Profit and Operational-Based Value Functions

Design and development of large scale complex engineered systems require engagement and coordination of thousands of individuals spanning multiple companies and organizations, making decisions driven largely by prescribed requirements. One issue in this development process is related to the stakeholder desires and the ability to effectively communicate stakeholder preferences to the designers, who are often distributed across teams, organizations, and countries. Value-Driven Design is an approach from systems engineering that attempts to address this issue. Another issue is that stakeholders from military organizations typically have very different preferences from profit driven organizations. Multiple types of value functions are explored in this paper to contrast these two perspectives. Value functions are formed to understand their impacts on the high level design of a strategic strike aircraft. Both monetary and operational value functions are used to understand how preferences on the system influence the final design. More specifically, profit seeking value functions are contrasted with operational value functions to demonstrate the different decisions that would result from each, thereby leading to vastly different system designs.

[1]  T Haftka Raphael,et al.  Multidisciplinary aerospace design optimization: survey of recent developments , 1996 .

[2]  James Scanlan,et al.  Application of Value-Driven Design to Commercial Aero-Engine Systems , 2010 .

[3]  Paul Collopy,et al.  Value-Based Assessment of DoD Acquisitions Programs , 2013, CSER.

[4]  Kemper Lewis,et al.  The Role of Engineering Design in Large-Scale Complex Systems , 2012 .

[5]  Paul Collopy.  Military Technology Pull and the Structure of the Commercial Aircraft Industry , 2004 .

[6]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  Multidisciplinary Design Optimization for Complex Engineered Systems: Report From a National Science Foundation Workshop , 2011 .

[7]  Jasbir S. Arora,et al.  Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering , 2004 .

[8]  Anna-Maria Rivas McGowan,et al.  The Design of Large-Scale Complex Engineered Systems: Present Challenges and Future Promise , 2012 .

[9]  Paul Collopy,et al.  ECONOMIC-BASED DISTRIBUTED OPTIMAL DESIGN , 2001 .

[10]  Paul Collopy,et al.  The Distinct and Interrelated Roles of Value-Driven Design, Multidisciplinary Design Optimization, and Decision Analysis , 2012 .

[11]  A. Rodt.  Successful Conflict Management by Military Means , 2012 .

[12]  Leonard E. Miller,et al.  NASA systems engineering handbook , 1995 .

[13]  Robert E. Ball,et al.  The fundamentals of aircraft combat survivability analysis and design , 1985 .

[14]  Paul Collopy.  VALUE MODELING FOR TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION , 2002 .

[15]  Kenji Takeuchi,et al.  A Choice Experiment Approach to the Valuation of Mortality , 2005 .

[16]  R. W. Hess,et al.  Aircraft Airframe Cost Estimating Relationships: All Mission Types , 1987 .

[17]  John David Anderson,et al.  Aircraft performance and design , 1998 .

[18]  Paul Collopy,et al.  Value-Driven Design , 2011 .

[19]  Joaquim R. R. A. Martins,et al.  Multidisciplinary design optimization: A survey of architectures , 2013 .

[20]  Erik Daniel Goetzke,et al.  Value-Driven Design of non-commercial systems through bargain modeling , 2015 .

[21]  Dennis M. Buede,et al.  The Engineering Design of Systems: Models and Methods , 1999 .

[22]  John Birkler,et al.  Development and Production Cost Estimating Relationships for Aircraft Turbine Engines , 1982 .

[23]  Kenneth Chelst,et al.  Value-Added Decision Making for Managers , 2011 .

[24]  Paul Collopy.  Value of the Probability of Success , 2008 .