Browse Topic: Supplier assessment
ABSTRACT An increasing pace of technology advancements and recent heavy investment by potential adversaries has eroded the Army’s overmatch and spurred significant changes to the modernization enterprise. Commercial ground vehicle industry solutions are not directly applicable to Army acquisitions because of volume, usage and life cycle requirement differences. In order to meet increasingly aggressive schedule goals while ensuring high quality materiel, the Army acquisition and test and evaluation communities need to retain flexibility and continue to pursue novel analytic methods. Fully utilizing test and field data and incorporating advanced techniques, such as, big data analytics and machine learning can lead to smarter, more rapid acquisition and a better overall product for the Soldier. Logistics data collections during operationally relevant events that were originally intended for the development of condition based maintenance procedures in particular have been shown to provide
ABSTRACT Digital Engineering (DE) has been a prevalent topic across the Department of Defense (DoD) since the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Systems Engineering – now the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering [OUSD(R&E)] - re-leased the DoD Digital Engineering strategy1 in 2018. Since then, there has been a major push to incorporate DE into the DoD acquisition process and for programs to use DE, including Mod-el-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE), in system development. This paper focuses on where the DoD stands today with adoption of digital acquisition, the challenges of implementing DE on major programs, and the approach used by the Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) program to define a realistic pathway to effectively implement a DE strategy from Re-quest for Proposal (RFP) to prototype acquisition. Citation: S. Scheithauer, D. Chudy, G. Byrd, B. Juelson, D. Clark, C. Arndt, “Translating the Digital Engineering
ABSTRACT U.S. Government procurement spending exceeds $500B annually. A request for proposal is one of the more common forms of solicitation, and source selection (SS) is the process for evaluating proposals submitted by contractors. The U.S. Department of Defense and the Army promulgate manuals and supplements that direct the SS process within those organizations. Those publications identify “trade-offs” as a preferred method for conducting a SS, and encourage the use of this process “when it may be in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest-price offeror.” Under this process, cost and non-cost factors are evaluated and the contract is awarded to the offeror proposing the combination of factors that represents the best value based on the evaluation criteria. This case study will describe how a trade-off, or structured decision, process was used to support a U.S. Army SS by thoroughly evaluating multiple vendors and their proposals of a major
The content of ARP6328 contains guidance for implementing processes used for risk identification, mitigation, detection, avoidance, disposition, and reporting of counterfeit electrical, electronic, and electromechanical (EEE) parts and assemblies in accordance with AS5553 Revision D. This document may also be used in conjunction with other revisions of AS5553. This document retains guidance contained in the base document of AS5553, updated as appropriate to reflect current practices. This is not intended to stand alone, supersede, or cancel requirements found in other quality management system documents, requirements imposed by contracting authorities, or applicable laws and regulations unless an authorized exemption/variance has been obtained
Today, defense organizations in several countries are attempting to expand military capabilities by investing in hypersonic missile development. Since these missiles travel at Mach 5, or nearly 4,000 mph, there are naturally a variety of challenges for developing both the actual weapons systems and the corresponding detection systems. While challenges span nearly every aspect of developing these missiles, in this article we will focus specifically on the key challenges associated with the embedded electronics and communication systems. We will also look at how aerospace and defense engineers working on hypersonic missiles can ensure they are selecting supplier partners that are well positioned to meet these unique challenges by looking into their space heritage and history developing high-reliability radiofrequency (RF) components
This standard defines requirements for the preparation and execution of the audit process. In addition, it defines the content and composition for the audit reporting of conformity and process effectiveness to the 9100-series standards, the organization's QMS documentation, and customer and statutory/regulatory requirements. The requirements in this standard are additions or represent changes to the requirements and guidelines in the standards for conformity assessment, auditing, and certification as published by ISO/IEC (i.e., ISO/IEC 17000, ISO/IEC 17021-1). When there is conflict with these standards, the requirements of the 9101 standard shall take precedence
This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) outlines a development, design/repair, and industrial guidance for systems using additive manufacturing (AM) to respond to aircraft requirement specifications. These recommendations reflect procedures that have been effective for designing/repairing metallic alloy components
The internet of things (IoT) is no stranger to most of us at this point. IoT devices can be seen as belonging either to the consumer, medical, or industrial markets. Whether the device is a video doorbell, an insulin pump, or an industrial sensor, the user will face two significant challenges: 1) getting the device physically/logically connected to the network and 2) making sure that the device has the proper credentials to enable it to interoperate with other devices on the same network or with the server(s) that are expected to collect the device's data. These challenges can be largely grouped into a process known as provisioning
This standard includes selected quality system requirements from ISO 9001:2008[1] and AS9100:2009 applicable to noncomplex products and associated manufacturing processes. ISO 9001 text incorporated into this standard appears in standard font; while aviation, space, and defense industry additional requirements, definitions, and notes are presented in bold, italic text. The requirements of this standard are intended to be applied in whole, without any exclusions. Compliance with all corresponding AS9100 requirements is considered to meet/exceed compliance with the requirements of this standard. The requirements specified in this standard are complementary (not alternative) to contractual and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. Should there be a conflict between the requirements of this standard and applicable statutory or regulatory requirements, the latter shall take precedence. The process approach described in ISO 9001 and AS9100 applies to this standard
This SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP)4294 is directed at life cycle cost (LCC) analysis of aerospace propulsion systems and supplements AIR1939. Specific topics addressed by ARP4294 are listed below: a Propulsion system LCC element structure. b Information exchange and relationships with: (1) Aircraft manufacturer (2) Equipment suppliers (3) Customer c The relationship of the LCC element structure to work breakdown structures. d The relationship between LCC analysis and other related disciplines (e.g., technical (performance analysis, weight control, component lives), reliability, availability and maintainability (RAM), integrated logistic support (ILS), production and finance). e Classification of the accuracy and applicability of LCC assessments
This standard is applicable to all phases of the system acquisition life cycle. It is intended for use on all programs with manufacturing content. It requires proven manufacturing management practices with the goal of delivering affordable and capable systems to the extent that it is invoked contractually. The term “organization” as used in this document refers to the company or facility that is implementing this standard, such as when imposed contractually by the customer
Today, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technology is widely used by healthcare professionals to examine soft tissues and organs in the body. MRI is an excellent diagnostic tool because it can be used to detect a variety of potentially life-threatening issues ranging from degenerative diseases to tumors in a noninvasive manner. To understand the design challenges involved in developing MRI equipment, specifically when it comes to the selection of radio-frequency (RF) and electrical components such as capacitors, it’s first important to understand the basic physics behind the way MRI machines operate
This report is intended to identify the various errors typically encountered in capacitance fuel quantity measurement systems. In addition to identification of error sources, it describes the basic factors which cause the errors. When coupled with appraisals of the relative costs of minimizing the errors, this knowledge will furnish a tool with which to optimize gauging system accuracy, and thus, to obtain the optimum overall system within the constraints imposed by both design and budgetary considerations. Since the subject of fuel measurement accuracy using capacitance based sensing is quite complex, no attempt is made herein to present a fully-comprehensive evaluation of all factors affecting gauging system accuracy. Rather, the major contributors to gauging system inaccuracy are discussed and emphasis is given to simplicity and clarity, somewhat at the expense of completeness. An overview of capacitive fuel gauging operation can be found in AIR5691. This document also discusses how
This document applies to hardware and software and provides CM requirements to be placed on contracts after being tailored by the Acquirer. The requirements have been organized by the following five CM functions: a Configuration Planning and Management b Configuration Identification c Configuration Change Management d Configuration Status Accounting e Configuration Verification and Audit
As technology advances in the medical device space, electronics design engineers are constantly adapting to meet industry requirements for increased functionality, reduced component size, and absolute reliability. For medical implantables, technological innovations are driven by the ability for electronic components manufacturers to superminiaturize electronic circuits and create advancements in the materials and designs available
This document is intended for use during audits to the requirements of AS5553C. It may be used by all contracting organizations that procure EEE parts, whether such parts are procured directly or integrated into electronic assemblies or equipment as guidance for evaluating compliance to AS5553C
It can be challenging to make sure you've covered all the bases during the tubing and hose selection process for medical instrumentation. For each application, there are many elements to consider, including chemicals, temperatures, pressures, and flexibility needs. The tips in this article are designed to help avoid situations in which the wrong tubing or hose is integrated. The article also presents critical details that can often be overlooked
This standard defines five CM functions and their underlying principles. The functions are detailed in Section 5. The principles, highlighted in text boxes, are designed to individually identify the essence of the related CM function and can be used to collectively create a checklist of “best practice” criteria to evaluate a CM program. The CM principles defined in this standard apply equally to internally focused enterprise information, processes, and supporting systems (i.e., Enterprise CM - policy driven, supporting the internal goals needed to achieve an efficient, effective and lean enterprise), as well as to the working relationships supported by the enterprise (i.e., Acquirer/Supplier CM - contracted relationship to support external trusted interaction with suppliers). In an Enterprise CM context there are several methodologies for principle use by the enterprise: The principles of this standard provide direction for developing enterprise or functional CM plans focused on
This document describes guidelines, methods, and tools used to perform the ongoing safety assessment process for transport airplanes in commercial service (hereafter, termed “airplane”). The process described herein is intended to support an overall safety management program. It is associated with showing compliance with the regulations, and also with assuring a company that it meets its own internal standards. The methods identify a systematic means, but not the only means, to assess ongoing safety. While economic decision-making is an integral part of the safety management process, this document addresses only the ongoing safety assessment process. To put it succinctly, this document addresses the “Is it safe?” part of safety management; it does not address the “How much does it cost?” part of the safety management. This document also does not address any specific organizational structures for accomplishing the safety assessment process. While the nature of the organizational
Electronics industry trends develop and change, technologies emerge and improve, and new applications bring new requirements and challenges. While this obviously has an impact on the electronics, it also has a significant impact on connector technology needed to support it
As already outlined in Part 1 (featured in the October issue of Tech Briefs), the main function of a connector is to enable the transfer of electrical signals
This document establishes guidelines for a Reliability Assessment Plan (herein also called the Plan), in which Electronic Engine Control manufacturers document their controlled, repeatable processes for assessing reliability of their products. Each Electronic Engine Control manufacturer (the Plan owner) prepares a Plan, which is unique to the Plan owner. This document describes processes that are intended for use in assessing the reliability of Electronic Engine Controls, or subassemblies thereof. The results of such assessments are intended for use as inputs to safety analyses, certification analyses, equipment design decisions, system architecture selection and business decisions such as warranties or maintenance cost guarantees. This Guide may be used to prepare plans for reliability assessment of electronic engine controls in which, typically, the impact of failure is high, the operating environment can be relatively severe and the opportunity to improve the equipment after the
This SAE Aerospace Standard (AS) standardizes inspection and test procedures, workmanship criteria, and minimum training and certification requirements to detect Suspect/Counterfeit (SC) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts. The requirements of this document apply once a decision is made to use parts with unknown chain of custody that do not have pedigree back to the original component manufacturer or have been acquired from a broker or independent distributor, or when there are other known risk elements that result in the User/Requester to have concerns about potential SC EEE parts. The tests specified by this standard may also detect occurrences of malicious tampering, although the current version of this standard is not designed specifically for this purpose. This standard ensures consistency across the supply chain for test techniques and requirements based on assessed risk associated with the application, component, supplier, and other relevant risk factors
This SAE Aerospace Standard (AS) standardizes inspection and test procedures, workmanship criteria, and minimum training and certification requirements to detect Suspect/Counterfeit (SC) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts. The requirements of this document apply once a decision is made to use parts with unknown chain of custody that do not have pedigree back to the original component manufacturer, or have been acquired from a broker or independent distributor, or when there are other known risk elements that result in the User/Requester to have concerns about potential SC EEE parts. The tests specified by this standard may also detect occurrences of malicious tampering, although the current version of this standard is not designed specifically for this purpose. This standard ensures consistency across the supply chain for test techniques and requirements based on assessed risk associated with the application, component, supplier, and other relevant risk factors
This document contains guidance for implementing a counterfeit mitigation program in accordance with AS5553. The information contained in this document is intended to supplement the requirements of a higher level quality standard (e.g., AS9100) and other quality management system documents. This is not intended to stand alone, supersede, or cancel requirements found in other quality management system documents, requirements imposed by contracting authorities, or applicable laws and regulations unless an authorized exemption/variance has been obtained
These requirements are applicable to IAQG sector schemes when making use of ABs, CRBs and their auditors, for the assessment and certification/registration of supplier quality systems in accordance with the requirements of this document. The quality management system standard used by the CRB shall be 9100/9110/9120, as appropriate to the supplier’s activities. It shall be applied to the supplier’s complete Quality System that covers aerospace products. Sectors may use these requirements for other standards. IAQG members have committed to recognize the equivalence of certification/registration of a suppliers quality management system to either of the AS, EN or JISQ/SJAC standards. This AS provides the approval process for Auditor Authentication Bodies (AAB), training course providers, trainers and auditors who meet the requirements of AIR5493 and outlines the America’s sector specific process to implement AS9104. This document is created to be in conformance with AS9104
This standard is applicable to all phases of the system acquisition life cycle. It is intended for use on all programs with manufacturing content. It requires proven manufacturing management practices with the goal of delivering affordable and capable systems to the extent that it is invoked contractually. The term “organization” as used in this document refers to the company or facility that is implementing this standard, such as when imposed contractually by the customer. NOTE: The term “shall” is used wherever the criterion for conformance with the specific recommendation requires that there be no deviation. The term “should” is used wherever noncompliance with the specific recommendation is permissible
These requirements are applicable to IAQG sector schemes when making use of ABs, CRBs and their auditors, for the assessment and certification/registration of supplier quality systems in accordance with the requirements of this document. The quality management system standard used by the CRB shall be 9100/9110/9120, as appropriate to the supplier’s activities. It shall be applied to the supplier’s complete Quality System that covers aerospace products. Sectors may use these requirements for other standards. IAQG members have committed to recognize the equivalence of certification/registration of a suppliers quality management system to either of the AS, EN or JISQ/SJAC standards
These requirements are applicable to IAQG sector schemes when making use of ABs, CRBs and their auditors, for the assessment and certification/registration of supplier quality systems in accordance with the requirements of this document. The quality management system standard used by the CRB shall be 9100/9110/9120, as appropriate to the supplier’s activities. It shall be applied to the supplier’s complete Quality System that covers aerospace products. Sectors may use these requirements for other standards. IAQG members have committed to recognize the equivalence of certification/registration of a suppliers quality management system to either of the AS, EN or JISQ/SJAC standards. This AS provides the approval process for Auditor Authentication Bodies (AAB), training course providers, trainers and auditors who meet the requirements of AIR5493 and outlines the America’s sector specific process to implement AS9104. This document is created to be in conformance with AS9104. NOTE: The
Items per page:
50
1 – 50 of 109