\label{cha:risk} Risk management is an essential and integral part of any project. Risks are identified as uncertain events which, if they do occur, have an undesired effect on the intended objectives of the project or product \cite{Maylor}. These adverse consequences usually affect the project in either of the following three categories: the project costs, schedule or technical performance. These categories are interrelated, e.g.: in order to eliminate a certain schedule risk, the cost and technical risks will most likely increase. Risk management aims at avoiding, minimizing or eliminating both the effects of risks and risks in general. Therefore, a risk management approach consists of five primary steps \cite{SE_contingency_policy}:
Planning: Establishment of risk management plan.
Risk Identification: Identification of possible risks and their causes.
Risk Assessment: Identification of the magnitude and likelihood of the identified risks.
Risk Analysis: Evaluation of costs and benefits related to risk mitigation (if needed).
Risk Handling: Proposed plan to reduce or eliminate risks and to keep track of the risks during the project execution.
This chapter will elaborate on steps two, three and five of the above mentioned list, and by so doing propose a risk management plan as identified as the very first step. Step four is not considered relevant for this project and will therefore not be included in the remainder of the chapter.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary the definition of risk is: “(Exposure to) the possibility of loss, injury, or other adverse or unwelcome circumstance; a chance or situation involving such a possibility.” \cite{RISK:oxford}. This definition can be used to identify the possible risks for this particular project. It is important to differentiate risks from corresponding causes and consequences. For example, it would be a risk for Mary to fall of her bike. A possible cause would be that traffic is dangerous or another cause would be that Mary only recently learned how to ride her bike. The consequence of that risk would be that she hurts herself.
In risk management it is very important that all the possible risks are identified. This requires the risk manager to be one step ahead of the rest of the project group in order to know the possible risks that may be encountered during the next phase of the project.
For a better overview the risks were divided into two categories. The risks related to the group management and work are shown in Table \ref{tab:proj_risks} and the risks related to failing to meet the requirements are listed in Table \ref{tab:req_risks}. The risks that were present during the previous phase of the project, but aren’t an issue anymore have been crossed out. The remaining risks are considered to still be relevant for the preliminary design phase.
\label{tab:proj_risks}
sdbb # & Cause & Risk & Consequence
P1 & Relatively new market & Market analysis is insufficient & Inaccurate estimation of the potential earnings
P2 & Relatively new market & Market analysis is insufficient & Missing some of the stakeholders
P3 & Electric technology & Some important functions not identified & Resulting in an incomplete requirement analysis
P4 & Electric technology &Reference aircraft cannot be found & Schedule delay to find reference aircraft
P5 & Electric technology & Reference aircraft cannot be found & Faulty initial aircraft parameters
P6 & Electric technology & Class I method cannot be used & Schedule delay to perform Class I
P7 &Electric technology & Requirements and regulations will differ from conventional aircraft & Schedule delay to find requirements and regulations
P8 & Independent work ethic of the DSE & Long group discussions & Schedule delays
P9 & Size of project & Many decisions to be made & Schedule delays
P10 & DOT requires considering all options & DOTs might take more time than estimated & Schedule delays
P11 & Success of conventional RBAR aircraft & Difficult to really think out of the box & Less innovative aircraft
P12 & Daily schedule & Students get fatigued & Loss of efficiency, frustrations
P13 & Size of the team & Communication errors may occur & Loss of efficiency
P14 & Subsystems should use current and near-future state-of-the-arts & Innovations are not yet fully developed & Uncertainties within design options
P15 & Independent work ethic of the DSE & broad definition of deliverables & Students may over think or overdo work & Loss of efficiency
P16 & Sickness or personal issues & Loss of a group member & More work for other students
P17 & Electric technology & Inaccurate Class I Estimation & Large difference between Class I and Class II, extra iterations required
P18 & The dependencies were not assessed correctly & Students need to wait on each other & Schedule delays
P19 & Picking one configuration & Not having chosen the best concept & Not designing the best possible aircraft
P20 & Success of conventional RBAR aircraft & Design does not compete with performance of current RBAR aircraft & Aircraft less marketable
P21 & Estimate for future battery efficiency & Battery efficiency in 2025 is lower than expected & Lower endurance
P22 & Long time between MTR and FR & Students get complacent& Schedule delays
P23 & Many days off in May & Loss of momentum/focus project & Schedule delays
P24 & Bias towards a design option & Trade-offs not objective & Not best design
P25 & Over- and/or underestimating parameters & Wrong trade-off weights & Trade-off outcome not optimal
P26 & Qualitative information & Non conclusive trade-off outcome & Schedule delays
P27 & Many activities in MTR and FR phase & Lose track of what has to be done & Schedule delays
P28 & Unconventional design option chosen & Little information known & Schedule delays/work has less quality
P29 & During conceptual phase many aspects not fully determined & Work takes longer & Schedule delays
P30 & Lack of information from literature & Options considered non feasible that are feasible & Not best design
P31 & Current aircraft have good performance & Bias towards conventional designs & Less innovative design
P32 & Assumptions & Outcome of Class 1/Class 2 inaccurate & Over/under designing
P33 & Assumptions & Trade-off of configurations wrong & Chosen concept not best
P34 & Large content of report & Loss of writing consistency & Schedule delay (more time necessary to QC)
P35 & Iterations change aircraft parameters & Old values used by other group members & Inconsistency/Schedule delays
P36 & Inexperience of group with design process & Unclear how to proceed & Schedule delays
P37 & Addition of a project focus & Limiting the potential of the aircraft & Less marketability
\label{tab:req_risks}
sdbb # & Requirement & Risk & Consequence
R1 & ESPARC-AF-ALL-001 & The aircraft will be less easily maintainable & Making it less attractive to potential buyers, particularly race teams
R2 & ESPARC-AF-FUS-001 & Aircraft unable to be piloted & Useless design
R3 & ESPARC-AF-WNG-001 & Aircraft too wide for the RBAR competitions & Smaller future clientele
R4 & ESPARC-CP-ALL-001 & Endanger the pilot’s safety & Potentially harmful or fatal situations
R5 & ESPARC-CP-ENV-002 & Endanger the pilot’s safety & Potentially harmful or fatal situations
R6 & ESPARC-CP-ENV-003 & Endanger the pilot’s safety while flying & Potentially harmful or fatal situations
R7 & ESPARC-MIS-001 & Increase manufacturing costs & Higher overall sale price or reduced profit
R8 & ESPARC-MIS-001 & Disappoint the TU Delft as stakeholder & Potential losses in project funding
R9 & ESPARC-MIS-002 & Reduce of potential profit & Potential bankruptcy
R10 & ESPARC-MIS-003 & Reduce of potential profit & Potential bankruptcy
R11 & ESPARC-MIS-003 & Increase potential losses if production not reached & Scaring off investors
R12 & ESPARC-MIS-004 & Delayed delivery of the first aircraft & Disappointed stakeholders
R13 & ESPARC-MIS-005 & Less innovative aircraft & Failure of the mission
R14 & ESPARC-MIS-007 & Less sustainable design & Disappointing the stakeholders
R15 & ESPARC-MIS-008 & Less maneuverable aircraft during race & Less competitive design
R16 & ESPARC-MIS-009 & Endangers the pilot while flying & Dangerous and potentially fatal situation
R17 & ESPARC-MIS-010 & Less maneuverable aircraft during race & Less competitive design
R18 & ESPARC-MIS-011 & Disappointed stakeholders & Potential loss of clients
R19 & ESPARC-MIS-012 & Limited possibility to fly at desired flight levels & disappointing stakeholders
R20 & ESPARC-MIS-013 & Limited airfields to operate aircraft from & disappointing the stakeholders
R21 & ESPARC-MIS-013 & Limited airfields to operate aircraft from & Limited participation in RBAR competitions
R22 & ESPARC-MIS-014 & Limited airfields to operate aircraft from & Disappointing the stakeholders
R23 & ESPARC-MIS-014 & Limited airfields to operate aircraft from can be operated & Limited participation in some RBAR competitions
R24 & ESPARC-MIS-016 & Increased landing speed & requiring more advanced deceleration devices
R25 & ESPARC-MIS-018 & Limited participation in RBAR competitions & Loss of clients
R26 & ESPARC-MIS-020 & Limited participation in RBAR competition & Disappointed stakeholders
R27 & ESPARC-CP-ERG-004 & Exclusion from RBAR competitions & Smaller clientele and less recognition.
R28 & ESPARC-AF-ALL-002 & Severe vibrations & Structural failure
R29 & ESPARC-PERF-017 & Pilot workload too large & Potentially dangerous situations
R30 & ESPARC-PERF-021 & Aircraft too weak in negative loading & Early structural failure
R31 & ESPARC-CT-CSF-003 & Pilot workload too large & Potentially dangerous situations
R32 & ESPARC-CT-ALL-001 & Pilot workload too large & Potentially dangerous situations
R33 & ESPARC-PERF-015 & Aircraft unable to participate in RBAR competitions & Failure of the mission
50 & ESPARC-PERF-016 & Aircraft crashes upon landing & Damage or loss of aircraft and pilot
51 & ESPARC-AF-ALL-003 & Aircraft components fail in flight & Damage or loss of aircraft and pilot
52 & ESPARC-ALL-ALL-001& The aircraft cannot be certified according to \(CS-23\)* & The aircraft cannot be used outside races*
\label{sec:risk_quantification}
In order to assess which risks pose the highest threat for the project, all risks are plotted in a risk map. For all the risks the likelihood of occurrence and the magnitude of the consequences are determined. The likelihood is expressed on a scale from one to five, one being almost impossible and five being almost certain. Similarly the magnitude of the risks is evaluated on a scale from one to five, or from insignificant to catastrophic.
The risk map that results from this approach can be seen in Table \ref{tab:risk_map}. The numbers in this risk map refer to the numbering of the risks in Tables \ref{tab:proj_risks} and \ref{tab:req_risks}. In order to have a clear overview of the threat that a certain risk poses, colors have been added to the risk map. The risks in the green area pose little to no threat, the ones in the yellow area pose a medium threat and the ones in the red area pose a considerable threat to the project and should be monitored closely.
From this risk map it can be seen that risks 5, 8, 9, 11, 14, 20, 27, 29, 32 and 44 need additional risk handling. The precautions that were taken can be seen in Section \ref{sec:risk_handling}.
\label{tab:risk_map}
l Y c c c c c & LIKELIHOOD & & & &
MAGNITUDE & 1. Impossible & 2. Rare & 3. Possible & 4. Likely & 5. Certain
5. Catastrophic& 22 & 18, 21, 49,50 & 11, 20, 29, 32, 44 & &
4. Major& & 17, 43, 46, 56 & 16, 19, 41, 51, 53, 57 & 8, 9, 14, 27 &
3. Moderate& 52 & 37, 39, 40, 47 & 10, 24, 25, 31, 33, 42, 48, 54 & 13, 15, 26, 28, 45 & 5
2. Minor& & 34, 35, 36, 38 & 12, 23, 30 & 3, 55 & 4, 6, 7
1. Insignificant& & & & & 1, 2
&&&&
&green & yellow & red
\label{sec:risk_handling} After having identified and assessed all the risks, the risks that pose the biggest threat (those in the red area of the map) are to be mitigated. This is part of the final step in the risk assessment approach, called risk handling. Risk handling can be done by either a mitigation plan or by minimising the risk. For each of the risks proposed in Section \ref{sec:risk_quantification} (5, 8, 9 11, 14, 20, 27, 29, 32, 44) a mitigation plan is proposed in Table \ref{tab:riskplan} below.
| Risk | Risk mitigation Plan |
|---|---|
| Risk 8 | The president or vice-president should lead the group discussions and keep an eye on the time. Additionally, a time limit could be considered prior to each meeting. |
| Risk 9 | This risk cannot be avoided, but by applying the same policy as mentioned for risk 8, discussions regarding certain decisions should be efficient, hence the effect of this risk is minimized. |
| Risk 14 | This risk can be minimized by consulting regularly with the coaches and other possible experts. |
| Risk 20 | To make sure it becomes part of the conceptual design this requirement should be part of the Trade-Off-table. Also, the coaches should be frequently consulted to make sure the design meets the requirement. |
| Risk 27 | There will be someone that regularly checks the budgets to limit the likelihood of the risk. The investors should be consulted with regularly to keep them up-to-date and limit the consequences. |
| Risk 29 | To make sure the design is electric, non-electric options are not considered and are scrapped from the design options. |
| Risk 32 | The structure should be designed to deal with the impact of collision, the impact forces will be taken into account for the design loads. |
| Risk 44 | Validated tests or simulations using numerical models should be performed to verify that the vibrations in the aircraft structure are damped. |
\label{tab:riskplan}
These risk handling plans will only work if the entire group is aware of the risks involved, as well as the proposed mitigation plans. Thus, one of the group members has been assigned the task of regular risk assessment. He will ensure that prior to each elementary phase of the project, the risk assessment steps are completed. He will also inform the group of the most significant risks and their corresponding mitigation techniques.