Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Abstract. Systems Engineering has successfully supported the space industry since its
inception with methodologies and techniques to handle complex projects. However, the
conventional design approach, ‘Document-Based Systems Engineering’ (DBSE), is more and
more reaching its limits. This research evaluates the benefits and the cost associated with the
paradigm of ‘Model Based Systems Engineering’ (MBSE) instead of DBSE by applying the
Systems Modelling Language (SysML) in the frame of the Atomic Clock Ensemble in Space
(ACES) project. ACES is indeed deemed to be a suitable project for this study as it includes both
a very complex ground segment as well as a challenging space segment on board the
International Space Station.
Following an introduction to SysML and the ACES mission, we first develop the metrics on
which the cost-benefit analysis is based on. Then, we explain the methodology and models used
to perform the analysis which targets to characterise DBSE versus MBSE based on the ACES
ground segment development. Then, we use the Analytical Hierarchical Process to determine
weighted criteria where attention is also given to the transitional process between DBSE and
MBSE.
After a critical reflection upon the analysis methodology and its results, we focus on lessons-
learned from the use of SysML for the implementation of MBSE in space projects. We have
identified five key areas of lessons-learned for using MBSE with SysML itself as well as main
deficiencies for Enterprise Architect, the tool used to implement SysML. We conclude with
seven suggested improvements which are considered valuable to help improving the
performance and acceptance of MBSE for the development of (space) projects in the future.
Keywords: Model-Based Systems Engineering, SysML, Systems Engineering, Modelling,
Space Engineering, Cost-Benefit analysis, Atomic Clocks Ensemble in Space (ACES),
International Space Station (ISS)
1 Introduction
As projects in the industry are getting bigger and more complex, they involve an increasing
number of stakeholders, not only on the end user side, but also on the rest of the life cycle of the
product, including design, development, manufacturing and end of life. Their requirements also
grow in number and complexity. Systems Engineering is the discipline that allows dealing with
this problem based on its processes, techniques and methodologies.
Though, those processes address very relevant questions, they are always ‘document based’,
meaning the information is stored and exchanged in the form of written documents. Model-
Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) provides a novel approach to Systems Engineering and is
presented as a candidate to solve many problems of nowadays Systems Engineering. SysML
appears in this context as a modelling language, and therefore enables MBSE. If MBSE with
SysML holds its promises, it may one day become a standard in Systems Engineering and project
management.
2 Analysis methodology
As defined in the objectives (section 1.1), the trade-off will cover two aspects:
• Identify the benefits of MBSE with SysML over Document Based Systems Engineering
(DBSE)
• Trade these benefits against its cost.
It has been decided to follow an approach suggested by (16), according to which, benefits
and costs should be assessed and traded-off separately. The generated output is expected to
provide a sounder basis for decision making. Once the costs and the benefits are evaluated, the
solutions can be compared in terms of their benefit to cost ratio. For each solution i, there is the
final score Fi which can be defined by
𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖
𝐹𝐹𝑖𝑖 =
𝑅𝑅𝑖𝑖
where Si is the benefits score and Ri is the cost ratio. These three quantifies are unitless.
𝑐𝑐 = � 𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖 𝑈𝑈𝑖𝑖
𝑖𝑖
where i is the index of the considered cost, pi is the proportion of the team members to
contribute to the cost (unitless, e.g. proportion of team members following the seminar), and Ui
is the unit cost of the item (€/person, e.g. cost of one seminar).
A target value for a’
One may now wonder what should the target value for a’ be. Depending on the total cost of
the project and the initial costs, what is the value of a’ that should be reached to ensure no money
was lost? If money is not lost then 𝐶𝐶𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 ≤ 𝐶𝐶𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 . Using the mathematical framework
previously defined :
𝐶𝐶𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑏𝑏
= 𝑎𝑎′ + ≤1
𝐶𝐶𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 𝐶𝐶𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷
and once reworked, one obtains:
𝑏𝑏
𝑎𝑎′ ≤ 1 −
𝐶𝐶𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷
Note that, as the equation shows, if the transitioning costs are about 5% of the total estimated
cost in the DBSE approach, then the company target a total amount of work in the MBSE
approach of 100% - 5% = 95% of the one in the DBSE approach, in order to reach the
profitability limit.
7.1 SysML
Five lessons have been learned through this research:
1. Try to always define, beforehand, the lowest level the model will reach in each
package, or diagram category! This shall be done in order to avoid continuing the
design after the point to which the model should be handed in to the subcontractor, or to a
specialized engineer. The purpose of the model has to defined and clear at all time.
2. Use separate high level packages for architecture, behaviour and behaviour
allocations! We suggest to completely separate architecture and behaviour. In frame of
this research, everything was gathered into one single project package. This resulted in
the necessity of using a hierarchy system of master package for each element, containing
composing block / behaviour packages, which makes project browser (or model
repository) very hard to navigate into. It also raises some problems concerning the level
at which such or such behaviour should be described. This is however only a suggestion:
more research has to be done on this point in order to determine what solution is the most
interesting.
3. Always take extreme care when showing diagrams to persons not introduced to
SysML! Systems Engineers are nowadays used to MS Visio diagrams in which an exact
and precise meaning is not associated with each type of arrows and blocks, and in which
the purpose of the diagram is supporting a paragraph, or a document. This leads to
misunderstandings, confusion and misinterpretations of the SysML diagrams. When a
modeller presents a diagram to other engineers, he or she needs to make sure, before even
explaining the diagram itself, that the others understood: the purpose of the diagram (e.g.
showing architecture and not functions), what each type of element represents (e.g.
physical block), and the meaning of each link (e.g. composition).
4. Do not use SysML for requirements handling only! since it was not meant to be used
as such, it becomes a bit awkward and unhandy as compared to other tools, which are
better suited to this kind of use.
5. Always Remember: though it provides a certain guidance in the design, it does not
substitute to experience in Systems Engineering!
9 Conclusion
Model-based Systems Engineering in general and SysML in particular have raised attention
over the past years. Though MBSE is a young approach of Systems Engineering, it could impose
itself in the industry in the years to come. SysML is a graphical language which enables MBSE.
This paper analyzed both and evaluated their maturity, through their benefits and their costs in
the framework of a space project.
The following key advantages have been identified:
• Project documentation is nearly perfectly consistent
• Relevant information is easily found
• Well structured information and clear separation between structure and behaviour
• Model and diagrams point out missing design information
• Opens the way to automated Systems Engineering, through automatic document
generation, assisted design verification and system behaviour simulation
Nevertheless, the following drawbacks have been identified:
• Steep learning curve: much effort is required to learn and use SysML
• It requires a significant knowledge before its advantages start showing
• Diagrams are very easily misinterpreted if SysML is not learned beforehand
• Tools are not completely ready yet
• Some things are difficult to model, where a simple sentence in the final report would have
been enough
To support decision makers on whether they should use MBSE with SysML or not, a trade-
off methodology has been developed. The advantages are very well reflected in the results of this
trade-off as it shows MBSE with SysML seems to be a more interesting option than DBSE.
These results, though, have to be modulated as the trade-off itself needs to be refined: more
accurate and potentially different results are expected if the costs estimation is improved by
further research (in particular, the evaluation of a’), and if the given evaluations in each of the
characteristic are supported by a poll, or at least by the opinions of several modellers.
Through this work, it was shown that Model-Based Systems Engineering with SysML
exhibits undeniable advantages over Document-Based Systems Engineering. These advantages
do, nevertheless, not undoubtedly outweigh its cost and other drawbacks. Tools are also not fully
mature, and SysML, in general, has not reached its final potential yet. Industry will, most
certainly, expect more from MBSE with SysML before it can generally be accepted as a
standard.
References
1. Object Management Group. OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysML™) version
1.2. 2010. Standard Specification URL: http://www.omg.org/spec/SysML/1.2/.
2. WordReference.com. Concise Oxford English Dictionary. WordReference.com. [Online]
University Press, 2011. http://www.wordreference.com/definition/.
3. Warwick, Graham and Norris, Guy. Design for Success. Aviation Week and Space
Technology. 2010, Nomvember 1/8, 2010.
4. Friedenthal, Sanford, Moore, Alan and Steiner, Rick. A Practical Guide to SysML. s.l. :
Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2009. ISBN-13: 978-0123786074.
5. Weilkiens, Tim. Systems Engineering with SysML/UML: Modeling, Analysis, Design. s.l. :
Morgan Kaufmann, 2008. ISBN-13: 978-0123742742.
6. Fieber, Florian, Regnat, Nikolaus and Rumpe, Bernhard. Assessing usability of model
driven development in industrial projects. Aachen : RWTH Aachen University, 2009.
7. Kirstan, Sascha and Zimmermann, Jens. Evaluating costs and benefits of model-based
development of embedded software systems in the car industry – Results of a qualitative
Case Study. Munich : s.n., 2010.
8. Herzog, Erik and Pandikow, Asmus. SysML - An Assessment. s.l. : INCOSE, 2005.
9. Belloir, Nicolas, et al. Utilisation de SysML pour la modélisation des réseaux de. s.l. :
Université de Pau et des pays de l’Adour, 2008.
10. Bone, Mary et Cloutier, Robert. The Current State of Model Based Systems Engineering:
Results from the OMG™ SysML Request for Information 2009. Hoboken : Stevens
Institute of Technology, 2009.
11. Karban, R., et al. Exploring Model Based Engineering for Large Telescopes - Getting
started with descriptive models. Garching bei München : European Southern
Observatory, 2008.
12. Vanderperren, Yves and Dehaene, Wim. UML 2 and SysML: an Approach to Deal with
Complexity in SoC/NoC Design. Leuwen : Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 2005.
13. Karban, R, Andolfato, L. and Zamparelli, M. Towards Model Re-Usability for the
Development of Telescope Control Systems. Munich : European Southern Orbservatory,
2009.
14. de Lange, Dorus, Guo, Jian and de Koning, Hans-Peter. Applicability of SysML to the
Early Definition Phase of Space Missions. 2011.
15. Saaty, T. L. Analytic Hierarchy Process. Encyclopedia of Biostatistics. 2005.
16. Expert Choice, The Analytic Sciences Corporation. An illustrated guide to the Analytic
Hierarchy Process. [Powerpoint in executable (*.exe)] Pittsburgh : s.n., 1999.
17. European Space Agency (ESA). Challenging Einstein on the ISS: ACES takes a step ahead.
ESA Technology Portal. [Online] [Cited: 15 03 2012.]
http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Technology/SEM7L2WNPBG_0.html.
Authors Biography
Julien Maurandy (TU Delft and EADS Astrium ST) has been prepared in the frame of his
MSc Final Thesis. He is a French international student who started off at Supméca, a French
"School of Engineering", which specializes in Mechanical Engineering. He joined TU Delft in
2009 to perform a double-degree programme, and to specialize in Aerospace Engineering. There,
he followed the Systems Engineering lectures of Prof. Eberhard Gill, who also supervised his
MSc Final Thesis. In 2010, he was given the opportunity to perform his MSc Final Thesis at
EADS Astrium, on the ACES project, where he got familiar with MBSE and SysML, and
performed its assessment.
Prof. Ebehard Gill (TU Delft, Chairholder of the Space Systems Engineering
department) holds a diploma in physics and a PhD in theoretical astrophysics of the Eberhard-
Karls-University Tübingen, Germany, as well as a Master of Space Systems Engineering of the
Delft University of Technology. He has been working at the German Aerospace Center (DLR) in
the field of precise satellite orbit determination, autonomous navigation and spacecraft formation
flying. He has been Co-Investigator on several international missions. Since 2007, he holds the
Chair of Space Systems Engineering of the Delft University of Technology.
Roland Stalford (EADS Astrium ST) is currently assigned to the Atomic Clock Ensemble
in Space Project (ACES) at Astrium Friedrichshafen where he is responsible for the Ground
Segment and for the procurement of one of the two key payload instruments, the Space
Hydrogen Maser. Previously he was Head of Systems Engineering at Galileo Industries in Rome,
assigned from EADS-Astrium Germany in 2001, where he was responsible for all aspects of the
Galileo Programme Space and Ground Infrastructure as well as overall systems performance and
the Test User Segment. Prior to this, he played a senior role in the GNSS-1 EGNOS Central
Processing Facility and has many years of experience in the technical management of large
international space and aircraft programmes as well as extensive experience in the development
and certification of safety critical software for Manned Space Programme and avionic inertial
navigation and flight control systems. He has in the past worked at the European Space Agency
(EURECA programme) and EUMETSAT (Meteosat Second Generation) and was attached to
CNES in Toulouse for the Hermes programme.
Achim Helm (EADS Astrium ST) is working as Systems Engineer for the ACES project.
Previously, he worked as a scientist at the Geo-research Centre in Potsdam in the field of GNSS
Remote Sensing and Satellite Radio Altimetry.