Integrated Product And Process Development Research Articles

Loss‐Driven Systems Engineering and Siloism

ABSTRACTThis article discusses the siloism concept in LDSE and the use of the integrated product team (IPT) concept to mitigate it. Siloism is any project team member's unwillingness to share information especially to mitigate conflicts and overlaps among project specialties. Failure to mitigate siloism potentially reduces the entire project's effectiveness. A recognized siloism mitigation method is employing the IPT concept. This concept uses organizational structure and rigorous management combined to encourage spcialty information sharing. Aligning the organizational project structure to the physical system architecture seeks close specialty cooperation. IPTs are part of the larger concept called Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) described in INCOSE's work (2015, 199‐203).

Integrated product and process development of powder metallurgy hub for automotive clutch

ABSTRACTWith the development of new near-net shape forming process, powder metallurgy has been widely used in the manufacturing of automobiles and their parts. This paper proposes a novel integrated product and process development (IPPD) methodology for clutch hub via powder metallurgy, and the manufacturing-oriented design is carried out. The three-dimensional model of the hub is established and simulated by ANSYS. A Fe–C-Cu–Ni–Mo material system for the powder metallurgy clutch hub is created, and a corresponding process scheme is developed. Through material metallographic analysis and experimental verification, the results show that the powder metallurgy clutch hub developed by the IPPD technology can meet the requirements of automotive applications in terms of strength and durability. The IPPD methodology and new near-net shape forming technology can be widely applied to automotive parts such as gear flanges.

Knowledge integration in IPPD project: role of shared project mission, mutual trust, and mutual influence

Project integration is an important management issue related to product development performance outcomes. Design, development, production, and commercialization of new products and services require a project team's ability to acquire and integrate different knowledge bases of internal capabilities, customers, and suppliers. A literature gap exists regarding critical drivers of knowledge integration and shared knowledge in product development projects that needs to be identified and scientifically validated. Based on goal setting, social exchange, and information processing theories, the current study identifies antecedents of knowledge integration in terms of a shared project mission, mutual trust, and mutual influence, and investigates key relationships among these antecedents to determine the effect of knowledge integration on integrated product and process development (IPPD) project outcomes. Proposed hypothetical relationships among these constructs were tested on primary data collected from 191 respondents (OEM project managers and team members, suppliers, and customers) from IPPD projects from the U.S. automotive industry. With regards to the antecedents of knowledge integration in IPPD projects, our results indicate a statistically significant positive association between shared project mission, mutual trust, mutual influence and knowledge integration. Further, our results indicate a positive relationship between knowledge integration and performance outcomes measured in terms of IPPD project success and IPPD product success. Our results also indicate a partial mediating effect of mutual trust and mutual influence between the relationships of shared project mission and knowledge integration. Discussion of our empirical results, limitations, and recommendation for future studies in the area of knowledge integration in the area of IPPD projects are also provided.

From project management to planetary defense: implementation of a systems engineering approach using integrated product and process development (IPPD) alaa adnan

Thirty-four participants from seventeen countries participated in the Planetary Defense Team Project at the International Space University's 2015 Space Studies Program (ISU-SSP15) to find solutions for short-term warning cosmic threats. The team spent nine weeks working intensively on departmental and lecture activities alongside this project. Space agencies and institutions around the world have discussed cosmic threats, including planetary defense. However, not enough attention has been given to a potentially catastrophic event; what has been done is limited to possible long-term cosmic threats. Having no specific pathway on how to tackle this global challenging task at the beginning of the project, the Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) methodology was used to enable the team to identify main elements of the project, starting from developing the mission statement, needs and requirements, and to proposing solutions to planetary defense. These elements include detection and tracking, deflection, collaboration, outreach and education, evacuation and recovery.

ANTECEDENTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF IPPD EFFECTIVENESS

Team is the primary mechanism through which product development projects are executed. Despite regular theoretical discussions on the importance of cross-functional team and concurrent engineering to improve new product development projects, empirical studies on consequence of integrated product and process development (IPPD) effectiveness on teamwork is largely missing in existing product development literature. IPDD projects execute concurrent activities that go through several iterations before the deliverable of each stage are finalised. Based on information processing theory and goal-setting theory for team, this study hypothesise shared project mission, clarity of the project target, and customer and supplier involvement positively influences effectiveness of IPPD project. We further hypothesise that such effective IPPD leads to teamwork which can have a positive impact on project performance in terms of product development cost, product development time, and customer satisfaction. Primary data collected from 191 IPPD projects from U.S. automotive industry were analysed using structural equation modelling technique. All the hypotheses representing antecedents of effective IPPD and the consequence of effective IPPD were found to be supported in the current study.

Implementation of a Systems Engineering Approach to the Management of a Planetary Defense Team Project in an Intensive Space Studies Program Using IPPD

AbstractPlanetary Defense is an important and challenging topic, and long‐term mitigation of asteroid impacts have been discussed by governments and space agencies; however, short‐term solutions of comet impacts are rarely considered. 34 participants from 17 countries tackled this problem, a comet impact two years after detection, at the 2015‐Space Studies Program and produced the Roadmap for EArth Defense Initiatives (READI). The Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) methodology was used to identify the mission statement, define requirements and needs, and provide possible solutions. This paper concentrates on how the IPPD was applied as a systems approach to each phase of our project, where the whole system was Planetary Defense, and its architectural decomposition was divided into five key elements: detection and tracking, deflection techniques, global collaboration, outreach and education, and evacuation and recovery. The importance of applying human factor concepts throughout the project is addressed through challenges faced, solutions applied, and lessons learned. Verification and validation of selected options are presented, along with the use of various project management tools. Furthermore, we discuss our results and recommendations for Planetary Defense, as they are products of our analysis using the IPPD approach to systems engineering.

Enhancing Integrative Capabilities through Lean Product and Process Development

To survive in today's hostile business environment, companies must constantly introduce new products and adapt their strategy to change. Managing product variety may therefore be considered as an important competitive factor. However, this requires resources in terms of people, equipment, inventory and raw material—all of which go against a Lean strategy. Mastering complexity becomes increasingly important in several industries, and companies must find a way to balance between lean and offering product variety. As robots become less expensive and more ‘intelligent’, in combination with more advanced CAM solutions, automated assembly may become beneficial at much lower quantities than in the past. Also, development of new manufacturing methods may enable new product designs, and vice-versa. In this emerging paradigm shift—also referred to as Industry 4.0—companies must enhance their integrative capabilities and facilitate knowledge sharing between product engineering and production to sustain competitive advantage. This paper discusses organizational capabilities and tools required to enable transformation into Industry 4.0. Literature on Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD), Concurrent Engineering (CE) and Lean has been studied. This state-of-the-art is seen in connection with efforts made in a research project with the goal to increase competitive advantage by leveraging capabilities in automated manufacturing of large and complex products—a manufacturing context that is regarded as difficult to automate in an economical way. The results show that investing in the latest manufacturing technology alone will not provide the capabilities required. It is also necessary to invest in people skills, knowledge and organizational learning. Process design and design-for-automation must be considered already from the conceptual product design to avoid expensive re-designs and design loops. The use of physical and virtual demonstrators proved to facilitate an efficient and effective design process.

Comprehensive aircraft configuration design tool for Integrated Product and Process Development

This paper describes an efficient aircraft geometry design tool which is necessary for design and analysis applications through Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD). The design process decomposes aircraft geometry into several components to represent it accurately and realistically with a reduced number of shape control parameters. For this purpose, several configuration representation algorithms are thoroughly investigated and discussed. The proposed configuration generation algorithm employs the super ellipse equation with simple analytic distribution functions, Class function/Shape function Transformation (CST) and can represent and manipulate complex shapes accurately with a small number of control parameters. A model of aircraft geometry, represented in this approach, can be applied to conceptual and preliminary stages of aircraft design and development with realistic and accurate configuration data. A Parameter-based Comprehensive Aircraft Design (PCAD) tool which implements a geometry generation process for aircraft design and optimization using customization of commercial computer-aided design software (CATIA V5) and the Product Data Management (Enovia Smarteam). The proposed configuration design tool could be especially efficient when automation, flexibility and rapid changes of geometry are required in a short time and with low computational resources.

The LPD 17 Ship Design: Leading a Sea Change Toward Collaborative Product Development

AbstractIn the summer of 2005, the lead ship of the LPD 17 Class was delivered to the US Navy. The LPD 17 is a highly capable amphibious assault warship, designed as a total ship system, which will provide significantly improved warfighting capabilities to support US Marine Corps and joint operations. Potential ship capabilities were initially explored as LX Concept Studies (1989–1990) and the final ship took form in the 1990s as Preliminary, Contract, and Detail Design progressed. Fabrication of the lead ship began in June 2000 and the LPD 17 was launched in July 2003. Currently, three ships have been delivered to the US Navy and five are under construction. The LPD 17 was the last contract design developed in‐house under the leadership of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) ship design group utilizing NAVSEA's highly experienced ship design workforce. Many new and innovative concepts and approaches were introduced into the LPD 17 design and acquisition process. The LPD 17 was the first surface ship design to experience the benefits of Total Ship Systems Engineering, Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD), Navy–Shipbuilder Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) collocated at the shipyard, and an Integrated Product Data Environment (IPDE). Such dramatic changes created many opportunities, hurdles, and even some pain. The Navy's Center for Innovation in Ship Design (CISD) championed a systems engineering case study of the LPD 17 ship design addressing all phases from requirements determination through detail design. This paper provides a retrospective of what occurred in order to document best ship design practices and lessons learned and to determine how the naval ship design process can be further improved. These lessons learned and best design practices will help transmit accumulated intellectual capital to other shipbuilding programs and future design leaders. The construction and delivery of ships is at a stage that provides a logical benchmark from which to make assessments. For example, the Secretary of the Navy recently received the US Marine Corps initial impressions of the LPD 17 Operational Evaluation (OPEVAL): “The Right Ship, The Right Size, The Right Capabilities.” Although a number of ship design process innovations contributed to a sound Contract Design technical package, it is now common knowledge that the LPD 17 lead ship was over budget and late. The authors conclude that the most significant best practice, or lesson learned in the case of LPD 17, is that there must be a tightly integrated, seamless, collaborative design‐build approach between the Navy and the Shipbuilder(s) throughout the whole design‐build process starting at the very beginning of ship design. There are new ship design projects like MPF(F) and CG(X) that could benefit from the innovations, best practices, and lessons learned of the LPD 17 Ship Design: leading a sea change toward collaborative product development.

Integration of quality function deployment and process management in the semiconductor industry

This study integrates quality function deployment (QFD) with process-management techniques to optimize product design investment, process improvement, and phase-in to meet customers’ requirements and company goals. QFD uses systematized multi-levelled development and evaluation to translate customer requirements into product and process design in a manner that satisfies customers and prevents potential failure costs. Process management, which is one of the pivotal Six Sigma implementation criteria, is used in the present study to construct an integrated product and process development (IPPD) model to promote the effectiveness and benefits of applying QFD techniques. This study provides insights into the integrated model's applicability and suitability in the semiconductor industry.

Cost Reducing Engineering Strategies in the Automotive Industry

AbstractThe workshop discussed demands of the industry on technologies and control strategies for reducing the cost of design, manufacturing and service for products through an Integrated Product-and Process-Development, Virtual Machining (digital factory), and e-Work. The panelists gave an input through statements for the discussion with the audience.

A life cycle engineering approach to development of flexible manufacturing systems

Life cycle engineering, or integrated product and process development (IPPD), has gained much attention recently due to its significant applications to various products and systems in industry. The authors' previous work introduced an IPPD methodology as a systems approach to competitive and environmentally conscious product and process development. Different product development issues are formally described as constrained optimization problems and solved using a life locus tree. The paper extends the methodology to the development of manufacturing systems. In order to increase its modeling capability and decision accuracy, a time variable is introduced into the methodology. The execution duration of processes and their time-varying characteristics are considered. The methodology is then applied to the life cycle development of a flexible manufacturing system (FMS). FMS machine selection and decisions along its life are optimally made. The latter includes how many times each FMS component should be upgraded and which end-of-life option it should take. Life cycle decision making is based on cost, benefit, and environmental impact of an FMS. The proposed approach provides a new way to develop cost-effective, high-quality, and environmentally conscious FMS.

4.1.1 Applying Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) on the U. S. Army Multi‐Role Armament and Ammunition System (MRAAS)

AbstractThe following quote was made by then Secretary of Defense, Dr. William Perry, on 10 May 1995.“…I am directing a fundamental change in the way the Department acquires goods and services. The concepts of IPPD and IPTs shall be applied throughout the acquisition process to the maximum extent practicable.”The purpose of this directive was to help reduce the “cost of the acquisition process by the elimination of activities that, although being performed by many dedicated and hardworking personnel, are not necessary or cost effective in today's environment.” Subsequently, the DoD Guide to Integrated Product and Process Development was released. This guide defines IPPD as, “A management process that integrates all activities from product concept through production/field support, using a multifunctional team, to simultaneously optimize the product and its manufacturing and sustainment processes to meet cost and performance objectives.”Since 1995, the various components of the United States Department of Defense have been implementing IPPD by allowing program managers the flexibility to choose the best IPPD practices and tools available for their programs. Much of the focus has been on acquisition programs, but the use of IPPD is now being pushed back into the Science and Technology (S&T) area as well. In fact, the Air Force Research Laboratory policy now is to use IPPD on all Advanced Technology Demonstration (ATD) Programs. The U.S. Army has also applied IPPD on several S&T programs such as the Future Scout Cavalry System (FSCS).This paper presents the results of applying IPPD on the U. S. Army Multi‐Role Armament and Ammunition System (MRAAS) Munition Suite Program. We first introduce the MRAAS Munition Suite Program and the rationale for the IPPD Process USFD—including the definition of the systems engineering process and tools. We then discuss the specific application of this process on the MRAAS Munition Suite Program. An overall objective was to apply the systems engineering process early in the life cycle of the system beginning with concept definition through manufacturing development into full‐scale production. In this discussion, we describe the unique approach that was used in the Request for Proposal (RFP) and subsequent contract award. We conclude with results to date of the application of the IPPD Process and offer observations for application to other Defense programs.

The systems engineering approach to an IPPD implementation

Over the years industry has undergone a dramatic change in product development. The design of new products had transitioned from being an almost artistic process to one involving significantly more discipline. This discipline has come in the form of various systems engineering processes, which utilise analysis and coordinated activities to develop products. Fortunately, the application of these processes has not reduced the level of innovation or creativity achieved in design, but rather has enhanced the probability that the final product will successfully meet its objectives within cost goals. We are continuing to refine our product development skills as we move to an integrated product and process development (IPPD) approach. IPPD continues to use a disciplined system engineering process, but adds the elements of concurrent life cycle consideration and empowered work teams to achieve a higher level of customer satisfaction. The IPPD approach requires us to perform product development on a much broader front. Through addressing the production, delivery, training, and support systems concurrently with the design of the out of the box product (the item which every customer would like to find under his or her Christmas tree), customer satisfaction can be significantly increased. This paper is intended to provide a brief description of system development. It describes where we have been in the past, and where we're trying to go in the future, relative to product development. A discussion of the application of systems engineering to IPPD is provided to highlight the shift in our systems perspective that we're trying to achieve. This paper provides neither a detailed coverage of the subject, nor the only valid interpretation of IPPD. It is intended solely to provoke constructive thought on the subject.

Effective team building process and team leadership for integrated product and process development

Technology is changing rapidly. Competition is getting hotter day by day among manufacturing circles. Quality, durability and the time taken to manufacture a product are the key words in today's major manufacturing plants. The entire production scenario has changed; it is now focusing mainly on customer needs. There is a continuous demand for adaptation to newer conditions as product development takes place in a volatile environment. In order to sustain all these changes in the production process, there arises the need for integrated product and process development, and facilitation of IPPD practices, which is where the product development team plays a crucial role. It is through the establishment of multi disciplinary PDTs that person-person implicit knowledge sharing takes place. In this paper, we discuss the factors that need to be considered when setting up an effective product development team. The objective of this paper is to provide practical guidance in the implementation of an Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) program. Its scope includes both technical and managerial considerations necessary to launch and effectively execute a new product and process development using such a program. The information presented in this paper is based upon lessons learned at United Defense on both the AFAS ATD and AFAS Common Chassis programs, as well as published information on the US Air Force's F-22 development program and Department of Defense (DoD) guide on IPPD.

CMMISM transition experiences from an integrated product and process development (IPPD) perspective

AbstractLockheed Martin Systems Integration‐Owego (hereafter referred to as Owego) formalized implementation of Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) in 1994 with the issuance of a policy requiring use of concurrent engineering on every program over $5 million. Since that date, the organization has focused on improving and institutionalizing integrated processes, integrated teams, and integrated tools. Beginning in June 2000, Owego initiated its transition to CMM®IntegrationSM(CMMISM) using the CMMISM‐SE/SW V1.0 model. Transition efforts expanded to include the CMMISM‐SE/SW/IPPD V1.02 model with its release in late 2000. In May 2001, Owego conducted a Standard CMMISM Assessment for Process Improvement (SCAMPISM) as part of the CMMISM Phase II Pilot Program. This paper will detail Owego's journey in deploying IPPD and experiences in transitioning from the Software Capability Maturity Model®(SW−CMM®) and the Systems Engineering Capability Model, Electronics Industries Alliance Interim Standard 731 (EIA/IS‐731) to CMMISM. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Syst Eng 5: 41–51, 2002; DOI 10.1002/sys.10005

1.2.4 A Web‐Enabled, Collaborative Solution for Product Development: The Enterprise Process Analysis Toolkit for Affordability (ePATA)

AbstractThe virtual enterprise is becoming a reality. With the advances in communication and computer technology, organizations now have the capability to conduct real business over the Internet. From weekly staff meetings to actual product design and services, it is now possible to sit in the comfort of your own office and collaborate with your colleagues electronically. These advances are especially advantageous to those companies involved in the design and manufacture of new products. The focus of this paper is to present the progress made in developing software tools to support the Air Force Research Laboratory's Science and Technology (S&T) Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD) process. The IPPD process applies a systems engineering approach to the research and development phase of system design using modified six sigma methods to provide a measurable way to evaluate and decide among competing design approaches. This measurement‐based approach involves an Integrated Product Team (IPT) comprising experts from every aspect of the project. They determine customer requirements and candidate technologies that may answer those requirements, then apply a series of metrics to analyze the technologies for performance, producibility, cost, schedule and risk tradeoffs to arrive at the best value design. Early research efforts indicated several tools would be needed to support the activities of the process. From requirements management to workflow, a suite of tools would provide program managers, scientists, engineers, cost analysts, etc. with the capability to effectively carry out their various duties in an integrated environment.The enterprise version of PATA is appropriately named Enterprise PATA or ePATA. Implemented in JAVA, ePATA will run on any computer platform that provides an Internet connection and an appropriate Web browser. Besides such benefits as ease of maintenance and support, this type of implementation provides an enterprise capability for product development. That is, ePATA offers the capability to conduct systems engineering activities in a Web‐enabled, virtual enterprise environment. By way of review, we first present the S&T IPPD Process background. Next, we cover the first iteration of the tools to support the process—PATA. Finally, we discuss ePATA, its architecture, and functionality.

Dynamics of Naval Ship Design: A Systems Approach

AbstractIn today's cost‐constrained environment, acquisition reform is a critical component in the design, production, and support of modern warships. This reform includes policies that require system acquisition programs to pursue commercial management and systems engineering practices. The application of Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD), concurrent engineering, open systems architecture, Total Quality Management (TQM), and Integrated Design Environments (IDE) have produced noteworthy commercial successes. Many defense acquisition programs have followed suite, implementing similar process improvements. However, as many commercial industries are finding, there are limits to the success of these improvements.Using the methods of System Dynamics, this paper examines the mechanisms which have lead to program instabilities in cost, schedule, and effectiveness. Modeling of these mechanisms provides a means to study past programs, and assess the potential savings that can be generated with the introduction of process improvements.As a case study, the paper examines the structures and resultant trends that impacted the design and acquisition of DDG 51. General process structures are studied including design interactions, schedule, resources, and allocation. Specific dynamic relationships between cost thresholds, design effort, and schedule are studied to show the ability of modeling to capture dynamic trends and predict results. Finally, a “what‐if?” scenario that looks at the application of IPPD is examined.

An integrated product and process development methodology: Concept formulation

Life cycle engineering, or integrated product and process development (IPPD), is a new trend of research and application in industry and academia. In our previous work, a generic framework was proposed to provide a means for an integrated consideration of the performance optimization issues in a product’s lifetime. Based on this generic framework, this paper proposes and presents an integrated product and process development methodology. Important concepts of the methodology are introduced, and an application procedure is provided to illustrate the systematic application of the methodology to real product and process development. Finally, we provide a brief report of our application of the methodology to personal computer development.

The CMMI Project

ABSTRACTThe CMMI ProjectThe CMMI project is a collaborative effort sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense/Acquisition and Technology (OSD/A&T) Systems Engineering with participation by U.S. government, industry, and the Software Engineering Institute (SEI). The project's objective is to develop a capability maturity model integrated product suite that provides industry and government with a set of integrated products to support process and product improvement.This project was designed to preserve government and industry's investment in process improvement and to enhance the use of multiple models. The project's outputs include integrated model(s), assessment method(s), and training materials.The CMMI project's objective is to improve the usability of the maturity modeling technology in a wider set of disciplines than simply software. The concept calls for use of common terminology, common components and rules for constructing models, to reduce the training and process improvement effort needed by users of multiple disciplines. In the initial phase, the scope of the CMMI project is restricted to the most needed disciplines: software engineering, systems engineering and Integrated Product and Process Development (IPPD). The initial set of models to be produced include staged and continuous representations for: Software Engineering Systems Engineering Software and Systems Engineering Software and Systems Engineering with IPPD. The CMMI Product Suite was designed with the capability to expand in both disciplines and life cycle coverage. While the schedule for these expansions has not yet been decided, other disciplines (such as security systems engineering) are possible. Expansion decisions will be made based upon the success of the initial stage, user community needs and support, and availability of participants for the Product Development Team (PDT).® Capability Maturity Model and CMM are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office