Set-Based Concurrent Engineering in CMI Defence

In the second half of 2013, CMI Defence, a weapons systems manufacturer from Belgium, started to explore Set-Based Concurrent Engineering (SBCE), its advantages, principles and tools associated with the approach. This is not the first time CMI Defence came across SBCE, but it was the first time they committed to it. The implementation was kicked-off at the engineering department, later followed by a first round of global implementation. This article briefly describes the SBCE process in CMI Defence, complemented with some theoretical foundations, for readers not so familiar with the Set-Based Concurrent Engineering approach (often called Set-Based Design or simply Set-Based Engineering).

Set-Based Concurrent Engineering (SBCE) is a product development approach where multiple solutions for the same need or problem are developed in parallel. As the solutions mature through time, teams gradually narrow their respective sets of solutions based on the knowledge gained through prototypes, experiments, and tests. As the teams narrow (reduce) their set of solutions, they commit to staying within the sets so that other design teams (working on a different subsystem or managing the entire system) can rely on their communication (Sobek, et al., 1999).

How does SBCE framework in CMI Defence looks like?

Prior to the ‘Exploration Phase’, the team breaks down the product under consideration (the entire product; e.g. armored vehicle turret system) into its core subsystems (e.g. feeding system, gun, armor, etc.), where each subsystem is then assigned to a team of specialists. This enables the development teams to enter the exploration phase where they create and explore multiple concepts for their respective subsystems in parallel. These are developed for as long as factual information is needed to make a decision. Trade-offs between alternative solutions are explored and feasibility tests are carried out. Testing ensures that enough and right knowledge is generated for informative decision-making, while trade-offs indicate potentially stronger and weaker solutions.

In the second phase called ‘Set-Based Communication,’ teams look for feasible intersections between developed alternatives and rule out the inferior ones. Although some alternatives are not fit for further development, they are not discarded entirely. The ruled-out alternatives might still have interesting and valuable features, which teams can merge with stronger alternatives if/when applicable. Only when all teams are aligned and key knowledge gaps are identified, they enter the third phase, called ‘Convergence’.

‘Convergence Phase’ is a phase where sets of alternative solutions are gradually narrowed down by increasing the details and knowledge through analysis, prototyping and testing.

When the final sets are communicated and agreed upon, development teams commit to staying within their sets so that other teams can rely on them. In this part of the project, teams spend most of the times trying to find the answers to address and resolve the knowledge gaps that exist within their own subsystems, while at the same time ensuring their solutions are capable of seamless integration with solutions from other subsystems. These integration events are ensuring the required knowledge is created and the functionality of the system is perfected before the solution proceeds to the detailed design phase. The final phase, known as the ‘Selection Phase,’ aims at selecting the most promising system solution which will be pursued in the following stages of the product life cycle.

As a result of following the SBCE process for a medium caliber feeding system, CMI Defence developed a brand new, patent pending, design which would have, in engineering team words, very unlikely been developed using their traditional processes and tools.