REG NASA-LLIS-1091--1999 Lessons Learned Synchronizing Customer Requirements with Service Provisions.pdf

1、Lessons Learned Entry: 1091Lesson Info:a71 Lesson Number: 1091a71 Lesson Date: 1999-07-15a71 Submitting Organization: JSCa71 Submitted by: Kevin Parrish / Ronald MontagueSubject: Synchronizing Customer Requirements with Service Provisions Description of Driving Event: During pre-operations for the 5

2、A US Lab Closed Hatch Environmental Control & Life Support System/Thermal Control System (ECLSS/TCS) testing, a water separator fault occurred in the Common Cabin Air Assembly (CCAA). The inlet ORU was pulled and found to be wet inside. Three to four ounces of water were noted on the rack floor unde

3、r the separator/heat exchanger. A small amount of water was found inside the separator but not enough to touch electronics. Water was also found in other areas (hydroflow fitting and coupler of the inlet hose and the inside of the inlet).Root cause: The Test Procedure (TP) and Test Preparaton and Re

4、storation Document (TP&RD) were not synchronized. The TP&RD placed a valve in series between the water separator and the GSE collection tank. The TP&RD also, appropriately, had the valve closed to keep water in the line after it was filled and before water separator was started. The TP did not open

5、the valve before initaiation of water separator operations. The TP&RD & TP WERE NOT carefully reviewed for complete integration.Lesson(s) Learned: The requirements of the test requestor must be fully consistent with the resulting test procedure developed by the service provider though a two-way coll

6、aboration / disciplineRecommendation(s): Include a walkthrough, dry run, or mental simulation of the TP prior to start of test and have the TP&RD a part of that review. The TP&RD and TP must be very carefully reviewed for complete integration by several groups test, quality/safety and engineering. H

7、ave qualified technicians follow the procedure as written. The procedures should go through a dry run with the test technicians.Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-Evidence of Recurrence Control Effectiveness: Test safety requirements at

8、JSC use a two-way review system for this type of test. The customer requesting a test will provide a test plan to be reviewed by the service provider. Once the test provider understands the test plan and objectives, the provider will write a test procedure that is reviewed by test participants and t

9、he test requestor. Theory behind this approach is that both the requestor and reviewer will arrive at a consensus on the test that will minimize any escapes such as occurred in the described event. Dry runs are also done where warranted.Documents Related to Lesson: N/AMission Directorate(s): a71 Exp

10、loration Systemsa71 Sciencea71 Space Operationsa71 Aeronautics ResearchAdditional Key Phrase(s): a71 Configuration Managementa71 Flight Equipmenta71 Flight Operationsa71 Ground Equipmenta71 Ground Operationsa71 Hardwarea71 Industrial Operationsa71 Launch Processa71 Parts Materials & Processesa71 Pol

11、icy & Planninga71 Range Operationsa71 Research & Developmenta71 Risk Management/Assessmenta71 Safety & Mission Assurancea71 Test & Verificationa71 Test Articlea71 Test FacilityAdditional Info: Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-Approval Info: a71 Approval Date: 2002-02-12a71 Approval Name: Ronald Montaguea71 Approval Organization: JSCa71 Approval Phone Number: 281-483-8576Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-