Insight最新文献

Technology development is the crucial first step in designing new products and systems. It is a unique phase of product development in that it incorporates both scientific exploration and reduction to an engineered result. Too often, systems thinking and systems engineering principles aren't applied at this stage, leading to technologies that solve the wrong problems, inability to progress to higher maturity levels, and unworkable implementation architectures. In practice, this means higher development costs, extended timelines, and failed technology development projects. This article presents a framework for and provides guidance on systems engineering activities that add value and improve outcomes if applied during early stages of product development.

A failure of a great many early research and development programs is the result of encountering the traditional valley of death that shadows early research and technology development. The elements that create the valley of death leads to research and technology development high risk and poor return on investment for a great many research and development organizations. This leads eventually to avoiding research and technology development all together because the organizations cannot viably manage the outcome of their early-stage research and development (ESR&D) efforts. Unfortunately, there are few established frameworks and processes for enabling smooth transitions to avoid failure and manage risk across fundamental research, applied research, development, and productization. Many leaders, program managers, and scientists are unwilling to involve systems engineering because of the perception that systems engineering is heavily process oriented, adds unnecessary costs, and should be applied only to mature technologies. The value of systems engineering as applied to ESR&D is unclear to these key individuals. The unfortunate result is that systems engineering is not applied to ESR&D. This article discusses the potential of application of systems engineering to ESR&D to improve return on investment and decrease risk.

Robust systems engineering is perceived as an unnecessary cost and schedule burden when the goal is proof of concept in an early-stage project (TRL 1-5). In reality the majority of industry, as opposed to academic, early-stage research and development (ESR&D) efforts are generally not “pure research”, but instead focus on technology development for the purpose of technology transition to applied development and technology insertion into new or existing products. To overcome the barriers, an early and active end-user focused system engineering approach is needed to build the use cases to support the transition from fundamental research to applied development. Digital engineering (DE) enablers can lower the transition investment cost through the use of agile methodologies, reference architectures, and model-based design and manufacturing capabilities. End-to-end digital continuity from ESR&D to manufacturing and sustainment facilitates early discoveries of transition risks, which enable informed decision-making to mitigate pitfalls leading to the “valley of death.”

This article leverages efforts associated with Industry 4.0, digital engineering transformation and INCOSE working group efforts to illustrate how a systems engineering approach based on DE concepts facilitates rapid instantiation of key systems engineering process and elements in ESR&D projects. This approach is both enabling to foundational ESR&D efforts, and transformational in building a bridge across the valley of death to foster success in technology transition to product. An agnostic tool, standards-based framework is presented, and specific tools are used to illustrate ESR&D transformation.

Early-stage research and development (ESR&D) plays a vital role in the product development lifecycle, necessitating innovative approaches to address the complex challenges faced during this phase. This article quantifies how the incorporation of digital twin (DT) technology can reduce cost and schedule risk during ESR&D and later lifecycle stages in megaprojects. The Idaho National Laboratory demonstrated the application of DT in the Microreactor AGile Non-Nuclear Experimental Testbed (MAGNET) operations phase, showcasing the transformative potential of DT in both design and operation. These advances allowed real-time assessment of construction changes and their impact on project requirements. By focusing on the benefits of digital twinning, this article aims to promote a more positive attitude toward the incorporation of digital twin technologies in the early stages of R&D projects.

The aerospace industry has widely adopted the use of technology readiness levels (TRLs), (NASA) which describe the maturity of a technology from earliest stages of research through the operational system. In using TRLs, it has been observed that bridging the gap between research on a technology and its incorporation by engineers into a system is challenging. Nominally, the transition from TRL 4, defined as a component and/or breadboard validation in a laboratory environment, to TRL 7, defined as a system prototype demonstration in an operational environment, is a programmatic gap known as the “valley of death.” The valley of death is a schism whereby the component that incorporates the new technology fails to meet the eventual system requirements. The goal of this paper is to provide a methodology and “language” that enables the researchers and engineers to communicate more effectively to traverse this gap. The basis for this methodology is the combination of established methods for communicating progress for a program combined with the development and application of domain assessments. Domain readiness levels (DRLs), analogs of the TRLs, are specific to the domains relevant to the system of interest. Specifically, the methodology is intended to enable two-way communication between the domain experts and the systems engineer, with the goal of effective incorporation of a technology. This paper will use an example of the approach to bridge the “valley of death” targeted on the development of a satellite composites optical support structure that must stay in focus across the temperature range of 77-323 degrees Kelvin. In this example, the communication will use two relevant domains, materials and processes, to illustrate the methodology.

Systems engineering today faces a wide array of challenges, ranging from new operational environments to disruptive technological — necessitating approaches to improve research and development (R&D) efforts. Yet, emphasizing the Aristotelian argument that the “whole is greater than the sum of its parts” seems to offer a conceptual foundation creating new R&D solutions. Invoking systems theoretic concepts of emergence and hierarchy and analytic characteristics of traceability, rigor, and comprehensiveness is potentially beneficial for guiding R&D strategy and development to bridge the gap between theoretical problem spaces and engineering-based solutions. In response, this article describes systems–theoretic process analysis (STPA) as an example of one such approach to aid in early-systems R&D discussions. STPA—a ‘top-down’ process that abstracts real complex system operations into hierarchical control structures, functional control loops, and control actions—uses control loop logic to analyze how control actions (designed for desired system behaviors) may become violated and drive the complex system toward states of higher risk. By analyzing how needed controls are not provided (or out of sequence or stopped too soon) and unneeded controls are provided (or engaged too long), STPA can help early-system R&D discussions by exploring how requirements and desired actions interact to either mitigate or potentially increase states of risk that can lead to unacceptable losses. This article will demonstrate STPA's benefit for early-system R&D strategy and development discussion by describing such diverse use cases as cyber security, nuclear fuel transportation, and US electric grid performance. Together, the traceability, rigor, and comprehensiveness of STPA serve as useful tools for improving R&D strategy and development discussions. Leveraging STPA as well as related systems engineering techniques can be helpful in early R&D planning and strategy development to better triangulate deeper theoretical meaning or evaluate empirical results to better inform systems engineering solutions.

Researchers and funding organizations often do not understand the value of systems engineering in early-stage projects (technology readiness levels TRL 1-5), during which systems engineering may be viewed as an unnecessary cost, and as a process heavy effort applicable only for mature technologies. This may result in a relative lack of engineering rigor and lack of understanding of innovation context which often contributes to failures in the “valley of death” between fundamental research and applied development.

We argue there is more than one pathway for crossing the valley of death, and that relevant application of systems engineering implemented at an appropriate level of rigor provides a foundation for transition and use of technical innovation. This article discusses the principles and foundational elements necessary for development and use of a framework for systems engineering applicable in early-stage research and development (ESR&D), including tailoring considerations associated with TRL and stakeholder roles. Associated framework metrics are suggested to enable evaluation and practical implementation of the framework for systems engineering innovation management at this phase of technology development.