V exercse were partcularly nterestng. It was durng ths process that many of VIPA’s processes and tools were valdated aganst actual flght data. It was also durng ths cycle that the VIPA team members started to understand the ntegraton process and formed strong commtments to that process. Fgure 5 shows a very bref summary of data created durng the Saturn V cycle. Note that the vehcles and hardware depcted are CAD representatons down to the skn and strnger level. Durng ths short 3-mo cycle, tools were developed and mproved, flght reconstructons were created, and trades were conducted usng advanced materals and engne concepts. Material: IM7–5250–4 Composite With Hexcel HRH 10–1/8–4 With Aramid Fiber/Phenolic Resin—Honeycomb Core Material: Aluminum 2219 Skin Thickness: 2.374 in Skin Thickness: 0.17 in–0.193 in 3 3 Capacity: 50,912,345 in Capacity: 51,721,687 in Weight: 25,950 lb Short Saturn has identical payload capability, but with a 1,600,000-lb S-IC LOX Tank Skin Temperature 100100 reduction in gross Historic Saturn V 5050 Tskin - Sta. 1404 Tskin - Sta. 909 00 Lower Bound lift-off weight. -50-50 Upper Bound Tskin - Sta. 909 (Constant -276 F) -100-100 Tskin - Sta. 909 (GM adiabatic BC) Resized Saturn V(Cloned From Historic Saturn V) -150-150 Temperature (F)-200-200 -250-250 -300-300 -350-350 -400-400 00 2020 4040 6 06 0 H Tank 2 Shortened by 67.3 in J–2 Engine Lox Tank Shortened by 197.2 in RP Tank F–1 Engine Shortened by 141.6 in Scaled RS–84 Weight: 16,169 lb 38% Weight Savings, With Only 2% Lost Capacity ThermalThermalThermalThermal Model Validation Againstinstinst Flight Data 1515 Comparison of Detailed Model with GM AS503 Flt Data GM Prediction 8080 100100 120120 1401400.60.6 160160 1010 Time (sec) S-IC/SII Interstage Calorimeter Data 0.50.5 55 0.40.4 Heat Transfer Rate (Btu/ft2-sec) 0.30.3 High Data Range Low Data Range 00 GM Prediction 0.20.2 0.10.1 -5-5 Heating Rate (Btu/sft-s) 00AerodynamicAerodynamicAerodynamicAerodynamic5050100100150150 200200 00 BaseBBaseBasease Time (sec)Time (sec) HeatingHeatingHeatingHeating -0.1-0.1 HeatingHeatingHeatingHeating 00 2020 4040 6060 8 08 0 100100 120120 14 014 0 1 601 60 Time ( Sec)Time ( Sec) VAC-02 Moment Loads - Max Q-Alpha Loads / Gross Liftoff Weight 250 ,00 0, 000250 ,00 0, 000 NASTRAN - Max Q-Alpha/GLOW Stage Thrust (Integrated Propulsion Model + Flight Data) AS-503 Flight Loads - Near Max Q 9. 50E +069. 50E +06 Saturn V Design Loads - Max Q L&D GM - Max Q-Alpha/GLOW 200 ,00 0, 000200 ,00 0, 000 9. 00E +069. 00E +06 8. 50E +068. 50E +06 150 ,00 0, 000150 ,00 0, 000 LoadsLoadsLoadsLoads 8. 00E +068. 00E +06 Moment (in-lbs) Thrust (lbf)7. 50E +067. 50E +06 100 ,00 0, 000100 ,00 0, 000 Flight DataIntegrated Propulsion Model 7. 00E +067. 00E +06 50 ,00 0, 00050 ,00 0, 000 6. 50E +066. 50E +06 PropulsionPropulsionPropulsionPropulsion 6. 00E +066. 00E +0600 2 02 0 4040 6060 8080 100100 1 201 20 140140 160160 180180 00 Time (sec) 00 5 005 00 10001000 15 0015 00 20002000 25002500 30 0030 00 35003500 4 0004 000 450 0450 0 Beam Station (in.) Nose to Tail Fgure 5. Saturn V exercse: sample results. 9

Original page 20

1. SUPPoRTInG ThE nEW nASA Today’s NASA s facng sgnfcant challenges and changes. The Space Exploraton Intatve ndcates a large ncrease n projects wth lmted ncrease n budget. The Columbia report has crtntegraton mpactng ts ablty to provde safety.3 czed NASA for ts lack of nsght and techncal  nd new ways of dong busness.4 In addton, experence The Aldrdge report s advocatng NASA f wth several programs from x–33 to OSP has ndcated that NASA engneerng had a dffcult tme transtonng from Phase C/D detaled work to more prelmnary Phase A/B and nsght work. The bottom lne to all these changes s that NASA must become a smart buyer. Ths mples that NASA must effcently do ts homework to correctly defne ts requrements, select vable provders, and ensure adequate performance wthout stflng creatvty and nnovaton. It s lkely no longer cost effectve for NASA to get nto the very detaled Phase C/D work. Contractors can do ths more effcently. However, NASA cannot afford to walk blndly nto a revew and grade a contractor based solely on a PowerPont presentaton. NASA also cannot afford to quckly revew a requrements document to see f t has the correct desgn crtera for a system that s substantally dfferent from anythng n ts experence. In order to have the correct level of nsght nto both the requrements and the performance, NASA must learn to work effcently wthn the mddle level of the T-Model. 10

Original page 21

1. V-MoDEl The process that VIPA uses to assess both performance and requrements s very smlar to the compartmentalzaton, desgn, and rentegraton functons dscussed n reference 1. VIPA refers to ths as the V-Model, and t s llustrated n fgure 6. As can be seen at the center of the V, ths process s drven by the general, dscplne-specfc, and specalzed models. Verify Stated Specialized Models Constraints Issues Documented Performance Start Analysis General Model Cycle Indicator Models Discipline-Specific Models Capability Booster Gen Model LM % Diff. BECO time 163.32 163.33 0.01 Altitude 191,012 190,838.1 0.09 Mach 7.46 7.55 1.19 Qbar 23.07 25 7.72 Latitude 29.22 29.22 0 Longitude 280.14 280.14 0 vRel 7,897.87 7,892.3 0.07 Max q 669.24 683.8 2.13 Orbiter MECO time 524.08 524.08 0 Altitude 332,580.8 331,209.2 0.41 Mach 25.08 25.79 0.41 Reintegration No Design Meets Capability Yes ? Design Acceptable Perigee 49.68 54.51 8.86 Feed System Residual Weight Issues Apogee 110.68 104.51 5.9 • Booster Oxidizer Lines ≈52,400 lbm • Booster Kerosene Lines ≈1,970 lbm • Orbiter Oxidizer Lines ≈9,400 lbm • Orbiter Hydrogen Lines ≈70 lbm Validate Input Data Fgure 6. VIPA V-Model. The frst leg of ths process s to verfy stated performance. Ths s the stated performance of a canddate or generc concept for a gven set of requrements. Ths verfcaton process s acheved by revewng the gven concept and generatng the ntegrated General Model that wll predct ts performance. It s durng ths process that nsght s ganed nto the concept by dong, rather than revewng. Upon completon of ths leg, the stated performance of the concept can be verfed by usng provded nputs n the General Model to match reported results. Once ths leg s complete, the gven nputs for the concept can be valdated. Ths s accomplshed by each of the nvolved dscplnes usng nsght ganed n formulatng the general and dscplne-specfc models, along wth experence. These models can then be used to determne senstvtes, performance 11

Original page 22

partals, and uncover ssues related to the concept or beng drven by requrements. Ths s a study perod at the bottom of the V. Fnally, any senstvtes or ssues that were dentfed can then be rentegrated along the fnal leg. Ths s done usng the General Model to determne ntegrated system mpacts to performance result- ng from altered nputs or requrements. An example of how ths process can be used durng the ntal development of a project s as follows. The VIPA team would be assembled and begn work at the same tme as potental contractors, just after the systems requrements drop occurrng n the upper left corner of the V. The VIPA team would work n parallel wth the contractors generatng ther own models of possble concepts whle keepng abreast of the contractors’ progress and concepts va the project offces. The bottom of the V occurs just pror to and durng the systems requrements revew. Durng ths perod, the contractors’ nputs and results are valdated and ssues are dentfed. Usng the nsght ganed durng the frst leg sgnfcantly mproves ths revew process. Fnally, the rentegraton efforts occur, ncorporatng further contractor nputs, models, and senstvtes n performance predctons. Ths effort could result n requrement changes, contractor selectons, or redrectons. The process would then repeat tself on ts way to the next revew cycle. By ncorporatng the VIPA process durng ths development cycle, NASA s effectvely dong ts homework and becomng a smart buyer—able to make nformed decsons. Ths process adds real value over and above the value of dscplne experts provdng commentary concernng concepts to whch they were only recently exposed. By usng the VIPA process, NASA’s effort s more effcently allocated to assessng sgnfcant system drvers. Ths s the process VIPA used durng ntal SLI and OSP cycles. The VIPA work added sgnfcantly to the revews and was well receved by both engneerng and project organzatons. 12

Original page 23

1. ConClUSIon A bref summary of the VIPA experence has been presented. VIPA s a new way of applyng exstng people, sklls, and tools to complex problems. VIPA’s processes are grounded n tradtonal engneerng capabltes and have been exercsed and valdated. VIPA concentrates on system-level nteractons, senstvtes, and margns to dentfy techncal rsks. VIPA s able to brng more detaled and ntegrated analyses earler nto the desgn process by enhancng the tradtonal capabltes wth mproved analyss technology thus allowng more nformed program decsons. Fnally, VIPA s a people-centered process that fosters contnued growth of experence, processes, and tools through challengng productve work. VIPA’s work has been applauded by both engneerng and project management organzatons. 13

Original page 24

14

Original page 25

REfEREnCES 1. Blar, J.C.; et al.: “Launch Vehcle Desgn Process: Characterzaton, Techncal Integraton, and Lessons Learned,” NASA/TP—2001–210992, Marshall Space Flght Center, AL, May 2001. 2. “Systems Engneerng Fundamentals,” Defense Systems Management College, Defense Acquston Unversty Press, Fort Belvor, VA, January 2001. 3. “Columbia Accdent Investgaton Board Report,” Vol. 1, NASA, GPO, August 2003. 4. Aldrdge, E.C., Jr.; et al.: “A Journey to Inspre, Innovate, and Dscover,” Report of the President’s Commission on Implementation of United States Space Exploration Policy, washngton, D.C., June 2004. 15

Original page 26

Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operation and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave Blank) 2. REPORT DATE January 2006 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED Techncal Memorandum 5. FUNDING NUMBERS The Vehcle Integrated Performance Analyss Experence— Reconnectng wth Techncal Integraton 6. AUTHORS D.S. McGhee 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) George C. Marshall Space Flght Center Marshall Space Flght Center, AL 35812 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Natonal Aeronautcs and Space Admnstraton washngton, DC 20546–0001 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER M–1156 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY REPORT NUMBER NASA/TM—2006–214271 Prepared by the Spacecraft and Vehcle Systems Department, Engneerng Drectorate 12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Unclassfed-Unlmted Subject Category 15 Avalablty: NASA CASI 301–621–0390 13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words) 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE Very early n the Space Launch Intatve program, a small team of engneers at MSFC proposed a process for performng system-level assessments of a launch vehcle. Amed prmarly at provdng nsght and makng NASA a smart buyer, the Vehcle Integrated Performance Analyss (VIPA) team was created. The dfference between the VIPA effort and prevous ntegraton attempts s that VIPA s a process usng experenced people from varous dscplnes, whch focuses them on a techncally ntegrated assessment. The foundatons of VIPA’s process are described. The VIPA team also recognized the need to target early detailed analysis toward identifying significant systems ssues. Ths process s drven by the T-model for techncal ntegraton. VIPA’s approach to performng system-level technical integration is discussed in detail. The VIPA process significantly enhances the development and montorng of realzable project requrements. VIPA’s assessment valdates the concept’s stated performance, identifies significant issues either with the concept or the requirements, and then reintegrates these issues to determne mpacts. Ths process s dscussed along wth a descrpton of how t may be ntegrated nto a program’s nsght and revew process. The VIPA process has ganed favor wth both engneerng and project organzatons for beng responsve and nsghtful. 14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES ntegraton, systems ntegraton, 24 system analyss, techncal ntegraton, analytcal  cle, performance, VIPA 16. PRICE CODE ntegrated performance, techncal nsght, launch veh 17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE Unclassfed Unclassfed NSN 7540-01-280-5500 16 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT OF ABSTRACT Unclassfed Unlmted Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 298-102

Original page 27

Original page 28

National Aeronautics and Space Administration IS04 George C. Marshall Space Flight Center Marshall Space Flight Center, Alabama 35812