Aerospace Systems Engineering as an Integrating Function for the Georgia Tech Graduate Program in Aerospace Systems Design - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Aerospace Systems Engineering as an Integrating Function for the Georgia Tech Graduate Program in Aerospace Systems Design PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 4950e9-NzhkM



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Aerospace Systems Engineering as an Integrating Function for the Georgia Tech Graduate Program in Aerospace Systems Design

Description:

Aerospace Systems Engineering as an Integrating Function for the Georgia Tech Graduate Program in Aerospace Systems Design Dr. Daniel P. Schrage – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:484
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 50
Provided by: dsch
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Aerospace Systems Engineering as an Integrating Function for the Georgia Tech Graduate Program in Aerospace Systems Design


1
Aerospace Systems Engineeringas an Integrating
Functionfor the Georgia Tech Graduate Program in
Aerospace Systems Design
  • Dr. Daniel P. Schrage
  • Professor and Director
  • Center of Excellence in Rotorcraft Technology
    (CERT)
  • Center for Aerospace Systems Analysis (CASA)

2
Presentation Outline
  • Overview of the Graduate Program Aerospace
    Systems Design Program
  • The Evolution from an IPPD to an IPPD through RDS
    to a Modern Aerospace Systems Engineering
    Approach
  • Description of the Graduate Course in Aerospace
    Systems Engineering
  • Opportunities for Collaboration with the School
    of ISYE

3
Georgia Tech School of AE
  • School of Aerospace Engineering
  • One of original six Guggenheim Schools of
    Aeronautics
  • 34 full time faculty
  • 600-700 undergraduate students (AE majors)
  • 250 -300 graduate students
  • Highest Rated Public Aerospace School (Overall
    UG 2nd to MITGR-3rd to MIT Stanford, U.S.
    News World Report)
  • Six Disciplinary Groups (Full A.E. School)

Aerodynamics and Fluid Mechanics Structural
Mechanics and Materials Propulsion and
Combustion
Flight Mechanics and Controls Structural
Dynamics and Aeroelasticity System Design and
Optimization
4
Graduate Program in Aerospace Systems Design
  • Includes core and elective courses to
  • Provide a Practice-oriented M.S. Program
  • Provide a Integrated-Discovery Focused Ph.D
    program
  • Includes a combination of disciplinary, methods
    and synthesis courses for System Design of
    Complex Systems
  • Aircraft and Rotorcraft
  • Missiles and Space
  • System of Systems Army/DARPA FCS FAA/NASA NAS
  • Integrates Research and Education
  • Two active research laboratories, ASDL and SSDL
  • Approx. 100 students (80 supported)
  • Approx. 15 research engineers
  • Uses an IPPD through RDS Approach and a modern
    Aerospace Systems Engineering Course as an
    Integrating Function for the Program

5
Evolution of the Georgia Tech Aerospace Systems
Design Program
6
Why it is Unique?
  • Is the Only Formal Graduate Aerospace Systems
    Design Program in the U.S., and probably
    throughout the world
  • Addresses the System Design of Complex Systems
    (Not Conceptual Design) utilizing a Generic IPPD
    Methodology, as a modern approach for Systems
    Engineering
  • Provides an engineering approach to Risk Based
    Management through Robust Design Simulation (RDS)
    environment for Implementing the IPPD Methodology
    at the Front End that can be continued for
    Process Improvement and Merging with Six Sigma
    methods
  • Provides a practical way of incorporating lean
    and other initiatives into the front end of a
    complex systems life cycle
  • Has spun off various methods, tools, and
    techniques from this IPPD through RDS approach
    for a variety of customers
  • Have moved to address System of Systems
    problems such as FCS and air transportation
    architectures for the NAS

7
Who are the Primary Supporting Faculty?
  • School of A.E.Primary Faculty
  • Dr. Dimitri Mavris, Director of ASDL and Boeing
    Chair Professor in Advanced Aerospace Systems
    Analysis
  • Dr. John Olds, Associate Professor and Director
    of SSDL
  • Dr. Jim Craig, Professor and Co-Director of CASA
  • Dr. Dan Schrage, Professor and Director, CASA
    CERT
  • Two recruitments Lewis Chair in Space Systems
    Technologies Junior Faculty in Design
    Methodology Tools
  • Supporting Faculty Dr. Amy Pritchett (AE/ISYE),
    Dr. Eric Johnson, Dr. JVR Prasad
  • Some Participation from the School of M.E.
  • Dr. Farokh Mistree, Professor and Director of
    SRL
  • Dr. Bob Fulton, Professor
  • Some Participation from the School of E.C.E
  • Dr. George Vachtsevanous, Professor and Director
    of the Intelligent Control Laboratory

8
Overview of Center for Aerospace Systems Analysis
(CASA)
  • Established in1998 based on successful
    development of the ASDL from 1992 and the
    successful development of the SSDL from 1995
    Serves as oversight for these labs
  • Through its laboratories provides the primary
    research support to the graduate program in
    Aerospace Systems Design which currently has
    100 students of which over 80 are U.S. citizens
  • Research support provides over 5M per year in
    sponsored research and supports 80 students
    15 research engineers
  • Provides a modern approach to systems engineering
    based on an Integrated Product/Process
    Development (IPPD) methodology executed through
    Robust Design Simulation (RDS)

9
Why Systems Analysis?
  • Systems Analysis is a scientific process, or
    methodology, which can best be described in terms
    of its salient problem-related elements. The
    process involves
  • Systematic examination and comparison of those
    alternative actions which are related to the
    accomplishment of desired objectives
  • Comparison of alternatives on the basis of the
    costs and the benefits associated with each
    alternative
  • Explicit consideration of risk
  • NASA, DoD, and Industry are realizing that more
    emphasis must be placing on enhancing systems
    analysis at the front end of the life cycle using
    modern systems engineering approaches

10
CASAs Laboratories
Aerospace Systems Design Lab www.asdl.gatech.edu
Space Systems Design Lab www.ssdl.gatech.edu
Flight Sim Lab
B.S.A.E. - M.S. - Ph.D Degrees
Design, Build, Fly Lab
Design Frameworks Lab
Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle Research Facility
IPERT Lab
11
An Integration and Practice-Oriented M.S.Program
in Aerospace Systems Design
Summer
Semester II
Semester I
ISE/PLMC Development
Design Methods/Techniques
Aerospace
Propulsion
Disciplinary
Systems
Electives
Systems
Engineering
Design
Special
Project
Applied
Applied
Systems
Systems
Design I
Design II
Design I
Design II
Safety
By Design
Modern
Modern
Product
Design
Design
Life Cycle
Methods I
Methods II
Management
Internship
Design Tools/Infrastructure
Mathematics (2 Required)
Other Electives
Legend
Core Classes
Elective Classes
12
Aerospace Systems Design Education Research
Philosophy
Industry
Government
Relevant Problems
Partners GEAE RRA LMTAS Boeing Sikorsky
  • Methods Formulation
  • Supports Basic Research
  • Implementation of Methods

Partners ONR NASA AFRL NRTC
Data Tools
Funding
Funding
Methods
Students
13
Design Process Paradigm Shift(Research
Opportunities in Engineering Design, NSF
Strategic Planning Workshop Final Report, April
1996)
  • A paradigm shift is underway that attempts to
    change the way complex systems are being designed
  • Emphasis has shifted from design for performance
    to design for affordability, where affordability
    is defined as the ratio of system effectiveness
    to system cost profit
  • System Cost - Performance Tradeoffs must be
    accommodated early
  • Downstream knowledge must be brought back to the
    early phases of design for system level tradeoffs
  • The design Freedom curve must be kept open until
    knowledgeable tradeoffs can be made

14
What is IPPD?
  • Integrated Product/Process Development (IPPD) is
    a management methodology that incorporates a
    systematic approach to the early integration and
    concurrent application of all the disciplines
    that play a part throughout a systems life cycle
    (Technology for Affordability A Report on the
    Activities of the Working Groups to the Industry
    Affordability Executive Committee, The National
    Center for Advanced Technologies (NCAT), January
    1994)
  • IPPD evolved out of the commercial sectors
    assessment of what it took to be world class
    competitive in the 1980s
  • The DoD has required IPPD and the use of IPTs
    where practical throughout the DoD Acquisition
    Process for Major Systems (DoD 5000.2R)
  • Conduct of IPPD requires Product/Process
    Simulation using Probabilistic Approaches

15
Quality Revolution - Where Competition is Today
NCAT Report, 1994
16
Japanese Auto Industry Made Changes Earlier Than
U.S. Auto Industry
17
Concurrent vs Serial Approach
18
Traditional Design Development Using only a Top
Down Decomposition Systems Engineering Process
19
IPPD Requires the Computer Integration of Product
and Process Models and
Tools for System Level Design Trades and Cycle
Time Reduction
20
Integrated Product and Process Development
Modeling Flow (Aircraft Example)
21
HSCT Integrated Design Manufacturing Ph.D
Thesis (W. Marx, 1997)
Wing Point Design Regions
William J. Marx
22
Aircraft Life Cycle Cost Analysis (ALCCA) -
including Economic Analysis
23
Aircraft Process Based Manufacturing Cost Model
24
Cost Time Analysis for Theoretical Production
25
Cost/Time Constraint Curve for Candidate
Selection
Ref. MIL-HDBK-727
26
Probabilistic Cost/Time Production Analysis
Cumul. time
Cost/Time Curve
End Points for Wide Range of Projected Lot Sizes
Finishing Operations
Largest Run
Production
Theoretical First Unit Cost (TFUC)
Setup
Smallest Run
Design Tools
Cost / Unit
Purchase Material
Material Cost
Setup Cost
Tool Design Cost
Finishing Operations Cost Smallest Run
Production Cost Largest Run
Finishing Operations Cost Largest Run
Production Cost Smallest Run
Ref. MIL-HDBK-727
27
Georgia Tech Generic IPPD Methodology
  • Methodology provides a procedural design
    (trade-off iteration) approach based on four key
    elements
  • Systems Engineering Methods and Tools (Product
    design driven, deterministic, decomposition
    approaches MDO is usually based on analytic
    design approach)
  • Quality Engineering Methods and Tools (Process
    design driven, nondeterministic, recomposition
    approaches MDO is usually based on experimental
    design approach)
  • Top Down Design Decision Process Flow (Provides
    the design trade-off process)
  • Computer Integrated Design Environment(Information
    Technology driven)
  • Methodology has been implemented through Robust
    Design Simulation (RDS) for a number of
    applications

28
Georgia Tech Generic IPPD Methodology
29
The Systems Engineering Process
  • Process Input
  • Customer Needs/Objectives/ Requirements
  • - Missions
  • - Measures of Effectiveness
  • - Environments
  • - Constraints
  • Technology Base
  • Output Requirements from Prior Development
    Effort
  • Program Decision Requirements
  • Requirements Applied Through
  • Specifications and Standards

System Analysis Control (Balance)
  • Requirements Analysis
  • Analyze Missions Environments
  • Identify Functional Requirements
  • Define/Refine Performance Design
  • Constraint Requirement
  • Trade-Off Studies
  • Effectiveness Analysis
  • Risk Management
  • Configuration Management
  • Interface Management
  • Performance Measurement
  • - SEMS
  • - TPM
  • - Technical Reviews

Requirement Loop
  • Functional Analysis/Allocation
  • Decompose to Lower-Level Functions
  • Allocate Performance Other Limiting
    Requirements to
  • All Functional Levels
  • Define/Refine Functional Interfaces
    (Internal/External)
  • Define/Refine/Integrate Functional Architecture

Design Loop
  • Synthesis
  • Transform Architectures (Functional to Physical)
  • Define Alternative System Concepts,
    Configuration
  • Items System Elements
  • Select Preferred Product Process Solutions
  • Define/Refine Physical Interfaces
    (Internal/External)

Verification
Related Terms Customer
Organization responsible for Primary Functions
Primary Functions Development,
Production/Construction, Verification,
Deployment, Operations,
Support Training, Disposal Systems Elements
Hardware, Software, Personnel, Facilities, Data,
Material,
Services, Techniques
  • Process Output
  • Development Level Dependant
  • - Decision Data Base
  • - System/Configuration Item
  • Architecture
  • - Specification Baseline

30
Modeling and SimulationVarying Fidelity of
Synthesis and Sizing
Safety
Safety
Economics
Aerodynamics
Aerodynamics
Economics
S
ynthesis Sizing
SC
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
SC
Integrated Routines
Increasing

Table Lookup
Sophistication and

Structures
Complexity
Performance

Conceptual Design Tools
(
First-Order Methods)
Approximating Functions
Direct Coupling of Analyses
Propulsion
Structures
Performance

Preliminary Design Tools
(
Higher-Order Methods)
Propulsion
31
The Quality Engineering Process provides
Recomposition Methods Tools
Knowledge Feedback
Quality Function Deployment Off-Line
Seven Management and Planing Tools Off-Line
Statistical Process Control On-Line
Robust Design Methods (Taguchi, Six - Sigma,
DOE) Off-Line
Customer
  • Identify Important Items
  • Variation Experiments
  • Make Improvements
  • Hold Gains
  • Continuous Improvement
  • Needs

Having heard the voice of the customer, QFD
prioritizes where improvements are needed
Taguchi provides the mechanism for identifying
these improvements
32
Computer Integrated Environment
Product LifeCycle Management
Create Optimize
33
CoVE Collaborative Visualization Environment
for Complex Systems Design
  • Funded by the
  • Defense University Research Instrumentation
    Program (DURIP)
  • February 2003

34
CoVE Objectives
  • A semi-immersive, very high resolution,
    Collaborative Visualization Environment (CoVE).
  • Used to investigate the use of semi-immersive
    virtual environments in collaborative design
    processes.
  • Basic concept for the CoVE is a large, high
    resolution display wall similar to those
    developed for media companies and operations
    centers.
  • It will allow us to apply emerging probabilistic
    design methods to problems at an industrial
    scale.
  • It is expected to promote new research in design,
    visualization and usability with other leading
    centers on campus.

35
CoVE Features
  • A single CoVE with a 25 M-pixel resolution curved
    data wall measuring 20 ft wide by 12 ft tall.
  • Seating for up to 12 participants, each with
    their own computers and local displays.
  • The basic design will be configured so that it
    can be used with another CoVE to execute
    distributed collaborative design with another
    team at a remote location.
  • The CoVE will include both single person and
    group video conferencing capabilities.
  • Project budget 630k

36
Examples
37
Examples
38
Example ASDL Application
Unified Trade-off Environment
Morphological Matrix
QFD
Mission Profile
Constraint Analysis
Video Conference
Technology Impact Matrix
RAM Model
Technology Profiles
JPDM
CDF
CFD Visualization
39
Weber 2nd Floor Site
Operations
Video Conferencing
Observers
Data Wall
Participants
40
CoVE Tentative Schedule
  • Award announcement February 2003
  • Final specifications April 2003
  • Site preparations May 2003
  • Construction Installation July 2003
  • Testing September 2003
  • Acceptance October 2003

41
Aerospace Systems Engineering Course AE 6370
  • Introduces new graduate students to Aerospace
    Systems Engineering and a methodology for
    Implementing it through IPPD through Robust
    Design Simulation (RDS)
  • Consists of covering traditional systems
    engineering methods and tools introduces quality
    engineering methods and tools introduces
    multi-attribute decision methods and introduces
    the need for a computer integrated environment
  • Course consists of a mid-term exam and team
    projects (5 students per team) addressing the
    concept formulation for complex systems or system
    of systems
  • Utilizes a simple set of integrated tools to
    allow the teams to conduct the first iteration
    through a complex system design
  • Will be offered as a distance learning course for
    the first time in Fall 2003

42
Aerospace Systems Engineering Taught using an
Integrated Set of Tools
43
Ten Complex System Formulation Projects from
AE6370, Fall 2002
  • AIAA Graduate Student Missile Design Competition
    Future Target Delivery System(Missile
    Multipurpose Target
  • RFP for a High Firepower Payload for Missile
    Defense (Missile Interceptor)
  • NASA Sponsored University Competition for the
    Conceptual Design of a Titan (Saturns largest
    moon) Vertical Lift Aerial Vehicle
  • AHS/NASA Student Design Competition for VTOL
    Urban Disaster Response Vehicle
  • NASA Personal Air Vehicle Evaluation Program to
    identify VTOL and ESTOL Concepts
  • RFP for a Quiet Supersonic Business Jet in
    conjunction with Gulfstream Aerospace Company
  • DoD Potential Joint Program for an Air Maneuver
    Transport Concepts for the Objective Force
  • AIAA Student Competition for Subsonic
    Commercial QuEST
  • AUVS International Aerial Robotics Competition
    and DARPA Project Intelligent Uninhabited
    Aerial Vehicle (UAV) using Software Enabled
    Control (SEC)
  • Army Aviation Recapitalization Program
    Technology and Risk Assessment for the Armys
    UH-60M Helicopter Improvement Program

44
What is IPPD Through RDS
  • Integrated Product/Process Development (IPPD)
    means applying Concurrent Engineering at the
    front end of a systems life cycle where design
    freedom can be leveraged and product/process
    design tradeoffs conducted in parallel at the
    system, component, and part levels
  • Implementation of IPPD requires moving from a
    deterministic point design approach to a
    probabilistic family design approach to keep the
    design space open and from committing life cycle
    cost before the system life cycle design
    trade-offs can be made
  • Robust Design Simulation (RDS) provides the
    necessary simulation and modeling environment for
    executing IPPD at the System level
  • Continuation of RDS along the system life cycle
    implies the creation of a Virtual Stochastic Life
    Cycle Design Environment
  • An Overall Evaluation Criterion (OEC) based on
    System Affordability should be identified early
    and its variability tracked along the life cycle
    time line

45
Roadmap to Affordability Through RDS
Robust Design Simulation
Subject to
Robust Solutions
Design Environmental Constraints
Technology Infusion Physics-Based
Modeling Activity and Process-Based Modeling
Objectives Schedule Budget Reduce LCC Increase
Affordability Increase Reliability . . . . .
Economic Life-Cycle Analysis
Synthesis Sizing
Operational Environment
Simulation
Impact of New Technologies-Performance Schedule
Risk
Economic Discipline Uncertainties
Customer Satisfaction
46
Interactive RDS Environment
47
Risk Uncertainty are Greatest at the Front
KNOWNS
KNOWN-UNKNOWNS
UNKNOWN-UNKNOWNS
48
Coninuous RDS along the System Life Cycle to link
the fuzzy front end to the process capability
approaches
Continuous Product Improvement / Innovation
Uncertainty
Risk Management/Reduction
Overall
Fuzzy Front End
Evaluation
Criterion
Upper Specification
(OEC)
Response
OEC Target
Lower
Specification
System Definition
System Integration
Manufacturing
System Design

(Detail/Tolerance)
(On-Line Quality)
(Preliminary/Parameter)
Tech. Development
(Conceptual/System)
Traditional C
and C

Approach for Continuous, On-line Process
Improvement
p
p
k
Overall
Upper Specification
Evaluation
Criterion
(OEC)
Response
OEC Target
Lower
Specification
Initial Distribution
Reduced Variability and Improved Mean Response
Time
49
The VSLCDE- Key Characteristics
The purpose of VSLCDE is to facilitate design
decision- making over time (at any level of the
organization) in the presence of uncertainty,
allowing affordable solutions to be reached with
adequate confidence. It is a research testbed.
  • Virtual . . . Simulation-based system life-cycle
    prediction
  • Stochastic . . . Time-varying uncertainty is
    modeled temporal decision-making
  • Life-Cycle . . . the design, engineering
    development, test, manufacture, flight test,
    operational simulation, sustainment, and
    retirement of a system. The operational
    simulation includes virtual testing, evaluation,
    certification, and fielding of a vehicle in the
    existing infrastructure, and tracking of its
    impact on the economy, market demands,
    environment.
  • Design . . . Implies that the environments main
    role is to provide knowledge for use by
    decision-makers, especially for finding robust
    solutions
  • Environment . . . Implies the support of
    geographically distributed analyses and people
    through collaboration tools and data management
    techniques

50
Some Opportunities for Collaboration between the
Schools of AE and ISYE
  • Integration of ISYE Logistics with AE Aerospace
    Systems Design Program for a variety of customers
    (Industry and Government)
  • With Lockheed Martin on a Modern Systems
    Engineering Approach (addressing Product Life
    Cycle tradeoffs from the Outset) based on the
    Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Development Approach
    successes and Lessons Learned (POC Bill Kessler,
    LM Lean Enterprise Mgr and Tom Burbage, LM JSF
    VP)
  • With OSD/DOD/USAF New Focus on Systems
    Engineering Education and Research
  • With USAF GT(CEE) Initiative in taking over the
    Lean Sustainment Initiative from MIT
  • With NASA Langley National Institute of Aerospace
    (NIA) and with NASA Ames Engineering of Complex
    Systems (ECS) programs
  • Others?
About PowerShow.com