Attachment A RST-PROP-SOW-0043-.pdf

Effective Date: July 21, 2020

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland

RST-PROP-SOW-0043, Revision -

Roman Space Telescope (RST), Code 448

Attachment A, Propellant Tank

Statement of Work (SOW)

GSFC RST CMO

July 21, 2020

Released

RST Propellant Tank SOW RST-PROP-SOW-0043, Revision -ii

Propellant Tank Statement of Work (SOW)

Review/Signature/Approval Page

Prepared by:

Daniel Ramspacher

Approved by:

Jason Hylan

Electronic approval is located on RST CM Tool iii

Preface This document is a Roman Space Telescope (RST) Configuration Management (CM)-controlled document.

Note: Prior to May 20, 2020, the project name was Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope

(WFIRST).

For the purposes of configuration management, the prefixes “WFIRST” and “RST” are completely interchangeable. For example, RST-MGMT-PROC-0024 is the same as WFIRST-

MGMT-PROC-0024.

Changes to this document require prior approval of the applicable Configuration Control Board (CCB) Chairperson or designee. Proposed changes shall be submitted to the RST CM Office (CMO), along with supportive material justifying the proposed change.

In this document, a requirement is identified by “shall,” a good practice by “should,” permission by “may” or “can,” expectation by “will,” and descriptive material by “is.”

Questions or comments concerning this document should be addressed to:

RST Configuration Management Office Mail Stop 448 Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland 20771 iv

Change History Log

Revision Effective Date Description of Changes (Reference the CCR & CCB/ERB Approval Date)

Revision - July 13, 2020 Initial Release per CCR-0223 v

Table of TBDs/TBRs/TBSs [optional]

Item No. Location Summary Individual/ Organization

Actionee

Due Date vi

Table of Contents

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

1.2 Scope

1.3 Related Documentation

1.3.1 Applicable Documents [and Forms]

1.3.2 Reference Documents

2 MANAGEMENT, REPORTING, REVIEWS, AND DOCUMENTATION

2.1 Program management

2.2 Reporting

2.2.1 Program Plan and Schedule

2.2.2 Weekly Program Status Update

2.3 Advanced Notifications

2.4 Reviews and Meetings

2.4.1 Kickoff Meeting (KOM)

2.4.2 Design Conformance Review (DCR)

2.4.3 Qualification Test Readiness Review (QTRR)

2.4.4 Acceptance Test Readiness Review (ATRR)

2.4.5 Pre-Ship Review (PSR)

2.4.6 Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM)

2.5 Documentation

2.6 NASA/GSFC Furnished Data, Equipment, and Facilities

2.7 Qualification by Similarity Report

3 DESIGN AND ANALYSIS

3.1 Interface Control Documentation

3.2 Drawing Package

3.3 Computer-Aided Design Files

3.4 Structural Analysis Report

3.5 Reliability Analysis Report

3.6 Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis Report

3.7 User/Instruction Manual

4 HARDWARE PROCUREMENT/MANUFACTURING

4.1 General Requirements

4.2 Hardware Deliverables

5 PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION AND TEST

5.1 Verification

5.2 Verification Plan

5.3 Verification Methods

5.3.1 Inspection

5.3.2 Analysis

5.3.3 Test

5.4 Inspection Requirements

5.4.1 Visual Inspection

5.4.2 Physical Measurement

vii

5.4.3 Documentation Search

5.5 Analysis Requirements

5.6 Test Requirements

5.6.1 Test Procedures & Reports

5.6.2 Verification Test Reports

5.6.3 Test Factors

5.6.4 Test Tolerances

5.6.5 Test Restrictions

5.6.5.1 Failure During Tests

5.6.5.2 Modification of Hardware

5.6.5.3 External Adjustment

5.6.5.4 Re-Test Requirements

5.7 Verification Requirements

5.7.1 Required Tests

5.7.2 Testing Requirements

5.7.2.1 Mass

5.7.2.2 Lifetime

5.7.2.3 Static Loads

5.7.2.4 Sine Sweep Survey

5.7.2.5 Sine Vibration

5.7.2.6 Random Vibration

5.7.2.7 Shock

5.7.2.8 Pressure Cycle Life

5.7.2.9 Proof Pressure Test

5.7.2.10 Burst Pressure Test

5.7.2.11 Tank Inspections

5.7.2.12 Volumetric Capacity

5.7.2.13 Flow/Pressure Drop

5.7.2.14 External Leakage

5.7.2.15 Purge and Flush

5.7.2.16 Cleanliness

5.7.2.17 Alignment

5.7.2.18 Mass Properties Measurement

5.7.2.19 Bonded Bracket Pull Test

5.7.2.19.1 Pressurant Line Bonded Bracket Pull Test

5.7.2.19.2 Propellant Line Bonded Bracket Pull Test

5.7.3 Slosh Testing

5.7.3.1 Center of Gravity Analysis Report / Oscillating Slosh Mass

5.7.3.2 Diaphragm Testing

5.7.3.3 Launch Vehicle Pad Sway Diaphragm Testing

5.7.3.4 Launch Vehicle Horizontal Handling & Transportation Load Testing

6 SAFETY AND MISSION ASSURANCE

6.1 General Requirements

6.1.1.1 Inherited Items Package

6.1.1.2 System Safety Program Plan

6.1.1.3 Operations Hazard Analysis and Hazard Verification Tracking Log viii

6.2 Configuration Management

6.3 Training and Certification of Contractor Personnel

6.4 Surveillance of the Contractor

6.4.1 Government Source Inspection

6.4.2 Contractor Source Inspection

6.4.3 Government Mandatory Inspection Points (MIPs)

6.5 Anomaly Reporting

6.6 Design Verification Requirements

6.6.1 Verification Requirements

6.6.2 Analysis, Trending, and Reporting of Test Data

6.7 Materials, Processes Requirements

6.7.1 Materials and Processes Control

6.7.2 Compatibility

6.7.3 Bimetallic Joints

6.7.4 Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS), Vendor-Designed and Fabricated, and Bilateral

Agreement Furnished Hardware

6.7.5 M&P Usage Documentation

6.7.6 Materials Usage Agreements (MUAs)

6.7.7 Additional Requirements

6.7.7.1 Flammability Control (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.1.1)

6.7.7.2 Toxic Offgassing (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.1.2)

6.7.7.3 Fluid Compatibility (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.1.3)

6.7.7.4 Oxygen Compatibility (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.1.4)

6.7.7.5 Titanium (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.2.3)

6.7.7.6 Polyvinylchloride (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.3.2)

6.7.7.7 Composite Materials (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.3.3)

6.7.7.8 Limited-Life Items (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.3.5)

6.7.7.9 Thermal Vacuum Stability (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.3.6)

6.7.7.10 External Environment Survivability (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.3.7)

6.7.7.11 Adhesive Bonding (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.4.3)

6.7.7.12 Nondestructive Evaluation (NDE) Plan (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.5.1) .. 36

6.7.7.13 Fastener Installation (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.6.5)

6.7.7.14 Contamination Control (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.6.6)

6.7.7.15 Packaging (NASA-STD-6016A Section 4.2.6.7)

6.7.7.16 Shelf-Life Items

6.7.7.17 Solder Flux

6.7.7.18 Fasteners with LL Longitudinal Locking Elements

6.7.7.19 Gold-Indium Intermetallic

6.7.8 Materials Procurement Requirements

6.8 Welding

6.9 Contamination Control Requirements

6.9.1 Contamination Control Plan

6.9.2 Surface Cleanliness

6.9.3 Material Outgassing

7 HANDLING, STORAGE, PACKAGING, PRESERVATION, AND DELIVERY

APPENDIX A GSFC PCB SUBMITTAL AND MATERIAL SELECTION FORMS

ix

APPENDIX B ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

APPENDIX C: DELIVERABLE ITEMS LISTS & SCHEDULE

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope (RST) is a mission responding to the 2010 National Research Council New Worlds, New Horizons (NWNH) Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey top priority recommendation in the large space mission category. The science program includes two dedicated investigations to tackle outstanding questions in dark energy research and exoplanet exploration, and includes a substantial General Observer program to enable targeted investigations of astrophysical phenomena to advance other goals from the Decadal Survey. A coronagraph instrument is included in the payload for purposes of advancing the present state of the art of coronagraph technology. This document defines the work to be performed by the Contractor in the design, development, fabrication, and delivery of the RST Propellant Tank, from here on referred to as the tank, prop tank, or propellant tank.

1.2 Scope

This Statement of Work (SOW) defines requirements that govern the management, development, testing, and delivery of the RST Propellant Tank. It defines the contractor tasks, deliverables, responsibilities, and schedule, either within this document or by reference. More details for the Deliverable Items List and Schedule (DILS) are contained in Appendix C of this document.

1.3 Related Documentation

In the event of a conflict between the SOW and the specification, the SOW shall take precedence.

The latest versions of all documents below should be used unless otherwise specified in this SOW.

RST documents can be obtained from URL: https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov.

1.3.1 Applicable Documents [and Forms]

The following documents are referenced within this document and are directly applicable or contain policies or other directive matters that are binding for the contents of this document. In the event of conflict between an Applicable Document and the content of this document, the RST Project Configuration Change Board has the final authority for conflict resolution.

Document Number Title

RST-PROP-SPEC-

RST Propulsion Subsystem Propellant Tank Specification

RST-SMA-REQ-0032 RST Mission Assurance Requirements

541-PG-8072.1.2C Goddard Space Flight Center Fastener Integrity Requirements

NASA-STD-6016A Standard Materials and Processes Requirements for Spacecraft

GSFC-STD-1000G Rules for the Design, Development, Verification, and Operation of Flight Systems https://ipdtdms.gsfc.nasa.gov/

Document Number Title NASA Reference Pub

Outgassing Data for Selecting Spacecraft Materials

NASA-STD-6008 NASA Fastener Procurement, Receiving Inspection, and Storage Practices for Spaceflight Hardware

1.3.2 Reference Documents

The following documents are referenced herein and amplify or clarify the information presented in this document. These documents are not binding on the content of this document.

Document Number Title

AIAA S-080A Space Systems – Metallic Pressure Vessels, Pressurized Structures, and Pressure Components

AMS5569 REV. B Steel, Corrosion and Heat Resistant, Seamless and Welded Hydraulic Tubing 19Cr - 9.5Ni - 0.03C max Cold Drawn, 1/8 Hard Temper

ASTM E-595-15 Standard test method for total mass loss and collected volatile condensable materials from outgassing in a vacuum environment

AMS5647 REV. K Steel, Corrosion-Resistant, Bars, Wire, Forgings, Mechanical Tubing, and Rings 19Cr - 9.5Ni Solution Heat Treated

MSFC-SPEC-445A Adhesive Bonding, Process and Inspection, Requirements for

NASA-STD-5005 NASA Technical Standards System

NASA-Std. 8719.24 Rev. A NASA Expendable Launch Vehicle Payload Safety Requirements

WFIRST-SMA-LIST-0027 WFIRST MAR Applicability Matrix

2 MANAGEMENT, REPORTING, REVIEWS, AND DOCUMENTATION

2.1 Program management

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

The contractor shall generate a matrix listing each section in this statement of work and specification reflecting either compliance or non-compliance. (DILS#1) Areas of non-compliance need to be addressed by the contractor showing how they plan to meet the requirement(s) or why it will remain non-compliant.

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

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

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

2.2 Reporting

This section details the requirements for reporting to the NASA/GSFC COR.

2.2.1 Program Plan and Schedule

The contractor shall develop a detailed program plan and schedule to describe how the work will be conducted. The contractor shall develop the plans for these activities and the customer shall review and approve these plans. (DILS #2)

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

• How the program is to be managed

• The key management, technical and quality people on the program

• Any and all subcontractors and their role in the program

• How the contractor plans to manage their subcontractors

• The programmatic and technical risks

The contractor shall use the Program Plan described above to develop a detailed schedule for the program, updated monthly. The contractor shall deliver the program plan to the COR for review. The contractor shall incorporate comments made at the Kick-off Meeting from the customer into the Program Plan document and submit a final document to the COR for review and approval.

2.2.2 Weekly Program Status Update

The contractor shall prepare and present to the NASA/GSFC COR weekly technical status updates via teleconference or equivalent. The status update shall be a summary presentation of the weekly progress to include topics such as schedule overview, accomplishments, technical performance measures, status of key milestones, risks, problem areas, challenges/issues, quality assurance issues/status, and on-going and planned activities. Meeting minutes and action items shall be submitted to the NASA COR (DILS#3).

2.3 Advanced Notifications

The contractor shall notify the NASA/GSFC COR at least seven (7) calendar days in advance of all mandatory hardware inspections, test activities, TIM’s, and deliveries at either the contractor’s or a subcontractor’s facility to allow timely participation by the NASA/GSFC Quality Assurance representative. (DILS#4) Event specific notification requirements (such as failures, anomalies, etc.) are included in the appropriate sections.

2.4 Reviews and Meetings

2.4.1 Kickoff Meeting (KOM)

The Contractor shall organize and hold a Kick-off Meeting at the Contractor’s facility prior to any activity identified in this SOW (DILS#5).

The Contractor shall provide to the NASA/GSFC COR a Kick-off Presentation Package and all other required deliverables (DILS#6). The Kick-off Meeting shall address program management and quality assurance activities outlined in this SOW, as well as the performance and environmental requirements outlined in the Propellant Tank specification RST-PROP-SPEC-0124 in sufficient detail to demonstrate understanding of contract requirements. At a minimum, the presentation package should cover the following areas:

• Program Management

• Quality Assurance

• Propellant Tank Design Description

• Preliminary Interface Control Documents

• Flight Heritage

• Facilities

• Qualification Verification Plan and Procedure, Qualification Report and Qualification by

Similarity (QBS) Report, if applicable

• Mechanical Analysis with Boundary Conditions

• Any long-lead items that need to be ordered prior to the Design Conformance Review

(DCR)

• Manufacturing Flow (Section 4.1)

Meeting minutes shall be prepared and delivered to the COR for review. The minutes shall include at a minimum, attendance, action items, action item accomplishment responsibility and agreements. (DILS#7)

2.4.2 Design Conformance Review (DCR)

The contractor shall organize and present a Design Conformance Review to a GSFC Review Team at the contractor’s facility prior to the manufacturing program. (DILS#8) The contractor shall provide to the NASA/GSFC COR a Design Conformance Review Presentation Package and all other required deliverable data prior to the review. (DILS#9) The Design Conformance Review shall address all program management, design, drawings, analysis, manufacturing, test, and quality assurance activities outlined in this SOW and the RST Propellant Tank Specification RST-PROP- SPEC-0124 in sufficient detail to ensure that the proposed design conforms to all requirements and is ready for fabrication to begin. At a minimum, the design package should cover the following areas:

• Program plan, risks, and schedule

• Qualification Test Plan, if applicable

• Program Management

• Quality Assurance

• Interface Control Documentation

• Electrical, Mechanical, and Environmental specifications

• Parts, including stress analysis and radiation hardness assessment

• Detailed architectural block diagrams for the different deliverable units

• Fabrication, Assembly, and Inspection Flow plan

• Facilities

• Verification Test Plan (Including Performance Test Description)

• Materials and Processes

• Contamination Control (for items sensitive to contamination or with explicit surface cleanliness or outgassing requirements)

• Mechanical/Structural analyses

• Reliability Analysis

• Worst-Case analyses

• Failure Modes Effects Criticality Analysis

• Flight Heritage

• Verification Matrix (per Section 6.6.1)

• Acceptance Test Plan

• Final Qualification Report (if applicable)

Review minutes shall be prepared and delivered to the COR for review. The minutes shall include at a minimum, attendance, action items, action item accomplishment responsibility and agreements. (DILS#10)

2.4.3 Qualification Test Readiness Review (QTRR)

The contractor shall hold a Qualification Test Readiness Review (QTRR) at the contractor's facility prior to starting qualification testing, if applicable (DILS#11). The contractor shall demonstrate that all qualification hardware manufacturing steps are complete, show that all analysis verifications are complete, show readiness of all activities required for testing, and describe in detail any activities that are not yet ready with a completion schedule for each. In particular, the contractor shall present the updated specification verification matrix and all test procedures. The COR and customer technical team will attend the QTRR.

The QTRR package shall be delivered to the COR for review (DILS#12). All Qualification Test Procedures shall be submitted to the COR for review. (DILS #13)

At a minimum, the QTRR package shall address:

• Summary of qualification hardware manufacturing results

• Any non-conformances and problem reports

• Risk Reduction Report

• Manufacturing lessons learned (for incorporation into flight build)

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

• Specification verification matrix

• All procedures required for the qualification tests

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

• Availability of facilities and personnel

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

• Accuracy of instruments used to record test data

• How the tests are monitored and signed off

• Accept / reject criteria for each test

• How the data results are recorded and transmitted to the customer

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

Review minutes shall be prepared and delivered to the COR for review. The minutes shall include at a minimum, attendance, action items, action item accomplishment responsibility and agreements. (DILS#14).

2.4.4 Acceptance Test Readiness Review (ATRR)

The contractor shall hold an Acceptance Test Readiness Review (ATRR) at the contractor's facility prior to the beginning of the acceptance test campaign (DILS#15). The contractor shall demonstrate that all hardware manufacturing steps are complete, show that all analysis verifications are complete, show readiness of all activities required for testing, and describe in detail any activities that are not yet ready with a completion schedule for each. In particular, the contractor shall present the updated specification verification matrix and all test procedures. The COR and customer technical team will attend the ATRR.

The ATRR package shall be delivered to the COR for as part of ATRR (DILS#16). All Acceptance Test Procedures shall be submitted to the COR for review (DILS#17)

The pre-acceptance testing data shall be delivered to the customer for review or, at a minimum, made available to review at the contractor’s facility.

The ATRR package shall address:

• Summary of hardware manufacturing results

• Any non-conformances and problem reports

• Manufacturing lessons learned

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

• Specification verification matrices

• All procedures required for the tests

• Availability of facilities and personnel

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

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

• Accuracy of instruments used to record test data

• How the tests are monitored and signed off

• Accept / reject criteria for each test

• How the data is recorded and transmitted to the customer

• Current hardware status, including build paperwork

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

Review minutes shall be prepared and delivered to the COR for review. The minutes shall include at a minimum, attendance, action items, action item accomplishment responsibility and agreements. (DILS#18).

2.4.5 Pre-Ship Review (PSR)

The contractor shall hold a Pre-Ship Review at the contractor's facility at the completion of verification tests and prior to the shipment of each hardware item to the customer (DILS#19). This presentation shall demonstrate completion of all activities required for delivery of any hardware deliverable item to customer, and note any activities that are incomplete. In particular, the contractor shall present the completed verification matrix that shows verification of all requirements and presents actual data (results of tests or analyses) where applicable. (DILS#20) Any requirements that are not met shall be identified in the Deviations/Waivers etc. list and discussed with customer during the review.

An End Item Data Package (EIDP) for each of the different hardware deliverables shall be delivered to the customer for review and approval electronically (DILS#21). The electronic copies shall be text searchable. Hard copies of the EDIP shall be made available at the contractor’s facility for the PSR at request of the customer. The package shall be comprised of, but not limited to, the following data:

• The deliverable Propellant Tanks, serial number, part number, and classification status (e.g., flight, non-flight, ground support).

• Appropriate approval signatures (e.g., contractor’s quality representative, product design lead, government Representative)

• Work orders for the final assembly and associated tests

• As-Built vs. As Designed Parts List, (EEE parts, includes serialization/revisions)

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

• Problem/anomaly reporting (complete copies of report)

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

• Status of all action items from previous reviews

• Class I MRBs (complete copies of reports)

• List of As-Built Materials and Processes used

• Achieved surface cleanliness and outgassing rate data (when applicable)

• Log of total cycles, separated by primary/redundant

• List and status of all identified Life-Limited Items

• Trended Critical Parameters Data (when applicable)

• Verification matrix (including environmental), test data and reports

• Photograph Documentation

• Certificate of Conformance, with management signature

• End Item Inspection Report

• As-Built Configuration List

• Storage and Transportation Plans and Requirements

Review minutes shall be prepared and delivered to the customer. The minutes shall include at a minimum, attendance, action items, action item accomplishment responsibility and agreements.

(DILS#22).

2.4.6 Technical Interchange Meetings (TIM)

The contractor shall plan for and facilitate up to three (3) informal, face-to-face technical interchange meetings to be held at the contractor facilities (DILS#23). These TIMs shall support review and coordination of technical issues including, but not limited to, parts, test plans, test procedures, software changes, design modifications, and design analyses.

2.5 Documentation

The contractor shall ensure the generation and delivery of all documentation as called for in the contract and listed in the DILS in Appendix C of this document.

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

2.6 NASA/GSFC Furnished Data, Equipment, and Facilities

NASA/GSFC shall furnish the following list of data, equipment, and facilities to the contractor for completion of this SOW by the following dates. If there are additional items that the contractor believes are necessary in order to fulfill this contract, they shall be stated in the response to this procurement.

Propellant Tank Stand Manufacturer: NASA GSFC Part Number: 2222818-1 Quantity: One (1) Delivery Date to the vendor: the government will deliver the tank stand 2 months prior to ATP testing or earlier

The tank stand shall be utilized for all vibration and shock testing to accurately represent the tank flight conditions. The tank stand shall be returned to NASA with the delivery of the flight units (DILS #53). The tank stand material properties and CAD file will be provided to vendor for analysis.

2.7 Qualification by Similarity Report

If existing analysis or documentation from past programs are already available for the flight unit that satisfies the requirements within the Propellant Tank Specification, RST-PROP-SPEC-0124 and this SOW this documentation can be submitted to the NASA/GSFC COR as part of a Qualification By Similarity (QBS) report.

Any requirements that are verified through QBS shall be approved by the COR, and the qualification reports for any similarity items shall be made available to the COR. Any design differences to referenced QBS items shall be documented in this report. Any QBS items that are not accepted by the COR shall be re-verified through qualification testing. The QBS report shall contain detailed rationale for acceptance of each verification proposed for QBS, including test methods, data as supporting evidence of compliance and any risks identified in the QBS approach.

Any differences to referenced QBS items shall be documented in this report. The QBS report shall be provided to the COR for review and approval (DILS #24).

3 DESIGN AND ANALYSIS

The contractor shall perform analyses of the technical and environmental requirements specified in the RST Propellant Tank Specification (RST-PROP-SPEC-01324) to ensure compliance of the hardware fabrication and to assemble the documentation necessary to ensure its usability by NASA/GSFC users. Previous analyses may be submitted for the items below per section 2.7.

3.1 Interface Control Documentation

The Contractor shall provide document(s) and/or drawing(s) that define, in detail, all electrical, thermal, and mechanical interfaces, including the center of mass relative to an external reference, subject to review and approval by the NASA/GSFC COR (DILS#25).

3.2 Drawing Package

The contractor shall make all detailed drawings for the hardware available for review at the contractor’s facility (DILS#26).

3.3 Computer-Aided Design Files

The contractor shall deliver a Computer-Aided Design (CAD) file of the Propellant Tank in a step file format to the customer (DILS #27)

3.4 Structural Analysis Report

The purpose of the structural analyses is to demonstrate compliance with the mechanical/structural design and test requirements. Structural analyses verify the structural integrity of the flight hardware by assessing the size and location of applied loads, load paths, and critical failure modes.

A Structural Analysis shall be provided for the Flight Unit structure to ensure the capability to withstand and survive launch and ascent loads, worst case pressure conditions at the worst case temperature. (DILS#28) The analysis shall also address loads on any lift points as well. For metallic elements whose strengths are to be qualified by analysis (rather than by test, subject to NASA/GSFC approval), margins of safety will be 2.0 on yield and 2.6 on ultimate. Beryllium and composite materials shall not be qualified by analysis alone. The effects of any thermal inputs shall be reflected in the analyses as appropriate. This analysis shall include a Venting analyses for applicable flight components (such as thermal blankets and contamination enclosures) susceptible to pressure loadings to verify that positive strength margins exist at loads equal to the maximum pressure differential during launch. The results of these analyses shall be summarized in a contractor format Structural Analyses Report that will be provided to the NASA/GSFC COR for review.

The propellant tank shall meet all requirements outlined in the current versions of safety documents including AFSPCMAN 91-710 Volume 3 and AIAA S-080A. Mechanical analyses, which shall include those required in the path chosen in AIAA S-080A, shall be performed in accordance with the above documents. Service life for these analyses shall include the cumulative exposure to all loading conditions, as applicable, including ground handling, transportation, testing, and launch. This will include the pressure cycle life specified in Propellant Tank Specification RST-PROP-SPEC-0124, with the cycle sequence determined by the contractor and reviewed and approved by the COR. Analysis will consider a life factor of four (4) times the service life as described in the above documents. Additionally, any exceptions or deviations to the analytical methods presented in the above documents must be reviewed and approved by the COR prior to implementation for design purposes.

The structural analyses shall include verification of the lifting features to ensure strength is adequate to lift the tank configuration required in Propellant Tank Specification RST-PROP-

SPEC-0124.

The structural analyses shall take into account the cyclic pressure loading, as specified in RST- PROP-SPEC-0124. The results of these analyses shall be summarized in a contractor-format Structural Analyses Report that will be provided to the COR for approval.

3.5 Reliability Analysis Report

The contractor shall provide a numerical reliability assessment of the component, using reliability data from historical on-orbit performance, life-testing, or data books, such as MIL-HDBK-217F.

(DILS#29) The results of this analysis shall be summarized in a Contractor format Reliability Analysis Report that will be provided to the NASA/GSFC COR for review.

3.6 Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis Report

The contractor shall identify tank failure modes for a Failure Modes, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) in accordance with MIL-STD-1629, Task 101 (DILS#30). In addition to Task 101, the contractor shall rate the failure mode probability from 1 to 5, with 1 being the most probable and 5 being the least probable (see MIL-STD-1629 for details). The FMEA shall only identify failure modes and identify how these failures can be detected, but not address system-level consequences. The failure modes shall be summarized in a contractor-format FMEA Report that will be provided to the COR for review.

3.7 User/Instruction Manual

The contractor shall deliver procedures that describe the operation of the unit and any operational constraints to the unit. Examples of items to include in the user/instruction manuals are long term storage activities, operational constraints for voltage, temperature, number of cycles, open and close procedures, etc. (DILS #31) At a minimum, the operational constraints document shall cover the following items:

• Maximum flow rates through the tank to avoid internal damage if applicable

• Maximum pressure differential across the diaphragm to avoid seat damage

• Maximum and minimum storage temperature and humidity

• Maximum exposure temperature and pressure limits

• Compatible fluids

4 HARDWARE PROCUREMENT/MANUFACTURING

4.1 General Requirements

The contractor shall either procure or manufacture all components required to assemble, integrate, and test the Propellant Tank to support the delivery dates as called for in the contract in Appendix B of this document.

The contractor shall assemble the quantities of Propellant Tank hardware described below. The contractor shall provide a Fabrication, Assembly, and Inspection Flow plan (DILS #32) that includes a step-by-step procedure that describes the method of fabrication, assembly, and inspection from piece parts to the completely assembled Propellant Tank.

4.2 Hardware Deliverables

The contractor shall provide the following hardware to meet the requirements of the RST Propellant Tank Specification (RST-PROP-SPEC-0124).

a) Four (4) Propellant Tank Flight Unit(s) (DILS#54), plus (1) spare forging set (DILS#55)

5 PERFORMANCE VERIFICATION AND TEST

5.1 Verification

The contractor shall conduct a verification program that demonstrates the component design is qualified. The contractor will provide a verification matrix defining the method of verification for each specific requirement of this document.

5.2 Verification Plan

A Verification Plan shall be generated by the contractor to describe the details of how the analyses, inspections, and verification tests identified in the RST Propellant Tank Specification RST-PROP- SPEC-0124 will be performed. (DILS#33) Verification tests shall demonstrate the item meets all of the specified performance requirements over the specified range of environments, measure performance parameters and reveal inadequacies in manufacturing and assembly such as workmanship or material problems. Any requirement that exceeds previous qualification test data shall be presented to the NASA/GSFC COR as part of the planning process for evaluation and a possible delta qualification test.

The plan shall state the purpose of each test, state acceptance criteria, describe in detail the test method, set up, instrumentation, data analysis methods (if applicable), and give the sequence of the tests. The plan shall include a verification matrix summarizing how all requirements are verified (analysis, inspection, test, per the definitions in the Spec.), and listing all tests that will be performed on the Propellant Tank.

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

5.3 Verification Methods

The following subsections describe the allowable verification methods include inspection, analysis, as well as environmental, functional, and performance testing, or a combination of these techniques used to verify compliance to the requirements in both this SOW and the associated specification (RST-PROP-SPEC-0124).

5.3.1 Inspection

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

5.3.2 Analysis

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

Analysis, including simulations where applicable, will also be used to guarantee that each Propellant Tank and its components will perform as expected under worst-case conditions.

5.3.3 Test

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

5.4 Inspection Requirements

Verification by inspection shall be by one of these three methods: 1) visual inspection of the physical component; 2) a physical measurement of a property of the component, or; 3) a documentation search demonstrating components of an identical design has demonstrated fulfillment of a requirement.

5.4.1 Visual Inspection

Visual inspection of the physical component shall be performed by a qualified inspector to certify that the component has the properties/configuration specified in the requirement.

5.4.2 Physical Measurement

Physical measurement of component property (i.e. mass, dimensions, etc.) shall be performed by a qualified inspector to demonstrate the component meets specific requirement.

5.4.3 Documentation Search

Verification of requirements based on similarity shall include supporting rationale and documentation and be approved by the NASA/GSFC COR.

5.5 Analysis Requirements

Verification of performance or function through detailed analysis, using all applicable tools and techniques, is acceptable with NASA/GSFC COR approval. Detailed descriptions of the minimum required analyses, as well as analysis requirements, are provided in the SOW.

5.6 Test Requirements

This section provides general test requirements on how testing is to be performed in the process of verifying that the deliverable item meets its requirements.

a. Performance parameter measurements shall be taken to establish a baseline that can be used to assure that there are no data trends established in successive tests that indicate a degradation of performance trend within specification limits that could result in unacceptable performance in flight.

b. Any requirement that exceeds previous qualification test data shall be presented to the

NASA/GSFC COR as part of the verification planning process described in the SOW, for evaluation and a possible delta qualification test.

5.6.1 Test Procedures & Reports

The contractor shall generate Acceptance Test Procedure (ATP) and Qualification Test Procedure (QTP), if applicable, and provide them to the NASA/GSFC COR. The procedures shall be step-by-step instructions for performing tests outlined by the Verification Test Plan. The procedures shall define the environmental conditions for the tests, required equipment and facilities, test constraints, use of diagnostic or performance test software, operating conditions, tolerance on all input stimuli, data to be recorded and pass/fail limits.

Verification Test Procedures shall be contractor controlled documents and indicate all changes made after the initial release for review to NASA.

5.6.2 Verification Test Reports

The contractor shall generate Verification Test Reports. (DILS#34) These reports shall document the results of each test that was performed, what test levels were achieved, what performance requirements were verified, what anomalies were seen, and how they were resolved.

5.6.3 Test Factors

The following test factors and durations, shown in Table 5-1, shall be used for prototype, protoflight, and follow-on flight hardware.

Table 5-1 Test Factors and Durations

Test Protoflight Acceptance Structural Loads

Level Duration

Centrifuge Sine Burst(1)

1.25 X Limit Load

30 Seconds 5 Cycles Full Level

Limit Load(2)

30 Seconds 5 Cycles Full Level

Acoustic Level Duration

Limit Level +3dB 1 Minute

Limit Level 1 Minute

Random Vibration

Duration

Limit Level +3dB 1 Minute/Axis

1 Minute/Axis

Sine Vibration

Sweep Rate(3)

1.25 X Limit Level

Octaves/Minute/Axis

Octaves/Minute/Axis

Shock Actual Device Simulated

2 Actuations

1.4 X Limit Level

1 Actuations/Axis

1 Actuation

1 Actuation/Axis

(1) Test levels for Beryllium structure are 1.4x limit level for both qualification and acceptance testing. Composite structure, including metal matrix, requires acceptance testing to 1.25 x limit level.

(2) As a minimum, the test level shall be equal to or greater than the workmanship level.

(3) The sweep direction should be evaluated and chosen to minimize the risk of damage to the hardware. If a sine sweep is used to satisfy the loads or other requirements, rather than to simulate an oscillatory mission environment, a faster sweep rate may be considered, e.g., 6-8 oct/min to reduce the potential for over stress.

(4) Shorter durations may be used in static testing if necessary to protect the hardware from damage due to facility limitations. If a shorter duration is used then the dwell time at load shall be sufficient to demonstrate that the target loading condition has been achieved within the specified tolerances, all test measurements have been recorded, and the structure is stable under the applied loading condition.

5.6.4 Test Tolerances

Tolerances for the various mechanical test parameters are given in Table 5-2.

Table 5-2 Test Tolerances

Test Test Parameter Tolerance Acoustics Overall Level: ≤ 1dB 1/3 Octave Band Frequency:

f ≤ 40 Hz + 3, - 6 dB 40 < f < 3150 Hz ± 3 dB f ≥ 3150 Hz + 3, - 6 dB Temperature ± 2 °C Humidity ± 5% RH Loads Steady-State (Acceleration): ± 5% Static: ± 5% Mass Properties Weight: ± 25g

Center of Gravity: ± 6 mm Moments of Inertia ± 10 % Products of Inertia ± 10 %

Mechanical

Response Spectrum:

Simulated (f ≤ 3kHz) Simulated (f ≥ 3kHz) Shaker

± 6 dB +9/-6 dB ± 3 dB

Shock Time History: ± 10% Pressure >1.3 x 104 Pa (> 100 mm Hg): ± 5%

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

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

< 1.3 x 101 Pa (< 1 micron): ± 80% Vibration Sinusoidal: Amplitude ± 10% Frequency ± 2% Random: RMS Level ± 10%

Accel. Spectral Density ± 3 dB

5.6.5 Test Restrictions

5.6.5.1 Failure During Tests

a. When a failure (non-conformance or trend indicating that an out-of-spec condition will result) occurs, determination will be made as to the feasibility and value of continuing the test to its specified conclusion. The test shall be stopped if equipment fails during testing in cases where this failure will result in damage to the equipment.

b. Otherwise, the test shall be completed to obtain as much information as possible. If corrective action is taken, the test will be repeated to the extent necessary to demonstrate that the test item’s performance is satisfactory. If corrective action taken as a result of failure affects the validity of previously completed tests (e.g., redesign of a component), prior tests will be repeated.

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

c. No replacement, adjustment, maintenance, or repairs are authorized during testing. This requirement does not prevent the replacement or adjustment of equipment that has exceeded its design operating life during tests, provided that after such replacement, the equipment is tested as necessary to assure its proper operation. A complete record of any exceptions taken to this requirement shall be included in the test report.

5.6.5.2 Modification of Hardware

Once the formal acceptance test has started, cleaning, adjustment, or modification of test hardware shall not be permitted.

5.6.5.3 External Adjustment

Each Propellant Tank shall be designed so that no external adjustments are required after start of acceptance or qualification testing.

5.6.5.4 Re-Test Requirements

If any event, including test failure, requires that the Propellant Tank be disassembled and reassembled, then all tests performed prior to the event shall be considered for repeat. If the unit has multiple copies of the same build, then all units must be examined to determine if the problem is common. If all copies require disassembly for repair, then each must receive the same test sequence.

5.7 Verification Requirements

This section contains verification test requirements including both qualification and flight acceptance testing. For all environmental testing, the propellant tank shall be mounted in a flight-like configuration proposed by the contractor and approved by the COR.

Table 5-3 provides a summary of the environmental verifications with the associated propellant configurations. Required tests are marked with an “X.” All tests in Table 5-3 will be carried out with the unit under test attached to the government-furnished tank stand.

All indicated wet tests require the propellant tank to be filled to the maximum fill fraction requirement identified in Propellant Tank Specification RST-PROP-SPEC-0124 with a COR-approved propellant simulant. Water is an approved simulant. The vendor shall provide in the test report(s) an error analysis that indicates the error/uncertainty that is introduced by using a simulant for the wet tests instead of the actual propellant.

Further requirements of each test are provided in subsequent sections. Shipping Ground Loads do not need to be testing in a separate test if the loads are enveloped in another test.

Table 5-3 Environmental Testing Summary – Dry and Wet Tests

Requirement Spec.

Section

Qualification Tests

Acceptance Tests

Dry Wet Dry Wet Shipping Ground Loads X Quasi-Static Acceleration X Fundamental Frequencies X X X Random Vibration X X X Shock X

5.7.1 Required Tests

The following tests are required for each Propellant Tank to provide assurance that the Propellant Tank meets its all of its requirements. Each test or demonstration is described below:

• Preliminary Examination (Mass Properties, etc.)

• Pre-Proof Volume Determination

• Proof Pressure

• Post-Proof Volume Determination

• Bonded Bracket Pull Test

• Expulsion Efficiency

• Internal Leakage

• External Leakage

• Radiographic Inspection

• Penetrant Inspection

• Bonded Bracket Pull Test

• Static Load/Strength

• Sine Sweep Survey

• Random Vibration Test

• Shock

• Internal Leakage

• External Leakage

• Determination of Weight and Final Inspection

• Cleanliness Verification and Final Examination

5.7.2 Testing Requirements

The following tests are required for each test of the propellant tank to provide assurance that the design meets all of the requirements. Particular test requirements are described in this section.

All requirements of Propellant Tank Specification RST-PROP-SPEC-0124 shall be verified for qualification.

5.7.2.1 Mass

The contractor shall provide the mass of the tank derived from analysis at the PDR. The mass of the qualification propellant tank shall be measured during qualification testing with an accuracy of ±0.025 kg.

5.7.2.2 Lifetime

A previous flight unit shall have demonstrated the lifetime requirement, OR all life-limiting mechanisms shall exceed the lifetime requirements.

5.7.2.3 Static Loads

Strength testing is used to verify the component strength and structural integrity (beryllium and composite materials cannot be qualified by analysis alone), and it can be done using a variety of techniques, such as sine burst, static pull, or centrifuge testing. For the static load test, the unit under test shall be attached to the government-furnished tank stand, and the loads shall be applied to the unit under test/tank stand system.

a. Structural design loads shall be applied to prototype or protoflight hardware. There is no requirement to strength test flight hardware that has already been strength tested through a prototype or protoflight program (i.e., there is no “acceptance level” strength test requirement for flight hardware).

No permanent deformation may occur as a result of the loads test, and all applicable alignment requirements must be met following the test. Units that require alignment will have an alignment check following loads testing.

b. A performance test shall be conducted after the static loads test to verify that no damage occurred due to the loads test.

c. A functional test shall be performed after testing if sine burst is used.

If sine burst test is selected, the test will be performed in each of three orthogonal component axes.

A simple Sine Burst test following the random vibration test in each axis is a convenient method to conduct a structural loads test. Test frequency will be less than one-third of the resonant frequency of the component to avoid dynamic amplification during test. This test applies a ramped sine input at a sufficiently low frequency such that the test item moves as a rigid body. The test will be conducted in a stepwise manner starting with lower level sine-bursts that are fractions of the full load. An analysis of the unit under test/tank stand system is required to show that a base drive Sine Burst test will not cause over-test or under-test in some areas of the structure. The number of cycles at maximum level will be at least 5.

5.7.2.4 Sine Sweep Survey

The contractor shall conduct the sine sweep survey on each propellant tank before and after vibration testing in each axis. A low-level sine sweep is used to determine the modal signature of the flight item to verify compliance with fundamental frequency requirements, and to verify no change in structural integrity from testing. Test parameters will be as follows:

• Frequency: 5 - 2000 Hz

• Acceleration: 0.25 g up to 0.5 g

• Sweep Rate: 2 octaves/minute

For the sine sweep survey, the unit under test shall be attached to the vibration table using the government-furnished tank stand, the required preloads, and attachment hardware that will be used during launch and flight. This test will be performed immediately preceding the random vibration tests and will be repeated after the random vibration tests to verify that the modal signature of the unit under test (first resonant frequency) is within 5% of the pre-test frequency. In this case, the unit has passed and the test can continue. If the post-test frequencies are between 5% and 10% of the pre-test frequencies, the cause of the shift should be investigated (test bolt torques, etc.) before determining whether failure has occurred or success has been achieved and whether the test can continue. A shift of greater than 10% indicates failure, and the test should be terminated, and the failure documented. In either case when the shift is greater than 5%, NASA/GSFC shall be notified.

At a minimum, the fundamental frequency of the propellant tank shall be verified in the dry configuration and with the propellant tank filled to the maximum fill fraction required in Propellant Tank Specification RST-PROP-SPEC-0124.