Orion flight test 1 architecture &amp;#x2014; Observed benefits of a model based engineering approach

Simpson, Kimberly A.; Sindiy, Oleg V.; McVittie, Thomas I.

doi:10.1109/aero.2012.6187263

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Development of model management processes [14] -life cycle management tools for MBSE model management are still limited; the model must be managed, configuration controlled, and kept up to date if it is to provide benefit to later phases of the program. • Cultural barriers across the design team and stakeholder team [15] -both engineers and stakeholders are accustomed to reviewing documents rather than MBSE model artifacts, and in some cases will argue that "this is the way we have always don it". The process of "first change the model, the model is the design" meets with cultural resistance, and represents one of the fundamental challenges to transition from a DBSE to an MBSE approach.…”

Section: Key Findings From Case Studies Without Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Literature Review: How is Model-Based Systems Engineering Justified?

Carroll¹,

Malins²

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The genesis for this systematic literature review was to search for industry case studies that could inform a decision of whether or not to support the change process, investment, training, and tools needed to implement an MBSE approach across the engineering enterprise. The question asked was, how the change from a document-based systems engineering approach (DBSE) to a modelbased systems engineering approach (MBSE) is justified? The methodology employed for this systematic literature review was to conduct a document search of electronically published case studies by authors from the defense, space, and complex systems product engineering industries. The 67 case studies without metrics mainly attributed success to completeness, consistency, and communication of requirements. The 21 case studies with metrics on cost and schedule primarily attributed success to the ability of an MBSE approach to improve defect prevention strategies. The primary conclusion is that there is a significant advantage to project performance by applying an MBSE approach. An MBSE approach made the engineering processes on a complex system development effort more efficient by improving requirements completeness, consistency, and communication. These were seen in engineering processes involved in requirements management, concept exploration, design reuse, test and qualification, Verification and Validation, and margins analyses. An MBSE approach was most effective at improving defect prevention strategies. The approach was found to enhance the capability to find defects early in the system development life cycle (SDLC), when they could be fixed with less impact and prevented rework in later phases, thus mitigating risks to cost, schedule, and mission. However, if a program only employed an MBSE approach for requirements management, advantages from finding defects early could not be leveraged in later phases, where the savings in cost and schedule from rework prevention is realized. Significant performance success was achieved when the systems engineer (SE) held a leadership role over engineering processes. A number of the case studies addressed a general lack of skilled MBSE engineers as a major hindrance to implementing an MBSE approach successfully.

show abstract

Section: Key Findings From Case Studies Without Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Literature Review: How is Model-Based Systems Engineering Justified?

Carroll¹,

Malins²

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A frequent recommendation in the literature was to establish a Core MBSE team, 4,23 dedicated modeling teams, 18,25 communities of practice, 4 or more formal teams that provide guidance, training, and technical support 1 . A common adoption activity amongst the interview participants was establishing a Core MBSE team.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

MBSE adoption experiences in organizations: Lessons learned

Henderson,

McDermott,

Salado

2023

Systems Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lessons learned through MBSE adoption efforts is one of the key ways of communicating best practices and recommendations for MBSE. This study compiles lessons learned from published case studies and practitioner interviews. Lessons are summarized into categories such as adoption strategy, modeling practices, and communication. This paper provides a source for future adopters of MBSE to review best practices and recommendations from a multitude of different experiences. This should improve the adoption and implementation of MBSE.

show abstract

“…Since the stakeholders of the EM-1 and EM-2 missions share many of the same concerns as their counterparts in the NASA's earlier Constellation Program (CxP) 1 and the Exploration Flight Test (EFT-1) mission 2,3 , we chose to reuse the EEIS viewpoints that they had defined. Figure 3 provides an overview of the viewpoints defined for the CxP-and EFT-1 missions including the primary set of questions (i.e., concerns) that each viewpoint addresses.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Architecting The Human Space Flight Program with System Modeling Language (SysML)

Jackson

Fernandez

McVittie

et al. 2012

Infotech@Aerospace 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The next generation of missions in NASA's Human Space Flight program focuses on the development and deployment of highly complex systems (e.g., Orion MultiPurpose Crew Vehicle, Space Launch System, 21 st Century Ground System) that will enable astronauts to venture beyond low Earth orbit and explore the moon, near-Earth asteroids, and beyond. Architecting these highly complex system-of-systems requires formal systems engineering techniques for managing the evolution of the technical features in the information exchange domain (e.g., data exchanges, communication networks, ground software) and also, formal correlation of the technical architecture to stakeholders' programmatic concerns (e.g., budget, schedule, risk) and design development (e.g., assumptions, constraints, trades, tracking of unknowns). This paper will describe how the authors have applied System Modeling Language (SysML) to implement model-based systems engineering for managing the description of the End-to-End Information System (EEIS) architecture and associated development activities and ultimately enables stakeholders to understand, reason, and answer questions about the EEIS under design for proposed lunar Exploration Missions 1 and 2 (EM-1 and EM-2). I. Introduction his paper describes the use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) with SysML to enable more robust and complete systems engineering and integrated analysis of complex System-of-Systems (SoS) problems which have historically been implemented via paper/presentation-based design capture, disparate models, in documents, and in the brains of expert engineers across many disciplines. This paper describes constructs, rules, and methods applied in developing a model conforming to a rigorous and engineered structure that supports views for domain experts, analysis and tracking of stakeholder concerns, and standardized analysis that uses the relationships between the traditional system views to provide cross-cutting reasoning. A. Background-To the Moon with Exploration Missions 1 and 2 Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1) will send an unmanned Orion MultiPurpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) around the moon on a 7-to-10 day mission to qualify NASA's new Space Launch System (SLS), and verify Orion MPCV's readiness to carry astronauts beyond Earth orbit. EM-1 is targeted for launch in late-2017. Subsequently, Exploration Mission 2 (EM-2) will send a crew of four astronauts on a 10-to-14 day mission to the moon, where astronauts will spend four days in lunar orbit to test critical mission events and perform operations in relevant environments to support exploration to more distant points beyond Earth orbit. EM-2 is targeted for launch in mid-2019. To accomplish these missions we must coordinate a significant number of diverse terrestrial and space-based systems including: MPCV; SLS; supporting space and terrestrial communication facilities (provided the USAF,

show abstract

Orion flight test 1 architecture — Observed benefits of a model based engineering approach

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Systematic Literature Review: How is Model-Based Systems Engineering Justified?

Systematic Literature Review: How is Model-Based Systems Engineering Justified?

MBSE adoption experiences in organizations: Lessons learned

Architecting The Human Space Flight Program with System Modeling Language (SysML)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About