Evaluation method for technical maturity of aerospace product

Abstract

The invention relates to an aerospace product technology maturity evaluation method, and belongs to the technical field of aerospace product quality reliability. The method specifically comprises the following steps: step 1, for a to-be-evaluated product, confirming a key technology of the evaluated product according to a use demand and a technology development route; 2, according to the technical elements of the key technology, quantitative evaluation is carried out around the technical index advancement A1, the simulation test completeness A2 and the limit pulling deviation effect A3; 3, determining each index of the technical elements, and obtaining an evaluation result matrix grade vector of the key technology; 4, processing the weight by adopting an analytic hierarchy process, firstly processing the product-technology layer to obtain a weight vector N1 of a key technology relative to an evaluated product, secondly processing the technology-index layer to obtain a weight N2 of each index in technical elements, and further obtaining a weight N of each sub-element relative to the product; and step 5, calculating the maturity grade of the product through a weighting method.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention relates to a method for evaluating the technical maturity of an aerospace product, and belongs to the technical field of quality reliability of aerospace products. Background Art

[0002] As a tool for technology risk management, technology maturity supports the identification of the development status of key product technologies and supports technology management decisions. Technology maturity is systematically evaluated from multiple aspects such as principle, feasibility, verification, and application according to certain level measurement standards, guiding product development units to carry out product development activities in a systematic, comprehensive, orderly, and standardized manner. Technology maturity can be used to sort out the activities and results of principle research, technical research, prototype manufacturing, demonstration and verification in the process of technical work, find out the technical mechanisms that have not been fully understood, and reduce the risks of technology in engineering applications. Therefore, a reasonable and accurate evaluation of the technology maturity of aerospace products is crucial for product development activities. Summary of the invention

[0003] In view of this, the present invention provides a method for evaluating the technology maturity of aerospace products, establishes technology maturity evaluation criteria from the perspective of technical indicator advancement, simulation test completeness, and extreme pull-off effectiveness, and proposes a weighted analysis calculation method to scientifically quantify the technology maturity level.

[0004] The main technical solutions of the present invention are as follows:

[0005] A method for evaluating the technical maturity of aerospace products, the specific process is:

[0006] Step 1: For the product to be evaluated, confirm the key technology of the product to be evaluated based on usage requirements and technology development route;

[0007] Step 2: Based on the technical elements of key technologies, quantitative evaluation is conducted around the technical indicator advancement A1, simulation test completion A2, and extreme pulling effectiveness A3;

[0008] Step 3: Determine the indicators of technical factors and obtain the evaluation result matrix level vector of key technologies;

[0009] Step 4: Use the hierarchical analysis method to process the weights. First, process the "product-technology" layer to obtain the weight vector N1 of the key technology relative to the evaluated product. Then process the "technology-indicator" layer to obtain the weight N2 of each indicator in the technical factor, and then obtain the weight N of each sub-factor relative to the product, N = N2 × N1;

[0010] Step 5: Calculate the maturity level of the product through a weighted method.

[0011] Furthermore, the present invention uses theoretical calculation, digital simulation and physical testing to combine the results obtained by the above three methods to further obtain key technical advancement indicators of the product to be evaluated.

[0012] Furthermore, each tensile test item described in the present invention is divided into three test levels. The one-star tensile test is measured according to the corresponding indicators specified in the task book, the two-star tensile test partially offsets the indicators specified in the task book, and the three-star tensile test further offsets some indicators on the basis of the two-star tensile test.

[0013] Furthermore, the product to be evaluated in the present invention is an inertial combination;

[0014] Technical indicators measurement: Through theoretical calculation, digital simulation and physical testing, four technical indicators are measured: long-term stability of gyro zero bias, long-term stability of gyro scale factor, steady-state power consumption, and error model parameter stability period;

[0015] Simulation test completion index measurement: measure the completion of simulation tests at the scheme stage, prototype stage and final prototype stage;

[0016] Limit deflection effectiveness measurement: including low temperature test, high temperature test, low frequency sine sweep test, steady state power supply deflection test, angular motion frequency characteristics, linear motion frequency characteristics and working life test.

[0017] Furthermore, the three test magnitude measurement indicators for measuring the effectiveness of the limit deflection of the present invention are shown in the following table:

[0018]

[0019] Beneficial effects:

[0020] The present invention carries out key technology maturity evaluation, which can implement the selection and control of new technologies and processes in a more standardized manner, and identify and analyze technical risks as early as possible by quantitatively analyzing the maturity of key technologies to be selected for the project. The technology maturity evaluation is implemented by quantitatively evaluating the technical indicators A1, A2, A3, and A4. When discussing the development status and risks of aerospace product technology, there is a common reference, which provides a deep understanding of the maturity of the technology. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0021] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the drawings required for use in the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying creative work.

[0022] Figure 1 The present invention is a flow chart of the aerospace product technology maturity evaluation method. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0023] The embodiments of the present invention are described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0024] It should be noted that the following embodiments and features in the embodiments may be combined with each other in the absence of conflict; and, based on the embodiments in the present disclosure, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in the field without making any creative work are within the scope of protection of the present disclosure.

[0025] It should be noted that various aspects of the embodiments within the scope of the appended claims are described below. It should be apparent that the aspects described herein may be embodied in a wide variety of forms, and any specific structure and / or function described herein is merely illustrative. Based on the present disclosure, it should be understood by those skilled in the art that an aspect described herein may be implemented independently of any other aspect, and two or more of these aspects may be combined in various ways. For example, any number of aspects described herein may be used to implement the device and / or practice the method. In addition, other structures and / or functionalities other than one or more of the aspects described herein may be used to implement this device and / or practice this method.

[0026] The present invention provides a technology maturity evaluation method based on quantitative calculation, such as Figure 1 As shown, the specific steps of the method are:

[0027] The present invention is described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and examples. The present invention provides a technology maturity evaluation method based on quantitative calculation, such as Figure 1 As shown, the specific steps of the method are:

[0028] S01 Identify the key technologies of the product being evaluated

[0029] Select the product to be evaluated, confirm the key technology of the product to be evaluated according to the usage requirements and technology development route, and clarify the key technology I i ; where i=1, 2,…m.

[0030] S02 Carry out quantitative evaluation of key technical elements

[0031] According to the technical elements of key technologies, a quantitative evaluation was conducted around the three technical elements of technical indicator advancement A1, simulation test completion A2, and extreme pulling effectiveness A3. i A1, I i A2, I i A3.

[0032] S03 Determine the key indicators of technical elements

[0033] Determine the indicators of technical factors and obtain the evaluation result matrix level vector of key technologies A1=[Y1,Y2,…Y n ],A2=[P1,P2,…P n ],A2=[Q3,Q2,…Q n ]. The evaluation matrix R of the key technology of the product is as follows:

[0034]

[0035] Among them, Y i , P i , Q i Y represents the technical indicators corresponding to the three technical elements of technical indicators A1, simulation test completion A2, and extreme deflection effectiveness A3. in , P in , Q in It represents the nth technical sub-element of the i-th technical indicator of the key technology. The list of key sub-element is as follows:

[0036] Table 1 List of key technical sub-elements

[0037]

[0038]

[0039]

[0040] Taking the key technology of inertial combination as an example, the implementation rules of technology maturity evaluation are as follows:

[0041] (1) Advanced technical indicators

[0042] Through theoretical calculations, digital simulations and physical tests, the rationality of the technical specifications is reviewed with respect to technical indicators such as the long-term stability of gyro zero bias, long-term stability of gyro scale factor, steady-state power consumption, and the stability period of error model parameters.

[0043] Table 2 Achievement of key indicators

[0044]

[0045]

[0046] (2) Completion of simulation test

[0047] The evaluation focuses on the completion of simulation tests of key technologies of inertial combination, focusing on the completion of simulation tests in the scheme stage, prototype stage, and final prototype stage, and the evaluation results are obtained:

[0048]

[0049] (3) Effectiveness of extreme pulling

[0050] Each pull-off test item is divided into three test levels, and the comprehensive comparison sub-factors correspond to each pull-off test item. The pull-off test items of key products are shown in Table 3. The extreme pull-off effectiveness adopts the means of star rating. Taking the inertial measurement unit as an example, the extreme pull-off effectiveness scoring rules are as follows:

[0051] Table 3 Deflection test levels for aerospace products

[0052]

[0053]

[0054] S04 Carry out quantitative analysis of key product technologies

[0055] The weight of each indicator in the technical factors is obtained by processing the "technology-indicator" layer, and each indicator is obtained by weighted calculation. ij It represents the weight of the technical sub-element in the key technology, and then obtains the key sub-element level SPRL.

[0056]

[0057] S05 weighted calculation to obtain the technology maturity level

[0058] Summarize the levels of key technologies to get the product's technology maturity level vector: use the analytic hierarchy process to process the weights, process the "product-technology" layer to get the weight of the key technology relative to the evaluated product, and ω is the weight association of each technology. Finally, the technology maturity level of the key technology is obtained.

[0059]

[0060] In summary, the above are only preferred embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the protection scope of the present invention. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc. made within the spirit and principles of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the technical maturity of aerospace products, characterized in that: The specific process is: Step 1: For the product to be evaluated, confirm the key technology of the product to be evaluated based on usage requirements and technology development route; Step 2: Based on the technical elements of key technologies, quantitative evaluation is conducted around the technical indicator advancement A1, simulation test completion A2, and extreme pulling effectiveness A3; Step 3: Determine the indicators of technical factors and obtain the evaluation result matrix level vector of key technologies; Step 4: Use the hierarchical analysis method to process the weights. First, process the "product-technology" layer to obtain the weight vector N1 of the key technology relative to the evaluated product. Then process the "technology-indicator" layer to obtain the weight N2 of each indicator in the technical factor, and then obtain the weight N of each sub-factor relative to the product. Step 5: Calculate the maturity level of the product through a weighted method.

2. The method for evaluating the technical maturity of aerospace products according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The above-mentioned theoretical calculation, digital simulation and physical testing methods are used to combine the results obtained by the above three methods to further obtain the key technical advancement indicators of the product to be evaluated.

3. The method for evaluating the technical maturity of aerospace products according to claim 1 is characterized in that: Each of the tensile test items is divided into three test levels. The one-star tensile test is measured according to the corresponding indicators specified in the task book. The two-star tensile test partially deviates from the indicators specified in the task book. The three-star tensile test further deviates some indicators based on the two-star tensile test.

4. The method for evaluating the technical maturity of aerospace products according to claim 3 is characterized in that: The product to be evaluated is an inertial combination; Technical indicators measurement: Through theoretical calculation, digital simulation and physical testing, four technical indicators are measured: long-term stability of gyro zero bias, long-term stability of gyro scale factor, steady-state power consumption, and error model parameter stability period; Simulation test completion index measurement: measure the completion of simulation tests at the scheme stage, prototype stage and final prototype stage; Limit deflection effectiveness measurement: including low temperature test, high temperature test, low frequency sinusoidal scanning test, steady state power supply deflection test, angular motion frequency characteristics, linear motion frequency characteristics and working life test.

5. The method for evaluating the technical maturity of aerospace products according to claim 4 is characterized in that: The three test level measurement indicators of the limit deflection effectiveness measurement are shown in the following table:

Images