Understanding how problem formulation in systems engineering influences system affordability: a systems thinking investigation

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 227
Author(s):  
Alejandro Salado ◽  
Roshanak Nilchiani
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 2991-3000
Author(s):  
Frank Koppenhagen ◽  
Tim Blümel ◽  
Tobias Held ◽  
Christoph Wecht ◽  
Paul Davin Kollmer

AbstractCombining agility and convergence in the development of physical products is a major challenge. Rooted in a design thinking approach, Stanford's ME310 process model attempts to resolve the conflicting priorities of these two design principles. To investigate how successful Stanford's hybrid process model is in doing so, we have used a qualitative case study approach. Our paper begins by outlining this process model's fundamental principles in terms of engineering design methodology. Subsequently, we present the results of our empirical analysis, which tracks the coevolution of problem and solution space by meticulously examining all prototype paths in ten of Stanford's ME310 student projects. We have discovered that convergence during solution finding does not correspond to the process model's theoretical specifications. Even in the phase of the final prototype, both the technical concept and the underlying problem formulation changed frequently. Further research should focus on combining the prototype-based ME310 approach with methods from systems engineering which allow for a more comprehensive theoretical exploration of the solution space. This could lead to improved convergence during solution development.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karim Muci-Kuchler ◽  
Mark Bedillion ◽  
Shaobo Huang ◽  
Cassandra Degen ◽  
Marius Ellingsen ◽  
...  

Aerospace ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
pp. 149
Author(s):  
Johney Thomas ◽  
Antonio Davis ◽  
Mathews P. Samuel

Safety is of paramount concern in aerospace and aviation. Safety has evolved over the years, from the technical era to the human-factors era and organizational era, and finally to the present era of systems-thinking. Building upon three foundational concepts of systems-thinking, a new safety concept called “integration-in-totality principle” is propounded in this article as part of a “seven-principles-framework of system safety”, to act as an integrated framework to visualize and model system safety. The integration-in-totality principle concept addresses the need to have a holistic ‘vertical and horizontal integration’, which is a key tenet of systems thinking. The integration-in-totality principle is illustrated and elucidated with the help of a simple “Rubik’s cube model of integration-in-totality principle” with three orthogonal axes, the ‘axis of perspective’ of vertical integration, and the two ‘axes of perception and performance’ of horizontal integration. Safety analysis along the three axes with a ‘bidirectional synthesis’ and ‘continuum approach’ is further elaborated with relevant case studies, one among them related to the Boeing 737 MAX aircraft twin disasters. Safety is directly linked to quality, reliability and risk, through a self-reinforcing reflexive paradigm, and airworthiness assurance is the process through which safety concepts are embedded in a multidisciplinary aviation environment where the system of systems is seamlessly operating. The article explains how the system safety principle of integration-in-totality is related to reliability and airworthiness of an aerospace system with the help of the ‘V-model of systems engineering’. The article also establishes the linkage between integration-in-totality principle and strategic quality management, thus bridging the gap between two parallel fields of knowledge.


Systems ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Amissah ◽  
Thomas Gannon ◽  
Jamie Monat

Systems thinking is an approach to reasoning and treatment of real-world problems based on the fundamental notion of ‘system.’ System here refers to a purposeful assembly of components. Thus, systems thinking is aimed at understanding relationships between components and their overall impact on system outcomes (i.e., intended and unintended) and how a system similarly fits in the broader context of its environment. There are currently several distinct flavors of systems thinking, both in practice and scholarship; most notably in the disciplines of systems science, systems engineering, and systems dynamics. Each of these, while similar in purpose, has a distinct history and a rich set of methods and tools for various application contexts. The WPI Systems Thinking Colloquium held on 2 October 2019 was aimed at exploring the diversity of perspectives on systems thinking from these disciplines. The colloquium brought together world-renowned experts from both industry and academia to share insights from their research and practice. This paper offers a compilation of summaries of the presentations given.


Systems ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 41
Author(s):  
Gregory Harris ◽  
Lauren Caudle

Systems engineering is a methodology where an interdisciplinary approach is applied, using systems thinking, to the development of a system of interest. The systems engineering discipline has emerged as an effective way to guide the engineering of complex systems, but has been applied most readily in the realm of cyber physical systems. In some circles of the Federal Government, the mention of systems engineering processes immediately leads people to think of a long, inefficient effort due to an often applied bureaucratic approach, where the focus is on documentation rather than the development of the system of interest, which comes from a view that the product of the systems engineering effort is the document, not the system itself. In this paper, the authors describe the application of systems thinking and the systems engineering process to the design and creation of an Advanced Manufacturing Innovation Institute (MII, part of the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation) established under Department of Defense (DoD) authority for the Office of the President, that was swift, efficient, and implemented without formality.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua-Liang Wei ◽  
Stephen A Billings

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, an astronomical number of publications on the pandemic dynamics appeared in the literature, of which many use the susceptible infected removed (SIR) and susceptible exposed infected removed (SEIR) models, or their variants, to simulate and study the spread of the coronavirus. SIR and SEIR are continuous-time models which are a class of initial value problems (IVPs) of ordinary differential equations (ODEs). Discrete-time models such as regression and machine learning have also been applied to analyze COVID-19 pandemic data (e.g. predicting infection cases), but most of these methods use simplified models involving a small number of input variables pre-selected based on a priori knowledge, or use very complicated models (e.g. deep learning), purely focusing on certain prediction purposes and paying little attention to the model interpretability. There have been relatively fewer studies focusing on the investigations of the inherent time-lagged or time-delayed relationships e.g. between the reproduction number (R number), infection cases, and deaths, analyzing the pandemic spread from a systems thinking and dynamic perspective. The present study, for the first time, proposes using systems engineering and system identification approach to build transparent, interpretable, parsimonious and simulatable (TIPS) dynamic machine learning models, establishing links between the R number, the infection cases and deaths caused by COVID-19. The TIPS models are developed based on the well-known NARMAX (Nonlinear AutoRegressive Moving Average with eXogenous inputs) model, which can help better understand the COVID-19 pandemic dynamics. A case study on the UK COVID-19 data is carried out, and new findings are detailed. The proposed method and the associated new findings are useful for better understanding the spread dynamics of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document