From: Jim Ryan [firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May
25, 2004 11:59 AM
Subject: RE: GLAST
Project RFA Responses for your Review
Per the independent review conducted by Swales, GLAST LAT CDR # 12 can be
closed. Paul Baird provided me the summary below.
At 11:14 AM 5/21/04 -0400, you wrote:
following steps summarize the activities undertaken to verify the SLAC Grid
Reviewed initial stress report dated (01/23/04) and found it difficult to
follow due to insufficient documentation of load cases used.
2. Asked for a margin summary table and
further clarification of load cases (date: 01/28/04 per Chiachung comments on
Grid stress report)
Received margin summary table but little clarification of load cases (received
02/23/04 through John Ku email)
4. Decided to perform independent stress assessments using latest load
results instead of asking SLAC to make further improvements to the stress
report (this was done in part in an attempt to off-load SLAC due to their
Completed independent assessments on 03/08/04 (see memo SAI-TM-2477, attached)
and found all margins acceptable except for the EMI skirt/grid shear
6. SLAC subsequently
showed this joint to be non alignment critical and positive margins result
from joint friction shear capability (see attached analysis package received
on 04/12/04 from John Ku).
- -----Original Message-----
- From: Jim Ryan [mailto:email@example.com]
- Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 9:28 AM
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com;
- Subject: Fwd: GLAST Project RFA Responses for your
- Larry, Paul, Jim, Minh,
- I am OK with responses to PDR #45 and CDR #13. However, I would
like to know that Code 542 and/or Swales has independently looked at the
stress report of the Grid and interfaces requested in CDR #12. It is
stated that a CD with the full stress report will be forwarded to me.
In my opinion, it is not enough to say that the Project has approved the
report (I am not sure what this Project approval really means). The
last I recall is that a large amount of information had been sent to Swales
for review, but that the information was fragmented, did not have a good
index, and it was unclear if the latest loads had been used. A summary
table of minimum margins using latest loads for Grid and critical interfaces
should be provided. At lease several of these calculations should be
thoroughly checked for proper methodology. If any of you have more
information, please weigh in on this.
- Jim Ryan
- Reply-To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- From: "Mark E. Melton" <email@example.com>
- To: "Jim Ryan" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Mark Goans"
- Cc: "Kevin Grady" <Kevin.Grady@gsfc.nasa.gov>,
- "Al Vernacchio" <Avernacc@pop400.gsfc.nasa.gov>,
- "Jack Leibee" <Jack.E.Leibee@nasa.gov>,
- "Bernie Graf" <Bernard.S.Graf@nasa.gov>
- Subject: GLAST Project RFA Responses for your Review
- Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 16:01:35 -0400
- X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
- Importance: Normal
- Attached are 3 responses to RFAs you wrote at the GLAST LAT PDR and
LAT CDR. Mark Goans, the Code 300 Review chair, has asked that all
Project approved RFA responses be reviewed and approved by the originators
prior to official submittal to him.
- Please review the attached responses and let me know if they
satisfactorily close the RFAs you generated. You can provide your
approval or comments back to me and I will distribute them to the
appropriate GLAST Project personnel.
- Responses are attached for the following RFAs:
- GLAST LAT PDR # 45
- GLAST LAT CDR # 12, 13 (note: a CD with the full stress report will be
forwarded to you along with #12)
- Thank you for your review and response,
- Mark E. Melton
- Systems Engineer
- Swales Aerospace
- Bldg 12, Rm N210A
- (301) 286-7936 (V)
- (301) 286-5717 (F)
From: "Ku, John"
To: "'Ichung Iweng'"
Cc: "'Paul Baird'"
EMI Skirt to Grid Friction
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:26:07
Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft
(S:99.90000/99.90000 R:95.9108 P:95.9108 M:99.5542 C:78.1961 )
I looked at the total
shear capacity versus the net shear force (see last page of attachment).
The margins weren't huge (MS=0.29), but positive. Considering that we
are not alignment critical, this is acceptable to me...do you
Let me know what you think.
John Ku, Stellar Solutions,
Inc., Cell#: 408.910.4139
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, GLAST
Mission System Engineer
We build too many walls and not enough bridges. --
Sir Isaac Newton
From: "Ichung Weng"
To: "Ku, John"
Cc: "'Paul Baird'"
RE: EMI Skirt to Grid Friction
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 07:38:53
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO,
Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By
Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
xmlns:w = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1 =
Thank you for your effort to resolve this
issue. I agree with this approach.
- -----Original Message-----
- From: Ku, John [mailto:email@example.com]
- Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 5:26 PM
- To: 'Ichung Iweng'
- Cc: 'Paul Baird'; 'firstname.lastname@example.org'
- Subject: EMI Skirt to Grid Friction
- I looked at the total shear capacity versus the net shear force (see
last page of attachment). The margins weren't huge (MS=0.29), but
positive. Considering that we are not alignment critical, this is
acceptable to me...do you concur?
- Let me know what you think.
- John Ku, Stellar Solutions, Inc., Cell#: 408.910.4139
- NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, GLAST Mission System Engineer
- We build too many walls and not enough bridges. -- Sir Isaac Newton