Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “lean six sigma”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

Performance Excellence Lean Six Sigma

Lean Six Sigma (LSS) organization at Y-12 sponsors the deployment of Performance Enterprise System (PES) and provides continuous improvement facilitation and training for the Y-12 site. Six- Question Survey was issued to 100 Y-12 employees at random, with the option to report one’s organization. Goals included: To gain an insight of Y-12 employees knowledge of PES & the Lean Six Sigma group • Generate employee desire to take PES class • Generate employee desire to perform continuous improvement.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Y-12 Lean Six Sigma Marketing Plan 2018

The Lean Six Sigma (LSS) organization at Y-12 sponsors the deployment of Performance Enterprise System (PES) and provides continuous improvement facilitation and training for the Y-12 site. The Lean Six Sigma organization is comprised of Subject Matter Experts (SME) who are passionate about continuous improvement and helping organizations improve their processes. The LSS group includes Support Leads, who perform various PES deployment activities, and Black Belts who use Lean, Six Sigma, and other leadership and project management tools to scope, analyze, and expertly facilitate teams on multifaceted improvement projects to meet safety, security, quality, timeliness, and/or cost savings goals. LSS is a group of change agents who help initiate continuous improvement throughout the Y-12 site. The ultimate goal of this marketing plan is to build a consistent, positive, and influential brand throughout Y-12. This brand will provide employees with information about the Lean Six Sigma organization, generate desire for employees to take the Performance Enterprise System training course, and to improve continuously.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Development of a Technical, Economic, and Risk Assessment Tool for the Evaluation of Work Reduction Opportunities

Efficient and cost-effective operation of a nuclear power plant (NPP) is essential to ensuring long-term economical and safe operation. Multiple cost saving opportunities exist, referred to here as work reduction opportunities (WRO). These WROs reduce plant operating costs by employing various cost-effective strategies (e.g., implementation of modern technologies). Identifying and objectively screening WROs is an essential task to help reduce overall costs. However, there is no comprehensive framework for assessing WROs in the nuclear industry and evaluating their impact on plant operations. This report presents a novel framework for systematically evaluating WROs from a technical, economic, and risk perspective. As NPPs continue to add new technology and implement modernization strategies into their current processes, potential WROs are commonly identified. Although most WROs have the potential to reduce costs, not all opportunities will result in significant cost savings due to unforeseen risks, large implementation costs, or benefits that fall short of expectations. Examples of this can be the result of a technology that is not fully developed, uncertainty in the amount of cost reduction, or difficulties introducing a new process into an organization. These uncertainties can manifest several ways and can result in a WRO with limited cost savings or even a loss of investment. The framework developed emphasizes the importance of effectively screening the WROs from a holistic perspective to objectively identify inefficiencies and ensure a positive impact to the organization. This report presents the Technical, Economic, and Risk Assessment (TERA) as a key methodology for the screening and evaluation of potential WROs. The TERA framework begins with a screening phase where the process is examined through a hybrid combination of Lean Six Sigma and Integrated Operations for Nuclear (ION) guiding principles. This framework examines the current processes using the Lean Six Sigma SIPOC (Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs, Consumers) methodology but retains the ION key elements of People, Technology, Process, and Governance as important factors to the nuclear decision-making process. By combining the principles of Lean Six Sigma and ION, the developed screening process is specific to the nuclear industry in that it systematically evaluates WROs in order to implement new technology that is comprehensively evaluated. The TERA begins by mapping current processes as they relate to WROs and examining the inefficiencies. Furthermore, the created process map can be used to identify and evaluate potential solutions. Using key performance indicators (KPIs), the TERA evaluates each area—technology, economics, and risk—for uncertainties and to perform cost-benefit analysis. The results of the TERA are important KPIs that allow for an evaluation of different processes and technology implementations. This assessment enables decision-makers to compare various WROs based on metrics and then make informed decisions for which opportunity to implement first. This research includes not only the creation of the TERA framework, but also the evaluation of its performance. A case study for screening potential WROs at Southern Nuclear Company is presented that utilizes the TERA methodology. Through the use of TERA, various WROs were screened, and the solutions evaluated for cost-benefit expectations. The report concludes by summarizing the overall effort and implications for utility modernization. The performance of the screening and TERA are discussed as well as the impact on the nuclear industry. The TERA process enables utilities to evaluate and inform investment decisions for WROs and mitigate any potential risks. Through this research, we provide utilities with a valuable framework to optimize operations, reduce costs, and drive continuous process improvement.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Streamlining Ground Station Network Compatibility Test for Small Satellites

A team of eight subject matter experts at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) completed a Lean Six Sigma project to identify process improvements for the compatibility test process for small satellites planning to use the NASA Near Earth Network (NEN). Ground station network compatibility testing is designed to reduce the risk to missions by resolving issues between the spacecraft's flight communication and navigation components and the ground systems prior to launch. Compatibility testing, which consists of a series of tests performed over a period of months and documented in reports, is an important step meant to prevent post-launch anomalies that could lead to expensive troubleshooting or mission failure. Compared to traditional missions, small satellite missions typically have a smaller budget and compressed schedules, which can result in small satellite projects' willingness to accept the risk associated with less comprehensive compatibility testing. Optimization and or refinement of the compatibility test process for small satellite missions could alleviate some of the pressures inherent with these factors. The goal of the Lean Six Sigma project was to develop alternative scalable methods of compatibility testing for small satellites. The Lean Six Sigma approach and the results of the project are reviewed in this paper.

Streamlining↗

MO-B-BRB-00: Optimizing the Treatment Planning Process

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRB-01: Optimize Treatment Planning Process in Clinical Environment

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRB-02: Maintain the Quality of Treatment Planning for Time-Constraint Cases

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRB-03: Systems Engineering Tools for Treatment Planning Process Optimization in Radiation Medicine

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

Ares Launch Vehicles Lean Practices Case Study

This viewgraph presentation describes test strategies and lean philisophies and practices that are applied to Ares Launch Vehicles. The topics include: 1) Testing strategy; 2) Lean Practices in Ares I-X; 3) Lean Practices Applied to Ares I-X Schedule; 4) Lean Event Results; 5) Lean, Six Sigma, and Kaizen Practices in the Ares Projects Office; 6) Lean and Kaizen Success Stories; and 7) Ares Six Sigma Practices.

Doreswamy, Rajiv, N.↗

The Application of Lean Thinking Principles and Kaizen Practices for the Successful Development and Implementation of the Ares I-X Flight Test Rocket and Mission

On October 28, 2009 the Ares I-X flight test rocket launched from Kennedy Space Center and flew its suborbital trajectory as designed. The mission was successfully completed as data from the test, and associated development activities were analyzed, transferred to stakeholders, and well documented. Positive lessons learned from Ares I-X were that the application of lean thinking principles and kaizen practices are effective in streamlining development activities. Ares I-X, like other historical rocket development projects, was hampered by technical, cost, and schedule challenges and if not addressed boldly could have resulted in cancellation of the test. The mission management team conducted nine major meetings, referred to as lean events, across its elements to assess plans, procedures, processes, requirements, controls, culture, organization, use of resources, and anything that could be changed to optimize schedule or reduce risk. The preeminent aspect of the lean events was the focus on value added activities and the removal or at least reduction in non-value activities. Trained Lean Six Sigma facilitators assisted the Ares I-X developers in conducting the lean events. They indirectly helped formulate the mission s own unique methodology for assessing schedule. A core team was selected to lead the events and report to the mission manager. Each activity leveraged specialized participants to analyze the subject matter and its related processes and then recommended alternatives and solutions. Stakeholders were the event champions. They empowered and encouraged the team to succeed. The keys to success were thorough preparation, honest dialog, small groups, adherence to the Ares I-X ground rules, and accountability through disciplined reporting and tracking of actions. This lean event formula was game-changing as demonstrated by the success of Ares I-X. It is highly recommended as a management tool to help develop other complex systems efficiently. The key benefits for Ares I-X were obtaining unambiguous schedule margin, defining enabling options for risk reduction, and most importantly a stronger more unified team.

Askins, B. R.↗

The Application of Lean Thinking Principles and Kaizen Practices for the Successful Development and Implementation of the Ares I-X Flight Test Rocket and Mission

On October 28, 2009 the Ares I-X flight test rocket launched from Kennedy Space Center and flew its suborbital trajectory as designed. The mission was successfully completed as data from the test, and associated development activities were analyzed, transferred to stakeholders, and well documented. A positive lesson learned from Ares I-X was that the application of lean thinking principles and kaizen practices was very effective in streamlining development activities. Ares I-X, like other historical rocket development projects, was hampered by technical, cost, and schedule challenges and if not addressed boldly could have resulted in cancellation of the test. The mission management team conducted nine major meetings, referred to as lean events, across its elements to assess plans, procedures, processes, requirements, controls, culture, organization, use of resources, and anything that could be changed to optimize schedule or reduce risk. The preeminent aspect of the lean events was the focus on value added activities and the removal or at least reduction in non-value added activities. Trained Lean Six Sigma facilitators assisted the Ares I-X developers in conducting the lean events. They indirectly helped formulate the mission s own unique methodology for assessing schedule. A core team was selected to lead the events and report to the mission manager. Each activity leveraged specialized participants to analyze the subject matter and its related processes and then recommended alternatives and solutions. Stakeholders were the event champions. They empowered and encouraged the team to succeed. The keys to success were thorough preparation, honest dialog, small groups, adherence to the Ares I-X ground rules, and accountability through disciplined reporting and tracking of actions. This lean event formula was game-changing as demonstrated by Ares I-X. It is highly recommended as a management tool to help develop other complex systems efficiently. The key benefits for Ares I-X were obtaining unambiguous schedule margin, defining enabling options for risk reduction, and most importantly a stronger more unified team.

Askins, B. R.↗

Monitoring of International Space Station Telemetry Using Shewhart Control Charts

Shewhart control charts have been established as an expedient method for analyzing dynamic, trending data in order to identify anomalous subsystem performance as soon as such performance would exceed a statistically established baseline. Additionally, this leading indicator tool integrates a selection methodology that reduces false positive indications, optimizes true leading indicator events, minimizes computer processor unit duty cycles, and addresses human factor concerns (i.e., the potential for flight-controller data overload). This innovation leverages statistical process control, and provides a relatively simple way to allow flight controllers to focus their attention on subtle system changes that could lead to dramatic off-nominal system performance. Finally, this capability improves response time to potential hardware damage and/or crew injury, thereby improving space flight safety. Shewhart control charts require normalized data. However, the telemetry from the ISS Early External Thermal Control System (EETCS) was not normally distributed. A method for normalizing the data was implemented, as was a means of selecting data windows, the number of standard deviations (Sigma Level), the number of consecutive points out of limits (Sequence), and direction (increasing or decreasing trend data). By varying these options, and treating them like dial settings, the number of nuisance alerts and leading indicators were optimized. The goal was to capture all leading indicators while minimizing the number of nuisances. Lean Six Sigma (L6S) design of experiment methodologies were employed. To optimize the results, Perl programming language was used to automate the massive amounts of telemetry data, control chart plots, and the data analysis.

Fitch, Jeffery T.↗

Ares Project Overview - Quality in Design

This presentation introduces the audience to the overall goals of the Ares Project, which include providing human access to low-Earth orbit, the Moon, and beyond. The presentation also provides an overview of with the vehicles that will execute those goals and progress made on the vehicles to date. The briefing will provide an introduction to Lean, Six Sigma, and Kaizen practices Ares will use to improve the overall effectiveness and quality of its efforts. Finally, the briefing includes a summary of Safety and Mission Assurance practices being implemented within[Ares to ensure safety and quality early in the design process. Integrating Safety and Mission Assurance in Design: This presentation describes how the Ares Projects are learning from the successes and failures of previous launch systems in order to maximize safety and reliability while maintaining fiscal responsibility. The Ares Projects are integrating Safer T and Mission Assurance into design activities and embracing independent assessments by Quality experts in thorough reviews of designs and processes. Incorporating Lean thinking into the design process, Ares is also streamlining existing processes and future manufacturing flows which will yield savings during production. Understanding the value of early involvement of Quality experts, the Ares Projects are leading launch vehicle development into the 21st century.

Cianciola, Chris↗

An Introduction to Flight Software Development: FSW Today, FSW 2010

Experience and knowledge gained from ongoing maintenance of Space Shuttle Flight Software and new development projects including Cockpit Avionics Upgrade are applied to projected needs of the National Space Exploration Vision through Spiral 2. Lessons learned from these current activities are applied to create a sustainable, reliable model for development of critical software to support Project Constellation. This presentation introduces the technologies, methodologies, and infrastructure needed to produce and sustain high quality software. It will propose what is needed to support a Vision for Space Exploration that places demands on the innovation and productivity needed to support future space exploration. The technologies in use today within FSW development include tools that provide requirements tracking, integrated change management, modeling and simulation software. Specific challenges that have been met include the introduction and integration of Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) Real Time Operating System for critical functions. Though technology prediction has proved to be imprecise, Project Constellation requirements will need continued integration of new technology with evolving methodologies and changing project infrastructure. Targets for continued technology investment are integrated health monitoring and management, self healing software, standard payload interfaces, autonomous operation, and improvements in training. Emulation of the target hardware will also allow significant streamlining of development and testing. The methodologies in use today for FSW development are object oriented UML design, iterative development using independent components, as well as rapid prototyping . In addition, Lean Six Sigma and CMMI play a critical role in the quality and efficiency of the workforce processes. Over the next six years, we expect these methodologies to merge with other improvements into a consolidated office culture with all processes being guided by automated office assistants. The infrastructure in use today includes strict software development and configuration management procedures, including strong control of resource management and critical skills coverage. This will evolve to a fully integrated staff organization with efficient and effective communication throughout all levels guided by a Mission-Systems Architecture framework with focus on risk management and attention toward inevitable product obsolescence. This infrastructure of computing equipment, software and processes will itself be subject to technological change and need for management of change and improvement,

Gouvela, John↗