KFUPM, January 2010

Center for Clean WaterAnd Clean Energy at MIT & KFUPM

Department of Mechanical Engineering

KFUPM, January 2010 Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Design Protocols and Risk Management in Complex Projects with Applications to Water Desalination, Clean Water and Clean Energy Systems


MIT

KFUPM

(PI) Prof. WarrenSeering

Prof. DavidWallace

Prof. Maria Yang Dr. Victor Tang Dr. Josef Oehmen

Prof. Anwar KhalilSheikh(ME)

(PI) Prof. Abdel-SalamM. Eleiche (ME)

Prof. Iyad Talal Alzaharnah

(ME)

Prof. AbdulazizBazoune

(ME)

Prof. Mohammed Ben Daya

(SE)

Prof. Muhammad Fahad Al-Salamah

(SE)




Background and Motivation

Background• Engineering design transforms customer needs into physical products or systems• If product or system requires more than a few people to develop, structured processes

should be used to orchestrate work• Large body of research on processes, but in practice, projects laden with inefficiencies• Key decisions made during early phase of system development

– Mistakes very costly

– Ricoh: $35 problem in early phase = $17,000 in mfg = $690,000 at customer (Hamada 96)

• Few risk management methods for early phase of product development

Motivation• Provide framework for utilizing existing and new knowledge bases and methods of

design and risk reduction in the domain of clean water and clean energy




Project initiatives

Technology Readiness

Risk Management

Design Requirements

Integration with Saudi Industry Partners

Educational Impact – Risk Mgmt Laboratory

Links to other KFUPM-MIT Projects

Research areas

Outreach

Education




Activities to date

• Identification of project initiatives• Development of a project Wiki (CMS) on the Internet• Five videoconferences from October to December 2009• Visit by Dr. Josef Oehmen of MIT to KFUPM on 7-18 December 2009

– Seminars by Dr. Oehmen to ME and SE Depts

• Round-table discussions with three SA Industry partners on 10 January 2010




Risk Management in Product Design and Development (PDD)




• Goal– Understanding overall risk in the value chain through factors that can be

addressed in PDD

• Project areas– Considering balancing risks in a portfolio of product development projects

– Improving risk management in PD to reduce risk in down stream processes

Risk Management in Product Design and Development

Early stage design Sales and

marketing

Collaboration with suppliersProduction

ramp up

Product distribution

Risk




Current work: Literature review

• Focus in the areas of

– Risk management in single product design projects

– Risk management of product design project portfolios

– Integrated risk management across different engineering domains (e.g. PD, production, and service)

• ~ 50 papers and books reviewed so far




Summary of Conclusions and Research Gap

• Findings from literature– No design process framework and corresponding methods for risk management

in PD– No comprehensive methods for different phases of risk management process– New ISO31000 important in developing risk management reference processes

• Observations for research– Product development managers have to manage portfolios of PD projects, but

no structured approaches– The integration of risk management and product development practices remains

an important and not sufficiently investigated field of research




Design requirements




Design Requirements

• Design requirements balance vision of stakeholders (users, development team, regulators…).

– Shared understanding of product goals

• Examples– “The plant must operate under wind speeds of X

kmh”– “The laptop must operate after a drop of Y meters”

• Good design requirements difficult to create– Integration of customer/market needs with

engineering considerations– Limited methodologies

• Research areas– Process of formulating design requirements– Categories of risks in requirements– Changes in requirements over time




Strategies for generating design requirements

• Elements of design requirements– Customer and user needs, market data– Engineering characteristics– Informal strategies (interviews, surveys) or structured (QFD)– Different practices at different companies

• Research goals:– Literature review and observations of design requirements in industry/case

studies– Categorization of strategies for design requirement generation– Metrics for design requirement “completeness”– Controlled studies of design teams generating design requirements




Understanding risk in design requirements

• Ways to specify risks in design requirements?– Risks inherent in any design requirement

• Risk of defining a requirement incorrectly• Risk of omitting a design requirement• Risk of not meeting the requirement• Interactions among risks• Others…

– Which are important to evaluate?

• Research goals: – Define categories of risk in design requirement specification– Evaluate design requirements and risks generated in industrial settings– Controlled studies of design teams generating design requirements




Flexibility in specifying design requirements

• Design requirements often change over time– New information during development

• Ideal: design team maintains shared understanding during changes

• What does “flexibility” in design requirements look like?

– Set-based design (Ward, et al 90)

• Research goals– Track how design requirements change over time

• Industry settings• Laboratory environment

– Metrics for “flexibility” in design requirements

Design freedom100%

Time

Knowledge about the design




Technology readiness levels




• Technology Readiness Levels: What is it? Origin? Generic uses?

• The Original Model/Use Description.

• Other Models/Applications.

• Our objectives?

NAS

A’s

TRL

Scal

ewww.wikipedia.com




The TRL: Origin/Primary Purpose/Uses

NASA developed (in early 1990s) a new standard: the Technology Readiness Level or TRL to assess the maturity of evolving technologies (especially related to the sustainable energy technologies).

Origin

Primary Purpose

Definition They are a scale that describes the maturity of a technology with

respect to a particular use- Scale from 1 (least mature) to 9 (most mature).

To help engineers, technology development managers, and researchers make decisions concerning the development and transition of technology.:




Original Model/Use Description

ReferenceReference : :John C. Mankins (Advanced Concepts OfficeJohn C. Mankins (Advanced Concepts Office of Space Access and Technology NASAof Space Access and Technology NASA((

TRL 1 Basic principles observed and reported

TRL 9 Actual system “flight proven” through successful mission operations

The

Trad

ition

al N

ASA

TRL

Leve

lsA Classical Model for a

Technology Product; the Development Generally Includes

Following Successive Stages

‘basic’ research

Focused Technology Development

Technology Development & Demonstration

System Development

NASA’s Description: TRLs represent a systematic metric/measurement system that supports assessments of the maturity of a particular technology and the consistent comparison of maturity between different types of technology.




Other Articulated Models

The U.S. Department of Defense

(DOD) Model

The U.S. Department

of Energy (DOE) Model

Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) model, which consists of three sequential steps:

- Identifying the Critical Technology Elements (CTEs). - Assessing the Technology Readiness Level (TRL). [as an intermediate stage in the technology development process]

- Developing a Technology Maturation Plan (TMP).

The European Space Agency

Model TRL

(N-1

)

TRL

(N)

YES

NO Desc

ripti

on

Requir

em

ents

Veri

fica

tio

n

Via

bili

ty

“Generic Technology Readiness

Assessment Steps”




The Technology Readiness Level Initiative

PublishedApplications in

Technical (technology) Research

• FUSION ENERGY• Plasma and Power Flow in a Reactor• NEXT Ion Propulsion System,

Objectives:: •Developing an understanding through implementing on ongoing selected projects (A preliminary questionnaire has been developed-It has been implemented on some of the ongoing projects from MIT side).

•Developing strategic next steps that might be taken to advance the technology’s readiness, and/or mitigate technology readiness risks.

•The recommendation for advancing technology readiness can be further enhanced by incorporating proven methods for product requirement specification and risk management in product development.

LeGresley et al 2000




Collaboration with other KFUPM researchers

• Preliminary evaluation of metric with two KFUPM-MIT faculty on their projects

– Initial TRL metric adapted from NASA– Prof. Evelyn Wang– Prof. Rohit Karnik

• Initial findings– Different aspects of the same technology may have different TRL levels– Define the end goal of doing the TRL metric




Education : The Quality, Reliability and Risk Management Lab

Goals :

• To establish a state of the art Quality, Reliability and Risk Management lab at KFUPM

• To develop educational modules in the areas of quality, reliability, and maintenance, manufacturing, and risk management.

Objectives of the lab :

• Provide state-of-the-art extensive suite of quality, reliability and risk management software, research documentation and expertise to support the research project

• Enhance the capacity of KFUPM researchers to help their industrial partners and potential clients in terms of quality, reliability and risk management in product development and allied areas in operations of products and systems.




Education: The Quality, Reliability and Risk Management Lab

Objectives, cont• Support teaching activities involving ME and SE departments with respect to relevant

courses and industrial training programs

• Support teaching activities by providing tools to enhance existing and new courses at both ME and SE departments in the area of quality, reliability, manufacturing and maintenance and industrial training programs ‘

• Develop several teaching (learning) modules, that can benefit from the research

outcomes of the project and are within the scope of proposed lab

• Develop two training modules (or short courses) for industrial partners in the area of quality, reliability and risk management in product development and operations management




Engaging Saudi Industrial Partners

• Understand project initiatives in context of real world problems

• The success of most is driven by product innovation, adaptation, and customization

• Representatives of Aramco R&D Center, SABIC and Al-Zamil Group attended the January 10, 2010 Industry Round Table Meeting and met with the KFUPM-MIT team

• Preparing for a Workshop with potential Industrial Partners to be held in March or April




• KFUPM-MIT Engineering Design Roundtable January 10, 2010




Thank you!

KFUPM, January 2010

Documents

Transcript of KFUPM, January 2010