OASD SD-22-2010 Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages《逐渐减少的制造原料和材料不足》.pdf

1、 SD-22 Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages A Guidebook of Best Practices and Tools for Implementing a Proactive DMSMS Management Program September 2010 Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-CONTENTS FOREWORD . 1 INTRODU

2、CTION . 2 BASIS FOR DMSMS MITIGATION . 4 Understanding TLCSM . 4 Understanding PBL 5 THE BUSINESS CASE FOR PROACTIVE DMSMS MANAGEMENT 7 DMSMS PROGRAM FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS 9 DMSMS Program Levels 9 Selecting DMSMS Mitigation Practices for Your Program 10 The Customers Perspective on Level of Practice

3、11 The Suppliers Perspective on Level of Practice. 12 Implications of Level of Practice for Source Selection 12 DMSMS RESOURCES 13 Keys to a Successful DMSMS Management Program . 14 DMSMS Program Elements 17 Taxonomy of DMSMS Resolutions . 21 Programmatic Strategies 22 MEASURING DMSMS PROGRAM EFFECT

4、IVENESS 26 Program Cost . 27 Program Schedule 32 Program Performance 33 SUMMARY 38 APPENDIX A. DMSMS-RELATED DOCUMENTS . 39 APPENDIX B. WEB-BASED RESOURCES . 40 APPENDIX C. BEST PRACTICES FOR OBSOLESCENCE MANAGEMENT OF COTS PRODUCTS 42 Federal Aviation Administration 43 Office of Naval Research 43 C

5、enter for Advanced Life Cycle Engineering 43 Lockheed Martin Naval Electronics and Surveillance SystemsSurface Systems . 44 Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-ITT Aerospace/Communications Division . 45 Carnegie Mellon Software Engineerin

6、g 45 Summary 45 APPENDIX D. USING BUSINESS CASE ANALYSIS TO EVALUATE RESOLUTION ALTERNATIVES 46 Background 46 BCA Application to a DMSMS Scenario . 47 APPENDIX E. ONTOLOGY OF DMSMS SOLUTIONS 50 APPENDIX F. GLOSSARY . 56 APPENDIX G. ASSESSMENT OF DMSMS SOLUTION ALTERNATIVES 59 APPENDIX H. EXAMPLES OF

7、 CONTRACT LANGUAGE 60 APPENDIX I. DEVELOPING PROGRAM-SPECIFIC NRE COST METRICS . 63 APPENDIX J. DESIGN INTERFACE ASSESSMENT CRITERIA 68 APPENDIX K. ABBREVIATIONS 71 Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-1 FOREWORD This guidebook on Diminish

8、ing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) is both a tutorial and a compilation of the best practices from across the Department of Defense for managing the risk of obsolescence for electronic, electrical, and mechanical parts. In addition, it identifies various tools that may be usefu

9、l for analyzing and tracking the effectiveness of DMSMS programs. We recommend that the program manager use this guidebook as a desktop refer-ence to quickly pinpoint key actions required to manage DMSMS issues and ad-dress concerns. Additional information can be found at the DMSMS Knowledge Sharing

10、 Portal (www.dmsms.org). If you have any questions or comments about this document, please contact the Defense Standardization Program Office at 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Stop 5100, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6221, or e-mail DSPOdla.mil. This version is an interim update to the 2009 version. A complete

11、 rewrite is ex-pected in 2011. Below are the principal changes in this interim update: Updated nonrecurring engineering (NRE) cost and time metrics data Procedures to escalate resolution cost estimates to future years Appendix D, Using Business Case Analysis to Evaluate Resolution Al-ternatives Appe

12、ndix E, Ontology of DMSMS Solutions Appendix I, Developing Program-Specific NRE Cost Metrics. Gregory E. Saunders, Director Defense Standardization Program Office Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-2 INTRODUCTION Diminishing Manufacturin

13、g Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS), the loss of sources of items or material, surfaces when a source announces the actual or impending discontinuation of a product, or when procurements fail because of product unavailability. DMSMS may endanger the life-cycle support and viability of the weapo

14、n system or equipment. Compared with the commercial electronics sector, the Department of Defense (DoD) is a minor consumer of electrical and electronic devices. While the elec-tronic device industry abandons low-demand, older technology products, the DoD seeks to prolong the life of weapon systems.

15、 These conflicting trends cause DMSMS problems as repair parts and/or materials disappear before the end of the weapon system life cycle. Although electronics are most likely to be discontinued, obsolescence of non-electronic and commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) items also poses a significant problem

16、 to weapon systems. In short, DMSMS is a threat to system supportability. Solving DMSMS is complex, data intensive, and expensive. You, the program manager (PM), have only two approaches to solving DMSMS in a system: reac-tive (you address DMSMS problems after they surface) and proactive (you identi

17、-fy and take steps to mitigate impending DMSMS problems). DoD policy pre-scribes the proactive approach. An effective proactive DMSMS program does the following: Ensures that all parts and material to produce or repair the system or equipment are available Reduces, or controls, total ownership cost

18、(TOC) Minimizes total life-cycle systems management (TLCSM) cost Eliminates, or at least minimizes, reactive DMSMS actions Evaluates design alternatives Provides for risk mitigation as it applies to DMSMS Evaluates more than one approach to resolve DMSMS issues Collects metrics to monitor program ef

19、fectiveness. To achieve an effective DMSMS program, you should consider adopting the common practices and tools described in this guidebook. These practices and tools were drawn from various DoD organizations that have successful DMSMS Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permi

20、tted without license from IHS-,-,-3 programs. This guidebook is not limited to any particular type or class of manu-facturing sources or material shortages. The purpose of this guidebook is fourfold: Define a proactive DMSMS management process that a PM can use to build an effective DMSMS program De

21、fine DMSMS support metrics to measure the effectiveness of a proac-tive DMSMS program Promote cost-effective supply chain management integrity through DMSMS problem solution at the lowest (cost, time, functional) level Promote the exercise of best practices throughout the DMSMS manage-ment cycle. Pr

22、ovided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-4 BASIS FOR DMSMS MITIGATION DoD Directive 5000.01, “The Defense Acquisition System,” addresses both TLCSM and performance-based life-cycle product support (PBL) in the weapon system life cycle and requir

23、es the preparation for sustainment early in the weapon system life cycle. Both TLCSM and PBL relate to DMSMS mitigation: TLCSM treats obsolescence as one of the cost drivers in the system life cycle. TLCSM is the implementation, management, and oversight, by the PM, of all activities associated with

24、 the acquisition, development, produc-tion, fielding, sustainment, and disposal of a DoD weapon system across its life cycle. It assigns the life-cycle manager full accountability and re-sponsibility for system acquisition and follow-on sustainment. PBL is the preferred sustainment strategy for weap

25、on system product sup-port. It employs the purchase of support as an integrated performance package to optimize system readiness. The relationship between DMSMS, TLCSM, and PBL was emphasized by the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Logistics and Materiel Readiness in a March 2007 memorandum, “L

26、ife Cycle Sustainment Outcome Metrics.” That memorandum described 14 life-cycle sustainment enablers that “when appro-priately addressed, positively impact Material Readiness outcomes.” PBL is enab-ler number one, and DMSMS management is number nine. The DoD Acquisition, Technology and Logistics ent

27、erprise is concerned with creating reliable and cost-effective industrial capabilities sufficient to meet stra-tegic objectives and also with implementing improved governance and decision processes. DMSMS poses a threat to those aspirations. An efficient, proactive process to manage and mitigate DMS

28、MS problems is critical to providing availa-ble, affordable, and supportable systems by identifying and mitigating DMSMS issues. Thus, DMSMS management is in line with the TLCSM and PBL discip-lines. Understanding TLCSM TLCSM emphasizes design for system reliability, availability, maintainability, m

29、anufacturability, and supportability. The objective of TLCSM is to improve sys-tem operational effectiveness (SOE) of new and fielded weapon systems. SOE is a composite of performance, availability, process efficiency, and total ownership cost. You can best achieve SOE by influencing early design. R

30、eliability, reduced logistics footprint, and reduced system TOC are most effec-tively achieved when they are recognized as drivers from the beginning of a pro-gram, starting with the definition of required capabilities. Reliability, maintaina-bility, supportability, and producibility affect availabi

31、lity. The objective of “de-sign for system supportability” is to positively affect and reduce the requirements Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-5 for the elements of logistics support during the system operations and mainten-ance phase

32、. One way of successfully accomplishing this is by continually address-ing DMSMS issues. Understanding PBL PBL is one strategy to deal with obsolescence throughout the life of a product. PBL manages the support of weapon systems, assemblies, subassemblies, and components. As responsibility for meeti

33、ng performance requirements shifts to the product support integrator (PSI) under the PM, PBL provides a tool for mitigating obsolescence and making continuous modernization a reality for current weapon systems, assemblies, subassemblies, and components (where a PBL application is feasible). PBL inco

34、rporates continuous modernization and obsolescence mitigation. With PBL, the PM, rather than purchasing parts or products, purchases an integrated product support package. You can pursue PBL through a long-term contract or through a memorandum of agreement or understanding with an organic support so

35、urce. In either case, the focus is on establishing performance guarantees. Programs using PBL should require the contractor to maintain a proactive DMSMS program. Ideally, PBL contracts are long term (5 to 15 years) and re-quire the provider to manage many aspects of product support through the life

36、 cycle. A properly implemented PBL strategy incentivizes the contractor to man-age DMSMS proactively as one means to achieve the performance outcomes. Long-term PBL contracts lower contractor risk and facilitate DMSMS mitigation efforts such as life-of-type buys, long-term contracts with prime contr

37、actors, long-term contracts between primes and subcontractors. The PBL contractor is motivated to continuously improve performance, because of its bottom-line profit impact: Optimized supply support reduces inventory investment and yields higher margins. Increased reliability of systems and subsyste

38、ms (and fewer failures or re-turns) reduces transportation, labor, and spare parts costs. Adoption of open system design increases the use of plug-and-play com-ponents that can be renewed or replaced quickly. Continuous modernization extends the systems useful life. Continuously refreshed technologi

39、es increase the residual value of the sys-tems, subsystems, components, and repair parts. Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-6 To implement an effective PBL strategy, you should be familiar with two key documents: Performance Based Logis

40、tics: A Program Managers Product Support Guide, published by the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) in March 2005 Designing and Assessing Supportability in DoD Weapon Systems: A Guide to Increased Reliability and Reduced Logistics Footprint, published by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD

41、) in October 2003. Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-7 THE BUSINESS CASE FOR PROACTIVE DMSMS MANAGEMENT In 1999, the B-2 bomber program developed a business case analysis (BCA) comparing the projected 20-year cost streams of a reactive

42、approach to the proac-tive approach to managing DMSMS. The outcome of the BCA demonstrated that proactive DMSMS management was cost-effective and confirmed the DoD policy of proactive DMSMS management. It was highly probable that other programs would experience similar BCA results. The two scenarios

43、 for the B-2 BCA were as follows: Reactive approach scenario. DMSMS problems would go unnoticed until a part, such as a microcircuit, was needed to repair a shop replaceable unit/shop replaceable assembly (SRU/SRA). If the part was obsolete and unavailable, the SRU/SRA would receive focused attentio

44、n from the re-sponsible integrated product team (IPT). The cost and complexity of the resultant corrective action would depend on the severity of obsolescence in the SRU/SRA. To model this scenario across the entire platform, and to generate a cost stream for it, it was necessary to estimate and mat

45、hemati-cally relate three items: Number of problems each year caused by obsolete unavailable parts (for 20 years into the future) Distribution of degree of obsolescence present in all SRUs/SRAs over the 20-year span Solution costs for those SRUs/SRAs associated with the varying de-grees of obsolesce

46、nce. Proactive approach scenario. The DMSMS Management Team (DMT) would identify problem parts in the platform configuration and act to de-velop and implement solutions before the problems affected the system support posture and operational availability. To model this scenario, it was necessary to e

47、stimate and mathematically relate three items (different from the reactive approach): Historical mix of solution types (e.g., substitute part, emulation) Number of obsolescence problems estimated to be solved each year Cost data for each type of solution. One output of the BCA was the breakeven poin

48、t (BEP), which was found from a plot of the cumulative yearly benefit less the cumulative yearly operations cost, computed over the years of interest. The benefit for each year was the difference Provided by IHSNot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-8 between the costs of the reactive and proactive approaches. The BEPthe point at which the plot crosses the x-axis, as shown in Figure 1signifies when cumu-lative investment in the proactive approach equals the cumulative benefit derived f