Performance‐Based Design for Fleet Affordability

Famme, Joseph B.; Gallagher, Charles J.; Raitch, Ted

doi:10.1111/j.1559-3584.2009.00233.x

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, one thing they share in common is a dependency on a design engineering workforce that efficiently and effectively delivers products created by these new plans and procedures. Extensive use of COTS products, Cost as an Independent Variable (CAIV) (Doerry 2009), Performance Based Design (Famme 2009) (Rickets 2011), Concurrent Engineering (Tibbits 1995), Designing for producability or supportability, Set Based Design (Singer 2009), and open ended architectures are all examples of techniques where design expertise from the workforce is a baseline assumption.…”

Section: Engineering Design Dependency Of New Ship Design Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Naval Enterprise Engineering: Design, Innovate and Train (NEEDIT)

Galway¹

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Every generation of government Naval Engineers has a responsibility to see that the lessons learned and body of knowledge associated with fielded Naval equipment, systems and processes makes it to the next generation. Part of this knowledge includes the design methods and production techniques associated with producing the equipment. The transfer of design knowledge traditionally occurs over a long period of time through a design engineering internship. However, in recent years, acquisition reform philosophies involving a shift in design and production work to private industry have reduced the ability of this transfer to occur. The focus of the current naval engineering workforce is acquisition support rather than design of naval systems and equipment. This focus limits the ability of government engineers to develop the level of design expertise necessary for design innovation to occur as rapidly or as widely as in past generations. Leadership places a high priority on an innovative workforce, but an innovative workforce can only exist when the working environment provides workers with the opportunity to develop the appropriate expertise. Given the current focus on acquisition, the workforce of the future will most likely consist of innovative acquisition experts who lack the expertise to be innovative designers. This paper examines current naval engineering workforce development and in particular the changes brought about by acquisition reform to the area of design engineering. It includes a discussion of recent publications addressing building a design engineering workforce. The discussion reveals a possible pathway for creating more innovative design engineers in the future and builds a case for providing structured design engineer training. The paper also includes a description of a tool for providing an elearning simulation based training program to help Naval engineers develop the necessary expertise in design engineering.

show abstract

Section: Engineering Design Dependency Of New Ship Design Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Naval Enterprise Engineering: Design, Innovate and Train (NEEDIT)

Galway¹

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Achieving substantial technological progress under these seemingly divergent conditions requires fresh and innovative approaches to the process of developing, testing, and demonstrating technology. Some approaches that have been proposed to address this fundamental challenge include model-based specification ("the model is the specification") [1], the Performance Based Design Continuum (PBDC) [2], and Hardware in the Loop (HIL) simulation and testing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power hardware-in-the-loop: A value proposition for early stage prototype testing

Steurer

Meeker

Schoder

et al. 2011

IECON 2011 - 37th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes advanced power hardware-inthe-loop (PHIL) facilities and experience gained in testing laboratory prototypes. The benefits of subjecting equipment to simulated environments include increased flexibility in designing, implementing, and executing experiments that reflect situations as close as possible to real world conditions. Individual test scenarios can be quickly configured and adapted once the device under test is connected, as only changes in software models need to be accommodated. Consequently, the required time and financial expenses associated with experimentation and testing are reduced. Further, the risk of late and costly changes due to specifications and design choices can be avoided as thorough and realistic tests can be performed earlier in the development cycle and before actual installation and deployment in the field. And, PHIL testing reveals how equipment will interact with the system for which it is being targeted in a way that more conventional non-interactive testing approaches cannot. As an example, the described PHIL capabilities can be used to derisk technology envisioned for realizing smart(er) grids.

show abstract

An Introduction to Simulation Models and the Modelling Process

Murray-Smith

2015

Testing and Validation of Computer Simulation Models

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Performance‐Based Design for Fleet Affordability

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Naval Enterprise Engineering: Design, Innovate and Train (NEEDIT)

Naval Enterprise Engineering: Design, Innovate and Train (NEEDIT)

Power hardware-in-the-loop: A value proposition for early stage prototype testing

An Introduction to Simulation Models and the Modelling Process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About