Search Results

Tradespace exploration (TSE) describes the activity occurring early in the design process through which stakeholders explore a broad solution space in search of more-optimal alternatives. In doing so, these stakeholders attempt to maximize the utility inherent in the chosen solution while understanding the tradeoffs and compromises that may be required to find an acceptable solution. In the field of vehicle design, tradespaces are often comprised of vast amounts of alternatives which increases the complexity of the decision-making process. Additionally, the number of stakeholders has grown, as decision-makers seek to include more variety in both perspectives and expertise. As such, decision-making stakeholders can often find themselves working at odds and attempting to maximize vastly different objectives in the process. One way to rectify these contrasting viewpoints can be to intentionally introduce a group framing prior to the start of decision making.

Tradespace analysis is used to define the characteristics of the solution space for a vehicle design problem enabling decision-makers (DMs) to evaluate the risk-benefit posture of a vehicle design program. The tradespace itself is defined by a set of functional objectives defined by vehicle simulations and evaluating the performance of individual design solutions that are modeled by a set of input variables. Of special interest are efficient design solutions because their perfomance is Pareto meaning that none of their functional objective values can be improved without decaying the value of another objective. The functional objectives are derived from a combination of simulations to determine vehicle performance metrics and direct calculations using vehicle characteristics. The vehicle characteristics represent vendor specifications of vehicle subsystems representing various technologies.

The complete lifecycle of complex systems, such as ground vehicles, consists of multiple phases including design, manufacturing, operation and sustainment (O&S) and finally disposal. For many systems, the majority of the lifecycle costs are incurred during the operation and sustainment phase, specifically in the form of uncertain maintenance costs. Testing and analysis during the design phase, including reliability and supportability analysis, can have a major influence on costs during the O&S phase. However, the cost of the analysis itself must be reconciled with the expected benefits of the reduction in uncertainty. In this paper, we quantify the value of performing the tests and analyses in the design phase by treating it as imperfect information obtained to better estimate uncertain maintenance costs.