seari short course seriesseari.mit.edu/documents/courses/pi26s/seari_sc-2010-pi26s-12-1.pdf · jdam...

seari.mit.edu

SEAri Short Course Series Course: PI.26s Epoch-based Thinking: Anticipating System and Enterprise Strategies for Dynamic

Futures Lecture: Lecture 12: Advanced Topics in Epoch-based Thinking Author: Adam Ross and Donna Rhodes Lecture Number: SC-2010-PI26s-12-1 Revision Date: July 24, 2010 This course was taught at PI.26s as a part of the MIT Professional Education Short Programs in July 2010 in Cambridge, MA. The lectures are provided to satisfy demand for learning more about Multi-Attribute Tradespace Exploration, Epoch-Era Analysis, and related SEAri-generated methods. The course is intended for self-study only. The materials are provided without instructor support, exercises or “course notebook” contents. Do not separate this cover sheet from the accompanying lecture pages. The copyright of the short course is retained by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Reproduction, reuse, and distribution of the course materials are not permitted without permission.

Lecture 12 Advanced Topics in Epoch-based Thinking

Dr. Donna H. Rhodes Dr. Adam M. Ross [email protected] [email protected]

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

[PI.26s] Epoch-Based Thinking: Anticipating System and Enterprise Strategies for Dynamic Futures

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

seari.mit.edu © 2010 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2

Outline

• JDAM case: impact of epoch-based thinking on changeability

• MCS and EEA example: combining methods for better analysis

• Survivability research: impact of epoch-based thinking on designing survivable systems

• Methods synthesis and technology transition


JDAM Case


JDAM Overview

• Motivated by 1991 Gulf War conflict • Addresses demand for low unit cost, high all-weather accuracy • Proposed by joint AF-Navy 1991 • Modification kit for existing “dumb” warheads • GPS-aided inertial navigation system (INS) • Developed by McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing) 1994-present • Program was experiment in acquisition reform • Several JDAM variants (different warheads, capabilities)

Is JDAM a flexible system? Can this quality be a “designed for” trait?


Gov’t Tradespace (Ep0-1)

Original Gov’t Prefs Unit Cost Poor Weather Accuracy Aircraft Compatibility Carrier Suitability Retarget Time Warhead Compatibility

Altered Gov’t Prefs

• Desire improved Clear Weather Accuracy

• Don’t care about Poor Weather Accuracy


Gov’t Tradespace (Ep2-3)


• Same as Original, but…

• Increased priority on being able to Retarget in flight


• Same as Original, but…

• Also desire Standoff Distance attribute


JDAM U-U TS (Ep0-1)

Epoch 0 Epoch 1

2 Decision Makers: Gov’t Utility vs. Prime Utility


JDAM U-U TS (Ep2-3)

Epoch 2 Epoch 3



Pareto Trace (Designs)

1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Plf Strake/

Fin Strake/

Fin Strake/

Fin Strake/

Fin Strake/

Fin Strake/

Fin Strake/

Fin Strake/

Fin

NS INS only

GPS only

INS/ GPS

GPS only

INS/ GPS

INS/ GPS/A

Cup

INS/ GPS+/ACup

INS/ GPS+/ACup

TS Static data

Static data

Static data

Far comm

Far comm

Far comm

Far comm

Far comm

GA All All All All All All All All

Sfw Simple Simple Simple Simple Simple Simple Simple Med

PU 16K 16K 16K 16K 16K 16K 18K 18K

LS None None None None None None None None

Wng None None None None None None None None

TG None None None None None None None None

UDM1

.732 .810 .823 .863 .875 .880 .885 .894

UDM2

.416 .415 .411 .409 .406 .402 .384 .376

Wi-Fi JDAM

Note: Original JDAM has the following design variable values: JDAMv1:{Strake/Fin, INS/GPS/ACup, Static data, All, Med, 21K, None, None, None}

JDAMv2:{Strake/Fin, INS/GPS+/ACup, Static data, All, Med, 21K, None, None, None}



Pareto Trace (Attributes)

1

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 PU 16K 16K 16K 16K 16K 16K 18K 18K

WA 30 m 13 m 10 m 13 m 10 m 9 m 5 m 3 m

AC All All All All All All All All

CS All All All All All All All All

RT 2 min 2 min 2 min .1 min .1 min .1 min .1 min .1 min

WC All All All All All All All All

SD 8 nmi 8 nmi 8 nmi 8 nmi 8 nmi 8nmi 8nmi 8 nmi

CU 14.4K 14.5K 14.9K 15.1K 15.5K 15.8K 16.4K 17.2K

SL 20 20 20 10 10 10 10 10

ROI 11% 11% 7.6% 6.2% 3.4% 1.1% 9.6% 4.5%

CA 30 m 13 m 10 m 13 m 10 m 9 m 5 m 3 m

UDM1

.732 .810 .823 .863 .875 .880 .885 .894

UDM2

.416 .415 .411 .409 .406 .402 .384 .376

Note: Original JDAM has the following attribute values: JDAMv1:{21K, 10(30) m, 0.943, All, 1.7 min, All, <21K, 8 nmi, 20 yrs, >0, 9(30) m}

JDAMv2:{21K, 5(30) m, 0.943, All, 1.7 min, All, <21K, 8 nmi, 20 yrs, >0, 4(30) m}

Wi-Fi JDAM



JDAM Discussion

• JDAM has key path enablers that lead to changeability – Modularity – COTS parts – Few interfaces, but with excess bandwidth (“hooks”)

• Is JDAM an exception in aerospace? – Had special status as test program for acquisition reform – Prime retained control over design and class 2 change authority

• JDAM able to offset higher transition time limits with the path enablers

• Supplier bears cost of path enablers with expectation that “options” reduces long term cost


JDAM Conclusions

• On Robustness… – The “WiFi JDAM” concept appears to be high value across

various Epochs. More research needed • On Changeability…

– JDAMv2 is highly changeable • Modularity (low ∆t) • COTS (low ∆C)

– If “retargeting” considered an attribute, system is highly scaleable across a number of concepts

– Mission adaptability enabled by JDAM (reduced cost/time to hit targets)

Various “types” of JDAM were predicted by the analysis and discovered as actual systems!


Impact of Epoch-based Thinking in Survivability Research


9/11/20013000 lives lost from attacks on WTC and Pentagon

Closed NYSE and NASDAQ until 9/17US stocks lost $1.2 trillion in value the following week

8/14/2003Generator in Parma, OH, goes offlineAffected 40 million people in 8 states

$6 billion in losses

8/28/2005Hurricane Katrina strikes New Orleans

2000 lives lost$81.2 billion in damage

2000ILOVEYOU internet virus

$10 billion business damage

Recent Events Operational environment of

engineering systems characterized by increasing number of disturbances

1999 2006


Definition of Survivability Ability of a system to minimize the impact of finite-duration disturbances on value delivery

through (I) the reduction of the likelihood or magnitude of a disturbance, (II) the satisfaction of a minimally acceptable level of value delivery during and after a disturbance, and/or (III) a timely recovery

time

value

Epoch 1a Epoch 2

original state

disturbance epoch: Time period with a fixed context; characterized by static constraints, design concepts, available technologies, and articulated attributes (Ross 2006)

emergency value threshold

required value threshold

permitted recovery time

Vx Ve

Tr

Epoch 1b

V(t)

disturbance duration

Td

Type I

Type II

Epoch 3

Type III


1. Deduce initial design principles from system-disturbance framework, exploratory interviews, and literature (12 design principles)

2. Select operational systems with survivability requirements

3. Trace design specifications of systems to design principles

4. Revise set to reflect empirical observation (17 design principles)

Empirical Generation of Survivability Design Principles

A-10A “Warthog” UH-60A Blackhawk F-16C Fighting Falcon Iridium Network

A-10A: Sample Survivability Features pre

vent

ion

mob

ility

con

ceal

men

t

det

erre

nce

pre

empt

ion

avo

idan

ce

har

dnes

s

evo

lutio

n

redu

ndan

cy

div

ersi

ty

repl

acem

ent

repa

ir

redundant primary structure Xdual vertical stabilizers to shield heat exhaust Xlong low-set wings (flight possible even if missing 1/2 wing) Xinterchangeable engines, landing hear, and vertical stabilizers X

Design Principles

stru

ctur

e

Type I Type II Type III

margin


Theory Development: Empirical Testing of Design Principles

Methodology 1. Deduce design principles

from generic system-disturbance representation

2. Select operational systems with survivability requirements

3. Trace design specifications to design principles

4. Revise design principle set to reflect empirical observation

4

3

2 1

Sample Survivability Features pre

vent

ion

mob

ility

con

ceal

men

t

det

erre

nce

pre

empt

ion

avo

idan

ce

har

dnes

s

evo

lutio

n

redu

ndan

cy

div

ersi

ty

repl

acem

ent

repa

ir

redundant primary structure Xdual vertical stabilzers to shield heat exhaust Xlong low-set wings (flight possible even if missing 1/2 wing) Xinterchangeable engines, landing hear, and vertical stabilizers Xpilot sits in a titanium/aluminum armor bathtub Xspall shields between armor and pilot Xbullet resistant windscreen Xspall resistant canopy side panels XACES-II ejection seat X Xnight vision goggles for operating in darkness Xsituational awareness data linktwo self-sealing fuel tanks located away from ignition sources X X Xshort, self-sealing feed lines Xwing fuel used first Xmost fuel lines located inside tanks Xredundant feed flow Xopen cell foam in all tanks Xclosed cell foam in dry bays around tanks Xdraining and vents in vapor areas X Xmaneuverability at low airspeeds and altitude X Xtwo widely separated engines Xengines mounted away from fuselage Xdual fire walls X Xfail-active fire detection with two shot fire extinguishing Xengine case armor Xseparation between fuel tanks and air inlets Xone engine out capability Xtwo independent, separated mechanical flight controls X Xtwo rudders and elevators Xarmor around stick where redundant controls converge Xtwo independent, hydraulic power subsystems Xmanual reversion mode for flight controls X Xdual, electrically powered trim actuators Xless flammable hydraulic fuel Xjam-free Xone 30 mm GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling gun X X X16,000 pounds of mixed ordnance X X Xinfrared countermeasure flares Xelectronic countermeasures chaff Xjammer pods X Xillumination flaresAIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles X X X

arm

amen

tfu

el s

yste

mco

ckpi

tpr

opul

sion

fligh

t con

trol

stru

ctur

e

Type I (Reduce Susceptibility) Type II (Reduce Vulnerability)

Missing ODA loop for internal change agent

distribution

margin

functional redundancy

timeEpoch 1a Epoch 2

Vx

Ve

Tr

Epoch 1b

V(t)

1.1 prevention 2.1 hardness

1.4 deterrence

1.3 concealment

1.2 mobility

2.2 redundancy

2.10 replacement

2.11 repair

2.8 evolution

newmodified

1.5

pree

mpt

ion

2.6 failure mode reduction

2.4 heterogeneity2.3 margin

2.7 fail-safe

2.9 containment

2.5 distribution

1.6

avoi

danc

e original

Type III Survivability (Increase Resilience)

repairreplacement

diversity

redundancyevolutionhardness

avoidancepreemptiondeterrenceconcealmentmobilityprevention

restoration of system to improve value delivery3.2substitution of system elements to improve value delivery3.1

variation in system elements (characteristic or spatial) to decrease effectiveness of homogeneous disturbances2.4

duplication of critical system components to increase reliability2.3alteration of system elements to reduce disturbance effectiveness2.2resistance of a system to deformation2.1

Type II Survivability (Reduce Vulnerability)maneuverability away from disturbance1.6suppression of an imminent disturbance1.5dissuasion of a rational external change agent from committing a disturbance1.4reduction of the visibility of a system from an external change agent1.3relocation to avoid detection by an external change agent1.2suppression of a future or potential future disturbance1.1

Type I (Reduce Susceptibility)

Type III Survivability (Increase Resilience)

repairreplacement

diversity

redundancyevolutionhardness

avoidancepreemptiondeterrenceconcealmentmobilityprevention

restoration of system to improve value delivery3.2substitution of system elements to improve value delivery3.1

variation in system elements (characteristic or spatial) to decrease effectiveness of homogeneous disturbances2.4

duplication of critical system components to increase reliability2.3alteration of system elements to reduce disturbance effectiveness2.2resistance of a system to deformation2.1

Type II Survivability (Reduce Vulnerability)maneuverability away from disturbance1.6suppression of an imminent disturbance1.5dissuasion of a rational external change agent from committing a disturbance1.4reduction of the visibility of a system from an external change agent1.3relocation to avoid detection by an external change agent1.2suppression of a future or potential future disturbance1.1

Type I (Reduce Susceptibility)


Survivability Design Principles observe act decide

time Epoch 1a Epoch 2

Vx

Ve

Tr

Epoch 1b

V(t)

1.1 prevention 2.1 hardness

1.4 deterrence

1.3 concealment

1.2 mobility

2.2 redundancy

3.1 replacement

3.2 repair

2.8 evolution

active passive

1.5

pree

mpt

ion


2.4 heterogeneity 2.3 margin

2.7 fail-safe

2.9 containment

2.5 distribution

1.6

avoi

danc

e

Cycle of external change agent (intelligent disturbance)

Dominant Design Strategy

Epoch 3


Survivability Design Principles Type I (Reduce Susceptibility)

1.1 prevention suppression of a future or potential future disturbance 1.2 mobility relocation to avoid detection by an external change agent 1.3 concealment reduction of the visibility of a system from an external change agent 1.4 deterrence dissuasion of a rational external change agent from committing a disturbance 1.5 preemption suppression of an imminent disturbance 1.6 avoidance maneuverability away from an ongoing disturbance

Type II (Reduce Vulnerability) 2.1 hardness resistance of a system to deformation 2.2 redundancy duplication of critical system functions to increase reliability 2.3 margin allowance of extra capability for maintaining value delivery despite losses 2.4 heterogeneity variation in system elements to mitigate homogeneous disturbances 2.5 distribution separation of critical system elements to mitigate local disturbances


elimination of system hazards through intrinsic design: substitution, simplification, decoupling, and reduction of hazardous materials

2.7 fail-safe prevention or delay of degradation via physics of incipient failure 2.8 evolution alteration of system elements to reduce disturbance effectiveness 2.9 containment isolation or minimization of the propagation of failure

Type III (Enhance Resilience) 3.1 replacement substitution of system elements to improve value delivery 3.2 repair restoration of system to improve value delivery 26


Survivability Metrics Need to evaluate ability of system to (1) minimize utility losses and (2) meet critical value thresholds before, during, and after environmental disturbances

time-weighted utility loss • Difference between design utility,

Uo, and time-weighted average utility

• Internalizes lifecycle degradation • Inspired by Quality Adjusted Life

Years in health economics*

∫⋅−= dttUT

UUdl

L )(10

threshold availability • Ratio of time above critical value

thresholds (Vx during baseline Epoch, Ve during disturbance and recovery Epochs) to design life

• Accommodates changing expectations across contexts

dlT T

TATA =

desirable attributes: value-based, dynamic, continuous

*Pliskin, J., D. Shepard and M. Weinstein (1980). "Utility Functions for Life Years and Health Status." Operations Research, 28(1): 206-224.

TAT = time above thresholds Tdl = time of design life


Continuum Between Survivability and Robustness

3

2

1

1 :DVDVDV

DV a

Epoch 1a Epoch 2 Epoch 1d Epoch 1c Epoch 1b Epoch 2 Epoch 2 Epoch 2 Epoch 1e Epoch 2 Epoch 1f

T1a

At what point do repeated disturbances constitute a change in context?

Td Td Td Td Td T1f T1e T1d T1c T1b

Survivable Robust impulse event — attack — disaster – market shift – policy change

when the disturbance interval goes to 0…

then design for robustness

11

<<TTd

then design for survivability

when newT

epochmentlimEnviron →→01


Future Work

• Methodological improvements – Parameterize concept-of-operations in design vector

– Extend scope for systems-of-systems (SoS) engineering

• Apply MATE for Survivability to additional systems for prescriptive insights

water distribution power distribution transportation communications


Finite Disturbance or Epoch Shift? Open Question

Given a system or enterprise of interest,

when is an event a finite disturbance (recovering to same epoch state) and when is it an epoch shift?

Super Volcano Eruption Category 5 Hurricane Nuclear Meltdown

Forbes, June 2010


Survivability Insights • Survivability definition provides a solution-generating

and decision-making framework, enabling discovery of systems robust to finite-duration disturbances

• Epoch-based construct used in definition of survivability

• Method for exploring design tradespaces adapted to incorporate survivability-specific analysis

• Importance of survivability will grow as critical infrastructures become increasingly large-scale, long-lived, and interdependent

Uniting epoch-based thinking and tradespace exploration with survivability analysis generates knowledge that may

ultimately lead to better design decisions


Methods Synthesis and Technology Transition of Epoch-based Thinking Research


Nature of Systems Engineering “Innovation” Research

• Motivated by need to do something differently; specific problem may not be fully defined

• May be targeted to application in systems of ‘tomorrow’ versus ‘today’

• Results come from synthesis of multiple research contributions

• Resulting outcome seeks to be domain-independent and context-free “Innovation” research requires long-term investment as compared with research resulting in improvements or simple enhancements


Research Example: Responsive Systems Comparison Method

Classic paradigm New paradigm using RSC method

What is Responsive Systems Comparison, or RSC?

RSC is a concept level analysis method for identifying system designs that provide performance over time at less cost. Epoch-based thinking is an essential part of this overall method.


Multi-Aspect Synthesis Example: Responsive Systems Comparison (RSC)

Seeking ways to combine multiple aspects is a source for

further methodological innovation

Synthesis of multi-aspect methods can be used to develop robust methods for engineering complex systems

Process 1Value-Driving Context Definition

Process 2Value-Driven Design

Formulation

Process 3Epoch Characterization

Process 4Design Tradespace

Evaluation

Process 5Multi-Epoch

Analysis

Process 6Era Construction

Process 7Lifecycle Path

Analysis

Time

RSC consists of seven processes: 1. Value-Driving Context Definition 2. Value-Driven Design Formulation 3. Epoch Characterization 4. Design Tradespace Evaluation 5. Multi-Epoch Analysis 6. Era Construction 7. Lifecycle Path Analysis

Using Multi-Attribute Tradespace Exploration, Epoch-Era Analysis, and

other approaches, a coherent set of processes were

developed into the RSC method

Ross, A.M., McManus, H.L., Rhodes, D.H., Hastings, D.E., and Long, A.M., "Responsive Systems Comparison Method: Dynamic Insights into Designing a Satellite Radar System," AIAA Space 2009, Pasadena, CA, September 2009


RSC Method Research Lifecycle as Experienced

Prototype Method

Basic Research

Method Elaboration

Case-based Validation

Synthesis Trial Use

Real-world Application

2000 2010

Understanding of the research lifecycle and end-phase criteria resulted from posteriori knowledge


Basic Research Phase

Key Success Factor for Phase Completion Tractability Is there a clearly identified and scoped problem for which there are promising fundamental concepts and constructs that may lead to a new method? Phase Outcomes • Elaborated and scoped problem • Multi-domain literature review • Ideas for concepts and constructs to pursue

Tradespace: Assessment of the utility and cost of a large space of possible system architectures


Prototype Method Phase

Key Success Factor for Phase Completion Feasibility Does the prototype method appear to be feasible for addressing the targeted problem given real-world needs and constraints? Phase Outcomes • Prototype method • Successful testing of prototype method on selected case • Technical papers and feasibility analysis reports


Method Elaboration Phase

Key Success Factor for Phase Completion Applicability Has the method been sufficiently defined and elaborated as demonstrated by application in multiple cases? Phase Outcomes • Case study theses and papers • Technical report on method and case applications • Initial graduate course offering

Each point represents a feasible solution

Epoch Variables

Design Variables Attributes

Model(s)


Case-based Validation Phase

Key Success Factor for Phase Completion Scalability Is the method scalable for use on different systems problems as demonstrated by the application of multiple cases? Phase Outcomes • Models for additional case studies • Scalability and sensitivity studies • Identification of limits, constraints, and biases

Tradespace Size vs. Num DV and Num Steps

1.E+001.E+011.E+021.E+031.E+041.E+051.E+061.E+071.E+081.E+091.E+101.E+111.E+121.E+13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Steps per DV

Trade

space

Size

1 DV2 DV3 DV4 DV5 DV6 DV7 DV8 DV9 DV10 DV11 DV12 DV

X-TOS Space Tug


Synthesis Phase

Key Success Factor for Phase Completion Composability Can interim research outcomes be combined (including with existing application practice/techniques) into a comprehensive new approach? Phase Outcomes • Comparative methods papers • Augmentation of research with existing mechanisms • Documentation of integrated method with application rules • Further validation of synthesized approach

Process 1Value-Driving Context Definition

Process 2Value-Driven Design

Formulation

Process 3Epoch Characterization

Process 4Design Tradespace

Evaluation

Process 5Multi-Epoch

Analysis

Process 6Era Construction

Process 7Lifecycle Path

Analysis

Time

RSC consists of seven processes: 1. Value-Driving Context Definition 2. Value-Driven Design Formulation 3. Epoch Characterization 4. Design Tradespace Evaluation 5. Multi-Epoch Analysis 6. Era Construction 7. Lifecycle Path Analysis

Using Multi-Attribute Tradespace Exploration, Epoch-Era Analysis, and

other approaches, a coherent set of processes were

developed into the RSC method


Trial Use Phase

Key Success Factor for Phase Completion Transferability Has the to-be-transferred “innovation” proven to be sufficiently supported with guidance, training, and enabling information and mechanisms in trial use? Phase Outcomes • Guidance materials for application • “Packaging” of research outcomes for use • Experimentation laboratory with application trials • Validation and identification of limits, constraints, and biases

Visualization of concept tradespace

Observed use of method in laboratory environment

Preliminary guidebook


Real-world Application Phase

Key Success Factor for Phase Completion Implementability Has the “innovation” been sufficiently demonstrated in real-world effort as mature enough for broader application? Phase Outcomes • Application enablers (e.g., guidebooks, software, laboratories, etc.) • Training enablers (e.g., materials, courses, venues, etc.) • Technical reports documenting application • Application measures of success met

Design 3435

p p1. Needs (expectations)2. Context (constraints including

resources, technology, etc.)

Era is an ordered set of Epochs

Epoch 63 Epoch 171 Epoch 193 Epoch 202 Epoch 171

2 yrs 4 yrs 1 yr 3 yrs 10 yrs

Utopia TrajectoryDesign 3435

p p1. Needs (expectations)2. Context (constraints including

resources, technology, etc.)

Era is an ordered set of Epochs

Epoch 63 Epoch 171 Epoch 193 Epoch 202 Epoch 171

2 yrs 4 yrs 1 yr 3 yrs 10 yrs

Utopia TrajectoryDesign 3435

Results of application

Course materials and templates

Application venues


Interim Research SE Application Outcomes

Mental models and mind shifts Educated engineers (entering workforce) Educational courses (educate existing workforce) New techniques to augment existing practice New approaches/tools to improve practice Significant new engineering theory and practice

Goal is adopted/adapted methods to change systems engineering practice


Summary

Epoch-based thinking is useful as a stand alone approach, but is even more powerful when integrated with other approaches and methods

– Several areas of research ongoing – Scalability studies examining benefit for effort – Real-world experience informs further work

Ongoing research on advanced topics related to contextual, temporal, and perceptual aspects, as well as understanding how to

use epoch-based approaches in practice

seari short course seriesseari.mit.edu/documents/courses/pi26s/seari_sc-2010-pi26s-12-1.pdf · jdam...

Documents