Thoughts on Model Interoperability

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Integration of MBSE and Virtual Engineering for Detailed Design
Advertisements

Component-Based Software Engineering Main issues: assemble systems out of (reusable) components compatibility of components.
Mahmut Ali GÖKÇEIndustrial Systems Engineering Lecture 2 System Identification ISE102 Spring 2007.
The design process IACT 403 IACT 931 CSCI 324 Human Computer Interface Lecturer:Gene Awyzio Room:3.117 Phone:
Software Modeling SWE5441 Lecture 3 Eng. Mohammed Timraz
Model-Based Product Line Architecture and Analysis
Automated Analysis and Code Generation for Domain-Specific Models George Edwards Center for Systems and Software Engineering University of Southern California.
L4-1-S1 UML Overview © M.E. Fayad SJSU -- CmpE Software Architectures Dr. M.E. Fayad, Professor Computer Engineering Department, Room #283I.
UML CASE Tool. ABSTRACT Domain analysis enables identifying families of applications and capturing their terminology in order to assist and guide system.
Business Area Analysis Focus: Domain View (selected business area) Goals: –Isolate functions and procedures that allow the area to meet its goals –Define.
® IBM Software Group © 2007 IBM Corporation Achieving Harmony IBM's Platform and Methodology for Systems Engineering and Embedded Software Development.
Enterprise Architecture
COMPONENT-BASED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
1 IBM Software Group ® Mastering Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with UML 2.0 Module 1: Best Practices of Software Engineering.
THE GITB TESTING FRAMEWORK Jacques Durand, Fujitsu America | December 1, 2011 GITB |
1 Process Engineering A Systems Approach to Process Improvement Jeffrey L. Dutton Jacobs Sverdrup Advanced Systems Group Engineering Performance Improvement.
Software Engineering Chapter 8 Fall Analysis Extension of use cases, use cases are converted into a more formal description of the system.Extension.
 CS 5380 Software Engineering Chapter 2 – Software Processes Chapter 2 Software Processes1.
© 2012 xtUML.org Bill Chown – Mentor Graphics Model Driven Engineering.
Component Oriented Programming 1 Introduction to COP.
CS551 - Lecture 5 1 CS551 Lecture 5: Quality Attributes Yugi Lee FH #555 (816)
Chapter 4 Automated Tools for Systems Development Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition 4.1.
Designing a Product Line Architecture Jan Bosch Professor of Software Engineering University of Groningen, Netherlands
Smart Home Technologies
Software Reuse Course: # The Johns-Hopkins University Montgomery County Campus Fall 2000 Session 4 Lecture # 3 - September 28, 2004.
Software Engineering Lecture 10: System Engineering.
High Risk 1. Ensure productive use of GRID computing through participation of biologists to shape the development of the GRID. 2. Develop user-friendly.
The Lockheed Martin Digital Tapestry
© 2009 Artisan Software Tools. All rights reserved. Testing Solutions with UML/SysML Andrew Stuart, Matthew Hause.
1 Ontological Foundations For SysML Henson Graves September 2010.
SysML v2 Model Interoperability & Standard API Requirements Axel Reichwein Consultant, Koneksys December 10, 2015.
INCOSE IW 2012 MBSE Workshop Systems Modeling
1 Copyright © 2014 by Lockheed Martin Corporation SE Use Cases SysML Roadmap Activity John Watson Lockheed Martin 6/17/2014.
1 CASE Computer Aided Software Engineering. 2 What is CASE ? A good workshop for any craftsperson has three primary characteristics 1.A collection of.
1 The XMSF Profile Overlay to the FEDEP Dr. Katherine L. Morse, SAIC Mr. Robert Lutz, JHU APL
M&CML: A Monitoring & Control Specification Modeling Language
Chapter 10 Structuring System Requirements: Conceptual Data Modeling
Building Enterprise Applications Using Visual Studio®
Systems Engineering Concept Model (SECM) Update
Integrating MBSE into a Multi-Disciplinary Engineering Environment A Software Engineering Perspective Mark Hoffman 20 June 2011 Copyright © 2011 by Lockheed.
Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition
Extending Model-Driven Engineering in Tango
Self Healing and Dynamic Construction Framework:
Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition
SOA Implementation and Testing Summary
Ron Williamson, PhD Systems Engineer, Raytheon 20 June 2011
HCI in the software process
Model-Driven Analysis Frameworks for Embedded Systems
Tools of Software Development
Chapter 4 Automated Tools for Systems Development
Ontology Reuse In MBSE Henson Graves Abstract January 2011
Component-Based Software Engineering
Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition
Digital Artifacts and the Need for Portability
Outbrief MBSE Workshop Breakout Session 31 January 2011
System Modeling Assessment & Roadmap Joint OMG/INCOSE Working Group
Modern Systems Analysis and Design Third Edition
HCI in the software process
System Modeling Assessment & Roadmap Joint OMG/INCOSE Working Group
CS385T Software Engineering Dr.Doaa Sami
Peeling Back The Layers Of MBE:
Copyright © 2015, 2012, 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
HCI in the software process
Automated Analysis and Code Generation for Domain-Specific Models
Human Computer Interaction Lecture 14 HCI in Software Process
Chapter 10 Structuring System Requirements: Conceptual Data Modeling
Copyright © 2015, 2012, 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Nicholas J. Di Liberto 20 June 2011
Open API and Open Architecture Working Group (OA2-WG) *DRAFT*
Lecture 10 Structuring System Requirements: Conceptual Data Modeling
Presentation transcript:

Thoughts on Model Interoperability NDIA Modeling and Simulation Workshop Sean McGervey Sean.McGervey@jhuapl.edu 13 August, 2018

Agenda Why is a new paradigm for development needed? Three enabling elements for the new paradigm Model-Based Systems Engineering Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Product Line Architecture Rationale for combining these enabling elements? How can these enabling elements be combined?

Why is a New Development Paradigm Needed? Product development is still often based on opportunistic reuse or one-off modification of components to fit needs Components that are modified must go through time consuming and costly verification and validation again New and modified components have no pedigree or usage history making them riskier to use in products Component development often involves multidisciplinary design aspects, conflicting requirements, and management of complex sets of system attributes and their parametric relationships Product A Payload Radar Structural Frame EO/IR Engine Comms Product B Radar Payload Structural Frame Weapon System EO/IR Engine Comms

Enablers for a Better Development Paradigm: Model-Based Systems Engineering Requirements Well-defined interfaces and self-consistent specifications for products and components Robust traceability of flow down of requirements to design of products and components Ability to assert structural, behavioral, and parametric relationships between components of products Behavior Structure Parametrics

Enablers for a Better Development Paradigm: Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization MDAO has long been a staple of the aerospace industry MDAO attacks the problem of multidisciplinary system design, analysis, and optimization Federates computational models of the system from the perspective of various design disciplines ModelCenter™ by the vendor Phoenix Integration is a COTS tool supporting MDAO work

Building a Better Development Paradigm, Part 1: MBSE + MDAO = Integrated Analytical Design Verification MBSE Workflow MDAO Workflow During Product Development, system attributes captured in the system model can be parametrically related to technical measures and analyzed by an integrated MDAO framework

Enablers for a Better Development Paradigm: Product Line Architecture Product lines enable reuse at each phase of the systems engineering lifecycle Everything including product requirements, features, and configurations can be reused during product development Many requirements will be common across all products in a product line, while others are optional Key to realizing “economy of scale” benefits lies in pre-planned reuse of product components

Enablers for a Better Development Paradigm: Product Line Lessons Learned from Lego™ Lego™ products are not just popular for the predefined designs that can be built, but for the reusable blocks Blocks have well-defined specifications which govern how they can be used While an entire predefined design has limited reuse value, the blocks have tremendous reuse value

Enablers for a Better Development Paradigm: Reuse Should Be Pre-Planned, Not Opportunistic Failing to appreciate that can result in unforeseen time and money modifying a component to fit a new product context Reusing a component means reusing all the requirements and architectural decisions that drove its development

Building a Better Development Paradigm, Part 2: PLA + MBSE = Domain Specific Modeling Language Combining PLA with MBSE allows unambiguous and self-consistent specification of systems in terms of the components that are common, optional, and variable across members of its product line Models can be built using standardized elements that are domain-specific with rules for their use that can be validated and enforced by system modeling tools

Building a Better Development Paradigm, Part 2: PLA + MBSE = Domain Specific Modeling Language The application of MBSE to the specification of a PLA also sets the stage for using MDAO for verifying design assertions

Putting the Pieces Together: MBSE + MDAO + PLA = Robust Product Development Development starts with specifying the new product in terms of the product line’s architecture constraints, and determining which components are already provisioned and which must be developed. MBSE (Product Specification) New components are developed using the domain specific modeling language for the product line, and their design is verified using the integrated MDAO framework. Verified components are added to the collection of provisioned components for the product line, and can be used in future product development. PLA (Component Provisioning) MDAO (Product Verification)

Summary Products can be made faster, cheaper, and better by adopting a product line approach to their development Opportunistic reuse and one-off modification of components is replaced by pre-planned reuse for product development Development of new components is managed in accordance with the constraints of the product line architecture The architecture of each component, product, and product line is specified using a SysML-based modeling language that is specific to that product line’s domain Development of products and new components is guided by continuous verification of their design using an integrated multidisciplinary analysis and optimization framework