Technology Prioritization and Architecture Flexibility for Space System-of-Systems

被引:0
|
作者
Guariniello, Cesare [1 ]
DeLaurentis, Daniel A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Purdue Univ, Sch Aeronaut & Astronaut, 701W. Stadium Ave, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1109/AERO55745.2023.10115852
中图分类号
V [航空、航天];
学科分类号
08 ; 0825 ;
摘要
Decision makers face a difficult task when planning large-scale space missions or long-term development of technologies for space systems architectures. The difficulties arise from multiple factors. First, the size of the problem, the diversity of the involved systems and technologies, and the variety of stakeholders and their needs result in a large a complex trade space. Second, technologies are continuously evolving, and it can be hard to find data and model for new technologies, which increases the uncertainty about availability and performance. Third, in these complex problems decision makers need to account not only for traditional engineering trade-off (including cost, time, performance, and risk) but also for policies, stakeholder preferences, and flexibility of space architectures. Building on our previous research in Systemof-Systems methodologies, we propose a combination of tools to support decision-making for technology prioritization and analysis of development time, risk, and flexibility of space architectures. Based on developmental dependencies between technologies, Technology Readiness Level (TRL), mission requirements, uncertainty, cost, and budget limitations, the tools produce the optimal expected schedule and allow the user to identify potential bottleneck and risks. Different strategies for prioritization of technologies can also be compared. The tools can handle constraints such as policies or stakeholder preferences, which impose prioritization of certain technologies or space missions. Finally, since long-term space mission planning is very dynamic and its specific objectives change often, we implemented tools to add analysis of flexibility on top of the technology prioritization tools. This analysis is performed from different perspectives. From a mission viewpoint, given a selected mission category (and its associated technologies), we assess how difficult it is to transition to a different mission, in terms of cost and number of technologies that are missing, as well as evaluating differences in cost. From a programmatic viewpoint, we quantify flexibility of specific technology prioritization schedules when decisions to switch to a different mission arise.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] System-of-Systems Complexity
    Kopetz, Hermann
    ELECTRONIC PROCEEDINGS IN THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE, 2013, (133): : 35 - 39
  • [32] Analysis on Warship Technology Supportability Equipment System-of-Systems Based on System Dynamics
    Wang, Le
    Yang, Chun-hui
    Deng, Ming-ran
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 23RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT 2016: THEORY AND APPLICATION OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, 2017, : 115 - 118
  • [33] Improved decision support in space exploration via system-of-systems analysis
    Sindiy, Oleg V.
    DeLaurentis, Daniel A.
    Akaydin, Kirk A.
    Smith, Donald A.
    2007 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, VOLS 1 AND 2, 2007, : 608 - 613
  • [34] Modeling Approaches for System-of-Systems Dynamic Architecture: Overview, Taxonomy and Future Prospects
    Mohsin, Ahmad
    Janjua, Naeem Khalid
    Islam, Syed M. S.
    Graciano Neto, Valdemar Vicente
    2019 14TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (SOSE), 2019, : 49 - 56
  • [35] Model-based architecture and programmatic optimization for satellite system-of-systems architectures
    LaSorda, Michael
    Borky, John M.
    Sega, Ronald M.
    SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, 2018, 21 (04) : 372 - 387
  • [36] BC Tree Fruit System-of-Systems Information Architecture (Initial Design and Review)
    Bach, Donovan
    Khmelevsky, Youry
    Lembke, Svan
    Cartier, Lee
    2020 14TH ANNUAL IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEMS CONFERENCE (SYSCON2020), 2020,
  • [37] CRC-MATE based method for system-of-systems architecture alternative selection
    Yuan L.
    Fang Z.
    Wang J.
    Qin X.
    Xi Tong Gong Cheng Yu Dian Zi Ji Shu/Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2021, 43 (08): : 2146 - 2153
  • [38] Interdependency Incorporated Combat System-of-Systems Architecture Selection Towards Capability Optimization
    Fang, Zhemei
    Chen, Dazhi
    Liao, Jingjing
    2021 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS (SMC), 2021, : 800 - 806
  • [39] Agile digital transformation of System-of-Systems architecture models using Zachman framework
    Bondar, Sergej
    Hsu, John C.
    Pfouga, Alain
    Stjepandic, Josip
    JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL INFORMATION INTEGRATION, 2017, 7 : 33 - 43
  • [40] A Governance Perspective for System-of-Systems
    Katina, Polinpapilinho F.
    Keating, Charles B.
    Bobo, James A.
    Toland, Tyrone S.
    SYSTEMS, 2019, 7 (04):