New Methodologies of Integrated Development in Aeronautical

102 Pages·2013·8.56 MB·English

New Methodologies of Integrated Development in
Aeronautical Structures
Implementation of a Knowledge Management Strategy in CEIIA
João Filipe Caetano de Santana
ThesistoobtaintheMasterofScienceDegreein
Aerospace Engineering
Examination Committee
Chairperson: Prof. DoutorJoãoManuelLagedeMirandaLemos
Surpervisors: Prof. FernandoJoséParrachoLau
Eng. FilipeDanielBarreiradaSilvaMaia
MemberoftheCommittee: Prof. ElsaMariaPiresHenriques
November 2013

Resumo
Nosdiasquecorrem,omercadoaeronáuticoeaeroespacialsãoambientesextremamentecompetitivosque
lidamcomquantidadesmonetáriasbastanteconsideráveiseondeosucessodeumaorganizaçãodependedaforma
como esta aplica o seu conhecimento nos projectos. A boa gestão do conhecimento de uma empresa leva a que
a sua aplicação seja mais eficiente e eficaz, o que se reflecte na qualidade do produto final e também nos lucros
obtidos. Várias empresas de renome como a Airbus ou Boeing possuem sistemas de gestão de conhecimento
aplicadosaoseumododefuncionamentoeissoreflecte-senasuaperformance.
EsteprojectotemcomoobjectivoestudaramelhorformadeimplementaçãodeumaestratégiadeGestãodo
ConhecimentonaUnidadeAeronáuticadoCentroparaaExcelênciaeInovaçãonaIndústriaAutomóvel(CEIIA).
Aestratégiadesenvolvidanestatesevisacoincidircomomododefuncionamentodaunidade,osseusobjectivos
e necessidades e também colmatar as dificuldades experimentadas pelos trabalhadores. Esta estratégia é apenas
aplicadaàsáreasdeStressedeDesign,poissãoasquepossuemmaiorvolumedetrabalho,tornando-asmodelos
ideaisparatestaraaplicabilidadedaestratégia. Comoprimeiropasso,estaestratégiavisaorganizareidentificaro
conhecimentogeradonaunidadeetambémopossuídopeloscolaboradores,vistoqueestaestratégiaéainiciação
daUnidadeAeronáutica(etambémdoCEIIA)mundodaGestãodoConhecimento. Ocustodestaimplementação
foiavaliadoemedidoemhorasdetrabalho,distribuídaspelasdiferentesetapaseprocessosdaestratégia.
PalavrasChave: Conhecimento,Gestão,Aeronaútica,Estruturas,CEIIA
iii
iv
Abstract
Nowadays, the Aerospace and Aeronautical markets are extremely competitive environments that handle
with quite considerable amounts of money and where an organization’s success relies on the way of how its
knowledgeisappliedintheprojects.AgoodKnowledgeManagement(KM)leadstoamoreefficientandeffective
knowledgeapplicationinacompany,whichisreflectedinthequalityofthefinalproductandalsoinitsprofits. A
greatnumberofwellknowncompaniessuchasAirbusorBoeinghaveKMSystemsappliedtoitsmethodologies
whichisreflectedintheirperformance.
ThisprojectaimstostudythebestwayofimplementingaKMstrategyinCEIIA’sAeronauticalUnit(AU),
appliedtothedevelopmentofAeronauticalStructures. ThedevelopedstrategyinthisthesisintentstomatchAU’s
wayofworking,goalsandnecessities,aswellassurpassthedifficultiesexperiencedbytheworkers. Thisstrategy
is only directed to the company’s Stress and Design areas, since these are the ones with more workload, which
makes them perfect models to test the strategy’s suitability. As a first step, this strategy aims to organize and
identifytheknowledgecreatedbyAUandalsotheonestoredinworkers,thusthisistheAU’sinitiation(andalso
CEIIA’s)intheKM’sworld. Theimplementation’scostwasevaluatedandmeasuredinworkinghoursdistributed
bythestrategy’sdistinctphasesandprocesses.
Keywords: Knowledge,Management,Aeronautical,Structures,CEIIA
v
vi
Contents
Resumo iii
Abstract v
Contents vii
ListofAcronyms xi
ListofFigures xiii
ListofTables xv
1 Introduction 1
1.1 TheThreeProposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.1 RealTestsVSVirtualTests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1.2 ImplementationofaKnowledgeManagementStrategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.3 ImplementationofanAGILE/SCRUMMethodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2 TheDecision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 StructureoftheThesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2 KnowledgeManagement-StateofArt 7
2.1 WhatisKnowledge? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.1 ExplicitKnowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.2 TacitKnowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1.3 RelationshipBetweenTacitKnowledgeandExplicitKnowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.1.4 TheImportanceofKnowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2 WhatisKnowledgeManagement,andwhatareitsadvantages? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3 WhatistheKMCycle? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3.1 Vision,SearchandControl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.3.2 Creation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3.3 Capture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3.4 Transference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3.5 Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
vii
2.4 HowcanKnowledgeManagementbeimplementedinanorganization? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.4.1 ContentsofagoodImplementationStrategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.4.2 ImplementationObstacles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.5 HowisKMbeingappliedintoday’sAerospaceandAeronauticalOrganizations? . . . . . . . . . 20
2.5.1 Tools/Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.5.1.1 Theintranet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.5.1.2 InformalCommunication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.5.1.3 KnowledgeCommunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.5.2 Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.5.2.1 Benchmarking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.5.2.2 Mentoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.5.3 CaseStudies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.5.3.1 NASA-LessonsLearned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.5.3.2 DLR-ToolsoftheAerogridPorject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.5.3.3 inSide-Boeing’sInternalSocialNetwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.5.3.4 ESA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.5.3.5 EuropeanSpaceOperationCenter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3 CEIIA’sAeronauticalUnit 31
3.1 CEIIAintheAeronauticalIndustry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.2 TheDevelopmentofAeronauticalStructures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.2.1 KnowledgeDiscrimination: FramefromLowerFuselage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
3.2.2 KnowledgeDiscrimination: RearProtectionPanelfromSecondaryStructure . . . . . . . 36
3.3 AeronauticalUnit’sWorkingProcess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.4 KnowledgeManagementinAU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.4.1 CEIIA’sKnowledgeTools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.4.1.1 i-CEIIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
3.4.1.2 LessonsLearned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
3.4.1.3 A3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.4.1.4 CEIIASharingKnowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
4 KnowledgeManagementStrategy 47
4.1 TheStrategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4.1.1 Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.1.1.1 SurveyofCompetences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.1.1.2 KnowledgeAnalysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.1.1.3 StudyofKnowledgeSubprocesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.1.1.4 ToolsImplementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.1.2 Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.1.2.1 Department’sCreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
viii
4.1.2.2 StudyofKnowledgeSubprocesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.1.2.3 Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.1.2.4 Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.2 StrategyProcesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.2.1 Vision,SearchandControlProcess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
4.2.1.1 YellowPagesSystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.2.1.2 Quantifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
4.2.2 CreationProcess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
4.2.3 CaptureProcess. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.2.4 TransferenceProcess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
4.3 CaseStudy/PossibleApplication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
4.4 ROI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.4.1 AnnualGoals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.4.2 EstimatedTimeandCost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
4.4.3 ReturnableValue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
5 Conclusion 67
Bibliography 69
A XPS4CFDExamplesofWorkflow,RulesTemplateandFormstemplate 75
B QueryaboutCEIIA’sKnowledgeProcessesandState 81
C LessonsLearnedTemplate 83
D A3Template 85
ix
x