Attachment_A_EUROPA-PROP-SOW-0006_12-06-2017.docx.pdf

Effective Date: 12/06/2017

Expiration Date: 12/06/2022

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-0006, Revision -

EUROPA Clipper Propulsion, Code 597

Low Pressure Latch Valve (LPLV)

Statement of Work

Goddard Space Flight Center

Greenbelt, Maryland

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Greenbelt, Maryland

GSFC Europa Clipper Propulsion

CMO K. Mrowczynski

12/06/2017

RRELEASED

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

LPLV SOW EUROPA-PROP-SOW-0006, Revision -i

Low Pressure Latch Valve (LPLV) Statement of Work

Signature/Approval Page

Prepared by:

Eric Golliher

Reviewers/Approvers:

Caitlin Bacha

Dan Ramspacher

Timothy Johnson

Eric Haggquist

Erin Lalime

Oscar Cheatom

Megan Casey

James Harper

Thomas Correll

Mark Fiebig

Luis Gallo

Approved by:

Caitlin Bacha

*** Electronic signatures are available on-line at https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov*** https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov/ ii

Preface

This document is a Europa Clipper Propulsion project 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 EUROPA Propulsion 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

Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 iii

Change History Log

Revision Effective Date Description of Changes

(Reference the SCoRe Approval Date)

Revision - 12/06/2017 Released following approval of EUROPA-SCoRe-0082 iv

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

2.2.1 Program Plan and Schedule

2.2.2 Monthly Status Report

2.2.3 Weekly Program Status Update

2.3 Reviews and Meetings

2.3.1 Kickoff Meeting

2.3.2 Design Conformance Review (DCR)

2.3.3 Qualification Test Readiness Review (QTRR)

2.3.4 Qualification Review

2.3.5 Acceptance Test Readiness Review (ATRR)

2.3.6 Pre-Ship Review (PSR)

2.3.7 Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM)

2.4 Advanced Notifications

2.5 Documentation

3.0 Analysis

3.1 Interface Control Documentation (ICD)

3.2 Drawing Package

3.3 Computer Models

3.4 Structural Analysis Report

3.5 Thermal Analysis Report

3.6 Worst Case Circuit Analysis Report

3.7 Parts Stress Analysis Report

3.8 Radiation Hardness Analysis Report

3.9 Magnetic Field Analysis Report

3.10 Failure Modes, Effects, and criticality Analysis Report

3.11 Operational Constraints

3.12 Venting Analysis

3.13 Center of Mass Location

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

v

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 Passivation of Wetted Stainless Steel

5.1.11 Humidity

5.1.12 Dissimilar Metals

5.2 EEE Parts Design Requirements

5.2.1 General

5.2.2 Connectors/Wires Requirements

5.2.3 Position Indicator Testing

5.3 Dielectric Structures

5.4 Planetary Protection

5.4.1 Bioburden

5.4.2 Bioassay

5.4.3 Biobarriers

5.4.4 PP Treatment Methods

5.4.5 LPLV PP Handling

5.5 Venting

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 Report

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

vi

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

7.1 General 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-Suppliers 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

7.4.5 Hardware Handling, Cleaning and Packaging

7.4.6 Workmanship: Use of Alternate Workmanship Standards

7.5 EEE Parts QA Requirements

7.5.1 General

7.5.2 Parts Age Control

7.5.3 GIDEP Alerts and Problem Advisories

7.5.4 Reuse of Parts and Materials

7.5.5 Part Notification of Failure

7.5.6 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 DILS Appendix C. ETAS Form (ENVIRONMENTAL TEST AUTHORIZATION SUMMARY) . 56

Appendix D EUROPA Material Selection Forms Appendix E. List of Applicable Documents Appendix F. Qualification Verification Matrix Appendix G. Acceptance Verification Matrix vii

List of Tables

Table Page

Table 1 Prohibited Materials List Table 2: HMR Times & Temperatures Table 3 Test Durations and Factors Table 4 Test Tolerances

Table 5: Cycle Qualification Requirements

Table 6: Mandatory Inspection Points (MIPs)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL INFORMATION

The Europa Clipper mission is being formulated and implemented by a joint partnership between the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the Applied Physics Laboratory, with NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (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 Project Low Pressure Latch Valve Specification, from here on referred to as the latch valve or low pressure latch valve

(LPLV).

1.2 SCOPE

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

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 LPLV design shall have been qualified to the levels in Europa Project LPLV Specification EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0006 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 Representative (COR).

The supplier shall generate a specification verification matrix listing each section in Europa Project LPLV Specification EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0006 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, EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0006, 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 COR for all technical aspects of the latch valve 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 COR technical status reports via weekly teleconference and a monthly written report. The report shall be a summary presentation of the period's progress, problem areas, and activities on-going and planned. As described in Section 2.2.3, the supplier shall hold weekly status teleconferences (telecons) with the COR where the supplier reports on progress, schedule, problems, upcoming MIPs, and action item status, at a minimum.

2.2.1 Program Plan and Schedule

The supplier shall develop a detailed program plan and schedule to describe how the work will be conducted. The supplier shall develop the plans for these activities and the COR shall review and approve these plans.

The supplier shall develop a Program Plan that includes the elements given below at a minimum.

How the program is to be managed

The key management, technical and quality people on the program

Any and all subsuppliers and their role in the program

How the supplier plans to manage their subsuppliers

The programmatic and technical risks

The supplier shall use the Program Plan described above to develop a detailed schedule for the program, updated monthly.

The supplier shall present a preliminary version of the Program Plan and schedule at the Kick-off meeting (2.3.1). The supplier shall incorporate comments made at the Kick-off Meeting from the COR into the Program Plan document and submit a final document to the COR for review and approval. The final Program Plan shall be submitted to the COR no later than one (1) week after the Kick-off Meeting and the COR shall return this document to the supplier with comments no later than one (1) week after the supplier provides the document. This document shall be updated monthly, with changes noted in the monthly status report.

2.2.2 Monthly Status Report

The supplier shall deliver to the COR a monthly written contract status report on the first day of each month. This report shall

Summarize the contract activities for the preceding month, including the activities at the suppliers subsuppliers

Review the progress of contract activities against the contract Program Plan and schedule

Identify any issues at both the supplier’s or subsupplier’s venues which could adversely affect work on the contract or the contact schedule

Provide whatever additional information is relevant for understanding the contract status

List any Mandatory inspection Points (MIPs) anticipated for the next month

2.2.3 Weekly Program Status Update

The supplier’s Program Manager (PM) and the COR shall have a weekly telephone call of approximately one half hour duration. The purpose of this call is for the supplier PM to update the COR on the status of ongoing program activities and apprise the COR of any issues or problems which need attention.

2.3 REVIEWS AND MEETINGS

The meetings listed below shall be part of this contract activity. These meetings shall be held at the supplier’s site. Attendees may also include representatives from Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).

2.3.1 Kickoff 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 one (1) month after award of the contract.

The supplier shall provide to the COR a Kick-off presentation package and all other required deliverables one (1) week 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 LPLV Specification EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0006 in a sufficient detail. At a minimum, the Kick-off Meeting presentation shall cover the following areas:

Program management, program plan, and schedule

Configuration management

Quality assurance

Flight heritage

Performance and environmental requirements, and specification compliance assessment

Qualification Report and Qualification by Similarity (QBS) Report, if applicable (Section 6.1)

Details and results of any risk reduction development testing performed to date

Preliminary qualification test plan, if applicable (Section 6.1.1Error! Reference s ource not found.)

Manufacturing flow with government MIPs (Section 7.1.2.3)

Facilities

Preliminary material selections

The supplier shall include the minimum material thickness and material surrounding all EEE parts within the valve. The suppler shall provide any known radiation susceptibility documentations for all EEE parts

2.3.2 Design Conformance Review (DCR)

The supplier shall organize and present a Design Conformance Review to a customer team at the supplier’s facility prior to starting the manufacturing program, on a date per the required schedule in Appendix B. Long lead hardware may be procured prior to the DCR only with written concurrence from the COR. The supplier shall provide to the COR a Design Conformance Review presentation package and all other required deliverable data two (2) weeks prior to the review. The Design Conformance Review shall address all design, drawings, analysis, and tests outlined in this SOW and the Europa Project LPLV Specification EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0006 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 shall cover the following areas:

Program plan, risks, and schedule

Qualification Report and Qualification by Similarity (QBS) Report, if applicable (Section 6.1)

Qualification Test Plan, if applicable (Section 6.1.1)

Acceptance Test Plan (Section 6.2)

Planetary Protection Plan (Section 5.4)

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)

Drawing Package (Section 3.2)

Thermal modeling results

Summary of LPLV Operational Constraints (Section 3.11)

Mechanical/Structural analyses (Section 3.4)

Electrical Worst-Case analyses (Section 3.6)

Parts Stress analysis (Section 3.7)

Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (Section 3.10)

Radiation Hardness Analysis (Section 3.8)

Magnetic Field Analysis (Section 3.9)

EEE Part EEE-INST-002 Conformance Test Data Package (Section 5.2.1)

Current Specification Verification matrices (Appendix F & G)

Review minutes shall be prepared and, as a minimum, shall include attendance, action items, action item accomplishment responsibility, action item deadlines, 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.

2.3.3 Qualification Test Readiness Review (QTRR)

The supplier shall hold a Qualification Test Readiness Review at the supplier's facility prior to starting qualification testing. The supplier shall provide to the COR 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

Updated Specification verification matrices

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 COR

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.

2.3.4 Qualification Review

The supplier shall provide final qualification reports which demonstrate that the latch valve design is qualified for all requirements in EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0006. 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

2.3.5 Acceptance Test Readiness Review (ATRR)

The supplier shall hold an Acceptance Test Readiness Review at the supplier's facility prior to the beginning of the acceptance test campaign. The supplier shall demonstrate that all 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

Updated 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 COR

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.

2.3.6 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 COR. The supplier shall provide to the COR 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 COR 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

Final 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 shall be comprised of 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 cleanliness and outgassing rate data

Log of total operating time (number of cycles per LPLV) 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

2.3.7 Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM)

The supplier shall plan for and facilitate 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 parts, test plans, test procedures, software changes, design modifications, and design analyses

2.4 ADVANCED NOTIFICATIONS

The supplier shall notify the COR at least one (1) week 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 COR. Quality Assurance representative. Event specific notification requirements (such as failures, anomalies, etc.) are included in the appropriate sections.

All documentation shall be submitted electronically to the COR.

2.5 DOCUMENTATION

The supplier shall ensure the generation and delivery of all documentation as called for in the contract and listed here Appendix B

In addition to that documentation specifically called for in the contract, upon request by the COR, the supplier shall make available a copy of any document or data generated during this contract performance for review by the COR 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 to the COR.

3.0 ANALYSIS

The supplier shall perform analyses of the technical and environmental requirements specified in the Europa Propulsion Subsystem Low Pressure Latch Valve Specification (EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0006) to ensure compliance of the hardware, and to assemble the documentation necessary to ensure its usability by the customer.

3.1 INTERFACE CONTROL DOCUMENTATION (ICD)

The Supplier shall provide document(s) and/or drawing(s) that define, in detail, all electrical, thermal, and mechanical interfaces, including the center of mass relative to an external reference, subject to review and approval by the COR. The center of mass shall been determined analytically via solid model. The mounting interfaces and center of mass shall be defined in the ICD. The electrical portion of the ICD shall include at least the following values for worst case specified conditions: maximum and minimum coil inductance in both positions, maximum and minimum coil current, maximum and minimum coil power, maximum and minimum coil resistance, maximum pull-in voltage, guaranteed survival time at maximum operating voltage, guaranteed survival time at 40 V, and maximum response time at minimum operating voltage. These documents and/or drawings shall be delivered two (2) weeks before the DCR and be reviewed and approved at the DCR.

3.2 DRAWING PACKAGE

The supplier shall make a complete drawing package, including mechanical drawings and electrical schematics at a minimum, 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.

Mechanical Model: STEP files

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 latch valve to ensure the capability to withstand and survive launch, ascent, and all operational loads per the requirements of NASA-Std. 8719.24 Rev. A. This analysis shall include the line load limits for axial, torque, momentum, and all combinations applied at the inlet and outlet tube interfaces. The results of these analyses shall be summarized in a supplier format Structural Analyses Report that will be provided to the COR for approval two (2) weeks before the DCR.

3.5 THERMAL ANALYSIS REPORT

The contractor shall provide a thermal analysis which documents that temperatures for all parts of the latch valve are within the Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts derating guidelines for operation in a vacuum environment. Analysis shall prove that requirements will be met under worst case conditions when the S/C thermal interface is at maximum/minimum qualification temperature and when the component is operating at maximum/minimum power dissipation. All analysis results shall be summarized in the Thermal Analyses Report, to be provided for review as per the contract schedule. This report should contain a description of any computer models that were used to perform the analysis.

3.6 WORST CASE CIRCUIT ANALYSIS REPORT

The supplier shall perform worst-case parameter analyses on performance critical or functional critical components for which excessive operating variations could compromise mission performance. The supplier shall identify the worst case analyses planned to assure the design meets critical performance and life requirements. When verification by analysis is used, the analyses shall consider all parameters at worst-case limits and worst-case environmental conditions for the parameter or operation being evaluated. Elements that warrant worst case analysis include: sensitive analog circuitry, motor and actuator systems, electro-mechanical elements that require torque margin to operate over life and environmental variations.

The supplier shall provide any limitations on the duration of power application in this document.

The worst case circuit analysis report shall include ESD events on any sensitive components. Reference MIL-STD-883G, Class 1A (human body model, 100 pF, 1000 V, 1500 ohm), test method 3015.7. Analysis shall be acceptable verification for the EEE parts expected within the latch valve due to the large anticipated margins.

The results of these analyses shall be summarized in a Supplier format Worst Case Circuit Analysis Report that will be provided to the COR for review.

3.7 PARTS STRESS ANALYSIS REPORT

The supplier shall perform parts stress analyses on Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts and devices to certify conformance with the derating requirements of EEE parts. The analyses shall be documented, and justification shall be included for all applications that do not meet the derating criteria. The Supplier shall use NASA document EEE-INST-002, Instructions for EEE Parts Selection, Screening, Qualification, and Derating to establish criteria. Supplier derating guidelines may be considered in place of EEE-INST-002 guidelines but shall be submitted to the COR for approval. The results of these analyses shall be summarized in a Supplier format Parts Stress Analysis Report that will be provided to the COR for review.

3.8 RADIATION HARDNESS ANALYSIS REPORT

The radiation testing and qualification of the EEE parts shall be documented in a stand-alone report. This report shall provide full information on the testing performed on the parts, and what the effects were. The results of these analyses shall be summarized in a Supplier format report that will be provided to the COR for review.

3.9 MAGNETIC FIELD ANALYSIS REPORT

The magnetic field produced by the static configuration of the field only shall be measured for the latch valve. This measurement shall be presented in a stand-alone document that will be provided to the COR.

3.10 FAILURE MODES, EFFECTS, AND CRITICALITY ANALYSIS REPORT

The supplier shall identify failure modes of the valve 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.

3.11 OPERATIONAL CONSTRAINTS

The supplier shall provide an operational constraints document for the LPLV design, which describes constraints on handling and operation to prevent unintentional damage to the flight hardware. At a minimum, the operational constraints document shall cover the following items:

Maximum flow rates through the valve to avoid internal damage

Maximum pressure differential across the valve seat to avoid seat damage

Maximum voltage application duration to avoid damaging electronics (results of worst-case thermal analysis)

Maximum and minimum storage temperature and humidity

Maximum exposure temperature and pressure limits

Maximum qualified cycle life

Maximum shelf life

Compatible fluids

The supplier shall deliver this document prior to the DCR per schedule in Appendix B

3.12 VENTING ANALYSIS

The supplier shall perform a venting analysis to verify that the latch valve can survive without degradation an external depressurization rate of -4.4kPa/s (-0.638 psi/s) during launch (Atlas V). A 1.5x margin for analysis shall be applied to this depressurization rate.

Venting adequacy can be established by satisfying the following empirical rule:

𝑉

𝐴 < 2000 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠 where V = the total internal “void” volume of the assembly in cubic inches and A is the total area of the vent hole(s) or path(s) in square inches. If the assembly satisfies this rule, then no further venting analysis is necessary.

3.13 CENTER OF MASS LOCATION

The center of mass shall be provided for the latch valve, not including harness. The center of mass may be calculated analytically via solid model.

4.0 HARDWARE PROCUREMENT

4.1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

The supplier shall either procure or manufacture all components required to assemble, integrate, and test the latch valve to support the delivery dates as called for in the contract and listed in Appendix B. The supplier shall assemble the quantities of deliverable latch valve hardware described below. The supplier shall provide a Fabrication, Assembly, and Inspection Flow plan one (1) week prior to the Kick-off Meeting that describes the fabrication, assembly, and inspection process from piece parts to the completely assembled LPLVs. This plan shall include all Mandatory Inspection Points (MIPs).

4.2 FLIGHT UNITS

The supplier shall provide the following hardware to meet the requirements of the Europa Project Low Pressure Latch Valve Specification (EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-006).

a) Eight (8) latch valve Flight Units, plus one (1) spare unit

All units shall be delivered to the customer within 12 months After Receipt of Order

(ARO).

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 templates in Appendix D. The MIUL shall identify all materials and processes used in fabrication of the LPLV. 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 Latch Valve shall be included in the MIUL. The COR shall review and approve all proposed LPLV materials and processes.

The supplier shall provide a Material Usage Agreement (refer to Appendix D) to the COR for each material within the LPLV 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 latch valve 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 3.9).

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.

Pure Tin, Zinc, and Cadmium are not acceptable for flight use.

5.1.2 Shelf Life Control

The supplier shall implement a 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 latch valve 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 COR.

Table 1: Prohibited Materials List

Alloy 426 Mumetal Alloy 7201 Nichrome

Carbon Steel 1008 Nickel 200, 270

Chromium3 Nickel Iron

Cobalt Pelcoloy

Copperweld Permalloy

Dumet Platinum3

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. With these precautions, Stainless Steel 304 is one of the preferred alternative materials for the Europa Clipper mission.

3Chromium and Platinum are listed by the Europa Magnetics Control Plan (D-55729) as acceptable materials for Europa, but should still be minimized.

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 for high resistance.

5.1.6 Process Selection Requirements

Materials and manufacturing process information shall be provided on the MIUL form.

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. If 300-series stainless steel is used, de-magnetization procedures shall 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.

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 delivered hardware and critical adjacent hardware, by outgassing of the lubricant or by lubricant creep or the natural wetting and wicking tendencies of the lubricants. Any use of lubricants shall be approved by the

COR.

5.1.9 Compatibility

All internal surfaces of the latch valves within the fluid path, including all welds, shall show no degradation over the mission life stated herein to any of the following fluids:

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

Monomethylhydrazine, per MIL-PRF-27404

All parts of the latch valves, 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)

Argon per MIL-PRF-27415A

Gaseous Nitrogen per MIL-PRF-27401

Ultra High Purity Gaseous Helium per MIL-PRF-27407

After exposure to any of the above fluids, the latch valves shall be flushed and dried by a supplier-prepared and customer-approved procedure.

5.1.10 Passivation of Wetted Stainless Steel

All parts consisting of a stainless steel alloy that are wetted within propellant shall be passivated using electro-polishing to minimize iron nitrate crystal development in accordance with ASTM B912. The supplier shall include alternatives for pickling and passivation of stainless steel parts if electro-polishing is not possible at the kickoff for review and approval by the COR.

5.1.11 Humidity

The supplier shall may use qualification by similarity with previous valves designs to verify the humidity requirement in the Low Pressure Latch Valve Specification, EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0006

5.1.12 Dissimilar Metals

To avoid electrolytic corrosion, dissimilar metals shall 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 COR for approval.

5.2 EEE PARTS DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

5.2.1 General

Flight Unit parts, including wire and cable, shall be selected and processed in accordance with the Level 1 requirements of Sections 3.0, 5.1, 5.2, 6.3, and 6.4 of EEE- INST-002, “Instructions for EEE Parts Selection, Screening, Qualification and Derating”. All application notes and parts subsections in EEE-INST-002 shall apply unless specifically excluded here or waived by the COR. Sections 1.0, 2.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, 6.1, 6.2, 6.5, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, and M1 of EEE-INST-002 are not applicable. All test data completed in accordance with EEE-INST-002 and certifications for EEE parts shall be provided to the COR at DCR. Violations of derating according to Section 6.5 and Table 4 in each category of parts in EEE-INST-002 shall be reported and require approval by the COR at DCR.

5.2.2 Connectors/Wires Requirements

5.2.2.1 Wire Specifications

All internal wire types shall meet the Wire and Cable Requirements in Section W1 of EEE-INST-002 for the worst case environments and radiation specified in the valve specification (EUROPA-PROP-SPEC-0006). All magnet wire used shall be qualified to ANSI/NEMA MW 1000 or equivalent. Any use of other wire needs approval by the

COR.

5.2.2.2 Leadwires

Leadwires shall be twisted shielded pairs or triples with no insulation jacket (i.e., M27500C22SC2S00, M27500C26SC3S00, or similar wire approved by the COR). The connections for each coil shall form a separate 22 AWG shielded pair. The position indicator connections shall form separate 26 AWG shielded triple(s) or separate 26 AWG shielded pair(s).

5.2.2.3 Minimum Wire Size

No wire smaller than AWG #26 shall be used with the exception of magnet wire. The size of magnet wire shall be provided to the COR at the DCR. Any lead wire larger than AWG #22 shall require approval by the COR.

5.2.2.4 Wire Derating

The current carrying capacity of the wires shall be derated for continuous operation at the required current levels in a vacuum, as defined in Section W1 of EEE-INST-002.

5.2.2.5 Wire Composition

Wire conductors and shields shall be copper or a copper alloy. The wires and shields may be tinned or plated with suitable materials except nickel or other magnetic materials. Magnet wire insulation shall be of two layers, also known as “heavy,” and conform to ANSI/NEMA MW 1000; exceptions must be justified-to and approved by the COR. During manufacturing of any part of the low pressure latch valve, mineral oil shall not be used as a lubricant. ANSI/NEMA MW 1000 part number suffix P shall be used;

exceptions must be justified to and approved by the COR. Suitable handling and storage precautions shall be used for the wire type, as called out in EEE-INST-002.

A 20 foot sample of all magnetic wire from the same lot used within the valve shall be delivered to the customer with the delivery of the flight and qualification valve units for additional testing.

5.2.3 Position Indicator Testing

Lot specific variables and attributes data for 100% screening and sample qualifications tests shall be submitted to show that tests were performed with acceptable results in the same lot/date code, same manufacturer on the same manufacturing line. Data shall be for the actual lot of parts that are intended for flight use. Generic or similarity screening and qualification data is not acceptable.

5.3 DIELECTRIC STRUCTURES

All dielectric structures shall have a charge bleed path to the spacecraft interface, designed to route the discharge into the spacecraft structure in a controlled fashion.

Dielectric structures with a bulk resistivity of greater than 1012 ohm-cm shall not be used.

5.4 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.

5.4.1 Bioburden

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.

5.4.1.1 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.

5.4.1.2 Bulk Bioburden

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

5.4.2 Bioassay

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 LPLV fabrication process or after delivery of the LPLV 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 COR. 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.

5.4.2.1 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.

5.4.2.2 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.

5.4.3 Biobarriers

The supplier shall store the valves in customer-approved biobarriers that have been deemed clean via bioassay and approved by the COR after the valve has been subjected to HMR. The biobarrier consists of bagging material made of plastic bagging, Dun-Shield (Llumalloy replacement), other materials approved by the COR that has been confirmed clean with bioassay by GSFC, APL, or JPL personnel. The biobarrier helps to maintain surface cleanliness of the valve and/or valve parts & subassemblies.

5.4.4 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. The treatment process and handling is defined in Section 5.4.5.

5.4.4.1 Surface Bioburden Treatments

5.4.4.1.1 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.

5.4.4.1.2 Propellant Exposure

a. Any surfaces exposed to liquid propellant, either Monomethylhydrazine (MMH) or nitrogen tetroxide (NTO), shall be considered sterile.

b. This approach shall only be used if the surface material of the part to be wetted with propellant is compatible with that respective propellant.

5.4.4.2 Bulk Bioburden Treatments

5.4.4.2.1 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 1.

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

c) The temperature and time relationship for HMR is defined in Table 1.

Table 1: 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

5.4.4.2.2 Liquid Propellant Exposure

a) Porous materials, i.e. many soft goods, saturated with propellants (MMH & NTO) shall be considered sterile.

5.4.5 LPLV PP Handling

The supplier 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 LPLV units.

5.4.5.1 Bulk Bioassays

Prior to assembly involving polymers-based parts, a representative 10% of each polymer within the LPLV are subject to bulk bioassay by the customer. A minimum of 10% of the total volume of each polymer-based piece part (seals, valve seats, etc.), electronics, adhesives, and 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 LPLV’s.

LPLV assembly with soft goods or machining of soft goods shall NOT begin until the materials are deemed clean by the COR.

5.4.5.2 Bioburden Reduction

The bulk and surface bioburden on and within the LPLV’s shall be reduced using HMR.

The supplier shall determine at what level HMR is…