A Design for Six Sigma: A Robust Tool in Systems Engineering Process

While systems engineering has been widely applied to complex system development, some evidences are reported about major budget and schedule overruns in systems engineering applied. On the other hand, many organizations have been deploying Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) to build Six Sigma momentums in the area of design and development for their products and processes. To explore the possibility of having a DFSS complement systems engineering process, this process reviews the systems engineering with their categories of effort and DFSS with its methodologies. A comparison of the systems engineering process and DFSS indicates that DFSS can be a complement to systems engineering for delivering higher quality products to customers faster at a lower cost. We suggest a simplified framework of systems engineering process, that is, PADOV which was derived from the generic systems engineering process which has been applied to the development of T-50 advanced supersonic trainer aircraft by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) with technical assistance of Lockheed Martin. We demonstrated that each phase of PADOV framework is comprehensively matched to the pertinent categories of systems engineering effort from various standards.

[1]  Ricardo Valerdi,et al.  Advancing an Ontology for Systems Engineering to Allow Consistent Measurement , 2006 .

[2]  Gregory H. Watson,et al.  Design for Six Sigma: caveat emptor , 2010 .

[3]  Donna H. Rhodes,et al.  Technical Report Value of Systems Engineering , 2004 .

[4]  Don R. Holcomb.  Design for Six Sigma in Technology and Product Development , 2003 .

[5]  Jai-Hyun Byun,et al.  A Program Level Application of Design for Six Sigma in the Aircraft Industry , 2011 .

[6]  Chi-Hyuck Jun,et al.  Multivariate Process Control Chart for Controlling the False Discovery Rate , 2012 .

[7]  Sarah A. Sheard,et al.  2.5.1 Systems Engineering Standards and Models Compared , 1998 .

[8]  A. T. Bahill,et al.  A road map for implementing systems engineering , 1997 .

[9]  Thomas C. Judd.  Program Level Design for Six Sigma , 2005 .

[10]  R. Andersson,et al.  Similarities and differences between TQM, six sigma and lean , 2006 .

[11]  Torben Hasenkamp,et al.  Engineering Design for Six Sigma—a systematic approach , 2010, Qual. Reliab. Eng. Int..

[12]  Joseph E. Kasser,et al.  Seven systems engineering myths and the corresponding realities , 2010 .

[13]  Kai Yang,et al.  Design for Six Sigma , 2005 .

[14]  Jiju Antony,et al.  Design for six sigma: a breakthrough business improvement strategy for achieving competitive advantage , 2002 .

[15]  Peter L. Jackson,et al.  Systems engineering metrics and applications in product development: A critical literature review and agenda for further research , 2008 .

[16]  Muhammad Azam,et al.  Tightened-Normal-Tightened Group Acceptance Sampling Plan for Assuring Percentile Life , 2012 .

[17]  Nathan R. Soderborg,et al.  Design for Six Sigma at Ford , 2004 .

[18]  Geoff Tennant.  Design for Six Sigma: Launching New Products and Services Without Failure , 2002 .

[19]  Kai Yang,et al.  Design for Six Sigma : A Roadmap for Product Development , 2003 .

[20]  Dean O. McFarren.  Six Sigma: The Breakthrough Management Strategy Revolutionizing the World's Top Corporations , 2000 .

[21]  Yao-Wen Hsu,et al.  Research on the correlation between Design for Six Sigma implementation activity levels, new product development strategies and new product development performance in Taiwan's high-tech manufacturers , 2010 .

[22]  Mohamed Gamal Aboelmaged,et al.  Six Sigma quality: a structured review and implications for future research , 2010 .

[23]  Sung H. Park,et al.  Six Sigma for quality and productivity promotion , 2003 .