lesson 15: conclusion and capstone · web view2012/12/12 · integral to this process is the...

LOG 211 Supportability Analysis Student Guide

Lesson 15: Conclusion and Capstone

Content

Slide 15-1. Lesson 15: Conclusion and Capstone

January 2013Final v1.2

1 of 39

Supportability Analysis Student Guide

Content

Slide 15-2. Supportability Analysis Life Cycle Management Framework

Supportability is the capability of a total system design to support operations and readiness needs throughout the total life cycle at an affordable cost.

Supportability Analysis identifies and justifies the logistics support requirements (e.g., people, parts, publications, tools, and test equipment) in support of the corrective and preventiveative maintenance tasks identified to maintain a system at the required readiness level.

The Life Cycle Management Framework defines and guides the activities that define system requirements, manage acquisition processes, and conduct the engineering, Supportability and product support analyses required to develop, field and sustain effective, suitable, and affordable systems.

2 of 39 January 2013Final v1.2


Content

Slide 15-3. Course Review


3 of 39


Topic 1: Introduction

Content

Slide 15-4. Topic 1: Introduction



Content

Slide 15-5. Supportability Analysis Life Cycle Framework

The Supportability Analysis Life Cycle Framework encompasses three broad areas:

Language - user requirements, Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs), and Logistics Product Data

Framework - Supportability analyses and the Product Support Package Evaluation - the Supportability test (e.g., M-Demo Evaluation) at

Milestone C that determines whether the program achieves Supportability/Suitability requirements during Development Test & Evaluation (DT&E) and Operational Test & Evaluation (OT&E)


5 of 39


Content

Slide 15-6. ASOE Model is Central

The Affordable System Operational Effectiveness Model (ASOE) balances Design Effectiveness, Product Support Efficiency, and Better Buying Power (BBP) Affordability targets to achieve Mission Effectiveness.

Designing for optimal ASOE requires balancing Mission Effectiveness (i.e., can the system do it) and Life Cycle Cost/Total Ownership Cost (i.e., can the program afford it) and Process Efficiency (i.e., are the processes responsive to the equipment and user needs).



Topic 2: Lesson Reviews

Content

Slide 15-7. Topic 2: Lesson Reviews


7 of 39


Content

Slide 15-8. Lesson 2: Product Supportability Across the Life Cycle

What’s in it for me?

The Life Cycle Management Framework defines and guides the activities that define system requirements, manage acquisition processes, and conduct the engineering, Supportability and product support analyses required to develop, field and sustain effective, suitable, and affordable systems.

The Affordable System Operational Effectiveness Model (ASOE) balances Design Effectiveness, Product Support Efficiency, and Better Buying Power (BBP) Affordability targets to achieve Mission Effectiveness. Integral to this process is the impact of Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) on performance, Supportability, and Affordability, which may account for as much as 60% of a system’s Life Cycle Cost.

The Supportability Analysis process optimizes the system’s R&M characteristics to reduce the need for maintenance and identify the resources and infrastructure required for effective Product Support.


SAE GEIA-STD-0007


Content

Takeaways

Designing for optimal ASOE requires balancing Mission Effectiveness (i.e., can the system do it) and Life Cycle Cost/Total Ownership Cost (i.e., can the program afford it) and Process Efficiency (i.e., are the processes responsive to the equipment and user needs).

The Supportability Analysis Life Cycle Framework encompasses three broad areas: Language, Framework, and Evaluation

MOEs and Logistic Product Data provide the foundational language which enable the LCL and SPRDE to communicate and organically foster a collaborative working relationship.

IPTs are the custodians of the Logistics Product Data and interpret the Supportability Analysis outcomes for major product and Product Support design decisions.


9 of 39


Content

Slide 15-9. Lesson 3: Measures of Effectiveness for Supportability


Measures of Effectiveness (MOE) for Supportability are objective measures of a system’s ability to meet user needs and achieve the right performance and sustainment outcomes over the Life Cycle.

As the system matures, the objectives identified in the early phases of the Life Cycle, are transformed into outcomes through their meeting of Key Performance Parameter (KPP) and Key System Attributes (KSA), and other Technical Performance Measurement (TPM) parameters.

MOEs serve as inputs to the Affordable System Operational Model (ASOE) to drive its trade-off processes. Within that context, MOEs serve the Program Management, Systems Engineering, Test & Evaluation and Life Cycle Logistics Communities as the gauges by which a system’s Operational Effectiveness, Suitability and Affordability are tracked and evaluated.


Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction


Content

Takeaways

An MOE is a mission-oriented qualitative or quantitative measure of operational success closely related to the mission objective or operation being evaluated.

MOEs for Supportability:o Are user definedo Mature through the life cycleo Are used to measure product, program, and process performanceo Translated by the program into KPPs

KPPs/KSAs are MOEs that serve as important criteria to assess whether the design meets user requirements TPM/metrics help users determine whether their needs are met.

Programs use TPMs/metrics to evaluate design maturity and progress.


11 of 39


Content

Slide 15-10. Lesson 4: LPD/Logistics Product Database


Systems Engineering requirements and functional analyses are linked to the Supportability Analysis process through the Logistics Product Database, which in term, provides the information needed to influence the design with respect to the impact of Reliability and Maintainability characteristics on both performance and sustainment.

From the sustainment perspective, the Logistics Product Database is the repository for the design data and the product support data used to conduct the Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) and the Maintenance Task Analysis, which are the foundations of the Product Support Package.

The Logistics Product Database establishes a common “data exchange” for the Systems Engineering and Life Cycle Logistics Communities and enables the collaborative communication of requirements and outcomes.



Content

Takeaways

The OEM must provide error free, SAE GEIA-STD-0007-compliant LPD. The LCL plays an important role in quality assurance by validating, on an

recurring basis, that the LPD is accurate and meets contract requirements.

Validate early and often—errors found late in the life cycle may require costly and time-consuming refinement of analyses.

It is best practice to specify LPD requirements in every contract.


13 of 39


Content

Slide 15-11. Lesson 5: R&M Allocation, Modeling, Prediction, and Analysis


Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) are the primary drivers of Performance, Suitability and Affordability.

The Reliability & Maintainability Allocation, Modeling, Prediction and Analysis process begins with the establishment of the structure by which system level requirements are allocated throughout the levels of indenture.

Modeling and prediction methodologies define and assess the design’s functionality and quantify its expected R&M performance. System analyses track and evaluate the maturity of the design as expressed by measures of Technology Readiness and Reliability Growth.

These tasks establish the baseline for the conduct of other Supportability analyses that assess the impact of R&M on both the design and its Sustainment requirements.



Content

Takeaways

R&M Allocation, Modeling, Prediction and Analysis kicks-off Supportability Analysis and is performed on an ongoing and iterative basis through the phases of the Life Cycle Management Framework.

R&M is a set of disciplined, iterative processes used to allocate requirements, model the system, and predict R&M performance to determine the most effective and affordable design.

Inputs for R&M Analysis include: top tier (KPP/KSAs) requirements and data from other sources, such as field data and similar systems.

Reliability and Maintainability are complementary parameters and inherently allow trades to be made. When it is impossible or impractical to meet a given level of Reliability, the required Availability can still be achieved if the Maintainability can be improved to compensate.

The outputs of R&M Analysis include lower tier requirements at the LRU/SRU levels of indenture and predictions used in subsequent Supportability analyses such as FMECA, FTA, RCM Analysis, LORA, and MTA.


15 of 39


Content

Slide 15-12. Lesson 6: Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA)/

Fault Tree Analaysis (FTA)


Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) and Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) identify the causes of failure, the document the impact of failure on system performance, assess the consequences of failure on safety, and define the potential for failure mitigation.

The FMECA/FTA processes assess the robustness of the design through its identification of Single Points of Failure (SPF), and promote the development of Maintainability design criteria and troubleshooting/maintenance procedures.

Systems Engineers and Life Cycle Logisticians use the FMECA/FTA as a common source for information to guide the design process and enable effective Product Support.

Takeaways

FMECA/FTA address root causes of failures and drive design changes and corrective/preventive maintenance recommendations. Both analyses:

Are conducted across the system life cycle, providing essential design, Reliability, and Maintainability evaluations.

Are evaluated by the LCL, who assists in coordinating resolution of analysis outcomes.



Content

Slide 15-13. Lesson 7: Software Supportability Analysis


Software Supportability Analysis reflects the unique circumstance of developing and maintaining software in the current technological environment where obsolescence drives both system hardware and software requirements, functionality and interoperability. Software is a major driver of system requirements and costs as most systems have some type of embedded software or rely on software for its functionality.

Software Supportability Analysis employs many of the same tools and processes as “Hardware” Supportability Analysis, to include Reliability Modeling Allocation and Prediction, Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) and Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), as well as Reliability Growth.

Current Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) prediction best practices combine hardware and software predictions to determine the total effect of the loss of functionality on performance, sustainment and cost.


17 of 39

SAE GEIA-STD-0007


Content

Takeaways:

Software Supportability Analysis is an iterative process. It is performed through the entire Life Cycle Management Framework.

Software, hardware, and networks are all interconnected. A change to one means a potential change to the rest.

Software is modeled first, creating the CSCIs and RBDs, which are the basis for all software testing and metrics.

Plan for obsolescence. A software life cycle is typically 6-18 months.



Content

Slide 15-14. Lesson 8: Reliability Centered Maintenance Analysis


Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) Analysis is a structured framework for analyzing a system’s functions and potential failure modes to develop a scheduled maintenance plan, balancing Availability and risk in an efficient and cost-effective manner.

RCM uses information identified in the Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) and Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) to define and balance “Condition-based”, “Interval-based”, and “Run-To-Failure” maintenance requirements. The process results the incorporation of revised preventive and corrective maintenance tasks/instructions and frequencies in the Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA).

RCM Analysis combines both Engineering and Sustainment requirements and perspectives to improve Availability, reduce the need for maintenance, and lower costs.


19 of 39


Content

Takeaways

RCM Analysis impacts design effectiveness, mission effectiveness, and design Affordability. RCM Analysis:

Spans the larger framework of R&M, FMECA, MTA, and LORA analyses. Determines maintenance tasks and frequencies for critical failures

identified by the FMECA and FTA. Outcomes serve as input to Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA). The MTA

is the authoritative analysis that consolidates all other analyses that impact maintenance tasks.

Uses FRACAS as a primary input: Failure reporting, analysis, and corrective actions based on CBM, T&E, and field data.



Content

Slide 15-15. Lesson 9: Maintenance Task Analysis


Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA) identifies and details the corrective and preventive maintenance tasks and resources required for system support.

The MTA assesses the system design’s compliance with Supportability issues such as ease of maintenance, accessibility and standardization that may have been established by earlier Systems Engineering analyses. Earlier systems Analyses include Conditioned Based Maintenance Plus (CBM)+, Failure Mode Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA), Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM), and Level Of Repair Analysis.

The detailed procedures directly relate the system’s Reliability & Maintainability characteristics and Supportability to develop maintenance procedures to achieve Availability and Affordability.


21 of 39


Content

Takeaways

Maintenance Task Analysis both populates Logistics Product Data and verifies the accuracy and compliance of that data with the Maintenance Concept and CDD.

For the MTA to be successful, the input data must be accurate and complete. LCLs should work with the IPT to establish approved sources of input data and a configuration management system.

The MTA is significantly interrelated with preceding Supportability Analysis analyses because it ties together design, component, and maintenance task information from R&M Modeling, Prediction, Allocation and Analysis, FMECA, FTA, and RCM Analysis to create supportability strategy that is refined by LORA.

The MTA populates maintenance task information into LPD and evaluates LPD for completeness and accuracy. The MTA also evaluates the supportability strategy indicated through maintenance tasks for compliance with the Maintenance Concept and feasibility within the supportability environment.



Content

Slide 15-16. Lesson 10: Level of Repair Analysis


Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) is conducted to determine the least cost feasible repair level or discard alternative for performing maintenance actions and to drive equipment design in that direction.

The LORA is conducted to reflect maintenance policy and the capabilities of maintenance organizations with respect to the number of maintenance levels, their diagnostic capabilities and the skill sets and skill levels of their staff. LORA uses cost data, and data from Reliability & Maintainability (R&M) analyses to include Reliability Allocation and Prediction, FMECA/FTA, RCM, CBM+, and the detailed procedures of the Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA) to balance Operational Availability and the cost of maintenance.

LORA outputs drive the Product Support Strategy and the Product Support Package by verifying the system’s maintenance requirements and identifying the resources required for effective support.


23 of 39


Content

Takeaways

It is the LCL’s job to implement original maintenance policy, determine the impact of doing so on Availability and Cost, and report findings to appropriate IPTs.

For the LORA to be successful, the input data must be accurate and complete. To avoid errors from manual data entry, Logistics Product Data should be imported using standards based data exchanges, such as SAE GEIA-STD-007, which support exporting and importing data between databases and analytical tools.

The LORA tool provides economically optimal maintenance policy, which is not always consistent with the Maintenance Concept.

The LCL may not update the Logistics Product Data with recommended maintenance policy unless the LCL’s recommendations have been authorized and approved



Content

Slide 15-17. Lesson 11: A Trade-off Analysis


DoD systems must meet user needs, provide a military capability, and be affordable. The Affordable System Operational Effectiveness (ASOE) Model establishes trade spaces that are analyzed and balanced to achieve the Key Performance Parameters (KPP) and Key System Attributes (KSA) that define their boundaries.

Supportability trade-offs address the key relationship of Reliability and Sustainment Cycle Time, and the impact of these parameters on Life Cycle Cost. Other trade-offs such as Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) Analysis, Maintenance Task Analysis (MTA) and Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) address fundamental trades within the Maintenance Concept and the development of the Product Support Package.

Trade-off analyses are linked to requirements. This construct guides the analyses and establishes criteria for the evaluation of results.


25 of 39


Content

Takeaways

A trade-off analysis is about achieving balance among competing priorities to get the best outcome possible. During a trade-off analysis, LCLs are trying to balance requirements and the lowest affordable Life Cycle Costs.

A trade-off analysis best practice is to repurpose existing models, templates, and data (as appropriate) to build in efficiencies and streamline the analysis process

Trade-offs are refined and occur throughout the Life Cycle Management Framework

After a program is fully funded at Milestone C, trade-offs occur at a minimum of every five years for the life of the program unless:o User requirements change significantlyo The product support strategy undergoes a changeo Technology advances dictate a system change

Content



Content

Slide 15-18. Lesson 12: Supportability Design Reviews


Technical Reviews are conducted throughout the Life Cycle to address system planning, development, and Sustainment, as required by DoD Directive 5000.01, the Defense Acquisition System. The reviews address Operational Effectiveness, Suitability, Affordability, Sustainment, and Supportability “throughout the system life cycle.”

Supportability Design Reviews are conducted as part of the Technical Reviews defined in the Systems Engineering Plan (SEP). Specific Supportability Design Review criteria are identified as part of the Design Review process, and are focused on meeting Supportability Objectives as detailed in the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG).

Supportability Design Reviews ascertain whether specific decision criteria have been met from the perspectives of the Program Management, Systems Engineering, and Life Cycle Logistics communities.


27 of 39

Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction


Content

Takeaways

Supportability design reviews ensure traceable requirements flow down to complete an effective, supportable, affordable system.

Supportability design reviews:

Defined as technical reviews that confirm design status between:o Entry Criteriao Exit Criteria

Considered as event-driven at major transition points (e.g., milestones) Used as major opportunities to check Affordability and Supportability Focused on a specific set of questions for each IPT



Content

Slide 15-19. Lesson 13: Evaluate Suitability


Suitability is the degree to which a system can be satisfactorily placed in field use, with consideration given to Reliability, Availability Maintainability, safety, supportability, technical manuals, manpower, training and other factors.

Suitability is principally evaluated through the conduct of the Logistics Demonstration (Log Demo) as part of the Developmental Test and Evaluation (DT&E) and the Initial Operational Test & Evaluation (IOT&E) events.

The Log Demo assesses the adequacy and accuracy of the Product Support Strategy and the Product Support Package and quantifies R&M metrics through the conduct of selected maintenance tasks performed by user personnel in the operational environment.

Given its impact on Operational Effectiveness and Affordability, Suitability is a primary criterion in the Milestone Decision process.


29 of 39


Content

Takeaways

Suitability evaluation is a real world test of system support that ensures the right resources, with the appropriate skill level, to achieve the maintenance task in the time allotted.

Evaluate Suitability through real-world testing of system support

DT&E/Log Demoo Perform Log Demo prior to Milestone Co Reports to the SIPT

IOT&Eo Conducted by outside OT&E agencyo Reports to Congress



Content

Slide 15-20. Lesson 14: Post-Fielding Sustainment Analysis


The Post Fielding Sustainment Analysis (PFSA) uses field data to quantify system’s performance and suitability, and to assess the effectiveness of the Product Support Strategy (PSS) and Product Support Package (PSP) in meeting user requirements.

Program Managers, Systems Engineers and Life Cycle Logisticians use PFSA data in the Sustaining Engineering process to develop Non-Material or Material Solutions to meet user needs, provide a useful capability and ensure Life Cycle Affordability.


31 of 39


Content

Takeaways

The PFSA assesses the effectiveness of the Supportability Strategy and the Product Support infrastructure in the operational environment. The LCL then, in conjunction with others, such as Systems Engineering, participate in the Supportability Analysis process to identify engineering and Product Support changes that provide the needed performance, operational, and Sustainment support.

The LCL uses a PFSA tool to evaluate fielded system data to identify when Availability fails to meet acceptable thresholds or cost exceeds acceptable thresholds.

The LCL analyzes the PFSA tool’s outcomes and draws conclusions about the kinds of Supportability challenges that exist given the maintaining organization’s logistics infrastructure, and then develops solutions to recommend to the maintaining organization.

PFSA outcomes may trigger an iteration of applicable Supportability analyses.

PFSA and Supportability Analysis iterations are significant and traceable inputs to BCA/LCSP. These updates substantiate Sustainment budgets and justify major system modifications. The analyses enable program responsiveness to operational/tactical and doctrinal/policy changes.



Content

Slide 15-21. Supportability Analysis Life Cycle Framework


33 of 39


Content

Slide 15-22. ASOE Model is Central



Topic 3: Just-in-Time Support

Content

Slide 15-23. Topic 3: Just-in-Time Support


35 of 39


Content

Slide 15-24. Capstone CD



Content

Slide 15-25. Market Research Survey of Tools

The LOG 211 Supportability Analysis Capstone CD provides a Microsoft Excel workbook with 22 tabs. Tab 1 is the Legend that provides the instructions that follow. Tab 2 is the Summary worksheet that identifies the terminal learning objectives (TLOs) for this course as column headers. The 21 hyperlinked tools listed down column A are cross-referenced with each TLO. If the cell highlight is blue or has an asterisk in it, that indicates the tool can be used to generate the software analysis related to that TLO. the tool hyperlink, when selected, will jump to the worksheet tab where the following information is compiled, if available:

Name of Tool Who Controls the Tool? Where Can I Find the Tool? Is there a User Group/Online Help? Primary Uses Details on Usage

Notice that the yellow tabs are Government-Owned Tools (GOTs) and green tabs are commercially-own tools (COTs). There are 12 COTs and 9 GOTs. Each tool sheet includes a Back link in the top left corner (i.e., cell A1) which, when selected, returns you to the Summary sheet.


37 of 39


Topic 4: Conclusion

Content

Slide 15-26. Topic 4: Conclusion



Content

Slide 15-27. Congratulations!

Thank you for participating in the LOG 211 Supportability Analysis Course. Congratulations on completing the course!


39 of 39

lesson 15: conclusion and capstone · web view2012/12/12 · integral to this process is the...

Documents