System Readiness Level Index
From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | System Readiness Assessment (SRA) is an innovative methodology that provides a system level metric to help reduce integration issues, one of the leading causes of system development failures. The SRA methodology provides decision-makers a snapshot of a system’s holistic state of maturity and quantifies the level of component-to component integration during system development, using a scale from 1 to 9, with 9 signifying the highest level of readiness, to improve system performance management. Implementation of the SRA methodology aids decision makers in identifying both programmatic and technical risk areas. The SRA methodology is currently being validated through a number of program pilots (M. Austin & D. York, P. 496). | ||
Revision as of 22:45, 21 February 2021
System Readiness Assessment (SRA) is an innovative methodology that provides a system level metric to help reduce integration issues, one of the leading causes of system development failures. The SRA methodology provides decision-makers a snapshot of a system’s holistic state of maturity and quantifies the level of component-to component integration during system development, using a scale from 1 to 9, with 9 signifying the highest level of readiness, to improve system performance management. Implementation of the SRA methodology aids decision makers in identifying both programmatic and technical risk areas. The SRA methodology is currently being validated through a number of program pilots (M. Austin & D. York, P. 496).
Contents |
Background And Purpose
Preliminary Metrics
TRL
| Level | TRL Definition |
| 9 | Actual system proven through succesful mission operations |
| 8 | Actual system completed and qualified through test and demonstration |
| 7 | System prototype demonstration in relevant environment |
| 6 | System/Subsystem model or prototype demonstration in relevant environment |
| 5 | Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment |
| 4 | Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment |
| 3 | Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof-of-concept |
| 2 | Technology concept and/or application formulated |
| 1 | Basic principals observed and reported |
![[TRL]_{\text{nx1}}=
\begin{pmatrix}
TRL_1 \\
TRL_2 \\
... \\
TRL_n
\end{pmatrix}](/images/math/a/4/e/a4e8183199a9707ecac1dd0290944239.png)
IRL
| Level | IRL Definition |
| 7 | The integration of technologies has been verified and validated with sufficient detail to be actionable |
| 6 | The integrating technologies can accept, translate, and structure information for its intended application |
| 5 | There is sufficient control between technologies neccesary to establish, manage, and terminate the integration |
| 4 | There is sufficient detail in the quality and assuranceof the integration between technologies |
| 3 | There is compatibility between technologies to orderly and efficiently integrate and interact |
| 2 | There is some level of specificity to characterize the interaction between technolgoies through their interface |
| 1 | An interface between technologies has been identified with sufficient detail to allow characterization of the relationship |
![[IRL]_{\text{nxn}}=
\begin{pmatrix}
IRL_{11} & IRL_{12} & ... & IRL_{1n} \\
IRL_{21} & IRL_{22} & ... & IRL_{2n} \\
... & ... & ... & ... \\
IRL_{n1} & IRL_{n2} & ... & IRL_{nn} \\
\end{pmatrix}](/images/math/f/4/2/f42cc92c0e832562782c74b027676717.png)
System Readiness Metrics
Component SRL
Composite SRL
SRL
| Level | SRL Definition |
| 9 | System has achieved initial operational capability and can satisfy mission objectives |
| 8 | System interoperability should have been demonstrated in an operational environment |
| 7 | System threshold capability should have been demonstrated at operational performance level |
| 6 | System component integrability shouldhave been validated |
| 5 | System high-risk component technology development should have been defined and the vaseline has been allocated |
| 4 | System performance specifications and constraints should have been defined and the baseline has been allocated |
| 3 | System high-risk immature technologies have been indetified and prototyped |
| 2 | System materiel solution should have been considered |
| 1 | System alternative materiel solutions should have been considered |
![[SRL]_{\text{nx1}}=[IRL]_{\text{nxn}}*[TRL]_{\text{nx1}}](/images/math/1/2/1/1214a9473a2b476e2d7e9dc0ce95a3c7.png)
The 3-Step SRA Process
Understand And Bound The System
Decompose And Map System
Perform Iterative Evaluations
| TRL | IRL | Composite SRL_i | Mean | Composite SRL_i Range | SRL |
| 9 | 9 | 1.000 | 0.914 - 1.000 | 9 | |
| 8 | 8 | 0.828 | 0.914 | 0.750 - 0.913 | 8 |
| 7 | 7 | 0.672 | 0.750 | 0.601 - 0.749 | 7 |
| 6 | 6 | 0.530 | 0.601 | 0.467 - 0.600 | 6 |
| 5 | 5 | 0.404 | 0.467 | 0.349 - 0.466 | 5 |
| 4 | 4 | 0.293 | 0.349 | 0.245 - 0.348 | 4 |
| 3 | 3 | 0.197 | 0.245 | 0.157 - 0.244 | 3 |
| 2 | 2 | 0.116 | 0.157 | 0.084 - 0.156 | 2 |
| 1 | 1 | 0.051 | 0.084 | 0.000 - 0.083 | 1 |
