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

Cesare Guariniello, D. DeLaurentis
{"title":"Technology Prioritization and Architecture Flexibility for Space System-of-Systems","authors":"Cesare Guariniello, D. DeLaurentis","doi":"10.1109/AERO55745.2023.10115852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Decision makers face a difficult task when planning large-scale space missions or long-term development of technologies for space systems architectures. The difficulties arise from multiple factors. First, the size of the problem, the diversity of the involved systems and technologies, and the variety of stakeholders and their needs result in a large a complex trade space. Second, technologies are continuously evolving, and it can be hard to find data and model for new technologies, which increases the uncertainty about availability and performance. Third, in these complex problems decision makers need to account not only for traditional engineering trade-off (including cost, time, performance, and risk) but also for policies, stakeholder preferences, and flexibility of space architectures. Building on our previous research in System-of-Systems methodologies, we propose a combination of tools to support decision-making for technology prioritization and analysis of development time, risk, and flexibility of space architectures. Based on developmental dependencies between technologies, Technology Readiness Level (TRL), mission requirements, uncertainty, cost, and budget limitations, the tools produce the optimal expected schedule and allow the user to identify potential bottleneck and risks. Different strategies for prioritization of technologies can also be compared. The tools can handle constraints such as policies or stakeholder preferences, which impose prioritization of certain technologies or space missions. Finally, since long-term space mission planning is very dynamic and its specific objectives change often, we implemented tools to add analysis of flexibility on top of the technology prioritization tools. This analysis is performed from different perspectives. From a mission viewpoint, given a selected mission category (and its associated technologies), we assess how difficult it is to transition to a different mission, in terms of cost and number of technologies that are missing, as well as evaluating differences in cost. From a programmatic viewpoint, we quantify flexibility of specific technology prioritization schedules when decisions to switch to a different mission arise.","PeriodicalId":344285,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE Aerospace Conference","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2023 IEEE Aerospace Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO55745.2023.10115852","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Decision makers face a difficult task when planning large-scale space missions or long-term development of technologies for space systems architectures. The difficulties arise from multiple factors. First, the size of the problem, the diversity of the involved systems and technologies, and the variety of stakeholders and their needs result in a large a complex trade space. Second, technologies are continuously evolving, and it can be hard to find data and model for new technologies, which increases the uncertainty about availability and performance. Third, in these complex problems decision makers need to account not only for traditional engineering trade-off (including cost, time, performance, and risk) but also for policies, stakeholder preferences, and flexibility of space architectures. Building on our previous research in System-of-Systems methodologies, we propose a combination of tools to support decision-making for technology prioritization and analysis of development time, risk, and flexibility of space architectures. Based on developmental dependencies between technologies, Technology Readiness Level (TRL), mission requirements, uncertainty, cost, and budget limitations, the tools produce the optimal expected schedule and allow the user to identify potential bottleneck and risks. Different strategies for prioritization of technologies can also be compared. The tools can handle constraints such as policies or stakeholder preferences, which impose prioritization of certain technologies or space missions. Finally, since long-term space mission planning is very dynamic and its specific objectives change often, we implemented tools to add analysis of flexibility on top of the technology prioritization tools. This analysis is performed from different perspectives. From a mission viewpoint, given a selected mission category (and its associated technologies), we assess how difficult it is to transition to a different mission, in terms of cost and number of technologies that are missing, as well as evaluating differences in cost. From a programmatic viewpoint, we quantify flexibility of specific technology prioritization schedules when decisions to switch to a different mission arise.
空间系统的技术优先级和架构灵活性
决策者在规划大规模空间任务或空间系统架构技术的长期发展时面临着一项艰巨的任务。困难是由多种因素造成的。首先,问题的规模、涉及的系统和技术的多样性、利益相关者及其需求的多样性导致了一个庞大而复杂的贸易空间。其次,技术在不断发展,很难找到新技术的数据和模型,这增加了可用性和性能的不确定性。第三,在这些复杂的问题中,决策者不仅需要考虑传统的工程权衡(包括成本、时间、性能和风险),还需要考虑政策、利益相关者偏好和空间架构的灵活性。基于我们之前对系统的系统方法的研究,我们提出了一种工具组合,以支持技术优先级的决策,并分析开发时间、风险和空间架构的灵活性。基于技术之间的发展依赖性、技术准备水平(TRL)、任务需求、不确定性、成本和预算限制,这些工具产生了最优的预期时间表,并允许用户识别潜在的瓶颈和风险。还可以比较技术优先次序的不同战略。这些工具可以处理诸如政策或利益相关者偏好之类的限制,这些限制规定了某些技术或空间任务的优先次序。最后,由于长期空间任务规划是非常动态的,其具体目标经常变化,我们实施了一些工具,在技术优先排序工具之上增加灵活性分析。这个分析是从不同的角度进行的。从任务的角度来看,给定一个选定的任务类别(及其相关技术),我们根据成本和缺失的技术数量,以及评估成本差异,评估过渡到另一个任务的难度。从规划的角度来看,当决定切换到不同的任务时,我们量化了特定技术优先级时间表的灵活性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信