Language
Country/Area
No result found
NASA Design Review: Why Every Little Step Matters
In the high-risk field of space exploration, any small oversight may lead to the failure of the entire mission. Therefore, NASA's design review has become a critical step to ensure the success of the project. Through a series of proper technical evaluations, NASA not only ensured the feasibility of the design, but also improved the technical and management quality of the overall project.
Design reviews provide a team of independent experts to conduct an in-depth evaluation of a design or concept to ensure it is technically feasible and meets program requirements.
NASA conducts multiple stages of design reviews during its engineering design life cycle. These reviews are not only for technical inspections, but also to ensure that funds can be effectively released to specific projects. This structured evaluation method can help identify potential problems and risks, allowing the team to solve problems at an early stage and avoid greater losses later.
According to the regulations of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, developers of medical devices also need to comply with design review requirements. These requirements are specified in 21CFR820, which emphasizes the record and systematicness of design review.
Design review is described as a "documented, comprehensive, systematic examination of the design designed to evaluate the adequacy of design requirements and whether the design will meet those requirements."
The design review process is not one-size-fits-all, and different organizations will make adjustments based on specific circumstances when conducting reviews. Take the system requirements review of the U.S. Department of Defense as an example. The review takes various forms. There are detailed requirements reviews for reference and briefings at the initial stage. These all show the diversity of different requirements and environments.
Types of design review
In NASA project management, design reviews usually include the following main types:
Mission Concept Review (MCR)
MCR confirms mission requirements, examines proposed mission goals and concepts for achieving these goals.
System Requirements Review (SRR)
SRR examines the functional requirements and performance requirements of the system and ensures that the selected concepts meet the requirements of the mission.
Mission Definition Review (MDR)
MDR thoroughly examines the proposed requirements, task structure, and implementation of these requirements to ensure the feasibility of the overall design.
System Design Review (SDR)
SDR focuses on developing system architecture and design, and examining the consistency of system functional elements.
Preliminary Design Review (PDR)
PDR proves that the preliminary design meets all system requirements and is within acceptable risk and budget, laying the foundation for subsequent detailed design.
Critical Design Review (CDR)
CDR seeks to confirm design maturity to support full production, assembly and other follow-up work, and to confirm whether the technical progress meets the requirements of the mission.
Production Readiness Review (PRR)
PRR determines whether system developers are adequately prepared to efficiently produce the required number of systems.
Test Readiness Review (TRR)
TRR ensures that test hardware/software, test facilities, and support personnel are all required for testing. This is not a requirement for critical decision points.
System Acceptance Review (SAR)
SAR evaluates the integrity of the final product to ensure it meets the expectations and requirements of all parties.
Operational Readiness Review (ORR)
ORR examines actual system characteristics to confirm that the system and support are operationally satisfactory.
Flight Readiness Review (FRR)
FRR confirms the flight readiness of the system to ensure the safety and success of the operation.
Conclusion
The above various reviews are not only technical responses, but also detailed planning of funds, time and resources by the entire engineering team. Every design review process tests the team's professional capabilities and the success rate of future tasks. Such a systematic inspection not only requires the full participation of each member, but also fully reflects the importance of teamwork. Under such a rigorous process, what other factors do you think will affect the final success of the project?
