Parker Solar Probe Science Gateway
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Parker Solar Probe SWG Telecon April 2, 2021 Project Status Helene Winters Project Science Nour Raouafi Payload Status SB,JK,DM,ML Solar Orbiter T. Nieves-Chinchilla SOC Activities Martha Kusterer Payload SE Telecon Sarah Hamilton Theory Group P. Mostafavi/M. Velli Upcoming Meetings Nour Raouafi Science Highlights: Guillermo Stenborg: Pristine PSP/WISPR Observations of the Circumsolar Dust Ring Near Venus' Orbit Glyn Collinson: Depleted plasma densities in the ionosphere of Venus near solar minimum from Parker Solar Probe observations of upper hybrid resonance emission Parker Solar Probe Project Status SWG Telecon April 2, 2021 Project Manager: Helene Winters Deputy PM: Susan Ensor Project Scientist: Nour Raouafi Mission System Eng: Jim Kinnison System Assurance Manager: Linda Burke Operations Timeline: Orbit 8 Today 28 5/28/21 Orbit 8 Mission science data available to the public Parker Solar Probe – Project Status Summary Jan Feb Mar Comments All spacecraft subsystems are performing nominally. In Orbit 8, as of 8 March; exited encounter 7 on 23 January. TCM-18 successfully executed on 15 February, making 18C unnecessary; cancelled TCM-19 (scheduled for 7 March). Technical G G G 4th Venus gravity assist was successfully executed on 20 February to bring the spacecraft closer to the Sun’s surface on subsequent encounters (20 RS -> 16 RS). A Pre-encounter 8 review was held 25 March. Ka-band tracks concluded 28 March, the first period to continue through aphelion. Orbit 8: 8 March-21 June; Encounter 8: 24 April-4 May; Perihelion: 29 April Beacon tones: 25 April (weak), 2 May Ka-band science downlink: 5-7 May & 15-28 May. Schedule G G G TCM-20/20C: 15/17 May Data releases for 2021: Encounter 6: 5 April; Encounter 7: 21 June; Encounter 8: 21 October. Parker One science conference rescheduled to 14-18 Jun 2021 at APL, targeting a hybrid attendance (in-person vs. hybrid decision delayed; registration opened 15 February); planning is underway. Worked with DSN to ready DSS-56 (Madrid) for use on PSP. Potential exists for reduction in support from Madrid stations in the near term due to COVID-19. Resources G/Y G/Y G/Y The project is reconciling prior-years’ fee charging. Task plan reconciliation has been completed and updated numbers provided to the program office – in follow-up discussions. Status will be changed from G/Y to G once project lagging fee has been cleared. Planning ”PSP Scholars”, a program for students and early career scientists, with the first meeting being 27 April. Awaiting PPBE guidance, although expected later than usual this year, with PPBE still early April. Programmatic G G G To begin preparing for PPbE23, coordinated with instrument teams to gather updated actuals and projections. PSP Project has no Phase E cost reserves and has limited funds available to deal with anomalies. Continue to follow plans to avoid and mitigate effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and monitor the situation. Spacecraft Status: 3/22/2021-3/28/2021 Solar Distance: 0.749 to 0.701 AU↓ Spacecraft/ Subsystem Status On-Going Issues Weekly Highlights All subsystems performing nominally at end of period; spacecraft at umbra orientation, +Z Spacecraft to Sun, heading inbound in orbit 8 Fault Management & Autonomy Avionics Various issues with file handling, most notably playback of SSR files at high data rates via Ka- Investigating recent occurrences of a Zero Block File (SP-A-821, Monitor – Block of zeros Flight Software band (Monitoring SP-A-817 and SP-A-821) in played back file) and checksum errors (SP-A-901 – Checksum errors on Playback) Star tracker demotions due to dust impacts being Nominal performance during planned commanded momentum dumps on March 24th, 26th, Guidance and Control characterized. No significant impact to operations and 27th (2021/083, 085, and 086) PDU (Power Distribution Unit) EPS (Electrical Power System) Propulsion SACS (Solar Array Cooling System) Exterior component temperatures not matching thermal model predictions at aphelion variable Thermal orientations (SP-A-844) Telecommunications Radio A reset prior to REM side switch (SP-A-877, (RF) closed) Radio B reset (SP-A-880, monitor) Nominal performance during Ka-band tracks during this period Science Instrument Status Instrument Status Commissioning Status Recorder Issues/ Constraints New Weekly Highlights Usage Anomalies EPI-Hi No Calibration of Heavy 47.8% None None Instrument powered on and collecting science data Ions: FSW update Feb. between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends 8th to trigger incident March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. electrons, protons, He EPI-Lo No Calibration of Heavy 66.7% None SP-A-857 2nd Instrument powered on and collecting science data Ions Epi-Lo dust between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends penetration March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. FIELDS 95.6% SCM Bx Antenna lost None Instrument powered on and collecting science data sensitivity between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. SWEAP 98.8% 1. SPC Cross-Talk None Instrument powered on and collecting science data observed on collection between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends plates (SP-A-902) March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. FSW upload 2. Ongoing Monitoring scheduled for March 30th SPC electronics box temperature WISPR 80.7% Investigation continues None Instrument powered on and collecting science data for internal Alarm OS between Ka-band tracks. Ka-band downlink ends Bad Address after turn- March 28th. Preparing for encounter 8. on Top-10 Risk Matrix Last Risk Board: 1 April 2021 Top Code Trend Title 5- Very Ten High 1 354 Unchanged Dust Penetration (Risk ID PSP-13) 4- High 2 353 Unchanged File System Corruption 3- 3 355 Increasing Dusk Risk for PSP Instruments Moderate 4 357 Unchanged SV Access via CRC Memory Dump 2- Low PSP-R-353 PSP-R-354 +PSP-R-355 5 360 Decreasing Covid-19 DSN Risk 1- Very PSP-R-342 PSP-R-357 Low - PSP-R-350-PSP-R-360 6 362 Unchanged SPC Temperature Trending =PSP-R-352 PSP-R-362 PSP-R-363 7 342 Unchanged Processor Margin Degradation 1 - Very 2 - Low 3 - 4 - High 5 - Very Low Moderate High 8 350 Decreasing G7C Model Functionality into CLCC 9 352 Unchanged Phase E Project Reserve Levels 10 363 New Star Track 1 Failure Winters’ Backup Slides COVID-19 Pandemic Mitigations Steps Remain in place § All staff are working from home unless there is a specific need to be physically present in a facility § Contingency planning information has been provided to the program office § Emergency personnel who may need to come on site were identified § APL is at stage 3 (and NASA centers have returned to stage 4), allowing APL staff to come to the campus, if needed § All non-essential travel is presently on hold § APL has an enhanced disinfecting process § APL has added significantly to the number of simultaneous WebEx users allowed, telephone bandwidth, and internet bandwidth, and has procured a government version of Zoom which is now in use § APL does have a few cases of COVID-19; contract tracing process executed rigorously § MOPS is extending the command-loss timer and the period covered by spacecraft command loads as proactive measures in case of any unexpected DSN outages during the pandemic § MOPS is leveraging automated and remote support for DSN contacts as appropriate; when in-MOC support is needed, precautions are being taken to enhance the safety of team members § Masks are mandatory in any common areas PSP Risk Rating Scoresheet Risk Likelihood Criteria Safety Technical Cost/Schedule Likelihood (Likelihood of safety event (Likelihood of not meeting mission (Likelihood of not meeting allocated occurrences) technical performance requirements) Cost/Schedule requirement or margin) -1 5 Very High (PSE > 10 ) (PT > 50%) (PCS > 75%) -2 -1 4 High (10 < PSE ≤ 10 ) (25% < PT ≤ 50%) (50% < PCS ≤ 75%) -3 -2 3 Moderate (10 < PSE ≤ 10 ) (15% < PT ≤ 25%) (25% < PCS ≤ 50%) -6 -3 2 Low (10 < PSE ≤ 10 ) (2% < PT ≤ 15%) (10% < PCS ≤ 25%) -6 1 Very Low (PSE ≤ 10 ) (0.1% < PT ≤ 2%) (PCS ≤ 10%) Risk Consequence Criteria LEVEL Minimal (1) Minor (2) Medium (3) Major (4) Very High (5) Negligible Minor injury with no lost work Injury with lost Death or permanent Safety Severe injury safety impact time work time disabling injury Decrease in spacecraft or payload capability/margin, but all mission Major loss of Loss of one or Negligible Loss of spacecraft, requirements met, or need for capability of more Level-1 Technical technical instrument, or requirement definition or spacecraft or science impact payload design/implementation payload requirements workaround Project cost Project cost Project cost Project cost overrun overrun of less Project cost overrun between 1% overrun between overrun between Cost of greater than than 1% of to 3% of allocated 3% to 10% of 10% to 20% of 20% of allocated allocated allocated allocated Schedule slip affecting critical Schedule slip Negligible path but not Schedule slip of 1 Schedule Schedule slip not on critical path greater than 3 schedule slip launch or post- to 3 months months launch critical event 5 x 5 Matrix Very High (5) High (4) Moderate (3) Likelihood Low (2) Very Low (1) Minimal Minor Medium Major Very High Risk Matrix (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Consequence Page 2 353 - Star Tracker 1 Failure Status: Mitigate POC: John Wirzburger Very High Statement: IF Star Tracker 1 was to fail, THEN data (5) High (4) downlink during large +Z to Sun off-points may be Moderate (3) Likelihood reduced due to Star Tracker 2 temperature limitations, Low (2) which may result in loss of data Very Low (1) X Very Minimal Minor Medium Major Risk Matrix High (1) (2) (3) (4) Latest Update: (5) (16 Mar 2021) John Wirzburger: ConsequenCe Risk Likelihood = 1-2, the likelihood of a star tracker failure is low, I would like to say below 2% (therefor a 1) based on run-time already incurred, but do not have the full equations used to verify this calculation, so 2 would be more conservative and bound the vendor lifetime calculations.