Safety and Material Requirements

for
ESA Research Payloads (NSTS)
Project Specific Annex
GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

Table of Content
Section I - General
I.1
Scope
I.2
Applicable Documents
I.4
Order of Precedence

2
2
2
3

Section II - Safety
II.1
Safety Requirements and Analysis
II.2
Safety Non-compliances and Waivers
II.3
Safety Reviews and Verifications

4
4
4
5

Section III - Materials, Mechanical Parts and Processes

III.1 Selection and Approval
III.2 Material and Mechanical Part Evaluation Programme
III.2.1
Stress Corrosion
III.2.2
Flammability
III.2.3
Offgassing and Toxic Analysis
III.2.4
Supplementary Tests
III.3 Lot/Batch Acceptance
III.4 Limited Life Materials
III.5 Forbidden Materials
III.6 Process Engineering
III.6.1
Process Selection
III.6.1.1
Selection of Standard/Established Processes
III.6.1.2
Selection Validation and Approval
III.6.1.3
Process Evaluation Programme

6
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
9
9

Section IV - Commercial, Aviation and Military (CAM) Equipment

IV.1 CAM Equipment Requirements
IV.1.1
General
IV.1.2
PA and Safety Requirements
IV.1.2.1
Safety and Reliability
IV.1.2.2
EEE Parts and Materials
IV.1.2.3
Manufacturing and Inspections
IV.1.2.4
Changes
IV.1.3
Maintenance, Repair and Spares
IV.1.4
Use Environment and Qualification
IV.1.5
Failure Reporting
IV.1.6
ESA Approval

11
11
11
11
11
12
12
13
13
13
13
14

Section V - Definitions and Acronyms

15

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

Section I - Introduction
I.1

Scope
This Annex to GPQ-010 defines the programmatic and technical requirements
for Safety, Mechanical Parts, Materials, Processes and CAM Equipment that are
applicable to ESA microgravity research payloads to be flown in the U.S. Space
Shuttle, including Spacehab.
This Annex is applicable to payload hardware, software, and ground and flight
operations.
This Annex is organised in the following sections:
-

I.2

Safety,
Materials, Mechanical Parts and Processes,
Commercial, Aviation and Military (CAM) equipment.

Applicable Documents
The following documents are applicable to the extent specified herein. The
current revision/issue at the time of Safety Data Package submittal shall apply.
ESA Documents:
PSS-01-401 Issue 2
ESA fracture control requirements.
PSS-01-708 Issue 1
The manual soldering of high reliability electrical connectors.
PSS-01-726 Issue 2
The crimping of high reliability electrical connections.
PSS-01-728 Issue 2
The repair and modification of printed circuit boards and solder joints for space
use.
PSS-01-736 Issue 1
Material selection for controlling stress corrosion cracking.
PSS-01-738 Issue 1
High reliability soldering for surface-mount and mixed technology PCB s.
GPQ-010 Issue 1.0
Product assurance requirements for ESA microgravity projects, including Change

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

Notice No. 01.

NASA and US DoD Documents:
NSTS 1700.7B
Safety Policy and Requirements for Payloads using the Space Shuttle
Transportation System, including CN 4.
KHB 1700.7B
Space Shuttle Payload Ground Safety Handbook.
NHB 8060-1
Flammability, Odor, Offgassing and Compatibility Requirements and Test
Procedures for Materials in Environments that support Combustion.
NSTS 13830C
Implementation Procedure for NSTS Payload System Safety Requirements
- Letter NC4-98-048
JSC Form 1230, Flight Payload Standardized Hazard Control Report, revised
October 1998.
NSTS 18798B
Interpretations of NSTS Payload Safety Requirements, including Change
Packets 001, 002, 003.
MSFC-STD-506
Material and Process Control Standards (materials only).
MSFC-HDBK-527F/JSC09604
Materials Selection List for Space Hardware Systems.
MIL-A-8625E
Anodic Coatings, for Aluminium and Aluminium Alloys.
I.3

Order of Precedence
In case of conflict between applicable documents, the order of precedence shall
be as follows:
1
2
3

NASA documents
ESA documents
Other documents

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

Section II - Safety
II.1

Safety Requirements and Analysis

The safety programmatic requirements are defined in this document and in NSTS
13830 and the extent of applicability to the Contractor is defined in the following
sections.
The payload safety technical requirements are defined in NSTS 1700.7B and
their interpretation in NSTS 18798. The ground safety requirements are defined
in KHB 1700.7B.
To ensure conformity of the hardware to the certified design, all related
manufacturing, integration and testing activities shall be performed in compliance
with the Quality Assurance requirements in GPQ-010.
The payload design shall allow safety maintenance on ground and shall meet the
structural safety requirements for the recovery and landing phases.
Safety analyses and verification, including definition of hazard categories shall
be implemented as required in NSTS 13830.
The Hazard Report form provided in NSTS 13830 and the Hazard Control Report
identified in NC4-98-048 shall be used to document hazard control measures and
verifications, as necessary.
The Contractor shall prepare one flight and one ground safety data package
(SDP) to support the payload level safety reviews in accordance with the
applicable DRL requirements.
The flight SDP shall cover hardware, software and planned operations for both
the launch and flight phases.
The ground SDP shall cover flight hardware, software, GSE and planned ground
operations (pre-launch and post-landing) at the launch and landing sites.
For training activities, the Contractor shall review both flight and ground SDP's
in order to identify hazards that are applicable to the training hardware and
software, GSE and operations. The related safety verifications shall be
satisfactorily closed before the training activities are allowed to start.

II.2

Safety Non-Compliances and Waivers

Non-compliances with respect to the safety requirements will be processed by
ESA in coordination with NASA. NASA agreement is also required for granting
any waiver resulting from safety non-conformances (ref. GPQ-010, paragraph

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

II.4.6). The Contractor shall document safety non-compliances and waivers in

accordance with rules and formats established by NASA.
II.3

Safety Reviews
The SDP's will be developed progressively in three phases. The SDP's contents
shall reflect the current design and be updated as needed to incorporate
changes.
Flight and ground SDP for phase 0/I shall be provided at PDR, for phase II at
CDR and for phase III before FAR. The safety activities to be performed during
each phase and the corresponding content of the packages are described in
NSTS 13830.
The Contractor shall provide support for the safety reviews at ESA and/or at
NASA premises.
SDP's shall be submitted to ESA at least 60 days prior to a scheduled review with
NASA. In case the 60 days requirement is in conflict with the PDR, CDR cycle,
the 60 days notice applies.
Phase III safety review shall be completed at least 40 days prior to delivery of
payload flight model and/or GSE.

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

Section III - Materials, Mechanical Parts and Processes

III.1

Selection and Approval

Initial material selection shall be made following the guidelines of MSFC-HDBK527F/JSC09604.
The documentation to support ESA approval differs depending on whether the
material or mechanical part has been on a previous similar space project.
1)

Selection of material and mechanical part on the basis of previous use

A material or mechanical part, for which widespread and sufficiently
constant data are available and which has been successfully used in
similar applications (space-proven), shall be selected whenever possible.
It shall be considered approved, provided that all the following criteria are
met:
a) Test/flight data are comparable with its intended application /
environment and are assessed to be such that performances under
those conditions are acceptable.
b) The material or mechanical part is included in the relevant list with all
specified details.

2)

Selection of material or mechanical parts with an evaluation programme

The selection of materials for which limited or no test data are available
shall be justified. An evaluation programme taking the project-specific
requirements into account shall be proposed, the programme being
followed by the Contractor or by an ESA approved test house on request.
In addition, ESA will approve the proposal and test result in the project
application.
The evaluation programme shall include the analyses and tests detailed
in III.1.4.2 and shall be so written that the test results will demonstrate that
the material or mechanical part meets its design criteria and will perform
satisfactorily for the duration of the intended mission and in the
environment foreseen for that mission.

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

Materials and mechanical parts shall be listed in the format as described in the
applicable DRD. The material list shall be reviewed and approved by ESA in
accordance with the project DRL.
Amendments to the approved lists shall be implemented only through established
change procedures as defined by the configuration control requirements in GPQ010. ESA reserves the right to request justification of type selection and
documented evidence of test data.
RFA (Request for Approval) as defined in the applicable DRD shall be submitted
to ESA for those materials and mechanical parts subject to an evaluation
programme.
III.2

Material and Mechanical Part Evaluation Programme

The evaluation programme shall include the following analysis and tests as
applicable:

III.2.1 Stress Corrosion

Items intended for structural applications shall possess a high resistance to
stress corrosion cracking. Structural products of a metallic nature shall be
selected from the preferred list in Table I of ESA PSS-01-736. Only those
products found to possess a high resistance to stress corrosion cracking may
have unrestricted usage in structural applications.
All metals shall be corrosion resistant or protected against corrosion, including
galvanic corrosion that might be caused during operation or storage. Anodising
is the preferred finish for this purpose; however, alodining is accepted for those
surfaces where electrical continuity is needed. MIL-A-8625E, "Anodic coatings,
for aluminium and aluminium alloys", shall be used as a guideline.
III.2.2 Flammability
Materials used for the payload shall be evaluated for flammability resistance.
NHB 8060-1 defines respectively the NASA requirements for flammability testing.
III.2.3 Offgassing and Toxic Analysis
All products considered for use in the crew compartment of manned spacecraft
shall be evaluated for offgassing and odour contaminants. NASA specification
NHB 8060-1 defines the requirements for offgassing and toxic analysis.
III.2.4 Supplementary Tests
The Contractor shall review his material and mechanical part test programme for
specific project requirements and add any other test to the above mentioned

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

tests to prove material, mechanical part and process suitability (e.g. thermal
vacuum, thermal cycling, radiation, atomic oxygen). The tests should be specified
where possible in international or in national test specifications and be subject
to ESA approval.
III.3

Lot/Batch Acceptance
All materials which are known to be variable in their final properties or have
limited life characteristics shall be highlighted in the DML and subjected to
lot/batch acceptance tests. The extent of the lot/batch acceptance tests shall be
dependent on the specific material and its application. Lot/batch acceptance
reports shall be prepared and copies included in the item ADP.

III.4

Limited Life Materials

The Contractor shall ensure that all materials which have limited life
characteristics have their date of manufacture (when available, otherwise date
of delivery) and shelf-life expiry date accurately identified and clearly marked on
each lot/batch. Materials which have exceeded their shelf-life expiry date may be
recertified only after the physical and chemical characteristics have been
inspected and the parameters, subject to deterioration, have been evaluated for
continued acceptability.

III.5

Forbidden Materials
The following materials constitute a safety hazard and are prohibited from being
used without prior approval from ESA:
-

III.6

Beryllium (for structures)

Beryllium oxide
Mercury
Cadmium
Zinc
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)
Radioactive materials

Process Engineering

III.6.1 Process Selection

The Contractor shall be responsible for the selection of processes and for
demonstrating that they are capable of meeting the applicable requirements. The
selection criteria shall ensure that the number of processes used is restricted to
a minimum. ESA reserves the right to audit critical processing lines and to run
confirmation tests on sample products before giving approval.

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

III.6.1.1 Selection of Standard/Established Processes

Standard processes shall be selected wherever possible.
The Contractor shall make the maximum use of existing ESA specification. In
particular, the following ESA specifications are applicable:
-

PSS-01-708 for soldering

PSS-01-726 for crimping
PSS-01-728 for PCB repair and modification
PSS-01-738 for soldering of surface-mount components

For all other processes, the Contractor shall use those process specifications
which are most suitable for the particular application. Priority shall be given to the
use of well known processes previously used for space applications. However,
the fact that a process is included in an approved process list or in the Declared
Process List (DPL) of a previous project is not sufficient reason to consider it
acceptable for use in any other application. Each process and its application shall
be considered separately.
III.6.1.2 Selection Validation and Approval
Preference shall be given to the processes already used successfully for other
space or aeronautical programmes, whose suitability to meet the programme
constraints has been demonstrated. The processes shall be listed to identify all
standard and non-standard processes and as an aid in reducing and
standardising the overall number of processes.
Critical processes shall be identified by the Contractor in the early phase of a
project. ESA, however, reserves the right to upgrade the criticality.
In order to apply for ESA approval, the Contractor shall submit in the first
instance a Declared Process List (DPL). This list shall be initialised from the
beginning of design and shall be issued under the responsibility of the
Contractor's product assurance function.
Each selected process shall be validated and controlled in accordance with the
requirements in GPQ-010. Prolonged halt in applying a process already validated
or subsequent change to it shall mandate a process revalidation.
III.6.1.3 Process Evaluation Programme
The process evaluation programme shall define:
-

process steps and the associated inspections,

representative samples and the associated tests (the results of follow-up

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

10

test specimens shall be correlated with those of the part samples),

-

test methods,

validation criteria.

The result of the evaluation programme shall be documented in an evaluation

report containing:
-

results of manufacturing tests (test specimens, physical, chemical

analyses, inspection results),

applicability of these results with regards to the required performance,

actions taken in order to minimise manufacturing risks.

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

11

Section IV - Commercial, Aviation and Military (CAM) Equipment

IV.1

CAM Equipment Requirements

This section establishes the PA and Safety requirements for Commercial,
Aviation and Military off-the-shelf equipment (CAM), as compared to those for
newly developed specially built equipment and the associated approval cycle. It
also provides the considerations for trade-off decisions on the use of CAM
equipment instead of specially built equipment.

IV.1.1 General
The decision whether CAM equipment should be used within the payload shall
be based on the criticality of the function which the equipment would perform and
on the trade-off studies as outlined in the following paragraphs. Trade-off shall
aim at selecting the most cost effective design solution.
Whenever the product assurance supporting information cannot be provided by
the manufacturer a detailed inspection of the proposed CAM equipment shall be
carried out as part of the evaluation process. This inspection shall be performed
with ESA involvement and aims at identifying any deficiency that would make the
equipment unacceptable or which would call for corrective actions or
improvements. The Contractor should then investigate whether it is practical and
feasible to ask the manufacturer to upgrade or improve the manufacturing and/or
inspection processes in order to achieve the required quality.
The Contractor shall control the choice, application and use of all CAM
equipment and submit them to ESA for approval. CAM equipment for use on the
payload shall have a demonstrable good industrial heritage and usage.
CAM equipment already flown on space missions shall be strongly preferred.
IV.1.2 PA and Safety Requirements
The full PA and safety requirements (programmatic and technical) applicable to
newly developed equipment within the project will not have full applicability.
However, the requirements in the following paragraphs shall be met by CAM
equipment.
IV.1.2.1 Safety and Reliability
The safety assurance programme shall address the CAM equipment compliance
with the technical safety requirements of the payload. Use of CAM equipment
shall be avoided in safety critical functions, unless compliance with the full set of
requirements applicable to the project can be demonstrated.

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

12

CAM failures which constitute a safety hazard or which could propagate to the
interfaces with NSTS and/or Spacehab, shall be prevented. CAM failures which
could have a negative effect on the operation of the payload or other equipment
(e.g. short circuits or excessive voltages, or any input or output, overheating, etc.)
shall be investigated and precautionary measures or fault isolation methods
applied by modifications of the equipment (e.g. shields against scattering material
from broken parts, fusing, etc.).
As an input for safety analysis, an FMECA of the CAM equipment shall be issued
as part of payload FMECA. The requirements for the FMECA format and the
definition of criticality levels, as stated in the reliability requirement for the project,
apply.
A quantitative reliability prediction analysis is not required. However, an
assessment of expected life time (e.g. MTBF) of the CAM equipment with respect
to the duration of the mission need to be performed as part of the trade-off
studies.
IV.1.2.2 EEE Parts and Materials
CAM equipment, in general, shall be taken as built in order to retain the cost
advantage compared to newly built equipment.
The Contractor shall provide to ESA, together with the technical description of the
CAM equipment that he proposes, a description of the EEE quality level of the
parts with which such equipment is built, e.g. whether they fall into the category
of MIL qualified parts, commercial parts controlled or not controlled by
specification. If this information cannot be obtained from the manufacturer, an
assessment by inspection of the item (e.g. PCB) shall be performed.
The derating requirements for electronic parts as specified in PSS-01-301 shall
not apply if standard parts are used in CAM equipment. However, it shall be
checked that sensitive parts (e.g. power transistors, wires, switches) are not
stressed during the use of the equipment in the environmental conditions in
which it will be used. In no instance shall parts be overrated at the end of life.
If a materials list is not available from the manufacturer, the inspection of the
CAM equipment shall cover also this area. The aim is to identify potential use of
forbidden materials or materials that do not meet the flammability, offgassing or
stress corrosion requirements.

IV.1.2.3 Manufacturing and Inspections

In general, the manufacturing and inspection processes of CAM equipment
should not be altered.

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

13

IV.1.2.4 Changes
In order not to lose the cost advantage of CAM equipment, changes shall be kept
to a minimum.
When modifying the CAM equipment (e.g. to meet flammability, offgassing),
safety and reliability requirements, care shall be taken not to introduce new
failure mechanisms. Changes shall be identified, implemented and verified
following the PA requirements in GPQ-010.
IV.1.3 Maintenance, Repair and Spares
Maintenance needs, availability of spares and mission duration shall be
considered for trade-off decisions.
In general, the Contractor shall ensure that high cost CAM equipment can be
repaired either by the manufacturer or by another company with reasonable effort
and turn-around time. Sufficient documentation shall be made available to allow
for on-site minor repairs.
The Contractor shall collect and evaluate available data on past performances,
maintenance schedule, durations, tools and spare parts and material needed.
IV.1.4 Use Environment and Qualification
CAM equipment shall be able to withstand the environmental conditions
applicable to the payload in all the mission phases. In this respect, on a case by
case basis, and depending amongst other things on the criticality of the
application, the need for qualification testing of CAM equipment in a stand-alone
configuration shall be assessed. As a result of this assessment a list of proposed
tests shall be provided.
As a minimum all CAM equipment shall be subjected to random vibration test,
thermal cycle test, and burn-in test (168 hours at the maximum temperatures
specified for the operating mode within the payload).
All CAM equipment used for qualification testing purposes shall be fully
representative of the pieces that will be used in the payload.

IV.1.5 Failure Reporting

Once approved for use in the payload and accepted, a CAM equipment shall
follow the non-conformance reporting system as defined in GPQ-010.

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

14

IV.1.6 ESA Approval

One Request for Approval (RFA format) shall be prepared for each CAM
equipment unit. The RFA shall contain all the necessary information to enable
ESA evaluation of acceptability.
The approval cycle shall consist of three steps:
a) Preliminary approval in the conceptual phase.
b) Intermediate approval after the main results of the trade-offs are available.
c) Final approval after the design review for the equipment and after the results
of trade-offs at subsystem and system level have been confirmed.
The Contractor shall include milestones for approval cycle into the programme
planning.

GPQ-010-PSA-104 Issue 2
Project(s) Specific Annex

Section V - Definitions and Acronyms

The definition in GPQ-010 shall apply.
For safety related definitions, the glossary of terms in NSTS 1700.7B applies.
ADP

Acceptance Data Package

CAM

Commercial, Aviation and Military

CDR

Critical Design Review

DPL

Declared Process List

DRD

Document Requirement Description

DRL

Document Requirements List

ESRR

ESA Safety Readiness Review

FAR

Flight Acceptance Review

FMECA

Failure Mode Effect and Criticality Analysis

GSE

Ground Support Equipment

MTBF

Mean Time between Failures

NSTS

National Space Transportation System

RFA

Request for Approval

PA

Product Assurance

PCB

Printed Circuit Board

PDR

Preliminary Design Review

PSA

Project Specific Annex

SDP

Safety Data Package

15