Reducing Uncertainty in Technology Selection for Long Life Cycle Engineering Designs

The best capabilities are usually achieved by having the latest technologies in defense systems. However, including the new, usually immature, technologies in a system design does not always easily result in achieving the capabilities at the right level, at an affordable cost, and in a timely manner. Many programs have suffered from immature technologies as cost overruns, late or no deliveries, and poor performance levels. Another impact of technology selection appears as obsolescence after the deployment of systems, or even before the deployment of the system. As the technologies of a system become obsolete, the cost of maintaining the system increases. Defense systems, which have longer sustainment life cycles, are more vulnerable to obsolescence of technologies. While obsolete technologies increase the cost of maintaining the military systems, they also impact the level of the superiority of the capabilities. In the current literature, several approaches have been proposed by different authors to address either the immature technology risk or the technology obsolescence risk. This study will make an effort to develop an approach which addresses the issue of technology selection for long life cycle defense systems that consider both the feasibility risk of immature technologies and obsolescence risk of technologies

-ilities Tradespace and Affordability Project – Phase 3

One of the key elements of the SERC’s research strategy is transforming the practice of systems engineering and associated management practices – “SE and Management Transformation (SEMT).” The Grand Challenge goal for SEMT is to transform the DoD community’s current systems engineering and management methods, processes, and tools (MPTs) and practices away from sequential, single stovepipe system, hardware-first, document-driven, point- solution, acquisition-oriented approaches; and toward concurrent, portfolio and enterprise- oriented, hardware-software-human engineered, model-driven, set-based, full life cycle approaches.This material is based upon work supported, in whole or in part, by the U.S. Department of Defense through the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD(R&E)) under Contract H98230-08- D-0171 (Task Order 0031, RT 046).This material is based upon work supported, in whole or in part, by the U.S. Department of Defense through the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD(R&E)) under Contract H98230-08- D-0171 (Task Order 0031, RT 046)

Technology Alignment and Portfolio Prioritization (TAPP)

Technology Alignment and Portfolio Prioritization (TAPP) is a method being developed by the Advanced Concepts Office, at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center. The TAPP method expands on current technology assessment methods by incorporating the technological structure underlying technology development, e.g., organizational structures and resources, institutional policy and strategy, and the factors that motivate technological change. This paper discusses the methods ACO is currently developing to better perform technology assessments while taking into consideration Strategic Alignment, Technology Forecasting, and Long Term Planning

Engineering the System and Technical Integration

Approximately 80% of the problems encountered in aerospace systems have been due to a breakdown in technical integration and/or systems engineering. One of the major challenges we face in designing, building, and operating space systems is: how is adequate integration achieved for the systems various functions, parts, and infrastructure? This Contractor Report (CR) deals with part of the problem of how we engineer the total system in order to achieve the best balanced design. We will discuss a key aspect of this question - the principle of Technical Integration and its components, along with management and decision making. The CR will first provide an introduction with a discussion of the Challenges in Space System Design and meeting the challenges. Next is an overview of Engineering the System including Technical Integration. Engineering the System is expanded to include key aspects of the Design Process, Lifecycle Considerations, etc. The basic information and figures used in this CR were presented in a NASA training program for Program and Project Managers Development (PPMD) in classes at Georgia Tech and at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC). Many of the principles and illustrations are extracted from the courses we teach for MSFC

Quantifying Impact of Cyber Actions on Missions or Business Processes: A Multilayer Propagative Approach

Ensuring the security of cyberspace is one of the most significant challenges of the modern world because of its complexity. As the cyber environment is getting more integrated with the real world, the direct impact of cybersecurity problems on actual business frequently occur. Therefore, operational and strategic decision makers in particular need to understand the cyber environment and its potential impact on business. Cyber risk has become a top agenda item for businesses all over the world and is listed as one of the most serious global risks with significant financial implications for businesses. Risk analysis is one of the primary tools used in this endeavor. Impact assessment, as an integral part of risk analysis, tries to estimate the possible damage of a cyber threat on business. It provides the main insight into risk prioritization as it incorporates business requirements into risk analysis for a better balance of security and usability. Moreover, impact assessment constitutes the main body of information flow between technical people and business leaders. Therefore, it requires the effective synergy of technological and business aspects of cybersecurity for protection against cyber threats. The purpose of this research is to develop a methodology to quantify the impact of cybersecurity events, incidents, and threats. The developed method addresses the issue of impact quantification from an interdependent system of systems point of view. The objectives of this research are (1) developing a quantitative model to determine the impact propagation within a layer of an enterprise (i.e., asset, service or business process layer); (2) developing a quantitative model to determine the impact propagation among different layers within an enterprise; (3) developing an approach to estimate the economic cost of a cyber incident or event. Although there are various studies in cybersecurity risk quantification, only a few studies focus on impact assessment at the business process layer by considering ripple effects at both the horizontal and vertical layers. This research develops an approach that quantifies the economic impact of cyber incidents, events and threats to business processes by considering the horizontal and vertical interdependencies and impact propagation within and among layers

Design for Support in the Initial Design of Naval Combatants

The decline of defence budgets coupled with the escalation of warship procurement costs have significantly contributed to fleet downsizing in most major western navies despite little reduction in overall commitments, resulting in extra capability and reliability required per ship. Moreover, the tendency of governments to focus on short-term strategies and expenditure has meant that those aspects of naval ship design that may be difficult to quantify, such as supportability, are often treated as secondary issues and allocated insufficient attention in Early Stage Design. To tackle this, innovation in both the design process and the development of individual ship designs is necessary, especially at the crucial early design stages. Novelty can be achieved thanks to major developments in computer technology and in adopting an architecturally-orientated approach to early stage ship design. The existing technical solutions aimed at addressing supportability largely depend on highly detailed ship design information, thus fail to enable rational supportability assessments in the Concept Phase. This research therefore aimed at addressing the lack of a quantitative supportability evaluation approach applicable to early stage naval ship design. Utilising Decision Analysis, Effectiveness Analysis, and Analytic Hierarchy Process, the proposed approach tackled the difficulty of quantifying certain aspects of supportability in initial ship design and provided a framework to address the issue of inconsistent and often conflicting preferences of decision makers. Since the ship’s supportability is considered to be significantly affected by its configuration, the proposed approach utilised the advantages of an architecturally-orientated early stage ship design approach and a new concept design tool developed at University College London. The new tool was used to develop concept level designs of a frigate-sized combatant and a number of variations of it, namely configurational rearrangement with enhancement of certain supportably features, and an alternative ship design style. The design cases were then used to demonstrate the proposed evaluation approach. The overall aim of proposing a quantitative supportability evaluation approach applicable to concept naval ship design was achieved, although several issues and limitations emerged during both the development as well as the implementation of the approach. Through identification of the research limitations, areas for future work aimed at improving the proposal have been proposed

Integrated helicopter survivability

A high level of survivability is important to protect military personnel and equipment and is central to UK defence policy. Integrated Survivability is the systems engineering methodology to achieve optimum survivability at an affordable cost, enabling a mission to be completed successfully in the face of a hostile environment. “Integrated Helicopter Survivability” is an emerging discipline that is applying this systems engineering approach within the helicopter domain. Philosophically the overall survivability objective is ‘zero attrition’, even though this is unobtainable in practice. The research question was: “How can helicopter survivability be assessed in an integrated way so that the best possible level of survivability can be achieved within the constraints and how will the associated methods support the acquisition process?” The research found that principles from safety management could be applied to the survivability problem, in particular reducing survivability risk to as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). A survivability assessment process was developed to support this approach and was linked into the military helicopter life cycle. This process positioned the survivability assessment methods and associated input data derivation activities. The system influence diagram method was effective at defining the problem and capturing the wider survivability interactions, including those with the defence lines of development (DLOD). Influence diagrams and Quality Function Deployment (QFD) methods were effective visual tools to elicit stakeholder requirements and improve communication across organisational and domain boundaries. The semi-quantitative nature of the QFD method leads to numbers that are not real. These results are suitable for helping to prioritise requirements early in the helicopter life cycle, but they cannot provide the quantifiable estimate of risk needed to demonstrate ALARP. The probabilistic approach implemented within the Integrated Survivability Assessment Model (ISAM) was developed to provide a quantitative estimate of ‘risk’ to support the approach of reducing survivability risks to ALARP. Limitations in available input data for the rate of encountering threats leads to a probability of survival that is not a real number that can be used to assess actual loss rates. However, the method does support an assessment across platform options, provided that the ‘test environment’ remains consistent throughout the assessment. The survivability assessment process and ISAM have been applied to an acquisition programme, where they have been tested to support the survivability decision making and design process. The survivability ‘test environment’ is an essential element of the survivability assessment process and is required by integrated survivability tools such as ISAM. This test environment, comprising of threatening situations that span the complete spectrum of helicopter operations requires further development. The ‘test environment’ would be used throughout the helicopter life cycle from selection of design concepts through to test and evaluation of delivered solutions. It would be updated as part of the through life capability management (TLCM) process. A framework of survivability analysis tools requires development that can provide probabilistic input data into ISAM and allow derivation of confidence limits. This systems level framework would be capable of informing more detailed survivability design work later in the life cycle and could be enabled through a MATLAB® based approach. Survivability is an emerging system property that influences the whole system capability. There is a need for holistic capability level analysis tools that quantify survivability along with other influencing capabilities such as: mobility (payload / range), lethality, situational awareness, sustainability and other mission capabilities. It is recommended that an investigation of capability level analysis methods across defence should be undertaken to ensure a coherent and compliant approach to systems engineering that adopts best practice from across the domains. Systems dynamics techniques should be considered for further use by Dstl and the wider MOD, particularly within the survivability and operational analysis domains. This would improve understanding of the problem space, promote a more holistic approach and enable a better balance of capability, within which survivability is one essential element. There would be value in considering accidental losses within a more comprehensive ‘survivability’ analysis. This approach would enable a better balance to be struck between safety and survivability risk mitigations and would lead to an improved, more integrated overall design

Framework For Quantifying And Tailoring Complexity And Risk To Manage Uncertainty In Developing Complex Products And Systems

In recent years there has been a renewed interest in product complexity due its negative impact on launch performance. Research indicates that underestimating complexity is one of the most common errors repeated by new product development (NPD) teams. It was concluded that companies that successfully manage complexity can maintain a competitive advantage. This is particularly true of CoPS projects (Complex Products and Systems) which are defined as large-scale, high value, engineering intensive products and systems. Investment in CoPS projects continues to grow worldwide, with recent estimates placed at over $500B annually. In this research we present methods to improve the planning and coordination of complexity and risk in CoPS projects to support launch success. The methods are designed to be consistent with systems engineering practices which are commonly used in their development. The research proposes novel methods for the assessment, quantification, and management of development complexity and risk. The models are initiated from preliminary customer requirements so they may be implemented at the earliest point in the development process and yield the most significant cost savings and impact. The models presented are validated on a large-scale defense industry project and experimental case study example. The research demonstrates that development complexity and risk can be effectively quantified in the early development stages and used to align and tailor organizational resources to improve PD performance. The methods also provide the benefit of being implementable with little disruption to existing processes as they align closely with current industry practices

Maintaining systems-of-systems fit-for-purpose: a technique exploiting material, energy and information source, sink and bearer analysis

Across many domains, systems suppliers are challenged by the complexity of their systems and the speed at which their systems must be changed in order to meet the needs of customers or the societies which the systems support. Stakeholder needs are ever more complex: appearing, disappearing, changing and interacting faster than solutions able to address them can be instantiated. Similarly, the systems themselves continually change as a result of both external and internal influences, such as damage, changing environment, upgrades, reconfiguration, replacement, etc. In the event of situations unforeseen at design time, personnel (for example maintainers or operators) close to the point of employment may have to modify systems in response to the evolving situation, and to do this in a timely manner so that the system and/or System-of-Systems (SoS: a set of systems that have to interoperate) can achieve their aims. This research was motivated by the problem of designing-in re-configurability to the constituent systems of a SoS to enable the SoS and its systems to effectively and efficiently counter the effects of unforeseen events that adversely affect fitness-for purpose whilst operational. This research shows that a SoS does not achieve or maintain fitness-for-purpose because it cannot implement the correct, timely and complete transfer of Material, Energy and Information (MEI) between its constituents and with its external environment that is necessary to achieve a desired outcome; i.e. the purpose