© 2014 Atego Modeling Systems-of-Systems and Management of Design Variations Matthew Hause – Atego

© 2014 Atego

Modeling Systems-of-Systems and Management of Design Variations

Matthew Hause – Atego

© 2014 Atego 2

© 2014 Atego 3

Agenda

• Introduction

• Model Based Systems & Software Engineering (MBSE)

• Systems of Systems

• Asset-Based Modular Design

• Model-based Product Lines– Variant Modeling– Variant Selection– Product Model Creation

• Model-based Product Line Engineering (MB-PLE)

• Summary

© 2014 Atego 4

Applying Model-Based Product Line Engineering can Reduce Total Development Costs by 62% and Deliver 23% More Projects on Time*

* (EMF 2013 Independent Survey Results from 667 Systems Engineering respondents)

Starting With What’s Possible …

© 2014 Atego 5

Issues/Challenges Facing Systems Engineering Organizations

Business Based Increasing Time Pressures

• Shorter Development Cycles

• Delivering on Schedule Cost Reduction Demands

• Total Development Cost

• Risks/Costs associated with delays and cancellations Larger & More Distributed Teams

• Communication & Collaboration

• Implementing Common, Architected Goals Quality Assurance

• Risk of Building the Wrong System

• Increased Costs of Later Stage Errors

© 2014 Atego 6

Issues/Challenges Facing Systems Engineering Organizations

Technical/Technology Based Growing Complexity & Functionality of Systems & Software

• Software comprises growing share of total systems Cost & Capability

• System & Sub-system Integration

• Certification, Regulation & Standards Compliance

• The Move to ‘Systems Thinking’ – Requirements, Design, Integration, Testing

© 2014 Atego 7

Agenda

• Introduction






• Summary

© 2014 Atego 8

Model-Based Engineering

• Model-based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is the formalized application of modeling to support system requirements, design, analysis, verification, and validation activities beginning in the conceptual design phase and continuing through-out development and later lifecycle phases.” (INCOSE, 2007).

• Modeling is at the heart of all aspects of the development effort

– Covers the complete product and project lifecycle

– Has a direct effect on any generated artifacts.

– MBE encompasses architecture, systems and software development.

© 2014 Atego 9

Changes in Systems Engineering Practice

Requirement SpecificationsInterface DefinitionsSystem ArchitectureSystem FunctionalityTrade-off AnalysisTest SpecificationsEtc.

Change from Document centric to Model centric

AirplaneATC Pilot

Request to proceed

Authorize

Power-up

Initiate power-up

Direct taxiway

Report Status

Executed cmds

Initiate Taxi

Old Approach New Approach

© 2014 Atego 10

The Four Pillars of SysML

ibd [Block] Anti-Lock Controller1

«Block»Anti-Lock Controller

«BlockProperty»d1 : Traction Detector

«BlockProperty»m1 : Brake Modulator

«BlockProperty»d1 : Traction Detector

«BlockProperty»m1 : Brake Modulator

c1:modulator interface

Use

Interaction

par [constraint] StraightLineVehicleDynamics [Parametric Diagram]

Structure

Parametrics

Vehicle SystemSpecification

Braking SubsystemSpecification

«requirement»

id#102

txtThe vehicle shall stop from60 mph within 150ft on aclean dry surface.

Stopping Distance

«requirement»

id#337

txtThe Braking subsystem shallprevent wheel lockup underall braking conditions.

Anti-Lock Performance

req [Package] Vehicle Specifications [Braking]

«deriveReqt»

Requirements

bdd [Package] Vehicle [ABS]

«Block»Library::

ElectronicProcessor

«Block»Anti-LockController

«Block»Library::

Electro-HydraulicValve

«Block»TractionDetector

«Block»Brake

Modulator

d1 m1

Definition

Gripping Slipping

LossOfTrac tion/

RegainTrac tion/

stm Tire [Traction] State Machine

Detect Loss Of Traction

TractionLoss Modulate Braking Force

act PreventLockup

Activity/Function

Behavior

© 2014 Atego 11

Cross Connecting Model Elements

ibd [block] Anti-LockController [Internal Block Diagram]

d1:Traction Detector

m1:Brake Modulator

c1:modulator interface


allocatedFrom«activity»DetectLosOfTraction

d1:TractionDetector

allocatedFrom «activity»Modulate BrakingForce

m1:BrakeModulator

allocatedFrom«ObjectNode»TractionLoss:

c1:modulatorInterface

act PreventLockup [Activity Diagram]

DetectLossOf Traction

Modulate BrakingForce

TractionLoss:

par [constraintBlock] StraightLineVehicleDynamics [Parametric Diagram]

:AccellerationEquation[F = ma]

:VelocityEquation[a = dv/dt]

:DistanceEquation[v = dx/dt]

:BrakingForceEquation

[f = (tf*bf)*(1-tl)]

tf: bf:tl:

f:

F:

c

a:a:

v:

v:

x:

Structure Behavior

Parametrics

act PreventLockup [Swimlane Diagram]

«allocate»:TractionDetector

«allocate»:BrakeModulator

allocatedTo«connector»c1:modulatorInterface

DetectLossOf Traction

Modulate BrakingForce

TractionLoss:

req [package] VehicleSpecifications [Requirements Diagram - Braking Requirements]

Braking Subsystem Specification

Vehicle System Specification

id=“102”text=”The vehicle shall stop from 60 mph within 150 ft on a clean dry surface.”

«requirement»StoppingDistance

id=”337"text=”Braking subsystem shall prevent wheel lockup under all braking conditions.”

«requirement»Anti-LockPerformance

«deriveReqt»


allocatedFrom«activity»DetectLosOfTraction

d1:TractionDetector


m1:BrakeModulator



satisfies«requirement»Anti-LockPerformance






SatisfiedBy«block»Anti-LockController



«deriveReqt»


allocatedFrom«activity»DetectLosOf Traction

d1:TractionDetector

valuesDutyCycle: Percentage


m1:BrakeModulator



satisfies«requirement»Anti-LockPerformance






[f = (tf*bf)*(1-tl)]

tf: bf:tl:

f:

F:

m:

a:a:

v:

v:

x:

v.Position:

v.Weight:v.chassis.tire.

Friction:v.brake.abs.m1.

DutyCycle:v.brake.rotor.BrakingForce:






[f = (tf*bf)*(1-tl)]

tf: bf:tl:

f:

F:

m:

a:a:

v:

v:

x:

v.Position:

v.Weight:v.chassis.tire.

Friction:v.brake.abs.m1.

DutyCycle:v.brake.rotor.BrakingForce:




VerifiedBy«interaction»MinimumStoppingDistance



SatisfiedBy«block»Anti-LockController



«deriveReqt»

satisfy

verify

value binding

allocate

Requirements

© 2014 Atego 12

Agenda

• Introduction






• Summary

© 2014 Atego 13

• Increasingly important in civilian and military systems– An SoS is a “set or arrangement of systems that

results when independent and useful systems are integrated into a larger system that delivers unique capabilities.” • DoD Defense Acquisition Guidebook

– “Key to addressing the evolution of complex systems of systems. SE principles and tools can be used to apply systems thinking and engineering to the enterprise levels.”• FEAF, 1999

Systems of Systems (SoS)

© 2014 Atego 14

• SoS systems engineering (SE) deals with planning, analyzing, organizing, and integrating the capabilities of new and existing systems into a SoS capability greater than the sum of the capabilities of its constituent parts.

• SoS delivers capabilities by combining multiple collaborative and independent-yet-interacting systems.

• Capabilities provide the criteria to systems engineers to determine how the different systems fit together and whether or not the SoS as a whole will meet stakeholder requirements.

• Evaluation at the level of individual requirements is too low level.

• Due to the complexity of these systems, an essential aspect of SoS SE is MBSE.

System of Systems Engineering

© 2014 Atego 15

DoD Architecture Framework 2.0 Views

All V

iewp

oin

tO

verarchin

g asp

ects of arch

itecture co

ntext th

at relate to all

mo

dels

Data an

d In

form

ation

View

po

int

Articu

late the d

ata relation

ship

s and

align

men

t structu

res in th

e arch

itecture co

nten

t

Stan

dard

s Vie

wp

oin

t A

rticulate ap

plicab

le Op

eration

al, Bu

siness, Tech

nical, an

d

Ind

ustry p

olicy, stan

dard

s, gu

idan

ce, con

straints, an

d fo

recasts

Systems ViewpointArticulate the legacy systems or

independent systems, their composition, interconnectivity, and context providing for,

or supporting, DoD functions

Services Viewpoint Articulate the performers, activities,

services, and their exchanges providing for, or supporting, DoD functions

Operational ViewpointArticulate operational scenarios, processes,

activities & requirements

Capability/Strategic Viewpoint Articulate the capability requirement,

delivery timing, and deployed capability

Pro

ject/A

cqu

isition

View

po

int

Describ

es the relatio

nsh

ips b

etween

op

eration

al and

capab

ility req

uirem

ents an

d th

e variou

s pro

jects bein

g im

plem

ented

; D

etails dep

end

encies b

etween

capab

ility man

agem

ent an

d th

e D

efense A

cqu

isition

System

pro

cess.

Architecture viewpoints are composed of data that has been organized to facilitate understanding.

© 2014 Atego 16

The Unified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM)

• UPDM is a standardized way of expressing DoDAF and MODAF artefacts using UML and SysML– UPDM is NOT a new Architectural Framework– UPDM is not a methodology or a process– UPDM 2.0 supports DoDAF 2.0, MODAF 1.2, NAF

3.x,• UPDM was developed by members of the OMG with

help from industry and government domain experts.• UPDM is now a DoD mandated standard• UPDM has been implemented by multiple tool vendors.– Tools supporting UPDM are available now, including

of course by Atego.

International Workshop26 Jan – 29 Jan 2013

Jacksonville, FL, USA

MBSE Workshop

SoS Pain Point Survey

Purpose• To collect information on major issues

or 'pain points' in the area of Systems of Systems operation, management and systems engineering

• To support planning for activities of the WG

Respondents38 survey respondents 65 SoS ‘pain points’ reportedRespondent location

US (86%). UK (8%) Australia (6%)

Respondent SoS experienceExtensive (60%)Some (37%)

Almost all (94%) are from defense sector

Survey Logistics• Developed during February and March

2012, with several drafts and pretests• Released to the community in April

with a cutoff of respondents in Mid-May.

• Administered over the internet using KWIK Surveys (www.kwiksurverys.com)

Questions & Analysis• Asked respondents to identify and

describe their priority SoS areas of concern: describe up to three 'pain points' including a short name, a description and an example

• Results were analyzed, a paper on the results was drafted and circulated for comment

17

http://www.kwiksurverys.com/

International Workshop26 Jan – 29 Jan 2013

Jacksonville, FL, USA

MBSE Workshop

SoS Pain Points

Pain Points QuestionLack of SoS Authorities & Funding

What are effective collaboration patterns in systems of systems?

Leadership What are the roles and characteristics of effective SoS leadership?

Constituent Systems What are effective approaches to integrating constituent systems into a SoS?

Capabilities & Requirements How can SE address SoS capabilities and requirements?

Autonomy, Interdependencies & Emergence

How can SE provide methods and tools for addressing the complexities of SoS interdependencies and emergent behaviors?

Testing, Validation & Learning How can SE approach the challenges of SoS testing, including incremental validation and continuous learning in SoS?

SoS Principles What are the key SoS thinking principles, skills and supporting examples?

Survey identified seven ‘pain points’ raising a set of SoS SE questions

18

© 2014 Atego 19

How NOT to Model Systems of Systems

© 2014 Atego 20

Disaster Relief Challenge….Provide Ice:

• Goals and Objectives: For the challenge, show how today’s tools can be used and

integrated together to support planning, analysis, decision making, communications,

and documentation and reporting while minimizing duplication of effort, or data entry.

Refer to the listing of Goals and Objectives posted on the TVC page for a full listing of

all Goals and Objectives to consider including as part of your demonstration.

• Challenge: It is summer time in Pleasantville, a rural US town located in a temperate

climate zone currently experiencing temperatures ranging between 70 – 100 degrees

Fahrenheit (20-35 C). A recent natural disaster has devastated the area within a 100

mile radius. An estimated 3000 people lost their homes due to the destruction, and

need to find shelter. Most roads are impassible by public so there is limited vehicle

transportation and the electricity is out in most of the disaster area. As part of

emergency response requirements, shelters must be set up within 24 hours from

when the evacuations begin to help sustain those who need to relocate. As part of

the initial emergency response, ice must be provided to sustain perishables such as

medicine and foods, and to support first aid needs. Power and potable water are to

be provided with the shelter solution.

http://www.incose.org/symp2013/index.php?q=taxonomy/term/23

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=emergency+ice+delivery&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=YIKETNOE3NPqmM&tbnid=jHf3NVUw_unRmM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://www.aclearalternative.com/emergency-ice.php&ei=YxiWUd_4BMTD0gH2w4GIDw&bvm=bv.46471029,d.dmQ&psig=AFQjCNEcx4sj9Pq8Juwq8wppf7t-E5qpwA&ust=1368875933450127

© 2014 Atego 21

Operational Concept for Disaster Relief

© 2014 Atego 22

Operational Concept for Disaster Relief Internals

© 2014 Atego 23

Dictionary of Project Capabilities

© 2014 Atego 24

Capability Dependencies for Manage Environmental Incidents

© 2014 Atego 25

System Structure for Disaster Response

© 2014 Atego 26

System Structure for Victim Support

© 2014 Atego 27

Agenda

• Introduction






• Summary

© 2014 Atego 28

Methods for Re-Use are Not New…

A standards-based Integrated, Practical & Pragmatic Solution Combining 2 Powerful Paradigms for ‘Model-Based Product Line Engineering’ Model-base Systems & Software Engineering (MBSE) Extending into Variable Product Families (PLE) with a Well Documented Value Proposition

(Linda Northrop, SEI SSPL 2008-2012)

System & Software Product

Lines

2005+ Software Product Lines

2000sServices

1990sComponents

1980sObjects

1970sModules

1960sSubroutines

29 © 2013 Atego

Asset-based Modular Design

Design the same way you Build− Construct Systems of Sub-Systems (SoS)

− Use Services to build your Application (SOA)

− Plug Components together (CBD)

Modular Design− Top-Down, Architected

− Specification (& Requirements) Driven− Parallel Working− Separation of Concerns

− Bottom-Up, Asset Mining− Un-modeled Assets− Other Modeling Tools− Legacy Integration− Published Interfaces (e.g. IDL)

© 2014 Atego 30

• Defines reusable assets, their interfaces, characteristics and supporting elements.

• Three dimensions describe reusable assets:

– Granularity describes problems or solution alternatives a packaged asset addresses.

– Variability and visibility vary from black-box assets, to white box assets, clear-box and gray-box assets.

– Articulation describes the degree of completeness of the artifacts in providing the solution.

– Asset specifications includes supporting documentation, requirements addressed, interfaces, etc.

– A modular, multi-level approach avoids the spaghetti diagrams

The Reusable Asset Specification (RAS)

31 © 2013 Atego

Asset-Based Modular Design

Models + Asset Library = Configuration Models

System Model 2System Model 1

Sub-System 2

Sub-System 1

Asset Library

Asset 1(Sub-System

Model)

Asset 2(Sub-System

Model)

Asset 3(Sub-System

Model)

Asset 4(Sub-System NO

Model)

Sub-System 2

Asset 1 Asset 2 Asset 3 Asset 4

Higher LevelModels

Links via Assets

Lower LevelModels

etc.

V1.0 V1.1

V2.0

V2.0

V2.0

V3.0

V3.0

V3.0

V3.0

V4.0

© 2014 Atego 32

View of Asset Library connectivity (OSLC)

© 2014 Atego 33

System Overview of an Ice Plant

© 2014 Atego 34

Atego Asset Library View in other model

© 2014 Atego 35

Block Definition Diagram of Distiller

bdd [Package] Distiller Structure [Structural Breakdown]

«block»

operationspowerOn ()powerOff ()Remove Latent Heat of Vaporisation ()Add Latent Heat of Vaporisation ()

Boiler«block»

operationsRemove Latent Heat of Vaporisation ()Add Latent Heat of Vaporisation ()

Valve

«block»

operationsTurnOn ()TurnOff ()Remove Latent Heat of Vaporisation ()Add Latent Heat of Vaporisation ()

Distiller

«block»


Heat Exchanger

hx1 bx1 drain

satisfies«requirement» HeatExchanger

satisfies«requirement» HeatExchanger

satisfies«requirement» Boiler

satisfies«requirement» Boiler

satisfies«requirement» Drain

satisfies«requirement» Drain

© 2014 Atego 36

Block Definition Diagram of Types

bdd [Package] Item Types

«block»

valuesdegrees C : tempkg/gm^2 : pressgm/sec : massFlowRate

Residue

«block»

valuesdegrees C : tempkg/gm^2 : pressgm/sec : massFlowRate

Fluid«block»

valuescal/sec : dQ/dt

Heat

«block»


valuesdegrees C : tempkg/gm^2 : pressgm/sec : massFlowRatecal/gm : specificHeatcal/(gm*deg C) : latentHeat

H2O

© 2014 Atego 37

Distiller model complete system

© 2014 Atego 38

• Lack of SoS Authorities and Funding– Modeling cannot provide authority or funding. – MBSE has begun to demonstrate true ROI– These techniques will provide ROI to decrease the

cost of developing SoS. – The Asset library provides metrics to demonstrate

cost savings for reuse. • Includes the development effort required to create the

original asset, and the estimated effort to reuse the asset.

• The reuse effort subtracted from the development effort provides an estimated time saving.

• The overall total savings for each asset library is also summarized.

Addressing Pain Points

© 2014 Atego 39

• Constituent Systems– Integrating constituent systems is difficult– Clearly defined system interfaces, capabilities,

requirements, behavior, characteristics, etc. is essential for any meaningful integration.

– Integrating system models as black box systems, means engineers can concentrate on the individual system definitions.

– With clearly defined system interfaces, development of these systems can take place in parallel without affecting the other models.

– The SoS model can then examine the interaction of the individual systems as a whole.


© 2014 Atego 40

• Capabilities and Requirements– Defining systems with capabilities specifies the

purpose and benefits of a system at a high level. – Capabilities describe desired outcomes as well as

specifying stakeholders and realizing resources.– Architects and engineers can determine capability

overlaps as well as capability gaps. – Shows how systems work together at a capability

level.– Useful when no model exists of the existing system. – When models do exist, system functions and

requirements they satisfy provide more detailed analysis examination.


© 2014 Atego 41

• Autonomy, Interdependencies and Emergence– Emergent behavior is often unpredictable. – The real problems of systems integration only come

to light when they are integrated together in the field under real conditions.

– Modeling and simulation of SoS can help, but no test or set of tests can predict all possible outcomes.

– As modeling simulation techniques improve and a critical mass of system models is built up, problems involving emergent behavior can be found, diagnosed and mitigated before the systems are fielded.


© 2014 Atego 42

• Testing Validation and Learning– Paper on model-based generation of system tests.

– The rail system models were developed for almost 10 years.

– Complex safety critical systems involving the interaction of multiple complex systems.

– Lead to ROI of 70% savings on system test.

– A direct benefit to testing and validation is the black-box reuse of components. • Reused assets are not modified but simply referenced.

• Reduces the chance of unintentional or even intentional modification

• Provides a modular structure for testing the individual systems.

• Provides supporting evidence, highlights potential problems, and increases confidence in the proposed solution.


43Copyright © 2013 Atego.

Agenda

Introduction

Model Based Systems & Software Engineering (MBSE)

Systems of Systems


Model-based Product Lines- Variant Modeling- Variant Selection- Product Model Creation

Model-based Product Line Engineering (MB-PLE)

Summary

© 2014 Atego 44

Enhancing MBSE with Product Line Engineering (PLE)

• The Goal of PLE is to Reduce the Time, Cost and Effort required to

Create, Deploy and Maintain Similar Products– By Leveraging Product & System Commonality – And Designed-in Variation (More than just Asset Reuse)

• To achieve this goal, the solution must– Minimize duplicate effort– Maximize commonality– Optimize reuse across similar products– Manage product line variations and complexity

Model Based PLE offers a fundamental shift in approach

– “A broader perspective that views product line engineering as designing a

single system rather than as creating a multitude of products”

Designing your products as a single system can deliver considerable development cost

savings (Dr Jerry Krasner, EMF 2013)


Model Based Systems Engineering

Package Diagram

pkg 01 [PD] Automotive Package Diagram

Automotive Drivetrain Example

HMI Power Plant «Asset»TransmissionSystem

Car Body

Fuel System

Electrical Network

Infotainment Braking


Modeling Based Systems Engineering

Block Definition Diagram

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

bdd 02 [BDD] System Breakdown Structure

Power Plant

Internal CombustionEngine

HMI

Accelerator pedal

GearSelector

HMI

Clutch pedal

«Asset»Transmission System

Transmission

Electrical Network

ElectricalNetwork

Starter

DrivetrainSystem

Alternator

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1


Model Based Systems Engineering

Internal Block Diagram

IBD 03 [IBD] Drivetrain System Connections

[Rear Axle]

: Wheel Hub : UJoint4

: Leaf Spring3

Gasoline Engine : Gas Engine Spline Hole

: Gas Engine Bolt

[Chassis]

: Hole1 : Hole2 : Hole3

Diesel Engine : Diesel Spline Hole

: Diesel Bolt

[Transmission] : Spline1

: Bolt2

: UJoint1[Drive Shaft]

: UJoint3

: UJoint2


Product Line Engineering

Artisan StudioProduct Line Model

Variability Model

Base Model

Decision Set

Artisan StudioProduct Model

Remaining(Unresolved)

Variability Model

ProductBase Model

Create Product Model

DecisionSet

Editor

VariantSelector

12

3MBSE

MBSE


VV

11

bdd [Package] Automotive Drivetrain Example [1]

«block»«component»

proxyPorts«ProxyPort» : Diesel Spline Hole«ProxyPort» : Diesel Bolt

references«BlockProperty» : Alternator«BlockProperty» : Electronic Control Unit«BlockProperty» : Clutch

Automotive Drivetrain Example::Components::Diesel Engine

«block»

proxyPorts«ProxyPort» : Gas Engine Spline Hole«ProxyPort» : Gas Engine Bolt


Automotive Drivetrain Example::Components::Gasoline Engine


references«BlockProperty» : Clutch«BlockProperty» : 6 gears Gearbox«BlockProperty» : Internal Combustion Engine«BlockProperty» : Internal Combustion Engine

Automotive Drivetrain Example::Components::Electronic Control Unit



Automotive Drivetrain Example::Power Plant::Internal Combustion Engine

Fast

V

Efficient

V

11

1 - Variant Modeling

Variant Diagram

Variation on all Diagrams

Simple NotationVariation PointVariantVariability Dependency Mandatory/OptionalRequires DependencyExcludes DependencyArtifact DependencyAlternate Choice

OVM- PALUNO, The Ruhr Institute of Software Technology- Software Product Line Engineering (Pohl et al - Springer 2005)

VP

V V

Diesel Engine Gasoline Engine

Engine

VP

Efficient

V

Fast

V1..1


2 - Variant Selection

Variant Selector- Browser User Interface- External Variation Points Only- Jump to Next Decision/Problem- Progress Bar

Decision Set Editor- Variant Debug- External & Internal Variation Points- Jump to Next Decision/Problem

Both Edit the Same Decision Sets


3 - Product Model Creation

Auto-Create Product Models- Applies Variability Decisions- Unnecessary Variation Points, Variants & Base Model Artefacts Removed

Creates New Product Model Branch, Original Product Line Model Retained

Product Model suitable for Trade Studies, Simulation, Documentation & Generation

Decision Set

Product Line Model

Product Model

VP

V V

Diesel Engine Gasoline Engine

Engine

VP

Efficient

V

Fast

V1..1


3 - Product Model Creation

Auto-Create Product Models (IBD)

Product Line Model

Decision Set


[Rear Axle]


: Leaf Spring3

[Chassis]



: Diesel Bolt


: Bolt2


: UJoint3

: UJoint2

: Wheel

«proxy»

: Holes

Gasoline Engine

: Gas Engine Bolt

: Gas Engine Spline Hole


[Rear Axle]


: Leaf Spring3

[Chassis]



: Diesel Bolt


: Bolt2


: UJoint3

: UJoint2

: Wheel

«proxy»

: Holes

No Gasoline Engine

Product Model


Agenda

Introduction

Model Based Systems & Software Engineering (MBSE)

Systems of Systems


Model-based Product Lines- Variant Modeling- Variant Selection- Product Model Creation

Model-based Product Line Engineering (MB-PLE)

Summary


Model-Based Product Line Engineering

Publish from Sub-system model into Atego Asset Library− With Variation



Use Sub-system from Atego Asset Library in Super-system Model (BDD)

− With Variation



Include Asset Variation in Super-system Model Variation Design & Make Decisions

Super-model Variation

Asset Variation



Create Product Model – Including Super-model and Asset Variation

Both Manual and 5 Gears selected

© 2014 Atego 58

Model- Based Product Line Engineering

Product ModelProduct Line Super-system Model

Sub-System 2

Sub-System 1

Asset Library

Asset 1(Sub-System

Model)

Asset 2(Sub-System

Model)Asset 3

(Sub-System Model)

Asset 4(Sub-System NO

Model)

Sub-System 2

Asset 1 Asset 2 Asset 3 Asset 4

Product LineModels

Links via Assets

Sub-system Product Line

Models

etc.

V V V

V V

V V

V

VP

V

Decision Set

V

VP

V

Decision Set

V

VP

V

Decision Set

• Integrated MBSE, Modular Design & Variability

Modeling = Model-based Product Line Engineering

© 2014 Atego 59

Agenda

• Introduction






• Summary


Development Cost Reduction & Delivery Time Improvements

SE (Non-Modeled Systems Engineering)- 59% of Projects Delivered on Time

MBSE (Model Based Systems Engineering)- 62% of Projects Delivered on TimeCompared to SE- 55% Reduction in Total Development Cost per Project- 16% More Project Delivered on Time

MB-PLE (Model Based Product Line Engineering)- 75% of Projects Delivered on TimeCompared to MBSE- 17% Reduction in Total Development Cost per Project- 6% More Projects Delivered on TimeCompared to SE- 62% Reduction in Total Development Cost per Project- 23% More Projects Delivered on Time

(EMF 2013 Independent Survey Results from 667 Systems engineering respondents)

Development Cost per Project

SE

MBSEMBPLE

On Time Delivery

SEMBSE

MBPLE

59%

75%

62%

© 2014 Atego 61

• Systems of Systems have long been in existence

– Their inherent complexity complicates things

• Modeling has both helped and hindered

• SysML, UPDM, & RAS provide a standard way to model and reuse SoS

– MBSE provides proven ROI

• This combination helps address the SoS Pain Points

• Product Line Engineering provides a means of managing product variants

• Model-Based Product Line Engineering provides proven ROI

Conclusion

© 2014 Atego 62

Questions and Answers

DescriptionDescription You:Attendee

Me:Speaker

loop1

You:Attendee

Me:Speaker

loop1 while open questions existQuestion1.1

end loop

while open questions existQuestion1.1 Question

Answer1.1.1Question

Answer1.1.1 AnswerAnswerend loop

{Speech Time}{Speech Time}

Documents

© 2014 Atego Modeling Systems-of-Systems and Management of Design Variations Matthew Hause – Atego