1. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 1 UCB, December 9, 2004 THEMIS Instrument Test Review Instrument Verification Program Overview Ellen Taylor University of California - Berkeley

2. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 2 UCB, December 9, 2004 Performance and Environmental Verification Philosophy Requirement Development and Verification Process Mission Requirements Documents (MRD) Verification Status Environmental Test Matrix (ETM) Verification Status Instrument Performance Verification Instrument System MRD Verification Instrument MRD Verification Summary Instrument Environmental Verification Instrument Integration and Environmental Test Overview – Jeremy McCauley Vibration Test Plans, Test Levels and ETU Test Results – Paul Turin Thermal Test Plans, Test Levels and ETU Test Results – Chris Smith EMC/MAG Test Plans, Test Levels and ETU Test Results – Michael Ludlam Instrument Reliability and Quality Assurance – Ron Jackson EEE Parts Status – Ron Jackson Failure Reporting – Ron Jackson Instrument Test Procedures Reliability Analyses (FTA, FMEA, PRA) Status Overview

3. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 3 UCB, December 9, 2004 Requirement Development and Verification Process Top-Level requirements developed during Phase A Concept Study Report (CSR) provides basic mission concept Outlines top-level requirements imposed by science and programmatic objectives Mission requirements flown down (to subsystem level), formalized and documented early in Phase B All elements of CSR concept and mission requirements reviewed by development team Mission Requirements Database (MRD) developed and reviewed MRD finalized and put under Configuration Control at System Requirements Review (SRR), July 2003 Subsystem Interfaces and Component Requirements further detailed in Phase B Interface Control Documents between Subsystems and Institutions System and Subsystem Specifications (Board Specifications, SOWs, etc) Mission Plans and Policies (PAIP, Risk Management Plan, FMECA, etc) Control Plans (Magnetics, ESC, Contamination)

4. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 4 UCB, December 9, 2004 Requirement Development and Verification Process Requirement Verification Plans developed in Phase B and C Development of Verification Matrix ensures a test or analysis is scheduled for all Mission Requirements in MRD Performance Verification and Environmental Test Plans provide launch and space environments and outlines comprehensive component, subsystem and system level test program Environmental Test Matrix (ETM) developed Requirements Compliance and Verification Matrices completed in Phase D MRD and ETM evolve into summary of verification and test program as run Documents Verification and Compliance Status of all Requirements Provides direct trace-ability from requirements to test procedures and reports

5. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 5 UCB, December 9, 2004 Performance Verification Performance Verification Program Applies to all technical requirements stated in MRD and associated documents Each item in MRD has field for verification method Performance Verification Methodology Verification of requirements is by Inspection (I), Analysis (A), Test (T) or combination Tasks for each method include: establishing the criteria; preparing plans and procedures; implementing; and documenting the results. Performance Verification Levels Verification will be performed at one or more of following levels: Component, Sub-Assembly, Assembly, Subsystem, System Example from THEMIS MRD Verification Matrix:

6. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 6 UCB, December 9, 2004 MRD Status Mission Requirements Document (MRD) Status MRD Rev A released at System Requirements Review (SRR) MRD Rev B released prior to Instrument and Subsystem Peer Reviews MRD Rev C released at Mission PDR MRD Rev D released during Instrument and Subsystem Peer Reviews Incorporated MPDR RFAs and System Change Notices (SCNs) since PDR Added compliance and detailed verification plan (I/A/T) for each requirement MRD Rev E released at Mission CDR MRD Rev F will be released at Mission PER Working version of Rev F is used to track verification status of all requirements Most Instrument performance requirements have been verified during the ETU development and test w/ all instruments meeting or exceeding required performance One waiver is expected for Instrument requirements – SST exceeds magnetic budget allocation

7. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 7 UCB, December 9, 2004 Environmental Verification Environmental Test Program Instrument hardware is tested to environmental requirements using GEVS as a Guideline per CDRL THM-SYS-005 THEMIS Instrument Payload Verification and Environmental Test Specification and summarized in Environmental Test Matrix (ETM) Environmental Test Methodology Each hardware item in ETM has fields for test description, test date, and procedure/report Applies to all instrument assemblies, subsystems and systems Example from THEMIS Environmental Test Matrix:

8. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 8 UCB, December 9, 2004 ETM Status Environmental Test Matrix (ETM) Status ETM presented at Mission CDR and delivered to GSFC as CDRL ETM has been further reviewed with minor changes to overall plan No changes at the Instrument or Instrument Suite Level ETM has evolved into summary of test program as-run Working version is used to track test status of all instrument systems Most Instruments have successfully completed all environmental tests on ETUs ETU Mag Booms have not gone through Thermal Vacuum Testing – expected mid December ETU ESA has not gone through Thermal Vacuum Testing – planned for flight unit only due to heritage

9. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 9 UCB, December 9, 2004 MRD Instrument Payload Requirements Lifetime and Radiation Resource Budgets Thermal Contamination Interfaces Test and Verification MRD Instrument Requirements Status of Science Calibration Performance Tests Completed and Planned MRD Performance Verification Changes from ETU to Flight to Improve Performance Instrument MRD Verification

10. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 10 UCB, December 9, 2004 Instrument Payload

11. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 11 UCB, December 9, 2004 Organization Mission Manager Frank Snow, GSFC Mission Manager Frank Snow, GSFC Financial Mgr K. Harps, UCB Financial Mgr K. Harps, UCB Launch Vehicle G. Skrobott, KSC Launch Vehicle G. Skrobott, KSC Project Scientist D. Sibeck, GSFC Project Scientist D. Sibeck, GSFC THEMIS PI V. Angelopolous, UCB THEMIS PI V. Angelopolous, UCB Project Manager P. Harvey, UCB Project Manager P. Harvey, UCB Science Co-I’s EPO N. Craig, UCB EPO N. Craig, UCB Subcontracts J. Keenan, UCB Subcontracts J. Keenan, UCB Scheduling D. Meilhan, UCB Scheduling D. Meilhan, UCB Quality Assurance R. Jackson, UCB Quality Assurance R. Jackson, UCB Mission Systems E. Taylor, UCB Mission Systems E. Taylor, UCB Mechanical/ Thermal Systems P. Turin, UCB C. Smith, UCB Mechanical/ Thermal Systems P. Turin, UCB C. Smith, UCB Mag Cleanliness C. Russell, UCLA Mag Cleanliness C. Russell, UCLA Probe/Probe Carrier Management UCB Oversight: D. King Swales Mgr: M. Cully Probe/Probe Carrier Management UCB Oversight: D. King Swales Mgr: M. Cully Instruments M. Ludlam, UCB Instruments M. Ludlam, UCB Ground Segment M. Bester, UCB Ground Segment M. Bester, UCB Software Systems D. King, UCB Software Systems D. King, UCB Mission I&T J. McCauley, UCB Mission I&T J. McCauley, UCB

12. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 12 UCB, December 9, 2004 Organization Instruments Electric Field Instrument (EFI) J. Bonnell Electric Field Instrument (EFI) J. Bonnell ElectroStatic Analyser (ESA) C. Carlson ElectroStatic Analyser (ESA) C. Carlson Solid State Telescope (SST) D. Larson Solid State Telescope (SST) D. Larson Instrument Data Processor Unit (IDPU) M. Ludlam Instrument Data Processor Unit (IDPU) M. Ludlam Fluxgate Mag (FGM) U. Auster Fluxgate Mag (FGM) U. Auster Search Coil Mag (SCM) A. Roux Search Coil Mag (SCM) A. Roux Forrest Mozer Greg Delory Art Hull Bill Donakowski Greg Dalton Robert Duck Mark Pankow Dan Schickele Stu Harris Hilary Richard Forrest Mozer Greg Delory Art Hull Bill Donakowski Greg Dalton Robert Duck Mark Pankow Dan Schickele Stu Harris Hilary Richard Robert Abiad Peter Berg Heath Bersch Dorothy Gordon Frank Harvey Selda Heavner Jim Lewis Jeanine Potts Chris Scholz Nestor Castillo Robert Abiad Peter Berg Heath Bersch Dorothy Gordon Frank Harvey Selda Heavner Jim Lewis Jeanine Potts Chris Scholz Nestor Castillo M. Marckwardt Bill Elliott Ron Herman Chris Scholz Heath Bersch M. Marckwardt Bill Elliott Ron Herman Chris Scholz Heath Bersch Robert Lin Davin Larson Ron Canario Robert Lee T. Moreau Robert Lin Davin Larson Ron Canario Robert Lee T. Moreau Hari Dharan Y. Kim Tien Tan Bill Tyler Hari Dharan Y. Kim Tien Tan Bill Tyler TUBS/IWF Uli Auster K.H. Glassmeier W. Magnes TUBS/IWF Uli Auster K.H. Glassmeier W. Magnes CETP Alain Roux Bertran de la Porte Olivier Le Contel Christophe Coillot Abdel Bouabdellah CETP Alain Roux Bertran de la Porte Olivier Le Contel Christophe Coillot Abdel Bouabdellah LASP Robert Ergun Aref Nammari Ken Stevens Jim Westfall LASP Robert Ergun Aref Nammari Ken Stevens Jim Westfall Mag Booms Mag Booms

13. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 13 UCB, December 9, 2004 REQUIREMENTVERIFICATION METHOD IN-1. The Instrument Payload shall be designed for at least a two-year lifetime I/A: All systems designed to two years and analyzed for two year mission IN-2. The Instrument Payload shall be designed for a total dose environment of 33 krad/year (66 krad for 2 year mission, behind 5mm of Aluminum, RDM 2) IN-3. The Instrument Payload shall be Single Event Effect (SEE) tolerant and immune to destructive latch-up A: GSFC Ray Trace Radiation Analysis provides radiation environment for instrument; I/T: Parts selected with known radiation characteristics or radiation tested for TID and/or SEE Lifetime and Radiation Status Initial GSFC Radiation Analysis complete. See Table 2 from report below. Environment < 33 krad for all instruments except ESA (81.5 krad) Additional electronics shielding added to ESA 100% Instrument Parts screened for TID/SEE requirements. Approx. 20 parts were tested. No parts that failed radiation testing are being used LVPS redesign required - reduced supply efficiency

14. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 14 UCB, December 9, 2004 REQUIREMENTVERIFICATION METHOD IN-6. The Instrument Payload shall not exceed the total allocated mass budget in THM-SYS-008 THEMIS System Mass Budget.xls T: Instrument payload will be weighed. IN-7. No component of the Instrument Payload shall exceed the allocated mass budget in THM-SYS-008 THEMIS System Mass Budget.xls T: Instruments will be weighed prior to delivery. Resource Budgets - Mass CBE: 23.19 kg Allocation: 23.63 kg Contingency: 1.9% Status Approx. 93% of ETU Instrument Payload has been weighed Thermal blankets and Flight cables are estimated

15. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 15 UCB, December 9, 2004 REQUIREMENTVERIFICATION METHOD IN-8. The Instrument Payload shall not exceed the total power allocated in THM-SYS-009 THEMIS System Power Budget.xls T: Instrument payload power will be measured. IN-9. No component of the Instrument Payload shall exceed the power allocated in THM-SYS-009 THEMIS System Power Budget.xls T: Instrument power will be measured prior to delivery. Resource Budgets - Power CBE: 14.27 W Allocation: 14.77 W Contingency: 3.5% Status Approx. 90% of ETU Instrument Payload power has been measured (all Instruments except ESA) ~3x power increase between ETU and Flight Actels was estimated and additional resistor load put on 2.5V line for ETU system

16. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 16 UCB, December 9, 2004 REQUIREMENTVERIFICATION METHOD IN-10. The Instrument Payload shall not exceed the allocated data budget of 750Mbits/orbit (uncompressed) A/T: Analysis of data rates, data budget, system states over an orbit; analysis verified during functional/performance testing IN-11. The Instrument Payload shall be capable of storing 1 orbit + 1 days worth of Instrument Science and housekeeping data. A/T: Analysis of storage capability, FSW storage efficiency; analysis verified during functional/performance testing Resource Budgets - Data Status 187.5MB storage is required (750Mbits/orbit + 1 day contingency = 1500Mbits = 187.5MB) DCB contains 256MB SDRAM for TM storage. Upper quadrant is devoted to ECC. Memory analysis using predicted data rates from Instruments show storage is sufficient for 4 day orbit + 1day contingency at worse-case spin period of 2.7seconds.

17. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 17 UCB, December 9, 2004 REQUIREMENTVERIFICATION METHOD IN-13. The Instrument Payload shall survive the temperature ranges provided in the ICDs A/T: Thermal analysis and modeling provides temperature predictions for Instrument Survival; Instruments are thermally tested to predicts plus margin IN-14. The Instrument Payload shall perform as designed within the temperature ranges provided in the ICDs A/T: Thermal analysis and modeling provides temperature predictions for Instrument Science Mode; Instruments are thermally tested to predicts plus margin Thermal Requirements Status ETU Instruments are tested to Thermal Limits +10 degrees Flight Instruments are tested to Thermal Predicts +10 degrees Most ETU Instruments have completed Thermal Vacuum Testing, with the exception of: ETU Mag Booms – expected mid December ETU ESA – planned for flight unit only due to heritage. ETU ESA Pre-Amp was tested in IDPU TV Test. ETU ESA Actuator was tested in separate Release Plate Assembly TV Test.

18. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 18 UCB, December 9, 2004 REQUIREMENTVERIFICATION METHOD IN-16 The Instrument Payload shall comply with the Magnetics Cleanliness standard described in the THEMIS Magnetics Cleanliness Plan I/A/T: Verification assured by Magnetics Committee per component budget and requirements provided in THM-SYS-002 Magnetics Control Plan; Components measured prior to Suite Integration in Coil facility. IN-17 The Instrument Payload shall comply with the THEMIS Electrostatic Cleanliness Plan I/A/T: Verification per THM-SYS-003 ESC Control Plan; Analysis provides allowable resistance/area and insulator budget; Measurements are made at system level. IN-18 The Instrument Payload shall comply with the THEMIS Contamination Control Plan I/A/T: Verification per THM-SYS-004 Contamination Control Plan; Thermal Vacuum Bake-out planned w/ TQCM monitoring. Contamination Requirements Status Worse-case offenders for Magnetics is EFI Booms, SST magnets, IDPU switching frequencies ETU EFI Booms w/ mu metal shielding tested at UCLA, meets budget of 0.25 nT @ 2m SST Magnets analysis and testing show it is extremely difficult to meet 1.25 nT @ 2m. Waiver likely. IDPU frequency management plan has implemented in LVPS - switching frequencies above 100 kHz, separated by 10 kHz to avoid beet frequencies in science range. Noise measurements with SCM sensor were made first week of December 2004. Provisions for synchronization circuit suggested by SWRI implemented in flight LVPS layout, but implementation unlikely given initial SCM testing results.

19. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 19 UCB, December 9, 2004 REQUIREMENTVERIFICATION METHOD IN-19. All Instruments shall comply with the electrical specifications T: Requirements provided in THM-IDPU-001 Backplane Specification; interfaces verified during IDPU integration. IN-20. The Instrument Payload shall be compatible per IDPU-Instrument ICDs T: Instruments tested to ICD prior to delivery; interfaces verified during I&T of Instruments to IDPU IN-21. The Instrument Payload shall be compatible per the IDPU-Probe Bus ICD T: Instrument Payload tested to ICD prior to delivery; interfaces verified I&T of IDPU to Probe IN-22. The Instrument Payload shall be compatible per Instrument-Probe Bus ICDs T: Instrument Payload tested to ICD prior to delivery; interfaces verified during I&T of Instrument Payload to Probe Interface Requirements Status All ETU Instrument Boards (DAP, ETC, FGE, DFB, BEB) have been integrated and tested with ETU IDPU core system (LVPS, DCB and PCB) Most ETU Instruments (SSTs, ESA Pre-Amp, EFI Pre-Amp, FGM, SCM, Boom Simulators) have been integrated and tested with ETU IDPU box (Core System and Instrument Boards) Data Interface between IDPU and Probe BAU has been tested on 3 occasions (UCB- Swales I/F Tests: July, October, December). Various levels of interface verification completed during each test. Power Interface Test planned for January. Mechanical Hi-Fi Instrument Mock-ups provided to Swales for Integration to Hi-Fi Probe. Mass Models to be provided to Swales for Structure Strength and Thermal Testing.

20. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 20 UCB, December 9, 2004 IDPU TV Configuration

21. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 21 UCB, December 9, 2004 IDPU/Instrument ETU I&T ETU IDPU Functional Testing ETU IDPU Thermal Vacuum Testing

22. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 22 UCB, December 9, 2004 REQUIREMENTVERIFICATION METHOD IN-23 The Instrument Payload shall verify performance requirements are met per the THEMIS Verification Plan and Environmental Test Specification I/A/T: Performance Requirements met as documented in MRD Verification Matrix IN-24 The Instrument Payload shall survive and function prior, during and after exposure to the environments described in the THEMIS Verification Plan and Environmental Test Specification I/A/T: Environmental Test Requirements met as documented in Environmental Test Matrix (ETM) Verification and Test Status As provided in MRD and ETM and summarized during Review: ftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/THEMIS/1 Management/1.3 Systems Engineering/1. Requirements/thm_sys_001f_MRD.pdfftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/THEMIS/1 Management/1.3 Systems Engineering/1. Requirements/thm_sys_001f_MRD.pdf ftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/THEMIS/1 Management/1.3 Systems Engineering/1. Requirements/thm_sys_005AppA_InstrumentETM.pdfftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/THEMIS/1 Management/1.3 Systems Engineering/1. Requirements/thm_sys_005AppA_InstrumentETM.pdf

23. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 23 UCB, December 9, 2004 Fluxgate Magnetometer (FGM) Calibration Status: 3 ETU’s completed F4 & F6 test and calibration completed F1, F2, F3, F5 test and calibration to be completed by February 2005 Performance Tests performed on ETUs, F4 & F6: digital functional test analogue adjustment of FGS and FGE temperature test of electronics temperature test of sensor test of non-linearity Earth field registration determination of sensor axis direction determination of scale value and orthogonally noise test Instrument Science and Performance Requirements

24. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 24 UCB, December 9, 2004 Fluxgate Magnetometer (FGM) Verification of MRD Requirements: All MRD requirements verified on ETU and first flight units Absolute Stability, Relative Stability, Noise Level, Resolution Driving Requirement: Changes to Flight design from ETU to improve performance: AD648 to be replaced with LT1013 to improve Absolute Stability measurement Grounding wire added and feed-back wires replaced with twisted/shielded wires Instrument Science and Performance Requirements IN.FGM-5 The FGM noise level @ 1Hz shall be less than 0.03nT/Sqrt(Hz)

25. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 25 UCB, December 9, 2004 Search Coil Magnetometer (SCM) Calibration Status: ETU completed, Magnetic Calibration Facility Chambon-la-Foret F1, F2, F3 test and calibration completed in December 2004 F4, F5 test and calibration to be completed by February 2005 Performance Tests performed on ETU: Transfer function measurement Calibration signal measurement (spectrum, waveform) Noise and Sensitivity Orthogonal measurement Projection (angle between magnetic field source and magnetic axis) Instrument Science and Performance Requirements

26. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 26 UCB, December 9, 2004 Search Coil Magnetometer (SCM) Verification of MRD Requirements: All MRD requirements verified on ETU Transfer Function, Sensitivity, Orthogonality Driving Requirement: Changes to Flight design from ETU to improve performance: None Instrument Science and Performance Requirements IN.SCM-3 The SCM sensitivity shall be better than 1pT/Hz^1/2 @10Hz, and 0.1 pT/Hz^1/2 @1 kHz. SxSySz Sensor number32b1 Sensitivity at 10 Hz pT/sqrt (Hz)0.730.980.5 Sensitivity at 100 Hz pT/sqrt (Hz)0.0730.0690.066 Sensitivity at 1 kHz pT/sqrt (Hz)0.0150.01540.016 Sensitivity at 4 kHz pT/sqrt (Hz)0.04

27. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 27 UCB, December 9, 2004 Solid State Telescope (SST) Calibration Status: ETU1 completed, ETU2 facility issues F1 test and calibration December 2004 F2, F3, F4, F5 test and calibration to be completed by January 2005 Performance Tests performed on ETU: digital functional test analog functional test temperature test of electronics temperature test of sensor (noise testing over temperature) magnetic cleanliness test and analysis noise test detection thresholds energy thresholds off-axis response (including information on the response to scattered particles) dead time electron and proton detection efficiency of individual counting rate channels sun pulse recovery Instrument Science and Performance Requirements

28. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 28 UCB, December 9, 2004 Solid State Telescope (SST) Verification of MRD Requirements: All MRD requirements verified on ETU Resolution, Moments Driving Requirements: Changes to Flight design from ETU to improve performance: Added capacitors to reduce noise and cross-talk Flight detectors w/ improved performance characteristics Changed baseline sun pulse recovery time (added digital logic) Lowered operating temperature Instrument Science and Performance Requirements IN.SST-7 The SST shall measure energetic particles over an energy range of 30-300keV for ions and 30-100keV for electrons found in the magnetotail plasma sheet. IN.SST-8 The SST energy sampling resolution, dE/E, shall be better than 30% for ions and electrons.

29. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 29 UCB, December 9, 2004 Electric Fields Instrument (EFI) Calibration Status: ETU completed F1 test and calibration December 2004 (SPBs) F1 test and calibration early January 2005 (AXB) Performance Tests performed on ETU: Quiescent and Operational Currents DC Tests (Gain, Offset, CMRR, Linearity, 0.1% Matching) AC Tests (Transfer Function, CMRR, Slew Rate, Linearity) SPB - Deploy Length, Turns Count, Deploy Rate, Door Actuation, Door Function, Deploy Currents, Cable Continuity and Isolation AXB - Deploy Length, Repeatability, Stiffness, Straightness, Deploy Current, Cable Continuity and Isolation EFI/SCM/FGM via DFB Phase Intercalibration - performed using EFI Test/Enable Plugs, SCM Mu-Metal Box, FGM TCU and 12-channel, 16-bit, +/- 10-V National Instruments DAC system – TO BE COMPLETED THIS WEEK Instrument Science and Performance Requirements

30. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 30 UCB, December 9, 2004 Electric Fields Instrument (EFI) Calibration Status: ETU completed F1 test and calibration December 2004 (SPBs) F1 test and calibration early January 2005 (AXB) Performance Tests performed on ETU: Quiescent and Operational Currents DC Tests (Gain, Offset, CMRR, Linearity, 0.1% Matching) AC Tests (Transfer Function, CMRR, Slew Rate, Linearity) SPB - Deploy Length, Turns Count, Deploy Rate, Door Actuation, Door Function, Deploy Currents, Cable Continuity and Isolation AXB - Deploy Length, Repeatability, Stiffness, Straightness, Deploy Current, Cable Continuity and Isolation EFI/SCM/FGM via DFB Phase Intercalibration - performed using EFI Test/Enable Plugs, SCM Mu-Metal Box, FGM TCU and 12-channel, 16-bit, +/- 10-V National Instruments DAC system – TO BE COMPLETED THIS WEEK Instrument Science and Performance Requirements

31. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 31 UCB, December 9, 2004 Electric Fields Instrument (EFI) Verification of MRD Requirements: All MRD requirements verified on first flight units Resolution, Range, Noise Level verified Driving Requirements: Changes to design from ETU to improve performance: None Instrument Science and Performance Requirements IN.EFI-11 The EFI noise level shall be below 10^-4 mV/m/sqrt(Hz). IN.EFI-13 The EFI shall achieve an accuracy better than 10% or 1mV/m in the SC XY E-field components during times of onset.

32. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 32 UCB, December 9, 2004 THEMIS Instrument Test Review Integration and Environmental Test Program Overview Jeremy McCauley University of California - Berkeley

33. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 33 UCB, December 9, 2004 Overview Agenda Facilities Status – Integration and Environmental Instrument I&T Flow Instrument Suite I&T Flow Current Status (PER topics)

34. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 34 UCB, December 9, 2004 Facilities - Integration B20 Cleanroom Suite Performance and Environment Testing

35. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 35 UCB, December 9, 2004 Facilities - Integration RM 125 Cleanroom Suite Integration and Electrical Verification

36. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 36 UCB, December 9, 2004 Thermal Chambers Space Sciences Lab New Chamber for EFI Booms Cal Chamber Upgrade for SST Vibration Facilities Quanta Labs EMI/EMC EMCE Engineering – Freemont Facilities - Environmental Available ChambersType SLW HiBay L1TVSTEREO SLW HiBay L2TVSTEREO SLW 320 T10TVSTEREO SLW 320 CalVacESA Cal SLW 320 “Mini”TVSCM, Bake-outs SLW B20-TV “Bayside”TVEFI PA, SPB, IDPU SLW B20-Large TVTVPayload TV SLW B20-Cal VAC2VacSST Cal SLW B20-TV “Snout”TV Comment SLW 339-TV Cal AXB, SST ESA MCPs

37. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 37 UCB, December 9, 2004 Status – TV Facilities Bayside Chamber Currently supporting thermal vacuum needs IDPU ETU EFI PA ETU and F1-F3 SPB ETU and subassemblies

38. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 38 UCB, December 9, 2004 Status – TV Facilities Bertha Chamber In final stages of assembly Undergoing TC calibration Undergoing bakeout with TQCM and RGA monitoring Current baseline 242Hz/hour at 50 ° C Ready for ETU Suite test by January 1

39. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 39 UCB, December 9, 2004 Status – TV Facilities Snout Chamber In final stages of assembly Undergoing TC calibration Undergoing bakeout with TQCM and RGA monitoring Ready for AXB ETU test by December 13 Cal Chamber Currently supporting SST calibration

40. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 40 UCB, December 9, 2004 Unit (SPB) Test Flow

41. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 41 UCB, December 9, 2004 Instrument (EFI) I&T Flow EFI Pre-Amp Thermal EFI Pre-Amp Delivery Swales Spec EFI RADIAL BOOM (SPB) EFI PRE-AMP 2 cycles EFI ELECTRONICS (BEB and DFB) SPB Vibration Swales Spec SPB Thermal 2 cycles T-V Hot/Cold Deploy SPB Delivery EFI Pre-Amp Functional IDPU/ESA/ SCM Pre-Amp Vibration Without sensors IDPU/ESA Thermal 2 cycles T-V IDPU/ESA Delivery Swales Spec AXB Vibration Swales Spec AXB Thermal 2 cycles T-V Hot/Cold Deploy AXB Delivery EFI AXIAL BOOM (AXB) SPB PER SPB/Pre-Amp Functional AXB PER AXB/Pre-Amp Functional IDPU Safe-to-Mate BEB Acceptance EFI Functional (Level 0) Backplane DFB Acceptance IDPU/ESA PER

42. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 42 UCB, December 9, 2004 F1 Instrument Suite I&T Flow FGM Functional (CPT) Harness Bake-out IDPU-Harness Safe-to-Mate Payload Thermal ESA Functional (CPT) Feb 24 Payload Vibration Payload Acceptance (PSR) Workmanship (if necessary) EFI SPB Deploy EFI Functional (CPT) Payload CPT Jan 3-4 ETU IDPU SCM Functional (CPT) SST Functional (CPT) Jan 5-6 Jan 17 Feb 10-16 Instrument PER Payload EMI/EMC/MAG Payload Self-Compat Feb 17-23 Jan 31 - Feb 1 EFI Functional (LPT) Jan 7-10 Jan 11-12 Jan 13-14 Jan 18-19 Jan 20 Jan 21 Jan 24 Mag Alignment EFI AXB Deploy Mag Boom Deploy Flight IDPU Integration Jan 27-28 Jan 25-26 Feb 2 Feb 9 (1 week slack) Instrument Suite I&T in order of Instrument Delivery schedule Based on 5 day work weeks, week-ends considered slack 1 week slack between finish of Electrical Integration and beginning of Instrument Environmentals Instrument Suite PSR 3/14/05 EFI/SCM/FGM Phasing

43. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 43 UCB, December 9, 2004 Integration Set-up Instruments at SSL integrated on platform same form factor as probe INSTRUMENT PAYLOAD ASSEMBLY PLATE

44. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 44 UCB, December 9, 2004 Schedule – Instrument Payload Delivery P1: 3/14/05 (Instrument PSR) P2: 4/19/05 P3: 4/19/05 P4: 5/25/05 P5: 5/25/05 With each instrument suite we deliver harnesses, GSE computer, booms, sensors in protection boxes. Support Instrument GSE Purge equipment including tubing and regulator Degausser Magnetometer Oxygen sensor Instrument Delivery to SC

45. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 45 UCB, December 9, 2004 Flight Instrument Status Instrument Environmental Testing ETU F1F2F3F4F5F6 EFI PAXXXT AXBX SPBXT SSTX ESA IDPUX Mag Booms T FGMXTTT SCMXTTT Suite X – Completed, T – Test in Progress - Board level screening - PER 12/1/04

46. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 46 UCB, December 9, 2004 Flight Instrument Status Instrument Environmental Testing – PER Required prior to environmental testing of flight units Topics covered include: Status of the Flight Instrument: A flow chart of testing activities Review of travelers and QA assessment List of outstanding deviances from the final flight configuration (electrical substitutions, mechanical checks, etc.; responsible party) Functional tests passed and documented Assure the unit meets all functional requirements as posed in the MRD Assure contamination and cleanliness precautions are sufficient Status of Procedures: Vibration Test Procedure, Thermal Vacuum Cycling Procedure, LPT and CPT procedures

47. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 47 UCB, December 9, 2004 Flight Instrument Status Instrument Environmental Testing – PER Topics covered include: Related Risks: Outstanding ETU tasks Status of action items from previous reviews Facilities: Is there a suitable spot in the facilities schedule for these test in the near future? Is the Facilities Team able to support this test? (resources, configuration, personnel)

48. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 48 UCB, December 9, 2004 THEMIS Instrument Test Review Vibration Test Program Paul Turin University of California - Berkeley

49. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 49 UCB, December 9, 2004 Vibration Testing Flight Instruments undergo sine and random vibration testing to the levels called out in Swales TM-2430-RevD6 per UCB Instrument Test Procedures ETUs were tested to the levels called out in Swales TM-2508, TM- 2510, and TM2575-2 Updated levels in TM-2430 have somewhat higher Grms levels but reflect a redistribution to higher ASD levels at low frequencies where motion is all rigid body, and lower levels at the 100-300 Hz peak. Thus, Swales does not feel we need to retest any instruments. Each test is preceded and followed by a 0.5g sine survey Each test is compared for significant shifts in peak frequency The minimum resonant frequency required for THEMIS instruments is listed below. This will be verified during the sine surveys.

50. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 50 UCB, December 9, 2004 IDPU/ESA ETU SST ETU ETU Testing TestDateFacilityReason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration Test Result 16/9/04WYLEBaseline DesignFAIL: Excessive Deflection. ESA Covers came loose. 28/18/04QUANTAIncreased thickness of IDPU connector plate. Replaced out of spec cover pre-load spring. FAIL: ESA SMA failed 310/5/04QUANTAChanged SMA assembly procedure PASS TestDateFacilityReason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration Test Result 16/16/04QUANTABaseline DesignTEST INADEQUATE: Incorrect notching (FM1 will be tested to Qual Levels)

51. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 51 UCB, December 9, 2004 ETU Testing SCM Sensor ETU SCM Pre-Amp ETU FGM Sensor ETU (F6) TestDateFacilityReason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration Test Result 18/12/04IASBaseline DesignPASS TestDateFacilityReason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration Test Result 15/24/04IASBaseline DesignPASS TestDateFacilityReason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration Test Result 16/25/04TIRAVIBBaseline DesignPASS

52. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 52 UCB, December 9, 2004 ETU Testing SPB ETU TestDateFacilityReason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration Test Result 16/9/04QUANTABaseline DesignFAIL: Low first mode frequency; Sphere damaged due to inadequate preload of release doors 26/30/04QUANTAAdded Stiffening Brace, Verified Preload during Assembly PASS 310/15/04QUANTARetest due to design changes: Added Counterweights to Front Doors; Added Ring Lock Lever. FAIL: Door released during vibration 410/18/04QUANTACounterweights removedFAIL: Retaining Ring Lock Lever bent during test 511/4/04QUANTACounterweights removed; Release Ring Spring added; Removed Ring Lock Lever PASS

53. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 53 UCB, December 9, 2004 AXB ETU MAG BOOM ETU ETU Testing TestDateFacilityReason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration Test Result 14/23/04QUANTABaseline DesignPASS 2Planned mid-Dec QUANTARetest planned due to significant design changes TestDateFacilityReason for Retest / Changes from Previous Configuration Test Result 110/8/04QUANTABread Board DesignPRELIM TEST: verifying first mode frequency 210/29/04QUANTABaseline DesignTEST INADEQUATE: Not able to perform required notching (FM1 will be tested to Qual Levels)

54. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 54 UCB, December 9, 2004 Random Vibration All instruments will be tested to the random vibration loads shown in Table 2.4.1 to Table 2.4.10 below. The boundary of inner and outer portion of bottom deck is the interface circle of upper ring. Depending on the ETU test history and level of fidelity to the flight models, the FM1 units will be tested to either qualification or acceptance levels, and the subsequent builds to acceptance levels. EFI SPB, IDPU and ESA, SCM Preamp All flight units except IDPU FM1 will tested to Acceptance levels. FM1 IDPU will be tested to Qual levels as the ETU did not have populated boards.

55. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 55 UCB, December 9, 2004 Random Vibration Magnetometer Booms, Magnetometers (FGM and SCM) FM1 booms will be tested to Qualification levels due to changes in the design and the need to test the mag ETUs on the booms. Based on results seen on FM1 boom, Flight mags may be re-tested on Flight booms. All subsequent FMs will be tested to Acceptance levels.

56. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 56 UCB, December 9, 2004 Random Vibration SSTs FM1 SSTs will be tested to Qualification levels due to out-of-spec notching that was performed on the ETU. All subsequent FMs will be tested to Acceptance levels.

57. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 57 UCB, December 9, 2004 Random Vibration EFI AXBs AXBs will be tested to Acceptance levels.

58. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 58 UCB, December 9, 2004 Sine Vibration All Instruments will be tested to the sine vibration loads shown in Tables 2.5.5 and 2.5.7. IDPU, Magbooms, and SST FM1s will be tested to Qualification Levels

59. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 59 UCB, December 9, 2004 Sine Vibration All other flight units will be tested to Acceptance Levels

60. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 60 UCB, December 9, 2004 THEMIS Instrument Test Review Thermal Test Program Chris Smith University of California - Berkeley

61. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 61 UCB, December 9, 2004 Thermal Testing Outline Thermal Vacuum Cycle Accumulation 2 cycles at instrument level - constrained by schedule 6 cycles at instrument suite level 4 cycles at spacecraft level 12 cycles total for every flight instrument 4 hour soaks at hot and cold targets Thermal Balance Done on one flight or flight like unit only at the instrument level Instrument level balance verifies conductance, absorptance, and emittance properties Instrument thermal design is verified at the probe level on P1

62. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 62 UCB, December 9, 2004 Thermal Limits Eclipse Operation / Turn On limits are for periods where the instrument will be on but need not be calibrated to collect science data

63. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 63 UCB, December 9, 2004 Thermal Verification Levels Thermal Analysis results must be 5 degrees inside limits Acceptance/ Qualification tests are 10 degrees outside of limits Heater duty cycle will be 50% or less in coldest case at lowest voltage Max Predict Op Limits Min Predict >5°C 10°C Qualification/ Acceptance

64. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 64 UCB, December 9, 2004 ESA/IDPU Thermal Testing Status Overcurrent limit on first hot cycle of ETU. Replaced Shotkey diode in LVPS.

65. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 65 UCB, December 9, 2004 FGM Thermal Testing Status F4 FGS was not conductively mounted correctly in first qualification test. Retest will be done in air at limits shown

66. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 66 UCB, December 9, 2004 SCM Thermal Testing Status Thin crack in the potting for two antennas during first ETU test. Potting method reworked and retested

67. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 67 UCB, December 9, 2004 SCM/FGM Boom Thermal Testing Status Booms will be balanced with flight or ETU sensors

68. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 68 UCB, December 9, 2004 SST Thermal Testing Status ITO coated silver teflon thermal control tape with 9703 conductive adhesive currently in thermal vac testing Testing will measure conductivity over expected temperature ranges and adhesion

69. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 69 UCB, December 9, 2004 EFI PreAmp Thermal Testing Status ETU 1 Preamp had no problems but FR4 board was switched to Thermount 85 NT for ETU 2 and flight Six ETU 2 Qual Units went through 24 cycles, Two of those units continue to add cycles and are currently at 30. They are expected to accumulate 36 complete cycles. Upper limit recently changed from 65 to 90 after the receipt of optical property testing results.

70. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 70 UCB, December 9, 2004 EFI PreAmp Thermal Testing Setup

71. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 71 UCB, December 9, 2004 EFI SPB Thermal Testing Status Qual ETU motor was a motor only stress test, no problems seen SPB design changed from flying with doors closed to flying with doors open. ETU was retested after the small modifications this required Calibration runs will be done with all of the sphere keyreels to determine release tension at hot and cold deployment conditions

72. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 72 UCB, December 9, 2004 EFI AXB Thermal Testing Status No problems experienced in deploy tests

73. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 73 UCB, December 9, 2004 Instrument Suite Thermal Testing Status

74. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 74 UCB, December 9, 2004 THEMIS Instrument Test Review EMC/MAG Test Program Michael Ludlam University of California - Berkeley

75. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 75 UCB, December 9, 2004 EMC Test Plan EMC levels for E have been calculated by UCB and documented in “THEMIS Environmental Design Specification SAI-SPEC-1148 Revision – A”. H field levels are located in the magnetic test plan (reference on page 7 of these slides). These levels have been fixed since early 2004. Instrument suite EMC test will be performed at EMCE in Fremont, CA on FM1. Both Radiated and Conducted Emissions and Susceptibility will be measured. Subsequent EMC testing (on FM2-6) will be done at bench level at UCB – conducted E-field only.

76. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 76 UCB, December 9, 2004 EMC Narrowband E-Field

77. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 77 UCB, December 9, 2004 EMC Broadband E-Field

78. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 78 UCB, December 9, 2004 EMC H-Field

79. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 79 UCB, December 9, 2004 ETU Instrument Tests IDPU ETU is finished initial testing and has also undergone some limited EMC testing on the bench. Results from these tests show that the EFI instrument is sensitive to noise conducted onto the 28V power rails with a ripple above 500mV p-p. Initial testing on the SCM instrument indicates that at lower frequencies no disturbance is seen at 200mV p-p. Further testing will be done this week. No instrument to instrument disturbance has been recorded at ETU level.

80. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 80 UCB, December 9, 2004 Mag Test Plan DC Fields Detailed Magnetics Control Plan (ftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/THEMIS/1 Management/1.3 Systems Engineering/1. Requirements/thm_sys_002d_Magnetic Cleanliness.pdf)ftp://apollo.ssl.berkeley.edu/pub/THEMIS/1 Management/1.3 Systems Engineering/1. Requirements/thm_sys_002d_Magnetic Cleanliness.pdf Early problem component identification and testing Modelling of instrument fields Magnetic mapping of all units before installation onto probes Deperming of tools for flight model assembly and integration AC Fields Careful implementation of Magnetics Control Plan recommendations e.g. twisting of power and return lines in harnesses. Currently there are no instrument AC fields issues Final check during S/C EMC test.

81. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 81 UCB, December 9, 2004 Magnetic Coil Facility Used for instrument mapping and deperming

82. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 82 UCB, December 9, 2004 THEMIS Instrument Test Review Reliability and Quality Assurance Ron Jackson University of California - Berkeley

83. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 83 UCB, December 9, 2004 Agenda Responsibilities of Quality Assurance prior to and during Instrument I&T EEE Parts Status Failure Reporting Test Plan and Procedure Status Design Reliability Analysis Status Quality Assurance Team Ron JacksonMission Assurance Manager Jorg FisherQuality Assurance Engineer Chris ScholzQuality Control Engineer Tom ClemonsQuality Control Technician Overview

84. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 84 UCB, December 9, 2004 1.) Review and Report on Quality Status for Flight Hardware Build: Evaluate/Audit contractors facilities for the ability to consistently produce quality flight hardware daily Equipment calibration, temperature and humidity monitors Clean room controls Compliance to ESD requirements Workmanship procedures/processes Material handling and shelf life material storage Data packages and logbooks Nonconformance reporting / Problem reports Assembly instruction / BOM Personnel training and certification to NASA standards 2.) Support Integration and Test Activities: Verify test set ups at board/instrument and spacecraft levels Monitor thermal testing at Box/instrument and spacecraft levels Witness vibration testing at instrument and spacecraft levels Verify magnetics testing at instrument levels All European suppliers – UCB shall review Acceptance Package Data / Travelers and inspect component/Box upon delivery to U.S. Responsibilities

85. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 85 UCB, December 9, 2004 3.) Provide electrical and mechanical inspections but not limited to: Incoming materials Solder workmanship, through hole and SMT methods (verify coupon acceptance) Conformal coating and staking applications Witness board or Box closure Wire harness build, continuity test, Hi-pot testing and routing Configuration verification, as designed vs. as built 4.) Monitor UCB Contamination Control: Class 100k clean room Air particle count will be monitored All flight hardware will be placed in clean bags Responsibilities

86. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 86 UCB, December 9, 2004 Current version of PIL THM_ee_parts_rev37.xls on shared database 100% of EEE Parts have been procured to approved list 100% of EEE Parts are in stock, except HS 508: quantity in stock not sufficient for all flight units, more have been ordered, expected to be in stock by need date for later flight units RH1013MH: replacement part for AD648, requested by FGM to improve noise measurements, expected Dec 10, 2004 100% of EEE Part Up-Screening has been completed, except 2 capacitors for LVPS (currently at GSFC) Parts Issues RT54SX72S Actel FPGAs: 66 flight FPGAs required for Instrument Flight build. 100 MEC Parts In-house, 20 UMC Parts on-order for spare trade (8 week lead time) EEE Parts Status

87. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 87 UCB, December 9, 2004 Failure Reporting All failures that occur during flight testing are documented at time of problem using UCB Problem Failure Report (PFR) PFR documents impact, assesses alternative and provides recommended course of action PFR is closed after corrective action has been taken and results reviewed Mission Assurance Manager (Ron Jackson), Project Manager (Peter Harvey) Mission Systems Engineer (Ellen Taylor), and Cognizant Engineering sign-off and record date of closure 3 PFRs have been logged to date for Instruments PFR 001: 3 Actels failed on BEB ETU. Analysis for overstress was completed. Flight design was changed to add termination resistors. Status: CLOSED. PFR 002: SCM Pre-Amp Cal signal for FM3 was not as expected. Determined problem was due to wrong resistor value. Pre-Amp will not be re-furbished, but used spare model. Status: CLOSED. PFR 003: Overflow of Low Telemetry data occurred during FM1 FGE testing. Corrected by minor change to FPGA. FPGA replaced with new design and tested. Status: CLOSED.

88. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 88 UCB, December 9, 2004 Instrument Test Procedures Assembly Procedures MAM reviews flight assembly procedures QA inspection points w/ UCB and GSFC Sign-Off Flight Board Functional Test Procedures MSE reviews flight board functional test procedures Most flight board functional test procedures are in final form Flight board testing has started on BEB, DAP, DFB, PCB, DCB (this week), FGE Test procedures and GSE scripts are run on ETU boards prior to Flight boards Environmental Test Procedures MAM, MSE and PM review Environmental Test Procedures at Instrument PERs MAM, MSE and Instrument Lead sign-off on Procedures prior to test Lead Mechanical and Thermal review on Vibration and Thermal Vacuum Levels To date, one UCB PER has occurred for the flight SPBs THM-SPB-PRO-420 Vertical Acceptance Testing of SPB Flight Units: Signed-Off THM-SPB-PRO-423 Acceptance Vibration Testing of SPB Flight Units: Signed-Off THM-SPB-PRO-424 Thermal Vacuum Testing of SPB Flight Units

89. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 89 UCB, December 9, 2004 Reliability Engineering Fault Tree Analysis (thm_sys_016_FTA) Current Version provided at Mission CDR Probability Risk Assessment (thm_sys_017_PRA) Current Version provided at Mission CDR Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analyses (thm_sys_007_FMECA) Additional Analyses performed as identified and tracked in FMECA worksheet

90. THEMIS INSTRUMENT TEST REVIEW 90 UCB, December 9, 2004 Actel Reviews Actel Review Status: ActelReviewerStatusFlight Part Burned? BEBBaja EngineeringReview Complete. Changes Incorporated. Yes DFB (3)Baja EngineeringDocumentation and ETU Testing Complete. Sent to Baja for Review. No DCBSWRIReview Complete. Comments being Evaluated. No PCBBaja EngineeringReview Complete. Changes Incorporated. No ETCBaja EngineeringDocumentation and ETU Testing >95% Complete. Design will be sent mid-Dec. No DAPUCBDocumentation and ETU Testing Complete. Review started. No FGEInternal by TUBSInitial Flight Part Functional Test Complete. Burn-In Testing On-going. Yes