Next Generation Manufacturing Technology Initiative PDF

Next-Generation Manufacturing Technology Initiative
Strategic Investment Plan for the Model-Based Enterprise

v2.1 27 May 2005
NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE
FOREWORD This document presents the NGMTI Strategic Investment Plan for the Model-Based Enterprise. Comments, questions, and additional input are welcome and highly encouraged. To participate in development of the NGMTI Strategic Investment Plans, please log into the NGMTI Communities of Practice at http://www.ngmti.us.
Copyright 2005, NGMTI
ii
CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 THE NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES INITIATIVE ....................................... 1-1 1.1.1 The NGMTI Program .................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.2 The NGMTI Assessment of Manufacturing ................................................................................. 1-1 1.1.3 The NGMTI Strategy ..................................................................................................................... 1-2 1.2 THE NGMTI ROADMAP FOR THE MODEL-BASED ENTERPRISE ........................................................ 1-2 1.2.1 The Model-Based Enterprise Definitions and Framework ........................................................ 1-4 1.2.2 The Model-Based Enterprise A Total Business Approach.......................................................... 1-5 1.2.3 The Functional Model for MBE .................................................................................................... 1-6 1.3 THE MBE VISION .................................................................................................................................... 1-7 1.3.1 Vision for Product Realization & Support..................................................................................... 1-8 1.3.2 Vision for Resource Management................................................................................................ 1-10 1.3.3 Vision for Strategic Management................................................................................................. 1-12 1.4 ACHIEVING THE GOALS: THE MBE PROJECT PLANS....................................................................... 1-13 2.0 PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT ........................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 FUNCTIONAL MODEL FOR PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT............................................... 2-1 2.2 CURRENT STATE OF PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT ......................................................... 2-2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 Innovation & Conceptualization ............................................................................................. 2-8 Product & Process Development ............................................................................................ 2-9 Manufacturing Execution...................................................................................................... 2-12 Life-Cycle Support ................................................................................................................ 2-14 Innovation & Conceptualization ........................................................................................... 2-23 Product & Process Development .......................................................................................... 2-25 Manufacturing Execution...................................................................................................... 2-30 Life-Cycle Support ................................................................................................................ 2-36
2.3 FUTURE STATE VISION & GOALS FOR PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT ........................ 2-16
2.4 ROADMAP FOR PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT ................................................................ 2-41 3.0 ENTERPRISE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 FUNCTIONAL MODEL FOR ENTERPRISE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ......................................... 3-1 3.2 CURRENT STATE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT .......................................................................... 3-2 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 3.2.8 Financial Management ............................................................................................................ 3-7 Operations Management ......................................................................................................... 3-9 Supply Chain Management ................................................................................................... 3-11 Marketing, Sales, & Distribution .......................................................................................... 3-12 Workforce Management........................................................................................................ 3-13 Capital Asset & Inventory Management .............................................................................. 3-14 Knowledge/Information Management.................................................................................. 3-16 Technology Management...................................................................................................... 3-17
iii
3.3 FUTURE STATE VISION AND GOALS FOR ENTERPRISE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ............... 3-19 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 3.3.5 3.3.6 3.3.7 3.3.8 Financial Management .......................................................................................................... 3-21 Operations Management ....................................................................................................... 3-23 Supply Chain Management ................................................................................................... 3-26 Marketing, Sales, & Distribution .......................................................................................... 3-28 Workforce Management........................................................................................................ 3-32 Capital Asset & Inventory Management .............................................................................. 3-34 Knowledge/Information Management.................................................................................. 3-36 Technology Management...................................................................................................... 3-40
3.4 ROADMAP FOR ENTERPRISE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT........................................................... 3-42 4.0 STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT............................................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 FUNCTIONAL MODEL FOR STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT ............................................................... 4-2 4.2 CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT FOR STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT ............................................... 4-3 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.5 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.5 Technology Portfolio Management ........................................................................................ 4-7 Financial & Capital Assets Management ............................................................................. 4-11 Knowledge Management & Applications ............................................................................ 4-13 Strategic Planning & Execution............................................................................................ 4-14 Strategic Operations Management........................................................................................ 4-16 Technology Portfolio Management ...................................................................................... 4-23 Financial & Capital Assets Management ............................................................................. 4-26 Knowledge Management & Applications ............................................................................ 4-28 Strategic Planning & Execution............................................................................................ 4-30 Strategic Operations Management........................................................................................ 4-31
4.3 FUTURE STATE VISION & GOALS FOR STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT ......................................... 4-21
5.0 MBE PROJECT PLANS........................................................................................................................ 5-1 MBE 13 Information Delivery to Point of Use ..................................................................................... 5-2 MBE 7 Product-Driven Product & Process Design ............................................................................ 5-10 MBE 1 Flexible Representation of Complex Models ......................................................................... 5-19 MBE 5 Intelligent Models.................................................................................................................... 5-28 MBE 6 Configuration Management for the Model-Based Enterprise................................................ 5-35 MBE 3 System-of-Systems Modeling for the Model-Based Enterprise............................................. 5-43 MBE 4 Enterprise-Wide Cost Modeling ............................................................................................. 5-50 MBE 10 Model-Based Distribution ..................................................................................................... 5-58 MBE 11 Multi-Enterprise Collaboration ............................................................................................. 5-66 MBE 8 Model-Based Product Life Cycle Management ..................................................................... 5-71 MBE 9 Model-Based, Real-Time Factory Operations........................................................................ 5-79 MBE 2 Shared Model Libraries ........................................................................................................... 5-89 MBE 12 Model-Based Resource Management ................................................................................... 5-94 APPENDIX: MBE PROJECT PLAN ............................................................................................................. A-1
iv
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 THE NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES INITIATIVE
1.1.1 THE NGMTI PROGRAM
The Next Generation Manufacturing Technologies Initiative (NGMTI) is a government/industry partnership to accelerate the development of breakthrough manufacturing technologies that strengthen the defense industrial base and improve the global economic competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers. NGMTI will achieve this mission by creating strategic investment plans for innovative manufacturing technologies, and by driving the implementation of those technologies through focused pilots and partnerships. NGMTI is unlike any program before it. It is delivering definitive plans for manufacturing success, and building a compelling national consensus for implementation. NGMTI takes a new approach to seeking increased funding for manufacturing technology. It uses a systematic methodology for selecting the right technologies, and defines a clear pathway to dramatic return on investment for focused technology deployment. The rich information and business case for investment provide the foundation for securing needed funding. NGMTI seeks to create new synergies and leverage opportunities to make better use of the funding presently available, and to seek additional funding for opportunities with high potential value to the nation. The requests for new funding will be supported by a business case and by rich plans which, when implemented, will deliver the best solutions to the problems that challenge our nations manufacturing infrastructure and economic strength.
1.1.2 The NGMTI Assessment of Manufacturing

NGMTI is vital to the nations defense and economic health. U.S. manufacturers face deepening challenges: a widening trade imbalance exceeding $600 billion in 2004, growing competition from low-wage countries, a decline in long-term technology investment, and a sharp increase in the cost of doing business in the U.S. According to a study by the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI of the nine largest U.S. trading partners, the overhead cost of manufacturing in the U.S is 22% higher than the average of these partners.1 Such factors have caused the loss of some 3 million U.S. manufacturing jobs and a continued decline in manufacturing as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) from about 30% of the GDP in the 1950s to about 15% today. While job count may decline in the short term, the wealth generation from manufacturing and the power of technology-driven innovation must not be lost. Indeed, it should be accelerated as a core element of our national economic strategy. There is a great opportunity to redefine the competitive base through application of new and emerging technologies and enabling tools. That is the formula for success supported by NGMTI. The next few paragraphs support that formula. Technology Drives Innovation. Innovation in product development and process technologies will enable faster generation of new product ideas, rapid and efficient maturation of those ideas to designs, and acceleration of innovative products to the marketplace. In this way, the U.S. can be preeminent through more effective product development and early market penetration. Advanced manufacturing processes complete the innovation equation. Process excellence drives productivity improvement, which reduces production costs and neutralizes the competitive impact of labor rates. Through process excellence, we can achieve an environment that drives the labor content down to a point of insignificance making highvalue manufacturing geographically immune from competition from low-cost labor sources. In the next1
Jeremy A. Leonard, How Structural Costs Imposed on U.S. Manufacturers Harm Workers and Threaten Competitiveness, Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI, 2003.
Executive Summary
1-1
generation manufacturing world, siting of production centers will be based on access to markets and market positioning, and will not be a necessity for low-cost production. Innovation Drives Wealth Creation. Increasing demand for innovative products creates market pull that will be satisfied by successful manufacturing firms. Wealth generation does not come from the small margins of commodity production, and the U.S. probably cannot (and should not) compete for low-value products with high labor content. However, innovative processes and efficient operations can greatly reduce the labor component and slash the cost of producing low-value products2. New high-value products create a tremendous market pull that only innovative, fast-to-market, technology-rich companies can satisfy. These two strategies low-cost manufacturing through process innovation and fast to market with innovative products should dominate our national thinking and define the next generation of U.S. manufacturing. Wealth Creates Jobs. Next-generation manufacturing technologies create wealth, and wealth creates jobs. The job content will change, with less emphasis on manual skills and touch labor and far greater need for computer programmers, planners and coordinators, and designers. There will be more jobs in distribution, sales, marketing and product support functions because of the wealth created through innovation-driven manufacturing. Technology is the Engine of Economic Growth. The manufacturing infrastructure and technology toolset that we use today will not support us in the future global economic arena. No single company or organization can supply that next-generation toolset. It requires a commitment to and support from both industry and government to 1) define what needs to be done; 2) establish the priorities, and 3) create strong synergy to deliver the needed solutions. That is what NGMTI is doing. NGMTI is a critical component of a national manufacturing success strategy.
1.1.3 THE NGMTI STRATEGY

NGMTI is a dual-purpose program. It is sponsored by the Department of Defense (DoD), and one of the major tenets of NGMTI is the delivery of breakthrough emerging technologies to support DoDs manufacturing needs. Specifically, we seek opportunities to move ideas that have direct application in meeting the needs of the warfighter from development to deployment and operational support. NGMTI also seeks crosscutting technologies that are good for all manufacturing enterprises. This unique partnership is working with 175 manufacturing community leaders representing more than 75 different organizations, and the number is growing rapidly. The NGMTI program is managed by the Advanced Technology Institute (ATI) in partnership with the Integrated Manufacturing Technology Initiative (IMTI) and the National Council for Advanced Manufacturing (NACFAM). National manufacturing leaders provide steerage and advocacy for NGMTI through an Industry/Government Forum. NGMTI addresses the common requirements of DoD and U.S. industry through a three-part strategy: 1. Developing a Strategic Investment Plan for Manufacturing. NGMTI is working with hundreds of representatives of the manufacturing community to define compelling needs, map current R&D investments against those needs, identify critical voids, and develop a comprehensive national plan for focused manufacturing technology investment. 2. National Implementation of the Strategic Investment Plan. As an integral part of the Strategic Investment Plan development, NGMTI is building the Industry/Government Forum as a leadershiplevel coalition of the industry, government, and research communities to work together to execute the plan. The Forum convenes semi-annually to review requirements and strategies.
2
As an example, American Safety Razor Company which makes 1 billion razors per year recently brought most of its offshore operations back to the U.S. because technology enabled productivity gains and cost reductions that offset the advantage of offshore labor rates.
Executive Summary
1-2
3. Transitioning Manufacturing Technology. NGMTI is implementing strategies and processes to accelerate the maturation and implementation of new technologies in alignment with the Strategic Investment Plan. These strategies include proof-of-concept experiments and a National Manufacturing Technology Testbed Network for facilitating and widespread deployment. The Testbed Network, integrating the resources of leading government and industry manufacturing laboratories, will provide a national capability to advance manufacturing technology. As shown in Figure 1.1-1, NGMTI uses a combination of research and input from subject matter experts (SMEs), plus input from industry participants via internet-based Communities of Practice, to create Technology Roadmaps for each NGMTI Thrust Area. This serves as input to a structured evaluation process wherein high-priority topics are selected for more in-depth treatment and as candidates for focused R&D projects through the NGMTI Testbed Network or other mechanisms.
Figure 1.1-1. NGMTI follows a structured process to define and prioritize needs, develop plans to meet those needs, and implement the required research and development.
The program is built around a series of six Thrust Areas that provide a focused structure for managing technology requirements that cut across the nations defense and commercial manufacturing base. These Thrust Areas are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Model-Based Enterprise Emerging Process Technologies Intelligent Systems Enterprise Integration Knowledge Applications Safe, Secure, Reliable & Sustainable Manufacturing Operations.
These topics were selected based on input from industry and government focus groups to define the right umbrellas under which to capture the high-priority technology needs of the nations manufacturing community.
1.2 THE NGMTI ROADMAP FOR THE MODEL-BASED ENTERPRISE

This document provides an overview of the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise, the first of the six Thrust Areas addressed by the NGMTI program. The roadmap is one element of a broader strategic investment plan that includes a series of white papers outlining recommended research, development, and demonstration projects for near-term implementation by government and industry. A brief
Executive Summary
1-3
synopsis of the white papers is provided later in this section; full copies of these and other NGMTI documents are available in the NGMTI Communities of Practice at http://www/ngmti.us.
1.2.1 THE MODEL-BASED ENTERPRISE DEFINITIONS AND FRAMEWORK

Model-based enterprise is a relatively new term for a collection of concepts that have matured over the last decade and coalesced under a new name. The vision of a totally digitally-driven design, production, and product support environment became an important driver of manufacturing enterprise strategies in the 1990s as extensions of concurrent engineering, integrated product and process development, and other emerging disciplines. Integrated product realization emerged as an all-encompassing concept that went beyond basic integration of product and process activities to call for a new toolset supporting a totally digital product life-cycle management system. The term model-based enterprise has become the embodiment of this progressive approach. What is a model-based manufacturing enterprise? Simply stated, it is a manufacturing entity that applies modeling and simulation (M&S) technologies to radically improve, seamlessly integrate, and strategically manage all of its technical and business processes related to design, manufacturing, and product support. By using product and process models to define, execute, control, and manage all enterprise processes, and by applying science-based simulation and analysis tools to make the best decisions at every step of the product life-cycle, it is possible to radically reduce the time and cost of product innovation, development, manufacture, and support. Before examining the model-based enterprise in depth, it is important to acknowledge that models are at the core of the concept. The term model can be defined in many ways; however, what is important is the functions that a model performs in the manufacturing enterprise environment. Within that context, the following definitions are appropriate.3 A model is a representation of a product: The most common reaction to the question of what is a model? related to design and manufacturing is that it is a digital description of a product. Stated more completely, a product model is an electronic representation of all attributes of a product that enable its manufacture, use, and support. An effective product model contains all elements needed to define a product and can provide detailed information about that product. Further, it provides information that is useful in applying the product as a piece of a whole, as in components, subassemblies, and assemblies. A model is a representation of interactions and results In manufacturing processes, a model mimics or mocks up a process including the interrelationships of entities and parameters. Hence, the model is able to determine the results of interactions based on changes in parameters of an entity or a process variable. In more scientific language, a process model is a mathematical description of a complex phenomenon or object useful in defining how products, processes, or systems respond to various inputs. A model is an enabler: A model can enable many things that are not otherwise possible. A product model can provide the information that enables downstream processes such as design of tooling, fabrication of fixtures and molds, manufacturing of products and assemblies, and inspection operations. It enables the exploration of options and quantification of expected results for each option. This capability is often referred to as virtual prototyping. Models enable evaluation of all parameters and their impacts on performance, costs, and other important attributes of a product or a process. A model is an integrator Modeling a single process may not be difficult, but may not deliver great value of itself. However, the ability to assemble collections of related models into metamodels that can define the results of complex interactions across products and processes without losing any of
3
A recent survey conducted by the Model-Based working group of the National Nuclear Security Administration provides the source material from which this discussion of model functions is derived.
Executive Summary
1-4
the constituent values can add tremendous value. The ability to integrate complex models offers the possibility of implementing radically new business processes and reengineering corporate cultures, based on an unprecedented ability to accurately predict the results of options for change. Process models, integrated across an enterprise, enable enterprise-wide process management. Cost models, when fully populated across a full range of product and process functions, can enable cost estimating, tracking, and management to a level not achievable otherwise. Process and factory models that document the full range of capabilities, can be configured in enterprise resource models to enable optimization of capacity and utilization. The list could continue, but the point is made that models, taken alone, have interesting value, but, when applied in integrated systems, they deliver breakthrough success.
1.2.2 THE MODEL-BASED ENTERPRISE A TOTAL BUSINESS APPROACH

The model-based enterprise, as the name implies, utilizes models to drive and enable every function of the enterprise. While many leading manufacturers make extensive using of modeling and simulation tools in their engineering and business processes, the model-based enterprise concept represents a sweeping change in the technological foundation, the business processes, and the culture of the enterprise as discussed below. The Technological Foundation for the Model-Based Enterprise (MBE): While there is a tendency to interpret the MBE concept as simply all-digital processes, it should be understood that enterprise functions are modeled only to the level that it makes business sense to do so. The technical environment is data-, information-, and knowledge-rich, and provides analytical tools that understand the interactions and dependencies of the enterprises systems and tools. This empowers a new level of technical understanding of products, processes, and resources supporting radically improved decision making across the enterprise. Model-Based Business Practices: It does little good to have model-based tools if the companys business processes and systems do not support their utilization. In a model-based enterprise, business functions are engineered to pull needed information from product and process models and linked knowledge sources, and apply that information together with business models. As an example, a model-based scheduling system would understand what needs to be accomplished to start a production process and would model the production activity. Product engineering, cost management, resource allocation, and other enterprise systems would interact with that model based on their own models and data in order to optimize plan for the best balance of results. In this manner, all business processes are integrated across the enterprise, using models to share and act on requirements, knowledge, and resource information. The ability to model all processes of the enterprise also provides unprecedented flexibility to accommodate change. Managers at all levels can use MBE tools to quickly explore different scenarios fed by a continuous stream of external and internal information. This enables companies to quickly adopt improved methods and tools, supporting continuously efficient operation for delivery of total value to enterprise stakeholders. The Culture of the Model-Based Enterprise: A model-based enterprise dictates a mindset of virtual experience in concert with physical experience. Productivity and quality metrics are key to MBE success, and embracing a culture of continuous optimization is a prerequisite. In a model-based culture, simulation and modeling systems replace much physical prototyping with the capability to deliver the first product correct every time. Validated product models drive validated processes to produce parts that fit and operate exactly as designed. The certification of product lies in the certification of the processes used to make it, with testing only done to satisfy customer-imposed (e.g., regulatory compliance) requirements. The culture of the model-based enterprise adapts quickly to incorporate new technologies, by providing the ability to thoroughly simulate the effects of a contemplated upgrade, replacement, or refresh of a product, process, or system.
Executive Summary
1-5
1.2.3 THE FUNCTIONAL MODEL FOR MBE

The MBE initiative addresses manufacturing enterprise requirements across three broadly defined functional areas: Product Realization & Support all activities required to conceive, develop, produce, and support the enterprises products, including appropriate disposition of the product at the end of its useful life. Product realization is the core of the manufacturing enterprise mission the design, fabrication, and support of products to generate revenue and fulfill the needs of the enterprises customers and other stakeholders. Resource Management all activities associated with the business of the enterprise, including control and oversight of production and support operations, supply chains, and sales and distribution mechanisms; and human and financial resources, knowledge and technology resources, and other assets. Enterprise Management all activities required to enable a companys leadership team to guide the enterprise based on current, complete, accurate information. Strategic management is discriminated from resource management in that strategic management is not specifically concerned with the enterprise at an operational level, although the two functions are closely interrelated. As shown in Figure 1.2-1, each of these topics is broken down into a set of logical functional elements and addressed in detail in the MBE Roadmap. The Roadmap provides 1) an assessment of the current state of practice; 2) a vision of the future state of capability enabled by model-based tools and processes; 3) goals and requirements that must be met to achieve the vision; and 4) a notional timeline for conducting the required research, development, and implementation.
Figure 1.2-1. Functional Model for the MBE Roadmap.
Executive Summary
1-6
1.3 THE MBE VISION

An integrated, all-digital system will support all functions of the enterprise. From the innovation process to delivery and support of product, a rich set of interconnected models that communicate in real time will augment human creativity and automate the operational component. The models that define products and processes will be so accurate that they will serve as the controller for process execution. All business and technical functions will be integrated using model-based systems for optimized performance and real-time, responsive control of the enterprise. In the future manufacturing enterprise, knowledge will be captured and applied through model-based systems and processes. Material properties, costs, and other factors will be readily available to aid designers in engineering products and processes for total performance. Processes will be characterized using robust and knowledge-rich models to provide absolute assurance of performance. Product features and characteristics will be modeled to assure product performance throughout the life cycle. The enterprise will be supported by analytical tools that include the capability to address functions and issues throughout the supply chain. Knowledge available to the modeling environment will not be limited to technical data, but also support legal, financial, regulatory, and other critical business functions. Analytical tools will evaluate options in real time and to the needed level of accuracy for the modeled function. Total value will always be the objective. In the conceptualization phase of product development, rapid concurrent evaluation of many alternatives may be more important than high-fidelity evaluation. In detailed design, exact performance prediction from high-fidelity simulations is essential. Every parameter and every operation will be evaluated in light of the impact of individual decisions on the whole of the product or the function of the enterprise. Sequential processes such as manufacturing will take on a new content as the product script is developed. From the first gleam of an idea, to conceptual design, to detailed design and on through the process, knowledge will be continuously added to a living, increasingly robust life-cycle model. The process models will be accurate and capable of responding to off-normal conditions to the point that model-based control will be standard practice in even the most demanding industries. Actual performance will be compared to the processing model of the script, and any deviation from requirements will result in an immediate corrective response. Business and technical functions will be integrated in a model-rich environment. Enterprise-wide resources will be managed in real time to assure that the best decisions are made. Enterprise resource management systems will consist of an open framework supported by an accurate and dynamic set of models enabling real-time awareness of all enterprise functions and support for all business and technical decisions. The model-based enterprise is not only about making product and managing resources, but extends to strategic decision processes as well. Managers, strategists, and all stakeholders will have the capability to evaluate strategic options based on knowledge gained from past experience; data from present operations; and trends, forecasts, and predictions for the future. The executives of the future will be supported by a rich set of knowledge-based advisors, visualization tools, and other capabilities that will enable them to evaluate options and make the best possible decisions. The Perspectives of MBE A key precept of the model-based enterprise is to facilitate unity of all enterprise functions, ensuring that different functions and organizational entities work together as a seamless unit and that every function or person has immediate access to any information that they need. This is not an issue of integration, but rather requires that each of the unique perspectives of the major functions of the enterprise be directly and clearly supported. To use a simple analogy, the window to the model-based enterprise systems is like a kaleidoscope. No matter who looks into the kaleidoscope, they see exactly the view they want often radically different views, but all drawn from the exact same repository of information and knowledge.
Executive Summary 1-7
The perspectives addressed by the MBE Roadmap are introduced using the three elements of the MBE functional model shown previously: Product Realization and Support, Enterprise Resource Management, and Strategic Enterprise Management. The unifying force for all perspectives is the integration of the enterprise. All systems collect and share data with all other systems without any need to manually translate or reenter data. All individual models and model-based systems interoperate with all others with which they interact. It is also important to note that integration removes the walls between design, analysis, and execution. The same data that is used in analytical tools to evaluate options also supports the design function, and the design data feeds seamlessly into the execution systems. The data for making products also supports the management of resources. In this way, a model-based enterprise is a machine that, simply put, turns ideas into money. The following sections provide an overview of each of the three elements, or perspectives, of the MBE concept.
1.3.1 Vision for Product Realization & Support

Seamlessly integrated M&S tools will enable distributed teams to quickly create product and process designs that achieve the best balance of performance, cost, robustness, and other factors. The product model and underlying knowledge base will control all processes across the product life cycle, capturing and sharing data to drive continuous improvement throughout the enterprise. Manufacturing processes will be designed and qualified entirely in the virtual realm, drawing on scientifically accurate models of materials, unit processes, and equipment. The resulting model-based knowledge base will support all aspects of maintenance, training, and life-cycle support. The ultimate vision for product realization in the model-based enterprise is the ability to seamlessly move back and forth between the virtual representation of the product and its processes, and the physical reality of the processes as they occur in real time. The product model will monitor and guide the production process and support analysis and decision processes to address changing requirements and deal with offnormal conditions and other problems. This tightly coupled virtual/real representation of the product and processes will be visible to all value chain members as they perform their functions, showing the status of the manufacturing process and their position in that process. This vision of a seamless value chain cannot be realized without the unifying base of the comprehensive product model. The model-based product realization environment will consistently deliver best designs to satisfy a balanced set of objectives for the enterprise and its stakeholders. Rich and mathematically accurate visualization environments, augmented by powerful analytical tools, will allow users to interactively refine objectives and preferences in performing trade-offs for optimization (Figure 1.3.11). As each preference is
Figure 1.3.1-1. Analytical applications will be integrated on the desktop interface that enables users to take full advantage of capabilities resident anywhere in the supply chain. 1-8
Executive Summary
specified, the user will see its impact on performance, cost, delivery time, aesthetics, and other attributes of interest. The resulting product model will not be merely a product representation coupled to a database of physical attributes. Rather, it will be a total product definition that is continuously linked to all sources of technical and business information that define and affect it throughout the life cycle. This knowledge base will not only enable the enterprise to radically improve its ability to design, produce, and support its products, but will provide a total audit trail of actions taken and supporting rationale. This will significantly improve the ability of the enterprise to address and favorably resolve potential liability issues throughout a products life. Future manufacturing process designers will draw on a comprehensive library of validated, thoroughly characterized models and simulations of common materials, unit processes, and manufacturing equipment to integrate optimal process designs for individual products. Resources (internal resources or those available from supply chain partners) will be modeled in terms of their characteristics and availability for any enterprise project. Interoperable, scaleable models that understand and actively search for the information they need for completion will be standard tools for product and process engineering and manufacturing execution. They will autonomously determine and search for the information they need to satisfy the requirements of the specification and production plan, using intelligent digital advisors to guide human users in making the best decisions at every step. Equipment and tooling manufacturers and material commodity vendors will provide validated 3D models, performance simulations, and supporting data as a standard part of their equipment and products, with standards ensuring the ability of different models to integrate in plug-and-play fashion. This will enable process designers across a supply chain to quickly create accurate virtual production lines, filling in gaps only as needed for product-specific tooling and proprietary processes. Virtual test environments will enable product and process designers to subject their designs to test to destruction rigor without making physical prototypes. The manufacturing execution team will use process simulations coupled with certified material, equipment, and process models to optimize the manufacturing strategy, testing and producing product in the virtual realm to verify readiness for production (Figure 1.3.1-2). These same models will control the product manufacturing process, with low-cost sensors and intelligent monitoring systems continuously comparing performance against the process models to keep the systems running in continuous conformance with requirements and specifications.
Figure 1.3.1-2. Manufacturing process parameters and control information will be downloaded directly from the product/process model to drive and control all manufacturing processes.
Executive Summary
1-9
1.3.2 VISION FOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Future manufacturing enterprises will continuously optimize internal and external resources to maximize value to all stakeholders. Fully integrating model-based design, manufacturing, and product support with all business functions will make appropriate knowledge available to decision-makers and enable them to tune enterprise performance for total customer and stakeholder satisfaction. The processes and operations of future enterprises will be powered by model-based business systems that provide continuous, precise visibility of capital asset and inventory requirements for manufacturers of all sizes. Intelligent resource management models linked to enterprise resource management (ERM) systems will monitor the enterprises marketing, sales, and distribution systems and external information sources to accurately predict near-term and long-term variations in product demand by region and locality, automatically recalculating requirements and redirecting resources at the enterprise level and at operating sites. The system will enable product managers and operations managers to understand, with a high degree of confidence, what requirements are coming the next day, week, month, and year. It will enable them to quickly evaluate the pros, cons, and deeper implications of all options for responding to those requirements. More importantly, the system will enable them to re-plan quickly as requirements change and as new opportunities and challenges arise. The core elements of the enterprise (including its business rules and strategies as well as its processes and systems) will be modeled so accurately and thoroughly that routine allocation of resources will be handled autonomously by ERM systems. These systems will have total connectivity to all enterprise processes and assets including product/process capabilities, manpower and skills, facilities and equipment, raw material and product inventories, supply chain capabilities, and working capital and budgets (Figure 1.3.2-1). This seamless connectivity will extend to every tier of the enterprises supply chains. An open business systems architecture based on well-defined standards for modeling and managing different types of resources will enable different companies to quickly plug together to exploit new opportunities. While allocation of resources will always be at the discretion of the enterprises managers, the ability to access
Figure 1.3.2-1. Future ERM systems will provide total connectivity of all enterprise processes to all enterprise resources, with powerful modeling and simulation capabilities that enable fast, accurate decisions.
Executive Summary
1-10
current resource information anywhere in the supply chain with appropriate security will eliminate much of the inefficiency inherent to managing complex supply chain relationships. Science-based models of the inputs, outputs, demand factors, and dependencies of every enterprise process, coupled with continuous access to all sources of information that affect these processes, will provide clear definition of what resources need to be where and when, and when they will be available again for reallocation. These models will control the systems that execute the enterprises technical and business processes. Managers at all levels will interact with the system to develop plans, monitor performance, analyze issues, evaluate opportunities, and efficiently direct resources to the point of need. Model-based operations management systems will enable supervisors and managers to quickly detect performance issues and direct the right resources to correct problems and optimize performance (Figure 1.3.2-2). This will rapid evaluation of different options for improving performance, such as rearranging shifts and workflows, adding or changing out equipment, and adjusting work-in-process levels. They will be able to plug in different resource options into the operations simulation and run multiple simultaneous scenarios to determine the best cost/performance solution. The system will automatically generate implementation plans that schedule the tasks to be done, including procurement, installation, checkout, worker training, and revision of workflows and maintenance plans. The greatest benefits of model-based resource management will come from a radically improved ability to prepare for new requirements and respond to problems throughout the supply chain. Future product and process models will provide precise definitions of the resources they require for their execution including raw materials, parts, and components; manufacturing labor and skills; facility space, equipment, tooling, and fixtures; handling and transport; and product support, including training and documentation. These requirements will be uptaken by the ERM system and fed to functional planning systems for implementation. Managers will use desktop modeling and simulation tools, connected to the enterprises knowledge bases, to evaluate options for meeting the requirements with those resources in ways that offer the best balance of performance, speed, cost, risk, and profitability. These tools will also enable managers to plan for new requirements and priorities of the business environment in areas such as safety and environmental compliance. The same tools will enable managers to rapidly determine the best response when requirements change as a result of design changes or due to performance or schedule problems anywhere in the supply chain. Intelligent advisors will rapidly recalculate the impacts of an actual or planned change in resources on all other dependent resources, and provide recommendations for corrective action to get the product, process, project, program, or operation back on track.
Figure 1.3.2-2. Model-based operations management will enable precise control of all factory systems, interfacing with equipment-level automation to continuously tune performance.
Executive Summary
1-11
1.3.3 VISION FOR STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT A master enterprise model that is unique to the enterprise will guide the strategic management team in continuously positioning the company for success in the rapidly changing global marketplace. Modeling systems accessed through a strategic management cockpit will support scenario-based evaluation of options for all strategic management functions. Model-based intelligent advisors will guide the organization to the best choices and best decisions for achieving corporate objectives and responding to challenges and opportunities. In the NGMTI vision for the model-based enterprise, top-down and bottom-up management processes across all functional elements of the enterprise are integrated in a unity model as illustrated in Figure 1.3.3-1. The unity model provides a framework whereby strategic planning and direction processes are integrated into work processes at every level of the organization. Information flows easily and accurately in all directions, to exactly the right level needed to support processes and operations for every function. The unity model aligns the enterprise mission and goals down to the lowest level of each area of the company. It places focus and value where it belongs, on the enterprise as a whole, not on any single entity or group. With all corporate elements in unity, the inherent disconnects between levels and units of the organization are eliminated. Each corporate officer occupies an equidistant management position. This facilitates a unity of purpose, roles, and responsibilities throughout every organizational element, regardless of their specific role. This unified process dissolves the notion that strategic responsibility is only significant to senior executives. Instead, it beFigure 1.3.3-1. The unity model provides a framework comes the mission of every management for a model-based environment to realize the future vision level, and flows all the way to the plant for strategic enterprise management. floor. More importantly, it provides a framework for developing and implementing model-based tools that every manufacturing company, regardless of size, sector, or organizational design, can apply to unify and coordinate its strategic management processes. In the manufacturing companies of the future, enterprise processes will be integrated and guided by a master enterprise model. This is not an organizational architecture, but rather a high-level process model unique to every company that contains or links to all the constituent models that define and guide the companys business and technical processes. The master enterprise model contains (or provides real-time access to) comprehensive, accurate, and timely information on the internal workings of the enterprise and its supply chain, plus the external information and events that may affect the enterprise. As the strategic management team executes its analysis and planning processes, the master model delivers the information needed to make the best decisions for the enterprise. It ensures that the implications of each decision are reflected in all affected business units, organizational elements, and processes, and provides feedback from these elements in order to optimize strategies for best results. The master model thus
Executive Summary
1-12
enables accurate analysis of the current situation and scenarios for the future, helping the management team position the enterprise to maneuver and succeed in the rapidly changing global marketplace. An open systems framework, flexible information representation schemes, and highly automated monitoring and surveillance functions will tightly couple strategic management processes to operational realities. Digesting daily a huge and complex quantity of data about internal operations and external conditions and events, the master model will empower the operation of the desktop management cockpit that provides each strategic management function with a continuously updated overview of pertinent events, trends, and opportunities for improvement. A continuous scan of external information sources (news media, patent applications, changes in regulations, R&D monitoring services, etc.) will feed into a continuously updated threats and opportunities analysis for the enterprise. Intelligent advisory systems will integrate this information with internal information to identify opportunity and challenge scenarios for consideration by the strategic management team. The model-based strategic management environment will be a dynamic one that learns from both inside and outside the organization on a 24/7 basis, integrating the top floor with the shop floor (and everywhere in between) and supporting the best decisions at every level. In the model-based enterprise, the information required for all business functions is available when it is needed, where it is needed, and in the form in which it is most useful. The strategic management cockpit will place anyone who needs the services in contact with the information they need and the tools to convert it to actionable knowledge. The cockpit is the point of interface between the user and the master enterprise model, and it is supported by analytical tools, intelligent advisors, and connectivity to all internal and external knowledge bases available to the enterprise. The user can present a scenario to the cockpit, and quickly receive an analysis based on the best information available. The basis for recommendations will be visible, enabling analysis of every decision and supporting continuous learning for the cockpits intelligent systems. The strategic management cockpit will give every member of the team the information they need to set objectives, monitor performance, and respond to opportunities and challenges. Occurrences will be analyzed for their strategic value, and proactive changes in corporate direction will be recommended when appropriate. The system architecture will be open, interoperable, and modular, enabling companies to quickly tailor generic modules to support the specific needs of the enterprise.
1.4 ACHIEVING THE GOALS: THE MBE PROJECT PLANS

The MBE Roadmap outlines more than 60 goals and 200 supporting requirements for development and implementation of model-based capabilities. The scope of work required to achieve these capabilities represents a huge undertaking with a high level of technical risk. In order to decompose this scope into manageable segments, the MBE team conducted a structured prioritization of the goals to define compelling needs that can be addressed in the near term to begin delivering vital capabilities to U.S. manufacturers. This approach also provides a means to demonstrate the value and power of the MBE vision helping build support and momentum to address the longer-term, higher-risk goals. The prioritization process identified 13 topics for expansion into project plans. In most cases these topics represent a rollup of several key goals that are closely related; in other cases, a single compelling goal was expanded into greater detail. Table 1.4-1 identifies the selected project topics and provides a brief synopsis of project objectives and estimated resource requirements, which total approximately $132 million over 7 years. These estimates are rough-order-of-magnitude only, intended to provide a starting point for detailed planning by implementation teams.
Executive Summary
1-13
NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE Table 1.4-1. The MBE Project Slate.
Project 1. Flexible Representation of Complex Models 2. Shared Model Libraries 3. System-ofSystems Modeling Scope and Key Objectives
Develop the capability to create a product model that is rich enough to support all development, production, support, and end-of-life disposition activities throughout the product life-cycle. The resulting product model will have the flexibility and power to quickly provide the exact view to support desired functions. The model of the product (and its associated manufacturing and support processes) will integrate all needed information, either within the model or by linking to data within the enterprise or from external sources. Establish a common, robust framework for managing repositories of collaborative models that, when assembled, can accurately simulate materials, products, and enterprise functions across different industry sectors. Establish an initial library of such models to validate the technical feasibility and business value of the shared model library concept. Develop and demonstrate capabilities, approaches, and tools for multi-level, multi-system modeling of products, processes, and life-cycle functions for a representative set of products in a selected manufacturing industry sector. Demonstrate the ability of system-ofsystems modeling techniques to reduce product development time and cost, eliminate current needs for manual integration among and across enterprise processes, and deliver product/process designs that are optimized for performance across the product life cycle. Develop the capability to establish and manage comprehensive, highly precise total product cost models that reflect not only traditional materials and direct production costs, but also design and other investment and indirect factors. These cost elements will not be static inputs; rather, the models will link to the live sources of cost data, down to the lowest level of the supply chain. Develop enabling technologies and demonstrate the use of intelligent models that understand, seek out, acquire, and act on the information they need to execute their functions. Establish linkages between the physical modeling realm and the logical models that provide intelligence to product, process, and enterprise models. Develop an integrated system that ensures association and traceability of the right information with any product or process throughout its life cycle. Develop requirements and an integration strategy for managing complex interdependent configuration entities within the manufacturing enterprise, to the lowest level of its supply chains, and across the full lifecycle of the products it manufactures. Develop and pilot M&S capabilities that enable a product model to automatically drive downstream manufacturing and support applications. Demonstrate collaborative interaction between product and process models to evaluate the current state of capability and provide business-case data regarding the impacts of decisions made at each step of product design and manufacturing. Provide the capability to create and apply scaleable, high-fidelity product life-cycle models that support every phase of the product lifespan and through all tiers of the supply chain. Develop enabling technologies and demonstrate real-time, model-based control of factory operations, including production and maintenance operations as well as active interfaces with asset, inventory, and facility management systems. Provide the models that establish the necessary operations control functions, and integrate these models with material, product, process, and control models to deliver a prototype system. Develop enabling technologies and conduct proof-of-principle demonstrations of modelbased distribution capabilities able to support highly complex requirements such as those for military systems. Provide a generic system framework that supports design for distribution, distribution planning, management/execution, and re-planning in response to changes in demand. Provide the initial set of methods and standards required for seamless interaction of model-based processes among supply chain members. Demonstrate these capabilities with a team of industry partners in a selected manufacturing sector. Develop enabling technologies to create a foundational, model-based manufacturing enterprise resource management system framework that is modular, scaleable, and built on open software standards. Deliver a baseline capability for modeling, simulating, and directing control over all manufacturing enterprise resources, and enable expansion to deal with increasing size, complexity, and functionality of organizational processes. Develop and demonstrate model-based technologies that deliver information to the point of use, through flexible, affordable systems that provide for heads-up, hands-free operation. Demonstrate sharing of information created in enterprise planning processes (e.g., product design) to the four primary execution systems of the enterprise: manufacturing, product service/support, factory maintenance, and training.
Scope 84 mo, $33M
39 mo., $9.1M 32 mo., $4.4M
4. Enterprise-Wide Cost Modeling
30 mo., $8.4M
5. Intelligent Models 6. Configuration Management for the Model-Based Enterprise 7. Product-Driven Product & Process Design 8. Model-Based Life-Cycle Management 9. Model-Based, Real-Time Factory Operations 10. Model-Based Distribution
36 mo., $5.6M 60 mo, $23M
38 mo., $7M
66 mo., $13.5M 36 mo., $4.0M
39 mo., $6.8M
11. Multi-Enterprise Collaboration 12. Model-Based Resource Management 13. Information Delivery to Point of Use
34 mo., $2.7M 40 mo., $4.7M
24 mo., $9.75M
Executive Summary
1-14
2.0 PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT

2.1 FUNCTIONAL MODEL FOR PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT
The Product Realization and Support function of the manufacturing enterprise includes all activities required to conceive, develop, produce, and support the enterprises products, including appropriate disposition of the product at the end of its useful life. Product realization is the core of the manufacturing enterprise mission the design, fabrication, and support of products to generate revenue and fulfill the needs of the enterprises customers and other stakeholders. For assessment and planning purposes, product realization and support can be divided into four separate yet interrelated elements as shown in Figure 2.1-1 and described below.
Figure 2.1-1. Functional Model for Product Realization & Support
Innovation & Conceptualization Product & Process Development
Includes discovery and definition of new and modified products based on the perceived needs of the customer base, documented customer requirements, a new and innovative product concept, or ideas derived from technology advances. Includes those activities required to create designs and specifications sufficient to enable cost-effective production of products that conform to their requirements. This function also includes developing and implementing any new or modified processes required to manufacture the product. Includes all activities associated with transforming and combining raw materials and components into a completed product ready for delivery to the customer. Encompasses all activities associated with ensuring that the product is maintained over its intended lifetime, including provision of spares and consumables; repair and servicing; and recycle, disposal, or other conversion at the end of the products life.
Manufacturing Execution Life-Cycle Support
These functions are highly interdependent with the other functions of the enterprise as indicated in Figure 2.1-2. The aggregation of all these functions creates a value chain for creating and delivering value to customers. The value chain encompasses and integrates every organization, resource, and knowledge asset involved in delivering value from initial needs/opportunity identification and development to production, support, and final disposition at the end of the products life.
Product Realization & Support
2-1
Figure 2.1-1. Product realization and support processes are highly interdependent with all other processes in the enterprise value chain.
2.2 CURRENT STATE OF PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT

This section provides an overview of the current state of modeling and simulation (M&S) technology and application for product realization and support processes, highlighting some best examples of current practice. It also identifies areas where advances and changes in industry practices are needed to realize the full potential of model-based enterprise concepts. Model-based product design and manufacturing technologies are in wide use in all sectors of industry and show great promise for being the enabling mechanism for every step of the product life cycle enabling rapid development and highly efficient production while eliminating the cost and time of physical prototyping. Table 2.2-1 notes some of the key attributes of the current state of practice in this area, and Table 2.2-2 provides a more detailed assessment for each of the functional elements.
Table 2.2-1. General Observations on Current State of Product Realization & Support
Lagging Practice No integration or interoperability Use limited to specialists; no collaborative access Limited model characterization/ validation, low fidelity Spreadsheets most frequent tool Lack of understanding of economic justification of modeling (how to assess nontraditional cost savings) State of Practice Stand-alone, single-domain models Excellent full geometry models Hybrid use of modeling with conventional processes Process systems verify performance against process models; models used off-line to debug problems Little feedback from product use to refine models Leading-Edge Practice Integrated performance/ geometry and tolerance/ variation models Full life-cycle cost models Virtual prototyping replaces much physical prototyping Model-based sensing & control systems taking on more selfdiagnosis and real-time control in manufacturing processes
2-2
NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE Table 2.2-2. Current State of Product Realization and Support
Element Innovation & Conceptualization Lagging Practice Little or no use of M&S in design phase beyond simple CAD Iterative design through multiple physical prototypes & redesign Incompatible & incomplete tools for design & analysis Product data exchange common but usually requires human intervention Execution of design optimizers too slow to permit comprehensive analysis Limited skill sets & resources Limited understanding of relationship among key parameters No integration of design & requirements data Little up-front attention to life-cycle issues Primarily paper-based design, especially in process design Little fundamental understanding of process or materials science Limited ability to map design to manufacturing features Knowledge represented as parametric models Little support for electronic querying of CAD models Design tools impose unnatural constraints in design process No mapping of design features to manufacturing features/processes Predictive modeling only in very narrow domains State of Practice 3D solid models that drive 2D design Tools for logic analysis Optimization of single discipline view of design M&S used for specific aspects of design Extensive model-based analysis of alternative concepts (parametric & other) Costing & performance modeling used, but not integrated for optimization of total product & process Limited analysis of producibility, maintainability Modeling not yet yielding faster generation & realization of product ideas Understanding of processes & materials Activity modeling 3-D geometry models used Finite element modeling Proprietary performance models Tolerance models CAD models for interference/fit Kinematic, dynamic, & thermal models Sensors expensive & provide only indirect monitoring of products closeness to design Process models widely used in continuous process industries, but little real-time linkage between process modeling & process execution Limited integration of workflows: Concurrent vs Synchronous engineering, where different work streams not always working on same targets/same cadence Limited access to design process/models granted to customers & supply chain members Leading-Edge Practice 3D model used throughout process Analysis Integrated with design Multidisciplinary optimization of design Parametric/variant design
Product & Process Development
Scientific models (first principles) for process design & material properties Process capability in design decisions (robust design) Manufacturing best practices lead manufacturing design more than producibility & taking IP & making better products Prediction of microstructure based on chemical & metallurgical properties Process simulators Circuit layout & simulation Immersive environments for virtual vehicles Automakers (and other industries) use models for design reviews, testing, etc. Distributed models run in own domains but communicate w/ each other Spectrum multi-physics model Full product models Robust proprietary specialty models for magnetics, kinematics, airflow, etc
2-3

Element Manufacturing Execution Lagging Practice Many models not physics-based; limited fidelity/verisimilitude to real world Lack of process & materials knowledge Little or no material characterization Poor accommodation of variable material (inclusions, defects, chemistry, condition, dimension, etc) Lack methodology for equipment modeling Lack science to allow predictability of tooling performance Not flexible in fixturing design to accommodate material variation No tying of tools, fixturing, & machines together in models Smaller firms still use manual approach In-process gages not robust & do not work well in production environment Difficulty of integrating sensors with controls & process knowledge State of Practice Actively growing some good process models Commercial tools CAPE, CAPP, Cognition, DFM/DFA, & tolerance modeling apps Plant layout modeling is OK, but info transfer to other apps is lacking Little understanding of material transformation science Little use of analytical models for process applications Proprietary controllers Limited use of sensors Test & inspection based on empirical rather than analytical process models Test, inspection, & validation are significant cost drivers Parametric acceptance as a basis for establishing product quality Processing plan & control system designed for continuous process products without consideration from plant floor & control parameters needed causing more cost for control system integration & configuration Control models for continuous process products hard-coded for steady state plus expected excursions; cannot handle unexpected Little or no ability for real-time model updates based on process performance Design for maintainability, reliability Spreadsheets used to predict quantities & costs Almost no telemetry or feedback from product in use to affect future designs Abundance of data from all life cycles creates more vulnerability to liability claims Leading-Edge Practice Increasingly agile automation (can use capital equipment to do multiple tasks) Limited modeling in real-time the current state of the product activities and factory, fed by sensors (now being done to a limited extent) e.g., with RF Electronics & continuous process industries lead other sectors by wide margin Excellent models available for kinetics & discrete events, molding, casting, forging Some processes (e.g., stamping) highly automated, well understood and modeled Some use of Design for Assembly (DFA) planning tools Simulation tools (e.g., Vericut, Deneb) used to validate control programs Some sensors in continuous processes taking on more intelligence, selfdiagnosing process, and self-correcting with actuator role
Life-Cycle Support
Predictive modeling only in very narrow domains Very little modeling of product endures to support actual use Poor, non-centralized record keeping among supply chain partners Little or no support cost info collected at product level
GIS-based models support distribution planning Use of product models & simulations to support training & trouble-shooting Consideration of final disposition in initial design DoD modeling part obsolescence Some prognostic tools for predicting life expectancy Some companies using GIS-based product feedback & awareness to communicate maintenance needs, design problems
2-4
Leading companies in every sector have made significant investments in M&S tools to achieve a differentiating product capability or to respond to critical business needs. However, even in the technologyintensive aerospace sector, industry lacks the ability to perform true multi-disciplinary optimization of products in a model-based environment. Current modeling capability centers on use of an increasingly capable base of commercial 3D design tools and analysis applications, supplemented by custom models and simulations developed in-house to meet the needs of a specific product or product family. Increasingly, companies are also realizing the need to capture model-based product knowledge to support products throughout their life. Although true model-based life-cycle management is not yet possible, tool vendors are addressing this expanded scope with product life-cycle management (PLM) software applications. Current PLM tools are typically extensions of product design tools. As pointed out by CIMdata,1 PLM is not a technology per se. It is instead a business approach to managing the complete set of product definition information creating that information, managing it, and disseminating and using it throughout the life cycle of the product. PLM is an approach in which the processes are as important, or more important, than the data. PLM is as much concerned with how a business works as it is with what is being created, focusing on: Secure, managed access and control of product definition information Maintaining the integrity of the product definition and related information throughout the life of the product Managing the business processes used to create, manage, disseminate, share, and use the information. Viewing the Product from Anywhere in the Enterprise
With model-based collaborative tools such as AutoVue and Enterprise VisView, all enterprise stakeholders today can access 3D product design data and provide feedback at all stages of the design process. Customers, engineers, suppliers, and manufacturing staff can review, analyze, and interact with product designs to improve performance, quality, and other factors helping avoid costly errors and reduce time-to-market. Advanced viewing features allow users to rotate, pan, and explode assemblies; take precise measurements; section models; and more. The current generation of these applications integrates with document management, PLM, and enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems to provide embedded viewing and workflow control.
http://www.cimmetry.com/cimweb.nsf/pages/CATIA_viewer However, despite a greatly improved ability to share design information in collaborative environments, companies continue to limit access outside the walls of their immediate organizations. This is due in part to the need to protect proprietary product and process data from competitors, and in part to an industry mindset that information exchange with external stakeholders (e.g., customers, suppliers, regulatory agencies) must be tightly controlled in order to manage expectations.
Capturing Reality in Models Modeling of products and processes with complete real-world fidelity is not yet possible. Current tools support models with sufficient depth of detail and complexity to provide high geometrical precision and meet a large percentage of different disciplines needs for information to support product development. Present simulation tools are limited in the types of information and the level of detail they deal with, and proprietary formats make it difficult to exchange information among different functions, disciplines, and tools. Current capabilities are lacking in areas such as design allowances, reliability, producibility, ac1
http://www.cimdata.com/PLM/plm.html.
2-5
commodation of uncertainty, and other functions that are essential to translating products from concept to production. There is also a lack of tools that support high-fidelity cost modeling of product components or processes to guide design for affordability earlier in the product life cycle. The limited ability of todays M&S tools to interface with each other in an integrated fashion is a major barrier to multi-function optimization and process planning as an automatic element of product development. The major software vendors are addressing needs for multidisciplinary coordination by adding PLM functionality and improving integration with their tool or among their product lines. For example, Parametric Technologies Corporation (PTC) markets more than 50 of its tools as an integrated suite2, and CATIAs AutoVue provides users of various ERP and document management tools the ability to review and comment on designs from their desktops. Some tools are appearing that address the problem of communication between competing applications, such as the ProEngineer Plug-in for CATIA V5 data. Despite these advances, for most manufacturers product optimization remains an iterative, primarily manual process managed using disciplines such as concurrent engineering and integrated product/process development (IPPD).
3D Design Tools Enable Rapid Customization to Meet Customer Needs

National Paintball Fields (NPF) operates Europe's largest paintball venue and is a leading manufacturer of paintball markers (guns). These high-precision weapons propel paintballs at over 200 miles per hour and contain sophisticated electronics to monitor performance. Professional and tournament paintball players value individuality, so NPF responded to demands for customized products with anodized mixed-color finishes and cut and carved surfaces tailored-made for each customer. "As demand grew for more sophisticated and individual sculpting, said NPFs Nick Marks, both the CAD and the programming for the CNC systems were a major bottleneck to production. Even working long hours and weekends we could only manage two personalized markers per week." To address the bottleneck, NPF implemented an integrated 3D design and manufacturing solution based on ProEngineer, expanding its capacity to design and machine per3 sonalized markers by a factor of 10. Defense contractors are using ProEngineer, CATIA, Unigraphics, and similar tools to do the same kind of customization for real weapon systems. Horizontal technology insertion (HTI) techniques enable sharing of critical subsystems such as lasers and sensors for multiple systems. This greatly reduces the time and expense of system upgrades, enabling the military services to share development costs and improve affordability in delivering new capabilities.
Another key issue is that current product modeling capabilities make little provision for reconciling the as-built design to the engineered design. The ability to accurately model changes as the product ages and is put to use by its customers is also a distinct gap. Also, product performance models are usually limited to normal operation; failure modes and effects are typically defined through off-line analysis, and are not coupled to the actual electronic product definition. Ease of Use
A final barrier with current modeling and simulation tools is their complexity. Most modeling applications require specialized training, and many companies cannot afford such training beyond a limited, business-critical implementation. The level of skill in todays manufacturing workforce is insufficient to support a pervasive modeling and simulation environment. Easier-to-use interfaces and smart built-in training interfaces are needed to facilitate wide use of model-based tools and practices. Here again, the enterprise must balance the need for high fidelity of models in critical engineering and business functions versus the need to provide lesser and tailored subsets of the same models for other purposes, including external information sharing and collaboration.
2 3
http://www.ptc.com/products/sw_landing.htm. http://www.cadserver.co.uk/common/viewer/archive/2001/May/10/feature10.phtm.
2-6
Given the current state of the art, most companies have not yet seen the move to widespread model-based enterprise processes as one that is clearly worth the cost and effort. However, the savings provided by these tools can be significant. In the automotive industry, model-based tools have helped reduce the time required to move a new car design from concept to the production line from 3 years to about 14 months. In the defense sector, programs such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) and Future Combat Systems (FCS) are relying on M&S technologies to meet DoDs goals to reduce acquisition and support costs by 50% compared to current weapon systems. Most of this savings is targeted to come through use of Simulation Based Acquisition (SBA) and systems engineering principles. SBA applies detailed modeling to identify the cost impact of different system requirements, and trade off cost versus benefits. Systems engineering ensures that the requirements are driven down to the lowest level of design, and uses modeling and simulation to optimize the design through system and subsystem-level tradeoff studies. Process Industry Needs Model-Based Analysis Tools Help Santa Cruz Bicycles Improve Performance and Profits
To bring a new suspension design to market, Santa Cruz Bicycles (SCB) used a mixture of analysis and modeling capabilities operating from PTCs Wildfire 2.0 interface. These included behavioral modeling for initial analysis and design; MCAD to give the bike its structure; advanced surfacing for aesthetics; mechanism dynamics to analyze clearances and loads; and structural simulation for failure analysis. "The most important capability for us is behavioral modeling," says SCBs David Earle. This allows up-front capture of design intent explicitly within the CAD program. The engineers use it to locate important pivot points, and keep track of the wheel path and shock rate. The finite element analysis of the main link examines the stresses likely to be applied to one component of the virtual pivot-point technology. ProEngineers behavioral modeling tools obtain probabilistic optimization results: sensitivity studies to determine the effects of specific parameter changes; optimization for specific requirements; feasibility studies to find possible solutions without specific requirements; and multi-objective studies based on design of experiments. Users can go back and forth among the tools and save results as design features.
While many of the attributes of the current state of model-based product realization and support apply to all types of manuOnce we have the information we need from behavioral modeling, we use CAD and create the hard form of the bike around the facturing, the process industries (e.g., propivot points," Earle says. "We can create the look we want with ducers of chemicals, foods, and processed advanced surfacing later on. What used to take six or seven raw materials) have unique needs and conhours now takes five minutes. By saving so much time at each cerns. Current manufacturing process stage, the engineering department gained an additional 415 minmodeling and simulation activities in this utes per simulation, and we used that time to refine the suspension system further, to levels previously impossible." sector largely focus on development and troubleshooting of selected portions of http://www.deskeng.com/articles/04/july/cover/main.htm specific unit processes. While these tools are valuable, they are incomplete and lack interoperability for application to other functions such as process planning and product/process optimization. Comprehensive standards for process modeling and integration, interoperable models for individual unit processes, and the means to share these resources are needed to enable the industry to build a rich base of process models that can be plugged together to create factory-level models. In this type of manufacturing, developers typically apply (or create) a theoretical model of the materials and transformations required to create a desired product. The model is validated through iterative labscale testing and then updated as the process is scaled up to ensure it performs as intended for production.
2-7
The engineers rely on flowsheets and material balance calculations in specifying process equipment, making extensive use of CAD/CAE tools to design the process systems with the requisite throughput, reliability, and controls. However, fully bridging the gap between the theoretical model and a reliable production process requires manual translation of product attributes and transformations into executable process instructions and control parameters. High-profile processes such as metal forging have been the primary focus of material behavioral modeling, simulation tools, and user interfaces. In the area of large structural forgings, for example, die and process steps are now exercised in a 3D finite element modeling (FEM) environment prior to any trials. The aerospace industry sees two fundamental issues associated with unit process models: 1) the need to fill the gaps by continuing to develop simulation tools and validated models for key unit processes; and 2) assuring the ability to integrate these tools to create a comprehensive simulation suite based on common data models. Lack of depth and precision of the underlying physics and math in process models is a fundamental problem that must be addressed. Current models provide an approximation of the reality of a process, but do not accommodate variability or uncertainty sufficiently to mitigate risk without extensive prototyping and testing. 2.2.1 CURRENT STATE OF INNOVATION & CONCEPTUALIZATION Currently, it is not possible to automatically generate a model of a product from an input of customer wishes or specifications, and few modeling tools are available to help turn ideas into executable product concepts. Monte Carlo simulations have been used for years in the defense community to evaluate the effectiveness of new weapon concepts, but these tools are limited to looking at discrete performance variables (e.g., range and probability of kill) in order to define top-level requirements for a particular system. DoD programs such as WARSIM and ADST are advancing interactive M&S capabilities to create simulated battlefield environments where new system concepts and tactics can be explored in the virtual realm, and where users can train without the need for costly specialized simulators. Such capabilities are vital in helping to optimize conceptual designs on the front end of the requirements definition and systems engineering process. The current generation of requirements management tools (SLATE, RequisitePro, and others) do a good job of creating a database of parsed and linked requirements to aid the systems engineering process, but they do not interact with CAD-based design systems to provide requirements in a form directly useable by downstream design and manufacturing applications. In continuous process industries, a product concept may be modeled well, but there is no direct means of translating that model into an executable process or parametric attributes to create the envisioned product. Product definition is a critical starting point in the development of any new product. However, there are a number of common shortcomings to the process of product definition in many companies: 4
No defined product strategy or product plan Lack of formal requirements as a basis for initiating product development Product requirements developed without true customer input Marketing requirement specifications (MRSs) are completed late, after development is underway,
and are typically incomplete, ambiguous, or overly ambitious derstanding of the requirements
Engineering has little or no involvement in development of the MRS, and thereby lacks a true un-
Product Definition, Kenneth Crow, DRM Associates, http://www.npd-solutions.com/pdef.html.
2-8
NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE Creeping elegance or a constantly evolving specification that requires increasing development
scope and design iteration. There are impressive advances in visualization technologies, simulation capabilities, and integration of information and analysis tools, but these are typically deployed only in best-practice applications that warrant the significant investments required. One best-practice example of a tool that can analyze multiple design options is Visteons Unified Parametric Vehicle (UPV). Auto companies apply UPV in design and performance prediction for powertrain and climate cooling systems. Weather conditions, driving conditions, interior cooling, and powertrain cooling requirements can be modeled to analyze design options for engine thermal management systems against criteria such as weight, fuel economy, emissions, and occupant comfort. This allows cost-effective evaluation and refinement of a wider scope of design options in a shorter amount of time, with fewer downstream engineering and manufacturing changes. The linkage between M&S for design optimization and for product and process concurrency is strengthening. In the most advanced applications, designers using desktop virtual cockpits can launch analytical simulation tools to evaluate design alternatives. With the computing power available today, many analyses can be performed in a few hours, at an acceptable level of fidelity for conceptual evaluation. However, it is still generally true that there is minimal ability to capture customer preferences as an input to the product requirements definition step that drives the product realization process. Two other ideas should also be noted: 1) product conceptualization is not the only time that communication with the customer should take place. The customer and supply chain members should have visibility into the product at every phase of its life cycle; and 2) product conceptualization should be viewed as a continuous process. Progressive enterprises take a stewardship approach to their products, continually seeking ways to improve or upgrade the products to better serve the needs of all value chain members. 2.2.2 CURRENT STATE OF PRODUCT & PROCESS DEVELOPMENT Current M&S tools for product and process development are generally dedicated to single functions or processes, and tradeoff tools for optimization based on product, process, and resource options are in their infancy. The ability to optimize based on an assessment of product performance, process capability, and resource availability has been demonstrated in a few specialized environments, but is not widely used. Despite the widespread availability of CAD tools,5 creation of models is rarely on the critical path of process development for discrete manufacturing. Models of processes are often created at a high level to design manufacturing flows or at a detailed level to help diagnose a problem, but are rarely used to create and optimize product and process designs as standard practice. Product and process development have historically been accomplished by testing a design to see how well it works, then modifying and testing it again. Modeling and simulation of processes is particularly expensive and time-consuming, and thus is limited to applications with a high return on investment. In continuous process industries, the product typically starts as a model of some material transformation process, and the process model drives the design of the product and the process systems for its manufacture. However, the process design is usually made without detailed consideration of control parameters. This is a major deficiency, considering that design decisions determine up to 40% of the cost of process control systems. The large investments required to implement model-based product and process development present a major barrier as manufacturers continue to focus on short-term profits ahead of life-cycle value. The lack of good awareness and confidence in process simulation tools makes it difficult to secure support for the needed software development, even though they have potentially large payoffs in time, resources, and profitability. Government investment in this area has been lacking for similar reasons. Model validation and verification are key needs to overcome these barriers in the manufacturing environment. Currently,
5
CAD tools are currently estimated to have an installed base of 20 million users. (http://www.jonpeddie.com/special/CAD.shtml)
2-9
quality assurance requirements for safety-critical products (e.g., defense products) do not permit processbased validation and verification. In areas where modeling and simulation is being applied, the results have been positive. Simulation tools are delivering excellent returns on investment in areas such as forging and spin forming, supporting creation of complex net shapes optimized for performance and cost-effectiveness. Model-based tools for mold design, pour, solidification, and defect prediction in development of complex investment castings have delivered significant improvements in manufacturing yields. Model-based product performance simulations are being used extensively in product certification. The application of simulations to conduct destructive testing has greatly reduced the need for physical tests. Hard particle and bird ingestion models, for example, are widely used today in certification testing for gas turbine engines. These capabilities, although demonstrating the real value of modelbased simulation tools, still lack truly accurate predictive capability and the ability to incorporate the uncertainties necessary for confident validation. Visualization technology has progressed rapidly, and the technology is outpacing its use in the product design environment. As mathematical rigor and geometric accuracy in modeling catch up with display capability, application of these technologies will expand. Today, 3D designs are viewed and archived in a 2D CAD medium. As CAD capabilities are implemented in 360-degree visualization environments with functionalities such as tolerancing and collision detection, the value of these technologies will increase tremendously.
Integrated Design Tools Making an Impact on Mars as Well as Earth

Alliance Spacesystems, Inc. (ASI) designs and manufactures mechanical systems, robotics, structures, and mechanisms for spacecraft and scientific instruments, including the robot arms used on Spirit and Opportunity, the two rovers developed by NASA for the Mars Exploration Rover mission. The Mars project presented significant challenges. Using the SolidWorks mechanical design system, ASI was able to develop the required highly precise, complex mechanisms in collaboration with NASA scientists to meet a compressed design schedule with limited resources. Integrated COSMOS analysis software enabled ASI to test and optimize the design of parts and assemblies to meet 6 the rigors of the harsh Martian environment. Companies such as Swagelok, a leading supplier of precision fluid system components, also use applications like SolidWorks to generate designs more efficiently and reduce product development time. Integration with downstream applications such as FEA, CFD, and PDM software enabled Swagelok designers to engineer an entirely new product line for the biotechnology and pharmaceutical markets in less than a year approximately half the time of more conventional systems.
In many areas, computational complexity still prevents simulation tools from supporting adequate and timely decision-making in the product design process. There is little knowledge of the underlying physics of most materials and transformation processes, limited ability to reuse knowledge about a product, and few tools or methods that enable product designers to electronically take nonphysical factors into account. Modeling the physical representation, performance, cost, producibility, and life-cycle features of a product demands robust capabilities to capture, transform, translate, and exchange knowledge and data. The increasing complexity of new products and technologies also increases the demand for concurrent, multi-disciplinary optimization of products and processes. Interoperability continues to be an industry challenge, barring efforts to achieve integrated systems that use and apply knowledge from partners and supply chain members in the design process. The PDES/ STEP initiatives have made good progress in improving exchange of product definition data, and other
6
http://www.solidworks.com/pages/successes/viewsuccess.html?record=865.
2-10
efforts are under way. Following the lead of the graphic design software industry, the major CAD vendors are beginning to roll out plug-ins enabling importation of files created in competitors tools. These capabilities remain far from seamless, however. Materials engineering and manufacturing process design applications are currently not well integrated with product design and visualization tools. Geometric representations are not mathematically complete, nor are they sufficiently precise to be directly useable in process design and control. Process simulations are applied independently from design and, in general, results are communicated manually to the design team. Material modeling is not scaleable and has only limited ability to account for variability in material constituents or quality (e.g., impurities). Whirlpools Applies Digital Manufacturing Continuity across product and process models Recipe to Shorten Time to Market is necessary to tie material properties at their most fundamental level to material properties Whirlpool Corp. is embarking upon digital manufacturing using DELMIA Process Engineer and V5 DPM Assembly as they apply to processes and products. Ford tools linked by a Manufacturing Hub. Motor Company engineers are developing the Production manager Anders Claesson explained, With capability to integrate materials and manufacthree new microwave platforms about to be introduced and turing process attributes and models with the no integration between our materials and planning system, geometric representation of product, from both we recognized it was a good time to move to a digital envitheir own design environment as well as from ronment. supplied subsystems and components. Before adopting the software, Whirlpool ran a pilot program Integrated product/process models are widely plement and integrate the tools and work flow. regarded as a need, but the enabling tools have The engineers are now gearing up for the next product line. not yet evolved to support their realization. The Manufacturing Hub, a repository that stores both hisElectronic product data exchange is common, toric and current product, process, and resource information, enables engineers to continuously update and share data to but often requires human intervention to correct better manage all processes and equipment orders. Manuthe results. Many engineering and computing facturing processes can be created and evaluated including tools exist to facilitate transition of a product time analyses, rough balances, ramp-up scenarios, and design from the conceptual stage to a detailed capacity analyses. The scenarios are stored in the Hub, design. For discrete products (i.e., manufacallowing engineers quick access to information for reuse and to support decision making. tured parts and assemblies), the CAD tool that Ultimately, we anticipate that the technology will accelerate generates the conceptual design is usually the time-to-market through faster product and process verificasame one used for detailed design. The softtion and validation, said Claesson. Manual data transfers ware tools used for analysis and simulation are 7 should become a thing of the past. usually separate products from the CAD systems, and the degree of integration of these tools with CAD systems varies widely. Where designs are created by organization working in collaboration, the use of different CAD systems can severely complicate the integration of CAD models with analysis and simulation tools. Interoperability of simulation tools is greatly lacking in the process realm. While discrete simulations may deal with product stress and temperature profiles during individual processes, they seldom deal with the total performance profiles of products and processes across multiple operations, and even more rarely do they enable concurrent optimization of multiple product and process parameters. Lack of standards is a major concern in all model-based simulation applications. Compatibility in product data exchange, standard representation of product and process, compatibility of simulation systems with process information systems, scaleability from micro to macro levels, all must be addressed as we move to the next level of cost-effective, high-performance simulation. There is little incentive for suppliers to model complex assemblies in detail, because the multiplicity of incompatible systems limits the scope of utility and cost-effectiveness. Currently, integration and optimization of capacity is difficult in a global manufacturing environment and distributed supply base. Factors contributing to this condition include
7
with application engineers stationed on-site helping to im-
http://www.3ds.com/en/home.asp.
2-11
proprietary information concerns, adversarial OEM/supplier relationships caused by a low trust factor, and the lack of cost visibility across the supply chain. Industry lacks collaboration strategies to solve these basic issues, and export control regulations impose additional restrictions (particularly in the aerospace/defense sector) on sharing of product and process information throughout a supply chain. 2.2.3 CURRENT STATE OF MANUFACTURING EXECUTION The manufacturing process uses raw materials and a detailed production plan to create deliverable products. The process must be faithful to the design to produce the product that was intended. In most cases, the manufacturing process, through human guidance, is refined and tailored to produce product conforming more closely to the stakeholders needs than is communicated by the design. In these cases, knowledge is added to the initial design information to produce a better result.8 For discrete products, finished articles are produced through the direct, complex interaction of tools and materials; e.g., machining of a part. In the case of continuous product processing, factory control systems are generally simple and indirect, using secondary effects to accomplish desired results. For example, instead of commanding an absolute flow rate, we command a valve to turn and monitor the resulting change in flow, then adjust the valve again to obtain the desired result. In assessing the current state of model-based manufacturing process execution for either product domain, the key question is, how effective is a process in converting raw materials and design information into the right product that satisfies all stakeholders? Model-based simulations today add little to manufacturing execution in traditional processes. Starting a production line with a new product presents many unknowns, and many processes especially those supporting complex products require a great deal of experimentation, tuning, and enhancement early in their life cycle. Production managers manually tweak processes for lower sensitivity to environmental changes and variability in raw material properties, and continuously improve fixtures, tooling, and workflow aids in their effort to optimize production. This is most often done without using M&S tools unless some problem is beyond the shop engineers capability to solve. Process models are sometimes used to control the process, or at least monitor the production rate. For example, in stereolithography the product definition is directly used to generate the control parameters used to fabricate the part. In continuous processes, newer sensing and control systems are taking on capabilities of
8 9
Virtual Manufacturing is Key to Rapid Final Assembly for Boeing 7E7

Manufacturing of the 7E7, Boeings first new jet since the 777 has received much attention for using composite wings and fuselage instead of metal, but there is another major difference. A dozen years ago, the 777 was the first digitally designed commercial airplane; no physical prototype had to be built. This time, engineers will not only design the plane digitally but also the entire development and manufacturing process and the aircrafts entire life cycle. Before the first 7E7 part is made, the plane will have been digitally defined and produced; so will the tooling and the assembly processes. Boeing and its partners will create a virtual-reality airplane, and everything needed to build it, from inception to rollout. From Japan, Italy, and the U.S., the composite structures will come into the factory certified, tested, and ready for final assembly. A moving line will carry the center fuselage section slowly down the factory floor as other sections wings, front fuselage, and aft fuselage are joined to it. In just 72 hours, a 7E7 will be assembled and ready for 9 painting and delivery.
First Product Correct, IMTI Inc., October 2000. Abstracted from June 1, 2004 article By James Wallace, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/175791_composites01.html.
2-12
process actuators and thus more ability to self-diagnose and make adjustments in the process, based on embedded algorithms. Many of the barriers to wider use of emerging model-based technologies relate to insufficient scientific understanding of processes and materials, which limits the ability to create an effective model. We must improve the ability to model processes and understand the situations or product requirements where those processes should be used. The ability to create accurate models of unit processes is key to model-based planning and control of end-to-end production lines, a concept pioneered by the DOE/Industry Technologies Enabling Agile Manufacturing (TEAM) program in the mid-1990s (Figure 2.2.3-1). After the product and processes are defined, infrastructure such as tooling and fixtures must be put in place. This activity is still done largely by humans using CAD tools and physical mockups. Assembly, testing, packaging, and shipping must all be similarly supported, and process plans must be generated and
Figure 2.2.3-1. The ability to create accurate, interoperable models of unit processes is key to model-based planning and control of end-to-end production lines.
2-13
distributed to shop supervisors along with instructions and training for the production staff. Much of this information is still generated by humans, although progress has been made in use of modeling and visualization tools to automate tasks such as creation of manufacturing process plans. The major barrier to achieving successful production of first articles is inability to produce a robust process model as part of an integrated product/process design. Inability to accommodate change or variation in process models is a pervasive issue, as is limited ability to incorporate underlying science to accurately predict performance. Models and simulations are usually specific to one part of the production process, and there is little integration across parts, fixtures, tooling, and material properties. The inability to understand, model, and control processes in three dimensions is certainly a major barrier in material processing. Cooling rate variability, for example, is a major uncertainty factor in casting as well as in fluid processing operations. It is possible today to characterize or approximate the dynamics of a machine or processing system with the goal of compensating for temperature fluctuations, wear patterns, and other variations, although precise modeling is difficult and expensive. However, the better that process transformations can be simulated by associated transformations in the related models, the greater the capability will be for producing correct product on the first pass and every pass. 2.2.4 CURRENT STATE OF LIFE-CYCLE SUPPORT While modeling and simulation are becoming increasingly valuable in product development, the application of these technologies to support the other phases of the product life cycle remains limited. Automated tools have transformed the way product support requirements are managed, customers are supported, and products are maintained, with the automotive and aerospace sectors leading the implementation of new processes, tools, and techniques. However, modeling in the area of life-cycle support remains largely limited to use of CAD tools to design support equipment; spreadsheets to calculate quantities, costs, and reliability; geographic information system (GIS)-based models to support distribution planning; and custom simulations to support troubleshooting of product support problems.10 Training is an area where model-based simulation technologies are delivering great value, but benefits have been slow to materialize because training is undervalued in the product equation traditionally because the product design must be locked down and in production before starting development of costly training aids. However, advances in desktop computing power are enabling system designers to shift more training to lower-cost generic platforms. Government initiatives such as the Marine Corps Aviation Simulation Master Plan program and the Navys Generic Reconfigurable Training System are pursuing improvements in training cost and effectiveness through use of common modeling technologies and simulators that support multiple training requirements from a common baseline. Virtual reality (VR) techniques, driven in large part by advances in the video gaming industry, are enabling pilots and equipment operators to accomplish more training with less reliance on costly hardware-based simulators. Modeling with 3D CAD and VR tools is improving the quality and safety of training while reducing the cost of developing and maintaining training materials. Product models generated by designers are now being ported directly into training media, reducing the cost of creating training content. This also enables training designers to work with product designers in collaborative engineering environments to produce complex multimedia training materials. Assembly models and simulations developed to optimize product manufacture are being used directly to train maintenance and repair staff, and VR techniques enable operators of hazardous processes to gain proficiency in a completely safe environment.
10
Modeling & Simulation for Affordable Manufacturing, IMTI, Inc., January 2003.
2-14
CAD designs can also be downloaded to stereolithography systems to produce physical models, thus reducing costs associated with creating training aids while providing exact form/fit replicas which is invaluable for maintenance training. Reliability and maintainability (R&M) have long been important factors in product design. However, beyond the use of spreadsheets for calculating reliability as a function of parts count (or as a function of the known and predicted reliabilities of each of a systems components), until recently the use of simulation tools in the R&M arena has been limited. Practical modeling capabilities at military maintenance and repair facilities are virtually non-existent, due largely to a combination of limited budgets, cultural resistance to change, and a predominant focus on simply getting the work done. Resources to support the needed technology investments are limited, since these are already stressed to meet day-to-day operational requirements. In the commercial sector, investments in modeling and simulation for design are paying dividends in terms of helping deliver products that are more reliable and easier to maintain. The evolution of 3D CAD to support assembly modeling for reduced cost and improved quality in manufacture has yielded additional benefits of making products easier to service and repair.
System of Systems
is a concept that emerged over the past decade in the defense community with the recognition that we can no longer afford to design and support complex weapon systems as stand-alone products. In the military environment, individual weapons must work together as an integrated system to accomplish their individual and collective objectives. This concept is even more important for the organizations that support these products maintaining and servicing them, providing training, troubleshooting problems, and coordinating the often conflicting requirements of different stakeholder organizations. M&S in logistics supply chains range from limited to nonexistent. Recurring problems and issues in maintenance and repair of specific products are referred back to the supplier or prime contractor, which imposes long delays in problem solution. Aggregation of the information about the products and systems and their problems into an integrated set of models would provide tremendous improvement. Much work must be accomplished to turn system of systems from a principle into tools and applications for the future manufacturing enterprise. M&S is a critical enabler of this transformation. Currently there is no accepted modeling framework to support concurrent evaluation, optimization, and management of life-cycle requirements for complex products that share a common operational environment.
However, many barriers remain. Poor, noncentralized recordkeeping means that it is difficult (if not impossible) to develop the rich databases required to understand maintenance and repair history and the associated cost of a product, much less make informed predictions. Feedback from the field to the factory is typically limited to basic warranty service information, which is inadequate for detailed modeling. Manufacturers often lose visibility of what happens to their products after delivery, and communication between primes, users, and support functions is fragmentary unless there is a serious problem. In these cases the prime organization focuses its M&S assets to analyze the problem, work with the customer to determine root causes and corrective actions, and implement required changes.
2-15
2.3 FUTURE STATE VISION & GOALS FOR PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT
Seamlessly integrated M&S tools will enable distributed teams to quickly create product and process designs that achieve the best balance of performance, cost, robustness, and other factors. The product model and underlying knowledge base will control all processes across the product life cycle, capturing and sharing data to drive continuous improvement throughout the enterprise. Manufacturing processes will be designed and qualified entirely in the virtual realm, drawing on scientifically accurate models of materials, unit processes, and equipment. The resulting model-based knowledge base will support all aspects of maintenance, training, and life-cycle support. The ultimate vision for product realization processes in the model-based enterprise is the ability to seamlessly move back and forth between the virtual representation of the product and its processes, and the physical reality of the processes as they occur in real time. The product model will monitor and guide the production process and support analysis and decision processes to address changing requirements and deal with off-normal conditions and other problems. This tightly coupled virtual/real representation of the product and processes will be visible to all value chain members in real time as they perform their functions, showing the status of the manufacturing process and their position in that process. This vision of a seamless value chain cannot be realized without the unifying base of the comprehensive product model. The model-based product realization environment of the future (Figure 2.3-1) will consistently deliver best designs to satisfy a balanced set of objectives for the enterprise and its stakeholders. Rich and mathematically accurate visualization environments, augmented by powerful analytical tools, will allow users to interactively refine objectives and preferences in performing trade-offs for optimization. As each preference is specified, the user will see its impact on performance, cost, delivery time, aesthetics, and other attributes of interest. The resulting product model will not be merely a product representation coupled to a database of physical attributes. Rather, it will be a total product definition that is continuously linked to all sources of technical and business information that define and affect it throughout the life cycle. This Figure 2.3-1. Future design and manufacturing systems will operate from knowledge base will not product models that link to all relevant information across all enterprise proconly enable the enterprise to esses and the entire product life cycle. radically improve its ability to design, produce, and support its products, but will provide a total audit trail of actions taken and supporting rationale. This will significantly improve the ability of the enterprise to address and favorably resolve potential liability issues throughout a products life.
2-16
Future manufacturing process designers will draw on a comprehensive library of validated, thoroughly characterized models and simulations of common materials, unit processes, and manufacturing equipment to integrate optimal process designs for individual products. Resources internal or available from supply chain partners will be modeled in terms of their characteristics and availability for any enterprise project. Interoperable, scaleable models that understand and actively search for the information they need for completion will be standard tools for product and process engineering and manufacturing execution. They will autonomously determine and search for the information they need to satisfy the requirements of the specification and production plan, using intelligent digital advisors to guide human users in making best decisions at every step. Equipment and tooling manufacturers and material commodity vendors will provide validated 3D models, performance simulations, and supporting data as a standard part of their equipment and products, with standards ensuring the ability of different models to integrate in plug-and-play fashion. This will enable process designers across a supply chain to quickly create accurate virtual production lines, filling in gaps only as needed for product-specific tooling and proprietary processes. Virtual test environments will enable product and process designers to subject their designs to test to destruction rigor without making physical prototypes. The manufacturing execution team will use process simulations coupled with certified material, equipment, and process models to optimize the manufacturing strategy, testing and producing product in the virtual realm to verify readiness for production. These same models will control the product manufacturing process, with low-cost sensors and intelligent monitoring systems continuously comparing performance against the process models to keep the systems running in continuous conformance with requirements and specifications. Model-Based Product Realization Environment: A System of Systems Future M&S tools will support not only the development of new individual products, but will enable better management of complexity in systems of products. This will enable manufacturers to build on existing capabilities to get optimal results on a new product, and optimize the new product with respect to all other products with which it will interact in operational use. Product and process models will seam-
2-17
lessly integrate in the enterprises system-of-systems environment with appropriate security for data and communications to evaluate the impacts of technical and business decisions on existing products. This will provide life-cycle cost savings for product support through streamlined maintenance and coordinated technology management. Product and process models will also exchange information with gatekeeper models supporting the enterprises resource management and strategic management functions. This will allow users to evaluate the broader impact of decisions on other enterprise operations. Cross-Cutting Modeling & Simulation Needs for Product Realization Before addressing specific needs for the functional elements of Product Realization, there are a number of capabilities that must be developed to support the broader vision of the model-based enterprise. Continuing advances in computing speed and capacity, for example, are vital to enabling fast ultimately real-time running of analytical codes and generation of model outputs such as complex visualizations. Application interoperability issues, particularly for product definition, must also be resolved by the vendor community. Information security must also be assured to protect the sensitive data of enterprise partners and organizations, particularly those involved in national security programs. While these general improvements in underlying technology are not specifically addressed by the NextGeneration Manufacturing Technology Initiative (NGMTI), there are a number of goals and requirements that cross-cut and support multiple product realization functions. These are listed below and included in the roadmap presented in Section 2.4. Goal 1: Flexible Representation of Complex Models Provide product and process modeling technologies that enable capture and representation of all realization and support attributes in a comprehensive, computer-based model that conveys a complete understanding of the models purpose. The model will enable real-time selectable, customizable views by different types of users or applications, and be reconfigurable to accommodate new business rules, new functionality, or changing technology. (L)11 Full Model Representation Develop technologies and standards enabling creation of a complete, mathematically accurate model that allows all enterprise systems and modeling tools to interact with it through standard interfaces. The resulting models must be able to completely capture and communicate customer requirements, design intent, physical and nonphysical attributes and their relationships, and functional performance, and include parametric feature definition for design and manufacturing. Include the capability to accommodate changes in business rules and track different versions of the product/process model over time. (M-L) Multi-Model Federation Develop techniques and standards that enable complex models to be quickly assembled by integrating physical representation models with material, process, quality certification, and other supporting models to yield a complete, federated model of a product or process. (S-M) Automated Abstraction Develop techniques for automated generation of specialized views of models at desired levels of detail for different enterprise functions (e.g., technical review, cost analysis, project planning) for any production-related application or decision process. Include the capability to quickly and automatically expand, collapse, or de-feature the model to provide the correct data and detail required for a particular application or use. (M) Graphical Representation Develop techniques to provide a graphic visual representation of a product or process in order to facilitate a full and complete understanding of the product or process and its attributes, throughout the life cycle, specific to the needs of an individual user or function. (M)
11
The S-M-L designations identify a nominal timeframe for delivery of the specified capability, where S (Short) = 0 to 3 years, M (Medium) = 3 to 5 years), and L (Long) = 5 to 10 years.
2-18
Multi-Sensory Representation Develop interface methods and representation standards enabling models and simulation environments to incorporate tactile, sound, smell, and other useful sensory attributes of a product or process in order to represent customer requirements and allow more accurate representation of the modeled reality in the virtual realm. (M-L) Model Version Archive Provide a system to manage different versions of the product/process models as changes occur over time, with linkage to the changing business rules, requirements, or technologies that led to the different versions. (M-L) Goal 2: Plug & Play Collaborative Modeling & Simulation Environment Provide a standardsbased and easy-to-use collaboration environment to optimize the value chain by supporting convenient, inexpensive integration of complex product models using components and designs from multiple value chain members, where any model is interoperable and plug-compatible with any other model and with any standards-compliant application. (M) Product/Process Model Integration Standards Develop standards for integrating material models, manufacturing process models, business process models, and product models into a collaborative enterprise M&S environment with interfaces that are intuitive enough to use without extensive training. The approach should accommodate capture of product and process performance requirements; a method to locate available models and supporting data; methods for identifying and resolving gaps and conflicts; methods to create federated models; and methods to share information among the models without compromising data integrity or information security. (S-M) Plug-and-Play Vendor Models Develop standards and protocols that enable vendors to supply plug-and-play product and process models for purchased parts, components, and equipment that can be quickly and transparently integrated into larger product and process models. (S-M) Collaborative Analysis Systems Develop a framework for integrating current and future analytical tools into engineering and business management workgroup applications to provide a collaborative simulation environment with decision support tools for performing technical and business tradeoffs. (M) Goal 3: Affordable Shared Model Libraries Establish an industry-wide network of shared libraries containing validated, well-characterized models that support plug-and-play simulation, proprietary tailoring, and optimization of designs for products, processes, and operations. (M) Framework for Model Library Develop a broad-based framework to provide validated, interoperable models that support multiple enterprise applications (design, manufacturing, product support, etc.). Establish standards for secure, shared access and for validation and characterization of models prior to release to the library. (S) Model Library Management Approach Develop a methodology for populating, updating, maintaining, extending, and ensuring the data quality/security of the shared model libraries, including the user interface and support tools. (S) Science-Based Materials Model Repository Establish an industry-wide shared repository of validated, well-characterized models and simulations for materials database to support product and process modeling and analytical simulation. Define and establish linkages to certified/certifiable industry, academic, and government sources to populate and update the database. (M) Validated Process & Equipment Model Repository Establish an industry-wide shared repository of validated, well-characterized models and simulations for processes and equipment based on industry priorities and value to multiple industry sectors. (M)
2-19
Process Labor Standards Knowledge Base Develop and establish a database of labor standards (i.e., time standards and skill/certification requirements) for all direct and indirect manufacturing processes and functions that interface to process design, simulation, planning, and resource management systems. (S) Goal 4: System-of-Systems Modeling Capability Provide integrated system-of-systems modeling capabilities to guide and improve product and process design decision-making for different product types and manufacturing sectors. (M-L) System-Level Product Modeling Develop system-level modeling capabilities for classes of products and processes, whereby a comprehensive decomposable product model captures or links to all types and levels of information needed to support all aspects of development. (M) Intelligent, Hierarchical, Composable, Shareable Models Establish interface standards that intelligently support creation of complex models at successive levels of detail, enabling integration of individual product models into system-of-systems models that support deep understanding of interdependencies and interactions. Initially focus on enabling integration within related product families for one selected manufacturing sector. (M) Scaleable System-of-Systems Simulation Architecture Implement scaleable architectures for a product/system/business M&S environment supporting thousands of component elements and dozens of modeling and analysis applications. Develop standards for supporting scaleable architectures and for interfacing architectural components and tools. Evaluate existing standards efforts in exploring approaches to this requirement.12 (M-L) Secure System-of-Systems Data Management Develop capabilities for compartmentalization, security, risk assessment, and long-term management of data to support system-of-systems modeling that integrates information from multiple sources having different security constraints, levels of functional detail available, and levels of risk and uncertainty. (S) Self-Completing Models Develop the capability to create models that know their own attributes and can interact with other model objects to complete a resulting superset of attributes, relationships, and behaviors. (L) Goal 5: Intelligent Models & Modeling Environments Develop intelligent modeling capabilities to automate and accelerate labor-intensive modeling tasks and reduce the need for human intervention in modeling processes, enabling M&S functions to be automatically invoked at required stages as a product or process evolves from conception to production. (M-L) Common Modeling Semantics Develop a standard, industry-wide terminology for representation of different model features and attributes, whereby a common and complete understanding is conveyed regardless of context, and like features can seamlessly transfer from one domain, model, or level of abstraction to another. (S) Automatic Model Conversion Extend current CAD applications to automatically generate the input required (e.g., mesh or flat file or model subset) for specific analytical tools. Prioritize desired tool compatibility across industry sectors and work with CAD vendors to accomplish the needed extensions and provide real/near-real-time processing capability. (M)
12
Standards to be evaluated include the Object Management Groups Model Driven Architecture, the ISO Reference Model for Open Distributed Processing, the DoD High Level Architecture, and the ISA 95 Enterprise Control System Integration standards being developed by the Instrumentation, Systems and Automation Society.
2-20
Adaptively Detailed Models Provide models that can adaptively offer de-featured abstractions or more detailed representations and datasets to suit the requesting function, providing a version ready for use or analysis by that function. (M-L) Automated Requirements Linking Develop methods and approaches enabling product and process models to automatically search for requirements that impact their domain or function (e.g., safety, health, and other regulatory requirements) and interact with the model owner to ensure these requirements are addressed as the model is developed. (M) Self-Composing Models Develop methods enabling models to automatically search for, acquire, and integrate existing information and sub-models needed to complete their intended design. Include the capability to automatically populate manufacturing process simulations with equipment models, material models, etc.; and the capability for product models to automatically extend themselves with material models, part/component models, and similar assets available from the model libraries accessible to the enterprise. Include the capability for models to mine for information about products, processes, and systems with which the product or process will interact in operational use. (M-L) Model Response to Factory Feedback Develop analysis techniques that enable product and process models to learn and modify themselves when feedback from manufacturing processes and product performance data indicate faults in existing product/process designs. Include the ability to differentiate between substantive differences (requiring model modification or adjustment of process equipment) versus normal deviations within acceptable tolerances, and record the deviations appropriately as part of the products batch history or unique configuration record. Include analysis concerning level of backup documentation needed to demonstrate appropriate response to any offnormal feedback (and thus address liability protections). (M-L) Self-Monitoring Product & Process Models Develop tools and methods that enable product and process models to monitor the enterprise knowledge base and respond appropriately (e.g., propagate a change or issue an alert) whenever the data underlying the model or the requirements the model is intended to fulfill change. (M-L) Goal 6: Enterprise-Wide Product/Process Cost Modeling Provide cost modeling systems and techniques that integrate all required data, from within and external to the enterprise, to support highfidelity analysis of development costs, production costs, life-cycle support costs, profitability, financial risk, and other cost attributes of a product, process, or operation. (L) Integrated Cost Modeling Application Architecture Develop a cost modeling application structure that provides for capture and linking of all sources of cost acquisition, nonrecurring design and development, engineering changes, recurring production, product ownership and support, retirement, regulatory factors, etc. into product, process, and operations models. Include the capability to interface with applications and business systems to support real-time decision making in all phases of product, design, manufacture, and support. (M-L) Common Cost Model Templates Develop and validate a series of cost model templates that identify the major cost elements for common product and part families, materials and manufacturing processes, life-cycle support processes, business operations, and other sources of cost in different business sectors (e.g., aerospace, automotive, chemical). (S) Product/Process Family Cost Models Develop suites of generic, PDM system-compatible production cost models for common product and process types. Include the capability to automatically tailor a generic product or process cost model to include additional features or attributes included in a specific design. (M-L)
2-21
Unified User Interface for Cost Modeling Develop easy-to-use interfaces that enable different users (engineers, estimators, etc.) to generate and apply accurate, comprehensive cost models for any enterprise function. (M) Actual Cost Capture Develop mechanisms for capture of actuals for all costs (recurring, nonrecurring, direct, and indirect) associated with product manufacture and other enterprise operations, and feed this information back to PDM and financial management systems to refine cost model fidelity. (S-M) Model-Based Estimating Develop costing tools that decompose product and process models and interface with the enterprises cost history knowledge base and financial systems to automatically generate bases of estimate (BOEs) for development and production based on programmatic requirements and historical costs for similar products, labor rates, supplier quotes, intellectual property licensing fees, and current rates and factors. Include the capability to automatically score BOEs for confidence level and flag areas of risk or uncertainty for management/engineering attention. (L) Automated Cost Modeling Develop cost modeling applications that automatically generate bills of material from the product or process model; calculate and communicate the effects of a change in one parameter across the entire cost model; and perform dynamic updates (with appropriate alerts and approvals) from enterprise data sources to ensure currency. (M) Integrated Life-Cycle Cost Modeling Develop methods for integrating life-cycle considerations such as maintenance, repair, sparing, customer service and support, recycling, and disposal, including these future costs into product, process, and operations cost models. (M) Integrated Supply Chain Cost Modeling Develop and unify product modeling standards and techniques to enable seamless, automated interfacing/integration of product and process cost models among partners and suppliers, with provision for protection of sensitive data (e.g., rates and factors). (M) Cost Sensitivity & Uncertainty Modeling Develop analytical applications and information elicitation methods that use probabilistic, statistical, and other mathematical analysis tools to calculate cost sensitivities and quantify uncertainties for any aspect of recurring or nonrecurring cost. Provide the capability to link uncertainty models directly to product, process models, and operations to enable automatic updating of impacts and risk factors in response to changes. (M-L) Goal 7: Model-Based Life-Cycle Configuration Management Provide a model-based configuration management capability supporting product evolution from requirements, design, and manufacturing to operation, maintenance, and end-of-life disposition. Include capability to manage and properly associate all data, information, and knowledge related to the life-cycle processes of a product and deliver appropriate views of the information to business functions that need it. (M-L) Model-Based Configuration Management Frameworks For common types of products, develop generic life-cycle frameworks that support automated prompting, generation, and distribution of various models at the appropriate point in the development process. Include the capability to alert responsible functions/personnel when a particular model requires creation, and to provide an initial model shell and data requirements definition that give users the most complete possible starting point for the required work. (S-M) Automated Change Management Develop a process and notification/authorization scheme for reviewing, approving, documenting, and communicating changes in configuration-controlled models to all affected functions and individuals, including customers and suppliers. (M) Automated Change Propagation Develop the capability to automatically ripple the effects of any one change to a product or process model to all other product and process models (e.g., tooling,
2-22
training, maintenance documentation) that are affected by the change. Include the capability to automatically update associated analyses, cost estimates, bills of material, purchase orders, and other dependent information and feed the changes to the change management system for dissemination. (M-L) Remote Product Upgrades Provide mechanisms for some classes of product to be modeled, produced, and shipped with unexpressed features (potential future product upgrades) that can then be activated either remotely or with minimal service when the new features are ready for implementation. Include the capability for product models to manage and reflect the changes to products in the field, and to accurately reflect the impact of the changes to product life-cycle cost. Such changes might include disposition of components at the end of product life, or reuse of components for other purposes. (M-L) Enduring Data Storage Develop the capability to preserve the accessibility and integrity of archived electronic definition records and associated data throughout and beyond the life of the product, process, or facility. Include the capability to automatically verify the accuracy of retrieved flat files and models generated in applications or versions no longer in use; and establish industry standards for ensuring backward compatibility of product definition applications. (M) 2.3.1 VISION & GOALS FOR INNOVATION & CONCEPTUALIZATION Future enterprise members exploring concepts for a product will interact in a high-fidelity simulation environment to evaluate problems and solution options, define product goals and objectives, understand the impacts of choices, and create robust design concepts with complete confidence in technical and business performance. In the future, modeling systems will assist design teams and customers in defining problems and translating them into opportunities; in exploring the bounds of what is possible; in rapidly defining and evaluating the merits of different options in terms of dollars, time, and performance; and in reaching agreement on the best ways to translate innovative ideas into reality. Customer preferences and objectives captured through direct interaction with customers as well as through market analysis will drive the definition of requirements that represent the best balance of technical and business performance attributes. The conceptualization process will be accomplished using a model-based application environment where the team has ready access to visualization and analytical tools to assess the impact of their choices in near-real time; and which provides intelligent decision support to ensure that both the products and the processes used to create them are the most effective and efficient possible. This environment will support continuous update of the product and process baseline, optimization of design features and parameters, communication with stakeholders, characterization of uncertainties, and interpretation of preferences in definition of requirements. The result will be a product concept that all parties agree can be designed, built, delivered, and supported within the defined cost and schedule and with clearly defined levels of risk. Rapid exploration of many product and process design options, coupled with a rich toolbox of analytical simulation tools, will greatly shorten product development time by reducing ultimately eliminating the need for physical prototyping for all but the most safety-critical applications. To put this capability into a use scenario, product commissioning in the future may begin with the customer and designers immersed with the product in a VR environment where product options can be selected and evaluated with full visual and tactile feedback. The users will receive a complete and accurate account of the result of their selections in terms of product performance, cost, and delivery timeline. The accumulated selections will be captured to modify the baseline product model and launch the manufacturing order (or launch subsequent detailed engineering activities for developmental products).
2-23
Goals & Requirements for Innovation & Conceptualization Goal 1: Interactive Concept Definition Tools Provide interactive visualization/representation and analytical tools that quickly guide the exploration of a product concept to satisfy relevant objectives (performance, cost, schedule, etc.) for all participants in the enterprise value chain. (M) Natural Interface for Concept Definition Provide interactive M&S capabilities that allow humans to interact naturally and directly with design systems in exploring potential solutions to customer problems and market opportunities. Include the capability to define and evaluate alternatives, make optimal choices, and create initial product models automatically, to the level of detail needed to support subsequent design and engineering sufficient to gain concurrence on the preferred solution. (M) Real-Time Decision Support for Conceptual Design Provide decision support tools that interface with CAD/PDM-based design tools to define tradeoff opportunities, bound trade spaces, aid the designer in selection of best solutions, and automatically document the results of tradeoff analyses. (M) Conceptual Performance Modeling For selected classes and types of products, develop performance modeling applications that monitor the conceptual design to provide an on-screen estimate of performance, and advise the user on tradeoffs that may enhance performance (e.g., lighter weight for better energy efficiency, or heavier-duty construction for longer life). (M) Conceptual Modeling for Producibility & Affordability Develop a general-purpose modeling system that interfaces with the conceptual design system to support producibility and affordability (and other ilities) tradeoffs for major product families (e.g., mechanical and electrical, structures, chemical products). Incorporate science-based material models to support requirements analysis and decision-making for product engineering and manufacturing planning. (M) Goal 2: Immersive Product Conceptualization Environment Provide integrated M&S tools that allow rapid creative exploration of technical and business options, and provide the customers with rich visual/sensory feedback and real-time analytical support to assess the impact of their choices on product performance, cost, and other attributes. (L) Immersive Conceptualization Interface Develop tools for real-time, intuitive interaction in immersive visualization environments that enable users to conceptualize products without requiring expert skills in the modeling tools. (M-L) Virtual Environment for Prototyping Develop visual prototyping tools that allow the user to interact with and manipulate the conceptual product in a physically accurate simulation environment while assuring the technical integrity of the resulting product concept. Include the capability to not only manipulate the design, but to exercise the conceptual product in a virtual usage environment. (M-L) Automated Featuring Provide the capability to automatically recommend and integrate specific product features based on captured knowledge of features 1) already available in similar products, 2) being developed elsewhere in the enterprise or by its partners, or 3) being produced by the enterprises competitors. (M) Automated Requirements Generation Provide the capability to automatically generate and document (and update) initial product design and manufacturing requirements directly from the conceptual product or process model. (S)
2-24
Goal 3: Comprehensive Factors Integration Provide the capability to integrate all aspects of product preference in the concept definition process, including business and operational factors beyond the immediate visibility of users including supportability, manufacturability, risk/uncertainty, and safety and environmental issues. (M-L) Manufacturability Assessment Develop conceptual design evaluation tools that interface with the enterprises process and facilities knowledge base to assess the manufacturability of the product concept and provide feedback on options for improvement in terms of feasibility, cost, quality, and other factors. (L) Risk Assessment Develop and integrate tools for automated assessment of technical, cost, and schedule risk into the conceptual design environment. (M) Safety & Environmental Assessment Develop automated tools for assessing safety and environmental compliance attributes (and associated liability issues) of the conceptual design and advising the design team in resolving potential compliance issues. (M) Supportability Assessment Develop automated tools for assessing the support attributes of the conceptual design, including reliability, maintainability, and logistics support factors (e.g., compatibility with existing product support infrastructures for similar products). (M-L) 2.3.2 VISION & GOALS FOR PRODUCT & PROCESS DEVELOPMENT The initial conceptual model of a product will be rapidly broadened and deepened into a high-fidelity, mathematically accurate representation that contains or links to all data required to drive development and subsequent manufacture, use, and support of the product. Materials and process plans will be automatically optimized according to business priorities, capabilities, and internal and external resources, with intelligent advisors guiding designers to arrive at the best balance of issues such as performance, robustness, environmental concerns, and cost. In the future, product models will no longer be simple physical representations coupled to a database of dimensions and other physical attributes. Instead, the product model will be a complete virtual product containing or linking to all information related to its design, manufacture, performance, use, and life-cycle support. Product data will be managed using a hierarchical structure that enables automated generation of models for any purpose from the master product model. The product model will possess (via embedding or linking) sufficient information to drive all analytical applications (Figure 2.3.2-1) and manufacturing processes. Further, it will support the ability to create custom abstractions for specific analyses. Designers will be able to call up custom views of any
Figure 2.3.2-1. Analytical applications will be integrated through a desktop interface that enables users to take full advantage of capabilities hosted anywhere in the enterprise supply chain.
2-25
product or process information to any level of detail to support development tasks and business decision processes. New interface methods will enable designers to create and manipulate models in new ways. Aural interfaces will allow users to launch tasks and commands via verbal input, and VR systems with tactile feedback mechanisms will let designers shape their concepts with their hands instead of a keyboard and mouse. Smart Models Future models will plug-and-play via selfdescribing interfaces. Every product and process model will understand its own behavior, its own input needs, and its own output capabilities, such that when a new element is added to the emerging product or process design, it will negotiate with the models of all other elements to fit in without human assistance. Self-analytical functions will help models validate themselves automatically. Specification of a particular material of construction, for example, will prompt the product model to automatically search the enterprise knowledge base and call up the properties/physics model of the subject material. The model will verify the selected material against the defined performance requirements and alert the designer to any potential problems, offering alternatives for better performance or reduced cost based on the design guidelines. Validated models of standard materials and components will be shared across industry. Such models will also be a required deliverable of any contract, facilitating use by all members of the products supply chain. Future models will accurately predict how a product will behave in its operating environment, and how it will react to external events and changing conditions. This will enable evaluation and optimization of reliability, maintainability, safety, environmental impact, and other life-cycle factors. From Design to Production Automatically generated manufacturing process plans updated as the product design evolves, with direct linkages to enterprise capacity and resource models will enable proactive resource planning and allocation. Advisory tools interfaced to the enterprise knowledge base will guide managers in optimizing capacity requirements and utilization during the early process planning and manufacturing execution stages, shortening the time required to ramp up to sustained production rates with six-sigma quality in every unit. Model-based product realization systems will eliminate all but mandatory physical testing, greatly reducing the time and cost of moving products from concept to production. While product testing will not disappear, it will eventually be used only where physical validation is specifically required (e.g., for safety certification). In those cases, the model will capture the results and augment the value of physical testing by using the results to deepen the science basis underlying the contributing models.
2-26
Linkage of the product and process development environment to the enterprise knowledge base and the enterprises business systems will enable continuous, accurate visibility into the cost impact of design decisions. All forms of cost acquisition, nonrecurring development, engineering changes, recurring production, and product ownership and support will be thoroughly understood and always available as a real-time input for decision-making in all phases of the product life cycle. Costs throughout a supply chain will be integrated using cost models standardized for particular industries, with appropriate protection of proprietary information. The ability to certify the enterprises model-based estimating process will greatly reduce the time required to generate quotes, freeing engineers to focus their talents on the design process. This will also give customers clear visibility into acquisition and life-cycle costs as a product moves through development, enabling fast identification and response to potential overruns. Goals & Requirements for Product & Process Development Goal 1: Automated Comprehensive Product & Process Design Provide the capability to create and optimize a complete product and process definition containing or linking to all related specifications, requirements, analytical results, and other pertinent information. (L) Common Product & Process Specification Standards For different industry sectors and product types, develop standards for defining product and process specifications that can be accessed by the design system and which are consistent with the parameters, attributes, and features on which product and process designs in each sector are based. (S) Design Knowledge Base Develop a knowledge base of certified materials, commercial components, and manufacturing process and equipment data and models that is accessible and directly useable by human designers and automated design tools. (S-M) Sector-Specific Design Knowledge Bases Extend the basic design knowledge base with sectorspecific information and knowledge to support the unique needs of different industry sectors. Include appropriate provisions for security and control of proprietary, export controlled, and classified data consistent with applicable regulations13. (M-L) Unified Performance Evaluation Applications Assess existing performance evaluation applications (i.e., analytical tools) and develop a framework for integrating those applications into a unified development environment for specific classes of products and processes. Conduct a gap analysis to define the extensions required for various tools to support the integrated environment and identify what new analytical capabilities need to be developed, then initiate development of the missing capabilities. (M-L) Rapid, Science-Based Product/Process Design Optimization Develop the capability to automatically create a complete and unambiguous, computer-sensible product and process definition that includes all underlying technical information needed to manufacture the product (e.g., material properties, boundary conditions, transformation physics, tolerances, loads, constraints). Develop M&S applications to provide rapid exploration, evaluation, and selection of best options in product and process design. Include considerations such as structural performance, ability to create a part with a single pass, available production equipment capacity, and ease, speed, reliability, and cost of assembly as well as future disassembly/reassembly for downstream maintenance. Include the capability to automatically repair or flag features that require nonstandard tools, fixtures, or assembly aids. (M-L) Material & Process Advisors: Create knowledge-based process advisors for individual materials and manufacturing processes to support a variety of design and engineering functions, including the capability to validate and verify designs. Develop a methodology to capture the requisite knowledge
13
National security requirements expressly prohibit the connection of classified processing systems to externally accessible networks such as the Internet or corporate intranets. Solutions for shared design information must therefore accommodate importation of stand-alone knowledge bases into classified environments via removable media (e.g., DVD).
2-27
and develop rule sets for existing materials and manufacturing processes based on published handbooks and other standard industry references. (M-L) Material Transformation Model Repository Establish an industry-wide shared repository of standardized, validated transformation models and analytical tools to support design, optimization, and troubleshooting of transformation processes. (M) Model-Based Material Transformation Develop applications to design transformation processes for the best result from a scientific understanding of the interactions involved, enabling processing in ways that deliver compliant product with minimum waste. (M-L) High-Fidelity Multi-Process Analysis Develop a suite of analytical applications that accurately predict the results (including time and cost components and environmental considerations) of different manufacturing processes and materials for a given design of a component, part, or formulation. (M-L) Manufacturing Capability Interface Develop product model interface mechanisms that provide real-time access to information that affects producibility and production cost, including material/commodity/supplier availability as well as enterprise manufacturing capability and capacity. (M) Integral Packaging Design Extend product modeling systems to include packaging issues as an integral design factor contributing to minimum product cost and assuring product protection and compatibility with handling and transport systems. (S) Goal 2: Multi-Scale Material Modeling Develop material modeling and analysis technologies enabling scaling of properties and behaviors from micro (e.g., molecular) to macro (product) levels to support creation of robust product models that accurately reflect the influence of real-world material properties. (L) Molecular Material Modeling: For high-priority classes of materials, develop molecular modeling tools able to provide accurate multi-physics modeling, enhance understanding of material properties, and capture, in computer-sensible form, the relationship of molecular composition and distribution to material variability. (S-M) Integrated Material Modeling Develop interfaces from product and process modeling systems to multi-physics material models and knowledge bases so that the properties and behaviors of the product and process design accurately reflect the properties of the materials used. (M-L) Multi-Scale Material Modeling Develop capabilities to predict macro-level process behaviors resulting from microstructural material attributes, and to address requirements on microstructure to attain desired macro properties both in-process and in the finished product. (L) Multi-Scale Process Modeling Identify high-priority needs for micro-scale material models to support high-fidelity, multi-physics process modeling and simulation. Initiate the development of material behavior models for critical micro-scale phenomena (such as grain growth and size fractions, dislocations, crystal structure) under different conditions. Provide modeling tools that manage the linkages and information exchange between levels. (L) Goal 3: Automated Process Planning Provide the capability to automatically generate process plans for a quantity of product as the product is being designed, consistent with product attributes, processing capabilities, enterprise and supply chain resources, and enterprise strategic direction. (L) Process & Resource Capability Models Develop tools and techniques for creating process and resource models that capture complete descriptions of enterprise manufacturing resources and process capabilities, enabling plug-and-play integration of resource/capability models through every level of the supply chain. (S)
Product Realization & Support 2-28
Process Model Repository Define required process model attributes and standard formats that support automated process planning and manufacturing execution, and establish a shared repository of well-characterized models of common processes for use in different industry sectors. Assess gaps in the process set to define high-priority model needs for critical processes, and initiate development of the required models. (S) Multi-Level Interoperable Process Models Develop capabilities and standards for integration of multi-element process models at the unit process, line, shop floor, factory, and enterprise levels. (M) Automatic Process Requirements Extraction Develop the capability to extract process requirements from higher-level process models in order to evaluate applicability for specific purposes (e.g., to assess the ability of an existing process to make a new product). (M) Planning System Interface to Factory Floor Develop analysis and planning tools that enable optimization of process plans within the constraints of product requirements. Create interfaces between process planning systems, manufacturing execution systems, and management information systems to guide decision-making for scale-up. Include the capability to optimize manufacturing plans with considerations including workflow, throughput, processing time scaleability (compress or expand time), manpower/skills requirements, and product mix. (M) Robust Multi-Step Process Planning Develop the capability to perform what-if and sensitivity analyses for optimization of multi-step processes and to automatically generate simulations and operational control models for process control and verification. Include the capability to characterize process robustness to allow innovation or variation in a complex process. (M-L) Technology Insertion Modeling Develop modeling tools to create structured plans for deployment of process technology advances across the life cycle of a production line or facility, supporting insertion of new equipment or capabilities to extend process life or meet future requirements for expanded capability or capacity or shifts to different products. Include the capability to interface with financial modeling and analysis applications to evaluate issues related to capital expenditure and return on investment. (M) Process Planning Direct from Product/Process Design Develop generative planning systems that operate directly from product and process definitions to provide all information needed to drive product manufacture. Include the capability to incorporate material and unit process models through interfaces to enterprise product/process/material model libraries and knowledge bases. (L) Executable Product Models Develop the capability to integrate process knowledge into product models sufficient for the product model to provide all information necessary to execute a manufacturing process, including material flow, actuator commands, assembly steps, and inspection. (M) Goal 4: Tools to Manage Development Uncertainty & Risk Develop modeling and simulation aids that enable effective management of risk, uncertainty, and sensitivities in product and process development. (M-L) Uncertainty Bounding Techniques Develop mechanisms, techniques, and protocols for identifying, quantifying, and providing adequate margins for uncertainty and risk in complex product and process models. (M) Robustness Evaluation Develop performance modeling systems that determine the sensitivities of the design, quantify uncertainties, and define the robustness of product solutions. (M) Automated Risk Scoring Develop a modeling utility that automatically assesses a proposed product or process design and scores it for technical, schedule, and business risk based on technology maturity (e.g., technology readiness level) and design uncertainties; and creates a prioritized characterization of the detected risks. (M)
2-29
Multi-Scale Uncertainty Management Create methodologies for accounting for and tracking the uncertainties associated with materials, component designs, subsystem designs, and other developmental elements in system-level product and process models. (M) Product/Process Risk Mitigation Tools Develop modeling tools that capture risk items from the product/process design and aid in development and monitoring of mitigation actions. Include business-case templates to quantify the benefits (cost savings, performance, and life-cycle advantages) of a high-risk product or process element to support management decisions. (M) Automated Risk Minimization Develop a modeling utility that draws on product and process experience captured in the enterprise knowledge base (or shared knowledge bases maintained by industry sectors) to recommend lower-risk alternatives for risk elements identified in a product or process design. (M-L) Goal 5: Model-Based Product Assurance & Manufacturing Process Validation Develop methodologies and standards for virtual testing methods that use simulations in lieu of physical testing in product and process development, over time eliminating all but mandatory physical tests. (L) Model-Based Quality Assurance Develop and promulgate quality assurance standards, for different industry sectors, for verifying product and process models and certifying analytical simulation tools within clear bounds of confidence for specific applications. (M-L) Self-Validating Designs Develop simulation and analysis tools that verify component, subsystem, and system designs against requirements and quality assurance criteria, reducing or eliminating the need for iterative physical testing in product and process development. (M-L) Model-Based Manufacturing Process Validation Develop sensor-based in-process verification techniques sufficient for automatic certification of manufacturing process results based on measured conformance of process execution against the approved control model, independent of the platform (legacy or current equipment) used to produce the product. (M-L) Model-Based Certification of Production Readiness Develop the capability to test and validate models of product designs and their simulated manufacturing processes with sufficient fidelity and accuracy that production readiness can be certified by simulation. (L) 2.3.3 VISION & GOALS FOR MANUFACTURING EXECUTION Future factory management systems will directly use product and process models to plan, visualize, and implement the operation, monitoring, and control of process execution. Interdependent processes will be so deeply modeled and thoroughly integrated with control systems that they interact as a single process, automatically adapting to real-time changes in requirements or the process environment. This will dramatically increase the efficiency, responsiveness, safety, and quality of the entire operation while reducing all forms of waste and inefficiency. Manufacturing execution in the future will benefit from well-understood, physics-based process and equipment models with materials characterization sufficient to eliminate the need for trial-and-error process development. Processes will intelligently accommodate material and part variability within welldefined limits of uncertainty. This will keep processes running continuously with minimal human intervention. It will also enable cost savings through use of variable-quality materials that the process systems can accommodate without compromising product quality. The ability to pre-manufacture products in the virtual realm will enable the production team to test and optimize the production plan concurrent with product development. It will enable them to have all resources in place at production go-ahead, including equipment, materials, suppliers, and trained staff ready
2-30
to execute (Figure 2.3.3-1). It will also enable the manufacturing operation to quickly adjust to changes in requirements and resource availability, thus eliminating bottlenecks and minimizing downtime. Manufacturing systems will self-configure to meet changing needs based on automatic evaluation of defined requirements against operations models. Self-defining interfaces, leveraging standard protocols, will enable new process systems to be modeled and integrated very quickly in building-block fashion, with new or customized software integrated as soon as code validation and verification are complete. Model-based manufacturing concepts will also enable process operators to train virtually, reducing drive fundamental changes in specific manufacthe time, cost, and risk of certification. turing processes. Based on a scientific understanding of materials, process interactions, performance criteria, and product models, material transformation processes will be designed, modeled, and executed to synthesize and manufacture materials with revolutionary mechanical, chemical, and electrical properties. This will support the evolution of netshape processes to reduce, and in many cases eliminate, the need for material removal processes such as milling and grinding. This will eliminate most forms of scrap and material waste, reduce energy demands and environmental impacts, and reduce product costs. An order of magnitude or greater reduction in time to produce parts will be achieved. Better upstream processes will eliminate finishing processes as corrective actions. Finishing steps that add functionality will be engineered based on measurable, modifiable properties, and will be tailored to provide the needed functionality. Perhaps the most important new function in future manufacturing systems will be the use of real-time processing information to correct and enhance product designs. With the tight integration of product and process design enabled by the model-based environment, product designers will have near real-time feedback on manufacturing performance, and have the ability to quickly refine any aspects of the design that are impacting production quality, cost, and throughput. Complemented by in-process sensing and metrology and a ubiquitous configuration management system, this will provide accurate capture of the as-built product definition to aid in life-cycle support and in design of future product enhancements (Figure 2.3.3-2).
Figure 2.3.3-2. The ability to capture the characterization basis for every product will provide a total knowledge base for life-cycle support and improved design of future products. Figure 2.3.3-1. Advanced simulation techniques will
2-31
Model-Based Control Future manufacturing process systems will be controlled and managed using a rich base of scientifically accurate and deeply characterized material, equipment, process, and product models. Manufacturing process parameters and control information will be downloaded directly from the product model and used to drive, control, and monitor all manufacturing processes (Figure 2.3.3-3). Process control systems will interface bi-directionally with the processes they control and with the factory control model. This model, equipped with robust definitions of process requirements, characteristics, capabilities, constraints, and attributes, will use real-time feedback from process sensors to tune operation for continuously optimized performance. Analytical applications integrated into the monitoring and control system will provide deep insight into process performance, enabling fast response to problems.
Process models will accept real-time input from the factory floor sensor net and dictate corrections based on captured knowledge of the physics of the process. For example, instead of issuing commands in the form of a stored program, a machine-specific process model will accept direct feedback of measured product attributes to detect and correct out-of-spec variations. The higher-level factory model will monitor the sensor net to continuously update status and launch analytical applications to accurately predict future operational performance and to forecast requirements for additional or modified resources. The shop floor control systems of the future will not only integrate all the production-related information flow to and from the shop floor, but will also collect, distribute, and report key information concerning shop operations. The current function of distributing processing instructions to machine/process controllers will be expanded to include work instructions, operations simulations, assistance in resolving offnormal conditions, and other process-related information. Quality information and processing trends will be continuously available and up-to-date.
Figure 2.3.3-3. Manufacturing process parameters and control information will be downloaded directly from the product/process model to drive and control all manufacturing processes.
The controllers will continuously monitor the health and availability of all process equipment, enabling proactive and just-in-time maintenance to maximize uptime and avoid process upsets. Process controllers will be built using open, modular architectures that incorporate the level of sophistication required for a given process, using seamlessly interoperable hardware and software components from a variety of vendors. Material flow models coupled to autonomic material handling systems will route materials and work-in process from one operation to the next, removing humans from the loop especially in hazardous processes. Products will be verified in-process as they move through each stage of manufacture, with process sensors continuously comparing actual to predicted to required performance.
2-32
The enterprise knowledge base will maintain baseline signatures of all equipment for real-time comparison to actual process performance. This will enable early detection and proactive correction of offnormal behavior. Continuous, real-time operating status of all equipment, material, and support assets will be maintained and reported; reactive schedulers will re-route material and re-schedule equipment to adapt to breakdowns and other upsets in operations. Goals & Requirements for Manufacturing Execution Goal 1: Product Model-Driven Manufacturing Provide the capability for manufacturing control systems to execute manufacturing plans derived from the product model. (L) Automated Verification of Production Readiness Develop the capability for product models to verify that all information required to execute manufacturing is complete and accurate based on knowledge available from the enterprises manufacturing information system. Include the capability to flag areas where information is missing or where the model cannot verify that information is correct (e.g., that a supplier-provided item will deliver on time). (M-L) Complete Process Control Models Develop techniques to incorporate process effector and sensor design information and product-specific parameter data into a complete process model, to enable the integrated product/process model to operate as a real-time process controller at the unit process, line, and shop floor levels. (M) Model-Based Direct Manufacturing Develop transformation processes that synthesize and manufacture materials to produce final parts directly from the product model, based on a scientific understanding of materials, process interactions, and performance criteria. (L) Goal 2: Model-Based Intelligent Process Control Develop intelligent, adaptive process controllers that sense material and its geometric/chemical/physical properties in-process and dynamically adapt processing parameters to assure continuous production of certifiably correct product. (L) Adaptive, Real-Time Process/Equipment Control Models Develop self-tuning process and equipment control models based on first principles, validated material and process knowledge bases, and continuous feedback of sensor test and inspection data. Include models for legacy equipment as well as current-generation equipment. (M) Rapid Material, Part, & Process Characterization Develop characterization technology enabling fast, accurate in-process assessment of material/part condition and characteristics (shape, composition, distribution, viscosity, temperature, etc.) and associated processes, to support model-based process monitoring and control. (L) Standardized Process Models Develop robust, standardized definitions of processes such that the outcome of successfully performing the process is certifiably the same, independent of the actual platform (legacy or current equipment) that produced the outcome. (S-M) Sensors & Sensor Fusion for Process Monitoring Develop non-intrusive sensors and sensor fusion technologies for current and legacy manufacturing equipment that enable the model-based process controller to recognize and quickly adjust to any in-process variances (e.g., tool wear and material variation), maintaining the quality of process output. Include the capability to evaluate sensor data to determine if readings from each sensor are credible based on inputs from other sensors, and to take appropriate action to maintain the health of the process if one or more sensors are not functioning correctly. (M-L) Self-Diagnostic Equipment Maintenance & Performance Monitoring Develop techniques for monitoring equipment status against the validated equipment model, detecting and analyzing trends toward out-of-spec performance, and automatically issuing commands/requests for maintenance. (M)
2-33
Model-Based Failure Prediction & Recovery Develop the technology and tools to accurately model equipment and facility failure modes and effects, identifying predictive indicators for impending failures and process upsets. (M-L) Operational Feedback to Process Models Develop the capability to monitor the shop floor and update process control models (for one or more unit operations, as appropriate) to adapt to changes in the processing environment, to continuously ensure the correctness of the product being produced. (M-L) Enterprise-Wide Control Capability Provide the capability to support model-based control in multiple-process, enterprise-wide (supply chain) applications. (L) Zero Finishing Develop model-based process control schemes that eliminate the need for finishing steps by dynamically managing product surfaces during operations such as forming, assembly, and blending. Include the capability to dynamically identify and recalculate mid-surface locations for thin shells. (L) Goal 3: In-Process Validation of Models Provide means of matching feedback from physical processes (e.g., via sensors, human interaction) against process models and performance metrics, and issuing alerts and requests for actions if the situation does not match expectations. (S-M) Mapping Feedback to Models Provide means of continuously comparing sensor readings or instrument/equipment measurements or human observations to the performance expectations defined by the controlling models, and taking appropriate action when measured values exceed specified tolerances or indicate a negative trend. (S-M) Corrective Action & Alerting Develop broadly applicable ground rules to guide system and user response to off-normal events, including requests for intervention, prioritization of intervention options, verification of requested action, and issuance of higher-level alerts (and launching of fail-safe actions) to ensure the problem is contained and mitigated. (S-M) Goal 4: Zero Post-Process Certification Establish robust, science-based manufacturing process control models that eliminate the need for post-process inspection by integrating certification as an integral part of individual manufacturing processes. (L) Quality Certification Models Develop process certification models that enable elimination of product certification as a separate process step through the application of model-based control using information collected in-process. Prioritize processes of interest to different industry sectors and implement a phased program to deliver process-specific certification models. (M-L) Self-Integrating Measurement Systems Develop self-calibrating, self-integrating measurement systems that provide all needed metrology for specific processes based on process models that define the inspection points for a given process and the inspection parameters and acceptance criteria for a given product. (M-L) In-Process Intelligent Conformance Monitoring Develop intelligent inspection and measurement systems that detect and respond to nonconformances in-process, ensuring continuous adherence to requirements. Include the capability to automatically flag nonconforming product, route it out of the normal production flow, and recommend appropriate disposition (i.e., rework/repair or scrap) to speed material review board processes. (L)
2-34
Goal 5: Intelligent, Self-Configuring Manufacturing Execution Models Provide intelligent, selforganizing manufacturing execution models able to integrate the product model with all applications, systems, equipment, and process instructions to form a complete logical representation of what is to be accomplished, and to ensure readiness to satisfy all requirements for producing correct product. Include the capability to monitor execution and automatically adapt to off-normal occurrences or changes in requirements. (L) Manufacturing Planning Model Templates Develop a series of model-based templates, for major classes of products in different sectors, that can integrate sub-models of processing equipment, unit processes, line operations, and material flows to create an end-to-end model of a given manufacturing process. (S) Manufacturing Execution Standards Evaluate current standards from ISO, IEEE, SME, ASME, etc. that are relevant to model-based manufacturing, and lead standardization efforts where gaps exist to provide increased openness and interoperability of product/process/business models among vendors and supply chain partners. (S) Generic Equipment Models Develop generic equipment performance models for families of manufacturing equipment (e.g., injection molding machines, three-axis milling machines). (S) Equipment Characterization Models Establish standards and requirements for integration of performance characterizations into existing or vendor-supplied models of process equipment (machine tools, valves, process sensors, material handling devices, etc.), including legacy equipment as well as current models. (M) Machine-Specific Equipment Models Develop tools to extend generic or vendor-supplied equipment performance models to reflect the as-installed configuration and use real-time sensor information to accurately report specific equipment system performance. Include the capability to capture the current signatures for each production machine in its supporting baseline model. (M-L) Intelligent Manufacturing Execution Models Develop methods to integrate needed component models creating an intelligent manufacturing execution model that logically represents what is to be accomplished. Provide the capability for the model to automatically update itself by recognizing and responding to approved changes in underlying material/process/product models, or in response to information from the shop floor control system. (L) Goal 6: Flexible, Reconfigurable Manufacturing Facility Model Develop technologies and methods for creating rapidly reconfigurable production lines and resource streams able to use capacity, demand, and unit process models to quickly adapt to changing product and process requirements. (M) Scaleable, Interoperable Process Models Prioritize unit processes and manufacturing equipment of interest and develop scaleable, interoperable process models capable of going from one to many, or from small to large, or accommodate a defined wide range of input material variability, quickly and autonomously in response to changes in production demand. (M) Robust Model-Based Control Develop extensions to current manufacturing process control models to add the capability to adapt dynamically to changes in basic process parameters; to remain reliable and robust within the defined operating envelope; and to automatically respond to failures or process upsets with the appropriate action. (M)
2-35
2.3.4 VISION & GOALS FOR LIFE-CYCLE SUPPORT Models and simulations created in product and process development will be used directly in all phases of the product life cycle, augmenting other modeling tools to provide hands-on support to users and support personnel. Enterprise value chain members will use real-world performance and maintenance/repair/failure data to evaluate products and processes in synthetic operational environments; model options for improvement; and implement changes to enhance reliability, maintainability, safety, ease of use, and other life-cycle attributes. In the future, a master product life-cycle model linked to live sources of product information and the enterprise knowledge base will guide all support activities throughout the products life (Figure 2.3.4-1). This model will capture the genealogy or record of assembly of the product at the instance level, so that there is a specific model for every serial-numbered part or product batch. With provisions to protect intellectual property, information in this model will be accessible to all manufacturing processes or product support functions. The model will reflect changes in the product over time as it was originally produced, and as it is affected by use throughout its life. Support planners will use the master product model as a key tool in collaborating with customers and product support organizations to optimize requirements and approaches for maintenance, repair, training, and user support. The model will provide all desired types and levels of detail including what support assets are required, how many, when and where they will be needed, how they will be delivered, and what must accompany them. Support strategies will be based on comprehensive simulations of all aspects of product use and accurate predictions of reliability at the system, subsystem, and component levels. Reliability calculations will use these simulations to take full account of the impacts and effects of operational usage, including the impacts of misuse and sustained operation in extreme (e.g., arctic and desert) environments.
Figure 2.3.4-1. All product and process models will interact through the enterprise knowledge base, enabling feedback across the product life cycle to benefit future products and enhance customer satisfaction.
2-36
Automated analytical tools will monitor the life-cycle attributes of the emerging product design and flag potential problems for attention. For example, if a designer specifies a life-limited component containing a hazardous material, the system will flag both issues and draw on the enterprise knowledge base to suggest a different component or a design change to alleviate the reliability and safety impacts. Process Life-Cycle Management Just as model-based processes will enhance management of all stages of the life cycle for products, they will benefit manufacturing processes in similar ways. As processes and their enabling equipment and systems are developed, proven out, and modified over time as a result of technology changes, iterative improvements, or functional changes, the information in the process model will be updated to capture a clear version history along with supporting configuration and characterization data. The process genealogy will be retained in the model so that the correct version is always readily accessible when needed to support the products produced using that version. This will be particularly valuable for products that must be supported over many years or even decades allowing engineers to look back to any point in time to understand how a particular product was built and how the processes and equipment used to build it contribute to its current condition and attributes. Model-Based Monitoring of Product The performance of delivered products will be tracked against their model predictions in order to continuously enrich the knowledge base underlying the models. For many complex mechanical and electronic products, embedded sensors will monitor the systems condition and autonomously initiate corrective actions e.g., issuing a maintenance alert or intelligently compensating for a detected fault. The sensors will compare prognostic and diagnostic results to system models and continually adjust for optimum performance, including degraded modes of operation. For other types of products, the product life-cycle management system will continuously monitor feedback from the enterprises customer service channels, and issue alerts to the product management team regarding potential design issues and opportunities for improvement. Continuously collected product performance data will also feed the enterprise business systems, providing total visibility of performance to support continuous improvement at the unit process, line, shop, factory, and enterprise levels. Variances from specifications and modeled performance will be automatically flagged for analysis and corrective action using model-based applications. This will enable potential problems to be detected and addressed very early in the life cycle, thus minimizing the impact of defects requiring product recalls and service actions. This will be of particular benefit in pharmaceuticals, foods, electronics, automotive, and other sectors where safety issues have major liability implications. Designers will use this same information to optimize product improvements and future product designs for better reliability and other performance attributes. Model-based tools also will enable designers to rapidly configure and integrate product elements so that the parts or assemblies most likely to fail, or requiring specific maintenance attention, can be quickly and easily accessed using a minimum of special tools. Designers will also use the model to determine the life-cycle impacts of proposed design changes, linking to the supply chain management system to rapidly get assessments of cost, schedule, and technical impact from their suppliers. Product models capturing usage history will provide clear visibility of all aspects of life-cycle performance to all members of the product support chain, enabling accurate identification and analysis of trends and efficient performance of support actions over the life of the product. Model-Based Maintenance Maintenance staff will likewise use the master product model to manage their activities. Repair technicians, for example, will be able to call up the product model on their desktop, heads-up display, or other portable interface, quickly navigate to the area of interest, and bring up associated models, simulations, and instructions for fixing the problem. Analytical tools will enable technicians to troubleshoot complex problems and quickly evaluate the merits of different solution approaches.
2-37
Support staff anywhere in the world will be able to collaborate in real time with design staff back at the prime manufacturer and supplier sites, using the model to point out problems and rapidly work through suggestions for corrective actions including changes to the design or to maintenance/repair procedures. As maintenance, repair, and provisioning services are performed, the support system will log all product activity and routinely compare actual to predicted performance. Repair staff will also use the master model to analyze and fix problems without having to go back to the suppliers. This is critical where a supplier is out of business, or no longer supports the product. Using the master model, repair staff will be able to call up a part design, modify it if needed, and then download the part model (with associated machine instructions) to their in-house fabrication systems for manufacture.
Mobile Manufacturing Project Aims to Keep Trucks and Tanks Moving

Military vehicles are often located in a war zone or other difficult-to-reach locations, so getting repair parts in the field is extremely difficult. Using a mobile parts hospital equipped with a rapid manufacturing system (RMS), repairs can now be made in the field using digital information to manufacture parts right on the spot or at a regional agile manufacturing cell. The RMS retrieves part models and manufacturing data via satellite from an extensive engineering and manufacturing database. If data for a part is not available, the RMS gathers its own geometric data using a 3D laser scanning system. The scanned data can be sent to an engineering CAD package and then to a CNC machining center or powdered material deposition system for production.
Realizing these capabilities will require a significant change in the present basis of competition in the The system, now in development, will enable the Army manufacturing industry and will probably be feasible to dramatically reduce the time and cost of getting at first only for large contractors in the defense, trucks, tanks, and other vehicles back into service aerospace, and automotive sectors. Currently, prodwhile reducing the strain on logistic support pipelines. uct information at a detail level is proprietary and closely held. Customers typically receive only basic documentation such as operation and maintenance manuals. Achieving true model-based life-cycle support will require the supplier of a part or a product to make all information about the product accessible in digital form, in ways that can be openly shared across the entire supply chain. Model-Based Training Future product and process models, created in the design phase, will provide the basis for all training activities across the product life cycle. Product models, for example, will link directly into training media to support specific training needs such as different views of parts and assemblies, and simulations that show how to operate and maintain the product, how parts fit together, and how tools should be applied to perform testing, servicing, removal, and replacement. Where communications capabilities (networks, cellular, satellite) enable it, training assets will link directly to the master product and process models. This will allow training content to be automatically updated (with appropriate alerts) whenever a configuration or a procedure changes. Product users and support personnel will be able to log into the enterprises product support system and call up any desired training on demand simply by clicking on the applicable piece of the model and selecting the desired training module. This will enable personnel in all domains to keep current with requirements for both new and refresher training. Evolving VR technologies will enable users to immerse themselves in simulated operational environments and receive highly realistic virtual hands-on training on demand, including collaborative training with other users anywhere in the world. This will greatly reduce the need for special-purpose training simulators, and will enable generic simulators to be quickly and easily customized for different uses.
2-38
Goals & Requirements for Life-Cycle Support Goal 1: Model-Driven Support Over Full Life Cycle Provide the capability to manage all product life-cycle support activities using model-based processes, by extending the product model including traceability through all configurations, adding life-cycle simulations, and capturing and applying information from the products operational environment. (L) Robust Requirements Modeling Tools Develop modeling tools that integrate the entire chain of life-cycle events for a product or process, including environmental, safety, health, and other regulatory requirements. (M) Integrated Life-Cycle Modeling Develop integrated, plug-and-play tool sets and standard database structures that support modeling and simulation of all life-cycle factors for generic product types (e.g., mechanical, electrical, chemical). Include the capability for accurate modeling of all design factors relevant to product support, including reliability, availability, maintainability, and supportability, to optimize product designs for performance, cost-effectiveness, and customer value. (M-L) Integration of Legacy Data Provide the capability to integrate archived information from legacy applications and databases into the current life-cycle model framework, and demonstrate the capability for a selected product family having long-term usage and support requirements. (M) Integral Product Monitoring Develop packaging and transportation systems and onboard sensors that monitor products from point of origin and record and report environmental conditions and handling history (thermal cycles, g shocks, UV and salt air exposure, etc.) to enrich the products lifecycle knowledge base. (M) Modeling Tools for Systems-Based Life-Cycle Planning Develop and pilot modeling capabilities supporting requirements definition, problem-solving, tradeoff analysis, and prediction of decision impacts anywhere in the product life cycle (including future technology insertions) in the context of the environment in which the product will operate. Include tools enabling product models to take in data gathered concerning operational use and predict product condition at end of life, to support design decisions about refurbishment, recycle, and disposal. (L) Model Linkages to MRO Management Systems For a selected set of products, extend and integrate current design, manufacturing, PDM/PLM, and maintenance/repair operations (MRO) management systems to support forecasting to plan for expected repair operations, prioritization of resources, conduct of work, resupply/reorder of spares and consumables, and similar MRO functions. (M) Product-Driven Support Schedules Develop modeling tools to analyze a specific product and quickly and accurately generate the projected need for repair assets and spare parts, and optimize maintenance schedules based on the product design and its deployment schedule. (S-M) Technology Impact Forecasting Develop the means to link knowledge and projections about future technology progressions (e.g., faster processors, new materials) to optimize a product design for its intended useful life, including technology refresh or phase-out. (M) Goal 2: Life-Cycle Model Feedback to Design & Planning Provide the ability to acquire and use captured information from users and maintenance/repair and disposition operations to enrich the fidelity and depth of product life-cycle models, and to feed back and enhance the process and product design function. (M-L) Life-Cycle Model Connectivity to Operational Data Develop means for capturing, verifying, and delivering needed data (including cumulative history such as performance over time and repair
2-39
trends and spares demands) for different types and families of products back to the enterprise and product models. Include the capability to continuously update life-cycle system models and systemof-systems models to enhance their fidelity and value. Include the capability to mine data for products with service problems, searching development and manufacturing data for contributing conditions, and provide alerts if associations are found (e.g., concerning defects or potential liability issues). (L) Life-Cycle Performance Feedback Tools Develop tools and methods to automatically capture life-cycle performance data (e.g., actual reliability and repair turnaround times) from the enterprises product support systems and update the product knowledge base. (S-M) Model Database Interfaces to Life-Cycle Feedback Establish formal interfaces with specific manufacturer and customer databases enabling product models to link to actual life-cycle information such as spares and consumables drawdowns, frequency of maintenance and repair actions, field modifications, and user feedback on performance and problems. (M) Real-Time Access to Maintenance Data Develop the capability to capture and use real-time feedback from maintenance activities in predictive maintenance/support models to improve planning and management of maintenance/repair operations, including supply logistics. (M) Goal 3: Model-Based Training Provide the capability to use product and process models as the basis for all training activities across the product life-cycle. Provide model-based training tools that enable development of training content concurrent with the product or process, support training for different kinds of products and processes, are available for training prior to release and use of the product/process, and are readily adaptable for all types and levels of user. (S-M) Model-Based Training Requirements Definition Define levels and types of training needs (including both formal training and real-time job support for operation, maintenance, and product support) for different classes of products, in cooperation with training community stakeholders (including universities). (S) Model-Based Embedded Training Concepts Develop model-based embedded training concepts and approaches for different classes of products and processes in collaboration with industry and government user communities, academia, and training technology providers. (S-M) Embedded Training Pilots Develop and demonstrate model-based embedded training technologies and applications for selected products, for use by support/maintenance staff and end users. (M) Goal 4: Industry-Wide Sharing of Product Support Data Work with the prime manufacturer and vendor communities to develop strategies and methods for sharing (with appropriate protection of sensitive information) of detailed product information needed to enable model-based life-cycle support environments. (M-L) New Business Models Develop new business standards that facilitate controlled sharing of proprietary life-cycle data and information. (S-M) Shared Life-Cycle Modeling Tools Develop tools, standards, and methodologies enabling webbased access to appropriate data, models, and modeling tools to all participants in the value chain. (S-M) Shared Product Support Data Pilots Select and conduct a series of small-scale government or commercial pilot projects to demonstrate and validate tools and techniques for controlled sharing of data needed for model-based life-cycle management, and document the resulting benefits. (M-L)
2-40
2.4 ROADMAP FOR PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT

The following pages lay out a nominal project plan for technology development to achieve the NGMTI goals for Product Realization & Support. The schedule is based on a January 2006 start, and the spans allocated for the defined activities are based on a convention where each activity is targeted for completion in a Short (0 to 3 years), Medium (3 to 5 years), or Long (5 to 10 years) timeframe. This project plan is intended as a reference point of departure for detailed planning purposes. Refinement of the schedule is dependent upon allocation of funding, assignment of responsible organizations, and development of detailed statements of work and project plans to accomplish the individual tasks. Further detail on specific Product Realization projects proposed for near-term implementation is provided in the NGMTI white papers for Flexible Representation of Complex Models, Intelligent Models, Model-Based Life Cycle Management, Product-Driven Product & Process Development, Real-Time Factory Operations, Shared Model Libraries, and other topics. These documents are available in the NGMTI Communities of Practice at http://www.ngmti.us.
2-41
2-42
2-43
2-44
2-45
2-46
2-47
2-48
3.0 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

3.1 FUNCTIONAL MODEL FOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Resource management (RM) is the process of integrating the activities of the enterprise to ensure that the right people and the right processes have the right resources at the right time to fulfill their functions. It encompasses all activities associated with the business of the enterprise, including control and oversight of production and support operations, supply chains, and sales and distribution mechanisms; and human and financial resources, knowledge and technology resources, and other assets. For assessment and planning purposes, these functions can be divided into eight separate yet interrelated elements as shown in Figure 3.1-1 and described below.
Figure 3.1-1. Functional Model for Resource Management
Financial Management
Includes all activities associated with controlling and applying the financial resources of an enterprise, including accounting and financial reporting, budgeting, expenditure tracking, collecting accounts receivable, disbursing funds, and managing financial risks. Includes all planning, directing, monitoring and controlling activities associated with the support of manufacturing operations, including scheduling, equipment and facilities maintenance, material handling, quality systems support, and cost management and control. Includes all activities associated with managing and controlling the network of facilities and organizations including subcontractors, suppliers, vendors, and partners that provide services, materials, components, subsystems or other constituents of the enterprises products, transforms these materials into components, and distributes products and services to enterprise customers. Includes all activities associated with sales, delivery, and billing including market research, product positioning and advertising; pre- and post-sale support, inquiry and quotation processing, and order processing; delivery to point of sale or point of use; and billing. Includes all activities associated with managing the human capital assets of the enterprise including recruiting and retention; training and development; compensation and benefits; motivation; and complying with laws and regulations regarding health, safety, employment practices, and related subjects.
Operations Management
Supply Chain Management
Marketing, Sales, & Distribution
Workforce Management
Resource Management
3-1
Capital Asset & Inventory Management Knowledge/ Information Management Technology Management
Includes all activities associated with tracking, controlling, and directing the physical resources of the enterprise, including assets entrusted to it by third parties (e.g., partners and the government), product stocks, and materials and components maintained to meet production requirements. Includes all activities associated with identifying, developing, managing, controlling, and applying the intellectual and data assets available to the enterprise. Includes all activities associated with surveillance, assessment, selection, implementation, and management of the technologies used by the enterprise in its products, processes, and facilities. This includes coordinating the required organizational changes (e.g., delivery of training and establishment of new policies and procedures) as part of a new technology implementation.
3.2 CURRENT STATE OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Competitive pressures in every sector of U.S. industry are continuing to drive companies, large and small, to manage their enterprises more efficiently and improve their ability to respond quickly to opportunities and challenges. Manufacturing capabilities have improved to the point where quality is rarely a genuine competitive discriminator, so success is increasingly tied to cost, service, and innovation the ability to be first to market with new and improved products. Industrys focus for more than a decade has been on automating and integrating enterprise processes, managing information more efficiently, reducing costs through operations streamlining, waste elimination, and managing financial performance for maximum short-term results. Modeling has been a key tool in helping companies redesign their operations for greater efficiency, using techniques such as value stream analysis and business process reengineering to eliminate non-value-added functions and focus their resources on those processes with the greatest impact on competitiveness, performance, and profitability. Although modeling tools are widely used, the current generation of tools both commercial and internally developed are function-specific (e.g., financial, product distribution, process design, and workflow) and do not readily support integration across different enterprise processes. It is increasingly important for manufacturers to integrate their design, manufacturing, and life-cycle product support activities with processes and systems across the rest of the enterprise, knocking down longstanding silos of integration to deliver appropriate knowledge to decision-makers to maximize enterprise performance and customer/stakeholder satisfaction. Model-based tools such as product data management (PDM) applications are providing new and valuable integration functionality. However, integration of legacy systems and applications to support the new tools and technologies remains a key barrier. Multi-enterprise integration the ability to integrate processes across multiple companies in a supply chain is another critical need that is not supported by the current generation of proprietary resource management applications. Most of the tools are not affordable for small manufacturers, or simply do not offer economic returns sufficient to justify the required investments in software, training, and support. Enterprise integration has been a major focus of industry for decades, focusing largely on process automation. Computer integrated manufacturing (CIM), manufacturing execution systems (MES), material resource planning (MRP), enterprise resource planning (ERP), product life-cycle management (PLM), supply chain management (SCM), customer relationship management (CRM), and enterprise manufacturing intelligence (EMI) approaches have all sought to solve pieces of the puzzle. While these solutions have in many cases delivered great value, in many others they have failed at great expense to meet expectations. The result is an enterprise systems landscape that is chaotic, with tools that dont talk to
Resource Management
3-2
each other, processes that are isolated from their upstream and downstream counterparts, and vital data that is trapped in legacy systems. The current state is migrating from tools and functions that operate in relative isolation to a shared environment where systems and functions talk to each other; and where new capabilities are added quickly to respond to short-fuse requirements. It is moving from an environment where placing an order initiates human activities to get ready to produce product, to an environment where order placement automatically launches processes in coordinated execution to deliver the goods. It is moving from an environment where data is collected ad-hoc to one where data is collected and shared in real time to tune products and processes for performance, efficiency, and profitability. Modeling and simulation are increasingly used in all aspects of manufacturing, planning, and financial management. Most enterprise management software tools provide modeling functions to help users make informed decisions. Models can range from simple static depictions used to understand and evaluate concepts (e.g., organizational structures and business process flows), to formulas that calculate a result based on a set of inputs (e.g., material balances), to sophisticated simulations that emulate a complex manufacturing process with scientific accuracy. Engineers use computer-aided design and engineering (CAD/CAE) applications and analytical codes to create, evaluate and refine product and process designs, lay out factory workflows and facility designs, and calculate throughputs and material requirements. Financial staffs use cost modeling tools to develop estimates, predict cash flows, and quantify risk and return on investment. Marketing and sales staffs use modeling tools to understand and predict customer behaviors and sales potential. Managers use modeling tools to develop business strategies and align organizational elements to execute those strategies. However, all of these capabilities are highly dependent on the users subject matter expertise, their skill with the application, and their ability to obtain accurate data to feed the model. Resource modeling techniques are delivering great impact. In defining training requirements for the DoDs Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program, for example, an Integrated Training Center discrete event simulation model is used to calculate the number of instructors, simulators, classrooms, support equipment, and other resources required to train a given number of pilots and maintainers. This enables the services to understand exactly what resources are needed to meet the training requirements for the three different JSF types, and quickly update the training program plan to reflect changes in aircraft quantity and type mix. Like many models today, however, the JSF ITC model is entirely dependent upon the accuracy of its underlying data, which is input manually based on the ad-hoc knowledge of the JSF training team. In some areas, integrated business modeling is a reality today. Multi-functional modeling applications such as Proformas ProVision and Interfacing Technologies Enterprise Process Center provide unified modeling environments that enable managers to model strategies, rules, organizational design, business systems and interactions, workflows, use cases, and more. General-purpose modeling tools such as Wizdom Systems ProcessWorks and Imagine Thats Extend (Figure 3.2-1) provide a powerful capability to build dynamic models perform what-if analyses.
1
http://www.imaginethatinc.com/prods_overview.html.
Figure 3.2-1. General-purpose modeling tools such as Extend use generic building blocks that enable users to quickly build complex simulations of business processes and systems.1
Resource Management
3-3
However, these systems all require considerable investments in resources and training that small companies cannot easily afford, nor do smaller firms have the flexibility to experiment with new tools unless they are paid for under a contract. These issues are a major barrier to enabling smaller firms to support the multi-enterprise collaboration initiatives of their various prime manufacturer customers. Table 3.2-1 notes some key attributes of the current state of practice for each of the functional elements of resource management. Further discussion is provided in the following sections.
Resource Management
3-4
NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE Table 3.2-1. Current State of Resource Management
Element Financial Management Lagging Practice Reactive financial planning using spreadsheets and back of the envelope Long lags in getting actuals to understand financial performance Little or no use of modeling tools to analyze issues and understand the implication of options Systems are automated, but planning and management processes remain driven by paper Success/failure entirely dependent on handful of key managers and lead staff Limited use of modeling and simulation tools to plan and manage operations Little or no integration of processes or tools; strong reliance on paper contracts and personal contacts Supplier relationships an intractable source of cost, schedule, quality problems State of Practice Well-defined business management processes based on accepted accounting practices Routing use of spreadsheets; limited use of financial modeling tools Low fidelity of estimating for large, complex projects Good capability to plan for and maintain steady-state operations using discrete event simulation tools, facility CAD systems Widespread use of third-party consulting engineering to optimize throughput, quality, reliability, etc. Complex subcontract management environments using multiple, often incompatible tools for prime/sub interfaces Certified supplier programs to simplify sourcing decisions and benefit from past good working relationships Increased reliance on subs, with risks pushed down the supply chain Widespread use of modeling in consumer product sectors to plan/implement new introductions and develop demand Heavy reliance on company transport fleet and third-party distribution networks (e.g., Fedex, UPS, USPS) Wide use of spreadsheets, compensation models, and similar tools for manpower and HR planning Some use of commercial analytical tools to understand current resources, needs, and forecast future requirements Increasing use of outsourcing to reduce manpower costs Leading-Edge Practice Financial management processes integrated across all business functions and organizational units Widespread use of specialized tools for cost modeling and analysis Heavy reliance on accuracy of manual estimating and forecasting Highly automated processes well integrated with operations monitoring and management, especially in process industries and high-volume discrete product manufacturing (e.g., automotive and semiconductors) Point integration of suppliers into longterm relationships using common suites of tools and shared collaboration environments Supplier selection and management processes use a large base of automated tools; SC management costs consume large percentage of overhead Marketing and distribution processes highly efficient, make extensive use of modeling and IT tools Econometrics and marketing mix modeling used to optimize sales and profitability Wide use of modeling to analyze and reengineer business processes to lean out the workforce Workforce analytics included in major ERM systems (e.g., PeopleSoft, SAP) Active efforts to capture workforce expertise and experience in knowledge preservation systems
Operations Management
Supply Chain Management
Marketing, Sales, & Distribution
Workforce Management
Market modeling routine in consumer products sector, non-existent in others Sales targets set by fiat, not determined by good models Distribution modeling capabilities readily available from commercial tools; used as needed Automation implemented to ensure compliance to applicable regs; little or no use of modeling and simulation Management processes for staffing tend to be reactive, focused on short-term issues
Resource Management
3-5
Element Capital Asset & Inventory Management
Lagging Practice Little or no modeling in capital asset management processes buy it/build it and use it until it wears out Inventory management an intractable issue; systems in place, but not well coupled to the factors that influence demand
State of Practice Strong focus on maximizing utilization of existing capital assets beyond their competitive life Processes supported by commercial tools or homegrown systems Aggressive implementation of just-in-time (JIT) inventory management, but factors influencing demand variables are not well controlled significant effort devoted to mitigating impacts of dips and spikes Automated tools used to generate and manage information in vast majority of technical and business processes Company/corporate networks with electronic document storage in native and PDF formats Increasing use of internal web-based information management (intranets) Structured strategic technology planning processes; forecasts coupled into business plans with financial analysis Routine use of modeling and simulation to explore/understand new opportunities and solve technical problems High aversion to risk technology has to proven and implemented successfully by somebody else
Leading-Edge Practice Capital decision processes and inventory management well supported by financial modeling and analysis tools Good capabilities for life-cycle modeling of capital facility and equipment assets Improving ability to forecast demand and benefit from JIT inventory management while avoiding shortfalls PLM and ERP/ERM systems used as repository and source for all product and process information, with costly manual integration of legacy systems Increasing emphasis on tools for capture, reuse, and preservation of data, information, and knowledge Technology management integrated into business processes strategic planning, market positioning R&D investment decisions supported by technology forecasting and economic modeling Increasing interest in automated tools to guide technology investments Moderate to high risks routinely accepted, but well monitored and managed for mitigation
Knowledge/ Information Management
I.T. a necessary evil; little or no use of modeling tools or any automation beyond electronic file storage and exchange Paper and personnel remain the critical assets for company knowledge Poor interoperability of the systems holding different types of enterprise data Technology decision processes are manual, ad-hoc, and reactive High aversion to risk conscious position as a late follower in implementing new technologies
Technology Management
Resource Management
3-6
3.2.1 CURRENT STATE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT Finance functions in todays manufacturing enterprises rely heavily on spreadsheet-based models and modeling applications because of their ease of use in preparing complex estimates. Although such tools lack the power and scalability of the enterprise planning tools available in current ERP/ERM packages, low-end tools such as Excel and more sophisticated packages such as Quantrix Modeler and OutlookSofts Everest offer useful functionality at a fraction of the cost of an ERP implementation. Commercial estimating applications provide both large and small manufacturers the ability to model costs for discrete processes such as manufacturing. Feature-based estimating functions in tools such as MTIs Costimator OEM (Figure 3.2.1-1) allow designers to quickly compare the cost of various part features to determine the most economical designs.2 Applications such as BSDs CostLink/AE provide a similar capability for architectural and engineering estimating by using parametric models as templates to guide the cost calculation process.3 Many of these applications support integration with ERP/ERM systems, providing the foundation for integrated model-based financial management. Most financial models today do not incorporate non-financial drivers and thus do not support higher-level business decision processes with the needed accuracy; i.e., they do not enable accurate financial predictions beyond extrapolation of trends from known data. Spreadsheet-based models are typically developed only to the level of detail sufficient to capture categories of cost, and rarely provide the deeper insight companies need to identify areas where they can cut costs. For example, manufacturers do not generally know if a particular shift is always over-staffed or that a particular machine could have been replaced for less than the cost of its repairs over the past 6 months. Activity-based cost modeling techniques have gone a long way towards helping manufacturers model labor costs and have been invaluable in reducing costs in the service sector. Business process modeling techniques and applications, as previously discussed, are well-developed and widely used for analyzing operations to eliminate non-value-added activities and better understand the factors that influence the costs of processes. The available base of specialized cost modeling tools continues to grow. COCOMO is well-established as the standard for estimating the cost of software development, and software companies closely track productivity metrics that enable them to model costs for software systems based on new and modified
Costimator
CostLink/AE
Figure 3.2.1-1. The current generation of commercial estimating applications give managers a greatly improved capability to model production costs.
2 3
http://www.costimator.com/products/oem.html. http://www.bsdsoftlink.com/costlinkae/ae_frame.htm.
Resource Management
3-7
lines of code. Coupled with improved standards for software development (e.g., the CarnegieMellon Software Engineering Institutes Capability Maturity Model), these tools have contributed significantly to reduce the time, cost and risk of software development for military products. Organizations such as the Electronic Systems Cost Modeling Laboratory (ESCML) at the University of Maryland provide on-line models for understanding the cost impacts of technology obsolescence, test rework, and other financial drivers in electronic systems design and manufacturing. ESCMLs MOCA (Mitigation of Obsolescence Cost Analysis) is a design tool for determining part obsolescence impact on life-cycle sustainment costs for the electronic systems based on future production projections, maintenance requirements and part obsolescence forecasts. Using on a detailed cost analysis model, MOCA determines the optimum design refresh plan over the life of the system (Figure 3.2.1-2). Outputs from this analysis are used as inputs to the PRICE H/L commercial software tools for predicting system life-cycle costs.4
Figure 3.2.1-2. MOCA models the cost implications of all possible combinations of design refresh points in an electronic system's life cycle.
Despite the wealth of financial modeling tools available, hard barriers remain. Most such tools are not responsive to change because they are not directly connected to the sources of their underlying data. Changing model structure and formulas is a manual process, making it problematic to ensure the models are accurate and current. The upcoming generation of financial modeling tools is tackling these issues, however. CostVision is developing a modular software application (Figure 3.2.1-3) to plan and manage financial, time and capacity impacts over the product life-cycle, from concept through design, sourcing, manufacturing, and support. The total cost model can trade off changes in the portfolio, products, investments, manufacturing processes, materials, tooling, and facilities. For risk assessment and optimization in an Figure 3.2.1-3. Next-generation tools being developed by CostVision engineering sandbox, the model and others are providing the capability to develop complete life-cycle
cost models that are tied to underlying data from PDM and PLM tools.
4
http://www.enme.umd.edu/ESCML.
Resource Management
3-8
components can be integrated or isolated, with different levels of granularity. The user interface provides access to data and predictive analytic workflows based on the user profile, which allows different functional roles (e.g., engineering, manufacturing, supplier) to collaborate within their level of access on cost models. The web-based system integrates to CAD, PLM, manufacturing software, and ERP applications to maintain consistent and accurate cost inputs.5 Current financial models (and modeling tools) also are not well integrated with the rest of the enterprise. This makes forecasting targets (e.g., for orders, sales, and profits) difficult. Targets today are still are based more on politics and competitive positioning than on reality. Much estimating, particularly in the defense industry, continues to be driven by top-down processes where bogeys are assigned by subsystem or department, and engineers and functional staff then have to back into their assigned targets. As a result, estimators tend to low-ball or inflate figures in order to account for risks and navigate the internal negotiation processes to ensure their scope of work is adequately funded. Poor ability to model the cost impact of technical decisions continues to be a significant problem in the defense and aerospace sectors. Major programs such as NASAs space station, the Air Forces F-22 Raptor, and the Armys RAH-66 Comanche helicopter experienced extreme cost escalations due to inadequate estimating, failure to fully account for cost risk, and inability to project the financial impacts of changes in requirements. Restructuring of the Comanche program in 2002 (the sixth time the program was restructured since its inception in 1983) doubled the aircrafts development budget to over $6 billion, and estimated unit cost grew from $24 million to more than $32 million.6 With the development testing program uncovering numerous technical issues requiring further outlays, the Army elected to terminate Comanche in February 2004, writing off 20 years and more than $7 billion of investment. 3.2.2 CURRENT STATE OF OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT While the definition of operations varies widely across different industry sectors and even with the walls of a single company this manufacturing enterprise function has benefited greatly from application of modeling and simulation technologies. Discrete event simulation (DES) is particularly useful in this area since it enables users to model interdependent activities, especially in complex operations involving multiple interrelated processes. Major semiconductor producers routinely apply DES tools to optimize their production lines, which are characterized by high volume, high precision, high capital costs for specialized process equipment, and significant product changeovers every 12 to 24 months. In the case of Intel, use of operations modeling including sensitivity studies, ergonomic simulations, factory layout/ flow, throughput constraint modeling, and chaos effects saves millions of dollars in direct and avoided costs each year. 7 Modeling and simulation tools such as Delmias Quest (Figure 3.2.2-1) and UGS E-Factory enable facility designers to create 3-D virtual factory models including tooling and material flows to support design and optimization of operational facility layouts and factory floor process flows. AspenTech has established a leading position in the petroleum and chemicals sectors, providing unified operations and supply chain management capabilities and modeling and simulation functionality with its aspenONE product suite.8 Operations modeling is also supported by multipurpose application environments such as TechnoSofts TIE (Tool Integration Environment), which uses adaptive modeling language (AML) to link a wide array of process modeling and cost modeling functions (Figure 3.2.2-2).
5 6
http://www.costvision.com. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/rah-66.htm. 7 Courtland M. Hilton, Manufacturing Operations System Design and Analysis, Intel Technology Journal, 4th Quarter 1998. http://www.intel.com/technology/itj/q41998/articles/art_3.htm. 8 http://www.aspentech.com/mfg-sc/index.cfm.
Resource Management
3-9
Much operations modeling is performed by third-party specialty firms using a combination of proprietary and commercial modeling tools, and success stories are numerous with both approaches. ExxonMobil used ProModel to evaluate new equipment installation and process change for its Films Division, enabling a capacity increase of 40% by identifying and reengineering handling constraints. Laser manufacturer Cymer used the tool to optimize new layout design, evaluate process changes, find and exploit constraints, schedule personnel, control work-in-process, and investigate the impact of new techniques, helping ramp up production 400% in one year and increasing revenues by more than $180 million.9 Despite the excellent range of capabilities available from commercial applications, a number of barriers remain. Creation and updating of operations models with useful fidelity requires a significant investment of time and funds, and extensive application training as well as subject-matter expertise. The applications are costly, and much of the high-value functionality is available only through acquisition of extra modules. The high cost of acquiring, implementing, and maintaining such applications makes them unaffordable for many small manufacturers.
Figure 3.2.2-1. Quest and similar modeling tools enable facility designers to create 3-D virtual factory models that are tied to constituent process models.
Areas such as operations maintenance such as TIE provide the ability to link activity-based costs to each require yet a different brand of applioperational element. cation, although tools such as Relex OpSim provide a comprehensive capability for modeling of maintenance and repair operations. Also, although different application packages have different strengths and features, investment in one package generally precludes investment in another one even for large firms, due to lack of interoperability. Perhaps the most significant barrier is that current operations modeling applications do not operate in real time; i.e., they lack to capability to accept and respond to live data feeds from the shop/plant floor to support routine decision-making. Such integration can be done, but requires a dedicated point-to-point development effort for the specific operation.
Figure 3.2.2-2. Multi-purpose operations modeling applications
http://www.promodel.com/solutions/manufacturing.
Resource Management
3-10
3.2.3 CURRENT STATE OF SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT Managing suppliers has always been key to business success, and the importance of this function has grown tremendously over the last decade. Mergers and consolidations have driven the rise of global manufacturing enterprises and systems integrators who coordinate the efforts of many suppliers to design, manufacture, and support increasingly complex products. The growing high-technology content of many products also drives this trend, since it is impractical for companies to maintain internal capabilities for production of specialized items that can be readily procured with greater capability and at lower cost from specialty suppliers. The concept of the supply chain is evolving as well, from a paradigm where vendors deliver products to spec to one where suppliers team with larger manufacturers to design, produce, and support products across their life cycle. The pressure to lean out their operations has companies looking to outsource many functions, with the expectation that these functions can be managed with sufficient rigor to meet cost, schedule, and quality requirements. Modeling and simulation play a key role in the current evolution of supply chain management. Business modeling tools help companies better understand their core competencies and re-engineer their processes to the point where suppliers and vendors can be integrated into those processes efficiently, delivering sufficient value to offset the cost of managing outsourced functions management. CAD, PDM, and PLM environments are enabling members of supply chains to collaborative effectively in design, manufacturing, and product support. Modeling of supply chains is a well-developed capability. General-purpose business modeling tools such as GoldSim10 provide good supply chain modeling functionality (Figure 3.2.3-1), and users have a very wide range of software applications from which to choose. The Managing Automation web site maintained by Thomas Publishing (producers of the Thomas Register) currently lists more than 495 software applications related to supply chain management, of which 446 claim analytic capability. The largest present challenge in this area is the ability to integrate real-time data, followed closely by the ability to account for uncertainty factors. Modeling of supply chain elements is limited, and there are no standards for what constitutes a model of a supplier. Supply chain management is intimately tied to enterprise integration, and many barriers remain in the way of the enterprise integration vision. Limited CAD systems Figure 3.2.3-1. Supply chain modeling is a mature science, interoperability forces suppliers to support and current applications provide excellent capabilities for multiple systems, or convert primes engisupply chain design and analysis. neering data into formats their tools can use. Many sub-tier suppliers have opted to focus their business on supporting a single prime with whom they can cost-effectively implement compatible processes and systems. The growth of large-scale ERP systems offered by SAP, PeopleSoft, and SSA Global (Baan) is giving large manufacturers much better visibility and control of their suppliers. However, small suppliers are
10
http://www.goldsim.com/Solutions/ExAutoSupply.asp?Referrer1=casestudies.
Resource Management
3-11
bearing the brunt of the cost of buying into those environments, by either purchasing the required tools or having to translate data and information into formats that their primes particular ERP systems can accept. Another major concern in this area is protection of proprietary information. A large manufacturer is typically interconnected with multiple suppliers who compete with each other. Each supplier typically supports many manufacturers who likewise compete with each other. For these relationships to work, the primes must have access to resource and capacity information. Likewise, suppliers must have visibility into the primes requirements; however, knowing all of the details on either side may compromise the competitive position of the prime, the supplier, or both. Tools are needed to enable partners to access appropriate detail while protecting sensitive data in dynamic collaboration environments. Compatibility is another key barrier. Despite the growth of web-based interfaces, the modeling and simulation applications community must provide better, easier-to-use tools that all members of the supply chain can afford. Standards must be developed to define how different applications can interact in a distributed environment with appropriate security to support integration of supply chain operations across the entire product life cycle. 3.2.4 CURRENT STATE OF MARKETING, SALES, AND DISTRIBUTION The marketing functions of todays consumer products manufacturers make extensive use of modeling and simulation tools because of the size, complexity, and chaotic nature of their customer base and markets. Modern information technologies give companies an increasingly large and detailed base of information about their customers, providing the capability to refine their marketing models with ever-greater precision and closely track factors that impact the marketplace. Web-based surveys, usability testing, ethnographic research, and virtual reality tools are increasingly used to customize product offerings, set pricing, and profile of customers for targeted marketing and advertising efforts. Econometric modeling is used by every large consumer goods manufacturer in the U.S. and Europe to identify the marketing variables that maximize return on sales. One of the reasons this analysis is difficult, is that brand managers focus advertising outlays to build brand equity which often manifests as a delayed response while financial managers define payback in terms of weekly, monthly, and quarterly sales. Leading-edge companies now use marketing-mix modeling to allocate marketing dollars for maximum return. At Procter & Gamble, the insights gleaned from use of these modeling tools affected over $400 million of the firms marketing budget in 2003 almost a tenth of the companys $4.3 billion global outlay.11 Although marketing-mix modeling has existed since the 1980s, improved analytics have brought it to the foreground among progressive business practitioners. Randolph Stone, president of Aegis Groups Marketing Management Analytics, foresees adoption of this approach by firms in the automotive, telecommunications, retail, entertainment, and pharmaceutical industries in the near future. Sales The digital environment is now a rapidly expanding element of the company-customer sales interface. The Internet now gives companies storefronts that are open 24/7, with the ability to service hundreds of customers simultaneously anywhere in the world. Geographic models, data mining, and analytics are increasingly standard tools for lead generation, and sales force resource analysis is well established as a best practice for optimizing and training the sales force. Wider use of sales-response modeling has led to more intense competition in many sectors, forcing companies to rethink their current sales models. In the pharmaceutical industry the technique has been used since the early 1990s to predict the number of prescriptions written per physician as a function of the number of sales contacts. This allows sales managers to determine how many contacts are needed to produce results for the targeted physician segment. This has been a major driver of expansion in this indus11
The 50% that works: can econometrics help us lose some of the guesswork? Adweek, 45 (19):25, May 10, 2004.
Resource Management
3-12
try, where sales forces have expanded by 75% in the past 6 years. Return on sales for the top 14 pharmaceutical companies actually declined 24% between 1998 and 2001,12 which indicates that the technique is well past the saturation point. Distribution Higher customer expectations, coupled with lean operations strategies, are placing tremendous pressure on the distribution systems of both large and small manufacturers. Leading companies that use sophisticated modeling tools to distribute large quantities of small items include well-known shipping services Federal Express, UPS, and DHL. Leading enterprise management systems providers such as SAP and ASPEN include robust distribution planning and analysis capabilities as part of their product lines. The Department of Defense, through its Defense Logistics Agency, uses sophisticated models to move people and supplies around the world; however, DoD faces formidable challenges because it must keep pace with rapidly changing and unpredictable requirements in managing the worlds largest and most complex inventory. The distribution function for most large and mid-sized manufacturers operates using well-developed models that incorporate geographic information, logistics, and delivery schedules into highly effective distribution systems. Ketera, MindFlow, Oracle, and others provide a myriad of solutions for spend analysis, sourcing analytics, contract monitoring and tracking, cost performance analysis. These tools also support modeling of complex monetary parameters that include duties, taxes, tariffs and other charges associated with complex international distribution systems. The growing complexity of todays consumer marketplace has spawned a large market of its own for third-party distribution management. As with other areas of enterprise resource management, the barriers to wider use of model-based technologies in distribution management include the cost and complexity of available tools, and the difficulty of modeling uncertainties. The ability to detect, analyze, and respond to subtle qualitative factors that influence demand and hence impact the distribution system remains more art than science. 3.2.5 CURRENT STATE OF WORKFORCE MANAGEMENT Modeling in the broad sense is routine in the workforce management area, with enterprises maintaining human resource (HR) models in the form of structured job descriptions and organizational models that enable them to relate manpower and skill requirements to enterprise talent needs. Competencies and skills are the basic building blocks of HR management, and do not lend themselves to the kind of mathematical description needed to create models that enable accurate prediction. Salary structures and job categories are well modeled, but the tight definitions of job categories in the models limit flexibility. In addition, job performance-specific models are lacking and human resource decisions are often impeded by poor job specification. Factors such as attrition and turnover can be modeled based on historical data, but the effect of potential actions to influence those factors cannot be predicted with statistical accuracy today. Many workforce management decisions are based on business reality instead of modeled scenarios. More than one large company has met the challenge of reducing overhead rates by simply jettisoning the desired percentage of overhead staff leaving the survivors to figure out how to get the same amount of work done with fewer bodies. Simulation techniques are used in re-engineering of business process workflows to eliminate non-valueadded activity, sustain or increase productivity with smaller workforces, and align skill and manpower needs more closely to business objectives. PeopleSoft, Baan, and other major ERP vendors provide workforce analytics as a part of their HR management packages, but their modeling and simulation functionality is not well defined in available literature.
12
Hard sell: as expanding the sales force becomes a less attractive option, pharmaceutical companies are reevaluating their sales strategies. In Med Ad News, 23(3), No. 1, March 2004.
Resource Management
3-13
Another problem today is that business metrics do not reflect job requirements well. Staff utilization is rarely efficient, and employee education is often not well aligned with actual job requirements. Employee training is migrating to training for specific functions, but mandatory compliance training is consuming many companies training budgets at the expense of training for useful skills. Global outsourcing of many core enterprise functions (particularly customer service and product support functions) and shifting workforce demographics have completely overturned the traditional employer/ employee expectation of an implied lifetime relationship. The current trend toward flexible job assignments and short-term employment is not being handled gracefully by many organizations. Ability to model these issues is significantly lagging todays realities, with most companies making outsourcing decisions purely on the basis of near-term cost and profit factors. Inability to model the long-term impacts of these strategies has many companies gambling on their future ability to compete. 3.2.6 CURRENT STATE OF CAPITAL ASSET & INVENTORY MANAGEMENT Capital asset and inventory management is a key managerial concern as manufacturers face increasing competition in the global marketplace. Competitive survival demands reducing costs and closely matching capacity to demand. As a result, capital assets and inventory are becoming increasingly important targets for cost-reduction efforts. Capital Asset Management Capital asset (equipment, facilities, etc.) tracking models are mature, and tools such as the Balanced Scorecard Method (Figure 3.2.6-1) are widely used to evaluate return on assets. U.S. manufacturers have billions of dollars invested in capital assets ranging from skilled personnel and fixed plants to equipment such as machine tools and cooling towers. Even small improvements in managing and maintaining assets can have a major impact on a companys financial position. Acquiring, maintaining, and disposing of assets is serious business. A fractional improvement in managing capital assets can be worth millions of dollars annually to a large manufacturer). However, the difficulty of accessing detailed information on these assets makes decisions regarding postponing purchases or eliminating current assets risky. The importance of effective capital asset management models that enable executives to make such decisions accurately and confidently is clear.13 Accurate assessment of the remaining operational lifetime of a capital asset requires a broad range of model expertise (i.e., vibration characteristics, oil analysis, motor current dynamic characteristics, thermographic behavior, and process conditions). Traditional capital management systems supply raw data to in-house experts who ana13
Figure 3.2.6-1. The Balanced Scorecard is a widely accepted management tool for allocating capital resources to support critical drivers of business success.
Climate is Right for Plant Asset Management and Condition Monitoring Solutions to Grow Substantially, David Clayton, Senior Analyst for ARC Advisory Group (www.arcweb.com/Newsmag/ent/pam061903.asp)
Resource Management
3-14
lyze data and make recommendations regarding each assets health. However, experienced and knowledgeable employees are leaving manufacturing plants in ever greater numbers. As a result, the era of inhouse maintenance experts is coming to an end, and there is a growing need for open, fully integrated solutions capable of examining asset performance and comparing it to performance models and drawing accurate conclusions from the disparate data. This need is fueling growth of a new breed of integrated, model-based PAM and CM solutions. Inventory Management The high cost of carrying product and material inventory between the point of resource need and the point of product sale has driven most manufacturers to adopt just-in-time practices that minimize in-process inventory. Advanced, model-based inventory management (AIM) systems are mature and widely used to improve warehouse operation and efficiency. Internal routing models permit the definition of step-bystep paths to follow for the movement of goods and all the properties assigned to each step: label printing, confirmation options, status, reference, and lot/serial changes. Inventory management is closely tied to distribution management and entity-relationship distribution models typically include inventory management functions (Figure 3.2.6-2).14 Inventory modeling is a well-developed discipline, and the only significant barrier in this area is the difficulty of linking live data to the model to enable real-time problem-solving.
Figure 3.2.6-2. Inventory modeling is a well-developed discipline closed tied to distribution modeling.
14
Michelle A. Poolet, Product Distribution Metamodel, July 2002. http://www.windowsitpro.com/SQLServer/Article/ArticleID/24912/24912.html.
Resource Management
3-15
3.2.7 CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE/INFORMATION MANAGEMENT There is tremendous emphasis on knowledge management in the ERM domain today, but use of models to manage knowledge assets beyond relatively simple functions such as reuse of CAD data is in its infancy. In most companies, there are few organized efforts to document knowledge in reusable forms. Although progress is being made with distributed workgroup tools and company intranets, only the larger companies can afford the cost of developing and maintaining focused systems for knowledge management. While smaller manufacturers typically have a much smaller and more focused base of knowledge they wish to preserve, these assets are almost universally captured in the same source their most experienced and skilled employees. Today, huge amounts of valuable information are captured in ways that make it difficult to reuse (i.e., embedded in spreadsheets, text documents, and application files having proprietary formats). However, the kinds of knowledge that are most valuable to the enterprise reside in the heads of key personnel at all levels of the organization. Formal documentation of best practices has helped companies preserve and share institutional wisdom, but much of such information is of limited usefulness because it is highly context-specific. ERP and PLM systems, which are in wide use today even by smaller businesses, are increasingly becoming the repositories for the data and information used to support day-to-day operations and management planning. However, these tools are designed primarily as database-based application systems, and do not provide the deeper functionality associated with emerging knowledge management concepts. 3D CAD is enabling significant improvements in the quality of training while reducing the cost of developing and maintaining training materials (Figure 3.2.7-1). Product models generated by designers are now being ported directly into training media, eliminating much of the cost and time of creating documentation. Assembly models and simulations developed to optimize product manufacture are being used directly for training of maintenance and repair staff. CAD designs can also be downloaded to stereolithography systems to produce physical models, thus reducing costs associated with creating training aids while providing exact form/fit replicas. This is particularly valuable in maintenance training for complex, expensive equipment.
Figure 3.2.7-1. Sharing of model-based technical Advances in interactive simulation, being led by data greatly reduces the cost and time of developing DoD initiatives such as High Level Architecture documentation. It also ensures that all users have (HLA), are laying the foundation for distributed inthe exact same data and version information. teractive training that relies heavily on modeling and simulation. These technologies will enable teams of geographically dispersed individuals to train in shared synthetic environments, ultimately combining both simulators and live assets in the loop.
Numerous modeling and simulation technology advances are needed to support such capabilities, ranging from more robust and comprehensive standards for product models (physics as well as geometry), faster and more powerful processing capability, enhanced visualization, and interaction of synthetic entities.
Resource Management
3-16
3.2.8 CURRENT STATE OF TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT While most companies use formal processes to allocate R&D funding for technology development and maturation, corporate decision-making in this area is highly subjective. Current business modeling capabilities aid in aligning corporate priorities with core competencies, but investment decisions are predominantly driven by the perceptions of the organizations senior technology managers. Significant effort is devoted to quantifying market potential in order to calculate ROI and risk in different scenarios, but aside from spreadsheets and rule-of-thumb models such as Moores Law15, few tools exist to model the technology investment process to support specific business decisions. Modeling and simulation are used extensively to explore concepts for new products and product improvements, particularly in the defense sector. Monte Carlo force-on-force simulations are used routinely to gauge the potential value of new weapons and sensors, and these results in turn support marketing to military customers to influence DoD R&D funding. Simulation-Based Acquisition principles are now a cornerstone of current DoD strategies to ensure that new weapon systems are not over-engineered and that they stay on track to meet requirements at each stage of the development process. Standard tools such as FLIR92 and NVTHERM are commonly used to model the performance of infrared sensor systems, and MATLAB is used to generate similar kinds of performance analyses for radar systems. Many agencies also apply should cost modeling techniques to quantify cost risk in major development programs, helping neutralize the competitive advantage of lowball quotes. The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) model is rapidly gaining favor in managing technology development in the aerospace sector. The TRL process, simply put, assigns TRL levels on a scale of 1 to 7 according to the evaluated maturity of subject technology, where TRL 1 = basic research and TRL 9 = in production and flight proven. Industry proponents are moving toward adopting a similar methodology for manufacturing (MTRL), which aligns closely to the basic TRL model (Figure 3.2.8-1). The past decade has also seen a shift in technology management strategies for high-tech manufacturers. Prime contractors are increasingly Figure 3.2.8-1. TRL and MTRL models provide a structured method repositioning themselves as system of assessing technology readiness to guide R&D investments. integrators, reducing their own R&D budgets and relying on their supply chain members to deliver innovations that they can incorporate
15
The observation made by Gordon Moore, co-founder of Intel, that the number of transistors per square inch on integrated circuits doubles approximately every 18 months.
Resource Management
3-17
into their product lines. This has shifted the burden of development risk to smaller companies, whose ability to get problematic programs back on track is limited by their smaller pool of resources. Companies such as General Motors have applied system dynamics principles to model the effectiveness of research partnerships, helping better understand the impacts of factors such as cooperation, conflict, and trust (Figure 3.2.8-2).16 This kind of model will only increase in value as more companies move to distributed technology development strategies.
Figure 3.2.8-2. System dynamics modeling techniques can help companies better manage their technology development partnerships.
16
Modeling Relationship Dynamics In GMs Research-Institution Partnerships, Glcin H. Sengir et. al., IAMOT 2004, 15 March 2004. http://www.iamot.org.
Resource Management
3-18
3.3 FUTURE STATE VISION & GOALS FOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Future manufacturing enterprises will continuously optimize internal and external resources to maximize value to all stakeholders. Fully integrating model-based design, manufacturing, and product support processes with all business functions will make appropriate knowledge available to decisionmakers and enable them to tune enterprise performance for total customer and stakeholder satisfaction. In the future, the core elements of the enterprise (including its business rules and strategies as well as its processes and systems) will be modeled so accurately and thoroughly that routine allocation of resources will be handled autonomously by enterprise resource management (ERM) systems. These systems will have total connectivity to all enterprise processes and assets including product/process capabilities, manpower and skills, facilities and equipment, raw material and product inventories, supply chain capabilities, and working capital and budgets (Figure 3.3-1). This seamless connectivity will extend to every tier of the enterprises supply chains. An open business systems architecture based on well-defined standards for modeling and managing different types of resources will enable different companies to quickly plug together to exploit new opportunities. While allocation of resources will always be at the discretion of the enterprises managers, the ability to access current resource information anywhere in the supply chain with appropriate security will eliminate much of the inefficiency inherent to managing complex supply chain relationships. Science-based models of the inputs, outputs, demand factors, and dependencies of every enterprise process, coupled with continuous access to all sources of information that affect these processes, will provide clear definition of what resources need to be where and when, and when they will be available again for reallocation. These models will control the systems that execute the enterprises technical and business processes. Managers at all levels will interact with the system to develop plans, monitor performance, analyze issues, evaluate opportunities, and efficiently direct resources to point of need.
Figure 3.3-1. Future ERM systems will provide total connectivity of all enterprise processes to all enterprise resources, with powerful modeling and simulation capabilities that enable fast, accurate decisions.
Resource Management
3-19
The greatest benefits of model-based resource management will come from radically improved ability to prepare for new requirements, and to respond to problems, throughout the supply chain. Future product and process models will provide precise definitions of the resources they require for their execution including raw materials, parts, and components; manufacturing labor and skills; facility space, equipment, tooling, and fixtures; handling and transport; and product support, including training and documentation. These requirements will be uptaken by the ERM system and fed to functional planning systems for implementation. Managers will use desktop modeling and simulation tools, connected to the enterprises knowledge bases, to evaluate options for meeting the requirements with those resources in ways that offer the best balance of performance, speed, cost, risk, and profitability. The same tools will enable managers to rapidly determine the best response when requirements change as a result of design changes or performance or schedule problems anywhere in the supply chain. Intelligent advisors will rapidly recalculate the impacts of an actual or planned change in resources on all other dependent resources, and provide recommendations for corrective action to get the product, process, project, program, or operation back on track. CROSS-CUTTING GOALS & REQUIREMENTS FOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Goal 1: Model-Based Resource Management Provide model-based tools and techniques to manage
all resources across all components of the manufacturing enterprise. (M)17
Model-Based Enterprise Architecture Develop an open, model-based business systems architecture that enables the necessary interconnections and resource-related information flows between and among different enterprise processes. Include the capability to support different sizes and types of manufacturing enterprises, including small suppliers as well as OEMs and complex supply chains. (M) Generic Resource Models Develop a generic set of models and modeling standards for common resource types that can be customized to meet the specific needs of any manufacturing enterprise. Include materials, manpower, skills, process equipment, unit processes, facilities, capital/cash, and other common forms of resource. (M) Resource Data Linking Develop methods, tools, and techniques for linking model-based resource management applications to current resource status information from different processes, functions, sites, and organizational entities. (S) Resource Change Management Develop a computer-based advisory tool, compatible with current MRP/ERP/ERM and operations management software applications, to alert resource owners and users when a requirement changes, so as to enable quick negotiation and implementation of the proper response. Include the capability to automatically communicate changes in resource requirements and availability to all affected organizations, systems, and applications. (M) Goal 2: Multi-Enterprise ERP/ERM Integration Provide mechanisms and methods for rapidly interconnecting the systems of different enterprise partners to integrate ERP/ERM functionality to the lowest tier of the supply chain. (M) ERP/ERM Interface Frameworks Develop interface frameworks and standards for quickly and seamlessly integrating different resource management systems across different companies. Include the capability for ERP/ERM systems to automatically negotiate full or limited interfaces depending on the capabilities of the systems being interfaced. (M)
17
Resource Management
3-20
Linkages to External Resource Sources Develop tools for linking ERM systems to external resource information sources to enable continuous update of resource information to support planning and decision processes. (S) Distributed Resource Status Tracking Develop model-based tools for continuously tracking and forecasting resource status throughout the supply chain, enabling real-time updating of activity schedules based on internal and external resource constraints. (M) 3.3.1 VISION & GOALS FOR FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT Future decision-makers will be able to quickly predict, with confidence, the financial implications of all decisions. The systems and models that drive the enterprises business processes will capture financial data and relationships with precise accuracy to provide a continuous, clear view of performance. Financial models and simulations will take into account both financial and non-financial parameters, predict well, and enable managers to continuously fine-tune financial strategies for business success. In the future manufacturing enterprise, model-based business management systems empowered by fully interconnected business processes will provide real-time visibility into all aspects of financial performance. These systems will enable managers to rapidly analyze financial issues and consistently make the best decisions based on all relevant factors and options. Real-time cost reporting systems will continuously feed the business models to reveal cost problems, and desktop analytical tools will enable fast evaluation of options for workarounds, recovery, and re-planning. Product and process models will be fully populated with accurate cost data via interfaces to the enterprises financial systems. Cost information for labor, materials, parts, commodities, and support elements will be automatically captured along with appropriate rates and factors and linked to the associated product and process models, updating themselves automatically whenever the underlying data change. Because cost information will always be captured at the lowest level of the design or activity, basic cost information for an element will travel with it transparently when the same element is applied to a different product or process. Routine changes in cost basis (such as fluctuations in material or commodity costs) will be handled automatically within defined limits. In the case of design changes, the PDM system will automatically extract the change information from the product/process model and pass it to the appropriate function (Engineering, Purchasing, Subcontracts, etc.) for re-pricing. With product and process models able to link to actual cost history captured in the enterprises knowledge base, preparation of estimates will require minutes rather than hours freeing functional personnel to focus on their real jobs and ensuring that estimates are accurate and complete. This will remove much of the time, complexity, and risk in bidding for large and complex contracts, particularly in the defense and civil engineering sectors. Model-based costing will also enable companies to provide required cost information to partners and supply chain members without revealing sensitive financial data such as rates and factors. This will facilitate greater openness in teaming on large, multi-company programs where competitors today have great difficulty in working together. Although many managers will continue to rely on simple spreadsheet-based models to aid day-to-day financial decisions, most manufacturing firms will have converted to more powerful and capable enterprise management tools. Both financial and non-financial parameters will be included in decision processes, and the models will capture the reality (with varying fidelity based on the ability to express factors mathematically) of all parameters impacting financial decisions. They will predict well and, by comparing actual to predicted performance, help companies determine where they can or should cut costs. The ability to monitor maintenance and repair trends, for example, will enable production managers to quickly determine if an item of equipment should be replaced. The ability to understand the precise contribution of the equipment to cost and profit will enable the manager to quickly select the solution that best meets
Resource Management
3-21
near-term requirements at the lowest cost or the one that fulfills the immediate need and provides additional capability to meet future needs. Financial models will be well integrated into all of the enterprises functions and, as a result, realistic cost and profit targets will be easy to set and track. Calculating the net present value (NPV) of expected future cash flows will continue to be a widely used method for evaluating financial options, but most organizations also will evaluate the financial implications of non-financial options using pricing models, Monte Carlo simulations, and other modeling tools. Integration of different companies accounting systems will remain a challenge to financial modeling across supply chains. Even should the U.S. pass legislation to unify accounting practices, the widely different standards in the global business environment will continue to complicate financial planning and management in international business dealings with customers, partners, and suppliers Creation of country-specific financial knowledge bases will be key to advancing modeling capabilities in this area. Goals & Requirements for Financial Management Goal 1: Enterprise-Wide Product & Process Cost Models Provide cost modeling systems and techniques that enable integration of all required data, within and external to the enterprise, to support modeling and analysis of cost, profitability, and other financial attributes of a product or process design. (L) Model-Based Cost Standards Establish financial information management standards that support creation of comprehensive cost models for products and processes. Include provision for capture of direct and indirect costs; integration of life-cycle factors such as maintenance and repair, spares, training, and recycling/disposal; and tailoring to meet the unique requirements of a particular industry sector. (M) Intelligent Cost Models Develop cost modeling techniques that automatically distribute the effects of a change in one cost parameter across all affected cost models, and automatically perform dynamic updates against enterprise data sources to ensure currency of cost data. Include the capability to alert all affected business functions when costs change beyond defined thresholds. (M-L) Automated BOE Documentation Provide the capability for cost models to automatically document the basis of cost at the material, part, subsystem, and system levels. Include the ability to automatically update the bill of material and capture engineering estimates as designs are created, retrieve and apply cost history for similar items, pull in subcontractor/vendor quotes, apply overhead rates and other factors, and query manual inputs that conflict with captured data. (M) Multi-Level Cost Modeling Develop tools to model costs at different levels and from different perspectives (e.g., activity-based versus product-based) and automatically present the user-requested view. Include the capability to click down to the lowest level of the model. (M-L) Goal 2: Enterprise Financial Simulation Environment Provide the capability for cost modeling applications to obtain and evaluate current financial status information and requirements, and to accurately predict effects of contemplated actions or events on capital levels, funds flow, profitability, ROS/ROI, rates and factors, and other financial factors. (L) Accounting Integration Model Develop a comprehensive, generic accounting data model to which an individual enterprises cost structure can be automatically mapped, enabling rapid correlation of cost elements and associated data among all members in a supply chain. (M) Distributed Financial Engineering Tool Suite Develop financial engineering and analysis tools to enable integrated modeling of all finance functions (estimating, accounting, asset management, cash flow management, etc.) throughout the enterprise. (M-L)
Resource Management
3-22
Extended Enterprise Financial Data Interchange Develop methods and tools to integrate and continuously update financial data across the extended enterprise to provide a unified view of financial health, status, and issues. (M) 3.3.2 VISION & GOALS FOR OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT Future operations functions will be directed by an integrated enterprise model that provides full visibility, accurate prediction, and real-time control of scheduling, resource allocation, performance monitoring, maintenance, and day-to-day problem-solving. In the future, operations teams will meet their business objectives using model-based planning and control systems that provide real-time, in-depth (appropriately filtered) access to all factory/plant/activity status, performance, capability, and utilization information. The operations model will monitor real-time feedback from ubiquitous sensors, continuously comparing actual to predicted and required performance to ensure that all activities conform to their requirements and are continuously tuned for best results. Supervisors and managers at different levels (unit process, production line, shop floor, plant/factory, etc.) will be able to quickly detect and assess performance issues and direct the right resources to correct problems, respond to challenges, and optimize the performance of their operations (Figure 3.3.2-1). The model-based operations management system will also enable them to predict, with high degrees of confidence, the impacts of planned or potential changes. This will enable managers to quickly evaluate different options for improving performance, such as rearranging shifts and workflows, adding or changing out equipment and tools, and adjusting work-in-process inventory levels. They will be able to plug in different resource options into the operations simulation and run multiple simultaneous scenarios to determine the best cost/performance solution. The system will automatically generate implementation plans that itemize and schedule the tasks to be done to accomplish the change, including procurement, installation, checkout, worker training, and revision of workflows and maintenance plans. Routine fluctuations in process performance will be automatically corrected by the operations model based on defined process control rules. Although humans will always be in the loop for safety-critical and other sensitive processes, model-based operations systems will enable fast, accurate assessment of corrective action options while providing automated oversight to prevent, or minimize the impact of, process upsets. The operations model will implement an orderly shutdown when a process upset results from an accident, failure, natural disaster, or other cause, and automatically implement emergency response plans. The model will also define options for degraded-mode operations. Model-based operations management capabilities will initially be implemented to control activities at the shop floor level, including both highly automated unit operations (e.g., batch chemical processing) and
Figure 3.3.2-1. Model-based operations management will enable precise control of all factory systems, interfacing with equipment-level automation to continuously tune performance.
Resource Management
3-23
those combining automated and manual processes (e.g., product assembly). This capability will then be extended to more complex operations including multi-site manufacturing across supply chains. Interdependent operations functions that today are managed as separate processes, such as product distribution and product support, will be fully integrated into the enterprise operations model. This will ensure that every part of the enterprise that is affected by a change or a problem is able to respond quickly and correctly to the event. Since what constitutes operations varies widely in different sectors and from company to company, model-based technologies, applications, and systems for operations management will be flexible as well as modular. Model-based planning and control systems for process systems and equipment will have robust interfaces that enable self-integration with upstream (lower-level) and downstream (higher-level) processes. This will support the emergence of flexible, adaptive operations systems able to reconfigure themselves to meet changing requirements such as variation in production rates and switchover to new products or new models (Figure 3.3.2-2). Maintenance activities will continue to be one of the more costly components of facility operations, but model-based monitoring and maintenance will greatly reduce these costs while improving uptime and ensuring quality Figure 3.3.2-2. Plug-and-play process and equipment performance of complex operations. Facility models will enable manufacturers to quickly build highoperations models will integrate component fidelity operations models to support real-time control as life-cycle models for individual units of well as planning for the future. equipment, with many of these models provided by equipment vendors and the remainder developed in-house using standard modeling tools and templates. This will enable creation of a model-based maintenance program covering all facility requirements, including inspection, routine servicing, and parts replacement at regular intervals based on process throughput and demand factors. The facility operations model will continuously track performance versus plan, factoring in unscheduled maintenance and repair calls and supporting analysis to determine if maintenance intervals should be changed for any item of equipment. In the broader context of operations, next-generation modeling and simulation tools will enable designers to rapidly explore options for configuring and integrating product and process elements so that the elements most likely to fail, or requiring the most maintenance attention, can be quickly and easily (and safely) serviced on site using a minimum of special tools. Designers will also use simulations to determine the life-cycle support impacts of product and process design changes, linking to the supply chain management system to rapidly get cost/schedule/technical impact assessments from suppliers and vendors. The operations model will also provide the basis for all work instructions related to operations support. Maintainers and service technicians will be able to call up process and equipment models on their desktop or heads-up display, quickly click down to the area of interest, and bring up an interactive simulation and instructions for servicing the affected equipment. Analytical tools will enable service staff to troubleshoot complex problems and evaluate the feasibility of different solution approaches. Support staff anywhere in the world will also be able to collaborate directly with on-site staff, using the model to point out problems and rapidly work through solution options. This will enable the operations support team to
Resource Management
3-24
quickly plan, evaluate, select, and implement corrective action plans including a mix of options recall, repair in place, updating of usage or maintenance/repair instructions, etc. Goals & Requirements for Operations Management Goal 1: Operations Element Modeling Provide the capability to create accurate models and simulations of manufacturing operations for an entire facility, and to integrate and modify constituent models to mirror the real-world facility and its assets and processes. (M) Operations Modeling Framework Establish standard conventions for creating high-fidelity models and simulations of manufacturing operations, including equipment, tools, fixtures, unit processes, physical facility attributes (structure, utilities, etc.), material flows and transport systems, work flows, monitoring and control functions, safety systems, and other attributes of interest. (M) Generic Integratable Process Models Develop generic models for different kinds of processes and facilities associated with manufacturing operations in different business sectors. Include interface definitions and hooks that enable integration of equipment models, unit process models, and facility models into higher-level operations models with accurate linking of inputs and outputs between and among each element of the system. (M) Goal 2: Real-Time Factory Modeling Provide the capability to develop supply-chain-wide factory models that provide real-time representations, run large portions of factory operations, and are able to optimize operations under multiple constraints. (L) Emergent Workflow Modeling Develop the capability to automatically re-optimize workflow models in response to any changing factors impacting operational requirements or constraints. (M-L) Performance Barrier Modeling Develop modeling and simulation applications to identify and quantify limitations to operational performance. Include the capability to examine equipment issues (capability, throughput, capacity), staffing and skills issues, regulatory issues (e.g., safety and environmental requirements), and material availability issues (raw materials, supplied components, handling capability, etc.); and the ability to interface with the enterprise design function to examine and implement product and process design changes to improve operational performance. (M-L) Extended Factory Modeling Develop methods, tools, and techniques for modeling extended factory operations across multiple sites and linking to current resource status information (i.e., utilization and capacity from all sites. (L) Goal 3: Model-Based Operations Control Provide the capability to integrate proprietary control models for equipment and unit processes to enable model-based control at the shop floor and factory levels. (L) Process Control Linkage Develop methods for linking individual equipment and process performance monitoring and control functions to facility operations models to support model-based control of operations performance. Include the capability to monitor external factors that affect operational performance, such as supplier production schedules. (M) Performance Reporting Modules Develop generic reporting modules that can be plugged into operations models to deliver defined performance status information sets for different types of processes and equipment. Include the capability to respond to specific queries and calculate the impacts of simulated changes in operating parameters. (M) Equipment & Material Status Develop equipment/material status systems that interface with other enterprise planning and management systems to continuously update operations models with
Resource Management
3-25
equipment and material resource availability and utilization information. Include the ability to predict the impact of running equipment at 100% capacity/utilization for sustained periods. (M-L) Model-Based Performance Management Develop model-based tools and methods to monitor and evaluate the performance of factory operations including resource staging and application, material and work-in-process flows, and off-line activities. Include the ability to simulate problems and changes in selected functions to support troubleshooting, tradeoffs and optimization, and planning to meet new requirements. (L) Goal 4: Integrated Maintenance Modeling Provide the capability to apply real-time feedback from the production floor to plan and manage all operations maintenance activities using an integrated model-based operations management system. (L) Standard Maintenance Models Develop standards for creating and managing model-based maintenance information for manufacturing equipment and operational processes, with the capability to integrate vendor-provided maintenance models into the enterprises operations management system. (S) Model-Based Maintenance Frameworks Develop frameworks for model-based operations management systems able to integrate predictive and reactive maintenance models for equipment and unit processes. Provide the capability to create maintenance models for operational elements that lack vendor-provided models, and to automatically capture actual performance history to refine the models over time. (M) Model Linkages to Maintenance Management Systems Develop standards for linking product and process models to maintenance/repair management systems to support forecasting, prioritization, and conduct of maintenance work, resupply/reorder, and similar functions. Include the capability for maintainers to remotely access technical data, assembly models, and instructional media as well as OEM support services. (M-L) Autonomous Model-Based Maintenance Develop predictive modeling and diagnostic technologies to support the ability of operations management systems to autonomously plan and implement all required preventive and reactive maintenance/repair actions. (L) 3.3.3 VISION & GOALS FOR SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT Widespread use of model-based processes at every level of the supply chain, coupled with model-based technical and business management tools, will enable manufacturers of all sizes to efficiently manage the intricacies of designing, producing, supplying, and supporting products in a highly dynamic and competitive global marketplace. Model-based supply chain management is arguably the most important capability that manufacturers will need to survive and thrive in the future business environment. Development and proliferation of modelbased technical and business processes will drive the evolution of highly agile supply chains that use model-based techniques to quickly recognize and respond to opportunities and problems. Model-based connectivity will dissolve many of todays walls between prime manufacturers and their suppliers. Smaller manufacturers will serve as virtual specialty departments simultaneously for multiple primes, distinguished from in-house departments only by their company nameplates and reporting chains. Automated market surveillance systems will monitor demand and potential, continuously canvassing online sources of information on market forces and trends (both economic and competitive) to accurately forecast demand profiles for current and future product. This will give product managers and facility managers at every level of the supply chain clear visibility of upcoming needs as well as provide early warning of disruptive events that impact business requirements.
Resource Management
3-26
Model-based product and process definition will enable seamless integration of supply chain operations. Prime manufacturers business planning systems will interface to comprehensive capability models maintained by potential suppliers. These models will be virtual mirrors of a suppliers products and production capability, complete with high-definition models of equipment and processes and including both performance and capacity information. This will allow designers and procurement teams to quickly evaluate the ability of a supplier to support prime requirements, either singly or in combination with other suppliers. The system will also enable engineers, planners, and managers at all levels of the supply chain to collaborate in virtual environments where designs and approaches are optimized for the best balance of performance, reliability, cost, schedule, and other factors. All product design data and supporting information will reside in secure repositories readily accessible via the owners PDM system interfaces by authorized users anywhere in the world. This will eliminate the time, cost, and complexity of maintaining and reconciling multiple versions of the same data at different stages of the supply chain, and ensure that every members engineering, planning, and management tools are always operating off the same information. The ability of future model-based CAD, PDM, and planning and reporting systems to transparently exchange information between different brands of application will eliminate the cost and time of transferring or recreating design definitions shared among different members of the supply chain. For suppliers, this will eliminate the need to operate and support multiple CAD/PDM and analytical tools. For primes and suppliers, this will eliminate a major source of design errors and reduce the time and cost of moving new products and processes from design to production. Operation of suppliers and primes in an integrated PDM environment is essential to realizing the vision of true science-based manufacturing. Suppliers will no longer simply provide materials, parts, or subassemblies for the prime to incorporate into their products; they will also provide the complete design definition, complete with properties, characteristics, and supporting analytical data. This digital knowledge will be seamlessly integrated into the primes product and process models, providing a complete and total definition of the product or process and its underlying science. This will enable engineers to create models and simulations that accurately reflect not merely approximate the true properties of the design to its lowest level. Goals & Requirements for Supply Chain Management Goal 1: Extended Enterprise Interoperability Provide standards and methods enabling seamless interconnection of model-based processes among supply chain members. (M-L) Common Supply Chain Language Define and develop a standardized language and method of sharing model-based data, methods, and procedures across and between each member of a supply chain. (M) Shared, Secure Models Develop information management methods enabling all members of the supply chain to input to, access, and manipulate shared models in accordance with appropriate permissions, with assured data security. Include the capability to provide a continuous audit trail of all actions and to automatically communicate changes to affected partners and personnel. (M) Extended Business Infrastructure Management Develop modeling tools and techniques for identifying, monitoring, and responding to internal and external forces acting on the supply chain. Include the capability to predict the different impacts of an event on each member of the supply chain. (M-L) Multi-Enterprise Estimating & Planning Develop models and associated tools that support multi-enterprise estimating and planning for joint projects, with appropriate protection of the sensitive data of each team member. (M)
Resource Management
3-27
Goal 2: Model-Based Teaming Provide a modeling framework and tools for rapidly creating new supply chain teams to exploit business opportunities. (M) Prequalification Model Framework Develop a standard, web-based supplier qualification model template appropriate for any manufacturing industry type. Include data elements for process capabilities, capacity, current utilization and commitments, certifications, past performance, financial assets, and cost history. (S) Industry-Specific Extensions Extend the standard supplier qualification model to support the unique requirements of specific industries, including definition of ranges of performance requirements for factors such as tolerances, purity, turnaround time, quantity, regulatory/standards compliance, and similar criteria. (S) Extended Enterprise Modeling Develop methods for modeling extended enterprises to pursue and execute defined business opportunities, including evaluation of team member contributions, value added, and capabilities to support supplier selection and teaming/partnering decisions. (M) Goal 3: Model-Based Extended Enterprise Management Provide frameworks and standards that enable integration of model-based technical and business systems to the lowest level of the supply chain. (L) Enterprise Multi-Model Integration Develop a methodology to integrate different companies enterprise models within the framework of an extended enterprise architecture, providing connectivity of interdependent operations including requirements management, product and process design, configuration management, manufacturing planning, cost estimating, scheduling, and performance management. (M) Extended Factory Modeling Develop methods, tools, and techniques for creating accurate models and simulations of the extended enterprises factory and for linking to current resource status information from different companies and sites. Include the capability to automatically query status, locate extra capacity, identify and analyze constraints, and forecast requirements throughout the extended enterprise. (L) Integrated Enterprise Logistics & Life-Cycle Support Modeling Develop tools to model logistics requirements across the supply chain and invoke required actions to ensure that materials, equipment, and human resources are delivered to point of need to facilitate product tracking, supply, support, maintenance, repair, and return for reprocessing and recycle/reuse. Include analytical capabilities for problem problem-solving, tradeoff analysis, and predicting the impacts of decisions (including future technology insertions) at different points in the product life cycle. (L) Inverse/Reverse Manufacturing Modeling Tools Develop modeling and simulation tools to aid in reverse engineering of products or components no longer supported by the original supplier (or for which the original supplier no longer exists), to support product life extension programs and help manage end-of-life concerns such as reprocessing, reuse, recycling, and disposal. (M) 3.3.4 VISION & GOALS FOR MARKETING, SALES, & DISTRIBUTION Model-based tools integrated across all elements of the enterprise will be used to plan, manage, and execute marketing, sales, and distribution functions with scientific precision, enhancing customer responsiveness, mitigating risk, and maximizing profitability and return on investment. Marketing & Sales Modeling and simulation are key to the future enterprises ability to conceive and explore product opportunities, generate demand, and fulfill customer needs. Model-based tools will enable product line manag-
Resource Management
3-28
ers and designers to forecast the likely impacts of different business options, and facilitating a proactive response to events and trends in the marketplace. Future market modeling tools will extend current capabilities using technologies such as ontology-based knowledge mining to provide deeper insights into available data, and provide different users with the specific data views they need through a single desktop or handheld interface. These tools will marry econometrics modeling with the growing body of contextual research on branding and its relationship to marketing effectiveness. Marketing analysis systems will apply and refine purchasing behavior models segmented by demographic and econometric factors, providing an ever-deepening understanding of the enterprises customer base. Immersive modeling and simulation capabilities with intuitive, natural-language interfaces will increasingly enable companies to bring customers into the loop to better understand their needs, wants, and preferences, exploring and refining product concepts in the virtual realm before committing resources to production. These systems will be applied to enhance existing products and explore ideas for new and future products, providing the capability to trade off performance and features versus costs and other factors to best meet customer needs and wants with a single product or with variants that target different niches. Future marketing management systems will monitor news feeds and corporate intelligence sources for local, regional, and global events and trends that impact the enterprise, its customers, its suppliers, or its products. These systems will distill the resulting data into meaningful knowledge to guide research, product development, manufacturing, marketing, sales, and support. They will provide early warning of emerging opportunities and competitive threats, and enable the enterprise to devise and evaluate the effectiveness of different response options. Ubiquitous electronic connectivity to points of sale, distribution nodes, and news sources, exploited with intelligent data mining tools, will enable companies to accurately model demand for products already on the shelf or in the production pipeline, calculate saturation levels, and identify windows of opportunity for customer incentives that maximize payback. The sales environment of the future will rely strongly on science-based modeling coupled to real-time sales performance data to identify windows of opportunity, define sales force requirements (skills as well as manpower), set and manage sales targets, continuously tune incentives to meet those targets with maximum profit margins, and ensure ability to meet demand. Sales managers at local, regional, and enterprise levels will use modeling and analysis tools to track daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly performance, analyze trends, and explore the potential of different strategies to boost performance. The marketing function will interface with the engineering and manufacturing functions throughout the product development cycle, extracting the information it needs to support interactions with customers. The ability to simulate the functionality and features of different design options will be a powerful tool for positioning products with discriminating features that resonate with the customer. Modeling and simulation capabilities at the point of sale will be powerful tools for engaging customers, allowing them to explore product features and options and providing a non-confrontational milieu for triggering the purchase decision (Figure 3.3.4-1). Customers for many kinds of products will use the
18
Figure 3.3.4-1. Immersive interface technologies will enable customers as well as engineers to manipulate models with their hands instead of a keyboard. 18
Haptic Workbench photo 2003 Scientific Computing and Imaging Institute at the University of Utah (www.sci.utah.edu). Haptic interface device photos 2004 Force Dimension, Lausanne, Switzerland. (www.forcedimension.com)
Resource Management
3-29
model-based sales interface to interact directly with the factory, customizing exactly the product they want based on what can be produced rather than being limited to only what is in inventory or the production pipeline. Distribution Future model-based distribution management systems will deliver products to point of sale and point of use through the most efficient means, forecasting and responding proactively to every fluctuation in geographic demand. The ability to accurately model the ebb and flow of demand based on seasonal patterns, advertising and marketing outlays, and other factors that influence purchasing behaviors will enable manufacturers to apply lean strategies, closely matching production levels to drawdown rates. This will enable enterprises to drastically reduce inventory carrying costs while preserving the ability to quickly surge to meet upswings in demand. The cost of these tools will be driven down to the point that even small manufacturers will find the capability investments clearly advantageous to their bottom line. Advanced modeling and simulation capabilities will enable companies of all sizes to analyze different distribution approaches for new or current products, optimizing for location, stock levels, choice of carriers, etc. and providing the ability to quickly respond to changes in the distribution environment such as fluctuations in carrier capacity, changing fuel prices, and congestion of local and regional transportation routes. These systems will also model complex financial factors including duties, taxes, tariffs and other charges to optimize the design of international distribution strategies. Increasingly widespread use of radio-frequency ID tags and similar sensors, coupled to cellular and satellite communications networks, will provide managers with real-time visibility of assets anywhere in the distribution network, moving beyond present common-carrier tracking to enable immediate, precise location of any shipment anywhere in the delivery channel. Distribution management systems will collect this information continuously, make it available to customer support systems, and compare actual to predicted results to flag performance issues, explore solutions, and update the enterprises distribution process model. Goals & Requirements for Marketing, Sales, & Distribution Goal 1: Market Assessment & Planning Toolset Provide modeling tools that support rapid creation and exploitation of market opportunities based on enterprise capabilities and a clear understanding of customer needs and wants, competitive factors, and other market forces. (L) Customer Requirements Analysis Develop modeling and simulation tools that provide a complete capability for exploring and capturing customer needs and wants both expressed and inferred based on past experience, direct interactions, and market trends. Include the capability to trade off the needs of multiple customers with diverse and conflicting requirements. (M) Opportunity Analysis Develop model-based methods to evaluate business opportunities based on enterprise core competencies and trends in customer buying patterns, technology evolution, and marketplace conditions. (M) Niche Market Customization Develop capabilities for modeling and rapidly adapting product development, positioning, and production strategies to align with local, regional, and global economic/cultural trends and customer values. Include the capability to model the effectiveness of products tailored for local and regional niche markets. (M) Market Entry Modeling Develop generic, tailorable models to support evaluation of opportunities to enter new product markets. Include capabilities to analyze sales and ROI potential as a function of capital investment level and timing; to model the impacts of new ventures on existing products, facilities, and enterprise resources; and to evaluate the costs and benefits of targeting specific niches (e.g., high-end vs. low-end) in the new market. (M)
Resource Management
3-30
Market Tracking Methods Develop market modeling systems that autonomously monitor changes in marketplace trends and support analysis to refine product development, production, marketing, and sales strategies. (L) Qualitative Market Forecasting Tools Develop modeling and simulation tools that use fuzzy logic, neural nets, and similar techniques to forecast market requirements based on non-quantitative factors. (L) Market-Based Restructuring Integrate marketing analysis tools with enterprise resource planning tools to support evaluation of business opportunities that require significant changes in enterprise core competencies and technical/business capabilities. (M) Goal 2: Model-Based Sales Management Provide fully integrated modeling capabilities for planning and managing sales operations. (M) Sales Force Modeling Develop applications for modeling sales force requirements, including demographics, skills, training, and staffing levels by region and location, to support introduction of new products and services and better manage sales staffing levels to respond to surges and lags in customer demand. (S) Responsive Sales Performance Modeling Develop applications that enable regional and local sales managers to quickly analyze options (e.g., promotions, buyer and sales force incentives, customer outreach) for boosting sales to meet or exceed targets. Include the capability to incorporate competitor attributes. (M) Build-to-Order Product Fulfillment Develop point-of-sale modeling tools that allow a customer to interactively design a unique product from a range of options based on enterprise capability and transmit the order directly to manufacturing for fulfillment. (M) Integrated Product/Service Modeling Develop point-of-sale modeling applications that enable rapid creation of customized product/service offerings that facilitate selling customers not just a onetime product, but a lifelong service. (M) Goal 3: Real-Time, Responsive Distribution Management Provide the capability to calculate optimal product allocation to points of sale/use and staging nodes based on current need, rapidly determine the most efficient means of distribution for new shipments, and interface with product tracking systems to direct assets to points of need anywhere in the distribution network. (M-L) Design for Distribution Develop modeling capabilities to optimize product designs for efficient distribution via different transport modes, including long-range bulk shipment as well as local delivery to point of sale. Include the capability to model approaches for final assembly at point of sale/use and to model methods for optimization of performance and cost-effectiveness in protecting, storing, and transporting the product from origin to destination. (M) Integrated Distribution Modeling Develop modeling and simulation applications that enable planning and management of distribution requirements based on predicted and actual demand and distribution network capabilities. Include the capability to automatically determine best delivery methods and routes based on time, cost, and capacity factors; to analyze stock drawdown patterns to redirect product to demand points; and to identify opportunities to reengineer distribution channels to enhance performance and profitability. (M) Model-Based Product Tracking Develop product tracking systems that enable continuous or ondemand location of products in the distribution network, with the capability to locate any asset to precise GPS coordinates and automatically direct or redirect assets while updating any resulting changes in the product distribution model. (S)
Resource Management
3-31
Pull-Based Distribution Develop modeling capabilities that enable the distribution system to automatically respond to changes in demand by initiating shipments from inventory and reporting drawdowns to the factory production planning system. (L) Special Materials Management Develop applications to support modeling and planning for distribution and tracking of radiological materials, hazardous chemicals, and other high-value/highsensitivity products requiring special handling for safety, environmental, or security reasons. Include the ability for the distribution model to interface with regulatory requirements databases, automatically detect any changes that affect the enterprises distribution strategies and mechanisms, and support analysis to develop necessary changes (M) 3.3.5 VISION & GOALS FOR WORKFORCE MANAGEMENT Job requirements modeling, human capability modeling, and model-based training will enable human resource functions to proactively plan for near-term as well as long-term needs, ensuring readiness of the enterprise workforce to respond to changing requirements. Future manufacturing enterprises will apply modeling and simulation technologies to maintain a clear understanding of current and future skill and manpower requirements and couple these needs directly to business planning and operations systems to ensure readiness of the human resource pipeline to meet changing needs. Job performance and human capability modeling will enable human resource functions to clearly quantify the value of investments in education, skills, performance, and compensation for every job position; tune job structures to respond to changing business realities; and define career paths that better prepare individuals to benefit the company as well as realize personal growth. The ability to model the impacts of changes in compensation and benefits against industry norms will greatly improve control of The Changing Workforce retention rates, preserving the ability to compete costAs we move deeper into the Information Age, many effectively in the enterprises market sectors. These observers believe that its impact on the manufaccapabilities will also enable the enterprise to clearly turing workforce will be as great as that of the Industrial Revolution. understand and plan for the changes required to move into new areas of opportunity. Workers now must be increasingly computer literWorkforce modeling tools will enable managers to quickly define requirements for increased and decreased staffing, and trade off options for new hires versus subcontract labor versus reallocation of existing staff to realize the most cost-effective solutions that meet the talent need. These tools will also enable managers to understand and plan for new requirements and priorities of the business environment in areas such as safety and environmental compliance, ethics, diversity, and technical/business certifications. Manpower planning tools tied to product, process, and resource modeling tools will enable program managers to accurately forecast the staffing levels, skill mix, ramp-up, and learning curve for new production programs, and automatically feed these requirements to the human resource system for allocation. These tools will also tie into the financial systems of the enterprise to support automated cost estimating, eliminating much of the time and uncertainty associated with current labor costing practices.
ate, and need to understand and master a much wider array of technologies than in the past. The term knowledge worker applies to more and more jobs as workers need to better understand information systems, decision support tools, knowledge bases, digital modeling and simulation, and computer-controlled equipment as part of their basic functions. At the same time, workers at all levels are increasingly being called on to function as members of collaborative teams, and thus need skills in interpersonal relations and other non-technical topics that enable them to function effectively in the manufacturing cultures of the 21st century. Manufacturing line workers are no longer task repeaters simply making product, but serve as process facilitators who apply experience and knowledge to meet enterprise goals. As the 1950s paradigm of lifetime employment continues to dissolve as companies downsize their workforces to compete, the ability to capture knowledge and experience in reusable forms is critical to long-term survival. Integration of knowledge management functions into model-based processes is thus key to future success.
Resource Management
3-32
Model-based technologies will enable workers to train more cost-effectively and receive training with far greater fidelity than currently possible. Training functions embedded into enterprise process systems will enable users to train on demand to refresh current skills and acquire new ones. In many cases these systems will monitor worker performance, enabling real-time identification of skill gaps for remediation. Training functions will be fully integrated with the enterprises knowledge management systems, continuously monitoring the underlying knowledge bases for changes that affect training content. Training systems will link directly to product and process definitions maintained by engineering and operations functions, enabling real-time update of configuration data used in training media. This will drastically reduce the cost of maintaining training content and eliminate much of the lag time between completion of product development and completion of training development. This capability will also enable product and process designers to better understand the impacts of design choices on training functions. Model-based training and qualification functions19 will be built into operations management systems. Every node in the operations model will provide links to related training content, and immersive simulation capabilities will enable personnel to train in 3-D virtual environments to acquire proficiency in individual processes and items of equipment. Most complex items of manufacturing equipment will come from the vendor with built-in and/or uploadable training functionality, supporting a mix of virtual and hands-on instruction as well constructive (instructor in the loop) training. Interfaces between the operations management system and the human resources system will enable fully automated administration of training requirements, ensuring that personnel remain current with required certifications. Goals & Requirements for Workforce Management Goal 1: Workforce Asset Modeling Provide modeling tools that enable managers to assess the benefits of human resource development investments and help enterprises develop and maintain the proper talent and manpower resource mix to support changing business requirements. (M) Human Attribute Representation Develop standards for representing personnel information, skills, education, training, certifications and other human resource traits in models and simulations. Include the capability to link to enterprise knowledge bases to provide continuous insight into human resource capabilities. (M) Unified Skills Standards Develop and promulgate a standard definition, characterization, and metrics that support modeling of all types and levels of skills in all manufacturing sectors. (S) Manpower Planning Models Develop modeling tools that enable managers to accurately define manpower requirements to support new programs, products, or business initiatives. Include the capability to map requirements against available internal and external resources, identify gaps, and determine the optimum method to fill those gaps; and the capability to link to financial systems to support cost estimating processes. (M) Skills Requirements Definition Develop analytical tools to help determine the type and mix of worker skills needed to establish new product lines or operations; new engineering, manufacturing, and support processes; or new business relationships. Include the capability to perform comparative analysis with similar past requirements. (M) Human Resource Investment Modeling Develop tools to model the impacts on enterprise performance and capabilities of investments in human resources, including hiring, training, education, certification, and incentive programs (i.e., compensation, benefits, and reward mechanisms). Include the capability to analyze labor outsourcing options and quantify the near-term and long-term impacts of outsourcing in terms of cost and competitive positioning. (M)
19
Goals and requirements for model-based training are addressed in Sections 3.3.5 and 3.3.7.
Resource Management
3-33
Attrition & Retention Modeling Develop tools to model the impacts of factors such as aging of the workforce, compensation/benefits positioning, and corporate culture on the ability of the enterprise to recruit and retain the right mix of skills and experience to meet current and future business needs. (M) Goal 2: Model-Based Workforce Training Provide modeling and simulation tools that support training for different classes of products and processes, adapt for all levels of user, and support business environments characterized by continuous change. (L) Model-Based Training Requirements Definition Define types and levels of training needs for different classes of products (military and consumer, electronic and mechanical, etc.) and different types of engineering and manufacturing processes. Include requirements for both formal and adhoc/on-demand training. (S) Model-Based Embedded Training Develop embedded training concepts and supporting modeling and simulation tools in collaboration with industry/government users, academia, and training technology vendors. Include the capability for users to receive training on demand and for process systems to monitor individual performance issues and identify skill gaps for remediation in-process or off-line. (M-L) Real-Time Linkage to Product/Process Models Develop methods and protocols to link product and process data and representations contained in training media directly to the configurationcontrolled product and process baselines. (M) Universal Training Modules Develop a suite of standard, computer-based training modules, spanning the complete spectrum of manufacturing functions, that can be plugged together to provide job-specific training and instruction to any worker in any industry. Include the capability for embedded advisory systems to call up and integrate sets of training modules and automatically tailor the content and depth of instruction in response to user feedback. (L) 3.3.6 VISION & GOALS FOR CAPITAL ASSET & INVENTORY MANAGEMENT Modeling and simulation tools will enable future enterprises to manage their capital assets and inventories with extreme precision and efficiency, ensuring that whatever is needed will be where its needed, on time. This will drastically reduce the need for maintaining excess capacity and inventory to meet changing business requirements. The processes and operations of future enterprises will be powered by model-based business systems that provide continuous, precise visibility of capital asset and inventory requirements for manufacturers of all sizes. Intelligent resource management models linked to ERP/ERM systems will monitor the enterprises marketing, sales, and distribution systems and external information sources to accurately predict nearterm and long-term variations in product demand by region and locality, automatically recalculating requirements and redirecting inventory at the enterprise level and at operating sites. The system will enable product managers and operations managers to understand, with a high degree of confidence, what requirements are coming the next day, week, month, and year. It will enable them to quickly evaluate the pros, cons, and deeper implications of all options for responding to those requirements. More importantly, the system will enable them to re-plan quickly as requirements change and as new opportunities and challenges arise. Ubiquitous use of bar coding, radio-frequency tags, and other tracking technologies will enable every product to be tracked from origin to point of sale, providing the real-time information that model-based inventory management systems need to monitor demand, adjust manufacturing throughput, and direct distribution networks to ensure the right makes, models, and styles of product reach customers on time in every market.
Resource Management
3-34
The system will monitor all indicators that directly and indirectly influence demand local and regional economic trends, weather, new product introductions by competitors, and the like and enable enterprise managers to quickly identify issues, evaluate options, and determine the best response. Model-based planning systems will also enable companies to more efficiently manage their capital assets. Life-cycle models supplied with every item of capital equipment, or developed in-house for existing equipment, will enable facility planners to understand the capability and capacity limits of their factory assets, and make the best decisions when trading off options to meet changing requirements. The models will help managers determine the right kind of equipment to acquire, and project when the item will need to be upgraded or replaced to keep pace with production needs. Real-time monitoring of equipment performance will feed data to factory health models, enabling continuous visibility of equipment life and keeping managers apprised of when assets will need to be replaced. These capabilities will reduce outlays of capital (and associated financing costs) by providing more options to solve capability and capacity needs through leasing and subcontracting, as well as by enabling managers to optimize capital facilitization strategies for the highest return on investment. Model-based facility planning advisors will also interface with the enterprises information systems to monitor the competitive and regulatory environment, providing clear visibility of issues that impact capital equipment and facility decisions. Goals & Requirements for Capital Asset & Inventory Management Goal 1: Dynamic Asset Modeling Provide asset management systems that integrate high-fidelity models to manage capital equipment and facilities across their useful life and support evaluation of appropriate responses for addition, modification, replacement, and retirement of equipment and facilities. (L) Asset Definition Modeling Standards Develop standards for creation of object and life-cycle models for different types and classes of capital equipment and facilities, which support integration into business and facility planning models. Provide the capability to include key factors such as capacity (throughput, sizing, tolerances, etc.), life expectancy and life-limiting factors, and growth capability to support higher performance levels, expanded functionality, or changeover to support new requirements. (S) Automated Asset Monitoring & Condition Prediction Develop techniques for predicting the life expectancy of capital assets based on feedback from sensing systems that monitor wear, frequency of maintenance/repair, and changes in performance over time. Include the capability to simulate the effects of stressing conditions (e.g., extended operation at limits of capacity) to support contingency planning. (M-L) Asset Alternative Modeling Develop methods to integrate asset information and knowledge across the enterprise, including its suppliers and partners, to enable rapid evaluation of solution options for fulfilling a capital asset requirement. Include the capability to define the margins of capability and financial impacts for each option for a given time span, including factors such as availability of capital funds, return on capital, funds flow, and ability to meet surges in demand. (L) Regulatory Impact Modeling Develop techniques for modeling the impact of changes in regulatory requirements on capital equipment and facilities. Include the capability to automatically monitor information sources for issues relative to process and facility emissions (air and water discharges, noise), safety standards, and similar factors that potentially dictate modification, replacement, or shutdown of capital assets. (L)
Resource Management
3-35
Goal 2: Intelligent Inventory Modeling Provide modeling tools that monitor sources of inventory requirements change and aid users in defining and implementing optimal responses to change. (L) Adaptive Inventory Modeling Applications Develop generic inventory modeling applications that can be readily adapted to specific industry sectors and different supply chain roles (i.e., OEM, major subcontractor, supplier). Include the ability to integrate products having widely varying inventory characteristics, easily add new products to the model, and interface with distribution planning and management systems. (M) Inventory Modeling Information Interface Develop interface solutions enabling inventory management systems to acquire and continuously update all information that impacts inventory requirements, including direct factors such as orders, sales, and market trends, and indirect factors such as economic forecasts, weather, and governmental actions (e.g., changes in regulations). (M) Capacity Management System Interface Develop methods for interfacing inventory modeling tools with factory management systems to enable calculation of factory impacts resulting from shifting production demands. Include the capability to interface with supply management systems to ensure just-in-time provision of raw materials, components, labor, and other assets required to fulfill product demand. (L) Automated Demand Prediction Develop modeling tools able to evaluate variables that impact product demand over time, and accurately forecast inventory requirements for all makes, models, and styles of product. Include the capability to extrapolate demand trends for new product introductions based on initial orders and sales, and the ability to model the demand impacts of disruptive events such as strikes, natural disasters, political upheaval, or introduction of competing products. (L) 3.3.7 VISION & GOALS FOR KNOWLEDGE/INFORMATION MANAGEMENT Model-based systems will revolutionize manufacturing enterprise productivity and effectiveness by drawing on totally interconnected information resources to ensure the right knowledge is available as needed to the right people and processes. Model-based corporate information systems linked to live data sources and automatically filtering information feeds for significance will be the ultimate power tools for the future manufacturing enterprise. Companies will operate from an ever-growing knowledge base that contains or automatically searches out all information needed by any of its functions, from concept definition to engineering, production, and life-cycle support (Figure 3.3.7-1). All of these functions will rely on science-based modeling and simulation tools not only to develop optimum solutions to their requirements, but also to continuously tune their processes for optimal performance based on all information and knowledge available to the enterprise. The value of model-based processes will depend in part on the ability to develop models and simulations that are equipped with the accurate, complete information essential to obtain valid results, and on the ability of models and simulations to recognize when supplied information is inadequate to calculate a result with the necessary degree of confidence. The model-based systems of the future will possess sufficient intelligence to understand what inputs they require to fulfill their functions, and will interact with the enterprises information resources to acquire the data they need to perform their functions, with humans in the loop to interpret results and provide the necessary checks and balances. Current barriers posed by capture of data in proprietary formats will dissolve as market demands force application vendors to support open standards, and as the vendors expand their market share by supporting application integration across different domains (e.g., CAD with PDM, PDM with ERM/ERP, and
Resource Management
3-36
Figure 3.3.7-1. Model-based integration provides an elegant solution to information management challenges, going beyond current middleware and message broker technology to enable true plug-and-play interfacing of enterprise processes and systems.
ERM/ERP with financial systems). The current migration of corporate information services toward client/server architectures where thin client systems host all applications and data on servers (as opposed to desktops) will make all enterprise knowledge and data readily available to the individuals, the processes, and the supporting modeling and simulation systems needing it. This will also drastically reduce redundant data entry and the occurrence of multiple conflicting versions of the same information. The systems that power the enterprises modelbased processes will directly access external knowledge repositories shared across all of industry or within an industry sector or a supply chain relationship (Figure 3.3.7-2). Domainspecific repositories will Figure 3.3.7-2. Future manufacturing enterprises will rely on a transparently evolve over time into sharable reservoir of data and knowledge to integrate processes, operations, multi-domain repositofacilities, and partnering relationships. ries with many types of information available to all users and directly accessible by model-based tools. Standards organizations will ensure that shared tools, models, and information resources meet well-defined criteria for validation, verification, and interoperability.
Resource Management
3-37
Goals & Requirements for Knowledge/Information Management Goal 1: Model-Based Knowledge Integration Provide methods and tools enabling capture, storage, and usage of technical and business information resources by model-based systems. (M) Multi-Functional Knowledge Representation Develop methods for storing information and data in formats that transparently support different modeling and simulation applications for engineering, planning, manufacturing, product support and other enterprise functions. (M) Common Concept Representation Develop standard representation schemes for common product, process, and support concepts used within and across multiple industry sectors, to enable transparent sharing and exchange of model-based knowledge. (M) Multimedia Integration Develop techniques and standards for integrating information of diverse types (text, graphical, sound, tactile, etc.) in formats that enable seamless access by modeling and simulation applications. (M) Goal 2: Standard Modeling & Simulation Architectures Define standard formats and information requirements enabling creation, interoperability, and quality assurance of common types of models and simulations. (M) Common M&S Architecture for Product Models Develop standards that define the basic information content, data quality requirements, and external hooks and interfaces that support creation, application, and maintenance of models and simulations for major classes of manufactured products. Categories to be addressed include mechanical, electronic, electromechanical, feedstocks, chemicals, agricultural, and textiles. (M) Common M&S Architecture for Technical Process Models Develop standards that define the basic information content, data quality requirements, and external hooks and interfaces that support creation, application, and maintenance of models and simulations for engineering, manufacturing, and other technical processes. Categories to be addressed include material properties, unit processes (machining, forming, etc.), chemical processes, assembly processes, quality assurance (inspection and test) manufacturing flow, and sensing and control. (M) Common M&S Architecture for Business Process Models Develop standards that define the basic information content, data quality requirements, and external hooks and interfaces that support creation, application, and maintenance of models and simulations for major business processes. Functions to be addressed include enterprise resource planning, finance, supply chain management, strategic planning, capital asset management, inventory management, distribution, customer relationship management, and product support. (M) Goal 3: Model-Based Knowledge/Skills Management Provide modeling and simulation tools and techniques to enable a growing store of corporate knowledge plus an integrated training and certification environment that transforms manpower assets into capable, qualified skill/knowledge workers. (L) Model-Based Training Develop concepts and approaches enabling creation of training systems and media that automatically capture as-designed, as-built, and as used product and process data and update the models used for training workers and users. Include the capability to feed back worker/user experience to refine the training models and document opportunities for product/process improvement. (M) Tacit Knowledge Capture Develop methods to capture enterprise knowledge and lessons learned in forms that allow it to be accessed by, and applied to enrich, model-based technical and business processes. (M-L)
Resource Management
3-38
Embedded Simulators Develop capabilities and standards for embedding training and user support simulations into enterprise management and control systems (and into products that are of sufficient complexity to warrant embedded functionality). Include the ability to support factory operations, customer service, engineering, and other major functions of the manufacturing enterprise. (L) Goal 4: Model-Based Enterprise Knowledge Repositories Establish manufacturing knowledge repositories that support transparent data acquisition by modeling and simulation applications. (M-L) Model Baseline Survey, compile, and establish an internet-accessible database of validated product and process models and related information available from industry, government, and academic sources. Acquire copies of these models to populate the repository and establish linkages to enable updating as needed. (S) Model Validation Methods Define standard methods for testing models and simulations to verify their accuracy and document, within the model or simulation, their limitations and bounds of uncertainty. (M) Uniform Data Formats Define standard data formats for storing information in ways that enable transparent access by modeling and simulation systems. (S) Protection of Sensitive Knowledge Provide means of ensuring proprietary or sensitive data contained in or accessed by product and process models is accessible only to applications and users entitled to that data. (M) Knowledge Scouts Develop mechanisms to monitor external databases, news feeds, and other real-time information sources, recognize when knowledge is potentially relevant to the enterprise, and integrate it into the repository for use by modeling and simulation applications. Include the capability to reconcile conflicting data (both autonomously and with humans in the loop) and provide an audit trail of all updates. (M-L) Goal 5: Information Delivery to Point of Use Provide the capability to create, manage, and deliver required information to the point of need for use by model-based systems and human users. (L) Authoring of Planning Information Develop a model-based integrated information framework and authoring tools that enable authoring of information from enterprise planning processes (design, scheduling, etc.) with the appropriate view and presentation style needed by different enterprise functions over the life-cycle of the product, process or business function. (M) Publishing & Distribution of Planning Information Develop means of managing information from planning functions in a highly functional, vendor-neutral format (e.g., XML) that is compatible with ERP/ERM and manufacturing execution systems. Include the capability to publish the information in different formats such as discrete pages, executable animations, etc. that are required for different tasks and to facilitate real-time delivery of extremely large files. (M) Point of Use Information Delivery Devices Develop technologies to enable hands-free, wireless information delivery with intuitive navigation and human interface, with emphasis on human factors such as safety and ergonomics. (S-M) Task-Appropriate Information Access Develop information schemas and control mechanisms that provide easily navigable, real-time access to all needed information from enterprise models and other sources, with appropriate security. (M) Integration of Legacy & External Information Develop techniques for integrating and maintaining enterprise legacy information suitably along with new/current information. (M-L)
Resource Management
3-39
3.3.8 VISION & GOALS FOR TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT Future planning and decision processes for technology management will apply model-based tools to provide a clear vision of technology direction, maintain continuous visibility of emerging technologies with significant and potentially disruptive impact, and enable managers at all levels to guide their technology investments for maximum cost-effectiveness, competitive benefit, and return on investment. In the future, robust technology forecasting and planning tools will support systematic management of technology decisions and activities in all manufacturing sectors. Technology planning models linked to the enterprise knowledge base and external surveillance systems will enable managers to quickly identify and analyze science and technology advances that relate to their enterprises product lines, core competencies, operations, and strategic plans. The surveillance systems will troll the Internet and accessible databases for new information on patent awards, R&D and product announcements, changes in customer requirements (e.g., pending regulatory changes) and other sources of technology news. Results will be mapped in real time against the enterprises defined technology interests, scored for degree of interest and applicability, and routed to responsible managers and staff members. The technology management system will enable users to analyze the potential impacts of new technology advances in many ways. It will model technology maturation timelines, enabling prediction of when the technology will be ready for initial implementation, and when it will supplant current technology as a competitive preference and as the industry standard. It will evaluate what elements and operations of the enterprise will be impacted, enabling direction and timing of capital investments to implement the new technology at the right time based on competitive and cost/benefit factors. It will also enable managers to decide when to reduce or terminate a technology investment due to changes in ROI predictions; emergence of a better technology; or a change in business strategy (e.g., a decision to exit a particular product sector) that eliminates the technology need. The system will enable far more effective day-to-day management of technology investments by monitoring performance indicators for ongoing R&D programs and by updating metrics for technology readiness, risk, and return whenever underlying information changes. Goals & Requirements for Technology Resource Management Goal 1: Model-Based Technology Surveillance Provide autonomous surveillance capabilities that enable enterprises to capture relevant information about technology developments having potential beneficial or adverse impact to current and future products, processes, facilities, and operations as defined in enterprise business models. (M) Autonomous Technology Data Acquisition Develop technologies enabling automated search of web-accessible databases for information on technologies of interest and correlation of retrieved information against specific areas of interest to, or having potential impact on, the enterprise. (S) Intelligent Semantic Search Develop automated analysis technologies to perform deep search of internet-accessible databases and information sources based on semantic content, enabling users to obtain search results that correlate directly to technology topics of interest, with zero redundancy and no false alarms (i.e., no non-relevant matches). (M) Automated Technology Needs Definition Develop technologies enabling rapid creation of enterprise-specific technology needs definition from multiple sources including documented strategic plans and product/process/facility/business models maintained in the enterprises knowledge base. (M)
Resource Management
3-40
Goal 2: Technology Management Modeling Provide integrated modeling tools to support analysis and prediction of technology maturation timelines and impacts. (M) Technology Timing Analysis Develop modeling tools enabling forecasting of maturation timelines for specific technologies based on historical trends, market conditions, driving factors (e.g., regulatory compliance milestones and customer-directed capability targets), and known risks. Include the capability to support automated technology readiness level (TRL) and technology advancement risk assessments through surveillance of internet-accessible information sources. (M) Technology Impact Assessment Develop tools and techniques supporting accurate evaluation of the impacts of a new or emerging technology, including effects on competitive position, product and process life spans, and capital facility investments. (M) Technology Investment Decision Support Develop capabilities for automated analysis of competing options for technology selections (including factors such as capital requirements and ROI, timing, and competitive impact) and documentation of results in a form that readily supports investment decisions. Include the capability to support make/buy tradeoffs in acquisition of technical capabilities and to provide real-time update when changes in underlying data or factors impact the business case for a particular technology investment. (M) Technology Insertion Modeling Develop modeling capabilities enabling identification of the optimal insertion point for application of new technologies in enterprise products and processes. Include the capability to evaluate the risks and returns of insertion at different points in the product/process life cycle with respect to impact on competitive position, sales and profits, and return on investment. (M)
Resource Management
3-41
3.4 ROADMAP
FOR ENTERPRISE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
The following pages lay out a nominal project plan for technology development to achieve the NGMTI goals for Resource Management. The schedule is based on a January 2006 start, and the spans allocated for the defined activities are based on a convention where each activity is targeted for completion in a Short (0 to 3 years), Medium (3 to 5 years), or Long (5 to 10 years) timeframe. This project plan is intended as a reference point of departure for detailed planning purposes. Refinement of the schedule is dependent upon allocation of funding, assignment of responsible organizations, and development of detailed statements of work and project plans to accomplish the individual tasks. Further detail on specific Resource Management projects proposed for near-term implementation is provided in the NGMTI white papers for Information Delivery to Point of Use, Enterprise-Wide Cost Modeling, Model-Based Resource Management, and Multi-Enterprise Collaboration. These documents are available in the NGMTI Communities of Practice at http://www.ngmti.us.
Resource Management
3-42
Resource Management
3-43
Resource Management
3-44
Resource Management
3-45
Resource Management
3-46
Resource Management
3-47
Resource Management
3-48
4.0 STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

This document explores Strategic Management functions in the manufacturing enterprise and lays the foundation for creation of a model-based environment that supports those functions to achieve an efficient and responsive business entity. Strategic management encompasses those operations of the enterprise that are associated with positioning the company for success, both near- and long-term. It overlays and guides the core functions of designing, producing, and supporting products, and managing enterprise resources. Establishing a clear view and a plan for success in the manufacturing sector is a difficult challenge because of the increasing complexity and quantity of data inherent to the modern business environment. Although tracking of performance metrics and health indicators is routine today, it is difficult to monitor all the external forces and factors that can cause disruptive impacts. And, while corporate intelligence functions can provide early warning of problems, executives have few tools available to help analyze impending or fast-breaking problems, accurately predict possible outcomes, and make and enact the best possible decisions. It is also a major challenge to make needed data accessible in a useful form. For executives, what is needed is a continuous, intelligent winnowing of the waterfall of real-world data into focused, summarized, factual information that is filtered into customized views (Figure 4-1) and coupled with modelbased tools for analysis, prediction, and problemsolving. In the NGMTI vision of the model-based enterprise, all aspects of enterprise operations are represented in a rich and ever-changing master model that is continuously fed with information from internal and Figure 4-1. Effective strategic management demands continuous, intelligent external sources. This gathering and refinement of the mass of real-world data into focused, summarized, factual information filtered into customized views. model reflects the enterprise and its processes and interactions with the world, both in physical operations (e.g., development, manufacturing, and support) and in setting and maintaining long-term corporate direction (i.e., strategic operations). Diverse views are formulated through filtering and analysis of pertinent information to meet the needs of all functional users, supporting the different needs of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Chief Operations Officer (COO), Chief Technology Officer (CTO), and other executives.
Strategic Management
4-1
4.1 FUNCTIONAL MODEL FOR STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

Strategic management (Figure 4.1-1) includes all activities required to enable a companys leadership team to guide the enterprise based on current, complete, accurate information, and best decisions. Formulating the optimal strategic directions and making the right decisions is critical, as the decision outcomes at this level carry longer-term and greater cost, risk, profit, business health, and survival ramifications for the enterprise. Strategic management is discriminated from enterprise resource management (discussed in Section 2) in that strategic management is not specifically concerned with the enterprise at an operational level, or within a short time window, although the two functions are certainly interrelated.
Figure 4.1-1. Functional Model for Strategic Management of the Model-Based Enterprise
There are five distinct elements within Strategic Management: 1. TECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT includes all activities related to technological capabilities and intellectual property of the enterprise. These activities include acquisitions, mergers, and strategic collaborations needed to acquire the technology and to direct funds needed to develop new technology for future competitive advantage. 2. FINANCIAL & CAPITAL ASSETS MANAGEMENT includes all activities related to protecting the enterprises investments by optimizing capacity. This includes allocating capital to implement required improvements, sustain levels of capability, and ensure future financial viability; determining the optimal distribution of capital; and maintaining appropriate levels of capital, equity, and debt. 3. KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT & APPLICATIONS includes all activities involved in the creation, maintenance, and use of the internal and external information assets of the enterprise. This includes identifying information needs; determining how to acquire, manage, control, and distribute information; and managing the various knowledge resources available to the enterprise. 4. STRATEGIC PLANNING & EXECUTION includes all activities associated with developing and implementing the enterprises strategic objectives, aligning core competencies with market needs, and ensuring the enterprise is properly positioned and equipped to address future opportunities and challenges. 5. STRATEGIC OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT includes all activities related to developing and implementing the tactics needed to achieve the strategic objectives of the business. This includes benchmarking against competitors; implementing corporate consistency across all enterprise operations; evaluating the productivity, capacity, and efficiency of production facilities; all activities related to establishing the businesss market presence; and positioning the businesss product lines.
4-2
4.2 CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT FOR STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

A corporation cannot realize the full potential and value of its assets without understanding how individual programs, projects, operations, and resources fit into the holistic view of the present and future business environment. Today, executives and managers work together to assure that the company performs to its highest standards, is ready to exploit upcoming opportunities, and is able to respond quickly and correctly to new challenges. Although information technology is giving executives access to a wealth of data, and practices such as monitoring of key performance indicators are improving the ability to monitor business health, tools that deliver the knowledge needed to maximize enterprise potential remain sorely lacking. Several themes are common across all executive management functions. Currently, parameterization of variables and data collection required for building business models is performed manually or semiautomatically. This consumes significant organizational resources and typically delivers static models having limited utility and depth, and lacking real-time connectivity to the underlying sources of data. However, modeling technology is improving and software tools for automated text and data mining are maturing. These emerging toolsets will provide a new capability to assure that information is available to make the best long-term decisions. This in turn provides a more solid foundation to ensure that the best strategies are in place for enterprise success.
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT APPROACHES

In todays world, most manufacturing corporations are managed from the top down and operated from the bottom up (Figure 4.2-1). Executives set direction and drive that direction down through the organization. The quality of direction varies with every manager in the organizational chain, making consistency one of the biggest problems in achieving a strong and responsive corporate culture. The corporate management strategies that affect the entire organization are seldom visible below the top levels, and are typically communicated in generalities to line employees. In normal circumstances, the factory simply operates and product is produced based on weekly or monthly schedules. Except in very small companies, senior management has little insight into the detailed workings of the enterprise as a whole until or unless a serious problem arises. From the top down, strategic direction is driven by the enterprises mission and vision. These define why the company exists and what it wishes to accomplish. Upon this foundation, the company architecture of business units and organizational elements is fit together. The core values and mission generally remain
Figure 4.2-1. The two approaches to enterprise management each have unique strengths and weaknesses.
4-3
stable over time, while the organizational vision and structure evolve to respond to perceived changes in the needs and wants of the enterprises stakeholders (customers, stockholders, etc.) as well as shifts in the competitive landscape. The top-down approach has deficiencies. The process of strategic management is frequently implemented using corporate off-site retreats, strategic planning meetings, and emergency sessions to correct serious problems. These processes typically permeate down through the entire organization, with each organizational element responding reactively to commands filtered down from the levels above. In this environment, major changes are disruptive events that are typically kept concealed from the rank-and-file of the organization. This has bred corporate environments where changes in strategic direction are heavily spin doctored and are usually greeted with a high degree of skepticism by the affected employees. The bottom-up approach usually is successful in getting the product out the door. Creative workers can find a way to make the product, while mistake-proofing techniques have made engineered solutions and structured performance commonplace. However, there is still much room for improvement. What happens when problems are encountered on the shop floor? In most cases the foreman instructs the workers to fix the problem. Often the incentives are all focused on getting product out at all cost, and not focused on anticipating and eliminating problems. There are many stories of small problems at the factory floor level that were fixed to avoid missed schedules, resulting in costly failures. The Department of Energy uses an occurrence reporting system to avoid exactly these kinds of problems in manufacturing for the nuclear stockpile. In their facilities, the contractors are obligated to report all deviations from normal practice. Standard measures are in place to categorize occurrences, and specific corrective actions are mandated by the categorization. There are parallels in industry. The following sections provide an overview of the current state of practice and technology issues for each element of the Strategic Management functional model. Table 4.2-1 (see following page) provides a summary-level view into a number of specific areas of concern to executives.
4-4
NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE Table 4.2-1. Current State Assessment for Strategic Management
Element Technology Portfolio Management Lagging Practice Technologies not identified as core competencies; company just makes things Acquisition and hoarding of technology to protect existing product lines and revenues Limited focus on patents that improve core competencies No concept of technology portfolio management State of Practice Technologies managed primarily to improve financial returns More companies managing technology assets in global market context, struggling to address international intellectual property (IP) issues Strategic partnerships sought to complement core capabilities (distribution, manufacture, service, etc.) and add to resource base without capital investment Leading-Edge Practice Technology needs and investments fully integrated into strategic plans; long-term tech refresh strategies integral to product visions (e.g., defense sector) Increasing reliance on new technology pulled from lower tiers of supply chain R&D very clearly focused on keeping products at leading edge of market segments Formal risk management integrated into technology planning and management processes Pricing strategies focus on ensuring R&D cost recovery within opportunity windows (e.g., pharmaceuticals, aerospace) Financial goals and objectives tied to longterm corporate strategic direction International standardization of business applications using XML and as Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) Real options evaluating using financial CAD tools such as Black-Scholes model or Monte Carlo simulations; cross-cutting financial model used to optimize use of capital equipment capacity and capital investment Strategy mapping process used to define and communicate causal links among different components of company strategy FIFO and averaging inventory tools give more realistic assessment; multivariable testing used by BASF, DuPont, and others Integrated information systems with extensive use of standardized digital tools Internal Information Technology (IT) organizations dictate all hardware and software standards (e.g., "managed desktops) Communications integrated into supply chains and distribution networks Global communication capabilities and enterprise-wide networks used to strategic advantage
Financial & Capital Assets Management
GAAP-based accounting system based on analog reporting; not a good fit to our digital world; slow, cumbersome, very manual Over-reliance on improving the bottom line for shareholder value at expense of future growth Belief that short-term management of capital is good management; e.g., making decisions on shortterm amortization of capital equipment vs. long-term investments
Companies hamstrung by short-term view of corporate success performance tied to 10-day forecasts, 10K and quarterly reports to SEC, weekly stock price Financial management tools lack single-point data entry afforded by integrated systems Real options evaluating using financial computer-aided design (CAD) tools such as BlackScholes model or Monte Carlo simulations Electronic data interchange is widespread, yet complex and inflexible Return on X (investment, sales, capital, etc.) analysis drives decisions; net present value analysis dictates mergers, major projects Business unit models primarily standalone Digital storage and transfer of information is commonplace Information systems not well integrated Electronic data exchange between companies is still cumbersome; standards (e.g., EDI, FIX financial info exchange protocol, XML) do not cover all scope needed Many companies require suppliers to acquire and use specified software systems
Knowledge Management & Applications
Paper-based systems to capture and exchange information Ad-hoc information exchange between companies No effort to capture human aspects of information management, especially capturing expertise and experience Lack of integration of communications systems
4-5
Element Strategic Planning & Execution
Lagging Practice Market-reactionary pursuit of immediate orders or current product fads Limited product focus Limited understanding of how the organization adds value with its product offerings
State of Practice Opportunity analysis using quantitative and qualitative research methods to explore trends, customer needs, competitive landscape Market modeling fragmented, based on incomplete data; statistical analysis packages and spreadsheets used for regression and cluster analysis Common value propositions are price leadership, product performance edge, complete customer solutions, and system lock-in Practices benchmarked against best in industry to guide improvement initiatives Lean, Six Sigma, statistical process control (SPC), and similar techniques used to improve and ensure performance Increased outsourcing/offshoring to reduce labor costs and capital expense ERP/MRP/ERM systems used to manage operations Balanced scorecard, key characteristic (KC), and key performance indicator (KPI) techniques used to set and manage performance against targets
Leading-Edge Practice Future forecast model relies heavily on identification of technology that is strategic for corporation to acquire or develop (e.g., GM with fuel cells) Continuous trend analysis used to frequently refresh and guide planning Model-based brand management, with model for each brand (P&G, auto manufacturers) Bootstrapping of derivative products to undercut competitors and capture new revenue streams (e.g., Microsoft) Lean principles enhanced by future forecasting used to manage capacity and utilize equipment and workforce Pull-based manufacturing based on demand, rather than push Staff are cross-trained in up-to-date operations methods Activity-based costing (ABC) techniques used to understand cost at detail level Leaders take information gathered through all the processes and analyze it for strategic opportunities and productivity improvements Executive cockpits provide continuous visibility of many performance indicators (throughput, availability, etc.) Better companies always refreshing their technology to improve performance, profitability, and competitive advantage
Strategic Operations Management
Duplication of activities and equipment across different business units and sites Inefficient, reactionary use of capacity Poor forecasting means company cannot deliver products to customers when they want it (due to lack of surge capability) Ineffective training results hinders productivity improvement and implementation of change Management by crisis, not analysis and prevention Lacking or inconsistent performance measurement; key indicators not understood, resulting in arbitrary objectives
4-6
4.2.1 CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT FOR TECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT

WHO'S LOOKING AND WHAT DO THEY SEE? Technology portfolio management is a shared responsibility. If an issue concerns assurance of technological excellence and methods of acquiring it, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Technology Officer are likely the hub of the decision process. This function requires an honest view of the companys technical capabilities, continuous awareness of the competitive landscape, and the ability to quickly identify and respond to emerging opportunities and threats.
The technology portfolio of an enterprise includes its technical know-how and the skills of its staff; its physical assets such as specialized equipment and facilities; and the more important intangible assets of intellectual property. Technology portfolio management involves those actions that an organization takes to ensure that its technology base is in place and ready to perform when opportunities and challenges arise, both anticipated and emergent. It includes the acquisition, development, and exploitation of technical capabilities (process as well as product-related), and also includes the divestiture or discarding of technical capabilities that no longer align with the direction of the enterprise. The technology portfolio is the engine of the corporate enterprise, and a company that is not managing its technology assets in a focused and efficient way, is driving blind. Good strategic management processes empower a company to systematically apply the assets of the technology portfolio to create, sustain, and grow revenue streams while balancing risk and cash flow. However, today there are few tools (aside from financial models) available to help companies model their technology assets and make optimal decisions with respect to those assets. Recent trends have resulted in major shifts in strategies for technology portfolio management, and have greatly heightened this aspect of strategic management. Globalization pressures and stockholder demands for quarterly performance have forced companies to take a hard look at their technological investments and strategies. Many companies now manage their core competencies and competitive positions in different market segments by simply buying and selling each others business units buying where the potential for increased sales and profits appears high; then, selling if the promised gains fail to materialize. The competitive landscape has changed in other ways as well. The corporate roles of the past where a competitor was a competitor and a supplier was a supplier are now blurred. Many companies today function simultaneously as competitors in one area, partners in another, and in reversed prime and supplier roles in yet other areas. Some trends are ominous. Many formerly innovative companies have all but eliminated basic R&D, repositioning themselves as systems integrators who rely on suppliers and partners to bring forth new technologies that they can exploit. Corporation after corporation has moved from manufacturing product to assembling and distributing product. Original equipment manufacturers have pushed technological responsibility down the supply chain and have become far more selective in where they focus their R&D. The worlds top 100 corporations spent $236 billion on R&D in 20031; however, the percentage of that investment focused on applied product development is very high, leaving a huge underinvestment in fundamental science and critical areas such as process technology. Core Competencies When does an enterprise choose to maintain capability in house, and when does it choose to rely on partners and suppliers? In most cases the decision is a balance between profit, risk, and speed to market. Where it is clear that a certain function can be satisfactorily fulfilled with no reduction in product delivery or performance, and no loss of intellectual capital, the decision is purely an economic one. Where threat factors are present, the decision becomes more complex.
1
Harry Goldstein and Ronil Hira, IEEE Spectrum R&D 100, IEEE Spectrum, November 2004.
4-7
Circuit board manufacture is a good example of the trend to outsource. Not many years ago, most electronics manufacturers maintained an in-house capability for making circuit boards. However, as environmental rules became more stringent and suppliers became more reliable, company after company closed their internal shops. Today, most circuit boards are commodity items bought from the lowest-cost supplier. High-end products are made through partnerships and qualified suppliers. Only a very small group of original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) maintain any kind of circuit board production capability. The same stories can be told for every industry and sector, from automotive and aerospace, to clothing and consumer products. In the consumer products industry, Procter & Gamble, long a pillar of in-house technological excellence, recently announced their commitment to go from 95% internal technology to 60% within 5 years. In the automotive sector the obsession with exploiting existing process capability and capacity has driven a reduction of investment in core competencies to the extent that some industry leaders worry about the loss of U.S. technical competitiveness. How do models assist in sorting through the complexity of technology management and investment decisions? In leading companies, cost/benefit modeling and return on investment (ROI) analyses are mainstream tools for making technology investment and entrance/exit decisions. However, in many cases the decisions come down to humans looking at the data (which is not complete or up-to-date), evaluating the risk (which may not be well-characterized), and making a determination about corporate priorities. These decisions are not simple. For example, in pursuing foreign sales, U.S. companies frequently have to address offset requirements2 that include technology transfer to in-country partners. Companies in this position have to balance the merits of winning a significant piece of work against the specter of creating a potential future competitor. Outsourcing is another area where decisions have long-term strategic implications. A decision to outsource a technical capability may be made to quickly increase product capacity, offload workforce issues, or reduce capital exposure at the cost of losing a previously vital corporate asset. The commitment to lean organizations and processes has led to the loss of critical capabilities in many U.S. companies. Too lean could place the future of an organization in jeopardy. In other cases, OEMs have found their product not making it to market because of the failure of key suppliers. The Sony PlayStation 2 is a classic example, as an entire Christmas of sales was essentially lost due to a failure of the supply chain to provide critical electronic components. Companies who outsource both production and quality control have paid dearly for those decisions. U.S. companies need enhanced methods for core competency management and more sophisticated models to assure that all pertinent factors are considered during the decision process. The qualitative human decision needs to be augmented by quantitative knowledge provided from within the company and through external data/information mining. Modeling systems, integrated with knowledge-based risk assessment, can support proactive core competency management. Technology Selection & Maturation Management of technology selection and maturation is an area of much progress, although government and industry continue to invest billions in R&D without any kind of large-scale coordination based on accurate knowledge of the entire R&D landscape. A senior manager of R&D for a major corporation recently said, We do a great job of managing our technology investment. We have a Director of R&D who reports to the VP of Operations. We have four program managers working for her, and they make sure that the money is well spent. While it may be true that they are doing a great job, is this approach enough? Is it empowered individuals or a rigorous and unbiased strategic system that assures R&D dollars are spent wisely?
Offset is a common practice in multi-national contracts. For example, an engine manufacturer might be required to subcontract a significant portion of production to in-country sources and import certain technological capabilities as a basic requirement of a compliant bid.
4-8
Roadmapping is an increasingly popular and powerful tool for guiding technology evolution. Using any of a wide variety of formats and development methodologies, technology roadmaps answer the questions: Where are we now? Where do we need to be? How do we get there? Technology roadmaps alone are not sufficient to assure wise investment. Systems are needed to manage the technology maturation process. One system becoming commonplace across the manufacturing landscape is the technology readiness level (TRL) convention. This method assigns a technology readiness level (TRL) to an emerging technology on the basis of discrete points in the maturation process.. Processes such as stage gate3 enable the management of the decision points for progressing through the levels. Manufacturing technology readiness levels (MTRLs) are becoming more relevant in managing manufacturing technologies to the point of application and productive use. Figure 4.2.1-1 outlines and compares the TRL and MTRL criteria. Another element of the TRL/MTRL process is advancement risk level (ARL), which is used in assessing risk and supporting investment decisions. The ARL metrics are: ARL 1 Very low degree of difficulty anticipated in achieving R&D objectives; only a single, short-term technology project is required to assure high probability of successfully achieving the next MTRL on schedule. ARL 2 Moderate degree of difficulty anticipated in achieving R&D objectives; a single, focused technology project with a viable alternate approach for development is required to ensure high probability of successfully achieving the next MTRL on schedule. ARL 3 High degree of difficulty anticipated in achieving R&D objectives; two concurrent alternative technology approaches are required to assure high probability of successfully achieving the next MTRL on schedule.
Figure 4.2.1-1. Technology readiness assessment is an effective tool for understanding technology maturity and determining the investment required to move to production readiness.
ARL 4 Very high degree of difficulty anticipated in achieving R&D objectives; requiring multiple technology development approaches to achieve the next MTRL within project schedule requirements. Technologies with this designation are most likely assessed at TRL 3 maturity or lower and would be difficult to scale up.
http://www.prod-dev.com/stage-gate.shtml.
4-9
ARL 5 The degree of difficulty anticipated in achieving R&D objectives for this technology is so high that a fundamental demonstration of concept feasibility is required. Technology likely assessed at TRL 1 or 2 and is thus considered not ready for applied technology development until basic principles are developed. Alternate approaches should be developed in parallel. While the current state does embrace the readiness assessment methodology, there are deficiencies that the model-based strategic management process will address. In the present state, TRLs, MTRLs, and ARLs are assigned based on human opinion since supporting models and decision tools are not available. Further, the determination for advancement and continued funding is very much dependent on the written and oral communications skills of the researcher or program manager. The systems have promise, but tools are needed to make them more effective. There is a clear need for strategic planning models to guide the technology maturation process. Technology Acquisition, Protection, & Exploitation The circuit board example used earlier provides a convenient starting point for discussion of technology acquisition. Suppose an electronics company has excess capital they wish to invest in growing their business base. They have several choices: 1) diversify into related products; 2) expand existing design and manufacturing capabilities to increase capacity; and 3) acquire technologies from suppliers, partners, or competitors to bring more work in-house. These important decisions have very different implications relating to cost, profit, market share, workforce skills, capital position, and future competitiveness. Models play a role in these kinds of decisions, but not a strong enough one. In todays best practice, human analysts review cost and profit projections based on economic and market conditions and forward their findings to the decision makers. The final result typically comes down to an individual decision that is based on intuition as much as hard numbers. In the current state, the company leadership rarely has all the information they need to make the best decisions, and much of the information they do have is incomplete or imprecise. There is a pressing need for robust models that link to rich sources of accurate data to allow executives to accurately project the outcome of different options, evaluate the impact of possible future business conditions in each scenario, and determine, with high confidence, the best course of action. Intellectual property (IP) is the knowledge capital that an organization can utilize to transform an existing product or process to a new or better product or process. IP is the fuel that powers the corporate engine. Today, the only real source of IP is the human thought process. IP is often created when companies seek to improve on a product or to find a different and better solution altogether. A second major contributor to IP is pure research. A third way IP is generated is by accident. This happens when the search for a solution to one problem, or a random observation, unexpectedly results in a new idea or discovery. The concept for Velcro, for example, resulted from a look at a cocklebur under a microscope. The concept for Post-It notes came from a flawed batch of adhesive. Models are valuable tools in IP generation. Combinatorial chemistry the ability to model and evaluate many matrices of materials with graded doping has led to a revolution in pharmaceuticals and other process industries. Modeling ideas and designs to quickly identify failure modes, and success modes, is accelerating the innovation process. However, there is still much to do. We need models that can quickly turn random thoughts into workable concepts, and concepts into systems. Protection of IP is an increasingly contentious issue as U.S. manufacturers become global companies and increasingly rely on offshore markets and sources to grow their sales and profits. Many countries, and most foreign competitors, have little or no regard for U.S. patent protections, and even U.S. companies actively engage in reverse engineering to analyze competitors products and incorporate valuable features into their own designs. Although these issues are not solvable with technology, modeling capabilities can aid by helping companies weigh options for exposing their technologies to copying or reverse engineering by other countries. These capabilities would not impede pirating, but they could help com-
4-10
panies understand the potential time windows within which a market opportunity could be exploited before it is undercut by local sources. Modeling and simulation systems are finding their way into IP management applications. Dow Chemical Company found, as many organizations do, that they were inundated with patents and IP that was not being well utilized. They increased annual licensing income from $25 million to more than $125 million in just 5 years using an Intellectual Asset Management Model. This model helped reduce patent administration costs and identify worthless patents for abandonment. Examples like this highlight the need for modeling systems that support innovation and the exploitation and protection of decision processes.
4.2.2 CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT FOR FINANCIAL & CAPITAL ASSETS MANAGEMENT
WHOS LOOKING AND WHAT DO THEY SEE? Capital and Financial Management is a team sport. The Chief Executive Officer and his direct reports drive the decision process for mergers, acquisitions, and major capital investments. The Chief Financial Officer represents the most prominent viewpoint, being responsible for financial planning and management and having a strong role in managing capital assets. The compelling need for all executives is accurate, current, and complete data, coupled with financial models that accurately forecast outcomes and risks.
This very broad element of the functional model for strategic management includes the management of enterprise-level finances and capital assets. Capital asset management concerns questions such as: Do I build a new building, or renovate the present one? Do I continue to invest in Product X when my competitor is working on something similar? Is it better to continue to compete with Competitor A or pursue a merger to dominate the market, even though it may be us that is acquired? While supply chain management may not be on the radar screen of the capital management function, sourcing decisions (e.g., do we build the new product here at our main facility or distribute production around the world) certainly impact capital utilization. Improved systems are needed to provide accurate dynamic models that enable the comprehensive management of the finances of the total enterprise. 4.2.2.1 Financial Management The financial management function is critical to the success of all companies, large and small. Modern information systems and financial modeling tools provide a wealth of data to help understand the health of the business and guide financial decisions. However, fully understanding all factors that impact fiscal success, and getting access to all the data needed to support good decisions, is still a major challenge for every company. Even in a small business, when considering the time spacing of events (leads and lags), the tax effects, constraints, and other complexities, the modeling process is complex and highly sensitive to error. The modeling tools that assist in creating financial projections may include mathematical calculations, simple rules, or complex rule systems that apply complexity theory, neural inference, and other advanced concepts. Many tools exist in a wide range of cost, sophistication, and functionality, although spreadsheets remain the standard tool for financial modeling in every business sector. Major deficiencies of the current state in this area are the lack of standards for financial information exchange and the lack of interoperability of financial management systems. An imOn-Line Financial Data Saves Money
When Mike Jordan took over as CEO of Frito-Lay, it was suffering from something analogous to a "spinal cord injury" -- its physical body was severed from its digital brain. Starting with decentralization of sales and marketing platforms, Jordan developed a "rip and replace" plan of IT renewal based on handheld technology for salespeople in the field and shifting to on-line operations. Salespeople were able to manage price, inventory, and customer data in real-time in communication with the supply chain. The changes cost $140 million. Result: the company saved 30,000 to 50,000 hours of paperwork per week. Better control of sales data saved the company more than $40 million per year. Frito-Lay was able to reduce the number of distribution centers, reduce stale inventory by 50%, and increase domestic revenues from $3 billion to $4.2 billion in 3 years. Quite an ROI!
From "Getting IT Right", Harvard Business Review, by Charlie S. Feld and Donna B. Stoddard
4-11
portant development is the emergence of the Extensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL) a common standard to improve the speed and accuracy of corporate reporting. XBRL is a web-based programming language that tags financial information and provides contextual information. Standard coding of financial data ensures that it can be used across software programs, platforms, and countries; allows for direct comparison of numbers obtained from disparate sources; and makes it easier to benchmark financials with other businesses in a companys sector. Also, financial information can be exchanged between different corporate divisions or sent to regulators or investors without manual re-entry or conversion using middleware. This enables organizations to manage international differences in currencies and accounting standards. Use of a common financial language also simplifies account reconciliation in partnership arrangements or after a merger or acquisition.4 Some experts believe that XBRL will be widely used by the end of 2005.5 The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) will require banks to submit their 2005 call reports in XBRL; banks are offering incentives to clients who are XBRL-compliant; and the U.S Congress is considering whether the SEC should adopt XBRL. Development of XBRL-compliant modeling and other software tools will enable the adoption of XBRL on a large scale. 4.2.2.2 Capital Management Capital asset management is a stressing challenge in todays business environment. In much of traditional manufacturing, the industrial complex now in place was built for a large-production, limited-change marketplace (i.e., large buildings with lots of equipment and space). Downsizing, outsourcing, and lean manufacturing have been among the many influences that have led to the present situation of mismatched capacity. Agility is limited by the constraints of sunken investments, so change to incorporate new technologies and processes is impractical in many cases. In the automotive industry, for example, utilization of existing processes and existing assets is a top priority. The R&D budget for this sector is heavily invested in product-based technologies to the exclusion of processes. The result is a focus on continuous improvement that offers little chance of dramatic, transformational change. This locks the basis for competition into one of minor changes for each model year and limited new product capabilities until someone breaks the mold and forces competitors to play catch-up. The electronics industry offers a different view. With high-profit products and a business strongly focused on exploiting intellectual property, the cash flow is robust and product model lifetimes are short. New fabrication factories (fabs) are quickly built with the latest equipment for emerging product lines. As new products emerge, the fabs are closed, then either retooled or made available for other applications. This model of highly fluid change is not limited to electronics. One mid-sized mechanical component manufacturer is known to have a policy that a machine tool will never reach its second birthday in their shop. The logic is that the latest model equipment is valuable for resale, maintenance is low and reliability is high, and the shop is always tooled for world-class operation. This discussion relates to the decision processes for capital investment. In most cases, the decisions are made based on competitive positions (such as the automotive and electronics industry models) and available assets. Modeling tools are used extensively to support capital investment decisions. For example, one Navy program utilized a very large and highly specialized eight-axis mill. The milling operations were timed to the availability of tooling sets for various setups, and the contract with the Navy specified only two sets of tooling. The contractor used process flow models to demonstrate that it was impossible to deliver the product on schedule and within cost without an additional tooling set. The investment of a mere $250K paid for itself many times, and enabled the delivery of critical components for a multibilliondollar program.
4 5
CFO.com (2004). Special Report: Need-to-Know Tech, http://www.cfo.com/guides/guide.cfm/3036068?f=search. Ibid.
4-12
Capital investment decisions and the models that support them consider many factors. Typically, in any corporate structure someone is going to spend all the capital funds in the budget. This promotes reasoning like, This department has done well this year, so lets renovate their offices, driving many decisions. The choice to acquire an asset, lease it, or outsource the capability should be extensively and accurately modeled. In most cases, the measure of the models effectiveness swings on its ability to predict future results. In most cases, if we have the data and have an accurate vision of the future, accurate prediction is assured. The strategic management challenge is thus to develop financial modeling systems with greatly improved prognostic accuracy.
4.2.3 CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT FOR KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT & APPLICATIONS

WHOS LOOKING AND WHAT DO THEY SEE? Managing corporate knowledge may or may not be a strategic imperative in a given organization. Chief Technology Officers and Chief Information Officers might find knowledge in their responsibility area often without a clear view of what that responsibility means. Some corporations have established the Chief Knowledge Officer as a senior management position. Whatever the structure, in todays business environment the ability to manage the knowledge assets of the enterprise is increasingly vital to not just business success, but continued survival.
Knowledge is an inseparable component of a model-based enterprise knowledge about customers and product technologies, production data trends, process expertise, market intelligence, and more. The current state of knowledge management is characterized by isolated examples of success and some disillusionment about the topic area. The opportunity is strong, as knowledge applications offer an increasingly valuable toolset for managing the complexity of corporate data and capabilities. Some companies have utilized the tools to institutionalize best practices, preserve valuable expertise, optimize decision making, and develop future capabilities through focused knowledge capture and application. Disillusionment due to the intangible nature of the topic and the fuzzy implementation of many companies exists. Many companies have created lessons-learned systems and established internal web portals to communicate best practices and improve access to corporate knowledge. Results of such initiatives have been mixed. One large aerospace company recently shared with IMTI that they have 870,000 lessons-learned documents in a repository, but no clue what to do with them. Another large aerospace firm launched a corporationwide web presence redesign in 2003, with the result that tens of thousands of employees lost links to vital internal information sources. One user commented that formerly rich detail available on company programs is apparently gone, requiring employees to make dozens of phone calls to track down information that was formerly available with a few clicks of a mouse. On the positive side, Ford Motor Company has institutionalized a best practice system that has documented savings of over $1.4 billion since 1997.6 Knowledge management is a relatively new field. It has arisen as a new discipline in its own right because leading companies have realized the role of knowledge in creating sustainable competitive advantage. Unlike many other organizational functions, knowledge management is cross-disciplinary. Every department, facility, and employee is both a user and a contributor. Successful companies understand that managing knowledge is a collective activity. The need for reusable nonphysical resources, as manifested in object-oriented programming models, is rapidly growing. Finally, knowledge management can be useful in managing organizational changes and improving agility. It is viewed by some as a valuable protection against the vulnerability caused by the business process reengineering movements emphasis on rapid reorganization to meet changing customer requirements. It is no surprise that business managers and technologists have different viewpoints with respect to knowledge management. Business practitioners typically have a top-down perspective and are primarily interested in leveraging intellectual assets to achieve corporate strategic objectives. They often view knowledge management as a people issue, not a technology issue. The problem, writes Phil Murray, Editor-In-Chief of KM Briefs and KM Metazine, is that tacit knowledge, which is embedded in personal
6
From information exchanged in e-mails with Ford Motor Company employees and provided here with permission.
4-13
experience and often intangible, is rarely recorded and shared in business organizationseven though tacit knowledge may be the real key to getting things done. 7 Technologists, in contrast, typically have a bottom-up perspective and are interested in technologies for sharing and reusing knowledge. They are concerned with building models using the organizations explicit, codified knowledge. They often hold the view that the benefits of knowledge management will inevitably emerge, albeit in unpredictable ways, as long as people use the right tools in the right way. Most business practitioners and technologists agree that data and information do not by themselves solve problems or create value. Knowledge management is concerned with the transformation of data and information into knowledge: the actionable insights and lessons learned from experience, which are transformed into wisdom the ability to apply knowledge to solve problems and exploit opportunities. While both perspectives have strategic significance, the focus for the model-based enterprise is on the business viewpoint. Leading companies are beginning to use competency modeling to create models that represent the skill sets, values, and behaviors of their top-performing employees. Auditing of intellectual assets may help companies leverage existing explicit knowledge and skills, but competency modeling goes further. It identifies the intellectual and emotional characteristics that are most strongly associated with individual performance, helping ensure a well prepared, flexible, and responsive workforce. Competency modeling also allows more accurate modeling of potential enterprise responses to future opportunities. Knowledge management for strategic positioning is being accelerated by the emergence of ontologybased knowledge discovery and management systems using modeled structures and increasingly powerful algorithms. Corporations have long desired to understand the R&D landscape as a prerequisite to their investments: to understand what the future holds and to look into the future and see opportunities. These and more capabilities are being provided through the development of text and data mining systems that are based on a semantic understanding of the topic area as defined in specialized ontologies. Applying this ontological understanding, automated knowledge management systems and other tools use modelbased frameworks to process massive amounts of information into useful knowledge. At Pfizer, Executive Vice President Karen Katen leverages intellectual assets using a process she calls information mining. Pfizers systems and marketing research departments gather and analyze data from an array of information feeds and repositories. Product positioning is based on knowledge culled from databases of Pfizer's clinical trials information. Competitive intelligence is gathered using Pfizer's sales force, news feeds, online search services, and web-based and traditional resources focused on specific diseases.8 Knowledge management is a rich topic that extends far beyond the bounds of strategic management as addressed here. Knowledge Applications for Design and Manufacturing is a separate NGMTI thrust area being launched in the 2005-2006 timeframe. For more information check the NGMTI web site at www.ngmti.us.
4.2.4 CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING & EXECUTION

WHOS LOOKING AND WHAT DO THEY SEE? Everyone on the corporate management team should be engaged in the strategic planning process. In the best-managed companies, strong leaders drive a corporate vision that permeates all operations and processes. The key needs in this area are for greatly improved capabilities to model the future business environment, the linking of these models to rich sources of data, and the integration of these capabilities into every aspect of enterprise operations.
There is little argument that strategic planning is critical to corporate success; however, there are no sure rules for successful strategic planning, and it cannot be truly effective without continuous effort. One key promise of the model-based enterprise is to institutionalize strategic planning into the business processes
7 8
Ibid. Alice Dragoon, Rx for Success, CIO magazine, July 1995, p. 52.
4-14
of the enterprise by providing a toolset that enables senior management to define the best directions and continually make the right decisions to support those directions. The challenges of strategic planning are well documented. In The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Henry Mintzberg concludes that, The whole nature of strategy making dynamic, irregular, discontinuous, calling for groping, interactive processes with an emphasis on learning and synthesis compels managers to favor intuition. This is probably why all those analytical techniques of planning felt so wrong...Ultimately, the term strategic planning has proved to be an oxymoron.9 Progress is being made, however. Almost every manufacturing company has a strategic plan, and the strategic planning process has evolved to be far more than documenting a few strategic objectives. Leading enterprise management applications such as OutlookSofts Everest (Figure 4.2.4-1) provide predictive analytics tools to bridge the gap between activity monitoring, strategic planning, and tactical execution.10 Similar functionality is available in the product lines of SAP, AspenTech, and other vendors. Technology roadmapping has evolved to add greater depth to the strategic planning process. Tools such as the balanced scorecard, developed in the early 1990s by Robert Kaplan and David Norton,11 now provide structured ways to understand the various perspectives important to the enterprise and define what should be measured in order to ensure success. While the balanced scorecard (Figure 4.2.4-2) is not a strategic planning tool per se, it is a leading example of how models are used to supplement strategic planning processes in guiding business performance. In virtually all corporations, the strategic management process is managed from the top and permeates the organization through establishment of goals and objectives for each business unit and operational element. The Chief Executive Officer, supported by a Vice President or Director of Strategic Planning, ensures that the strategic plan, the metrics, and the action process are in
9
Figure 4.2.4-1. Applications such as OutlookSofts Everest provide predictive analytics tools to integrate strategic planning and tactical execution.
Figure 4.2.4-2. The Balanced Scorecard is a widely accepted management tool for creating a clear view of a corporations strategic direction and translating that direction into action.
Henry Mintzberg, The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Free Press: 1994. http://www.outlooksoft.com/product/predictive_analytics.htm. 11 http://www.balancedscorecard.org/basics/bsc1.html.
10
4-15
place and the plan is executed. The top-level measures of success are broken down through each organizational unit, and performance assessment is directly tied to that process. In the current state, strategic planning is mostly the purview of the executives. It may be dynamic if implemented appropriately, but it is not a real-time process except when activated to respond to a crisis. Models are used, but are not integrated into the mainstream process or automated toolsets. An internet search will deliver many options for strategic planning templates and models. Scorecard systems and dashboards are plentiful, and their functionality is expanding. It is probably fair to state that these systems mostly provide assistance in executing manual processes, but do not provide an integrated, modelbased analysis system that lays out the best path for the enterprise.
4.2.5 CURRENT STATE ASSESSMENT FOR STRATEGIC OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT

WHOS LOOKING AND WHAT DO THEY SEE? For the Vice President of Operations and the top levels of operations management, their view is not necessarily focused on daily operations performance, but on strategies to keep those operations efficient, productive, safe, reliable, and profitable in meeting their commitments. The key need is for better ability to model complex issues regarding capacity, expansion and contraction, changeovers, and response to both near- and long-term challenges.
Uncertainty and complexity cloud the vision of the enterprise for assured ability to produce profitable products and respond quickly and surely to changing requirements. How does an organization accurately align to produce what the customer needs, in the way it needs to be made to be competitive at a profit? How can the organization select the best production and support partnerships with other companies, and under what terms? This challenge is exacerbated by the intensity of competition, by the multiple roles organizations have with one another today, and by the necessity of maintaining lean operations that are responsive to change. Many issues must be considered to obtain a clear view of the needs for operations management from the strategic perspective, as discussed below. Integration of Design & Manufacturing Modeling and simulation systems play a large role in the integration of design and manufacturing, but further development is needed. The cost of creating all the models needed to evaluate design options and provide a total digital handover for manufacturing execution is not yet affordable, so progress will continue to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. This current state points clearly to the need for a model-based world of product realization wherein many options are fully evaluated for producibility and total life-cycle performance. Integration of Business Development & Production The business developer and the production manager must understand and support each others perspectives. If the marketer sells a favored customer on the idea of a new product, the result of the deal may leave the production manager with an unrealistic opportunity with no acceptable excuse for not meeting the commitment. Enterprise production must be closely allied with marketing, sales, and business development to avoid such disconnects. Opportunity analysis must be balanced between return and risk, and modeling systems can and already are helping with this. In the 1970s and 80s there was a very popular software tool developed by Brigham Young University called DCLASS. It was primitive by todays standards, but some of its capabilities were ahead of their time. One particular DCLASS application, developed by Eaton Corporation, connected the marketer directly with the factory. A laptop database that was regularly upgraded with models of the factory capability gave the marketer instant access to information such as: Can we make it?
4-16
When can it be delivered? How much will it cost? Real-time systems today perform these functions much better than the early prototypes, but many companies today do not have useful models that define their capabilities. Meaningful links between production operations and the marketing function frequently do not exist, and there are no good models that allow managers to thoroughly analyze the short- and long-term prospects and operational impacts of potential business relationships. Efficiency vs. Capability Lean manufacturing continues to have a remarkable impact on the production landscape. The current state is that most of the fat is gone, and companies are now cutting muscle in order to squeeze out increasingly smaller increments of productivity and profit. There are two strategies for getting lean. One focuses on making operations more efficient without impacting capability, through mistake-proofing, cellular operations, integrated workflow and workspace optimization, and kaizen (process improvement) techniques. The second strategy is to downsize for efficiency at the expense of capability, which can raise significant strategic management issues. In todays environment, the short-term payback and quarterly profit picture are driving companies increasingly to the second strategy, at the risk of losing the ability to capitalize on fast-breaking opportunities. Modeling and simulation play a strong role here. By modeling capability and throughput, companies can test proposed changes in capacity and capability to understand likely effects on the ability to support both present and future demands. The current generation of business modeling tools supports this function; but, aside from a number of good workflow modeling applications, the tools are not robust. The better versions of these tools generally exist as component applications within large and costly ERP packages, which are not affordable for smaller manufacturers. Effective, Skilled Employees While automation is enabling companies to run manufacturing operations with fewer personnel, there will always be a strong need for skilled, creative employees. In fact, the continuing trend to downsize work forces and make the remaining employees deliver more for less, raises the priority for high-caliber touch labor, technical staff, and managers. Strategic management of staffing requires the same kinds of modeling as the other enterprise functions previously discussed. What is the right level of permanent staff versus subcontracted employees? If we have to go to two shifts to meet a production spike, do we have enough lead personnel to maintain consistent productivity and quality? Should employees be developed in-house for the changing environment or should they be replaced with off-the-shelf trained people? What are the emerging skill sets needed for new products and technologies and how are those skills best acquired? Model-based capabilities are key to maximizing the potential and capability of a shrinking and increasingly stressed workforce. Model-based systems are essential to enabling consistent process performance with limited human intervention, and model-based training offers the potential to radically shorten learning curves and help employees quickly leverage existing skills to develop new ones. Model-based human resource management systems are needed to enable more accurate forecasts of staffing requirements as the strategic plans for the enterprise unfold over time. These projected needs can help address a deeper issue in the staffing problem, which is the declining number of students who are interested in entering the manufacturing field. By developing academic profile models to design future content for undergraduate and K-12 academic curricula, teachers and manufacturing leaders can help reverse current trends and revitalize the nations manufacturing workforce and technical leadership. Some leading edge companies have employees cross-trained in multiple operational functions to guard against lost productivity in the event of employee absence or attrition. Modeling these requirements is
4-17
key to developing training programs that cost-effectively deliver a flexible workforce able to respond to rapidly changing requirements. Optimization of Inventories The current state of inventory management is closely aligned with lean practices. In the tactical world, the simple answer is that the best approach to inventory management is to have none. This is the goal for raw material, work in process, tooling and equipment, product inventory, and every other aspect of the value chain. Wal-Mart, the standard setter for logistics and procurement on the retail side, is pioneering strategic relationships to push inventory responsibility onto the supplier, responding to the consumer pull with Wal-Mart taking a profit in each transition. In the manufacturing arena, companies such as Volkswagen have instituted electronic commerce systems that share more information with the suppliers and integrate them more closely to every aspect of production. PBR, an Australian caliper manufacturer that supplies many of the U.S. automakers, does not own the machines, the tooling, or the product as it passes through their factories. While many companies still have raw material bins and make parts in batches, the current trends are toward pull systems with limited inventory. Modeling is an important part of the strategic inventory management process. In order for PBR to have the right tooling for its machines, the right forged parts for its processing, and trucks at the dock to deliver the product, it must model its factory and production schedules. For General Motors to know that it can get a yellow Camaro to Kansas City on Thursday, it must also know that there are three yellow ones with the right accessories in a storage lot in St. Louis, and that they are not blocked by 47 gray and cream colored Park Avenues. They also must know that there are trucks available to make the transfer. This is a simple example on the surface, but the models are run each night, and the trucks roll every morning. Without these models, automotive commerce would come to a halt. Regulatory Compliance Operations management includes the assurance of regulatory compliance in all processes that are planned, and ensuring that present processes comply with changing regulations. This is a challenge to all industries, but it is particularly challenging in sectors where risk, liability, and human interface are closely tied to regulatory issues. Pharmaceuticals, chemicals, medical devices, and the automotive industry are among the many examples where strategic management processes require special attention to regulatory requirements and trends. The present state is characterized by some major areas of concern and areas of great progress. On the concern side, there continues to be significant disconnect between regulators and implementers. Despite aggressive lobbying, the legislative bodies and the agencies that impose the regulations often have limited appreciation for the ultimate impact of their actions on the affected companies. California emission laws and congressional buy American legislation are two examples that demonstrate how government is perceived as being unhelpful towards industry in the U.S., adding costs that foreign competitors do not have to bear. Modeling is a valuable tool in planning for and managing regulatory compliance. Process models and product chemistry models are commonly used to obtain regulatory approvals and engineer out health, safety, and environmental risks for new processes and facilities, and solve problems in existing operations. However, even the best models lack the deep scientific fidelity needed to eliminate requirements for extensive testing and qualification. There is a compelling need for individual industry sectors to work closely with regulatory agencies to develop and validate models for widely used processes. This will reduce the time and cost of ensuring compliance with safety, health, and environmental requirements, thus reducing the time and cost of implementing new manufacturing processes and reengineering existing ones. Also needed is a means to integrate regulatory knowledge bases and make needed data available to manufacturing enterprise planning and business systems. This will enable companies to more accurately understand and predict the impact of potential regulatory changes, and explore the implications of differ-
4-18
ent response options such as moving a particular operation offshore, modernizing current operations for compliance, exiting a line of business, or developing new technologies. Global Operations U.S. companies are increasingly a part of the global marketplace through pursuit of overseas customers, establishment of offshore operations, or linking with foreign suppliers and partners. The ability to model the local environment is key to designing and implementing operations strategies that align with cultural traits, fulfill their intended functional and performance requirements, and maximize returns on investment. Local considerations typically include different work schedules, labor costs and skills, and the costs of assuring good relationships with local authorities and communities. Models are already used in international operations. A semiconductor supplier in Korea provides models of operations with the quote and provides real-time visibility of operations, including testing data, during production. Despite competitive issues, this is an arena where U.S. companies (including direct competitors) should work together to share the benefits of existing models and collaborate in developing and maintaining new generations of models that strengthen global competitiveness. Learning from Tactical Experience Effective use of filtered information from factory floor and business operations could be a big opportunity for operations management. In the current state, management directives come from the top, and operations are managed at the factory and shop floor level. The craftsmen and operators make the product, the foreman runs the shop, the general foreman provides oversight, and so on up the chain. The Vice President of Operations is often disconnected from the day-to-day operations. In other words, the tactical world and the strategic world seldom work to the same objectives, and misguided performance objectives worsen the gap. One of the biggest problems resulting from this disconnect is perpetuation of a culture where problems are misrepresented, underreported, or even hidden from the next higher level of management in order to meet production schedules and avoid costly stoppages. As an example, a tire manufacturer had trouble with bubbles in the tires. The shop-floor fix was to puncture the bubbles with an awl and be sure that there was good rubber contact at the point of the defect. After multiple failures and extensive investigations, it was determined that this practice was leading to catastrophic tire failure failures that could have been easily avoided by halting production until the flaw in the process was uncovered and fixed. There are good examples of managing operations information flow from the bottom to the top. In Department of Energy facilities, an occurrence reporting system drives responsibility for raising awareness of any deviation or change throughout the organizational structure. Off-normal occurrences are immediately categorized and reported according to established rules. The methods of response are predetermined based on the level of the occurrence. Similar structures are used in the Department of Defense, particularly for ordnance and nuclear power operations. These structures are not perfect, but they point toward an environment where operations are monitored and model-based tools are used to detect problems and devise solutions. An increasingly valuable tool is the use of management dashboards and cockpits, which monitor key performance indicators and other metrics of operational health. The cockpit concept, as its name implies, provides the same kind of situational awareness that an aircraft cockpit provides for its pilot and is an extension of the corporate war room concept. One of the leading implementations, developed in 1989 by Belgian neurosurgeon Patrick M. Georges, is part of the current SAP product line and is in use today in more than 50 American and European companies (Figure 4.2.5-1). Many companies have developed similar electronic war rooms of their own, such as the APECS (Aerospace Production Execution Control System) environment created by Martin Marietta in the mid-1980s to manage production for the LANTIRN navigation and fire control system. Desktop management dashboards are standard tools today in the IT and communications service management industry, where incentive-based payments are directly
4-19
tied to daily and weekly metrics such as system availability, downtime, and average response time for resolving customer service requests.
Figure 4.2.5-1. SAPs management cockpit provides real-time visibility into performance against critical success factors. (photo courtesy of Bretel and SAP AG)
4-20
4.3 FUTURE STATE VISION & GOALS FOR STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

A master enterprise model that is unique to the enterprise will guide the strategic management team in continuously positioning the company for success in the rapidly changing global marketplace. Modeling systems accessed through a strategic management cockpit will support scenario-based evaluation of options for all strategic management functions. Model-based intelligent advisors will guide the organization to the best choices and best decisions for achieving corporate objectives and responding to challenges and opportunities. In the NGMTI vision for the model-based enterprise, top-down and bottom-up management processes across all functional elements of the enterprise are integrated in a unity model as illustrated in Figure 4.3-1. The unity model provides a framework whereby strategic planning and direction processes are integrated into enterprise work processes at every level of the organization. Information flows easily and accurately in all directions, from the bottom and the top, to exactly the right level needed to support processes and operations at each level for every function. The unity model aligns the enterprise mission and goals across and down to the lowest level of each area of the company. It places focus and value where it belongs, on the enterprise as a whole, not on any single entity or group. With all corporate elements in unity, the inherent disconnects between levels and units of the organization are eliminated. Each corporate officer occupies an equidistant management position. This facilitates a unity of purpose, roles and responsibilities throughout every organizational element, regardless of their specific role. This unified process dissolves the notion that strategic responsibility is only signifiFigure 4.3-1. The unity model provides a framework cant to senior executives. Instead, it befor a model-based environment to realize the future vision comes the mission of every management for strategic enterprise management. level, and flows all the way to the plant floor. More importantly, it provides a framework for developing and implementing a powerful set of model-based tools that every manufacturing company, regardless of size, sector, or organizational design, can apply to unify and coordinate its strategic management processes. In the manufacturing companies of the future, enterprise processes will be integrated and guided by a master enterprise model. This is not a monolithic organizational architecture or an information system, but rather a high-level process model that contains or links to all the constituent models that define and guide the companys different business and technical processes. The master enterprise model contains (or provides real-time access to) comprehensive, accurate, and timely information on the internal workings of the enterprise and its supply chain, plus the external information and events that may affect the enterprise. As the strategic management team executes its analysis and planning processes, the master model delivers the information needed to make the best decisions for the enterprise. It ensures that the implications of each decision are reflected in all affected business units, organizational elements, and processes, and provides feedback from these elements in order to optimize strategies for best results. The master model thus enables accurate analysis of the current situation and probabilistic scenarios for the future, helping the
4-21
management team position the enterprise to maneuver and succeed in the rapidly changing global marketplace. An open systems framework, flexible information representation schemes, and highly automated monitoring and surveillance functions will tightly couple strategic management processes to operational realities. Digesting daily a huge and complex quantity of data about internal operations and external conditions and events, the master model will empower the operation of the desktop management cockpit that provides each strategic management function with a continuously updated overview of pertinent events, trends, and opportunities for improvement. A continuous scan of external information sources (news media, patent applications, changes in regulations, R&D monitoring services, etc.) will feed into a continuously updated threats and opportunities analysis for the enterprise. Intelligent advisory systems will integrate this information with internal information to identify opportunity and challenge scenarios for consideration by the strategic THE STRATEGIC management team. The model-based strategic management enviMANAGEMENT COCKPIT ronment will be a dynamic one that learns from both inside and The model-based strategic manageoutside the organization on a 24/7 basis, integrating the top floor ment environment will be a dynamic structure that learns from both inside with the shop floor (and everywhere in between) and supporting and outside the organization on a 24/7 the best decisions at every level of the enterprise. In the model-based enterprise, the information required for all business functions is available when it is needed, where it is needed, and in the form in which it is most useful. The strategic management cockpit will place anyone who needs the services in contact with the information they need and the tools to convert it to actionable knowledge. The cockpit is the point of interface between the user and the master enterprise model, and it is supported by analytical tools, intelligent advisors,12 and connectivity to all internal and external knowledge bases available to the enterprise. The user can present a scenario to the cockpit, and quickly receive an analysis based on the best information available. For example, if a decision is being made between acquisition, merger, or partnering to acquire a needed capability, accurate and complete evaluation of all alternatives will be readily available. The basis for recommendations will be visible, enabling analysis of every decision and supporting continuous learning for the cockpits intelligent systems.
basis, integrates the top floor with the bottom floor (and everywhere in between), and supports the best decisions for every function at every level of the enterprise.
The model-based strategic management cockpit will extend far beyond todays electronic war rooms, giving every member of the team the information and tools they need to plan well, analyze thoroughly, implement quickly, and operate efficiently. The cockpit will be supported by the master enterprise model, which will integrate knowledge and modeling tools to support all business processes. The system architecture will be open and modular, enabling any organization to tailor it to support their unique needs and environment.
The strategic management cockpit will give every member of the team the information they need to set objectives, monitor performance, and respond to opportunities and challenges. Occurrences will be analyzed for their strategic value, and proactive changes in corporate direction will be recommended when appropriate. The system architecture will be open, interoperable, and modular, enabling companies to quickly tailor generic modules to support the specific needs of the enterprise.
12
A knowledge-based or intelligent advisor is a software tool that provides analysis and advice to support decision processes.
4-22
4.3.1 FUTURE STATE VISION FOR TECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT

With the model-based understanding of current environment and potential scenarios for the future, the strategic management team will evaluate its current portfolio of technologies, phase out those that do not contribute to continued growth, and select other value-added technologies for development within, or acquisition to, the enterprise. Protection of intellectual property will be a computer assisted, rapid, and secure operation. 4.3.1.1 Core Competencies In the model-based enterprise, management advisory systems interfacing with the master enterprise model will enable corporate executives to evaluate the value, importance, and impacts of maintaining a core competency in light of current and future competitive position and economic conditions. Decision support tools will guide executives in evaluating different options of continued internal support, outsourcing, or other alternatives, quantifying cost/benefit tradeoffs and assessing related risks. Goals & Requirements for Management of Core Competencies Goal 1: Core Competency Model Repository Establish a shared industry core competency repository that captures the business attributes of processes and technologies across the enterprise. (S-M)13 Common Core Competency Modeling Survey existing core competency models and modeling techniques and develop appropriate standards for creating and validating such models in digital form. Address interoperability requirements to ensure their compatibility with analytical tools. (S) Repository Structure Design and implement the shared core competency repository using openarchitecture information management standards that allow companies to populate the repository with their own models concurrently with sharing access to public domain models. (S) Repository Population Develop and prioritize a comprehensive list of core competencies for which models should be developed, and implement development in accordance with those priorities. (S-M) Goal 2: Core Competency Evaluation System Provide a system to evaluate core competencies, determine their value, and make informed decisions with respect to maintaining, discarding, or augmenting them. Include the capability to report and forecast usage, the value of use, the cost of maintaining the competency over time, and the availability and desirability of alternative options. (M) Core Competency Cost/Benefit Analysis Establish a knowledge-based approach and standard business rules to enable cost/benefit evaluation of the various methods of providing core competencies to the enterprise and managing those competencies over time. The system should accommodate all options including procurement, development, outsourcing, technology partnership, or supplier sourcing. (M) Process Competencies Develop and provide competency analysis capabilities specific to manufacturing processes. Include the capability to assess process evolution for improved capabilities and forecast the timeframe for maturation of emerging process technologies that will render the existing process uncompetitive or obsolete. Include the capability to model a processs flexibility to generate new steams of revenue through modification to support new and different product types. (M)
13
The S-M-L designations identify a nominal timeframe for delivery of the specified capability, where S (Short) = 0 to 3 years, M (Medium) = 3 to 5 years, and L (Long) = 5 to 10 years.
4-23
Product Competencies Develop and provide competency analysis capabilities specific to existing and potential product lines. Include the capability to forecast competitive trends in the product area in order to determine if product lines should be sustained, phased out, or reconfigured to capitalize on emerging technologies. (M) Technical Competencies Develop and provide competency analysis capabilities specific to the general technical competencies of the enterprise as they reside in the technical staff and production workforce. Include the capability to evaluate the pros, cons, and risks of retaining or growing a particular competency vs. divesting internal capability and relying on external partners and supply chain members. (M) 4.3.1.2 Technology Selection & Maturation In the model-based enterprise, a knowledge-rich modeling environment will guide the evaluation and assessment of technology options to advance product and process capabilities. On-line decision support tools will provide robust modeling capabilities and accurate, current, and complete information on which to base technology investment and entrance/exit decisions. Technology roadmaps, strategic plans, and other tools used to define the direction of the enterprise will be dynamically maintained with the assistance of automated knowledge discovery tools. Technology needs assessments and readiness assessments will be supported by digital tools to ensure accuracy and thoroughness of evaluation as well as alignment with the enterprises strategic goals and objectives. R&D investment opportunities will be evaluated to ensure that investments are not duplicated or unwisely made in technologies that can be otherwise procured or which will have little or no ultimate value. Goals & Requirements for Technology Selection & Maturation Goal 1: Technology Evaluation & Selection System Provide a comprehensive and flexible system that enables the companys technical leadership team to identify and analyze technology needs, model and evaluate options, and select the best options consistent with the technical and business imperatives of the enterprise. (M) Value Stream Analysis Model Template Develop a model-based advisory tool and templates to guide value stream analysis for enterprise processes, enabling identification and characterization of needed technologies or improvements to existing capabilities. (S) Model-Assisted Technology Roadmapping & Technology Planning Provide a modeling environment and tools that enable in-depth analysis of all factors associated with targeted technologies, including cost, risk, timing, potential returns on investment (ROIs), competitive position, and implications for current enterprise product, processes, and capabilities. (M) Technology Monitoring System Develop an autonomous technology surveillance system that trolls the internet and accessible knowledge sources to search for and identify new information that relates to the enterprises technology base and future technology plans. Include the capability to provide routine updates to affected researchers, developers, and managers on developments of interest, and red-flag items having potentially disruptive impact. (S-M) Decision Support Tools for Process Selection Develop a decision support advisor to assist in the evaluation of process options and aid in selection of the best processes with respect to all pertinent business factors. Include the capability to accommodate multiple technology options and outline multiple paths with selection points and criteria. (M)
4-24
Goal 2: Technology Maturation Management System Provide a model-based system for managing technology maturation processes and continuously assessing performance and value against the enterprises plans and strategic objectives. (M) Technology Readiness & Risk Assessment Develop analytical tools that enable consistent and unbiased assessment of technology maturity level, and requirements for maturation, based on standards and criteria for determination of technology readiness levels (TRLs), manufacturing technology readiness levels (MTRLs), and advancement risk levels (ARLs). (S) Objective Advancement Evaluation Extend the readiness and risk assessment toolset to manage and monitor technology progression through the readiness levels. Include the capability to define progress milestones, monitor progress against the plan, and update any comparative assessment of competing options. Provide interfaces with enterprise product and process modeling systems to automatically update cost/benefit projections and ROI calculations of selected technologies at each milestone or stage of the maturation process. (M) 4.3.1.3 Technology Acquisition, Protection, & Exploitation Commercially available tools and analysis methods will interact with the master model of the enterprise to assist the strategic management team in evaluating the best mechanisms for acquiring targeted technologies. The model-based analysis will evaluate options for developing the technology internally, procuring intellectual property rights, partnering A New Approach for with a technology developer, or buying turnkey Technology Surveillance technology with supporting services. Internal developments will apply a model-based conceptualization environment as discussed in Section 2. Starting from scientific models of materials and processes, plus a clear definition of desired and potential applications, the system will analyze the key characteristics of the envisioned product or process to highlight the richest target areas to explore. The system will assist researchers and designers in evaluating competing approaches, identifying opportunities for R&D collaboration, and turning their ideas into working concepts using virtual prototypes. With these model-based analysis tools plus human ingenuity and imagination, the enterprise can explore and weigh all possible solution paths and focus development efficiently on the most promising and valuable approaches.
Technology roadmapping is a valuable tool for helping organizations develop a focused plan to achieve their strategic objectives. However, setting the strategic direction of technology-intensive organizations is a complex activity that does not end with the definition of how the objectives will be met. For each objective, many solution pathways can help the organization meet its goals. Maintaining awareness of new scientific, economic, and corporate developments and analyzing the relevant information in real time is a challenge that cannot be met with the current generation of corporate information systems and commercial search engines. InRAD LLC, a small company in Tennessee, is building a toolset to fill this critical void with the support of the Department of Commerces Advanced Technology Program. The toolset, known as AKDS (Automated Knowledge Discovery System) will enable manufacturers to answer the question, Now that weve identified our R&D strategy, how can we be sure we stay on track and dont miss emerging and better solutions? AKDS is an innovative approach to identifying, retrieving,
analyzing, and presenting to everyone across the manuWhen a new product or process concept is defacturing enterprise the information the organization fined, the technology management system will needs. Through the creation of company-specific domain automatically search patent databases and other ontologies and by harnessing the power of semantic-based R&D knowledge sources to support determinatext and data mining capabilities, AKDS not only retrieves the most relevant information (both internal to the organition and characterization of intellectual property zation as well as from external web sites and databases), issues, export control limitations, and other facbut also stores it in exactly the right place for real-time actors that influence how the idea should or must cess. be protected. The system will provide a fully automated capability for intellectual property documentation, submission of patent applications, and determination of export protections, greatly reducing the time, cost, and complexity of legal compliance.
4-25
Goals & Requirements for Technology Acquisition, Protection, & Exploitation Goal 1: Real-Time Awareness of Technology Availability Provide capabilities to monitor the technology landscape, identify information of value to the enterprise, and deliver it to the right locations within the organization. (M) Autonomous Technology Surveillance Develop tools that can be trained for specific domains to automatically search for and categorize information about technologies of interest to the enterprise, providing a living repository of knowledge that is immediately accessible to researchers, program managers, and all members of the organizations technology leadership team. (S-M) Custom Presentation of Needed Information Develop models/profiles of user organizations and individual users to provide a framework for delivering information of interest in the form and format that is most useful to the users. (S) Technology Transfer Management Develop a comprehensive database of technologies produced with public funds that are available for licensing or other means of exploitation. Refine the business processes that research institutions are required to work to in order to remove or mitigate the roadblocks to commercialization. (M) Goal 2: Intellectual Asset Management System Provide tools to evaluate existing intellectual assets and make the best determination of strategy for action. Include the capability to assess the value of the asset, the cost of maintenance, and potential applications to determine if it is best to exploit, hold, sell, or drop the asset from the enterprise portfolio. (M) Gap Analysis & Decision Support Provide intelligent model-based advisors that capture the specific needs of the organization and match those needs to existing and emerging capabilities within and external to the enterprise. Include the capability to identify and characterize gaps that represent new opportunities to pursue or problems that must be addressed. (M) Discovery Evaluation Provide knowledge discovery tools that search patent databases for potential matches to topics of interest and help identify opportunities for discovery and innovation. Provide the capability to evaluate the potential value of the discovery and define recommendations for further efforts. (M) Innovation Management Tools Provide tools that match technological discoveries and innovative ideas to potential applications and aid in defining the best path to implementation. Include the capability to guide inexperienced researchers/technologists in bridging the gap from concept to application. (M) Commercialization Management Tools Provide model-based advisory tools to assist fledgling businesses and entrepreneurs in moving from first demonstration to viable commercial application. The SBIR program should be considered as a source of input and a testbed for this capability. (M)
4.3.2 VISION FOR FINANCIAL & CAPITAL ASSETS MANAGEMENT

At every point and at any time, managers and executives will have the information they need to run their businesses and make the best financial decisions for the future. Major capital investment and redirection decisions will be aided by powerful, highly automated models that combine mathematical analysis, knowledge-based rules, and economic analysis of projected scenarios, both locally and around the world. Allocation of capital funds will be accomplished with a full view of the value and risk of each potential investment. In the model-based enterprise, financial modeling tools and their outputs will be standardized within and across all sectors of industry. This will greatly simplify the process of building financial models, linking
4-26
them to living data sources, and integrating the tools into an enterprises strategic management systems environment and unique business processes. With XBRL and other standards providing convenient user interfaces and enabling transparent data exchange, model-based management tools will enable the financial staff to create and maintain extremely high-fidelity financial models of the enterprise and its business environment. These models will be linked to their real-world counterparts, ensuring that changes in the nature or value of variables are quickly updated in the living model. This will improve the speed and accuracy of corporate reporting, drastically reduce manual data collection and processing, and enable automatic integration of financial systems among all business partners in a supply chain. Financial analysis modules will accurately and completely model the long-term cost of a capital asset under possible acquisition, utilization, and disposition scenarios. The prognostic evaluation function of these systems will learn and adapt from experience, continually increasing accuracy of projections. Capital investment decisions will be based on evaluations of how well the projected expenditure supports the strategic directions of the enterprise, no longer simply yielding to the best sales pitch. Connected to the enterprises internal and external information sources, the systems will continuously troll for relevant data (political developments, regulatory changes, R&D or product announcements, economic trends, news events, etc.) that bear on the enterprises financial interests. The system will provide appropriate alerts whenever such information affects the enterprise financial model, and intelligent advisors will aid executives and managers in quickly understanding the impact of the change and identifying options for corrective action or exploitation of opportunities. The new-found ease in modeling of enterprise finances will yield a powerful new flexibility in capital management. As an example, if model-based analysis determines that sufficient profit potential can be realized, new business lines (requiring new facilities, technologies, and equipment) can be pursued with previously unimaginable speed. With all levels of the enterprise operating off the same models and the same data, and with far higher levels of confidence in the models than currently possible, the time required to work financial issues up the chain will be reduced from days or weeks to minutes and hours. Goals & Requirements for Financial & Capital Assets Management Goal 1: Unified Financial Modeling Environment Establish standards and standard techniques for creation and use of financial modeling systems that are seamlessly interoperable between partner companies and multi-tiered supply chains. (M) Standards for Financial Models Establish open standards for creation, communication, and implementation of interoperable financial models and modeling systems. (S) Model-Based Validation of Input Data Develop modeling capabilities that interface with enterprise information systems to validate all input data used in financial estimating and analysis. (M) Uniform Capital Investment Criteria & Assessment Develop standardized investment and capital asset evaluation criteria that provide decision guidelines for different kinds of capital investments (facility, equipment, R&D). Establish key success criteria, probability and risk projection, and weighing mechanisms to support a model-based decision environment. (M) Goal 2: Knowledge-Based Financial Management & Strategy Advisors Provide rule-based financial modeling systems augmented with intelligent advisors to enable rapid creation of robust and accurate financial models. Ensure that the system is specifically tailored to meet the needs of small and medium manufacturers. (M-L) Smart Modeling Templates Develop user-friendly on-line advisors that aid users in filling in the blanks in creating cash flow models, charts of accounts, cost estimates, and other financial models, without requiring a spreadsheet interface. (S-M)
4-27
Forward-Looking Costing Models Develop systems that continuously collect, report, and project costs based on automated analysis of actuals, trends, and risk factors including inflation, cost of money, currency rate fluctuations, fringe costs, supply shortages, etc. (M) Financial Trends Assessment Provide a knowledge base and means to identify numerical and empirical economic trends to allow companies to make investment or divestiture decisions with a full understanding of the probable and potential economic environment over the defined time windows. Include the capability to provide automated risk assessment and automatically flag and characterize soft variables that are outside the enterprises control. (M) Model-Based Acquisition Targeting Develop a system that can access commercial and government financial information sources and identify compatible capital acquisition targets based on key parameters such as corporate objectives, cash/debt position, financial returns, and cost risk. (M) Scenario-Based Capital Investment Advisor Develop a desktop virtual cockpit to allow managers to quickly and accurately evaluate various options for investment. Include the capability to verify assumptions and input data in real time based on information available from the enterprise knowledge base. (M-L)
4.3.3 VISION FOR KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT & APPLICATIONS

Future knowledge applications will be fully integrated with modeling capabilities to support all strategic management processes. Both the explicit intellectual assets of the company and the intangible assets captured in the skills and knowledge of the workforce will be accurately reflected in the strategic enterprise model. Knowledge will be harvested both within and external to the enterprise, to continually enrich the knowledge base. Decision support tools will tap into this dynamic knowledge base to enable the best decisions from the best possible information. In the model-based enterprise, effective knowledge management and application will be an intrinsic component of all enterprise processes and systems. Enterprise models will reflect the explicit assets of the company, including intellectual capital as well as financial and physical assets and liabilities. Business management systems in all functional areas will use intelligent advisors to integrate new knowledge automatically and update their functional models to reflect current reality. These systems will integrate the know-how and institutional memory that is dispersed across the organization. This tacit knowledge includes problem-solving expertise, project management and engineering experience, process expertise, market understanding, and more. The capture of all this knowledge, its application, and integration with all the processes and models that run the enterprise, will provide a rich and powerful toolset for better managing the complexity of the manufacturing enterprise from the strategic level. Techniques such as competency modeling will be used unobtrusively in daily operations to capture the skills, values, and behaviors of top-performing employees. Intellectual assets will be modeled along with technical assets and production capacities, thus allowing more accurate analysis of options for enterprise response to new opportunities and challenges. Applying a deep ontological understanding of the industry sector, automated information monitoring, mining, and integration tools will capture and process massive amounts of data into useful knowledge. These systems will provide a continuously updated view of the competitive landscape, the market landscape, the R&D landscape, and other views of interest to the enterprise. Integrated modeling tools will draw on these resources to enable strategic managers to look into the future with unprecedented clarity and project the best decisions for the health of the enterprise today and sustainability for tomorrow.
4-28
Goals & Requirements for Knowledge Management & Applications Goal 1: Enterprise Knowledge Capture Provide the capability to automatically capture lessons learned and other forms of enterprise knowledge and make these assets available for reuse through model-based processes and systems. (M) Knowledge Discovery for Corporate Memory Develop knowledge management systems that capture information in digital form about the operations of the enterprise and convert that information to useful knowledge. Include the capability to continually review candidate materials and store information in a knowledge repository for easy access and use. (M) Conversion of Lessons Learned to Actionable Knowledge Develop standard-format models for capturing lessons learned and systems to extract relevant data and information from the lessonslearned knowledge base. Develop systems to convert the data and information to knowledge that can be institutionalized for inclusion in policies, procedures, and other corporate documents. (S-M) Goal 2: Knowledge-Based Strategy Advisors Develop a suite of corporate/enterprise advisors as part of the strategic management cockpit to support the decision processes in setting and maintaining corporate direction. The advisors below are an initial set for consideration. (M) Competitive Positioning Advisor Develop a model-based advisor supporting evaluation and determination of optimum strategies for competitive positioning based on enterprise strengths and the positioning of primary and secondary competitors. (M) R&D Advisor Develop a model-based advisor supporting evaluation and determination of optimum strategies for R&D investments based on a deep understanding of enterprise strategic direction, core competencies, and ongoing and planned R&D in areas of interest to the enterprise. (S-M) Capital Investment Advisor Develop a model-based advisor supporting evaluation and determination of optimum strategies for capital investment based on a full understanding of enterprise strategic direction, financial resources, and economic/business/market forecasts. (M) Goal 3: Process-Based Ontologies Develop ontologies by industry sector to capture the essence of process knowledge and enable model-based characterization of all processes. (S-L) Common Ontologies Develop ontologies for common manufacturing industry business processes to support development of knowledge management systems that can be put to use by any company with little or no tailoring. (S) Sector-Specific Ontologies Develop ontologies specific to industry sectors (e.g., electronics, automotive) and process classes (e.g., machining, forming) to enable characterization and knowledge processing by model-based systems. (M-L) Goal 4: Model-Based Human Resource Management Establish the capability to accurately model human resources and quantify skill capabilities, training and qualification, attrition/turnover, and similar factors. (M) Job Requirements Profiles & Models Establish methods to fully define job requirements in a standard model format. (S) Training & Qualification Models Establish methods to fully define training, qualification, and certification requirements in a standard model format. (S-M) Workforce Factors Models Establish methods to model workforce composition, attrition, turnover, retention, and similar factors in a standard model format. (M)
4-29
4.3.4 VISION FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING & EXECUTION

Strategic direction for the future manufacturing enterprise will be captured in a master enterprise model that automatically evaluates all current and planned activities for fit and contribution to the enterprise plan and vision. The master model will provide a powerful framework for managing the planning process and associated performance metrics, ensuring that the strategic plan is fully integrated into, and with, all enterprise processes. In the model-based enterprise, strategic planning, execution, and performance measurement will be an integrated process that integrates both top-down and bottom-up perspectives. Desktop tools will enable executives and senior managers to digitally define the enterprise vision and mission; link those drivers to enterprise objectives, processes, and organizational elements (line of business, product line, operating unit, department, etc.); and develop appropriate goals and performance assessment metrics. The system will aid in evaluating options for achieving the defined goals, selecting the best course of action, and ensuring that adequate resources are allocated. It will also aid in up-front development of alternatives, fallback plans, and workarounds so that the enterprise can respond quickly as previously gamed contingencies arise. A key benefit of this capability will be that executives and managers will have a systematic process for defining strategic objectives and then setting realistic performance targets instead of arbitrary goals with clear strategies for achieving those targets. The master enterprise model will continuously represent current strategic directions, and institutionalize the strategic plan into the everyday business of the enterprise. The strategic planning maintenance process will operate dynamically in response to changes in direction or new information captured by the enterprise model. It will interface with the execution systems that drive the process throughout the enterprise, issuing updates for action to affected business units and organizations, and collecting performance, status, and progress data in order to compare results against the plan. Well-defined metrics built into the enterprise model and strategic plan will be applied to continuously monitor performance and measure progress against strategic goals at every level of activity. Staff at every level of the organization will be clearly aware of the companys strategic direction, and their role in fulfilling the plan. Senior management will have a continuous high-level view of the state of the plan and the ability to quickly drill down to whatever detail they desire. Integration of the monitoring and surveillance system with the systems that execute the processes of the business, down to the level of individual processes on the factory floor, will provide the capability to quickly flag and investigate potential problems before they escalate into crises. Automated performance monitoring systems will autonomously flag negative performance trends or potentially serious incidents and alert multiple appropriate levels of management to ensure that an issue is not merely addressed, but resolved in the best possible way. Goals & Requirements for Strategic Planning & Execution Goal 1: Model-Based Strategic Planning Provide a toolset that supports an entirely computerbased interactive strategic planning process readily useable by any type or size of manufacturing firm. (M) Strategic Planning System Develop a generic strategic planning system that uses model-based techniques to develop and document the enterprises vision and goals, facilitate alignment of the goals with the enterprise model, and create the framework for defining and managing requirements in each element of the enterprise (business unit, process, facility, department etc.) to achieve the enterprise vision. (M)
4-30
Metrics & Performance Measures Provide modeling and advisory systems that assist managers in assigning metrics and performance measures to each element of the strategic plan and flow those metrics into an implementation model. (M) Goal 2: Strategic Performance Monitoring Provide the automated capability to collect data and information on a continuous basis to provide up-to-date assessment of the state of the enterprise against the strategic plan. (M-L) Integrated Performance Monitoring Develop approaches and techniques for integrating enterprise performance reporting systems (e.g., cost/schedule status reporting systems) with the strategic planning system to provide automated reporting and analysis of performance against strategic goals. (M) Occurrence Updating Integrate operations occurrence reporting systems with the strategic planning system to continuously refresh the strategic plan. (M) Strategic Alarms Provide control limits based on defined performance metrics to automatically trigger alerts and alarms for deviations in performance from the strategic plan. Include the capability to rapidly model options for corrective action or changes to the plan. (M-L)
4.3.5 VISION FOR STRATEGIC OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT

Future operations processes will be seamlessly integrated with strategic planning and performance monitoring processes to ensure that all operations are conducted in full concurrence with strategic objectives. Strategic operations management in the model-based enterprise will be characterized by a broad field of vision and full integration with the enterprises higher-level business processes through the master enterprise model. This model will put all challenges and opportunities in the context of immediate solution, strategic impact, and linkage to other functions. Some of the characteristics of the future state are discussed below. Design and manufacturing are fully integrated Unity of design and manufacturing follows automatically if enterprise operation is based on integrated product and process design. A major component of that unity is the flow in both directions to and from design and operations. Model-based systems will automatically evaluate product and process design alternatives for life-cycle impact and value, continually feeding preferred operations alternatives to the design function. Business development and production are united The strategic operations management function and the business development function will set their directions based on the enterprises strategic goals, and jointly work within the framework of the master enterprise model. The master enterprise model, rich with operations knowledge, will provide the capability to model business alternatives and provide go/no-go decisions about which opportunities to pursue. Modeling and simulation capabilities will also determine how opportunities should be best pursued in order to maximize orders, sales, and profits, and take best advantage of operational resources. Efficiency is balanced with capability By thoroughly modeling enterprise capability, throughput and demand scenarios, proposed rightsizing, and efficiency changes will be evaluated to determine their impact on enterprise ability to support both present and future demands. This will provide the means to survive both surges and droughts. Workforce capabilities are assured Models of the enterprise will provide a continuously updated and accurate projection of staff and skill-mix needs and will aid managers in selecting and implementing the best strategies to meet those needs, including hiring, subcontracting, and employee education and development. Robust models of industry conditions will enable managers to optimize compensation and bene-
4-31
fits structures to remain competitive while ensuring that the human resources pipeline delivers the right mix of staff to meet operational requirements. Model-based training will drastically reduce the time required to bring new employees up the learning curve, and will provide the flexible cross-training required for the enterprise to respond quickly to changing requirements. Inventories are optimized Optimization of inventories will be closely aligned with lean practices, balancing efficiency and capability as discussed above. Manufacturing enterprises will use finely tuned models to adjust raw material, component, or subsystem acquisition, production activities, and logistics systems to align with actual product orders. This will ensure the capability to keep inventories low but sufficient and protected from interruption. Regulatory compliance is assured Adherence to regulatory requirements will be assured through model-based planning, design, operations management, and product life-cycle management systems that interface with on-line knowledge bases and integrate compliance into their processes. Robust product, process, and operations models will provide the capability to rapidly evaluate the implications and impacts of potential or pending regulatory changes. This will enable quick and efficient implementation of changes to minimize downtime and provide a market advantage over lagging competitors. A less adversarial relationship between regulators and implementers will be supported by proactive communication, sharing of models, and impact analysis before regulations are drafted into law. Based on models (generic and specific) of the industries affected, lawmakers and regulators will be able to readily evaluate the impact of a regulation on the cost and performance of affected companies and their products. The closer relationship fostered by better knowledge on both sides will strengthen the competitiveness of American manufacturing. Seamless Global Operations Models will be an integral part of business-to-business operations around the world. Model-based planning systems will enable greatly improved decision processes in evaluating options for global partnering, outsourcing, or siting of offshore facilities, taking into consideration complex factors such as political and economic stability as well as costs and distribution system impacts. These systems will also enable local optimization to realize efficient, harmonious operations in any region, country, or locale, and transparent integration of dispersed operations regardless of language, culture, currency, and time zones. Model-based operations management systems will also enable rapid analysis of problems (e.g., work stoppages, economic instability) in global operations and will support evaluation and selection of the best responses. Strategic Lessons Learned from Tactical Experience Model-based operations management systems will interface with operational process systems to not only continuously optimize performance, but also detect problems and capture knowledge to support process improvements and mistake-proofing. Decisions now made on the factory floor will be visible at much higher levels, providing better oversight of problem responses. Decisions made on the floor today by one person with limited knowledge of the potential impact will be made by a team of knowledgeable people supported by intelligent models that enable fuller understanding of the potential consequences of different response options. Goals & Requirements for Strategic Operations Management Goal 1: Unity of Design, Manufacturing, & Business Development Provide intelligent, modelbased systems that fully integrate design, manufacturing, and sales/marketing functions in order to take best advantage of operational capabilities. (M-L) Operations-Focused Product Design Develop design system interfaces and capabilities to access a rich operations model that defines process options, process capabilities, limitations, risks, cost, and other relevant factors to ensure that product designs are producible and optimized for total value and operational efficiency. (M)
4-32
Integration of Business Development & Operations Provide real-time systems that connect the business developers with the operations function to evaluate any potential contract or order against the ability of the enterprise to deliver at a profit. Include the capability to rapidly develop and validate strategies and plans for meeting requirements that cannot be fulfilled by current capacity or capability. (M) Living Process Models Develop and establish a process model library that is continuously updated from operations data and which enables operational planning systems to quantify process capability and capacity, identify areas for improvements, evaluate risks, and mitigate failure. This capability is particularly critical for small and medium manufacturers who must continually seek optimized performance from equipment without aid of large engineering support organizations. (M-L) Life-Cycle Optimization Develop intelligent operations life-cycle modeling capabilities that accept input from multiple sources and continually update themselves to support optimization in product and process design, manufacturing, operation, support, and eventual disposition. (L) Goal 2: Model-Based Strategic Operations Management Toolset Provide intelligent, modelbased systems that fully integrate design, manufacturing, and sales/marketing functions in order to take best advantage of operational capabilities. (M-L) Workforce Modeling Develop an operations workforce modeling system that enables operations managers to assess the attributes and performance of the current workforce against operational requirements and explicitly define future requirements and strategies to meet both near- and long-term projected needs. Include the capability to evaluate different options including addition and training of new staff, and outsourcing of core or peak work. (M) Lean Advisor Develop an optimization advisor that enables senior operations managers and staff to evaluate options for cost and capability reduction against the value of flexibility and capability. Include the ability to assess risk in moving operational capabilities to other entities (partners, subcontractors) in a lean supply chain. (S) Compliance Advisor Develop knowledge-based systems and models to evaluate regulations, determine the requirements and cost of compliance, highlight opportunities to reduce complexity, and drive compliance implementation. Design the system to provide a collaborative environment that is shared with regulators to enable arbitration and best solutions. (M-L) Global Operations Advisor Develop a model-based advisor system to aid operations strategists in evaluating options for international outsourcing or offshoring of operational capabilities. Include the capability to build local operations models that interface with the master enterprise model and transparently manage language, time, financial, and other differences that impact business processes. (M-L) Operational Monitoring & Occurrence Reporting Develop systems interfaces that enable detection, reporting, and resolution of deviations in operations. Develop intelligent models that assist the operations staff in analyzing root causes and impacts, and determining the best response. (M)
4-33
5.0 MBE PROJECT PLANS

This section presents the current compendium of white papers that were developed to outline the highpriority research, development, and implementation projects that support the NGMTI vision of future model-based manufacturing enterprises. The projects are presented in the order of priority that resulted from the NGMTI Technology Advisory Board and Industry-Government Forum meetings held in late 2004 and early 2005. The projects are as follows: MBE 13 Information Delivery to Point of Use MBE 7 Product-Driven Product & Process Design MBE 1 Flexible Representation of Complex Models MBE 5 Intelligent Models MBE 6 Configuration Management for the Model-Based Enterprise MBE 3 System-of-Systems Modeling for the Model-Based Enterprise MBE 4 Enterprise-Wide Cost Modeling MBE 10 Model-Based Distribution MBE 11 Multi-Enterprise Collaboration MBE 8 Model-Based Product Life Cycle Management MBE 9 Model-Based, Real-Time Factory Operations MBE 2 Shared Model Libraries MBE 12 Model-Based Resource Management
MBE Project Plans
5-1
NGMTI Project MBE-13
INFORMATION DELIVERY TO POINT OF USE

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop and demonstrate model-based technologies that deliver information to end users at the point of use, wherever that user might be. The information will be delivered through flexible, affordable systems that provide for heads-up, hands-free operation. Concentrating on graphical views of information provided by model-based systems, this project will demonstrate the sharing of information created in the enterprises planning processes (e.g., product design, manufacturing planning) to the four primary execution systems of the enterprise: manufacturing execution, product service/support, factory maintenance, and training. It will go far beyond the passing of visual files and text, providing users with interactive access to physical and logical models useful in guiding operations, with appropriate levels of detail and security. 2.0 CHALLENGE Model-based tools have been used for years in manufacturing enterprises, mostly in designing products, in operations planning, and in financial management.1 The model-based enterprise vision of NGMTI deepens and adds to these capabilities and extends them to all functions of the enterprise. This presents new challenges in order to make the vision an operational reality. The kinds of systems needed to provide integrated model-based capabilities are extremely complex, and the high degree of autonomy envisioned for these systems makes the human-system interface critically important. The information delivered to users must be accurate, clear, and free of unnecessary complexity. The interface must also enable rapid, intuitive interrogation to aid different kinds of users (novice and expert, engineer and business manager, etc.) in gaining a full understanding of the delivered data and in making the best decision based on that data. The information delivery systems must also be capable of easily accepting input to execute commands, modify models, update knowledge bases, rectify errors, and capture real-world experience and lessons learned. This requires that model-based systems have the ability to verify information inputs and arbitrate conflicting data, to ensure that all information accepted into the system is valid before acting upon it. Managing all of the information sources that feed the underlying models that drive the processes and equipment of the model-based enterprise is likewise a huge barrier. Much valuable information is contained in legacy systems, electronic flat files, or hardcopy documents that are no longer in current use or are not readily convertible to open digital formats. Much vital data will also reside in, or be controlled by, shared models or information repositories external to the enterprise. The system must also have the flexibility to accommodate new human/machine interface technologies as they become commercially available. Many challenges must be met to achieve model-based information delivery to point of use. They are: Establishment of model-based planning systems that determine how processes need to operate and what information needs to be communicated. Creation of operational models that link the plan to the execution mechanisms (i.e., to the process systems and equipment)
1
Operations planning in this context covers a wide range of functions, such as modeling of production capacity and distribution networks, cost and resource estimating, optimization of manufacturing flows, logistics planning (e.g., modeling of spares requirements), and similar activities.
MBE Project Plans
5-2
Creation of logical, knowledge-based models that arbitrate situations to assure the proper solutions. Creation of user interface tools that provide robust, affordable, heads-up, hands-free access to needed information. Development of model-based processes and intelligent controls is key to realizing the Model-Based Enterprise vision. These requirements are addressed in several other NGMTI white papers, including Intelligent Models; Model-Based, Real-Time Factory Operations; System-of-Systems Modeling for the ModelBased Enterprise; and Product-Driven Product & Process Design.2 Certain infrastructure needs also must be addressed to provide information delivery to point of use across different industries. The service will require delivery of very large data files and need to reach locations where high bandwidth or even basic network connectivity is not available. Mechanisms for ultra-high data compression are essential, and compact media (e.g., flash memory devices) with terabyte capacity will be the repositories of choice for operation in remote areas. The specific challenge addressed by this project involves communication between the model-based systems of the enterprise and the users at the point of use. The information provided must be conveniently presented to the user, without impairing safety or worker functionality. There are wearable, hands-free visualization products emerging that give operators information similar to cockpit heads-up displays and helmet-mounted sight systems common in military aviation. In general, these first-generation commercial products lack the flexibility and power to satisfy a broad range of user requirements. The device technologies need further capabilities as secure wireless communications and use-specific configuration templates. Evolution of these technologies currently centers on mass-market devices that may not have the safety, ergonomic or durability and cost factors solved for wide use in manufacturing or military environments. Most important, the ability to logically integrate massive amounts of complex information for intelligent, appropriate delivery in the manufacturing environment has not been addressed. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN This project will develop the model-based integration and data interface performance requirements needed by future information delivery technologies. It will demonstrate the high value of integrating point-of-use information delivery from the enterprises planning processes to the four execution domains (value vectors) of the enterprise: 1) manufacturing execution, 2) service/support, 3) factory maintenance, and 4) training. The project, led by industry participants including John Deere, General Motors, Ford, Boeing, Procter & Gamble, Lockheed Martin, Honeywell Kansas City, and Caterpillar, will demonstrate the ability to not only fulfill the explicit functional needs of each execution domain and their supporting systems, but also to provide derivative forms or abstractions of models needed by downstream and upstream processes. The proposed project will develop and demonstrate the capability to deliver model-based information (about products, processes, equipment, and other facility information) to users in a largely visual/graphic form that is rich in detail, annotated as needed, and conveys the intent of the task in context to the point of use. The underlying models will be stored in a flexible, vendor-neutral format, and support delivery of associated information in the form needed at all points of use. The information delivery tools will provide hands-free, wireless interactive presentation, thus ergonomically enhancing productivity, reducing errors, and continuously enriching and validating the contents of the underlying models via both human and system/machine feedback. The system will support functional workflows naturally and non-invasively, providing information views that are specific to the user, task, and activity context. The delivery devices may be heads-up or local displays (for individuals), or large glass screens (for work teams), and the system will provide the flexibility to accommodate new presentation technologies such as holographic display, voice command, and other sensory interfaces.
2
These and other NGMTI white papers are available through the NGMTI Communities of Practice at www.ngmti.us.
MBE Project Plans
5-3
The interactive information delivery mechanism will enable operator input to contribute to real-time validation of underlying models against the actual physical reality of production, thus putting planning functions in a continuous feedback loop with the execution function. Information flows in real time from operators, users, and mechanical/electronic feedback mechanisms in the physical world and gets matched against the associated information in the affected models, thus providing validation of the model-based object or process definitions. All downstream execution functions are supported by the comprehensive product and process models and information delivery systems. For the Product Service/Support domain, instead of hardcopy files or shelves of paper and softcopy manuals for all models still in use, workers are supported by real-time delivery of required and requested information. In the Factory Maintenance domain, equipment history and as-built and as-used information is available on line and just-in-time via the model, eliminating the need for hanging file folders and hardcopy logs for each machine. In the Training domain, formal training is reduced to primarily a skills inculcation and certification role. Task training is merged with real-time task support through real-time, just-in-time presentation of needed information needed at the moment. If training enables the operator to select the proper tools (which wrench, procedure, etc.) for a task, then the task support component provides specific information (which bolt next, where to apply the tool, with what torque, etc.). Figure 3-1 provides a high-level view of the relationship of the enterprises model-based planning processes with the execution domains (in this example, the manufacturing execution domain). The relationship for the other three domains (Product Service/Support, Factory Maintenance, and Training) is very similar.
Figure 3-1. Delivering needed information to the point of use requires seamless integration of model-based processes to their corresponding execution functions.
MBE Project Plans
5-4
3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR INFORMATION DELIVERY TO POINT OF USE The goals and requirements that must be met to realize the vision for this project outlined below. Additional goals that relate to this topic, and define many of the underlying capabilities required to support model-based information delivery, are provided in the NGMTI white papers for Intelligent Models; Model-Based, Real-Time Factory Operations; System-of-Systems Modeling for the Model-Based Enterprise; Product-Driven Product & Process Design; and Configuration Management for the Model-Based Enterprise. Goal 1: Authoring of Planning Information For all planning information in the enterprise process models, provide mechanisms to identify critical characteristics and define the appropriate view and presentation style needed by different enterprise functions over the life-cycle of the product, process or business function. (M) Integrated Information Framework Define and demonstrate the integration and flow of information generated by model-based tools into a coherent and comprehensive model that can support all enterprise planning and execution functions over the entire life-cycle. Use the framework to establish a complete understanding of each function (including critical characteristics) and of its role in the larger operation, including upstream and downstream functions. (M)3 Model-Based Information Authoring Tools Develop automated authoring tools that enable creation of appropriate point-of-use information extracted from process models and underlying knowledge bases. For common types of models (e.g., product models), provide tools that automatically extract needed information with no human intervention and convey it to users for specific tasks. (M) Goal 2: Publishing & Distribution of Planning Information Develop means of representing information from planning functions in a highly functional, vendor-neutral format (e.g., XML) that is compatible with enterprise resource planning/management systems and manufacturing execution systems. Provide the ability to publish the information in different formats such as discrete pages, executable animations, etc. that are required for different tasks and to facilitate real-time delivery of extremely large files. (M) Generic Data Storage Provide standards-based data format storage solutions that can be managed by any major database management system and are accessible to any major ERP or MES or supporting model-based applications. (S) Large File Delivery Provide high-bandwidth communications and ultrahigh data compression techniques and other mechanisms to enable delivery of very large files in real or near-real time to remote parts of the enterprise. (M) Interconnected File Storage Management Provide storage and data management solutions for efficient management of very large files and which enable rapid access to interconnected information stored and widely dispersed sites within and external to the enterprise. (M) Goal 3: Point of Use Information Delivery Devices Provide technologies to enable hands-free, wireless information delivery with intuitive navigation and human interface, with emphasis on human factors such as safety and ergonomics. (S-M) Ergonomic Information Presentation Provide information presentation and input/output mechanisms, including hands-free displays, natural language interaction, etc., sufficient to cover a broad range of manufacturing work environments. (S-M)
3
This framework is defined primarily by goals outlined in the NGMTI White paper for Flexible Representation of Complex Models.
MBE Project Plans
5-5
Information Selection & Interface Mechanisms For all manufacturing enterprise functions, develop convenient and easy-to-understand means of navigating through options and interfacing with the system. Address technologies including voice-commanded selection/interrogation and system-enabled mechanisms (e.g. barcode or RF tag navigation). (S) Goal 4: Task-Appropriate Information Access Provide easily navigable, real-time access to all needed information from enterprise models and other sources, with appropriate security. (M) Information Rights Definition Develop schemas that identify the appropriate information and level of detail and data protection required for every manufacturing enterprise function. This goal should initially address one well-bounded manufacturing sector and then extend the solution to other sectors. (S) Functional Information Mapping For each enterprise function defined under the Information Rights Definition requirement above, develop a mapping of information needs including level of detail needed, needed/desired delivery formats, and targeted presentation devices. (S) Information Security Mechanisms Provide the capability to assess the information and level of detail requested by an enterprise function or user, determine the access privileges of user and point of use, and then provide the information within the defined security constraints. (M) Goal 5: Integration of Legacy & External Information Provide the capability to integrate and maintain enterprise legacy information suitably along with new/current information. (M-L) Model Linkages to Major Legacy Systems Develop techniques for organizing and presenting information derived from legacy modeling tools and information systems, and link these information structures into the comprehensive enterprise information management models. (M) Model Linkages to Foreign Systems Develop techniques for organizing and creating custom presentations of information from custom applications and from systems external to the enterprise, and link these information structures into the comprehensive enterprise models. (M-L) Model Version Management System Develop a system to manage all previous versions of all models used within the enterprise, to maintain a configuration audit trail and enable retrieval of the models and associated data when needed. (M) Goal 6: In-Process Validation of Logical Models Provide means of matching feedback from physical processes (e.g., via sensors, human interaction) against process models and performance metrics, and issuing alerts and requests for actions if the situation does not match expectations. (S-M) Mapping Feedback to Models Provide means of continuously comparing sensor readings or instrument/equipment measurements or human observations to the performance expectations defined by the controlling models, and taking appropriate action when measured values exceed specified tolerances or indicate a negative trend. (S-M) Corrective Action & Alerting Capability Develop broadly applicable ground rules to guide system and user response to off-normal events, including requests for intervention, prioritization of intervention options, verification of requested action, and issuance of higher-level alerts (and launching of fail-safe actions) to ensure the problem is contained and properly mitigated. (S-M)
MBE Project Plans
5-6
3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK Task 1 Model-Based Information Authoring & Publishing: This task shall develop means for extracting and representing information from enterprise planning processes in vendor-neutral formats that are compatible with enterprise resource planning and manufacturing execution systems. The objective is to provide the capability to publish and manage model-based information and instruction sets that can be automatically formatted for effective and secure delivery to the point of use, including remote locations. This task shall also address requirements and solutions for integration of information from legacy systems and file formats. Task 2 Information Delivery & User Interface Toolset: This task shall develop a set of information delivery device options and user feedback mechanisms which are evaluated for form, validated for purpose, assured for safety, and durable for service in the manufacturing and support environment. Task 3 Point of Use Pilots Task 3.1 Model-Based Factory Operations: This task shall apply the capabilities developed under the preceding tasks to demonstrate point-of-use information delivery for manufacturing execution in an industrial setting for one or more industry sectors. Task 3.2 Model-Based Support of Maintenance & Repair: This task shall apply the capabilities developed under the preceding tasks to demonstrate point-of-use information delivery for model-based factory maintenance and product maintenance and repair. Task 3.3 Model-Based Support of Training: This task shall apply the capabilities developed under the preceding tasks to demonstrate use of product and process models and point-of-use information delivery systems for different types (e.g., factory worker, maintainer, product user) of training requirements. Task 4 Technology Extensions Task 4.1 New Information Delivery Capabilities: This task shall investigate visualization advances beyond present day technology and develop an understanding of likely advances, such as Augmented Reality, that can be applied over time to enhance model-based information delivery. Task 4.2 New Human Interface Capabilities: This task shall draw on emerging technologies to extend current capabilities beyond simple voice commands to include mechanisms such as more extensive natural language interaction, gesturing, eye tracking, and brainwave monitoring. 4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO COMMERICAL INDUSTRY The ability to publish model-based information on demand in convenient, interactive visual format to all enterprise functions will benefit all sectors of manufacturing. These benefits include: Closer adherence to the design and process plan, with fewer mistakes thus increasing manufacturing yields and other performance metrics while enabling fast, flawless response to problems, challenges, and changes in requirements. Greatly improved user understanding of processes, procedures, equipment, and systems thus decreasing time and cost for training and troubleshooting and radically shortening learning curves. Improved productivity through immediate access to definitive information. Reduced warranty costs for returns and allowances, thus offsetting the typical 2% gross cost impact that most businesses incur. Improved ability for users and enterprises to deal with an increasingly complex and technical product mix and work environment
MBE Project Plans
5-7
Rapid, accurate modeling of proposed changes, with virtual testing and analysis enabling more efficient switchovers and faster problem-solving. Reduced training, with instruction provided just in time to workers already trained in basic functional skills. In-depth product knowledge available to service personnel and end users even at remote locations, reducing the time and cost of maintenance and repair. There are a number of significant advantages to be gained from wider, more effective use of information delivered from model-based systems. Quality, overall efficiency, and first-pass yield in manufacturing will be enhanced by real-time knowledge and understanding of the product and its processing status. And as the number and complexity of products in enterprise portfolios keeps growing, information delivery to point of use will help companies address the problems of an aging skilled workforce and a more transient workforce facilitating transfer of knowledge and capabilities to the next generation of workers. The useful skill level of all workers will increase with real-time, hands-free access to comprehensive, modelbased knowledge presented in highly graphical forms. This information will include work instructions for shop floor operations and equipment maintenance activity, and life-cycle support in product operation, service, and repair. It will also reduce the delays of off-line training and the language translation burden associated with global operations and increasingly multi-cultural work environments. John Deere, for example, reports such techniques have provided a 90% savings in language translation costs for the 76 languages they support for their manuals, procedures, and training documents. Improved information delivery will help sustain high productivity for any manufacturing facility. The model-based factory management system will continuously monitor key performance indicators (KPIs) and other vital metrics by monitoring performance of all enterprise processes, systems, operations, equipment, tasks, etc. against their respective control models. Status and trends will be continuously displayed to points of use, and any issues will be flagged for action by appropriate users. The point-of-use information delivery systems will provide those users with the intuitive tools they need to quickly understand the issue, evaluate options, and command the best response. This radically improved capability to anticipate and respond to problems will help companies large and small minimize planned or unplanned downtime caused by changes in tooling or product requirements, equipment failures, scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, technology insertions, etc. anything that prevents being in smooth production status. 4.2 BENEFITS TO DOD The DoD will realize direct benefits from this project through the evolution of an increasingly more reliable, capable, and responsive defense manufacturing base. Model-based capabilities and information management mechanisms will enable a faster, more cost-effective response to surge and mobilization requirements, reducing the lead time required to build up stocks for rapid-response deployments. Likely the most visible impact will be in the logistics support realm, where model-based maintenance, repair, supply support, and training processes coupled with model-based information delivery mechanisms will reduce the cost and time of all logistics functions. A far larger proportion of skills training for weapon system operators and maintainers will be delivered at point of use, reducing the need for costly part task trainers and time-consuming out-of-unit training. This concept is entirely consistent with DoDs philosophy for upcoming generations of weapon systems such as Joint Strike Fighter, where maintenance techs will use the aircrafts onboard maintenance interfaces and PDA devices to diagnose problems and call up technical documentation and repair procedures before they roll the aircraft into a hangar. The improved capability for multilingual support will also simplify interoperability with NATO and other coalition forces, and reduce the cost and complexity of training and support for joint operations and foreign military sales (FMS) programs. Greater emphasis on embedded training and on generic reconfigurable information delivery devices for training also supports the future vision for U.S. allies. The United
MBE Project Plans
5-8
Kingdom, for example, is aggressively exploring these technologies for implementation on programs such as the Maritime Composite Training System (MCTS). DoDs emphasis on improved information delivery for battlefield command and control, particularly on programs such as Future Combat Systems (FCS), is an area where military R&D and fielded systems is well ahead of commercial industry in both concepts and technology. Opportunities for synergy should certainly be explored in this NGMTI project, since commercial leverage can enable DoD to significantly reduce the cost of acquisition and ownership for end-user information delivery devices. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN & RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The initial project plan outlined below spans 24 months with an estimated resource requirement of $9.75 million, of which approximately $7 million is allocated for technology development and acquisition of commercial software and hardware required to integrate working systems for subsequent demonstrations under Task 3.
Task 1.0 Model-Based Info Authoring/Publishing 1.1 Integrated Information Framework 1.2 Model-Based Authoring 1.3 Data Storage & File Delivery/Management 1.4 Legacy Systems Integration/interface 2.0 Information Delivery & User Interface Toolset 2.1 Information Delivery Devices 2.2 User Interface & Feedback 2.3 Information Requirements Mapping 2.4 Information Security 3.0 Point of Use Pilots 3.1 Model-Based Factory Operations 3.2 Model-Based Maintenance & Repair 3.3 Model-Based Training 4.0 Technology Extensions 4.1 New Info Delivery Capabilities 4.2 New Human Interface Capabilities Duration 12 mo 21 mo 6 mo 24 mo 18 mo 18 mo 6 mo 12 mo 3 mo 3 mo 3 mo 6 mo 6 mo Start Date Program Start Mo 3 Mo 6 Program Start Program Start Mo 6 Mo 6 Mo 12 Mo 12 Mo 15 Mo 18 Mo 18 Mo 18 Est. Cost 2.75M 250K 1.5M 250K 750K 4.0M 2.0M 1.0M 250K 750K 2.0M 1.0M 500K 500K 1.0M 500K 500K
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT The risk for this project is assessed as high, due to the scope and complexity of information that must be addressed, the wide variety of user environments, and the need to integrate or interface with potentially hundreds of existing applications and systems. Risk is mitigated by the availability of existing technologies that can be leveraged to support demonstration of basic capabilities. The technology readiness level is assessed at TRL 3-4, with elements such as hands-free displays being in initial commercial use (TRL 7-8) and other elements, such as automated mode-based authoring, being in the conceptual phase of development (TRL 2-3).
MBE Project Plans
5-9
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-7
PRODUCT-DRIVEN PRODUCT & PROCESS DESIGN

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop and pilot modeling and simulation capabilities that enable a product model to automatically drive downstream applications. While product design creates a model that describes what is to be made, process design provides a model of how the product will be produced. These are usually two very different kinds of models requiring highly skilled (and usually manual) translation of information from one domain to another. This project will demonstrate collaborative interaction between product and process models in an enterprises product realization environment, to evaluate the current state of capability and provide business-case data regarding the impacts of decisions made at each step of product design and manufacturing. 2.0 CHALLENGE Model-based product realization liberally applies simulation in the design, engineering, manufacturing, and support processes of the enterprise. Product realization is the core of the manufacturing enterprise mission the creation of products to generate revenue and fulfill the needs and wants of the enterprises customers. However, product realization processes are highly interdependent with the other functions of the enterprise. In the model-based enterprise concept, these relationship are greatly heightened in importance due to the intensive collaboration required among all processes, systems, and information flows (Figure 2-1). Despite the widespread availability of computer-aided design (CAD) tools4, creation of digital product models is rarely on the critical path of product development. Similarly, process models are often created at a high level to design manufacturing flows or at a detailed level to help diagnose a problem, but rarely as a standard tool to optimize process designs. Historically, products and processes are developed by creating and testing a design to see how well it works, then modifying the design and testing it again. Computer-aided design and analysis tools have greatly improved the ability to arrive at ready-to-manufacture de4
Figure 2-1. Future design and manufacturing systems will operate from product models that link to all relevant information across all enterprise processes and the entire product life cycle.
CAD tools are currently estimated to have an installed base of 20 million users. (http://www.jonpeddie.com/special/CAD.shtml).
MBE Project Plans
5-10
signs with fewer prototype iterations, but process development still too often relies on engineering drawings, specifications, and bills of material that are handed off to the production organization to figure out how to make the product. The manufacturing team assesses the design to determine what can be made inhouse and what needs to be subcontracted out, develops the manufacturing process plan and procedures (including fabrication, assembly, test, and inspection functions), and runs several iterations of pilot production to verify readiness to make deliverable product. Most manufacturers today practice concurrent engineering and integrated product/process development (IPPD) by engaging the manufacturing team directly in product development. This helps optimize designs for features such as producibility, quality, reliability, and affordability, and reduces the time required to move to initial production. Model-based tools are commonly used to lay out manufacturing flows, develop assembly procedures, and define skill and equipment resource requirements to meet the target schedule and production rates. However, use of detailed process simulation is very limited due to the time and cost of creating the models, which restricts use to critical applications with a clear return on investment. The lack of general awareness of (and confidence in) process simulation tools also makes it difficult to secure support for process simulation development efforts, even though they have potentially large payoffs in time, resources, and profitability. Government investment in this area has been limited for similar reasons. For chemicals and other continuous process industry products, the product starts off as a material transformation model and a material balance sheet. These drive the design of the process systems and manufacturing plan. Simulation is used extensively to engineer the process for throughput, quality, and safety. However, the process design is usually made without detailed consideration of control parameters. This is a major deficiency considering that design decisions determine up to 40% of the process cost. In the NGMTI vision for the model-based enterprise, product and process modeling functions will truly collaborate. Creation of a product design will automatically pull associated manufacturing process models, material models, and supplier capability models, enabling the product realization team to deliver a complete manufacturing plan concurrent with completion of the product design. Intelligent advisor tools will aid designers in optimizing design features, tolerances, and material selections to take best advantage of process capabilities. The result is a total product design that can be downloaded for manufacturing execution (Figure 2-2). Realizing this vision is a significant challenge. Materials engineering and manufacturing process design are currently not well integrated with product design applications. Geometric representations are not mathematically complete, nor are they sufficiently precise for direct use in process design and control. Process simu-
Figure 2-2. In the NGMTI vision, manufacturing execution specifications and plans will be downloaded directly from the product/process model to drive and control all manufacturing processes.
MBE Project Plans
5-11
lations are often independent of the actual design and, in general, results are communicated manually to the design team. Material models are not scaleable and have limited ability to account for variability in material quality (e.g., impurities). Collaborating product/process models are widely regarded as a need, but the needed tools have not yet emerged. Many engineering computing tools exist to facilitate the transition of a product from the conceptual stage to a final, detailed design. While electronic product data exchange is common, it often requires human intervention to ensure accuracy of results. Interoperability of simulation tools is sorely lacking in the process realm. While discrete simulations may deal with product stress and temperature profiles during individual processes, they seldom address the total performance profiles of products and processes across multiple operations. Concurrent optimization of multiple product and process parameters is likewise rare. Lack of standards is a major concern across all model-based applications for product and process design. Compatibility in product data exchange, representation standards, compatibility of simulation systems with process information management systems, and scaleability from micro to macro levels, all must be addressed to provide cost-effective and robust simulation capabilities. Industry lacks collaboration strategies to solve these basic issues, and export control regulations impose additional restrictions (particularly in the aerospace/defense sector) on sharing of product and process information across international supply chain. Solving all of these challenges requires a large-scale and coordinated effort between the manufacturing user community, which must specify required functionalities and integration needs, and tool developer/vendor community, which must deliver affordable solutions that meet requirements for both small and large manufacturers. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN The full set of goals and requirements for product-driven product and process development as defined in the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise is given in Section 3.1. Delivering the full extent of capability defined by many of these goals will be an evolutionary process spanning many years of technology development, incremental implementation, and extension across different sectors. This project will develop that part of the set that represents the next step in enabling product models to automatically drive downstream manufacturing and support processes. The project will demonstrate seamless interoperability of product and process models in a system-of-systems enterprise environment. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR PRODUCT-DRIVEN PRODUCT & PROCESS DEVELOPMENT Goal 1: Automated Comprehensive Product & Process Design Provide the capability to create and optimize a complete product and process definition containing or linking to all related specifications, requirements, analytical results, or other pertinent information. (M-L)5 Common Product & Process Specification Standards For different industry sectors and product types, develop standards for defining product and process specifications that can be accessed by the design system and that are consistent with the parameters, attributes, and features on which product and process designs in each sector are based. (S) Design Knowledge Base Develop a knowledge base of certified materials, commercial components, and manufacturing process and equipment data and models that is accessible and directly useable by human designers and automated design tools. (S-M) Sector-Specific Design Knowledge Bases Extend the basic design knowledge base with sectorspecific information and knowledge to support the unique needs of each industry. Include appro5
MBE Project Plans
5-12
priate provisions for security and control of proprietary, export controlled, and classified data. (ML) Multi-Attribute Manufacturability Assessment Develop and integrate design evaluation tools that interface with the enterprises process and facilities knowledge base to assess manufacturability and provide feedback on ways to improve manufacturability in terms of both feasibility and cost. Include the capability to simultaneously evaluate multiple design attributes to enable rapid optimization of product designs for efficient manufacture. (M-L) Unified Performance Evaluation Applications Assess existing performance evaluation applications (i.e., analytical tools) and develop a framework for integrating those applications into a unified development environment for specific classes of products and processes. Conduct a gap analysis to define the extensions required to various tools to support the integrated environment and to identify what new analytical capabilities need to be developed. Initiate development of the missing capabilities. (M-L) Automated Design for Assembly Develop extensions to current CAD tools to automatically assess assembly attributes for components, parts, and subsystems and guide the product designer in optimizing the design for ease, speed, reliability, and cost of assembly as well as future maintenance of the delivered product. Include the capability to automatically repair or flag features that require nonstandard tools, fixtures, or assembly aids. (M) Integral Packaging Design Extend product modeling systems to include packaging issues as an integral design factor contributing to minimum product cost and assuring product protection/preservation and compatibility with handling and transport systems. (S) Manufacturing Capability Interface Develop product model interface mechanisms that provide real-time access to information that affects producibility and production cost, including material/commodity/supplier availability as well as enterprise manufacturing capability. (M) Accurate Process Simulation Tools Develop effective simulation tools that address materials and manufacturing processes of interest to industry, and are validated against certification standards within defined boundaries and parameters. (M) Material & Process Advisors Create knowledge-based process advisors for individual materials and manufacturing processes to support a variety of design and engineering functions. Develop a methodology to capture the needed knowledge and develop rule sets for existing materials and manufacturing processes based on guides, handbooks, and other industry reference resources. (M) Model-Based Material Transformation Develop applications to design transformation processes for the best result from a scientific understanding of the interactions involved, enabling processing in ways that deliver compliant product with minimum waste. (M-L) High-Fidelity Multi-Process Analysis Develop a suite of analytical applications that accurately predict the results (including time, cost, and environmental considerations) of different manufacturing processes and materials for a given component, part, or formulation. (M-L) Rapid Product/Process Design Optimization Develop modeling and simulation applications to provide rapid exploration, evaluation, and selection of optimal options in product and process design. Include the capability to launch analytical applications from the desktop CAD/PDM interface and have them execute automatically, with no dependence on the user. (M-L) Automated Product/Process Definition Develop the capability to automatically create a complete and unambiguous, computer-sensible product and process definition that includes all information needed to manufacture the product. (L)
MBE Project Plans
5-13
Design Conventions Development & Learning System Develop the capability to nonintrusively monitor the development process and learn from the decisions made by design teams. Apply this knowledge to develop a continuous learning system that automatically executes the steps in the design process and defines voids in the knowledge base or the rule set, to support evolution of expert automated design systems. (L) Goal 2: Multi-Scale Material Modeling Capability Develop material modeling and analysis technologies enabling scaling of properties and behaviors from micro (e.g., molecular) to macro (product) levels to support development of robust product models that accurately reflect the influence of real-world material properties. (L) Molecular Material Modeling Extend existing, and develop new, molecular modeling tools for high-priority classes of materials to enhance understanding of material properties and capture, in computer-sensible form, the relationship of molecular properties to material variability. (S-M) Material Transformation Model Repository Establish an industry-wide shared repository that addresses material phase transformation and the impact of various attributes on transformation processes. Include standardized, validated transformation models plus tools to use these models to support design, optimization, and troubleshooting of transformation processes. (M) Integrated Material Modeling Develop interfaces from product and process modeling systems to material models and knowledge bases so that the properties and behaviors of the product and process design accurately reflect the properties of the materials used. (M-L) Multi-Scale Material Modeling Develop capabilities to predict macro-level process behaviors resulting from micro-structural material attributes, and address requirements on microstructure to attain desired macro properties in-process and in the finished product. (L) Multi-Scale Process Modeling Identify high-priority material needs for micro-scale models to support high-fidelity process modeling. Develop material behavior models for critical micro-scale phenomena such as grain growth and size fractions, dislocations, and crystal structure. Provide modeling tools that manage the linkages and information exchange between levels. (L) Goal 3: Automated Process Planning Provide the capability to automatically generate the process plan as the product is being designed, consistent with product attributes, processing capabilities, enterprise and supply chain resources, and enterprise business objectives. (L) Process & Resource Capability Models Develop tools and techniques for creating process and resource models that capture complete descriptions of enterprise manufacturing resources and process capabilities, enabling plug-and-play integration of resource/capability models through every level of the supply chain. (S) Process Model Repository Define required process attributes and standard formats for process models that support automated process planning and manufacturing execution, and establish a shared repository of process models for use by different industry sectors. (S) Shared Process Models Work with industry to acquire well-characterized models of common processes and make those models available via the Process Model Repository. Assess gaps in the process set to define high-priority model needs for critical processes, and initiate development of the required models. (S) Multi-Level Interoperable Process Models Develop capabilities and standards enabling integration of multi-element process models at the unit process, line, shop floor, factory, and enterprise levels. (M)
MBE Project Plans
5-14
Automatic Process Requirements Extraction Develop the capability to extract process requirements from higher-level process models in order to evaluate applicability for specific purposes (e.g., to evaluate the ability of an existing process system to make a new product). (M) Planning System Interface to Factory Floor Create interfaces between process planning systems and enterprise information systems to guide decision-making for optimizing manufacturing process plans with respect to factors such as process flow, manpower/skills requirements, and product mix). (M) Multi-Step Process Planning Develop the capability to perform "what-if" and sensitivity analyses to optimize multi-step processes and generate simulations and operational models for process control and verification. (M-L) Technology Insertion Modeling Develop modeling tools to create structured plans for deploying process technology advances across the life cycle of a production line or facility, supporting insertion of new capabilities to extend process life or meet future requirements for increased capability or capacity or shifts to different products. Include the capability for financial analysis to evaluate issues related to capital expenditure and return on investment. (M) Process Planning Direct from Product/Process Design Develop generative planning systems that operate directly from product and process definitions to provide all information needed to drive product manufacture. Include the capability to incorporate material and unit process models through transparent interfaces to enterprise model libraries and knowledge bases. (L) Goal 4: Tools to Manage Product/Process Development Uncertainty & Risk Develop modeling and simulation aids that enable effective management of risk, uncertainty, and sensitivities in product and process development. (M-L) Uncertainty Bounding Techniques Develop mechanisms, techniques, and protocols for identifying, quantifying, and providing adequate margins for uncertainty and risk in complex product and process models. (M) Robustness Evaluation Develop performance modeling systems that determine the sensitivities of the design, quantify uncertainties, and define the robustness of product solutions. (M) Automated Risk Scoring Develop a modeling utility that automatically assesses a proposed product or process design, automatically scores it for technical, schedule, and cost risk based on technology maturity (e.g., technology readiness level) and design uncertainties, and creates a prioritized assessment of the detected risks. (M) Multi-Scale Uncertainty Management Create methodologies for accounting for and tracking the uncertainties associated with materials, component designs, subsystem designs, and other developmental elements in system-level product and process models. (M) Product/Process Risk Mitigation Tools Develop modeling tools that capture risk items from the product/process design and aid in development and monitoring of mitigation actions. Include business-case templates to quantify the benefits (cost savings, performance, and life-cycle advantages) of a high-risk product or process element to support management decision processes. (M) Automated Risk Minimization Develop a modeling utility that draws on product and process experience captured in the enterprise knowledge base (or shared knowledge bases maintained by industry sectors) to recommend lower-risk alternatives for risk elements identified in a product or process design. (M-L)
MBE Project Plans
5-15
Goal 5: Model-Based Product Assurance Develop methodologies and standards for virtual testing methods that use simulations in lieu of physical testing in product and process development, over time eliminating all but safety/performance-critical physical tests. (L) Model-Based Quality Assurance For different industry sectors, develop quality assurance standards for verifying product and process models and for certifying analytical simulation results within clear bounds of confidence for specific applications. (M-L) Self-Validating Designs Develop simulation and analysis tools that verify component, subsystem, and system designs against requirements and quality assurance criteria, reducing or eliminating the need for iterative physical testing in product and process development. (M-L) Model-Based Certification of Production Readiness Develop the capability to test and validate models of product designs and their simulated manufacturing processes with sufficient fidelity and accuracy that production readiness can be certified by simulation. (L) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK This NGMTI pilot project will develop simulation capabilities that enable a product model to drive downstream process planning and manufacturing planning applications, and provide tools to optimize product designs for all attributes of interest. The project will demonstrate seamless interoperability of product and process models in one or more representative industry environments for a selected family of products, and create a number of shareable knowledge bases and model repositories. At its conclusion, the project will provide detailed information useful for developing business cases for further development in this area. The project plan has five major tasks as discussed below. For each of the tool, model, or knowledge base developments, maximum leverage will be obtained by using best-in-class tools and existing data assets as a point of departure for achieving the desired capabilities. The major tasks are as follows: Task 1 Project Organization: This task shall bring together technical contributors from both commercial and government areas. The team will produce a detailed plan defining the specific scope, deliverables, schedule, and approach for developing and demonstrating the specified capabilities. Task 2 Automated Comprehensive Product & Design: This task shall develop, for a representative product family in a selected industry sector, initial capabilities to create and optimize a complete product and process definition that contains or links to all related specifications, requirements, analytical results, and other pertinent information. Specific subtasks include: 1. Creation of common product and process specification standards 2. Development of a design knowledge base 3. Development of automated design for assembly tools 4. Integration of product and process simulation tools. Each of these capabilities will leverage and extend existing applications and tools (e.g., analytical codes) to the maximum extent possible. Task 3 Automated Process Planning: This task shall develop the initial capabilities to automatically generate, for the product design developed under Task 2, the associated process plans and manufacturing execution plan. Specific subtasks include: 1. Development of a process model repository 2. Development of shared process and resource capability models 3. Development of multi-level interoperable process models.
MBE Project Plans
5-16
Task 4 Product/Process Development Uncertainty & Risk: This task shall develop modeling and simulation aids that enable effective management of risk, uncertainty, and sensitivities in product and process development. Capabilities to be developed include uncertainty bounding techniques, robustness evaluation tools, and automated risk assessment and mitigation planning tools. Task 5 Product-Driven Environment Demo: The final deliverable from this project shall be a demonstration of the developed technologies at one or more selected industry sites and assessment of benefits of automating the interface between product design and process planning. The demonstration results will be documented along with recommendations for future efforts. 4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO DOD The DoD will realize the same benefits as commercial industry as described below, but the reductions in the cost and time of moving new military systems to production are expected to be orders of magnitude greater due to the more complex development cycles of DoD products. The ability to drive manufacturing execution directly from the product design is key to delivering the next generation of SimulationBased Acquisition (SBA) capabilities. It will enable military products to be much better optimized entering Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) and Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP), thus significantly reducing the level and extent of design changes typical for new production systems. This in turn will reduce cost impacts on training and maintenance system development as well as schedule impacts on deployment milestones. The ability to thoroughly simulate all aspects of product usage will also enable far better optimization of product operation and maintenance attributes, including skills requirements and safety hazards. These capabilities will be particularly valuable for systems now early in development, such as the Navys DD(X) and Littoral Combat Ship, and upcoming generations of unmanned combat air vehicles (UCAVs). The capabilities developed will also benefit programs expected to be in early production in the 2010 timeframe, such as Joint Common Missile (JCM) and the Future Combat Systems (FCS) family of vehicles and sensors, providing tools to further optimize designs for producibility, reliability, and cost reduction. The creation of product and process model repositories will directly support DoDs goals for greater commonality across new weapon systems and implementation of horizontal technology insertion (HTI) upgrades to fielded systems, particularly with respect to electronics and sensors. Sharing of these kinds of models does present unique issues for DoD, including control of classified data and resolution of contractor data rights issues. Although none of these issues are intended to be addressed by this project, DoD input and guidance will be solicited to define a workable strategy for future implementation. The risk analysis and mitigation tools to be developed by this project are expected to be of particular value to DoD, enabling contractors to do a much more thorough job of addressing risks in each stage of product development. With DoD using the exact same toolset, risks can be assessed and managed with a much higher degree of certainty than is possible today. 4.2 BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY This project will deliver significant improvements in product and process development capability for all sectors of the U.S. manufacturing industry. Most of the functional capabilities will not be radically new; what will be new is the extremely high level of integration and concurrency enabled by the product-driven product and process development environment. Engineering analysis functions and business planning that today are performed off-line at great time and expense and routinely invalidated whenever a configuration is modified or a requirement changes will be launched from the designers desktop with a single command. Re-running of analyses and recalculation of plans to respond to design changes will be automatic, eliminating labor-intensive tasks such as updating bills of material, procurement packages, and cost estimates. This will radically reduce the time and cost of moving from initial design to production,
MBE Project Plans
5-17
and will greatly improve the ability of product teams to optimize the product design, process design, and manufacturing strategy for total satisfaction of all customer and stakeholder requirements. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN & RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project schedule and estimated resource requirements are provided below. The initial estimate for the 38-month effort is $7 million.
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT The proposed project is assessed as high to moderate in risk. While many of the capabilities to be developed will leverage existing tools, securing participation of major tool vendors particularly for the CAD functions will be an issue. These vendors typically keep their technology developments focused on addition of incremental capabilities, and have not been responsive to pressure from the user community to address compatibility and interoperability issues across competing tools. Computational demands are also an issue. Even with leading-edge computing tools, complex simulations and analyses require hours or even days of run time, which is a major barrier to delivering the near-real-time simulation capabilities required to meet the goals of the project. The project must also be ready to bound the requirements for some of the envisioned tools, particularly in the area of design risk analysis, since it is unlikely that all of the potential risk factors applicable to a complex design can be quantified to the extent required for accurate modeling. Technology readiness for product-driven product and process design is assessed at TRL 2 to 3. Modelbased tools are available and in routine use for product and process design, and integrated product/process development environments are maturing, but the level of interoperability and the types of functionality targeted for this project are presently in a visionary stage. Significant development is required to advance the technology to a point where it can be practically implemented.
MBE Project Plans
5-18
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-1
FLEXIBLE REPRESENTATION OF COMPLEX MODELS

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop the capability to create a product model that is rich enough to support all development, production, support, and end-of-life disposition activities throughout the product life-cycle. The resulting product model will have the flexibility and power to quickly provide the exact view of the model or underlying data to support desired functions. The model of the product (and its associated manufacturing and support processes) will integrate all needed information, either within the model or by linking to data within the enterprise or accessible from external sources. 2.0 CHALLENGE Design and manufacturing have become computing-intensive activities, with digital design and electronically controlled processing equipment in widespread use in every industry sector. However, for many manufacturers particularly the small firms that comprise the bulk of the U.S. manufacturing base modeling and simulation remain too complex and costly to be mainstream tools. More importantly, while computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) have become commonplace, for the most part we still work from the same foundations that have been in place for 30 years. The solid geometry models of the 1990s were a major step forward, but there remain great limitations on the ability to actually use these models for more than visual depiction. While there are well-publicized successes in the use of modeling and simulation for product and process design, the tools remain largely geometry-based and not integrated with downstream production processes or associated functions such as procurement, tooling preparation, labor scheduling, or facility maintenance. High-fidelity rendering and visualization remain time-consuming tasks on even the fastest desktop PCs; and computationally intensive processes such as finite element meshing and running of analytical codes can take days. Preparation of specialized inputs from product models for analysis applications can require weeks of work by expert analysts, and time and cost typically preclude re-running analyses when designs change. For these reasons, new products look almost exactly like old ones, with new technology introduction limited to a very few functions with each model, and costly repetition of old problems. Interoperability of modeling systems is a key challenge. Interfacing and melding of different kinds of models or similar kinds of models generated by different applications is a major barrier to the interconnected product and process modeling needed to support true model-based engineering and business processes. Getting information from application to another typically requires manual reentry of the data or translation and cleanup, which is inefficient as well as a significant source of errors. Much progress has been made, but, in the main, this has been with single-source solutions. Limited integration has been successful, but typically only when a large company mandates use of a common toolset by its supply chain partners. This creates a problem for smaller companies who may have to acquire expensive software and skills for multiple tools to support their various contracts. A neutral framework for integrating different tools and information sources could save billions of dollars each year just by avoiding data incompatibility and eliminating the need to translate or re-enter the same data multiple times in different systems. There are pointers to the future. For example, progress has been made in model-based product management, including the recently concluded NIST-funded Federated Intelligent Product Environment (FIPER) project. FIPERs goal was to streamline the design of highly engineered products, integrating legacy
MBE Project Plans
5-19
and best-of-breed design and analysis tools through a web-enabled environment (Figure 2-1). As a result of this work, Engineous Software now has commercially available products (iSight and FIPER 1.5) that provide an initial infrastructure for model-based engineering design collaboration.6 The FIPER system uses custom-built software wrappers to interface existing tools and models, enabling design engineers to more easily evaluate design options. Another aspect of model-based design of products is addressed by Cognitions Six Sigma Cockpit (SSC). With SSC, design engineers can visually explore the entire design space for a product and its parameters (customer requirements, features critical to quality, etc.); manage the many-to-many interaction relationships among those parameters; and control the applications and documents involved in design for Six Sigma.7 Achieving the ability to access all model-based tools from a single product model interface, accurately and quickly evaluate alternatives, and deal with uncertainty and risk across different disciplines, offers great opportunity for improvement in all areas of design, manufacture, and product support. It is generally accepted that 80% of the ultimate cost of a product is committed in the first 20% of the development phase. Even with all the improvements over the last few decades, design and manufacturing flaws continue to cost billions of dollars per year in product corrections, degraded performance, and safety problems. Modeling and simulation with Figure 2-1. FIPERs goal was to establish a distributed, integrated tools are essential technologies to web-based product development environment that integrates leading-edge and legacy design applications. meet this challenge, allowing good design decisions to be made, risk and uncertainty to be accurately assessed, and failure modes to be explored and engineered out in the virtual realm so that products perform as intended. The key challenge is to develop a comprehensive, computer-based representation of a product (be it one model or an integrated suite of models) that is complete in its ability to capture all information about a product and to support all analysis and downstream manufacturing and lifecycle support applications (Figure 22). The product model must be able to communicate and negotiate its input and output requirements automatically, without requiring custom wrappers or other manual interfaces. A shared knowledge repository will manage integration of the product information and integrate this information with the applications. Figure 2-2. The solution approach for flexible representation
focuses on a complete product model that contains or links to all data needed for design, manufacturing, and product support.
6
A Distributed, Component-Based Integration Environment for Multidisciplinary Optimal and Quality Design, Brett A. Wujek et al. http://www.fiperproject.com/pdf_files/fiper_engineous.pdf. Six Sigma Cockpit and Design for Six Sigma. http://www.ci.com/products/ssc_proddesc.htm.
MBE Project Plans
5-20
The components of the product model must be interoperable with each other and with the information sources and downstream applications from multiple domains, including the manufacturing processes involved with producing the product. In each case, the model must be able to deliver specific views of the information at different levels of abstraction as needed by different processes, applications, or users. Achieving this goal requires that three tightly coupled issues be solved together. Interoperability can be solved in the framework of automated model generation. First, the product model must support the input requirements of all of the applications that interact with it. Second, it must be able to provide needed information automatically, without manual translation. There are two approaches to solving these problems. Neutral-format product definition representation and plug-and-play compatibility of model-based applications is the preferred approach. The second approach, being used as a migration strategy while the required technologies are developed and standards established, is to use application programming interfaces (APIs) and wrappers to provide compatibility with individual applications. Levels of abstraction are the heart of the issue of flexible representation of complex models. The ability to automatically spawn all needed models from a master product model is the foundation of a revolution in design and manufacturing. An abstraction in this context is an aspect of a model separately viewed or manipulated to serve a purpose; e.g., an analysis, generation of a production plan, or preparation of control instructions for directing a process. More simply, an abstraction is a sub-model sufficient to support a specific need. If the product model enables capture (through a combination of embedding and linking) and representation of all product attributes via a single interface, then custom views for different applications and different users can be easily produced. Multi-domain support means that all enterprise functions interface with the product model. Mechanical, electrical, aerodynamic, reliability, affordability, and other analyses can be launched as needed (or even run continuously in the background) because the single model supports all of these functions. This would also enable needed analyses to be re-run automatically whenever an aspect of the design changes, thus providing clear visibility of the consequences of the change, supporting change propagation, and enabling concurrent optimization of all attributes to make the product the best it can be. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN The solution approach for flexible representation is focused on providing the capability to create a complete product model that contains or transparently links to all of the information needed for all design, manufacturing, and downstream support applications in the particular product domain. This is a complex challenge because of the tremendous scope of the downstream applications environment. Some of the key features that must be included in the product model solution include: Ability to seamlessly integrate individual component and material models (with associated physical, chemical, electrical, etc. properties) to create complex, multi-part/constituent product models that can plug-and-play with higher-level models. Support for different levels of fidelity, with clear definition of limits of uncertainty and risk at each level, to enable quick-look analysis with short simulation run times. Dynamic synchronization among all model elements, enabling cascading of changes in one part of the model to all other parts affected by the change, with appropriate alerts to affected functions. Ability to embed captured product knowledge into the models to take full advantage of experience, lessons learned, and other forms of real-world feedback. Support for trade-off analysis and optimization including risk, uncertainty, and variability. Ability to automatically extract only that information needed to make specific product decisions, and present that information in easily understandable forms at different levels of detail as requested
MBE Project Plans
5-21
by the user. This includes the capability to instantly provide different "slices" of data to support exploration of options and technical/business decisions. Ability for models to understand and communicate features in human-sensible terms (e.g. "slot" or "hole") to track requirements through design and production and to enable human query of the model-based product management system. The solution is highly dependent on the ability of the enterprise infrastructure to provide real-time access to supporting information from all sectors and functions of the enterprise, including its partners and supply chain members. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR FLEXIBLE REPRESENTATION OF COMPLEX MODELS The vision for flexible representation of complex models, and the ability to provide specific views or versions (or abstractions) of the product model to support specific technical or business functions, requires capabilities far beyond retrieval and visualization of data. Many of these capabilities are defined in the "Crosscutting Goals" outlined in the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise. Of the crosscutting goals documented in the MBE roadmap, the following two goals are most specifically relevant to this project. Two other goals (System of Systems Modeling Capability, and Intelligent Models) are addressed in separate NGMTI MBE white papers. Goal 1: Flexible Representation of Complex Models Provide modeling technologies that enable capture and representation of all design, manufacturing, and support attributes in a comprehensive, continuously current, computer-based model that enables real-time selectable, customizable views by different users and applications. (L)8 Full Product Model Representation Develop technologies and standards enabling creation and automated updating of a complete, mathematically accurate product model that allows all enterprise systems and applications to interact with it through standard interfaces. The resulting models must be able to accurately capture and communicate customer requirements, design intent, physical and nonphysical attributes and their relationships, functional performance, and include parametric feature definition for design and manufacturing. (M-L) Multi-Model Federation Develop techniques and standards that enable complex product and process models to be quickly assembled by integrating physical representation models (e.g., CAD models) with material, process, quality certification, and other supporting models. (S-M) Automated Abstraction Develop techniques for automated generation of specialized views of models at desired levels of detail for different enterprise functions (e.g., technical review, cost analysis, project planning). Include the capability to expand, collapse, or de-feature the model to provide the correct data and detail required for a particular application or use. (M) Graphical Representation Develop representation techniques that enable users to call up different visual depictions of a product or process in order to convey, to different kinds of users, a complete understanding of the product/process and its attributes. (S) Multi-Sensory Representation Develop interface methods and representation standards enabling models and simulation environments to incorporate tactile, sound, smell, and other useful sensory attributes in order to provide a more complete representation of a product or process in the virtual realm. (M-L)
MBE Project Plans
5-22
Model Versioning Provide a system to document and manage configuration of product and process models as changes occur over time, including capture of the requirements or decisions that led to each revision. (S) Goal 2: Plug & Play Collaborative Modeling & Simulation Environment Provide a standardsbased, easy-to-use collaboration environment that supports inexpensive integration of complex product models using components and designs from multiple supply chain members, where any model is interoperable with any other model and with any standards-compliant simulation tool. (M) Product/Process Model Integration Standards Develop standards for integrating material models, manufacturing process models, business process models, and product models into a comprehensive collaborative enterprise modeling environment that is easy to use without extensive training. The approach should accommodate capture of product and process performance requirements; a method to locate available models and supporting data; approaches for identifying and resolving gaps and conflicts; and methods (e.g., federation techniques) to share information among the models without compromising data integrity or information security. (S-M) Plug-and-Play Vendor Models Develop standards and protocols that enable vendors to supply plug-and-play product and process models for purchased parts, components, and equipment that can be transparently integrated into larger product and process models in real time. (S-M) Collaborative Analysis Systems Develop a framework for integrating current and future analytical tools into engineering and business management workgroup applications to provide a collaborative simulation environment with decision support tools for resolving technical and business tradeoffs. (M) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK Providing companies with the capability to automatically generate user-commanded views of product and process models and other model-based visualized information requires concurrence on a technical framework for integrating different types of models and simulations through a common user interface and federation environment; close cooperation with the application vendor community; support of different engineering and business domains; strategies for management of security and proprietary data; and extended capabilities such as natural-language and voice-command interaction. Significant advances in underlying model-based technologies are required to create this framework and develop supporting applications and capabilities. The following tasks are proposed to launch and guide the required effort: Task 1 System Requirements & Architecture Task 1.1 Common Modeling Terminology & Practices: This task shall develop a standard set of industry-wide terminology and practices for representation and capture of different model features and attributes, whereby a common and complete understanding is conveyed regardless of context, and like features can seamlessly transfer from one domain, model, or level of abstraction to another. Task 1.2 Technical Specs & Interim Plan: This task shall survey existing industry standards and models (commercially available and others) and develop technical specifications for the required lifecycle functions and interfaces, including interim measures to maximize early integration benefits across the life-cycle of a chosen industry sector. Task 1.3 Product Model Framework: This task shall develop a robust, production-quality object model framework as a complete source (or enabling resource) for all product information. Include technologies and standards enabling creation of a complete, mathematically accurate product model that allows all enterprise systems and modeling tools (including material models, manufacturing process models, and business process models) to interact with it through standard interfaces. The resulting models
MBE Project Plans 5-23
must be able to accurately capture and communicate design intent with complete traceability to requirements physical and nonphysical characteristics, and functional performance, and include parametric feature definition for design and manufacturing. Work within the chosen industry sector at first, but with consideration to broader applicability. Task 1.4 Product/Process Model Integration Standards: This task shall develop standards and techniques for integrating product models with material models, manufacturing process models, and business process models into a comprehensive collaborative enterprise modeling and simulation environment. The approach should accommodate capture of product and process performance requirements; a method to locate available models and supporting data; approaches for identifying and resolving gaps and conflicts; and methods to share information among the models without compromising data integrity or information security. Task 1.5 Hierarchical, Composable, Shareable Models: This task shall establish interface standards that support creation of complex models at successive levels of detail, enabling integration of individual product models into system-of-systems models that support deep understanding of interdependencies and interactions. Initially focus on enabling integration within related product families for one selected manufacturing sector. Task 2 User Interface Task 2.1 Human/Computer Interface: This task shall develop intuitive interface techniques (visually oriented when possible) that focus on usability of the tools and provide a learning environment that supports both training and real-time task support. Task 2.2 Automated Abstraction: This task shall develop techniques for automated generation of specialized "views" of models at desired levels of detail for different enterprise functions (e.g., technical review, cost analysis, project planning) for any product-related application or decision process. Include the capability to expand, collapse, or de-feature the model to provide the correct data and detail required for a particular application or use. Task 2.3 Natural Language Interaction: This task shall develop the ability of the product model to interpret and communicate requirements and product features in natural-language terms to support human query of the system. Task 2.4 Multi-Sensory Representation: This task shall develop interface methods and representation standards enabling models and simulation environments to incorporate tactile, sound, smell, and other useful sensory attributes of a product or process. Task 3 Model Functionality Task 3.1 Unit Process Models: This task shall develop models for manufacturing processes that include representation of their capabilities, characteristics, and attributes; and enable interaction with product models to automatically generate process plans. Task 3.2 Plug & Play Vendor Models: This task shall develop standards and protocols that enable vendors to supply plug-and-play product and process models for purchased parts, components, and equipment, or plug-and-play business models or industrial design models, any of which can be transparently integrated into larger models in real time. Extend current model-based applications to include the capability to automatically generate the input required (e.g., mesh or flat file or model subset) for use by specific analytical tools. Prioritize desired tool compatibility across industry sectors and work with software tool vendors to accomplish the needed extensions with real/near-real-time processing capability. Task 3.3 Process Performance Models: This task shall extend product and process models to include understanding and representation of performance; e.g., the ability of a process to hold a specified tolerance level over repeated runs, or a products ability to perform its function over time with normal and abnormal modes of operation.
Task 3.4 Self-Monitoring Product & Process Models: This task shall develop tools and methods that enable product, process or business models to monitor the enterprise knowledge base and respond appropriately (e.g., propagate a change or issue an alert) whenever the data underlying the model or the requirements the model is intended to fulfill change. Task 3.5 Self-Composing Models: This task shall develop the capability to create models that know their own attributes and can interact with other model objects to complete a resulting superset of attributes, relationships, and behaviors. Enable models to automatically search for, acquire, and integrate existing information and "sub-models" needed to complete their intended design. Include the capability to automatically populate manufacturing process simulations with equipment models, material models, etc.; and the capability for product models to automatically extend themselves with material models, part and component models, and similar assets available from the model libraries accessible to the enterprise. Include the capability for models to mine for information about products, processes, and systems with which the product or process will interact in operational use. 4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO DOD The ability to fully understand and explore all aspects of a weapon system design, its production and support, and its interactions with other products in the operational environment (as part of a system of systems) will save DoD millions each year as a result of greatly improved abilities to optimize system design at each stage of development, prior to committing to physical prototyping and production. The flexible modeling environment will be a major step forward in achieving the vision of simulationbased acquisition, shortening the development cycle for new weapons systems and ensuring that the systems deployed are ready to perform flawlessly. The cost of not modeling well is well documented. As one example, the Army spent $6.9 billion and 21 years of effort developing the Comanche armed reconnaissance helicopter to the point of production readiness, only to terminate the program due to design and manufacturing problems that ultimately made it unaffordable in light of other DoD priorities. While much of the technology developed for the Comanche will be exploited in other systems, the program remains a prime example of failure to model the impacts of requirements changes and design decisions. On the positive side, programs such as Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) and Future Combat Systems (FCS) is making extensive use of model-based capabilities. On JSF, modeling and simulation are enabling the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps to concurrently develop three different variants of the same aircraft (Figure 4-1), saving tens of billions of dollars over independent development and reducing the cost of providing future variants for export. On FCS, product models and simulations are being widely shared across the contractor teams as the FCS vehicles and sensor systems progress through development. However, there are limitations on the usefulness of the models because of the time and cost of generating different
Figure 4-1. Flexible modeling technologies will directly support DoDs simulationbased acquisition vision for the JSF program.
MBE Project Plans
5-25
versions of different models to support different needs. Flexible representation technology could be invaluable in helping the FCS integrators (Boeing/SAIC, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman) and the FCS vehicle developers simplify the demands of exploiting the terabytes of modeling and simulation data being generated. Flexible representation technologies will also significantly enhance the services simulation and training capabilities. Rather than building or re-building separate models (e.g., to JSAF standards) for use in different kinds of simulators, simulation environments, and wargaming systems such as those being developed under WARSIM, ADST, and similar programs, simulators would simply tap a shared knowledgebase and upload the desired model with the specified attributes and fidelity. This capability would save DoD millions in future development costs for common simulation environments such as OneSAF. Reconfigurable simulators such as those being developed under the Marine Corps Aviation Simulation Master Plan (MCASMP) program would be particularly well-suited to operate using a shared model knowledgebase with flexible representation capability. 4.2 BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY The benefits to industry outside the defense sector are huge, as the capabilities developed in this project will redefine the design and manufacturing landscape and deliver billions of dollars in savings and competitive impact. The ability to create comprehensive product definitions and flexible models that enable automated generation of representations at user-selected levels of abstraction will radically reduce the time and cost required to analyze and optimize the design of products and the processes for their subsequent manufacture. The change from incremental, iterative product and process design to totally optimized first-product correct will deliver cost and performance savings on a scale of billions of dollars per year. Other benefits include: Reduced time to market Enhanced innovation with lower risk Reduced design cycle time Evaluation and optimization of designs and validation of performance and other attributes before committing resources to prototyping and production Lower cost for product development, manufacture, and life-cycle support Better products and better product performance. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN & RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project schedule is provided on the following page. The estimated cost for the approximately 7-year effort is $33 million. 6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT The risk for this project is assessed as moderate to high, due to the comprehensive scope and complexity of the information to be integrated into a rich, plug-and-play information representation and the reluctance of the vendor community to give up their proprietary advantages. Needed technologies for portions of the project are not yet available outside of the research environment e.g., in recognizing and creating suitable model representations for natural language or sensory interaction. Technology readiness is therefore assessed at TRL 2-3.
MBE Project Plans
5-26
Project Schedule for Flexible Representation of Complex Models
MBE Project Plans
5-27
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-5
INTELLIGENT MODELS
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop enabling technologies and demonstrate the use of intelligent models that understand, seek out, acquire, and act on the information they need to execute their functions. The project will establish linkages between the physical modeling realm and the logical models that provide intelligence to product, process, and enterprise models. The addition of intelligence in the modeling environment will radically improve the ability of manufacturers to design products and processes, configure and operate production facilities, and manage their business processes. 2.0 CHALLENGE For maximum efficiency, manufacturing systems must operate at all times under optimum conditions and be able to respond to off-normal circumstances. Physical models provide an awareness of expected response, but they lack the ability to interpret that response and to guide for correction and optimization. That is where intelligent models enter the manufacturing equation. While a product or process model provides a mathematical and/or visual representation of a physical object or a system, an intelligent model acts on sensed or received information to execute a function reconfiguring itself to respond to change, or commanding an action to direct an associated task or process. Intelligent models play an essential role in the realization of the model-based manufacturing enterprises of the future. Some of these models will replace the static databases of today with repositories of deep knowledge, while others will possess the logic required to seek out and process the information they need to fulfill their functions. Thus, several categories of models will be needed. A number of varieties of intelligent models are described in the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise. These include examples that are associated with the creation, testing, and optimization of product definitions, material properties, process knowledge and control, equipment characteristics and performance, and resource management. Intelligent, self-learning models able to interface with all of the relevant enterprise functions and knowledge sources (Figure 2-1) present a significant challenge. A product model, for example, should be able to pull in the appropriate material properties data when the designer selects a material for a product component, and automatically run mechanical, thermal, chemical, and other analyses in the context of the higher-level product to verify that the material meets performance requirements at the lowest possible cost. It must also be able to draw on the materials knowledge base to prompt the designer with alternatives consistent with the design requirements and priorities (e.g., lower cost, longer life). It must also be able to interrogate the production planning function and supply network to verify material availability and cost as well as compatibility with downstream manufacturing and product support functions. Once an intelligent model has been created, it must be able to recognize when its underlying data change and respond appropriately. This includes monitoring of input data sources and updating of changes, rerunning analyses, and providing alerts to affected functions and users throughout the supply chain. The model must also be able to recognize conflicting, spurious, and inadequate inputs, identify and quantify risks, seek resolution, and capture all decision history in a complete audit trail.
MBE Project Plans
5-28
Figure 2-1. Intelligent product and process models will interact through the enterprise knowledge base, enabling feedback across the product life cycle to ensure and enhance customer satisfaction.
Interaction between intelligent models, data sources, and humans must be seamless. Since all possible permutations of interaction may be impossible to define, the models must have the ability to recognize and adapt to new interactions. Since some of the knowledge processed by such models will have legal, proprietary, or other sensitivities, the models must be capable of recognizing and responding to such conflicts. This includes routine functions such as querying regulatory knowledge bases to extract safety requirements and issuing alerts to ensure the requirements are addressed. The models must also provide the appropriate level of information, or views, for ease of human interaction. For example, views of a product definition for marketing staff will be very different from those of the manufacturing engineers. Also, as new interactions arise, the models must be capable of generating the new views with a minimum of manual intervention. Intelligent models will be expensive to create, and cost effectiveness will be an issue. No single silver bullet can satisfy all the needs for intelligent models; however, key attributes are common. Capture of the data that models and simulations need to fulfill their functions must be automated and require little human effort. Experience with knowledge-based and expert systems has revealed that knowledge capture requires a great deal of human effort and is very time consuming. The cost of creating and populating intelligent models using current techniques would be prohibitive; hence, new techniques must be found. For this reason, common frameworks, templates, and repositories of reusable models and knowledge will be essential. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN The goals defined in the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise related to intelligent modelbased systems represent a far larger scope than is appropriate to address in this project. Many of the goals focus on providing the information that intelligent models need to execute intelligent functions, particularly with regard to manufacturing process control (Goals 2 and 3 below). Therefore, the project focuses on developing and demonstrating key capabilities in one representative industry sector in order to demonstrate the value and power of the technology. A project team will be assembled, requirements for intelligent model functionality defined, prototypes developed, and a series of demonstrations conducted.
MBE Project Plans
5-29
3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR INTELLIGENT MODELS Goal 1: Intelligent Models & Modeling Environments Develop intelligent modeling capabilities to automate and accelerate labor-intensive modeling tasks and reduce the need for human intervention in modeling processes, enabling modeling and simulation functions to be automatically invoked at required stages as a product or process evolves from conception to production. (M-L)9 Common Modeling Semantics Develop a standard, industry-wide terminology for representation and capture of different model features and attributes, whereby a common and complete understanding is conveyed regardless of context, and like features can seamlessly transfer from one domain, model, or level of abstraction to another. (S) Automatic Model Conversion Extend current Computer-Aided Design (CAD) applications to include the capability to automatically generate the input required (e.g., mesh or flat file or model subset) for specific analytical tools. Prioritize desired tool compatibility across industry sectors and work with CAD vendors to accomplish the needed extensions with real/near-real-time processing capability. (M) Adaptively Detailed Models Provide models that can adaptively offer defeatured abstractions or more detailed versions of their attributes to suit the requesting function, presenting a version ready for use or analysis by that function. (M) Automated Requirements Linking Develop methods and approaches enabling product and process models to automatically search for requirements that impact their domain or function (e.g., safety, health, and other regulatory requirements) and interact with the model creator to ensure these requirements are addressed as the mode is developed. (M) Self-Composing Models Develop methods enabling models to automatically search for, acquire, and incorporate existing sub-models needed to initially complete their intended design. Include the capability to automatically populate manufacturing process simulations with equipment models, material models, etc.; and the capability for product models to automatically extend themselves with material models, part/component models, and similar assets available from model libraries. (M-L) Self-Monitoring Product & Process Models Develop tools and methods that enable product and process models to monitor the enterprise knowledge base and respond appropriately (e.g., propagate a change or issue an alert) whenever the data underlying the model or the requirements the model is intended to fulfill change. (M-L) Goal 2: Model-Based Intelligent Process Control Develop intelligent, adaptive process controllers that sense material and its geometric/chemical/physical properties in-process and dynamically adapt processing parameters (e.g., temperature, process speed, flow rates, equipment position) to assure continuous production of certifiably correct product. (L) Adaptive, Real-Time Process/Equipment Control Models Develop self-tuning process and equipment control models based on first principles, validated material and process knowledge bases, and continuous feedback of sensor test and inspection data. Include models for legacy equipment as well as recently released equipment. (M) Rapid Material, Part, & Process Characterization Develop characterization technology enabling fast, accurate in-process assessment of material/part condition and characteristics (shape,
MBE Project Plans
5-30
composition, distribution, viscosity, temperature, etc.) and associated processes, to support modelbased process monitoring and control. (L) Standardized Process Models Develop robust, standardized definitions of processes such that the outcome of successfully performing the process is certifiably the same, independent of the technical platform (legacy or current equipment) that produced the outcome. (M-L) Sensors & Sensor Fusion for Process Monitoring Develop non-intrusive sensors and sensor fusion technologies for current and legacy manufacturing equipment that enable the model-based process controller to recognize and quickly adjust to any in-process variances (e.g., tool wear and material variation), maintaining the quality of process output. Include the capability to evaluate sensor data to determine if readings from each sensor are credible based on inputs from other sensors, and to take appropriate action to maintain the health of the process if one or more sensors are not functioning correctly. (M-L) Self-Diagnostic Equipment Maintenance & Performance Monitoring Develop techniques for monitoring equipment status parameters against the validated equipment model, detecting and analyzing trends toward out-of-spec performance, and automatically issuing commands/requests for needed maintenance. (M) Model-Based Failure Prediction & Recovery Develop the technology and tools to accurately model equipment and facility failure modes and effects, identifying predictive indicators for impending failures and process upsets. (M-L) Operational Feedback to Process Models Develop the capability to monitor the shop floor and update process control models (for one or more unit operations, as appropriate) to adapt to changes in the processing environment to continuously ensure the correctness of the product being produced. (M-L) Enterprise-Wide Control Capability Provide the capability to support model-based control in multiple-process, enterprise-wide (supply chain) applications. (L) Zero Finishing Develop model-based process control schemes that eliminate the need for finishing steps by dynamically managing product surfaces during operations such as forming, assembly, and blending. Include the capability to dynamically identify and recalculate mid-surface locations for thin shells. (L) Goal 3: Self-Configuring Manufacturing Execution Models Provide self-organizing manufacturing execution models able to integrate all applications, systems, equipment, and process instructions to ensure readiness to satisfy all requirements for producing correct product, and which have the capability to automatically adapt to changes in requirements. (L) Manufacturing Planning Model Templates Develop a series of model-based templates, for major classes of products in different sectors, that can integrate "sub-models" of processing equipment, unit processes, line operations, and material flows to create an end-to-end model of a given manufacturing process. (S) Generic Equipment Models Develop generic equipment performance models for families of manufacturing equipment (e.g., injection molding machines, three-axis milling machines). (S) Equipment Characterization Models Establish standards and requirements for integration of performance characterizations into existing or vendor-supplied models and simulations of process equipment (machine tools, valves, process sensors, material handling devices, etc.), including legacy equipment as well as current models. (M)
MBE Project Plans
5-31
Machine-Specific Equipment Models Develop tools to extend generic or vendor-supplied equipment performance models to reflect the as-installed configuration and use real-time sensor information to accurately represent specific equipment system performance. Include the capability to capture the baseline signatures for each production machine in its supporting model. (M-L) Intelligent Manufacturing Execution Models Develop methods to automatically update manufacturing execution models by recognizing and responding to approved changes in underlying material/process/product models, or in response to direction from the shop floor control system. (L) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK Realization of the full potential of intelligent model technology will be an evolutionary process where advances in capability are demonstrated in a focused application then migrated to additional applications where the data sources and communication/integration functionality can be defined, developed, and implemented. The proposed project is expected not only to provide working prototypes but also to identify a necessary minimum set of standards that must be defined to enable the development of much more sophisticated future models. These initial deliverables will demonstrate tangible benefits in a selected representative manufacturing sector. The project is comprised of four tasks as follows. Task 1 Project Planning: This task shall establish the project technical team, select the manufacturing sector to be addressed, define the specific functionality to be developed and demonstrated, and establish the detailed project plan with task assignments. Task 2 Intelligent Model Requirements: This task shall define the specific functionality to be developed for the selected manufacturing enterprise application. The team shall recruit external experts to serve as a standards body; define the full set of model-based tasks to be addressed; and specify the classes of intelligent models necessary for accomplishing the range of tasks. General functionality to be provided includes: Auto-completion of product and process designs Automated analysis via interface to simulation tools Automatic query of resource availability and status Automated process monitoring to ensure certifiably correct product Autonomous monitoring and response to changes in source data such as configuration updates.
The documented requirements shall be circulated to team participants and interested government and industry stakeholders for review, comment, and finalization prior to start of the development tasks. Task 3 Functionality Development: This task shall create, test, and refine prototype models and application functions providing the capabilities defined in Task 2 and addressing to the maximum extent possible the desired capabilities specified in Section 3.1. Efforts associated with databases and knowledge bases that serve as sources of input to the prototype intelligent models shall be limited to integration of available information sources (e.g., existing materials knowledge bases). Vendors of model-based tools (e.g., CAD, PDM, and ERM applications and analytical codes) shall be engaged to provide development support for their respective products. Results shall be demonstrated in both legacy shops and newer factory installations. Task 4 Technology Demonstrations: This task shall demonstrate successful functionality of intelligent models in an industry setting. A project final report shall be produced that documents the capabilities delivered and requirements for further development.
MBE Project Plans
5-32
4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO DOD Defense acquisition programs will realize the same kind of benefits from intelligent models as described below for commercial industry, although the payoff in terms of cost savings will be far more significant due to the much higher complexity of military systems development. The ability of weapon system product models to automatically self-complete by drawing in supporting data; to automatically verify conformance to detailed requirements; to autonomously re-run thermal, aero, producibility, reliability and other analyses when configurations or requirements change; and to automatically update design detail to the lowest level of assembly to reflect the as-delivered configuration, will radically reduce design cycle times and development costs. Automation of many routine engineering functions and avoidance of common errors is expected to provide cost savings estimated at a minimum of 10% to 20% for engineering labor alone. The time and cost of preparing data packages for subcontracting and for major design reviews could be cut in half at a minimum, since these packages will be generated automatically by design systems working in concert with intelligent product models. The time required to move from conceptual to detailed design could be reduced significantly, although the critical DoD development programs will continue to be driven by hardware build-and-test cycles. Logistics support for weapon systems is also expected to benefit greatly from intelligent modeling capabilities. Intelligent life-cycle models will interoperate with intelligent product models to optimize the design of the product and its support approach for all attributes of interest (reliability, level of repair, spares requirements, etc.) When a product upgrade is introduced, the intelligent model will automatically update all linked and associated information, including training media, interactive electronic technical manuals (IETMs), and onboard prognostics systems for health monitoring. Intelligent modeling technology developed under this project may also have application to advanced simulation environments such as OneSAF to support warfighter training and mission rehearsal. Adding higher levels of intelligence (and verisimilitude with real-world physics) to vehicle, platform, and weapon entities offers the potential to significantly increase the fidelity of entity behaviors. This would provide a more realistic simulation experience. It would support evolutions of very high-fidelity engagement scenarios to aid in one-on-one, one-on-many, and many-on-many gaming and mission rehearsal. 4.2 BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY Benefits derived from successful development of intelligent models will fall into two classes. The most obvious benefit will be the ready availability of smart modeling and simulation applications that: 1. Reduce design cycle times by 50% or better compared to current tools 2. Eliminate design iterations by delivering optimal solutions on the first pass 3. Automatically generate plans and machine instructions for driving manufacturing execution. Probably the greatest contribution of intelligent models toward realizing the vision of the model-based enterprise, however, will come from the crosscutting, or supportive, models that enable the success of nearly all other components of the enterprises business infrastructure. Intelligent models will enable automatic, directed analysis of many more potential solution paths, which will produce more optimized solutions to technical and business problems. The ability to add intelligent sensors and process control capability to the invested capital base of legacy equipment will save billions of dollars while preserving business competitiveness of the affected companies. Companies in the process industries are already realizing benefits from similar technology. BP Amoco, for example, implemented a model-based control system for crude oil processing that saves more than $500,000 a year and greatly reduces waste streams associated with changes in the composition of incoming crude oil.
MBE Project Plans
5-33
5.0 PROJECT PLAN & RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project schedule and estimated resource requirements are provided below. The estimated cost for the 36-month effort is $5.6 million.
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT This project is high-risk. The creation of intelligent models that are sufficiently generic to serve many functions is a difficult challenge at best. Providing models with the self-learning capability such that they can capture knowledge without human intervention, and verify the accuracy of their inputs and outputs, is certainly a stretch endeavor. Finally, the need for the models to interoperate with their networked external components (e.g., knowledge bases, other models, simulation codes) in plug-and-play fashion is also very difficult considering the variety and complexity of functions that must be served. Overall, the state of the present technology is assessed at TRL 2.
MBE Project Plans
5-34
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-6
Configuration Management for the Model-Based Enterprise

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop an integrated system that ensures association and traceability of the right information with any product or process throughout its life cycle. To do this, the project will develop requirements and an integration strategy for managing complex configuration entities within the manufacturing enterprise, to the lowest level of its supply chains, and across the full life-cycle of the products it manufactures. 2.0 CHALLENGE As manufactured products continue to increase in technological complexity and manufacturers rely more on their supply chain partners to design, build, and support new products, the importance of managing configuration data well will only increase. Configuration management must be part of a seamlessly interconnected technical and business infrastructure that supports and actively facilitates all activities across the product life cycle. Configuration management includes all activities associated with managing all data, information, and knowledge related to all the life-cycle processes of the product (from initial requirements through design, manufacturing, and support to final disposition at the end of the products life). It ensures traceability of the product throughout its life, and specifically addresses the assurance of providing current/approved data to support each process in the life cycle. The nature of the product largely determines the level of detail retained.10 Configuration management requirements also vary according to whether the product operates in isolation or is part of a larger system of products. Configuration management of processes includes documented definition and certification of manufacturing processes against standard process definitions; documentation of process parameters and in-process product against defined requirements and tolerances; documentation of performance on products (as-built configuration and process data to document the products pedigree); and maintenance of process equipment and systems themselves. It also includes maintaining an accurate baseline of maintenance, repair, training, and other processes and infrastructure that support a product throughout its life, including tools, consumables, and spares. Management of configuration data is important in a broader business context as well. The technology infrastructure of an enterprise is an exceedingly complex array of facilities, systems, equipment, software applications, and information assets in many forms. Careful coordination of new technology implementations is required to avoid operational disruption. The information and knowledge assets themselves must be managed to assure protection and appropriate accessibility to different users and functions. Technology refresh initiatives must be well designed to ensure continued access to data that is trapped in legacy systems. Perhaps less obvious but also important is documentation and management of the business processes in effect for different states of the product life-cycle. These may range from labor rules and shift schedules to accounting practices and government regulations that are applied in different ways on different
10
For weapon systems, for example, configuration data is maintained for every delivered unit; for commercial products, configuration data is typically maintained only for makes, models, and lots or batches.
MBE Project Plans
5-35
programs or in different operating units of the enterprise. It is often important to understand how the business environment was configured at the time a product was designed and produced. Although the basic principles of configuration management are simple, managing and controlling configuration data is a challenge even in the best-run companies. Even with good integration of the product design, manufacturing, and support domains, a final production configuration usually undergoes numerous changes after the first unit comes off the production line. This greatly complicates product support functions, since training, maintenance, repair, and logistics processes must support each production variation. As-built configurations are often inadequately documented and may diverge significantly from the official design drawings. Product definition changes over time may even cause loss of compliance with an original requirement a potentially unpleasant surprise for the customer in the operating environment. If the original design definitions are primarily captured on paper or in legacy systems, maintenance and support presents a huge challenge. This situation also severely hampers the process of capturing life-cycle support insights that can be passed back to the design and production functions for product and process improvement. In the NGMTI vision, model-based tools will automatically capture product and process information into an enterprise-wide configuration management system. For every baselined configuration of the product and its associated processes, the system will provide the associated digital records to support life-cycle management of that product, and feed back lessons learned to continuously improve product and process capabilities. Configuration management processes will run in the background, capturing in real time all information needed to document the design for engineering, quality, security, and other purposes capturing the total genealogy of the product across its life (Figure 2-1). Data management protocols will be developed to verify the integrity and usability of all information captured by the system, with automatic capture of the audit trail for configuration-controlled data assets. Finally, lifetime management mechanisms will be put into place to transfer data as media and applications evolve. These tools will ensure that no useful information is ever lost, corrupted, or trapped in a legacy system, and that information which is no longer needed is phased out of the system. There is no commercially available tool that approaches the configuration management capabilities required to support the NGMTI vision of the model-based enterprise. However, there are some product data management (PDM) and product life-cycle management (PLM) tools that provide part of the needed capabilities. The many PDM systems commercially available today generally support configuration management as part of managing information about a product as it moves through engineering and manufac-
Figure 2-1. Model-based configuration management processes will capture all information needed to document the total genealogy of the product across its life.
MBE Project Plans
5-36
turing. This generally includes functions such as management of engineering drawings, processing of change notices, and version control. Configuration management across the product life-cycle is already supported by some (largely CAD-based) PLM tools such as IBM/Dassaults CATIA-based Enovia system, enterprise resource management systems such as SAP, and PTCs Windchill family of products. However, the cost and complexity of PLM implementation are major barriers to entry for small manufacturers despite increasing emphasis on open, web-based standards. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN Providing a comprehensive configuration management solution for the model-based manufacturing enterprises of the future will be a huge undertaking. Thus, this project is designed as a series of phased developments and demonstrations aimed at delivering key enabling capabilities to validate the technical approach and stimulate a coalescence of vendor and user community focus. In Section 3.1 below, Goal 1 (Model-Based Configuration Management) is directly addressed by this project. Other preliminary foundation tasks are also defined in Section 3.2. It is important to note that the objective of this project is not to develop new PDM/PLM tools that compete with current applications, but rather to specify required model-based enterprise functionality and work with the vendor community to develop and demonstrate the required capabilities. Open architecture, standards-based vendor components will be used wherever possible as part of the solution, but it is expected that much additional development will be required. The overall technical approach will support a system of systems, because of the risk of a single system and because companies will need to gradually migrate their different configuration management systems to support a common capability across their supply chains. The configuration management capabilities delivered will automatically capture product information into the standards-based framework of an enterprise-wide, model-based configuration management system. For every baselined configuration of the product, the system will provide the associated digital records to support life-cycle management of that product, plus feedback of lessons learned to improve product and process capabilities. Data associated with each unit (or model or batch, as appropriate) will validate that product configurations compliance to requirements and will be automatically provided to whatever downstream functions require it. This will include provision of shared product support databases that update as-maintained product configuration data as well as information on spares and other support assets. The model-based configuration management system will deliver on demand the data and information needed to optimize products, processes, and operations for life-cycle performance, cost-effectiveness, efficiency, and certainty in every task. With this system and the required technical infrastructure in place, support personnel will be able to call up the specific history of any product or component to view the asproduced design and identify who created it and how (down to the specific manufacturing equipment used), the receiving inspection logs of the raw material lots, and the process history logs of the personnel who created it. This system will also eliminate the need to re-create and re-enter (or worse, infer) information at multiple points in the life cycle, thus eliminating a significant source of error and associated impacts on cost, safety, and other critical factors. The configuration management system will provide the basis for true product intelligence, interfacing with simulation tools and knowledge bases to support configuration change decisions in every stage of development. This includes support for new technology insertions as well as design changes to address performance and support issues; risk assessment and mitigation; and rapid quantification of impacts to cost, schedule, and other requirements. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR MODEL-BASED CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT Enterprise-wide configuration management is a key theme of the NGMTI vision. Both the Product Realization and Resource Management sections of the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise define multiple needs in this area. Specific goals and supporting requirements are outlined below. Other
goals and requirements supporting configuration management are outlined in the MBE Roadmap (and other NGMTI white papers including Flexible Representation of Complex Models and Model-Based Product Life-Cycle Management. Goal 1: Model-Based Configuration Management Provide model-based configuration management capabilities supporting product, process, and systems evolution across the entire life cycle. Include the capability to manage and associate all data, information, and knowledge related to life-cycle processes and deliver appropriate views of the information to all enterprise functions that need it. (M-L)11 Model-Based Configuration Management Frameworks For common types of products, process, and systems, develop generic life-cycle frameworks that support automated prompting, generation, and distribution of various models at the appropriate point in the development process. Include the capability to alert responsible functions/personnel when a particular model requires creation, and provide an initial model shell and requirements definition that gives users the most complete starting point for the required work. (M) Automated Change Management Develop a process and notification/authorization scheme for reviewing, approving, documenting, communicating, and archiving changes in configurationcontrolled models to all affected functions, processes, systems, and individuals, including customers and lower-tier suppliers. (M) Automated Change Propagation Develop the capability to automatically ripple the effects of any one change to a product or process model to all other product and process models (e.g., tooling, training, maintenance documentation) that are affected by the change. Include the capability to automatically update associated analyses, cost estimates, bills of material, purchase orders, and other dependent information and assets and feed the changes to the change management system for dissemination. (M-L) Enduring Data Storage Develop the capability to preserve the accessibility and integrity of archived electronic definition records and associated data throughout and beyond the life of the product, process, or facility. Include the capability to automatically verify the accuracy of retrieved flat files and models generated in applications or versions no longer in use; and establish industry standards for ensuring backward compatibility of product definition applications. (M) Remote Product Upgrades: Provide mechanisms for some classes of product to be produced with unexpressed features (potential future product upgrades) that can then be activated either remotely or with minimal service when the new features are ready for implementation. Include the capability for product models to manage changes to products in the field, and to accurately reflect the impact of the changes in the life-cycle cost baseline. (L) Goal 2: Multi-Enterprise Model-Based Business Systems Integration Provide mechanisms and methods for rapidly interconnecting the systems of different enterprise partners to integrate PDM, ERP/ERM, and other business management system functionality to the lowest tier of the supply chain. (M-L) PDM/ERP/ERM Interface Frameworks Develop interface frameworks and standards for quickly and seamlessly integrating disparate product data management and enterprise resource management systems across different companies. Include the capability for enterprise systems to automatically negotiate full or limited interfaces depending on the capabilities of the systems being interfaced and the permissions defined for specified business relationships. (M-L)
11
MBE Project Plans
5-38
Linkages to External Resource Sources Develop tools for linking enterprise business management systems to external data sources to enable continuous update of resource information to support planning and decision processes. (S) Distributed Status Tracking Develop model-based tools for continuously tracking the status of resources and activities throughout the supply chain, enabling real-time updating of operational plans based on internal and external constraints. (M) Goal 3: Life-Cycle Model Feedback to Product & Process Design & Planning Provide the ability to acquire and use captured information from users and maintenance/repair and final disposition operations to: 1) enrich the fidelity and depth of product life-cycle models, and 2) feed back and enhance the process and product design function. (M-L) Robust Requirements Modeling Tools Develop modeling tools that integrate the entire chain of a products life-cycle events, including environmental, safety, health, and other regulatory requirements. (M) Integrated Life-Cycle Support Modules Develop plug-and-play modules for current CAD and PDM systems that enable accurate modeling of all product design factors relevant to product support, including reliability, availability, maintainability, and supportability, to optimize product designs for performance, cost-effectiveness, and customer value. (M-L) Life-Cycle Performance Feedback Tools Develop tools and methods to automatically capture life-cycle performance data (e.g., actual reliability and repair turnaround times) from the enterprises product support systems and update the master product knowledge base. (S-M) Technology Impact Forecasting Develop the means to link knowledge and projections about future technology progressions (e.g., faster processors, new materials) to optimize a product design for its intended useful life, including technology refresh or product phaseout. (M) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK This project will develop and demonstrate an integrated configuration management capability that supports all activities across the product life cycle, focusing on design, manufacturing, and product support. Specific tasks to be accomplished are as follows: Task 1 Configuration Management System Requirements & Architecture: This task shall develop basic system requirements and a systems engineering approach for model-based configuration management, including the following: 1. Standard Data/Knowledge Representation & Management: Develop standard, compatible approaches for capture, use, and configuration management of model-based data and knowledge to eliminate errors and significantly reduce associated costs.12 Ensure compatibility with ISO 10303 AP 239. 2. Model Management Lexicon: For selected industry sectors, establish a common nomenclature for storage and retrieval of model-based information, enabling users or applications to quickly access needed models and supporting information/data for the product in question. 3. Life-Cycle Configuration Management Requirements Definition: Define explicit configuration management requirements for each function in the product life cycle analysis, design, procurement, manufacturing, inspection, maintenance, refurbishment, technology refresh, retirement, disposal/recycle, etc.).
12
This task should be worked in collaboration with the NGMTI project for Flexible Representation of Complex Models.
MBE Project Plans
5-39
4. Model-Based Configuration Management Frameworks: For a selected set of types of products, process, and systems, develop generic life-cycle frameworks that support automated prompting, generation, and distribution of various models at the appropriate point in the life-cycle process. Include the capability to alert responsible functions/personnel when a particular model requires creation, and to provide an initial model shell and requirements definition that give users the most complete starting point for the required work. Task 2 Configuration Management System Components: This task shall develop and integrate the following core capabilities for model-based configuration management. Leading vendors will be engaged in producing an interoperable set of capabilities and maintaining compatibility to satisfy government and industry requirements for configuration management. 1. Extraction of Product Configuration Data: Develop the capability to automatically generate a totally complete bill of material for a product and all its associated manufacturing and support processes directly from the associated product and process models. 2. Automated Model Information Delivery: Provide automated delivery of, and controlled access to, correct models and data for each life-cycle function at the correct points in the life-cycle.13 3. Automated Change Management: Develop a process and notification/authorization scheme for reviewing, approving, documenting, communicating, and archiving changes in configurationcontrolled models to all affected functions, processes, systems, and individuals, including customers and lower-tier suppliers. 4. Automated Change Propagation: Develop the capability to automatically ripple the effects of any one change to a product or process model to all other product and process models (e.g., tooling, training, maintenance documentation) that are affected by the change. Include the capability to automatically update associated analyses, cost estimates, bills of material, purchase orders, and other dependent information and assets and feed the changes to the change management system components for dissemination across the value chain. Task 3 Associated Systems: This task shall develop and integrate functional capabilities required to fully implement operational model-based configuration management capabilities, including: 1. Model-Based Product Requirements Management Environment: Develop a model-based requirements management environment enabling demonstration for selected products that the master product model satisfies all functional requirements for model-based configuration management. 2. Data Management & Auditing System: Develop a data management and auditing system that is compatible with the configuration management system and ensures continuous integrity and accessibility of all configuration data assets. Include metadata tagging capability that enables captured information to be migrated into new systems for future use. 3. Real-Time Product Support Linkage: Develop methods and protocols to link product data and representations contained in maintenance and training media directly to the configurationcontrolled master product model and support real-time interaction, including between live and virtual training activities. Include techniques and procedures for automatically updating support materials when a product configuration or procedure change is authorized, and alerting users when such change occurs so that they can receive needed updates.
13
This task shall be worked in collaboration with the NGMTI project for Information Delivery to Point of Use.
MBE Project Plans
5-40
4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO DOD Disciplined configuration management is critical for DoD products and processes, but the military services today depend on the contractor community to maintain configuration data for the weapons, vehicles, sensors, and other equipment in inventory. Every contractor has their own processes for configuration management, and although the industry adheres to common practices, configuration management relationships with DoD customers are unique for every program and product. By virtue of its compliance with ISO 10303 AP 239, this project will support creation of neutral data sets compatible with EIA-836, the configuration management data exchange and interoperability standard that grew out of MIL-STD2549. While this project will not implement a universal configuration management system, it will begin interconnecting manufacturing enterprise processes and systems around a model-based configuration management backbone that ties together, and makes available, the universe of data associated with every product and process. Depot organizations, for example, will not only be able to call up product drawings and repair history they will be able to pull up the unique manufacturing record for a unit, including the machines and tools used to build it, the original process parameters, and the actual tolerances obtained on that machine as a specific part was machined, formed, or assembled. Training units will no longer have to wait for updated manuals and procedures when a configuration changes; these will be transmitted automatically to all affected electronic training media, with alerts highlighting changes and configuration representations automatically updating to show the most current baseline. This will support the continued evolution of high-fidelity immersive simulation environments for training of maintainers, pilots, drivers, weapon operators, and other users. Configuration updates and underlying models will also be uploaded automatically to onboard systems, ensuring that not only is the user maintainer alerted to a change, but so is the platform itself. This will support the emergence of smart weapon systems that are able to self-configure for specific missions based on their on-board knowledge of the capabilities and limitations of their specific hardware/software configuration. The capabilities delivered by this project will also enable capture of a wealth of operational performance information that can be fed back to the product support team and the design team to aid in solving problems and designing product upgrades. This is expected to greatly reduce time, cost, and uncertainty in managing block and spiral upgrades, and allow DoD to implement shorter technology refresh cycles that keep its front-line weapon systems much closer to the cutting edge of capability. 4.2 BENEFITS TO INDUSTRY Model-based configuration management will deliver significant benefits to industry, tying together applications and processes that today provide limited model-based capabilities and radically reducing the time, complexity, and cost of operating and managing interrelated processes that are not interconnected. Many companies and application vendors claim to have solved the configuration management challenge with PDM, ERM, and related tools, but present functionality is extremely application-dependent and organizationally unique. The project will comply with ISO 10303 AP 239, and thus ensure compatibility through common data definitions and provision of feedback on as-maintained configuration, usage, properties, operating state, and behavior. The capabilities delivered by this project will enable a more responsive enterprise environment that enables product and process integration across all functions of the enterprise and its supply chains and stakeholders. Engineers, for example, will be able to link process models to product models in minutes rather than days, and have all the associated data and knowledge needed to make the best design decisions. Model-based configuration management will also provide powerful capabilities for long-term traceability of product data, which is essential to improving life-cycle support for military systems and products or
facilities subject to close regulatory oversight. The ability to quickly access the total audit trail of any product, including the materials and the processes used to produce it, will reduce the time and cost of troubleshooting by orders of magnitude. The ability to link the product definition to its real-world experience, and feed that experience back to the product and process designers, will reduce the time and cost of resolving performance issues and support quantum leaps rather than incremental advances in developing upgrades, enhancements, and next generations of products. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN AND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project schedule is provided below. The estimated cost for the 5-year effort is $23 million.
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT Risk for this project is assessed as low, since the scope of the tasks is bounded to an achievable set of deliverables and the technologies required primarily involve application-focused development leveraging a large base of existing tools and standards. Modification of existing commercial tools is the main area of risk, since the vendors must be willing to support the required extensions and new capabilities on the same timeline. Such agreement may be difficult to achieve. The potential benefit in terms of future competitive advantage, however, is seen as significantly large enough to provide strong motivation from the large field of vendors currently active in the PDM/PLM markets. Technology readiness for this area is assessed at TRL 4-5, since the basic technologies exist but require extension and a significant degree of integration to provide the required model-based functionality.
MBE Project Plans
5-42
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-3
System-of-Systems Modeling for the Model-Based Enterprise

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop and demonstrate capabilities, approaches, and tools for integrated multi-level, multi-system modeling of products, processes, and life-cycle functions for a representative set of products in a selected manufacturing industry sector. The project will demonstrate the ability of system-of-systems modeling techniques to reduce product development time and cost, eliminate current needs for manual integration among and across enterprise processes, and deliver product/process designs that are optimized for performance across the product life cycle. 2.0 CHALLENGE System of systems is a concept that evolved over the past decade in the defense community with the recognition that we can no longer afford to design and support complex weapon systems as standalone products. In the military environment, individual weapons must work together as an integrated system intheater and on the battlefield to accomplish individual and collective objectives. This concept is even more important for the organizations that support these products supplying, maintaining, and servicing hem; providing training; troubleshooting problems; and coordinating the often conflicting requirements of different stakeholder organizations. In the non-defense world, the same approach is needed in environments such as medical care, where a vast array of products and technologies must all work together seamlessly as a single complex system. The same principles apply in manufacturing enterprises. Design systems, planning systems, control systems, business management systems, communication systems and myriad of other systems have evolved to automate and improve the performance and capabilities of various enterprise functions. On the whole, unless a company has bought into a full line of compatible applications from a single vendor (typically at great expense and requiring further large investments in integration and business process reengineering), these systems do not work together well, if at all. Models created in different kinds of applications, or using different brands of the same kind of application (e.g., two different CAD tools), in general do not integrate easily, if at all. A model-based approach to integrating processes and systems, with the ability to create composable and self-integrating models14, is key to overcoming this challenge. The system-of-systems concept has many origins. In the realm of product design and manufacturing, systems engineering arose in the 1970s as companies realized that simply designing and developing the components of a product did not necessarily deliver products that worked well when all the parts were assembled. Systems engineering principles were created and applied to enable organizations to manage development from a system-level perspective, ensuring that each element of the product was not only optimized to perform its own specific function, but that it meshed smoothly with all of the other parts, components, and subsystems with which it interacted. The system-of-systems concept emerged in the 1990s as Congress and DoD realized that it had many new weapon systems in the development pipeline, many of which were designed for redundant or overlapping missions (e.g., killing Soviet main battle tanks an overriding priority of the Cold War that largely
14
This topic and related requirements are covered in further detail in the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise (Section 2, Product Realization & Support) and in the NGMTI white paper on Intelligent Models.
MBE Project Plans
5-43
evaporated with the collapse of the USSR threat to Western Europe). Changing missions and global priorities dictated that DoD develop lightweight, highly flexible and lethal, rapidly deployable, and readily supportable forces that enabled the services to accomplish their missions affordably, with great precision, and at minimum cost. Today, virtually all weapon system development is done in a system-of-systems context that is best exemplified by the Armys Future Combat Systems (FCS) program. FCS is developing a family of weapon systems (Figure 2-1) with unique and complementary functions that are all tied together with networks of sensors and tightly integrated command and control functions. The joint services F-35 Joint Strike Fighter embodies the system-of-systems concept on the discrete weapon system level, with one airframe tailored into three different versions and sharing a common logistics chain to meet the unique mission requirements of the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps. The system-of-systems principle is thus saving billions in acquisition costs, and is expected to deliver even greater savings in operations and maintenance costs while radically improving the combat effectiveness of our warfighters.
Figure 2-1. The FCS program is developing a tightly integrated system of systems that will enable Army warfighters to see first, understand first, act first, and finish decisively. Extensive modeling and simulation of FCS ground and air vehicles, weapons, sensors, logistics support, and battlefield command and control function independently and collectively is enabling the U.S. Army to save billions in development costs.
Much work must be accomplished to turn system of systems from a principle into tools and applications for the future manufacturing enterprise. Modeling and simulation is a critical enabler of this transformation. Currently there is no common modeling framework to support concurrent evaluation, optimization, and management of life-cycle requirements for multiple complex products that share a common operational environment, nor is there a framework for integrating different model-based systems in a unified enterprise environment. DoD has made excellent progress in the former area with programs such as ADST II, WARSIM, and JSIMS, which are developing and managing simulation and modeling capabilities that support analysis and training in realistic virtual environments that effectively integrate multiple players and multiple systems. The NGMTI vision for the model-based enterprise requires similar capabilities, but goes beyond simulation of entities and interactions to provide real-time integration of live assets. Product and process models will link to and maintain connectivity to the knowledge bases that define their attributes, including material models, equipment models, production capacity models, skill models, source requirements, and supplier resources. The following scenario illustrates some of these capabilities: A designer specs a screw to fasten a cover plate for a custom electronics box. As he moves on to the next feature, the design application autonomously reviews the requirements associated with the cover plate and discovers that it must be opened periodically for maintenance, and that the customer wishes this function to be performed in the field by any user, without any tools. The design system automatically re-specs the screw as a quick-release fastener and alerts the designer to the change.
MBE Project Plans
5-44
When the designer OKs the mod, the design system calls on the enterprises product archive and pulls up previous designs for such fasteners, and interrogates the manufacturing facility model to ascertain if ready production capability is available. At the same time it queries the supplier network to obtain capability, availability, and pricing on a suitable part, verifying ability to provide the required size, configuration, and ruggedness. The design system selects the optimum part based on cost and performance, downloads the fastener model from the preferred supplier, and integrates it into the cover plate design. It then launches multiple simultaneous background simulations to evaluate performance. These simulations verify that: 1) the fastener can be readily accessed by a soldier wearing full NBC gear in arctic conditions; 2) that it will remain securely fastened when subjected to the specified vibration, shock, and handling environments; and 3) that it is within the weight allowance for the electronics box. With designer approval, the system adds the part to the bill of material and forwards a ready-to-place procurement spec to the purchasing function. The simulation results are archived and a note is automatically added to the maintenance documentation that the fastener requires lubrication check as a part of the regular maintenance schedule for the electronics unit. This step has taken 15 minutes with no cost for engineering or administrative labor. As indicated in the above example, product and process models will seamlessly integrate in the enterprises system-of-systems environment including partners in the supply chain, and with appropriate security for data and communications to evaluate the impacts of technical and business decisions in design, development, manufacturing, and operation. This will provide significant life-cycle cost savings for product support through streamlined maintenance and closely coordinated technology management. Product and process models will also exchange information with gatekeeper models supporting the enterprises resource management and strategic management functions. This will allow users to evaluate the broader impact of decisions beyond the product or process at hand. The supporting systems architecture will also provide a means of robust operation when a subsystem is not available, using a managed substitution shell for missing functions or data. The missing system may be out of commission, not yet fully developed (i.e., full functional definition is not yet known in detail), or intentionally withheld. The overall system will compensate for the missing subsystem, with resulting diminished function or uncertainty being noted in downstream results. This concept is similar to the current practice of using simulators and emulators to conduct system-level testing when a specific subsystem is not yet available. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN This project will develop and demonstrate capabilities, approaches, and tools for integrated multi-level, multi-system modeling of products, processes, and life-cycle functions for a representative set of products in a selected manufacturing industry sector. It will demonstrate the ability of system-of-systems modeling techniques to reduce product development time and cost, eliminate current needs for manual integration among and across enterprise processes, and deliver product/process designs that are optimized for performance across the product life cycle. A key capability to be demonstrated in this project is that of composable models complex models that can be quickly assembled from component/constituent models created by different applications, without the need for manual translation or repair. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR SYSTEM-OF-SYSTEMS MODELING FOR THE MODEL-BASED ENTERPRISE The vision of the future of manufacturing as defined in the Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise is built around the concept that models will drive and control all enterprise processes, and that the models of the enterprises processes and systems will be able to interact in a highly autonomic fashion. The systems that rely on other systems will be able to feed information requests and receive not merely requested data,
MBE Project Plans
5-45
but the right knowledge along with the context needed to apply those resources to model products and simulate processes in an integrated fashion. The core goal and supporting requirements to enable this capability are outlined below. Other goals and requirements supporting this capability are outlined in other NGMTI model-based enterprise white papers, including Intelligent Models, Product-Driven Product & Process Design, and Flexible Representation of Complex Models. Goal 1: System-of-Systems Modeling Capability Provide integrated system-of-systems modeling capabilities to guide and improve product and process design decision-making for different product types and manufacturing sectors. (M-L)15 System-Level Product Modeling Develop system-level modeling capabilities for classes of products and processes, whereby a comprehensive decomposable product model captures or links to all types and levels of information needed to support all aspects of development. (M) Intelligent, Hierarchical, Composable, Shareable Models Establish interface standards that intelligently support creation of complex models at successive levels of detail, enabling integration of individual product models into system-of-systems models that support deep understanding of interdependencies and interactions. Initially focus on enabling integration within related product families for one selected manufacturing sector. (M) Scaleable System-of-Systems Simulation Architecture Leverage emerging scaleable architectures to provide a system-of-systems modeling and simulation environment supporting thousands of component elements and dozens of modeling tools and analytical applications. Develop standards for supporting scalable architectures and for interfacing architectural components and tools. Evaluate existing standards efforts in exploring approaches to this requirement. (M-L) Secure System-of-Systems Data & Risk Management Provide capabilities for compartmentalization, security, and long-term management of data and estimated risk to support system-ofsystems modeling that integrates information from multiple sources having different security constraints, levels of functional detail available, and levels of risk and uncertainty. (S) Self-Completing Models Develop the capability to create models that know their own attributes and can interact with other model objects to complete a resulting superset of attributes, relationships, and behaviors. (L) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK This project will develop and demonstrate system-of-systems modeling capabilities to guide product and process design decision-making, development, and life-cycle support for different product types and manufacturing sectors. Information security issues shall also be addressed. Specific tasks to be accomplished are as follows: Task 1 Product/Process System-of-Systems Modeling Architecture This task shall develop a scaleable architecture for a system-of-systems product/system/business modeling and simulation environment supporting hundreds to thousands of component elements and dozens of modeling tools and analytical applications. The project team shall evaluate existing standards efforts16 in exploring approaches to this requirement. The architecture shall include a logical information model that defines the model objects (entities) supported for each product type and process type; a functionality definition, with
15
The S-M-L designations identify a nominal timeframe for delivery of the specified capability, where S (Short) = 0 to 3 years, M (Medium) = 3 to 5 years, and L (Long) = 5 to 10 years. 16 Standards to be evaluated include the Object Management Groups Model Driven Architecture, the ISO Reference Model for Open Distributed Processing, the DoD High Level Architecture, and the ISA 95 Enterprise Control System Integration standards being developed by the Instrumentation, Systems and Automation Society..
MBE Project Plans
5-46
inputs and outputs, for each entity; and an application map that associates required functions with discrete modeling/simulation tool definitions. This task shall also survey and assess, at a high level, the ability of current modeling, simulation, and information management tools to fulfill the needed application functionality, and perform a gap analysis to identify desired enhancements to current tools as well as functions for which new tools must be developed. Task 2 System-Level Product & Process Modeling This task shall develop system-level modeling capabilities for a representative set of products and processes, whereby the comprehensive product model is able to capture or link to all information needed to support its associated technical or business process (e.g., process models, analytical codes, cost estimating applications, and scheduling functions). The model shall automatically display customized domain views (e.g., electrical design, mechanical design, thermodynamic design, product assembly, bill of material, make/buy) on command; simultaneously load or call up associated domain applications for launch by a user; and query associated knowledge bases and databases to update and ensure currency of the models data basis. This task shall include a system-of-systems demonstration that validates the integrated, faithful interoperation of the selected product and process models at varying levels of fidelity. Task 3 Composable, Shareable Models This task shall develop product and process model structuring approaches and interface standards that support creation and automated integration of complex multi-model models at successively higher and lower levels of detail, enabling integration of individual product and process models into system-of-systems models with accurate relating and cascading of interdependencies and interactions. The task shall focus on providing and demonstrating automated system-of-systems model composition for one representative product family and associated processes for one selected manufacturing sector, including life-cycle modeling functions for domains including customer and logistics support (supply, maintenance, repair, etc.). Task 4 Secure System-of-Systems Data Management This task shall adapt and apply leading-edge multi-level information security tools to provide capabilities for compartmentalization, security, and longterm management of data to support system-of-systems modeling that integrates information from multiple sources having different security constraints. The task shall demonstrate the ability of the system-ofsystems management environment to invoke appropriate security actions as models and associated information are acted upon by applications and users preventing access to data for which a user is not authorized, without barring appropriate access. As an example, such functionality includes enabling a user to access a process model in order to run a simulation of a manufacturing step, but preventing the user from accessing the underlying simulation code. This task shall also demonstrate the capability to automatically assign security properties to a product or process design when it achieves sufficient fidelity or adds features requiring protection. The demonstrations associated with this task shall be conducted on a stand-alone secured system but involving no actual sensitive data, and representatives of interested government security organizations (e.g., DSS, NSA) shall be invited to provide review and technical recommendations. Task 5 Self-Completing Models This task shall explore approaches to create models that know their own attributes and can interact with other model objects to complete a resulting superset of attributes, relationships, and behaviors. This effort shall leverage work expected to be ongoing under the NGMTI Intelligent Models project.
MBE Project Plans
5-47
4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO DOD This project will provide significant advances in DoD capabilities supporting the next generation of simulation-based acquisition processes. The advanced functionalities described in Section 4.2 for general industry will be especially valuable in the defense manufacturing base, where the products are far more complex and dependent on developmental technologies and customer-driven requirements in design, manufacture, and support. DoD labs and evaluators will be able to work directly in the loop with contractor teams in collaborative engineering environments, where product models can be quickly verified with analytical codes, tuned, and exercised in operational simulations in days instead of weeks or months. This will provide a much improved ability to identify, quantify, mitigate, and manage risks in every phase of development. Conceptual development programs will be able to deliver conceptual designs that are significantly advanced over those obtainable with current practices, and costs and time for engineering and manufacturing development should be notably reduced. Current practices using engineering judgment and rough approximations of technical performance and cost will be replaced by high-fidelity estimates and calculations based on well-defined, governmentaccepted models. This will greatly reduce the burden of creating and evaluating cost estimates, and provide a better ability to counter low-balling, defective pricing, and similar issues that continue to challenge the defense acquisition community. Developers of sensors, weapons, electronics boxes, and other subsystems that must integrate with air, ground, and naval platforms will be able to exercise their designs in realistic environments that incorporate high-fidelity platform models instead of merely running individual models based on temperature, accelerate, vibration, and other specifications. This is expected to reduce final system integration time and cost and aid in identification of emergent properties, effects, and issues that will likely be encountered when the subsystems are physically integrated and tested in OpEval programs. Operational support activities will realize significant benefits through the ability to simulate, with high fidelity, the effects of wear and tear on complex systems in combat and training. Development of new products and product improvements will draw on accurate life-cycle process models incorporating actual performance history for similar and prior-generation products they will replace, greatly increasing accuracy in predicting and optimizing for key attributes such as Ao, MTBF, MTTR, and level-of-repair. Weapon system operators and maintainers will not have to train with virtual part task trainers; rather, everyone will interact with a single master product model that contains or links to all constituent product and process models related to that product including support equipment, tools, spares, and weapons. 4.2 BENEFITS TO INDUSTRY The ability to integrate manufacturing enterprise systems and processes into a system of systems or full digital mock-up of the product system through model-based methodologies will deliver dramatic benefits for U.S. manufacturers. The composable and decomposable models created with the system-ofsystems philosophy will enable evaluation of total system performance within its operational context while in the virtual realm, before physical systems are built. The time and cost of product and process development, production planning, and life-cycle support could be reduced by an estimated 20-40% by enabling engineering and planning tools to automatically and autonomously access real-world data to optimize solution approaches. Typical errors and cost/schedule impacts associated with designers and planners lacking the full and correct information they need to make the right decisions will be eliminated. Designers will be able to exercise their solutions in robust, mathematically accurate simulation environments that mirror the real-world environment in which the product will be built, operated, or used, identifying issues that typically are not uncovered until a product has been in the marketplace for months or even years.
MBE Project Plans
5-48
Product design applications will automatically interface with highly precise process models for manufacturing and life-cycle support functions, ensuring that product designs are production-ready and totally optimized for low cost and compliance to all requirements within hours of design approval. Program managers will know exactly how much a product will cost because the product model will continuously interrogate the enterprises procurement and finance systems for the latest data, including supplier pricing. This includes the capability to rapidly re-price product realization and support strategies on demand to evaluate the impacts of changes in specifications, quantities, production rates, product mix, process improvements, and other factors. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN AND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project schedule is provided below. The estimated cost for the 32-month effort is $4.4 million.
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT Risk for some parts of this project is assessed as moderate, since the technical approach uses existing technologies as a point of departure and specific capabilities to be developed will be bounded through selection of a specific set of existing, representative products in a limited number of manufacturing sectors. However, risk for the ultimate system-of-systems capability is high because of technical complexity and vendor proprietary issues that must first be resolved. Both the product owner (e.g., the developer/manufacturer) and the model-based tool vendor community will be actively engaged, minimizing external funding requirements while ensuring a deep base of expertise to support development of the desired capabilities. Technology readiness for this area is assessed at TRL 2-3 from the manufacturing enterprise perspective, although related concepts are well advanced in the DoD simulation community. This project is expected to advance the technology to TRL 6 with demonstration of prototype capabilities in a relevant environment.
MBE Project Plans
5-49
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-4
ENTERPRISE-WIDE COST MODELING

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop the capability to establish and manage comprehensive, highly precise total product cost models that reflect not only traditional materials and direct production costs, but also time-discounted (net present value) design and other investment costs, capital resources, overhead burdens, regulatory compliance costs, and other indirect cost factors. These cost elements will not be static inputs; rather, the models will link to the live sources of cost data, down to the lowest level of the supply chain. This will provide a continuously updated and accurate view of all cost factors to guide technical and business decisions. 2.0 CHALLENGE U.S. manufacturing enterprises face tremendous challenges in maintaining economic competitiveness in global markets where competitors have the advantage of lower direct labor and fringe costs, lower operating costs due to lesser regulatory requirements, or government subsidization, countered only by increased transportation costs and higher potential for distance-induced delay. While these issues cannot be solved directly through technological means, technology is the key to maximizing competitiveness by reducing costs as part of the total product value equation. Implementation of lean principles and modernization of processes and equipment help companies eliminate waste, reduce uncertainties and other non-value-added costs, and increase productivity. Outsourcing or moving selected operations offshore to take advantage of lower labor costs is also helping U.S. manufacturers remain competitive, although job loss for American workers is an increasing volatile issue. In the defense arena, the cost issue is primarily one of affordability. Despite more than a decade of intense focus on improving the affordability of U.S. weapon systems and more efficiently controlling development and production costs, major Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition programs continue to experience significant cost problems. While many factors play in the defense acquisition equation, the common denominator in cost escalation is the poor ability to estimate costs accurately up front and accurately calculate the financial impacts of changes during the system development process. This can lead to a death spiral where increasing unit costs force the customer to reduce production quantities, which in turn forces the manufacturer to increase unit costs to re-spread the nonrecurring costs that must be recovered in production. Model-based technical and business processes are key to solving these challenges for both the commercial and defense sectors. In the NGMTI vision, the enterprises design, production, operations, and support environments will be seamlessly integrated, with model-based processes linked to living knowledge bases that provide continuously current technical and business data to all applications that need them. Although most manufacturers rely heavily on modeling applications (i.e., spreadsheets or discrete financial models) to develop cost estimates, and the current generation of tools is providing greatly improved abilities to model production costs (Figure 2-1), companies must begin to use more integrated modelbased systems that enable all the components of the enterprise to communicate the critical information needed to understand cost factors and impacts in a collaborative, real-time fashion to support business decisions. Business process modeling techniques are well-developed and widely used for analyzing operations to better understand the factors that influence the cost of processes and to identify non-value-added activi-
MBE Project Plans
5-50
Costimator CostLink/AE
Figure 2-1. Current commercial estimating applications greatly improve capabilities to model production costs.
ties. Activity-based cost modeling techniques have come a long way toward helping manufacturers model labor costs, and have been invaluable in reducing costs in the service sector. Although the available base of specialized cost modeling tools continues to grow, such models must go further than those currently available. Product data management (PDM), enterprise resource planning (ERP), and enterprise resource management (ERM) software packages represent the state of the art for todays model-based enterprise management functions. All of these systems offer financial modules; however, most off-the-shelf models do not incorporate traditionally non-financial parameters, and thus do not adequately support higher-level business decision processes with the needed accuracy (i.e., they do not enable accurate financial predictions beyond extrapolation of trends from known financial data.) Such models are also highly dependent on the accuracy of their inputs. These models do not handle uncertainty well. While some allow Monte Carlotype analysis, it is not applicable when the model structure is variable (uncertain). Hard barriers remain despite the wealth of financial modeling tools available. Most existing tools are not responsive to change because they are not directly connected to the sources of their underlying data. The high level of manual work required to collect and update input data, and modify model structures and formulas to reflect changes, makes model accuracy and currency problematic. Further, current financial models (and modeling tools) are not well integrated with the rest of the enterprise, especially in those areas outside the normal financial envelope. This makes cost estimating and financial forecasting difficult, to the extent that most estimates are valid only a few months into the future. Much estimating, particularly in the defense industry, continues to be driven by top-down processes where bogeys are assigned to subsystems and functional departments so that engineers and staff members can back into their cost targets. As a result, estimators tend to either low-ball or inflate figures to accommodate perceived uncertainties and navigate internal negotiation processes to ensure their scope of work receives adequate funding. These issues are greatly magnified in the context of supply chain management. Most prime-supplier agreements are based on quotes with levels of fidelity ranging from excellent to nonexistent. Participants at all levels of the supply chain rely on scope creep and customer-driven design changes to cover estimating shortfalls and protect profit margins. Problems with one supplier often ripple up, down, and across the supply chain as the prime and the different team members work to get the project back on track while protecting their respective interests. Poor ability to model the cost impact of technical decisions across the supply chain remains a major problem in the defense and aerospace sectors. High-profile programs such as NASAs space station, the
MBE Project Plans
5-51
Air Forces F-22 Raptor, and the Armys RAH-66 Comanche experienced extreme cost escalations due to inadequate estimating, failure to fully account for cost risk, and inability to accurately project the financial impacts of design changes. Restructuring the Comanche program in 2002 (the sixth time the program was restructured since its inception in 1983) doubled the aircrafts development budget to over $6 billion, and unit cost grew from $24 million to more than $32 million.17 With the development program experiencing numerous technical issues requiring still further outlays, the Army terminated Comanche in February 2004 all but writing off more than $7 billion of investment due largely to the inability to accurately estimate costs and predict the impact of technical changes. Excellent capability does exist, however. One example of a successful model-based estimating system is COCOMO, a well-established standard for estimating the cost of software products. Software developers closely track productivity metrics that enable them to model costs for software systems based on new and modified lines of code. Coupled with improved standards for software development (e.g., the CarnegieMellon Software Engineering Institutes Capability Maturity Model), these tools have contributed significantly to reduce the time, cost, and risk of software development for military products. Organizations such as the Electronic Systems Cost Modeling Laboratory (ESCML) at the University of Maryland provide on-line models for understanding the cost impacts of technology obsolescence, test rework, and other financial drivers in electronic systems design and manufacturing. ESCMLs MOCA (Mitigation of Obsolescence Cost Analysis), shown in Figure 2-2, is an excellent design tool for determining part obsolescence impact on life-cycle costs for the electronic systems based on future production projections, maintenance requirements, and part obsolescence forecasts. Using a detailed cost analysis model, MOCA determines the cost-based optimum design refresh plan over the life of the system. Outputs from this analysis are used as inputs to the PRICE H/L commercial software tools for predicting system life-cycle costs.18 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN
In the future, manufacturing firms will apply possible combinations of design refresh points in an electronic system's life cycle. powerful enterprise management tools that support all decision processes with continuously current financial and non-financial data that are directly accessible to and from product (and associated process) models. These tools will enable product managers at all levels to quickly ascertain, with a high degree of confidence, the financial implications of any decision or change. The simulations and models that drive the enterprises business processes will capture financial data and relationships with sufficient accuracy to provide a continuous and clear view of performance versus financial metrics, enabling managers to continuously fine-tune financial strategies for business success.
Figure 2-2. MOCA models the cost implications of all
17 18
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/rah-66.htm. http://www.enme.umd.edu/ESCML.
MBE Project Plans
5-52
This proposed project will develop, demonstrate, and validate the technologies and strategies required to integrate the entire enterprise and its supply chain in cost estimating and management, extending far beyond current generations of PDM, ERP, and ERM systems. Successful demonstration will stimulate the evolution and implementation of model-based cost management in all sectors of industry. This project will involve financial and engineering experts from industry, academia, and government working together to develop a robust cost traceability architecture, develop software and interfaces to enable the required communications and data management, and demonstrate the results in a way useful for future investment decisions. The product cost estimating architecture and software developed will provide the capability to automatically capture cost information for labor, materials, parts, commodities, and support elements along with appropriate burdens and links to the associated product and process models at each level of the supply chain. These models will update themselves automatically whenever the underlying data change, and will provide alerts to all affected functions. Because cost information will be captured down to the lowest level of the design or activity, basic cost information for an element will travel with it transparently when the same element is applied to a different product or process. Routine changes in cost basis (such as fluctuations in material or commodity item costs) will be handled automatically within defined limits. In the case of design changes, the system will enable PDM applications to automatically extract the change information from the product/process model and pass it to the appropriate function (Engineering, Purchasing, Subcontracts, etc.) for re-estimating. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR ENTERPRISE-WIDE COST MODELING The proposed project addresses two major goals defined in the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise. Goal 1: Enterprise-Wide Product & Process Cost Models Provide cost modeling systems and techniques that integrate all required data, from within and external to the enterprise, to support highfidelity analysis of development costs, production costs, life-cycle support costs, profitability, financial risk, and other cost attributes of a product, process, or operation. (L)19 Integrated Cost Modeling Application Architecture Develop a global cost modeling application structure that provides for capture and linking of all sources of cost acquisition, nonrecurring design and development, engineering changes, recurring production, product ownership and support, retirement, regulatory factors, etc. into product, process, and operations models that interface with applications and business systems to support real-time decision making in all phases of product, design, manufacture, and support. (M-L) Common Cost Model Templates Develop and validate a series of cost model templates that identify the major cost elements for common product and part families, materials and manufacturing processes, life-cycle support processes, business operations, and other sources of cost in different business sectors (e.g., aerospace, automotive, chemical). (S) Product/Process Family Cost Models Develop suites of generic, PDM system-compatible production cost models for common product and process types. Include the capability to automatically tailor a generic product or process cost model to include additional features or attributes included in a specific design. (M-L) Unified User Interface for Cost Modeling Develop easy-to-use interfaces that enable different users (engineers, estimators, etc.) to generate and apply accurate, comprehensive cost models for any enterprise function. (M)
19
MBE Project Plans
5-53
Actual Cost Capture Develop mechanisms for capture of actuals for all costs (recurring, nonrecurring, direct and indirect) associated with product manufacture and other enterprise operations, and feed this information back to PDM and financial management systems to refine cost model fidelity. (S-M) Model-Based Estimating Develop costing tools that decompose product and process models and interface with the enterprises cost history knowledge base and financial systems to automatically generate bases of estimate (BOEs) for development and production based on programmatic requirements and historical costs for similar products, labor rates, supplier quotes, and current rates and factors. Include the capability to automatically score BOEs for confidence level and flag areas of uncertainty for management/engineering attention. (L) Automated Cost Modeling Develop cost modeling applications that automatically generate bills of material from the product or process model; calculate and communicate the effects of a change in one parameter across the entire cost model; and perform dynamic updates (with appropriate alerts and approvals) from enterprise data sources to ensure currency. (M) Integrated Life-Cycle Cost Modeling Develop methods for integrating life-cycle considerations such as maintenance, repair, sparing, recycling, and disposal into product, process, and operations cost models. (M) Integrated Supply Chain Cost Modeling Develop and unify product modeling standards and techniques to enable seamless, automated interfacing/integration of product and process cost models among partners and suppliers, with provision for protection of sensitive data (e.g., rates, factors, and formulas). (M) Cost Sensitivity & Uncertainty Modeling Develop analytical applications and information elicitation methods that use probabilistic, statistical, and other mathematical analysis tools to calculate cost sensitivities and quantify uncertainties for any aspect of recurring or nonrecurring cost. Provide the capability to link uncertainty models directly to product, process models, and operations to enable automatic updating of impacts and risk factors in response to changes. (M-L) Additional requirements related to this particular goal are extracted from the Resource Management section of the MBE Roadmap: Model-Based Cost Standards Establish financial information standards that support the creation and integration of comprehensive cost models for products and processes. Include provision for capture of both direct and indirect costs; integration of life-cycle factors such as maintenance and repair, spares, training, and recycling/disposal; and tailoring to meet the unique requirements of a particular industry sector (e.g., defense). (M) Intelligent Cost Models Develop cost modeling techniques that automatically distribute the effects of a change in one cost parameter across all affected cost models, and automatically perform dynamic updates against enterprise data sources to ensure currency of cost data. Include the capability to alert all affected business functions when costs change beyond defined thresholds. (M-L) Multi-Level Cost Modeling Develop tools to model costs at different levels and from different perspectives (e.g., activity-based versus product-based) and automatically present the user-requested view. Include the capability to "click down" to the lowest level of the model. (M-L)
MBE Project Plans
5-54
Goal 2: Enterprise Financial Simulation Environment Provide the capability to obtain and evaluate current financial status information and requirements, and accurately predict effects of contemplated actions or events on capital levels, funds flow, profitability, ROS/ROI, rates and factors, and other financial factors. (L) Accounting Integration Model Develop a comprehensive, generic accounting data model to which an individual enterprises cost structure can be automatically mapped, enabling automated correlation of cost elements and associated data among all partners in a supply chain. (M) Distributed Financial Engineering Tool Suite Develop financial engineering and analysis tools to enable integrated modeling of all finance functions (estimating, accounting, asset management, cash flow management, etc.) throughout the enterprise. (M-L) Extended Enterprise Financial Data Interchange Develop methods and tools to integrate and continuously update financial data across the extended enterprise to provide a unified view of financial health, status, and issues. (M) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK Execution of this project will involve the following six tasks. Task 1 Project Planning: This task shall assemble a team of industry, academic, and government contributors who will develop the detailed technical plan and approach to accomplish the requirements of the project, including the technical goals defined above in Section 3.1. This effort will include interaction with sponsoring agencies and interested organizations to define the scope for the development efforts and the pilots to be conducted under Task 3 and Task 5. Task 2 Model-Based Cost Architecture: This task shall develop a generic architecture that maps one or several representative products to all established and potential sources of cost and cost impact, and characterizes requirements for providing linkages to and from the product model. Consideration shall be given to addressing a commercial product and a DoD product of sufficient complexity to serve as challenging testbeds for development and also as applications where the delivered capabilities will provide direct value to the project participants. The project team shall survey available cost modeling tools and related cost management applications (e.g., PDM and ERM packages) and define the new elements and functionalities needed to enhance the cost estimating capability and provide the required connectivity and communications for real- or nearreal-time updating. The linkages expected to require focused development include those to human resources, procurement/subcontracting, support elements, and product/process configuration management functions. The project team will work with the application vendor community to select baseline tools and launch efforts to develop and implement the required enhancements. The project will require access to fully populated product and process models with current cost data and PDM interfaces to a participating enterprises financial systems. If these cannot be obtained through a project participant, the team shall develop a working set to support the required development and demonstrations. Task 3 Application Development: This task shall develop the needed modifications to enhance the selected design/PDM and estimating tools to provide comprehensive model-based cost estimating functionality. Applications shall be developed based on the requirements defined in Task 2 and address the requirements outlined in Section 3.1 above. Task 4 Data Linking: This task shall develop the required linkages between the product model and the identified cost elements. The linkage shall facilitate cost information flow both ways at the product model boundary, allow the models to perform autonomous updates when source data changes, issue alerts to affected functions, and support interoperability of the whole complex of models.
Task 5 Demonstration & Validation: This task shall exercise the enterprise-wide product cost models in selected industry sectors to verify the performance of the developed functionalities and demonstrate the value of the delivered capability. Task 6 Final Report: This task shall document the developed capabilities and assess the results of the demonstration/validation task to provide industry users with the data they need to support investment decisions for implementation of the new and enhanced tools, and provide the tool developers with requirements for further development and commercialization. 4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY This project will provide technologies and demonstrated capabilities that enable all manufacturers to create and manage product cost models that incorporate data from all levels of the enterprise and its supply chains. Without this capability, the alternative is to continue the current limited and often very inadequate cost estimating techniques. As discussed in Section 2.0, these costs can be staggering. Enterprise-wide cost modeling will complement other model-based business management systems empowered by fully interconnected business processes to provide real-time visibility into all aspects of business performance. These systems will enable managers of all sizes of enterprises to rapidly analyze financial issues and consistently make the best decisions by considering all relevant factors and options. Real-time cost reporting systems will continuously status performance to the business models to rapidly detect cost problems. Desktop analytical tools coupled to product and process models and associated cost data sources will enable fast evaluation of options for workarounds and recovery planning. With product and process models able to link to actual cost histories captured in the enterprises knowledge base, preparation of estimates will require minutes rather than hours, while ensuring that estimates are accurate and complete. This will greatly reduce the need for functional finance staffs while enabling technical and management staff to focus on value-added work. Model-based costing will also enable companies to provide required cost information to partners and supply chain members without revealing sensitive financial data such as rates and factors. This will facilitate greater openness in teaming on large, multi-company programs where competitors today have great difficulty working together. Financial models will be well integrated into all enterprise functions and, as a result, realistic cost and profit targets will be easy to set and track. Calculating the net present value of expected future cash flows will continue to be a widely used method for evaluating financial options, but organizations will also begin evaluation of the financial implications of non-financial cost contributors using this newly demonstrated pricing model, Monte Carlo simulations, and other powerful predictive modeling tools. 4.2 BENEFITS TO DOD The enterprise-wide cost modeling capabilities developed under this project have the potential to deliver billions of dollars of direct savings to DoD. Despite aggressive acquisition reforms, cost estimating and cost management remain two of the most intractable and serious problems in the DoD acquisition community. By more closely linking product and process models to live sources of cost data and actual history of previous work as opposed to engineering judgment based on similar scope on a similar program all of the military services will be able to have much clearer visibility into contractors proposed costs as well as early and accurate warning of the cost impacts of design changes. DoD estimators will be able to obtain much greater fidelity in performing should-cost exercises to bound the scope of planned programs. Low-balling and defective pricing practices will be greatly curtailed, since all estimates will be directly traceable to underlying sources of cost information including vendor and subcontractor quotes as well as labor and material estimates. DoD program managers will also be able to get much more accu-
MBE Project Plans
5-56
rate estimates of the cost impacts of technical problems, since the system cost model will automatically calculate the cost of redesign efforts resulting from requirements changes or test failures. The ability to collect operation and maintenance cost data across the life of a weapon system or other military product will also provide far greater visibility into total cost of ownership and other measures of life-cycle cost. This will enable the user community to quickly identify major areas of O&S expense that can be modeled and analyzed for potential improvement, allowing upgrade and replacement decisions to be made with confidence that the savings promised will be the savings delivered. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN AND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The following project plan assumes a start date of October 2006 for the 30-month effort. Resources for the defined scope of work are estimated at approximately $8.4 million.
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT While cost modeling is a mature discipline, linking of product and process models to sources of cost input is a significant challenge, as is managing those linkages to ensure accuracy and protect the integrity of the living cost estimate. The technical risk associated with providing simple linkages is low; however, the problems with accomplishing this objective for a complex product increase geometrically due to the much larger number of input sources. Reliably relating hundreds or potentially thousands of dependencies is also a major source of risk, as is the challenge of incorporating difficult-to-quantify factors such as development risk. Overall risk for the project is assessed as medium.
MBE Project Plans
5-57
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-10
MODEL-BASED DISTRIBUTION
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop enabling technologies and conduct proof-of-principle demonstrations of model-based distribution capabilities able to support highly complex distribution requirements such as those for fielded military systems. The project focuses on providing a generic system framework that supports design for distribution, distribution planning, management/execution, and re-planning in response to changes in demand. 2.0 CHALLENGE Higher customer expectations, coupled with lean operations strategies, are placing tremendous pressure on manufacturers distribution systems. Leading-edge companies that use sophisticated modeling tools to distribute large quantities of small items include well-known shipping service providers Federal Express, UPS, and DHL. The food and beverage industry, automotive industry, and consumer product industries move millions of product units to established distribution points every month, and have highly sophisticated distribution systems that enable their business units to predict demand, queue up the right products, and get them quickly to where they need to be. These systems are very responsive, enabling customers or users at the distribution points to submit orders and have the right products en route in 24 hours or less. Distribution modeling tools enable rapid re-planning of order fulfillments in the event of system upsets, including severe weather events (hurricanes, blizzards, etc.), transportation bottlenecks, carrier strikes, and similar problems. The distribution function for most large and mid-sized manufacturers operates using mature models that incorporate geographic information, logistics, and delivery schedules into highly effective systems for product delivery to point of sale. Ketera, MindFlow, Oracle, and others provide a myriad of solutions for spend analysis, sourcing analytics, and cost performance analysis as well as solutions for modeling complex shipping parameters that include duties, taxes, tariffs, and other charges associated with complex international distribution systems. Leading enterprise management systems providers such as SAP and ASPEN include robust distribution planning and analysis capabilities as part of their product lines. Manhattan Associates offers its Integrated Logistics Solution suite of programs as part of industry-focused supply chain execution and optimization product line that manages the entire supply chain, from source to consumption. Distribution management is also closely tied to inventory management, and entity-relationship distribution models typically include inventory management functions (Figure 2-1). Inventory modeling is a well-developed discipline, and the only significant barrier to enabling real-time problem-solving in this area is the difficulty of linking live data to the model. The high cost of carrying product and material inventory between the point of resource need and the point of product sale has driven most manufacturers to adopt just-in-time practices that minimize in-process inventory. Advanced model-based inventory management (AIM) systems are mature and widely used to improve warehouse operation and efficiency. Internal routing models permit the definition of step-by-step paths to follow the movement of goods and all the properties assigned to each step: label printing, confirmation options, status, reference, and lot/serial changes. The future vision for distribution is, for commercial product sectors, one of incremental advances building off of current capabilities. Future model-based distribution management systems will deliver products to
MBE Project Plans
5-58
Figure 2-1. Inventory modeling is a well-developed discipline closely tied to distribution modeling.
20
point of sale and point of use through the most efficient means, forecasting and responding proactively to every fluctuation in geographic demand. The ability to accurately model the ebb and flow of demand based on seasonal patterns, advertising and marketing outlays, and other factors that influence market pull will enable manufacturers to apply lean strategies, closely matching production levels to drawdown rates. This will enable enterprises to reduce inventory carrying costs while preserving the ability to quickly surge to meet upswings in demand. Advanced modeling and simulation capabilities will enable companies to analyze different distribution approaches for new or current products, optimizing for location, stock levels, choice of carriers, etc. and providing the ability to quickly respond to changes in the distribution environment such as fluctuations in carrier capacity, changing fuel prices, and congestion of local and regional transportation routes. These systems will also enable modeling of complex financial factors including duties, taxes, tariffs, and other charges to optimize the design of international distribution systems. Widespread use of RFID sensors coupled to cellular communications networks will provide managers with real-time visibility of assets anywhere in the distribution network, moving beyond present commoncarrier tracking to enable immediate, precise location of any shipment anywhere in the delivery channel. These technologies will enable every product to be tracked from origin to point of sale, providing the real20
Michelle A. Poolet, Product Distribution Metamodel, July 2002. http://www.windowsitpro.com/SQLServer/Article/ArticleID/24912/24912.html.
MBE Project Plans
5-59
time information that model-based inventory management systems need to monitor demand, adjust manufacturing throughput, and direct supply and distribution networks to ensure that the right makes, models, and styles of product reach customers on time in every market. Distribution management systems will collect this information continuously, make it available to internal and external customer support systems, and compare actual to predicted performance of the distribution system to flag performance issues, explore solutions, and update cost and time information used by the enterprises product and process models. More efficient distribution planning will be enabled by intelligent resource management models that link to ERP/ERM systems to monitor marketing, sales, and distribution systems and external information sources and accurately predict near- and long-term variations in product demand by region and locality, automatically recalculating requirements and redirecting inventory at the enterprise level and at all affected operating sites. The system will enable product managers and operations managers to understand, with a high degree of confidence, what requirements are coming the next day, next week, next month, and next year. The system will enable them to quickly and systematically evaluate the pros, cons, and deeper implications of all options for responding to those requirements. More importantly, the system will enable them to re-plan quickly as requirements change and as new opportunities and challenges arise dayto-day. The system will monitor all indicators that directly and indirectly influence demand local and regional economic trends, weather, new product introductions by competitors, and the like and enable enterprise managers to quickly identify issues, evaluate options, and determine the best response. The challenges in achieving this vision are relatively straightforward. The distribution system for the model-based enterprise must be able to tie into the product definition model and the life-cycle support model in order to define the requirements for what product and product elements (e.g., spares, repair parts, consumables, support tools/equipment) will be entering the distribution chain. It must be able to tie into the customer requirements management function and the manufacturing planning system, in order to understand what items in what quantities need to arrive at what location and by when. And, the system must be able to tie into the enterprises environmental surveillance function in order to monitor, analyze, and respond to changes in requirements, including subtle qualitative factors that influence demand. The system must also be able to operate equally efficiently in reverse providing the capability to accept products back at the end of their useful life for reprocessing, reuse, reclamation, and disposal. These challenges are significant for the military services. The Department of Defense, through its Defense Logistics Agency, uses sophisticated models to move people and supplies around the world; however, DoD faces formidable challenges because it must keep pace with rapidly changing requirements for one of the worlds largest and most complex inventory of equipment, supplies, consumables, spares, and replacement parts. Unlike commercial product fulfillment, defense logistical supply does not enjoy the luxury of simple product requirements with well-defined and stable distribution requirements. Military operations often involve situations that develop rapidly with issues that, although identified in contingency planning, cannot be solved quickly or easily. During the first Gulf War (Operation Desert Shield/Storm), the responsiveness of the logistics systems were degraded by thousands of duplicate orders placed because operational units had inadequate visibility over the status of their requisitions. Moreover, an enormous amount of materiel was shipped to the theater which was not readily available to our forces because of poor control and poor visibility of assets intheater. Such problems reduce the readiness and effectiveness of combat forces and place unnecessary strain on the transportation system.21 Despite significant improvements afforded by initiatives such as the Defense Logistics Agencys Joint Total Asset Visibility (JTAV) program and the DoDs Integrated Data Environment (IDE) program,
21
http://www.dla.mil/j-6/jtav/.
MBE Project Plans
5-60
military distribution management remains a huge challenge. The extent of the continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, for example, has placed a tremendous strain on the ability of the military to provide vehicle armor to counter roadside bombs and batteries to keep weapons, communications, and other powered equipment operational. The military air transport fleet has been severely pressed in moving massive quantities of materiel and supplies to the operational theaters, and the ground transport fleet has been equally hard-pressed to get the right supplies from main operating bases to forward units. In the early days of the war in Iraq, supply problems greatly complicated the ability of field commanders to sustain high operational tempos in engaging enemy units that offered either unexpectedly strong resistance or fled in headlong retreat. Modeling and simulation have been key to improving logistics responsiveness under efforts such as the Forward Stock Positioning program (Figure 2-2). Major weapon systems now in development, such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), are making extensive use of modeling techniques to optimize the logistics approach for the three JSF variants. The JSF support strategy is centered on the concept of autonomic logistics, wherein every aircraft monitors its health using onboard sensors and reports failures (actual or predicted) to the logistics support system. The logistics system in turn automatically places the maintenance request and orders the necessary parts and materials so that the repair team is ready to start work Figure 2-2. In-depth modeling of transportation capabilities has been as soon as the incoming aircraft key to DLAs aggressive efforts to improve efficiency and responsiveness rolls to a stop. The pulling of a in distribution of materiel and supplies.22 spare part from the on-hand assets automatically triggers an order through the logistics supply chain for re-stocking, either from a contractor depot or from the factory. In addition to enabling the fast combat turns needed to sustain very high operating tempos, the autonomic logistics approach will enable the JSF support network to maintain clear and continuously current visibility of stock levels. This will enable early detection of unusual drawdowns, maximizing lead time for re-supply as well as flagging potential reliability issues requiring investigation and corrective action. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION While distribution management is well-developed in many industries, the current capabilities are the product of years of development and optimization using in-house developed or proprietary discrete event tools to systematize and refine well-understood distribution requirements. For the model-based enterprises of the future, the distribution management capability must be integral to the product realization and support system. It must be based on open standards, accommodate qualitative variables and far more complex dependencies than possible today, and integrate seamlessly with other model-based enterprise systems as discussed in Section 2.0. Key goals for this capability follow.
22
Scott Rosbaugh, Stockage Committee Update, DLA CSR Conference Presentation, September 2003.
MBE Project Plans
5-61
3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR MODEL-BASED DISTRIBUTION Goal 1: Real-Time, Responsive Distribution Management Provide the capability to calculate optimal product allocation to points of sale/use and staging nodes based on current need, rapidly determine the most efficient means of distribution for new shipments, and interface with product tracking systems to direct or redirect assets to points of need anywhere in the distribution network. (M-L)23 Design for Distribution Develop modeling capabilities to optimize product designs for efficient distribution. Include the capability to support final assembly at point of sale/use and optimize performance and cost-effectiveness in protecting, storing, and transporting the product from origin to destination. (M) Integrated Distribution Modeling Develop modeling and simulation applications that enable planning and management of distribution requirements based on predicted and actual demand and distribution network capabilities. Include the capability to automatically determine best delivery methods and routes based on time, cost, and capacity factors; to analyze stock drawdown patterns to redirect product to demand points; and to identify opportunities to reengineer distribution channels to enhance performance and profitability. (M) Model-Based Product Tracking Develop product tracking systems that enable continuous or ondemand location of products in the distribution network, with the capability to locate any asset to precise GPS coordinates and automatically direct or redirect assets while updating any resulting changes in the product distribution model. (S) Pull-Based Distribution Develop modeling capabilities that enable the distribution system to automatically respond to changes in demand by initiating shipments from inventory and reporting drawdowns to the factory production planning system. (L) Special Materials Management Develop applications to support modeling and planning for distribution and tracking of radiological materials, hazardous chemicals, and other high-value/highsensitivity products requiring special handling for safety, environmental, or security reasons. Include the ability for the distribution model to interface with regulatory requirements databases, automatically detect any changes that affect the enterprises distribution strategies and mechanisms, and support analysis to develop necessary changes. (M) Goal 2: Intelligent Asset/Inventory Modeling Provide modeling tools that monitor sources of inventory requirements change and aid users in defining and implementing optimal responses to change. (L) Adaptive Inventory Modeling Applications Develop generic inventory modeling applications that can be readily adapted to specific industry sectors and different supply chain roles (i.e., OEM, major subcontractor, supplier). Include the ability to integrate products having widely varying inventory characteristics, easily add new products to the model, and interface with distribution planning and management systems. (M) Inventory Modeling Information Interface Develop interface solutions enabling inventory management systems to acquire and continuously update all information that impacts inventory requirements, including direct factors such as orders, sales, and market trends, and indirect factors such as economic forecasts, weather, and governmental actions (e.g., changes in regulations). (M) Automated Demand Prediction Develop modeling tools able to evaluate variables that impact product demand over time, and accurately forecast inventory requirements for all makes, models,
23
MBE Project Plans
5-62
and styles of product. Include the capability to extrapolate demand trends for new product introductions based on initial orders and sales, and the ability to model the demand impacts of disruptive events such as strikes, natural disasters, political upheaval, or introduction of competing products. (L) Capacity Management System Interface Develop methods for interfacing inventory modeling tools with factory management systems to enable calculation of factory impacts resulting from shifting production demands. Include the capability to interface with supply management systems to ensure just-in-time provision of raw materials, components, labor, and other assets required to fulfill product demand. (L) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK This project will develop enabling technologies and conduct proof-of-principle demonstrations of realtime, model-based distribution capabilities able to support highly complex distribution requirements such as those for fielded military systems. The project focuses on providing a generic system framework that supports distribution planning, management/execution, and re-planning in response to changes in demand. Task 1 Real-Time, Responsive Distribution Management: This task shall provide the capability to calculate optimal product allocation to points of sale/use and staging nodes based on current need, rapidly determine the most efficient means of distribution for new shipments, and interface with product tracking systems to direct or redirect assets to points of need anywhere in the distribution network. The activity shall commence with a focused effort to develop and verify system requirements with the commercial and government user community, particularly DLA. Existing commercial tools shall be evaluated for the potential to support a model-based distribution capability consistent with the modelbased enterprise vision, and one or more application vendors shall be brought onboard to support modification of existing tools, development of new tools, and system integration. The project team shall choose a representative set of complex product types of interest to both DoD and commercial industry, and engage one or more leading manufacturers in each sector to support testing and piloting of the capabilities to be developed. The project team shall coordinate with DLA in order to maximize synergy with an ongoing agency such as JTAV/IDE. Specific capabilities to be developed under this task include: 1. Modeling capabilities to optimize product designs for efficient distribution, including the capability to optimize for final assembly at point of use and for performance and cost-effectiveness in protecting, storing, and transporting the product. 2. Modeling and simulation capabilities that enable planning and modification of distribution requirements based on demand and on distribution network capabilities. This shall include the capability to automatically determine best delivery methods and routes based on time, cost, and capacity factors; to analyze stock drawdown patterns to redirect product to demand points; and to identify opportunities to reengineer distribution channels to enhance performance. 3. Product tracking approaches that enable continuous on-demand location of products in the distribution network, with the capability to locate any asset to precise GPS coordinates and automatically direct or redirect assets in transit while updating any resulting changes in the product distribution status system. 4. Modeling capabilities that enable the distribution system to automatically respond to changes in demand by initiating shipments from the optimal inventory points and reporting drawdowns to supply node management and factory planning systems. 5. Applications to support modeling and planning for distribution and tracking of radiological materials, hazardous chemicals, and other high-value/high-sensitivity products requiring special hanMBE Project Plans 5-63
dling for safety, environmental, or security reasons. Include the ability for the distribution model to interface with regulatory requirements databases, automatically detect any changes that affect the enterprises distribution strategies and mechanisms, and support analysis to develop necessary changes. Task 2 Intelligent Asset/Inventory Modeling: This task shall provide modeling tools that monitor sources of inventory requirements change and aid users in defining and implementing optimal responses to change. Specific capabilities to be developed include: 1. A generic inventory modeling application that can be readily adapted to specific industry sectors and different supply chain roles (i.e., OEM, major subcontractor, supplier). Include the ability to integrate products having widely varying inventory characteristics, easily add new products to the model, and interface with distribution planning and management systems. 2. Interface solutions enabling inventory management systems to acquire and continuously update all information that impacts inventory requirements, including direct factors such as orders, sales, and market trends, and indirect factors such as economic forecasts, weather, and governmental actions (e.g., changes in regulations). 3. Modeling tools able to evaluate variables that impact product demand over time, and accurately forecast requirements for all makes, models, and styles of product. Include the capability to extrapolate demand trends for new products based on initial orders and sales, and the ability to model the demand impacts of disruptive events such as strikes, natural disasters, political upheaval, or introduction of competing products. 4. Methods for interfacing inventory modeling tools with factory management systems to enable calculation of factory impacts resulting from shifting production demands. Include the capability to interface with supply management systems to ensure just-in-time provision of raw materials, components, labor, and other assets required to fulfill product demand. 4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO DOD DoD will realize perhaps the greatest benefit from this project, as its supply and logistics chains are tremendously complex, have large consequences, and very large numbers of highly varied product. Implementation of model-based distribution in the contractor community will provide the foundation for the military to better integrate total visibility of assets throughout the product life-cycle. Logistics support models developed for individual systems will be readily integrated into a master DLA logistics support model that takes into account all product attributes that ultimately impact the distribution chain. Factors such as MTBF and MTTR integrated into every products life-cycle model will enable DoD to have instant visibility of the impacts of increases in operational usage based on planned deployments and current operational realities, providing early warning of requirements for re-supply of spares, repair parts, consumables, and the like. This is key to realizing the potential of the autonomic logistics concept. Modeling and simulation to support distribution planning will also be highly automated. Capacity and throughput models at the lowest level (truck, C-130, sea container, etc.) will be linked to live transport asset status, enabling rapid direction of the right transport asset to the right location for loading of materiel and expedited transit to the required delivery point. Associated requirements such as the need for inflight refueling will be calculated and scheduled automatically, greatly reducing administrative coordination workload, particularly across the services. Commanders will have full on-demand visibility of assets en route, and know with confidence exactly when the requested materiel or supplies will reach each transit point.
MBE Project Plans
5-64
4.2 BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY The model-based distribution capabilities to be delivered by this project will deliver a varying range of benefits to U.S. manufacturers. Companies that already have highly refined and efficient distribution systems in place will realize limited benefits since the upside potential for improvement over their existing systems is small. For companies and organizations whose distribution functions are not already highly optimized (due to being highly complex, highly variable, or both), or who cannot afford the cost of current enterprise-class applications, the benefits will be dramatic. The ability to plan for distribution concurrent with the development of a product design will enable planners to engineer out, on the front end, many of the distribution problems typically encountered in new product rollout. The model-based distribution management system will seamlessly interface without the cost of hardwired or custom integration with all other enterprise functions that impact it or depend on it, including manufacturing planning, shipping and transportation, asset management, and product support. Distribution planning will accommodate far more variables than currently possible, and will provide a greatly improved ability to model qualitative factors. Successful conclusion of this project should provide useful tools to provide flexibility to rigid supply chains. The project is also expected to deliver greatly improved capabilities for re-planning and for management of downstream life-cycle functions including product returns for recycle and disposal. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN AND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project schedule is provided below. Estimated cost for the 39-month effort is $6.8 million, which includes conduct of a prototype demonstration for each of the defined capabilities.
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT This project is assessed as medium risk. Although many of the desired functionalities can be demonstrated using existing tools and technologies (such as real-time asset location tracking), the ability to integrate the capabilities as part of a unified model-based enterprise environment is a significant challenge, as is developing tools that can deliver broad applicability for different industry sectors (e.g., consumer products and defense) and for small as well as large manufacturers. The technology readiness level is assessed at TRL 4-5 due primarily to the significant integration that must be accomplished.
MBE Project Plans
5-65
MULTI-ENTERPRISE COLLABORATION
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to provide the initial set of methods and standards required for seamless interaction of model-based processes among supply chain members. The project will conclude with a demonstration of these capabilities involving a team of industry partners in a selected manufacturing sector. 2.0 CHALLENGE Widespread use of model-based processes at every level of the supply chain, coupled with model-based technical and business management tools, will enable future manufacturers of all sizes to efficiently manage the intricacies of designing, producing, supplying, and supporting products in a highly dynamic and competitive global marketplace. Model-based technical and business processes will drive the evolution of agile supply chains that use model-based techniques to quickly recognize and respond to opportunities and problems. Many of todays walls between prime manufacturers and their suppliers will be dissolved through model-based collaboration. Smaller manufacturers will serve as virtual specialty departments simultaneously for multiple primes, distinguished from in-house departments only by company nameplates and management reporting chains. Model-based product and process definition will support seamless operation of technical and business functions to the lowest level of the supply network. Prime manufacturers business planning systems will interface to comprehensive capability models maintained by potential suppliers. These models will electronically mirror a suppliers products and production capability, complete with high-fidelity models of manufacturing processes and equipment and including performance, availability, and capacity information that is kept continuously current. This will allow designers and procurement teams to quickly evaluate the ability of a supplier to support prime requirements, either singly or in combination with other suppliers. Model-based processes will also enable engineers, planners, and managers at all levels of the supply chain to collaborate in virtual environments where designs and approaches are optimized for the best balance of performance, reliability, cost, schedule, and other factors. All product and process design data and supporting information will reside in shared repositories accessible by authorized users from anywhere in the world via product data management (PDM) system interfaces. This will eliminate the time, cost, and complexity of maintaining multiple versions of the same data at different levels of the supply chain. It will also ensure that every team members engineering, planning, and management tools operate from the same information. While CAD-based PDM applications are enabling prime manufacturers to integrate unitary supply chains with individual partners, current implementations are highly tailored and require significant investments by supply chain members to meet the specific requirements for compatibility (e.g., for product data exchange and cost/schedule performance reporting) with a particular prime manufacturer. Even apparently simple requirements can be sources of significant problems. On the Armys Future Combat Systems (FCS) procurement, lead systems integrator Boeing specified submittal of program schedules in Microsoft Project. Raytheon, after being selected as the integrator for the FCS ground sensors, revised the sensor program requirements to specify use of OpenPlan for schedules. One prospective bidder, having already
MBE Project Plans
5-66
prepared its integrated master schedule (IMS) in MS Project, was forced to fly in OpenPlan experts to recreate the IMS at great expense. When the IMS files were submitted, Raytheon admitted that they didnt have the capability in place to use OpenPlan, and what they really wanted was an MS Project file. The cost of maintaining different applications and systems to support different chains often precludes smaller suppliers from supporting multiple primes, and the economics of such investments force smaller suppliers into business relationships where their options are greatly narrowed. The challenge for the future is to provide ways for partners to integrate their technical and business systems, instead of reengineering them to support specific tools and practices. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN The full solution to enabling secure information sharing throughout the supply chain will require an enormous amount of effort as outlined in the goals and requirements listed in Section 3.1 below. In this project we propose to accomplish the initial step of developing the first set of methods and standards for sharing information using model-based processes among supply chain partners. The results will illuminate key issues and provide validated data for investment decisions regarding further development. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTI-ENTERPRISE INTEGRATION Goal 1: Model-Based Teaming Provide a modeling framework and tools for rapidly creating new teams and supply chains to pursue business opportunities. (M)24 Prequalification Model Framework Develop a web-based supplier qualification model or template appropriate for any manufacturing industry type. Include data elements for process capabilities, capacity, current utilization and commitments, certifications, past performance, financial assets, and cost history. (S) Industry-Specific Extensions Extend the standard supplier qualification model to support the unique requirements of specific industries, including specific factors such as tolerances, purity, turnaround time, quantity, regulatory compliance, and similar criteria. (S) Extended Enterprise Modeling Develop methods and tools for modeling extended enterprises to pursue and execute defined business opportunities, including evaluation of team member roles, values, and capabilities, to support supplier selection and teaming/partnering decisions. (M) Multi-Enterprise Estimating & Planning Develop models and associated tools that support multi-enterprise estimating and planning for joint bids, with appropriate protection of the sensitive data of each team member. (M) Goal 2: Extended Enterprise Interoperability Provide standards and methods enabling seamless interconnection of model-based processes among supply chain members. (M-L) Common Supply Chain Language Define and develop a standardized language or method of sharing model-based data, methods, and procedures within and between each member of a supply chain. (M) Shared, Secure Models Develop information management methods enabling all members of the supply chain to input to, access, and manipulate shared models in accordance with appropriate permissions, with assured security of every data element. Include the capability to provide a continuous audit trail of all actions and automatically communicate changes to affected partners and personnel. (M)
24
MBE Project Plans
5-67
Extended Business Infrastructure Management Develop modeling tools and techniques for identifying, monitoring, and responding to internal and external forces acting on the supply chain, including the capability to predict the different impacts of an event on each member of the supply chain. (M-L) Goal 3: Model-Based Extended Enterprise Management Provide frameworks and standards that enable interoperability of model-based technical and business systems to the lowest level of the supply chain. (L) Enterprise Multi-Model Collaboration Develop a methodology to interface different companies enterprise models within the framework of an extended enterprise architecture, providing point-to-point connectivity of interdependent operations including requirements management, product and process design, configuration management, manufacturing planning, cost estimating, scheduling, and performance management. (M) Extended Factory Modeling Develop methods, tools, and techniques for creating accurate models for simulations of the extended enterprise factory and linking to current resource status information from different companies and different sites including the capability to automatically query status, locate extra capacity, identify and analyze constraints, and forecast requirements throughout the extended enterprise. (L) Extended Enterprise Logistics & Life-Cycle Support Modeling Develop tools to model logistics requirements across the supply chain and ensure materials, equipment, and human resources are delivered to point of need. This will facilitate product tracking, supply, support, maintenance, repair, and return for reprocessing and recycle/reuse. Include analytical capabilities for problem solving, tradeoff analysis, and predicting the impacts of decisions (including plans for future technology insertion) at different points in the product life cycle. (L) Inverse/Reverse Manufacturing Modeling Tools Develop modeling and simulation tools to aid in reverse engineering of products or components that are no longer supported by the original supplier (or for which the original supplier no longer exists) to support product life extension programs and manage end-of-life concerns such as reprocessing and recycling. (M) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK This project will pursue the development and implementation of methods and standards to share modelbased data and information in interconnected processes across an enterprise supply chain. Specific tasks are as follows. Task 1 Project Organization & Planning: This task shall establish a team of industry, government, and academic participants to develop the detailed plan for project execution. This activity shall select a manufacturing sector for the technology pilot and engage members at each level of a selected producttype supply chain. The objective is to select an existing supply chain with well-established working relationships and a high level of technical and business process automation, including a minimum of four levels with multiple participants at sub-tier: prime manufacturer (one), subsystem supplier (2 to 3 participants), part/component supplier (4 to 6 participants), and material or commodity supplier (5 to 10 participants). Task 2 Methods & Standards: This task shall develop the top-level process models that define the business and technical interactions across the selected supply chain. Existing applications supporting these functions shall be mapped to the model and requirements defined to cover gaps in functionality. For each gap, the team shall survey available tools, select the tools that provide the best functionality fit, and work with the tool vendors to develop the required capabilities.
MBE Project Plans
5-68
Functions to be addressed include product definition (design and configuration management), cost estimating and reporting, scheduling and schedule performance reporting, procurement/work order placement and status tracking, change management, distribution (e.g., shipping and transport) management, and manufacturing execution. Task 3 Integration Pilot: This task shall implement and demonstrate the effectiveness of the modelbased supply chain integration methods developed under Task 2. The project team shall document the results of this effort in a project final report, quantifying the resulting improvements and documenting those areas where further development is required and barriers remain. Recommendations for new or improved application functionality shall be documented and shared with the providers of the tools used in the pilot in order to guide further development. 4.0 BENEFITS & BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY Management of product data and associated technical and business processes across multiple levels of a supply chain is expected to realize the greatest benefits from this project. The ability of model-based product definition, data management, and planning and reporting systems to transparently exchange information between different brands and types of applications will eliminate the cost and time of transferring or recreating design definitions shared among different members of the supply chain. For suppliers, this will eliminate the need to support multiple CAD/PDM and analytical tools. For primes and suppliers, this will eliminate a major source of errors and reduce the time and cost of moving new products and processes from design to production. Other parts of the enterprise will also benefit. Program managers and production managers will have greatly improved ability to objectively evaluate potential suppliers for capability, capacity, and ability to meet schedule and cost targets, eliminating a large percentage of supplier performance issues. Product and process designers and planners will have access to the accurate, in-depth information they need to plan design and manufacturing efforts with a clear, high-fidelity understanding of cost and schedule risks. 4.2 BENEFITS TO DOD DoD programs will realize the same benefits as discussed above but, given the far greater complexity of the military acquisition environment, the resulting improved efficiencies in supply chain relationships are anticipated to translate to multi-billion-dollar annual savings across the DoD contractor base. More seamless integration of team members technical and business systems will directly benefit large-scale programs such as Joint Strike Fighter, Future Combat Systems, and DD(X), which will ultimately involve hundreds of companies in the U.S. and abroad. For future programs, prime contractors will be able to choose suppliers based solely on performance and cost factors, knowing that any qualified supplier will be able to quickly plug in to the programs engineering and business environment. This will also provide more accurate and timely visibility of technical progress and earned value, since cost and schedule status will be extracted electronically each week or each day instead of having to be manually processed. Administrative costs for subcontract management could be easily halved given the ability to fully integrate reporting mechanisms. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN & RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS This project is estimated to require approximately 34 months to complete at a cost of $2.7 million. The project schedule is provided below.
MBE Project Plans
5-69
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT The risk for this project is assessed as high, because the integration of a large number of applications presents significant technical issues in addition to overcoming the resistance of application vendors to making their products more open to compatibility with competing applications. A major challenge will be balancing the need to accept some point solutions to bridge gaps and mitigate risks that cannot be overcome within the project timeframe using truly open, model-based solutions. Technology readiness for model-based multi-enterprise integration is assessed at MTRL 2-3. Although a number of supply chains particularly in the automotive industry have achieved a high degree of automation and interoperability, successes have been highly dependent on the use of a small set of common applications and performing point-to-point integration of specific processes between specific members of the supply chain. The ability for candidate suppliers to transparently plug and play in a new supply chain relationship remains at the vision stage.
MBE Project Plans
5-70
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-8
MODEL-BASED PRODUCT LIFE-CYCLE MANAGEMENT

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to provide the capability to create and apply scaleable, high-fidelity product life-cycle models that support every phase of the product lifespan and through all tiers of the supply chain. 2.0 CHALLENGE In the NGMTI vision, from inception of product development through the end of a products life, all engineering and business activities will apply and support a central, integrated product master model or metamodel that contains or is linked to the original requirements and specifications for the product; analytical simulation tools for design, engineering, and business decision support; and all processes, systems, and participants in the product life cycle (Figure 2-1) through manufacturing and product support. For some products with long expected life spans, this means ensuring availability of all modeled data related to the product and its support for decades after its creation. This requires a strong focus on archival of modelbased information in addressing lifecycle issues. Despite increasing awareness of the importance of taking a life-cycle view in managing complex product development from inception through manufacture, operation, and support to fully embrace all aspects of a products life cycle, current capabilities in this area are inadequate to meet todays business challenges. It is widely accepted that 80% of the total ownership cost (TOC) of a product is locked in by decisions in the early stages (the first 20%) of the life cycle. However, major TOC Figure 2-1. An integrated model will drive, enable, factors such as maintenance, reliabiland support all phases of the product life cycle. ity, training, upgrades, and end-of-life disposition (e.g., recycle and disposal) receive limited visibility in the development phase, since the overriding emphasis is on product performance and acquisition cost. While progress has been made in better addressing life-cycle issues in both the commercial and defense sectors, most products remain complicated and costly to support in the operational environment. Compounding these problems is the limited feedback from the operations, maintenance, training, and customer support functions to improve design
MBE Project Plans
5-71
decision processes for better life-cycle performance, and corrective action is typically initiated only when it is externally forced. Tools for understanding life-cycle factors beyond basic spreadsheets to calculate costs and factors such as reliability do not exist to any meaningful degree. In the defense sector, techniques such as environmental testing, level-of-repair analysis, reliability growth engineering, and supply support analysis help tune weapon system designs for reliability and supportability in the field. Contractor depots and product support organizations collect failure data and repair information and perform failure analyses to identify needed improvements. However, in the development phase of programs, these disciplines along with other downstream functions such as training are among the first to have their budgets reduced when programs run into schedule and budget problems. In the commercial sector, life-cycle aspects of product design receive far less attention. Most manufacturers particularly automotive and electronics address reliability aggressively in product development, but the overriding goals are typically to ensure a product will perform for its warranty period and be on a perceived quality par with its competitors. Beyond that, provision of repair services and spare parts is a valuable revenue stream, so there is little incentive to optimize for long, reliable life. Below the level of major appliances, today many consumers will throw a product away and buy a new one rather than deal with the inconvenience of trying to get it repaired. Model-based processes can deliver dramatic improvements in all these areas. By providing the capability to accurately model all aspects of the product life cycle from the earliest stages of design, manufacturers can drastically reduce costs associated with creating and distributing the product, improve operational performance, and improve efficiency of maintenance/repair operations and training. The model can also be used to harvest the information gathered about downstream performance and repair trends in order to improve product design and manufacturing approaches. Life-cycle costs are difficult to understand adequately due to the enormous number of variables (and degrees of uncertainty) involved in a complex product. Different kinds of data and information that factor into life-cycle equations are not sharable across different models, and everyone uses different models, plus some of the information needed is archived in legacy data stores. In addition, in the defense sector different life-cycle functions are typically funded from different budgets, making true costs very difficult to understand. While cost is the most tangible concern with respect to the product life cycle, there is a pressing need to be able to optimize products for all aspects of lifecycle performance including reliability, supportability, maintainability, supply of consumables and spares, repair, training, and other downstream functions (Figure 2-2). The challenges in these areas are daunting. We lack the ability to model many life-cycle factors in their operational context with mathematical rigor and completeness. InforFigure 2-2. The product model must support every mation about life-cycle requirements is not readily function across every phase of the life cycle. traceable back to fundamental data, and we dont capture knowledge in readily usable/reusable forms. This is especially true of information captured in legacy systems. We also lack the ability to quantify many life-cycle factors with sufficient rigor and certainty to support accurate decision processes. Current development in this area is focused largely on CAD-based product life-cycle management (PLM) tools and refinement of available models. Reliability, perhaps the most mature example, is currently modeled by adding together the cumulative reliabilities of all of the constituent parts and subsystems of a product to calculate factors such as mean time between failures (MTBF). This yields useful results for
MBE Project Plans
5-72
planning purposes, but represents only a best-guess approximation based on engineering judgment and known history of life-limiting components or materials. When the reality turns out to be very different, the impacts on operational performance and support costs can be huge. The AH-64 attack helicopter, for example, was originally designed (as were many current front-line DoD systems) as a tank-killing platform to operate in the cold and wet weather of European theater. The different climate of the Middle East, where blowing sand, dust, and extreme heat are a constant threat to mechanical systems, has dramatically impacted the operational availability of the AH-64 fleet and its major systems and has stressed maintenance and repair resources to their limits. Modeling and simulation of maintenance functions is one area where excellent progress is being made, improving the ability to design in life-cycle robustness and affordability from early stages in the product design phase. Ergo man and design for assembly (DFA) tools enable aircraft designers to simulate support functions such as stores loading and removal of parts for servicing, greatly improving supportability aspects of the system design. Also, emergence of the system-of-systems concept has contributed significantly to improving the process of engineering products in ways that complement all of the other products and systems with which a product must interoperate in its operational environment. This concept must be fully extended to the life-cycle support context. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN The goal of this project is to develop the capabilities required to provide a single product master model that is linked to analytical simulation tools for design, systems engineering, and decision support; and to all processes, systems, and functions in the product life cycle. The key to this concept is providing the ability to: Link all elements of the integrated product life-cycle model to accurate, complete, and current data, and maintain these linkages over the life of the product in order to continuously enrich the model and keep it current. Accurately bound risk and uncertainty for each element (or sub-model) of the model, and propagate associated variability across interrelated factors. Create models that are scaleable in terms of complexity and level of detail; extendibility over time; and extendibility across product/product family types. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR MODEL-BASED PRODUCT LIFE-CYCLE MANAGEMENT This project responds to three major goals defined in the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise, as follows. Goal 1: Model-Driven Support Over Full Life Cycle Provide the capability to manage all product life-cycle support activities using model-based processes, by extending the product model including traceability through all configurations, adding life-cycle simulations, and capturing and applying information from the products operational environment. (L)25 Robust Requirements Modeling Tools Develop modeling tools that integrate the entire chain of life-cycle events for a product or process, including environmental, safety, health, and other regulatory requirements. (M) Integrated Life-Cycle Modeling Capability Develop integrated, plug-and-play tool sets and standard database structures for modeling and simulation of all life-cycle factors for generic product types (e.g., mechanical, electrical, chemical). Include the capability for accurate modeling of all
25
MBE Project Plans
5-73
product design factors relevant to product support, including reliability, availability, maintainability, and supportability, to optimize product designs for performance, cost-effectiveness, and customer value. (M-L) Integration of Legacy Data Provide the capability to integrate archived information from legacy applications and databases into the current life-cycle model framework, and demonstrate the capability for a selected product family that has long life-cycle use and support characteristics. (M) Integral Product Monitoring Develop packaging and transportation systems and onboard sensors that monitor products from point of origin and record and report environmental conditions and handling history to enrich the products life-cycle knowledge base. (M) Modeling Tools for Systems-Based Life-Cycle Planning Develop and pilot modeling capabilities supporting requirements definition, problem-solving, tradeoff analysis, and prediction of decision impacts anywhere in the product life cycle (including future technology insertions) in the context of the environment in which the product will operate. Include tools enabling product models to monitor data gathered concerning operational use and predict product condition at end of life, to support design decisions about refurbishment, recycle, and disposal. (L) Model Linkages to MRO Management Systems For a given set of products to be supported, extend and integrate current design, manufacturing, PDM systems, and maintenance/repair operations (MRO) management systems to support forecasting to plan for expected repair operations, prioritization of resources, conduct of work, resupply/reorder of spares and consumables, and similar MRO functions. (M) Product-Driven Support Schedules Develop modeling tools to analyze a specific product and quickly and accurately generate the projected need for repair and spare parts and optimal maintenance schedules based on the product design and its deployment schedule. (S-M) Technology Impact Forecasting Develop the means to link knowledge and projections about future technology progressions (e.g., faster processors, new materials) to optimize a product design for its intended useful life, including technology refresh or product phaseout. (M) Goal 2: Life-Cycle Model Feedback to Design & Planning Provide the ability to acquire and use captured information from users and maintenance/repair and final disposition operations to 1) enrich the fidelity and depth of product life-cycle models, and 2) feed back and enhance the process and product design function. (M-L) Life-Cycle Model Connectivity to Operational Data Identify and develop means for capturing, verifying, and delivering needed live data (including cumulative life-cycle history such as performance over time and repair trends and spares demands) for different types and families of products back to the enterprise and product models, enabling life-cycle system models and system-of-systems models to be continuously updated to enhance their fidelity and value. Include capability to mine data for products with service problems, searching development and manufacturing data for offnormal conditions that might be associated and alerting management if sensitive associations are found (e.g., concerning potential liability issues). (L) Life-Cycle Performance Feedback Tools Develop tools and methods to automatically capture life-cycle performance data (e.g., actual reliability and repair turnaround times) from the enterprises product support systems and update the master product knowledge base. (S-M) Model Database Interfaces to Life-Cycle Feedback Establish formal interfaces with specific manufacturer and customer databases enabling product models to link to actual life-cycle information such as spares and consumables drawdowns, frequency of maintenance and repair actions, field modifications, and user feedback on performance and problems. (M)
MBE Project Plans
5-74
Real-Time Access to Maintenance Data Develop the capability to capture and use real-time feedback from maintenance activities in predictive maintenance/support models to improve planning and management of maintenance/repair operations, including supply logistics. (M) Goal 3: Model-Based Training Provide the capability to use product and process models as the basis for all training activities across the product life-cycle. Provide model-based training tools that: 1) are developed along with the product or process, 2) support different kinds of training for different kinds of products and processes, 3) are available for training prior to release and use of the product/process, and 4 are automatically adaptable for all types and levels of user. (S-M) Model-Based Training Requirements Definition Define levels and types of training needs (including both formal training and real-time job support for operation, maintenance, and product support) for different classes of products, in cooperation with training community stakeholders (including universities). (S) Model-Based Embedded Training Concepts Develop model-based embedded training concepts and approaches for different classes of products and processes in collaboration with industry/government user communities, academia, and training technology vendors and service providers. (S-M) Embedded Training Pilots Develop and demonstrate model-based embedded training technologies and applications for selected products, for use by support/maintenance staff and customers/users. (M) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK Under the proposed project, a team of commercial and government-funded participants will develop, pilot, and demonstrate the benefits of scaleable life-cycle model-based technologies and associated lifecycle support processes. The project comprises four major tasks as follows. Task 1 Product Life-Cycle Model-Based Framework Concept: This task shall define and baseline a technical framework for model-based product life-cycle management. The project team shall: 1. Conduct research and develop case studies to define and characterize life-cycle requirements for different types and classes of products, and quantify the benefits of life-cycle modeling and simulation applications to document a detailed business case for investment. 2. Define information needs for each life-cycle phase, process, and stakeholder, and develop logical information models for an initial set of product types. 3. Identify available models and software tools, and define tool integration requirements and an enabling framework to support the Task 2 demonstration activity. This effort shall include a gap analysis to identify required tool modifications/extensions, and disseminate requirements to the tool vendor community. Task 2 Phase I Demonstrations: This task shall pilot the model-based product life-cycle framework and enabling tools on a set of selected product types of interest to both DoD and commercial industry. Working with the product supply chain members and modeling and simulation tool vendors, develop and demonstrate integrated life-cycle models for the selected product types. Key factors to be addressed include life-cycle cost and supportability. Task 3 Phase I Framework Validation: This task shall validate the baseline product life-cycle framework through operational evaluation on a selected product with members of the products supply chain. The project team shall:
MBE Project Plans
5-75
1. Develop a generic product-type life-cycle model and tailor it to the selected product example and its operational life-cycle processes (e.g., provision of spare parts and consumables, maintenance and repair, recycle/disposal). 2. Disseminate the generic model to all members of the product supply chain and interested organizations for independent evaluation, and solicit feedback on utility, deficiencies, and considerations to optimize the model for use in business processes. 3. Conduct specific tests to exercise functionality, such as compatibility with analytical tools and ability to automatically predict the cascade effects of changes on both small and large scales. 4. Based on the feedback of the supply chain members, enhance and extend the pilot model framework and identify required technology advances. Task 4 Phase II Development & Demonstration: This task shall conduct follow-on demonstrations of improved and extended functionality and capabilities, targeting the gaps remaining from the Phase I activity and applying available model-based tools to a complex product as opposed to the simple product addressed in Phase I. The project team shall: 1. Develop a generic life-cycle model for the complex product type and tailor it to the selected product example and its life-cycle processes. 2. Work with the vendor community to extend the capabilities and functionality of the life-cycle model-based toolset to support the complex product case. 3. Work with product supply chain members to implement the technologies in wide-scale demonstrations and evaluations, enhance and extend the pilot framework, and identify required technology advances. After conclusion of the project, it is expected that broad-based technology development and maturation will continue with focused R&D projects to attack key technology gaps identified in the Phase I and Phase II demonstration activities. These requirements are anticipated to include the following: 1. Work with the model-based tools vendor community to extend the capabilities and functionality of the life-cycle toolset in areas such as ability to accept real-time data feeds, plug-and-play interoperability of different applications and model types, and data quality assurance. 2. Advance capabilities to capture and apply feedback from maintenance activities in predictive models to improve planning and management of maintenance/repair operations (including supply logistics) and improve original product designs. 3. Develop technologies to monitor products from point of origin to point of use and report environmental conditions and usage/handling history to enrich the products life-cycle knowledge base. 4. Work with the vendor community to promote needed standards, conduct demonstrations of technology advances, and commercialize new tools that support integrated life-cycle modeling. 4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO DOD Use of integrated life-cycle modeling in all phases of the DoD product life cycle is key to improving costs and efficiency for maintenance, repair, training, supply, technology refresh, and other sustainment functions. With a global theater of operations involving multiple major force deployments (e.g., Iraq, Afghanistan, and South Korea) expected to continue for many years, improved ability to model and understand life-cycle support requirements at the systems and system-of-systems levels will help DoD decision-makers anticipate maintenance and support bottlenecks and improve operational availability (Ao).
MBE Project Plans
5-76
For weapon systems now in the development pipeline, such as the F-35 and the Future Combat Systems fleet, the capabilities delivered by this project will greatly enhance the ability of DoD program managers and contractor teams to optimize evolving the system designs for reliability, maintainability, supportability, training, and seamlessness of future block and spiral upgrades. Improved ability to model requirements, workload, and work processes for restoration of signature-control features after maintenance and repair, for example, will give designers greater insight into optimizing these kinds of problematic processes. This will reduce the cost and time of reapplying treatments, enabling faster combat turns while improving abilities to protect signature integrity. Systems in production or early in production, like the F/A-18E/F and AH-1S aircraft and the F-16 Advanced Targeting Pod, will benefit in terms of improved ability to optimize life-cycle performance based on feedback from the field in the early years of operational deployment. Systems well into their service life such as the F-16, F-15, A-10, C-130/AC-130, and B-52 aircraft and ground systems such as the HMMWV, M-1 Abrams, and Patriot missile system will benefit by improved abilities to design and implement system upgrades and life extensions that deliver maximum value to the warfighter while reducing the associated impacts on support infrastructures. 4.2 BENEFITS TO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRY Developing the ability to create and use product life-cycle models will yield the following benefits: Provide a toolset for modeling and understanding life-cycle cost and supportability impacts. Enable feedback from downstream experience to improve upstream functions. Improve the speed and accuracy of technical and business decisions over the life cycle. Improve the ability to analyze field information on as-worn parts to predict failures and improve designs. Providing the capability to create and apply scaleable product life-cycle models will fundamentally change the way we develop, produce, and support manufactured products. Much of the data needed to drive these processes will be openly shared, changing the basis of competition from one of protected knowledge to one of proven capability and genuine best value. Other key benefits include: Higher fidelity of life-cycle cost and performance drivers early in the design process, enabling stronger focus on optimizing affordability, reliability, availability, supportability, and similar attributes. Ability to capture knowledge from manufacturing and repair/maintenance shop floors for use in all phases of life-cycle support, including product improvements, technology insertions, and future development of similar products. Deeper integration and understanding across the supply chain, which is particularly critical as prime manufacturers continue to evolve to larger roles as system integrators. Ability to create shared life-cycle knowledge bases including validated design models, cost models, and process models that are plug-and-play compatible. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN AND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed schedule for the 66-month project is provided below; cost is estimated at $13.5 million.
MBE Project Plans
5-77
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT Risk for this project is assessed as moderate to high. Many of the capabilities desired can be implemented through extension of current tools to the extent needed to demonstrate clear value, but integration of all the tools and incorporating feedback from real experience to modify the models will be more difficult. The interoperability issues raised by integrating archived legacy information also increases the risk. Technology readiness is assessed at TRL 3. Although many of the technologies required are mature in their current implementations, the ability to fully integrate model-based tools and processes to provide a complete life-cycle capability remains an experimental concept.
MBE Project Plans
5-78
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-9
MODEL-BASED, REAL-TIME FACTORY OPERATIONS

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop enabling technologies and conduct a proof-of-principle demonstration of real-time, model-based control of factory operations, including production and maintenance operations as well as active interfaces with asset, inventory, and facility management systems. The project is focused on providing the models that establish the necessary operations control functions, and integrating these models with material, product, process, and control models to deliver an operational prototype system. 2.0 CHALLENGE Automation of processes and factory management is commonplace in the U.S. manufacturing industry, and has been key to improving productivity, quality, efficiency, and economic competitiveness over the past 10 years in all sectors of manufacturing. Real-time control is a well-established capability in the continuous process industries (e.g., chemicals, pharmaceuticals), where the ability to monitor, sense, and adjust to observed conditions is critical to ensuring highly precise product quality. However, such capabilities are presently limited to unit process lines where key parameters such as feeds, speeds, temperatures, pressures, and dwell times can be closely monitored and controlled in accordance with welldeveloped chemical transformation process models that have been proven at laboratory, bench, and pilot scales. A similar situation exists in the discrete product sectors (e.g., automotive), although sensing and control is more typically limited to manufacturing cells and individual units of equipment. As a generalization, the most highly automated and controlled factory operations are those that have extremely well-defined and non-varying processes producing extremely well-defined and non-varying products. Process upsets can have problematic or occasionally catastrophic impacts, and product changeovers or significant changes in production requirements can take operations or facilities off line for days, weeks, or even months. Leading companies such as Procter & Gamble make extensive use of model-based technologies to engineer out potential problems up front, optimizing systems and equipment for reliability and productivity. In the NGMTI vision, future factories will be highly autonomic entities that monitor their resources, assets, and activities and rely on robust models and high-performance simulations to continually tune all factors for optimal performance not only in steady-state operation, but in response to changes in requirements and to fluctuations in the performance and availability of every asset and function. Modelbased, real-time executive control over factory operations will not only tighten control of both production and support functions but will also offer substantial savings through reduced manpower, lower material and spare parts inventories, and improved processes. Models are required for both planning and control of factory operations. Discrete event models have been available for more than a decade for simulation of processes and material flow, but significant work is required to provide control over the myriad of details associated with storage and movement of material, tools, and fixtures, as well as delivery of instructions to humans. These models must also incorporate materials and other resources delivered through the factorys external supply chains.
MBE Project Plans
5-79
Omniscience, at least with respect to factory control, is the state sought to realize true model-based factory control. Real-time information describing all facets of factory operation must be provided to the executive models. These models must also be equipped with the logic required to generate decisions optimized over critical production variables. Significant challenges exist in both the scope of the project and in the difficulty of individual components. Proprietary enterprise resource planning (ERP) tools already provide many of the planning and work direction functions associated with factory control. They currently lack integration with product and process models. Higher-level tools associated with scheduling, routing, etc. must be added. These tools must use the product and process models and apply valid logic to specify the paths of material flow, process sequence, and specific equipment to be used as well as manage the many other details associated with factory control. A significant effort must be invested in creating and/or integrating information-gathering and reporting tools if the administrative systems are to work as needed. If accurate factory simulation is to be realized, the underlying models must be continually updated with accurate information. Shop-level tools such as reactive schedulers may be employed to enable optimization in the presence of local upsets in availability of machines, tools, programs, fixtures, or materials. Such local tools must also draw from real-time information and must provide updates to the factory-level simulation and control systems. The executive-level systems must also control the distribution of the full array of information associated with factory control. Although much of the control programs, operator instructions, and quality requirements will be stored near their applications, the timely availability of the right information is the responsibility of the overall control system. Quality maintenance must also be addressed. In the long term, zero defect and N Sigma product quality will be assured by real-time control of critical process parameters. In the near term certainly within the duration of this project some post-process product inspection will be required, and such information must be generated as with any other stage of operations. Quality analysis systems must therefore be included among the required models. Equipment and facility maintenance must also be addressed, as these functions occupy a significant fraction of the cost of factory operations. Over the past 20 years, these functions have seen major developments in equipment condition monitoring and work planning and estimating, but models and new strate-
MBE Project Plans
5-80
gies remain to be developed to make serious advances in avoidance of failures and in time spent on diagnosis and repair. For example, a substantial effort is required to capture information related to failures, symptoms, repairs, and equipment history. The maintenance models of the future will capture this information automatically because the local controllers will routinely supply data on wear, variability, and other health indicators to higher-level monitoring systems that track trends in equipment performance and function. Again, the necessity of working with legacy equipment imposes constraints. Thus, maintenance and reliability functions, which are often overlooked in higher-level planning functions, will be represented by models that contribute significantly to the efficient utilization of factory assets and to the success of real-time factory operations. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Many of the needed capabilities defined under the Goals and Requirements given below are medium- to long-range objectives. The proposed project takes a prototyping approach in order to demonstrate the value of model-based operations control while beginning to deliver tangible benefits to industry. A number of components both within this project and external to it will not be available during the project timeframe, so a number of placeholders will be required. After the project team is established, the technical effort will begin with selection of the target manufacturing environment and creation of a functional map of operations components that describes all the required models and their relationships. Some components, such as scheduling, ERP, quality, and maintenance systems, already provide useful capabilities and will be tailored to function in the model-based environment. Both high- and low-level models must be created or modified for this project.26 Some specific lowerlevel models will be required for process/machine control along with material, tooling, and fixturing models. Process/machine control units can be built in the near term that couple real-time sensing of process information for local control with the status reporting and self-diagnosis features required for highlevel operations management. All of these control models must connect automatically to the factory network in plug-and-play fashion. As the equipment controllers become more sophisticated, the detailed programs will be generated within the controllers rather than by higher-level engineering functions. Controls vendors already supply some machine parameters for high-level simulation and control of machine functions. However, a considerable effort will have to be invested in legacy equipment and networks to realize similar capability over the entire enterprise. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR MODEL-BASED, REAL-TIME FACTORY OPERATIONS This project addresses the following goals and requirements found in the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise, Part 3: Resource Management. Goal 1: Product Model-Driven Manufacturing Provide the capability to execute manufacturing operations directly from the product model. (L)27 Executable Product Models Develop the capability to integrate process knowledge into product models sufficient for the product model to provide all information necessary to execute a manufacturing process, including material routing/flow, actuator commands, assembly steps, and quality monitoring. (M)
26
27
Some specific material, product, and process models will be developed under separate projects (e.g., Product Driven Product and Process Design), and are not included in the scope of this project. Placeholder models may be required in place of these models in the early stages of the project. The S-M-L designations identify a nominal timeframe for delivery of the specified capability, where S (Short) = 0 to 3 years, M (Medium) = 3 to 5 years, and L (Long) = 5 to 10 years.
MBE Project Plans
5-81
Automated Verification of Production Readiness Develop the capability for product models to verify that all information required to execute manufacturing is complete and accurate based on knowledge available from the enterprises manufacturing information system. Include the capability to flag areas where information is missing or where the model cannot verify that information is correct (e.g., that a special part or fixture on order will deliver on time). (M-L) Complete Process Control Models Develop techniques to incorporate process effector and sensor design information and product-specific parameter data into a complete process model, to enable the integrated product/process model to operate as a real-time process controller at the unit process, line, and shop floor levels. (M) Model-Based Direct Manufacturing Develop transformation processes that synthesize and manufacture materials to produce final parts directly from the product model, based on a scientific understanding of materials, process interactions, and performance criteria. (L) Goal 2: Comprehensive Material Flow Modeling Provide tools to develop and manage enterprisewide material flow models to support planning and execution of complex manufacturing operations. (M-L) Material Flow Modeling Capability Develop applications for creation of material and product flow models that enable plug-and-play integration of all flow models for a product down to the lowest tier of the supply chain, and enable material flows to be optimized both locally and supply-chain wide. (S) Real-Time Material Flow Modeling Capability Provide links to enterprise information systems to support rapid re-optimization of material flow models when factors change. (M-L) Outgoing Material Characterization Establish standards and requirements for material suppliers to provide a complete and computer-sensible material characterization as a deliverable item with each lot of material (e.g., for bar and sheet stock, chemical formulations, raw materials, and manufactured commodity items such as fasteners and bulk electronic components). (M) Incoming Material Disposition Develop supplier material disposition models that automatically direct the appropriate action (e.g., route to production with special processing instructions) based on incoming lot characterization results. (M) Material Variability Management Develop material monitoring and flow management control models that interface with receiving inspection, manufacturing process sensors, and the enterprise materials knowledge base to monitor the state of incoming/in-process materials and direct adjustment of processing parameters to accommodate for material variability. Include the capability to predict the impacts (e.g., cost, schedule, quality) of material disposition options. (L) Goal 3: Self-Configuring Manufacturing Execution Models Provide self-organizing manufacturing execution models able to integrate all applications, systems, equipment, and process instructions to ensure readiness to satisfy all requirements for producing correct product, and which have the capability to automatically adapt to changes in requirements. (L) Manufacturing Planning Model Templates Develop a series of model-based templates, for major classes of products in different sectors, that can integrate sub-models of processing equipment, unit processes, line operations, and material flows to create an end-to-end model of a given manufacturing process. (S) Generic Equipment Models Develop generic equipment performance models for families of manufacturing equipment (e.g., injection molding machines, three-axis milling machines). (S)
MBE Project Plans
5-82
Equipment Characterization Models Establish standards and requirements for integration of performance characterizations into existing or vendor-supplied models and simulations of process equipment (machine tools, valves, process sensors, material handling devices, etc.). (M) Machine-Specific Equipment Models Develop tools to extend generic or vendor-supplied equipment performance models to reflect the as-installed configuration and use real-time sensor information to accurately represent specific equipment system performance. Include the capability to capture the baseline signatures for each production machine in its supporting model. (M-L) Intelligent Manufacturing Execution Models Develop methods to automatically update manufacturing execution models by recognizing and responding to approved changes in underlying material/process/product models, or in response to direction from the shop floor control system. (L) Goal 4: Flexible, Reconfigurable Manufacturing Facility Modeling Develop technologies and methods for creating reconfigurable production lines able to use capacity, demand, and unit process models to quickly adapt to changing product and process requirements. (M-L) Manufacturing Facility Modeling System Develop generic manufacturing facility modeling systems for different industry sectors (e.g., mechanical, electrical/electronic, chemical) with the capability to plug in unit process and equipment models and systematically develop and refine the generic model into a facility-specific model. (M-L) Scaleable Process Models Prioritize unit processes and manufacturing equipment of interest and develop scaleable process models capable of going from one to many, or from small to large, or accommodate a defined wide range of input material variability, quickly and autonomously in response to changes in production demand. (M) Robust Model-Based Control Develop extensions to current manufacturing process control models to add the capability to adapt dynamically to changes in basic process parameters, to remain reliable and robust within the defined operating envelope, and to automatically respond to failures or process upsets with the appropriate action. (M) Goal 5: Operations Element Modeling Provide the capability to create accurate models and simulations of manufacturing operations for an entire facility, and to integrate and modify constituent models to mirror the real-world facility and all of its assets and processes. (M) Operations Modeling Framework Develop standards and conventions for creating high-fidelity models and simulations of manufacturing operations, including equipment, tools, fixtures, unit processes, facility attributes (structure, utilities, etc.), material flows and transport systems, work flows, monitoring and control functions, safety systems, and other attributes of interest. (M) Generic Integratable Process Models Develop generic models for different kinds of processes and facilities associated with manufacturing operations in different business sectors. Include interface definitions and hooks that enable integration of equipment models, unit process models, and facility models into higher-level operations models with accurate linking of inputs and outputs between and among each element of the system. (M) Goal 6: Model-Based Operations Control Provide the capability to integrate model-based control functions for equipment and unit processes to enable model-based control at the shop floor and factory levels. (L) Process Control Linkage Develop methods for linking individual equipment and process performance monitoring and control functions to facility operations models to support model-based
MBE Project Plans
5-83
control and optimization of operations performance. Include the capability to monitor external factors that affect operational performance, such as supplier production schedules. (M) Performance Reporting Modules Develop generic reporting modules that can be plugged into operations models to deliver defined performance status information sets for different types and classes of processes and equipment. Include the capability to deliver predefined reports, respond to specific queries, and calculate the impacts of simulated changes in operating parameters. (M) Equipment & Material Status Develop equipment/material status systems that interface with other enterprise planning and management systems to continuously update operations models with equipment and material resource availability and utilization information. Include the ability to predict the impact of running equipment at 100% capacity/utilization for sustained periods. (M-L) Model-Based Performance Management Develop model-based tools and methods to monitor and evaluate the performance of factory operations including resource staging and application, material and work-in-process flows, and off-line activities. Include the ability to simulate problems and changes in selected functions to support troubleshooting, tradeoffs and optimization, and planning to meet new requirements. (L) Goal 7: Dynamic Asset Modeling Provide asset management systems that integrate high-fidelity models to manage capital equipment and facilities across their useful life and support evaluation of appropriate responses for addition, modification, replacement, and retirement of equipment and facilities. (L) Asset Definition Modeling Standards Develop standards for creation of object and life-cycle models for different types and classes of capital equipment and facilities that support integration into business and facility planning models. Provide the capability to include key factors such as capacity (throughput, sizing, tolerances, etc.), life expectancy and life-limiting factors, and growth capability to support higher performance levels, expanded functionality, or changeover to support new requirements. (S) Automated Asset Monitoring & Condition Prediction Develop techniques for predicting the life expectancy of capital assets based on feedback from sensing systems that monitor wear, frequency of maintenance/repair, and changes in performance over time. Include the capability to simulate the effects of stressing conditions (e.g., extended operation at limits of capacity) to support contingency planning. (M-L) Asset Alternative Modeling Develop methods to integrate asset information and knowledge across the enterprise, including its suppliers and partners, to enable rapid evaluation of solution options for fulfilling a capital asset requirement. Include the capability to define the margins of capability and financial impacts for each option for a given time span, including factors such as availability of capital funds, return on capital, funds flow, and ability to meet surges in demand. (L) Regulatory Impact Modeling Develop techniques for modeling the impact of changes in regulatory requirements on capital equipment and facilities. Include the capability to automatically monitor information sources for issues relative to process and facility emissions (air and water discharges, noise), safety standards, and similar factors that potentially dictate modification, replacement, or shutdown of capital assets. (L) Goal 8: Intelligent Inventory Modeling Provide modeling tools that monitor sources of inventory requirements change and aid users in defining and implementing optimal responses to change. (L) Adaptive Inventory Modeling Applications Develop generic inventory modeling applications that can be readily adapted to specific industry sectors and different supply chain roles (i.e., OEM, major subcontractor, supplier). Include the ability to integrate products having widely varying inMBE Project Plans 5-84
ventory characteristics, easily add new products to the model, and interface with distribution planning and management systems. (M) Inventory Modeling Information Interface Develop interface solutions enabling inventory management systems to acquire and continuously update all information that impacts inventory requirements, including direct factors such as orders, sales, and market trends, and indirect factors such as economic forecasts, weather, and governmental actions (e.g., changes in regulations). (M) Capacity Management System Interface Develop methods for interfacing inventory modeling tools with factory management systems to enable calculation of factory impacts resulting from shifting production demands. Include the capability to interface with supply management systems to ensure just-in-time provision of raw materials, components, labor, and other assets required to fulfill product demand. (L) Automated Demand Prediction Develop modeling tools able to evaluate variables that impact product demand over time, and accurately forecast inventory requirements for all makes, models, and styles of product. Include the capability to extrapolate demand trends for new product introductions based on initial orders and sales, and the ability to model the demand impacts of disruptive events such as strikes, natural disasters, political upheaval, or introduction of competing products. (L) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK A manufacturing sector will be chosen that represents a significant element of the U.S. manufacturing base. The effort will begin with selection of the target manufacturing environment and specification of the multiple system layers required for the factory control architecture ranging from individual machine monitoring and control to the executive control level. This stage will require close coordination with the sources that will be providing models for use in this project. Task 1 Project Planning: This task shall establish the project management and technical team, select the manufacturing environment to be addressed, select one or more testbed sites, and establish the detailed project plan with task assignments. Task 2 Requirements Definition: This task shall create a functional map of all components and relationships in the target manufacturing environment, identify required models, and define integration requirements at each level of operation (i.e., equipment, unit process, line, and factory). Standards for the various types of models required shall be defined, making maximum use of existing standards. The documented requirements shall be circulated to team participants and interested industry and government stakeholders for review, comment, and finalization prior to start of the development tasks. Task 3 System Development: This task shall create, test, and refine the required models. Although the models are prototypes, they shall be fully functional for the planned demonstration. This task also includes the parallel effort of establishing standards for the model structures that will be extended to applications and industry sectors beyond the bounds defined for the projects demonstration activities. Task 4 System Demonstration: This task shall demonstrate successful functionality of model-based factory operations in an industry setting. Because of the importance of the demonstration, system testing will begin before some of the models are complete; design of the demonstration will likewise begin early in the project.28 Expectations for the demonstration include: Successful performance of all models Seamless integration of all models such that no human intervention is required
28
Many problems associated with seemingly minor details in individual models (data types, dependencies, lack of data, etc.) only become evident when forced to function in the full system. Logic that appears to produce credible results in lower-level testing may produce faulty results when operating in the full factory control system.
MBE Project Plans
5-85
All information relevant to factory control is delivered automatically to the point of use (machines and/or human operators) All machine status and condition information is acquired and communicated as designed Information links to ERP and other external systems operate seamlessly in real time The factory control system accesses all information and knowledge sources and directs targeted factory operations as designed Quality information is collected, analyzed, reported, and made a part of the product and process knowledge base. The demonstration task will conclude with delivery of a project final report that documents the capabilities delivered and requirements for further development. All software will be documented and made available as a deliverable. 4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO DOD This project will not benefit any specific DoD weapon system since its focus is on the much lower level of basic manufacturing operations management; however, all of the military services will benefit from having a more efficient, responsive, flexible, and capable manufacturing base. One key benefit to DoD will be the greatly improved ability to optimize manufacturing performance early in the production transition process, reducing the time required to qualify production capability for a new weapon system, sensor system, or other item of military hardware. The greater intelligence and automation afforded by model-based operation control is expected to enable a better than 10% reduction in manufacturing touch labor and supervisory workload, with complex, large-scope programs such as Joint Strike Fighter realizing the greatest benefit. The factory system also will be able to capture a far richer and deeper base of information about its processes and equipment, which will reduce the time and cost of uncovering and analyzing manufacturing problems and getting production back on track. This is particularly important at the major subsystem supplier level, where manufacturing problems experienced by multiple suppliers can have severe impact on the prime contractor responsible for final system integration and test. The capabilities delivered by this project will also greatly enhance the ability of the supply base to respond to surge and mobilization requirements, by shortening the timelines required to ramp up production of product improvements and special-purpose variants, re-start cold or warm lines, or change over to products experiencing spikes in demand due to unanticipated inventory draw downs. This would minimize the challenge of feeding DoD spares pipelines for items such as batteries and repair parts, which has been a persistent issue in Iraq and Afghanistan. 4.2 BENEFITS TO INDUSTRY The primary benefit derived from this project is the demonstrated functionality of model-based real-time operations in a realistic, representative manufacturing environment. This will be a significant step forward in real-time factory operations control. The system and its constituent technologies (models, control software, etc.) should be usable elsewhere immediately within the assumptions made in developing the prototype system. Second, the specification of functional map and the definition of system component models, together with the methodology used in this stage, will facilitate implementation of similar capabilities for other types of manufacturing. The models themselves and the integrating architecture can be replicated, refined, and/or modified for use in similar or other sectors. The availability of these proven models will shorten substantially the effort required to bring similar functionality to use in other manufacturing enterprises.
MBE Project Plans
5-86
Performance in all areas of factory operations will be radically improved. The ability to continuously monitor factory status and health and model the impact of planned or potential changes will greatly reduce the time required to respond to new requirements, including large-scale changeovers as well as routine shifts in product quantities, styles, etc. Improved control will also reduce all types of inefficiency and waste, including scrap, rework, and spoilage, and enhance safety through close monitoring and control of hazards throughout the factory. Other key benefits expected from this project include: Accurate information will be delivered reliably and on time to all functional components of the factory. Success in these communications should significantly reduce current levels of staffing associated with this function while improving the quality of the information. Lower-level control components will not only control their equipment, but also automatically gather and report status and performance information. Timely delivery of control programs and instructions will reduce the human requirement for such tasks. Availability of equipment status data will improve the ability to anticipate equipment failures and shorten timelines for diagnosis and repair. The real-time knowledge of the availability of all equipment provides greater flexibility in assigning resources to address production requirements. Accurate simulations of the factory operations will enable optimized use of facilities and equipment and accurate, precise forecasting of upcoming requirements. Direction of maintenance activities will benefit from the continuous availability of equipment status information as well as from accurate equipment history and knowledge of production requirements. Thus, appropriate preventive maintenance, repairs, upgrades, etc. can be scheduled and conducted with minimal impact on production operations. Major reductions in maintenance costs are expected through labor reductions associated with both maintenance planning and maintenance repair. Some reduction in cost of spares should also result. Automatically gathered quality information permits automatic analysis and documentation as well as rapid recognition for process anomalies and human intervention. This information will also be used in the product/process design models as well as in cost estimating and other business areas. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN AND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project schedule and estimated resource requirements are provided below. The estimated cost for the 36-month effort is $4.0 million, which includes the required development and conduct of one major prototype demonstration.
MBE Project Plans
5-87
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT The risk associated with this project is considered medium. Some of the functionality needed in the project has already been demonstrated in proprietary software. Demonstrations of high-level direction over factory operations already exist but are not model-based and cannot be easily re-mapped to other environments or industry sectors. Some difficulties associated with seamlessly interfacing with a wide variety of other models will be encountered but these difficulties should be manageable within the project period. An overall MTRL of 5 is appropriate for this project.
MBE Project Plans
5-88
NGMTI PROJECT MBE-2
SHARED MODEL LIBRARIES

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to establish a necessary, common, and robust framework for managing repositories of collaborative models that, when assembled, can accurately simulate materials, products, and enterprise functions across different industry sectors. This will enable significant reductions in the time and cost of translating product concepts to delivered products, and enable accurate prediction of the impacts of engineering and business decision. In its final phase, the project will establish an initial library of such models to validate the technical feasibility and business value of the shared model library concept. 2.0 CHALLENGE The model-based enterprise will use complex models and simulations based on modular assemblages of electronically compatible models to design, develop, manage, and support products, processes, and operations. Doing so will require engineering and business applications to quickly locate and integrate the appropriate models and data (either generic or proprietary) needed to develop a response to user commands and queries. For product designers, this includes the ability to rapidly access different material models to evaluate the benefits and impacts of various material options for a part, an assembly, or a chemical formulation; and to quickly locate and plug in existing design components. For process and facility engineers, it includes the ability to quickly access different equipment options to arrive at the optimal production execution solution based on product requirements and enterprise capabilities and resources. For product support engineers, it includes the capability to quickly explore available support equipment and tools to create the most effective solution for maintenance and repair. For program managers, it includes the capability to rapidly evaluate different sourcing options to provide the best balance of low risk and assured ability to deliver. In todays environment, there is no systematic approach to managing models and associated data. Configuration management systems and product data management (PDM) tools only manage models and associated data for specific configuration-controlled products. Leading CAD tools include libraries of standard designs and features, and some companies have established proprietary libraries of designs and data to facilitate reuse and life-cycle support across product families. However, current model-based libraries in general do not support multiple application types (e.g., product design and process planning tools), or different applications of a similar type (e.g., ProE vs. Intergraph vs. CATIA). Accessing the libraries that are available is a manual function highly dependent on the expertise of the user. Models that are made available for reuse come in many formats, with varying degrees of fidelity, and with limited confidence in their accuracy. In the NGMTI vision of the future manufacturing enterprise, model-based applications will perform all the work of locating and integrating constituent models and supporting data based on the users specification of requirements and parameters. Manufacturers and suppliers of commodity items, parts, components, material stock, tools, equipment, and consumables will provide validated, high-fidelity models and simulations of their products for inclusion in model repositories shared across industry sectors. Using the shared library concept, product, process, and facility designers will specify a design element (e.g., pump) and designate required performance parameters and other attributes (e.g., 5 gpm and 10 psi max and <10 pounds). The design application will access the model library and present a list of available candidates for the designer to evaluate. When the designer makes a selection, the specific model will be
MBE Project Plans
5-89
pulled into the design while carrying with it (or linking to) all available supporting data reliability, supplier options, order lead time, price, availability, maintenance requirements, usage instructions, tolerances, failure modes, optional features, and the like. The shared model library concept requires manufacturers to provide validated, robust models of their products along with supporting data in standard formats that are compatible with mainstream applications. The library function will provide the infrastructure for managing and maintaining the shareable models, providing search and notification functions for users and security functions to ensure model integrity and protect proprietary data. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT PLAN In the NGMTI vision, designers in the future manufacturing enterprise will draw on a comprehensive library of validated, thoroughly characterized models and simulations of common materials, components, parts, subsystems, unit processes, and manufacturing equipment to create, produce, and support their products. Reusable, scaleable models that autonomously search for information needed to execute their own function will be standard tools for product and process engineering and manufacturing execution. This project will establish the shared model library function required for realizing this vision and provide the capability to easily reuse and share models in accordance with the following requirements defined in the NGMTI Roadmap for the Model-Based Enterprise. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR SHARED MODEL LIBRARIES Goal 1: Shared Model Libraries Establish an industry-wide network of shared libraries of validated, well-characterized models that support plug-and-play simulation, proprietary tailoring, and optimization of designs for products, processes, and operations. (M)29 Framework for Model Library Develop a broad-based framework to provide validated, interoperable models that support multiple enterprise applications (design, manufacturing, product support, etc.). Establish standards for secure shared access and for validation and characterization of models prior to release to the library. (S) Model Library Management Approach Develop a methodology for populating, updating, maintaining, extending, and ensuring the data quality/security of the shared model libraries, including the user interface and support tools. Include methods enabling all members of a supply chain to input to, access, and manipulate shared models in accordance with appropriate permissions, with assured security of every data element. Include the capability to provide a continuous audit trail of all actions and automatically communicate changes to affected partners and personnel. (S-M) Component Libraries Establish library segments for standard mechanical and electrical parts and components used in design and production of complex products. Areas to be addressed include fasteners, connectors, lubricants and sealants, valves, pumps, piping and tubing, circuit boards, cables, and similar commodity items. (S) Science-Based Materials Model Repository Establish an industry-wide shared repository of validated, well-characterized models and simulations for materials database to support product and process modeling and analytical simulation. Define and establish linkages to certified/certifiable industry, academic, and government sources to populate and update the database. (M)
29
The S-M-L designations identify a nominal timeframe for delivery of the specified capability, where S (Short) = 0 to 3 years, M (Medium) = 3 to 5 years, and L (Long) = 5 to 10 years
MBE Project Plans
5-90
Validated Process & Equipment Model Repository Establish an industry-wide shared repository of validated, well-characterized models and simulations for processes and equipment based on industry priorities and value to multiple industry sectors. (M) Process Labor Standards Knowledge Base Develop and establish a database of labor standards (i.e., time standards and skill/certification requirements) for all direct and indirect manufacturing processes and functions that interface to process design, simulation, planning, and resource management systems. (S) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK This project will provide the initial framework for shared libraries of compatible models and an initial set of models able to support manufacturing enterprise operations. The project plan contains five tasks: Task 1 Management Structure: This initial task shall establish the ground rules by which the community of contributors and users will govern themselves in the collaborative venture. Task 2 Library Structure: This task shall develop the scheme and methods for organizing the collection of models within the library, providing traceability, information security, and search and access functions for users. Compatibility with leading design and PDM applications shall be addressed to ensure that library modules will interface with current model-based product definition management systems. Task 3 Certification Requirements: This task shall define requirements for validating, verifying, providing configuration management, and assuring application compatibility (and inter-model collaboration) of the models in the library. Application interoperability requirements (e.g., ProE, CATIA, and Intergraph) will be documented and addressed with the application vendors, but no further effort to resolve these issues shall be funded under this project. Task 4 Initial Library Population: This task shall acquire, through development or submission from third parties, initial sets of models to support collaborative product and process design, estimating, production, resource management, product support, and related activities. The project team shall work with potential contributors to define what assets can be acquired and made available as "off-the-shelf" resources, prioritize the gaps, and focus further effort on building up the initial resources in areas that offer the maximum benefit in the pilots to be conducted under Task 5. Task 5 Library Pilots: The initial shared model library shall be made available for testing, evaluation, and pilot usage. The project team shall work with the pilot participants to define the pilot activities, establish metrics and mechanisms for collecting feedback, lay out schedules for the pilots, collect feedback to assess the effectiveness of the library structure and content, and document requirements for further development. These results shall be documented in a project final report. This report shall also address opportunities and issues related to establishment of common standards for different types of models (e.g., material models, factory equipment models) to support transparent sharing in industry-wide repositories. 4.0 BENEFITS & BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO INDUSTRY A central model library function is essential to realizing the MBE vision of enabling product and process designers, product support engineers, factory planners, business managers, and other enterprise functions to share and reuse knowledge, data, and designs captured in model form. The ability to simply "plug in" validated models of high-fidelity material, product, or process components with performance properties and supply-chain sourcing data will reduce design cycle time and cost by an estimated 10 to 40% depending on design complexity, and will eliminate the need to manually capture supporting data. Use of validated models will also reduce the need for acceptance testing while ensuring the ability of the specified item to perform to the defined specification, and ensuring that designers spec the right item for the required use and function.
MBE Project Plans
5-91
For suppliers, the shared library function will greatly reduce overhead associated with marketing, sales, and responding to routine queries, since OEM customers will be able to select products directly from the library, and electronically transfer all procurement requirements directly to the enterprises purchasing function for order placement. Suppliers will be able to update any attribute of their models on demand (e.g., price reduction, spec change), ensuring that existing and potential customers always have the latest information to guide their design and procurement choices. 4.2 BENEFITS TO DOD The DoD is already a leading practitioner of shared model usage, with major programs such as Future Combat Systems (FCS) and Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) using leading-edge workgroup environments to share product definition models and performance simulations (e.g., NVTherm and MATLAB models) across multi-company teams. Current-generation simulator systems such as the Armys Close Combat Tactical Trainer and the Navys Generic Reconfigurable Training System make extensive use of shared Joint Semi-Automated Forces (JSAF) models, allowing instructors to quickly set up pilots and gunners with training scenarios that call up terrains and targets from a ready library of modeled assets. This project builds from that concept and extends it to new levels in the product design and development arena. The ability for distributed teams to operate from a shared materials library, for example, will enable rapid integration and virtual testing of complex weapon systems incorporating contributions from dozens of subcontractors and suppliers, with each contributors model carrying the exact same fidelity and accuracy for the shared, common aspects of the system model. In the materials example, the structural model provided by a warhead section supplier will be seamlessly compatible with the structural models provided by the propulsion section supplier and the guidance section supplier. This will reduce the time and difficulty of system-level structural analysis; but of greater importance, it would help ensure that the total structural design is right before the first part is cast eliminating a potentially significant source of redesign requirements. Contractors could likewise share the manufacturing process and equipment models developed under this project, enabling end-to-end optimization of manufacturing execution strategies for low-cost, high-quality, and on-time delivery. System-of-systems modeling capabilities would also be greatly advanced using shared library techniques, enabling DoD planners to build complex multi-system scenarios in a fraction of current timelines while delivering far greater accuracy in wargaming simulations and mission rehearsals. The system model provided by a missile system supplier, for example, would come equipped with all of its pertinent attributes speed, range, Pacq, Phit, Pk, aero envelope, sensor modes, RCS profiles, etc. and would transparently plug in to the model of its launch platform, enabling extremely high fidelity in operational simulations. The level of models being developed for leading-edge programs such as FCS, JSF, and Joint Common Missile (JCM) provide an excellent starting point for development of system-level shared model repositories. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN & RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project schedule is provided on the following page. The estimated cost for the 39-month effort is $9.1 million. 6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT Risk for this project is low to moderate. A large base of models can be harvested for use on the project to demonstrate the feasibility and value of shared model libraries, although validating and verifying these assets presents a technical challenge as does ensuring compatibility of the models with multiple applications. Technology readiness is assessed at MTRL 2-3 since although the concept of model libraries is well-established, current applications are limited to single tools and much of the base of available models is in proprietary formats that may not be readily useable by other tools.
MBE Project Plans
5-92
Project Plan for Shared Model Libraries
MBE Project Plans
5-93
MODEL-BASED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY The objective of this project is to develop enabling technologies to create a foundational, model-based manufacturing enterprise resource management system framework that is modular, scaleable, and built on open software standards. The project will deliver a baseline capability for modeling, simulating, and directing control over all manufacturing enterprise resources, and will enable expansion to deal with increasing size, complexity, and functionality of organizational processes. The system will also have a plug-and-play capability that minimizes the cost of deployment so that the costs of acquisition and implementation will be affordable for companies of all sizes. 2.0 CHALLENGE Current enterprise resource planning/management (ERP/ERM) systems provide good capability to simulate asset scenarios and control resources ranging from people and materials to equipment to facilities. The cost and complexity of these systems, however, make them affordable only to larger companies with the financial resources and the technical staff needed to implement and support them. Many large ERP projects have been abandoned because of technical, cost, and schedule problems that made implementation untenable. Moreover, despite widespread migration to web-type and PC interfaces, the current generation of systems and associated applications are proprietary, and hence force dependence on the vendor for upgrades and support. Additionally, it is difficult to integrate these business management systems with the wide variety of other software systems used in a manufacturing enterprise. Legacy systems are integrated only at significant time and expense, and typically with limited success. Even for enterprises that have the resources to install a fully capable ERP/ERM system, the process is expensive and time-consuming, and the cost of deployment typically dwarfs the cost of buying the software. For most small companies the cost of these tools is prohibitive. Another problem is loss of flexibility; once an organization has gone through the trouble and cost of customization to establish a properly running system, it is very difficult to implement changes to meet new business requirements. Another problematic aspect of current ERP/ERM systems is their rigidity of design, which generally requires companies to change their business processes to fit the software rather than adapting the software to fit their business processes. Consequently, changes in corporate culture are required, dictating significant training efforts for users and write-off of previous outlays for other systems and processes. While the new systems may ultimately provide significant improvements in quality and productivity, the disruptive impacts on corporate culture can be significant. These problems are not easily solved, and the challenges addressed by this project are daunting. The intent is to create a model-based framework for ERM systems that yields the performance benefits of current major proprietary ERP/ERM systems, while being more flexible and affordable for all sizes of company. The ability to link resource information directly to related models, and enable the models to automatically manipulate resource requirements, will eliminate much of the time, cost, and error currently associated with capturing (and recapturing) data for use within the resource management system. In the NGMTI vision, the core elements of the enterprise (including its business rules and strategies as well as its processes and systems) will be modeled so accurately and thoroughly that routine allocation of resources will be handled autonomously by enterprise resource management (ERM) systems. These systems will have total connectivity to all enterprise processes and assets including product/process capa-
MBE Project Plans
5-94
bilities, manpower and skills, facilities and equipment, raw material and product inventories, supply chain capabilities, and working capital and budgets (Figure 2-1).
Figure 2-1. Future ERM systems will provide total connectivity of all enterprise processes to all enterprise resources, with powerful modeling and simulation capabilities that enable fast, accurate decisions.
This seamless connectivity will extend to every tier of the enterprises supply chains. An open business systems architecture based on well-defined standards for modeling and managing different types of resources will enable different companies to quickly plug together to exploit new opportunities. While allocation of resources will always be at the discretion of the enterprises managers, the ability to access current resource information anywhere in the supply chain with appropriate security will eliminate much of the inefficiency inherent to managing complex supply chain relationships. Science-based models of the inputs, outputs, demand factors, and dependencies of every enterprise process, coupled with continuous access to all sources of information that affect these processes, will provide clear definition of what resources need to be where and when, and when they will be available again for reallocation. These models will control the systems that execute the enterprises technical and business processes. Managers at all levels will interact with the system to develop plans, monitor performance, analyze issues, evaluate opportunities, and efficiently direct resources to point of need. The greatest benefits of model-based resource management will come from radically improved ability to prepare for new requirements, and to respond to problems, throughout the supply chain. Future product and process models will provide precise definitions of the resources they require for their execution including raw materials, parts, and components; manufacturing labor and skills; facility space, equipment, tooling, and fixtures; handling and transport; and product support, including training and documentation. These requirements will be uptaken by the ERM system and fed to functional planning systems for implementation. Managers will use desktop modeling and simulation tools, connected to the enterprises knowledge bases, to evaluate options for meeting the requirements with those resources in ways that offer the best balance of performance, speed, cost, risk, and profitability. To achieve this vision, the model-based resource management systems framework must be built on a truly open architecture that permits ready extension for new applications and new business demands. This ar-
MBE Project Plans
5-95
chitecture must serve a broad range of resource management functions (manpower and skills, equipment, materials, etc.) that are each tied to high-fidelity models and simulation tools that are managed by modules that can be added or deleted according to business needs. A common generic model structure is needed to house the information required for any business function and enable real-time, seamless exchange of information among all of the models and their owner systems. The capability must be developed to automatically associate resource information to product and process models and their constituent features. Certain specialty model-based applications will be required. These include an advisory function able to recognize requirement changes that impact a particular resource model, implement the needed changes, and verify the accuracy and completeness of the transaction. A real-time data integration model is also required to monitor data flows and ensure that the right models are receiving and sharing the right data they need to perform their own functions as well as support the models that are upstream or downstream from the resource node. The ability to perform real-time data quality assurance checks on resource information entering the system particularly from vendors and suppliers and flag potential problems is also critical. Other requirements will emerge as the system architecture is developed. The baseline system must address an initial set of business functions in a given enterprise, and support linking of business functions with external entities (e.g., customers and subcontractors). While different companies will not be willing to fully open their books and systems, the ability to share knowledge and seamlessly exchange essential data for a shared endeavor is vital. Thus, tools must be provided that recognize the data structures of incoming resource information or external system interfaces and extract and format the data according to the defined needs of the receiving system and the affected models. For example, an enterprise serving as a part of a supply chain may wish to share knowledge of its equipment capabilities while not revealing knowledge initially about capacity, schedule, or cost. As the business relationship develops, additional information may be revealed with the consent of the owner. Special models and information management tools will be required to support such data negotiation needs. 3.0 PROPOSED SOLUTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project will construct and demonstrate an open, modular, model-based enterprise resource management system that emulates the basic functionalities of current proprietary systems while greatly reducing acquisition and operation costs and providing a new generation of model-based planning and management capabilities. Project goals and requirements are summarized below. 3.1 GOALS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR MODEL-BASED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Goal 1: Model-Based Resource Management Provide model-based tools and techniques to facili-
tate management of all resources across all components of the manufacturing enterprise. (M)30
Model-Based Enterprise Architecture Develop an open, model-based business systems architecture that enables the necessary interconnections and resource-related information flows between and among different enterprise processes. Include the capability to support different sizes and types of manufacturing enterprises, including small suppliers as well as OEMs and complex supply chains. (M) Generic Resource Models Develop a generic set of models and modeling standards for common resource types which can be customized to meet the specific needs of any manufacturing enterprise. Include materials, manpower, skills, process equipment, unit processes, facilities, capital/cash, and other common forms of resource. (M)
30
MBE Project Plans
5-96
Resource Data Linking Develop methods, tools, and techniques for linking model-based resource management applications to current resource status information from different processes, functions, sites, and organizational entities. (S) Resource Change Management Develop a computer-based advisory tool, compatible with current MRP/ERP/ERM and operations management software applications, to alert resource owners and users when a requirement changes, so as to enable quick negotiation and implementation of the proper response. Include the capability to automatically communicate changes in resource requirements and availability to all affected organizations, systems, and applications. (M) Goal 2: Multi-Enterprise ERP/ERM Integration Provide mechanisms and methods for rapidly interconnecting the systems of different enterprise partners to integrate ERP/ERM functionality to the lowest tier of the supply chain. (M) ERP/ERM Interface Frameworks Develop interface frameworks and standards for quickly and seamlessly integrating different resource management systems across different companies. Include the capability for ERP/ERM systems to automatically negotiate full or limited interfaces depending on the capabilities of the systems being interfaced. (M) Linkages to External Resource Sources Develop tools for linking ERM systems to external resource information sources to enable continuous update of resource information to support planning and decision processes. (S) Distributed Resource Status Tracking Develop model-based tools for continuously tracking and forecasting resource status throughout the supply chain, enabling real-time updating of activity schedules based on internal and external resource constraints. (M) 3.2 PROJECT STATEMENT OF WORK The project will develop and demonstrate a framework and component capabilities for model-based resource management systems, and build a pilot system for a chosen manufacturing sector. Specific tasks are as follows. Task 1 Model-Based Resource Management Infrastructure: This task shall develop openarchitecture tools and techniques to facilitate model-based management of all resources across all components of the manufacturing enterprise. Subtasks include: 1. Resource Management Architecture: Develop a model-based business systems architecture that enables the necessary interconnections and resource-related information flows between and among different enterprise process models. Include the capability to support different sizes and types of manufacturing enterprises (e.g., OEM and small supplier, consumer products, and defense). 2. Generic Resource Models: Develop a generic, modular set of resource models and modeling development specifications (structures and information interchanges) for common resource types, which can be customized to meet the unique needs of any manufacturing enterprise. Include materials, manpower, labor skills, process equipment, unit processes, capital/cash, and other common forms of manufacturing resource. 3. Resource Data Linking: Develop methods, tools, and techniques for linking model-based resource management applications to current resource status information (e.g., availability, capacity/capability, and fitness for use) from different processes, functions, sites, and organizational entities. 4. Resource Management System Demonstration: Demonstrate the functionality of model-based enterprise resource management in a representative factory setting. The demonstration shall in-
MBE Project Plans
5-97
clude full documentation of the system and recommendations for improvements and extensions. Standards will be established that facilitate interface with other business systems and applications used by the enterprise. 5. Resource Change Management: Develop an advisory module, compatible with current MRP/ERP/ERM and operations management applications, to alert resource owners and users when a requirement changes, so as to enable quick negotiation and implementation of the proper response. Include the capability to automatically communicate changes in resource requirements, status, and availability to all affected organizations, systems, and applications. Task 2 Multi-Enterprise Resource Management: This task shall develop mechanisms and methods for interconnecting the systems of different enterprise partners to integrate model-based ERM functionality to the lowest tier of the supply chain. 1. ERP/ERM Interface Frameworks: Develop interface frameworks and standards for quickly and seamlessly integrating disparate resource management systems across different companies. Include the capability for ERP/ERM systems to automatically negotiate interfaces depending on the capabilities of the systems being interfaced and the information permissions established by the data owner. 2. Linkages to External Resource Sources: Develop tools for linking the model-based resource management system to external resource information sources to enable continuous update of resource information to support planning and decision processes. 3. Distributed Resource Status Tracking: Develop model-based tools for continuously tracking resource status throughout the supply chain, enabling real-time updating of activity schedules based on internal and external resource constraints. 4.0 BENEFITS AND BUSINESS CASE 4.1 BENEFITS TO DOD Model-based resource management capabilities are expected to provide notable benefit to DoD primarily through improving resource management efficiency in the defense manufacturing supply base, reducing administrative overheads, and improving the quality of planning for production. The ability to better predict, understand, and accommodate the resource impacts of procurement problems (e.g., delivery delays by lower-tier suppliers) will reduce program management costs and provide better visibility of problems, enabling corrective actions to be taken earlier thus improving the ability of government program managers to keep acquisition and deployment schedules intact. Success in this program will also provide the technology validation needed to lay the foundation for migrating the technologies and concepts of model-based resource management to the DoD materiel and manpower management arena. This offers the potential to streamline logistics chains; better anticipate the impacts of drawdowns in consumables and expendables (e.g., ammunition, batteries, spares, and repair parts); shorten timelines for fielding of systems and deployment of units; and improve efficiency in scheduling and delivery of training (both initial and refresher). The approach in this area would leverage DoDs investments in autonomic logistics for programs, such as Joint Strike Fighter. It would couple models with real-time feedback from diagnostic and prognostic systems to ensure the right resources are in hand at the right place at the right time to enable fast execution of maintenance, repair, and resupply actions for all assets across an entire theater of operations. 4.2 BENEFITS TO INDUSTRY The primary benefit expected from this project is the provision of model-based resource management capabilities that: 1) greatly reduce the cost of acquiring, deploying, and maintaining a resource management system, thereby making the capabilities affordable by enterprises of all sizes; and 2) enable far greater
MBE Project Plans
5-98
accuracy and efficiency in managing resources by enabling product and process models to manage resource information automatically and, in many applications, autonomously. The open, modular construction of these systems will enable low-cost addition of new resource system components as they are needed. Instead of being dependent on costly and inflexible proprietary systems, the open structure of the system and its interfaces will reduce the cost of changing the business systems infrastructure and will greatly simplify the process of integrating new resource functions into the system. Perhaps the greatest benefit of this project will be the flexibility for smaller companies to choose resource management tools, and be able to interface their systems to those of their prime manufacturer customers or project partners without having to buy the primes system. This is an insoluble problem today for small manufacturers that support multiple supply chains, particularly in the automotive and defense sectors. 5.0 PROJECT PLAN AND RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS The proposed project schedule is provided below; estimated cost for the 40-month effort is $4.7 million.
6.0 RISK/READINESS ASSESSMENT The proposed project is assessed as medium to high risk, due primarily to the significant challenge associated with developing an integrating framework that can support all of the required functionality while at the same time allowing integration of the huge base of existing tools, databases, and applications currently in use throughout different industry sectors. Engaging the support of resource management tool vendors operating in this market is also critical, since success hinges in part on the ability of the project to leverage the communitys technology development resources. It is also clear that the project must be perceived as an opportunity, not a threat, for this market. Technology readiness for this area is assessed at TRL 3-4. The basic concepts are clearly valid and elements of capability are commercially available. The challenge is to establish a framework that enables integrated functionality and robust utility particularly for the generic resource models then to develop the tools and mechanisms to fill in the gaps.
MBE Project Plans
5-99
APPENDIX MBE PROJECT PLAN

This section presents a compiled schedule of the scopes of work outlined in the MBE project plan white papers. The schedule is intended as an input to the NGMTI implementation process, and therefore represents a starting point for more detailed planning.
A-1
ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Task Name
Duration
Start
Finish
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Enterprise-Wide Cost Modeling 1.0 Detail Project Plan 1.1 Team Development 1.2 Plan and Estimate 1.3 Current Practice Estimate 1.4 New Element ID 2.0 Model-Based Cost Architecture 2.1 Available Cost Model Survey 2.2 New Element Incorporation 3.0 Applications Development 3.1 Integrating Protocol 3.2 Existing Cost Model Enhancement 4.0 Data Linking 4.1 Collaborating Software Development 4.2 Elements Integration 5.0 Demonstrate Cost Estimating Improvements 6.0 Final Report Shared Model Libraries 1.0 Management Structure 1.1 Working Group 1.2 Workshop development and publication 2.0 Library Structure Information Requirements Software Hooks 3.0 Certification Requirements 3.1 Certification Requirements 3.2 Document and Socialize Requirements 4.0 Initial Library Population 4.1 Cost model 4.2 Product model 4.3 Process model
Page 1
660 d 300 d 6 mo 3 mo 6 mo 6 mo 240 d 2 mo 12 mo 480 d 12 mo 12 mo 300 d 12 mo 6 mo 3 mo 3 mo 780 d 120 d 2 mo 4 mo 120 d 4 mo 6 mo 240 d 6 mo 6 mo 160 d 8 mo 8 mo 8 mo
10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 3/19/07 6/11/07 6/11/07 11/26/07 11/26/07 11/26/07 10/2/06 10/2/06 9/3/07 9/3/07 9/3/07 5/12/08 10/27/08 1/19/09 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 11/27/06 3/19/07 3/19/07 3/19/07 9/3/07 9/3/07 2/18/08 8/4/08 8/4/08 8/4/08 8/4/08
4/10/09 11/23/07 3/16/07 6/8/07 11/23/07 11/23/07 10/24/08 1/18/08 10/24/08 8/1/08 8/31/07 8/1/08 10/24/08 8/1/08 10/24/08 1/16/09 4/10/09 9/25/09 3/16/07 11/24/06 3/16/07 8/31/07 7/6/07 8/31/07 8/1/08 2/15/08 8/1/08 3/13/09 3/13/09 3/13/09 3/13/09
ID 15 16 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 4 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Task Name
Duration
Start
Finish
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
4.4 Resouce model 5.0 Library Pilots Flexible Representation of Complex Models 1.0 System Requirements & Architecture 1.1 Common Modeling Terminology 1.2 Technical Specs and Interim Plan 1.3 Product Model Framework 1.4 Product/Process Model Integration Standards 1.5 Hierarchical, Composable, Shareable Models 2.0 User Interface 2.1 Automated Abstraction 2.2 Natural Language Interaction 2.3 Multi-Sensory Representation 3.0 Model Functionality 3.1 Unit Process Models 3.2 Plug-and-Play Vendor Models 3.3 Process Performance Models 3.4 Self-Monitoring Product & Process Models 3.5 Self-Composing Models Final report Multi-Enterprise Integration 1.0 Project Organization & Planning 1.1 Project Team & Plan 1.2 Supply Chain Selection 2.0 Methods & Standards 2.1 Top-Level Process Models 2.2 Application mapping & Gap Analysis 2.3 Tool Selection & Development 3.0 Integration Pilot 3.1 Demonstration Prep 3.2 Pilot 3.3 Final Report & Recommendations
Page 2
8 mo 7 mo 1740 d 1200 d 12 mo 12 mo 36 mo 36 mo 24 mo 960 d 48 mo 36 mo 36 mo 1440 d 36 mo 24 mo 36 mo 36 mo 36 mo 3 mo 720 d 80 d 3 mo 1 mo 480 d 6 mo 4 mo 16 mo 160 d 2 mo 4 mo 2 mo
8/4/08 3/16/09 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 9/3/07 8/4/08 7/6/09 8/4/08 8/4/08 8/4/08 8/4/08 9/3/07 9/3/07 7/6/09 7/6/09 7/6/09 6/7/10 3/11/13 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 12/25/06 1/22/07 1/22/07 5/14/07 9/3/07 11/24/08 11/24/08 1/19/09 5/11/09
3/13/09 9/25/09 5/31/13 5/6/11 8/31/07 8/31/07 6/4/10 5/6/11 5/6/11 4/6/12 4/6/12 5/6/11 5/6/11 3/8/13 6/4/10 5/6/11 4/6/12 4/6/12 3/8/13 5/31/13 7/3/09 1/19/07 12/22/06 1/19/07 11/21/08 7/6/07 8/31/07 11/21/08 7/3/09 1/16/09 5/8/09 7/3/09
ID 5 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 6 2 3 4 5 7 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Task Name
Duration
Start
Finish
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Configuration Management for the Model-Based Enterprise 1.0 CM System Requirements & Architecture 1.1 Standard Data/Knwldg Representation & Mgmt 1.2 Model Management Lexicon 1.3 Life-Cycle CM Requirements Definition 1.4 Model-Based CM Frameworks 2.0 CM System Components 2.1 Extraction of Product Configuration Data 2.2 Automated Model Information Delivery 2.3 Automated Change Management 2.4 Automated Change Propagation 3.0 Associated Systems 3.1 MB Product Requirements Mgt Envmt 3.2 Data Management & Auditing System 3.3 Real-Time product support Linkage Intelligent Models 1.0 Project Planning 2.0 Intelligent Models Requirements 3.0 Functionality Development 4.0 Technology Demonstrations Model-Based, Real-Time Factory Operations Project Planning Form project management team Define project plan Form technical team Recruit external experts for review panel Requirements Definition Create functional map of all components and relationships Define integration requirements Define structures of models Systems Develoment Create, test and refine prototypes of models
Page 3
1300 d 300 d 130 d 130 d 198 d 260 d 524 d 180 d 220 d 264 d 264 d 780 d 528 d 528 d 440 d 756 d 3.15 mo 13.65 mo 22.05 mo 14.7 mo 740 d 160 d 3 mo 3 mo 2 mo 2 mo 240 d 12 mo 12 mo 12 mo 240 d 12 mo
10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 1/29/07 10/30/06 11/27/06 10/1/07 10/1/07 11/26/07 1/21/08 9/29/08 9/29/08 9/29/08 3/16/09 1/18/10 10/2/06 10/2/06 12/28/06 7/23/07 7/9/08 10/1/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 12/25/06 3/19/07 3/19/07 5/14/07 5/14/07 5/14/07 5/14/07 4/14/08 4/14/08
9/23/11 11/23/07 3/30/07 7/27/07 8/1/07 11/23/07 10/1/09 6/6/08 9/26/08 1/22/09 10/1/09 9/23/11 10/6/10 3/23/11 9/23/11 8/24/09 12/27/06 1/14/08 3/30/09 8/24/09 7/31/09 5/11/07 12/22/06 3/16/07 5/11/07 5/11/07 4/11/08 4/11/08 4/11/08 4/11/08 3/13/09 3/13/09
ID 13 14 15 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 10 2 3
Task Name
Duration
Start
Finish
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Create model standards for further development. System Demonstration Report Model-Based Product Life Cycle Management 1.0 Product LC Model-Based Framework 1.1 Case Studies 1.2 Information Models 1.3 Requirements Definition & Gap Analysis 2.0 Phase I Demonstrations 3.0 Phase I Framework Validation 3.1 Generic LC Model (Simple Product) 3.2 Independent Evaluation 3.3 Functionality Testing 3.4 Enhancements & Extensions 4.0 Phase II Demonstration & Validation 4.1 Generic LC Model (Complex Product) 4.2 Tool Extensions 4.3 Implementation & Testing Model-Based Resource Management 1.0 Model-Based Resource Mgmt Infrastructure 1.1 Resource Mgmt Architecture 1.2 Generic Resource Models 1.3 Resource Data Linking 1.4 Resource Mgmt System Demo 1.5 Resource Change Mgmt 2.0 Multi-Enterprise Resource Management 2.1 ERP/ERM Interface Frameworks 2.2 Linkages to External Resource Sources 2.3 Distributed Resource Status Tracking Product Driven Product & Process Design 1.0 Project Organization 2.0 Automated Comprehensive Product & Design
Page 4
12 mo 2 mo 3 mo 1320 d 120 d 2 mo 2 mo 4 mo 12 mo 480 d 6 mo 6 mo 6 mo 6 mo 480 d 6 mo 6 mo 12 mo 836 d 836 d 1.1 mo 22 mo 8.8 mo 1.1 mo 17.6 mo 682 d 18.7 mo 14.3 mo 1.1 mo 968 d 6.6 mo 792 d
4/14/08 3/16/09 5/11/09 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 11/27/06 3/19/07 2/18/08 2/18/08 8/4/08 1/19/09 7/6/09 12/21/09 12/21/09 6/7/10 11/22/10 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 11/1/06 5/8/08 1/9/09 8/8/08 4/4/07 4/4/07 9/9/08 10/14/09 10/2/06 10/2/06 4/4/07
3/13/09 5/8/09 7/31/09 10/21/11 3/16/07 11/24/06 11/24/06 3/16/07 2/15/08 12/18/09 8/1/08 1/16/09 7/3/09 12/18/09 10/21/11 6/4/10 11/19/10 10/21/11 12/14/09 12/14/09 10/31/06 7/8/08 1/8/09 2/9/09 12/14/09 11/12/09 9/8/08 10/13/09 11/12/09 6/16/10 4/3/07 4/15/10
ID 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 12 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Task Name
Duration
Start
Finish
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
2.1 Common Product & Process Specifications Standards 2.2 Design Knowledge Base 2.3 Automated Design for Assembly 2.4 Accurate Process Simulations Tools 3.0 Automated Process Planning 3.1 Process Model Repository 3.2 Process & Resource Capability Models 3.3 Multi-Level Interoperable Process Models 4.0 Product/Process Development Uncertainty & Risk 5.0 Demonstrate Initial Product Driven Environment Model-Based Distribution 1.0 Real-Time, Responsive Distribution Mgmt 1.1 System Rqmts Definition 1.2 Design for Distribution 1.3 Integrated Distribution Modeling 1.4 Model-Based Product Tracking 1.5 Pull-Based Distribution 1.6 Special Materials Mgmt 2.0 Intelligent Asset/Inventory Modeling 2.1 Adaptive Inventory Modeling Apps 2.2 Inventory Modeling Info Interface 2.3 Automated Demand Prediction 2.4 Capacity Mgmt System Interface Information Delivery to Point of Use 1.0 Comprehensive Planning and MFG Execution System 1.1 Requirements for MB Control of Manufacturing Execution 1.2 Evaluate Existing Modeling Tools 1.3 Create Integrated Planning System 1.4 Create Intelligent Manufacturing Execution Model 2.0 Determine Information Viewing Requirements 2.1 Develop Requirements for Execution Domains 2.2 Prepare Planning Processes to Provide the Info
Page 5
26.4 mo 26.4 mo 26.4 mo 26.4 mo 924 d 13.2 mo 13.2 mo 19.8 mo 39.6 mo 2.2 mo 836 d 792 d 6.6 mo 13.2 mo 16.5 mo 9.9 mo 19.8 mo 11 mo 682 d 18.7 mo 13.2 mo 13.2 mo 11 mo 1584 d 528 d 6.6 mo 6.6 mo 6.6 mo 6.6 mo 132 d 6.6 mo 6.6 mo
4/4/07 4/4/07 4/8/08 4/8/08 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/5/07 10/9/08 4/4/07 4/16/10 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 5/4/07 5/4/07 1/2/07 4/8/08 6/5/07 5/4/07 5/4/07 6/9/08 10/9/08 2/10/09 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06 4/4/07 10/5/07 4/8/08 10/2/06 10/2/06 10/2/06
4/10/09 4/10/09 4/15/10 4/15/10 4/15/10 10/4/07 10/8/08 4/15/10 4/15/10 6/16/10 12/14/09 10/13/09 4/3/07 5/7/08 8/7/08 10/4/07 10/13/09 4/7/08 12/14/09 10/8/08 6/11/09 10/13/09 12/14/09 10/25/12 10/8/08 4/3/07 10/4/07 4/7/08 10/8/08 4/3/07 4/3/07 4/3/07
ID 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Task Name
Duration
Start
Finish
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
2.3 Assess Current Viewing Technologies 2.4 Evaluate Recent Pilot Info Delivery Efforts 3.0 Develop Architecture and Standards 3.1 Functional Architecture for Information Delivery 3.2 Recognized Standards for Information Delivery 3.3 Technical Architecture for Information Delivery 4.0 Short-Term Information Delivery Capability to Pt of Use 4.1 Provide Information Delivery Toolset 4.2 Provide Solution Products 5.0 Extend Model-Based Support to Other Execution Systems 5.1 MB Support of Maintenance & Repair 5.2 MB Support of Training 6.0 Next Generation Information Delivery Capabilities 6.1 Develop New Info Delivery Capabilities 6.2 Develop New Communication Capabilities
6.6 mo 6.6 mo 264 d 6.6 mo 6.6 mo 6.6 mo 528 d 13.2 mo 13.2 mo 528 d 13.2 mo 13.2 mo 792 d 39.6 mo 39.6 mo
10/2/06 10/2/06 4/4/07 4/4/07 4/4/07 10/5/07 10/5/07 10/5/07 10/9/08 4/4/07 4/4/07 4/8/08 10/14/09 10/14/09 10/14/09
4/3/07 4/3/07 4/7/08 10/4/07 10/4/07 4/7/08 10/13/09 10/8/08 10/13/09 4/10/09 4/7/08 4/10/09 10/25/12 10/25/12 10/25/12
Page 6

Next Generation Manufacturing Technology Initiative PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Next Generation Manufacturing Technology Initiative PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Next-Generation Manufacturing Technology Initiative

Strategic Investment Plan for the Model-Based Enterprise

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

Copyright 2005, NGMTI

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1.2 The NGMTI Assessment of Manufacturing

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

1.1.3 THE NGMTI STRATEGY

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

1.2 THE NGMTI ROADMAP FOR THE MODEL-BASED ENTERPRISE

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

1.2.1 THE MODEL-BASED ENTERPRISE DEFINITIONS AND FRAMEWORK

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

1.2.2 THE MODEL-BASED ENTERPRISE A TOTAL BUSINESS APPROACH

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

1.2.3 THE FUNCTIONAL MODEL FOR MBE

Figure 1.2-1. Functional Model for the MBE Roadmap.

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

1.3 THE MBE VISION

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

1.3.1 Vision for Product Realization & Support

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

1.4 ACHIEVING THE GOALS: THE MBE PROJECT PLANS

Scope 84 mo, $33M

39 mo., $9.1M 32 mo., $4.4M

4. Enterprise-Wide Cost Modeling

36 mo., $5.6M 60 mo, $23M

66 mo., $13.5M 36 mo., $4.0M

34 mo., $2.7M 40 mo., $4.7M

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

2.0 PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT

Figure 2.1-1. Functional Model for Product Realization & Support

Innovation & Conceptualization Product & Process Development

Manufacturing Execution Life-Cycle Support

Product Realization & Support

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

2.2 CURRENT STATE OF PRODUCT REALIZATION & SUPPORT

Product Realization & Support

Product & Process Development

Product Realization & Support

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

Product Realization & Support

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

Product Realization & Support

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

3D Design Tools Enable Rapid Customization to Meet Customer Needs

Product Realization & Support

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

Product Realization & Support

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

Product Definition, Kenneth Crow, DRM Associates, http://www.npd-solutions.com/pdef.html.

Product Realization & Support

Product Realization & Support

NEXT-GENERATION MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE

Integrated Design Tools Making an Impact on Mars as Well as Earth

Product Realization & Support