SSP_50034_Revision_D.DOC

SSP 50034

Revision D

NASA/ESA Bilateral Integration and Verification Plan

International Space Station Program

Revision D

March 2005

National Aeronautics and Space Administration International Space Station Program Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas

REVISION AND HISTORY PAGE

INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION PROGRAM

NASA/ESA Bilateral Integration and Verification Plan

CHANGE SHEET

June 17, 2005

Revision D

Space Station Control Board Directive 008805/(1-1), dated 03-17-05 and 008805R1/(1-1), dated 04-12-05. (2)

CHANGE INSTRUCTIONS

SSP 50034, NASA/ESA Bilateral Integration and Verification Plan for Columbus and ATV, has been baselined by the authority of SSCD 008805 and 008805R1. All future updates to this document will be identified on this change sheet.

International Space Station Program

NASA/ESA Bilateral Integration and Verification Plan

March 2005

PREFACE

CONCURRENCE

March 2005

CONCURRENCE (Continued)

March 2005

INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION PROGRAM

LIST OF CHANGES

March 2005

All changes to paragraphs, tables, and figures in this document are shown below:

1.3

2.1

2.2

4.1.2.1

4.1.3

4.2.1

4.2.2

5.2.1.1

5.2.1.2

5.2.2.2 (deleted)

5.2.7

5.2.8

5.2.9

6.3

1.1.1

1.1.2

1.3

2.1

2.2

3.4

4.1.1

4.1.2

4.1.3

4.2

4.2.1

4.3

4.3.2

4.4.4

4.4.6 (new)

5.2.10 (new)

5.3 (new)

5.3.1 (new)

5.3.2 (new)

5.3.3 (new)

5.3.4 (new)

5.3.5 (new)

6.4 (new)

APPENDIX(ES)

C

Table C-1

Test Sheet 2A

Tests sheet 3A

Test Sheet 6

Test Sheet 7

Test Sheet 9

Test Sheet 10

Test Sheet 21

Test Sheet 22

Test Sheet 24

Test Sheet 25

D

Table D-1 (new)

Test Sheet D1 (new)

Test Sheet D2 (new)

Test Sheet D3 (new)

Test Sheet D4 (new)

E page E-2

F (new)

G (new)

4.4.1.1

5.2.1.2

5.2.2.2 (SSCN 6245)

5.2.5

5.2.6

5.2.11 (SSCN 2664)

Replaced “DASA” by “ASTRIUM” in all Paragraphs and Test Sheets

APPENDIX(ES)

C

Table C-1

Test Sheets updated:

3A, 3B, 6, 7, 9, 20, 21, 22, 23

Test Sheet added:

3A-1, 26

G

Col VCD format

H

TBDs/TBCs

4.4.1.1

4.4.5.1

5.2.7

5.3.3

5.3.5

APPENDIX(ES)

C

Table C-1 updated

Test Sheet added:

9-1

D

Table D-1 updated

Test Sheets updated:

D-2, -3, and -4

Test Sheet added:

D-5

E

Updated the content to reflect agreed list of candidate verification activities for APM

G

ATV VCD Sample added

H

TBDs updated

TBCs updated

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PARAGRAPH

PAGE

1-11.0 introduction

1.1 Purpose and Scope of Document

1-1 1.1.1 Purpose

1-1 1.1.2 Scope

1-1 1.2 Precedence

1-2 1.3 Control and maintenance

1-2 2.0

RELATED DOCUMENTS

2-1 2.1 Applicable Documents

2-1 2.2 Reference Documents

2-2 3.0 Interfacing Hardware Description

3-1 3.1 Attached pressurized module to NODE 2

3-1 3.2 ISPR to APM

3-1 3.3 APM Robotics Interfaces

3-2 3.4 ATV to ISS/russian service module

3-2 3.4.1 Proximity Operations Interfaces

3-2 3.4.2 Physical Docking Interfaces

3-3 3.4.3 ISS Reboost/Refuelling Functional Interfaces

3-3 4.0 Verification Management

4-1 4.1 Verification Program Roles and Responsibilities

4-1 4.1.1 ESA Responsibilities

4-1 4.1.2 NASA Responsibilities

4-2 4.1.2.1 International space station program office Integrated Test AND Verification Team

4-3 4.1.3 Relationship between NASA and ESA Verification Management

4-3 4.2 Verification Process

4-3 4.2.1 ESA Verification process

4-4 4.2.2 NASA Verification Process

4-5 4.3 Verification Methods

4-5 4.3.1 Analysis/Similarity

4-5 4.3.2 Review of Design

4-6 4.3.3 Inspection

4-6 4.3.4 Demonstration

4-6 4.3.5 Test

4-6 4.4 Verification Reporting

4-7 4.4.1 ESA Verification Reporting

4-7 4.4.1.1 ESA Verification Control Reports/Status Reports

4-7 4.4.1.2 ESA Verification Compliance

4-7 4.4.2 NASA Verification Reporting

4-8 4.4.2.1 Program Verification Information System

4-8 4.4.3 Problem Reporting and Corrective Actions

4-8 4.4.4 NASA Process sampling

4-9 4.4.5 Certification of Flight Readiness

4-9 4.4.5.1 Launch Vehicle CoFR

4-9 4.4.5.2 ESA ISS CoFR

4-9 4.4.6 Joint NASA/ESA schedules

4-9 5.0

SUMMARY VERIFICATION ACTIVITIES DESCRIPTION

5-1 5.1

GENERAL

5-1 5.2

COLUMBUS VERIFICATION

5-1 5.2.1 Command and data handling Verification

5-1 5.2.1.1 Joint C&DH Verification

5-2 5.2.1.2 Joint Test at Bremen, Germany

5-3 5.2.1.3 Joint Test at Houston, Texas, U.S.

5-4 5.2.2 Extravehicular robotics verification principles

5-5 5.2.2.1 Robotics Assembly Verification

5-5 5.2.2.2 Centerline Berthing Camera System Target

5-5 5.2.3 Electrical Power System Interface Verification

5-6 5.2.3.1.1 Development Testing (Step 1) in Space Power Electronics Laboratory Facility

5-6 5.2.3.2 Electrical power system Tests (Step 2 and 3) in Bremen

5-7 5.2.4 Audio Interface Verification

5-7 5.2.5 Utilities Mating Verification

5-7 5.2.6 Digital Pre-Assembly

5-8 5.2.7 Composite Data Interfaces Verification

5-8 5.2.8 1553 Remote Terminal Validation

5-9 5.2.9 ExtraVehicular Activities Verification

5-9 5.2.10 Common Berthing Mechanism Post Installation Acceptance

5-9 5.2.11 Limit Angular Momentum Disturbance Verification

5-10 5.3 ATV Verification

5-10 5.3.1 1553 Remote Terminal Validation

5-11 5.3.2 Radio Frequency Interference

5-11 5.3.3 Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System/ATV Compatibility

5-11 5.3.4 Validation of ATV Proximity Operations

5-12 5.3.5 ISS/ATV stage verification

5-12 6.0 data exchange

6-1 6.1 Environmental Control and Life Support System

6-1 6.2 Thermal Control System

6-1 6.3 Microgravity

6-1 6.4 Validation of ATV Proximity operations

6-1

APPENDIX

aa Acronyms and abbreviations

-1 b standard layout for bilateral verification Test Sheet b-1 c apm bilateral verification Test Sheets c-1 d atv bilateral verification Test Sheets d-1 e List of candidate verification activities for apm e-1 f List of candidate verification activities for ATV f-1 g vcd formatS for columbus and atv g-1 h open work h-1

1.0 introduction

1.1 Purpose and Scope of Document

1.1.1 Purpose

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)/European Space Agency (ESA) Bilateral Integration and Verification Plan (BIVP) documents the agreements between ESA and NASA for the integration and verification of the ESA Segment into the International Space Station (ISS) as established in SSP 50019, NASA/ESA Joint Management Plan.

The agreements encompass:

A. the ESA Segment verification trace-ability, B. the ISS to ESA Segment interface verification per Interface Requirements Documents (IRDs), C. other tests, where partner support is needed.

The ESA Segment consists of the Columbus Attached Pressurized Module (APM) and the Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV).

This plan defines the verification trace-ability from the ESA APM and ATV Segment Specifications and the IRDs via the ESA System Requirements Documents (SRDs) to the verification close-out material of the ESA Prime Contractors.

For the implementation of the joint interface verification tests and other tests, where partner support is needed, this plan contains the NASA/ESA agreements in Section 5.0 and Appendices B - Standard layout for Test Sheets, C - Columbus Test Sheets and D - ATV Test Sheets. Appendices E and F list the candidate verification activities to be witnessed for Columbus and the ATV respectively.

1.1.2 Scope

This SSP 50034 defines the data, products, tasks, and planning agreements for the integration and verification of the ESA Segment into the ISS, as necessary before the APM and ATV can be turned over to the respective launch authority for immediate subsequent launch.

SSP 50034 exclusively addresses the first flight ATV element. ESA/NASA bi-lateral Interface (I/F) test agreements for the second and subsequent ATV flight elements will be documented in <TBD->.

Design and interface verification of International Standard Payload Racks (ISPRs) integrated with payloads is not part of this document.

Integration and Verification of the ISS Ground System including United States Ground Segment (USGS) and Ground Segments of International Partners (IPs) are not part of this document. The Ground System integration and verification activities are addressed in SSP 54501, International Ground System Integration, Verification and Test Management Plan.

For the ATV this document covers only the interfaces which are jointly to be verified by NASA and ESA. The majority of the interfaces to be verified are between the ATV and the Russian side of the Space Station and are covered in SSP 50334, RSA/ESA Bilateral Integration and Verification Plan for the Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV).

SSP 50334 contains some tests requiring NASA participation. In these cases NASA is a signatory on the applicable Test Sheets.

1.2 Precedence

The NASA/ESA BIVP is the only top level ISS integration and verification planning document for NASA/ESA interfaces and takes precedence over any NASA or ESA interface verification plans. This BIVP is subordinate to SSP 50019 and the IRDs.

1.3 Control and maintenance

The BIVP is controlled, through approval signatures, by the NASA Space Station Program Manager and the ESA Segment Program Manager. Changes to this plan are approved as a result of discussions of proposed changes reviewed at either Space Station Control Boards (SSCBs) involving ESA participation or at NASA/ESA Bilateral Program Reviews. All changes require the approval of the NASA and ESA Program Managers. Following initial joint approval, ESA maintains the baselined BIVP, including the incorporation of approved changes, which NASA Configuration Management Office (CMO) will release and distribute in accordance with SSP 41170, Configuration Management Requirements.

The Test Sheets of Appendices C and D are controlled through approval signatures by the NASA Manager for ESA and Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) Integration, the NASA ISS Integrated Test and Verification Manager, the ESA System Integration Manager and the ESA Columbus and ATV Engineering and Avionics Integrated Verification (AIV) Managers.

2.0 RELATED DOCUMENTS

2.1 Applicable Documents

The following documents are applicable to the extent specified herein. When no revision or issue date is specified, the latest revision is considered applicable. Paragraphs in which the documents are called-up are identified in brackets below each document title.

Documents applicable to Test Sheets in Appendices C and D are listed on the individual Test Sheets and are not repeated in this Section 2.

(1.1.1, 1.2, 4.1, 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.2, 4.2.1, 4.3, 4.4.2.2, 5.2.1.1, App B)

(4.1, 4.2.1)

(1.1.1, 4.1, 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.2.1)

(5.2.2)

(1.1.1)

(4.1, 4.2.1)

(5.2.2, 5.2.2.2, 5.2.2.3)

(1.1.1, 4.1, 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.2.1)

(4.2, 4.2.1, 4.4.2.2)

2.2 Reference Documents

The following documents are referenced herein for supporting and background information:

(4.1.2)

(1.3)

(4.3.2)

(6.3)

(4.4.5.2)

(4.1.1, 4.4.3, 5.2.1, 5.2.2.2, 5.2.3, 5.2.5, 5.2.6, 6.0, 6.1, 6.3, 6.4)

(5.2.1.3)

(5.1, 5.2.1.1, 5.2.4, 5.2.5, 5.2.7)

(1.1.2, 5.3)

(5.3.3)

(1.1.2)

(4.2.2, 4.4.4)

(4.4.2.1)

(4.2.2)

(5.2.1)

(4.4.5.1)

(4.4.6)

(5.3.3)

(4.2.1)

3.0 Interfacing Hardware Description

3.1 Attached pressurized module to NODE 2

The APM will be launched by the Space Shuttle and physically attached to the Space Station at Node 2 with the Common Berthing Mechanisms (CBMs) using the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS).

In the un-berthed mode the APM receives heating power from the ISS, supplied through the APM Power and Data Grapple Fixture (PDGF) and controlled through the APM heater control unit.

After berthing the utilities jumpers are installed for the following utilities:

A. Electrical power;

B. Cooling water;

C. Air exchange;

D. Air sampling;

E. Waste water return;

F. Essential command, system and payload command, and data;

G. Sensor/effector hard-wires;

H. Composite data link;

I. High rate data link;

J. Audio link;

K. Video link;

L. Crew Health Care System (CHeCS) command and data link;

M. SSMB payload bus extension to the APM;

N. Gaseous nitrogen.

3.2 ISPR to APM

For the ISPR the APM provides accommodation in terms of mounting space and connections to APM utilities. The utilities comprise the following:

A. Electrical power;

B. Essential/auxiliary power;

C. Single-phase water coolant;

D. A fire detection instrumentation link, including monitoring of air circulation equipment for fire detection;

E. A gaseous nitrogen line;

F. A payload data bus connection;

G. Connectivity to the ISPR located maintenance power switch;

H. Optical video lines;

I. A high rate data line;

J. A waste gas interface;

K. A vacuum interface.

3.3 APM Robotics Interfaces

The Robotics interfaces between the APM and Motion Servicing System (MSS) include a PDGF, Vision System Targets and Berthing Visual Cues. The APM is removed from the Shuttle payload bay with the SSRMS, which grapples the module via the PDGF and berths the APM to the ISS, Node 2. The integration of the PDGF in the ESA segment allows for the SSRMS to provide a utilities conduit to the APM, and is not intended to be used as a base for SSRMS operations.

3.4 ATV to ISS/russian service module

3.4.1 Proximity Operations Interfaces

The ATV will be launched on Ariane 5 and will perform automated phasing, homing and rendezvous with ISS along the minus v-bar, up to docking to the ISS-Service Module (SM) docking port.

Functional interfaces with the ISS are established when ATV enters the ISS communication range, and consist of:

A. A bi-directional Radio Frequency (RF) communication link (S-Band, 1550 to 5200 Megahertz), to provide data exchange with ISS for navigation by relative Global Positioning System (GPS), and monitoring and control of ATV by the ISS for safety critical events (health watch, go-ahead and wave-off commanding);

B. A Rendezvous (RDV) sensor optical link, from 250 m until docking contact; the active sensor part is on ATV, and the passive part (target pattern) on the station side installed at the ISS-SM docking port;

C. A visual link, from 250 Meters (m) until docking contact by a SM by video camera and from 1000 m by USOS cameras for the ISS crew observer; the video cameras on the ISS, and the visual cues and video target pattern are installed on the ATV.

The normal approach scenario is based on failure tolerant on-board automated sequences that can be overridden from the ATV Control Center (CC) and from the ISS.

3.4.2 Physical Docking Interfaces

Mechanical capture, alignment and structural latching, as well as separation of the ATV from the ISS, is accomplished by the Russian Docking System (RDS). The ATV composite is equipped with an active RDS half.

Electrical utility and propellant interfaces between ATV composite and station are integrated in the RDS and will be automatically mated at docking.

Electrical interfaces consist of:

A. Electrical power bus (redundant) for power supply from station to ATV;

B. System data bus (redundant) for data exchange between space station and ATV, and relay of ATV data to ground via the space station ground link;

C. Discrete command interfaces for space station command and control of ATV (activation/deactivation).

Fluidic interfaces consist of:

A. Propellant lines (Unsymmetrical Dimethyldrazine (UDMH), oxidizer and purging gas) for the transfer of propellant from the ATV to the ISS-SM;

B. Air exchange interface for ventilation of the ATV pressurized cargo module (forward: via hose routed through the open RDS hatch; return: through the open RDS hatch);

C. Atmosphere gases and water re-supply interface

D. Oxygen, nitrogen, and air will be supplied into the composite atmosphere;

E. Water will be supplied from ATV tanks to an interface connector located inside the ATV Power Module (PM), and pumped into ISS containers;

F. Liquid wastes will be transferred from ISS containers to the ATV tanks via the interface connector.

3.4.3 ISS Reboost/Refuelling Functional Interfaces

The ATV will remain attached to the ISS-Russian Segment (RS) for up to six months in a dormant mode. During this phase, at intervals, the ATV will be activated from the dormant mode, and operate under ISS control, to provide:

A. Crew access for loading and unloading;

B. ISS re-boost and support to Station attitude control, debris avoidance maneuvers, Control Moment Gyro (CMG)/gyrodine desaturation by means of the ATV propulsion system, and ISS refueling by means of the ATV refueling system via propellant connectors integrated in the RDS.

4.0 Verification Management

4.1 Verification Program Roles and Responsibilities

NASA and ESA are both responsible for the integration and verification of their own end items in accordance with their respective segment specifications. Agency responsible for the design of the hardware (H/W) and software (S/W) which represents a mating side of the interface, is also responsible for the verification that its own system/element is in compliance with the interface requirements established in SSP 41150, Interface Requirements Document Space Station Manned Base (SSMB) to Columbus Attached Pressurized Module (APM), SSP 50129, Interface Requirements Document International Space Station (ISS) to Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), SSP 41152, Interface Requirements Document International Standard Payload Rack (ISPR), and that the “as built” configuration is in compliance with the associated Interface Control Documents (ICDs).

NASA is responsible for ensuring that the United States On-Orbit Segment (USOS) meets all of the requirements of the USOS Specification, and that the USGS meets all of the requirements of the USGS Specification and applicable IRDs. NASA is also responsible for the overall integration and verification of the ISS, including management of the integration of the efforts of all International Participants. ESA will support NASA in the integration and verification of ESA Segment to ISS as defined in this document.

4.1.1 ESA Responsibilities

ESA is responsible for the verification of the APM and the ATV, including both H/W and S/W.

ESA responsibilities vis-à-vis NASA are the following:

A. To provide the verification trace-ability from the ESA Segment Specifications and applicable IRDs to the ESA SRDs;

B. To carry out the joint interface verification tests as agreed in this document;

C. To support NASA tests, where ESA support is needed as agreed in this document;

D. To invite NASA to the respective integration and verification review activities (including Test Readiness Review (TRR) and formal qualification testing, as considered necessary), associated with the verification of IRD related requirements;

E. To provide to NASA a data package containing the verification close-out material related to the requirements contained in the ESA Segment Specifications and applicable IRDs at the time of the ESA element Qualification Review (QR);

F. To provide data necessary for NASA/Prime Contractor to perform overall Space Station integration and verification as specified in this document and SSP 50127, NASA/ESA Bilateral Data Exchange Agreements, Lists, and Schedules;

G. To invite NASA to the element project reviews;

H. To invite NASA to participate in system level test activities as required.

I. To verify its respective half of the interface requirements as specified in the respective IRDs;

J. ESA to communicate the dates of the verification activities as listed in Appendix E to NASA in due time.

4.1.2 NASA Responsibilities

NASA responsibilities vis-à-vis ESA are the following:

A. To conduct the ISS system verification program;

B. To integrate the ESA elements, launched by National Space Transportation System (NSTS), into the launch package;

C. To provide Certificate of Qualification (COQ) and Acceptance Data Package (ADP) for equipment provided by NASA as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) to ESA to be used for, and or incorporated in ESA elements;

D. To verify all NSTS/USOS utility ports to the ESA segment;

E. To provide trace-ability between the ESA Segment Specifications, and SSP 41000, System Specification for the International Space Station, and between the IRDs and the ESA Segment Specifications in the Program Verification Integration System (PVIS) database;

F. To carry out the joint interface verification tests as agreed in this document;

G. To support ESA tests, where NASA support is needed as agreed in this document;

H. To invite ESA to the respective integration and verification review activities (including readiness reviews and formal qualification testing as considered necessary), associated with the verification of IRD related requirements;

I. To make available to ESA all close-out documentation produced by NASA to demonstrate the achieved verification of the ISS to ESA Segment interfaces for consultation at one agreed location;

J. To verify its respective half of the interface requirement as specified in the respective IRDs;

K. To make available to ESA IRD verification method data for the SSMB side of the interface, to allow ESA to keep COL-ESA-RQ-32, Columbus External Interfaces Verification Requirements, current with SSMB interface verification planning, ensuring verification visibility on both sides of the interface;

L. To perform process sampling;

M. To communicate the dates of the verification activities as listed in Appendix E to ESA in due time.

4.1.2.1 International space station program office Integrated Test AND Verification Team

The International Space Station Program Office Integrated Test and Verification Team (IT&V) Team in the Vehicle Office of the ISS Program Office is responsible for ISS test and verification. The IT&V team develops and/or approves the following verification plans: The Program Master Integration and Verification Plan (PMI&VP), and NASA’s Prime Contractor (Boeing) Integration and Verification Implementation Plan (I&VIP), and the International BIVPs. In addition the IT&V team:

A. Provides a forum, and test and verification focus to sub-system and discipline teams;

B. Acts as a focal point for test and verification activities and conveys unique needs for test and verification activities;

C. Provides access to verification mechanisms;

D. Ensures sub-system and discipline teams receive appropriate reports (type and content);

E. Verification/test assessment;

F. PVIS development, training, and maintenance;

G. Develop on-orbit checkout requirement.

4.1.3 Relationship between NASA and ESA Verification Management

The NASA IT&V team will participate in the Columbus and ATV program reviews (Critical Design Review (CDR), QR, and Acceptance Review (AR)) held by ESA. The NASA IT&V team leader may be a member of these review boards and will sign the review board minutes. The NASA IT&V team shall co-ordinate support for test and verification assessment and for joint test activities and aid in identification of those tests which require Boeing support. In addition the IT&V team shall provide ESA with access to program test verification data, databases and documentation, and aid in resolution of integration and verification issues.

4.2 Verification Process

Verification requirements (methods, objectives, conditions, success criteria) for ISS system, USOS, USGS and all U.S. End Items Specifications are defined in their respective Section 4, Quality Assurance Provisions. Verification requirements for ESA Segment are documented in Section 4 of the ESA ATV Segment specification, the ESA APM and ATV SRDs, and Sections 4 of the applicable IRDs (joint verification for APM only), and in COL-ESA-RQ-032 for APM unilateral verification.

ESA Verification process

The ESA requirements base-line is contained in the following documents:

A. The ESA Segment Specifications;

B. The APM and the ATV SRDs;

C. The three IRDs, the SSMB to APM IRD, the ISPR IRD, and the ISS to ATV IRD.

The ESA requirements verification base-line is contained in the following documents:

A. The ESA Segment Specification for the ATV;

B. The SRDs contain verification requirements specifying the verification method and level, flight configuration or assembly level;

C. The Columbus IRDs contain only those verification requirements, where joint NASA/ESA verification activity is agreed. The ISS to ATV IRD includes all stand-alone and joint interface verification requirements for ESA, Rocket Space Corporation – Energia (RSC-E) and NASA;

D. All other interface verification requirements for the ESA side are contained in COL-ESA-RQ-032 for the APM, specifying the verification method vis-à-vis industry.

The ESA Contractors respond to the technical as well as to the verification requirements by generating an Assembly, Integration, and Test Plan and APM/ATV specifications, intermediate level specifications, and equipment specifications to the appropriate level as necessary, allocating and decomposing the ESA requirements.

The ESA Contractors are obliged to demonstrate to ESA the verification of ESA established requirements. In case of a test, this entails notification to ESA of the test readiness review, the actual test, and the post test review.

The progress and degree of completion will be contained in the verification control document/status report, being part of the regular progress report to ESA.

At the completion of verification activity a verification report is due containing the verification evidence, be it based on a test, an analysis, or Review of Design (ROD).

Finally, the element QR will be conducted with the objective to:

A. Confirm that the assembly designs not governed directly by ESA requirements are qualified and the associated lower level COQs are approved by the Contractor, B. Confirm that the APM/ATV system-, interface-, and assembly-designs, as far as governed by ESA requirements, are properly qualified, C. Confirm that the safety-related tasks have been completed successfully.

Upon successful completion of the QRs, ESA will issue the respective COQs.

4.2.1 NASA Verification Process

The NASA verification process for the ISS is described in D684-10020-01, Program Master Integration and Verification Plan. The NASA program verification approach is to verify specification compliance starting at the lowest level (components, end items) and building to the ISS System level. Each organization responsible for development of an end item is responsible for verification of that item to its allocated requirements. Specification compliance at the system and USOS level is verified by using a five-step verification process. A detailed description of the five-step verification process is provided in D684-10020-01.

The ISS interface verification process is described in D684-10025-01, Integration and Verification Implementation Plan for ISS System and USOS Segment.

In addition to the verification requirement documentation, a set of verification plans describing processes, products, activities, agreements, and resources are developed for the Space Station program, USGS and Development Centers.

4.3 Verification Methods

The methods of verification are, Analysis/Similarity, ROD, Inspection, Demonstration and Test, or combination thereof, as defined below.

These methods refer to verification techniques which, at NASA and ESA, are sometimes grouped in different categories. Typically, interfaces verified at ESA by ROD, would be verified at NASA by Inspection; similarly, some interfaces verified at NASA by Demonstration would be verified at ESA by Testing. In any case, while occasionally the verification method may differ in denomination, the actual verification process is identical, whatever is the assigned category.

4.3.1 Analysis/Similarity

Analysis is the interface verification method which utilizes proven analytical techniques and tools such as engineering analysis, mathematical modeling, earlier obtained test data, simulations, analytical assessments, etc.

Analysis is used when flight or actual operation conditions can not be simulated adequately on the ground. Analysis is also used in support to tests, where the wide spectrum of conditions prohibits testing of all conceivable configurations. Analytical methods selected for qualification shall be supported by appropriate rationale, recorded in the relevant verification documents.

Similarity is the verification method to be applied where it can be proved by analysis that the article is similar or identical in design, manufacturing process and quality standards to another article that has been previously qualified to equivalent or more stringent criteria.

4.3.2 Review of Design

ROD is the verification method used to verify specific design implementation requirements by use of approved lower level documentation.

ROD consists in utilizing approved design reports, technical descriptions, and/or engineering drawings to unambiguously demonstrate that the interface is designed as documented in the ICD.

ROD items are verified at an early program phase, and formalized at Preliminary Design Review (PDR) or CDR at latest.

4.3.3 Inspection

Inspection verifies the compliance of the flight article with the design requirements of physical characteristics as construction features, visible workmanship, physical condition and finish, interface dimensions, etc., by use of standard visual and/or other non destructive means.

Inspection on NASA’s side also includes the examination of documentation and/or software, already covered by ESA under ROD.

4.3.4 Demonstration

Demonstration is a qualitative method of verification that evaluates the properties of the verification item by observation.

Demonstration is used with or without special test equipment or instrumentation, to verify required characteristics such as operational performance, human engineering features, service and access features, transportability and displayed data. Interface demonstration should preferably be performed on flight hardware, but high fidelity simulators, mock-ups and models may be used, as defined in the specific element verification plans.

Demonstration verification on ESA’s side is covered as part of the test activities.

4.3.5 Test

Verification by test is the method to determine the interface properties and performance by mechanical, electrical, environmental and functional measurement, during or after the controlled application of functional and/or environmental stimuli.

Measurements may require the use of laboratory equipment, recorded data, procedures, test support items, or services. Interface verification can be performed on flight hardware, on high fidelity simulators/mock-ups, and on dedicated engineering or qualification models, as defined in the specific element verification plans.

4.4 Verification Reporting

4.4.1 ESA Verification Reporting

4.4.1.1 ESA Verification Control Reports/Status Reports

The ESA Contractor provides Verification Control Reports/Status Reports, reflecting the current status of the verification close-out completion. This reporting function leads to at least the following two outputs:

A. Verification Control Document.

This report contains the requirement text, and, as selected, in addition either of the following data:

1. Verification method;

2. Verification level;

3. Qualification/acceptance applicability statement;

4. Execution document reference (procedures);

5. Reporting document reference (reports);

6. Verification status (open/closed);

7. Verification close-out (electronic signature of the authorized level);

8. Approved Requests for Waivers/Deviations.

B. Verification Status Report.

These two documents for each ESA element will be made available to NASA at the CDR, QR, and Flight Assembly Review (FAR) in electronic format, for Columbus and ATV as per example in Appendix G.

4.4.1.2 ESA Verification Compliance

ESA will provide a Verification Completion Notification COQ document for each ESA element to NASA to attest to the completion of verification. This COQ will certify that the elements conform to the specifications.

The verification close-out report will contain a complete Verification Traceability Document and all data and references to demonstrate successful close-out of a verification activity.

A Verification Report may consist of:

1. Analysis report(s) or;

2. ROD report(s) or;

3. Inspection report(s) or;

4. Test report(s) or combination thereof.

Verification Reports will contain as a minimum:

1. Roadmap to executed (as run) procedures/models/programs;

2. Identification of satisfied requirements;

3. Engineering judgment;

4. Agreed deviations from results;

5. Support data, as required to substantiate conclusions.

In case of a combination of verification methods or activities from different levels for the verification of the same Flight Configuration requirement, then the links between the different activities will be provided.

4.4.2 NASA Verification Reporting

4.4.2.1 Program Verification Information System

PVIS is an automated database that provides the ISS program the capability to track the large amount of technical and programmatic data in support of the ISS verification process, on-line access to current requirements status, visibility for impact assessment, and data transfer between sites and organizations. PVIS process and software are identified in D684-10021-1, Program Verification Information System Process Document and SW684-10011-1, Software Requirements Specifications.

Status reports from the PVIS database are available as requested to allow ISS management, including ESA, to assess the status of the ISS verification.

4.4.3 Problem Reporting and Corrective Actions

Design, manufacturing and operational discrepancies discovered in Space Station hardware or software are resolved through the use of a Problem Reporting and Corrective Action (PRACA) system. The PRACA system establishes a disciplined process for reporting and determining corrective action for problems detected in hardware or software items during integration and verification.

NASA/ESA exchanges of failure reports will be in accordance with SSP 50127.

NASA Process sampling

Process sampling is the activity of NASA or its Prime Contractor to, on a non-interfering basis, witness selected ESA Segment verification activities to support their Certificate of Flight Readiness (CoFR) process. NASA Process Sampling approach is defined in the PMI&VP, D684-10020-01.

NASA will provide to ESA a seven day quick look report that documents the conclusion of the process sampling activity, followed by a final report within 30 days of the verification activity completion. This final report will be established jointly by the NASA process sampling team and the NASA IT&V organization and will provide detailed description of the verification activities, results, anomalies and other data pertaining to the evaluation.

By providing the verification visibility defined in this document including system level test participation by NASA as listed in Appendices E and F, ESA is supporting the NASA process sampling activities. To this end, ESA or its Prime Contractors will communicate the schedule for these activities in due time to NASA.

4.4.4 Certification of Flight Readiness

4.4.4.1 Launch Vehicle CoFR

The CoFR for the Space Shuttle process is defined in NSTS 08117, Space Shuttle Requirements and Procedures for Certification of Flight Readiness. This document describes the endorsement process for any element launched on the Space Shuttle. The inputs for the Shuttle CoFR process will be coordinated with the NASA/ISS Program Office.

The ISS Program does not require an ISS CoFR for Ariane 5, as the launch vehicle for the ATV.

4.4.4.2 ESA ISS CoFR

ESA ISS CoFR Process, ESA responsibilities and products are defined in SSP 50108, Certification of Flight Readiness Process Document. ESA ISS CoFR 1 will certify that all the necessary activities required for integration of the ESA H/W and S/W into an ISS Launch Package and the applicable transportation systems have been accomplished. NASA ISS CoFR 2 will certify that on-orbit Space Station and the Ground Systems are ready to support the launch of the ESA element and on-orbit and stage operations.

4.4.5 Joint NASA/ESA schedules

NASA and ESA will develop and maintain a series of integrated program schedules which will depict the overall life cycle (development through on-orbit installation) of the ESA elements and associated H/W and S/W.

NASA will provide detailed schedules to ESA of the mission integration activities as defined in the ISS Mission Integration Plans (MIPs). MIP reviews will be held to ascertain that the mission specific configuration of the integrated ESA elements have positive margins of safety considering launch, landing and on-orbit environments, and has met the requirements of NSTS 14046, Payload Verification Requirements.

5.0 SUMMARY VERIFICATION ACTIVITIES DESCRIPTION

5.1 GENERAL

This chapter defines the technical verification principles which will be applied when executing the verification test activities as defined in Appendices C and D, and which comprise:

A. Joint test activities, hereafter referred to as “Joint Tests;”

B. ESA support to NASA I/F tests and NASA support to ESA I/F tests, hereafter referred to as “Other Tests.”

The general technical principle for the “Joint Tests” is that both sides of the I/F are tested employing a suitable I/F simulator of the other side.

Pass/Fail criteria are applicable to both involved parties.

Following successful completion of a Joint Test there shall be:

A. A Test and Assessment report approved by both parties closing out the particular Verification Test activity;

B. An identification of and agreed resolution planning for discrepancies, including their close-out as part of a subsequent Joint Test specified in this plan.

The general technical principle for the “Other Tests” is that the supporting party provides the hardware, software, resources/accessibility and skills, as required, to enable the test execution of the other party and takes responsibility that the support, including H/W and S/W, conforms to the agreed requirements and the applicable I/F design.

Pass/Fail criteria for the test itself are not applicable to the supporting party.

The identification of the “joint” or “other” test category is identified in the Appendices C and D.

H/W and S/W exchange identified in this document and in the Bilateral Hardware and Software Exchange Agreements, Lists, and Schedules (BHSEALS), as a rule, is performed on the “on-loan” basis, when the providing agency is responsible for delivery, integration, check-out, operation, and maintenance of the delivered items. Items provided are to be returned to the providing agency after use. Should there be any deviations from this rule, they will be documented in this document and the BHSEALS.

5.2 COLUMBUS VERIFICATION

5.2.1 Command and data handling Verification

The ISS Command and Data Handling (C&DH) subsystem interfaces with the APM systems. This Section describes the approach to integration, test, and verification of the interfaces between the Command and Control (C&C) and APM. Details for the individual tests to verify the interfaces between NASA and ESA are described in the Test Sheets (appended to this document), and will be further defined in test plans and procedures.

The C&DH verification activities include early software integration, interface verification, and stage verification. The software verification approach will use joint tests to be conducted in both ESA and NASA facilities. This Section and Test Sheets in attachment C of this BIVP provides more specific description of the agreements on the C&DH Joint Verification activities. These NASA activities will be further defined in D684-10241-6, C&DH Stage Integration and Verification Plan for Flight 2A. All the agreed C&DH related activities to be performed by both NASA and ESA are specified in this Section of the BIVP.

Additionally, NASA/Prime will perform ISS system level network analysis for the interface data buses. ESA will perform interface data bus development analysis/tests, bus cabling design, European Orbital Replacement Unit (ORU) validation testing, and APM System Integration/Verification tests.

ESA will perform system data bus tests described in Test Sheets and will provide APM bus topology data to NASA/Prime for use in its interface network analyses. ESA will also provide results of ORU validation and qualification tests to the NASA/Prime for use in the interface network analysis. NASA/ Prime will perform software simulation and laboratory tests using bus network topology, and bus component and ORU data provided by ESA, the Product Groups, and other IPs. NASA/Prime will provide to ESA the interface network simulation and laboratory test results, and other partner topology/ORU data pertinent to the APM buses.

ESA will perform APM System Integration/Verification tests, including APM C&DH subsystem and APM sub-element tests. These tests will include APM cable manufacturing integrity tests, ORU acceptance tests, data bus communication tests and interface signal waveform analysis.

Results of these tests will be provided to NASA/Prime for use in flight verification. NASA/Prime will provide ESA the results of United States (U.S.) and other IP End-Item testing that could impact APM network verification.

All interface bus characterization test and analysis data to be exchanged will be agreed to and described in SSP 50127.

5.2.1.1 Joint C&DH Verification

The main software verification activities concerning NASA and ESA will be to verify the ISS/APM interfaces in accordance with SSP 41150 for 1553 interfaces and the hardwired command and monitoring interfaces. NASA/ESA C&DH Joint Test Activities are performed sequentially in three test phases: Development testing, APM qualification and Stage Verification (including pre-stage integration) testing. These test phases are a series of joint tests with increasing levels of software fidelity to ensure that sequential integration and testing will discover a majority of the interface problems and increase the probability of successful and on time completion of the C&DH system. Specific equipment and resource/support required for all NASA/ESA C&DH joint testing is contained within the appropriate Test Sheets in Appendix C.

The approach to joint testing is a software risk mitigation approach intended to discover and correct problems in the interfaces between Computer Software Configuration Items (CSCIs) and utilizes mixed fidelity of software by the partners for a majority of the testing. The ESA development program is planned earlier than the NASA software development therefore mandating this approach. These tests will be jointly conducted by the NASA/ESA Verification Teams.

To work around the existing schedule mismatch between the APM qualification program in Europe and the C&C software development and qualification program in the U.S., NASA will make specific software “engineering” releases available and provide associated resources in time to support the ESA versus ASTRIUM APM/SSMB interface qualification (as per Test Sheet 3A in Appendix C). Based on the successful completion of this test 3A, ESA (as far as C&DH interfaces are concerned) will issue the APM COQ as part of ESA’s input to the CoFR process, as outlined in Paragraph 4.4.5.2.

The final test phase is the formal test period in which Stage Verification is performed in the U.S. (as per Test Sheet 3-B). The Stage Verification of the ISS/APM interface requirements will use flight software which has completed Functional Qualification Test (FQT) and has been released to C&DH Verification Team for stage testing. These tests will also be jointly conducted by the NASA C&DH Verification Team and ESA C&DH team. Test 3B results will be the ISS program input to the CoFR process and will close the ESA/NASA verification. It is noted that Test 3B may be conducted after the APM QR/AR completion.

5.2.1.2 Joint Test at Bremen, Germany

There will be two tests (as per Test Sheets 2A and 3A) that will be conducted in Bremen, Germany. These tests are to be conducted by ESA with support from the C&DH Verification Integrated Product Team (IPT). Processors will be FEUs, Engineering Models (EMs) or Flight Models (FMs). FEUs are rack mounted and defined as units which replicate input and output signals/characteristics utilizing the same flight software destined for flight, but are not flight qualified. The facility description along with laboratory requirements for Bremen, are contained within the applicable Test Sheets (2A and 3A).

The first test (as per Test Sheet 2A) will be a development test with the objective to test the implementation of the communication protocols on both sides of the interface. This test utilizes FEUs and (ETMs). NASA will provide an engineering release of the C&C CSCI. The software components relevant to the APM/USOS interface is the basis for this build. Any changes that impact the interface and any changes to the software components from the software build supporting Test 2A will be coordinated through formal means.

The second test (as per Test Sheet 3A) will be the ESA/ASTRIUM APM C&DH interface verification close-out test using a specific NASA provided C&C S/W release. Although by the fact that C&C CSCI will not have completed FQT (possibly not have started), this software release will be an “engineering” release. NASA understands the schedule conflict and will ensure that all changes that are potential impacts to the interface will be thoroughly coordinated through formal means. Any changes that impact the software components from the software build supporting test 3A will be under C&C IPT configuration control. Software changes, ISPR’s resolution from joint testing and trace-ability of versions are maintained within the Program Configuration Management System (PCMS) database and are available for NASA/ESA review. The fidelity for the C&C CSCI shall be sufficient to enable formal verification close out between ESA and ASTRIUM.

Engineering support to ESA from NASA to support Joint activities in Germany includes: development of test script simulation scenarios, debugging of those test scripts, operation of NASA RT Tester and Mate unit, operation of C&C simulation software, and all operations requiring the Command and Control Software (CCS) flight software. engineering and technician support also includes problem resolution, installation, integration, and maintenance of equipment.

At the time of the update of this BIVP to Revision C, Test 3A has been conducted in Bremen, Germany, and NASA/ESA have agreed to conduct testing in the Software Development Integration Laboratory (SDIL) and the Software Verification Facility (SVF) in Houston, Texas, using the Columbus SVF simulator, as detailed in Test Sheet 3A-1 in Appendix C.

5.2.1.3 Joint Test at Houston, Texas, U.S.

Stage Integration tests (applicable to Test Sheet 3B) will be conducted in Houston, Texas, in the SVF. This test phase is scheduled to be executed prior to the FQT activity for CCS Release 5 for the purpose of facility integration and procedure dry runs. These tests will be conducted by the Verification Team with support from ESA. All processors will be FEUs or EMs.

Stage Verification tests (applicable to Test Sheet 3B) will be conducted in Houston, Texas in the SVF. These tests, in principal will use code which has completed the FQT process. However the formal execution of the Stage tests are typically run in parallel with the FQT formal runs. Any subsequently necessary FQT tests will be verified by the Stage verification team. Results of 3B testing will be used for the formal closure of SSMB/APM IRD interface requirements. The facility description along with laboratory requirements, which includes SSP 50148, Attached Pressurized Module (APM) Simulator to the Software Development Integration Laboratory (SDIL) Interface Control Document, for SVF, is contained with the applicable Test Sheets (3B).

Engineering support to NASA from ESA to support joint activities in Houston, Texas includes: Development of test script simulation scenarios, debugging of those test scripts, operation of the APM Simulator, and Vital Telemetry Telecommand Computer (VTC)-1, VTC-2, Data Management Computer (DMC), Mission…