Systems Engineering Case Studies

1
Systems Engineering Case Studies

• Charles M. Garland
• Air Force Center for Systems Engineering
• [phone] x3368
• Charles.Garland_at_us.af.mil
• Dr John Colombi
• Dept of Systems and Engineering Mgt
• Air Force Institute of Technology

October 3, 2008
2
Agenda

• Air Force Center for Systems Engineering
• Case Studies
• Case Framework/ Approach
• Learning Principles
• Teaching Systems Engineering Cases

3
Air Force Center for Systems Engineering
4
AF CSE Vision and Mission
Vision Become a national center of excellence
for systems engineering, from theory to
application, for the defense community.
Mission Shape the future of systems engineering
in the AF and DoD to improve our ability to
deliver war-fighting capabilities. We will
accomplish this by conceptualizing new processes,
practices, tools, and resources for the SE
workforce through research, education, and
consultation.
5
AF CSE Leadership
Director
Mr. George Mooney
Deputy Director
Technical Director
Mr. G. Richard Freeman
Col. John Camps
Education Training Division
Applications Development Division
Curriculum Chair for Systems Engineering
Maj. Jeffrey Havlicek
Dr. David Jacques
Mr. Mike Ucchino
6
Systems Engineering Case Studies

• Began under the academic oversight of a
  Subcommittee on Systems Engineering to the Air
  University Board of Visitors
• Chaired by Air Force Chief Scientist Dr. Alex
  Levis
• Selected four programs for initial case studies
  (Hubble Space Telescope, Theater Battle
  Management Core System, F-111, and C-5)
• AF CSE Strategic Plan for Case Studies
• Five year plan updated every three years
• Identified, evaluated, and prioritized candidate
  programs

7
Completed Case Studies
Hubble Space Telescope
GPS (Global Positioning System)
F-111 Aardvark
B-2
C-5 Galaxy
TBMCS (Theater Battle
Management Core Systems)
Peacekeeper Intercontinental Ballistic Missile
A-10
8
Ongoing Future Case Studies
International Space Station
E-10
MH-53J/M Helicopter
on contract
FY09 Option
FY10 Option
underway
Global Hawk
T-6A Texan II
KC-135 Simulators
on contract
FY09 Option
underway
underway
9
Friedman-Sage Framework

• Based on student heuristics, developed by
• Dr George Friedman University of Southern
  California
• Dr Andy Sage George Mason University
• Comprised of 9 concept domains (rows) 3
  responsibility domains (columns)
• Rows represent phases in SE life cycle
  necessary process and systems management support
• Columns depict responsibilities from both sides
  of the program (industry and government)
• Derived into matrix - Identifies learning
  principles
• Used to organize the case writing

Case Studies of Systems Engineering and
Management in Systems Acquisition. Systems
Engineering, Vol.7, No. 1, 2004
10
Friedman-Sage Framework
11
Peacekeeper Learning Principles
12
Peacekeeper LP1

• Development commands must manage their technology
  base to optimize progress over several programs.
• Ballistic Missile Office (BMO) developed and
  managed a technology base that spanned several
  programs
• Atlas, Titan, Minuteman, Peacekeeper and Small
  ICBM
• This matured technologies such as
• Solid rocket propellants
• Nozzle manufacture
• Liquid fueled engines
• Guidance systems

13
GPS Learning Principles
14
GPS Learning Principle 2

• The systems integrator must rigorously maintain
  program baselines
• Joint Program Office (JPO) retained the role of
  managing and controlling the systems
  specification
• This allowed control of functional baseline
• JPO derived and constructed an agreed-to set of
  systems requirements that became the program
  baseline
• Performance/Risk/Cost trade studies against
  functional baseline
• Interface Control Working Group managed the
  functional requirements of the allocated baseline
  
• Processes gave JPO first-hand knowledge and
  insight into risks at lowest level

15
Hubble Learning Principles
16
Hubble Learning Principle

• For complex programs, the number of players
  (government and contractor) demands that the
  program be structured to cope with high risk
  factors in many management and technical areas
• Contractors Lockheed (LMSC) and Perkin-Elmer
  (P-E) owned very significant and unique program
  risk areas
• LM was the overall integrator
• P-E was the technical expert in the critical
  optical system
• Lack of insight into quality assurance led
  directly to the primary mirror defects, in spite
  of substantial evidence otherwise

17
Synopsis of Learning Principles

• Created as a reference tool for practitioners
• Categorizes LPs
• Consider adopting the approach highlighted
• Problem to be avoided
• Will be updated as more case studies are completed

18
Learning Principle Distribution
19
Case Study Availability
http//www.afit.edu/cse/cases.cfm
20
Case Study Audience?

• Support teaching of Systems Engineering
  principles
• Systems engineering/ programmatic decisions
• Operational effectiveness
• Processes, principles, tools
• Decision material
• Highlight the importance of skills from multiple
  functional areas, including multiple engineering
  disciplines
• Audience students in a classroom?
• Audience practitioners (engineers/management)
  throughout the organization?
• Can a single case address both?

21
SE Case Study Format

• Format is different for the audience
• Students
• Typical Harvard Business School case
• Chronologic story emphasizing decision making
• Shorter length of typically 10-30 pages
• No answers, guided discussion and personal
  discovery
• Practitioners
• Executive Summary
• Detailed treatment of Systems Engineering
  activity
• What to avoid - What to emphasize/apply
• We attempt to blend both

22
SE Case Study Format

• For Practitioners (Part 1)
• Executive Summary
• Description of the Learning Principles
• Students (Case Body Part 2)
• Systems Engineering Intro/ Appropriate guidance
• System Description
• Detailed Chronology
• Insightful Questions
• Appendix Material -Trade studies, reviews,
• Requirements, architecture, other analysis

23
Case Study Scope

• Need to understand scope as key controlling
  factor
• Time/ Schedule
• Total Resources
• Outline/ Page Allocation
• Scope! Focus on 4-6 LP
• Apply a framework
• Assessment
• Reference

24
Success

• Dont confuse operational system success with
  systems engineering success
• C-5 example
• Heavy-lift aircraft capable of carrying multiple
  tanks and related equipment
• Maximum take-off Gross Weight over 764,000 lbs!
• Unique front and aft ramps facilitate easy
  drive-on, drive-off loading of military vehicles
  and equipment
• Accomplishes tasks that no other military
  aircraft can

25
C-5 Success Synopsis

• So while a very successful operational aircraft,
  but
• LP 2. Total Package Procurement Concept (TPPC)
  was a fixed-price, incentive fee contract
  strategy for the design, development, and
  production of 58 aircraft.
• Invented to control cost growth underlying
  cause for overruns
• LP 3. A Weight Empty Guarantee was included in
  the specification and in the contract as a cost
  penalty for each delivered overweight aircraft.
• Contract Penalty 10,000 per pound per delivered
  aircraft
• Dominated the traditionally balanced requirements
  resulting in a major shortfalls in wing and pylon
  fatigue life
• Negative effects of forcing (out-of-balance) one
  system parameter
• Trend in forcing an aircraft from nominal
  weight

26
Insight into TPM (Weight)
27
Teaching

• How best to teach (Systems Engineering)?
• Wrong question
• How best do students learn?
• Student centered
• Discussion based
• Active Learning

Participant Centered Learning and the Case
Method, Harvard Business School Publishing
28
Participant Centered Learning

• Harvard Business School Participant-Centered
  Learning and the Case Method
• Typically a class will cover a 2-3 key points
  (LPs)
• No Lecturing
• Students dont have the LPs need to discovery as
  a class
• Students must apply course material together with
  experience
• Listen to other students
• Professor will elicit student participation
• How do you know that ?
• What do you think about ? Why?
• Professor questions, listens and responds
• Organize responses, ask more questions, summarize

29
Summary

• Feedback suggests these can be very effective to
  support Graduate and Continuous Learning courses
• Provide real-world, well-known examples
• Target an organization / domain
• DoD examples for DoD students
• NASA examples for NASA students
• Provide for practitioners and resident students
• Use a student-led Case Study pedagogical approach