Improving Engineering Governance for Large

Infrastructure Projects

William Scott & Peter Campbell, University of WollongongGary Arabian & Richard Fullalove, Asset Standards Authority, Transport for New South Wales

Presentation Outline

• Background• Transportation Infrastructure Project Complexity

– Transport for NSW Organisation and ASA Role– Individual Project Complexity

• Use of Architecture Framework Models in Managing Complexity of Large Scale Infrastructure Systems– TRAK Metamodel using SysML (Perspectives)– The Top Level View

• Diagrammatic Illustrations – Views– Behaviour example– Physical example– Document traceability (Library)– Requirements to Standards traceability

• Future Development– Stakeholder engagement and viewpoint development

• Summary

Background

• Recent reorganisation (www.transport.nsw.gov.au/asa)– Some expertise retained, some outsourced to private sector

• Organisational Complexity – TfNSW & ASA– A number of different divisions with well defined, interdependent but

differing responsibilities– Need for many coordinated interactions between them in terms of

design, schedule, financing, presentation to stakeholders, business requirements, related system requirements, etc.

– Need for coordinated interaction with AEOs, other external stakeholders such as Planning NSW, private bus concession operators, etc.

• Individual Project Functional & Physical Complexity– TfNSW has a very ambitious project schedule

TRAK Metamodel

• TRAK is an enterprise architecture framework based on the UK MoD's MODAF 1.2. (And follows ISO 42010/IEEE 1471)

• TRAK provides a way of describing systems and their place in the world through architectural models. (http://trakmetamodel.sourceforge.net/)

• To guide the design of the overall architecture modelling ASA is following the TRAK metamodel which has the following 5 major Perspectives:– Enterprise, Concept, Procurement, Solution and Management, which

are expressed in 21 viewpoints• TRAK is usually implemented in UML• UOW is paralleling ASA’s UML implementation for heavy rail with a SysML

version which supports requirements modelling and validation, and several other capabilities not available using UML

Pictures vs

Diagrammatic Models

• The two following slides show a Visio “Picture” of the communications aspects of the heavy rail system, and a SysML diagrammatic model of the same communications (for the internal links only)

• The Visio picture is very informative and excellent for showing to politicians, the public and other stakeholders who have no direct responsibility for building and managing the system – but there is no underlying information linked to the various components.

• The SysML diagram is capable of providing links to interface descriptions, design documents, standards, etc. as well as insights into the interdependencies.

SLIDE TITLE

Slide content

SysML Diagram of the Internal Communications Interfaces

Top Level Architecture

Illustrations of Model Components

The following slides illustrate, at several different levels, how some parts of the model are being developed within this top level structure:- Physical- A solution function for behaviour within the heavy rail stations & buildings component of the model- The document library structure, as part of the management model component- Demonstration requirements trace and allocation diagrams- To support a future extension, a demonstration diagram for linking different transport modes into the model

Physical Hierarchy

Physical Connectivity

Behaviour Hierarchy

Document Library

Requirements Trace to Source

Requirement Allocation

Mode Interfaces

Ongoing Work& Summary

• Ongoing development work includes:– Continuing development of the heavy rail model– Tool enhancements using AI for a number of applications– Stakeholder engagement, leading to specific views and

data/document/standards links– Initial outline of a generalised all mode transport model for TfNSW– Requirements model synchronisation with DOORS– Integration of simulations for requirements validation

• Summary– All staff contacted so far aware of the benefits of the model to combat

siloing– Linking of nodes through activities to requirements/standards– Making roles/responsibilities visible across divisions– Change management