Technology Insertion/Infusion

Transcription

1 Technology Insertion/Infusion Design Refreshes Rarely will a design refresh just replace an obsolete part. Usually, if a design refresh is to be undertaken, the opportunity will be used to upgrade the system using: Newer parts High reliability parts Increased functionality Increased memory Increased performance Reduce system size and weight Reduce power requirements Improve maintainability and reliability Reduce cost of acquisition and life cycle support

2 What We Want to Know About Technology Insertion When: When to insert a technology is a crucial parameter in determining the cost effects. Cost effects vary greatly with the programmatic variables of the system, i.e., budget availability. Roadmapping of technology availability is also necessary. Why: A comparative quantification of technologies being considered can enable decision makers to maximize value (value = economic, performance, requirement satisfaction). Who: People involved in technology insertion analysis include the decision maker (normally program manager), engineers, cost analysts and the customer How Much: Once we have assigned a value to the technology insertion, we want to be able to assess how much it cost allowing the customer to determine if the extra value of inserting the cost is worth the extra cost. Technology Availability Roadmapping forecasts the beginning of availability (maturity) of technology Obsolescence forecasting focuses on the backend of the technology wave What is your risk threshold? Availability Beginning of availability End of availability Calendar Time

3 Technology Forecasting Methods There are many technology forecasting methods (most focused on predicting introduction/maturity), but the challenge is relating the two extremes (beginning of availability and end of availability). Expert Opinion Technology Trend Analysis (Pearl-Reed & Gompertz) Delphi Technique Fisher-Pry Substitution Nominal Group Technique Scenarios Morphological Analysis Relevance Trees Impact Wheel Patent Analysis Data Mining On-Line Analytical Processing Units shipped/market ($) Introduction Growth Maturity Time Decline Phase-out Discontinuance Cost Considerations (Current Technology Comparison to Future Technology) Cost historical data for current technology Cost of keeping the old technology in the field (maintain) Technical considerations for current technology and future technology Engineering effort Engineering difficulty New design effort Technology indices Design integration Time (technology year) Maturity level Improvements in methods and processes Technology trend Year to insert technology Quantity

4 Average Annual Rate of Technology Change Manufacturing Producibility Mx (Mx) Fighter/Attack Aircraft Mx versus IOC- Fighter/Attack AC y = x R 2 = Manufacturing Producibility (Mx) Manufacturing Producibility (Mx) measures recurring cost impact of materials, fabrication, assembly, and inspection Military Mx Transport vs IOC Aircraft y = x R 2 = Year of Initial Operational IOC-1900 Capability (IOC) Darryl Webb Price Systems, LLC Year of Initial Operational IOC Capability Components, subsystems and systems follow the same patterns. Battery Performance Example Total cycles Li Ion Ni H2 Ni Cad Year of Initial Operational Capability Most component technologies historically have maintained consistent improvement rates in Performance (batteries: cycles) Efficiency (batteries; watt-hours per kilogram) Physical characteristics (batteries;: mass, density, and volume) Technological cycle time is consistent and driven by: Application Competition Demand Subsidiary industries (infrastructure) Efficiency (Wh/kg) Ni Cad Ni H2 Li Ion Mass Ni Cad Ni H2 Li Ion Year of Initial Operational Capability Darryl Webb Price Systems, LLC Year of Initial Operational Capability

5 Disruptive Technologies Disruptive technology innovations are accounted for here. Many of the data points on the previous two slides were viewed as a disruptive technologies. Performance Metric Disruptive Technology Time Trend for a history of all families of technologies Trend for a particular evolving family of technology Cost Life Cycle of a Technology Relative Cost per Unit State-of-the-art State-of-the-practice Obsolete Year Initial part of the curve; high cost due to low producibility, small production runs and limited sources Center portion of the curve; low cost due to mature manufacturing processes, high yields and multiple sources Latter part of the curve; increase in cost due to outdated processes, low procurement quantities and limited sources (and decreasing profitability to the technology supplier) Depth of curve a function of market size and number of applications

6 Technology Generations (Cost) Cost Generations of Technology When should you make the jump from one technology to the next? Ni Cad NiH2 Commercial product Military product Li Ion Time Three generations of battery technology Initial high peaks of each generation caused by subcontractor processes maturity costs, prime contractor design integration costs and low producibility When obsolete for several generations, cost is higher than current technologies of much greater performance Darryl Webb Price Systems, LLC Technology Generations (Performance) Performance Ni Cad Performance Trend Ni H2 Li Ion Performance is a technology-specific metric constructed from a combination of the operational, functional, and reliability requirements placed on the system by the customer Time For the battery example: Performanc e = Darryl Webb Price Systems, LLC 1 f (Efficiency,, Total Cycles) Mass

7 Value Ni Cad 1 6 Technology Generations (Best Value) Technology Benefit Ni H Time Li Ion Technology benefit analysis provides the benefits divided by the cost over time. Performance/Reliability Value = Cost It considers direct benefits (performance and reliability) and indirect benefits (reductions in weight and power requirements). A cost effectiveness study analytically assesses the comparative worth of alternatives for achieving a designated goal through the joint consideration of costs, time, technical performance, and limitations inherent in other cost related studies. Darryl Webb Price Systems, LLC Utilization of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Techniques AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) is a multi-criteria decision analysis methodology that involves choosing from a number of alternatives based on how well those alternatives rate against chosen criteria. The criteria are weighted in terms of importance to the decision maker, and the overall "score" of an alternative is the weighted sum of its rating against each criteria. SMART (Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique) is another multi-criteria analysis approach. In SMART, ratings of alternatives are assigned directly, in the natural scales of the criteria. SMART is more appropriate to use if new alternatives are likely to be added to the model later. The decision analysis must be performed within an environment that includes all the major stack-holders (customer, prime contractor, OEM community) Example commercial tools: Expert Choice Professional implements AHP. The company also offers Team Expert Choice which is suitable for team decisionmaking. ( Criterium DecisionPlus implements AHP and SMART. ( Logical Decisions implements not only AHP and SMART but also includes Tradeoff and SMARTER. ( RADSS Resource Allocation Decision Support System (

8 Forecasting Obsolescence of Future Technologies Year Phase-out Introduction y = x y = Introduction Growth Maturity Decline Phase Out y = = x Peak Sales Year Note, the time between introduction and phase-out is becoming smaller STTL TTL ALS CMOS LSTTL FAST HCT AS FCT ACT BCT LVT ABT Forecasting Obsolescence of Future Technologies - Example y = y x = x Year y y = = x Introduction Growth Maturity Peak Sales Year Decline Phase out ( ) i 1 Obsolescence date = B + L 1 = where, 4 B = 2005 (the year you project replacing the part) L = (2005) (2005) =6.7 i = 3

9 Another Example Minimum Feature Size (microns) Note, the time between introduction and phase-out is approaching a constant Year Adapted and compiled from: Sandia National Laboratories, 1999, Electronic News Online, and Semiconductor Business News Online Technology Forecasting Observations Regression of all performance data not recommended Typical regression of all data represents central economic utility only Trend technology leaders Trend obsolescence Watch for changes in balance of technology, size and quantity Recognize that leader trend forecasts points to step function increases (cycle increases) Performance trends are remarkably stable over time Product relies upon subsidiary technology development

10 Criteria: 1) User preference 2) Optimization decision Refresh Event Functional Upgrade No MOCA Functional Upgrade Strategy Part-for-part replacement of obsolete parts only Yes What portion of the BOM: a) Unchanged (no obs. problem or upgrade) b) One-for-one replacement c) One-for-multiple replacement Derived trends in: Manufacturing producibility (Mx) and other factors Recalibration of life cycle cost models Price H/HL New BOM (new obs. dates for new parts) New software New system characteristics Compute Cost of Refresh Event Accommodating Technology Insertions in Product Design Technology refreshment is inevitable, whether due to electronic part obsolescence, or changing customer requirements, or both, it will happen. How does a product accommodate technology insertions in an economically viable way? Synchronize technology insertions with technology refreshments (save on re-testing) Provide opening for functional growth to affordably fit into the unchanged architecture Continuous evolution required To avoid system obsolescence To keep pace with prevailing standards To enable technology insertion and functional enhancement

11 Traditional Program Plan Example User Capabilities Development Production Sustainment Note: JSF is planned to have approximately one decade of initial development, two decades of production, and three decades of support after that (Butch Ardis, ASC/EN, WPAFB) Customer Desired Operational Capability Updates User Capabilities Development Production Sustainment (Butch Ardis, ASC/EN, WPAFB)

12 Continuous Technology Insertion View Capabilities Development Production Sustainment DMS &Tech. Insertion (Butch Ardis, ASC/EN, WPAFB) Avionics Viability Avionics Viability is a metric for the ability to support both the system s current and future affordability and capability needs Avionics Viability includes (over the life of the system) avionics producibility, supportability, and the ability to grow to meet operational capability needs Avionics Viability includes hardware, software, and verification as well as their support environments Avionics Viability is driven by a combination of architecture, process, and business attributes Avionics (aviation electronics) includes prime equipment, support systems, training systems, production systems, test systems,. (Butch Ardis, ASC/EN, WPAFB)

13 Viability Assessment Areas For the projected life cycle of the weapon system: Producibility - Ability to produce the Sub-System in the future based upon the current architecture and design implementation. (Production & Initial Spares, not replenishment Spares) Supportability - Ability to sustain the Sub-System and meet the required Mission Capable rates. This includes repair and resupply as well as nonrecurring redesign for supportability of the as is design implementation and performance. Future Requirements Growth - Ability of the Sub-system to support projected Combat Capability Requirements with the current design and avionics architecture. This includes capability implemented by software updates. (Butch Ardis, ASC/EN, WPAFB) Viability is a metric for sustainment Smart Roadmapping (Roadmapping in Both Ends of the Wave) When should you jump into a new technology When should you phase out an old technology Based on total cost of ownership, best value and visibility into your customer s platform roadmaps Availability Beginning of availability End of availability Calendar Time

14 The Need for Smart Roadmapping Cost models (and value models) embedded in the roadmap to allow execution of application-specific what-if scenarios. Develop and execute integrated change roadmaps that leverage commercial technologies and affordable open avionics architectures using evolutionary acquisition principles Integrated Change Roadmap Integrates development, verification, production, support, and future capability needs into single strategy Developed by each program for life of program Used to set context for developing program plans and long range architecture requirements Viability of proposed solution evaluated against integrated change roadmap (Butch Ardis, ASC/EN, WPAFB)

15 Major Electronic Industry Roadmaps and their Direct Application to Avionics The three major electronics industry roadmaps are The Semiconductor Industries Association (SIA) roadmap The National Electronics Manufacturing Initiative Inc., (NEMI) roadmap The Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits (IPC) roadmap The SIA, NEMI, and IPC roadmaps direct application to avionics lies in the fact that a segment of these roadmaps forecast technology requirements for the electronic products that operate in harsh environments such as a temperature range of -55 C to 125 C.