Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Robert F. Hodson.
SEL is a serious obstacle to use of state-of-the-art microelectronics, and a priori prediction of SEL susceptibility has proven elusive. We develop SEL risk-assessment tools based on analysis of large archives of SEL test data for unhardened CMOS parts. Results include a flexible method for bounding SEL rates even with minimal test data.
This paper provides an overview of some of the major steps needed to mature and justify the design of an avionics system for crewed spacecraft. It is organized as a collection of artifacts or pieces of evidence that NASA needs to assess the system at design reviews, including a functional failure modes and effects analysis (FFMEA), fault containment region (FCR) definitions, the failure hypothesis, and reliability analysis. This paper is intended as a reference for designers working on NASA crewed spaceflight projects, reliability engineers responsible for avionics system assessments, and program managers wanting to understand what evidence is required at design reviews to ensure crew safety and mission success.
This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.
The existing VMEbus (VersaModular Eurocard bus) International Trade Association (VITA)-78 industry standard, also known as SpaceVPX, is an avionics board- and chassis-level standard derived from the OpenVPX standard as defined in VITA-65. While VITA-65 defines backplane and board-level profiles from COTS vendors to ensure interoperability of products used in developing systems and subsystems, the VITA-78 standard defines SpaceVPX to incorporate fault tolerance features that are required by many spaceflight systems. However, VITA-78 allows so much flexibility that interoperability between modules cannot be assured. This assessment provides guidelines on the use of, and extensions to, the VITA-78 standard to enable avionics interoperability for future NASA missions. The assessment team was comprised of subject matter experts (SMEs) from Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), Johnson Space Center (JSC), and Langley Research Center (LaRC). The team included valuable external consulting support from a SME who was a key participant in the development of the VITA-78 standard. The team had extensive collaboration with the NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) High Performance Spaceflight Computing (HPSC) project, specifically in the development of SpaceVPX interconnect findings, observations, and NESC recommendations. To provide an understanding of the breadth of implementations that SpaceVPX must accommodate, multiple NASA use cases were analyzed to assess the requirements for SpaceVPX implementations across a wide range of NASA missions (Appendix C). Applications included crewed missions, science missions, and orbital and surface robotic systems. Product surveys were conducted to assess the level of industry support for SpaceVPX, applications, and the variations in their implementations (Appendix D). In-depth analysis was conducted in the areas of: (a) power management and distribution, (b) form factors and daughtercards, (c) interconnect, and (d) fault tolerance. Leveraging the use cases, product surveys, and SMEs from multiple NASA Centers, these areas were analyzed to determine the range of implementations permitted by the VITA-78 standard and potential interoperability issues. Applicable findings and NESC recommendations were provided for each area. During this assessment, there were multiple opportunities to engage with other agencies to learn about their interest in SpaceVPX, their strategies for implementing SpaceVPX-based systems, and their internal development efforts. These engagements also generated findings and NESC recommendations. Based on this assessment analysis, NESC recommendations were made regarding the feature set and module profiles to support NASA SpaceVPX implementations. This feature set includes restrictions on features in VITA-78, and extensions to the standard. Key recommendations in this area include the use of 10 Gigabit Ethernet and Peripheral Component Interconnect Express (PCIe) as high bandwidth interconnect on the backplane, the retention of SpaceWire interconnect for control functions, and support for 3U (unit) and 6U, form factors for NASA systems. Restrictions were proposed on the usage of user-defined signals to promote interoperability, and specific power managements and distribution schemes for 3U systems. Beyond the technical implementation of SpaceVPX, recommendations were made on areas that warrant further investigation. Primary among these is the recommendation for NASA to collaborate with other space-going agencies and industry to incorporate recommendations into a future ‘dot spec’ of VITA-78. This would ensure wide adoption and availability of the modules that comply with the specification. The assessment includes appendices with candidate module profiles that can be considered as a starting point for this activity, and example systems based on the recommendations. Follow-on studies are recommended for architectures beyond SpaceVPX to address potential enhancements including condensed set of interconnect, software required to implement protocol layers on the interconnect (and other features), alternative power architectures, and system-level testability.
In recent designs of safety-critical pyro control circuitry, latching circuits, used to store the state of control signals, have been found to have sensitivity to noise that could lead to inadvertent firing. This technical bulletin describes the sensitive circuit, and provides best practice recommendations to improve the design.
This is to present the NESC assessment "Recommendations on Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions" at the Microelectronics Reliability and Qualification Workshop hosted by Aerospace Corporation in February 8-10, 2022. The assessment has two Phases, Phase I on NASA Center current practices on use of COTS and Phase II on DoD and FAA current practices on use of COTS and NESC guidance on COTS selection, application and verification processes. Phase I report was published as NASA/TM−20205011579 and NESC-RP-19-01490 in December 2020. The presentation also includes the scope of the Phase II of the assessment, which is expected to be completed in March-April, 2022.
This presentation is to provide an update on the NASA Engineering & Safety Center (NESC) Assessment of "Recommendations on Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Parts for NASA Missions". Phase I was a published report and Phase II is on-going. Phase I captured the current NASA center practices on using COTS parts while Phase II provides updated NESC recommendation of using COTS parts for NASA missions with different risk classifications.