SSP_50406_Rev_B_.doc

SSP 50406, Revision B 24 August 2004

Page Intentionally Left Blank

REVISION AND HISTORY PAGE

NASA/ESA Bilateral Integration & Verification Plan

LIST OF CHANGES

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

Numerous editorial changes were made to improve document quality. These changes are not listed here.

Specific test dates have been included in Appendix C

INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION PROGRAM

NASA/ESA Bilateral Integration & Verification Plan

APPROVAL

See directive SSCN 8790 for signatures____

09/30/04_______ William C. Panter

Date National Aeronautics Space Agency

Manager, Vehicle Office See directive SSCN 8790 for signatures____

11/16/04_______ David Wyn-Roberts

ESA Cupola Segment Manager

INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION PROGRAM

NASA/ESA Bilateral Integration & Verification Plan

CONCURRENCE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PARAGRAPH

PAGE

revision and history PAGE i list of changes ii approval iii concurrence iv 1.0 introduction

1.1 purpose and scope of THE document

1.1.1 Purpose

1.1.2 scope

1.2 document organization

1.3 precedence

1.4 control AND maintenance.

2.0 related documents

2.1 applicable documents

2.2 reference documents

3.0 interfacE hardware description

3.1 cupola description

3.2 node description

3.3 cupola to node

3.4 cupola robotics interfaces

4.0 verification management

4.1 verification program roles and responsibilities

4.1.1 joint integration and verification program approach

4.1.2 ESA responsibilities

4.1.3 nasa responsibilities

4.1.4 nasa issp test and verification team.

4.2 verification processES

4.2.1 verification requirements

4.2.2 interface verification requirement

4.3 relationship between nasa and esa verification management

4.4 verification process

4.4.1 esa verification PROCESS.

4.4.2 nasa verification process

4.5 verification methods

4.6 verification traceability and close-out

4.7 verification reporting

4.7.1 esa verification reporting

4.7.2 nasa verification reporting

4.7.2.1 program verification information system (pvis)

4.7.3 problem reporting and corrective action (praca)

4.8 nasa process sampling

4.9 verification certification

TABLE OF CONTENTS – Continued

4.9.1 certification of flight readiness (cOfr)

4.9.1.1

LAUNCH VEHICLE COFR

4.9.1.2 cupola cofr

4.10 CUPOLA PROGRAM MILESTONE REVIEWs

5.0

SUMMARY VERIFICATION ACTIVITIES DESCRIPTION

5.1

GENERAL

5.2

CUPOLA VERIFICATION

5.2.1

CUPOLA WINDOW VERIFICATION

5.2.2

EXTRAVEHICULAR ROBOTICS VERIFICATION PRINCIPLES

5.2.2.1

ROBOTICS ASSEMBLY VERIFICATION

5.2.2.2

FRGF INTERFACES

5.2.2.3 SPACE VISION SYSTEM (svs) TARGET INTERFACES

5.2.2.4

RWS INTERFACES

5.2.3

ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEM INTERFACE VERIFICATION.

5.2.4

AUDIO / VIDEO INTERFACE VERIFICATION

5.2.5

DATA TRANSMISSION

5.2.6

HUMAN FACTORS VERIFICATION

5.2.7 CBM INTERFACE VERIFICAtiON

6.0

GROUND CHECK-OUT OF ON-ORBIT ASSEMBLIES

6.1

UTILITIES MATING VERIFICATION

6.2

DIGITAL PRE-ASSEMBLY.

7.0

FLIGHT HARDWARE INSPECTION

8.0

DATA EXCHANGE IN SUPPORT OF NASA/PRIME INTEGRATION

AND VERIFICATION TASKS.

APPENDIX

PAGE

A

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

A-1

B

STANDARD LAYOUT FOR BILATERAL VERIFICATION TEST SHEET

B-1

C

CUPOLA BILATERAL VERIFICATION TEST SHEETS

C-1

D Cupola process sampling candidates D-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Figures

Figure

PAGE

4.1 Cupola Verification Control Document (VCD) format

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE DOCUMENT

1.1.1 PURPOSE

The Cupola Bilateral Integration and Verification Plan (BI&VP) documents the agreements between ESA and NASA for the integration and verification of the Cupola into the International Space Station (ISS).

The agreements defined in this plan address the verification tasks required to comply with the requirements of SSP 50333, Cupola Segment Specification.

The agreements encompass:

1.

The Cupola Segment Specification verification traceability.

2.

The Node to Cupola interface verification per SSP 41142, Part 1.

3.

Joint and other tests where partner support is needed.

For the implementation of joint and other tests, where partner support is needed, this plan contains the NASA/ESA agreements in Section 5.0 and Appendices C and D standard test sheets as follows:

1.

Purpose of test and implementation.

2.

Identification of test set-up, equipment needed, and facility.

3.

Test parameters and success criteria.

4.

Responsibility by lead agency and partner.

5.

Schedule of execution.

1.1.2 SCOPE

This BI&VP defines the data, products, tasks, and planning agreements for the integration and verification of the Cupola into the ISS, as necessary before the Cupola can be turned over to the launch authority for subsequent launch.

1.2 DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION

The top-level overall verification planning document for the ISSP is documented in the Program Master Integration and Verification Plan (PMI&VP). The NASA-ESA BI&VP for Cupola will comply with the NASA-ESA Joint Management Plan (JMP), and will receive source data from PMI&VP, D684-10020-1. The BI&VP will address the verification and integration process utilized.

1.3 PRECEDENCE

This NASA-ESA BI&VP is prepared in compliance with the NASA-ESA Joint Management Plan, Implementing Arrangement (IA), and the Cupola Segment Specification.

The Cupola BI&VP is the only top level integration and verification planning document for NASA/ESA interface verification related to the Cupola and takes precedence over any unilateral NASA or ESA interface verification plans. In the event of a conflict, the document shall apply in the following order of precedence:

1.

Implementing Arrangement (IA).

2.

NASA-ESA Joint Management Plan (JMP).

3.

Cupola Segment Specification.

4.

NASA/ESA Bilateral Integration and Verification Plan for Cupola.

1.4 CONTROL AND MAINTENANCE.

This BI&VP is controlled, through approval signature, by the NASA Space Station Program Manager and the ESA Cupola Project Manager. Changes to this plan are approved as the result of discussions of proposed changes at either the Space Station Control Boards (SSCB) involving ESA participation or at NASA/ESA Bilateral Program Reviews. All changes require the approval of the NASA Program Manager and the ESA Cupola Project Manager. Following initial joint approval, NASA maintains the baselined BI&VP, including the incorporation of changes, which the 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 of the NASA International Element Manager, the ESA Cupola Project Manager, and the NASA Integrated Test and Verification Manager.

2.0 RELATED DOCUMENTS

The following applicable documents of the exact issue shown form a part of this specification to the extent specified herein.

2.1 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

2.2 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

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

3.0 INTERFACE HARDWARE DESCRIPTION

3.1 CUPOLA DESCRIPTION

The Cupola provides a pressurised observation and worksite area for Space Station crewmembers. The Cupola also provides space for command and control workstation and other hardware used in conjunction with observing the earth, celestial objects, exterior Space Station surfaces, Orbiter docking, Extravehicular Activity (EVA) and Extravehicular Robotics (EVR) activities.

3.2 NODE DESCRIPTION

The Node is a pressurised element providing storage and berthing locations for attached elements. The Node contains a limited amount of powered hardware for its own operations and plumbing and cable runs for distribution of resources to the attached elements.

3.3 CUPOLA TO NODE

The Cupola will be launched by the Space Shuttle and physically attached to the Space Station, first at Node 1 and later at Node 3, with the Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM) using the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS).

After berthing the following interface functions are achieved:

1.

Electrical power.

2.

Thermal control.

3.

Life Support.

4.

Data exchange.

5.

Sensor/Effector hard-wires.

6.

Audio link.

7.

Video link.

8.

Mechanical attachments.

3.4 CUPOLA ROBOTICS INTERFACES

The robotics interfaces between the Cupola and the Mobile Servicing System and the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System (SRMS) include Flight Releasable Grapple Fixtures (FRGFs), Space Vision System (SVS) targets and berthing visual clues. The Cupola is removed from the Shuttle payload bay with the SRMS via the SRMS FRGF and is handed over to the SSRMS, which grapples the Cupola via the SSRMS FRGF and berths it to the appropriate ISS Node.

The Robotics Workstation (RWS), when accommodated in the Cupola, is used for control of the SSRMS operations.

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 the respective segment specifications. The agency responsible for the hardware and software 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 the Nodes to Cupola Interface Control Document Part 1, SSP 41142, and that the “as built’ configuration is in compliance with the associated Interface Control Document (ICD) Part 2. For the Cupola, NASA provides various equipment items, verification of which is NASA’s responsibility. ESA will be responsible for their integration into the Cupola, and thus for the overall Cupola system, to the extent specified in SSP 50333.

NASA is responsible for ensuring that the U.S. On-Orbit Segment (USOS) meets all of the requirements of its specification, and that the U.S. Ground Segment (USGS) meets all of its requirements and those of the applicable ICDs. NASA is also responsible for the overall integration and verification of the ISS, including the management of all Internal Participants. ESA will support NASA in the integration and verification of the Cupola to the ISS as defined in this document.

4.1.1 JOINT INTEGRATION AND VERIFICATION PROGRAM APPROACH

NASA and ESA are jointly responsible for the following:

1.

Exchange of data, hardware, and software per agreed to bilateral agreements (Bilateral Hardware and Software Exchange Agreement, Bilateral Data Exchange Agreement, Lists, and Schedules).

2.

Monitoring NASA/ESA (Cupola) bilateral activities and maintaining NASA/ESA data exchange agreements.

3.

Supporting joint testing as defined herein.

4.1.2 ESA RESPONSIBILITIES

ESA is responsible for the verification of the Cupola as specified in SSP 50333. ESA responsibilities vis-à-vis NASA are the following:

1.

ESA to verify its respective part of the interface requirements as specified in the SSP 50333 and applicable interface documents.

2.

ESA to carry out joint interface verification tests as specified herein;

3.

ESA to support NASA tests as specified herein;

4.

ESA to invite NASA to the respective integration and verification review activities (including Test Readiness Reviews and formal qualification testing, as considered necessary) associated with the verification of ICD related requirements, and to the Cupola Qualification/Acceptance Review.

5.

ESA to communicate the dates of the verification activities listed in Appendix C to NASA in due time.

6.

ESA to provide NASA a data package containing the verification close out material related to the Cupola Segment Specification and applicable Interface Control Documents at the time of the Cupola Qualification Review.

7.

ESA to provide the hardware and data necessary for the NASA/Prime Contractor to perform the overall Space Station integration and verification as specified in this document, and SSP 50407, NASA/ESA Cupola BDEALS, and SSP 50408, NASA/ESA Cupola BHSEALS.

8.

Apply the requirements of the ISSP CoFR processes and endorsements.

9.

Establish, manage, and maintain VCD database in accordance with BDEALS.

10.

Certification of the Cupola hardware in accordance with CUP-ESA-RQ-004.

11.

Integration, verification, qualification, and acceptance of the Cupola hardware and ESA provided Ground Systems in accordance with CUP-ESA-RQ-004 and CUP-ESA-RQ-103.

12.

Provide verification data to the ISSP verification team according to the delivery schedule established in BDEALS.

13.

Support activities at the KSC as specified in the IA.

14.

Provide test and checkout support requirements for launch site processing as specified in the IA.

4.1.3 NASA RESPONSIBILITIES

NASA responsibilities vis-à-vis ESA are as follows:

1.

NASA to provide traceability between the top level ISS requirements and the Cupola Segment Specification.

2.

NASA to manage the implementation of the ISSPO verification process.

3.

NASA to conduct the ISS System verification program.

4.

NASA to integrate and verify the Cupola into the launch package.

5.

NASA to perform end-to-end system integration and verification of the ISS including the Cupola.

6.

NASA to carry out the joint interface verification tests as specified herein.

7.

NASA to support ESA tests as specified herein.

8.

NASA to communicate the dates of the verification activities listed in Appendix C to ESA in due time.

9.

NASA to verify its side of the ISS to Cupola interfaces as specified in SSP 50333 and applicable interface documents.

10.

NASA to provide the hardware and data necessary for the ESA/Prime Contractor to perform the Cupola integration and verification as specified in this document, and SSP 50407, the NASA/ESA Cupola BDEALS, and SSP 50408, the NASA/ESA Cupola BHSEALS.

11.

NASA to perform process sampling.

12.

Certification that the On-Orbit ISS is ready to support the Cupola.

13.

Obtaining CoFR endorsement for Shuttle Launch Packages.

14.

Verification of all NSTS/USOS utility ports to Cupola.

15.

Provide Certification of Qualification (COQ) and Acceptance Data Package (ADP) for NASA GFE hardware incorporated or used for the Cupola.

16.

Establish, manage, and maintain the NASA/ESA Cupola BI&VP, BDEALS, and BHSEALS.

4.1.4 NASA ISSP TEST AND VERIFICATION TEAM

The Integrated Test and Verification (IT&V) team in the Vehicle Office of the ISSPO is responsible for ISSP verification. The IT&V team develops and/or approves the verification plans for the overall system and for the Prime, and the BI&VPs for the International participants. In addition the IT&V team:

1.

Provides a forum and verification focus to subsystem and discipline teams.

2.

Is the focal point for verification activities.

3.

Provides access to verification mechanisms.

4.

Performs verification assessment.

5.

Is responsible for PVIS development, training, and maintenance.

6.

Support Cupola Segment reviews (DCR, CDR, QR, and FAR).

7.

Conveys sub-system and discipline team unique needs on test and verification activities.

8.

Ensures sub-system and discipline teams receive appropriate reports.

9.

Perform process sampling to ensure the verification activities or processes of ESA/Alenia conforms to the applicable ISS Program Standards and Directions.

10.

Penetrate into the Cupola verification processes to ensure physical, functional, safety, and operational capabilities at the element-to-element interfaces within constraints of the Cupola IA and JMP.

4.2 VERIFICATION PROCESSES

4.2.1 VERIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

The ISS top-level single specification is the SSP 41000, System Specification for the ISS. The requirements in the ISS System Specification form the foundation for requirement flowdown throughout the specification hierarchy to the lowest level specifications. Sub-tier to the ISS System Specification are segment level specifications that include USOS, USGS, and Cupola specifications, and IRDs.

4.3 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NASA AND ESA VERIFICATION MANAGEMENT

The NASA IT&V team will participate in Cupola project reviews conducted by ESA and IT&V team leader may be a member of those review boards. The IT&V team shall provide personnel to perform review of the verification related material. It shall co-ordinate support for verification assessment and for joint test activities and aid in the identification of those tests that require Boeing Prime support. In addition, the IT&V team will provide ESA with access to program verification data, databases, and documentation, and aid in resolution of integration and verification issues.

4.4 VERIFICATION PROCESS

Verification requirements (methods, objectives, conditions, success criteria) for ISS System, USOS, USGS, all U.S. End Item specifications, and Segment specifications are defined in their respective Section 4, Quality Assurance Provisions.

4.4.1 ESA VERIFICATION PROCESS

The ESA contractor responds to technical and verification requirements by generating an Assembly, Integration and Verification Plan and industrial specifications to the extent necessary to decompose the Cupola Segment Specification requirements.

The ESA contractor is obliged to demonstrate to ESA the verification of the established Segment Specification 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, delivered at the project reviews, and the status report, which is part of the regular contractor reporting to ESA. Each verification activity, upon completion, is reported in a Verification Report, be it based on test, analysis, inspection, demonstration, or similarity.

ESA responsibility for the Cupola hardware verification encompasses development phase, performance and functional requirements compliance (qualification), and Flight Article Acceptance. The primary objectives to be accomplished by the verification program during the above phases include:

1.

Support the design development.

2.

Certification that the design fulfils all specified requirements and therefore is qualified.

3.

Demonstration that the delivered hardware is free of workmanship defects and is built in accordance with the qualified design.

A basic assumption of the Cupola hardware development and verification program is that deliverable configurations will be verified through the qualification and acceptance phases. Verification will start at the equipment/component level and progress through the various intermediate levels, and element verification. To achieve the above objectives, verification will be an incremental integrated process. The verification process begins with the translation of design and performance requirements (documented in specifications) into verification requirements, i.e. with the allocation of these requirements to the appropriate method of verification. With this determination, the objective and conditions for analysis and/or testing/demonstration/inspection are established forming the basis for preparation of plans, specifications, and procedures.

The results of the analysis, inspection, demonstration, and test activities are evaluated against the established requirements. Confirmation of the satisfaction of each requirement provides an increment in the verification process.

The practical implementation of the verification program is accomplished by establishing and maintaining the Verification Control Documents (VCDs). The VCDs are those documents used to plan, control, and report status/completion of verification activities.

The VCD structure is shown in Figure 4.1 and the document will be prepared as required indicating:

1.

Specification Paragraph Number.

2.

Specification Paragraph Title.

3.

Specification Paragraph Text.

4.

Verification Method at the applicable level.

5.

Applicable Verification Phase.

6.

Applicable Execution Document (specification, procedure, etc.).

7.

Verification Reporting Document.

8.

Supporting Information (RFW, comments, etc.).

The VCD data will be part of the Verification Data Base. Format and content of this Data Base, to be delivered to NASA, are detailed in PVIS data format.

The Cupola verification campaign is considered concluded when all components are accepted and delivered to NASA.

4.4.2 NASA VERIFICATION PROCESS

The NASA verification process for the ISS is described in the Program Master Integration and Verification Plan (PMI&VP). The approach is to verify specification compliance starting at the lowest level (components, equipment) and building to the ISS System level. Each organisation responsible for the development of an end item is responsible for the verification of that item to its allocated requirements. Specification compliance at the system and USOS level is verified using a 5-step process as defined in the PMI&VP.

The ISS interface verification process is described in the Integration and Verification Implementation Plan for the ISS System and the U.S. Segment.

In addition to the verification requirements documentation, a set of verification plans describing processes, products, activities, agreements, and resources is developed.

Figure 4.1 Cupola Verification Control Document (VCD) Format (page 1 of 2)

Figure 4.1 Cupola Verification Control Document (VCD) Format (page 2 of 2)

4.5 VERIFICATION METHODS

The U.S. verification process for the ISSP is described in the PMI&VP, D684-10020-01. The objective of the verification process is to ensure that all of the requirements of the ISS System Specification, SSP 41000, have been met.

The following general rules apply to the verification activities within the ISSP:

1.

Safety requirements are verified in principle by test.

2.

Test preferred (alternatives are selected if not feasible or cost effective).

3.

Verification of the critical requirements anticipated as much as possible.

4.

Combination approach (e.g. test at lower level and analysis at higher level is used).

5.

Verification by analysis only by using validated tools.

6.

Interface verification at appropriate level is done using simulators/models.

7.

Lower level verification is completed before associated higher level one.

8.

Verification in one phase is completed before the next phase.

The methods of verification are defined in SSP 50333 and are as follows:

Inspection: Inspection is a method that determines conformance to requirements by the review of drawings, data or by visual examination of the item using standard quality control methods, without the use of special laboratory procedures.

Analysis: Analysis is a process used in lieu of, or in addition to, other methods to ensure compliance to specification requirements. The selected techniques may include, but not be limited to, engineering analysis, statistics and qualitative analysis, computer and hardware simulations, and analogue modeling. Analysis may be used when it can be determined that (1) rigorous and accurate analysis is possible, (2) test is not cost effective, and (3) verification by inspection is not adequate.

Similarity: Verification by similarity is the process of analysing the specification criteria for hardware configuration and application for an article to determine if it is similar or identical in design, manufacturing process, and quality control to an existing article that has previously been qualified to equivalent or more stringent specification criteria. Special effort will be made to avoid duplication of previous test from this or similar programs. If the previous application is considered to be similar, but not equal to or greater in severity, additional qualification tests shall concentrate on the areas of new or increased requirements.

Demonstration: Demonstration consists of a qualitative determination of the properties of a test article. This qualitative determination is made through observation, with or without special test equipment or instrumentation, which verifies characteristics such as human engineering features, services, access features, and transportability. Demonstration requirements are normally implemented within a test plan, operations plan, or test procedures.

Test: Test is a method in which technical means, such as the use of special equipment, instrumentation, simulation techniques, and the application of established principles and procedures, are used for the evaluation of components, subsystems, and systems to determine compliance with requirements. Test shall be selected as the primary method when analytical techniques do not produce adequate results; failure modes exist which could compromise personnel safety, adversely affect flight systems or payload operation, or result in a loss of mission objectives; or for any components directly associated with Space Station and Orbiter interfaces. The analysis of data derived from tests is an integral part of the test program, and should not be confused with analysis as defined above. Tests shall be used to determine quantitative compliance to requirements and produce quantitative results.

4.6 VERIFICATION TRACEABILITY AND CLOSE-OUT

The NASA Prime Contractor will establish and maintain the traceability from the Cupola Segment Specification requirements to the ISS System Specification requirements in the Program Verification Information System (PVIS) database.

ESA Prime Contractor will establish and maintain the requirement traceability from the Cupola Segment Specification requirements to the applicable Cupola subsystem/End Item specification requirements based on ESA verification traceability process.

4.7 VERIFICATION REPORTING

4.7.1 ESA VERIFICATION REPORTING

In addition to the data defined in SSP 50407, BDEALS, the ESA Contractor provides verification reporting in the form of the following outputs:

1.

Verification Control Document as specified in section 4.4.1 and Figure 4.1.

2.

Verification Status Reports.

This report is produced for statistical reporting as part of the regular progress reporting including the percentage of verification achieved for each verification method.

These two documents will be made available to NASA at the Cupola Project Reviews.

ESA will provide a Certificate of Qualification (COQ) to NASA to attest to the completion of verification. This COQ will certify that the Cupola design conforms to the Segment Specification.

4.7.2 NASA VERIFICATION REPORTING

4.7.2.1 PROGRAM VERIFICATION INFORMATION SYSTEM (PVIS)

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 organisations. PVIS process and software are defined in the PVIS Process document and the PVIS Software Requirements Specification. Status reports from the PVIS database are available as requested to allow ISS management, including ESA, to assess the status of the ISS verification.

PVIS database is defined in the PVIS Process document, D684-10021, and the PVIS Software Requirements Specification, SW684-10022.

4.7.3 PROBLEM REPORTING AND CORRECTIVE ACTION (PRACA)

Design, manufacturing, and operational discrepancies discovered in Space Station hardware or software are resolved through the use of a PRACA system. This system establishes a disciplined process of reporting and determining corrective action for problems detected during integration and verification. NASA/ESA exchanges of failure reports will be in accordance with SSP 50407, Cupola BDEALS.

4.8 NASA PROCESS SAMPLING

Process sampling is an activity performed by NASA and/or its Prime Contractor, to witness selected Cupola verification activities or processes that show that Cupola’s design meets its allocated requirements. Process sampling requires that a meets-or-exceeds assessment has been completed to confirm that Cupola specifications and standards are acceptable to the ISSP. Appendix D is a list of candidate activities for process sampling that has been developed jointly by NASA/Prime and ESA/Alenia.

The focus of a process sampling will be on critical verification activities and will ensure that the established verification process was followed. It will not be a technical review by NASA of the correctness or completeness of the verification data nor to approve ESA/Alenia processes, but the findings will be used by NASA to support CoFR endorsements.

Process sampling conduct will be co-ordinated by the NASA/ESA verification team. The criteria for these activities will vary with that aspect of verification implementation being sampled. The depth of penetration will vary based on the specific process to be sampled and the agreement obtained from ESA/Alenia. The NASA/ESA verification team will provide a set of instructions to the process sampling team prior to the activity to be witnessed. At the completion of activities, a 7-Day Quick-Look-Report will be prepared that documents the conclusion of the process sampling activities. A more In-Depth-Report shall be completed jointly by the process sampling team and IT&V organization within 30 days of test completion. This report will provide detailed description of the verification activities, results, inspection anomalies, and other data pertaining to the evaluation.

Reports will be submitted by the process sampling team to the NASA/ESA verification teams and the ISSP Integrated Test and Verification team.

To this end, ESA will communicate the schedule for these activities in due time to NASA.

4.9 VERIFICATION CERTIFICATION

Certification is a subset of verification that provides formal visibility that requirements were met. Verification certification will be accomplished by ESA/Alenia and NASA/Boeing verification management participation in Cupola program reviews and via the delivery of the data as defined in this volume. The purpose being to identify and resolve verification issues in a timely manner. In addition to participation in Cupola program review boards the NASA/Boeing IT&V team will provide test and verification manpower for these reviews, in order to aid in the identification and resolution of verification issues. In addition, Process Sampling will be performed on an as agreed basis. The IT&V team is responsible for all Process Sampling efforts and reports. Process Sampling reports will be an addition to verification/certification documentation. Also, the IT&V team will participate in joint testing as defined in this document. Verification and certification information will be obtained incrementally by NASA IT&V participation in Cupola program activities. ESA will provide the following documentation as evidence of completion in accordance with NASA/ESA Cupola Bilateral Data Exchange Agreement.

1.

Cupola Verification Plan.

2.

Verification Control Document.

3.

Verification Reports.

4.

Test/Inspection/Analysis/Demonstration Reports.

5.

Log-Books.

At the Cupola Final Acceptance Review, ESA shall provide an Acceptance Data Package that certifies that the Cupola meets all requirements and provides a complete and verified status of each hardware item, including the as-built configuration and information pertinent to acceptance.

4.9.1 CERTIFICATION OF FLIGHT READINESS (CoFR)

4.9.1.1 LAUNCH VEHICLE CoFR

The CoFR for the space shuttle process is defined in NSTS 08117. This document defines the endorsement process for any element launched on the space shuttle. The inputs for the Shuttle CoFR process will be co-ordinated with the NASA/ISSPO.

4.9.1.2 CUPOLA CoFR

The ESA Cupola CoFR process, ESA’s responsibilities, and products are defined in the ISS CoFR Process document, SSP 50108. The ESA CoFR I will certify that all Cupola provided hardware and software items are ready for use by the ISS program and all necessary activities required for integration of the Cupola system into the ISS Launch Package have been accomplished. The NASA CoFR II will certify that on-orbit Space Station and Ground System are ready to support the Cupola.

4.10 CUPOLA PROGRAM MILESTONE REVIEWS

Detailed schedules will be provided by ESA to NASA on the development, manufacturing, verification, and program reviews. The Cupola program is divided into main phases at the end of which reviews are conducted to ascertain the status and provided authorisation on continuation of the activities. The main Cupola reviews are DCR, CDR, QR, and FAR. Their purpose and scope is defined in CUP-ESA RQ- 103, which is agreed between NASA and ESA.

Detailed schedules are provided by NASA to ESA of the mission integration activities as defined in the ISS Mission Integration Plan (MIP). The MIP reviews are held primarily to ascertain that the mission specific configuration of the integrated Cupola has positive margins of safety considering all launch, landing, and on-orbit environments, and has adequately met the requirements of NSTS 14046.

5.0 SUMMARY VERIFICATION ACTIVITIES DESCRIPTION

5.1 GENERAL

This chapter defines the principles which will be applied when executing the activities defined in Appendix C and D, which comprise:

1.

Joint test activities (“Joint Test”).

2.

ESA support the NASA I/F tests and NASA support to ESA I/F test (“Other Tests”).

For Joint Tests:

1.

Both sides of the I/F are tested.

2.

Pass/fail criteria are applicable to both sides.

3.

Identification and resolution of discrepancies shall be mutually achieved.

4.

A Test and Assessment Report closing the related activity shall be approved by both Parties.

For Other Tests:

1.

The lead Agency tests their side of the I/F with the support of the other.

2.

Pass/fail criteria are not applicable to the supporting party.

3.

Discrepancy resolution and Test/Assessment Reporting is the responsibility of the lead Agency.

Joint tests are defined in detail in Appendix C. Hardware and software exchanges necessary to support these tests as identified herein will, as a rule, be provided on the “load” basis and are documented in SSP 50408, BHSEALS. Such items provided are to be returned to the providing Agency after use, except where documented specifically herein.

5.2 CUPOLA VERIFICATION

5.2.1 CUPOLA WINDOW VERIFICATION

In accordance with the ESA/NASA Arrangement covering the Cupola, NASA will provide the glass panes for the Cupola Structural Test Article (STA) and Flight Model windows. In principle, and as defined in SSP 50333, NASA is responsible for the glass verification, and ESA is responsible for the verification of that glass as part of the window assemblies within the Cupola system (post installation verification). To support this arrangement the following summary of co-operative verification activities related to the glass and windows will be performed:

1.

NASA will provide the glass panes for one side and one top window assembly for the Cupola STA for the ESA test campaign. ESA will provide Aluminium plates that replace the glass for certain tests on both the STA and the Flight Models.

2.

ESA will instrument the Aluminium plates on the STA using data from the Cupola finite element model in order to provide NASA with strain and deflection data in support of glass lifetime/fracture control verification.

3.

ESA will verify the glass integrity within the window assemblies, covering nominal and failure/repair cases.

4.

ESA shall provide all test data, test reports, verified math model etc., to NASA for NASA to perform the life verification of the window glass.

5.

NASA will deliver glass panes with “flaw maps”. ESA will maintain these maps and will return them to NASA at the end of STA and Flight Model activities, for each pane.

6.

NASA will supply certain U.S. Laboratory data related to glass, as defined in SSP 50407, the BDEALS, in order to enable ESA to qualify certain aspects of the window by similarity, as defined in SSP 50333.

7.

ESA will ensure that no instrumentation is attached to the glass itself, and that the flight glass is not subjected to proof tests.

8.

ESA will invite NASA to witness any tests on the STA or Flight Models in which the glass requirements are verified.

9.

NASA will provide a certification course for each requested ESA Contractor individual involved in physical glass handling. Unless so certified, ESA Contractors will not handle glass at all.

Test Sheet 10 of Appendix C gives the detail of the related ESA test activities.

5.2.2 EXTRAVEHICULAR ROBOTICS VERIFICATION PRINCIPLES

The robotics interfaces between the Cupola and the MSS Segment include the Flight Releasable Grapple Fixture (FRGF), the Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM), the Space Vision System targets and berthing cues, and the RWS.

5.2.2.1 ROBOTICS ASSEMBLY VERIFICATION

NASA will assess the feasibility of the assembly berthing tasks using NASTRAN models supplied by ESA of the Cupola and SSRMS models based on TRICK software supplied by NASA. NASA will perform an integrated analysis including kinematic reach and clearances, translation corridor analysis, trajectory design for translation, visual cue analysis, dynamic analysis of loading for jet firing, operational timelines, and berthing mechanism capture envelope analysis. The majority of these analyses will be based on other CBM applications, tailored for the Cupola application.

NASA will provide the analysis report to ESA.

5.2.2.2 FRGF INTERFACES

The FRGF is a Station common item provided by NASA to ESA for the Cupola. The FRGF to SRMS/SSRMS interface is a NASA responsibility, and will be verified before FRGF delivery to ESA. ESA has the primary responsibility to integrate the FRGFs in accordance with SSP 42004, the MSS to User ICD. ESA will verify the stiffness at the Cupola to FRGF interface and provide relevant data to NASA. NASA will perform the analysis to verify the approach corridor and correct location and orientation of the grapple fixture for the baselined assembly task. No FRGF joint testing is foreseen.

5.2.2.3 SPACE VISION SYSTEM (SVS) TARGET INTERFACES.

The SVS targets are mounted on the Cupola to provide visual cues to the SSRMS operator to facilitate berthing. The SVS targets will be mounted and verified according to SSP 50228, Volume TBD. NASA will complete the analysis for placement and orientation, and also supply and install the targets on the Cupola. ESA will provide analysis of SVS target implementation on the Cupola. NASA will provide the target locations and thermal properties. This data exchange is documented in SSP 50407, the BDEALS.

Test Sheet 9 in Appendix C gives the detail of the installation activity.

5.2.2.4 RWS INTERFACES

The RWS interfaces with the Cupola are verified as part of the relevant interface verification activities for power, video, data, utilities mating, and human factors as described in this document.

5.2.3 ELECTRICAL POWER SYSTEM INTERFACE VERIFICATION

The verification of power interfaces between the Cupola and the Nodes/ISS is based on the following principles:

1.

Compatibility of functional and performance requirements (including EMC and power quality) shall be verified at unit level by the unit provider.

2.

Where NASA equipment is powered from the Cupola power distribution, interface verification at Cupola system level shall be confined to impedance and isolation measurements.

No dedicated bilateral testing is foreseen to verify the power interfaces.

5.2.4 AUDIO / VIDEO INTERFACE VERIFICATION

ESA will verify the audio interface as defined in SSP 50333. Subsequently, a functional test will be performed by NASA, using the NASA provided equipment described in Appendix C, test sheet 1. ESA will verify the video interface as defined in SSP 50333.

5.2.5 DATA TRANSMISSION

ESA will verify the data transmission requirements as specified in SSP 50333. Following delivery of the Cupola to NASA, NASA will integrate functional boxes to the extent necessary and will perform the Amplitude Test 2 as described in Appendix C, test sheet 3.

5.2.6 HUMAN FACTORS VERIFICATION

ESA will verify all human factors and crew systems requirements as specified in SSP 50333. Two specific test campaigns will support this, namely:

1.

1-g mock-up demonstration: ESA will perform tests on the ESA mock-up as described in Appendix C, test sheet 4.

2.

Neutral Buoyancy Tests: NASA will perform neutral buoyancy tests on the NASA mock-up in the NBL at JSC as described in Appendix C, test sheet 6.

5.2.7 CBM INTERFACE VERIFICATION

In accordance with the ESA/NASA Arrangement covering the Cupola, NASA will provide Passive CBMs and a G1138 simulator to ESA. The following summary of co-operative verification activities related to the Passive CBM will be performed:

1.

NASA shall provide to ESA the Passive CBM installation drawing and installation procedure.

2.

NASA shall provide to ESA the G1138 installation and Passive CBM and G1138 leak test procedures to ESA.

3.

ESA shall perform Passive CBM installation, Passive CBM leak testing, and G1138 installation and leak testing onto the Cupola STA and Flight Units as required.

4.

NASA shall provide on-site engineering consultation at the request of ESA.

5.

NASA shall provide the Passive CBM finite element model.

6.

ESA shall incorporate the Passive CBM finite element model into the Cupola finite element model and provide to NASA any strain and deflection data from the Passive CBM derived from the Cupola STA and Flight Model structural test program, as well as the test verified structural mathematical model of the Passive CBM/Cupola assembly so that NASA can verify that the CBM meets its structural requirements.

7.

NASA shall perform the integrated structural analysis of the Cupola while it is attached to the Node to assure that the Passive CBM meets structural and fracture control requirements in the on-orbit configuration. NASA shall provide structural margins and fracture/fatigue analysis of the Passive CBM when it is attached to the Cupola.

8.

NASA shall compare the ovality and planarity of the Cupola to Passive CBM interface plane and the Passive CBM to Active CBM interface plane derived from the test verified Cupola finite element model with the qualification limits of the CBM to assure that the interface requirements are complied with.

Following delivery of the Cupola Flight Model the passive to active CBM physical interface will be verified by NASA as described in Appendix C, test sheet 11.

6.0 GROUND CHECKOUT OF ON-ORBIT ASSEMBLIES

The ISS is unique from previous aerospace programs in that it cannot be assembled and verified on the ground and launched into orbit as a complete assembly. Additionally, there is no full-scale mock-up where major elements can be mated and fit-checked with their on-orbit neighbour prior to launch.

To mitigate these risks the ISSP is implementing certain mechanisms that will provide acceptable confidence for on-orbit assembly tasks that the interfaces have been properly designed, manufactured, and verified prior to deployment.

This section describes such activities that will be jointly performed on the ground by NASA/Prime of the interface between Cupola hardware and ISS in addition to formal requirement compliance verification activities.

6.1 UTILITIES MATING VERIFICATION

The purpose of Utility Mating activity is to reduce the risk of physical connection incompatibilities of power cables, data cables, and fluid lines during the assembly of the ISS elements. The objective is to confirm the successful connection engagement, which is defined as:

1.

The connecting mechanism engages mechanically and latches as designed.

2.

Each connection point within the connecting mechanism is correctly matched to the corresponding connection point, across the interface, as designed.

NASA/Prime have developed a three stage process of utilities interface verification consisting of:

1.

Design Audit

2.

Physical Audit

3.

Fit Check

In the design audit phase, design for power and data cables and fluid lines will be verified to ensure their construction and functional characteristics. The U.S. team will conduct design audits utilising element receptacles and cable connector drawing, wiring diagrams, and cable application requirements to assess cable functionality across the interface.

This is followed by physical audit by the U.S. team. The cables and fluid lines will be verified in this phase to conform to the drawing without any sign of physical damage or deformations.

The last phase involves the actual fit check of the flight hardware cable and fluid line assemblies. The Cupola flight utility lines will be mated to the Node interface to ensure coupling compatibility. The U.S. team will provide the procedures and coordinate with ESA/Alenia to complete these tasks.

The first phase will be performed by NASA based on data made available by ESA through BDEALS/Project Review Data Packages.

The second phase will be done together with ESA at the same time that NASA performs the third phase at KSC for the following items.

1.

Avionics harnesses.

2.

IMV ducts.

3.

Water Loop piping.

The third phase will be performed using the NASA provided hardware as defined in the SSP 50408, BHSEALS. Further details are contained in D684-10290-1-03A (for cables), D684-10321-2-122 (for fluid lines), and test sheet 7 of Appendix C.

6.2 DIGITAL PRE-ASSEMBLY

The objective of the DPA process is to identify off-nominal variances on the mating surfaces, alignment and latching components and also interference involved externally mounted components, fluid lines, and cables that may encroach in the “stay out zone”. The process begins with the creation of three-dimensional Computer-Aided Design (CAD) model of each side of the element interface using two dimensional hardware production drawings. The model includes not only the mating surfaces and hardware, but includes all externally installed components that are in the vicinity of the “stay out zone”.

Once both sides of the interface have been modeled an “as designed” mating is performed in the CAD environment providing an early assessment of the “as designed”.

The element flight hardware is then physically measured using portable photogrammetry equipment. The measured data is then mapped back (reverse engineering) into the model creating an “as built” model of the flight hardware.

This “as built” model is loaded into the portable digital measurement equipment computer and moved to the location of the mating element flight hardware (when the flight hardware becomes available), where a “digital mating” is performed. From this “digital mating” of the element interfaces, interference and variance data is collected allowing an evaluation to be made of the ability of these elements to properly mate.

The DPA is a NASA test supported by ESA.

ESA will provide the as-designed data for the Cupola through the Project Review data packages and will provide the Cupola Flight Models in the interface assembly complete configuration following shipment to KSC for NASA to perform the DPA measurements. Further details are provided on Test Sheet 8 of Appendix C and D684-10291-01 and D684-10291-01-03B.

7.0 FLIGHT HARDWARE INSPECTION

NASA Flight Crew Office Representative will participate in hardware inspection as described in Appendix C, Test Sheet 5.

8.0 DATA EXCHANGE IN SUPPORT OF NASA/PRIME INTEGRATION AND VERIFICATION TASKS

Being responsible for the overall ISS verification and integration, NASA/Prime shall perform integrated analyses of the ISS system based on the input data provided by ESA and other International Partners and participating organisations. In support of these integrated analyses ESA will provide Cupola data as documented in SSP 50407, BDEALS. This data will include, but not be limited to:

1.

ECLSS analyses.

2.

Thermal control analyses.

3.

Microgravity analyses.

4.

Mass and Power Resource Reports.

5.

On-orbit dynamics analyses.

APPENDIX Atc "APPENDIX A" \l 1 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONStc "List of acronyms and abbreviations" \l 2

ADP

Acceptance Data Package

ATU

Audio Terminal Unit

BDEALS

Bilateral Data Exchange Agreement, Lists, and Schedules

BHSEALS

Bilateral Hardware/Software Exchange Agreement, Lists, and Schedules

BI&VP

Bilateral Integration and Verification Plan

CAD

Computer-Aided Design

CBM

Common Berthing Mechanism

CDR

Critical Design Review

CMO

Configuration Management Office CoFR Certification of Flight Readiness

COQ

Certificate of Qualification

DCR

Design Consolidation Review

DPA

Digital Pre-Assembly

ECLSS

Environmental Control and Life Support System

EMC

Electromagnetic Compatibility

ESA

European Space Agency

EVA

Extravehicular Activity

EVR

Extravehicular Robotics

FRGF

Flight Releasable Grapple Fixture

IA

Implementing Arrangement I/F Interface

ICD

Interface Control Document

I…