Spacecraft technology portfolio: Probabilistic modeling and implications for responsiveness and schedule slippage

被引:11
作者
Dubos, Gregory F. [1 ]
Saleh, Joseph H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Georgia Inst Technol, Sch Aerosp Engn, Atlanta, GA 30332 USA
关键词
Portfolio; Spacecraft; Schedule; Responsiveness; Probabilistic model; Technology readiness level; Utility; SELECTION; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1016/j.actaastro.2010.10.007
中图分类号
V [航空、航天];
学科分类号
08 ; 0825 ;
摘要
Addressing the challenges of Responsive Space and mitigating the risk of schedule slippage in space programs require a thorough understanding of the various factors driving the development schedule of a space system. The present work contributes theoretical and practical results in this direction. A spacecraft is here conceived of as a technology portfolio. The characteristics of this portfolio are defined as its size (e.g., number of instruments), the technology maturity of each instrument and the resulting Technology Readiness Level (TRL) heterogeneity, and their effects on the delivery schedule of a spacecraft are investigated. Following a brief overview of the concept of R&D portfolio and its relevance to spacecraft design, a probabilistic model of the Time-to-Delivery of a spacecraft is formulated, which includes the development, Integration and Testing, and Shipping phases. The Mean-Time-To-Delivery (MTTD) of the spacecraft is quantified based on the portfolio characteristics, and it is shown that the Mean-Time-To-Delivery (MTTD) of the spacecraft and its schedule risk are significantly impacted by decreasing TRL and increasing portfolio size. Finally, the utility implications of varying the portfolio characteristics are investigated, and "portfolio maps" are provided as guides to help system designers identify appropriate portfolio characteristics when operating in a calendar-based design environment (which is the paradigm shift that space responsiveness introduces). (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1126 / 1146
页数:21
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2001, PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1991, Third Generation RD Managing the Link to Corporate Strategy
  • [3] Archer N. P., 1999, International Journal of Project Management, V17, P207, DOI 10.1016/S0263-7863(98)00032-5
  • [4] BAKER N, 1975, MANAGEMENT SCI, V21
  • [5] Berthouex P.M., 2002, Statistics for environmental engineers, P49
  • [6] Understanding R&D value creation with organizational simulation
    Bodner, Douglas A.
    Rouse, William B.
    [J]. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, 2007, 10 (01) : 64 - 82
  • [7] BRATHWAITE J, 2008, AIAA SPAC 2008 C EXP
  • [8] Value-centric framework and pareto optimality for design and acquisition of communication satellites
    Brathwaite, Joy
    Saleh, Joseph H.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS AND NETWORKING, 2009, 27 (06) : 330 - 348
  • [9] Satellite Reliability: Statistical Data Analysis and Modeling
    Castet, Jean-Francois
    Saleh, Joseph H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SPACECRAFT AND ROCKETS, 2009, 46 (05) : 1065 - 1076
  • [10] CHAPLAIN CT, 2007, GAO07730T