1 / 6

Learning from Failure Managing Changing Requirements

The Apollo 13 mission, often termed a "successful failure," offers invaluable lessons in managing changing requirements and engineering processes. Despite failing to land on the moon, the mission succeeded by safely returning astronauts, showcasing teamwork and problem-solving under pressure. Key insights include the importance of robust change control systems, proper requirements validation, and accepting intermediate failures as learning opportunities. By analyzing mistakes in voltage requirements and understanding the flow of requirements, engineers can better navigate complex projects to ensure success.

ella
Télécharger la présentation

Learning from Failure Managing Changing Requirements

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Learning from FailureManaging Changing Requirements SYSM 6309 Advanced Requirements Engineering By: Paul Wasilewski

  2. Apollo 13 Mission - Background • “Successful Failure” • Mission failed to land on moon, but succeeded to return astronauts safely • Engineers/Mission Controllers able to work together to create a safe return for Apollo 13 crew • “Failure is not an Option” – Flight Director Gene Krantz • Failure may be an option at every step except the final goal • Intermediate failures contribute to success

  3. Apollo 13 Voltage Requirements • Original requirement for Command and Service Module (CSM)- 28V • Requirement changed to be compatible with ground-support equipment - 65V external power • Thermostat safety switches were not changed • All Apollo spacecraft up to 13 had wrong switches • Underrated switches may not have been a problem • Prior removal from Apollo 10 damaged ability to drain tanks • Following a test ground crew was unable to drain LOX • Tank heaters activated – boil off oxygen • 65V applied to 28 V rated thermostatic switch • Switch fused shut

  4. Apollo 13 Voltage Requirements (cont.) • Thermostat required to keep temperature <27°C • Heaters stuck on for 8 hours – Temps>500°C • Teflon insulation melted exposing wires • Thermometer only calibrated to 29°C • Prevent overheat requirement missed • LOX in tank prevent arcing until depleted • Request to stir tanks resulted in explosion of oxygen tank 2

  5. Lessons Learned • Improper flow of requirements • Change control system • Requirements validation • Failure provides a platform for increased learning • Intermediate levels of failure acceptable • Provides opportunity to reassess • Addition of processes not necessarily the answer • Critical thinking and Self-Accountability

  6. References • [1] S. Cass, "Apollo 13, We Have a Solution," IEEE Spectrum, 2005. • [2] N. J. Slegers, R. T. Kadish, G. E. Payton, J. Thomas, M. D. Griffin and D. Dumbacher, "Learning from Failure in Systems Engineering: A Panel Discussion," Systems Engineering, vol. 15, pp. 74, 2011. • [3] M. Williamson, "Aiming for the Moon: The engineering challenge of Apollo," Engineering Science and Education Journal, vol. 11, pp. 164, 2002.

More Related