Assembly, Integration & Verification 2015 SKA Engineering Meeting Richard Lord 11 November 2015

About the AIV Consortium Current Status of Major Milestones Roll-Out Planning Integration & Verification Planning Product Hand-Over Planning Test Procedure Planning MeerKAT Precursor Integration Planning Risks Overview

AIV Consortium Member Organisations

Element Project Manager: Peter Hekman Element Systems Engineer:David Bolt Architecture Group:Gie Han Tan Project Scientist:Tyler Bourke Operations Planning Group:Antonio Chrysostomou SKA Office Contacts

# Stage 1: Milestone DescriptionDue Date 1 t0Nov t0 + 12wJan Verification RequirementsApr Roll-Out Plan (Draft)Jun Input to Re-Baselining ExerciseSep PDR SubmissionNov PDR ClosureFeb 2015 Major Milestones - Stage 1 PDR Baseline completed in eB.

Major Milestones - Stage 2 # Stage 2: Milestone DescriptionDue Date 1 Kick-offApr Telescope Preliminary I&V PlanJul SEMP and PMP AlignmentJun Product Hand-Over ChecklistJul Updated Cost ModelAug MeerKAT Precursor ICDsAug Telescope Roll-Out Plan (Next Release)Sep Telescope Test Procedures (Draft)Dec Precursor Integration Plan and ICDsMar Telescope Detailed I&V PlanJun CDR Data Pack Finalisation (Element CDR)Dec Telescope AIV Resource PlanMar Telescope Test Procedures (Final)Apr CDR Data Pack Update (for System CDR)May CDR Submission (for System CDR)Jul CDR Closure (for System CDR)Oct 2017

Forms the basis for the delivery of products and planning of integration & verification activities. Considers: –Sequencing of implemented functionality –Scale: How many Dishes / Stations deployed and when –Integration of MeerKAT Precursor into SKA1 MID Sequential process – early retirement of risks Achieved by specifying “Array Releases” Roll-Out Planning

How hard can it be? “Getting to AR1” Session: Today (Wednesday): 12h30 – 15h00, Breakout 2 (Merlot) Friday: 8h30 onwards, Breakout 2 (Merlot)

Described by: –Date When all required products have been installed, i.e. not necessarily integrated into Telescope System –Number of Dishes / Stations –Array Capability → Determines back-end Element functionality –Key Engineering Goals –Science Capability Used by AIV Team and Science Validation Team –Verification of Level-1 (System Level) Requirements –Validation of Science Requirements Released Array

V-Diagram Performed with Array Releases

Multiple ITFs –At Element Level or lower All over the world. Rely heavily on simulators/emulators. No AIV involvement. –At System Level End-to-End line-up of Level-2 products. Possibly one ITF at each Host Country. –On Site Conceptually possible to have an on-site ITF, e.g. in the form of an Engineering Array. System-Level ITF used for: –System Level Design Qualification –Verification of interfaces between Level-2 products –Debugging, troubleshooting, development work, etc –Testing of hardware/firmware/software upgrades during Constr. Phase –Knowledge transfer (between contractors, engineers, AIV Team, etc) Laboratory Verification Event (LVE) –Verification of end-to-end functionality and performance required for Array Release 1 Integration Test Facility (ITF)

SKA1 MID Roll-Out Plan

SKA1 LOW Roll-Out Plan

SKA1 MID Dish Roll-Out

SKA1 LOW Station Roll-Out

Software Release Management

Integration & Verification Planning

I&V Planning Integration Events Verification Events Start date Duration Resources Prerequisites Each event is a workpackage that can be project-managed

Product Hand-Over Planning Objectives are to ensure that: A well-defined development process was followed for the product. The product meets its technical specifications, documented by Qualification Test Results (QTRs) and Acceptance Test Results (ATRs). The product can be supported and maintained after hand-over. The product is successfully installed on-site. The logistic support development for the product is in process. What level of product integration is required from the AIV Contractor?

Installation, Integration, Verification

Test Procedure Planning Requirements Verification Requirements Verification Events System Test Procedures Test Configurations specified by verified by fulfilled at employs formed by Test Equipment Systems Engineering Tool

MeerKAT Integration Planning

MeerKAT Integration: ECP Replace MeerKAT’s Receivers (known as “Digitisers”) with SKA1_MID’s Receivers Replace MeerKAT’s TFR distribution to each MeerKAT Dish with SKA1_MID’s STFR distribution Does not consider replacement of MeerKAT’s Feeds Limited space inside SDCL-Band Receiver (“Digitiser”) 25 U rack space

Roll-Out Plan not yet mandatory for Design Consortia Support of the System-Level ITF not yet mandatory for contractors Late release of software/firmware functionality (TM, CSP, SDP) during Construction Phase –Knock-on effect on Array Releases –Integration Test Facility would reduce the risk of on-site issues Underestimating scale and complexity of MeerKAT Precursor Integration Participating organisations not delivering on their contributions on time, or to an acceptable level of quality Staff continuity Risks

Thank You