Deployment in the Space Sector Progress Report 22/09/2008 Timo Latvala

2 Outline Current Vision of Deployment Strategy Training Pilot Modelling Tool Feedback Management Issues Conclusions

3 STRATEGY

4 Task vs time

5 Tools and Modelling Dominate in the Beginning

6 Goals for Year I Learn B and use of Rodin Contribution to JD1 (D5): Achievement of Training Goals Requirements engineering: does it help us to write better requirements Modelling approach Suitability Complete first stages of pilot Initial feed back to tools Measurement goals

7 Activities for M24 and later unclear KEY QUESTIONS Going from pilot to enhanced deployment How to achieve integration with normal SW process? The pilot deployment is critical for success

8 TRAINING

9 Training Goals Have Been Met ACTIVITIES Blocked Course in Zurich Internal Training Arranged by Aabo Mini-pilot modelling Fast learning facilitated by FM experience in RAMS team SW Engineers also have achieved basic understanding

10 PILOT MODELLING

11 Pilot Model Development Mini- Pilot BC Services More complete BC model Complexity May October January 2009

12 Pilot Continues... PUS Services Time January 2009 May 2009 December 2009 More Complete BC model Complete BC model

13 The BepiColombo Environement

14 Current Model Captures High-Level Features All instruments are modelled Focus on State machine features Basic TM/TC traffic FDIR is completely abstract Instrument HW is not modelled TC traffic is completey non- deterministic

15 The most important invariants are relations between state machines

16 White Paper Defines Modelling Approach Key Requirements have been identified First step was to create granular global model Next refined models of instruments were introduced

17 Iterate and Compose Refined instrument models are composed with the global model after every step Smaller steps makes finding errors easier Deviates somewhat from the approach in the White Paper

18 Conventions to Manage Complexity Naming conventions (global namespace) Instruments are modelled separately first (lack of team features)

19 Next Target is November Plenary Meeting More complete TC/TM Instrument HW Fully composed model Traceability in the model

20 Feedback to Requirement Documents Initial instrument modes Instrument mode transition Management of house keeping data Actual changes are still TBC

21 TOOL FEEDBACK

22 Rodin Platform is not Mature

23 Team Work is not Supported Model breaks easily breaks if two people work on the same development Composing models from different developments is difficult

24 Lack of Modularity is a Show Stopper Managing complexity is challenging already hard for small models Modularity in the model is needed NOW Development of larger models is infeasible without it

25 Proof Management Still Needs Work Deafult tactics proove too little, enhanced tactics are too slow, even crash the tool Work around: enhanced tactics only for certain theorems works some times Automatic build is a mixed blessing Training on advanced use could help (best practices)

26 MANAGEMENT ISSUES

27 SW Engineers involvement has decreased

28 Partners: Aabo, Cetic, UNew, and Soton are active ACTIVITIES 1 Training with Aabo 2 Planning Meetings with Aabo Soton contributed a pilot model UNew contributed a pilot model Cetic has been arranging measurement

29 Practical form of co-operation still unclear compared to resource allocation... New ways of collaboration are needed!

30 CONCLUSIONS & ACTIONS

31 Complete Next Step of Pilot as Planned Pilot is in good shape Modelling proceeding according to schedule Add the planned features for the Plenary Meeting

32 Bugs and Stability Issues Must Be Adressed Latest Version of Rodin released 11/3/2008 Response to bug reports is SLOW More resources must be commited to tool maintenance

33 Advanced Training Could Increase Modelling Efficiency Basic things are not a problem Most issues related to manual proving and capturing Arrange course on advanced topics

34 New Features are Needed Urgently Team work is too hard Complexity management is too hard We still dislike the type system New features should be implemented earlier!

35 Partner Involvment Needs To Be Increased Collaboration is not very active at the moment Partner contribution is vague and expectations are unclear New forms of collaboration and explicit plans should be defined

36 Increase SW Engineering Involvment SW engineering team not very involved after initial training period We will pay for it later unless we act Bi-weekly meetings with SW team on modelling

37 Decided actions SSF to submit buggy models to BSCW to show crash problems SSF to submit models which show what issues should be covered at advanced course SSF to submit pilot model for comments and then suggest telecon date. SSF to start co-ordinating meetings with SW team on pilot model