| Item | Who | Notes | Action-Items |
|---|
| Welcome | X.Bonnin | |
|
| RPW ground segment validation plan overview | S.Lion | |
|
| Information from ECSS on tests | D.Bagot | |
|
| Discussions on ROC validation activities: ROC fonctions validation, ROC software validation, ROC interface validation, ROC data validation | All | - Validation procedure
- REQ-ROC-SSS-0152 too long --> need to split RSSS requirement between retrieving and processing
- Determine/write the validation procedures
- Responsibilities: Sonny + Xavier
|
|
Discussion on RPW science data validation (ROC, THR, BIAS, LFR, SCM, TDS): description, task, workflow validation, human resources / team, responsibilities, constraints, anomalies, .. etc. | All | - Data validation
- Formal validation - How to?
- ROC checks automatically the metadata and structure
- Can also automate the checking of val_min/val_max (out of range values)?
- When formal validation is done → global attribute "Validate = 1" (validate flag)
- Science quality?
Idea: - Check if a value is lower than the sensitivity - Check if a value is constant - Check for discontinuities Teams are in charge of determining the quality flag If quality of the records is enough -> The ROC can set the validate flag to 2 ROC is responsible for the bitmask Science quality verification procedure: - Add a piece of software in the RCS to compute the quality flag - in case of problem -> generate a report to be sent to the scientist in charge
- SCM Problem : Only one quality flag for each x,y,z record (no quality flag by axis) Reference frame
| - Action Milan: Send an email to Alexis Rouillard and the MADAWG concerning the qualit_flag level definition in the SOL-SGS-TN-0009_2_2 document.
- Aciton Action RCS teams: Define criteria to determine the quality factor -> Requirements document?
- Action RCS teams: Fill the Excel sheets provided by the ROC and send it to Xavier
- Action RCS teams: Determinate the bitmask content required to define the science quality flag
- Action ROC: Determine the procedures for each data product/team
|
| Discussion on RPW flight validation: description, task, workflow validation, human resources / team, responsibilities, constraints, anomalies, .. etc. | All | - roc_validation_workshop_flight_validation_intro_v01.pdf
- ROC has prepared specific Excel sheets for the in-flight validation activities of RPW. The main idea is to list all the activities and related relevant information in order to prepare these tasks (to ensure nothing has been forgotten)
- COMMISSIONING validation activity:
- The reaction wheels filtering should be added somewhere (during interference campaign or antenna rolls?)
- A 8th RPW activity should be asked to MOC to test the nominal working of RPW before the Cruise Phase (CP). Especially, all modes should be tested and run for enough long time (~24h) and nominal modes with other IS instruments should be run. If possible the SBM_DETECTION should be activated (but quick downlink of selective data is not garantuee for now during the NECP and CP phases)
- What about the inter-instrument communication (IIC) validation? Done during NECP or CP? Functional part (checking TM exchanged via S20 should be possible, but it would be difficult for the detection part without event).
| - Action XB: Verify with MOC/SOC if ICC flight validation campaign is planned and when
- Action ?DB: Prepare and submit to MOC the 8th activity for RPW
|
Splinter session RPW flight configurations | RPW lead CoI teams + Diane and Antonio | —————————————— - During commissioning HK at least every second (or even higher cadence if possible)
- iBoom deployement : In order to synchronize snapshots between LFR and TDS, TDS will increase the time between two snapshots to 11s (instead of 10s)
- Antenna + I-Boom + interference campaign : all sub systems in SBM1+normal mode. Same configuration for LFR and TDS for each campaign.
- LFR : temps entre 2 snapshots 22s
- TDS : 1 snapshot chaque seconde + 1 triggered toutes les 11s —> un snapshot every 11s, one simultaneously with LFR, one without LFR
- SCM agrees with LFR config
- LFR wants to add during interference campaign a configuration to test the reaction wheels effect.
- The LFR document for interference campaign has been transfered to the Bias team for filling its own doc.
—————————————— - The daily 10 min. of SURVEY_BURST mode do not take too much telemetry rate (<5%) so we can let it. But the SBM1 mode has significant telemetry rate.
- For LFR, the main goal is to have the higher cadence as possible for the BP.
- TDS has no specific constraint
- 2 configs for low rate :
1) - LFR :
- no SBM,
- 10 min of SURVEY_BURST,
- time between two snapshots 1800s;
- time between two ASM : 3600s,
- time between BP : 8s;
- time between 2 products : 40s
- TDS :
- Time between 2 RSWF : 1800s;
- Time between 2 TSWF : 7200s
—> cf calculator LOW RATE 1 (TODO : Put the ref)
2) - LFR :
- SBM1 activated
- 10 min of SURVEY_BURST,
- time between two snapshots 3600s;
- time between two ASM : 3600s,
- time between BP : 16s;
- time between 2 products : 60s
—> cf calculator LOW RATE 2 (TODO : Put the ref)
—————————————————————
LFR calibration : snapshots every 22 s (change in LFR software in progress).This will have a slight impact on the data rate because currently the same configuration is kept in NORMAL-DEFAULT: 1 snapshot every 300s | - Action Jan : correct word file with 11s.
- All team will provide word files about antenna, I-Boom and Interference campaign before the end of next week
- Action AV : Put on Git the two calculator sheets for the low-rate config.
- Action DB : Send the calculator sheets with the two low rate config to LFR and SCM (TDS already has them).
- Action AV : Put on Confluence the page with all the nominal configs (as well as the fixed parameters) and send the url to the teams.
- Action Action DB : Add LFR calibration in the calculator sheet (because in low-rate we stay in default for the calibration)
|
| Splinter session : ROC validation traceability | CNES + Stephane Papais + Sonny Lion | TBW |
|