请选择 进入手机版 | 继续访问电脑版

CCOSE论坛

 找回密码
 立即注册
查看: 824|回复: 1

The Art and Science of Systems Engineering [NASA]

[复制链接]

400

主题

572

帖子

2139

积分

论坛元老

Rank: 7Rank: 7Rank: 7

积分
2139
发表于 2019-5-12 11:52:21 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式


The Art and Science of SystemsEngineering
The Scope of Systems EngineeringThe Personal Characteristics of Good Systems Engineer Summary
This  work  culminates  years  of  experience  in  systems engineering  and  focused  discussions  among  NASA  leadership,  systems  engineers,  and  systems  engineering  trainers  across  the  Agency.  One  consistent  theme  in  these  experiences  and  discussions  is  that NASA  uses  many  definitions  and  descriptions  of  systems  engineering.  We  use  the  terms  and  job titles  of  chief  engineer,  mission  systems  engineer,  systems  engineering  and  integration  manager,  system  architect,  vehicle  integration,  and  so  on  for  various  pieces  of  the  complete  systems  engineering  function. We need to agree on a common understandingof systems engineering. In  addition, no matterhow we divide the roles and responsibilities among people, we  must ensure that those roles and responsibilitiesare clear and executed as a functional  whole.  Our objectives  are  to  provide  a  clear definition  of  systems  engineering,  describe  the  highly"effective  behavioral  characteristics  of  our  best  systems  engineers and make explicit the expectations ofsystems engineers at NASA.
Systems  engineering  is  both an  art  and a  science.  We  can  compare  systems  engineering  to  an  orchestra  and  its ability  to  perform  a  symphony.  Most  people  understand  what  music  is,  but not  everyone  can  play  an instrument.  Each  instrument requires a different level of expertiseand skill. Some musicians spend  their entirecareers mastering a single instrument, which is good because each one  needs  to  be  played  well.  But sophisticated  music  involves  many  different  instruments played in unison. Depending on howwell they come together, they  may producebeautiful music or a terrible cacophony.
We can think of a symphony as asystem. The musicians apply the science of  music:  they  follow  the  process  of  translating  notes  on  a  page  to play  their  instruments. But an orchestra conductor, a maestro,must lead them to connect the  process ofplaying to the art of creating great music. Maestros do a lot more than  just keep time They:
*  Systems  engineering  is  a  critical  core  competency  for  successful  NASA  missions.  This  paper summarizes the collective wisdom of someof NASA’s best technical minds on the  subject. So here the word “we” represents all contributorsto this effort: Michael Bay, Bill  Gerstenmaier,  Mike  Griffin,  Jack  Knight,  Wiley  Larson,  Ken  Ledbetter,  Gentry  Lee,  Michael Menzel, Brian Muirhead, John Muratore,Bob Ryan, Mike Ryschkewitsch, Dawn  Schaible,  Chris  Scolese,  and  Chris  Williams.  Among  them,  they  have  more  than  390  years—almost four centuries—of experience in aerospaceand systems engineering.
1/18/09 1
file:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image001.pngfile:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image002.png
THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

  • Know and understand music—such     matters as pitch, rhythm, dynamics,  and sonic qualities—as well as the capabilities     of various instruments and  musicians
  • Are necessary once the orchestra     reaches a certain size and complexity
  • Have typically mastered one or     more musical instruments
  • May be composers
  • Select and shape the music that     an orchestra plays
  • Interpret a composer’s music     in light of the audience
  • Strive to maintain the integrity     of the composer"s intentions
  • Organize and lead the musicians     
  • Are responsible for the success     of the performance
The systemsengineer is like the maestro, who knows what the music should sound  like (the look and function of a design) and hasthe skills to lead a team in achieving  the desired sound (meeting the system requirements).Systems engineers:

  • Understand the fundamentals of     mathematics, physics, and other pertinent  sciences, as well as the capabilities of various     people and disciplines
  • Have mastered a technical discipline     and learned multiple disciplines
  • Must understand the end game     and overall objectives of the endeavor
  • Create a vision and approach     for attaining the objectives
  • May be architects or designers     
  • Select and shape the technical     issues to be addressed by multidisciplinary  teams
  • Must often interpret and communicate     objectives, requirements, system  
architecture, and design

  • Are responsible for the design’s     technical integrity
  • Organize and lead multidisciplinary     teams
  • Are  responsible  for  the  successful  delivery  of  a  complex product or service
The  similarities  between  maestros  and  systems engineers  are  useful  in  describing  the  latters’  desired  behavioral characteristics and capabilities.
A great systems
completely understands and applies the art of leadership and has theexperience and scar tissue from trying to earn the badge of leader from his or herteam.
Harold Bell NASA Headquarters
file:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image003.png
Systems engineering is the artand science of developing an operable system  that  meets  requirements  within  imposed  constraints.  This  definition  is  independent  of  scale,  but  our discussion  here  focuses  on  developing  complex  systems, such as aircraft, spacecraft, power plants,and computer networks.
Systems  engineering  is  holistic  and  integrative.  It  incorporates  and  balances  the contributions of structural, mechanical, electrical,software, systems safety, and  power  engineers,  plus  many  other,  to  produce  a  coherent  whole.  Systems  engineering  is  about  tradeoffs  and  compromises,  about  generalists  rather  than  specialists.
1/18/09 2
engineer
THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
Systems engineering is not onlyabout the details of requirements and interfaces  among  subsystems.  Such  details  are  important,  of  course,  in  the  same  way  that accurate  accounting  is  important  to  an  organization’s  chief  financial  officer.  But  accurate accounting does not distinguish betweena good financial plan and a bad  one, norhelp to make a bad one better. Similarly, accurate control of interfaces and  requirements  is  necessary  to  good systems  engineering,  but  no  amount  of  care in  such  matters  can  make  a  poor  design  concept  better.  Systems  engineering  is  first  and  foremost  about  getting  the  right  design—and  then  about  maintaining  and  enhancing  its  technical  integrity,  as  well as  managing  complexity  with  good  processes to get the design right. We define interfacesin a system design to minimize  unintended  interactions  and  simplify  development  and  operations—and  then  we document  and  control  the  design.  Neither  the  world’s  greatest  design,  poorly  implemented—nor a poor design, brilliantly implemented—isworth having.
The  principles  of  systems  engineering  apply  at  all  levels.  For  example,  engineers  who  are developing  an  avionics  system  must  practice  creative  design  and interface definition to achieve their goals.Similar activities are essential to the  architecture,  design,  and  development  of  elements  and  subsystems  across  the  broad spectrum of NASA developments. But for theremainder of this discussion,  we  use  the term  “systems  engineering”  in  the  context  of  complex,  multidisciplinary system definition, development,and operation.
In  his  2007  presentation,  “Systems  Engineering  and  the ‘Two  Cultures’  of  Engineering,”  Mike  Griffin  describes  how  the complexities  of  today’s  aerospace  systems and the ways they fail have led to branchingwithin the industry. For our  purpose,  we  divide  systems  engineering  into  technical  leadership  and  its ally,  systems management.
file:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image004.png

  • Technical leadership focuses     on a system’s technical  design and technical     integrity throughout its lifecycle
  • Systems  management  focuses  on  managing  the  complexity  associated  with  having  many  technical  disciplines, multiple organizations, and hundreds     or  thousands  of  people  engaged  in  a  highly  technical  activity
Once a credibledesign and architecture are established, the systems engineer’s job is tomaintain technical integrity throughout the complex system’s very rigorous andchallenging lifecycle phases.
Robert Ryan, Marshall Space FlightCenter
Technical leadership, the artof systems engineering, balances broad technical  domain knowledge, engineering instinct, problemsolving, creativity, leadership,  and  communication  to  develop  new  missions  and  systems. It  is  the  system’s  complexity, and severity of its constraints—notjust its size—that drives the need  for systemsengineering.
NASA systems are often large andcomplex, so they require systems engineers  to work in teams and with technical and other professionalexperts to maintain and  enhance the system’stechnical integrity. The creativity and knowledge of all of the  people involved must be brought to bear to achievesuccess. Thus leadership and  communications skills are often as important astechnical acumen and creativity.  This partof systems engineering is about doing the job right.
1/18/09 3
THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
For  large  complex  systems,  there  are  literally  millions  of  ways to  fail  to meet  objectives, even after we have defined the “rightsystem.” It is crucial to work all the  details  completely  and  consistently  and  ensure  that  the  designs  and  technical  activities of all the people and organizationsremain coordinated—art is not enough.
Systems  management  is  the  science  of  systems  engineering. Its focus is on rigorously and efficiently managing  the  development  and  operation  of  complex  systems.  Effective  systems  management  requires  applying  a  systematic,  disciplined  engineering approach that is quantifiable, recursive, repeatable, and demonstrable. Here the emphasisis
on  organizational  skills,  processes,  and  persistence.  Process  definition  and  control  are  essential  to  effective,  efficient,  and  consistent  implementation.  They  demand  a  clear understanding  and  communication  of  the  objectives,  and  vigilance  in  making sure that all tasks directly support theobjectives.
Systems  management  applies  to  developing,  operating,  and  maintaining  integrated systems throughout a project or program’slifecycle, which may extend  for decades.Since the lifecycle may exceed the memory of the individuals involved  in the development, it is critical to documentthe essential information.
To succeed, we must blend technicalleadership and systems management into  complete systems engineering. Anything less resultsin systems not worth having  or that failto function or perform.
The Scope of Systems Engineering
Since  the  late  1980’s,  many  aerospace#related  government  and  industry  organizations have moved from a hard#core, technicalleadership culture (the art)  to one of systemsmanagement (the science). History has shown that many projects  dominated  by  only one  of  these  cultures  suffer  significant  ill  consequences. Organizations  that  focus  mainly  on  systems  management  often  create  products  that fail to meet stakeholder objectives or arenot cost effective. The process often  becomes an end unto itself, and we experience “processparalysis.” Organizations  that  focus  solely  on  technical  issues  often  create  products  or  services  that  are  inoperable,  or  suffer  from  lack  of coordination  and  become  too  expensive  or  belated to be useful.
To achieve mission success, wemust identify and develop systems engineers  that are highly competent in both technical leadershipand systems management.  That is why we focuson the complete systems engineer, who embodies the art and science  of  systems  engineering  across  all  phases  of  aerospace  missions—a  type  reflected  in  Figure  1.  In  any  project,  it  is  critical  that  systems  engineering  be  performed well during all lifecycle phases. Thescope of systems engineering and  the associatedroles and responsibilities of a systems engineer on a project are often  negotiated by the project manager and the systemsengineer. The scope of systems  
1/18/09 4
file:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image005.png
Systemsmanagement provides a framework for problem solving...creative problem solvingfor complex systems.
Dinesh Verma, Stevens Institute ofTechnology
One of thebiggest challenges for a systems engineer of a large complex project is to“bring order from chaos.”
Chris Hardcastle, Systems Engineeringand Integration Manager, NASA’s Constellation Program, Johnson Space Center
THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
engineering and the activitiesfor which the systems engineer is both responsible  and accountable should be understood and documentedearly in the project.
Figure 1. The Scope of Systems Engineering. Systems engineers often focuson one lifecycle phase like architecture and design versus development oroperations, but good systems engineers have knowledge of and experience in allphases.
Here  we  describe  the  characteristics,  some  innate  and  others  that  we can  develop,  that  enable select  people  to  “systems  engineer”  complex  aerospace  missions and systems—to design, develop, and operatethem. Then, we focus on  how to further developNASA’s systems engineers to help them deal better with  the complexities of sophisticated missions andsystems.
The Personal Characteristics ofGood Systems Engineers
Figure 2 depicts the personal behavioralcharacteristics of  effective systems engineers.
Intellectual  curiosity.  Perhaps  the  most  important
personal  characteristic  of  successful  systems  engineers  is
intellectual  curiosity.  People  who  prefer  boundaries  around  their work to be comfortable, know what they know,and enjoy
a  focused  domain  may  want  to consider  another  occupation.
Systems  engineers  continually  try  to  understand  the  what,
why,  and  how  of  their  jobs,  as  well as  other  disciplines  and  situations that other people face. They are alwaysencountering new technologies,  ideas, andchallenges, so they must feel comfortable with perpetual learning.
1/18/09 5
file:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image006.pngfile:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image007.png
People who have“systems engineer” in their title, regardless of the modifiers —project,program, flight system, and so on—are responsible for everything.
Gentry Lee, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
file:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image008.png
Figure 2. Characteristics of a Good Systems Engineer. The characteristics are shownin decreasing priority from top to bottom. Some of them are innate, whereasothers can be learned and honed.
Ability to see the big picture. Good systemsengineers maintain a big"picture  perspective.  They  understand  that  their  role,  though  always  significant,  changes  throughout a project’s lifecycle. At any pointin the lifecycle the systems engineer  must  be fully  cognizant  of  what has  been  done,  what  is necessary,  and  what  remains to be done. Each phase has a differentemphasis:  

  • Concept—mission and systems architecture,     design, concept of operations,  and trade     studies
  • Development—maintaining  technical  integrity  throughout  all  lifecycle  phases: preliminary design review, critical     design review, verification,  validation, and launch
  • Operations—making sure that the     project meets mission requirements and  maintains technical integrity
Systems engineers  pay  particular  attention  to  verification  and  validation.  Verification  answers  the  question:  “Did  we build  our  system  right?”  If  we  are  successful, it proves our product meets the requirements.We emphasize the hard# earned lesson, “Test like you fly, fly like you test.” Validation,on the other hand,  answers  the  question:  “Did  we build  the  right  system?”  If  we  are  successful,  the  
1/18/096
THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
system does what it is supposedto do, which often goes well beyond just meeting  requirements  
Good  systems  engineers  are  able  to “translate”  for  scientists,  developers,  operators,  and  other  stakeholders.  For  example,  “Discover  and  understand  the  relationship  between  newborn  stars  and  cores  of  molecular clouds,”  is  meaningful to a scientist. But developers and operatorswould better understand  and use this version:“Observe 1,000 stars over two years, with a repeat cycle of  once every five months, using each of the fourpayload instruments.” The systems  engineer that knows the project’s objectives, helpsdetermine how to meet them,  and maintainsthe system’s technical integrity throughout its lifecycle has a good  chance  of  succeeding.  A  corollary  is  to  check  everyone"s  understanding  of  each other to make sure the team truly IS on thesame page.
Ability  to  make system"wide  connections.  First#rate  systems  engineers  understand the connections among all elementsof a mission or system. They must  often  help  individuals  on  the  team  see  how their  systems  and  related  decisions  connect  to  the  bigger  picture  and  affect  mission  success.  The  Chandra  X#ray  Observatory  offers  a  practical  example  of  these  connections.  The  star  tracker’s  designer  must  understand  that  the  star  tracker  is  part of  an  attitude  control  system—specifically,  of  an  attitude  estimator  used  to take  precisely  pointed  observations—and  that  the  star  tracker’s  output  determines  whether  or  not  the  properimages are obtained. If the designer does not understand this, the project is  in trouble. Good systems engineers can anticipatethe impact of any change injected  into  the  system  or  project,  and  describe  the  nature  and  magnitude  of  the  impact  throughout their system.
Exceptional  two"way  communicator.  Communications  skills  are  the great  enabler.  Systems  engineers  need  to be  able  to get  out  of  their  offices  and  communicate well—listen, talk, and write. GeorgeBernard Shaw once stated that  England andAmerica are “two countries separated by a common language,” but  engineers  are  separated  by  their  separate languages—even  more  so since  the  advent  of  electronic  communications.  Systems  engineering  helps  bridge  the  communication  gaps  among  engineers  and  managers  with  consistent  terms,  processes, and procedures. A key to success isthe ability to see, understand, and  communicate  the  big picture,  and  be  effective  in  helping  others  develop  a  big#picture view.
1/18/09 7
THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
file:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image009.png
Strong  team  member  and  leader.  Here  we distinguish  between  management  and  leadership, realizing that a systems engineer  must be skilled in both.
So  far,  we have  described  the  characteristics  that  good  systems  engineers  share.  Ideally,  as  they gain  experience,  they  are able to deal with more complex systems  through

  • Breadth  of  technical  knowledge  and  expertise, combined with execution  excellence
  • Passion  for  the  mission  and  challenges,  combined  with  force  of  personality and leadership ability
  • Creativity  and  engineering  instinct  —ability to sense the right way to  attack  a  problem  while  appreciating  inherent risks and implications
  • Ability to teach and influence     others
Comfortable with  change.  Systems  engineers should be comfortable with change.They  understand  that  change  is  inevitable.  They  anticipate change, are able to understand how it affects their systems, and deal with thoseeffects  properly, usually without losingsleep at night.
While managementand leadership are related and often treated as the same, their centralfunctions are different. Managers clearly provide some leadership, and leadersobviously perform some management. However, there are unique functionsperformed by leaders that are not performed by managers. My observation overthe past forty years...is that we develop a lot of good managers, but very fewleaders. Let me explain the difference in functions they perform.
• A managertakes care of where you are; a leader takes you to a new place
• A manager isconcerned with doing things right; a leader is concerned with doing the rightthings
• A managerdeals with complexity; a leader deals with uncertainty
• A managercreates policies; a leader establishes principles
• A manager seesand hears what is going on; a leader hears when there is no sound and sees whenthere is no light
• A managerfinds answers and solutions; a leader formulates the questions and identifiesthe problems
James E. Colvard
The number of changesmust decrease with time. If projects continue to change, they will never get tothe launch pad. This is particularly true with requirements. While it isundesirable to freeze them too early, it is much more likely that requirementswill continue to change way too long. ...At some point, the design must beimplemented, at which time “change” is the enemy.
Ken Ledbetter, NASA Headquarters
file:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image010.png
Comfortable  with  uncertainty.  A  companion characteristic is being comfortablewith uncertainty—indeed, embracing  uncertainty. We usually do not know when we willfinish a task, or even a mission.  We knowrequirements are not complete, so we have to interpret them. This is the  simple side of uncertainty. But uncertainty hasa more complex side, so a strong  background  in  probability  and  statistics  is  important.  A  good  systems  engineer  understands  and  encourages  quantification  of  uncertainty. For  example,  if  the  mission objective is to land a probe on a comet,the location and severity of jets or  debris  may  be  unknown  or  the  comet’s  albedo  may  be  uncertain.  The  systems  engineer must be able to work with a team to designa system that accommodates  the uncertainties.
Proper paranoia. Anotherimportant characteristic is proper paranoia: expecting  the  best,  but  thinking  about  and  planning  for  the worst.  This  suggests  that  the  systems engineer is constantly checking and crosscheckingselected details across  the system to besure that technical integrity is intact.
Diverse  technical  skills.  A  systems  engineer  must  be able  to  apply  sound  technical  principles  across  diverse technical  disciplines.  Good  systems  engineers  
1/18/09 8
THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
know  the  theory  and  practice  of  many technical  disciplines,  respect  expert  input,  and  can credibly  interact  with  most  discipline  experts.  They  also have  enough  demonstrated engineering maturity to delve intoand learn new technical areas that  should  be  integrated  into  the  system.  They  must  be strong  technical  leaders,  in  addition to having broad technical competence.Systems engineers must meet the  special challengeof commanding diverse technical knowledge, plus managing, and leading effectively
file:////Users/wenyuejie/Library/Group%20Containers/UBF8T346G9.Office/TemporaryItems/msohtmlclip/clip_image011.png
Self  confidence  and  decisiveness.
Systems  engineers  must  have  well#earned  self"confidence.  They  know  what  they  know  and are aware of what they do not know, and  are not afraid to own both. It does not mean  systems  engineers  never  make  mistakes.  We  haveall made mistakes...at least occasionally.
Commission, notomission. This should be written on the door of every systems engineer. Thereis no excuse for omission. A systems engineer does not need authority fromanyone to investigate anything. The systems engineer’s job is the whole space.You go out, you make decisions. If someone tells you to stop, you use yourcommunication skills and listen.
Gentry Lee, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Appreciate  the  value  of  process.  Good
systems  engineers  appreciate  process.  That  does  not  mean  systems  engineering  is  just one  process,  plus  another,  plus  another—like  recipes  in  a  cookbook.  Let  uslook back at our metaphor. To create the music of a symphony, musicians use their instruments, musical scores, and notes. Thesetools provide them with a common  frame ofreference, help them keep proper time, and allow the orchestra to work  together  to  create  beautiful  music.  Processes  serve  the  same  purpose  for  the systems engineer. But just providing sheetsof music to a group of musicians does not  guarantee  a  great orchestra.  While  each  orchestra  uses  the  same  tools  and  many  have  very  skilled  musicians,  they  do not  all  sound  like  the  New York  Philharmonic.
Herein  lies  the  art—how  well  does  the  maestro  lead  the  people  and  use the  tools provided? Maestros know how to bring outthe best in their musicians; they  know howto vary the tempo and the right moment to cue the horn section to draw  in the listeners. The same is true for systemsengineers. We must all use processes  to getthe job done, but it is what we DO with the processes and talents of the team  that matters.
Summary
Systems  engineering  is  a  crucial  core  competency  within  NASA.  Systems  engineering  has  two key  components:  technical  leadership,  the  art,  and  systems  management,  the  science,  that  are  necessary  for  mission  success.  Technical  leadership  balances  broad  technical  domain  knowledge,  engineering  instinct,  problem  solving,  creativity,  leadership,  and  communication  to  develop  and  maintain new missions and systems at NASA.
Systems  management"s  focus  is  on  rigorously  and  efficiently  managing  the  development  and  operation of  complex  systems.  Effective  systems  management  requires  applying  a  systematic,  disciplined  engineering  approach  that  is quantifiable,  recursive,  repeatable,  and  demonstrable.  Here  the  emphasis  is  on  organizational skills, processes, and persistence.
1/18/09 9
THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
Systems  engineering  at  NASA is  most  successful  when  there  is  a  healthy  balance of technical leadership and systems managementengaged in a project.
Systems engineers are a criticalresource for the Agency, and as such, we are  dedicated  to  develop  highly  capable  systems  engineers  that  are  able  to lead  and  manage our missions and systems.
1/18/09 10


回复

使用道具 举报

400

主题

572

帖子

2139

积分

论坛元老

Rank: 7Rank: 7Rank: 7

积分
2139
 楼主| 发表于 2019-5-12 12:02:32 | 显示全部楼层
14 DEC 2010Michael D. Griffin Explains How to Fix System Engineering[size=0.875]SHARE THIS STORY

[size=1.25]This week, as part of the ongoing School of Systems & Enterprises (SSE) Dean’s Seminar Series, Stevens Institute of Technology was honored to host Michael D. Griffin, eminent scholar and current professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at the University of Alabama in Huntsville.

More than 120 guests filled the standing-room only classroom, with another 100 people dialing in to join the event online. SSE Dean Dinesh Verma welcomed everyone, describing the Dean’s Seminar Series as a venue for “folks who need no introduction to come to campus and speak to us about topics in engineering.” Beginning a year and a half ago, the Series is a bi-annual event and features distinguished guests from industry, government and academia.

Stevens’ Interim President George P. Korfiatis then introduced Jeff Wilcox, VP of corporate engineering at Lockheed Martin and member of the SSE Board of Advisors. Dr. Korfiatis said: “We are privileged to have both Jeff Wilcox and Michael Griffin here today.”

“I really wanted to be a part of today’s event,” Wilcox stated. “Michael Griffin is a rare engineering leader as he has combined experience and expertise in government, industry and academia. Stevens is at the forefront of engineering education today, making this an ideal venue for Mike’s seminar.”

Wilcox went on to give a brief bio of Griffin, encompassing his tenure at NASA, five Master’s degrees and inclusion in Time Magazine’s 100 Annual List of the Most Influential People in the World in 2008. Additionally he noted that in November of this year, Griffin was ranked seventh in an informal survey conducted by the Space Foundation of inspirational space heroes.

Currently, Griffin is the King-McDonald Eminent Scholar and Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, and the Director of the Center for System Studies at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. From 2005-09 he was the Administrator of NASA. Prior to re-joining NASA he was Space Department Head at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. He has also held numerous executive positions within industry, including President and Chief Operating Officer of In-Q-Tel, Chief Executive Officer of Magellan Systems, General Manager of Orbital Science Corporation’s Space Systems Group, and Executive Vice President and Chief Technical Officer at Orbital.

Griffin took the podium and led the attendees through his seminar entitled How do we fix System Engineering? After offering a look at the history of system engineering (and engineering in general), Griffin transitioned seamlessly into his suggestions for the future with well-spoken ease and clearly apparent knowledge. At the end, he opened the floor for some questions, all of which were met with thoughtful clarity.

“In academia and advanced research, I believe we must first ask interesting questions. From there we can set up experiments and studies to find the answers,” Griffin asserted. “My observation is that System Engineering has not followed this process yet.”

In his belief, the true goal should be design of products that are “elegant.” As an engineer, one can easily see when something fits this definition, though Griffin said it’s harder to explain. He said: “We can identify good system engineers, but we can’t always identify good system engineering.”
[size=1.25]To ascertain a product’s “elegance,” Griffin asks four questions: Does this product work? Is it robust? Is it efficient? What does it do that you didn’t want it to do? His conclusion is that there aren’t measures in place yet to determine how well things are done. “We don’t have a theory of system engineering,” Griffin stated.

Griffin closed his seminar with his suggestion for “fixing” system engineering: a proactive, collaborative research effort. “I see the future being driven by inter-disciplinary teams,” he concluded. “We need to combine government, industry and academia and come up with a theory – then we can advance the frontiers of system engineering.”




回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则

QQ|京ICP备17005959号|IAC-16|Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|CCOSE论坛

GMT+8, 2019-10-16 22:03 , Processed in 0.059860 second(s), 20 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表