1 / 5

Preliminary Design Review

Preliminary Design Review. Feedback from May 2, 2012 Presentation. Ultima Finium Strengths. Good communication skills Excellent teamwork Ability to use engineering tools Knowledge of current issues Good demonstration of system relationships Good use of systems engineering process

kishi
Télécharger la présentation

Preliminary Design Review

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. Preliminary Design Review Feedback from May 2, 2012 Presentation

  2. Ultima Finium Strengths • Good communication skills • Excellent teamwork • Ability to use engineering tools • Knowledge of current issues • Good demonstration of system relationships • Good use of systems engineering process • Use of Google was complimented • Good WBS • Excellent use of FMEA process

  3. Cygnus Strengths • Good use of the FMEA process • “Future Work” well done • Good Communication justification • Excellent WBS (and FMEA) • Good ConOps • Mass budget a good idea (I think they meant the mass tracking chart) • Good presentation and delivery • Good prop system sizing explanation • System requirements well done • Teamwork was highly rated

  4. Areas for Improvement: Ultima Finium • Risk analysis needs work • Unreadable Flow Chart • Weak cost analysis • Thrusters and placement • Con Ops needs work • C&DH system needs work • Weight margin too small • Materials analysis? • How do parts fit in assembled unit? • Natural frequency: free-free or restrained in ring (How was vibration analysis done?) • Too much information in allotted time • Mixed ºC and ºF in GN&C? • Effect of aluminum skin on communication? • No definition of loads for stress analysis (What stress is allowable?) • Suggest map of Performance Requirements vs. System Performance • Suggest Quality Functional Distribution (QFD) • Include internal component temperature and its impact • GN&C: heard about range but not about bearing • Avoid reading from slides

  5. Areas for Improvement: Cygnus • Trades not adequately described • S&M needs work • What were the S&M assumptions? • 344 ksi error • Need simulation capability • Mass margin too small • Are the sensors driving GN&C performance, or vice-versa? • Thermal environment effects need work • Don’t manufacture fuel tank in-house. • Presentation organization needs work • Cylindrical configuration considered? • More on redundancy • What about regulations (FAR, MILSTD)? • More technical details (demonstrate understanding of engineering fundamentals) • Vibration load during launch needs to be considered • Spectral input estimate is missing • How was vibration analysis performed? • More about the component selection process? Team involved or reviewed? • More on system relationships • Avoid reading from slides • Avoid black text on dark blue background

More Related