An application of the Design Structure Matrix to Integrated Concurrent Engineering

Abstract This paper demonstrates an application of the Design Structure Matrix (DSM) to Integrated Concurrent Engineering (ICE), an approach to conceptual space systems design intended to increase the pace of work by bringing together all relevant personnel in the same room to conduct focused, collaborative one-week design studies. Although the DSM methodology explicitly incorporates the concurrent aspects of engineering design, it has not been applied formally to an integrated, rapid design environment such as ICE. In this paper, a DSM consisting of 172 design parameters and 682 dependencies is constructed to represent the typical process employed at the Mission Design Laboratory (MDL), an ICE facility at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Analysis of the DSM reveals an optimal sequencing among five phases of the ICE design process, the interdependent disciplines in the design team, and a set of starting assumptions that can be made at the outset of the work to facilitate a more structured approach to the highly complex and iterative process of space systems design.

[1]  Tyson R. Browning,et al.  Applying the design structure matrix to system decomposition and integration problems: a review and new directions , 2001, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[2]  Robert P. Smith,et al.  A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development , 1994 .

[3]  Reza H. Ahmadi,et al.  Structuring product development processes , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[4]  D. V. Steward.  Systems Analysis and Management: Structure, Strategy and Design , 1981 .

[5]  James L. Rogers.  Tools and Techniques for Decomposing and Managing Complex Design Projects , 1999 .

[6]  M E J Newman,et al.  Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[7]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Model-based Approaches to Managing Concurrent Engineering , 1991 .

[8]  James R. Wertz,et al.  Space Mission Analysis and Design , 1992 .

[9]  D. V. Steward,et al.  The design structure system: A method for managing the design of complex systems , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[10]  James R. Wertz.  Space Mission Geometry , 1991 .

[11]  William Stallings,et al.  Communications architectures , 1992 .

[12]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Methods for Analyzing Design Procedures , 2011 .

[13]  Katja Hölttä-Otto,et al.  Degree of Modularity in Engineering Systems and Products with Technical and Business Constraints , 2007, Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl..

[14]  Emery Reeves.  Spacecraft Design and Sizing , 1991 .

[15]  Mark S. Avnet,et al.  Socio-cognitive analysis of engineering systems design : shared knowledge, process, and product , 2009 .

[16]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Organizing the Tasks in Complex Design Projects , 1991, MIT-JSME Workshop.

[17]  S. D. Wall.  ICE Heats up Design Productivity , 1998 .

[18]  Raphael T. Haftka,et al.  Demonstration of decomposition and optimization in the design of experimental space systems , 1989 .

[19]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Identifying Modular and Integrative Systems and Their Impact on Design Team Interactions , 2003 .

[20]  G. Karpati,et al.  The integrated mission design center (imdc) at nasa goddard space flight center , 2003, 2003 IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.03TH8652).