EPFD Pre-solicitation Industry Day Slides Final 12.10_with all updates_12_15_2020pptx.pdf

NASA Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration (EPFD) Project

Pre-Solicitation Industry Day December 10th, 2020 2:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.

Time Presenter Presentations Objectives and Technical Discussion and DRDs 2:30 - 2:40 Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor • Welcome and EPFD Project Overview 2:40 - 2:55 Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor • Statement of Objectives 2:55 - 3:15 Ralph Jansen • Barrier Technical and Integration Risks

• Technical Measures of Effectiveness

• Vision Vehicle Systems Analysis

3:15 - 3:35 Ralph Jansen • Integrated MW-Class Powertrain Ground and Flight Data

• Capability and Technology Development 3:35 - 3:55 Vince Schultz and Herb

Schlickenmaier

• EAP Regulations and Standards

3:55 - 4:10 Break 4:10 - 4:30 Ada Narvaez-Legeza • System Requirements Approach 4:30 - 4:50 Steve Jacobson • Airworthiness Approach Programmatic DRDs 4:50 - 5:10 Julie Grantier • Insight Implementation Plan 5:10 - 5:30 Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor • Integrated Performance Management Data-Budget, Resources, WBS, IMS

• Risk Management

• Joint Confidence Level Analysis of Cost and

Schedule 5:30 – 6:00 James Williams • Solicitation process and information 6:00 – 6:30 James Williams, Moderator • Question and Answer

EPFD Pre-Solicitation Industry Day- December 10th, 2020 Agenda

Time Presenter Presentation s

Description

1:00 - 1:05

Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor

Welcome and Purpose

1:05 - 2:05

Dimitri Mavris Uncertainty Quantification

• Uncertainty in powertrain design leads to design and vision system uncertainty.

• Electrified Propulsion designs are therefore potentially expensive and time-consuming to develop.

• Traditionally technology development decisions are made based off deterministic performance assessments employing subject matter expert readiness assessments often without accounting for the uncertainty of the technology impacts.

• An overview of uncertainty quantification techniques will be presented. These techniques are crucial to formulate the design of the right experiments to address technical and integration risks and enable technology maturation.

EPFD Public Webinars - December 11th, 2020 s

Description

2:05 - 3:05

Vince Schultz and Herb Schlickenmaier

Standards and Regulations

• Many barriers must be overcome to ensure success in implementing integrated MW-class powertrain system technologies on turbofan-powered transport category airplanes into the National Airspace System.

• In addition to technical challenges, a substantial barrier is the lack of relevant regulations and standards that need to be developed to address key integrated MW-class powertrain system technologies. Identifying the data to support the development of new standards is vital.

• This webinar will discuss NASA’s goals for capturing the highest priority pre-competitive gaps in current regulations and standards supporting the implementation of MW-class Hybrid Electric Aircraft Technologies.

• It is imperative that approaches to closing these most critical gaps be identified to ensure successful adoption and eventual FAA certification.

s

Description

3:05 - 3:15

Break

3:15 - 4:15

Kiara Graf Risk Management

• Reporting, assessment and mitigation of Project risks provides the Project with the ability to understand the technical scope and associated risks to successful execution of the mission.

• Risk Management enables the Project to be agile and responsive through the implementation of robust mitigation steps to enable the achievement of technical performance goals and objectives within the Project’s lifecycle cost and schedule.

4:15 - 5:15

Rey Carpio Joint Confidence Level Analysis of Cost and Schedule

• The development of a joint confidence level (JCL) assessment of a technical plan within a proposed schedule and budget enables a Project Manager to assess how realistic the technical plan is as well as provide insights to the cost and schedule risk drivers that may need to be mitigated.

• An overview of the JCL methodology will be presented highlighting how to develop the schedule structure, cost, risk and uncertainty inputs.

5:15 - 5:30

Gaudy Bezos- O’Connor, Moderator

• Q&A

• Closing

Remarks

Ground testing of Key electrical components (work is ongoing but must accelerate)

• Key data informing product decisions

• Knowledge to support certification

• Learning to inform further fundamental research

Flight Experiments in relevant environment

Integrate in a flight system (likely existing airframe) – leveraging experience from X-57

NASA ARMD Strategy for Electrified Aircraft Propulsion Advancing Technical and Integration Readiness

AERONAUTICS

STRATEGIC

THRUST

EPFD

TECHNICAL

CONTENT

Thrust 3: Ultra Efficient Subsonic Transports Realize revolutionary improvements in economics and environmental performance for subsonic transports with opportunities to transition to alternative propulsion and energy

AAVP and IASP

CRITICAL

COMMITMENT

Critical Commitment 3.1 - Demonstrate practical vehicle-level integration of MW-class electrified aircraft propulsion systems, leveraging advanced airframe systems to reinvigorate the regional and emerging smaller aircraft markets and strengthen the single-aisle aircraft market.

Agency Goal

3.0 Address national challenges and catalyze economic growth

3.2: Transform Aviation Through Revolutionary Technology Research, Development, and Transfer

Technical Challenges

TC 5.2: Establish viable concept for 5-10 MW hybrid gas-electric propulsion system for a single-aisle class vehicle with reduced fuel burn, emissions and noise (TRL2) Finished in FY19

(AATT)

TC 10.1: Demonstrate representative hybrid electric powertrain having a total power of at least 3X the state-of-the-art that meets fault management, redundancy, and power quality requirements (TRL 4) and develop key components to TRL 6.

(AATT with EPFD Enhancements)

TC 14.1: Achieve 20% power extraction at altitude from a modern commercial turbofan engine with the thrust, efficiency, operability, and durability to enable the benefits of electrified aircraft propulsion at a vehicle level.

(AATT with EPFD Enhancements)

• EPFD will address technical and integration barriers that will enable U.S. industry to be first to market with a MW-class powertrain demonstration

• EPFD, in cooperation with the AAVP/AATT and IASP/FDC Projects, will establish a plan to identify gaps in standards and certification; during formulation assess how industry-led flight demos may contribute results to help fill those gaps

Agency and ARMD Strategic Plan Flow Down to EPFD Project

2:30 - 2:40 Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor • Welcome and EPFD Project Overview 2:40 - 2:55 Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor • Statement of Objectives 2:55 - 3:15 Ralph Jansen • Barrier Technical and Integration Risks

• Technical Measures of Effectiveness

• Vision Vehicle Systems Analysis

3:15 - 3:35 Ralph Jansen • Integrated MW-Class Powertrain Ground and Flight Data

• Capability and Technology Development 3:35 - 3:55 Vince Schultz and Herb

Schlickenmaier

• EAP Regulations and Standards

3:55 - 4:10 Break 4:10 - 4:30 Ada Narvaez-Legeza • System Requirements Approach 4:30 - 4:50 Steve Jacobson • Airworthiness Approach Programmatic DRDs 4:50 - 5:10 Julie Grantier • Insight Implementation Plan 5:10 - 5:30 Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor • Integrated Performance Management Data-Budget, Resources, WBS, IMS

• Risk Management

• Joint Confidence Level Analysis of Cost and

Schedule 5:30 – 6:00 James Williams • Solicitation process and information 6:00 – 6:30 James Williams, Moderator • Question and Answer

Traceability/Flow Down to EPFD Demonstration Solicitation Requirements

EPFD Solicitation

Industry Deliverables

Ground and Flight Demonstrations

EPFD Project Level

NASA and Industry Validated

Barrier Technical and Integration Risks

Needs Goals Objectives

Statement of Objectives

Driving Requirements

System Requirements

Document

Data Requirement Deliverables

Engineering Lifecycle Products aligned with best practices NPR of

7120.5 and 7123

NPR 7900 /

FAA

Airworthiness Compliance

Engine Ground Test

Data (TRL 5/6)

Flight Test Data (TRL

6/7)

EPFD Statement of Objectives (SOO)

DRIVING REQUIREMENTS

GOALS

NEEDS

ARMD: CRITICAL COMMITMENT 3.1/AATT TCs

OBJECTIVES

Need 1 Accelerate integrated MW-class powertrain system maturation and transition to the

U.S. fleet

Need 2 Identify and retire barrier technical and integration risks associated with commercial transports utilizing integrated MW-class powertrain systems

Need 3 Identify and address gaps in regulations and standards associated with commercial transports utilizing integrated MW-class powertrain systems

Need 4 Acquire necessary ground and flight test data to advance design and modelling tools pertinent to EAP-based vision systems and to validate technical performance measures of the integrated MW-class powertrain systems

DRIVING REQUIREMENTS

OBJECTIVES

GOALS

EPFD Statement of Objectives (SOO): Needs

Goal 1 Collaborate with US Industry and other NASA projects on EAP development, flight testing, flight test instrumentation, and range support

Goal 2 Conduct necessary ground demonstration s of integrated electrified aircraft propulsions systems with

US Industry to support flight test

Goal 3 Conduct flight testing of a crewed aircraft with an electrified aircraft propulsion powertrain system with US Industry

Goal 4 If possible, within specified timeframe and budget, allow for spiral developments of EAP technology

Goal 5 Will plan ground and flight test campaigns to provide appropriate data to establish standards to address gaps in certification requirements

DRIVING REQUIREMENTS

OBJECTIVES

NEEDS

EPFD Statement of Objectives (SOO): Needs

Objective 1 Develop partnership agreements, including contractual arrangements with

US Industry for EAP technology development and flight testing to enable rapid technology transition to the US fleet

Objective 2 Conduct technology maturation and risk reduction ground testing of MW-class powertrain system components and system to support flight testing

Objective 3 Flight demonstrate technologies for practical vehicle level integration of high-power electrified aircraft propulsion system maturation

Objective 4 If possible, within specified timeframe and budget, provide a flexible system architecture to demonstrate additional emerging technology with flight test insertions

Objective 5 Collaborate with FDC Project personnel and US Industry to identify and address regulation and standards gaps through ground and/or flight testing

DRIVING REQUIREMENTS

GOALS

NEEDS

EPFD Statement of Objectives (SOO): Objectives

GOALS

NEEDS

OBJECTIVES

DR 1: The EPFD integrated MW-class powertrain system ground and flight demonstration(s) shall reduce barrier technical risks associated with the system to enable U.S. industry to be first to market.

DR 2: The EPFD integrated MW-class powertrain system flight demonstration(s) shall demonstrate in flight high voltage operation at all relevant ground and flight conditions.

DR 3: The EPFD integrated MW-class powertrain system flight demonstration(s) shall conduct crewed (human rated) flight operations and testing.

DR 4: The EPFD integrated MW-class powertrain system flight demonstration(s) shall conduct first flight no later than 2023, spiral developments may extend into 2025.

DR 5: The EPFD integrated MW-class powertrain system flight demonstration(s) shall demonstrate in flight a thermal management system for the electrical power system.

DR 6: The EPFD integrated MW-class powertrain system flight demonstration(s) shall demonstrate in flight a control system which manages electrical faults while maintaining fail-safe aircraft operations.

DR 7: The EPFD integrated MW-class powertrain system flight demonstration(s) shall measure the performance of the system against the technical performance metrics (TPMs) – Reference EPFD 02-06 for TPMs.

DR 8: The EPFD integrated MW-class powertrain system flight demonstration(s) shall provide ground and flight test data to address gaps in regulations and standards associated with system application to commercial transport aircraft.

DR 9: The EPFD integrated MW-class powertrain system flight demonstration(s) shall acquire ground and flight data used to validate NASA modeling tools and research.

ARMD: CRITICAL COMMITMENT 3.1

EPFD Statement of Objectives (SOO): Driving Requirements

Preliminary Data Requirement Deliverables (DRD) – Programmatics

DRD ID: Programmatic DRD Title DRD-PM-01 Project Plan

DRD-PM-02

Integrated Program Management Data Analysis Report

(IPMDAR)

DRD-PM-03 Earned Value Management (EVM) Plan DRD-PM-04 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS Dictionary DRD-PM-05 Joint Confidence Level (JCL) Analysis Inputs DRD-PM-06 Monthly Progress Report (MPR)

DRD-PM-07

NASA Form (NF) 533 Monthly Contractor Financial Management Report

DRD-PM-08 Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) Materials DRD-PM-09 IT Security Management Plan DRD-PM-10 Risk Exposure/Posture and Reserve Report DRD-PM-11 Risk Management Plan (RMP) DRD-PM-12 Risk Registry and Risk Score Card DRD-PM-13 Final Report DRD-PM-14 Communication Plan (CP) DRD-PM-15 Insight Implementation Plan

Outlined DRD addressed in chart package

Preliminary Data Requirement Deliverables (DRDs) – Systems Engineering

DRD ID: Systems Engineering DRD Title DRD-SE-01 Scaled Models DRD-SE-02 EAP Regulations and Standards Gap Analysis Document DRD-SE-03 Aircraft System Description Document (ASDD) DRD-SE-04 System Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) DRD-SE-05 System Integration and Test Plan (SITP) DRD-SE-06 System and Subsystem Requirements Documents DRD-SE-07 Verification & Validation (V&V) Plan DRD-SE-08 Waiver and Deviations List and Information DRD-SE-09 Computational Modeling Analysis Report DRD-SE-10 Design Analysis Report DRD-SE-11 EAP Computational Models DRD-SE-12 Ground Test Objectives (GTO) and Flight Test Objectives (FTO) DRD-SE-13 Ground and Flight Test Data DRD-SE-14 Lifecycle Review Products DRD-SE-15 Human System Integration Plan (HSIP) DRD-SE-16 Ground and Flight Test Plans DRD-SE-17 Photographs DRD-SE-18 ConOps DRD-SE-19 A “Quick Look” Flight Test Research Data Report DRD-SE-20 Capability and Technology Development Plan DRD-SE-21 Environmental Testing Requirements DRD-SE-22 Airworthiness Approach DRD-SE-23 Master Measurement List DRD-SE-24 Data Management Plan

Preliminary Data Requirement Deliverables – Software and Safety & Mission Assurance

DRD ID: Software DRD Title DRD-SW-01 Software Management Plan (SMP) DRD-SW-02 Software Development Plan (SDP) DRD-SW-03 Software Safety and Quality Assurance Plan DRD ID: Safety & Mission Assurance DRD Title

DRD-SM-01 Mishap Preparedness and Contingency Plan (MPCP) DRD-SM-02 Safety and Mission Assurance Plan (SMAP) DRD-SM-03 System Safety Plan (SSP) DRD-SM-04 System Safety Analyses DRD-SM-05 Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) DRD-SM-06 EMI/EMC plans

2:30 - 2:40 Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor • Welcome and EPFD Project Overview 2:40 - 2:55 Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor • Statement of Objectives 2:55 - 3:15 Ralph Jansen • Barrier Technical and Integration Risks

• Technical Measures of Effectiveness

• Vision Vehicle Systems Analysis

3:15 - 3:35 Ralph Jansen • Integrated MW-Class Powertrain Ground and Flight Data

• Capability and Technology Development 3:35 - 3:55 Vince Schultz and Herb

Schlickenmaier

• EAP Regulations and Standards

3:55 - 4:10 Break 4:10 - 4:30 Ada Narvaez-Legeza • System Requirements Approach 4:30 - 4:50 Steve Jacobson • Airworthiness Approach Programmatic DRDs 4:50 - 5:10 Julie Grantier • Insight Implementation Plan 5:10 - 5:30 Gaudy Bezos-O’Connor • Integrated Performance Management Data-Budget, Resources, WBS, IMS

• Risk Management

• Joint Confidence Level Analysis of Cost and

Schedule 5:30 – 6:00 James Williams • Solicitation process and information 6:00 – 6:30 James Williams, Moderator • Question and Answer

EPFD Technical Metrics informed by Formulation Studies

• Study contracts have been completed with six companies to define:

– The largest market opportunities for MW-Class EAP

– A Vision Vehicle (potential product) for that market

– Barrier Technical Risks that need to be overcome for the Vision Vehicle

– Technology maturation needed for Vision Vehicle

– A proposed flight demonstration to reduce the Barrier Technical Risks and increase the Technology

Readiness levels for Integrated MW-class powertrain systems

– Probabilistic assessments of cost and schedule for the proposed flight demonstration

Formulation studies informed the objectives and performance goals of the Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration project

MW- Class Powertrain System Architecture

• The EPFD Project will contract/partner with US Industry to rapidly mature and demonstrate MW-class electrified powertrain systems

• Mature MW-class electrified powertrain system technology is directly applicable to three small transport aircraft types

Electrified Powertrain Missions and Aircraft Size

Parallel Hybrid – A motor/generator with battery or equivalent energy storage is integrated to boost or draw power from a turbofan or equivalent during the mission to increase the overall efficiency or provide other possible benefits.

Source – Fuel and Electric Electrical distribution needed – part of the power

Series Hybrid – Power is generated by a battery or equivalent and a turbo-generator or equivalent and then distributed to motor driven fans.

Source – Fuel and Electric Electrical distribution needed – all of the power

Proposed MW-class Powertrain System Architectures

Through execution of risk reduction activities Industry and NASA have identified credible system architectures focused on demonstrating an integrated MW-class powertrain systems.

Integrated MW-class Powertrain System Boundary Refer to Document: EPFD 02-06 Technical Measures Of Effectiveness

• The “integrated MW-class powertrain system” consist of all the electrical parts of the aircraft used for propulsive purposes along with the portion of the thermal management system which services those electrical parts.

• The figure shows the boundary of the “integrated MW-class powertrain system” on one notional system configuration. An analogous boundary should be defined for the actual system configuration under consideration.

• Typical components included are electric Machines, inverters, converters, energy storage, circuit protection devices, switches, cables, and connectors.

Propulsor

Motor/ Generator

Turbine Engine

Fuel

Distribution Cables

Battery or

Equivale nt

Thermal Control System

Inverter Circuit Protection

Devices

Technical Measures of Effectiveness Refer to Document:

EPFD 02-06 Technical Measures Of Effectiveness

• The EPFD project has established a draft set of Technical Measures of Effectiveness & Measures of Performance

Vision Vehicle Flight Demonstration

NOTE on MOE-1: Each industry participant only needs to submit one Vision Vehicle concept.

NASA will have a portfolio of Vision Vehicle concepts comprised of those submitted by Industry and NASA generated Vision Vehicles spanning the markets of interest.

Key Performance Parameter

(KPP)#

Key Performance Parameter

(KPP)

Full Success

Single Aisle Part 25

Minimum Success

19 PAX Thin Haul Part

KPP-1 Total Power level of the Integrated MW-Class Powertrain System

2MW 500kW

KPP-2 Power Level of individual electrical components

1MW 250kW

KPP-3 Operating Voltage of the Integrated MW-Class Powertrain System

1000V 500V

KPP-4 Altitude Capability of the Integrated MW-Class Powertrain System

40,000 ft. 20,000 ft.

KPP-5 Specific Power of the Integrated MW-Class Powertrain System

1.25 kW/kg 0.5 kW/kg

KPP-6 End to End loss of the Integrated MW-Class Powertrain System

20%

KPP-7 Mission Fuel Burn/Energy Reduction 4% for Part 25 Transport Aircraft

10% for Part 23 Transport Aircraft

Technical Performance Parameter

(TPM)#

Technical Performance Parameter

(TPM)

Full Success Minimum Success

TPM-1 Total Power level of the Integrated MW- Class Powertrain System

1.5MW 500kW

TPM-2 Power level of individual electrical components

1MW 250kW

TPM-3 Operating Voltage of the Integrated MW- Class Powertrain System

1000V 500V

TPM-4 Altitude Capability of the Integrated MW- Class Powertrain System

30,000 ft. 15,000 ft.

TPM-5 Specific Power of the Integrated MW- Class Powertrain System

1.25 kW/kg 0.5 kW/kg

TPM-6 End to End loss of the Integrated MW- Class Powertrain System

20% 25%

KPPs and TPMs Refer to Document: EPFD 02-06 Technical Measures Of Effectiveness

• Draft Key Performance Parameters for the Vision Vehicle and draft Technical Performance Parameters for the flight demonstration have been established.

* KPP 5 & TPM-5 are based on a mildly hybrid architecture, if an approach is proposed that uses a large amount of energy storage, it is acceptable and the expected performance should be indicated in the response.

Vision Vehicle Flight Demonstration

Barrier Technical Risks and Specific Risks

Barrier Risks

Specific Risks By Activity #1

Specific Risks By Activity #2

Specific Risks By Activity #n

Some, but not all, specific risks relate to barrier risks.

EPFD is using two risk types, Barrier and Specific:

– Barrier Technical Risks

• Overarching risks applicable to future commercial transport applications described as the “Vision Vehicle” product by US Industry that will be reduced over the life of the project

– Specific Risks

• Risks related to individual integrated MW-class powertrain system flight demonstrations There are 5 Risk categories:

– Technical, Safety, Cost, Schedule and Acquisition

Risk Mitigation through Ground & Flight Demonstration

Track Risk Burn Down over Time

Pre Formulation / Formulation Technical, Safety, Cost, Schedule, Acquisition

Risks Directly address technical, safety, cost, schedule, and acquisition risks through risk infused cost and schedule approach

Risk Mitigation through Ground Development & Test

Activities

Track Risk Burn Down over Time

Implementation

Industry will be required to provide risk information and risk mitigation steps (if appropriate) directly to the project, to better track and anticipate risk to the project.

Industry Data Management Plan Refer to DRD-SE-24 Data Management Plan

• The Data Management Plan (DMP) describes the data requirements and provides traceability of the data generated to meet the EPFD objectives.

• The DMP shall define the

– required data

– frequency of data delivery (which lifecycle reviews and key ground and test flight milestones data will be delivered or updated)

– accuracy of data for each ground and flight test campaign. The DMP shall also specify data that is unlimited and limited rights.

• The detailed information about Data submission can be found in DRD-SE-24

EFPD Data Needs Refer to DRD-SE-24 Data Management Plan

• Measurement of technical performance and readiness of Integrated MW-Class Powertrain Systems [Ref. EPFD 02-06 and DRD-SE-20].

– Details in DRD-SE-24

• Provide validation data to reduce/retire regulations and standards gaps through simulation, ground test, and flight tests of integrated MW-Class powertrain systems

– Details in DRD-SE-24

• Provide validation data for NASA and Industry tools and research

– Details in DRD-SE-24

Data is the product of the EPFD project.

Data is how we measure of progress on Technical Performance, TRL Level, Barrier Technical Risk Reduction, and Reduction of regulation and certification gaps

Industry Capability and Technology Management Plan Refer to DRD-SE-20 Capability and Technology Development Plan

• The Capability and Technology Development Plan shall include a TRL assessment, a plan on TRL advancement, and a top level assessment table. The assessment shall include current and projected TRL at major lifecycle reviews of the Integrated MW-Class Powertrain technologies and the Contractor’s capability to perform the ground and flight demonstration.

• The plan shall describe how activities advance the TRL of the proposed technologies at each life cycle review connected with the Contractor’s schedule. Descriptions of the TRL levels that shall be used are defined in NPR 7123.1, Appendix E. An example TRL assessment table is provided below with Integrated MW-Class Powertrain technologies that may be included for the flight demonstration, but is not limited to the example list.

Any additional technologies required to support flight demonstration shall be included.

• The plan shall include a Barrier Technical Risk Assessment, and a top level assessment table. The assessment shall include the current and projected Barrier Technical Risk Assessment at major lifecycle reviews and tests.

Example tables for TRL and Barrier Risk Scores Refer to DRD-SE-20 Capability and Technology Development Plan

• TRL and Barrier Risk Score Tables will be submitted at proposal with current and projected future scores

• At each lifecycle review and at key events the tables will to updated to sho actual progress and updated future projections

Technical Barrier Risk At Proposal submission At SRR At PDR At CDR At PFAR High Voltage Operation at Altitude Thermal Management Propulsion System Integration Battery System Performance Shortfall Powertrain System Integration Aircraft System Integration

Maturation of Barrier Technical Risk Scores Across Life Cycle Reviews

At Proposal submission At SRR

Component Ground

Test At PDR

Integrated Ground

Test At CDR

Pre-Fight Test At PFAR

Control Integration Thermal Management of Electronics Turbofan and Electric System Integration High Voltage EMI/Power Quality/Dynamic Stability Electric Machines Inverters Energy Storage DC/DC Converter Circuit Protection Devices/Switches Cables and Connectors

Maturation of Technology Readiness Levels

Powertrain Components

Aircraft Systems

Power System Integration

TRL Level of Key Technologies

Capability Description

• Industry will describe their capability to perform the specific ground and flight demonstration that they propose

• The description should include

– Technical capability of workforce and key partners

– Facility capabilities for ground test

– Aircraft and airworthiness capabilities for flight test

– Regulation and standards capabilities

• Existing and future capabilities that are related to this project should be included.

EAP Regulations and Standards Gap Analysis Document DRD-SE-02 (1 of 4)

USE: To identify Key Regulatory and Standards Gaps to Enable the Development of Standards Based on the Introduction of an Aircraft with Integrated MW-Class Powertrain System Technology.

CONTENT: Part 1 of 2

Regulations and Standards Gap Analysis The Contractor shall identify regulations and standards gaps associated with introducing the vision vehicle product and then rank the highest priority gaps and show how their ground and flight demonstration of the integrated MW-Class powertrain system reduces those gaps.

• Regulations and Standards Gap Analysis Approach:

– Identify regulations and standards gaps associated with introducing the vision vehicle product

– Rank the highest priority gaps

– Show how the ground and flight demonstration of the integrated MW-Class powertrain system reduces those gaps

• Regulations and Standards Gap Analysis Plan, Identifying Highest Priority Standards:

– Identify the Highest Priority Standards based on the regulations and standards gaps associated with introducing the vision vehicle product

– Rank the highest priority gaps

– Describe a draft plan of how the ground and flight demonstration of the integrated MW-class powertrain system reduces those gaps

DRD-SE-02 (2 of 4)

CONTENT: Part 2 of 2

Standards Development The Contractor shall identify regulations and standards gaps associated with introducing the vision vehicle product and then rank the highest priority gaps and show how their ground and flight demonstration of the integrated MW-class powertrain system reduces those gaps.

• Regulations and Standards Development Plan:

– Identify the Highest Priority Standards based on the approval of the draft regulations and standards gap analysis plan

– Document the plan necessary to develop the approved standards

• Regulations and Standards Data Plan:

– Shall reflect the data necessary to support each of the reviews and/or tests that are necessary to support each of the standards proposed in the baseline Regulations and Standards Development Plan

• Regulations and Standards Data Report:

– Shall reflect the data from each ground and flight test reflecting the requirements identified and approved in the Regulations and Standards Data Plan

DRD-SE-02 (3 of 4)

Table of Needs

DRD-SE-02 (4 of 4)

Due Dates

System and Subsystem Requirements Documents DRD-SE-06 (1 of 2)

USE: NASA will verify compliance or success in meeting system specifications and performance requirements.

SCOPE: This document includes the specific system design and verification requirements applicable to the EPFD system and its subsystems. It establishes the detailed system/subsystem requirements and specifications for the EPFD system with the traceability and verification closure.

CONTENT: The Contractor shall provide their System and Subsystem requirements for NASA review and concurrence. The system requirements and subsystem requirements shall be responsive to and support verification of the NASA level 1 requirements (Driving requirements and system requirements in EPFD SRD-02-02.

The Industry Partner system and subsystem requirements shall have the following, but not limited to attributes:

– requirement number, requirement title, requirement description, requirement rationale, verification method, traceability, and allocation.

The Industry developed Level 2 requirements are due with the proposal and consist of the high level system and subsystem requirements and specifications that are responsive to the SOO, EPFD SRD-02-02 and DRDs.

Configuration control of the Industry Partner System Requirements will be in accordance with DRD PM-15. .

Airworthiness Approach, Plan and Airworthiness Data Products DRD-SE-22 (1 of 3)

USE: To coordinate the airworthiness activities, roles and responsibilities for the Industry Partners and NASA for obtaining an airworthiness certificate and flight release for the electrified powertrain flight demonstration flight test aircraft with the integrated MW-class powertrain system. Also, to obtain the data products that will be used to establish airworthiness.

DEFINITIONS

• Airworthiness Certificate: A government document which grants authorization to operate an aircraft in flight.

• Flight Release: Official NASA authorization for NASA or a contractor to conduct a flight or series of flights.

CONTENT

• Airworthiness Approach: The airworthiness approach is a high level description of how the industry partner will establish airworthiness for their flight test aircraft with the integrated MW-class powertrain system. The airworthiness approach will be evaluated with the proposal. Table 1 shows the content that should be included in the airworthiness approach.

• Airworthiness Plan: The airworthiness plan is a more detailed description of how the industry partner will establish airworthiness for their flight test aircraft with the integrated MW-class powertrain system. Table 1 shows the content that should be included in the airworthiness plan.

• Airworthiness Data Products: All data products that are provided to the airworthiness authority that issues the airworthiness certificate for their flight test aircraft with the integrated MW-class powertrain system shall be provided to the EPFD project team. 51

Airworthiness Approach, Plan and Airworthiness Data Products DRD-SE-22 (3 of 3)

Topics for the Airworthiness Approach Due with the Proposal.

• Flight test aircraft and systems overview

• Electric propulsion system description and integration into the flight test aircraft

• Aircraft modifications from the certified configuration

• Areas of special concern for establishing airworthiness

• Flight envelope

• Environmental ground and flight conditions

• Standards/requirements that will be used. Discuss areas where standards do not exist or are not applicable to the design.

• Human Systems Integration approach

• Safety and Mission Assurance approach

• Hazard analysis (Preliminary)

• Verification activities (Analysis and tests) to establish airworthiness (Preliminary)

• Airworthiness certificate and flight release

– Approval authority to provide Airworthiness certificate (NASA, FAA, CAA or hybrid approach) with a description of the process

– Preferred airworthiness review process (e.g. Internal Industry Partner process, AFRC Process, NASA

AMD IAOP)

– How NASA will be incorporated into the airworthiness review process (throughout the life of the project)

– The review process to obtain flight releases.

• Aircrew qualifications

• Configuration management (overview)

• Maintenance program

• Industry Partner certificates for 14 CFR 121 or 14 CFR 135 operations (NPR 7900.3d 10.1.5). Note: there is a waiver process. 53

Insight Implementation Plan DRD-PM-15 (1 of 3)

USE: NASA will utilize the Contractor’s Insight Implementation Plan to ensure NASA personnel and its support services contractors can perform their insight

SCOPE

Describe the partnering approach to ensuring an effective working relationship, communication, and coordination between NASA and the Contractor

CONTENT

The Contractor’s Insight Implementation Plan shall provide a description of the Offeror’s proposed approach to communications and coordination with NASA. The Insight Implementation Plan shall also describe the accommodations for providing Government personnel and its support services contractor(s) timely and open access to relevant data and information necessary to obtain a working-level understanding into Contractor’s activities. These activities include the approach to accommodating Government insight of technical and programmatic performance, including safety and mission assurance while allowing the Contractor to maintain the efficiencies and effectiveness of their normal commercial processes. The Insight Implementation Plan will describe approaches supporting Project Management and Technical Management, and establish a process and mechanisms for NASA to provide feedback and communicate issues and concerns for consideration and resolution.

DRD-PM-15 (2 of 3)

The Insight Plan shall describe accommodating Government Insight while maintain the efficiencies and effectiveness of Contractor established processes on the following:

• NASA Defined Insight (Approach and Content)

– Contractor-Led Quarterly Project Management Reviews

• Progress and status on schedule, cost , technical, risk, safety, quality assurance, flight operations, and airworthiness

• Status on Technical Measurements (Technical Measures of Effectiveness; EPFD-02-06)

– Contractor-Led Lifecycle Reviews

• In accordance with NPR 7123.1C, NASA Systems Engineering Processes and Requirements, tailored to industry practices and application to a flight test demonstration

• SRR, SDR, PDR, CDR, FRR, PFAR

• NASA anticipates offerors will be at various stages of design maturation:

– NASA may request review of Contractor design maturation state after award

– Industry will be required to deliver DRDs through agreed to design maturation state after award

• Contractors shall define a process for NASA feedback and Contractor response during reviews

• Data Requirements Descriptions shall be provided as reviewable documents at the associated phase review

DRD-PM-15 (3 of 3)

• NASA Defined Insight (Approach and Content) - continued

– Contractor-Led Bi-Weekly Project Status Meetings

• NASA participants include the Technical Monitor and EPFD Executive Team

• Example content: Highlight changes in risk, cost, or schedule; present progress of key activities associated with the design, development, manufacture, integration, test, and verification for the demonstration; and provide updates in technical performance maturation of the Technical Measures of Effectives

– Working-Level Interactions

• Interaction at the WBS level (working level) to establish a strong partnership and NASA awareness on progress of systems engineering, risk management, safety, quality assurance, flight operations, and airworthiness activities

• Frequency is defined by the Contractor

– Key Technical Interactions

• NASA SME awareness and participation in critical engineering review boards, system integration reviews, test readiness reviews, post-test reviews, lower level design reviews, resolution of integration and test issues or anomalies, resolution of waivers and deviations, and critical safety & mission assurance review boards

– Final Closeout Meeting

• Intent of this meeting is to report the overall progress and outcomes of the contract activities, the plan to move the resulting technology to a Vision Vehicle product, and the final assessment of the benefits of the technology that was demonstrated against the ARMD metrics in the Vision Vehicle implementation

– Public Outreach

• An approach awareness and partnering for public interactions and events such as conferences, NASA aviation related events, and publications vAllowing the Contractor to maintain the efficiencies and effectiveness of their normal processes

Integrated Program Management Data Analysis Report (IPMDAR)

DRD-PM-02

USE

• The IPMDAR is the primary means of communicating program cost and schedule information between the prime Contractor and the Government.

• The IPMDAR focuses on data, which can be used to regenerate human readable reports such as the NASA 533M and IPMR/CPR Formats 1-4, as well as project management artifacts such as the Control Account Plan (CAP), Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RAM), WBS and OBS Structures and even to reconcile Work Authorization Documents (WAD), budget logs and the basis for integration.

The IPMDAR consists of four components that provide project managers information to:

1. integrate cost and schedule performance data with technical performance measures,

2. identify the magnitude and impact of actual and potential problem areas causing significant cost and schedule variances,

3. forecast schedule completions, and

4. provide valid, timely program status information to higher management.

INTER-RELATIONSHIPS

• To ensure an integrated approach to risk management, the information within the data provided by this IPMDAR DRD shall be integrated with the following DRDs when required:

– Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and Dictionary,

– Project Management Plan,

– Risk Management Plan,

– Technical Performance Measures.

• The Contract Performance Data (CPD) and Schedule Performance Data (SPD) for each reporting period should be interrelated by WBS, OBS, Control Account ID and Work Package ID. 59

DATA ITEM DESCRIPTION

• Each submittal shall be provided following instructions of the Data Item Description # DI-

MGMT-81861B except the sections tailored below which includes:

– The Contract Performance Dataset (CPD),

– Schedule Performance Dataset (SPD) including the native schedule file,

– Performance Narrative Reports and

– Supplemental Deliverables

IPMDAR DiD: https://www.acq.osd.mil/evm/#/policy-guidance/ipmdar-dei-ffs

CONTENT

• Contract Performance Dataset

– This is almost identical to the extended IPMR Format 7 where it has the time phase budget, earned, expended and estimates to complete down to the work package level with listing of Control Accounts to WBS and OBS elements with contract information.

• Schedule Data, which consists of

– The native schedule file

– The Schedule Performance Dataset which is essential the IPMR Format 6

• Program Narrative Reports

– This is like the IPMR Format 5 variance analysis report but much more streamlined and tailorable to narratives that are important to the program and not a blanket of narratives that trip all pre-defined thresholds

• Contract Performance Dataset (CPD) - Provides performance/execution data from the contractor’s existing management systems.

– The CPD is a collection of JSON encoded data tables capturing the contract metadata, the WBS, Organizational Structure (previously Organizational Breakdown Structure (OBS)), contractor reporting calendar, control account (CA) definitions, optional work package (WP) definitions, to-date contract performance metrics (hours and dollars by element of cost) by CA (or WP), and time-phased future baseline (BCWS) and ETC forecast by CA (or WP).

• Schedule (Comprised of both the Native Schedule File and the Schedule Performance Dataset(SPD)) - Provides data from the contractor’s Integrated Master Schedule (IMS).

– The Native Schedule submission is a direct export from the contractor’s scheduling tool. The SPD is a collection of JSON encoded data tables capturing the detailed task and schedule metrics, task relationships, and resource assignments tables. Since the CPD data report is now required at the CA or WP levels, the task definitions within the SPD must now be correctly encoded against the CA or WP data included in the corresponding CPD submission. This critical improvement enhances the ability to support integrated cost/schedule analysis.

• Performance Narrative Report (Comprised of both the Executive Summary and the Detailed Analysis Report). Provides narrative analysis of data provided in the CPD and the Schedule.

– The Performance Narrative consists of the Executive Summary and the Detailed Analysis Report. The Executive Summary is a program and contract performance overview, a top-level program managers’ cost and schedule forecast, a high-level variance summary, undistributed budget (UB) and management reserve (MR) analysis, and optional content as needed or requested. The Detailed Analysis is a compilation of write-ups to describe the variances within a certain scope of the contract at the control account level.

The CPD and SPD formats will be JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) format as defined by the IPMDAR File Format Specifications (FFS) and the native scheduling file will be as dependent upon the scheduling application used by contractor (e.g. mpp, xer, bk3).

USE

To establish a product-oriented framework to Level 6 for reporting program cost, schedule, and technical performance. To provide a basis for uniform planning, reporting status, program visibility, and assignment of responsibilities.

CONTENT:

• WBS – A logical hierarchical display of the subdivision of all project work to be completed.

• The WBS shall include the approved element title and element number, broken down to Level 6.

• The WBS Dictionary shall describe and document the work content of every WBS element and relevant efforts associated with each element (e.g., design, development, manufacturing).

• The WBS Dictionary shall be arranged in the same order as the contract WBS.

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS Dictionary

DRD-PM-04

Joint Confidence Level (JCL) Analysis Results and Inputs

DRD-PM-05

USE

• Joint Confidence Level analysis provides an analysis approach which merges the cost, schedule, uncertainty, and risks to deliver risk-informed decision-making.

CONTENT

• JCL results shall include cum schedule and cost distribution functions (S-curves), and

JCL scatter results at 50% and 70%.

• CDF/PDF (for schedule and cost) visibility and insights shall include lower tier major activities JCL results, e.g., component testing.

• Schedule inputs shall be detailed to satisfy the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) 14-Point Schedule Assessment of the entire project, e.g., Integrated Master Schedules (IMSs) that are logically linked with task durations to IMS level 6.

• Risk inputs are the 5x5 risk information with likelihood and consequence score.

• Cost inputs are categorized by time dependent (TD) and time independent (TI) costs allocated to respective IMS tasks/activities.

• JCL assumptions shall be provided to support JCL results, e.g., uncertainty factors for risks, staffing understanding, access to test facility cost and schedule impacts, TI and TD breakouts, duration and cost uncertainty bounds.

Risk Exposure/Posture and Reserve (REPR) Report

DRD-PM-10

USE

• To provide information regarding the contractor’s risk exposure from the identified risk, assessment of the risk posture taking into consideration the mitigation steps, and the management of cost and schedule Unallocated Future Expenditures (UFE), or reserves, to execute the project at target JCL levels.

CONTENT:

• The report shall capture the risk exposure of the project given the identified risk with likelihood and consequences, and its associated uncertainties. Exposure will measure the probabilistic impact resulting from a specific risk or combination of the risks. Given the exposure, mitigation steps are considered to minimize or eliminate the risk which assesses the pre-mitigation and post-mitigation risk postures of the project. With exposure and posture information and data, the project cost and schedule Unallocated Future Expenditures (UFE), or reserves, are formulated and developed to successfully execute the project at target JCL levels.

• Explanations shall include risk input assumptions and rationale

• Narrative to address any differences in JCL UFE determination and industry standard reserve milestone driven targets, e.g., 30% at PDR, etc.

• Explanations to show mitigations associated with UFE formulation, i.e., pre-mitigated and post-mitigated risk postures, at summary and lower tier levels

Risk Management Plan (RMP)

DRD-PM-11

USE

• To provide a disciplined and documented approach the Contractor will use to conduct risk management and provide a foundation for their risk management process.

CONTENT

• The RMP shall specify the processes and deliverables that support planning, identifying, documenting, assessing, analyzing, and tracking of programmatic and technical risks and associated mitigations.

• The RMP shall include sections that address NASA Continuous Risk Management (CRM) elements to include, but limited to:

• Risk Identification: detail the processes and documents that contribute to the identification of risks on a continuous basis

• Risk Analysis: define each factor contained in the Risk Scorecard. Should also include the scoring methodology for each risk with justification for red, yellow, and green classification scores.

• Risk Planning: define Risk Actions to include but not limited to: Accept, Watch, Mitigate, Research, or Transfer. Define the process for Risk Tracking, Risk Control, and Risk Communication.

• Risk Management Board: Address how the RMB will receive evidence, discuss evidence and score risks, and resolve disputes.

• Roles and Responsibilities: address the job description for each role in the risk management process to include but not limited to: Board Member, Board Chair, Risk Manager, and Risk Owner. 65

Risk Registry, Risk Information Sheet

DRD-PM-12

USE

• To provide EPFD Project insight into all Contractor risks and details associated with the

Contractor risks.

CONTENT

• The Contractor shall provide the Risk Registry monthly as an Excel file, containing every risk to include but not limited to the following fields: Risk ID, Risk Title, Risk Action, Mitigation, Likelihood, Cost, Schedule, Technical, Uncertainty, Risk Score, Suspension Date and Timeframe. Likert values (1-5) shall not be used for Cost, Schedule, and Timeframe. These values shall be the actual dollar amount, number of weeks, or date.

• The Contractor shall provide a collection of Risk Information Sheets (RIS) monthly as a PowerPoint file containing an individual RIS for every risk from the registry. Any risk information captured in a RIS should also be captured in the Risk Registry.

• Fully vetted mitigation plans are expected with each contractor risk where the risk action is “Mitigate”. Mitigation plans are no different than technical work plans and should include an associated schedule and/or budget. Mitigations plans become a part of the overall project scope when they are approved through the project’s Configuration Change process. TBD or incomplete information within mitigation steps is discouraged. If there is incomplete data in a mitigation step, it must be accompanied by a rationale, or a timeline for when the information will be added.

• The Contractor shall present monthly their top 10 risks in the Project Status meeting using the NASA template provided.

USE

To provide EPFD Project insight into all Contractor risks and details associated with the Contractor risks.

TEMPLATES

Risk Registry, Risk Information Sheet

DRD-PM-12

DRFP Overview

• NAICS Code and Size Standard

– NAICS Code 541715 “Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences

(except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology)”

– Size Standard: 1,500

• Government intends to award without discussions.

• Acquisition will be conducted under full and open competition pursuant to FAR Part 15 “Contracting by Negotiation.”

– Non-Commercial requirement

Posted:19 Nov 2020

Response Potential Offerors are encouraged to review all aspects of the DRFP, including the requirements, schedules, proposal instructions, and evaluation approaches. Potential Offerors should provide questions and/or comments and identify any unnecessary or inefficient requirements relating to the DRFP no later than 2:00 pm Pacific, Dec 16, 2020.

The objective of this requirement is to plan, manage, and conduct appropriate ground tests and flight tests of an integrated MW-class Powertrain System that enables the offeror’s vision system, that meets the described needs, goals and objectives identified in the attached Statement of Objectives, and that are in alignment with system and data requirements defined in the System Requirements Document (SRD).

Proposal Submittal Requirements

Mission Suitability

• Submission of proposal. Offerors shall submit a copy of their draft presentation slides, and their signed and dated proposal to the office specified in this solicitation at or before the exact time specified in this solicitation.

• Offerors are required to submit Mission Suitability subfactor documents, and provide an oral presentation in response to the Mission Suitability factor of the solicitation. The submitted documents for each subfactor shall be separately identifiable per the below table.

Cost-Sharing CLIN 0002: From CDR Through Close-Out

• The Offeror shall propose a cost-share price for CLIN 0002 listed in the solicitation schedule.

• The Offeror shall propose a minimum 50 percent cost-share of the total life cycle cost of the flight demonstration.

• Total life cycle cost shall include the firm fixed price of CLIN 0001 as part of the Government cost-share of the total.

• As part of the Cost-Price Volume, the offeror shall provide recent information on relevant DCAA or DCMA audits, including DCAA or DCMA audit report numbers, the CO…