Architecting with Models and UML/SysML Dr. Kenneth Kung Architecture Technology Area Director Raytheon Company June 2005 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved

Page 2 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Raytheon Company SASIISNCSIDSMSRTSC RAC

Page 3 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Four Strategic Business Areas (SBA’s) Missile Defense Homeland Security Precision Engagement Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance (ISR) The SBA’s Focus on Cross-Business Opportunities

Page 4 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Technology Strategy to Support Business and SBAs Business Units Strategic Business Area MSRACIDSNCSIISSAS Technology Areas RF EO/Lasers Processing Arch/Syst Int Missile Defense Precision Strike Homeland Security ISR Correlate Rationalize Strategize RF EO/Lasers Processing Arch/Syst Int Mat’l & Structure Mat’l/Struct Architecture Vision Reference Architectures Implementation Guidelines Repositories for Reuse Architecture Review Board (ARB) Training and Certification Framework and Standards REAP (Raytheon Enterprise Arch Process)

Page 5 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Architecture Vision – System of Elements™ TraditionalSystem of Elements ™

Page 6 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Reference Architecture Raytheon Enterprise Architecture Process (REAP) Customer Needs Specific Program Requirements Apply Ref Arch Technology, Lessons Learned, Best Practices Applicable Strategy statement “System of Elements” Reference Architecture offers a single point of departure in implementing mission solutions Reference Architecture offers a single point of departure in implementing mission solutions Governed by ARB MissionSolution Businesses

Page 7 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved System Architecture Implementation Approach

Page 8 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Operational View

Page 9 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Logical View Layered Architecture Patterns

Page 10 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Physical View Hardware Block Diagram Deployment Diagram Design Documentation Product Data Standards Profile Software Documentation Timing/Performance Data

Page 11 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Architecture Analysis Operator Roles Activity Threads Use Cases Domain Collaboration Diagram Operational/Mission Analysis Process/Workflow Analysis Scenarios/ Events Mission Outcomes Actor Inputs/ Events System Outputs Messages/ Data Action Timing Digital Product Model Logical/Functional Analysis Physical Analysis Physical Architecture Product Data Size/Timing Estimates Design Patterns Foundation Classes Behavioral Patterns Logical Architecture Executable Architecture Design Verification

Page 12 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Integrated Model “ SysML DoDAF Operational Architecture” OVs CIM - Computation Independent Model Elaborated “SysML DoDAF System Architecture” SVs PIM - Platform Independent Model Hardware and OS Independent Common Services + HW & OS (OACE) Platform Model Delivered Components PSM - Platform Specific Model X Platform Profile Mission Profile Unit Test, VV&A Drive Architecture-Based M&S Analyze Requirements X X Testing Space Net Centric Stand- alone Live M&S Drive Testing

Page 13 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved UML Profiles: Major MDA Autocode Generation Mechanism UML profiles support the development of domain or technology specific semantics extensions to UML. Association of code to these standard profiles is a major mechanism for auto-code generation. Profiles can be built on other profiles, and multiple profiles can be used together. – Define a majority of the Platform Model – Key Language Mappings profiles include CORBA, DSS (publish& subscribe) and XML-SOAP. – Key facilities profiles include: ■Scheduling, Performance, and Time (RT support) ■Testing ■QoS and Fault Tolerance – Key domain profiles include SysML and DoDAF. ■SysML is the System Engineering UML-2 Profile in process of being adopted. ■SysML has defined interfaces to HLA, MATHLAB, AP233, SystemC, and other SysEng constructs ■DoDAF will become a SysML Profile.

Page 14 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved UML Profile for Systems Engineering (SysML) - Observations SEDSIG RFP for UML Profile for System Engineering Very Solid Raytheon supports and agrees with this development SysML Partners have nGood Technical product nStrive for consensus, both users and vendors nNeed to push forward, despite schedule slips

Page 15 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved UML Profile for Systems Engineering (SysML) - Expectations A model driven language for holistic system representation – SysML is broader than UML can do – Can capture all salient aspects of complex system design A language that is intuitive for system engineers – Supporting proven systems engineering concepts – The language must not be a barrier to traditional system engineering methods A language that facilitates, but does not mandate OO concepts A language that is consistent with, or transitionable to, UML used in software development A language that is embraced by a critical mass of tool vendors

Page 16 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved UML Profile for DoDAF and MoDAF (UPDM) - Observations Customers demanding DoDAF artifacts Lack of Standard expression of DoDAF views in UML Non-standard tools and techniques for modeling DoDAF RFP – very solid team – Got DoDAF 2 key people involved Submission Development – Raytheon values this activity – Will participate in the development of this profile

Page 17 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved UML Profile for DoDAF and MoDAF (UPDM) - Expectations A set of representations that is intuitive to our customer, and to non-UML engineers A model-based approach for developing DoDAF/MoDAF views – Consistency between views, based on underlying model An implementable profile, based on UML 2/SysML – More consistent tools – compliance beyond basics (intermediate or complete) Usable data exchange between tools – XMI - XML meta data interface ■Expect tools to compliant with XMI to support interoperability – Diagram exchange interface

Page 18 © 2005 Raytheon Company All Rights Reserved Final Thoughts Integration of processes has blurred the distinction between software and system Integrated tool from operational views down to executable code can ease the communication among engineers from various disciplines OMG is building the right products – Encourage faster consensus building Challenge: Very few of us get to design a brand new system. – How do we bring the legacy applications into the framework? – How do we decompose their functionality to be re-used in an SOA architecture?