w independent orbiter assessment n w - nasa · comparison is provided through additional analysis...

306
= w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w ASSESSMENT OFTHE DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM FIMEA/CIL m 28 NOVEMBER 1986 i https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19900001601 2020-06-11T16:12:24+00:00Z

Upload: others

Post on 05-Jun-2020

5 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

=

w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

n

w

ASSESSMENT

OFTHE

DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM

FIMEA/CIL

m

28 NOVEMBER 1986

i

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19900001601 2020-06-11T16:12:24+00:00Z

Page 2: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

[]

N

!i

U

i

i

Page 3: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS ASTRONAUTICS COMPANY

HOUSTON DIVISION

SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT

WORKING PAPER NO. 1.0-WP-VA86001-08

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ASSESSMENT OF THE DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM FMEA/CIL

28 November 1986

u

w

This Working Paper is Submitted to NASA under

Task Order No. VA86001, Contract NAS 9-17650

PREPARED BY:

H J LoweryLead Analyst

Independent OrbiterAssessment

W.A. Haufl_/r

Lead Analyst

Independent OrbiterAssessment

APPROVED BY___

Independent OrbiterAssessment

Technical Manager

Independent OrbiterAssessment

APPROVED

Deputy Program ManagerSTSEOS

i

Page 4: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

Zi

i

iBm

i

m

i

win

o

U

m

JmZ

m

m -

m

rolE

w

Page 5: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

Purpose

Scope

Analysis Approach

Ground Rules and Assumptions

3.0 SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION

3.1

3.2

3.3

Design and Function

Interfaces and Locations

Hierarchy

4.0 ASSESSMENT RESULTS

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

Multiplexer/Demultiplexers (MDM)

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Multifunction CRT Display System (MCDS)

Data Bus Coupler (DBC)

Data Bus Isolation Amplifier (DBIA)

Mass Memory Unit (MMU)

Engine Interface Unit (EIU)

5.0 REFERENCES

APPENDIX A ACRONYMS

APPENDIX B DEFINITIONS, GROUND RULES, AND ASSUMPTIONS

B.I

B.2

B.3

Definitions

Project Level Ground Rules and Assumptions

Subsystem Specific Ground Rules and Assumptions

APPENDIX C ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETS

APPENDIX D CRITICAL ITEMS

APPENDIX E ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS

APPENDIX F NASA FMEA TO IOA WORKSHEET CROSS REFERENCE /

RECOMMENDATION

Page

1

3

3

3

3

4

5

5

6

6

17

20

23

25

25

25

26

27

28

A-I

B-I

B-2

B-4

B-6

C-I

D-I

E-I

F-I

i

Page 6: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

List of Figures

FigureFigureFigureFigureFigureFigureFigureFigureFigure

1 - DPS FMEA/CIL ASSESSMENT2 - DPS SUBSYSTEMOVERVIEW3 - DPS MULTIPLEXER/DEMULTIPLEXER(MDM)4 - DPS GPC CENTRALPROCESSINGUNIT (CPU)

5 - DPS GPC INPUT/OUTPUT PROCESSOR (IOP)6 - DPS MCDS FUNCTIONAL BLOCK DIAGRAM

7 - DPS MCDS

8 - DPS DATA BUS COUPLERS

9 - DPS MASS MEMORY UNIT (MMU)

Figure I0 - DPS ENGINE INTERFACE UNIT (EIU)

Figure Ii - DPS FUNCTIONAL INTERFACES AND LOCATIONS

Page

2

7

8

9

i0

ii

12

13

14

15

16

U

J

I

m

I

List of Tables

Page l

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

I - SUMMARY OF IoA FMEA ASSESSMENT

II - SUMMARY OF IOA CIL ASSESSMENT

III- SUMMARY OF IOA RECOMMENDED FAILURE

CRITICALITIES

IV - SUMMARY OF IOA RECOMMENDED CRITICAL ITEMS

V -IOA WORKSHEET NUMBERS

17

18

18

19

19

J

g

B

Du

• =

m

I

B

D

m

ii

m

w

u

Page 7: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

Independent Orbiter Assessment

Assessment of the Data Processing System FMEA/CIL

u

m

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company (MDAC) was selected in

June 1986 to perform an Independent Orbiter Assessment (IOA) of

the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical Items

List (CIL). Direction was given by the STS Orbiter and GFE

Projects Office to perform the hardware analysis using the

instructions and ground rules defined in NSTS 22206, Instructions

for Preparation of FMEA and CIL, i0 October 1986.

The IOA effort first completed an analysis of the Data Processing

System (DPS) hardware, generating draft failure modes and poten-

tial critical items. To preserve independence, this analysis was

accomplished without reliance upon the results contained withinthe NASA FMEA/CIL documentation. The IOA results were then

compared to the NASA FMEA/CIL baseline with proposed Post 5i-L

updates included. A resolution of each discrepancy from the

comparison is provided through additional analysis as required.

This report documents the results of that Comparison for theOrbiter DPS hardware.

The IOA product for the DPS analysis consisted of one hundred

twenty-two failure mode "worksheets" that resulted in twenty-

three potential critical items being identified. Comparison wasmade to the NASA baseline (as of 19 November 1986) which

consisted of seventy-eight FMEAs and twenty-five CIL items. The

comparison determined if there were any results which had been

found by the IOA but were not in the NASA baseline. This

comparison produced agreement on all but four FMEAs which causeddifferences in two CIL items. Figure 1 presents a comparison of

the proposed Post 51-L NASA baseline, with the IOA recommended

baseline, and any _ssues.

The issues arose due to differences between the NASA and IOA

FMEA/CIL preparation instructions. NASA had used an older ground

rules document which has since been supersede_ by the NSTS 22206

used by the IOA. After comparison, there were no discr--e_ncies

found that were not already identified by NASA, and the remaining

issues may be attributed to differences in ground rules.

= :

Page 8: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

EL!i

LLI

=>,O

LLi

,--.II

!11

LL

{=

I

......... I...........

Z _,=,_--

0 Z_EI./_I ,,_

0=,, --

u.,G

Figure

Z

___ _""

ua . •i---

NN ..="

_Izlz

•---JQ_

ZCDU..I

--°

-°i.z ..

i - DPS _ICIL ASSESSMENT

2

I

i-_-.........;

= .=

c_

o

(23

p--

o

Z

O

I

I

I

Ii

I

iI

iii

m

mi

I

_m

i

S -_-[

_z_ _

: =

I

i

I

I

i

ORIGINAL PAGE

BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAPH

Page 9: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

=

w

w

=

w

W

u

w

w

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Purpose

The 51-L Challenger accident prompted the NASA to readdresssafety policies, concepts, and rationale being used in the

National Space Transportation System (NSTS). The NSTS Office hasundertaken the task of reevaluating the FMEA/CIL for the Space

Shuttle design. The MDAC is providing an independent assessmentof the proposed Post SI-L Orbiter FMEA/CIL for completeness and

technical accuracy.

2.2 Scope

The scope of the independent FMEA/CIL assessment activityencompasses those Shuttle Orbiter subsystems and GFE hardware

identified in the Space Shuttle Independent FMEA/CIL AssessmentContractor Statement of Work. Each subsystem analysis addresseshardware, functions, internal and external interfaces, and

operational requirements for all mission phases.

2.3 Analysis Approach

The independent analysis approach is a top-down analysis

utilizing as-built drawings to breakdown the respective subsysteminto components and low-level hardware items. Each hardware item

is evaluated for failure mode, effects, and criticality. These

data are documented in the respective subsystem analysis ........and are used to assess the proposed Post 51-L NASA and Prime

Contractor FMEA/CIL. The IOA analysis approach is summarized inthe following Steps 1.0 through 3.0. Step 4.0 summarizes the _assessment of the NASA and Prime Contractor FMEA/CIL which is

documented in this report.

Step 1.01.1

1.2

1.3

Subsystem Familiarization

Define subsystem functions

Define subsystem componentsDefine subsystem specific ground rules and

assumptions

Step 2.0 Define subsystem analysis diagram2.1 Define subsystem2.2 Define major a_semblies

2.3 Develop detailed subsystem rePresentations

Step 3.0 Failure events definition3.1 Construct matrix of failure modes

3.2 Document IOA analysis results

Page 10: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

Step 4.0Resolve differences

ReView in_house

Document assessment issues

Forward findings to Project Manager

Compare IOA analysis data to NASA FMEA/CIL

2.4 Ground Rules and Assumptions

The ground rules and assumptions used in the IOA are defined in

Appendix B. The subsystem specific ground rules were defined to

limit the analysis to single-failed-parts for each failure mode.

A subset of the failure mode keywords were identified_'for the DPS

team. This allowed for commonality in the analysis results.

I

m

i

mm

mm

mm

g

m

u

u

mm

I

.g

g

m

mmm

Page 11: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

m

m

w

Lu

w

w

L

m

W

w

w

3.0 SUBSYSTEM DESCRIPTION

3.1 Design and Function

The DPS consists of that hardware required for data acquisition,

data manipulation, data display, and data transfer on theOrbiter, and includes the five onboard computers and their

interfaces. Reference Figure 2. More specifically, the DPS

consists of the following components:

o Twelve MDM units which convert and format data at the

remote locations. Each MDM has internal redundancy and

consists of a Multiplexer Interface Adapter (MIA),

Sequential Control Unit (SCU), Input/Output Module,Analog To Digital Converter, and Power Supply. Theyconvert and format serial digital GPC commands into

parallel discrete, digital, and analog data fortransfer to vehicle subsystem hardware. They also

convert and format parallel discrete, digital, and

analog data from vehicle subsystems into serial digitaldata for transmission to the GPCs. Reference Figure 3.

2. Five GPCs each consisting of a Central Processing Unit(CPU) and Input/Output Processor (IOP). The CPU

functionally consists of an Arithmetic Logic Unit,Local Store, Master Bus Control Unit, Data Flow

Multiplexer, Micro-code control unit, CPU Timer,

Interrupt Logic, Main Memory Timing Page, Timers,Address Bus Control, Main Memory, and Power Supply.The IOP contains Control Monitor, IOP Main Memory,

Channel Control, Direct Memory Access Queue, Arithmetic

Logic Units, Local_ Store, Micro-code store and Decode,.

MIAs, and Time-slice and Multiplexing: One of thefunctions of the GPCs is to support guidance,

navigation, and control requirements of the vehicle.

- They provide for the monitoring and control of vehiclesubsystems. They also check for data transmissionerrors and Crew inpu_ error. Vehicle system failuresand out-of-tolerance conditions are annunciated by the

GPCs. Reference Figure 4 and Figure 5.

3. The MCDS consists of three Keyboard Units (KU), four

Display Units (DU) and four Display Electronics Units(DEU). Each KU has Keys, Switches and Lights. The DU

consists of X/Y Deflection Amplifiers, video

Amplifiers, Cathode-Ray Tube, BITE and Power Supplies.The DEU has an Oscillator, Memory, Key-board Adapter,

Symbol Generator, MIA, Control Logic, BITE, LoadSwitch, and Power Supplies. The subsystem provides for

crew/vehicle interface via a keyboard and CRT display.

The crew can interact with the subsystems with keyboardentries and executions. Reference Figure 6 and Figure7.

Page 12: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

. Thirty serial digital data buses are connected to theBus Terminal Units (BTUs) via 227 DBCs. The DBCs are

shown in Figure 8.

o Two DBIAs provide the amplification necessary to drive

the stubs and provide isolation when the stubs are

opened or shorted at the umbilica!s.

.

.

Two MMUs contain MIAs, Read Electronics, Write

Electronics, Mass Memory Control Logic, Power Supply

with Switch, Tape Transport Mechanism with motor, tapeand heads. The mass memory unit stores programs for

loading into tee GPcs and the MCDS. Reference Figure 9.

Three EIUs provide status and command capability of themain engines. Each EIU contains a MIA, BITE, StatusBuffer, C6n£r6iier Interface Aaapt er-_6pera£ional

Interface Element, Data Status and Power Supply. The

EIU transfers main engine control commands from the GPC

and main engine status for use by the GPC, the GSE

launch processing system, and the operationalinstrumentation system. Reference Figure i0.

• 7

The DPS interfaces with many onboard Orbiter systems includingthe Main Propulsion System, Solid R0cke _ Boosters, Reaction

Control System (RCS), Orbital Maneuvering System (OMS), AirSurface Controls used for guidance and control, Nose-wheel

Steering, and the Master Timing Unit.

3.2 Interfaces and Locations

The DPS hardWare_s_loca£ed throughou_ "t_Or_iter. .....The

composite data bus network provides the hardware interfacesbetween the GPCs and all other avionics subsyg_tems that

-communicate via a digital data format. Reference Figure ii.GPCs 1 and 4 are located in Avionics Bay 1 while GPCs 2 and 5 are

located in Avionics Bay 2, to provide separation of redundancy.GPC 3 is located in Avionics Bay 3. Each GPC interfaces to all

Flight Critical MDMs, however only_on_ _C nOrmaliy communicates

to only one FF and one FA MDM during ascent and entry dynamic

fl ight. ..............

3.3 Hierarchy

Figure 2 illUstrates the hierarchy Of the DP_ _hardware and the

corresponding subcomponents. Figures 3 through i0 comprise the

detaile d system representations. _....._ . _ , =, .....

g

I

U

U

r

g

B

l

u

N

l

mm

l

mi

mm

6

I

m

Page 13: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

i

w

mum

i

=

Figu;e 2 - DPS SUBSYSTEM OVERVIEW

Page 14: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

IIN

[-

_L.r

,, _:iI

__ ! !_,1=_

i

rl ir

![]]-I:o..,,..]"

i !

< =" I:_ Iu_ c__.=I:EI

<--.!

I iiliiiiii_ili:,i_i::i:_:_i

L_iiii_iiii!iiiill iili

_!:':' !::::::

£

_z__o

Z

--7

I

-i

D

_ 0

I-_ I,-, 0

k4 _ _ _ 0 0 0o o o ,..i ,._ ,.-I _ ,,_Z

,,,4 _ -,,,4 -.,,4 _ _: _ ®

l I I I I I I I I

_ 0 0 _ _ 0 _ ,_

-l-l-td_t-Ifi-I-I_t.=l=l_t:l=l_i

' iI/

_,_,__..1

! - I

i

_m_.l_---.,,?,.) ,_--,i !

Ltl

m

Figure 3 - DPS MULTIPLEXER/DEMULTIPLEXER (MDM

w

i

i

m

I

zI

I

I

i

I

I

i

H

I

z

I

I

"I

a

I

I

Page 15: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

i

_=

mi

m

m

w

- =

w

m

r

u

w

Z

Z

I

%) lO w

z%)

%)

r%

N

Z

, r.

Zm

I I I

L)

<

_ _ Z

r_ i_

<

I _:

n

I

0 x..] _I

m m u I

l

t

m

a

Figure 4 - DPS GPC CENTRAL PROCESSING UNIT (CPU)

9

Page 16: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

=--

I

= z%3

Z

%2

I , _ I_=

I o_ o,II i=

i i,IiI

1 I!

J |

,ljl

m

I

I

I

g

I

I

m

I

I

m

I

i

I

I

Figure 5 - DPS GPC INPUT/OUTPUT PROCESSOR (IOP)

i0

I

I

Page 17: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

1

E: q

1

1

1

I

1

1

u

r--

:

Figure 6 - DPS MCDS FUNCTIONAL BLOCK DIAGRAM

11

Page 18: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i-I ._ T'T

1

_.'-I

'il-ii i i

I _ _ ,_

=

I

I

I

I

I i

i •I

I IN

I 1

!

i-

0

!

i

i

zJ_

_1__1

Ul_'|I

I

--I

r.

..T

ii

uli"!i

"-ii

Zlm I

I-I"-!Iim

"II

T":-!:::::IV::!:

"v T

i!

,J7

ill " i

i_ml F

m _

:i:!::'.iS:':._ _i!i!_i!i

.>:<.>:.>: :.:.:..>>..

i:? :: ":'_>|

ii:iZ! :._!

Figure 7 - DPS MCDS

12

I

I

I

I

I

i

m

==.

I

I

I

Page 19: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

m

w

m

u

w

i

Do II

j,,,l

_zzz_

>"

m

Z

O'

_m

r_

,<[-

____ , ,

__ _ ___

I

u

0

z

zm

i

Figure 8 - DPS DATA BUS COUPLERS

13

(DBC )

m

Page 20: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

Z

-io Im

m

Z

_Um

m

l

I_e. !

w

z

I

D

i

B

D

g

J

l

I

i

mm

i i

i

Figure 9 - DPS MASS MEMORY UNIT (MMU)

14

m

B

Page 21: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

=N

--jn

u

u

n

E

mF--_1 i t

w. [_.-

m

m

)

I,ql

>. PI

I

.£-_-

m

m

m

m

r_

i mW_ml, m_

I

1 TI

J

d _

• w

Figure i0 : DPS ENGINE INTERFACE UNIT (EIU)

15

Page 22: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

C..,'O

I,---I

(./9b..,)I_,_Ir.._3

<_

++_'+°++i!

m

-+++)+++.++-im

u.X

m

m

m

I

m

m

m

m

i

m

m

m

m

m

i

Flgure 11 : _ FUNCTIONAL

16

INTERFACES AND LOCATIONSm

i :

Page 23: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

w

w

m

4.0 ASSESSMENT RESULTS

The IOA analysis of the DPS hardware initially generated eighty-five failure mode worksheets and identified two Potential

Critical Items (PCIs) before starting the assessment process. In

order to facilitate comparison, thirty-seven additional failure

mode analysis worksheets were generated. These analysis results

were compared to the proposed NASA Post 51-L baseline of seventy-

eight FMEAs and twenty-five CIL items, which was generated using

the Rockwell 100-2G FMEA/CIL instructions. Upon completion of

the assessment, sixty of the seventy-eight FMEAs were in

agreement. Of the eighteen that remained, fourteen had minor

discrepancies that did not affect criticality. Of the remaining

four, two issues were with FMEAs (05-5-B03-I-I and 05-5-B03-2-I)

that had considered failure modes outside the DPS subsystem, and

caused inflated criticalities. These criticalities mistakenly

placed both FMEAs on the CIL. The other two issues were with

FMEAs (05-5-B01-I-I and 05-5-B02-I-I) that also considered

failure modes outside the DPS subsystem. However, when thecorrect failure mode is included, the current criticalities will

remain unchanged. In summary, all issues may be attributed to

differences between ground rules in Rockwell 100-2G and

NSTS 22206 instructions. The rOA. recommends correcting the

_ur-6 modes considered in the four FMEAs, which lowers

criticality assignments in two of the FMEAs, and removes themfrom the CIL.

A summary of the quantity of NASA FMEAs assessed, versus the

recommended IOA baseline, and any issues identified is presented

in Table I.

Table I Summary of IOA FMEA Assessment

[ Component

MDM

GPC

MCDS

DBC

DBIA

MMU

EIU

NASA

14

25

23

1

2

9

4

•IOA

14

25

23

1

2

9

4

Issues

2

2

I TOTAL4

78 78

m

w

4

w

17

i

Page 24: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

A summary of the quantity of NASA CIL items assessed, versus the

recommended IOA baseline, and any issues identified is presented

in Table II.

Table II Summary of IOA CIL Assessment

Component

MDM

GPC

MCDS

DBC

DBIA

MMU

EIU

NASA

i0

6

3

1

i

1

4

IOA

8

6

3

1

w

1

4

Issues

2

TOTAL 25 23 2

IF

I

Appendix C presents the detailed assessment worksheets for each

failure mode identified and assessed. Appendix D highlights the

NASA Critical Items a_d corresponding IOA worksheet ID. Appendix

E contains the IOA analysis worksheets that were used to assess

the NASA FMEA/CIL. Appendix F provides a cross reference between

the NASA FMEA and corresponding IOA worksheet(s). IOArecommendations are also summarized.

Table III presents a summary of the IOA recommended iailure

criticalities for the Post 51-L FMEA baseline. Further

discussion of each of these subdivisions and the applicable

failure modes is provided in subsequent paragraphs.

+ +

I TABLE III Summary of IOA Recommended Failure Criticalities I+

Criticality:

MDM

GPC

MCDS

DBC

DBIA

MMU

EIU

TOTAL

i/i 2/IR

- 4

- 5

- 3

- 1

n

2 2

2/2 3/IR

- 6

- 9

- 14

1

1 I 29_ ..... +

I 2 I 15+..... +

3/2R 3/3

2

1

1

1

6

ii

2

I0

5o

1

2

2O

TOTAL

14

25

23

1

2

9

4

78

m

zZ

l

I

l

mm

I

mm

l

i-

mR

=-

m

m

i

I

i

I

18

imm

=m

Page 25: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

mm_

Of the failure modes analyzed, twenty-three were determined to be

critical items. A summary of the IOA recommended critical items

is presented in Table IV.

TABLE IV

Criticality:

MDM

GPC

MCDS

DBC

DBIA

MMU

EIU

TOTAL

mn_

Summary of IOA Recommended Critical Items

i/i

m

w

m

2

2/IR 2/2

4'

5

3

1

- 1

2

15 1

3/IR

4

1

5

3/2R 3/3

w

m

w

TOTAL

8

6

3

1m

1

4

23

The scheme for assigning IOA assessment (Appendix C) and analysis

(Appendix E) worksheet numbers is shown in Table v.

4w

=

w

m

I Table V IOA Worksheet Numbers I4

I Component I+ +

MDM

GPC

MCDS

MMU

EIU

IOA ID Numberm

DPS-100 to DPS-195

DPS-201 to DPS-232

DPS-300 to DPS-321 (includes DBC and DBIA)DPS-400 to DPS-417

DPS-501 to DPS-509

w

w

19

Page 26: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

4.1 Assessment Results MDM ............

The IOA has a total of forty-two assessment worksheets associated

with the fourteen NASA MDM FMEAs; excluding the OF, OA, LL, and

LR MDM groups, as shown in Figure 3. The IOA worksheets

correspond to nine different failure modes for each of the four

groups of MDMs, plus six worksheets that are power related. The

numbering scheme is shown in the table below.

I0A ID Ran@eDPS-100 to 108

DPS-120 to 128

DPS-140 to 148

DPS-180 to 188

DPS-190 to 195

Item Group

FF - Flight Forward

FA - Flight Aft

PF - Payload Forward

LF,LA - Launch Forward and AftPower related: RPCs, switches, and

resistors

Three basic failure modes were found: Loss of Output, Erroneous

Output, and Premature Operation. A failure mode may have a

different effect, and thus a different criticality, if applied

separately to both output sides of a MDM; that is, a MDM's out-

puts to GPCs and LRUs (such as sensors and effectors), Thus it

was decided to treat each output side separately for each basic

failure mode, resulting in Six failure modes; such as "Loss of

Output to GPC" and "Loss of Output to LRU". As it turned out,

the effects were somewhat different but" the criticaliti_s

remained the same.

Three oth@r failure modes were added which were considered

applicable to only one output. These are "Selected All Channels

Wrong to LRU" (worksheets DPS-106, 126, 146, and 186), "Stuck on

a Constant Output to LRU" (DPS-107, 127, 147, and 187), and

"Falsely Stuck on Busy Mode" to GPC (DPS-108, 128, 148, and 188).

The first two specific failure modes could be considered special

cases of "Erroneous Output to LRU", and the third failure mode

could be considered a special case of "Loss of Output to GPC".

They were considered on the possibility that the specific cases

would differ in effects and criticality from the general cases.

Again, the result was that these specific cases differed in their

effects but not in their criticalitles from the general cases.

The NASA FMEAs considered general failure modes, consequently

each output and specific cases were not covered uniquely. This

resulted in one (NASA FMEA) to many (IOA worksheets) relation-

ships, as shown in the following table. This table shows how the

NASA FMEAs and I0A worksheets associated with MDMs map onto each

other.

m

u

i

mmmm

I

i

i

ram

.U

i

U

2O

m

Page 27: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

m

B

u

w

w

Failure

Mode Item

Loss of

Output

FF

FA

PF

LF,LA

NASA

FMEAs

05-5-B03-2-1

05-5-B03-i-1

05-5-B03-5-i

05-5-B03-4-i

Erroneous

Output

Premature

Output

FF

FA

PF

LF, LA

FF

FA

PF

LF, LA

05-5-B03-2-2

05-5-B03-1-2

05-5-B03-5-2

05-5-B03-4-2

no map

no map

no map

no map

Miscell-

aneous

IOA Assessment

Worksheets (Appendix. C)

i00, 101, 108

120, 121, 128

140, 141, 148

180, 181, 188

102, 103, 106, 107

122, 123, 126, 127

142, 143, 146, 147

182, 183, 186, 187

104, 105

124, 125

144, 145

184, 185

Resistor 05-6S-BRES3-1 190

RPC 05-6S-BRPC3-1 191

RPC 05-6S-BRPC3-2 192

Switch 05-6S-BSW3 -i 193

Switch 05-6S-BSW3 -2 194

Switch 05-6S-BSW5 -3 195

=

u

w

w

=

bw

w

w

The number of FMEAs and CILs by criticality are summarized in the

following table. The Unmapped IOA column is the raw number of

IOA analysis worksheets. The Mapped IOA column is the number of

IOA analysis worksheets after they have been mapped onto the NASAFMEAs.

Unmapped Mapped

Criticality IOA IOA NASA IOA CILs Issues2/IR i----5 T 6 4 2

2/2 0 0 0 0 0

3/IR 16 6 4 4 0

3/2R 9 2 2 0 0

3/3 2 2 2 0 0

T o t a i 4---2 i---_ 1---4 _ ---_

The NASA FMEAs also covered power related items associated with

the MDMs, including Remote Power Controllers (RPCs), Power

Switches, and Current Limiting Resistors. IOA did not cover

these items in the original analysis due to time constraints, but

did cover them later, concurring with NASA's reevaluation of

these six. IOA's DPS subsystem team did not cover the

Operational Instrumentation Forward and Aft (OA and OF) MDMs,

since they were considered to be in the domain of IOA's

Instrumentation subsystem team. IOA and NASA also did not cover

the Launch Left and Launch Right (LL and LR) MDMs since they are

within the SRBs.

u

21

Page 28: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

The difference in the number of FMEAs is due to the fact that IOA

considered more specific failure modes than NASA. Anotherdifference is that NASA did not consider the "Premature Operation

to GPC" and "Premature Operation to LRU" failure modes for MDMs.This however is not an issue since the criticality of thefunction of the hardware item (2/IR) was not increased by thesefailure modes. Also, after further analysis these failure modes

are considered to be non-credible.

The criticalities for the LF and LA MDMS (3/2R) were the same for

IOA and NASA. For the FF, FA, and PF MDMs however, IOA's

criticalities (3/IR) were lower than NASA's criticalities (2/IR).Part of this difference is due to whether the effects of multiple

unrelated failures were taken into account. The NASA, using the

Rockwell 100-2G hardware criticality 2 ground rules, consideredin FMEAs 05-5-B03-I-I and 05-5-B03-2-I, a MDM failure and then

considered an Aero Surface Amplifier (ASA) next related failure

outside the DPS subsystem. Whereas, the IOA, using NSTS 22206,considered in assessment worksheets DPS-100, DPS-101, DPS-108,

DPS-120, DPS-121, and DPS-128, a MDM failure and then consideredthe next redundant item failure to be another MDM. The IOA does

not concur with these two NASA reevaluations. The I0A believesthe hardware criticality should be downgraded to three, thereby

removing these two FMEAs from the CIL. The IOA concurred withthe remaining twelve FMEAs.

I

I

m

mm

i

U

U

mm

_I

m

I

J

m

m

II

J

i

22

m

Page 29: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

mmm

wle

= .

w

t -

w

4.2 Assessment Results GPC

The GPC analysis was subdivided into IOP and CPU failures.

Generic black box failures were analyzed with causes stemming

from failures of the subcomponents such as the MIA, as shown in

Figure 4 and Figure 5. IOA has analyzed twenty-five failure

modes (FMEAs) related to the General Purpose Computers (GPCs).

Four of these FMEAs are attributable to the Input/Output

Processors (_OP), eleven are related to the Central Processing

Units (CPU), and the remaining ten affect various EPD&C switch

functions associated with the GPC. NASA wrote twenty-five GPC

related FMEAs: two CPU related, two IOP related, five switch

related, four GPC status related, and two GPC power related.

The following table is a summary of the GPC related FMEA

criticalities including the results of the DPS Pre-board:

Criticality IOA NASA IOA CILs Issues2/IR 5 5 5 2

3/1R 9 9 1 0

3/2R 1 1 0 0

3/3 i0 I0 0 0

Total 2---5 _ _

The seven NASA proposed individual power component failures

(FMEA 05-6S-BDIOx-I, 05-6S-BDMCI-I, 05-6S-BDMCI-2, 05-6S-BFUSI-I,

05-6S-BRESI-I, 05-6S-BRPCI-I, and 05-6S-BRPCI-2) were analyzed,

along with the four failures of the GPC status indicators. These

failure modes arecovered in Appendix E.

Of the five Switch related failures analyzed by NASA, the CPU

Output Switch FMEAs (05-5-B15-I-I and 05-5-B15-I-3) agree with

the IOA assessment (DPS-211) as does the Mode Switch FMEA

(05-5-B17-I-I, DPS-210). One GPC Power Switch FMEA

(05-6S-BSWl-2) written by NASA is confirmed by a similar qOA FMEA

(DPS-216) as criticality 3/IR; the newly-proposed GPC Power

Switch FMEA (05-6S-BSWI-3) is consistent with the IOA analysis

DPS-217. IOA agrees with the assessment that inadvertent power

switch opening has the same effects as CPU Loss of Output

(05-5-B01-i-i).

The NASA and IOA analyses of the CPU and IOP erroneous output

FMEAs (05-5-B01-I-2, 05-5-B02-I-2, DPS-206 and DPS-202,

respectively) are identical in criticality 3/IR, as are the

analyses of the inadvertent command outputs from the IOP with

criticality 2/IR (05-5-B02-I-3, DPS-225). An IOA analysis of

erroneous data inputs to the IOP (DPS-204) brought similar

effects with 3/IR criticality.

23

Page 30: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

The IOA analyzed a failure mode (DPS-208) on the CPU which wasnot considered by NASA. This 2/IR failure is similar in effectto the IOP inadvertent command output failure (05-5-B02-I-3): CPU

attempts to output data on incorrect bus due to errors in memorylocations containing configuration or bus-stringing parameters

(e.g. the Nominal Bus Assignment Table). In this case two outputdata channels would be lost simultaneously and the actuators

would not be able to select the correct data paths. IOAdetermined this to be a non-credible failure mode during the

assessment process.

The NASA analysis of the CPU "Loss Of Output" (05-5-B01-I-I) hasa criticality of 2/1R. IOA analysis 205, using the NSTS 22206does not take into account the effects of multiple un-_e

failures outside the DPS subsystem. IOA does not agree with the

effects assigned by NASA. The IOA recommends changing theeffects to delete the sentence "During ascent/entry, this...".The IOA does concur with the rest of NASA's reevaluation and

rationale.

The NASA analysis of the IOP "Loss of Output" (05-5-B02-I-I) hasa criticality of 2/IR. Initially, the IOA analysis 201 "assigned

a hardware criticality of 3 for this failure mode. The IOA does

not believe a single IOP failure would cause loss of mission,The second failure of an IOP would not result in loss of

crew/vehicle. However, NASA's failure effects coupled this

failure with an undetected ASA failure (outside the DPS

subsystem). This could result in two healthy paths being votedout. This could possibly cause loss of vehicle. Simultaneousdissimilar failures were excluded from the IOA. Multiplefailures are inconsistent with the NSTS 22206. The IOA

recommends changing the effects to _I_te t--_ sentence "During

ascent/entry, this...". The IOA does concur with the rest ofNASA's reevaluation and rationale

g

g

mg

zI

J

l

mm

I

mid

g

m

l

l

l

m

l

I

i

24

l

Page 31: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

m

u

4.3 Assessment Results MCDS

The MCDS consists of the KU, DU, and DEU. Functional failures of

components were analyzed. These components are shown

functionally in Figure 6 and Figure 7. Nine failure modes were

identified, thirty IOA assessment worksheets and twenty-one IOA

analysis worksheets were generated. These were then compared to

the twenty-three NASA FMEAs. The difference in the total number

of FMEAs may be attributed predominantly to the fact that NASA

has one FMEA per failure mode whereas IOA has multiple failure

modes per worksheet. The additional seven IOA assessment work-

sheets yielded no additional unique FMEAs and are not included in

the comparison FMEA count. They are included in the Appendices

for completeness. No issues were identified.

Number of FMEAs by criticality

Criticality I0A NASA IOA CIL Issues2/1R _ 3 3 0

3/IR 15 15 0 0

3/3 5 5 0 0

Total 2---3 2---3 _ ---_

w

w

4.4 Assessment Results DBC

Thirty serial digital data buses connect the GPC IOPs to the BTUs

via 227 DBCs. The DBCs' functional components are shown in

Figure 8- Two failure modes were identified and one worksheet

was generated. No issues were identified.

Number of FMEAs by criticality

Criticality IOA NASA IOA CIL Issues2/IR 1 _ 1 0

u

l

4.5 Assessment Results DBIA

The DBIAs consists of components required to provide isolationbetween the Orbiter Launch/Boost Data Buses and the SRBs and

associated GSE. Four failure modes were identified and two

worksheets were generated. No issues or CILs were identified.

Number of FMEAs by criticality

Criticality IOA NASA IOA CIL Issues3/2R T 1 0 0

3/3 1 1 0 0

w

25

Page 32: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

4.6 Assessment Results MMU

The MMUanalysis investiga£ed failures in £he individualcomponents of power supply, read and write electronics, tapetransport mechanism, MIA and control logic. These are shownfunctionally in Figure 9. The power switch and RPC were alsoinvestigated. Most of the failures were criticality 3/2R. Onecritical item was identified.

Number of MMUTre_a£ed FM_S _by cri%ica!ityCriticality IOA NASA IOA CIL Issues

2/2 -T- _ 1 0

3/2R _ 6 -_ 6 0 03/3 2 2 0 0

Total --_ _ ---T

The IOA 400 through 407, 411 and 412 c0rrespond to NASA FMEAs05-5-B04-2-I and 05-5-B04-2-2. These FMEAs are concerned with

malfunctions of the MMU unit itself. The difference in number of

FMEAs is due to the fact that the IOA analysis considered

failures of individual components of the MMU, such as the tape

transport mechanism. There was no significant difference in theresults. Both IOA and NASA found the criticality to be 3/2R.

Four NASA FMEAs (05-6S-BRPC2-1, 05-6S-BSW2-1, 05-6S-BSW2-2, and

an as yet unnumbered new item) correspond to IOA FMEAs 408, 409,and 410. These FMEAs deal with failures of the MMU power

switches and RPCs. The only difference in the results in this

group is that IOA found the switch failure mode which causes the

MMU to remain permanently on to be criticality 3/3 rather than

3/2R. The NASA agreed with this criticality in their reevalua-

tion report.

The IOA FMEA 415 corresponds to NASA FMEA 05-5-B20-I-I. This

FMEA deals with failure of the GPC IPL source switch. Both IOA

and NASA found the criticality to be 2/2. This is the only CILitem associated with the MMUs.

The NASA FMEAs 05-5-B16-I-I (GPC IPL switch, criticality 3/2R),

05-5-B18-I-I (GPC IPL indicator, criticality 3/3), and

05-6S-BRES2-1 (current limit resistor, criticality 3/2R) were

analyzed by IOA and are contained in Appendix E. No issues wereidentified.

I

I

I

im

i

I

Im

I

I

iI

I

I

I

m

I

26

imi

I

Page 33: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

m

u

I

i

w

=

w

?

=

4.7 Assessment Results EIU

There were no differences between the hardware and functional

criticalities assigned by I0A and NASA on the baseline FMEAs of

the Engine Interface Unit (EIU).

Number of EIU related FMEAs by Criticality.

Criticality I0A NASA IOA CILs Issuesi/1 T 2 2 0

2/1R 0 2 2 0

3/IR 5 0 0 0

Totals --5 -_ -_ --0

The NASA presented at the Level III Pre Board (12th and 15th of

September, 1986) requests to upgrade the two existing FMEAs from

3/IR to 2/IR. The rationale presented was for a heavy payload.

The loss of one engine can cause loss of mission. The IOA can

accept this upgrade of criticality based upon a combined payload

and vehicle weight requiring three main engines to achieve

mission orbit goals.

The second upgrade was requested against the power circuit. Theloss of the second circuit causes loss of the EIU. The worst

case failure would occur during the last i0 seconds prior to MECO

when the crew may not have enough time to respond to manual

engine shutdown. This could cause an engine to have fuel or

oxidizer depletion with engine running. Previous tests have

indicated that pumps fall due to cavitation. In fact, the engine

turbine pumps have exploded from cavitations. The IOA agrees

with this upgrade and rationale.

There were two new FMEAs proposed by NASA at the pre-board with

criticalities of i/1.- The first w.as for a failure mode of

erroneous output to the GPC. The GPC would then command the pre-

valves to close with the engine running. That would cause the

high pressure turbine pumps to throw turbine blades which have

caused uncontained engine failures. The engine explodes and the

crew and vehicle are lost.

The second proposed FMEA deals with the failure of the power

switch. The failure mode was both contacts shorted to ground.

The loss of power to the EIU causes loss of control of engine

throttling and shutdown. If failure occurs in the last six toten seconds before MECO, the crew would have to manually shutdown

the engines. The engines would ingest gas causing pumpcavitation and disintegration. This results in loss of crew and

vehicle.

Four additional failure modes were analyzed by IOA, but following

the pre-board these modes were found to be covered by one of the

original baseline FMEAs.

27

Page 34: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

5.0 REFERENCES

Reference documentation available from NASA and Rockwell was usedin the analysis. The documentation used included the following:

i. ICD 13M15000, vehicle/Main Engine Interface ControlDocument, Rev. U, 6-18-85.

2. JSC±18819, DPS Console Handbook, 8-1-84.

3. JSC-19041, Booster-Systems Briefs, 10-1-84.

4. JSC-18820, DPS System Briefs, 4-20-85.

5. VS70-971102, Integrated System Schematic Rev. D, 9-28-85.

6. JSC-17239, Booster Console Handbook, 10-17-85.

7. JSC-12770, Shuttle Flight Operations Manual, Volume 5,

Data Processing System, 3-24-84.

8. JSC-12820,

9. JSC-ll174,

STS Operational Flight Rules, Final PCN-3,6_28_85._ ........... _=

Space Shuttle Systems Handbook, Rev. C, DCN-5,

i0. V72 Vol III, Operations and Maintenance Requirements and

Specification Document - Orbiter OMRSD -DPS, 6-13-86. _ i'

ii. STS82-0032 Orbiter vehicle Operational Configuration

- FMEA for DPS Subsystem, Revised 1-28-83. _

12. VS70-973099

13. JSC-18730

Integrated System Schematic, Rev AI0, 10-17-85.

orbiter operational configuration Critical

Items List, 12-17-82.

14. NSTS 22206, Instructions for Preparation of Failure Modes

and Effects Analysis (FMEA) and Critical

Items List(CIL), 10-10-86.

" = 15. MDAC IOA_bPSW0rking-_Paper No. I._L_WPLVA86001-02, I0"24-86.

16. NASA-JSC FMEA & CIL Review Comments, -_

A. DPS - GPC's and MCDS and EPD&C DPS Items, 9-ii-86.

B. Engine Interface Unit (EIU), 9-19-86.

C. Mass Memory Unit (MMU), 9-19-86.

D. MDM, DBC, & DBIA, 8-22-86.

m

z

u

z

m

mm

mn

[]

[]

==nN

[]

[]ms

m i

m

28

j

Page 35: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX A

ACRONYMS

w

2

w

m

m

i

A/D

AID

AIS

ALU

AOA

AOD

ASA

ATO

BFC

BFS

BITE

BSS

BTU

CI

CIA

CICU

CIL

CPU

CRIT

CRT

C&W

DBC

DBIA

DDU

DEU

DIH

DIL

DMA

DOH

DOL

DPS

DU

EIU

EVA

FA

FCOS

FF

FM

FMEA

GPC

GSE

IMU

IOA

IOM

IOP

IPL

KU

- Analog to Digital

- Analog Input Differential

- Analog Input Single-ended

- Arithmetic Logic Unit- Abort Once Around

- Analog Output Differential

- Aero Surface Amplifier- Abort To Orbit

- Backup Flight Controller

- Backup Flight System

- Built-In Test Equipment

- Backup System Services

- Bus Terminal Unit

- critical Item

- Controller Interface Adapter

- Computer Interface Conditioning Unit

- Critical Items List

- Central Processing Unit

- Criticality

- Cathode Ray Tube

- Caution and Warning System

- Data Bus Coupler

- Data Bus Isolation Amplifier

- Display Driver Unit

- Display Electronics Unit

- Discrete Input High

- Discrete Input Low

- Direct Memory Access

- Discrete Output High

- Discrete Output Low

- Data Processing System

- Display Unit

- Engine Interface Unit

- Extravehicular Activity

- Flight Aft

- Flight Control Operating System

- Flight Forward- Failure Mode

- Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

- General Purpose Computer

- Ground Support Equipment

- Inertial Measurement Unit

- Independent Orbi£er Assessment

- Input/Output Module

- Input/Output Processor

- Initial Program Load

- Keyboard Unit

A-I

Page 36: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

LA

LFLLLPS

LRLRU

MCMCDS

MCIUMDAC

MDMMEC

MIAMM

MMUMTU

NA

NASA

NSTSOA

OF

- Launch Aft- Launch Forward- Launch Left

- Launch Processing System

- Launch Right

- Line Replaceable Unit- Memory Configuration- Multifunction CRT Display System

- Manipulator Controller Interface Unit- McDonnell Douglas Astronautics Company- Multiplexer/Demultiplexer

- Main Engine Controller- Multiplexer Interface Adapter

- Major Mode- Mass Memory Unit

- Master Timing Unit _ __ _

- Not Applicable _ __ .......- National Aeronautics and Space Administration

- National Space Transportation System

- Operational Aft _ _ _i!..... _ _- Operational Forward .......... '

OIE - Operational Interface ElementOMRSD - Operational Maintenance Requirements and Specifications

Document .....OMS

OPS

PCI

PCMPF

RCSRHC

RI

RMRMS

RPC

RSRTLS

SCUSIO

SM

SRBSSMESTSSW

TAC

TAL

TDTHC

VDC

- Orbital Maneuvering System

- Operational Sequence ._ _ .- Potential Critical Item- Pulse Code Modulation

- Payload Forward

- Reaction Control System ..........- Rotational Hand Controller

- Rockwell Iiternational

- Redundancy Management-.Remote Manipulator System ....- Remote Power Controller

-- Redundant Set

- Return To Landing Site _ "

- Sequential Control Unit- Serial Input/Output

- Systems Management- Solid RQcket Booster - -

- Space Shutkle Main Engine- Space Transportation System- Software

- Tacan _ _ _- _

- Transatlantic Abort Landing- Touch Down

- Translational Hand Controller _ _ ___- volts Direct Current

m

mm

I

RI

g

m

B

mm

[]

[]

l

m

m

l

A-2

I

m

Page 37: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

uAPPENDIX B

u

DEFINITIONS, GROUND RULES, AND ASSUMPTIONS

B.I

B.2

B.3

Definitions

Project Level Ground Rules and Assumptions

Subsystem-Specffic Ground Rules and Assumptions

I

w

u

m

L

=.

m

B-I

Page 38: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX B

DEFINITIONS, GROUND RULES, AND ASSUMPTIONS

B.I Definitions

Definitions contained in NSTS 22206, Instructions For Preparationof FMEA/CIL, i0 October 1986, were'used with the _6-[lowing

_plifications and additi--_.

INTACT ABORT DEFINITIONS:

RTLS - begins at transition to OPS 6 and ends at transition

to OPS 9, post-flight

TAL - begins at declaration of the abort and ends att'r-ansition to OPS 9, post-flight

AOA - begins at declaration of the abort and ends at

tr---ansition to OPS 9, post-flight

ATO - begins at declaration of the abort and ends at_-_nsition to OPS 9, post-flight

CREDIBLE (CAUSE) - an event that can be predicted or expected inanticipated operational environmental conditions. Excludes an

event where multiple failures must first occur to result inenvironmental extremes

CONTINGENCY CREW PROCEDURES - procedures that are utilized beyondthe standard m--_func_ion procedures, pocket checklists, and cuecards

EARLY MISSION TERMINATION - termination of onorbit phase prior topa-I_ed end of mission

EFFECTS/RATIONALE - description of the case which generated thehighest criticality

HIGHEST CRITICALITY - the highest functional criticality

determined in the phase-by-phase analysis

MAJOR MODE (MM) - major sub-mode of software operational sequence(ops)

MC - Memory Configuration of Primary Avionics Software System

(PASS)

MISSION - assigned performance of a specific Orbiter flight with

payload/objective accomplishments including orbit phasing andaltitude (excludes secondary payloads such as GAS cans,middeck P/L, etc.)

U

m

u

m

m

m

m

I

zm

I

i

mi

m

B

[]

=

mm ,

I

B-2

m

l

m

I

Page 39: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

n

k_

i

MULTIPLE ORDER FAILURE - describes the failure due to a single

cause or [vent of all units which perform a necessary (critical)

function

OFF-NOMINAL CREW PROCEDURES - procedures that are utilized beyond

the standard malfunction procedures, pocket checklists, and cuecards

OPS - software operational sequence

PRIMARY MISSION OBJECTIVES - worst case primary mission objec-

tives are equal to mission objectives

PHASE DEFINITIONS:

PRELAUNCH PHASE - begins at launch count-down Orbiter

power-up an--_ds at moding to OPS Major Mode 102 (liftoff)

LIFTOFF MISSION PHASE - begins at SRB ignition (MM 102) andends at transitio-n out of OPS 1 (Synonymous with ASCENT)

ONORBIT PHASE - begins at transition to OPS 2 or OPS 8 andends at _-_ition out of OPS 2 or OPS 8

DEORBIT PHASE - begins at transition to OPS Major Mode301 and en--_at first main landing gear touchdown

LANDING/SAFING PHASE - begins at first main geartouchdown and ens_ith the completion of post-landingsafing operations

E

i

w

B-3

Page 40: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX BDEFINITIONS, GROUNDRULES, AND ASSUMPTIONS

B.2 IOA Project Level Ground Rules and Assumptions

The philosophy embodied in NSTS 22206, Instructions forPreparation of FMEA/CIL, i00-_ober 1986, was employee--with the

following amp-[ifications _d addition-s.

i , The operational flight software is an accurateimplementation of the Flight System SofhwareRequirements

(FSSRS_.

RATIONALE: Software verification is out-of-scope ofthis task. ' _

, After liftoff, any parameter which is monitored by system

managemen_ (SM) or which drives any parh_o_f-the Caution and

warning'System (C&W) will support passage of RedundancyScreen B for its corresponding hardware item.

,

RATIONALE: Analysis of on-board parameter availability

and/or the actual monitoring by the crew

is beyond the scope of this task.

Any data employed with flight software is assumed to befunctional for the specific vehicle and specific missionbeing flown.

.

RATIONALE: Mission data verification is out-of-scope ofthis task.

i

All hardware (including firmware) is manufactured and

assembled to the design speciflcations/drawlngs.

RATIONALE: Acceptance and verification testing is

designed to detect and identify problemsbefore the item is approved for use.

. All Flight Data File crew procedures will be assumedperformed as written, and will not include human error in

their performance.

RATIONALE: Failures caused by human operational error

are out-of-scope of this task.

mg

E

I

I

m

mm

m

l

mm

g

I

m

i

B

mm

B

mm

M

B-4

u

_=

E

Page 41: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

--=

w

w

w

c

.

,

,

.

i0.

ii.

All hardware analyses will, as a minimum, be performed at

the level of analysis existent within NASA/Prime ContractorOrbiter FMEA/CILs, and will be permitted to go to greaterhardware detail levels but not lesser.

RATIONALE: Comparison of IOA analysis results with

other analyses requires that both analyses

be performed to a comparable level ofdetail.

verification that a telemetry parameter is actually

monitored during AOS by ground-based personnel is not

required.

RATIONALE: Analysis of mission-dependent telemetryavailability and/or the actual monitoring of

applicable data by ground-based personnel is

beyond the scope of this task.

The determination of criticalities per phase is based on the

worst case effect of a failure for the phase being analyzed.

The failure can occur in the phase being analyzed or in

any previous phase, whichever produces the worst caseeffects for the phase of interest.

RATIONALE: Assigning phase criticalities ensures a

thorough and complete analysis.

Analysis of wire harnesses, cables and electrical connectorsto determine if FMEAs are warranted will not be perfo!med

nor FMEAs assessed.

RATIONALE: Analysis was substantially complete prior

to NSTS 22206 ground rule redirection.

Analysis of welds or brazed joints that cannot be inspected

will not be performed nor FMEAs assessed.

RATIONALE: Analysis was substantially complete priorto NSTS 22206 ground rule redirection.

Emergency system or hardware will include burst discs andwill exclude the EMU Secondary Oxygen Pack (SOP), pressurerelief valves and the landing gear pyrotechnics.

RATIONALE: Clarify definition of emergency systems toensure consistency throughout IOA project.

B-5

Page 42: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX B

DEFINITIONS, GROUND RULES, AND ASSUMPTIONS

B.3 DPS-Specific Ground Rules and Assumptions

The IOA analysis was performed to the component or assembly level

of the DPS subsystem. The analysis considered the worst case

effects of the hardware or functional failure on the subsystem,

mission, and crew and vehicle safety.

i. Crew procedures that take the two good FCS channels to

override following two GPC or two MDM failures are

considered in assigning criticality.

RATIONALE: Clarifies standard cockpit procedures that can

be considered in assigning criticality.

I

u

i

m

mm

l

g

mm

l

g

i

mm

mm

z

l

mm

B-6

Page 43: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

APPENDIX C

DETAILED ASSESSMENT

This section contains the IOA assessment worksheets generated

during the assessment of this subsystem. The information onthese worksheets facilitates the comparison of the NASA FMEA/CIL

(Pre and Post 51-L) to the IOA detailed analysis worksheets

included in Appendix E. Each of these worksheets identifies the

NASA FMEA being assessed, corresponding MDAC Analysis Worksheet

ID (Appendix E), hardware item, criticality, redundancy screens,and recommendations. For each failure mode, the highest assessed

hardware and functional criticality is compared and discrepancies

noted as "N" in the compare row under the column where the

discrepancy occurred.

LEGEND FOR IOA ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETS

w

m

r

m

W

Hardware Criticalities:

1 - Loss of life or vehicle

2 = Loss of mission or next failure of any redundant item

(like or unlike) could cause 10ss of life/vehicle

3 = All others

Functional Criticalities:

1R - Redundant hardware items (like or unlike) all of which,

if failed, could cause loss of life or vehicle

2R = Redundant hardware items (like or unlike) all of which,

if failed, could cause loss of mission

Redundancy Screens A, _ and C:P _ Passed Screen

F - Failed Screen

NA - Not Applicable

NASA Data :

Baseline

New

- NASA FMEA/CIL

- Baseline with Proposed post 511L Changes

CIL Item :

X - Included in CIL

Compare Row :

N - Non compare for that column (deviation)

C--1 I

Page 44: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-100

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-2-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

100

MDM FF1,FF2,FF3,FF4

LEAD ANALYST-= W.A. Hauf!er _

ASSESSMZNT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ P ]IOA [ S /IR ] [ P ]

[p] [p] [x]*[P] [P] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

[ S/IR ]

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

(If different from NASA)

[ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ D ]

(ADD/DELETE)

(If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

• INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :

SIMULTANEOUS DISSIMILAR FAILURES WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE IOA,

MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE NSTS 22206.

IOA RECOMMENDS REPLACING THIS PHRASE IN THIS NASA/RI FMEA'SEFFECTS FIELD "COUPLED WITH AND _DETECTED FCS FAILURE (IN THE

NULL POSITION)," WITH "COUPLED WITH A LIKE FAILURE IN ANOTHERMDM". IOA DID NOT CONSIDER DEGRADED STATE VECTORS.

IoA DOE-S NOT B_LIEVE THE LOSS OF TW-O-STATE VECTORS WILL CAUSELOSS OF CREW OR VEHICLE. IN_ WORST_E ON _NTRY, THE LOSS OF

THE SECOND STATE VECTOR WILL PERMIT THE ORBITER TO FLY WITH ONE

REMAINING STATE VECTOR.IOA DOES NOT CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

IOA RECOMMENDS DOWNGRADING HARDWARE CRITICALITY TO 3, THEREBY

REMOVING THE FMEA FROM THE CIL.

l

l

Z

Ill

m

m

ml

!I

m

m

mm

l

z

mmm

B

lm

mm

ml

D

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-2

Ill

Page 45: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

w

n

u

win.

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-101

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-2-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: I01

ITEM: MDM FFI, FF2, FF3, FF4

LEAD ANALYST: W.A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

CIL

ITEMCRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ D ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :

THIS FAILURE MODE "LOSS OF OUTPUT TO LRU" IS CONSIDERED TO BECOVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT:

FAILED MDM PORT - SCU, MIA, A/D, POWER SUPPLIES, OR I/OCARD/CHANNEL FAILURE".SIMULTANEOUS DISSIMILAR FAILURES WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE IOA.MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE NSTS 22206.

IOA RECOMMENDS REPLACING THIS PHRASE IN THIS NASA/RI FMEA'S

EFFECTS FIELD, "COUPLED WITH AND UNDETECTED FCS FAILURE (IN THE

NULL POSITION)", WITH "COUPLED WITH A LIKE FAILURE IN ANOTHERMDM". IOA DID NOT CONSIDER DEGRADED STATE VECTORS.IOA DOES NOT BELIEVE THE LOSS OF TWO STATE VECTORS WILL CAUSE

LOSS OF CREW OR VEHICLE. IN THE WORST CASE ON ENTRY, THE LOSS OFTHE SECOND STATE VECTOR WILL PERMIT THE ORBITER TO FLY WITH ONE

REMAINING STATE VECTOR.IOA DOES NOT CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE. IOA

RECOMMENDS DOWNGRADING HARDWARE CRITICALITY TO 3, THEREBY

REMOVING THE FMEA FROM THE CIL.

REPORT DAT.E 12/01/86 C-3

Page 46: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-102

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-2-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 102

ITEM: MDM FFI, FF2, FF3, FF4

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTIO_ RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]_mu_s,IOD DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER DEG_DEDST_TE _VECTORS_

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

g

mm

mm

m

l

mmmI

mm

I

i

m

mI

m

m

u •

-_c

mm

!

I

I

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-4

i

I

m

Page 47: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

i

w

r

u

m

u

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

DPS-103

05-5-B03-2-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 103

ITEM: MDM FFI, FF2, FF3, FF4

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

W. A. Haufler

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] C ] [ ] C

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

THIS FAILURE MODE "ERRONEOUS OUTPUT TO LRU" IS CONSIDERED TO BE

COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEAWITH FAILURE MODE "ERRONEOUS

OUTPUT: ADDRESS CHECK FAILURE, DATA ERROR TO MDM MODULE, ORMODULE SELECT

IOA DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER DEGRADED STATE VECTORS.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-5

Page 48: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-104

NASA FMEA # : NONE

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ / ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ N /N ]

DPS

104

MDM FFI, FF2, FF3, FF4

W. A. Haufler

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[ ] [ ][P] [P]

[N ] [N]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEW[]

C

[ ][P]

[N]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] •[ ]

[ ]

[ ](ADD/DELETE)

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] C ] C ] C ]

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :

ROCKWELL/NASA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE.

THIS FAILURE MODE, "PREMATURE OPERATION TO GPC", IS DETERMINED TOBE NON-CREDIBLE, _ -_ _ ....... i_ ................

g

mm

Mm

m

mm

immI

u

mm

mm

R

wl

mm

I

m

g

ms

m

mm

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-6

g

Page 49: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

=

u

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-105

NASA FMEA #: NONE

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 105

ITEM: MDM FFI, FF2, FF3, FF4

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEW [

CIL

ITEM

C

NASA [ / ] [ ] [ ]. [ ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [.P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N /N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE ,[ ]

REMARKS:

THIS FAILURE MODE "PREMATURE OPERATION TO LRU" IS DETERMINED TO

BE NON-CREDIBLE.

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-7

Page 50: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

l

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/96

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 2=/IR ]IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ N / ]

DPS-106

05-5-B03-2-2

DPS

106

MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4

W. A. Haufler

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[P]. [P][P] [P]

[ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CILITEM

[ X ] *__[ ]

IN]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

c / ] c ] c ] c C ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :

IOA DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER DEGRADED STATE VECTORS.IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

mm

mm

I

D

I

mm

mm

il

g

I

l

i

[]I

m

m

l

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-8

m

Page 51: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

zw APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

z

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/07/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-107

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-2-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 107

ITEM: MDM FFI, FF2, FF3, FF4

LEAD ANALYST: W.A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ p ] [ p ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

• THIS FAILURE MODE "STUCK ON A CONSTANT OUTPUT TO LRU" IS

CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE

"ERRONEOUS OUTPUT: ADDRESS CHECK FAILURE, DATA ERROR TO MDM

MODULE, OR MODULE SELECT FAILURE".IOA DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER DEGRADED STATE VECTORS.

IOA DOES CONCURWITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-9

Page 52: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 2 /IR ]IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ N / ]

DPS-108

05-5-B03-2-I

DPS

108

MDM FFI, FF2, FFI, FF4

W. A. Haufler

REDUND_CY SCREENS

A B C

[P] [P] [P][P] [P] [P]

[ ] [ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEw [ ]

.........C_LITEM

IX]*[ ]

[N]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ D ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) .......

ADEQUATE [ X ]INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS :THIS FAILURE MODE "FALSELY STUCK ON BUSY MODE" IS CONSIDERED TO

BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT:

FAILED MDM PORT - SCU, MIA, A/D, POWER SUPPLIES, OR I/OCARD/CHANNEL FAILURE". ...... .........._ _ -___ _SIMULTANEOUS DISSIMILAR FAILURES WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE IOA.MULTIPI_ FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE NSTS 22206'

IOA RECOMMENDS REPLACING THIS PHRASE IN THE NASA/R/ FMEA'S _-_.....

EFFECTS FIELD, "COUPLED WITH AN _DETE_TED FCS FAILURE (IN THE

NULL POSITION)", WITH "COUPLED WITH A LIKE FAILURE IN ANOTHERMDM". IOA DID NOT CO__ DEGRADED STATE VECTORS.IOA DOES NOT BELIEVE THE LOSS OF TWO STATE VECTORS WILL CAUSE

LOSS OF CREW OR VEHICLE. IN THE WORST CASE ON ENTRY, THE LOSS OFTHE SECOND STATE VECTOR WILL PERMIT THE ORBITER TO FLY WITH ONE

REMAINING STATE VECTOR.IOA DOES NOT CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE. IOA

RECOMMENDS DOWNGRADING HARDWARE CRITICALITY TO 3, THEREBYREMOVING THE FMEA FROM THE CIL.

M

m

mm

[]

I

mmm

m

B

m

_=_

m

D

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-10

m

u

Page 53: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

u

L_

i ±

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-120

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-I-1

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 120

ITEM: MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENSFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA [ 2 /IR ]IOA [ 3 /IR ]

[P] [P][P] [P]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CILITEM

[X] *[ ]

IN ]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

[ 3 /IR ]

(If different from NASA)

[ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ D ]

(ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ X ]

. INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:SIMULTANEOUS DISSIMILAR FAILURES WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE IOA.

MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT'WITH THE NSTS 22206.

IOA RECOMMENDS REPLACING THIS PHRASE IN TH_SNASA/RI FMEA'S

EFFECTS FIELD, "COUPLED WITH ANUNDETECTED FCS FAILURE (IN THENULL POSITION)", WITH "COUPLED WITH A LIKE FAILURE IN ANOTHERMDM".IOA DOES NOT CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.IOA RECOMMENDS DOWNGRADING THE HARDWARE CRITICALITY TO 3, THEREBY

REMOVING THE FMEA FROM THE CIL.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-If

Page 54: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-121

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-1-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 121

ITEM: MDM FAI, FA2, FA3, FA4

LEAD ANALYST: W.A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ D ]

(ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]- INADEQUATE [, ]

REMARKS:

THIS FAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT TO LRU" IS CONSIDERED TO BE COVEREDBY THE ROCKWELL FMEA WITHFAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT: FAILED MDM

PORT - SCU, MIA, A/D, POWER SUPPLIES, OR I/O CARD/_LFAILURE". _-_..... _ _ ...............

SIMULTANEOUS DISSIMILAR FAILURES WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE IOA.

MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE NSTS 22206.IOA RECOMMENDS REPLACING THIS PHRASE IN THIS NASA/RIFMEA'S :_

EFFECTS FIELD, "COUPLED WITH AN UNDETECTED FCS FAILURE (IN THE

NULL POSITION)", WITH "COUPLED WITH A LIKE FAILURE IN ANOTHERMDM" ........... :....IOA DOES NOT CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

IOA RECOMMENDS DOWNGRADING THE HARDWARE CRITICALITY TO 3, THEREBYREMOVING THE FMEA FROM THE CIL.

mmm

I

m

mm

mm

ms

B

J

l

m

L

I

m

m

D

Z

mm

I

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-12

mmm

Page 55: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

m

n

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-122

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-I-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 122

ITEM: • MDM FAI, FA2, FA3, FA4

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CIL

ITEM

C

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

.[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

I0A DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER E/T SEP DOORS CLOSING PREMATURELY.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

w

w

u

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-13

Page 56: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

J

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-123

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NZw C ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 123

ITEM: MDM FAI, FA2, FA3, FA4

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY _DUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

THIS FAILURE MODE "ERRONEOUS OUTPUT TO LRU" IS CONSIDERED TO BE

COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "ERRONEOUS

OUTPUT: ADDRESS CHECK FAILURE, DATA ERROR TO MDM MODULE, ORMODULE SE-_ FAILURE".

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

mm

ms

B

mm

M

I

m

mm

mB

I

B

m

M

m

m

|

j

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-14

i

Page 57: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

w

m

u

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-124

NASA FMEA #: NONE

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEW [

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 124

ITEM: MDM FAI, FA2, FA3, FA4

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL= =

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N /N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]J

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] C ]{ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

. INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

ROCKWELL/NASA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE.

THIS FAILURE MODE, "PREMATURE OPERATION TO GPC", IS DETERMINED TOBE NON-CREDIBLE.

i

J

w

n

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-15

Page 58: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-125

NASA FMEA #: NONE

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEW [

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

125

MDM FAI, FA2, FA3, FA4

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT-.

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENSFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [_ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ]_OA [ 3 /iR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

[ ] *[ ]

COMPARE [ N /N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] C ] C ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)_ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [. ]REMARKS :

ROCKWELL/NASA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE.

THIS FAILURE MODE, "PREMATURE OPERATION TO LRU", IS DETERMINED TOBE NON-CREDIBLE.

ms

Rl

B

i

l

mm

B

mm

[]

|

ms

mm

I

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-16

Page 59: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

=

L_

w

u

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-126

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 126

ITEM: MDM FA1, FA2, FA3, FA4

LEAD ANALYST: W.A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLI GHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

C

[ P ]

[P]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ X] *[ ]

CN]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

[ /

(If different from NASA)

] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

IOA DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER E/T SEP DOORS CLOSING PREMATURELY.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

=

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-17

Page 60: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C ....

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 2 /IR ]IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ N / ]

DPS-127

05-5-B03-I-2

DPS127

MDM FAI, FA2, FA3, FA4

W. A. Haufler

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[P] [P][P] [P]

[ ] [.]

C

[P][p]

[ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

CIL

ITEM

[X]*[ ]

[ N ] _r_=

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :THIS FAILURE MODE "STUCK ON A CONSTANT OUTPUT TO LRU" IS

CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE

"ERRONEOUS OUTPUT: ADDRESS CHECK FAILURE, DATA ERROR TO MDM

MODULE, OR MODULE SELECT FAILURE".IOA DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER E/T SEP DOORS CLOSING PREMATURELY.IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

mm

lI

Fm

mm

B

mm

S

l

mm

i

ms

= =

W

B

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-18

I

m

Page 61: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

L

1

1

w

l

1

i

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 2 /IR ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ N / ]

DPS-128

05-5-B03-I-I

DPS

128

MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4

W. A. Haufler

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[P] [P]

CP] [P]

[ ] C ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CIL

ITEM

C

[P] IX]*[P] [ ]

[ ] [N]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C 3 /IR ] C P ] C P ] C P ] C ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS :

THIS FAILURE MODE "FAI_SELY STUCK ON BUSY MODE" IS CONSIDERED TO

BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT:

FAILED MDM PORT-SCU, MIA, A/D, POWER SUPPLIES, OR I/O

CARD/CHANNEL FAILURE".SIMULTANEOUS DISSIMILAR FAILURES WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE IOA.

MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE NSTS 22206.

IOA RECOMMENDS REPLACING THIS PHRASE IN THIS NASA/RI FMEA'S

EFFECTS FIELD, "COUPLED WITH AN UNDETECTED FCS FAILURE (IN THE

NULL POSITION)", WITH "COUPLED WITH A LIKE FAILURE IN ANOTHER

MDM."

IOA DOES NOT CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-19

1

Page 62: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

DPS-!40

05-5-B03-5-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 140

ITEM: MDM PFI, PF2

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT :

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 2 /1R ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ N / ]

W. A. Haufler

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[P] [P]

[P] [P]

[ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

C

[p][P]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ X] *

IN]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] C ] C ] [ _ [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) _

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:IOA DID NOT INITIALLY _CONSIDE_ LOSSOF PAYLOAD BAYDOORS CLOSE

COMMAND.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH N_A'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.NO DIFFERENCES.

g

mme

l

z

mm

zI

[]

llm

llm

l

l

!

I

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-20

Page 63: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

m

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-141NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-5-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 141

ITEM: MDM PFI, PF2

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [2 /IR ]IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ N / ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[P] [P][P] [P]

[ ] [ _]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[X]*[ ]

IN]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS :THIS FAILURE MODE "LOSS OF OUTPUT TO LRU" IS CONSIDERED TO BE

COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT:

FAILED MDM PORT-SCU, MIA, A/D, POWER SUPPLIES, OR I/O

CARD/CHANNEL FAILURE".IOA DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER LOSS OF PAYLOAD BAY DOORS CLOSE

COMMAND.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-21

Page 64: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX _ ..........

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-142

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-5-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 142

ITEM: MDM PFI,PF2

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENSF-LIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

[ x ] *

[ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] C ] [ ] [ ] [N]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

[ ](ADD/DELETE )

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:IOA DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER INADVERTENT COMMAND TO PAYLOADBAY

DOOR'S LATCH TO UNLATCH.IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

l

M

mm

mR

zm

B

mb

I

D

II

ZI

I

g i

m

mm

U

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-22

I

m

Page 65: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

D

n

i

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-143

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-5-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 143

ITEM: MDM PFI, PF2

LEAD ANALYST: W.A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ P-] [ P ]IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] .[ P ]

o

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUND_CY SCREENS CILFLIGHT _ iTEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

[P][P]

[ ]

[ x] *[ ]

IN]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [. ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ X ]

•INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS •THIS FAILURE MODE "ERRONEOUS OUTPUT TO LRU" IS CONSIDERED TO BE

COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "ERRONEOUS

OUTPUT: ADDRESS CHECK FAILURE, DATA ERROR TO MDM MODULE, ORMODULE SELECT FAILURE".

IOA DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER INADVERTENT COMMAND TO PAYLOAD BAY

DOOR'S LATCH TO UNLATCH.IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.NO DIFFERENCES.

u

b

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-23

Page 66: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APP_NDZX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-144

NASA FMEA #: NONE

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEw [

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 144

ITEM: MDM PFI, PF2

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

NASA [ / ]IOA [ 3 /iR ]

COMPARE [ N /N ]

[ ] [ ] [ ]•[P] [P] [P]

[N] [N] [N]

]]

CILITEM

[ " ] *

[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONSz (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If_applicable) ....!_ _

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ] ....REMARKS:

ROCKWELL/NASA DID NOT COVER THISFAILURE MODE.

THIS FAILURE MODE, "PREMATURE OPERATION TO GPC", IS DETERMINED TOBE NON-CREDIBLE.

ms

[]

rm

mmI

m

[][]

[]

mm

ms

mmB

I

B

m

m

i

m

mmm

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-24

m

i

Page 67: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

i

_z

r.

i

i

i

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

NASA DATA:

DPS-145 BASELINE [ ]

NONE NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 145

ITEM: MDM PFI,PF2

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

W. A. Haufler

REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

ITEMCRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P j [ P ] [ ].

COMPARE [ N /N ] [ N ] [,N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DET.V.TE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

ROCKWELL/NASA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE.

THIS FAILURE MODE, "PREMATURE OPERATION TO LRU", IS DETERMINED TO

BE NON-CREDIBLE.

I

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-25

Page 68: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPE DZXCASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-146

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-5-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 146

ITEM: MDM PFI,PF2

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUND_CY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] . [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [, ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)_ ....._..... "

ADEQUATE [ X ]INADEQUATE [ ]

REds :

i_A DiD NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER INAD_RTE_ COMMAND TO PAYLOAD BAY

DOOR'S LATCH TO UNLATCH.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.NO DIFFERENCES.

mm

ms

|

mms

R

M

|

l

|

m

m

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-26

n

=_

i

Page 69: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

m..

n

u

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-147

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-5-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 147

ITEM: MDM PFI,PF2

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ p ] ,[ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS :THIS FAILURE MODE "STUCK ON A CONSTANT OUTPUT TO LRU" IS

CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE

"ERRONEOUS OUTPUT: ADDRESS CHECK FAILURE, DATA ERROR TO MDM

MODULE, OR MODULE SELECT FAILURE".IOA DID NOT INITIALLY CONSIDER INADVERTENT COMMAND TO PAYLOAD BAY

DOOR'S LATCH TO UNLATCH.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

NO DIFFERENCES.

L .

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-27

Page 70: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

DPS-148

05-5-B03-5-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 148

ITEM: MDM PFI,PF2

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

W. A. Haufler

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT _ ITEM

HDW/FUNC

COMPARE [ N / ]

A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

[ ] [ ] C ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)2

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :THIS FAILURE MODE "FALS_.LY-STUCR_ON _ BUSY MODE _'_ IS_CON__D TO

BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT:

FAILED MDM PORT - St"J, MIA, A/D, POWER SUPPLIES, OR I/O

CARD/CHANNEL FAILURE".IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

A SECOND MDM FAILURE WOULD REQUI_ EVA TO CLOSE PAYLOAD BAY DOORSFOR WORST CASE FAILURE MODE.NO DIFFERENCES.

mm

l

Z

I

ms

i

m

B

sm

I

I

m

n

=

g

l

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-28

Page 71: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

m

m

= =

m

w

b_

l

i

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-180

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-4-1

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 180

ITEM: MDM LFI, LAI

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /2R ]IOA [ 3 /2R ]

COMPARE [ / ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[ P ] [ NA]

[ P ] [ NA]

[ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

[ /

(If different from NASA)

] C ] C ] C [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES,

(If applicable)ADEQUATE [ 3

INADEQUATE [ ]

w

z •

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-29

Page 72: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-181

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-4-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 181

ITEM: MDM LFI,LAI

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

W. A. Haufler

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ NA] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA C _ _2R ] C P ] [ NA] E P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

c / 3 c 3 c 3 E 3 _ 3(ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (_f applicable)_ '_i _

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

RE_S:THIS FAILURE MODE "LOSS OF OUTPUT TO LRU" IS CONSIDE_D TO BE

COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT:

FAILED MDM PORT - SCU, MIA, A/D, POWER SUPPLIES, OR I/O

CARD/CHANNEL FAILURE".

NO DIFFERENCES.

g

mm

!mm

m

m

mm

|

I

!

|

mm

I

mmw

=_

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-30

i

g

Page 73: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

v APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-182

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-4-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 182

ITEM: MDM LFI,LAI

LEAD ANALYST: W.A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ NA]

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ NA]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

C

[P][p]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] C ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

(If applicable)ADEQUATE [

INADEQUATE [

L_w

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-31

Page 74: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

DPS-183

05-5-B03 -4-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 183

ITEM: MDM LFI, LAI

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT :

W. A. Haufler

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITI_LITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL....FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ NA] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ NA] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS: ....

THIS FAILURE MODE "ERRONEOUS OUTPUT TO LRU" IS CONSIDERED TO BE

COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEAWITH FAILURE MODE "ERRONEOUS

OUTPUT: OUTPUT CHANNEL".

NO DIFFERENCES.

mm

U

m

B

m

m

[]

m

m i

!

|

g

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-32

N

g

D

g

Page 75: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

k

m

W

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-184

NASA FMEA #: NONE

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEW [

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 184

ITEM: MDM LFI, LAI

LEAD ANALYST: W.A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

NASA [ / ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ]

COMPARE [ N /N ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

[ ] [ ] [ ][ P ] [ NA]- [ P ]

IN] IN] IN]

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

*-CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

ROCKWELL/NASA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE.

THIS _AILURE MODE, "PREMATURE OPERATION TO GPC", IS DETERMINED TO

BE NON-CREDIBLE.

w

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-33

Page 76: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ / ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ]

COMPARE [ N /N ]

DPS-185

NONE

DPS

185

MDM LFI, LAI

W. A. Haufler

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEW [

A B

[ ] [ ][ P ]. [ NA]

[N] [N]

C

[ ][P ]

IN]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ 3

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[, / 3 [ ] [ ] [ 3 [ ](ADD/.DELETE)"

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) "

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ,]REdS :ROCKWELL/NASA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE.

THIS FAILURE MODE, "PREMATURE OPERATION TO LRU", IS DETERMINED TOBE NON-CREDiBLE.

Hi

N

EIn

I

n

I

I

mm

J

II

III

=_w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-34

m

L

u

m

m

Page 77: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

N

w

ASSESSMENT DATE:

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /2R ]

IOA [ 3/2R ]

COMPARE [ / ]

lO/O6/86DPS-186

05-5-B03-4-2

DPS

186

MDM LFI, LAI

W. A. Haufler

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[ P ] [ NA]

[ P ] [ NA]

[ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

C

[P][p]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] C ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS :

NO DIFFERENCES.

(If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

w

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-35

Page 78: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-187

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-4-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 187

ITEM: MDM LFI, LAI

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT _ ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /2R ] C P ] _ [ NA] [ P ] C ] *_

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ NA] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) _

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ] ......REMARKS: •THIS FAILURE MODE "STUCK ON A CONSTANT OUTPUT" IS CONSIDE_D TO

BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEAWITH FAILURE MODE "ERRONEOUS

OUTPUT: OUTPUT CHANNEL",

NO DIFFERENCES.

um

U

U

m

R

U

i

Oougi

n

i

I

i

U

n

i

N

u

n

i

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-36

i

ImP

Page 79: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

m

w

w

i

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-188

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B03-4-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 188

ITEM: MDM LFI, LAI

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /2R ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILITEM

A B C

[ P ] [ NA] [ P ] [ ] *

[ P ] [ NA] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

c / c c i t ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

, INADEQUATE _ ]

REMARKS:

THIS FAILURE MODE "FALSELY STUCK ON BUSY MODE" IS CONSIDERED TO

BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT:

MDM FAILED PORT - SCU, A/D, MIA, POWER SUPPLY, OR I/O CHANNEL".NO DIFFERENCES.

w

z :

w

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-37

Page 80: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/15/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-190

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRES3-1

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

Nzw [ x ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 190

ITEM: RESISTOR, CURRENT LIMITING

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C i [ ] C ] c(ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION" RATIONALE: (If applicable) - ....

ADEQUATE [ ]

, INADEQUATE [ X ]REMARKS :

THE IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

THE IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET

AVAI LABLE.

II

J

imI

m

I

E

=_!

mi

l

m

m

m

im

l

I

m

m -

w

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-38

u

m

Page 81: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

= =

iI.

w

w

w

W

I

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/15/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-191

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRPC3-1

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

191

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X']

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] C ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ X ]

REMARKS:

THE IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

THE IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT ISNOT YET

AVAILABLE.

i

u

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86

¢

C-39

Page 82: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/15/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-192

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRPC3-2

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:ITEM:

DPS

192

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

N%_ [ ]

CIL

ITEMCRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ NA] [ ] * _

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

C

[_p ][ NA]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ ] [ N ] C ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] C ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) ' ;

ADEQUATE [ ]INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS: ......_.........THE IOA D_D NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN _ O_iGiNAL ANALYSIS.

THE IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

mm

DD

mu

m

i

I

i

m

l

g

--Z

m

m

_mD

I

k _

I

W

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-40

mmm

m

i

Page 83: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

u

I

w

w

w

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/15/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-193

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSW3-1

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 193

ITEM: SWITCH, MDM POWER

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER

ASSESSMENT"

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

. INADEQUATE [ X ]

REMARKS :

THE IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

THE IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET

AVAILABLE.

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-41

Page 84: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/15/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-194

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSW3-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 194

ITEM: SWITCH, MDM POWER

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS?LIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

C!LITEM

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ NA] [ P ] [ ] *IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ ] [ N ] [ ]J

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

FOR FMEAS WITH A C_I_ALI_3/3.NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) .... ;_

ADEQUATE [ ]

. INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS_ .................... \ ............. "THE IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

l

Bmm

m

i

m

l

m

l

g

[]mm

E !m

I

---r_

i

m

"m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-42

u

Page 85: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

i

w

w

• w .

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/15/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-195

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSW5-3

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 195

ITEM: SWITCH, MDM POWER

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

N_w C x ]

CIL

ITEM

C

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] IN]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ X ].

REMARKS :

THE IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

THE IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET

AVAILABLE.

w

u

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-43 _

Page 86: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ms

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-20!

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B02-I-1

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:ITEM:

DPS201

Input/Output Processor _IOP)

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs

ASSESSMENT:

NASA

IOA

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

[ 2 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ][ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

CILITEM

[x3*[ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) _:_:_:: _: ......ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS: - _i _ ._. _ _,_ _SIMULT_EOUS_DIssIMi_FAILURES WE-RE EXCLUDED FROM THE IOA.

MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE NSTS 22206.NASA'S FAILURE EFFECTS COUPLED THIS FAILURE WITH AN UNDETECTEDFLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM FAILURE. THIS COULD RESULT IN TWO HEALTHYPATHS BEING VOTED OUT. THIS COULD POSSIBLY CAUSE LOSS OF

VEHICLE.

IOA RECOMMENDS CHANGING THE EFFECTS TO DELETE THE SENTENCE

"DURING ASCENT/ENTRY, THIS...".IOA DOES CONCUR WITH THE REST OF NASA'S REEVALUATION AND

RATIONALE.

mmm

lmm

B

[]RI

[]m

mm

[]

zm

i !

m :l

I

" |

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-44

--i

mm

Page 87: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-202

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B02-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

202

Input/Output Processor (IOP)

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

[ ].*[ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ]J

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [

INADEQUATE [

REm_as:NO DIFFERENCES IN ANALYSIS RESULTS.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-45

Page 88: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-203

NASA FMEA #: NONE

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEW [

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

203

Input/Output Processor (IOP) _

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

T. B. Cribbs

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ / ] [ ] [ ] C ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] C P ] [ ]r

COMPARE [ N /N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]J

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / [ ] [ ] [] ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:

NASA/RI DID NOT COVER THISFAILURE MODE OF PREMATURE OPERATION.

THE FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ARE DETERMINED TO BE NON-CREDIBLE.

[]

|

m

|

I

m

mmm

m

[]

m

m

mm

M

R

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-46

m

B

Page 89: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

=

w

m

r_u

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-204

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B02-1-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

DPS

204

Input/Output Processor (IOP)

T. B. Cribbs

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] C ] C ] C ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS :

NO DIFFERENCE. FAILURE MODE'S EFFECT COULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED

IN ROCKWELL'S 05-5 -B02-I-2. IOA'S FAILURE MODE ANALYSIS DID NOT

CHANGE CRITICALITY OF FUNCTION.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-47

Page 90: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-205

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B01-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

2O5

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILF_LIGHT _ ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (ifapplicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS ....................... _ _ _ _ .......SIMULT_EOUS __D_SS_Mi_ @AIh_uRE%-_ EXCLUDED-_0M _ IOA_ _ .....

MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE NSTS 22206.NASA CONSIDERED ONE GPC AND ONE FCS FAILURE IN ASSIGNING THEIR

CRITICALITY FOR THIS FMEA.

THE IOA RECOMMENDS CHANGING THE EFFECTS TO DELETE THE SENTENCE

"DURING ASCENT/ENTRY, THIS... ".IOA DOES CONCUR WITH THE REST OF NASA'S REEVALUATION AND

RATIONALE.

mm

i

U

m

m

I

i

z

r_

mm

m

u

l

mm

ms

n

z

u

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-48

I

m

Page 91: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

m

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-206

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B01-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

DPS

206

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

T. B. Cribbs

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ]

[P] [P][P] [P.]

C ] C]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ]. [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE

INADEQUATE

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES

[ ][ .]

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-49

Page 92: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C .......

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-207

NASA FMEA #: NONE

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEW [

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 207

ITEM: Central Processing Unit (CPU)

LEAD ANALYST: T.B. Cribbs

ASSESSMENT:

NASA

IOA

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

[ ](ADD/DELETE)

COMPARE [ N /N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] C ] [ ]

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) _ _

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS: _IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

THE IOA DOES NOT RECOMMEND THAT A NEW FMEA BE WRITTEN, SINCE THE

CRITICALITY OF THIS ITEM WAS NOT INCREASED BY THE FAILURE MODE.

I

[]

ms

U

m

mm

|

mm

B

i

mm

[]

B

i

M

m

m

J

B

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-50

mm

B

Page 93: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

i

w

ASSESSMENT DATE:

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

1o/o6/86DPS-208

NONE

NASA [ ./ ]

IOA [ 2 /IR ]

COMPARE [ N /N ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

DPS

208

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

T. B. Cribbs

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

[ ] [ ] [ ][P] [P] [P]

IN]- CN ] [N ]

C ] *[ ]

C ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] C ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:

THE FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ARE'DETERMINED TO BE NON-CREDIBLE.

n

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-51

Page 94: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

J

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

DPS-209 BASELINE [ ]

NONE NEW [ ]

NASA [ / ]IOA [ 3 /3 ]

COMPARE [ N /N ]

DPS209 ; ....CPU Power Switch _

T. B. Cribbs

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

[ ] [ ] [ ][ NA] [ NA] [ NA]

[N] [N] [N]

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:

THIS FAILURE MODE WOULDREQUIRE A SECOND FAILURE OF THE GPCBEFORE THE CRITICALITY OF THE POWER SWITCH COULD BE UPGRADED.SECOND FAILURES ARE NOT ANALYZED TO ESTABLISH FUNCTIONAL

CRITICALITY.

THIS FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ARE DETERMINED TO BE NON-CREDIBLE.

I

m

M

|

ms

_J

B

II

!m

lg

m

mm

mg

w

Ig

g

I

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-52

l

I

Page 95: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

i

m

L

W

W&i

i

I

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

DPS-210

05-5-B17-I-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 210

ITEM: GPC Mode Switch

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

COMPARE [ N / ]

T. B. Cribbs

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA .[ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [.P J [ X ] *

IOA _ S /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

[ ] [ ] [ ] IN]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ X ]

REMARKS:

THE IOA DOES NOT RECOMMEND THAT ANEW FMEA BEWRITTEN, SINCE THE

CRITICALITY OF THIS ITEM WAS NOT INCREASED BY THE FAILURE MODE.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION. THE CILRETENTION

RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET AVAILABLE.

m

i

i

_ =

__=

=

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-53

Page 96: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /1R ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ / ]

DPS-211

05-5-B15-I-3

DPS

211

GPC Output Switch

T. B. Cribbs

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A

[P][P]

[ ]

B C

[.P ] [ P ][P] [P]

[ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] C ] C ] C ] C ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETE_ION RATIONALE: (If applicable) _ _

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS : _ _ ............. ............. _,-_ _ ,±,:_ c .....THIS FAILUm_MODe _C0NSID_._D _0__COVE_D BY ROC_LL'S 05-5'B15-1-3 WHICH HAS THE SAME CRITICALITY AS THIS FAILURE MODE.

mm

==

mm

[]

I

l

m

[]U

m

!

ms

g

I

n

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-54

u

m

• U

Page 97: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

u

=

w

ASSESSMENT DATE:

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

DPS-213

NONE

NASA [ / ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ N /N ]

DPS

213

GPC Power Switch

T. B. Cribbs

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [

NEW [

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

[ ] [ ] [ ][P] [P] [P]

IN ] [ N ] [ N ]

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELET E)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

NASA/RI DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE. IOA DOES NOT RECOMMENDA FMEA BEING WRITTEN SINCE THE CRITICALITY OF THIS ITEM WAS NOT

INCREASED BY THE FAILURE MODE.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-55

Page 98: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIXASSESSMENTWOm_HEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/16/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-214

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BDMC1-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

_EW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

214DRIVER MODULE CONTROT,LE_

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA _ [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA]

CILITEM

] *

]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C ] [ ] C ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

• CIL RETE_ION RATIONALE:(If applic_ie) ....ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

IOADI--__OT COVE_THISITE_I_6_AL_A_. _NO__LEFFECTSTO PO_R UP A GPC. ROC_ SHOU_ DO.GRADETHEFMEA.NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

z

mm

g

I

l

|

I

g

[]

m

i

i

mU

J

J

D

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-56

m

m

Page 99: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WO_HEET

i

i

= .

W

rw

i

g

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/16/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-215

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BDMCI-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

215

DRIVER MODULE CONTROLLER

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESS_:

CRITI_LITY _D_DANCY SC_ENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA '[ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DETonaTE)

* CIL RETENTION _TIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS. THE CRITICALITY OF THE FUNCTION WAS NOT INCREASED BY

THE FAILURE OF THE HARDWARE ITEM.

=

L

r

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-57

Page 100: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C _

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/17/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-216

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSWI-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 216

ITEM: SWITCH, GPC POWER

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ I ] [ ]" [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) _ ....ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ] ....

IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

THE FAILURE MODE OF PREMATURE OPERATION CAUSES NO HARMFULEFFECTS. THE CRITICALITY OF THE ROCKWELL FMEA SHOULD BE

_G_mED TO A 3/3.NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

mU

i

u

i

mm

m

m

ED

m

R

Immm

I

Rmm

J

I

J

m

z

w

Q

B

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 0-58

m

w

Page 101: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

r-

m

r- k

L-

w

m

ASSESSMENT DATE:

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

io/17/86DPS-217

05-6S-BSWI-3 (NEW)

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 217

ITEM: SWITCH, GPC POWER

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

B. ROBB

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 2 /iR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ X ]

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. THIS ITEM WAS PRESENTED ATTHE DPS PRE-BOARD AS

NEW FMEA. IOA DID NOT COVER THE FAILURE MODE IN THE ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET

AVAILABLE.

IOA AGREES THAT CRITICALITY SHOULD BE SAME AS LOSS OF GPC OUTPUT

FOR THIS FAILURE MODE.

w

w

REPORT DATE 12/02/86 BTK C-59

w

Page 102: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/20/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-218

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B27-I-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 218

ITEM: STATUS LIGHT

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

[ /

(If different from NASA)

] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]_(ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTIONRATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL-ANALYSIS.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

m

I

I

m

!

i

|

i

[]i

[]

g

u

w

I

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-60 m

g

Page 103: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

u

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/20/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-219

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B27-2-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 219

ITEM: CICU

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /3 ]IOA [ 3 /3 ]

COMPARE [ / ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

[ P ] -[ P ] [ P ]

[ NA] [ NA] [ NA]

IN] IN] [N]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C ] [ ] [

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

] [ ](ADD/DE LETE )

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMAR/S:NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

w

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-61

Page 104: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/20/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-220

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B16-I-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 220

ITEM: SWITCH, IPL

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW C ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /2R ] .[ P ] [ P ] -[ P ] [ ] *IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) ....

ADEQUATE [ ]INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:NO DIFFERENCES. IOADID NOT cOVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS.

l

i

R

m

im

I

i

I

m

I

I

I

l

z

I

m

[]

I

w

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-62

m

!

Page 105: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

L

w

w

m

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/20/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-221

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B18-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 221

ITEM: INDICATOR, IPL

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /3 ]

IOA [ 3 /3 ]

COMPARE [ / ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

[ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

[ NA] [ NA] [ NA]

[N] [N] IN]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *

[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] C ] [ ] C

* CIL-RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-63

Page 106: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

D

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/20/86

ASSESSMENT !D: DPS-222

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B18-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 222

ITEM: INDICATOR, IPL

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P _ [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

- * CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS :

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, _D_CY SCREENS _ST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A cRITICALITY OF 3/3.

I

m

l

|

iE

mm

i

l

l

i

m

B

mm

mm

Q

i

B

w

l

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-64

I

Page 107: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

u

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/20/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-223

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B19-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

223

INDICATOR OUTPUT, BARBER POLE

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-65

Page 108: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/20/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-224

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B19-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

224

INDICATOR OUTPUT, BARBER POLE

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] [ ] C ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST B_ "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

M

I

U

B

I

mm

mm

l

m

L__m

B i

w

me :

w

z

w

D

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-66

m

Page 109: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

m

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/27/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-225

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B02-I-3

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

225

INPUT/OUTPUT PROCESSOR (IOP)

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 2 /IR ] [ p ] [ p ] [ P ] [ X ]

COMPARE[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: _f applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ -]

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS.

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-67

Page 110: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/30/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-226

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRESI-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 226ITEM: RESISTOR

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ /NA ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [

IOA [ /NA ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [

] *

]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELET E )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)_

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS: _

FMEA HAS BEEN DELETED BECAUSE RESISTOR HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A

FUSE.

IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

m

m

i

mm

l

ms

l

[]

m

I

l

R

w

mm

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-68

im

m

Page 111: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

m

z :

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/30/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-227

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BFUSI-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 227

ITEM: FUSE

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [

] *

]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE

ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

m

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-69

Page 112: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

=

m

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/30/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-228

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRPCI-1

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:ITEM:

DPS228

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ]IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CIL

iTEMC

[P] [ ]*[P] [ ]

[ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS :

] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

(If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE

ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

m

B

[]

|

I

m

M

m

I

m

m

I

mmm

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-70

r__

I

mm

Page 113: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

rams

w

-m--

7

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/30/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-229

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRPCI-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

229

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

LEAD ANALYST: J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

- INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE

ORIGINAL ANALYS_S.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 222067 REDUNDNACY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

-_-_T

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-71

Page 114: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 11/03/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-230

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BDIOX-I (NEW)

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 230

ITEM: DIODE

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]a

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different- from NASA)

C / ] C ] [ 3 C ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) ....._ ....._ =_

ADEQUATE [ ]

- INADEQUATE [ X ]

REMARKS :

NO DIFFERENCES. I0A DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE

ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET

AVAILABLE.

NASA AGREED WITH THE I0A ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

m

U

|

mm

[]

U

|--4

mn

l

[].,,[]

mim

n

l

m

mmm

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-72

zI

m

Page 115: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

i

i

z

ASSESSMENT DATE: 11/03/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-231

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B15-I-I

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

DPS

231

SWITCH, NORMAL-TERM BACK-UP

H J LOWERY

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE

ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

i

D

REPORT DATE 12/01/8.6 C-73

Page 116: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

, =

u

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-232

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSWI-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 232

ITEM: SWITCH, GPC POWER

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *IOk [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :THIS FAILURE OF ONE SET OF CONTACTS ON THE POWER SWITCH HAS THE

SAME EFFECT AS THE LOSS OF A DRIVER MODULE CONTROLLER. ONE OF

THREE REDUNDANT POWER SOURCES IS LOST.NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE

ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

u

m

l

I

===

[]mm

l

i

m

[]

lmm

mR

i

l

mmm

g

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-74

mm

I

Page 117: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

m

h_

w

w

w

B

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/07/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-300

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B22-I-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 300

ITEM: KEYBOARD SWITCH

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

H DW/FUN C A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [- ]

REMARKS:REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE ACCESSIBLE DURING LIFTOFF AND

DEORBIT. KEYBOARD COMMAND CAPABILITY WOULD BE INHIBITED. THE

SECOND RELATED FAILURE WOULD RESULT IN LOSS OF LIFE/VEHICLE.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

w

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-75

Page 118: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

M

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-300A

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B24-I-2

NASA DATA:BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 300ITEM: KEYBOARD SWITCH

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

H J LOWERY

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

?LIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ /N ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DE LETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) I .....

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS : _ _ ........_....NO DIFFERENCES. THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL

CRITICALITY.IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

mm

m"

[]

m

i

l

l

l

m

m

U

i

Q

-z

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-76 _

Page 119: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

m

w

w

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-300B

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B24-I-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 300

ITEM: KEYBOARD SWITCH

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

CIL

ITEM

C

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ X ]REMARKS:

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET

AVAILABLE. THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL

CRITICALITY.

1

w

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-77

Page 120: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-301

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B21-1-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

N'm_ [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

301

X/Y DEFLECTION AMPLIFIERS

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /IR ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ]

[P] [P] [P][P] [P] [P]

] *

]

COMPARE [ / ] C ] [ ] [ ] C ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CILRETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [

INADEQUATE [

REMARKS_ _ • ........

CRTS (DUS) ARE ESSENTIAL FOR LIFE OR VEHICLE.

NASA AGREED WITH THE IOAASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

IOA DOES CONCUR WI--TH NASA'S REEVALUATION. ....

mm

mm

I

mm

m

i

mm

I

ii

ms

ml

i

u

l

Imm

m

i

w

mm

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-78

m

i

Page 121: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

n

L

w

w

.w

w

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 8/08/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-302

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B21-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 302

ITEM: VIDEO AMPLIFIER

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ][P][P ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE

INADEQUATE

REMARKS :

CRTS (DUS) ARE ESSENTIAL FOR LIFE OR VEHICLE.

NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

[ ][ ]

L

=

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-79

Page 122: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-303

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B21-1-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 303

ITEM: CATHODE-RAY TUBE

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /IR ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

ITEM

A B C

T

[P] [P] [P] [[ ,P] CP] [P] [

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ]- [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS: _......_ _ ..... • =_

CRTS (DUS) ARE ESSENTIAL FOR LIFE OR VEHICLE.

NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION. _IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASAFS_=P_E_EVALUATION.

m

m

m

B

i

mm

m

m.ramm

m

|

.5l

m

I

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-80

m

m

Page 123: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

m

m

w

z -

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-304

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B21-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

304

HI AND LOW VOLTAGE POWER SUPPLIES

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

NASA

IOA

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

H DW/FUN C A B C

[ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [

[ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] _ [

] *

]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE

INADEQUATE

REMARKS:

CRTS (DUS) ARE ESSENTIAL FOR LIFE OR VEHICLE.NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

[ ][ ]

w

"T-

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-81

Page 124: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

U

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-305

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRPC4-1

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]_EW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 305ITEM: RPC

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] "[ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :

CRTS (DUS) ARE ESSENTIAL FOR LIFE 'OR VEHICLE. VERIFICATION IN

FLIGHT OF REDUNDANT STRINGS WHICH IS PROVIDED BY MDM MEASUREMENTS

MAY BE ERRONEOUS SINCE THE STATUS MEASUREMENT DERIVATION ISINITIATED BY A REDUNDANT CIRCUIT.NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

m

m!

m

I

m

I

!

|

mm

i

m

3

i

U

i

mm

mn

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-82

mm

I

Page 125: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

m

r_

n

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-306

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B23-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 306

ITEM: MEMORY

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3. /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

•COMPARE C / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE .[ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL

CRITICALITY.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-83

Page 126: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

ms

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-307

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B23-!-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 307

ITEM: KEYBOARD ADAPTER

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

CIL

ITEM

C

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P "] [ P ] [ ] *• IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA) z

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS ::__NO DIFFERENCES. THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL

CRITICALITY.

[]

|

|

z

|

mmR

ms

m

[]

!

z

m

I

I

u

-B

g

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-84

I

u

Page 127: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

i

i

ASSESSMENT DATE:

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

1o/14/86DPS-307A

05-5-B23-I-3

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 307

ITEM: KEYBOARD ADAPTER

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

COMPARE [ N / ]

H J LOWERY

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

[ ] [ ] [ ] IN]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:

MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH NSTS 22206. SIMULTANEOUS

DISSIMILAR FAILURES WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE IOA.

PREMATURE TRANSITION FROM ONE MODE TO ANOTHER MODE WHEN OPS

KEYBOARD ENTRY IS TO BE CLEARED IS A TWO FAILURE EFFECT SINCE A

PREVIOUS FAILURE IS REQUIRED TO NECESSITATE CREW INITIATION OF

OPS MODE RECALL, AS STATED IN NASA FMEA 05-5-B23-I-3.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-85

Page 128: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-308

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B23-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

308

SYMBOL GENERATOR .....

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

[ ] *[ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

[ ](ADD/DELETE)

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ I ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

CRITICALITY.

(If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL

B

I

l

msmm

i

|

|

_=l

l

R

m !

Z Zu

W

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-86.

B

i

Page 129: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

m

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-308A

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B23-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 3O8ITEM: SYMBOL GENERATOR

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA C 3. /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

ITEM

C ] *C ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (if different from NASA)-

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

THIS FAILURE'MODE "NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT" ISCONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE

"LOSS OF OUTPUT".NO DIFFERENCES. THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL

CRITICALITY.

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-87

Page 130: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C- -

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE:

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /IR ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ / ]

io/o8/86DPS-309

05-5-B23-I-2

DPS309

MIA

H J LOWERY

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

CP] CP]CP] [P]

[ ] [ ]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

C ] *C ]

C ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] C ] C ] C ] r ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

(If applicable)ADEQUATE

INADEQUATEC ][ ]

B

=m

i

i

i

|

i

m

m tm

u

=rill

m

m

mm

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-88

Page 131: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

u

w

w

w

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-3 i0

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B23-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 310

ITEM: CONTROL LOGIC

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /IR ]IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ / ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[P] [P][P] [P]

[ ] [ ]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

[ /

(If different from NASA)

] C ] [ ] C ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS :

NO DIFFERENCES.

(If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

v

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-89

w

Page 132: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET I

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-311

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B23-I-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 311

ITEM: POWER SUPPLIES

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] C ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

c / l c C c C ](ADD/DELETE ) "

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)......... ADEQUATE

INADEQUATEREMARKS:NO DIFFERENCES.

[ ][ ]

z

II

R

m

II

==-mm

J

m

Ul

l

l

I

II

I

II

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-90

z

w

Page 133: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-312

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRPC5-1

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 312

ITEM: RPC

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [

] *

]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] .[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

VERIFICATION IN FLIGHT OF REDUNDANT STRINGS WHICH IS PROVIDED BY

MDM MEASUREMENTS MAY BE ERRONEOUS SINCE THE STATUS MEASUREMENT

DERIVATION IS INITIATED BY A REDUNDANT CIRCUIT.

THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL CRITICALITY.

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-91

Page 134: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-312A

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BDI01-1

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 312

ITEM: RPC

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

NASA

IOA

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

[ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

[ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ]*

[ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C ] C ] C

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS :

] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

(If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

THIS NASA FMEA NUMBER WAS COVERED IN THE ORIGINAL IOA ANALYSIS.IITHIS FAILURE MODE OPEN/CLOSED/PREMATURE OPERATION" IS CONSIDERED

TO BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "OPENS".

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION. THIS FAILURE MODE DID

NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL CRITICALITY.

VERIFICATION IN FLIGHT OF REDUNDANT STRINGS _ICH IS PROVIDED BY

MDM MEASUREMENTS MAY BE ERRONEOUS SINCE THE STATUS MEASUREMENT

DERIVATION IS INITIATED BY A REDUNDANT CIRCUIT.

D

a

im

mm

g

i

R

mm

ml

i

m

m

m

I

i

mm

m

REPORT DATE 12/02/86 BTK C-92D

i

Page 135: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-312B

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSW4-1

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 312

ITEM: RPC

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /1R ]

IOA [ 3 /IR ].

COMPARE [ / ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[P] [P]

[P] [P]

[ ] [ ]

C

[p][p]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS :

] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

(If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

THIS NASA FMEA NUMBER WAS NOT COVERED IN THE ORIGINAL IOA

ANALYSIS. THIS FAILURE MODE ,,OPEN/CLOSED/PREMATURE OPERATION" IS

CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE

"PREMATURE OPERATION".

VERIFICATION IN FLIGHT OF REDUNDANT STRINGS WHICH IS PROVIDED BY

THE MDM MEASUREMENTS MAY BE ERRONEOUS SINCE THE STATUS

MEASUREMENT DERIVATION IS INITIATED BY A REDUNDANT CIRCUIT.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION. THIS FAILURE MODE DID

NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL CRITICALITY.

= =

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-93

Page 136: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /IR ]IOA [ 3 /IR ]

COMPARE [ / ]

DPS-312C05-6S-BFUS2-1

DPS

312

RPC

H J LOWERY

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[ P ] [ P ][P] [P]

[ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

C ] *C ]

[ I

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If dpplicable)...... ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ] -REMARKS :THIS NASA FMEA NUMBER WAS NOT COVERED IN THE ORIGINAL iOA _

..............................It V!ANALYSIS. THIS FAILURE MODE OPEN MATURE _PZRATION IS

CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE

"PREMATURE OPERATION 'L.--'..... - ' __ ...................VERI_Ti_ON I_[?LIGHT OF _ANT STRetCH XS PROV_ BY

THE MDM MEASUREMENTS MAY BE ERRONEOUS SINCE THE STATUS

MEASUREMENT DERIVATION IS INITIATED BY A REDUNDANT CIRCUIT.IOA DOES C0N_ wITH NASA'S _EVALUATION. THIS FAILURE MODE DID

NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL _CRITICALITY.

mm

M

i

m

|

m

mm

g

i

mm

l

u

w

i

REPORT DATE 12/02/86 BTK C-94D

l

Page 137: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

u

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-313

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B25-I-3

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 313ITEM: LOAD SWITCH

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ /N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

• [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:DEU'S ARE NOT NORMALLY RELOADED DURING A MISSION. SWITCH IS NOT

NEEDED.IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

÷

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-95

Page 138: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C _,I_

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENTDATE:10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:ITEM:

DPS-31405-5-B26-I-2

DPS314FUNCTION SWITCH

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENSFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]_

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) ......

ADEQUATE [ ]INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS: _ ! .....

NO DIFFERENCES. THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL

CRITICALITY.

g

m

m

m

m

B

m

-iii

l

llm

i

w

N

m :

n

I

m

l

-- im

N

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-96

mm

m

Page 139: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

m

L

ASSESSMENT DATE:

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

lO/14/86DPS-314A

05-5-B26-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW C ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

314

FUNCTION SWITCH

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

E / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CI_ RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

- INADEQUATE [ ,]_REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL

CRITICALITY.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-97

Page 140: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-314B

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B26-I-3

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 314ITEM: FUNCTION SWITCH

LEAD ANALYST: H J _RY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /1R ]IOA [ 3 /iR ]

COMPARE [ / ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[ P ] C p ]CP] [P]

[ ] [ ]

C

CP]CP]

C ]

CILITEM

] *

]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C ] [ ] [

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

[ ](ADD/DELETE)

ADEQUATE [ ]- INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS :

NO DIFFERENCES. TH_I_S FAILURE MODE DID NQT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL

il

im

Ji

m

II

iN

mm

m

l

I

ul

mm

ill

m

iD

i

I

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-98 D

Page 141: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

v

u

w

w

m

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-315

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B14-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

315

DATA BUS COUPLER (DBC)

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ p ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *IOA [ 3 /1R ] [ P ] [ P ]" [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS :IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE ACCESSIBLE DURING LIFTOFF AND

DEORBIT.IF THE SECOND RELATED FAILURE WAS ASSOCIATED WITH EITHER PRE-

VALVES OR PURGE DURING RTLS ABORT THIS FAILURE WOULD RESULT IN

LOSS OF LIFE/VEHICLE. SIMULTANEOUS DISSIMILAR FAILURES WEREEXCLUDED FROM THE IOA.MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE NSTS 22206.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-99

Page 142: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/08/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-316

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B13-I-4

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 316

ITEM: DBIA

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENSFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

CIL

ITEM

C

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ NA] [ P ] [ ] *IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ]" [ NA] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE )

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) ............ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARK S:_ .......

NO DIFFERENCES. THIS FAILURE MODE DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONALCRITICALITY.

m

m

g

U

mnm

m

iQ

g

U

m

n

m

U

I

l

I

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-100 I

I

Page 143: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

_z

= ,

m

n

L

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-316A

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BCKT-2-1

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 316

ITEM: DBIA

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ NA] [ P ]

[ ] *C ]

COMPARE [ /N ] [ ] [ N ] [ ] [ ]J

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ .]

REMARKS:

THIS FAILURE MODE "OPEN/SHORT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT" IS

CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE

"ALL CREDIBLE MODES".

THE IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION. THIS FAILURE MODE

DID NOT UPGRADE THE FUNCTIONAL CRITICALITY.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-101

Page 144: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C=

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET D

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/27/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-317

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRES4-1

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

N_W [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 317ITEM: RESISTOR

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]*

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

i INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :

THE IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

THE IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION ....ACCORDING TO NSTS-22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3. _

g

I

m

i

g

mm

E

m !

J

l

z

mmmm

g

m

u

m

m

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I02

ms ,

Page 145: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

DPS-318

05-6S-BRPC4-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 318

ITEM: RPC

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

H J LOWERY

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]• INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:THIS FAILURE MODE "PREMATURE OPERATION" IS CONSIDERED TO BE

COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "INADVERTENTOUTPUT".

NO EFFECT SINCE DU WILL HAVE POWER APPLIED PREMATURELY, BUTDISPLAY WILL NOT APPEAR UNTIL THE DEU IS TURNED ON.NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

THE IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.ACCORDING TO NSTS 22_06, REDUNDKNCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-103

w

Page 146: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET i

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-319NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSW4-2

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 319

ITEM: SWITCH, CRT POWER

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]NEW [ X ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [NA] [NA] [NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

. INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:THISFAILURE_MoDE+_MA_E_OP_RATIQN" IS CONSIDERED TO BE _COVERED THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "PREMATURE

OPERATION".

NO EFFECT SINCE DU WILL HAVE POWERAPPLIED PREMATURELY, BUTDISPLAY WI_ NOT APPEAR _TIL DEU IS _ED ON. ++- + •

NASA AGREED WITH THE IOAASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

IOADID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

mI

i

ii

i

i

i

mi

[]

Mme

[]im

[] i

-- +m i

m

B

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-i04

me

i

Page 147: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-320

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRPC5-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 320

ITEM: RPC

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] , [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS: ..THIS FAILURE MODE "PREMATURE OPERATION" IS CONSIDERED TO BE

COVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE "INADVERTENT

OUTPUT".

NO EFFECT SINCE DEU WILL HAVE POWER APPLIED PREMATURELY.

IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I05

r-

Page 148: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET I

ASSESSMENT DATE: 11/03/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-321

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BDIOI-2 (NEW)

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 321

ITEM: DIODE, SUPPRESSOR

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

H J LOWERY

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA]

I0A [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA]t

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

C ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] C [ ]

(ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS:

IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

ms

mm

[]

Z

m

[]

i

m

[]

m

u

m

u i

mm

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I06m

g

Page 149: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

=

u_

w

I

ASSESSMENT DATE: 11/10/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-322

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSW4-3 (NEW)

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 322

ITEM: SWITCH, CRT POWER

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] • [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :

REF. 05-6Q-2201-3. NASA-JSC FMEA & CIL REVIEW COMMENTS, 9-11-86.

IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MDOE IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

u

w

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I07

r.

w

Page 150: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET I

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-400

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B04-2-1

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 400

ITEM: Tape transport mechanism

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA [ 3 /2R ]IOA [ 3 /2R ]

[P] [P][P] [P]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CILITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] C ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION-RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [INADEQUATE [

REMARKS: .......NO DIFFERENCES.

]]-

I

m

[]

mm

I

m

i

l

i i

g

m

i

I

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I08m

=

mm

Page 151: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

u

zu

m

F

u__

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-401

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B04-2-I

NASA DATA:BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

DPS

401

Tape transport mechanism

K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENSFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ _ ] [ P ] [ P ]r

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE

INADEQUATEREMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

[ ][ ]

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I09

Page 152: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENTWORKSHEET ms

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

DPS-402

05-5-B04-2-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 402

ITEM: Read electronics

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

K. Pietz

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /2R. ] [ P ] [ P ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CILITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] C ] C

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE

INADEQUATEREMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

[ ](ADD/DELETE)

[ ][ ]

mm

mm

mm

[]

l

I

=

m

z

i

M

mm

D

m

B

mm

mm

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-110 mm

I

Page 153: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

m

i

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-403

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B04-2-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 403

ITEM: Read electronics

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /2R ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ]

COMPARE [ / ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

[P] [P] [P][P] [P] [P]

[ ] [ ] [ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]•(ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

(If applicable)

ADEQUATE [

INADEQUATE [

w

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-Ill

Page 154: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-404

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B04-2-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 404

ITEM: M IA

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

[ ] *[ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C ] [ ] C ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS:NO DIFFERENCES.

(If applicable)..... ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

I

I

B

mm

I

in

,,m

m

mm

zi

wi

m

m

m

m

I

i .

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I12U

m

Page 155: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

m

w

w

u

w

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-405

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B04-2-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 405

ITEM: MIA

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 3 /2R ] "[ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ]

] *

]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C ] C ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

*CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

(If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I13

Page 156: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS-406

05-5-B04-2-I

DPS

4O6

Write electronics

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA [ 3 /.2R ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

C

[P][P]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

C ] *C ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] C ] [

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE

INADEQUATE

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

[ ](ADD/DELETE)

C ][ ]

mm

g

i

mmmm

m

mm

mm

mm

EimR

D

Z

I

I

,,m

j !

g

g

m

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I14m

B

Page 157: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-407

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B04-2-I

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 407

ITEM: RPC

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ]IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ .]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ]

B C

[P] [P]

[P] [P]

[ ] C ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (if different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE

INADEQUATEREMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

[ ][ ]

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I15

Page 158: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-408

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSW2-1

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 408ITEM: Switch

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

NASA

IOA

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

[ 3 /2R ][ 3 /2R ]

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

[ p ] [ p ] [ p ][P] [P] [P]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *=

[ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

[ /

(If different from NASA)

C ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE:

REMARKS:NO DIFFERENCES.

(If applicable )...........ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

R

|

mm

[]

mm

iIm

I!

mm

I

i

zI

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-I16I

g

Page 159: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/10/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-409

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BSW2-2

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 409

ITEM: Switch

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /3 ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-117

Page 160: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-410

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B04-2-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 410

ITEM: Control logic

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENSFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ]

CP]CP]

[ ] *[ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [u

] C ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] C ] C ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) _ADEQUATE

INADEQUATEREMARKS:NO DIFFERENCES.

[ ][ ]

mm

mm

mm

,,m

|

m

ms

I

B

mm

R

u

,,m

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-i18ms

I

Page 161: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-411

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B04-2-2

m

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 411

E ITEM: Control logic

w

n

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

C

[P][p]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] •C ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE

INADEQUATE

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES.

C ][ ]

I

r

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-i19

Page 162: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE:ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /2R ]IOA [ 3 /2R ]

COMPARE [ / ]

10/14/86DPS-412

05-5-B04-2-I

DPS

412

Power supply

K. Pietz

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[P] [P][P] [P]

[ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ }

C

[P][P]

[ -]

CILITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

C / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) ...................ADEQUATE [ ]

_INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS :THIS FAILURE MODE, "FAILS OUT OF TOLERANCE", IS CONSIDERED TO BECOVERED BY THIS ROCKWELL FMEA WITH FAILURE MODE, "LOSS OF

OUTPUT".

HI

l

i

mm

li

g

HI

U

[]

i

B

m

mm

mmim

z

U

im

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-120

Page 163: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

F

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/17/86

ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT :

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 3 /2R ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ]

COMPARE [ / ]

DPS-413

05-6S-BRES2-1

DPS

413

RESISTOR, CURRENT LIMITER

B. ROBB

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

[P] [P] [P]

[P] [P] [P]

C ] C ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ ] *[ ]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL

ANALYSIS. THE EFFECTS OF THIS FAILED ITEM COULD BE CONSIDERED TO

BE COVERED BY MDAC ID. 408, A SWITCH WHICH IS IN SERIES WITH THIS

RESISTOR.

l

u

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-121

Page 164: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDI_ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/30/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-414

NASA FMEA #: 05-6S-BRPC2-1

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 414

ITEM: CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 3 /2R ]

IOA [ 3 /2R ]

[P] [P] [P][P] [P] [P]

COMPARE [ / ] C ] C ] C ] [ ]

] *

]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

[ /

(If different from NASA)

[ ] [ ] [

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

] E ](ADD/DELETE)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARKS :NO DIFFERENCES.

ANALY SIS.IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE IN THE ORIGINAL

l

z

I

I

|

i

I

i

I

I i

I

I

m

l

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-122mI

g

Page 165: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

v

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/06/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-415

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B20-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 415

ITEM: IPL Source Switch

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /2 ] [ p ] [ P ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /3 ] [ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ N /N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] C ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ X ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

IOA CRITICALITY ASSIGNMENT WAS MADE BECAUSE AFTER INITIAL PROGRAM

LOAD IS COMPLETE A SYSTEMS SOFTWARE PROBLEM OF SOME TYPE WOULD

HAVE TO OCCUR BEFORE ANY ATTEMPT WOULD BE MADE TO RE-IPL A GIVEN

GPC.

SIMULTANEOUS DISSIMILAR FAILURES WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE IOA.

MULTIPLE FAILURES ARE INCONSISTENT WITH NSTS 22206.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA' OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION AND RATIONALE.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-123

Page 166: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENT WORKSHEET D

ASSESSMENT DATE: 11/10/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-416

NASA FMEA #: MMU-I (NEW)

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

DPS

416

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

T. B. cribbs

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /3]IOA [ 3 /3 ]

[ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ] *[ NA] [ NA] [ NA] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA_

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]REMARYS:

IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

ACCORDING TO NSTS 22206, REDUNDANCY SCREENS MUST BE "NA" OR BLANK

FOR FMEAS WITH A CRITICALITY OF 3/3.NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

m

l

m

U

i

m

mm

m

l

mm

m

I

m

i

g

I

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-124m

T_

m

Page 167: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

L •

=

U

z

i

=

w

n

m

w

ASSESSMENT DATE: 11/10/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-417

NASA FMEA #: MMU-2 (NEW)

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID:. 417

ITEM: SWITCH, IPL

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ] *

IOA [ 3 /2R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:REF. 05-5-B16-1-I. NASA-JSC FMEA & CIL REVIEW COMMENTS, 9-19-86.IOA DID NOT COVER THIS ITEM IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-125

Page 168: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET EI

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-B01

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B08-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 501

ITEM: CIA

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CIL

ITEM

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ N ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)., .

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ X ]REMARKS:

THIS FAILURE MODE, "LOSS OF OUTPUT TO MAIN ENGINE ON ONE _ _ii_;:_

B08-1-1 WITH FAILURE MODE, "NO OUTPUT",IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION. THE CIL RETENTION

RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET AVAILABLE.

U

u

!mm

U

U

l

U

i

n

U

mm

m

m

m

ms

I

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C'126 -- |

U

Page 169: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

w

u

w

E=

w

u

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-502

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B08-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 502

ITEM: MIA

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] _ [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ N ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ X ]

REMARKS:

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION. THE CIL RETENTION

RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET AVIALABLE.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-127

Page 170: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET i

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-503

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B08-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

DPS503

POWER CONTROL SWITCH

B. ROBB

CIL

ITEM

[ ]*[ ]

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENSFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C ......_

NASA [ 2 /1R ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ]IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] _ P ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ N ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) _ _ _ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ X ]REMARKS: .....THIS FAILURE MODE, "LOSS OF OUTPUT TO MAIN ENGINE ON ALL COMMAND

CHANNELS", IS CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY ROCKWELL 05-5-B08-I-IWITH THIS FAILURE "LOSS OF REDUNDANT POWER S-UPPLIES".

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION. THE CIL RETENTION

RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET AVIALBLE.

R

B

i

B

J

I

Imm

i

|

m

mim

im

i

i

z

!

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-128=

m

I

Page 171: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

=

m

w

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86

ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-504

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B08-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS

504

INTERNAL POWER SUPPLIES

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ] *

IOA [ 3 /l'R ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ N ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE. [ X ]

REMARKS :

THIS FAILURE MODE, "LOSS OF OUTPUT TO MAIN ENGINE ON ALL COMMAND

CHANNELS", IS CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY ROCKWELL 05-5-B08-I-I,

WITH THIS FAILURE "LOSS OF REDUNDANT POWER SUPPLIES".

IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YET

AVAILABLE.

i

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-129

Page 172: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETl

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-505

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B08-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

ITEM:

DPS5O5

CONTROLLER INTERFACE ADAPTER

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CILFLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

NASA [ 2 /IR ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ] *IOA [ 3 /IR ] [ P ] [ P ] [ P ] [ ]

COMPARE [ N / ] [ ] [ N ] [ ] [ N ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) _ADEQUATE [ ]

IS_ADEQUATE [ X ]REMARKS :

THIS FAILURE MODE, "LOSS OF OUTPUT ON STATUS OF ENGINES", IS

CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY ROCKWELL 05-5-B08-I-I, WITH THISFAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT".IOA DOES CONCUR WITH NASA'S REEVALUATION.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YETAVAILABLE.

mm

I

mm

_o

m

[]

mm r

mm

m

mm

m "

ms

REPORT DATE 12/O1/86 C-130mm

M

u

Page 173: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

m

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/14/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-506

NASA FMEA #: 05-5-B08-I-I

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ X ]

NEW [ ]

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 506

ITEM: OIE

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENSFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B C

CILITEM

NASA [ 2 /IR ]IOA [ 3 /9 ]

[ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [[ NA] [ NAI [ NA] [

] *

COMPARE [ N /N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ N ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ ]

REMARKS:

NASA/RI DID NOT SPECIFICALLY COVER THIS FAILURE MODE, '!LOSS OFOUTPUT TO S-BAND, MAINTENANCE RECORDS, AND LPS T-O UMBILICAL".THIS FAILURE MODE IS CONSIDERED TO BE COVERED BY ROCKWELL FMEA

05-5-B08-I-I, WITH FAILURE MODE "NO OUTPUT".

L

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-131

Page 174: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ASSESSMENT DATE: 10/16/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

DPS-50705-6S-BCKTI-I

NASA [ 2 /IR ]

IOA [ 2 /IR ]

COMPARE [ / ]

DPS507

CIRCUIT, EIU POWER

B. ROBB

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS CIL

FLIGHT ITEM

HDW/FUNC A B C

[ P ] [ Y ] [ P ] [ X ] *

[Pl IF] [P] IX]

[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)ADEQUATE [ ]

INADEQUATE [ X ]REMARKS:

NO DIFFERENCES. IOA DID NOT cOVER THIS ITEM INOR_G!N_L_ _ANALYSIS. IOA DOES CONCUR WITH THE NASA REEVALUATION.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YETAVAILABLE.

mm

i

m

m

mI

|

|

m !ms ,

m

mm

=mu

=_

m

mm

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-132I

u

Page 175: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX C

ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

=

w

L_

:

u

ASSESSMENT DATE: 11/03/86ASSESSMENT ID:

NASA FMEA #:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:ITEM:

LEAD ANALYST:

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITYFLIGHT

HDW/FUNC

NASA [ 1 /i ]IOA [ 1 /i ]

COMPARE [ / ]

DPS-508

EIU-1 (NEW)

DPS5O8

EIU

H J LOWERY

REDUNDANCY SCREENS

A B

[P] [F]

[P] IF]

[ ] [ ]

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

C

['P ]

[P]

[ ]

CIL

ITEM

[ X] *[X]

[ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable)

ADEQUATE [ ]• INADEQUATE [ X ]

REMARKS:IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE MODE IN THE ORIGINAL ANALYSIS.

NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

THE RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YETAVAILABLE. THIS IS A NEW FMEA PRESENTED AT THE DPS PREBOARD.

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-133

Page 176: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX CASSESSMENTWORKSHEET g

ASSESSMENT DATE: 11/03/86ASSESSMENT ID: DPS-509

NASA FMEA #: EIU-2 (NEW)

SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 509

ITEM: SWITCH, POWER

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

ASSESSMENT:

CRITICALITY REDUNDANCY SCREENS

FLIGHT

HDW/FUNC A B

NASA DATA:

BASELINE [ ]

NEW [ X ]

CIL

ITEMC

NASA [ 1 /i ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ] *IOA [ 1 /I ] [ P ] [ F ] [ P ] [ X ]

COMPARE [ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

RECOMMENDATIONS: (If different from NASA)

[ / ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ](ADD/DELETE)

* CIL RETENTION RATIONALE: (If applicable) :ADEQUATE [_ ]

. INADEQUATE [ X ]REMARKS: ..........IOA DID NOT COVER THIS FAILURE _ MODE IN THE ORIGINAL_NALYSIS.

NASA AGREED WITH THE IOA ASSESSMENT RECOMMENDATION.

THE CIL RETENTION RATIONALE IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT IS NOT YETAVAILABLE. THIS IS A NEW FMEA PRESENTED AT THE DPS PREBOARD.

I

I

Bm

mmm

g

BB

mm

[]

i !

I

BB

i

BBB

E

REPORT DATE 12/01/86 C-134i

i

Page 177: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

n

APPENDIX D

CRITICAL ITEMS

D-I

Page 178: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX D

CRITICAL ITEMS

I

_m

NASA FMEA

MDM

05-5 -B03-I-I

05-5 -B03-I-2

$ 05-5 -B03-2-I

05-5 -B03-2-2

05-5 -B03-5-1

05-5 -B03-5-2

% 05-6S-BRES3-1

% 05-6S-BRPC3-1

% 05-6S-BSW3 -1

% 05-6S-BSW5 -3

GPC

$ 05-5 -B01-I-I

$ 05-5 -B02-I-1

05-5 -B02-1-3

% 05-5 -B17-1-1

% 05-6S-BDIOX-1

% 05-6S-BSW1 -3

MCDS

05-5-B22-I-1

05-5-B23-I-3

% 05-5-B24-1-1

DBC

05-5-B14-I-1

MMU

05-5-B20- I- 1

EIU

% EIU-1

% EIU-2

% 05-5 -B08-I-1

% 05-6S-BCKTI-1

IOA

ID

120

122

108

107

141

142

190

191

193

195

!

205

201

225

210

230

217

300

307

300

315

415

508

509

501

507

I ITEMNAME

!

FA MDM

FA MDM

FF MDM

FF MDM

PF MDM

PF MDM

RESISTOR

RPC

SWITCH

SWITCH

i

CPU

IOP

IOP

SWITCH

DIODE

SWITCH

SWITCH

KBD ADAPTER

SWITCH

DBC

SWITCH

EIU

SWITCH

CIA

POWER CKT

FAILURE MODE

LOSS OF OUTPUT

LOSS OF OUTPUT

LOSS OF OUTPUT

LOSS OF OUTPUT

LOSS OF OUTPUT

LOSS OF OUTPUT

OPEN

LOSS OF OUTPUT

PREMATURE OPERATION

FAILS-TO-TRANSFER

LOSS OF OUTPUT

LOSS OF OUTPUT

ERRONEOUS OUTPUT

LOSS OF OUTPUT

FAILS OPEN

FAILS OPEN

ERRONEOUS OUTPUT

ERRONEOUS OUTPUT

FAILS OPEN

FAILS OPEN/SHORT

FAILS-TO-TRANSFER

ERRONEOUS OUTPUT

SHORT-TO-GROUND

NO OUTPUT

FAILS OPEN/SHORT

NOTE $ IOA ISSUE

% ADDED TO CIL POST 51-L

R

mm

mi

g

mm

m

mImm

l

D

i

B

_=

I

D-2

I -

w

Page 179: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

w

i

m

w

APPENDIX E

DETAILED ANALYSIS

This section contains the IOA analysis worksheets generated

during the analysis of this subsystem. The information on theseworksheets is intentionally similar to the NASA FMEAs. Each of

these sheets identifies the hardware item being analyzed, and

parent assembly, as well as the function. For each failure mode,

the possible causes are outlined, and the assessed hardware and

functional criticality for each mission phase is listed, as

described in the NSTS 22206, Instructions for Preparation of FMEA

and CIL, l0 October 1986. Finally, effects are entered at the

5-_tom of each sheet_-_d the worst case criticality is entered

at the top.

LEGEND FOR IOA ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS

Hardware Criticalities:

1 z Loss of life or vehicle

2 = Loss of mission or next failure of any redundant item

(like or unlike) could cause loss of life/vehicle

3 z All others

Functional Criticalities:1R - Redundant hardware items (like or unlike) all of which,

if failed, could cause loss of life or vehicle.

2R - Redundant hardware items (like or unlike) all of which,

if failed, could cause loss of mission.

Redundancy Screen A:1 = Is Checked Out PreFlight

2 = Is Capable of Check Out PreFlight

3 = Not Capable of Check Out PreFlight

NA = Not Applicable

Redundancy Screens B and C:p = Passed Screen

F - Failed Screen

NA = Not Applicable

w

E-I

Page 180: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

M

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

i00 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/1R3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4

LOSS of Output to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

_)

3)

4)

S)

6)

7)8)9)

DPS

Multipl exer-DeMultip i exers (MDM)

Flight critical Forward MDM (FFI..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

Av Bay 1,2,3,2

MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW ignores

that data. FCOS bypasses MDM after 2nd consecutive commfault,

and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port moding may recover MDM, but

not allowed during ascent until after 2nd MDM failure.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of IMU torquing, forward RCS

jets, Hand Controls (THC,RHC), most switches and indicators.

REFERENCES:

I

i

B

m

u

iu

I

B

i

m

B

mm

mm

m

J

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-2M

Page 181: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

= :

w

w

2 •

=

_- 7

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

101 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/1R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4

Loss of Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)5)6)v)8)9)

DPS

Multip i exer-DeMultip i exers (MDM)

Flight critical Forward MDM (FFI..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/1R

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/1R

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,2,3,2

MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback

signals.If all redundancy fails, lose use of IMU torquing, forward RCS

jets, Hand Controls (THC,RHC), most switches and indicators.

REFERENCES:

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-3

Page 182: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

U

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 102 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

311R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4

Erroneous Output to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

DPS

Multiplexer-DeMultiplexers (MDM)

Flight critical Forward MDM (FFI..4)

FLIGHT PHASE

PRELAUNCH:

LIFTOFF:

ONORBIT:

DEORBIT:

LANDING/SAFING:

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CRITICALITIES

HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

3/2R RTLS: 3/IR _-

3/1R TAL: 3/1R

3/2R AOA: 3/IR

3/IR ATO: 3/IR

3/1R

CAUSES:

A [ 1 ] B [ P ]

Av Bay 1,2,3,2

MC615-0004-6110,5110±

Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

c[p]

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW ignores

that data. FCOS bypasses MDM after 2rid consecutive commfault,

and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port moding may recover MDM, but

not allowed during ascent until after 2nd MDM failure.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of IMU torquing, forward RCS

jets, Hand Controls (THC,RHC), most switches and indicators.

REFERENCES:

g

I

im

mm

m

N

l

mm

l

mm

mm

RmmI

m

I

mF

I

l

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-4 l

I

Page 183: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

u

w

w

w

u

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:MDAC ID: 103 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/IR

ITEM: MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4FAILURE MODE: Erroneous Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)

2)

3)4)

5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Multip I exer-DeMultip Iexers (MDM)Flight critical Forward MDM (FF1..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IRLIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:PART NUMBER:

Av Bay 1,2,3,2MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Wordprocessing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detectio n depends_?n separate, redundant feedbacksignals.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of IMU torquing, forward RCSjets, Hand Controls (THC,RHC), most switches and indicators.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-5

Page 184: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENTORBITERASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEMANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

104 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/IR

3/iR

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4

Premature Operation to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)

2)3)4)s)6)v)8)9)

DPS

Multiplexer-DeMultip i exers (MDM)Flight critical Forward MDM (FF1..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNCPRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LI FTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/1RONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IRLANDING/SAF!NG: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,2,3,2

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6110,5110 ......

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:This failure on either port can interfere with FCOS returnin_ _

data from other BTU(s) and cause heal%hy BTU(s) to be bypassed.

Port moding will not fix a blabbing MDM. Power cycling may reset

electronics, but cannot be performed during ascent(power switches cannot be reached), and will not always stop

premature operations. If all redundancy fails, lose use of IMUtorquing, forward RCS jets, Hand Controls (THC,RHC), most

switches and indicators.

g

l

=_mm

mR

l

[]m

mm

mm

I f

m

I

w

REFERENCES:m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-6

=

g

Page 185: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

=

w

=

w

=

L_

u

=Imm

n

I

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

i0/03186DPS

105

HIGHEST CRITICALITY

FLIGHT:

ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4

Premature Operation to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufier SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)5)6)7)s)9)

DPS

Multip lexer-DeMultip I exers (MDM)

Flight critical Forward MDM (FFI..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R

LIFTOFF: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R

DEORBIT: 3/IR

.LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

ABORT HDW/FUNC

RTLS: 3/!R

TAL: 3/1R

AOA: 3/IR

ATO: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] SIP] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,2,3,2 -

MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback

signals. ......

If all redundancy fails, lose use of IMU torquing, forward RCS

jets, Hand Controls (THC,RHC), most switches and indicators.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-7

Page 186: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER suBSYSTEM ANALYS IS WO_S_EET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

106 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

311R

3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4

Selected All Channels Wrong

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)

3)

4)

s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Mul tip i exer-DeMultip i exers (MDM) _

Flight critical Forward MDM (FF1..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

P_LAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/ 1R TAL: 3 / 1R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/1R

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS : A[ i] B[P] C[P]

•LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1-,2,3,2

MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE: ..............

The GPC's FCOS and the LRUs wouldreject all data_from that MDM

except any data that happened to be in the same format as the

expected data. Redundancy Mgt. soon detects and bypasses that

MDM, and the effects of wrong data input or output is minimized.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of IMU torquing, forward RCS

jets, Hand Controls (THC,RHC), most switches and indicators.

REFERENCES:

i

mm

l

mmm

=i

B

mm

=

i

mm

m

mI

I

Bmm i

m

m

i

m

=

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-8

B

Page 187: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:MDAC ID: 107 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4

Stuck on a Constant Output to LRU

HDW/FUNC3/1R3/ZR

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Mu I tip iexer-DeMu itip iexers (MDM)

Flight critical Forward MDM (FFI..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LI FTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IRONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/ IR ATO: 3/IRLANDING/SAF!NG: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 _] B [ P] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,2,3,2

MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings tovoting LRUs. Detection depends On separate, redundant feedbacksignals. -

If all redundancy fails, lose use of IMU torquing, forward RCSjets, Hand Controls (THC,RHC), most switches and indicators.

REFERENCES:

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-9

Page 188: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENTORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEMANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

lO/O3/86DPS108

HIGHEST CRITICALITYFLIGHT:ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/1R

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM FFI,FF2,FF3,FF4

Falsely Stuck on Busy Mode

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)

2)3)

4)

s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Mu itip I exer-DeMu itip iexers (MDM)

Flight critical Forward MDM (FF1..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/ 2R RTLS: 3/ IRLIFTOFF: 3/ 1R TAL: 3/ 1R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/ IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,2,3,2MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination, SCU Busy Cross-

strap stuck high

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:FCOS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW ignores

that data. FCOS bypasses MDM after 2nd consecutive commfault,

and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port moding may recover MDM, but

not allowed during ascent until after 2nd MDM failure.If all redundancy fails, lose use of IMU torquing, forward RCS

jets, Hand Controls (THC,RHC), most switches and indicators.

REFERENCES:

,,m

m

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

I

l

I

[]

m

I

I

I

M

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-10mR

u

m

Page 189: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

L

u

u

i

w

wlc--w

m

rn

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 120 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4

Loss of Output to GPC

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/IR

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)s)6)7)s)9)

DPS

Mul tip i exer-DeMul tiplexers (MDM)

Flight critical Aft MDM (FAI..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/1R

LI FTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/1R

LANDING/SAFING: 3/1R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

Av Bay 4,5,6,6

MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :

FCOS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW ignores

that data. FCOS bypasses MDM after 2nd consecutive commfau!t,

and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port moding may recover MDM, but

not allowed during ascent until after 2nd MDM failure.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of aft RCS, Body Flap,

Ailerons, Rudder, Speedbrake, and ability to purge SSMEs and

tanks.

REFERENCES :

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-II

n

Page 190: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM _AL¥SiS WORKSHEET

DATE:SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:121 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/IR

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4

Loss of Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)

2)3)

4)S)6)7)8)9)

SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

DPS

Multipl exer-DeMultip i exers (MDM)Flight critical Aft MDM (?AI..4)

CRITI CALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE ' HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LI FTO FF: 3/ IR TAL:ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA:

DETROIT: 3/IR _ AT0:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

31U_

c[P]REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ]J

LOCATION: AV Bay 4,5,6,6

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6110,5110: .., _- _ _i__ __

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Wordprocessing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback

signals.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of aft RCS, Body Flap,Ailerons, Rudder, Speedbrake, and ability to purge SSMEs andtanks.

REFERENCES :

Ii

i

=

[]

[]

[] i[] ;

i !

iml

m

u

u

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-12uU

mm

Page 191: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

g

u

l

i

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

122 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/1R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4

Erroneous Output to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Mu itip i exer-DeMultip i exers (MDM)

Flight critical Aft MDM (FAI..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: .... 3/2R ' RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/1R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/1R

DEORBI T: 3/ IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

Av Bay 4,5,6,6

MC615-0004-61r0,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW ignores

that data. FCOS bypasses MDM after 2nd consecutive commfault,

and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port moding may recover MDM, but

not allowed during ascent until after 2nd MDM failure.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of aft RCS, Body Flap,

Ailerons, Rudder, Speedbrake, and ability to purge SSMEs and

tanks.

REFERENCES:

I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-13

m

Page 192: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

123 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4 ...._Erroneous Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)

3)

4)S)

6)V)

8)9)

DPS

Multip i exer-DeMultip i exers (MDM) _ _Flight critical Aft MDM (FA1.,4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/_C ABORT HDW/_C

PRELAUNCH: 3/2 R RTLS: 3/iR _LIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/1R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/1R

DEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/1RLANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C [P]

LO CAT I0N:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 4,5,6,6MC61_-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback

signals.If all redundancy fails, lose use of aft RCS, Body Flap,Ailerons, Rudder, Speedbrake, and ability to purge SSMEs andtanks.

REFERENCES:

B

n

I

I

mI

|

mm

Z--I

Z

mm

m

ms

m :

I

I

w

I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-14I

R

Page 193: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

z

i

w

r_

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITERSUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

124 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4

Premature Operation to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Hauf!er SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Multip i exer-DeMultiplexers (MDM)

Flight critical Aft MDM (FA1..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS : A [ l] B [P] C [ P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 4,5,6,6

MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

This failure on either port can interfere with FCOS returning

data from other BTU(s) and cause good BTU(s) to be bypassed.

Port moding will not fix a blabbing MDM. Power cycling may reset

electronics, but cannot be performed during ascent

(power switches cannot be reached), and will not always stop

premature operations. If all redundancy fails, lose use of aft

RCS, Body Flap, Ailerons, Rudder, Speedbrake, and ability to

purge SSMEs and tanks.

REFERENCES:

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-15

i

Page 194: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

125 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4

Premature Operation to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Mul tip lexer-DeMultip I exers (MDM)

Flight critical Aft MDM (FAI..4)

FLIGHT PHASE

PRELAUNCH:

LIFTOFF:

ONORBIT:

DEORBIT:

LANDING/SAFING:

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

CRITICALITIES

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/IR

3/2R

311R

3/IR

A C 1 ]

ABORT

RTLS :

TAL:

AOA:

ATO:

B[P]

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/IR311R_3/iR

c[P]

LOCATION: Av Bay 4,5,6,6

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE : ....

FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detectiondepends on separate, . redundant feedback

signals. _ ± ............... f_ _

If all redundancy fails, lose use of aft Rcs, Body Flap,

Ailerons, Rudder, Speedbrake, and ability to purge SSMEs and

tanks.

REFERENCES:

B

mm

I

=_

I

zmg

I

N

!

i !

w

I

I

l

l

g

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-16J

l

Page 195: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

L

r

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

126 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/1R3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FAI, FA2,FA3,FA4

Selected All Channels Wrong

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

S)

4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Mu i tip i exer-DeMu 1tip i exers (MDM)

Flight critical Aft MDM (FA1..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR •

DE ORB I T: 3/ IR ATO: 3/ 1R

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P]

LO CAT I ON:

PART NUMBER:AV Bay 4,5,6,6

MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

The GPC's FCOS and the LRUs would reject all data from that MDM

except any data that happened to be in the same format as the

expected data. Redundancy Mgt. soon detects and bypasses that

MDM, and the effects of wrong data input or output is minimized.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of aft RCS, Body Flap,

Ailerons, Rudder, Speedbrake, and ability to purge SSMEs andtanks.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-17

Page 196: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:MDAC ID: 127 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/1R3/IR

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4 ....

Stuck on a Constant Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)

2)3)

4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Mu itip Iexer-DeMultip lexers (MDM)

Flight critical Aft MDM (FAI..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNCPRELAUNCH: 3/2R

LI FTOFF: 3/IRONORBIT: 3/2R

DEORBIT: 3/ IRLANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

ABORT HDW/FUNC

RTLS: 3/1R

TAL: 3/1RAOA: 3/!R

ATO: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 4,5,6,6

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detection depends on separate, redundant feedbacksignals.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of aft RCS, Body Flap, _ _i

Ailerons, Rudd-er__Speedbrake, and ability to purge SSMEs andtanks.

REFERENCES:

ms

m

M

mm

M

[]

I

m

mm

m

i

i t

mm

m

E|

u i=-

g

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-18l

EE

Page 197: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

=

w

u

m

w

u

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

128 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM FAI,FA2,FA3,FA4

Falsely Stuck on Busy Mode

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)s)6)T)8)9)

DPS

Multip lexer-DeMultip i exers (MDM)

Flight critical Aft MDM (FA1..4)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/1R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ i ] B [ P] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 4,5,6,6

MC615-0004-6110,5110

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination, SCU Busy Cross-

strap stuck high

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:FCOS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW ignores

that data. FCOS bypasses MDM after 2nd consecutive commfault,

and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port moding may recover MDM, but

not allowed during ascent until after 2nd MDM failure.

If all redundancy fails, lose use of aft RCS, Body Flap,

Ailerons, Rudder, Speedbrake, and ability to purge SSMEs and

tanks.

w

Lw

REFERENCES:

I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-19

w

Page 198: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITERSUBsYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:MDAC ID: 140 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/3

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM PFI,PF2Loss of Output to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)

3)4)

S)6)7)8)9)

SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

DPS

Multipl exer-DeMultip I exers (MDM)Payload Forward MDM (PF1..2)

CRITICALITIES

HDW/FUNC ABORT3/2R RTLS:

3/3 TAL:3/ 1R AOA:

ATO:

FLIGHT PHASE

PRELAUNCH:LIFTOFF:ONORBIT:

DEORBIT: • 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

HDW/_C3/33/3

3/3

3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ i ] B [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay I, 2

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6710,5710

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

c[p]

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:FCOS/BSS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW

ignores that data. System software bypasses MDM after 2ridconsecutive commfault, and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port

moding may not recover MDM.If all redundancy fails, lose ability to release, open, close,

and latch Payload Bay Doors, and ability to cradle and latch RMSarm without an EVA.

REFERENCES:

m

m

n

I

i

N

m

m

=

l

l

R

B

i

g

D

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-20g

Page 199: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

=

i

w

m

m

u

b

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

141 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:MDM PFI,PF2

Loss of Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

7)

8)

9)

DPS

Multiplexer-DeMultip I exers (MDM)

Payload Forward MDM (PF1..2)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/1R AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS : A [ 1 ] B [P] C [ P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,2

MC615-0004-6710,5710

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS/BSS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant PF MDMs.

Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback signals.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability to release, open, close,

and latch Payload Bay Doors, and ability to cradle and latch RMSarm without an EVA.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-21

Page 200: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

g

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WO_ET

DATE:SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

142 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:MDM PFI,PF2Erroneous Output to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)s)6)T)

9)

DPS

MU 1tip lexer-DeMu Itip I exers (MDM)Payload Forward MDM (PFI..2)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/1R AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO:LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS : A [ 1 ] B [ P ]

HDW/FUNC

3133/3

3/3

3/3

tiP]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,2PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6710,5710

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EF;EC S/ TiONALE:FCOS/BSS sets Commfault flag for that data. Applica£fon SWignores that data. System software bypasses MDM after 2nd

consecutive commfault, and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port

moding may not recover MDM.If all redundancy fails, lose ability to release, open, close,

and latch Payload Bay Doors, and ability to cradle and latch RMSarm without an EVA. ........

REFERENCES:

m

l

m

i

me

mU

u

I

l !

__ o

m

r_

i

m

D

m

mmm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-22m

Page 201: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

m

=

w

u

i

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 143 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM PFI,PF2

Erroneous Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)7)s)9)

DPS

Multiplexer-DeMultip I exers (MDM)

Payload Forward MDM (PF1..2)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P]

•LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

AV Bay 1,2

MC615-0004-6710,5710

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS/BSS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant PF MDMs.

Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback signals.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability to release, open, close,

and latch Payload Bay Doors, and ability to cradle and latch RMS

arm without an EVA.

REFERENCES :

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-23

Page 202: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WO_SHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

144 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM PFI,PF2

Premature Operation to GPC __'_: -....

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)S)6)V)8)9)

SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

DPS

Multiplexer-DeMul tip i exers (MDM)

Payload Forward MDM (PFI..2)

FLIGHT PHASE

PRELAUNCH:

LIFTOFF:

ONORBIT:

DEORBIT:

LANDING/SAFING:

CRITICALITIES

_Dwgnmc ABORT3/2R RTLS:

3/3 TAL:

3/IR AOA:

3/3 ATO:

3/3

3/3

3/3

3/3

3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,2

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6710,5710

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :

This failure on either port can interfere with FCOS/BSS returning

data from other PF MDM and cause good MDM to be bypassed. Port

moding will not fix a blabbing MDM. Power cycling may reset

electronics, but will not always stop premature operations.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability to release, open, close,

and latch Payload Bay Doors, and ability to cradle and latch RMSarm without an EVA.

REFERENCES:

l

m

m

B

I

mm

i

n

g

E

B

m

ZI

i

I

l

I

D

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-24I

m

Page 203: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

w

hm

_=i

i

w

7

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:145 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

311R3/3

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM PFI,PF2

Premature Operation to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)3)4)

S)6)

7)S)

9)

DPS

Mu Itip Iexer-DeMu itip iexers (MDM)Payload Forward MDM (PFI..2)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/3LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/1R AOA: 3/3DE,BIT: .... 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/ 3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] SIP3 C[P]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,2PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6710,5710

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS/BSS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant PF MDMs.Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback signals.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability to release, open, close,

and latch Payload Bay Doors, and ability to cradle and latch RMSarm without an EVA.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-25

Page 204: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDE=NT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

146 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/3

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM PFI,PF2Selected All Channels Wrong

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)2)

3)

4)S)6)V)8)9)

SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

DPS

Mul tip I exer-DeMul tip iexers (MDM)Payload Forward MDM (PFI..2)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNCPRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,2MC6i5-0004-6710,5710

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:The GPC's FCOS and the LRUs would reject all data from that MDM

except any data that happened to be in the same format as the

expected data. Redundancy Mgt. soon detects and bypasses thatMDM, and the effects of wrong data input or output is minimized.If all redundancy fails, lose ability to release, open, close,

and latch Payload Bay Doors, and ability to cradle and latch RMSarm without an EVA.

REFERENCES:

D

m

m

ms

[]

mmmm

I

im

m

i

m

g

L

%L

R_

REPORT.DATE 12/20/86 E-26

Page 205: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

m

u

m

u

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 147 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM PFI,PF2

Stuck on a Constant Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Multip I exer-DeMultip I exers (MDM)

Payload Forward MDM (PFI..2)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF:. 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

Av Bay 1,2

MC615-0004-6710,5710

B [ P ] C [ P ]

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS/BSS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant PF MDMs.

Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback signals.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability to release, open, close,

and latch Payload Bay Doors, and ability to cradle and latch RMSarm without an EVA.

REFERENCES:

L

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-27

Page 206: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

_=,i

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86

SUBSYSTEM: DPSMDAC ID: 148

HIGHEST CRITICALITY

FLIGHT:ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/3

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM PFI,PF2

Falsely Stuck on Busy Mode

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)3)

4)5)6)v)

9)

SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

DPS

Mu itip iexer-DeMu I tip I exers (MDM)

Payload Forward MDM (PFI..2)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

P_LAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/ 1R AOA: 3/3DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,2PART NUMBER: MC6i5"0004-67i0,57i0

cAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination, SCU Busy Cross-

strap stuck high

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:FCOS/BSS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW

ignores that data. System software bypasses MDM after 2ndconsecutive commfault, and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port

moding may not recover MDM.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability to release, open, close,

and latch Payload Bay Doors, and ability to cradle and latch RMSarm without an EVA.

l

m

ms

mm

mm

[]

Z

m

|

[]

mm

I

m .

|

I

I

REFERENCES :mm

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-28 mm

U

Page 207: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

10103186DPS180

HIGHEST CRITICALITY HDW/FUNC

FLIGHT: 3/2RABORT: /NA

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:MDM LFI, LAI

Loss of Output to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

3)4)

5)6)

7)

8)9)

DPS

Multip i exer-DeMultip lexers (MDM)

PreLaunch Forward & Aft MDM (LF,LA)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: /NA

LIFTOFF: /NA TAL: /NAONORBIT: /NA AOA: /NA

DEORBIT_ /NA ATO: /NALANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [NA ] C [ _ ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,6

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6610,5600

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW ignoresthat data. FCOS bypasses MDM after 2nd consecutive commfault,

and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port moding may recover MDM.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability of GSE to monitor andcontrol systems while attached.

REFERENCES:

"= j

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-29

Page 208: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

181 ABORT:

HDW/_C

3/ R/NA

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM LFI,LAI

LOSS Of Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

_)

8)9)

SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

DPS

Multip lexer-DeMultip i exers (MDM)

preLaunch Forward & Aft MDM (LF, LA)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNCPRE LAUNCH: 3/2R ....RTLS: /NA

LIFTOFF: /NA TAL: /NA

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: /NA.

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NA

LANDiNG/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [NA ] " C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,6

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6610,5600

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFE CTS/RATIONALE :

FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback

signals.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability of GSE to monitor and

control systems while attached.

REFERENCES :

l

i

I

I

I

i

mm

m

mm

|!

mu

l

m

J

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-30

z

m

m

mm

Page 209: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

w

n

W

w

=

u

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 182 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

/NA

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM LFI,LAI

Erroneous Output to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)s)6)v)8)9)

DPS

Mu i tip i exer-DeMu I tip i exers (MDM)

preLaunch Forward & Aft MDM (LF,LA)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/ 2R RTLS: /NA

LI FTOFF: /NA TAL: /NA

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: /NA

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NA

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [NA ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,6

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6610,5600

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW ignores

that data. FCOS bypasses MDM after 2nd consecutive commfault,

and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port moding may recover MDM, but

not allowed during ascent until after 2nd MDM failure.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability of GSE to monitor and

control systems while attached.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-31

w

Page 210: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

HIGHEST CRITICALITYzo/o3/86 _DPS FLIGHT:183 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/2R

/NA

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM LFI,LAiErroneous Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Hauf!er SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)

3)4)

S)

6)T)8)9)

DPS

Multip iexer-DeMul tip i exers (MDM)preLaunch Forward & Aft MDM (LF,LA)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/ 2R RTLS:

LI FTOFF: /NA TAL:ONORBIT: /NA AOA:

DEORBIT: /NA ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [NA ]

HDW/FUNC/NA

/NA

/NA/NA

c[p]

'LOCATION: Av Bay 1,6PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6610,5600 ...........;._ _;<

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback

signals.If all redundancy fails, lose ability of GSE to monitor and

control systems while attached.

REFERENCES:

U

mmm

i

i

I

i

iJ

i

i

m

i

i

m

i

m J[] ii !

N_

ig

l

Him

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-32U

I

Page 211: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

L

u

w

n

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

184 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R/NA

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:MDM LFI,LAI

Premature Operation to GPC

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

8)

9)

DPS

Mu i tip i exer-DeMu I tip I exers (MDM)

preLaunch Forward & Aft MDM (LF,LA)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R

LIFTOFF: /NA

ONORBIT: /NA

DEORBIT: /NA

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ]

ABORT HDW/FUNC

RTLS: /NA

TAL: /NA

AOA: /NA

ATO: /NA

B [NA ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,6

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6610,5600

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

This failure on either port can interfere with FCOS returning

data from other BTU(s) and cause good BTU(s) to be bypassed.

Port moding will not fix a blabbing MDM. Power cycling may reset

electronics, but will not always stop premature operations.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability of GSE to monitor and

control systems while attached.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-33

Page 212: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:MDAC ID: 185 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/2R

/NA

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

MDM LFI,LAIPremature Operation to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)

3)

4)5)61

8)9)

DPS

Mu i t ip I exer-DeMu itip iexers (MDM)

preLaunch Forward & Aft MDM (LF, LA)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNCPRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: /_A

LIFTOFF: /NA TAL: /NA

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: /NADEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NA

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [NA ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay I, 6

MC615-0004-6618,5600

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE: ........_

FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Wordprocessing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to _

voting LRUs. Detection depends on separate, redundant feedbacksignals.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability of GSE to monitor and

control systems while attached.

REFERENCES:

I

mm

m

mm

mm

gmm

| i

mI

mm

B

_ i

B

g

g

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-34=

u

I

Page 213: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

F-

w

u

i

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 186 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R/NA

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM LFI, LAI

Selected All Channels Wrong

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Mu i tip i exer-DeMu i tip i exers (MDM)

preLaunch Forward & Aft MDM (LF,LA)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ....ABORT HDW/FUN_

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: /NA

LIFTOFF: /NA TAL: /NA

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: /NA

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NA

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [NA ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,6

PART h_JMBER: MC615-0004-6610,5600

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

The GPC's FCOS and the LRUs would reject all data from that MDM

except any data that happened to be in the same format as the

expected data. Redundancy Mgt. soon detects and bypasses that

MDM, and the effects of wrong data input or output is minimized.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability of GSE to monitor and

control systems while attached.

REFERENCES:

t

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-35

Page 214: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

l

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

187 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

/NA

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MDM LFI,LAi

Stuck on a Constant Output to LRU

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

s)9)

DPS

Mu i tip i exer-DeMu i tip i exers (MDM)

preLaunch Forward & Aft MDM (LF,LA)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: /NA

LIFTOFF: /NA TAL: /NA

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: /NA

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NA

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [NA ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,6

MC615-0004-6610,5600

CAUSES: Vibration, Corrosion, Contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS does not directly detect this error via MDM Return Word

processing. Fault tolerance depends on redundant strings to

voting LRUs. Detection depends on separate, redundant feedback

signals.

If all redundancy fails, lose ability of GSE to monitor and

control systems while attached.

REFERENCES:

i

i

uI

mm

mM

[]

B

mm

mm

mm

mm

zJ

J

m

D

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-36

zI

I

Page 215: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

l

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:188 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

312R/NA

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:MDM LFI,LAI

Falsely Stuck on Busy Mode

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. Haufler SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

Multip I exer-DeMul tip iexers (MDM)preLaunch Forward & Aft MDM (LF,LA)

CRITI CALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: /NALIFTOFF: /NA TAL: /NA

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: /NADEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NALANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [NA ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,6 .

PART NUMBER: MC615-0004-6610,5600

CAUSES: Vibration, CorrOsion, Contamination, SCU Busy Cross-strap stuck high

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

FCOS sets Commfault flag for that data. Application SW ignoresthat data. FCOS bypasses MDM after 2nd consecutive commfault,

and displays fault msg on CRTs. Port moding may recover MDM.If all redundancy fails, lose ability of GSE to monitor andcontrol systems while attached.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-37

Page 216: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/22/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 190 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/1R

ITEM: RESISTOR,FAILURE MODE: OPEN

CURRENT LIMITING

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MULTI PLEXER- DE MULTI PLEXERS (MDM)POWER DISTRIBUTION

RESISTOR, CURRENT LIMITING

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORTPRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA:DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/1R

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/IR3/1R3/1R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ F ] c[P]

LOCATION:PART NUMBER: RWR&0S 12 IiFR

CAUSES: THERMAL STRESS, VIBRATION, SHOCK, FRACTURE

EFFECTS/RATIONA_ :NO EFFECT ON ONE FAILURE SINCE MDM ARE NOT INTERRUPTED WITH LOSS

OF ONE-OF-TWO POWER CIRCUITS. NO EFFECT ON FAILURES OF BOTH

RESISTORS (NO LOSS OF VECHICLE) SINCE MDM ARE ALSO REDUNDANT.

n

nI"

um

B

I

o

I

U

B

m

m

I

m !

z z

REFERENCES :z

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-38lure

m

l

Page 217: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

Lm

n

_m

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/22/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY HDW/FUNC

DPS FLIGHT: 3/IR

191 ABORT: 3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

GROUND

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

LOSS OF OUTPUT, FAILS TO CONDUCT, OPEN OR SHORT TO

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

7)8)9)

DPS

MULTIPLEXER-DEMULTIPLEXERS (MDM)

POWER DISTRIBUTION

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/1R

DEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/1R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ F ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER: MC450-0017-2050, 2075

CAUSES: PIECE PART STRUCTURE FAILURE, VIBRATION, THERMAL STRESS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NO EFFECT ON ONE FAILURE SINCE MDM ARE NOT INTERRUPTED WITH LOSS

OF ONE-OF-TWO POWER CIRCUITS. NO EFFECT ON FAILURE (NO LOSS OF

VEHICLE) OF BOTH RESISTORS SINCE MDM ARE ALSO REDUNDANT.

REFERENCES:

wREPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-39

Page 218: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/22/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 192 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/33/3

ITEM: CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWERFAILURE MODE: INADVERTENT OPERATION: CONDUCTS PREMATURELY

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)

3)4)s)6)T)8)s)

DPS

MULTIPLEXER-DEMULTIPLEXERS (MDM)POWER DISTRIBUTION

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNCPRELAUNCH: 3/3LIFTOFF: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3

I_DING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

ABORTRTLS:

TAL:AOA:

ATO:

HDW/FUNC3/3

3/3

3/3

3/3

A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: CONTAMINATION,.SHOCK'PIECE FAILURE

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NO EFFECT ON ANY MDMs THAT ARE OPERATIONAL THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE

MISSION (FFI,3 AND FAI,2). POWER WILL BE APPLIED TO ANY ONE OFTHE FOLLOWING MDMs: FF2,4 AND FA3,4 IF ITS DEDICATED SWITCHFAILS AND IF THE APPROPRIATE POWER BUSSES ARE "ON".

R

I

mI

[]

m

[]

m

m

R

[]_m

mm |

m

m

REFERENCES:I

l -

I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-40

_I

I

_I

m

Page 219: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

J

J

u

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/22/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 193 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

SWITCH, MDM POWER

FAILS OPEN

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

V)

8)

9)

DPS

MULTIPLEXER-DEMULTIPLEXERS (MDM)

FA, FF2, FF4, AND PF MDMs

POWER DISTRIBUTION

SWITCH, MDM POWER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR.

LIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/1R

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ F ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER: ME452-0102-7201

CAUSES: PIECE-PART STRUCTURAL FAILURE, CONTAMINATION, MECHANICAL

SHOCK, VIBRATION

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NO EFFECT ON ONE FAILURE SINCE MDM ARE NOT INTERRUPTED WITH LOSS

OF ONE-OF-TWO POWER CIRCUITS. NO EFFECT ON FAILURES OF BOTH

RESISTORS (NO LOSS OF VEHICLE) SINCE MDMs ARE ALSO REDUNDANT.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-41

Page 220: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/22/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:MDAC ID: 194 ABORT:

ITEM: SWITCH, MDM POWER ........ _FAILURE MODE: PREMA_E OPERATION: CLOSES INADVERTENTLY

HDW/FUNC3/3

3/3

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MULTIPLEXER-DEMULTIPLEXERS (MDM)

FA, FF2, FF4, AND PF MDMsPOWER DISTRIBUTION

SWITCH, MDM POWER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

ABORT HDW/_CRTLS: ' 3/3

TAL: 3/3AOA: 3/3

ATO: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:PART NUMBER: ME452-0102-7201

CAUSES:

STRESSPIECE-PART STRUCTURAL FAILURE, SHOCK, VIBRATION, THERMAL

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NO EFFECT ON MDMs THAT ARE OPERATIONAL THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE

MISSION. THIS SWITCH FAILURE WILL INADVERTENTLY POWER UP MDMs

THAT MIGHT BE OFF; I.E. FA3, FA4, FF2, AND FF4. NO LOSS OFVEHICLE.

REFERENCES:

l

[]

mm

B

m

m

mm

m

I

m

m

mm

mm

I

m

m

I

l

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-42mm

mm

Page 221: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

u

m

T

zu

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/22/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

195 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/z

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

SWITCH, MDM POWER

FAILS OPEN

LEAD ANALYST: W. A. HAUFLER SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)s)6)

8)9)

DPS

MULTIPLEXER-DEMULTIPLEXERS (MDM)

FFI, AND FF3 MDMsPOWER DISTRIBUTION

SWITCH, MDM POWER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHAS_ HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/ 2R RTLS: 3/ IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORB IT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/1R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ F ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER: ME452-0102-7210

CAUSES: STRUCTURAL FAILURE, CONTAMINATION, MECHANICAL SHOCK,VIBRATION

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

NO EFFECT ON ONE FAILURE SINCE MDM ARE NOT INTERRUPTED WITH LOSS

OF ONE-OF-TWO POWER CIRCUITS. TWO FAILURE (LOSS OF BOTH POWER

CIRCUITS AND THUS BOTH FFI AND FF3) WOULD CAUSE LOSS OF ONE NSP

INTERFACE.

WORKAROUND EXISTS TO UPDATE STATE VECTOR WITH LOSS OF BOTH FFI

AND FF3.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-43

Page 222: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSES_SME_NTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:201 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC311R3/IR

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

Input/Output Processor (IOP)

Loss of output

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)s)6)

8)9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Input/Output Processor (IOP)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FtrN¢

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IRLIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IRDEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/1R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av BaysPART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MIA Fails to output to data bus due to piece/partfailure from contamination or mechanical, thermal, or electrical

overstress, or power failure

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:Loss of a bus-commanding MIA results in loss of a GPC's abilityto communicate over that bus, attached bus terminal units

(BTU's), and all inputs and outputs connected to those BTU's.In dynamic flight phases, where a single BTU controls anactuator, the crew would have to manually intervene on a single

failure, and switching transients could arise. Loss of all

redundancy would cause loss of vehicle control.

im

|

m

l

m

i

i

m

O

mm

i

in

i

R

mum

i

l

g

I

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-44im

am

Page 223: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

w

n

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

202 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/1R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Input/Output Processor (IOP)

Erratic/Erroneous Output

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

7)

8)

9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Input/Output Processor (IOP)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R : AOA: 3/1R

DEORBIT: _ 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av BaysPART NUMBER:

CAUSES: Component failure due to contamination or mechanical,

thermal, or electrical overstress in MIA, ALU, MUX, Local Store,

or Memory

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

Critical GPC outputs are validated by sumword comparison;

however, errors are downlinked and logged, but not corrected.

MDM/Actuator hardware cancels the effects of an erroneous output

from a single channel by "Force fighting", but multiple

failures during critical flight phases would likely result in

loss of vehicel/life.

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-45

Page 224: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/22/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 203 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:Input/Output Pro?essor (IOP)Premature Operatlon

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

3)4)

S)6)

T)

8)9)

SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)Input/Output Processor (IOP)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNCPRELA-UNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 2/IR _

LI FTOFF: 2/1R TAL: 2/IRONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 2/iR ATO: 3/i_ __/SAFING: 2/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

LOCATION: Av BaysPART NUMBER:

A [ 1] B [P] C [ P]

CAUSES: Control monitor, channel control, MSC, or microcode

store failure results in invalid execution of program. Caused by

piece/part failure.

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

Premature issuance of critical outputs is detected by other GPC'sin the Redundant Set. GPC fails to sync and strings are bypassed

by other GPC's. Faulty commands are still passed to the actuator

by failed GPC. Premature commands to actuatorsduring dynamic flight phases would likely result in loss of

vehicle/life, if actuator redundancy was lost or if simultaneous

loss of two output channels.

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

m

a

mms

m

mm

m

mm

g

I

g

I

D

I

[]

m

m

i

m

ms

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-46m

m

m

Page 225: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

=

m

F

m

m

w

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 204 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Input/Output Processor (IOP)

Erroneous Input

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Input/Output Processor (IOP)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRE I_AUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/1R

LI FTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/ 3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P ] C[P]

LOCATION: Av BaysPART NUMBER:

CAUSES: Component failure due to contamination or mechanical,

thermal, or electrical overstress in MIA, ALU, MUX, Local Store,

Memory, or DMA Queue

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

Critical GPC/IOP inputs are validated thru parity checking.

Recurring input errors result in either GPC "fail-to-sync"

bringing down an erring GPC, or ignoring inputs from an erring

MDM via a GPC mask. Erroneous inputs, if propagated through

the GPC, could result in erroneous command outputs and loss of

vehicle/life, if complete function was lost.

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-47

m

Page 226: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 205 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/1R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

Loss of output

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)S)6)V)S)9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/F_C

' PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2 R AOA: 3/ IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/!R

LKNDING/SAFING: 3/ IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bays-PARTNUMBER:.

T

CAUSES: CPU fails to function due to loss of power or failure of

memory timing page

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

In dynamic flight phases where redundant set (RS) is operating,

other GPC's recognize GPC failing to sync and issue fail votes

against it. The failing GPC's voting logic then removes it from

the RS. Four RS GPC's control critical flight

functions; if at least three are lost, the 5th GPC (backup flight

computer, BFS) is engaged. Loss of BFS would-result in loss of

vehicle/life. ...........

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

mm

I

I

I

I

[]

P.

I

I

[]

J

I

z

D

IiI

I

I

UI

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-48I

Page 227: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

wm_

u

u

w

w

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 206 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/1R

3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

Erroneous/erratic output

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

8)9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/1R

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/1R

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:, Av BaysPART NUMBER:

CAUSES: CPU outputs invalid data to IOP due to memory parity

error, or failure of Master Bus Control, ALU, Data Flow Mux, or

Local Store

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

Critical GPC outputs are validated by sumword comparison to

outputs from redundant GPC's; however, detected errors are merely

logged and downlinked without corrective action. Invalid command

outputs are passed through Bus Terminal Units (BTU's)

to actuators which "force fight" the redundant commands in orderto vote out the erroneous command. Loss of more than one output

channel to the same actuator would require crew intervention,

possibly causing instable switchover transients.

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-49

Page 228: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 207 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/1R

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

Delayed/premature/inadvertent operation

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)3)

4)S)

6)7)

8)

9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

CRITICALITIES

FLI_ PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

P_ LAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IRLI FTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/1R

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IRLANDING/SAFING: 3/ IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

,LOCATION: Av Bays ,PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: CPU attempts to output data at inappropriate time due to

processor slow-down while _ervicing recurring I/O errors, failureof interrupt logic, or intermittence in timing page.

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:Redundant Set GPC's synch up by waiting for synch point messagesfrom other GPC's to indicate completion of identical operations.

Excessive processor load could require all GPC's to wait

excessively, but each GPC would recognize the slow down

and issue a fail-to-synch vote, and the slow GPC's voting logicwould remove it from the RS. If performance of all GPC's was

degraded during dynamic flight phases, vehicle instability couldoccur unless crew took control.

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

I

l

z

mm

m

l

l

U

m

_zg

mm

B

B

i

D

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-50m

Page 229: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

m

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

208 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

2/IR2/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

Inadvertent operation

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)s)6)v)8)9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 2/IR

LIFTOFF: 2/IR TAL: 2/1R

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 2/IR

DEORBIT: 2/IR ATO: 2/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 2/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS :L

A[ l] B [ P] C [ P]

LOCATION: Av BaysPART NUMBER:

CAUSES: CPU attempts to output data on incorrect data bus due to

errors in memory locations containing configuration or bus-

stringing parameters.

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

Loss of memory in bus assignment table (NBAT) could result in a

GPC attempting to command a data bus commanded by another GPC.

Both examine their respective NBAT and assume no error condition,and continue transmission on that same bus.

This would cause all data on that bus to be erroneous.

Furthermore, idle bus is created and 2 command paths are lost.

Possible to outvote good commands: loss of vehicle/life.

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-51

Page 230: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY HDW/FUNC

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT: 3/3

MDAC ID: 209 ABORT: 3/3

ITEM: CPU Power switch

FAILURE MODE: Fails closed

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) General Purpose Computer (GPC)

3) Central Processing Unit (CPU)

4) CPU Power Switch

5)

6)

7)

8)

9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3 ........ _ _

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION: Panel 06

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: CPU power switch is stuck in the "on" position due tocontamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

Flight rules dictate that the crew should power off any GPC which

has recurring errors during dynamic flight phases, as soon as

possible to avoid erroneous outputs being sent to actuators. If

the CPU power switch were stuck in the "on"_i _ _!_!_ _

position and another GPC began sending erroneous data, _£heactuators could not vote out the erroneous commands and the crew

would'need to take manual control.

m

mm

[]

m_

m

R

Z

mms

|

m

mm

mm

REFERENCES: JSC'18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770 []

[]

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-52[]

m

Page 231: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

u

m

=

N

m

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

210 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

GPC Mode Switch

Fails closed

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)2)3)4)s)6)v)8)9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

GPC Mode Switch

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/1R

DEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/1R

LANDING/SAFING: 3/1R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS : A[I] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

Panel 06

CAUSES: CPU mode switch is stuck in the "halt" or "standby"

position due to contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:If the mode switch for a GPC were stuck in a non-run position the

GPC would in effect be disabled, similar to failing to halt. The

remaining GPC's would ignore this GPC, and the GPC would not be

available as a backup or redundant member. If all

GPC's were stuck in the standby mode, the crew could not perform

critical flight control functions.

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

i

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-53

Page 232: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 211 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

GPC Output SwitchFails closed

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

GPC Output Switch

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS : 3/ IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ i ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

Panel 06

CAUSES: CPU output switch is stuck in the "terminate" or

"backup" position due to contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:If the Output Switch were stuck in the "terminate" position, thiswould have the same effect of disabling the GPC's output; all

switches in this position would cause loss of vehicle control.If the switch were stuck in the "backup" position this GPC would

only be available as BFS. If all switches in "backup" GPC 5 would

be backup when engaged.

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

mm

I

|

mm

mm

Z

iM

ms

=

D

mm

I

I

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-54

m

ZmR

Page 233: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

! --

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 213 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

GPC Power Switch

Fails open

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)5)617)8)-

9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

GPC Power Switch

FLIGHT PHASE '

PRELAUNCH:

LIFTOFF:

ONORBIT:

DEORBIT:

LANDING/SAFING:

CRITICALITIES

HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

3/3 RTLS: 3/IR

3/IR TAL: 3/1R

3/2R AOA: 3/IR

3/IR ATO: 3/IR

311R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 I B[P] C[P]

LOCATION: Panel 06

PART "NUMBER:

CAUSES: CPU power switch is stuck in "off" position, or GPC

power is lost

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

If the GPC power switch were stuck in the "OFF" position, the GPC

could not function, same as CPU Loss of Output.

REFERENCES:" JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

L_

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-55

Page 234: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

214 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/3

/NA

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

DRIVER MODULE CONTROLLER

PREMATURE OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)2)3)4)s)6)T)8)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)POWER DISTRIBUTION

DRIVER MODULE CONTROLLER

cRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNCPRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: /NA

LIFTOFF: /NA TAL: /NAONORBIT: /NA AOA: /_ _ _

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NA

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: INTERNAL COMPONENT FAILURE

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:PREMATURE OPERATION CAUSES POWER TO BE APPLIED TO A GPC.HARMFUL EFFECTS TO POWER UP A GPC.

NO

ms

[]

i

Mmm

u

I

mm

g

l

[]m

g

mm

REFERENCES:

=

ms

I

I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-56

I

Page 235: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

mw

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 215 ABORT:

ITEM: DRIVER MODULE CONTROLLER

FAILURE MODE: NO OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

v)8)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)

POWER DISTRIBUTION

DRIVER MODULE CONTROLLER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/ IR RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/1R3/IR3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ I ] B [ P ] c[p]

LOCATION :

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: INTERNAL COMPONENT

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS ONE OF THREE REDUNDANT POWERSOURSES TO A GPC.

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-57

Page 236: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY HDW/FUNCSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT: 3/3MDAC ID: 216 ABORT: 3/3

ITEM: SWITCH, GPC POWERFAILURE MODE: PREMATURE CLOSURE

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)3) POWER DISTRIBUTION

4) SWITCH, GPC POWER

5)6)

8)9)

CRITICALITiEs

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNCPRE LAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/3

LI FTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3ONORBIT" - - 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION :

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: VIBRATION, PIECE PART FAILURE

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:THE MAIN DC POWER IS APPLIED TO THE GPC.

APPLY POWER TO A GPC.

NO HARMFUL EFFECTS TO

REFERENCES:

mm

J

l

i

B

U

N

B

l

zmm

l

I

i

I

Dm

i

gB

i

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-58

I

mm

Page 237: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

w

i

L

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 217 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC2/1R2/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

SWITCH, GPC POWERFAILS OPEN

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)

POWER DISTRIBUTION

SWITCH, GPC POWER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 2/1R RTLS: 2/1R

LI FTOFF: 2/1R TAL: 2/IR

ONORBIT: 2/IR AOA: 2/IR

DEORBIT: 2/IR ATO: 2/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 2/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P] C [ P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: VIBRATION, PIECE PART FAILURE

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:POSSIBLE MISSION TERMINATION ON FIRST FAILURE. SECOND FAILURE

COULD CAUSE LOSS OF CREW AND VEHICLE. IF FAILURE OCCURS CLOSE TO

MECO THERE IS NOT ENOUGH TIME TO MANUALLY SHUT DOWN ENGINES TO

PREVENT CAVITATION.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-59

Page 238: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

N

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY HDW/FUNCSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT: 3/3

MDAC ID: 218 ABORT: 3/3

ITEM: STATUS LIGHT

FAILURE MODE: NO OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)

3) GENERAL PROCESSING UNIT (CPU)

4) STATUS LIGHT

s)6)

8)9)

C_TICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: FILAMENT FAILURE, VIBRATION

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

NO EFFECT. CRT DISPLAYS GPC STATUS,

OF FAILED GPC IS TERMINATED.

BARBER POLE INDICATES OUTPUT

lid

iim

mm

i

i

i

I

|

!i

I

m

B

I

mm

REFERENCES: m

B

mI

mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-60

m

I

Page 239: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

w

Imm

u

w

u

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 219 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

ITEM: CICU

FAILURE MODE: NO OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)S)6)V)8)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)

GENERAL PROCESSING UNIT (CPU)

COMPUTER INTERFACE CONDITIONING UNIT (CICU)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: INTERNAL COMPONENT FAILURE, VIBRATION

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NO EFFECT. LOSS OF CONVERSION POWER TO DRIVE GPC STATUS LIGHTS

HAS SAME EFFECT AS LOSS OF STATUS LIGHT. OTHER INDICATORS

PROVIDE GPC HEALTH STATUS.

REFERENCES:

t

L

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-61

Page 240: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

om

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 220 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

SWITCH, IPLPREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)516)T)8)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)

SWITCH, IPL

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/2R

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL: 3/2R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/2R

DEORBIT: 3/2R ATO: 3/2R

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P] C [ P ]

LOCATI ON:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: VIBRATION, ?IECE PAST FAILURE

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NO EFFECT IF GPC IS IN RUN OR STANDBY MODE. IPL NOT NECESSARY

IN-FLIGHT_LESS_OTHERFAI_LURE OCCURS TO GP_F_T'

REFERENCES:

m110

l

mm

M

mmm

i

m

s

Ig

m

m

D

mg

g

u

g

I

mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-62

mm

J

Page 241: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

m

w

L_u

i

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

221 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

INDICATOR, IPL

PREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)

INDICATOR, IPL

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES : VIBRATION, SHOCK

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

A FALSE INDICATOR OF THE IPL FUNCTION HAS NO EFFECT ON THE GPC.

IPL FUNCTION CAN BE MONITORED ON COMPUTER ANNUNICATOR PANEL FOR

GPC STATUS.

mREFERENCES:

L_

w

w

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-63

Page 242: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

mms

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

222 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

INDICATOR, IPLFAILS TO TRANSFER INDICATION OF GPC MODE

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BP_EAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)

2)3)4)5)6)

B)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)

INDICATOR, IPL

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/3LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: VIBRATION, SHOCK

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:AN ERRONEOUS INDICATION OF THE GPC STATUS WILL BE DISPLAYED.

EFFECT ON THE GPC'S FUNCTIONS.

NO

zwI

zmD

mm

I

m

!m

mm

!l

mm

J

I

REFERENCES:l

m

I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-64

I

!

Page 243: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

w

i

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

223 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

INDICATOR OUTPUT, BARBER POLE

ERRONEOUS INDICATION

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

Z)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

7)

8)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)INDICATOR OUTPUT

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUN CH: 3/ 3 RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: FAILED DRIVER, SHOCK, VIBRATION

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

INDICATES ERRONEOUS GPC STATUS. NO EFFECT OF GPC FUNCTION.

STATUS DISPLAYED ON GPC STATUS ANNUNCIATOR.

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

GPC

REFERENCES :

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-65

Page 244: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

224 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/33/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

INDICATOR OUTPUT, BARBER POLE

FAILS TO TRANSFER

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)s)6)v)8)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)

INDICATOR OUTPUT

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: '3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: VIBRATION, SHOCK, PIECE PART F_ILURE _--

EFFECTS/RATIONA_:_ ........,_ _:_ , _-_i_ ...........ERRONEOUS INDICATION OF G:PC STATUS_ _GPC STATUS ANNUNCIATOR CAN

BE MONITORED OF GPC STATUS_. _ z _ _ _ : ....

mm

mm

m

z

B

m

rm

mm

mm

i

--=__mE

ms

REFERENCES:ms

z

I

z

m

mm

mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-66

mm

Page 245: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

w

w

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

10/24/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

225 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC2/iR2/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

INPUT/OUTPUT PROCESSOR (IOP)ERRONEOUS OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

7)

8)

9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER

INPUT/OUTPUT PROCESSOR (IOP)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE ' HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 2/IR RTLS: 2/IR

LIFTOFF: 2/1R TAL: 2/1R

ONORBIT: 2/1R AOA: 2/IR

DEORBIT: 2/1R ATO: 2/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 2/1R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION :

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: INTERNAL COMPONENT FAILURE

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:MAY EXECUTE COMMAND TO WRONG MDM WITH ADDRESS ERROR. THE WORST

CASE WOULD BE TO AN UNVOTED EFFECTOR. NO EFFECT ON IST FAILURE.

CREW CAN PRECLUDE SENSITIVITY TO 2ND FAILURE.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-67

Page 246: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

J

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/30/86SUBSYSTEM: DPS

MDAC ID: 226

ITEM: RESISTOR

FAILURE MODE: NOT APPLICABLE

HIGHEST CRITICALITYFLIGHT:

ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

/NA

/NA

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I) DPS

2) GPC3) RESISTOR

4)5)6)7)8)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: /NA RTLS: /NALIFTOFF: /NA TAL: /NA

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: /NADEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NA

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: RESISTOR HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH A FUSE.

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:THIS RESISTOR HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH PART NUMBER ME451-0018-0300

(SEE FMEA #05-6S-BFUSI-I)

D

L_

I

D

lmm

m

[]

[]

I

mm

mm

mm

=

mm

m

B

REFERENCES:

COMMENTS.

FMEA NO. 05-6S-BRESI-I NASA-JSC FMEA CIL REVIEW

E

I

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-68

I

M

Page 247: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

u

w

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/30/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 227 ABORT:

ITEM: FUSE

FAILURE MODE: OPEN

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l) DPS

2) GPC3) FUSE4)S)6)

e)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/IR RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

HDW/FUNC3/1R3/1R3/1R3/1R

A[ i] B [ P] C [ P]

LOCAT I ON:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURE

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :

HDW/FUNC3/1R3/IR

w

REFERENCES: FMEA NO. 05-6S-BFUSI-I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-69

Page 248: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

l

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

mR

DATE: 10/30/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY HDW/FUNCSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT: 3/IR

MDAC iD: 228 ABORT: 3/IR

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

LOSS OF OUTPUTITEM:FAILURE MODE:

SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBBLEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY

l

i

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS __

2) GPC []3) CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER4)S) l6)7) __8)9) u

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/IR RTLS: 3/IRLIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/1R AOA: 3/IRDEORBiT: 3/ IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ I ] B [ P] C [ P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

TEMPERATURE STRESS, MECHANICAL FRACTURES, CONTAMINATION,CAUSES:DEBRIS

NASA JSC FMEA CIL REVIEW

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:ONE OF THREE REDUNDANT RPC IS DISABLED.

FMEA NO. 05-6S-BRPC-I.REFERENCES:

COMMENTS.

I

I

Im

Mms

n

u

mg

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-70

I

Page 249: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

z z

u

w

m

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

TD_TE:

/SUBSYSTEM:

_MDAC ID:

10/30/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

229 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

ITEM:

_FAILURE MODE :

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWERCONDUCTS PREMATURELY

I_EADANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

_BREKKDOWN HIERARCHY:

_) DPS

._) _PC"3) CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

"4)

5)

V)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC

PRELAUN_H: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

:4_EDUNDANCY SCREENS:

ABORT

RTLS:

TAL:

AOA:

ATO:

HDW/FUNC

3/33/3

3/33/3

A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:

iPARTNUMBER:-

TEMPERATURE STRESS, MECHANICAL FRACTURE, CONTAMINATION,

_F_"TS/RATIONALE:POWER WOULD BE APPLIED PREMATURELY.

_E_FERENCES:

:COMMENTS.

FMEA NO. 05-6S-BRPC1-2. NASA-JSC FMEA CIL REVIEW

_A_RT DATE 12/20/86 E-71

Page 250: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 11/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 230 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/1R

ITEM: DIODE

FAILURE MODE: FAILS OPEN

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I) DPS

2) GPC

3) DIODE

4)5)6)7)8)9)

• CRITICALIT!ESFLI GHT PHASE _ HDW/me ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/IR RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/1R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS : A [ i] B [F] C [P]

LOCATION:PART NUMBER:

T ss,CONTACAUSES: THERMAL S MINATION, DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :

NONE ON FIRST/SECOND FAILURE. THREE RPC OUTPUTS ARE "OR" TOGETHER

TO PROVIDE TRIPLY REDUNDANT POWER PATH TO CPU AND IOP. THREE

FAILURES COULD CAUSE LOSS OF GPC.

mm

m

lm

mm

l

m

l

l

l

J

l

=_

I

I

l

REFERENCES: 05-6S-BDIOX-I. NASA-JSC FMEA & CIL REVIEW COMMENTS.I

D

mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-72

i

I

Page 251: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 11/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 231 ABORT:

ITEM: SWITCH, NORMAL-TERM BACK-UP

FAILURE MODE: PREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) GPC

3) SWITCH, NORMAL-TERM BACKUP

4)

S)

6)

"I)

8)

9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/IR RTLS : 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA: 3/ IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/1R

LAND ING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: THERMAL STRESS, CONTAMINATION, DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

WILL TERMINATE FC DATA BUS I/O ACTIVITY OF A GOOD GPC.

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/1R

REFERENCES: FMEA 05-5-B15-I-I

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-73

Page 252: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 232 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:SWITCH, GPC POWERNO OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB suBsYs LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

GENERAL PURPOSE COMPUTER (GPC)POWER DISTRIBUTIONDRIVER MODULE CONTROLLER

FLIGHT PHASE

PRE LAUNCH:

ONORBIT:

DEORBIT:

LANDING/SAFING:

" REDUNDANCY ScREENs:

.....CRITICALIT_S _

HDW/FUNC ABORT3/IR RTLS:3/IR TAL:

3/IR AOA:

3/1R ATO:3/ZR

HDw/ C3/IR3ZIR_I3/!R3/IR

A[ i] B[P] C [P]

LOCATION :PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: INTERNAL COMPONENT

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS ONE OF THREE REDUNDANT POWER SOURSES TO A GPC.

REFERENCES:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/IR

mm

I

I

[]

z

zm

m

l

m

l

m

i

g

I

Ill

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-74

I

mm

Page 253: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

w

ram-

z

Z

w

w

7

F

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

300 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

KEYBOARD SWITCH

OPEN/CLOSED

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)5)6)v)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

KEYBOARD

SWITCH

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LI FTOFF: 3/IR TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

HDW/FUNC

_/IR3/IR

3/IR

3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] c[P]

LOCATION: UPPER CREW AREA

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURE/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :LOSS OF INPUTTING COMMAND CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD

NOT BE ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. i. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

REFERENCES :

!

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-75

Page 254: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

B

DATE:SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:301 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/IR

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

X/Y DEFLECTION AMPLIFIERSNO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)5)6)

8)9)

DPSMULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DISPLAY UNIT

X/Y DEFLECTION AMPLIFIERS

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL:ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ]

HDW/ C3/1R3/1R3/IR3/IR

C[P]

LOCATION: UPPER CREW AREAPART NUMBER:

CAUSES: TEMPERATURE STRESS/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING _ABILITY. _DUNDANT _DWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. i. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

l

g

__=

I

U

B

g

m

m

E

i

l

dmm

mI

!

I

I

REFERENCES:m

±

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-76

m

Page 255: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

l

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 302 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

VIDEO AMPLIFIER

NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/IR

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

_)

4)

S)

6)

v)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DISPLAY UNIT

VIDEO AMPLIFIER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRE LAUNCH: 3/ 2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL:

ONORB IT: 3/ IR AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/ IR ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS :

HDW/FUNC3/1R3/1R3/IR3/IR

A[I] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

UPPER CREW AREA

CAUSES: TEMPERATURE STRESS/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. i. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-77

Page 256: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

B

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 303 ABORT:

ITEM: CATHODE-RAY TUBE

FAILURE MODE: NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/IR

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)2)3)4)S)6)V)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)DISPLAY UNIT

CATHODE-RAY TUBE

CRITICALITIES

FLIG_ PraiSE HDW/_C ABORT HDW/_CPRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/'IR

LI FTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/ 1RONORBIT: 3/IR AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/1RLANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATI ON:

PART NUMBER:

UPPER CREW AREA

CAUSES: SHOCK/ TEMPERATURE STRESS/ MECHANICAL FRACTURE/

VIBRATION/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BEACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. i. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF " APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

REFERENCES:

U

I

i

B

[]mm

!I

I

mm

mm

m

mim

I

I

B

D

l

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-78

mm

B

Page 257: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

z

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY HDW/FUNCSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT: 3/IR

MDAC ID: 304 ABORT: 3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

HI AND LOW VOLTAGE POWER SUPPLIES

NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

7)s)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DISPLAY UNIT

HIGH AND LOW (+/-5, 15, 28 & 80 VDC) VOLTAGE POWER SUPPLIES

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRE LAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/1R

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/1R AOA: 3/1R

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION: UPPER CREW AREA

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURES/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. 1. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-79

Page 258: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 305 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/ZR

ITEM: RPC

FAILURE MODE: OPEN/CLOSED/PREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B, ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

3) DISPLAY UNIT

4) RPCS)6)V)8)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS :

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/1R AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO:

_DING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

UPPER CREA AREA

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/_R3iIR3/IR

ciP]

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURE/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. I. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

mR

I

[]

|

z

m

[]

==

B

M

ms

i

mm

I

mm

REFERENCES:[]

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-80

Page 259: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

L_z ,

=

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 306 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/1R3/1R

ITEM: MEMORY

FAILURE MODE: NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)5)6)v)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DEU

MEMORY

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRE LAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/1R AOA: 3/1R

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS : A[ i] B [P] C [ P]

LO CAT I ON:

PART NUMBER:

UPPER CREW AREA

CAUSES: CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. I. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-81

Page 260: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENTORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

307 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

KEYBOARD ADAPTER

NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DEU

KEYBOARD ADAPTER

CRITI CALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/_JNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LI FTOFF" 3/1R TAL: 3/1R

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: UPPER CREW AREA

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF INPUTTING COMMAND CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD

NOT BE ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.- ......ie. i. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

mm

S

z

m

I

mm

I

m

m

J

ms

BI

ms

I

J

z

mm

REFERENCES:wmm

[]

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-82

[]

Z

mm

Page 261: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

Lw

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 308 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/1R

3/1R

ITEM: SYMBOL GENERATOR

FAILURE MODE: NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)5)6)

7)s)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DEU

SYMBOL GENERATOR

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: , 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LI FTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/1R AOA: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/1R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: UPPER CREW AREA

PART NUMBER: -

CAUSES: CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. 1. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-83

Page 262: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

mm

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 309 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/1R3/1R

ITEM: MIA

FAILURE MODE: NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

3)

4)5)6)v)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DEU

MIA

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R

LIFTOFF: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

ABORT HDW/FUNC

RTLS: 3/IR

TAL: 3/IR

AOA: 3/IR

ATO: 3/1R

A [ 1] B [ P] C [ P]

LOCATION: UPPER CREW AREA

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: CONTAM_ION/ DEBRIS _ _.....

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

_S_OFMONITORING CAPABILITY, REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES. _ !_±__zi_ii_i_ _ :i_ie. i. LIFT-OFF _OUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,O00ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

REFERENCES:

I

2

mm

nms

iB

g

I

I

mI

mm

I

I

I

u

I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-84

M

m

Page 263: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 310 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

ITEM: CONTROL LOGIC

FAILURE MODE: NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: HJ LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

4)S)6)7)8)9)

l) DPS

2) MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

3) DEUCONTROL LOGIC

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/ 2R RTLS : 3/IR

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORB I T: 3/ 1R AOA: 3 / IR

DEORBIT: 3/1R ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCAT ION:

PART NUMBER:

UPPER CREW AREA

CAUSES: CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. i. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-85

Page 264: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 311 ABORT:

ITEM: POWER SUPPLIES

FAILURE MODE: NO OUTPUT/ERRONEOUS/ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/IR

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)

3)4)

S)6)

T)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)DEU

POWER SUPPLIES (+/-5, 12 & 15 VDC)

....CRITICALITIES .......FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/_FUNC '

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: _/IR_/:LIFTOFF: 3/IR _ TAL: 3/IR_

ONORBiT: _71R °AbA: 3/iR _

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO: 3/IRLANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATI ON:PART NUMBER:

UPPER CREW AREA-

CAUSES: CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. I. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

miU

m

B

ms

z

D

[]i

--__--u ;

[]

i

mm

i

m

REFERENCES:

u

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-86

I

i

Page 265: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

w

m

w

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

312 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

RPC

OPEN/CLOSED/PREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)3)4)5)6)v)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DEU

RPC

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/ 2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/ IR ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ]

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/1R

3/IR

311R

B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCAT I ON:

PART NUMBER:

UPPER CREW AREA

CAUSES:

DEBRIS

TEMPERATURE STRESS/ MECHANICAL FRACTURE/ CONTAMINATION/

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF MONITORING CAPABILITY. REDUNDANT HARDWARE WOULD NOT BE

ACCESSIBLE DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH

ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATION FORCES.ie. i. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

REFERENCES:

i

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E'87

Page 266: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

g

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIG_ST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 313 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

ITEM: LOAD SWITCH

FAILURE MODE: OPEN/CLOSED/PREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DEU

LOAD SWITCH

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

HDW/FUNC

3/33/33/33/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION: UPPER CREW AREA

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURE/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:DEUS ARE NOT NORMALLY RELOADED DURING A MISSION. SWITCH IS NOT

NEEDED.

mI

!

mm

I

m

i

mm

m

m

m

i

g

U

REFERENCES: B

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-88

g

i

Page 267: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

L

w

m

u

w

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 314 ABORT:

ITEM: FUNCTION SWITCH

FAILURE MODE: OPEN/CLOSED/PREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DEU

FUNCTION SWITCH

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R

LIFTOFF: 3/IR

ONORBIT: 3/IR

DEORBIT: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: 3/1R

ABORT

RTLS:

TAL:

AOA:

ATO:

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ]

HDW/FUNC

3/1R311R3/1R3/1R

c[p]

LOCATION: UPPER CREW AREA

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURE/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

IMPROPER MAJOR FUNCTION IDENTIFICATION

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/IR

w

REFERENCES'.

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-89

Page 268: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

U

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:315 ABORT:

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

DATA BUS COUPLER (DBC)

OPEN/SHORT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/IR

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)s)6)v)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DBC

FLIGHT PHASE

PRELAUNCH:LIFTOFF:

ONORBIT:

DEORBIT:

LANDING/SAFING:

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

HDW/FUNC ABORT

3/2R RTLS:

311R TAL:3/IR AOA:

3/1R ATO:311R

HDW/FUNC

3/iR _=_3/IR3/IR3/1R

A[ 1 ] B [ P] C [ P]

LOCATION: ,ALL AV BAYSPART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURE/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF DATA BUS. REDUNDANT HARDW_ WOULD NOT BE ACCESSIBLE

DURING PERIODS OF ANTICIPATED HIGH ACCELERATION/DEACCELERATIONFORCES.ie. i. LIFT-OFF THROUGH MAIN ENGINE CUT-OFF - APPROXIMATELY 8 MIN

40 SEC; 2. ENTRY THROUGH SAFEING -APPROXIMATELY 400,000ft (TD -40

MIN) THROUGH SAFEING.

g

g

z

_m

mm

m

mm

mm

mim

U

m :

m

m

D

In

u

m

REFERENCES:

D

U

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-90

u

HI

Page 269: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

L

W

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

316 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

DBIA

OPEN�SHORT�ERRONEOUS�ERRATIC OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DBIA

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL:

ONORBIT: /NA AOA:

DEORBIT: /NA ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [NA ]

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

/NA

/NA

/NA

c[P]

LOCATION: AV BAY 5

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURE/ CONTAMINATION/ DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

LOSS OF ONE COMMAND/DATA PATH

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

/NA

w

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-91

Page 270: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

R

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

10/27/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

317 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

ITEM: RESISTOR

FAILURE MODE: OPEN

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I) EPD&C

2) DPS&C

3) MCDS

4) RESISTOR

5)6)7)S)9)

CRITICALITIES _

FLIGHT PHASE; HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3 .....ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

_DUNDANCY SCREENS: A [_A ] B [NA ] C [NA_]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: THERMAL STRESS, CONTAMINATION

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

NO EFFECT. POWER TO MCDS IS NEITHER AFFECTED NOR INTERRUPTED.

RESISTOR PROVIDES SIGNAL THAT INDICATES THE MCDS (DEU/DU) POWER

STATUS "ON" OR "STBY". THE MDM (OF4) WILL INTERPRET NO SIGNAL AS

POWER "OFF" CONDITION.

REFERENCES:

M

i

m

I

B

R

[]

nmm

D

I

m

m

J

i

l

m

m

g

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-92

m

g

Page 271: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

w

p

w

w

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/27/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

318 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

RPC

PREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l) DPS

2) MCDS

3) DU

4 ) RPC

s)6)7)s)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

3/3

3/3

A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURE/CONTAMINATION/DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NONE. DU WILL HAVE POWER APPLIED PREMATURELY.

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

REFERENCES :

i

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-93

Page 272: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

U

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 319 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:SWITCH, CRT POWERPREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)DU

SWITCH, CRT POWER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORTPRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA:DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO:LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ]

HDW/FUNC

3/33/33/33/3

C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL FRACTURE, CONTAMINATION

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NONE. DU WILL HAVE POWER APPLIED PREMATURELY.

REFERENCES:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

mm

fi

m

[]

mm

m

m

l

[]

mI

m

m

m

m o

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-94

m

m

Page 273: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS PLIGHT:

320 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

RPC

PREMATURE OPERATION

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)5)6)7)s)

DPS

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CRT DISPLAY SYSTEM (MCDS)

DEU

CONTROLLER

CRITICALITIES

PLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ]

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/33/3

.313

C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: TEMPERATURE STRESS/MECHANICAL

FRACTURE/CONTAMINATION/DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NONE. DEU WILL HAVE POWER APPLIED PREMATURELY.

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-95

Page 274: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

il/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

321 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

DIODE, SUPPRESSOR

FAILS SHORTED

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) MCDS

3 ) DEU

4) DIODE, SUPPRESSOR

S)

6)

7)s)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO:

LAND_NG/SAFING: 3/3

HDW/FUNC

3/33!3_._3/3

3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

LOCATION :

PART NUMBER:

A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

CAUSES: THERMAL STRESS, CONTAMINATION, DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LACK OF SUPPRESSION OF DEU TO MDM REVERSE TRANSIENTS WOULD ENABLE

PREMATURE "ON" INDICATION OF THE DEU.

REFERENCES:

COMMENTS.

FMEA-05-6S-BDIOI-I. NASA JSC FMEA & CIL REVIEW

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-96

I

l

Z

U

I

M

i

mm

m

mmm

I

J

B

mm

I

m

g

m

g

Page 275: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

11/10/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

322 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/iR3/!R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:SWZTCH, CRT POWER

SHORT TO GROUND

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) MCDS

3) DU

4) SWITCH, CRT POWER

5)

6)

7)

8)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/1R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/IR AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/IR ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/IR

HDW/FUNC

3/1R3/1R

3/1R

3/1R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ]

LOCATION : ,

PART NUMBER:

c[P]

CAUSES: MECHANICAL SHOCK, CONTAMINATION, DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

ACTIVATION OF ASSOCIATED OVERLOAD PROTECTIVE CIRCUITS.

DU.

LOSS OF

REFERENCES: FMEA 05-6Q-2201-3. NASA-JSC FMEA & CIL REVIEW

COMMENTS, 9-11-86.

w

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-97

Page 276: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM : DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 400 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Tape transport mechanism

Loss of Output

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

Tape transport mechanism

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA:

DEORBIT: /NA ATO:

-LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 2 ]

LOCATION_ Av Bay 1,2PART NUMBER: MC 615-0005

HDW/FUNC

/NA3/2R

3/2R

3/2R

B [ P ] C [ P ]

CAUSES: Worn tape or foreign matter on tape, Motor failure (worn

brushes, etc.), Worn heads, Failur6 of negator spring causing ....

Tape slippage due to incorrect tension.

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 and 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

REFERENCES:

l

i

i

i

m

z

i

i

E

i

l

g

_i eim o

_m Ei

=

m -

l

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-98 !m

im

Page 277: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

B

m

w

r

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 401 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/2R3/2R

ITEM: Tape transport mechanism

FAILURE MODE: Erroneous Output

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)

2)

3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

Tape transport mechanism

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: /NA

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL: 3/2R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/2R

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: 3/2R

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 2 ] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

Av Bay 1,2

MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Worn tape or foreign matter on tape, Tape slippage dueto incorrect tension.

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 and 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-99

Page 278: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

mm

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC !D:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

402 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Read electronics

Loss of Output

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)5)61

8)9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

Read electronics

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA:

DEORBIT: /NA ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 2 ] B [ P ]

HDW/FUNC

/NA

3/2R3/2R3/2R

c[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,2MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Electrical failure

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 and 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or-_S engaged for entry.

REFERENCES:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

I

Ll

m

lib

mR

l

l

m

mm

I

[]ms

I

mm F

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-100

Page 279: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

m

m

u

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 403 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Read electronics

Erroneous Output

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

V)

8)

9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)Read electronics

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL:

ONORBIT:I 3/2R AOA:

DEORBIT: /NA ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 2 ]

LOCATION: Av Bay I, 2

PART NUMBER: MC 615-0005

HDW/FUNC

/NA

3/2R3/2R3/2R

B[P] C[P]

CAUSES: Electrical failure

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 and 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

REFERENCES:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-101

Page 280: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 404 ABORT:

ITEM: MIA

FAILURE MODE: Loss of Output

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)s)6)v)s)9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

MIA

CRITT CALITIE S

FLIGHT _ PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/_C

PRELAUNCH: 3 / 2 R RTLS: /NA

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL: 3/2R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/2R

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: 3/2 R

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [P] C [ P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:AV Bay 1,2MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Electrical failure

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :

If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 and 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

REFERENCES:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

m

l

mi

m

mR

m

mm

m

|

m

mm

R

M

[]

g

mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-102

m

mm

Page 281: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

W

w

u

w

=_

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

405 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/2R3/2R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

MIA

Erroneous Output

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

3) MIA

4)s)6)v)s)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FD_C ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: /NA

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL: 3/2R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/2R

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: 3/2R

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [P] C [P]

LOCATION: AV Bay 1,2PART NUMBER: -MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Electrical failure

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 and 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

REFERENCES:

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-103

Page 282: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 406 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/2R3/2R

ITEM: Write electronics

FAILURE MODE: Loss of Output

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)5)6)v>8)

9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)Write electronics

FLIGHT PHASE 'PRELAUNCH:

LIFTOFF:ONORBIT:

DEORBIT:

LANDING/SAFING:

CRITICALITIES

HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

3/2R RTLS: /NA

3/2R _TAL:_ 3/2R .....3/2R AOA: 3/2R

/NA ATO: 3/2R/NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 2 B[P] C[P]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,2PART "NUMBER: MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Electrical failure

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:If the ability to write to MMUs were lost, the mission could beterminated early. No danger to crew or vehicle.

REFERENCES:

mm

I

[]

m

m

m

U

M

mI

mm

[]

E

mm

m

D

mm

mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-104

I

I

Page 283: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

r_

F_

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 407 ABORT:

ITEM: RPC

FAILURE MODE: Failed Open

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

3) Power supply

4) RPCS)6)7)8)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA:

DEORBIT: /NA ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ]

HDW/FUNC

/NA

3/2R

3/2R3/2R

B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: Av Bay 1,2PART NUMBER: MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Broken contact

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 and 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

REFERENCES:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R3/2R

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-105

Page 284: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03 / 86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 408 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Switch

Failed Open

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

Power supplySwitch

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELA_CH: 3/2R RTLS: /NA _/_

LI FToF-F: 3/2 R TAL: 3/2-R _

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/2R

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: 3/2R

LANDING/SAFING: , _ /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

Av Bay 1,2MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Broken contact

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :

If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 and 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

REFERENCES:

!

===

I

mm

mE

mm

m

i

I

I

|

M

g

m

m

I

I

l

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-106

m

Page 285: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

u

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

409 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Switch

Failed Closed (on)

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l) DPS

2) MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

3) Power supply

4 ) Switch

5)

6)

7)

S)

9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDw/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS :

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/ 3 AOA:

DEORBIT: /NA ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ]

HDW/FUNC

/NA

3/33/33/3

C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,2MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Stray particle

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

None

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

REFERENCES:

w

z

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-107

Page 286: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 410 ABORT:

ITEM: Control logic

FAILURE MODE: Loss of Output

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

3) Control logic

4)s)6)v)8)9)

CRITI CALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R

LIFTOFF: 3/2R

DNORBIT: 3/2R

DEORBIT: /NA

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 2 ]

ABORT

RTLS :

TAL:

AOA:

ATO:

B [ P ]

HDW/FUNC

/NA

3/2R3/2R312R

C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:Av Bay 1,2MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Electrical failure

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 or 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

REFERENCES-.

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

I

!

imm

B

I

Lm

m

l

l

II

Z

mm

i

m

m

M

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-108

I

g

Page 287: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

m

_z=

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 411 ABORT:

ITEM: Control logic

FAILURE MODE: Erroneous Output

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)

3)

4)

s)6)v)8)9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

Control logic

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA:

DE ORB IT: /NA ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 2 ]

HDW/FUNC

/NA

3/2R

3/2R

3/2R

B[P] C[P]

LO CAT I O N:

PART NUMBER:

Av Bay, l, 2MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Electrical failure

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :

If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 or 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

REFERENCES :

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

w

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-109

Page 288: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

I

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 412 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

Power supply

Fails out of tolerance or Interrupt

LEAD ANALYST: K. Pietz SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)2)3)4)S)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNITS (MMU)

Power supply

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: /NA

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL: 3/2R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/2R

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: 3/2R

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 2 ] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER':Av Bay 1,2

MC 615-0005

CAUSES: Electrical failure

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

If both MMUs fail, OPS 2 and 3 software cannot be loaded.

However, OPS 3 can be uplinked or BFS engaged for entry.

of these options require the use of MMUs.

REFERENCES:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

Neither

z

i

mm

l

m

z

Q

m

mm

B

[]

R

[]

g

I

B

m

I

i

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-II0

B

zi

Page 289: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

=

l

w

m

w

F

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 413 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R3/2R

ITEM: RESISTOR, CURRENT LIMITER

FAILURE MODE: FAILS OPEN

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)5)6)v)s)9)

DPS

MASS MEMORY UNIT (MMU)POWER DISTRIBUTION

RESISTOR, CURRENT LIMITER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/2R ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ I ] B[P]

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

3/2R

312R

c[P]

LOCATION :

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: VIBRATION, SHOCK, PIECE PART FAILURE

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :

LOSS CONTROL AND USE OF ONE MMU.

GOOD MMU.

LOAD GPC OR MCDS WITH REMAINING

REFERENCES :

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-111

W

Page 290: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/30/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 414 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

LOSS OF OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

MMU

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/2R

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL: 3/2R

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA: 3/2R

DEORBIT: 3/2R ATO: 3/2R

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: All] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES:

DEBRIS

TEMPREATURE STRESS, MECHANICAL FRACTURE, CONTAMINATION,

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NONE. BFS GPC AND A FROZEN PRIMARY GPC DO NOT REQUIRE IPL OR

OVERLAY DURING ORBIT BEFORE ENTRY.

u

i

=--l

mm

mm

B

U

l

g

g![]I

J

REFERENCES:

COMMENTS.

FMEA NO. 05-6S-BRPC2-1. NASA-JSC FMEA CIL REVIEW i

l

I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-II2

m

mm

Page 291: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

i

i

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

DPS FLIGHT:

415 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

IPL Source Switch

Fails open

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

Z)

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

7)

S)

9)

DPS

General Purpose Computer (GPC)

Central Processing Unit (CPU)

MMU Initial Program Load (IPL) Source Switch

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FtfNC ...... -ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3 RTLS: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3 AOA: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3 ATO: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ] C [NA ]

LOCATION: Panel 06

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: IPL selector switch is shorted or power source is lost

due to contamination

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:IPL source switch is used at pre-launch to initialize GPC's. This

failure could cause loss of a mission opportunity due to launch

delay. During flight the GPC's are not typically re-IPL'ed, even

though the MMU is used to retrieve new memory overlays (as

opposed to the IPL loading the entire system software, including

MCDS initialization).

REFERENCES: JSC 18820, JSC 11174, JSC 12770

I

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-II3

Page 292: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

rm

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 11/10/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 416 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

PREMATURE OPERATION

HDW/FUNC

3/3

3/3

LEAD ANALYST: T. B. Cribbs SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1) DPS

2)

3)

4)

S)

6)

7)

8)

9)

MMU

CONTROLLER, REMOTE POWER

CRITI_LiT i_S

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC

PRE LAUNCH: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 3/3

ONORBIT: 3/3

DEORBIT: 3/3

LANDING/SAFING: 3/3

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ] B [NA ]

ABORT HDW/FUNC

RTLS: 3/3

TAL: 3/3

AOA: 3/3

ATO: 3/3

C [NA ]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL SHOCK, CONTAMINATION, DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE".NO EFFECT. PREMATURE TURN ON.

REFERENCES: 05-6S-BRPC2-1.

9_19_86.

NASA-JSC FMEA & CIL REVIEW COMMENTS,

mm

U

I

J

I

ms

mms

mm

m

I

m

m

mm

m

E-II4REPORT DATE 12/20/86

l

Page 293: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

n

m

m

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

11/10/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

417 ABORT:

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

SWITCH, IPL

SWITCH SHORT, BOTH IPL OUTPUTS ARE TRUE.

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. Robb

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) MMU

3) SWITCH, IPL

4)

5)

6)v)8)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/2R TAL:

ONORBIT: 3/2R AOA:

DEORBIT: 3/2R ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: 3/2R

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

HDW/FUNC3/2R3/2R3/2R3/2R

A [ 1 ] B [P] C [ P]

- LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: MECHANICAL SHOCK, CONTAMINATION, DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF GPC IF IN HALT MODE.

HDW/FUNC

3/2R

3/2R

REFERENCES:

9-19-86.

05-5-B16-I-I. NASA-JSC FMEA & CIL REVIEW COMMENTS,

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-115 C -_

Page 294: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

mm

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENTORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:MDAC ID: 501 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/!R3/IR

ITEM: CIA

FAILURE MODE_ LOSS OF OUTPUTTO MAIN ENGINE ON ONE CHANNEL

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS2) ENGINE INTERFACE UNIT (EIU)

3) CONTROLLER INTERFACE ADAPTER4)5)6)7)8)9)

FLIGHT PHASE 'HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/IR TAL:ONORBIT: /NA AOA:

DEORBIT: /NA ATO:LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS:

HDW/FUNC3/IR

3/IR

3/1R

A[ l] B[P] C [ P]

LOCATI ON:PART NUMBER:

AV BAY 4,5,6

CAUSES: CONTROLLER INTERFACE ADAPTER FAILS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :LOSS OF THROTTLE COMMANDS, SHUTDOWN COMMANDS, LIMIT

INHIBIT/ENABLE COMMANDS, GPC SHUTDOWN COMMANDS, AND MPS DUMPCOMMANDS.LOSS OF ONE OF THREE COMMAND PATHS WILL BE VOTED INVALID. NO

EFFECT ON ENGINE OPERATIONS.

REFERENCES:

mm

m

l

|

m

mm

mmm

|m

m

m

i

! i

i!

m

mm

m

m

m

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-116

mm

m

Page 295: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

v

• L

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 502 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR3/IR

ITEM: MIA

FAILURE MODE: LOSS OF OUTPUT TO MAIN ENGINE ON ONE CHANNEL

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)s)6)v)8)9)

DPS

ENGINE INTERFACE UNIT (EIU)

MULTIPLEXER INTERFACE ADAPTER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRE LAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/IR

LI FTOFF: 3/IR TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: 3/1R

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

AV BAY 4,5,6

CAUSES: MULTIPLEXER INTERFACE ADAPTER FAILS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE :

LOSS OF THROTTLE COMMANDS, SHUTDOWN COMMANDS, LIMIT

INHIBIT/ENABLE COMMANDS, GPC SHUTDOWN COMMANDS, AND MPS DUMPCOMMANDS.

LOSS OF ONE OF THREE COMMAND PATHS WILL BE VOTED INVALID. NO

EFFECT ON ENGINE OPERATIONS.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-II7

Page 296: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

g

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 503 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC3/IR3/1R

ITEM: POWER CONTROL SWITCH

FAILURE MODE: LOSS OF OUTPUT TO MAIN ENGINE ON ANY OF THREE

COMMAND CHANNELS

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i)2)3)4)s)6)7)8)9)

DPS

ENGINE INTERFACE UNIT (EIU)

POWER CONTROL SWITCH

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/1R

LIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/IR

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: 3/ IR

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: 3/IR

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P] C[P3

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

AV BAY 4,5,6

CAUSES: EIU POWER CONTROL SWITCH FAILS OPEN

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF ALL COMMANDS AND STATUS OF THE ENGINE FOR THIS FAILURE

MODE

THE LOSS OF THE ENTIRE EIU WILL RESULT IN ENGINE SHUTDOWN BY CREW

BY SWITCHING AC POWER TO THE ENGINE TO OFF POSITION.

REFERENCES:

l

[]

Ewl

[]

J

i

ll

mm

u

g

I

i

ml

mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-II8

ms

[]

Page 297: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

L

L

= =

m

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYSUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT:

MDAC ID: 504 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

3/IR

3/iR

ITEM: INTERNAL POWER SUPPLIES

FAILURE MODE: LOSS OF OUTPUT TO MAIN ENGINE ON ANY OF THREE

COMMAND CHANNELS

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

i) DPS

2) ENGINE INTERFACE UNIT (EIU)

3) INTERNAL POWER SUPPLIES

4)

5)

6)

7)

S)

9)

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNCPRELAUNCH:

LIFTOFF:

ONORBIT:

DEORBIT:

LANDING/SAFING:

CRITICALITIES

ABORT HDW/FUNC

3/2R RTLS: 3/1R

3/IR TAL: 3/1R

/NA AOA: 3/IR

/NA ATO: 3/IR

/NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:AV BAY _,5,6

C [ P ]

CAUSES: INTERNAL POWER SUPPLIES FAIL

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:

LOSS OF THROTTLECOMMANDS, SHUTDOWN COMMANDS, LIMIT

INHIBIT/ENABLE COMMANDS, GPC SHUTDOWN COMMANDS, ANDMPS DUMPCOMMANDS.

THE LOSS OF THE ENTIRE EIU WILL RESULT IN ENGINE SHUTDOWN BY CREW

BY SWITCHING AC POWER TO THE ENGINE TO OFF POSITION.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-If9

Page 298: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY HDW/FUNCDPS FLIGHT: 3/IR505 ABORT: 3/IR

ITEM:FAILURE MODE:

ENGINES.

CONTROLLER INTERFACE ADAPTER

LOSS OF OUTPUT TO ONE OR THREE GPC ON STATUS OF

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I)2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

ENGINE INTERFACE UNIT (EIU)CONTROLLER INTERFACE ADAPTER

CRITI CALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS: 3/1RLIFTOFF: 3/1R TAL: 3/IR:

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: 3/IR

DEORB IT: /NA ATO: 3/ IRLANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ P ] C [ P ]

LOCATION: AV BAY 4,5,6PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: CONTROLLER INTERFACE ADAPTER FAILURE

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NO MAIN ENGINE MONITORING BY ONE OR THREE OF FOUR GPCS. MCC

CONFIRMS COMMAND PATH GOOD BY MONITORING 3-G THROTTLE CONTROL. IF

ENGINE IS NOT OPERATING, THE PUSHBUTTON FOR THE ENGINE MUST BEUSED TO INFORM GUIDANCE FOR PREVALVE CLOSURES.

FLIGHT RULE 2-17 PRECLUDES RESTRINGING DURING POWERED ASCENT

THROUGH MECO.

= =

L

mi

I

U

D

m

j

D

REFERENCES: mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-120

mm

l

i

I

Page 299: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

w

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE: 10/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITY HDW/FUNC

SUBSYSTEM: DPS FLIGHT: 3/3

MDAC ID: 506 ABORT: 3/IR

ITEM: OIE

FAILURE MODE: LOSS OF OUTPUT TO S-BAND, MAINTENANCE RECORDER, OR

LPS T-0 UMBILICAL

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l)2)3)4)5)6)7)s)9)

DPS

ENGINE INTERFACE UNIT (EIU)

OPERATIONAL INTERFACE ELEMENT

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT

PRELAUNCH: 3/2R RTLS:

LIFTOFF: 3/3 TAL:

ONORBIT: /NA AOA:

DEORBIT: /NA ATO:

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [NA ]

LOCATION: AV BAY 4,5,6

PART NUMBER:

B [NA ]k

HDWIFUNC3/1R3/IR3/IR3/1R

C [NA ]

CAUSES: OPERATIONAL INTERFACE ELEMENT FAILURE -

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:NO FM DATA RECORDING, NO MCC STATUS MONITORING OF ENGINE EXCEPT

IN DOWNLIST DATA FROM GPC.

REFERENCES:

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-121

Page 300: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

l

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:MDAC ID:

10/20/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

507 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC2/1R

2/IR

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:CIRCUIT, EIU POWER

ALL CREDIBLE MODES, OPEN, SHORTS

LEAD ANALYST: B. ROBB SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

1)

2)3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

DPS

ENGINE INTERFACE UNIT (EIU)POWER DISTRIBUTION

CIRCUIT, EIU POWER

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 3/3

LIFTOFF: 2/IRONORBIT: /

DEORBIT: /

LANDING/SAFING: /

REDUNDANCY SCREENS : A [ 1 ]

ABORTRTLS :

TAL:

AOA:

ATO:

B [ F]

HDW/FUNC2/IR2/!R

2/IR2/1R

c[P]

LOCATION:PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: PIECE PART FAILURE, SHOCK, VIBRATION

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:THE LOSS OF ONE OF TWO REDUNDANT CIRCUITS WILL NOT EFFECT THE

EIU. THE LOSS OF BOTH CIRCUITS WILL CAUSE LOSS OF EIU TO MAIN

ENGINE INTERFACE. MAIN ENGINE WOULD HAVE TO BE MANUALLY SHUTDOWN AT MECO.

I

imR

m

I

[]

mm

U

m

i

|[][]

m

mm

mg

m

REFERENCES:

D

mm

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-122

mm

g

Page 301: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

w

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

DATE:

SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

11/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:

508 ABORT:

HDW/FUNC

1/l

i/i

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

EIU

ERRONEOUS OUTPUT

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

l) DPS

2) EIU

3)4)5)6)7)8)9)

CRITICALITIES

FLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: 1/l RTLS: 1/l

LIFTOFF: 1/l TAL: I/i

ONORBIT: /NA AOA: /NA

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NA

LANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B[F] C[P]

LOCATION:

PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: THERMAL STRESS, CONTAMINATION, DEBRIS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:ERRONEOUS OUTPUT MAY CAUSE THE GPC'S TOTHINK THAT THE ENGINE HAS

SHUT DOWN OR THE ENGINE TO CHANGE ITS THROOTLE SETTING, EITHER OF

WHICH COULD BE CATASTROPHIC.

REFERENCES: NASA-JSC FMEA & CILREVIEW COMMENTS.

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-123

¢

Page 302: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

DATE:SUBSYSTEM:

MDAC ID:

INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT

ORBITER SUBSYSTEM ANALYSIS WORKSHEET

11/03/86 HIGHEST CRITICALITYDPS FLIGHT:509 ABORT:

HDW/Frn_CI/I1/i

ITEM:

FAILURE MODE:

SWITCH, POWERSHORT BOTH CONTACTS TO GROUND

LEAD ANALYST: H J LOWERY SUBSYS LEAD: B. ROBB

BREAKDOWN HIERARCHY:

I) DPS2) EIU3) SWITCH, POWER4)S)6)

S)9)

iTICALITiESFLIGHT PHASE HDW/FUNC ABORT HDW/FUNC

PRELAUNCH: !/I RTLS: I/iLIFTOFF: ° i/i TAL: i/i

ONORBiT: /NA AOA: /NA

DEORBIT: /NA ATO: /NALANDING/SAFING: /NA

REDUNDANCY SCREENS: A [ 1 ] B [ F ] C [ P ]

LOCATION:PART NUMBER:

CAUSES: THERMALSTRESS,CONTAMI TI N,'DEBriS

EFFECTS/RATIONALE:LOSS OF SWITCH CAUSES LOSS OF THAT EIU. LOSS OF EIU CAUSES LOSS

OF COMMAND CAPABILITY TO THAT MAIN ENGINE. RESULTS COULD BE

CATASTROPHIC.

REFERENCES: NASA-JSC FMEA & CiLREVIEW COMMENTS.

I

mm

U

I

m

m

M

ms

i

[]

l

m

M

m

zm

u

mmm

ms

REPORT DATE 12/20/86 E-124

m

s

Page 303: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX F

NASA FMEA TO IOA WORKSHEET CROSS REFERENCE/RECOMMENDATION

This section provides a cross reference between the NASA FMEA and

corresponding I0A analysis worksheet(s) included in Appendix E.

The Appendix F identifies: NASA FMEA Number, IOA Assessment

Number, NASA criticality and redundancy screen data, and IOA

recommendations.

Appendix F Legend

Code Definition

1 IOA recommends changing the second failure modedescribed in the effects field.

2 IOA recommends deleting the IOA failure mode.

w

w

=

=

F-I

Page 304: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIXFNASAFMEATO IOA WORKSHEETCROSS REFERENCE I RECOMMENDATIONS

IDENTIFIERS

NASA IOA

FMEA NO: ASSESSMENT

_SS_IRI_mmDBJS_:Z_m_RJ_II_

05-5 -B01-I-I DPS-205

05-5 -B01-I-2 DPS-206

05-5 -B02-I-I DPS-201

05-5 -B02-I-2 DPS-202

" DPS-204

05-5 -B02-I-3 DPS-225

05-5 -B03-I-I DPS-120

• ORS-121

• DPS-129

05-5 -B03-1-2 DPS-122" DPS-123

• DPS-126• DPS-127

05-5 -B03-2-I DPS-IO0

" DPS-IO1• DPS-IO8

05-5 -B03-2-2 DPS-102• DPS-I03

• DPS-IO6

• DPS-I07

05-5 -B03-4-1 DPS-IBO

• DPS-1B1• DPS-1B8

05-5 -B03-4-2 DPS-IB2• DPS-IB3" DPS-1B6

• DPS-1B7

05-5 -B03-5-1 DPS-140

" DPS-141.• DPS-148

05-5 -B03-5-2 DPS-142

• DPS-143" DPS-146

" DP5-147

05-5 -B04-2-1 DPS-400• DPS-401• DPS-402

• DPS-403• DPS-404

" DPS-405

" DPS-406• DPS-407

• DPS-410

• DP5-412

05-5 -B04-2-2 DPS-411

05-5 -BOS-I-I DPS-501

I IF DIFFERENT FROM NASA

NASA

CRIT

HW/F

2 /IR

3 /1R

2 /1R_ /1R

n

2 /IR

2 IIR

2 /1R

2 /!R

2 /1R

3 /2R

3 /2R

2 /1R

n

2 /IR

3 /2R

3 /2R

2 /1R

SCREEN CRIT

A B C HW/F

P P PPP P

PPP

PPP.

PP P

PP P 3 /IR

• 3 /1R• 3 /1R

P P P

")P P P _" /IR

" 3 /IR

" 3 /1RPPP

PNP

PNP

P P P

P PP

PPP

Ill

PPP

PFP

IDA RECOMMENDATIDNS !

SCREENABC

P P PP P P

PP P

p F_ p

P P P

P P P

1...... tOTHER / ISSUE',

(SEE LEGEND CODE)

X

i

F-2

ORIGIN_ P_,GE IS'3F P_ _ALITY

lib

il

II

m

m

m

[]

D

U

I

I

i

I

U

m

I

iiI

I

iim

i

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Page 305: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

w

!

L_

APPENDIX F

NASA FMEA TO IDA WORKSHEET CROSS REFERENCE / RECOMMENDATIONS

IDENTIFIERS

NASA I IDA

FMEA NO: / ASSESSMENT

i DPS-50311

11

ii

05-5 -B13-!-4

05-5 -B14-I-I

05-5 -B15-I-I

05-5 -B15-I-3

05-5 -BI6-1-1

05-5 -BIT-I-I

05-5 -BIB-1-1

05-5 -B18-I-2

05-5 -B" =- _.-._

05-5 -BI =,-i-Z

05-5 -B20-I-I

05-5 -B21-I-I

05-5 -B21-I-2m

05-5 -B22-I-I

05-5 -B23-I-I

05-5 -B23-I-2

ii

ii

05-'5 -B23-I-3

"05-5 -B24-I-I

05-5 -B24-1-2

05-5 -B25-I-3

05-5 -_26-i-I

05-5 -B26-I-2

05-5 -B26-1-3

05-5 -B27-1-105-5 -B27-2-1

05-6S-BCKTI-105-6S-BCKT2-1

05-6S-BDIOI-I

05-65-BDID1-2

05-6S-BDIOX-I

05-6S-BDMCI-I

05-6S-BDMCI-2

05-6S-BFUSI-I

05-6S-BFUS2- I

DPS-504

DPS-505

DPS-50&

DPS-31&

DPS-315DPS-2Z1

DPS-211

DPS-220DPS-210

0PS-221

DPS-222DPS-_2_

DPS-Z24

DPS-4_5

DPS-501DPS-303

DPS-302

DPS-304DPS-300

DPS-3OBA

DPS-_06DPS-307

DPS-30BDPS-309DPS-310

DPS-311

DPS-307A

DPS-3OOB

DPS-3OOA

DPS-313

DPS-314A

DPS-314DPS-_I4B

DPS-21BDPS-219

DPS-507DPS-_16A

DPS-312A

DPS-321DPS-230

DPS-215

DPS-214

DPS-227DPS-_12C

! IF DIFFERENT FROM NASA

NASA

CRIT

HW/F

ii

,i

3 /2R

2 /IR

3 /1R/IR

3 /2R

2 /1R3 /5

2 /2

/1R

3 /IR

2 /1R/1R

3 /1R

w

n

n

2 ,/ITR

2 / IR

3 /2R3 /1R

3 /IR

3 /IR3 /IR

3 /5

2 /1R

3 /53 /1R

/IR

3 /IR

/1R/1R

SCREEN

A B C

n

1" !1

PNP

P P P

PPPPPP

PPPPPP

PPP

°'ilPPP

PPP

PPP

PPPPPP

PPP

n

PPPPPP

PPP

PPPPPP

PPRPPP

PPPPPP

PFPPPP

PPP

NNNPFP

PPP

PPPPPP

PPP

IOA RECOMMENDATIONS ;

CRIT SCREEN [_;;;;HW/F A B C

/

i

OTHER

(SEE LEGEND CODE)

F-3

_:)F_OOR _jALITY

Page 306: w INDEPENDENT ORBITER ASSESSMENT n w - NASA · comparison is provided through additional analysis as required. This report documents the results of that Comparison for the Orbiter

APPENDIX F

NASA FHEA TD IDA WORKSHEET CROSS REFERENCE / RECOMMENDATIONS

IDENTIFIERS NASA

NASA

FMEA NO:

05-GS-BRESI-!

O_-_S-BRES2-1

05-_S-BRES3-1

05-GS-BRES4-!

05-GS-BRPCI-I

05-GS-BRPCI-2

05-GS-BRPC2-!

05-6S-BRPC3-1

05-6S-BRPC3-2

05-65-BRPC4-1

05-6S-BRPC4-205-6S-BRPC5-1

05-6S-SRPC5-205-OS-BSWI -I

=

05-_S-BSW_ -205-6S-BSWI -3

05-GS-BSW2 -I

05-GS-BSW2 -2

05-GS-BSW3 -I

05-6S_BSW3 -2

05-aS-BSW4 -1

05-6S-BSW4 -205-6S-BSW4 -3

05-6S-BSW5 -3

EIU-I (NEW)EIU-2 (NEW)

MMU-I (NEW)

MMU-2 (NEW)

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONENONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

IOA

ASSESSMENT

m == 81=_ =IC:==I ==_II¢I

DPS-226

DP¢.-413

DP_-190

DPS-317

DPS-22B

DPS-229

DPS-414

DPS-191

DPS-192

DPS-305

DPS-31B

DPS-312DPS-320

DPS-232

DP5-216

DPS-217

DPS-40BDPS-409

DPS-193

DPS-I?4DPS-312B

DPS-319

DPS-322DPS-195

DPS-50B

DPS-509DPS-416

DPS-417DRS-'104

DPS-I05

DPS-124

DPS-125

DPS-144

DPS-145

DPS-IB4DPS-1B5

DPS-203

DPS-207

DPS-20BOPS-209

DPS-213

BSI_Z8 _ml

I IF DIFFERENT FROM NASA

CRIT

HW/F

/NA

3 /2R

3 /IR

3 /3

3 /IR

3 /3

3 /2R3 /IR

3 /3

3 /1R

3 /33 /1R

3 /33 /IR

2 /1R3 /2R

3 /33 /1R

3 /3

:3 /IR

3 /3

3 /1R3 /1R

1 /11/I

3 /33 /2R

/

1/

1

/

//

//

/

1

//

liar==== _ I==

IOA RECOMMENDATIONS S

SCREENABC

N N N

P P P

P F P

P P P

P P P

P P P

P P P

PFP

P NP

PPP

P P P

PPP

P P P

P P P

P P P

P P P

PBP

PPP

PF P

PNP

PPP

PPP

P.P P

P FPP FP

P F PN NNp p p"

CRIT

HW/F

SCREEN

ASC

OTHER(SEE LEGEND CODE)

ISSUE

,

22

2

2

22

22

2

2

22

F-4

I

u

w

mim

[]

i

m

R

m

u

im

E

zm

i

w

im

l

m*

=

m

i

m

m

E