Improving new product development using process simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bombardier Aerospace currently puts more effort into developing new products at a faster pace. The goal of this thesis is to study the effect of sharing an aeroelastic model between the Loads and Dynamics departments at Bombardier Aerospace as well as to seek out other opportunities in order to reduce total effort. The work in this thesis is based on a previous project that was conducted two years ago in order to establish process maps for the two departments and to simulate the aeroelastic model sharing scenario.In the present thesis, two types of strategies are applied: (1) add resources to the tasks located on the critical path to shorten project span time; (2) seek opportunities for sharing design processes which in turn reduce total effort. Firstly, the process maps for the two departments were updated and verified. Secondly, the critical tasks were identified on the process maps. In addition, the process maps were shown to the engineers in both departments to look for potentially sharable design processes. Thirdly, the scenarios with additional resources and with shared processes were simulated. The benefits of the scenarios were observed by comparing two factors: (1) project span time and (2) effort. Afterwards, the quality of the inputs and the design processes was investigated. Finally, this thesis concludes with validated simulation results, suggested optimal solutions to reduce the span time and effort, and guidance for future work.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".