Slide 1

Columbus Operations Page 1 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS Flight Displays PWS Displays Product Status Displays - Structure - Layout Types - Elements Reviews Documentation Next Step PCS Displays Development Status Discrepancies - Example

Slide 2

Columbus Operations Page 2 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Product Status 395 PWS Displays have been developed for monitoring and control of the Columbus nominal System, Payload and Activation. The displays have been developed with the FWDU V4.0.0 (based on Sammi 3.0.12). The results from several reviews (crew, IDAGS) have been taken into account. The displays have been used during test and training activities. The last display version is part of MDB Data V 9.1 and has been delivered with Columbus Operations Products 2.4 for Software Cycle 8.0 at the beginning of February 2004 (COL-SRO-0460). The Ops Products V2.4 release to SIVQ is the sixth delivery to support test and generation activities in the SITE / PFM / ETM environment. Revision A of this version (Ops Prod 2.4.1) will be the baseline for display qualification on the Software Integration and Test Equipment (SITE). Snapshots of the actual displays can be found on the ESA ODF Home Page, Current Columbus System Laptop Displays (zipped jpg and ppt - files): http://spaceflight.esa.int/eo/EOI/esa-odf-site/esaodf_index.htm

Slide 3

Columbus Operations Page 3 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Product Status COL Home Page1 Topoligical and Functional Overview (COMMS, DMS, ECLSS, EPDS, TCS, Payload) 12 Subsystem / Component (COMMS, DMS, ECLSS, EPDS, TCS, Payload) 30 Payload (BIOLAB, EDR,EPM, EuTEF, FSL, SOLAR) 6 Detail and Command335 Info (Symbols and Hot Key Table)2 System SW (COAP, LAPAP, MTL Status)2 Task oriented (Activation, SPC Checkout, CHX Dryout, Set Cabin Temp) 7 Total395 The final set of 395 PWS Displays encloses Overview, Component, Detail and Task oriented displays for the Columbus Systems. Some more task oriented display may be developed on request. The high number of Detail and Command Displays comprises mainly the displays to configure video lines, to switch PDU outlets, TCS and ECLSS valves.

Slide 4

Columbus Operations Page 4 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 Subsystems Components COL Synoptics Home Page Functional / Topological Overviews (each 1 per system) Details & Commands (status data, atomic or supervisory FLAPs) Columbus Operations COLUMBUS PWS Displays Structure Tasks Information (display related / general) The displays are structured in a top- down hierarchy tree following the COL system breakdown. "Navigation" menu on the main panel, which cascades down to the lowest level. Navigation using internal navigation buttons.

Slide 5

Columbus Operations Page 5 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Layout Types Functional displays are primarily used for the top- down presentations of COL systems and payloads. The functional layouts show the flow of information (e.g. heat, power, fluid) and the relationship between the system parts. Topological displays are provided as system overview displays that show the location and interconnection of equipment in the COL module and include generally only selected status data. Detail & Command displays form the lowest display level for the representation of status data, commands via atomic FLAPs or configuration commands via supervisory FLAPs (to be used during nominal operations). Commands are implemented as Selection List. Only one command can be selected. Confirmation is always required for the execution unless the command is canceled. OKCANCEL

Slide 6

Columbus Operations Page 6 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Elements The first part of the Window Title is automatically generated; the second part represents the label or symbol on the navigation button (e.g. S_285212199_COL_HOME: COL Synoptics Home Page). The display Version is defined by the MDB CDU version and included on the home page only (e.g. Mission Master 11 \ SYNOPTICS CDU 9.0.0). The Menu Panel is provided on all primary displays and includes the five menu items: Navigation opens a drop-down list of the hierarchical display tree. Mark marks the actual display in the marked windows list. M/U/R opens a pop-up window, which allows to Mark, Unmark and Resume a single display. Annotation opens the Annotation Tool. Help opens the onboard Crew Documentation Browser. The System Bar is provided on the home page and on all topological and functional overview displays. The System Button opens the functional overview display of the selected system. The background color of a selected button changes from light to dark gray. Closes the overview display and brings the home page in foreground. On the home page itself the home button is replaced by the exit button, which terminates the MCD SWOP. 3 4 1 2 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Slide 7

Columbus Operations Page 7 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays - Reviews First crew review from 28. until 31. October 2002 Second crew review from 25. until 28. August 2003 Recommendations related to display layout have been implemented. IDAGS Reviews - First presentation of Columbus PWS Displays - IDAGS TIM #9, May 2002 - Presentation of results from first crew review - IDAGS TIM #12, August 2003 - Reviews of Columbus PWS Displays - Telecons 2003/2004 Several comments have been taken into account to decrease the number of deviations from the IDAGS (e.g. engineering units, ops names, icons, graphical elements, orientation).

Slide 8

Columbus Operations Page 8 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays First Crew Review In response to the Columbus CDR RID: E-D-OPS-70 a four day crew review of Columbus displays was carried out at ASTRIUM Bremen from 28. until 31. October 2002. The evaluators were Nicole P. Stott, Stephanie Wilson (both NASA), Julie Payette (CSA), Jean- Francois Clervoy and Thomas Reiter (both ESA). All astronaut representatives were experienced in display standards. The review comprised two parts: The evaluation of displays related to EPDS, TCS and ECLSS using the Columbus Trainer for USA (COL-TRU). The evaluation of displays related to COMMS and DMSS. The hierarchical structure of the displays was demonstrated using hyperlinks in a Powerpoint presentation. Crew comments were documented with written notes taken by EAC (Ruediger Seine and ESA (Mikael Wolff) representatives. A report has been prepared to document the analysis and the conclusions of the first Columbus Display Crew Evaluation.

Slide 9

Columbus Operations Page 9 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays First Crew Review From a total of 21 general- and 56 system-display specific review items 33 were rated acceptable, 39 were rated unacceptable1 (crew efficiency) and 5 were rated unacceptable2 (mission impact). Safety critical review items were identified in the areas of command verification, command response and labeling of telemetry data. The majority of comments were related to standardise labeling of system elements/components and telemetry fields, and to the graphical layout of schematics, selectable items and navigation-/command buttons. There was still a considerable potential in the MCD-software to improve the readability of displays as a prerequisite for crew-efficiency. In general all Columbus displays are in a very advanced state. Based on first ODF-versions all given tasks could be executed. The COL-TRU simulator was running stable during the three days of testing.

Slide 10

Columbus Operations Page 10 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays First Crew Review The following circumstances precluded this test to be a final crew (-acceptance) test: not all Columbus system displays were functionally integrated into the simulator no system feedback was provided on the PWS (i.e. System Message Panel) the definition of numerous operational names / TM ops names was not finalized. Second Crew Review Considering these circumstances and due to the five review items rated U2 it is recommended to implement the recommended changes and envisage a final review/crew acceptance test (with full PWS functionlity available) before the start of the first increment specific training for Columbus.

Slide 11

Columbus Operations Page 11 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Second Crew Review As a follow-up activity to the Columbus MCD-review in October 2002 the Columbus laptop software (LAPAP) was assessed by 4 astronauts in the timeframe 25. until 28. August 2003. The laptop software comprised the following applications: date&time window (DTG), monitoring&control displays (MCD), system message panel (SMP), documentation browser (DOC), master timeline application (MTL), automated crew- procedure tool (ACP) and annotation tool (ANN). Payload applications, which will be developed under the responsibility of payload facility centers (FRCs), were not available. The evaluators were Alan Drew (NASA), Frank De Winne, Leopold Eyharts and Thomas Reiter (all three ESA). All four crew representatives were familiar with the operation of laptops (PCS and/or PWS) and IDAGS standards. The evaluation exercise was performed on the Software Integration and Test Equipment (SITE) at EADS, Bremen. The SITE was running stable and provided a high-fidelity simulation environment for the tests. Crew comments were documented with written notes taken by EAC representative Ruediger Seine (MSM-AT) and ESTEC Columbus System / Operations Engineer Berengere Houdou (MSM-MC). A report has been prepared to document the analysis and the conclusions of the Columbus DMS Laptop Applications (OPS-RP-O-OO5-ESA).

Slide 12

Columbus Operations Page 12 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Second Crew Review Since the last review in October 2002 the monitoring and control displays have been significantly improved. However, a lot of findings were still related to this application. The findings were mainly of graphical nature, i.e. are related to the graphical layout of functional diagrams, to labels or enumeration values (i.e. state-codes) of telemetry fields. A patch, which should reduce the risk of inadvertent one-step commanding, was tested and needs further modification before implementation. Furthermore, the display, which indicates the status of all laptop applications running on the various PWSs, requires a functional modification; a display, which provides the crew with information about the location of a fire alarm was missing; the label of the ISPR maintenance switches was not harmonized with the related display. However, due to the drawbacks inherent to the SAMMI development environment the MCDs are still lacking significant functionality compared to the monitoring- and control displays of other ISS partners (lack of dynamic icons/graphical elements and lack to generate & display software derived variables).

Slide 13

Columbus Operations Page 13 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Second Crew Review In view of two safety critical findings, based on the experienced drawbacks in its overall stability and robustness, and due to missing functionalities or deficiencies in various applications, it has to be concluded that the reviewed version of the LAPAP software in its current state is not yet acceptable for on-orbit operations. The following table gives a statistical overview of all findings: RatingACPDOCDTGANNMCDOSSMPMTLadd.Sum func. acceptable (small corrections)726413 33 38 unacceptable 1 (crew efficiency)2243421119368 unacceptable 2 (mission impact)1 2141 9 unacceptable 2 (safety) 1 1 2 covered by existing SPRs7 412 41 28 Sum37691249212153145 During technical meetings after the crew review a proposal has been developed by Thomas Reiter to De-scope LAPAP Mk I to a min version (disregard ANN, ACP and DOC). He presented necessary changes for this version and defined a roadmap to future LAPAP enhancements (Mk II).

Slide 14

Columbus Operations Page 14 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Documentation The documentation of the PWS displays will be based on MDB reports. The reports are realized by adaptation and reuse of USS prototype S/W. Overall CCU reports and single FWDU display reports will be generated via I_MDB Flexible Tool Invocation mechanism: overall CCU reports one for TM and one for TC complete CCU FWDU display report single FWDU display report The reports consist of HTML files (loadable to Excel or Word) with HTML references to the display snapshots and contain: display name (window title) and CCU version display object name (DFD name) end item reference to measurement as OPS name, as pathname and as SID command label (select list text or button label) command string as defined by user (with pathnames) raw command string (pathnames replaced by SIDs) OPS command string (pathnames replaced by OPS names if defined) For display documentation the complete CCU FWDU report will be used.

Slide 15

Columbus Operations Page 15 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Documentation Example for a single FWDU display report display snapshot window title generation date display identification MDB version list of telemetry data list of commands

Slide 16

Columbus Operations Page 16 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PWS Displays Next Step Qualification based on Ops Products delivery 2.4.1 (MDB Data V9.1) Desktop review based on FWDU display and TM/TC reports Tests on SITE (Software Integration and Test Equipment) Display modifications and additional task oriented diplays resulting from ODF procedure development.

Slide 17

Columbus Operations Page 17 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PCS Displays Development Status Columbus Portable Computer System (PCS) displays are required for module activation, control of safety critical functions, and situational awareness. Initial set of display layouts were developed during a 2 week collocation in December 02. The layouts were generated with NASAs PrepTool, which allows for rapid prototyping and display requirement definition, i.e. the display definition file (xml) contains references to command and telemetry PUIs from the StdOut file. Display layout development was continued (approx. 132 displays) by NASA flight controllers in March, and layouts were delivered to the PCS software development group for implementation. Results were available in May StdOut delivery. Display layout verification, i.e. check that display command and telemetry elements contain the correct PUI reference, has to be performed by ESA/EADS to proof display requirements. The verification approach and associated effort is not yet agreed between involved parties. Functional verification of executable displays shall be performed in the frame of BIVP 3B.

Slide 18

Columbus Operations Page 18 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PCS Displays Development Status At last SD&I meeting ESA took the action: To consider the situation (EIM telecon with NASA) and inform EADS accordingly (AI#33/ESA/7.11.03). PCS displays are required for multielement/impact procedure development. Display discrepancies, e.g. missing cmds, incorrect 2-stage cmd functionality, deviating OpNom, have been discovered during procedure authoring (see example on next page). How to proceed: request an official delivery of Col PCS displays and associated data from NASA plan/perform a review cycle in accordance with development and test milestones document as build status in a TBD document as defined in the bilateral agreement (see example of SSP 50337 for SSRMS displays)

Slide 19

Columbus Operations Page 19 Andrea Brinkmann, TO52 COLUMBUS PCS Displays Discrepancies (Example) 2-Stage Commands for COL not implemented, i.e. Pick List required for ALL Fire Commands Commnads for IMV Safing ACS not implemented on this display ??