Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Boeing Value Front Tool (VFT) Multi-Attribute Trade Study Tool A Phantom Works System Assessment team effort Mark Schankman Phantom Works Affordability.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Boeing Value Front Tool (VFT) Multi-Attribute Trade Study Tool A Phantom Works System Assessment team effort Mark Schankman Phantom Works Affordability."— Presentation transcript:

1 Boeing Value Front Tool (VFT) Multi-Attribute Trade Study Tool A Phantom Works System Assessment team effort Mark Schankman Phantom Works Affordability Engineering Cost & Affordability Decision Analysis Effectiveness Analysis 23 March 2005

2 Chart 2 23 March 2005 Agenda Goals of this Presentation Definitions Purpose of Tool Background to Value Front Tool Demonstration Trade Study Methods and Tool Process Summary and Questions

3 Chart 3 23 March 2005 Goals of this Workshop Familiarize you: Trade Study Methods and Tool Inform you: –Use of Multi-Attribute Decision Methods for Design Trade Studies Solicit Your Ideas: Potential Applications of Trade Study Tool Have FUN !!

4 Chart 4 23 March 2005 Definition of Terms VFT: Value Front Tool LCC: Life Cycle Cost Uncertainty: Degree to which the cost, technical performance, or schedule is unknown (measured by probability distributions) CAIV: Cost as an Independent Variable (also known as: Target Costing) Illustration: Design a Hot Beverage Container

5 Chart 5 23 March 2005 Utility (Customer Satisfaction) or Performance Cost Performance Threshold (minimum) Cost Objective (Target) Performance Objective (desired) Cost Threshold (not to exceed) Trade Space Best Value Concepts Lie on the Value Front Line Value Front = Concepts that Maximize Customer Satisfaction with the Least Increase in Cost Value Front Tool Identifies Best Value Alternatives Within the Trade Space Concepts that provide less value per $

6 Chart 6 23 March 2005 CAIV Analysis Includes Measure of Performance & Cost Uncertainty Utility =Customer Desirability Life Cycle Cost Value Front = Best Value Concepts Technical Uncertainty Cost & Schedule Uncertainty Trade Space

7 Chart 7 23 March 2005 Methods Needed to Evaluate Best Value Value Front Tool Customer Need Priorities (Decision Analysis) Customer Desirability Attribute Value O/S Dev Prod Cost-Risk Attribute Value Distribution Uncertainty Simulation

8 Chart 8 23 March 2005 Value Front Method and Tool Capabilities that Meet Systems Engineering Needs Link performance, cost, effectiveness and risk and measures their ability to meet customer needs Identify Best Value solutions in the design space = Systems Engineering Process for Trade Studies Include uncertainty in trade study evaluations (Boeing PRO 4819:..balance cost, performance, & risk) Boeing success as Systems Integrator depends on tools that Deploy the Systems Engineering Process

9 Chart 9 23 March 2005 Systems Engineering Trade Study Process Key Steps Addressed by Value Front Tool Value Front Tool Provides Discipline to the Systems Engineering Trade Study Process Define the purpose Establish evaluation criteria & weights that meet customer needs Identify alternative solutions Screen alternatives Document results Analyze results Select Best Value alternative Evaluate down selected alternatives – Performance – Weight – Reliability – Effectiveness – Safety – Etc Trades -7 7/28/00 Accept/reject results Steps in Value Front Tool

10 Chart March 2005 Example Value Front Tool Analysis : Which Drip Coffee Maker to Buy ?

11 Typical Consumer Reports ® Value Comparison Chart from Consumer Reports Dec 2004, Coffee Makers We all evaluate performance criteria (if just in our heads) Value Comparison Performance Criteria scored Total utility score Performance Criteria Average Cost

12 Chart March 2005 Value Front Tool Inputs Required Performance Criteria relative importance (from QFD or other Decision Analysis methods) Performance Criteria values (e.g., Warranty period in years) Utility Curves ( use threshold and objective values ) (must represent customers expectations) Life Cycle Cost (Purchase Price + Operating cost ) ** ** Assume Development Cost included in Purchase Price

13 Chart March 2005 Sample Evaluation Criteria Scores Braun KF400 Source: Consumer Reports© December 2004 Attributes evaluated for five coffee makers

14 Chart March 2005 Choose Your Criteria Scores & Weights Mr. Coffee © Coffee Maker XXXXX X

15 Chart March 2005 Boeing Value Front Tool Main Screen

16 Chart March 2005 Evaluation Criteria Scores from VFT Five Coffee Maker Comparison Attribute Scores based on Consumer Reports ® Price: $20 $170 $60$35 $15 You Get What You Pay For Good Poor

17 Chart March 2005 Value Front Value Front Tool Results Utility Value vs. Cost (CAIV) Black & Decker Proctor Silex Braun KF400 Compresso Braun KF180

18 Chart March 2005 Method to Visualize Utility and Best Value Uncertainty Performance Attribute (eg, range, speed) Producibility Reliability Safety Mission Effectiveness (eg, survivability) Risk - measured as the probability that attribute is less than expected (in Value Front Method) Utility - Extent to which customer is satisfied

19 Chart March 2005 Value Front Tool Utility Plot for Compresso Coffee Maker Brewing Warranty Ease of Use Cool to Touch Cleaning Programmable Utility - Extent to which customer is satisfied Utility Score = 1.0

20 Chart March 2005 Utility Radar Plots All Coffee Makers Evaluated Braun KF400 Compresso Braun KF180 Black & Decker Proctor Silex

21 Chart March 2005 Methodology Used in Value Front Tool

22 Chart March 2005 Trade Study Methods are Integrated with Value Front Tool Plot Utility vs Cost Identify Value Front Utility =Desirability Cost Value Front 3 CAIV Analysis identifies best value Utility Analysis QFD (house of quality) Uncertainty simulation CAIV analysis Cost-risk estimating Utility Analysis uses Inputs from IPTs Attribute Value Score Attribute Utility for each Concept Threshold Goal Desirability Risk Utility =Desirability Requirements Analysis Facilitated by Decision Analysis Technical Attributes Customer Needs Attribute Importance Score 1 Translate Customer Needs to System Technical Attributes Methods Used

23 Chart March 2005 Front End House of Quality Inputs Plot Utility vs Cost Identify Value Front Utility =Desirability Cost Value Front 3 CAIV Analysis identifies best value Utility Analysis QFD (house of quality) Uncertainty simulation CAIV analysis Cost-risk estimating Utility Analysis uses Inputs from IPTs Attribute Value Score Attribute Utility for each Concept Threshold Goal Desirability Risk Utility =Desirability Requirements Analysis Facilitated by Decision Analysis Technical Attributes Customer Needs Attribute Importance Score 1 Translate Customer Needs to System Technical Attributes Operations Analysis Methods Used 1 Translate Customer Needs to System Technical Attributes Technical Attributes Customer Needs Attribute Importance Score

24 Chart March 2005 Requirements Analysis Facilitated by Decision Analysis Technical Attributes Customer Needs Attribute Importance Score 1 Translate Customer Needs to System Technical Attributes Utility Analysis uses Inputs from IPTs Attribute Value Score Attribute Utility for each Concept Threshold Goal Utility =Desirability Value Front Tool Utility Analysis Plot Utility vs Cost Identify Value Front Utility =Desirability Cost Value Front 3 CAIV Analysis identifies best value Operations Analysis Methods Used

25 Chart March 2005 Transform Attribute Value to Customer Desirability (Utility) Attribute Value Desirability (Utility Score) Threshold Objective Risk Expected Value Distribution Determined By Worst / Best value expected

26 Chart March 2005 Value Front Tool Boeing Potential Program Users Conceptual Trade Studies: JDAM Container trade (completed) LASER Test bed aircraft trade – Phase I used commercial Utility Tool Advanced Rotorcraft – Considered by Boeing-Philadelphia Engineering Disciplines Affected: Systems Engineering Operations Analysis: Cost & Affordability Decision Analysis (Utility Analyses) Effectiveness

27 Chart March 2005 Status of Value Front Tool Successfully applied tool for JDAM Container trade study User Instructions planned later in year Beta Test version with self-contained Tool Planned –Sensitivity analysis capability –Plotting enhancements –Help screens Current Excel Prototype tool will be converted to Visual Basic Tool for interactive use with customers

28 Chart March 2005 Boeing IDS Example Analysis : Weapon Container Trade Study

29 Chart March 2005 Weapon Container Affordability Analysis Utility (Value to Customer) vs. Cost Uncertainty Region Define Boundaries of Utility Score & Cost Cost - Millions of Dollars Utility Score Weighted Average ECS #1 ECS #3 Hardigg PRC #3 PRC # Concept 4 5 Value Front Uncertainty Region (Bounded by 10% and 90% Uncertainty) Greater cost uncertainty: bad choice ?

30 Chart March 2005 Value Front Tool Summary Tool provides standardized, disciplined, methods to evaluate cost, performance, and risk of design & technology solutions Identifies best value solutions in the design space as an essential part of the trade study process Tool provides contractor a competitive advantage by quantifying a concepts value to the customer. The metrics necessary to make design and technology investment decisions are all evaluated (i.e., cost, performance, effectiveness, uncertainty). Value Front Methods & Tool Help Deploy Affordability Best Practices supporting the Systems Engineering Process

31 Chart March 2005 References Cost & Affordability: Matt Anderson ( ) Decision Analysis: David Hamilton ( ) Decision Analysis: Mike Wheeler ( ) Target Costing Society: Affordability Resource Database: Affordability Best Practice (Boeing): PRO-4819

32 Chart March 2005 Backup Charts

33 Chart March 2005 Top Level Objectives Objective Importance Ratings Operational Attributes Operational Attribute Priorities QFD Matrices Description The Value Front Tool Utilizes the Normalized Priorities Derived In a QFD Effort (3X7) + (1X5) Be Able to Fly Long Distances Be Able to Easily Detect Moving Targets Be Re-deployable Range Loiter Time Sortie Generation Relative Priorities (157) Priority Normalized Priority System Attributes Operational Attributes

34 Chart March 2005 Value Front Tool – Uncertainty Input Templates Developed at Boeing-Huntington Beach to Select Technical and Cost Uncertainty Ranges for Cost-Risk Analysis Cost Risk Technical Risk

35 Chart March 2005 Best Value (CAIV) Analysis is Facilitated with Systems Assessment Integrated Tools Value Front Trade Study Tool Customer Satisfaction Metric = utility (0 – 1.0) Combines utility metric for each technical attribute Measures utility uncertainty based on technical risk Analogy Cost- Risk Tool Estimates concept cost compared to baseline (known cost) Measures cost & schedule uncertainty Life Cycle Cost Value Front Trade Study Option Cost Threshold Cost & Schedule Uncertainty Technical Uncertainty Utility =Desirability

36 Chart March 2005 Example Attribute Criteria (source: Boeing Trade Study Workshop - Al Bruns) Product capability –Operational utility –Performance –Effectiveness –Survivability Producibility –Task time –Cycle time –Mistake proofing Supportability –Maintainability –Design for upgrade –Logistics –Training –Reliability Environmental Safety Political Ease of use Attributes should be measurable (but can be qualitative)

37 Chart March 2005 Categories of Trade Studies Performed with Value Front Tool Preferred Design concept: –System, sub-system, or component trade studies Preferred Technology concept –Evaluate technology investment vs. risk (uncertainty) –Evaluate new/emerging technologies for best value that meets Boeing strategic needs Evaluate manufacturing options Screen tool to weed out concepts with less value to customer (performance vs. cost) Decisions can be Design or Technology Selection


Download ppt "Boeing Value Front Tool (VFT) Multi-Attribute Trade Study Tool A Phantom Works System Assessment team effort Mark Schankman Phantom Works Affordability."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google