Maritime Systems & Sensors NDIA 2003 Systems Engineering Conference 20-23 October 2003 Rapid...

Maritime Systems & Sensors

NDIA2003 Systems

Engineering Conference20-23 October 2003

NDIA2003 Systems

Engineering Conference20-23 October 2003

Rapid Response Technology Trade Study Tool – R2T2

Technology Management of Systems in Practice

Rapid Response Technology Trade Study Tool – R2T2

Technology Management of Systems in Practice

Tom [email protected]

703-367-2973LM Maritime Systems & Sensors

Manassas, VA 20110-4157

Tom [email protected]

703-367-2973LM Maritime Systems & Sensors

Manassas, VA 20110-4157


Agenda

• Background

• Technology Refreshment – Obsolescence Driven

• Technology Assessment – Input data

• Technology Refreshment Strategy and Plan

• R2T2 Description – A Technology Management Approach


Background

Started with an interest in being able to predict how often change must occur to a system in order to mitigate the impacts of individual component obsolescence, especially in COTS systems.

Note that a component in this definition can be a part at any level in the hierarchy.

Programs of initial interest were:

• JSF (F-35) - Started the interest with planned TR and TI during development window and management of a COTS-intensive solution, particularly at the board and sub-assembly levels.

• SLVR - Super Low and Very Low Frequency Radar offered a small-sized project to test the manual process that evolved into the R2T2 web-based (ASP format) engine.

• ACS - Aerial Common Sensor (Army) Concept Exploration phase allowed for further refinement of the model and initial validation.

• ARCI – Acoustic Rapid COTS Insertion, Advanced Processing Build


Technology Refreshment StrategyTechnology Refreshment StrategyWith Escalating Technology PerformanceWith Escalating Technology Performance

10

1

100

1,000

10,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Technology Refreshment Strategy

Consolidate Processing Into Fewer, Partially Populated Processing Units to Reduce Cost


Consolidate Processing Into Fewer, Partially Populated Processing Units to Reduce Cost

High Density Embedded Processing Systems

HPC Servers

Web Servers

Workstations


Migrate Applications Down the Vendor’s Product Line To Leverage Lower Cost, High-Volume Processors


Migrate Applications Down the Vendor’s Product Line To Leverage Lower Cost, High-Volume ProcessorsP

roce

ssin

g T

hro

ug

hp

ut

(GF

LO

PS

)

Technology Insertion

Additional Functionality Can Be Accommodated By Re-Populating Processing Units or by Migrating Up the Product Line

Technology Insertion

Additional Functionality Can Be Accommodated By Re-Populating Processing Units or by Migrating Up the Product Line


Open Standards Evolve Too!Open Standards Evolve Too!

Typical Processor ProductsTypical Processor Products

Complex System Operational ProfileComplex System Operational Profile

97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

ATMATM OC3OC3 OC12OC12 OC48OC48 OC192OC192

FCSFCS

UNIXUNIX

Windows NTWindows NT

VMEVME

DevelopmentDevelopment ProductionProduction SupportSupport

Product Life Cycle

CORBACORBA

DCOMDCOM

Continuous Evolution Required• To Avoid System Obsolescence• To Keep Pace with Prevailing Standards• To Enable Technology Insertion, Functional

Enhancement

Potential New Technologies

Next Generation Processor TechnologyNext Generation Processor Technology

Current Open and Defacto Standards Examples

Key Evolving Technologies


Technology Refresh ProcessTechnology Refresh ProcessStrategy & Plan DevelopmentStrategy & Plan Development

Assess Each ProductAssess Each Product• Selected Open Standards Conformance• Technologies Employed• Current Status of Each

– Technology Life Cycle– Technology Change Frequency – Capacity Change Percent– Current Technology Maturity

Develop Technology Refresh PlanDevelop Technology Refresh Plan• Maintain Open Standards, Change Only As Required for TOC• Minimize Architectural Re-Design Cost• Unique Solution for Each Subsystem• Technology Refreshment Roadmap • Integrate the Unique Solutions• Create Matrix (W/Subsystems As X-Axis & Tech Refreshes As Y-Axis)• Synchronize with Any Known/Projected Functionality Upgrade Plans

Develop Technology Refresh StrategyDevelop Technology Refresh Strategy• Plan for Cost Effective “State-of-the-Practice Bathtub Curve”• Keep in “State-of-the-art” Product Announcements + 4 Levels • Use System Assessment to Set a Tech Refreshment Frequency• Have a Commonality Vision That the Strategy Supports


Technology Refreshment StrategyTechnology Refreshment StrategyBased on Technology & Product AssessmentsBased on Technology & Product Assessments

F3I-Compatible HW Changes

2005 Tech Refresh 2010 Tech RefreshInitial Baseline

SWTR 1

SW Fixes &CapabilityEnhanced

HW Refresh HW Refresh HW Refresh

Form/Fit HW

Changes

Major HW Changes

Synchronize HW/SW Changes to Consolidate

System Regression Testing Synchronize HW/SW Changes to Consolidate

System Regression Testing

OSA StableInitial OSA Set Minor OSA Change

20002000 20052005 20102010 2015 . . .2015 . . .

. . .. . .

. . .. . .

. . .. . .

. . .. . .

. . .. . .

SWTR 2

SWTR 3

SWTR 4

SWTR 5

SWTR 6

SWTR 7

SWTR 8

Asynchronous Substitutions for Out-of-Production Parts

Potential Supplier Change

Example = TR every 5 years:Example = TR every 5 years:


Technology Refreshment Strategy Development–Technology Life Cycle for Each Product–Technology Maturity for Each Product–Technology Change Frequency–Capacity Percent Change

Cost

Product Cost Life Cycle

Cost Is High at Initial Product Introduction and Goes Down As

Competition Increases

Cost Is High at Initial Product Introduction and Goes Down As

Competition Increases

Product Generation A Product Generation A + 1 Product Generation A + 2

State-of-the-Practice Cost StabilizesState-of-the-Practice Cost Stabilizes

Cost Goes Back Up As Technology Advances and

Supportability Costs Increase

Cost Goes Back Up As Technology Advances and

Supportability Costs Increase

Time

Technology Change Periodicity &

Percent Change

Technology Life Cycle

Technology Maturity = Where is the Subsystem in the Current Technology Life

Cycle?

What is theWhat is theIdeal Point for a Technology Ideal Point for a Technology

Refreshment?Refreshment?Jump to A+1 or A+2?Jump to A+1 or A+2?

R2T2 Technology Refresh StrategyR2T2 Technology Refresh Strategy

Maritime Systems & SensorsTechnology Change ConsiderationsTechnology Change Considerations

NRE Cost for RefreshmentsNRE Cost for Refreshments– High cost for High Refreshment Frequency (i.e. annually)High cost for High Refreshment Frequency (i.e. annually)– Low cost for 15-year modernization methodLow cost for 15-year modernization method

Support Cost ElementSupport Cost Element– Small Cost for High Refreshment Frequency (i.e. annually) – Small Cost for High Refreshment Frequency (i.e. annually) –

Low Need for spares procurement, but greater Configuration Low Need for spares procurement, but greater Configuration Management (i.e. Technical Documentation and Training)Management (i.e. Technical Documentation and Training)

– High Cost for “bridge buys” to end of long refreshment High Cost for “bridge buys” to end of long refreshment frequencies (i.e. 10 – 15 years in length)frequencies (i.e. 10 – 15 years in length)

– Cost due to end of phase high dollar investment, sunk cost, Cost due to end of phase high dollar investment, sunk cost, budget inefficiency.budget inefficiency.

– Two Factors: MTBF and ObsolescenceTwo Factors: MTBF and Obsolescence

See Next Slide for Graphical View . . . See Next Slide for Graphical View . . .

Maritime Systems & SensorsTechnology Change Cost GraphTechnology Change Cost Graph

Technology Refreshment Frequency

Cost

NRE Cost for RefreshmentsNRE Cost for Refreshments

Annually(Fast-Paced)

Once in Life Cycle

Support Cost ElementSupport Cost Element

Realized Total Refreshment CostsRealized Total Refreshment Costs = =Refreshment NRE +Refreshment NRE +Refreshment Recurring +Refreshment Recurring +Support NRE +Support NRE +Support RecurringSupport Recurring

Finding the Balance of Support and Change CostsFinding the Balance of Support and Change Costs

Maritime Systems & SensorsTechnology Management SummaryTechnology Management Summary

Technology Refreshment Is a Necessary Fact of Life for Technology Refreshment Is a Necessary Fact of Life for COTS-Based & Custom-Designed SystemsCOTS-Based & Custom-Designed Systems– Required for SupportabilityRequired for Supportability

– Reduces Cost of OwnershipReduces Cost of Ownership

– Allows Continuous Exploitation of Exponentially-Improving Allows Continuous Exploitation of Exponentially-Improving TechnologyTechnology

– Facilitates Introduction of Advanced, Processing-Intensive Facilitates Introduction of Advanced, Processing-Intensive FunctionalityFunctionality

Effective Planning for Technology Refreshment Based on:Effective Planning for Technology Refreshment Based on:– Comprehensive Technology Strategy and Plan To Accurately Comprehensive Technology Strategy and Plan To Accurately

Anticipate Technology and COTS Product DirectionsAnticipate Technology and COTS Product Directions

– Implementation-Independent Design To Enable Low Cost Implementation-Independent Design To Enable Low Cost Exploitation of Emerging COTS Products and Advanced Exploitation of Emerging COTS Products and Advanced TechnologiesTechnologies


R2T2 Summary & Abstract

Abstract

Current noteworthy industry capabilities are focused on component-level obsolescence predictions (such as TACTrac, i2 LCE and MOCA) and look to predict only the “next” obsolescence issue. This R2T2 technology assessment engine permits the level of abstraction to be raised to sub-assembly, unit, sub-system and the system level in support of System-of-Systems design. This tool also focuses on the technologies and their behavior (based on history and/or user knowledge inputs). The algorithm for assessing a system behavior from the aggregation of the technology elements is the heart of this research.

Summary of the Intent

Rapid Response Technology & Trade Study methodology and aid for Technology Forecasting and Strategy Recommendations (especially useful during proposal and early conceptual phases)

See Enhanced Function Flow Block Diagrams on following pages


R2T2 High-Level Description

Tom Herald


Problem to SolveThe Needs:

• Rapid Response Technology Assessment Mechanism that can support Proposal Trades, CE Trades as well as Development phase.

Originating Technical Requirements Des

ign

Dep

end

ent

Req

uir

emen

ts

De

fin

e T

ec

hn

olo

gy

Cu

rve

s (

Ha

rdw

are

& S

oft

wa

re)

De

fin

e T

ec

hn

olo

gy

Re

fre

sh

Pla

n M

ap

pin

g R

ule

s

De

fin

e C

ER

s f

or

Te

ch

no

log

y R

efr

es

h N

RE

Co

sts

Ou

tpu

t R

ep

ort

Co

mp

ara

tiv

e A

na

lys

is G

en

era

tio

n

We

b D

ep

loy

ab

le v

ia W

ind

ch

ill,

MS

Sh

are

po

int,

etc

.

IET

M T

ec

h D

oc

um

en

tati

on

Le

ve

l

De

mo

of

the

In

teg

rate

d S

uit

e

Su

pp

ort

Co

st

CE

Rs

(T

rain

ing

, e

tc.)

CO

TS

Co

st

As

se

ss

me

nt

To

ols

(P

ric

e,

SE

ER

, e

tc.)

Su

m o

f C

ov

era

ge

4. Recognize Technology Insertion 10 10 10 306. What-if Scenario Capabilities 3 3 6 3 6 217. Distributed Processing f/Geographic Distance 10 108. Software Development Content 3 3 6 129. Sample Application of Tools 3 10 6 1910. Prototype of Process and Tools Experience 3 10 6 1911. Tool Responsiveness 6 6 1212. Models for Costing 6 6 6 10 10 3813. Required Expertise for Operation 6 6 3 3 18SUM of Applicability (0 - 10 Scale) 13 19 19 18 25 9 32 16 28

10 = Strongly Linked Design Dependency6 = Medium Linked Design Dependency3 = Low Linked Design Dependency

• Give a Rapid Response to a Technology Assessment (on order of hours, not weeks)

• Give an “80% accurate” full life Cost Estimate for comparison and sizing

• Recommend a Program TR frequency

• Defendable / Tangible Process

• Flexible enough to handle What-If Synthesis

• Inexpensive Solution


Marketplace

What is the marketplace for the research? Which LM program What is the marketplace for the research? Which LM program could use it?could use it?

• TACTrac (a product now owned by i2, previously owned by TACTECH). Part level (capacitor, transistors, etc.) obsolescence database, with extensive industry probing and data gathering. Very expensive product (about $20,000 plus annual fees for weekly updates). It rates a product on a scale of 1(new) to 5(obsolete). Provides warnings of impending obsolescence.

• LCE (also owned by i2, their original product), also expensive, and uses the TACTrac model of data gathering and database management. Same idea, get data from industry, compile and sell.

• MOCA (University of Maryland, CALCE organization) is a research-level C++ programmed Graduate project. It takes output from a TACTrac or LCE and uses it to predict a program Tech Refresh point. It uses production schedules and part tracking. Still too low a level for consideration. No cost data (no sales yet).


R2T2 Approach

•R2T2 performance is based on:R2T2 performance is based on:– Engineering data and technology assessment inputs

– Develops a program-level synchronous TR frequency

– Optimizes the recommended TR frequency based on life cycle cost

– Develops a TR Plan for each refresh point, identifying necessary changes by part number.

– Develops a Life Cycle Plan for each system serial number

– Allows for What-if Analysis to compare baseline options quickly

– Provides a quick/coarse Reliability Assessment for comparisons

– Develops a coarse Cost Estimate (can use Price or ICE as desired)

– Integrated, Web-deployed, uses databases (no shadowing)

– Clean, open architecture implementation maximizing flexibility


• Easy Side by Side Comparison of Easy Side by Side Comparison of StrategiesStrategies

• Increased, Customizable Graphing Increased, Customizable Graphing CapabilitiesCapabilities

R2T2 Optimization StrategyR2T2 Optimization Strategy


These charts represent These charts represent some of the technology some of the technology groupings for the VME groupings for the VME System. System.

The charts plot the maturity The charts plot the maturity of the system components of the system components and the projected cost and the projected cost associated with a given associated with a given functionality.functionality.

R2T2 Tech Refresh ScreensR2T2 Tech Refresh Screens


Capacity Increase Through Projected Life Span

105%

305%

505%

705%

905%

1105%

1305%

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Years

% C

apac

ity

Incr

ease

Tw o Cycle Cost

Three Cycle Cost

Four Cycle Cost

By utilizing an optimized Technology Refreshment Strategy, By utilizing an optimized Technology Refreshment Strategy, this example system will very conservatively be able to this example system will very conservatively be able to realize a realize a 1305% capacity increase.1305% capacity increase.

R2T2 System Capacity MetricsR2T2 System Capacity Metrics


Project Yearly Spare and Repair Costs

$-$50,000

$100,000$150,000$200,000$250,000$300,000$350,000$400,000$450,000$500,000$550,000$600,000$650,000$700,000$750,000$800,000$850,000$900,000$950,000

$1,000,000$1,050,000$1,100,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Year

Sp

are

an

d R

ep

air

co

st

Two Cycle Cost Three Cycle Cost Four Cycle Cost

In addition to the capacity increase, the optimal refresh In addition to the capacity increase, the optimal refresh strategy alsostrategy also represents a tremendous cost savingsrepresents a tremendous cost savings

• The cost The cost savings in savings in the last year the last year alone make alone make up ALL the up ALL the additional additional costs for costs for NRENRE

R2T2 Example AnalysisR2T2 Example Analysis


Cumulative Total Costs (NRE, Spares and Repair) Over the Projected Life Span

$-$500,000

$1,000,000$1,500,000$2,000,000$2,500,000$3,000,000$3,500,000$4,000,000$4,500,000$5,000,000$5,500,000$6,000,000$6,500,000$7,000,000$7,500,000$8,000,000$8,500,000$9,000,000$9,500,000

$10,000,000$10,500,000$11,000,000$11,500,000$12,000,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Year

Co

st o

f N

RE

, Sp

ares

an

d R

epai

r (i

n $

)

Two Cycle Cost

Three Cycle Cost

Four Cycle Cost

The cost savings of the optimized system become even more The cost savings of the optimized system become even more substantial when acquisition costs are added to the system.substantial when acquisition costs are added to the system.

R2T2 Example AnalysisR2T2 Example Analysis


R2T2 SummaryR2T2 Summary

• Thin Client Web-based ApplicationThin Client Web-based Application• Requiring minimal user inputsRequiring minimal user inputs• Providing comparative costs for trade analysisProviding comparative costs for trade analysis• Provides Technology Refreshment StrategyProvides Technology Refreshment Strategy• Provides a line-item analysis of Technology Refresh Provides a line-item analysis of Technology Refresh

Planning (Changes in time and magnitude)Planning (Changes in time and magnitude)• Capacity assessment performed over life cycleCapacity assessment performed over life cycle

Date post:	16-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	geraldine-hardy
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Maritime Systems & Sensors NDIA 2003 Systems Engineering Conference 20-23 October 2003 Rapid...

Documents