SlideServe
Télécharger Obtenir Pro
Menu
Accueil Pro
Préférences
ApparenceLight Aide et commentaires
© SlideServe · v2026

Design Assessment Review: Summary of Herschel Data Processing Requirements and Conclusions

infinity avatar
infinity
12 diapositives · 259 Views · Sep 07, 2014

This document summarizes the key points from the Herschel Data Processing Requirements and Design Assessment Review. It highlights the effective oversight by Kiymet, concerns about the timely completion of Work Packages (WPs), and the need for defined deadlines for documents outlined in the vision document. Recommendations include establishing timelines for document reviews, enhancing training and workshops, and ensuring user needs are clearly documented and addressed. The review calls for a strengthened DPUG, driving the implementation of the vision document while prioritizing updates and resolving testing evidence issues with DPMG support.

Design Assessment Review: Summary of Herschel Data Processing Requirements and Conclusions - slide 1
01 / 12Design Assessment Review: Summary of Herschel Data Processing Requirements and Conclusions
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

Design Assessment Review: Summary of Herschel Data Processing Requirements and Conclusions
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation

  1. Herschel Data Processing Requirements and Design Assessment Review9. Summary and Conclusions –my notes from today Tim LockProduct Assurance Manager

  2. WPs Kiymet doing good job overseeing WPs and flagging to DPMG when work is late, more effort than planned is needed, new WPs needed etc, etc. Concern that work running late already. Concern Vision doc will lead to more WPs, more work WPs are mainly defining items for people to implement, (not UCs), possibly low level req docs are also input to ‘developers’. Summary from agenda points 1 to 5

  3. vision document Useful for Cal.Sc. needs as well as Joe Astr. and others Needs completion, review and WPs stemming from it to be defined and prioritised. Deadline(s) needed for documents defined in vision document. REC: DPMG- define timeline for Vision doc completion, review(incls. assessment of knock work), WP updating and get implementation on track. Summary from agenda points 1 to 5

  4. Training and workshops [SL] need training and workshop plan(s) Workshops held show usefulness but effort required. Can more hands-on working meetings fill gap and delay getting user needs understood by developers and implemented and documented (UM) REC: DPMG to define and assign manpower to workshops, hands-on events and training. Summary from agenda points 1 to 5

  5. User Manual Todays user manual is quite detailed and going in ‘right’direction Need a high level UM above present UM User Reference Manual, low level and needs improvement. Is this generally approved ? Is Editorial group involved and doing an efficient job ? Summary from agenda points 1 to 5

  6. User Group User group identifying short-comings but not getting a quick resolution of their concerns and problems. DPUG busy working on visions document and do DPUG members get sufficient time to do their job? Summary from agenda points 1 to 5

  7. Do we have a definition of a minimum system to support launch and PV? How will DP pass the GSRR if tests do not report against any requirements, (QA is making a check-off list for URs) Are low level functions, e.g. in plot and in numerics being tested and reported in a way that can be used by others ? DP CCB/SCR process too slow, ineffective. Problem summary

  8. Too little time to get new software working correctly [AC] Iteration 11 behind schedule, [KB], new WPs and work expected, will too much come too late? [from Vis. Doc, data access work [PM], producing needed FITS files [PM] Adding user-friendliness difficult and not easy to do via SCRs Problem summary

  9. Developers getting info from many sides, documents, teams etc. Need a document and team hierarchy.[PM] Problem summary

  10. Need to get developers and users together and identify, show and fix code and user documentation in a hands-on session (2 to x days) Visions document – liked but needs to be implemented – DPMG to drive Conclusions

  11. Does the DPMG need to strengthen the present DPUG and Editorial and documentation working group. Can the DPMG push the implementation of the vision doc and all the follow on WP update and work allocation and prioristation Does the DPMG want to set up more hands-on working days to short cut the SCR and slow/difficult user feedback/successful implementation loop. Conclusions

  12. Can DP SQA with DPMG support resolve testing evidence problem in order to satisfy us and the GSRR – and – provide status of DP UC. Will the next RaDaR be similar to this one ? Is it effective ? Conclusions