AIAA R-099-2001 Recommended Practice for Space Launch Integration《航空发射场整合》.pdf

1、 Recommended PracticeAIAAR-099-2001 Space Launch IntegrationAIAAR-099-2001Recommended PracticeSpace Launch IntegrationSponsored byAmerican Institute of Aeronautics and AstronauticsAbstractThis document identifies the processes and methodologies of space launch integration and recommendsdemonstrated

2、practices that can improve the launch integration process. These recommended practicesare drawn from both government and commercial sectors. They are identified in four areas: physical andenvironmental interfaces; pre- and post-launch operations and processes; requirements, verification,analysis, an

3、d test; and mission assurance and risk management. In selecting the recommendedpractices, the following considerations are significant: level of effort, the launch integration process itself,required products and services, project organization, metrics, process improvement, and streamlining.The reco

4、mmended practices described in this document are based on the evolution of current standardpractice as illustrated by ISO International Standards for space systems and other documents.AIAA R-099-2001 ii Recommended practice : space launch integration / sponsored by American Institute of Aeronautics

5、and Astronuatics. p. cm. “R-099-2001.” Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 1-56347-527-8 (softcover : alk. Paper) ISBN 1-56347-528-6 (PDF) 1. Rockets (Aeronautics)Launching. 2. Space vehicles. I. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. TL78.L3 R43 2001 629.432dc21 2001053945 Publis

6、hed by American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA 20191 Copyright 2001 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, with

7、out prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America. AIAA R-099-2001iiiContentsExecutive Summary .vForeword. ixAcronyms . xii1 Introduction 11.1 General 11.2 Space Launch Integration Process 31.3 Summary of Recommended Practices.92 Physical Interfaces.102.1 Mechani

8、cal Interfaces 102.2 Electrical Interfaces132.3 RF-Electromagnetic Interfaces.142.4 Servicing Interfaces .142.5 Fluid Requirements152.6 Interface Catalog162.7 Pathfinder.162.8 Upper Stages.163 Environmental Interfaces (Ground and Flight) .173.1 Mechanical/Physical Environment .173.2 Controlled Envir

9、onment .183.3 Natural Environment (Uncontrolled).183.4 Contamination and Cleanliness Control.193.5 RF and Electromagnetic Environment .214 Pre-Launch and Post-Launch Operations and Processes .224.1 SC Factory Operations 224.2 LV Factory Operations .234.3 Launch-Site Operations .234.4 Flight Operatio

10、ns244.5 Other Considerations.245 Requirements and Verification.285.1 General 285.2 Space Launch Integration Requirements Development.305.3 Space Launch Integration Interface Requirements Verification .326 Mission Assurance and Risk Management 526.1 Project (Risk Management) Organization 526.2 Missio

11、n Assurance.59AIAA R-099-2001 iv 6.3 Risk Management . 73 6.4 Summary of Recommended Practices 78 Annexes Annex A: Implementation of the Integration Process 80 Annex B: Lessons Learned for Launch Base Planning. 87 Annex C: Quality Management Principles 89 Annex D: Program Requirements. 93 Annex E: B

12、ibliography 95 AIAA R-099-2001 v Executive Summary This study was performed under NRO Contract NRO000-98-D-2118, task order 0777, in response to NRO/OSL BAA 99-001, paragraph 1.4, Standards and Best Practices. Its objective was to develop a handbook of recommended practices for Space Launch Integrat

13、ion using a broad-based team of industry, government, and academic experts. The major issue to be resolved was to define how current best practices from all sectors - military, civil, government, and commercial - can be adapted to form a group of standards and best practices to best meet NROs needs.

14、 In accomplishing this objective the following tasks were performed, as specified by the contract: (1) Define the processes/elements and methodologies of space launch integration and their relationship to each other and interdependencies. Develop a representative process flow and description for spa

15、ce launch integration, recognizing that space missions have several degrees of complexity (2) Identify areas/processes/elements which lend themselves to the application of standards and best practices based on identified best practices of commercial and government integration activities (3) Address

16、how an organization would go about implementing the desired standards and best practices, the efforts needed to accomplish the actual development and application of standards, and how they may be leveraged across industry, including recommended methods for streamlining the launch integration process

17、 (4) Publish the results of this study as an AIAA product utilizing the accredited consensus procedures, “Recommended Practice for Space Launch Integration“ These objectives were pursued in four different areas, each by a separate working group, as follows: Physical and Environmental Interfaces Pre-

18、 and Post- Launch Operations and Processes Requirements, Analysis, Verification, and Test Mission Assurance and Risk Management Current practices in the integration of commercial and government payloads are described, and recommended practices identified. In selecting these recommended practices, th

19、e following considerations were significant. (1) Level of effort. The level of effort required for a launch integration process depends mainly on the following: (a) maturity of the systems involved (e.g., recurring vs nonrecurring missions); (b) complexity of the interfaces; (c) security implication

20、s; and (d) risk tolerance. (2) The launch integration process itself. The launch integration process begins with assessing the compatibility of spacecraft (SC) system interface requirements relative to launch system capabilities. It also begins with focusing on interface issue resolution to minimize

21、 overall cost to the customer, while emphasizing risk mitigation in interface design to enhance mission success. It culminates with the successful delivery of an operational SC to the desired orbit. (3) Products and services required. The scope and content of the products developed depend on the com

22、plexity of the spacecraft-to-launch vehicle (SC-to-LV) interfaces. The services provided depend on customer requirements. Typical examples of products and services associated with space launch integration are as follows: AIAA R-099-2001 vi Products Plans Schedules Interface requirements documentatio

23、n SC-to-LV interface hardware Test procedures Technical reports Range support documentation Range safety documentation FAA launch license (where required) Services Conduct and support management reviews Chair and support technical working groups Conduct selected technical analyses Define and verify

24、interface requirements Support launch and flight operations Provide project security guidance and monitoring Set up and staff operations information center during launch operations (4) Project organization. For highly complex missions, the launch integration organizational structure may include vari

25、ous agencies representing the satellite vehicle contractor, LV contractor, and launch site. In addition, vehicle and support contractors as well as consultants may be involved. This participation will vary depending on the “oversight” and “insight” required by the customer. The optimum project organ

26、ization depends to a great degree on the nature of the mission, and hence there is no generalized “recommended practice.” Any organization, however, requires the following elements: (a) chain of command; (b) definition of contractor and customer roles and responsibilities; (c) definition of roles, r

27、esponsibilities, and accountabilities for each functional category; and (d) definition of communication links among all personnel. (5) Metrics. Definition of appropriate metrics in all four areas of space launch integration is essential to characterize performance, reliability, safety, and mission a

28、ssurance. (6) Process improvement and streamlining. Continuous process improvement should be implemented in every program through the use of (a) formal strategies to evaluate “lessons learned” and (b) various analytical methods; e.g., “fishbone” fault-tree analysis, failure modes and effects analyse

29、s, probabilistic mission analyses, etc. Additional background material relevant to current practice that bears on the practices recommended in this document appears in Annexes A, B, C, D, and E. The recommended practices recognized by this study are summarized as follows: (1) Incorporate margins for

30、 robustness in both LV and SC designs. AIAA R-099-2001 vii(2) Design simplification in both SC and LV, while minimizing processing times at the launch site or on the launch pad, increases reliability and reduces cost. (3) Begin the space launch integration process as early in the development of SC a

31、nd LV systems as possible, at least to some degree in the pre-proposal phase. Jointly define roles and responsibilities of SC, LV, range, and all participating organizations as early as possible. (4) Select the launch system early in the design of the SC so that design changes downstream can be mini

32、mized. Design the SC so that it is compatible with more than one launch system. (5) Where possible, fly smaller SC to reduce the risk carried on each launch, allowing launch services to be purchased with minimal mission assurance requirements. Alternatively, spread the risk of a single large spacecr

33、aft by using smaller multiple spacecraft launched separately. (6) Simplify all types of interfaces between the SC and the LV. (7) Include only verifiable interface and performance requirements in the SC Interface Control Document or mission specification. Avoid including scope of work requirements t

34、hat specify analyses, schedules, plans, contact data requirements list, etc. (8) Address all interfaces to the SC, not just those to the LV Note: This document focuses primarily on the SC/LV interfaces. (9) SC design should accommodate off-pad encapsulation, minimizing SC processing at the launch si

35、te and minimizing requirements for specialized services and interfaces. (10) Conduct effectiveness evaluations of increasing (and decreasing) the levels of oversight and insight during design, manufacture, integration, and pre-launch/post-launch operations. (11) Establish manifesting procedures that

36、 enhance early conflict resolution. (12) Adopt a “data-centric“ approach to program management. Consolidate program information into as few databases as possible. Make access to information painless and control information updates via a password system. (13) Adopt standardized requirements, physical

37、 interfaces, environmental interfaces, and processing procedures as detailed in this study. (14) Establish a “most-likely” list of common risk areas and create process assessment practices to minimize risk in each of them. This should be done as early as possible in the program, using a formal risk-

38、management/risk-mitigation process. (15) Integrate the mission assurance team into the program throughout the life of the mission. Ensure continuity of personnel on the team, and set up links to ensure that all team members have access to all of the information. (16) Create one standard mission assu

39、rance process for commercial and government launches, applied consistently, with a common database and common mission assurance metrics. (17) Identify a standard set of mission assurance tools (e.g., for space situational awareness) for use in risk mitigation. (18) Identify a set of tools for tracki

40、ng anomalies (and resolving them) through the life of the project, from acquisition and design through post-launch analysis. (19) Incentivize SC contractors and launch-service providers in meeting customer requirements, based on the criticality, development risks, etc. associated especially with non

41、recurring missions. (20) For mature launch systems eliminate the requirement for a full-up Mission Dress Rehearsal. AIAA R-099-2001 viii (21) Establish a testing practice based on acceptance at the factory door, with subsequent testing only to verify aliveness or “no change.” (22) Incorporate a “des

42、ign-for-test” philosophy from the onset of development, along with factory test-as-you-fly practices. (23) Wherever practical employ test processes that combine tests to reduce cost and test time while making small compromises from traditional processes. (24) Establish a set of proven techniques for

43、 increased automation and remote monitoring in testing, analysis, and operations. (25) Adopt existing tools for 3-dimensional modeling to help streamline all phases of the integration process. (26) Set up methods to deal with “sunset technology;” i.e., support of software platforms and hardware comp

44、onents that are no longer being manufactured, outmoded standard test equipment, etc. (27) Use global positioning system (GPS) receivers or translators aboard LVs to simplify tracking during the launch phase, eliminating the need for tracking radars. (28) Establish a mechanism for coordination of rid

45、eshare payloads with LV service providers to demonstrate compatibility. (29) Develop a next-generation range capacity model that accurately determines launch-range capacity and thereby can establish where funds need to be invested to optimize and increase range capacity. In summary, mission assuranc

46、e for commercial SC typically relies on balancing risk, which may be revenue, cost and schedule. For missions with national security or science implications, the risk associated with the loss is entirely different and must be addressed appropriately. Additionally, each program should have a clear un

47、derstanding of and an established method of “insight“ and “oversight“, the mission implications, and a mechanism in place that accommodates implementation of either or both, as appropriate, to achieve the required level of risk mitigation. The recommended practices developed by this study are based

48、on evolution of current standard practice as described in ISO and other documents, which are referenced and also listed in a bibliography. Prospective areas for future “recommended practice” development will be addressed in follow-on studies as they mature. AIAA R-099-2001 ixForeword Spacecraft (SC)

49、 systems are developed to satisfy a wide range of specific missions including local and global commercial and government communications, Earth, solar system, and deep space scientific exploration, national defense, and research and experimental systems. SC systems require a launch service to place the SC into an intermediate or final operational earth orbit, or into an interplanetary or other trajectory. A significant effort is required to integrate a SC to a space launch system. This document summarizes the current practices for integrati