Systems Thinking, Systems Engineering Delivering Value S.I.Weiss Value for Products and Systems •  Value = Worth •  Value Systems = Sets of values, codes, principles •  Value ProposiBon = Basis for exchange •  Value Stream = Flow of tasks or informaBon to yield value Total Life-‐Cycle Value •  Product Development must consider “Big-‐Picture” deﬁniBon of value •  Customer Value –  Performance (inc. availability, other “iliBes”) –  Cost (purchase, maintenance, upgrades, disposal…) –  Timeliness (Design, producBon) •  Enterprise Value –  Synergies with other products –  Preserving/ enhancing core competencies –  Stakeholders: workforce, stockholders, etc. What is a System? A collecBon of interrelated elements with funcBonality greater than the sum of the independent element funcBonaliBes Systems Engineering: my deﬁniBon The applicaBon of inter-‐discipline engineering knowledge to problems involving complexity, interfaces and stakeholders Why Projects Succeed User & Stakeholder Involvement 16% Management support 14% Clear requirements 13% Proper planning 10% RealisBc expectaBons 8% Smaller milestones 8% Competent staﬀ 7% Ownership 5% From a 1995 Standish Group report Product Development “Best” Practices • VALUE ANALYSIS • SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND DESIGN APPROACH • FRONT END EMPHASIS-CUSTOMERS REQUIREMENTS! • INVOLVE ALL STAKEHOLDERS EARLY AND OFTEN • INTEGRATED PRODUCT/PROCESS DEVELOPMENT (IPPD) • INTEGRATE HARDWARE/SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT • LINK DATA BASES THROUGHOUT THE PD CYCLE • MINIMIZE DOCUMENTATION AND HANDOFFS • USE OTS TOOLS AND COMMON CADAM • OPTIMIZE THE PD VALUE STREAM • DFX and DF Lean The Stakeholder Connection A Stakeholder is any party that has an interest in, contribuBon to or capability to impact a project A QFD Progression System development is about creating value for customers and meeting the needs of stakeholders Important Stakeholder QuesBons •  Who is/are the users? Stakeholders? •  What will a successful soluBon be worth to the users? Stakeholders? •  What is the value to the customers? •  Who should be involved in the development? •  What trade-‐oﬀ between schedule and value? Can they be progressive? • What is the trade-‐oﬀ between cost and value? •  What potenBal soluBons have you for this problem? •  What problems might a soluBon create? Problem: The California Forestry Service is seeking a controlled or programmable remote piloted vehicle (RPV) system to provide ﬁre ﬁghBng surveillance and management. The legislature has set a budget of $100 million and two years for operaBonal start. The need to be able to map ﬁres and their movement, determine hot spots for inserBng and/or rescuing ﬁre ﬁghters and equipment as well as water bombing direcBon are the moBvaBons, Your company is planning to bid the project and is evaluaBng the basis for doing so. IdenBfy at least the important stakeholders, their values, and the requirements for the system to saBsfy these. Key Stakeholders Stakeholder Values Stakeholder Values Local Fire Departments • Enhanced emergency response • Public and operator safety • Cost/Durability • Operability Federal Regulators (FAA/ FCC) • Aircram Safety • See and avoid capability • Frequency usage Aerospace Engineers and manufactures • Cost • Manufacturability Wireless Company • Data usage Network Engineers • Quickness of data disseminaBon • Wireless technologies CAL Fire (department in charge of ﬁghBng California wildﬁres) CiBes Community Residents • Survey Area • Quickness of data disseminaBon • Deployment Bme • Public Safety • Cost • Grant money eligibility • Personal Safety • ProtecBon of Property Forest Service UAV system requirements AcquisiBon cost< $100 mil for three operaBng systems of three UAVs OperaBng cost < $10/year Ease of Use-‐rapid response and deployment-‐iniBal locaBon of site up to 400 miles in 4 hours Setup on site to launch of 30 minutes Site availability –approval to locate during ﬁre emergency Frequency availability L band and S band; Day-‐night capability Reliability for 2 hour ﬂight Bme of 95% Coverage: broad area 10 square miles; local coverage resoluBon 5 meters Safety: Command destruct required and/or auto homing to launch site Transportable – size and weight limitaBons for carriers and set-‐up Bme QFD Matrix RelaBonships Linking Analysis and RealizaBon SYSTEM ENGINEERING PROCESS TRADE STUDIES EFFECTIVENESS ASSESSMENTS PLANNING System Engineering PracBces In Aerospace FuncBonal IntegraBon Hot & Cold Water…Temperature & Flow Rate Control Pugh Decision Matrix l  l  Decision making tool to formally compare concepts (processes, products, services, etc) based on a set of speciﬁed criteria Quickly idenBﬁes strengths and weaknesses for each potenBal opBon relaBve to the baseline and helps converge on an opBmum soluBon Approach -‐  IdenBfy criteria or requirements -‐  IdenBfy design alternaBves -‐  Score each concept against each criteria as beuer than (+1), worse than (-‐1), or the same (0) as the baseline -‐  Select opBmum design alternaBve Criteria #1 Criteria #2 Criteria #3 Totals Weight Baseline 1 1 1 0 0 0 Alternative #1 1 1 -1 Alternative #2 0 0 1 Alternative #3 0 1 1 1 1 2 Slide 24 l  What is System Architecture? The structure, arrangement, or conﬁguraBon of system elements and relaBonships required to saBsfy both constraints and a set of funcBonal, performance, reliability, maintainability, and extensibility requirements Why an Architecture? •  Provides a visual idenBﬁcaBon of all the elements of a product/system – an organizaBon chart for the project •  Provides a basis for decomposiBon to lowest element. •  Is the basis for a Work Breakdown Structure •  Is eﬀecBve in establishing bills of material •  Useful in parBBoning outsourced elements •  A markeBng tool •  Another arBfact in the record keeping chain System Architecture for a Proposed Forest Service UAV Architecture Design Thinking -‐ DESIGN FOR: WHAT HOW COST PERFORMANCE AVAILABILITY SIMPLICITY RELIABILITY, QUALITY, SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INSERTION CHANGE MANUFACTURING, ASSEMBLY ASSEMBLY INSPECTION TEST OPERATIONS MAINTAINABILITY SUSTAINMENT PROCUREMENT Failure Modes and Fault Tolerance Failures: Occurrences that involve loss of funcBon or performance -‐ total, intermiuent, catastrophic, fail safe or operaBonal Fault Tolerance: Capability to respond to failures either safely, recoverably, or able to conBnue operaBng in some manner – use of redundancy, alternate paths or programmable Most failures occur at Interfaces Consider a typical Transmiuer integrity Risk Management Methods •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  •  1.Personnel shorwalls 2.Schedules & budgets 3.User interfaces 4.Gold plaBng 5.Unproven technology 6.Requirement changes 7.Supplier shorwalls 8.In-‐house shorwalls 9.Equipment issues -‐Key personnel, training -‐Reqts. scrub,incremenBng -‐Prototyping,IPT involvement -‐Reqts. scrub,cost-‐beneﬁts -‐Back-‐up planning -‐Customer/technology defers -‐Backups, mulB-‐source -‐SimulaBon, prototyping, -‐Backups, Out-‐source Serial/Concurrent Product Development CONCURRENT PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT Higher Consistency Less Cost Less Time Prau & Whitney CAD/CAM Strategy HBS Case Study WHY DO IT WELL?