Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Modeling and Simulation in Manufacturing and Defense Systems Acquisition Pathways lo Success Committee on Modeling and Simulation Enhancements for 21 st Century Manufacturing and Acquisition Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences National Research Council NATIONAL RESARCH COUNCIL Washington, D.C.
National Academy Press · 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. · Washington, DC 20418 NOTICE: The project that is the subject ofthis report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn Tom the councils ofthe National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was sponsored by the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office in the U.S. Department of Defense. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. government. International Standard Book Number: 0-309-08482-2 Additional copies ofthis report are available from: National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Box 285 Washington, DC 20055 (800) 624-6242 (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) http://www.nap.edu Available in limited quantities from: Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20418 (202) 334-3505 bmaed~nas.edu Copyright 2002 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America
Natio'~t A~d~ ~ Awes Nati~at Academy ~ ~`nes''ng Ir~i~e Of loci Nati-~t Research Pencil Adders to the Natio* on Science, EtegineerJag, and Medkine fig ·~.,)-- , ..,, ~ The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
COMMITTEE ON MODELING AND SIMULATION ENHANCEMENTS FOR 21ST CENTURY MANUFACTURING AND ACQUISITION PETER E. CASTRO, Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, New York, Chair ERIK ANTONSSON, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena DENIS T. CLEMENTS, GRC International, Vienna, Virginia JAMES E. COOLAHAN, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Laurel, Maryland YU-CHI HO, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts MARY ANN HORTER, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, Fort Worth, Texas PRADEEP K. KHOSLA, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania JAY LEE, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee JOHN L. MITCHINER, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico MIKEL D. PETTY, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia STUART STARR, The Mitre Corporation, McLean, Virginia CHARLES L. WU, Ford Research Laboratory, Dearborn, Michigan BERNARD P. ZEIGLER, University of Arizona, Tucson . PATRICK J. DOYLE, Program Officer IV
BOARD ON MANUFACTURING AND ENGINEERING DESIGN JOSEPH G. WIRTH, Raychem Corporation (retired), Mt. Shasta, California, Chair F. PETER BOER, Tiger Scientific, Inc., Boynton Beach, Florida PAMELA A. DREW, The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington ROBERT EAGAN, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico PAUL B. GERMERAAD, Augirin Systems, Inc., Cupertino, California RICHARD L. KEGG, Milacron, Inc. (retired), Cincinnati, Ohio JAY LEE, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee JAMES MATTICE, Universal Technology Corporation, Dayton, Ohio MICHAEL F. McGRATH, Sarnoff Corporation, Arlington, Virginia MANISH MEHTA, National Center for Manufacturing Sciences, Ann Arbor, Michigan JOE H. MIZE, Oklahoma State University (retired), Stillwater JAMES B. RICE, JR., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge ALFONSO VELOSA III, Gartner, Inc., Portland, Oregon JACK WHITE, Altarum, Ann Arbor, Michigan JOEL SAMUEL YUDKEN, AFL-CIO, Washington, D.C. TONI MARECHAUX, Director y
Preface The goal of virtual analysis over the life cycle of a product or system from "lust to dust" is as lofty as it is difficult to attain. Before any capital expenditure is made, we seek to use modeling and simulation to aid in, among other things, concept formation and evaluation, architecture development, specification, detailed design (of both the product or system and the manufacturing process to create it), risk analysis, provision for support in the field, life-cycle costing, and disposal. Strong progress toward this difficult goal will provide increased effectiveness of the product or system in the field, reduced cost and risk, and reduced time to deploymentthat is, the right product, better, cheaper, faster. The National Research Council's Committee on Modeling and Simulation Enhancements for 21 st Century Manufacturing and Acquisition was formed in response to a request from the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office (DMSO) of the Department of Defense. The committee was asked to do the following: (1) investigate next-generation evolutionary and revolutionary M&S capabilities that will support enhanced defense systems acquisition; (2) identify specific emerging design, testing, and manufacturing process technologies that can be enabled by advanced M&S capabilities; (3) relate these emerging technologies to long-term DOD requirements; (4) assess ongoing efforts to develop advanced M&S capabilities and identify gaps that must be filled to make the emerging technologies a reality; (5) identify lessons learned from industry; and (6) recommend specific government actions to expedite development and to enable maximum DOD and U.S. commercial benefit from these capabilities. Private industry, universities, federally funded research and development centers, government laboratories, and university-affiliated research centers were all represented on the committee. (Biographical sketches of committee members appear in Appendix A). The committee met five times between June 2000 and June 2001 to review previous literature on acquisition-related M&S (see Appendix B), to hear briefings from national experts on relevant topics (see Appendix C), and to discuss and develop their conclusions and recommendations. On the basis of its statement of task, the committee focused on M&S in acquisition and its associated functional areas, especially manufacturing. Such areas as M&S in training and logistics analysis, as well as detailed discussion of systems engineering, were considered as beyond the scope of the study. The committee has identified steps for progress toward widespread, systemic use of modeling and simulation in manufacturing and acquisition vii
of systems on four fronts: (1) enhancement of modeling and simulation technology, (2) enhancement of information technology infrastructure, (3) building experience in the use of modeling and simulation in large-scale enterprises, and (4) addressing cultural changes needed if modeling and simulation are to become truly important enablers for manufacturing and acquisition. Recommended steps involve the federal government, academia, and industry. They must be undertaken simultaneously in all communities for meaningful progress to be realized. Peter E. Castro, Chair Committee on Modeling and Simulation Enhancements for 21 st Century Manufacturing and Acquisition viii
Acknowledgments The Committee on Modeling and Simulation Enhancements for 21st Century Manufacturing and Acquisition would like to thank the following individuals for their presentations to the committee over the course of this study: Major Emily Andrew, USAF, Air Force Electronic Systems Center; Balkrishnan Annigeri, United Technologies Corporation; LTC Eileen Bjorkm an, USAF, Defense Modeling and Simulation Office; Ernie Blood, Caterpillar Corporation; Delores Etter, DOD Director of Defense Research and Engineering; Steve Hall, Lockheed Martin; Walter Hollis, Deputy Under Secretary of the Army for Operations Research; Mike Kamrowski, Raytheon; Stephen Keeler, The Boeing Company; Jim Korris, institute for Creative Technologies, University of Southern California; Matt Landry, Lockheed Martin; Dell Lunceford, Army Modeling and Simulation Office; Charles McLean, National institute of Standards and Technology; William McQuay, U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory; Richard Neal, integrated Manufacturing Technology Initiative; Wayne O'Connor, U.S. Air Force Aeronautical Systems Center; Steve Olson, Concurrent Technologies Corporation; James Poindexter, U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory; Ellen Purdy, U.S. Army Future Combat Systems Program Office; Ric Sylvester, Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition Reform; Steve Wall, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA; Mike Wendel, Coleman Research Corporation; and Randy Zittel, Defense Systems Management College. This committee also thanks LTC Eileen Bjorkman, USAF, Defense Modeling and Simulation Office, and Heikki Joonsar, of the Science Applications International Corporation support staff at the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office, for their support during the study process. This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council's (NRC's) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The contents of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to the thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: IX
Richard L. Engwall, RL Engwall & Associates, Jim Hollenbach, Defense Modeling and Simulation Office (retired), James Mattice, Universal Technologies Corporation, Michael McGrath, Sarnoff Corporation, Stephen B. Moore, Joint Warfighting Center, Katherine L. Morse, SAIC, B. art O. Nnaji, University of Pittsburgh, and Stephen M. Robinson, University of Wisconsin. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Gary L. Hogg of the Industrial Engineering Nepal lenient, Arizona State University. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution. Finally, the committee gratefully acknowledges the support of the staff of the Board on Manufacturing and Engineering Design, including Patrick J. Doyle, program officer, and Toni Marechaux, director. x
Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 INTRODUCTION Modeling and Simulation in Manufacturing and Acquisition, 12 New Challenges for Defense Acquisition, 16 11 2 MODELING AND SIMULATION IN DEFENSE ACQUISITION 29 Simulation-Based Acquisition, 30 Review of Acquisition-Related Studies on Modeling and Simulation, 41 Conclusions, 45 3 LESSONS LEARNED FROM COMMERCIAL MANUFACTURING Modeling and Simulation in Commercial Manufacturing, 48 Integrated Manufacturing Technology Initiative, 52 Conclusions, 60 4 SYSTEMS-OF-SYSTEMS, DISTRIBUTED SIMULATIONS, AND ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS Simulating Complex Systems-of-Systems, 63 Distributed Simulations, 65 Enterprise Systems, 70 Conclusions, 74 5 MODELING AND SIMULATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT TOPICS Modeling Methods, 78 Model Integration, 87 Model Correctness, 93 Standards, 95 Conclusions, 102 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Technology and Research, 105 Infrastructure for Modeling and Simulation, 109 Use of Modeling and Simulation in Acquisition and Manufacturing, 113 Culture and Human Issues, 120 Xl 47 63 77 103
REFERENCES APPENDICES A Biographica] Sketches of Committee Members B Summary of 10 Acquisition-Related Studies on Modeling and Simulation C Authors and Titles of Briefings to the Committee D Acronyms . . X11 127 141 147 175 177
Tables, Figures, and Box TABLES 1 -1 Breakdown of Activities and Phases in the Defense Acquisition Framework, 13 1-2 Long-Term DOD Acquisition Needs, 28 Categories of Recommendations from 10 M&S Simulation-Based Acquisition Studies, 45 3-l IMTI Vision for Product Functions, 55 3-2 IMTI Vision for Process Functions, 57 3-3 M&S Needs for Commercial Manufacturing, 61 4-l Enterprise Modeling and Simulation Functions, 72 FIGURES l - l Processes for an engineering system, 14 1-2 Six interrelated trends likely to affect DOD's acquisition needs, 17 1-3 integrated acquisition environments, 27 2- l Relationship between SBA and other categories of M&S applications, 31 Use of M&S in the acquisition process for the LPD- 17, 34 Planned applications of M&S in the system design and development phase for the Joint Strike Fighter, 35 Future Combat System "V" model, 36 GERAM architectural framework, 74 Levels of architectural scalability, 79 BOX l-l Joint Vision 2010 and Joint Vision 2020, 19 . . . Xi'!