1. The Lockheed Martin Digital Tapestry
2012 INCOSE MBSE Workshop
Jacksonville, FL
Christopher Oster
MBSD Rollout Manager
Lockheed Martin Corporation
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

2. Agenda
Past Experiences with Model-based Engineering at Lockheed Martin: Lessons Learned and Success Stories (5 min)
Realizing The Potential of Model-based Engineering: Developing a Model-centric Digital Tapestry (20 min)
Q&A/Open Discussion (10 min)
Please Interrupt if You Have Questions!
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

3. Past Experiences with Model-based Engineering at Lockheed Martin
Lessons Learned and Success Stories
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

4. Multidisciplinary MBSD Environment
Matlab, C++
DOORS
Rhapsody SysML ò
System
Verif. Models
(Quality Center) U ( s ) G ( s )
Rhapsody SysML
SEER-SEM
Legend
Systems
Software
Hardware
Shared
SystemC, Verilog, ProEngineer, ANSYS S
SET Q
Rhapsody UML R
CLR Q
MBSD Toolset Spans the Engineering Disciplines to Integrate Requirements Decomposition, Design , Development, and Implementation
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

5. Enabling our Engineers
Expertise Utilizing Model Based Practices And Integrated Tool Suites Allows More Variables And Trade Permutations To Optimize A Design And Find The Best Value Solution Faster
Domain Specific
Model Development & Integration
Enhanced Trade Space Exploration
Technical
Approach Validation
Enterprise Modeling
System Modeling
Component Modeling
I really see this as a way to enable our engineers. I think about my own experience on program – I’m a software guy, and I’d make design choices along a number of boundaries but never really had an objective way to trade one design against another easily. In general we’ll select the better design.
We want our engineers to be able to perform more and better trades. By utilizing and leveraging model based techniques, and highly integrated tool suites, we can allow them to consider more variables and permutations as they optimize their designs, ultimately coming to the best solution faster. This is obviously an affordability driver, but also provides us a route to ensure our solutions are in alignment with our customer needs, and with the shift to technical demonstrations in the procurement process, it provides us a clear path for influencing and supporting our customer requirements and decisions in the final competition.
And as we follow the graphic on the right, it really is
Behavior: Required system behavior captured in architecture model to ensure system meets customer needs
Interfaces: System interfaces defined in architecture model to mandate component compatibility
Requirements: Requirements link to architecture model elements to rapidly assess impact to design as mission needs evolve
Analysis: Parametric diagrams couple performance needs to architecture definition
Assumptions, Rationale, Test Cases and More: Architecture Model links all system artifacts into an integrated database
Promotes consistency, rigor, and understanding to improve program success, reduce risk, and yield greater product flexibility throughout its lifecycle
a flow – as we build and integrate domain specific models, we can enhance our trade space, and more easily asses our technical approach, ultimately letting us influence and support customer decisions.
Support for Customer Decisions
HW Modeling
SW Modeling
V&V Modeling
HW Impl.
SW Impl.
Product Integration
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

6. Adding Value through MBSD
Interface Management
Interface baseline maintained through SysML IBDs and Message model elements.
Documents HW & SW interfaces consistently and ties system behaviors to interfaces.
Scripts can be used to auto-generate interface software directly from the model.
Technical Budget Management
Budgets (size, weight, power, performance, cost) easily managed & maintained in the model.
Engineers enter budget values at lowest leaf level in model (allocated and actual).
Custom budget script runs to accurately roll up budgets to higher levels up to the system level
Test & Integration
The test context, test cases, and test architecture can be captured in SysML.
Test cases can be electronically linked to requirements with verification relationships.
Test procedures described in SysML activity diagrams.
Requirements Mapping
Requirements Decomposition Consistently Maintained within Architecture Model
As requirements evolve, component Impact assessment is easily evaluated through the model
Requirements Lineage Easily Traced , TPMs easily tagged and identified.
Document Generation
Storing information in a model-based database allows for easy data manipulation and extraction.
Documentation generated from the model is always up-to-date and consistent
Labor spent on Document generation can be shifted to more critical tasks
Physical BDD and Scripts Ensure Accurate and Consistent Budgets
Requirements Decomposition Consistently Maintained within Architecture Model
Model-Produced Documentation Increases Program Efficiency
I&T Leverages System Model to Generate High-Quality Test Artifacts
Model-Based Interface Management Drives Flawless Program Execution By Enforcing Consistency
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

7. Revisiting Additional Disciplines for Integration
Matlab, C++
DOORS
Rhapsody SysML ò
System
Verif. Models
(Quality Center) U ( s ) G ( s )
Rhapsody SysML
SEER-SEM
Legend
Use
System Design
Rationale
LM Standard
Systems
Software
Hardware
Shared
SystemC, Verilog, ProEngineer, ANSYS S
SET Q
Rhapsody UML R
CLR Q
Extension of MBSD Integration Concepts into Verification, Costing, Electronics, Mechanical and Manufacturing Disciplines Shows Promise
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

8. © Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation
Realizing The Potential of Model-based Engineering Developing a Model-centric Digital Tapestry
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

9. The New Reality – Affordability and Resilience
Systems 2020 Vision
Adversary can use commercial technologies and new tactics to rapidly alter the threat to US forces
DoD engineering, and business processes not structured for adaptability
New research, tools, pilot efforts needed to determine best methods for building adaptable defense systems
Need faster delivery of adaptable systems that are trusted, assured, reliable and interoperable
Existing Gaps and Critical Needs
Gap: Lack of a Conceptual Design Environment
Gap: Lack of tools to integrate system modeling capabilities across domains
Gap: Lack of open, virtual and realistic environment for validation and producibility analysis
Need an integrated (i.e. cross discipline) framework for concept, design and analysis of systems based on standards, open architecture and existing COTS tool sets
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

10. Existing Modeling Activities
Most engineers leverages focused modeling activities across various disciplines.
Capability to support integration across discipline lines tends to be limited or missing.
Existing integrations tend to be “point to point”
Architecture
Cost
CAD
Performance
Manufacturing
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

11. From Focused Models to Digital Tapestry
The Imperatives
Cost
Technical Credibility
Innovation
Business Generation
Manufacturing
Architecture
CAD
Software
Performance
Verification
Cost
Electronics
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

12. SysML: An Enabler for the Digital Tapestry
Lockheed Martin Proprietary Information
SysML: An Enabler for the Digital Tapestry
A well defined System Architecture Model (SAM) is the loom that weaves the many threads of digital information together.
The SAM helps link requirements to logical and behavioral design.
Requirements can be fed into increasingly detailed levels of domain specific modeling.
By viewing the SAM as the hub of the digital tapestry, an integration pattern emerges enabling cross-domain connectivity with a minimal set of required integrations.
F=ma
Take the “Digital Thread” concept to the next level by fully extending the beneficial use of system architecture and 3-D CAD models
Lockheed Martin’s model-centric digital tapestry links the architectural framework flexibility and adaptability of Platform-based Engineering with the Model-based integrations of design, analysis, cost prediction, technology management and production methods to enable engineering teams to meet the challenge of adaptability, affordability and rapid design.
I&T Test Case Modeling
Ability to Generate Test Documentation and Plans Leveraging All the Information Already Captured in the Model
Component Model Link, Auto-HW/SW Code Generation
Driving the Model to the Implementation Level
LCC Model Incorporation and Tool Linkage
Working to Fully Integrate LCC Information into the Model, as Well as Linking in Tools That Analyze It
Integration of Mechanical Engineering Artifacts
Strengthen Integration to Performance Modeling and Simulation
Incorporate realtime performance modeling
Full “Digital Tapestry”
Integration of all SE, SW, HW, I&T, ME, Manufacturing tools into one digital development/build/maintain suite
LM Actively Looking into How to Expand Model Capabilities and Versatility
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation
Lockheed Martin Proprietary Information

13. Modeling Across The Product Lifecycle
Achieving a Model-based Approach to Product Development Requires a Multi-disciplinary Modeling Methodology and Tools Environment
Maturity of approach must be achieved in each technical discipline and also across discipline boundaries
Engineering Is Responsible To Understand All Items That Could Impact A Design And Determine A Resolution For Those Items
Operations Modeling
Systems Modeling
Design Modeling
Mechanical Modeling
Performance Modeling
Electrical Modeling
Cost Modeling
Integrated Data Layer
Managed Part Tree
Single Source BOM
Modeling
Software Modeling
Systems Modeling
Weight budget
UPC budget
Test Modeling
Design
Performance
Cost
Production Modeling
Weight estimates
Dimensions
Mechanical Modeling
Sustainment Modeling
UPC estimates
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

14. Model Integration Through The Product Lifecycle
Concept Development
Concept Refinement
Technology Development
Engineering & Manufacturing Development
Production & Deployment
Operations & Sustainment
System CONOPS Model
Produc-ibility Model
O&S Hub… TBD
System Requirements
3D CAD Model
Mech. Analysis Model
System Test Model
System Architecture Model
Reliabilty Model
Lifecycle Cost Model
System Cost Model
Bill of Materials
System Analysis Model
Software Model
Firmware / Elect. Model
Integration of Major Hubs Achieved through Integrated Data Management Layer
Integrated Data Management Layer

15. Expand, Accelerate and Validate Trades
Calls for and Integrated Digital Analysis Thread for Performance, Cost, Usability and Compatibility
Accelerates Trade Analysis
Mission
Interactions
Reuse / Compatibility
System of
Systems
Integration
Levels of Trades
Usability
Systems
Model Based
Cost
Standards Based
Subsystems
Integrated / Compatible Tools
Performance
Components
Technical Progress Validation
We tend to focus trades at component level – but don’t necessarily track it up to the mission / system of systems level. Because of the business climate, the trades need to be focused on more than just cost or performance – focus on simplicity, usability, reliability, affordability, uniqueness.
We need to be focusing on all of the ‘ilities’, and taking an integrated digital analysis thread that focuses on performance, cost, producibility and usability throughout the product lifecycle.
And how do we enable this?
Model Based Enterprise
Standards Based Tools and Products
Integrated tool suites
Technical validation
Customer inclusion
and…
think differently about our solutions… don’t just come up with the silver bullet solution – present multiple alternatives and work with your customer.
Current process shortcomings:
Many disjointed models are employed to investigate performance, schedule, cost, and risk.
Difficult to Optimize across Models
Design of Experiments (DOE) and Response Surface Methodology (RSM) could be used to determine optimal solutions
Cost/Performance Assumptions easily forgotten and not linked to architecture/requirements
Collaboration Tools with Systems Engineering ensures these assumptions are built into the proposed solution and ensures models are synchronized
Problems are further complicated by complexity of large systems and geographically distributed teams
Modeling Tools can perform across a geographic distributed team
Mission Performance and Force Compatibility
Complexity
Usability VS
Customer Inclusion
Customer Business Climate Demands More
Levels and Complexity of Trades to build
Compatible Affordable Useable Solutions
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

16. Low Hanging Fruit: Integrated Multidisciplinary Analysis
Requirements
Cost Analysis
Detailed Performance Analysis
Design Artifacts & Methodology
Performance /
Cost Analysis
Design & Architecture
Systems Analysis
Design Optimization
Analysis Traceability
Best Value
Determination
Mission Performance
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation

17. © Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation / Phoenix Integration
Partnering with Tool Vendors Phoenix Integration: SysML to Analysis Integration
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation / Phoenix Integration

18. Enhanced Tooling Beginning to Enable Integrated Model-based Analysis
Lockheed Martin has worked with Phoenix Integration to begin defining an integration between SysML and Model Center™
Focused on rapid integration and trades and allowing engineers to use the right tool for each job.
Approval for this slide has been provided by Phoenix Integration (Scott Ragon, Director of Research and Grant Sorenkum, Lockheed Martin sales representative)
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation / Phoenix Integration

19. © Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation
Questions?
© Copyright 2011 Lockheed Martin Corporation