Science Operations Replan NGAO - Meeting 6 D. Le Mignant W. M. Keck Observatory 04/25/2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Designs to Estimate Impacts of MSP Projects with Confidence. Ellen Bobronnikov March 29, 2010.
Advertisements

NGAO Construction Project Cost Estimation: Initial Thoughts Richard Dekany NGAO Team Meeting #12 December 13, 2007.
Science Group: Status, Plans, and Issues Claire Max Liz McGrath August 19, 2008.
NGAO System Design Review Response Peter Wizinowich, Rich Dekany, Don Gavel, Claire Max for NGAO Team SSC Meeting June 18, 2008.
LGS AO Operations Transition: Introduction to Meeting April 15, 2005.
NGAO System Design Phase Update Peter Wizinowich, Rich Dekany, Don Gavel, Claire Max, Sean Adkins for NGAO Team SSC Meeting February 20, 2008.
Science Team Management Claire Max Sept 14, 2006 NGAO Team Meeting.
1 NGAO Instrumentation Studies Overview By Sean Adkins November 14, 2006.
Trying to connect WBSs with people and phases Relevant questions to my work: How the realistic NGAO strategies will/should affect the work in progress?
Observing Operations Concept Document Elizabeth McGrath NGAO PD Team Meeting #6 March 19, 2009.
Functional Requirements Status and Plans Christopher Neyman W. M. Keck Observatory Viswa Velur California Institute of Technology Keck NGAO Team Meeting.
NGAO System Design: AO System (WBS 3.2) & Laser Facility (WBS 3.3) Design Inputs & Outputs Peter Wizinowich NGAO Team Meeting #9 August 24, 2007.
Science Operations Update NGAO - Meeting 11 D. Le Mignant, E. McGrath & C. Max W. M. Keck Observatory 11/05/2007.
Build to Cost Directions & Guidelines Peter Wizinowich SSC Meeting November 3, 2008.
The Path to NGAO Core Science Requirements Claire Max and Liz McGrath NGAO Team Meeting September 11-12, 2008.
NGAO Meeting #3 Introduction NGAO Meeting #3 Peter Wizinowich December 13, 2006.
Planning “Science Operations” tasks for the PD phase NGAO PD Phase D. Le Mignant W. M. Keck Observatory 08/19/2008.
Demonstration of Science Observing Modes AOWG meeting Dec. 5, 2003 D. Le Mignant, A. Bouchez for the Keck AO team.
NGAO Management Update Peter Wizinowich NGAO Meeting #11 November 5, 2007.
WBS 3.3 Laser Facility Jim Bell, Jason Chin, Erik Johansson, Chris Neyman, Viswa Velur Laser Architecture Meeting Oct 1 st, 2007.
NGAO System Design Phase Management Report - Replan NGAO Meeting #6 Peter Wizinowich April 25, 2007.
Science Operations Plan NGAO - Meeting 10 D. Le Mignant W. M. Keck Observatory 09/17/2007.
Observing efficiency for NGAO 1.Definitions 2.Lessons learned a)Keck LGS AO “efficiency” b)Keck AO brute conclusion 3.Observing efficiency budget 4. Observing.
NGAO Status R. Dekany January 31, Next Generation AO at Keck Nearing completion of 18 months System Design phase –Science requirements and initial.
NGAO discussion: Science Operations NGAO Meeting #4 D. Le Mignant 22 Jan
NGAO Team Meeting Management Peter Wizinowich May 26, 2009.
NGAO operations thoughts D. Le Mignant, E. Johansson, C. Neyman.
NGAO System Design Phase System & Functional Requirements Documents NGAO Meeting #6 Peter Wizinowich April 25, 2007.
Design Team Report: AO Operational Tools (aka Acquisition and Diagnostics) Christopher Neyman W. M. Keck Observatory (for the Operational tools team) Keck.
Encouraging “System Level” Thinking Christopher Neyman, Erik Johansson, David Le Mignant W. M. Keck Observatory Viswa Velur California Institute of Technology.
System Architecture WBS 3.1 Mid-Year Replan Richard Dekany NGAO Team Meeting #6 April 25-26, 2007 UCSC.
NGAO topical discussion: Observing Efficiency and Uptime Budgets Telecon Meeting 12/7 D. Le Mignant and E. Johansson 7 Dec Attendees; R. Campbell,
California Association for Research in Astronomy W. M. Keck Observatory NGAO Next-Generation Adaptive Optics System NGAO Uptime Budget Keck NGAO Meeting.
Chapter 3: The Project Management Process Groups
Senior Review Evaluations (1 of 5) Proposals due: 6 March 2015 Panel evaluations: Week of 22 April 2015 Performance factors to be evaluated will include.
NGAO High-Contrast Performance Budget (WBS aka Companion Sensitivity) Initial WFE budget and status report NGAO Team meeting #4, WMKO Kamuela.
NGAO Instrumentation WBS Replan By Sean Adkins April 25, 2007.
NGAO Meeting #5 Introduction NGAO Meeting #5 Peter Wizinowich March 7, 2007.
WMKO Next Generation Adaptive Optics: Build to Cost Concept Review Peter Wizinowich et al. December 2, 2008 DRAFT.
NGAO Instrumentation Preliminary Design Phase Planning September 2008 Sean Adkins.
Functional Requirements for NGAO Christopher Neyman W. M. Keck Observatory NGAO Team Meeting #9 August 24, 2007.
Plan to develop system requirements through science cases Claire Max Sept 14, 2006 NGAO Team Meeting.
Trade Study Report: NGAO versus Keck AO Upgrade NGAO Meeting #5 Peter Wizinowich March 7, 2007.
Trying to connect WBSs with people and phases Relevant questions to my work: How the re 8 -planning will affect the work in progress? Priorities to capture.
Design Team Report: AO Operational Tools (aka Acquisition and Diagnostics) Christopher Neyman W. M. Keck Observatory (for the Operational tools team) Keck.
Thomas Hacker Barb Fossum Matthew Lawrence Open Science Grid May 19, 2011.
Project Planning & Estimating – Are we there yet?
Using ePortfolios Holly Miles as Tiare Ahu. Reasons for Use Interactive learning Display of work done by students Student directed learning Students decide.
August 2 and 3, 2010 Project Cost, Schedule, Risk and Contingency Jay Elias.
Elements of a Data Management Plan Bill Michener University Libraries University of New Mexico Data Management Practices for.
Eleventh Lecture Hour 9:30 – 10:20 am, Saturday, September 16 Software Management Disciplines Iterative Process Planning (from Part III, Chapter 10 of.
Project monitoring and Control
OPENQUAKE Mission and Vision It is GEM’s mission to engage a global community in the design, development and deployment of state-of-the-art models and.
The Development of BPR Pertemuan 6 Matakuliah: M0734-Business Process Reenginering Tahun: 2010.
Sudoku Project Jacinta LiDonni Santa Maria College Introduction This project is about examining the method of iteration and real world applications.
Optimizing NASA IV&V Benefits Using Simulation Grant Number: NAG David M. Raffo, Ph.D College of Engineering and Computer Science School of Business.
Jeff Sestokas Estimating the Budget and Cost (Part 2) Project Management for ARA Engineers and Scientists Developing an Estimate from the Top Down.
Meeting Management/Planning. Today Go over basics of meeting management Introduce key elements of creating a plan.
Response to TAC8 and Annual Review Recommendations John Haines Head of Target Division April 2, 2014.
Why A Software Review? Now have experience of real data and first major analysis results –What have we learned? –How should that change what we do next.
MEM 612 Project Management
Keck Next Generation AO Next Generation Adaptive Optics Meeting #2 Caltech November 14, 2006 P. Wizinowich for NGAO Executive Committee.
(6) Estimating Computer’s efficiency Software Estimation The objective of Software Estimation is to provide the skills needed to accurately predict the.
Eric Prebys LARP Program Director July 14, LARP FY10 and Beyond - E. Prebys 2 Guidance: LARP funding decreases $1M/yr Assume: $13 M LARP total for.
Strategic Information Systems Planning
Iterative Risk Management Workflow Tool
Measuring Impact Guide
NGAO topical discussion: Observing Efficiency and Uptime Budgets
Presentation transcript:

Science Operations Replan NGAO - Meeting 6 D. Le Mignant W. M. Keck Observatory 04/25/2007

2 Main points The Original Plan for Science Operations Progress Update Comment on the Work What’s next: the replan Priorities in the replan Risk/challenges

3 Observatory Rqts Science Operations Observing Models TS Observing Efficiency Budget System Design Approach System Engineering Science Operations Performance budget Trade Studies 3.4: Science Ops Functional rqts Rationales for Functional and Performance Requirements 100 hours 64 hours 80 hours 670 hours The Original Plan Should be done easily… and in time!!

4 Observatory Rqts Science Operations Science Requirements Observing Scenarios Observing Models TS: KAON 476 Observing Efficiency Budget System Design Approach System Engineering Science Operations Performance budget Trade Studies Rationales for Functional and Performance Requirements Progress Update 3.4: Science Ops Functional Rqts Current LGSAO Operations Assessment Report: KAON 463 Main Drivers & Risk Areas

5 Comments on the Work: The plan for the science operations was not interactive enough among WBS. –Should coordinate with other critically related WBS (e.g., Observing Scenarios) –Many items in the SEMP, but can we deliver the right work? –How much will we be able to iterate on the design? Contributors were not able to commit significant effort and attention –Not aware of the science case, science instrument and the literature on the subject –Contribution at best consisted in comments –Finding compelling reviewers is difficult -> quality of report? The work is more organic than expected. –Observing Scenarios requirements don’t always translate into science operations requirements (e.g., photometry reqts) –Slower work than expected (“less earned value”), but significant progress in building requirements for the science operations. –The cost/benefit analysis is not an objective exercise: there are as many biases as people, and less people could produce a greater risk for bias!

6 Observatory Rqts Science Operations Science Requirements Observing Scenarios Observing Models TS: KAON 476 Observing Efficiency Budget System Design Approach System Engineering Science Operations Performance budget Trade Studies Rationales for Functional and Performance Requirements What’s next: the replan 3.4: Science Ops Functional Rqts Current LGSAO Operations Assessment Report: KAON 463 Main Drivers & Risk Areas ??

7 Priorities in the replan Validate/discuss the Observing Model trade study with Keck directors. –Large cost driver in the long term. More analysis required? Need to complete the Observing Scenarios and provide a version1 for the flow of Science Operations Requirements –Observatory Requirements for Operations Planning operation cost control in the long term Data quality, observing efficiency, science data products? –Science Operations Functional Requirements Simulation tools, Observing tools, PSF reconstruction Is a list of functional requirements enough and should we need more details? Coordination with laser, AO and science instrument functional requirements Document the main drivers for the Observing Efficiency budget Telescope, AO, instrument overheads versus performance and cost

8 Risk / challenges Encounter the same difficulties we have seen so far: –Coordination among WBS, particularly for science operations (AO, laser, Science instrument) –Finding experienced scientists and engineers for reviews/discussion of the documents Difficulty to provide a good estimate for the effort –What is the work quality that needs to be provided: how accurate should the study be? –Not everything deserves the same priority and the same attention: how do we take this into consideration?

9 Science Operations Requirements Mission for the science operations be to: maximize the scientific impact of the TAC allocated observing time with the NGAO instruments from 2012 to Top-level goals from the science requirements: 1.Science-grade quality of the raw data (image quality per science requirements, completeness of observations) 2.Science-grade quality of the data products (photometry, astrometry, PSF knowledge, WCS calibrations) 3.Science impact from a given data product (number of publications and citations) Top-level goals from the observatory: 1.More than 80% of the time allocated is spent on collecting science-quality data. 2.The NGAO combined with its science instruments is facility-class instrument. 3.The Observatory is capable of supporting the equivalent of 240 nights/year for NGAO science operations.