SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “concurrent engineering”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1992

Fuzzy simulation in concurrent engineering

Concurrent engineering is becoming a very important practice in manufacturing. A problem in concurrent engineering is the uncertainty associated with the values of the input variables and operating conditions. The problem discussed in this paper concerns the simulation of processes where the raw materials and the operational parameters possess fuzzy characteristics. The processing of fuzzy input information is performed by the vertex method and the commercial simulation packages POLYMATH and GEMS. The examples are presented to illustrate the usefulness of the method in the simulation of chemical engineering processes.

Kraslawski, A.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Model-Based Systems Engineering in Concurrent Engineering Centers

Concurrent Engineering Centers (CECs) are specialized facilities with a goal of generating and maturing engineering designs by enabling rapid design iterations. This is accomplished by co-locating a team of experts (either physically or virtually) in a room with a focused design goal and a limited timeline of a week or less. The systems engineer uses a model of the system to capture the relevant interfaces and manage the overall architecture. A single model that integrates other design information and modeling allows the entire team to visualize the concurrent activity and identify conflicts more efficiently, potentially resulting in a systems model that will continue to be used throughout the project lifecycle. Performing systems engineering using such a system model is the definition of model-based systems engineering (MBSE); therefore, CECs evolving their approach to incorporate advances in MBSE are more successful in reducing time and cost needed to meet study goals. This paper surveys space mission CECs that are in the middle of this evolution, and the authors share their experiences in order to promote discussion within the community.

systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2015

Model-Based Systems Engineering in Concurrent Engineering Centers

Concurrent Engineering Centers (CECs) are specialized facilities with a goal of generating and maturing engineering designs by enabling rapid design iterations. This is accomplished by co-locating a team of experts (either physically or virtually) in a room with a narrow design goal and a limited timeline of a week or less. The systems engineer uses a model of the system to capture the relevant interfaces and manage the overall architecture. A single model that integrates other design information and modeling allows the entire team to visualize the concurrent activity and identify conflicts more efficiently, potentially resulting in a systems model that will continue to be used throughout the project lifecycle. Performing systems engineering using such a system model is the definition of model-based systems engineering (MBSE); therefore, CECs evolving their approach to incorporate advances in MBSE are more successful in reducing time and cost needed to meet study goals. This paper surveys space mission CECs that are in the middle of this evolution, and the authors share their experiences in order to promote discussion within the community.

MODEL↗

NASA NTRS2015

Model-Based Systems Engineering in Concurrent Engineering Centers

Concurrent Engineering Centers (CECs) are specialized facilities with a goal of generating and maturing engineering designs by enabling rapid design iterations. This is accomplished by co-locating a team of experts (either physically or virtually) in a room with a narrow design goal and a limited timeline of a week or less. The systems engineer uses a model of the system to capture the relevant interfaces and manage the overall architecture. A single model that integrates other design information and modeling allows the entire team to visualize the concurrent activity and identify conflicts more efficiently, potentially resulting in a systems model that will continue to be used throughout the project lifecycle. Performing systems engineering using such a system model is the definition of model-based systems engineering (MBSE); therefore, CECs evolving their approach to incorporate advances in MBSE are more successful in reducing time and cost needed to meet study goals. This paper surveys space mission CECs that are in the middle of this evolution, and the authors share their experiences in order to promote discussion within the community.

Iwata, Curtis↗

NASA NTRS2011

Characterizing Distributed Concurrent Engineering Teams: A Descriptive Framework for Aerospace Concurrent Engineering Design Teams

As aerospace missions grow larger and more technically complex in the face of ever tighter budgets, it will become increasingly important to use concurrent engineering methods in the development of early conceptual designs because of their ability to facilitate rapid assessments and trades in a cost-efficient manner. To successfully accomplish these complex missions with limited funding, it is also essential to effectively leverage the strengths of individuals and teams across government, industry, academia, and international agencies by increased cooperation between organizations. As a result, the existing concurrent engineering teams will need to increasingly engage in distributed collaborative concurrent design. This paper is an extension of a recent white paper written by the Concurrent Engineering Working Group, which details the unique challenges of distributed collaborative concurrent engineering. This paper includes a short history of aerospace concurrent engineering, and defines the terms 'concurrent', 'collaborative' and 'distributed' in the context of aerospace concurrent engineering. In addition, a model for the levels of complexity of concurrent engineering teams is presented to provide a way to conceptualize information and data flow within these types of teams.

Concept Design↗

NASA NTRS2011

Concurrent Engineering Working Group White Paper Distributed Collaborative Design: The Next Step in Aerospace Concurrent Engineering

As aerospace missions grow larger and more technically complex in the face of ever tighter budgets, it will become increasingly important to use concurrent engineering methods in the development of early conceptual designs because of their ability to facilitate rapid assessments and trades of performance, cost and schedule. To successfully accomplish these complex missions with limited funding, it is essential to effectively leverage the strengths of individuals and teams across government, industry, academia, and international agencies by increased cooperation between organizations. As a result, the existing concurrent engineering teams will need to increasingly engage in distributed collaborative concurrent design. The purpose of this white paper is to identify a near-term vision for the future of distributed collaborative concurrent engineering design for aerospace missions as well as discuss the challenges to achieving that vision. The white paper also documents the advantages of creating a working group to investigate how to engage the expertise of different teams in joint design sessions while enabling organizations to maintain their organizations competitive advantage.

Hihn, Jairus↗

NASA NTRS1993

The Design of a Primary Flight Trainer using Concurrent Engineering Concepts

Concurrent Engineering (CE) concepts seek to coordinate the expertise of various disciplines from initial design configuration selection through product disposal so that cost efficient design solutions may be achieve. Integrating this methodology into an undergraduate design course sequence may provide a needed enhancement to engineering education. The Advanced Design Program (ADP) project at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (EMU) is focused on developing recommendations for the general aviation Primary Flight Trainer (PFT) of the twenty first century using methods of CE. This project, over the next two years, will continue synthesizing the collective knowledge of teams composed of engineering students along with students from other degree programs, their faculty, and key industry representatives. During the past year (Phase I). conventional trainer configurations that comply with current regulations and existing technologies have been evaluated. Phase I efforts have resulted in two baseline concepts, a high-wing, conventional design named Triton and a low-wing, mid-engine configuration called Viper. In the second and third years (Phases II and III). applications of advanced propulsion, advanced materials, and unconventional airplane configurations along with military and commercial technologies which are anticipated to be within the economic range of general aviation by the year 2000, will be considered.

Ladesic, James G.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A New Concurrent Engineering Tool for the New Mission Design Center at NASA Ames Research Center

The NASA Ames Mission Design Center (MDC) has undergone a significant transformation process in recent years, culminating in becoming a true Concurrent Engineering Center. The underlying goal of this transformation is to better serve the Ames PI community in a cost-effective and rapidly-responsive way, providing quality products pivotal to the decision-making proposal strategy of our center. The four pillars of the change focus on four areas: personnel, physical places, tools, and training. Personnel: the MDC switched from using a dedicated pool of engineers—mostly entry-level career—for a matrixed approach with more experienced Subject Matter Experts, usually involved in spaceflight projects. These SMEs get detailed to the MDC for the duration of the study on a part-time or full-time basis. Physical places: The physical aspect pertains mostly to the layout of the new Engineering building and the dedicated concurrent engineering layout to foster collaboration. The current plan includes a dedicated space for concurrent engineering sessions as well as dedicated project rooms for concept studies. Tool: the MDC team is developing a new in-house concurrent engineering tool to facilitate concurrent engineering sessions. The team leveraged the many lessons learned and insight gained from using the current concurrent engineering tool, in use since 2007. SMEs have been involved throughout its design and development, ensuring accuracy and providing validity to the implementation approach. This new tool is database-driven and allows a team to work concurrently on the same model of a mission concept. “Workspaces” are provided for each of the traditional spacecraft mission design disciplines, including cost accounting and systems engineering. There are multiple tiers of fidelity available within each workspace, which can be completed parametrically or independently from the other disciplines as needed or synchronously with the other disciplines. A “commit” step synchronizes a workspace with the mission database and identifies any potential conflicts, along with the user who entered the conflicting data. A Mission Summary workspace enables a Study Lead to run an effective CE session, displaying key graphics, workspace status information, and technical and monetary budget information. This new CE tool will be undergoing Beta Testing with its primary user base and a limited Parts database in the summer of 2020. The team plans to release the first fully operational version in December 2020. Training: working in early concept development and maturation for a space mission requires a unique mindset and being comfortable with uncertainties in an environment where requirements are not yet fully developed, and where changes and trade-offs happen at a high tempo. The MDC started a weekly training program to ensure a common knowledge base on how do develop and mature early concept studies, as well as how to operate in a concurrent engineering environment. In conclusion, the MDC transformation will provide the overall PI community focused on cost-effective small satellite scientific missions with a powerful tool to address and mature early concepts more effectively and efficiently.

David Mauro↗

NASA NTRS2021

What Makes Hybrid Concurrent Engineering Teams Work and Not Work: A Theoretical Analysis

Aerospace concurrent engineering teams (CETs) have been around since 1995 and have evolved into various shapes and forms. Historically, CETs have been designed to function with all team members physically collocated. In order to continue operating during the coronavirus pandemic, these teams have had to become fully distributed in 2020. Previously, distributed CETs were predicted to be considerably less efficient than traditional CETs. However, at JPL studies are being successfully run at peak rate in a distributed mode. As nominal working conditions resume after the pandemic, a major question is whether these teams must go back to being fully collocated or if they can become successful hybrid teams, with half or more of the engineers working remotely. In order to address this question, it is important to understand the key characteristics that make a CET more likely to be successful in a remote mode. This paper revisits a framework for characterizing concurrent engineering teams, providing a means to describe and compare the behavior of concurrent engineering teams in various settings [1], and uses the framework to make recommendations for future hybrid teams.

Chattopadhyay, Debarati↗

NASA NTRS2011

Aerospace Concurrent Engineering Design Teams: Current State, Next Steps and a Vision for the Future

Over the past sixteen years, government aerospace agencies and aerospace industry have developed and evolved operational concurrent design teams to create novel spaceflight mission concepts and designs. These capabilities and teams, however, have evolved largely independently. In today's environment of increasingly complex missions with limited budgets it is becoming readily apparent that both implementing organizations and today's concurrent engineering teams will need to interact more often than they have in the past. This will require significant changes in the current state of practice. This paper documents the findings from a concurrent engineering workshop held in August 2010 to identify the key near term improvement areas for concurrent engineering capabilities and challenges to the long-term advancement of concurrent engineering practice. The paper concludes with a discussion of a proposed vision for the evolution of these teams over the next decade.

concurrent engineering design↗

NASA NTRS2020

Integrated Concurrent Engineering Teams for Increased Efficiency in Flight Projects

A highly integrated Concurrent Engineering Team (CET) within a flight project evolves in its function and has the potential to provide many benefits through the project lifecycle. The benefits include superior systems-oriented design products, as well as overall improved project efficiency and higher-performing interpersonal relationships within the project. If physically integrated, this can manifest as a Concurrent Engineering Center (CEC) centrally located within a project’s physical office space. Here we discuss the process to establish and maintain a tightly integrated engineering and design team for providing highly streamlined service to the project, including a cost/benefits analysis discussion.

Flight Project↗

NASA NTRS2020

Integrated Concurrent Engineering Teams for Increased Efficiency in Flight Projects

Flight Project↗

NASA NTRS1989

Dynamic systems-engineering process - The application of concurrent engineering

A system engineering methodology is described which enables users, particulary NASA and DOD, to accommodate changing needs; incorporate emerging technologies; identify, quantify, and manage system risks; manage evolving functional requirements; track the changing environment; and reduce system life-cycle costs. The approach is a concurrent, dynamic one which starts by constructing a performance model defining the required system functions and the interrelationships. A detailed probabilistic risk assessment of the system elements and their interrelationships is performed, and quantitative analysis of the reliability and maintainability of an engineering system allows its different technical and process failure modes to be identified and their probabilities to be computed. Decision makers can choose technical solutions that maximize an objective function and minimize the probability of failure under resource constraints.

Wiskerchen, Michael J.↗

NASA NTRS2006

Next-generation concurrent engineering: developing models to complement point designs

Concurrent Engineering Design teams have made routine the rapid development of point designs for space missions. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory's Team X is now evolving into a next generation CED; nin addition to a point design, the team develops a model of the local trade space. The process is a balance between the power of model-developing tools and the creativity of human experts, enabling the development of a variety of trade models for any space mission.

trade space exploration↗

NASA NTRS2006

Next-generation concurrent engineering: developing models to complement point designs

Concurrent Engineering Design (CED) teams have made routine the rapid development of point designs for space missions. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory's Team X is now evolving into a 'next-generation CED; in addition to a point design, the Team develops a model of the local trade space. The process is a balance between the power of a model developing tools and the creativity of humal experts, enabling the development of a variety of trade models for any space mission. This paper reviews the modeling method and its practical implementation in the ED environment. Example results illustrate the benefit of this approach.

concurrent engineering↗

NASA NTRS1992

Computational simulation of concurrent engineering for aerospace propulsion systems

Results are summarized of an investigation to assess the infrastructure available and the technology readiness in order to develop computational simulation methods/software for concurrent engineering. These results demonstrate that development of computational simulations methods for concurrent engineering is timely. Extensive infrastructure, in terms of multi-discipline simulation, component-specific simulation, system simulators, fabrication process simulation, and simulation of uncertainties - fundamental in developing such methods, is available. An approach is recommended which can be used to develop computational simulation methods for concurrent engineering for propulsion systems and systems in general. Benefits and facets needing early attention in the development are outlined.

Chamis, C. C.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Computational simulation for concurrent engineering of aerospace propulsion systems

Results are summarized for an investigation to assess the infrastructure available and the technology readiness in order to develop computational simulation methods/software for concurrent engineering. These results demonstrate that development of computational simulation methods for concurrent engineering is timely. Extensive infrastructure, in terms of multi-discipline simulation, component-specific simulation, system simulators, fabrication process simulation, and simulation of uncertainties--fundamental to develop such methods, is available. An approach is recommended which can be used to develop computational simulation methods for concurrent engineering of propulsion systems and systems in general. Benefits and issues needing early attention in the development are outlined.

Chamis, C. C.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Risk Identification and Visualization in a Concurrent Engineering Team Environment

Incorporating risk assessment into the dynamic environment of a concurrent engineering team requires rapid response and adaptation. Generating consistent risk lists with inputs from all the relevant subsystems and presenting the results clearly to the stakeholders in a concurrent engineering environment is difficult because of the speed with which decisions are made. In this paper we describe the various approaches and techniques that have been explored for the point designs of JPL's Team X and the Trade Space Studies of the Rapid Mission Architecture Team. The paper will also focus on the issues of the misuse of categorical and ordinal data that keep arising within current engineering risk approaches and also in the applied risk literature.

Risk Scoring↗