EUROPA-PROP-SOW-0008_12-04-2017_(002).pdf

Effective Date: 12/04/2017

Expiration Date: 12/04/2022

Check https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov to verify that this is the correct version prior to use

400-FORM-0002 (4/16/2014)

EUROPA-PROP-SOW-0008, Revision - EUROPA Clipper Propulsion, Code 597

Europa Project

Pressurant Tank

Statement of Work

Goddard Space Flight Center

Greenbelt, Maryland

GSFC EUROPA Clipper Propulsion

CMO K. Mrowczynski

12/04/2017

RELEASED

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov/

COPV SOW EUROPA-PROP-SOW-0008, Revision -ii

Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel

Statement of Work

Signature/Approval Page

Prepared by:

Eric Cardiff

Reviewers/Approvers:

Caitlin Bacha

Dan Ramspacher

Oscar Cheatom

James Harper

Megan Casey

Erin Lalime

Luis Gallo

Eric Haggquist

Timothy Johnson

Approved by:

Caitlin Bacha

*** Electronic signatures are available on-line at:

https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov*** https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov/ iii

Preface

This document is a EUROPA Clipper Propulsion signature-controlled document. Changes to this document require prior approval of the applicable Product Design Lead (PDL) or designee. Proposed changes shall be submitted in the Technical Data Management System

(TDMS) via a Signature Control Request (SCoRe) along with supportive material justifying the proposed change. Changes to this document will be made by complete revision.

All of the requirements in this document assume the use of the word "shall" unless otherwise stated.

Questions or comments concerning this document should be addressed to:

EUROPA Clipper Propulsion Configuration Management Office

Mail Stop: 597

Goddard Space Flight Center

Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 iv

Change History Log

Revision Effective Date Description of Changes

(Reference the SCoRe Approval Date)

Revision - 04/30/2017 Released following approval of EUROPA-SCoRe-0068 v

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction

1.1 General Information

1.2 Scope

1.3 SOW Compliance Matrix

1.4 Specification Verification Matrix

1.5 Applicable Documents

2.0 Management, Reporting, Reviews, and documentation

2.1 Program management

2.2 Reporting

2.3 Advanced Notifications

2.4 Reviews and Meetings

2.4.1 Kick-off Meeting

2.4.2 Design Conformance Review (DCR)

2.4.3 Qualification Test Readiness Review (QTRR)

2.4.4 Qualification Review

2.4.5 Acceptance Test Readiness Review (ATRR)

2.4.6 Pre-Ship Review (PSR)

2.4.7 Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM)

2.5 Documentation

3.0 Analysis & Documentation

3.1 Interface Control Documentation (ICD)

3.2 Drawing Package

3.3 Computer Models

3.4 Structural Analysis Report

3.5 Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis Report

3.6 Safety Analysis Report

4.0 Hardware Procurement

4.1 General Requirements

4.2 Flight Units

5.0 Design and Manufacturing

5.1 Materials Requirements

5.1.1 Materials Selection Requirements

5.1.2 Shelf Life Control

5.1.3 Vacuum Outgassing of Polymeric Materials

5.1.4 Minimizing Permanent Magnetic Fields

5.1.5 Stress Corrosion Cracking of Inorganic Materials

5.1.6 Process Selection Requirements

5.1.7 Fasteners

5.1.8 Lubricants

5.1.9 Compatibility

5.1.10 Radiation Compatibility

5.1.11 Bimetallic Joints

5.2 Dissimilar Metals

5.3 Planetary Protection

vi

5.3.1 Bioburden Definition

5.3.2 Bioassay Definition

5.3.3 Biobarriers

5.3.4 PP Treatment Methods

5.3.5 COPV PP Handling

6.0 Performance Verification And Test

6.1 Qualification

6.1.1 Qualification Testing

6.1.2 Qualification Test Report

6.1.3 Qualification By Similarity (QBS)

6.2 Acceptance Verification Plan

6.3 Verification Methods

6.3.1 Inspection

6.3.2 Analysis

6.3.3 Test

6.4 Inspection Requirements

6.4.1 Visual Inspection

6.4.2 Physical Measurement

6.4.3 Documentation Search

6.5 Test Requirements

6.5.1 Definitions

6.5.2 Test Factors

6.5.3 Test Tolerances

6.5.4 Test Restrictions

6.5.5 Environmental Test Authorization Summary

6.6 Verification Requirements

6.6.1 Qualification Tests

6.6.2 Pre-acceptance Testing

6.6.3 Acceptance Tests

6.7 Verification Test Procedures

6.8 Verification Test Reports

7.0 Quality Assurance (QA)

7.1 General QA Requirements

7.1.1 Quality Assurance Plan/Manual

7.1.2 Surveillance of the Supplier

7.1.3 Anomaly Reporting

7.1.4 Configuration Management

7.2 System Safety Requirements

7.3 Reliability Requirements

7.3.1 Limited-Life Items

7.3.2 Control of Sub-Developers and Suppliers

7.4 Workmanship Standards And Processes

7.4.1 Workmanship Requirements

7.4.2 New or Advanced Processes

7.4.3 Electrostatic Discharge Control Requirements

7.4.4 Training and Certification of Supplier Personnel

vii

7.4.5 Hardware Handling, Cleaning and Packaging

7.4.6 Workmanship: Use of Alternate Workmanship Standards

7.5 Parts QA Requirements

7.5.1 GIDEP Alerts and Problem Advisories

7.5.2 Materials Procurement Requirements

7.6 Welding

7.7 Contamination Control Requirements

7.7.1 Contamination Control Plan

7.7.2 Material Outgassing

7.8 Planetary protection Quality Assurance

7.8.1 Bioassays

7.8.2 Planetary Protection Cleaning

8.0 Handling, Storage, Packaging, Preservation, and Delivery

Appendix A. Abbreviations and Acronyms Appendix B Deliverable Item List (DIL) Appendix C. ETAS Form (ENVIRONMENTAL TEST AUTHORIZATION SUMMARY) . 46

Appendix D EUROPA Material Selection Forms Appendix E. List of Applicable Documents

Appendix F. Qualification Verification Matrix Appendix G. Acceptance Verification Matrix viii

List of Tables

Table Page

Table 1 Prohibited Materials List Table 2: HMR Times & Temperatures

Table 3 Test Factors and Durations Table 4 Test Tolerances

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL INFORMATION

The Europa mission is being formulated and implemented by a joint partnership between the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the Applied Physics Laboratory, with NASA GSFC building the propulsion system for the Applied Physics Laboratory.

This document defines the work to be performed by the Supplier in the design, development, fabrication, and delivery of the Europa Clipper Pressurant Tank.

The Europa Propulsion Subsystem design employs two (2) identical pressurant tanks hereafter referred to as Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessels (COPVs) to store high-pressure helium. The term COPV includes a metal liner, composite overwrapping, two polar mounting bosses, and a single port used to fill and vent the vessel.

Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel Specification, from here on referred to as the

COPV.

1.2 SCOPE

The supplier shall provide the facilities, personnel, services, tools, equipment, and materials necessary to design, analyze, manufacture, test, and deliver the hardware and data in accordance with the requirements of this SOW and the documents referenced herein.

This SOW defines the supplier tasks, deliverables, responsibilities, and schedule, either within this document or by reference.

1.3 SOW COMPLIANCE MATRIX

The supplier shall generate a matrix listing each section in this statement of work reflecting either compliance or non-compliance. Areas of non-compliance need to be addressed by the supplier showing how they plan to meet the requirement(s) or why it will remain non-compliant. Areas of compliance shall address the details of how they are compliant.

1.4 SPECIFICATION VERIFICATION MATRIX

The COPV design shall have been qualified to the levels in Europa Project COPV Specification EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0008 or the supplier shall designate one (1) non-flight unit as a qualification test unit to test at the qualification levels listed in this document. Any protoflight verifications shall be subject to approval by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

The supplier shall generate a specification verification matrix listing each section in Europa Project COPV Specification EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0008 and describing the verification method (Inspection, Analysis, Demonstration, or Test), details of the verification plan, and specific document(s) showing verification evidence for each requirement.

1.5 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

All applicable and reference documentation identified in this document shall apply in the situations where they are specifically referenced. In the event of a conflict between the SOW and the specification, the SOW shall take precedence. See Appendix E for referenced documents.

2.0 MANAGEMENT, REPORTING, REVIEWS, AND DOCUMENTATION

2.1 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

The supplier shall designate a single individual who will be given full responsibility and authority to manage and administer all phases of the work specified by the contract and ensure that all objectives are accomplished within schedule constraints.

The supplier shall designate and identify by name a single individual who shall serve as a point of contact with the NASA/GSFC Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) for all technical aspects of the COPV contract.

The supplier shall establish and apply a program control system for managing all resources, controlling schedules, managing all engineering, manufacturing and procurement activities, configuration management, Quality Assurance, documentation control, and distribution.

2.2 REPORTING

The supplier shall prepare and present to the NASA/GSFC COR monthly technical status reports via telecon and a written report. The report shall be a summary presentation of the period's progress, problem areas, and activities on-going and planned Including Mandatory Inspection Points, MIPs). A weekly program status meeting shall also be conducted (this shall be a brief informal telecom with the COR).

2.3 ADVANCED NOTIFICATIONS

The supplier shall notify the NASA/GSFC COR at least seven (7) calendar days in advance of all mandatory hardware inspections, test activities, TIM’s, and deliveries at either the supplier’s or a sub-supplier’s facility to allow timely participation by the NASA/GSFC Quality Assurance representative. Event specific notification requirements (such as failures, anomalies, etc.) are included in the appropriate sections.

2.4 REVIEWS AND MEETINGS

2.4.1 Kick-off Meeting

The supplier shall organize and hold a Kick-off Meeting at the supplier’s facility prior to any activity identified in this SOW within thirty (30) days after award of the contract.

The supplier shall provide to GSFC a Kick-off Presentation Package and all other required deliverables seven (7) calendar days prior to the meeting. The Kick-off Meeting shall address program management, flight heritage and quality assurance activities outlined in this SOW, as well as the performance and environmental requirements outlined in the Europa Project COPV Specification 597-EUROPA-SPEC- 0008 in a sufficient detail. At a minimum, the Kick-off Meeting presentation package should cover the following areas:

Program Management

Quality Assurance

Flight Heritage

Preliminary Qualification Report or Preliminary qualification test plan, if applicable (Section 2.4.1)

Manufacturing flow with government mandatory inspection points (Per Section 7.1.2.3)

Facilities

2.4.2 Design Conformance Review (DCR)

The supplier shall organize and present a Design Conformance Review to a GSFC Review Team at the supplier’s facility prior to the manufacturing program, on a date defined in Appendix B. The supplier shall provide to GSFC a Design Conformance Review Presentation Package and all other required deliverable data fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the review. The Design Conformance Review shall address all design, drawings, analysis, and tests outlined in this SOW and the Europa Project COPV Specification 597-EUROPA-SPEC-0008 in sufficient detail to ensure that the proposed design conforms to all requirements and is ready for fabrication to begin. At a minimum, the design package should cover the following areas:

Qualification Report and Qualification by Similarity (QBS) Report, if applicable (Section 2.4.1)

Qualification Test Plan, if applicable (Section 6.1.1)

Acceptance Verification Plan (Section 6.2)

Planetary Protection Plan (Section 5.3)

Interface Control Documentation and drawing status (Section 3.1)

Final Material Identification and Usage List (MIUL) (Section 5.1.1) including SCC ratings, identification of limited life items, and as-built material certifications

MUA’s (Section 5.1.3, 5.1.5)

Mechanical/Structural analyses (Section 3.4)

Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (Section 3.5)

Specification Verification matrices (Appendix F & G)

Review minutes shall be prepared and, as a minimum, shall include attendance, action items, action item accomplishment responsibility and agreements. All items shall be in sufficient detail to be self-explanatory. A Design Conformance Review Report shall be prepared following the review and, as a minimum, contain meeting notice, agenda, review meeting minutes described above and responses to all recommendations and action items.

2.4.3 Qualification Test Readiness Review (QTRR)

The supplier shall hold a Qualification Test Readiness Review (QTRR) at the supplier's facility prior to starting any qualification testing. If no qualification testing is required, then this review shall not be held.

The supplier shall provide to the customer a presentation package and all other required deliverable data per Appendix B two (2) weeks prior to the review. The supplier shall demonstrate that all qualification hardware manufacturing steps are complete, show that all analysis verifications are complete, show readiness of all activities required for testing, and describe in detail any activities that are not yet ready with a completion schedule for each. In particular, the supplier shall present the updated specification verification matrix and all test procedures. The COR and customer technical team will attend the QTRR. At a minimum, the QTRR package shall address:

Summary of qualification hardware manufacturing results

Any non-conformances and problem reports

Manufacturing lessons learned (for incorporation into flight build)

As-built materials and processes, including as-built material certifications

Specification verification matrix

All procedures required for the qualification tests

The list of tests to be conducted as part of the overall procedure

Availability of facilities and personnel

Special test equipment, e.g., for hot and cold tests

Accuracy of instruments used to record test data

How the tests are monitored and signed off

Accept / reject criteria for each test

How the data results are recorded and transmitted to the customer

Any risks associated with each test including safety risks, risks in not obtaining accurate data, or any other risk which it is appropriate to discuss

2.4.4 Qualification Review

The supplier shall provide preliminary and final qualification reports that demonstrate that the COPV is qualified for all requirements in EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0008. The data generated by any new qualification tests shall be provided to the COR. Qualification By Similarity (QBS) shall be approved by the COR, and the qualification reports for any similarity items shall be made available to the COR. Any differences to referenced QBS items shall be documented in this report. Any qualification by similarity items that are not accepted by the COR shall be re-verified for qualification.

2.4.5 Acceptance Test Readiness Review (ATRR)

The supplier shall hold an Acceptance Test Readiness Review (ATRR) at the supplier's facility prior to the beginning of the acceptance test campaign. The supplier shall demonstrate that all deliverable hardware manufacturing steps are complete, show that all analysis verifications are complete, show readiness of all activities required for testing, and describe in detail any activities that are not yet ready with a completion schedule for each. In particular, the supplier shall present the updated specification verification matrix and all test procedures. The COR and customer technical team will attend the ATRR.

The specific pre-acceptance testing data from Section 6.6.2 shall also be provided at the

ATRR.

The ATRR package shall address:

Summary of hardware manufacturing results

Any non-conformances and problem reports

Manufacturing lessons learned

As-built materials and processes, including as-built material certifications

Specification verification matrices

All procedures required for the tests

Availability of facilities and personnel

The list of tests to be conducted as part of the overall procedure

Special test equipment, e.g., for hot and cold tests

Accuracy of instruments used to record test data

How the tests are monitored and signed off

Accept / reject criteria for each test

How the data is recorded and transmitted to the customer

Current hardware status, including build paperwork

Any risks associated with each test, including safety risks, risks in not obtaining accurate data, or any other risk which it is appropriate to discuss

2.4.6 Pre-Ship Review (PSR)

The supplier shall hold a Pre-Ship Review at the supplier's facility at the completion of verification tests and prior to the shipment of each hardware item to the customer. The supplier shall provide to the customer a PSR presentation package and all other required deliverable data per Appendix B two (2) weeks prior to the review. This package shall demonstrate completion of all activities required for delivery of any hardware deliverable item, and note any activities that are incomplete with a completion schedule for each. In particular, the supplier shall present the completed specification verification matrix that shows verification of all requirements and presents actual data (results of tests or analyses) where applicable. Any requirements that are not met shall be identified in the Deviations/Waivers etc. list and discussed with the customer during the review.

At a minimum, the PSR shall cover the following areas:

Qualification verification summary (QBS, analysis, and test)

Summary of qualification test results

Specification verification matrix

A Delivery Data Package shall be made available for review during pre-ship reviews for each of the hardware deliverables. This package shall also be delivered with each end item with the level of detail required of that item. The package should be comprised of, but not limited to, the following data:

The deliverable item name, lot number, serial number, and part number

Appropriate approval signatures (e.g., supplier quality representative, supplier program manager, COR, NASA QA representative, etc.)

Work orders for the final assembly and associated tests

As-Built Parts List

As-Built Final Drawing Package (including rework instructions, if any)

Problem/anomaly reporting (complete copies of report)

Deviations/Waivers/shortages/open items/non-conformances and their dispositions, with supporting rationale

Status of all action items from previous reviews

Class I MRBs (complete copies of reports)

List of As-Built Materials and Processes used, with material/process certificates showing pedigree

Achieved surface cleanliness and outgassing rate data

Log of total operating time and failure-free operation

List and status of all identified Life-Limited Items

Completed specification verification matrix

Test data and reports (qualification, pre-acceptance, and acceptance)

Photographic Documentation (during manufacturing, pre-closeout, pre-test, and post-test)

Certificate of Conformance, with supplier quality/management signature

End Item Inspection Report

Storage and Transportation Plans and Requirements, including tripped sensor protocol

2.4.7 Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM)

The supplier shall plan for and facilitate up to five (5) informal, face-to-face technical interchange meetings to be held at the supplier facilities. These TIMs shall support review and coordination of technical issues including, but not limited to, parts, test plans, test procedures, software changes, design modifications, and design analyses.

2.5 DOCUMENTATION

The supplier shall ensure the generation and delivery of all documentation as called for in the contract and listed here (TBD).

In addition to that documentation specifically called for in the contract, upon request by the NASA/GSFC COR, the supplier shall make available a copy of any document or data generated during this contract performance for review by GSFC at either the supplier's facility or via the internet. This includes, but is not limited to, technical reports and memorandums, drawings, schematics, studies, analyses, parts and materials data, test data, alerts, etc.

All documentation shall be submitted electronically.

3.0 ANALYSIS & DOCUMENTATION

The supplier shall perform analyses of the technical and environmental requirements specified in the Europa Propulsion Subsystem COPV Specification (597-EUROPA- SPEC-0008) to ensure compliance of the hardware fabrication and to assemble the documentation necessary to ensure its usability by NASA/GSFC users.

3.1 INTERFACE CONTROL DOCUMENTATION (ICD)

The Supplier shall provide document(s) and/or drawing(s) that define, in detail, all the mechanical interfaces, including the center of mass relative to an external reference, subject to review and approval by the NASA/GSFC COR. The mounting interfaces shall also be defined in the ICD. These documents and/or drawings shall be delivered fourteen (14) calendar days before the DCR, reviewed and approved at the DCR.

The following shall also be provided on the ICD (or other drawing):

Dimensions of the inlet boss

Mounting dimensions, including the thread

Thickness of the liner and overwrap

Maximum length and diameter of the tank at MEOP and proof pressures These callouts shall be verified as part of the acceptance package.

3.2 DRAWING PACKAGE

The supplier shall make a complete drawing package available for review at the supplier’s facility for DCR.

3.3 COMPUTER MODELS

The supplier shall deliver the following computer models used for validation or in the analyses below no later than DCR. This mechanical model shall be of high enough fidelity (material thicknesses in particular, not material properties) to be useful for a detailed thermal analysis. The model shall be provided in the form of a STEP-file per

ISO 10303-21.

3.4 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT

The purpose of the structural analyses is to demonstrate compliance with the mechanical/structural design and test requirements. Structural analyses verify the structural integrity of the flight hardware by assessing the size and location of applied loads, load paths, and critical failure modes. A Structural Analysis shall be performed on the COPV to ensure the capability to withstand and survive launch, ascent, and all operational loads per the requirements of NASA-STD-8719.24 and AIAA S-081. The results of these analyses shall be summarized in a supplier format Structural Analyses Report that will be provided to the NASA/GSFC COR for review.

The report shall include at a MINIMUM:

Margins of Safety for all of the loads

Margins of Safety for all loads, Fatigue, Leak Before Burst, safe life, buckling, and the response of the composite .

Natural Frequency (axial and lateral)

Stress Rupture Probability

NASA FLAGRO results (NASGRO® version 9 preferred, version to be approved by the COR)

3.5 FAILURE MODES, EFFECTS AND CRITICALITY ANALYSIS REPORT

The supplier shall identify failure modes of the COPV for a Failure Modes, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) in accordance with MIL-STD-1629A, Task 101 “Failure Modes and Effects Analysis”. The FMECA shall identify failure modes and identify how these failures can be detected, but not address system level consequences. The failure modes shall be summarized in a supplier-format FMECA Report that will be provided to the COR for review at the DCR.

3.6 SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

The supplier shall document the propellant tank’s compliance with all applicable pressure vessel requirements of NASA-STD-8719.24 and AIAA S-081. The compliance matrix shall list the title of each applicable requirement from these documents and mark Compliant, Noncompliant, or Equivalent Level of Safety for each requirement. The supplier shall add comments as appropriate, with rationale provided for any requirements marked as Noncompliant and Equivalent Level of Safety, as a minimum.

These compliance matrices shall be delivered at DCR.

4.0 HARDWARE PROCUREMENT

4.1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

The supplier shall either procure or manufacture all components required to assemble, integrate, and test the COPV to support the delivery dates as called for in the contract and listed in the DILS in Appendix B.

The supplier shall assemble the quantities of COPV hardware described below. The supplier shall provide a Fabrication, Assembly, and Inspection Flow plan seven (7) calendar days prior to the Kick-off Meeting that shall include a step-by-step flow that describes the method of fabrication, assembly, and inspection from piece parts to the completely assembled COPVs.

4.2 FLIGHT UNITS

The supplier shall provide two (2) COPV Flight Units, plus one (1) COPV spare unit to meet the requirements of the Europa Project COPV Specification (597-EUROPA- SPEC-0008). The supplier shall include in the proposal a separate cost to purchase one additional COPV as an option.

5.0 DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING

5.1 MATERIALS REQUIREMENTS

5.1.1 Materials Selection Requirements

The supplier shall create and maintain a Materials Identification and Usage List (MIUL) using the forms in the Appendix D. The MIUL shall identify all materials and processes used in fabrication of the COPV. All organic materials shall be identified by chemical class, manufacturer’s part number, and application in use, together with estimated masses. The shelf life limitations of all materials within the COPV shall be included in the MIUL. The supplier shall review proposed materials and processes with the COR.

The supplier shall provide a Material Usage Agreement (refer to Appendix D) to the COR for each material within the COPV that is not listed in the JPL Preferred Materials and Processes Selection List (PMPSL) D-92600. The PMPSL will be provided to the supplier at award of the contract. Magnetic materials shall be minimized to limit permanent magnetic fields external to the COPV that could adversely affect other hardware. Any use of magnetic materials can be approved case-by-case upon completion of the magnetic assessment and the approval of the COR (Section 5.1.4).

An As-Built Materials List (ABML) shall be included as part of the end item data package.

An electronic copy of the ABML in Microsoft Excel format shall be provided to the COR as part of the end item data package.

5.1.2 Shelf Life Control

The supplier shall implement shelf life control procedures and processes, identifying shelf life limitations on all parts and materials used on flight and qualification hardware.

5.1.3 Vacuum Outgassing of Polymeric Materials

Only materials that have a total mass loss (TML) less than 1.00% and a collected volatile condensable mass (CVCM) less than 0.10% shall be approved for use in a vacuum environment. Material vacuum outgassing shall be determined in accordance with ASTM E-595. If a material exceeds these maximum limits, the supplier shall be required to either replace with a compliant material or bring it into compliance via a vacuum bakeout, or to submit a Material Usage Agreement (MUA) for its usage.

5.1.4 Minimizing Permanent Magnetic Fields

The COPV shall not contain any of the materials described in Table 1. Exceptions to this requirement can be made case by case upon completion of the magnetic assessment and the approval of the NASA/GSFC COR.

Table 1 Prohibited Materials List

Alloy 426 Mumetal Alloy 7201 Nichrome

Carbon Steel 1008 Nickel 200, 270

Chromium Nickel Iron

Cobalt Pelcoloy

Copperweld Permalloy

Dumet Platinum

Electroless Nickel (except high-phosphorous) Remendur

Electroloy Rodar

Elinvar Stainless Steel 2022

Fenicoloy Stainless Steel 3022

Ferrites Stainless Steel 3032

Gridaloy M, P Stainless Steel 3042

Haynes Alloy #6 Stainless Steel 403 & 405

Invar Stainless Steel 410 & 416

Iron Stainless Steel 430 & 446

Kovar Stainless Steel AISI 440C

Mesoloy Supermalloy

Molypermalllow Ti 430

Monel K1 Vicalloy

Monel R 1Based on a GSFC Materials Engineering Branch Technical Information Paper No. 128 entitled, "Minimizing Stray Magnetic Fields through Materials Selection".

2Non-magnetic (technically paramagnetic) in the annealed condition. If any of these alloys are cold worked then they will become magnetic. The alloy condition will be clearly indicated on the Material Certification that will accompany the purchase.

3Inconel alloys, 600, 625 and 718, are considered non-magnetic, but become magnetic at cryogenic temperatures.

5.1.5 Stress Corrosion Cracking of Inorganic Materials

Materials used in structural applications shall be highly resistant to stress corrosion cracking (SCC) as specified in MSFC-STD-3029. A Material Usage Agreement (MUA) and a SCC evaluation form shall be submitted, supplier format acceptable, for each material usage that does not comply with the MSFC-STD-3029 SCC requirements.

5.1.6 Process Selection Requirements

Manufacturing process information shall be provided on the MIUL form as shown on the templates in Appendix D.

5.1.7 Fasteners

The supplier shall follow the fastener screening requirements contained in 541-PG- 8072.1.2B Goddard Space Flight Center Fastener Integrity Requirements.

The COR shall approve all fastener selections.

All threaded fasteners shall be fabricated from materials that have a high resistance to stress corrosion cracking (SCC). Materials that have moderate or low resistance to SCC are not acceptable for use for fasteners.

The preferred material for structural fasteners is corrosion and heat-resistant steel, A286. Also acceptable are Ti-6Al-4V, MP35N, and Inconel 718. For nonstructural externally threaded fasteners, austenitic 300 series corrosion resistance steel is also acceptable.

The use of 300-series stainless steel should be avoided for fasteners and inserts on flight hardware where magnetic cleanliness is a concern. This material has variable (lot to lot) magnetic properties that make its characterization difficult and could, in sufficient quantity, make it difficult to meets project magnetic cleanliness requirements. If 300-series stainless steel is used, de-magnetization procedures should be implemented to avoid magnetic cleanliness issues.

Fracture critical fasteners shall not be fabricated from materials that have low fracture toughness.

Fracture critical fasteners shall not be fabricated from Ti-6Al-4V.

All externally threaded fasteners used for flight applications shall be certified. Fasteners used in structural applications shall have critical certification as described in JPL D- 53669.

Fasteners used in nonstructural applications shall have, as a minimum, a certificate of conformance.

Critical certification shall include documentation of chemical and physical test results traceable to both heat and lot numbers.

5.1.8 Lubricants

The supplier shall prevent contamination of that hardware and critical adjacent hardware, i.e., mirrors, lenses, other experiments, etc., by outgassing of the lubricant or by lubricant creep or the natural wetting and wicking tendencies of the lubricants.

5.1.9 Compatibility

All of the COPVs, including all welds, shall show no degradation after a 10-year exposure to any of the following fluids:

Helium, per MIL-PRF-27407, Grade A

Nitrogen Tetroxide, (MON-3, Low Iron), per MIL-PRF-26539

Monomethylhydrazine, per MIL-PRF-27404

All of the COPVs, including all welds, shall show no degradation after a 6-month exposure to any of the following test fluids:

Deionized and Distilled Water per JSC-SPEC-C-20C

Isopropyl Alcohol per TT-I-735 (Grade A)

Nitrogen, MIL-PRF-27401

Argon per MIL-PRF-27415A

Xenon, Research Grade

After exposure to any of the above test fluids, the COPVs shall be flushed and dried by a supplier-prepared and NASA/GSFC-approved procedure.

5.1.10 Radiation Compatibility

All of the COPV materials shall show no degradation after radiation exposure. The following materials are known to be compatible:

Toray T-1000G fibers The supplier shall supply samples of any other materials in the flight-like condition (fully cured) for testing by the government by the DCR.

5.1.11 Bimetallic Joints

Welding shall be performed and inspected per vendor/NASA-approved procedure.

Control of weld filler material shall also be per vendor and NASA approval. For bimetal welds, the verification shall consist of:

Documentation of the type of material used.

Documentation of the method of fabrication

Lot acceptance testing, including documentation of the following steps:

o During fabrication, the first, every 10th and last weld joints are required to be bent greater than 90 degrees without breaking. The upset loss shall be measured for all pieces of these selected pieces.

o Tensile test samples on 2 pieces o Sectioning performed on 3 pieces and visual inspection.

o Temperature exposure test (three thermal cycles between LN2 and boiling water) o Penetrant inspection of all of the samples o Proof pressure test o External leak test o Passivation o Repeat proof pressure o Section and inspection

Flight part testing before integration with the COPV, including documentation of the following steps:

o Temperature exposure test (three thermal cycles between LN2 and boiling water) o Penetrant inspection.

o Proof pressure test.

o External leak test.

5.2 DISSIMILAR METALS

To avoid electrolytic corrosion, dissimilar metals should not be used in direct contact unless protection against corrosion has been provided in accordance with MIL-STD-

889. Variances from this policy must be submitted to the NASA/GSFC COR for approval.

5.3 PLANETARY PROTECTION

Europa has the potential of life. The contamination of the Europa Clipper spacecraft during its construction shall be minimized to prevent the cross-contamination between Europa and Earth-born life and also to prevent false positives when testing for life on future Europan missions. Planetary Protection (PP) refers to the protocols and treatment of hardware that are implemented to minimize this Earth-born microbe contamination on and within Europa Clipper hardware.

5.3.1 Bioburden Definition

The concentration of microbes or spores on or within a component is known as bioburden.

Specific bioburden definitions and limits are provided below, with measurement and treatment methods outlined in subsequent sections.

5.3.1.1 Surface Bioburden

For Europa hardware, the total bioburden for any exposed or free surface of a component shall be less than 300 spores per square meter.

5.3.1.2 Bulk Bioburden

The volumetric or bulk bioburden consists of microbes embedded or encapsulated within a given material.

5.3.2 Bioassay Definition

The test used to measure the bioburden for surfaces and bulk material is known as a bioassay. A bioassay is where a surface or volume is sampled to determine the number of microbes present on or within a material. Once a component or piece parts of a component has been bioassayed for bulk and surface bioburden and the results are below the allowable limits of 300 spores/m^2 and TBD spores/cm^3, respectively, the component or piece part is considered “clean” and will be referred to as such in this document. Bioassays are performed by the customer either at the supplier’s facility during the COPV fabrication process or after delivery of the COPV to the customer. The supplier shall be responsible for completing sterilization treatments outlined in subsequent sections and for making the hardware available for bioassays if deemed necessary by the customer. The supplier shall not be responsible for performing bioassays. The supplier shall include bioburden treatments and bioassay provisions in the manufacturing flow plan presented at major reviews.

5.3.2.1 Non-Polymers

The bulk bioburden of metals and ceramics are considered to be zero via process, given the elevated temperatures during raw material production and bulk bioassay is not required. Surfaces still require PP treatment and surface bioassay.

5.3.2.2 Polymers

Any non-ceramic, non-metallic component, i.e. polymer, is subject to bulk bioburden bioassay. 10% of the total volume of each polymer component shall be sent to the COR for bulk bioassay prior to machining, integration, and/or assembly. For resins and epoxies, sampling of a lot to be used on a component shall be subject to bulk bioassay.

5.3.3 Biobarriers

The vendor shall store the COPVs in COR-approved biobarriers that have been deemed clean via bioassay and approved by the COR. The biobarrier consists of bagging material made of plastic bagging, Dun-Shield (Llumalloy replacement), or other materials approved by the COR that has been confirmed clean with bioassay. The biobarrier helps to maintain surface cleanliness of the COPV and/or COPV parts & subassemblies.

5.3.4 PP Treatment Methods

This section describes methods for reducing bioburden. The supplier shall develop a planetary protection plan that incorporates one or more of these methods to reduce the surface and bulk bioburden of the deliverable hardware.

5.3.4.1 Surface Bioburden Treatments – Solvent Wiping

a. Wiping of surfaces with a sterile, lint-free wipe saturated with a 70% by volume solution of Isopropyl Alcohol (IPA) and deionized water

b. Combination of the physical wiping and the solvent reduces bioburden to below 300 spores per square meters.

c. This shall be done to the tank surface prior to winding.

5.3.4.2 Bulk Bioburden Treatments - Heat Microbial Reduction (HMR)

a) The process of elevating the temperature of the component or parts to a temperature of 116°C or greater for a prescribed time, as seen in Table 2.

b) This HMR will reduce the bioburden on both free and mated surfaces and within bulk encapsulated volumes to the required level.

c) This shall be performed on the completed tank.

d) Over-temperature fault protection shall be in place to prevent the COPV from exceeding its maximum allowable temperature during HMR.

e) All HMR events shall be performed prior to the final performance tests during acceptance and qualification testing to ensure the COPV still meets all performance specifications.

Table 2: HMR Times & Temperatures

Temperature (°C) Time (hr)

116 116.53

120 102.99

125 88.58

130 76.53

135 42.74

140 24.21

145 13.90

150 8.08

155 4.76

160 2.84

165 1.71

170 1.05

175 0.65

180 0.40

185 0.25

190 0.16

195 0.10

200 0.07

5.3.5 COPV PP Handling

The vendor shall include a preliminary Planetary Protection Plan for the kickoff meeting A final Planetary Protection plan shall be presented at DCR and provided to the COR for approval prior to the start building the flight COPV units.

5.3.5.1 Bulk Bioassays

Prior to assembly involving polymers-based parts, a representative 10% of each polymer within the COPV are subject to bulk bioassay by the customer. A minimum of 10% of the total volume of each polymer-based piece part, including but not limited to soft good adhesives, epoxies (stacking compounds, resin, potting, etc.), shall be provided to the COR for bulk bioassay in either raw stock or machined. The piece parts or raw stock to be subjected to bioassay shall be from the same lot as the parts used on the flight COPV’s. COPV assembly with soft goods or machining of soft goods shall NOT begin until the materials are deemed clean by the COR.

5.3.5.2 COPV Assembly

The assembly process of all COPVs shall be performed within an ISO-5 flow bench within a class 10,000 cleanroom. The tank surface shall be cleaned with 70% IPA solution prior to winding. A Mandatory Inspection Point (MIP) shall be in place prior to the winding. The duration of a bioassay of this surface shall be included in the project schedule. During the MIP, a bioassay is performed on all surfaces subject to these final closeout, encapsulation, or closeout. The bioassay shall be performed by personnel designated by the COR. Turnaround time is 3 days for a given sample. The winding shall not be performed until the surfaces are deemed clean of bioburden by the COR. Once the COPV assembly is complete, the component is subjected to HMR, after which it is deemed clean and delivered to the COR within a customer-approved biobarrier.

6.0 PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION AND TEST

6.1 QUALIFICATION

6.1.1 Qualification Testing

Qualification testing is performed on a single, dedicated Qualification (or Engineering) Model of the flight hardware that is not intended to fly, in order to qualify the hardware design for the maximum expected flight environment plus margin, including margin on environment duration or cycles. If approved by the COR, an engineering model of an assembly may be used as a qualification unit and be subjected to qualification environmental testing.

The engineering model shall be identical to the flight units and manufactured using the same assembly techniques and fabrication processes as the flight hardware including:

structure, thermal design, shielding, cabling, circuit layout, power consumption, functional modes, and electrical parts with the same signal characteristics.

The qualification or engineering model shall be manufactured and assembled and the qualification program shall be completed prior to the assembly of the flight hardware.

A Qualification Test Plan shall be prepared covering all required qualification testing.

6.1.2 Qualification Test Report

The supplier shall provide preliminary and final qualification reports that demonstrate that the COPV design is qualified for all requirements in COPV Specification EUROPA-PROP- SPEC-0008. The data generated by all new qualification tests shall be provided to the COR. The final qualification test report shall also include copies of the as-run test procedures.

6.1.3 Qualification By Similarity (QBS)

Any requirements that are verified through Qualification By Similarity (QBS) shall be approved by the COR, and the qualification reports for any similarity items shall be made available to the COR. Any design differences to referenced QBS items shall be documented in this report. Any QBS items that are not accepted by the COR shall be re-verified through qualification testing. The QBS report shall contain detailed rationale for acceptance of each verification proposed for QBS, including any risks identified in the QBS approach. Any differences to referenced QBS items shall be documented in this report. A preliminary QBS report shall be provided to the COR at Kick-off. A final QBS report shall be provided to the COR at DCR.

6.2 ACCEPTANCE VERIFICATION PLAN

An Acceptance Verification Plan shall be generated by the supplier to describe the details of how the analyses, inspections, and verification tests identified in this SOW will be performed.

Acceptance Verification tests shall demonstrate the item meets all of the specified performance requirements over the specified range of environments, measure performance parameters and reveal inadequacies in manufacturing and assembly such as workmanship or material problems. Any requirement that exceeds previous qualification test data shall be presented to the NASA/GSFC COR as part of the planning process for evaluation and a possible delta qualification test.

The plan should state the purpose of each test, state acceptance criteria, describe in detail the test method, set up, instrumentation, data analysis methods (if applicable), and give the sequence of the tests. The plan should include an acceptance verification matrix summarizing how all requirements are verified (analysis, inspection, test, per the definitions in this SOW), and listing all tests that will be performed on the COPV. This document shall be approved by NASA/GSFC COR before any testing is performed.

This plan shall be a supplier controlled document and shall indicate all changes made after the initial approval by the GSFC. After Verification Plan approval, no changes shall be made without written NASA/GSFC COR approval.

6.3 VERIFICATION METHODS

Verification methods include inspection, analysis, as well as environmental, functional, and performance testing, or a combination of these techniques.

6.3.1 Inspection

Verification by inspection includes (but is not limited to) visual inspection, simple physical manipulation, gauging, measurement, and documentation examination.

6.3.2 Analysis

Verification by analysis will be used to show design margins. Also, when the particular tests required for verification are impractical, risky, unacceptably long, or prohibitively expensive, analysis may be used instead of testing, as noted in the verification matrices.

Analysis, including simulations where applicable, will also be used to guarantee that the COPV will perform as expected under worst-case conditions.

6.3.3 Test

Verification by test includes, but is not limited to, the evaluation of performance by use of special equipment or instrumentation, simulation techniques, and the application of established principles and procedures to determine compliance with requirements.

6.4 INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS

Verification by inspection includes visual inspection of the physical hardware, a physical measurement of a property of the hardware (including weight and center of gravity), or the documentation search demonstrating hardware of an identical design has demonstrated fulfillment of a requirement.

6.4.1 Visual Inspection

Visual inspection of the physical hardware by a customer appointed qualified inspector.

6.4.2 Physical Measurement

Physical measurement of hardware property (i.e. mass, dimensions, etc.) demonstrating the hardware meets specific requirement.

6.4.3 Documentation Search

Verification of requirements based on similarity shall include supporting rationale and all referenced documentation and shall be approved by the GSFC COR. Traceability to similar hardware shall document all of the differences between the similar hardware and the deliverable item.

6.5 TEST REQUIREMENTS

This section provides general test requirements on how testing is to be performed in the process of verifying that the deliverable item meets its requirements. Performance parameter measurements shall be taken to establish a baseline that can be used to assure that there are no data trends established in successive tests that indicate a degradation of performance trend within specification limits that could result in unacceptable performance in flight.

6.5.1 Definitions

Qualification or Prototype Hardware: Hardware of a new design; it is subject to a design qualification test program; it is not intended for flight. The purpose of the tests on this hardware is to prove that a new design meets one or more of its design requirements. Qualification testing is performed at maximum expected flight levels plus a margin. Test durations are typically longer than for acceptance tests.

Protoflight Hardware: Flight hardware of a new design; it is subject to a qualification test program that combines elements of prototype and flight acceptance verification;

that is, the application of design qualification test levels and flight acceptance test durations. The purpose of the test on this hardware is to prove that a new design meets one or more of its design requirements. Protoflight testing is performed at maximum expected flight levels plus a margin. Test durations are typically the same as for acceptance tests.

Follow-On (Acceptance) Hardware: Flight hardware built in accordance with a design that has been qualified either as prototype or as protoflight hardware; follow-on hardware is subject to a flight acceptance test program. The purpose of the test on this hardware is to prove that a particular flight unit has been manufactured properly. The design has already been proven during a qualification or protoflight test program.

Acceptance testing is performed at maximum expected flight levels.

6.5.2 Test Factors

The following test factors and durations, shown in Table 3, shall be used for prototype, protoflight, and flight hardware.

Table 3 Test Factors and Durations

Environment Design/Qualification

(Qual) Flight Acceptance (FA)

Random Vibration:

Level

Duration

FA level + 3dB

2 x FA duration (2 min/axis)

Envelope of MEFL and

Minimum Workmanship level

1 min/axis

Simulated Pyro

Shock

1.4 x FA level 2 shocks/axis (note 8)

NA

Pyro Device

Firings

2 firings

N/A

(no test required)

Quasi Static

Loads:

per AIAA-S081 per AIAA-S081

Thermal Test

Duration

6 hrs cold/6 hrs hot 6 hrs cold/6 hrs hot

Number of

Thermal Cycles

3 cycles minimum to 10 cycles max (cumulative)

3 cycles minimum to 10 cycles max (cumulative)

Temperature

Ramp Rate |dT/dt| ≤ 5oC/min

|dT/dt| ≤ 5oC/min

6.5.3 Test Tolerances

Tolerances for the various mechanical test parameters are given in Table 4.

Table 4 Test Tolerances Test Test Parameter Tolerance

Acoustics Overall Level: 1dB

1/3 Octave Band Frequency:

f 40 Hz + 3, - 6 dB

40 < f < 3150 Hz 3 dB f 3150 Hz + 3, - 6 dB

Temperature 2 C

Humidity 5% RH

Loads Steady-State (Acceleration): 5%

Static: 5%

Mass Properties Weight: 0.2%

Center of Mass: 2 mm

Mechanical Response Spectrum: + 25%, - 10%

Shock Time History: 10%

Pressure >1.3 x 104 Pa (> 100 mm Hg): 5%

1.3 x 104 to 1.3 x 102 Pa (100 mm Hg to 1 mm Hg): 10%

1.3 x 102 to 1.3 x 101 Pa (1 mm Hg to 1 micron): 25%

< 1.3 x 101 Pa (< 1 micron): 80%

Vibration Sinusoidal: Amplitude 10%

Frequency 2%

Random: RMS Level 10%

Accel. Spectral Density 3 dB

6.5.4 Test Restrictions

6.5.4.1 Failure during Tests

NASA/GSFC shall be notified within 24 hours of a test failure (non-conformance or trend indicating that an out-of-spec condition will result). When a failure occurs, determination will be made as to the feasibility and value of continuing the test to its specified conclusion. The test shall be stopped if equipment fails during testing in cases where this failure will result in damage to the equipment. Otherwise, the test shall be completed to obtain as much information as possible. If corrective action is taken, the test will be repeated to the extent necessary to demonstrate that the test item’s performance is satisfactory. If corrective action taken, as a result of failure, affects the validity of previously completed tests (e.g., redesign of a component), prior tests will be repeated.

If during a test sequence, a test item is operated in excess of design life and wears out or becomes unsuitable for further testing from causes other than deficiencies, a spare will be substituted, and previously completed tests will be repeated to the extent necessary.

No replacement, adjustment, maintenance, or repairs are authorized during testing. This requirement does not prevent the replacement or adjustment of equipment that has exceeded its design operating life during tests, provided that…