Introduction to Systems Engineering Assignment

EMGT 610. Introduction to Systems Engineering Assignment 2

1. Why do so many new complex system developments incur large risks by choosing to apply immature technology?  Give an example of where and how such choices paid off and one where they did not.

New complex system developments opt for promising, but immature technology. However, immature and unproven technologies are inherently risky since they may be subject to unforeseen obstacles to developments leading to significant schedule delays and cost overruns (Crowder et al., 2016). The result could be infrequent and large increases in deployed capability. However, there are times when the application of immature technology pays off enormously giving the developer a highly competitive advantage of early adoption of the technology by consumers. The untested and immature technology is not thoroughly researched, which could lead to complications in its utilization and ultimate success of the product. Such risk is subject to full analysis before the systems engineer can decide to apply the technology to the new complex system.

Risks for choosing to apply immature technology for new complex system developments stem from unarticulated or unrealistic project goals, badly defined system requirements, poor project management, and poor reporting of the project’s status. Commercial pressures and the inability to handle the complexity of the project may also lead to the failure of the project. The new complex system may fail partially or completely to meet all their requirements, such as quality, schedule, cost, or requirements objectives (Chang, 2016).

A case of a new complex system development that was a success from using immature technology is the use of Bluetooth technology in vehicles. The first Bluetooth technology to feature in automobiles was developed by Chrysler automotive maker in 2001. The company factory-installed Bluetooth for hands-free calls and to send digital music files to the vehicle’s stereo system. The technology avoided drivers the hassle of handling their phones while driving by keeping their hands on the wheel rather than on the dial pad. At the time, Bluetooth technology was still in its infancy and had not been entirely implemented in automobiles.

Chrysler reaped the benefits of the immature technology with early investment by taking the risk and seeing the reward. Since then, the technology has grown and Bluetooth is featured on every car produced today, not only the upper-end vehicles, but even the most affordable ones, for example, Ford Focus and Nissan Sentra. As states and different countries pass the hands-free mobile phone laws continue to increase the utilization of the then immature technology. Bluetooth allows devices at a range of 33 feet to connect without wires and for vehicles, the technology is mounted on the driver-side visor or the steering wheel.

An immature technology, on the other hand, that did not pay off was Google’s augmented reality technology on Magic Leap One, the head mounted virtual retinal display gadget. The technology was meant to superimpose 3D computer-generated imagery over real world objects. The technology, however, failed due to lack of focus in creating what the manufacturing company termed the Magicverse (i.e., a spatial information layer for the real world). The company sought to make a gadget that could attach different kinds of data to real-world objects. The product projected a digital light field into the consumer’s eye making them see the world in augmented reality. A lack of focus made it impossible to sell the developer hardware since developers were confused whether to buy the gadget for gaming machines or as an enterprise computing tool. The technology was also expensive and consumers thought the product could be phased out within a few years making it an unworthy investment.

• The personal laptop computer is a product that has proven to be highly reliable in spite of the fact that it has many interfaces, is operated by a variety of people, operates nearly continuously, and includes a number of internal moving parts (e.g., CD/DVD drive, hard drive). It is a portable device that operates in a wide range of environments (temperature, shock, vibration, etc.). List six design features or characteristics that contribute to the laptop reliability. For each item in your list, estimate the contributions this item has on the overall computer cost. A ranking of high, medium, and low is sufficient.

One of the most essential criteria for choosing a technology gadget is its reliability. A consumer wants to buy a device that will last long and would not bother them with much maintenance. Reliability also involves the product company’s customer support and service after one has purchased the gadget. The personal laptop computer is an example of a product that consumers look for reliability when purchasing given the many laptop brands available on the market (Chang, 2016). Since brands are constantly improving specifications and offering them at lower prices, reliability becomes a key issue.

The most reliable laptop brands are consistently high-quality with minimal faults or breakdowns. Such products have comprehensive warranty which can be extended to more years. Further, the consumer gets chat support and lower service fee for any accidental damages to the product or for its accessories, such as battery and chargers. With laptop reliability, repairs should also be inexpensive and fast where the consumer ships the product to the company customer care and is returned as soon as possible. Price should also be an issue and if a product is priced at premium, it should offer distinctive and superior specifications. Its operating system should also be compatible with other others.

Therefore, the six major design characteristics or features that contribute to a laptop reliability include quality, performance, battery life, cooling functions, size and weight, and screen size. According to pricing, performance and quality rank high on the computer cost while size and weight and battery life are medium in rank to the overall computer cost (Chang, 2016). The characteristics ranking low on the cost of the gadget include the screen size and cooling functions.

The performance of a laptop computer lies on its processor type and speed. The processor determines the speed the laptop operates at the number of tasks it can discharge simultaneously. Processors, such as the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3970X is quite expensive but offer up to 90% faster performance over products in the same class. Others, for example, Intel Dual-Core are cheaper and their reliability is lower. With increasing quality, speed, and type of processor comes more cost.

The overall size and weight of the laptop computer is a characteristic that some consumer consider when choosing a device. It does not have much influence on the cost of the product but ranks high on the preference of the buyer. Most laptops are standard in size and are not upgradable. Quality, on the other hand, is a crucial characteristic that every consumer looks at when purchasing a laptop computer. Has the quality and size of the laptop increases, so does its price.

Battery life is a critical reliability characteristic to consider when buying a laptop since battery power determines how long one would use the device without connecting it to a charger. The screen size does not impact its pricing, but is a reliable characteristic that consumer consider depending on what they want to use the device for. Although the screen size makes a difference in the power consumption of the laptop computer, the device is fitted with functions to reduce the brightness of the screen making it a lesser determinant to the cost of the device (Kossiakoff, & Sweet, 2003).

The laptop’s cooling system involves the gadget’s components and compact parts that generate heat during use and is connected to the hard disk, video card, and CPU. The entire cooling system is important to the functionality and reliability of the laptop because no consumer prefers a device that heats up easily.

• Test failures can be caused by many factors.  Describe three factors, how they can occur, and what steps you would take before, during, and after the test to be able to quickly diagnose the actual cause of the failure. Provide specific examples to support your points – no vague generalizations, please.

System failure is a core idea in engineering practice and engineering ethics. Systems engineers dedicate significant resources in ensuring that products do not fail and progress is made in the development of methods and tool to avert failure (Chang, 2016). Failure refers to the termination of a system’s ability to perform the intended function. It leads to unwanted outcomes that should be corrected or avoided with the best resources provided by engineering knowledge. Despite the wealth of knowledge and experience systems engineering may have, the possibility of failure cannot be ruled out with certainty. Failure of systems helps engineers to alter the product to correct any defects that may stem from quality, human error, and design issues. To ascertain whether failure has occurred, the systems engineer must define performance parameters for all the function, acceptance limits, and target levels.

Test failures in systems engineering emanate from different factors and reasons. Some of the factors leading to test failures include human error, quality, and design defects. Human error is a function of the end user or operator of the system when put in use. It is preventable, however, by ensuring that the systems operator follows and understands the procedural steps of operating the system. When testing the system, the user needs to follow the procedural steps properly and take the necessary action to document any case that requires review (Kossiakoff, & Sweet, 2003). Once the test is complete and the failure identified, it is crucial to review the documentation made during the test process to ascertain if human error was the cause. Human error in failure anticipation has been critical in maintaining systems reliability due to the deemphasis on engineering judgment and experience.

Chang (2016) assert that design inadequacy and issues can also lead to test failure of a system. Design inadequacy is evident in failures that originate from the construction phase of the system where unauthorized changes, poor coordination, and procedural inadequacies from design lead to failures when testing the system. These defects make the system inconvenient to utilize, therefore, hampering the user’s experience with the system. Compatibility testing of a product on applications, such as operating systems, browsers, and hardware may be done to note such failure issues. The system engineer or developer will conduct an inspection to pinpoint any design flaws or characteristics. The system is then monitored to ascertain and assess how the defects react to the testing conditions. Documentation of the noted defects ensues where Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) is conducted to isolate the design defects for the appropriate action to be done to eliminate or minimize the failures (Kossiakoff, & Sweet, 2003).

Quality, on the other hand, involves testing of materials used in complex systems as well as the actual test equipment. The quality of testing materials can indicate the test failures and require thorough investigation when perceived failures occur. Before the testing process can commence, the testing equipment and complex systems are examined to ensure that it is free from flaws or defects originating from the materials that make the system. The testing process should involve monitoring of the test equipment and system while after the test the systems engineer notes if there are any defects in quality of the system to ensure a proper diagnosis of the problem (Kossiakoff, & Sweet, 2003).

• Because complex systems contain a large number of subsystems, components, and parts, it is usually necessary to obtain a significant number of them from outside subcontractors and vendors. In many cases, it is possible to make these items either in-house or procure them elsewhere. Both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. Discuss the main criteria that are involved in deciding which approach is best in a given case. Provide specific examples to buttress your points.

Since complex systems have vast subsystems, components, and parts, procuring them from different subcontractors and vendors requires some criteria. It is important to consider every aspect of their advantages and drawbacks to ascertain the practice that suits one’s situation. First, in-house production of these components, subsystems, and parts has some inherent advantages. These include quality control where when a firm produces subsystems and components in their premises, they have the benefit of oversight over the production process (Kossiakoff, & Sweet, 2003). Further, they can ensure that the best level of quality control is observed and implemented to the manufacturer’s standards. It becomes easier to ensure that the components on design follow the exact same quality levels and standards suitable for the complex system.

Additionally, in-house production ensures that issues, such as integration or design issues are addressed immediately and resolved to make sure that large quantities of faulty products are not made. As such, the company can avoid getting stuck with large quantities of incompatible and faulty products. Another benefit of in-house production is cost cutting, which entails production costs and supplier profits. Making product components in the company premises ensures that the firm eliminates the delivery expenses, supplier profit upcharge, and credit fees that suppliers could charge. It also minimizes the production costs by direct material purchases from source. The drawbacks of producing components in-house include having to deal with the issue of producing so many products to meet the financial profits and targets while paying for different costs, such as property taxes, insurance, employee wages, equipment, and utilities (Chang, 2016).

Procuring products elsewhere presents different benefits and downsides. Producing products elsewhere could include outsourcing from various suppliers, which allows the company to spread the overhead costs among different individuals. With in-house production, there is no room for spreading the overhead costs incurred, which requires more production to cover costs with sales and unit costs to maintain the set profit margins. With in-house production, issues arise with personnel when not adequately trained to possess the right level of expertise. As such, the company would not realize the gains of in-house production (Crowder et al., 2016). Additionally, the time the company would spend correcting the issue impacts the production process.

Procuring products elsewhere or outsourcing presents a competitive advantage to a manufacturer of complex systems. For example, manufacturers of microprocessors understand that making smaller geometrics impacts the performance of the product. Companies outsource the manufacture of microprocessors to firms with better expertise and technology. The company can then focus on producing other parts of the complex system that they have a competitive advantage by outsourcing time-consuming processes to other companies (Kossiakoff, & Sweet, 2003).

The drawbacks of outsourcing are evident when the company has some secrets that they do not want competitors to know. Companies, such as Coca-Cola hold their secret formula to Coke and cannot outsource the production of the Coke syrup just to hold on to the competitive advantage it provides the company. Outsourcing of the production of components of complex systems to external companies provide the firm with improved workflow and business processes as it gets to concentrate on what it is good at while leaving other experts to work on the components it cannot manufacture cheaply. The human resources are also provided with flexibility to focus on what they are best at while the internal staff get to focus on the most important areas of business (Chang, 2016).

• An effective logistic support system is an essential part of successful system operational performance. While the support system is “outside” of the delivered system, discuss why the systems engineer should be involved in the design and definition of the support system. Discuss the functions of some of the characteristics that must be considered, such as the supply chain, spare parts, replaceable part level, training and documentation.

Systems engineers are involved in the design and definition of the logistic support system due to their unique understanding of the entire system. The logistic support system, being an important component of a successful system operational performance, is responsible for the repair of the system when a system of the installed base fails (Chang, 2016). Due to the high-downtime costs for capital goods, systems engineers repair the broken system by replacing any failed component from the system using spare parts. This makes the system operational within a short span of time. As such, systems engineers shape the design and definition of the support system to support the overall effectiveness of the logistic support system. The crucial characteristics of the logistic support system that require a systems engineer’s input include training and documentation, spare parts, and the supply chain.

Supply chain is a critical component of the logistic support system and the actual delivered system. Logistic support involves a complex of measures from design, development of products, material and technical means and services, identification of consumer needs, the repair, operation control, maintenance, purchase, supply, and storage of products (Kossiakoff, & Sweet, 2003). Supply chain is, thus, crucial in these processes since it involves a network between the manufacturer and suppliers. Supply chain is a critical process for it lowers costs and hasten the production cycle. In this case, systems engineers are engaged in the delivered system’s actual design processes and phases, and, as such, provide insight regarding what is most compatible with the system for the production and maintenance of the complex system. Systems engineers also use their extensive knowledge of the application and operation of the complex system to provide insight about the best techniques for delivery to the consumer.

Spare parts, on the other hand, are an important characteristic of the logistic support system for which systems engineers provide input and insight on design implementation. Spare parts help maintain and keep a complex system in operation. Systems engineers do spare parts management when they design the complex system and its support system to avert the issue of stocking expensive spare parts. Systems engineers ensure that the system’s spare parts are available and well-designed, they eliminate the need for the consumer to have a stockpile of expensive inventories (Chang, 2016). They emphasize a just in time management of the system’s spare parts to ensure that they are readily available for users. As such, they take part in planning and forecasting the timeline before the system could require spare parts.

Training and documentation form the other important feature of the logistic support system. Training helps personnel to get knowledge to perform specific maintenance and repairs to the complex system to ensure it works smoothly and at maximum efficiency (Kossiakoff, & Sweet, 2003). Documentation helps establish the operational and training protocols and guidelines for the complex system. It is utilized in all procedures of the operations, maintenance, and production of the system, as well as in all the processes of the system performance. Systems engineers play a critical part in developing these materials and taking them through the maintenance and testing phases of the complex system. They also offer consultation on how to manage and utilize the complex systems and related resources to end users.

References

Chang, C. M. (2016). Engineering management: Meeting the global challenges (2nd ed.). CRC   Press.

Crowder, J, A., Carbone, J. N., & Demijohn, R. (2016). Multidisciplinary systems engineering:    Architecting the design process. Springer.

Kossiakoff, A., & Sweet, W. N. (2003). Systems engineering, principles and practice. John          Wiley & Sons, Inc.