P18571: Sunspot Radio Telescope III

Gate Reviews

Table of Contents

1 MSD I: Readiness to move to Build & Test
2 MSD II: Project close-out
- 2.1 Expectations
- 2.2 Status Review

MSD I: Readiness to move to Build & Test

Team Self-Critique

Major Issues Encountered	Score: 1-5	Plan to Address (or how it was addressed)
Norms & values:
- Team dynamics: conflict, leadership/control, communication	4	Few times rubbed elbows
- Individual behavior/performance/participation	5
Logistics: scheduling meetings, scheduling work	2	Do things too late. Work on things sooner, and steadily. Also have more time
Skills gap?	3	Assymetric skill distribution, lots of outside learning
Customer requirements: access to customer, clarity of rqmts, behavior (support, commitment, attitude)	5
Engineering requirements: quality, completeness, flowdown to subsystems, traceability	4	Be more explicit about how work relates to ERs
Risk assessment and mitigation plans: missed important risks, focus on minor issues, ineffecitve mitigation plans, etc.	3	Not too many risks, not much development
Project planning & tracking: unrealistic schedule, poor tracking, not proactive, no accountability	2	Mostly short term, not too much long term. Better tracking
Systems design: benchmarking inadequate, limited concepts, functional decomposition gaps, mapping between functional and physical architecture, interface complexity, etc.	5
Engineering analysis & feasbility: analysis gaps or prioritization, appropriateness of analysis, timing, etc.	3	Remains to be seen in MSD 2.... Concerns over Radio Eyes integration
Detailed design: scope, complexity, resources, time, etc.	4	Concerns about timing
Test planning: ambiguity, implementation difficulty, resources, ownership	3	All test plans need to be elaborated on. Software tests must be written
Design reviews: participation, value-added	5

Self-Assessment	Score: 1-5	Comments
Knowledge: Consider team members knowledge, and ability to learn tools, procedures, methods, equipment and materials.	5
Technical: Consider team members technical competency within application areas required such as mechanical, electrical, software, etc. As necessary, also consider technical competency outside application area.	4	True test of competency outside application areas will happen in MSD 2, when everyone will have to develop software
Creativity: Consider the team members creativity with regards to contributions such as design, assembly, testing, debug, documentation, presentations, etc.	4	Dont know how to answer this, team clearly needs improvement.
Quality: Consider the accuracy and thoroughness of team and assess results in terms of errors, rework, and ability to complete tasks correctly the first time.	3	Remains to be seen

Status Review

Overall project status

– yellow to green light, leaning towards green.

Customer is well versed in the design. Software design needs to be refined. All major subsystems reviewed. Design is robust. Budget is on track to be met. No long lead time items, only medium to short lead times exist, most have been ordered. Work can begin immediately.

Current plan vs original plan

Original project plan was naive, and misallocated time to activities that were not that important. Not enough was known about the system at the time of writing. Many design activities were closed, but much of the software design blends in with its development. Some software development has already occurred, despite open mechanical and electrical tasks that were of low importance.

Preliminary Schedule for MSD II

Very high level schedule prepared. Low level, short term deliverables will be controlled through Meistertask

Risk

A lot of the risk has been reduced through design choices or intelligent assessment. Much of the risk identified by previous teams was found to be trivial, or not applicable

The major risks are time dependent, because of the small size of the team and outside obligations, as well as the major design pivot to try to rely less on RadioEyes software and create our own algorithm

Individual Commentary

Brandon
- High level software design is complete, but low level components are yet to be defined. This is partly due to uncertainty regarding radioeyes. Further, Zurich will be contacted to see if they’re interested in maintaining a new/rewritten version of eCallisto to determine whether the scheduler can be integrated with Callisto or broken off into the driver. Nonetheless, the scope of the software functionality is defined and will be adapted to the project constraints as they are determined.

Yaroslav
- Significant amount of CAD work remains to be done. A lot of the models are WIPS, and many old models are broken. Much of this is low priority work, but will be required by final build and for documentation. On the LabVIEW side, current VIs need to be improved with user feedback, all the necessary libraries exist for communications, and much of the development will be on subVIs and demos. A block of time will need to be allocated to rewire the algorithms into a single cohesive GUI, and another to test integration with the rest of the software systems. The next semester has me having significantly more free time, so much of the low priority projects can be closed out.
David
- The Rewiring is still in progress. Some temporary changes have been made, but the permanent solution still needs to be put in place. Majority of the design is complete, the only things left before build is to create the PCB layout as well a part procurement. Parts for this are currently on hold as the team still needs to verify that the parts are needed.
Kyle
- Found a suitable antenna for capturing ambient RF signals, and Marty has several possible feedhorns. The feedhorns will need to be measured on a network analyzer at the start of MSD 2, but that won’t take long. Getting data from the anemometer has been prototyped and further integration into the system will be looked at over the break. Stack light design will be done over the break, as it is not mission critical.

Project Plan

Project Plan

Risk Management

ID	Category	Risk Item	Effect	Cause	Likelihood	Severity	Importance	Action to Minimize Risk	Owner
R1	Technical	Time	Telescope does not get completed	Poor planning, skill gap, insufficient work time	2	3	6	Improve scheduling, utilize schedule that is more free for MSD 2, offload work off Brandon	ALL
R2	Technical	Improper feedhorn installation	Feedhorn may have loose mounting or be unable to be assembled.	Manufacturing Faults	1	3	3	"Use proper machining procedures"	ME
R3	Technical	Unreliable internet connection to Zurich	May not be able to transmit all data overnight.	Environmental conditions including thunderstorms.	2	1	2	"Provide data backup until Zurich server confirms reception"	CE
R4	Technical	Dish may be too heavy for motors/actuators	Tracking functionality is lost, manual repairs required	Ice buildup, power depletion, errors in measurements	1	2	2	Motors oversized for current load	CE
R5	Technical	File transfer system error	Zurich server receives incomplete data	Power lost or connectivity issues.	1	2	2	"Provide data backup until Zurich server confirms reception"	CE
R6	Technical	Auto-calibration error	Incorrect data analysis, manual repairs required	Drift of control systems over time	2	3	6	2 callistos in parallel, one for cal one one for data	CE
R7	Technical	TeamViewer software error	Remote operation made difficult or impossible	Loss of connectivity, random glitch	1	1	1	Ensure system doesnt rely on TeamViewer/Active user input	CE
R8	Technical	UPS battery dies	System loses power and is no longer operational.	Mains power is lost and UPS battery is exhausted.	1	2	2	Put system into safe shutdown state before battery is exhausted	EE
R9	Technical	RadioEyes/LabView incompatibility	Additional time required for integration solution	No documented API support	2	2	4	Plan B (parallel solution/other), Alternate Suntracking algorithm	CE
R10	Technical	Feedhorn selection may carry unexpected collaterals (integration)	RX levels may become inefficient for extraction from raw signal	Mismatching impedance and frequency response	0	1	0	Not really a concern	EE
R11	Technical	Software Error	Data may be corrupted or incorrect; Zurich may not recieve data at all	Improper program setup / unforeseen program error	2	2	4	"Perform extensive software testing and provide data backup"	CE
R12	Technical	Interference between subsystems	May cause errors or discrepencies in subsystem operation	Improper magnetic shielding on power lines near vulnerable systems	1	2	2	"Isolate magnetic interference, or place wiring more carefully"	EE
R13	Technical	Improper power management	One or more subsystems failing due to internal power loss	Power delivery components insufficient to meet power needs	1	3	3	Perform extensive power system calculations	EE
R14	Technical	Internal subsystem overheating	Damage to one or more subsystems	Inadequate cooling systems or lack of temperature sensor	1	3	3	Test Plan for thermal model validation	ME
R15	Technical	UPS overheat	Damage to battery system	Temperature sensitive battery in harsh enviornment	1	3	3	Will install UPS indoors	ME
R16	Resource	Insufficient budget to meet all project requirements	May need to take performance hits to accomodate cheaper budget	Limited funds (~$500)	1	1	1	"Design and build where possible"	All
R17	Resource	Destruction of Suntracker project hardware	Loss of uniquely designed hardware, project delays	Incorrect assumptions about input levels and tolerances	1	3	3	Observe best practices	All
R18	Resource	Inadequate space to assemble and test	Team may not be able to build project	Dish components too big for design space	1	3	3	Ensure that proper space or devices are reserved well in advance, only attempt finaly assy onsite	All
R19	Resource	Theft of system components	Irreplaceable components may be lost	Improper storage of materials	1	3	3	Lock physical project materials in a locker/keep at home	All
R20	Resource	Insufficient backup data storage	Zurich or ASRAS server may fail to recieve data	Insufficient or nonexistant backup data storage	0	2	0	Amount of data needed to exceed data capacity exceeds lifetime of system	CE
R21	Environmental	Remote log-in to unit may pose security threat	System may be tampered with by unauthorized user	Malicious actor obtaining password/login information	1	3	3	"Ensure strict security in regard to username/ password information"	All
R22	Technical	IP66 may not be as advertized	Water Damage	Leak, improper sealing	1	3	3	Test current enclosure, use waterproof sealing	ME
R23	Technical	Software sends too many emails consecutively	Flooded Mailbox	Periodic Failure alerts	1	1	1	Batch alerts together, rate limit messages	CE
R24	Technical	Smarthost service unavailable	System unable to send email alerts	Service is unavailable	1	2	2	Alternate alert mechanism (stacklight)	EE
R25	Technical	Wind Damage	System components break	High winds, low structural integrity	1	3	3	Perform comprehensive stress analysis, reinforce structure	ME
R26	Technical	System achieves resonance from wind	System components break	Winds hitting natural frequency of structure	1	3	3	Apply Damping	ME
R27	Technical	Heat Sensor Fails	System overheats	Random Failure	1	2	2	Overkill on cooling solution	ME
R28	Technical	Humidity Sensor Fails	Loss of humidity information, water damage	Random Failure	1	1	1	Enhanced waterproofing solution	ME

Risk Management

MSD II: Project close-out

Use this space to organize information for your review. Key elements are listed here

Expectations

All team members present and prepared to report on team and individual status.
All team MSD deliverables are complete and uploaded, and ready to be graded.
Guide is present and prepared to evaluate all items included in the review.
Review should take about an hour.

Status Review

Current state of the project

Summarize actual performance vs. requirements (include snapshot of current requirements document here, along with a link to the live document.).
- Which requirements were unmet, and why?
- How robust is your final design?
- Did you meet your project budget?
- What was your customer's assessment of the work you delivered to them? Were they satisfied?

Compare your current project plan/schedule to your original plan/schedule.
- Did the scope of your project change during MSD II?
- How and why did your schedule change during MSD II?
- What have you learned from these changes that you can apply to future projects?

Review individual team member status.
- Did you deliver on your personal responsibilities?
- Did you use your MSD II plan effectively? Was it realistic? If not already addressed above, what did you learn from this and how can you apply it to future projects?

Review your current risk assessment and problem solving status.
- Have you closed out your most important risks?
- Were there risks that you did not anticipate? If so, what do you think the reason is?
- Did any anticipated risks manifest themselves as problems?
- How did you use your problem solving process during the semester?

Deliverables Checklist and Website Status

All documents must be uploaded to your website in advance of the Gate Review.
The team should not use gate review time to conduct a detailed examination of specific deliverables unless related to discussion items in the status review.
Is prototype hand-off complete, is the team's workspace cleaned up, and have all tools been returned?

Lessons learned, etc.