----------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------
  ![](media/image1.jpeg){width="0.6819444444444445in"   ![](media/image2.jpeg){width="1.2729166666666667in"
  height="0.5666666666666667in"}                        height="0.55in"}

  ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------

**10th NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange**

**26-28 March 2008, Room Newton-1, ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands**

[**http://conferences.esa.int/pde2008**](http://conferences.esa.int/pde2008)

**Programme -- Version 4 -- Final (25 March 2008)**

+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| * |                                                                  |
| * |                                                                  |
| W |                                                                  |
| e |                                                                  |
| d |                                                                  |
| n |                                                                  |
| e |                                                                  |
| s |                                                                  |
| d |                                                                  |
| a |                                                                  |
| y |                                                                  |
| 2 |                                                                  |
| 6 |                                                                  |
| M |                                                                  |
| a |                                                                  |
| r |                                                                  |
| c |                                                                  |
| h |                                                                  |
| 2 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 8 |                                                                  |
| * |                                                                  |
| * |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | Registration                                                     |
| 8 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | **Opening and Welcome**                                          |
| 8 |                                                                  |
| : | Constantinos Stavrinidis (ESA/ESTEC, Netherlands) -- Head of     |
| 4 | Mechanical Engineering Department                                |
| 5 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | [[]{#RobertBeanTOC .anchor}**Using Pattern Recognition           |
| 9 | Technology as a Basis for Validation of CAD Data Translation and |
| : | Comparison**](#RobertBean)                                       |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 | Robert Bean, J. Gordon (Kubotek USA, Inc., USA)                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | [[]{#PaoloVercesiTOC .anchor}**Performance-Related Issues in     |
| 9 | Inter-Organizational Design Optimization**](#PaoloVercesi)       |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 | Paolo Vercesi (Esteco, Italy), Alberto Bartoli (DEEI -           |
| 0 | University of Trieste, Italy)                                    |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#AndyChinnTOC .anchor}**STEP Based Interoperability Across   |
| 0 | Space and Time**](#AndyChinn)                                    |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Andy Chinn (TranscenData Europe Limited, UK), Doug Cheney (ITI   |
| 0 | TranscenData, USA)                                               |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Coffee/Tea Break                                                 |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#IanBaileyTOC .anchor}**Formal Ontology as an Enabler for    |
| 1 | Exchanging Military Systems Architectures**](#IanBailey)         |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Ian Bailey (Model Futures, UK)                                   |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#LeoBreebaartTOC .anchor}**The MECA Project -- Using an      |
| 1 | OWL/RDF Knowledge Base to ensure Data Portability for Space      |
| : | Mission Operations**](#LeoBreebaart)                             |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| 0 | Leo Breebaart (Science & Technology BV, Netherlands), A. Olmedo  |
|   | Soler (OK-Systems, Spain), A. Bos (Science & Technology BV,      |
|   | Netherlands), Uwe Brauer (Astrium Space Transportation,          |
|   | Germany), M. Neerincx, N. Smets (TNO-D&S, Netherlands)           |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#HensonGravesTOC .anchor}**Using Ontological Methods For     |
| 2 | Product Development Planning and Execution**](#HensonGraves)     |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Henson Graves (Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, USA)                 |
| 0 | [CANCELLED!!]{.mark}                                             |
|   |                                                                  |
|   | Will be replaced by Lothar Klein on S-TEN (Semantic STEP)        |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#OnnoPaapTOC .anchor}**ISO 15926 update**](#OnnoPaap)        |
| 2 |                                                                  |
| : | Onno Paap (Fluor Corporation, Netherlands)                       |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Lunch Break                                                      |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#PhilippeNachtergaeleTOC .anchor}**OOFELIE Data Exchange for |
| 4 | CAE Multiphysics Numerical Simulation in FSI, Optics &           |
| : | Concurrent Design**](#PhilippeNachtergaele)                      |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 | Philippe Nachtergaele, P. De Vincenzo, I. Klapka, J.M. Vaassen   |
|   | (Open Engineering, Belgium)                                      |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#MathieuMaracheTOC .anchor}**Expressik LightCpp Project -    |
| 4 | C++ Open Source SDK for STEP data management**](#MathieuMarache) |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 | Mathieu Marache (CSTB, France)                                   |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#LotharKleinTOC .anchor}**A Component Oriented Software      |
| 5 | Architecture for Cross STEP-AP Implementations**](#LotharKlein)  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Lothar Klein (LKSoft, Germany)                                   |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Coffee/Tea Break                                                 |
| 5 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#MichelKleinTOC .anchor}**Tailoring Standards for Space      |
| 6 | Projects**](#MichelKlein)                                        |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Michel Klein, Rafeal Lorza-Pitt, Thomas Deak, Joel Asquier       |
| 0 | (ESA/ESTEC, Netherlands), P. Smith (Optimus Consulting, UK)      |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#MichaelKollerTOC .anchor}**Effective Exchange of Telemetry  |
| 6 | and Command Definitions using XTCE**](#MichaelKoller)            |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 | Michael Koller, Mario Merri (ESA/ESOC, Germany), K. Rice         |
| 0 | (NASA/GSFC, USA)                                                 |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Cocktail                                                         |
| 7 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Adjourn                                                          |
| 8 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+

+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| * |                                                                  |
| * |                                                                  |
| T |                                                                  |
| h |                                                                  |
| u |                                                                  |
| r |                                                                  |
| s |                                                                  |
| d |                                                                  |
| a |                                                                  |
| y |                                                                  |
| 2 |                                                                  |
| 7 |                                                                  |
| M |                                                                  |
| a |                                                                  |
| r |                                                                  |
| c |                                                                  |
| h |                                                                  |
| 2 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 8 |                                                                  |
| * |                                                                  |
| * |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | [[]{#JeanChevallierTOC .anchor}**Systems Requirements and        |
| 9 | Product Lifecycle Management**](#JeanChevallier)                 |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Jean Chevallier (Jean Chevallier SARL, France), L. Cohen, A.     |
| 0 | Lapeyre (Magellium, France)                                      |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | [[]{#AxelBerresTOC .anchor}**Simulation-based System Engineering |
| 9 | in the Virtual Satellite Project**](#AxelBerres)                 |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 | Axel Berres, Olaf Maibaum (DLR -- German Aerospace Center,       |
| 0 | Germany)                                                         |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#JeanLucLeGalTOC .anchor}**Axes of Progress Engaged at CNES  |
| 0 | to Improve Capacity of Collaboration with Partners between       |
| : | Concurrent Design Facilities**](#JeanLucLeGal)                   |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 | Jean-Luc Le Gal, Thierry Warrot (CNES, France), M. Joubert       |
|   | (Spacebel, France), E. Haardt (XI Ingénierie, France)            |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Coffee/Tea Break                                                 |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#HaraldEisenmannTOC .anchor}**Space System Reference Model   |
| 1 | -- Integration and Collaboration Platform for the Engineering    |
| : | Domains in the Space Industry**](#HaraldEisenmann)               |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 | Harald Eisenmann (Astrium Satellites, Germany), Matthias Grau    |
|   | (PROSTEP AG, Germany), Niklas Lindman, Hans Peter de Koning      |
|   | (ESA/ESTEC, Netherlands)                                         |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#ArneTonTOC .anchor}**The ESA OCDS Project - Enhancing the   |
| 1 | Concurrent Design Concept**](#ArneTon)                           |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 | Arne Tøn (Jotne EPM Technology, Norway), R. Richardson (Dayscha  |
| 0 | Consulting, Ireland), A. Relvas (Critical Software, Portugal),   |
|   | T. Christiansen (Det Norske Veritas, Norway), Jochen Haenisch    |
|   | (Jotne EPM Technology, Norway), C. Coutinho (Critical Software,  |
|   | Portugal)                                                        |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#MarkusLitzTOC .anchor}**Software Tools and Data Formats for |
| 2 | Data Exchange in Airplane Predesign**](#MarkusLitz)              |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Markus Litz, Holger Cornelsen, Hans-Peter Kersken (DLR -- German |
| 0 | Aerospace Center, Germany)                                       |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#UdoHeringTOC .anchor}**GlobalX - A Fast, Secure and         |
| 2 | Reliable Collaboration Platform for Data Exchange via            |
| : | Internet**](#UdoHering)                                          |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| 0 | Udo Hering (PROSTEP AG, Germany)                                 |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Lunch Break                                                      |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#HansPeterdeKoning1TOC .anchor}**Report on Model Based       |
| 4 | Systems Engineering Initiative in INCOSE including usage of      |
| : | SysML**](#HansPeterdeKoning1)                                    |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 | Hans Peter de Koning (ESA/ESTEC, Netherlands)                    |
|   |                                                                  |
|   | [**[Expressik LightCpp Project - C++ Open Source SDK for STEP    |
|   | data management]{.mark}**](#MathieuMarache)                      |
|   |                                                                  |
|   | [Mathieu Marache (CSTB, France)]{.mark}                          |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#HughUnangstTOC .anchor}**Architecture Alternatives Analysis |
| 4 | for the Generation of Visualization Data**](#HughUnangst)        |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 | Hugh Unangst (Boeing, USA)                                       |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#ZoranPetrovicTOC .anchor}**A Sustainable Solution for       |
| 5 | Repeatable CAE Workflows through Management and Exchange of      |
| : | Product Data using Open Standards**](#ZoranPetrovic)             |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 | Zoran Petrovic (Siemens PLM Software, Germany), Guy Wills        |
|   | (Siemens PLM Software, UK), S.A. Seitanis (BETA CAE Systems S.   |
|   | A., Greece)                                                      |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Coffee/Tea Break                                                 |
| 5 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#TheoJansenTOC .anchor}**Special invited keynote on          |
| 6 | out-of-the-box thinking**](#TheoJansen)                          |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Theo Jansen (strandbeest.com, Netherlands)                       |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Adjourn                                                          |
| 7 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Workshop dinner                                                  |
| 9 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+

+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| * |                                                                  |
| * |                                                                  |
| F |                                                                  |
| r |                                                                  |
| i |                                                                  |
| d |                                                                  |
| a |                                                                  |
| y |                                                                  |
| 2 |                                                                  |
| 8 |                                                                  |
| M |                                                                  |
| a |                                                                  |
| r |                                                                  |
| c |                                                                  |
| h |                                                                  |
| 2 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 8 |                                                                  |
| * |                                                                  |
| * |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | [[]{#AlainFagotTOC .anchor}**ESATAP - Post processing of large   |
| 9 | thermal result datasets using STEP-TAS/STEP-NRF HDF5             |
| : | implementation**](#AlainFagot)                                   |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 | Alain Fagot, François Brunetti (DOREA, France)                   |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | [[]{#GeorgSiebesTOC .anchor}**Implementation of STEP-TAS Thermal |
| 9 | Model Exchange Standard in Thermal Desktop**](#GeorgSiebes)      |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 | Georg Siebes (NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory, USA), Tim Panczak  |
| 0 | (C&R Technologies, USA)                                          |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#HansPeterdeKoning2TOC .anchor}**STEP-TAS: Kinematics, Space |
| 0 | Mission Aspects and other Developments**](#HansPeterdeKoning2)   |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Hans Peter de Koning, Duncan Gibson, Simon Appel, Harrie         |
| 0 | Rooijackers (ESA/ESTEC, Netherlands)                             |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#PhilippeBridenneTOC .anchor}**Status of the Current         |
| 0 | ECAD-MCAD Collaboration Solution**](#PhilippeBridenne)           |
| : |                                                                  |
| 3 | Philippe Bridenne, Hans-Ulrich Heidbrink (Mentor Graphics,       |
| 0 | Germany)                                                         |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Coffee/Tea Break                                                 |
| 1 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#DEPUISTOC .anchor}**DEPUIS - Design of Environmentally      |
| 1 | friendly Products Using Information Standards - EC               |
| : | project**](#DEPUIS)                                              |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| 0 | [**Presentation and Discussion Forum**](#DEPUIS)                 |
|   |                                                                  |
|   | Paul van Exel (USPI, Netherlands), Lothar Klein (LKSoft,         |
|   | Germany), Anna Moreno (ENEA, Italy)                              |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Lunch Break                                                      |
| 3 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | [[]{#CDFTOC .anchor}**ESTEC Concurrent Design Facility - Visit   |
| 4 | and Presentation**](#CDF)                                        |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 | Massimo Bandecchi (ESA/ESTEC, Netherlands)                       |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Birds of a Feather sessions                                      |
| 5 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Adjourn                                                          |
| 7 |                                                                  |
| : |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
| 0 |                                                                  |
+---+------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Abstracts**

[[]{#RobertBean .anchor}Back to programme](#RobertBeanTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 09:00

**Using Pattern Recognition Technology as a Basis for Validation of CAD
Data Translation and Comparison**

Robert Bean, J. Gordon (Kubotek USA, Inc., USA)

Artificial Intelligence technology using pattern recognition has been
applied to applications ranging from fingerprint matching by the FBI to
image recognition engines for locating for photos on the internet.
Applying similar pattern recognition algorithms to the validation of CAD
geometry can provide a fast and robust method for insuring the quality
of OEM master file data exchange to suppliers. This can be realized
using native CAD files as well as industry standard formats like STEP
and IGES. This presentation will focus on the application of validating
CAD geometry using pattern matching techniques as well as contrasting
this methodology to more traditional \"point cloud\" validation
techniques.

These same geometry pattern matching principles can be used for
comparison applications where one version of a part or assembly can be
compared to another version. Every major or subtle change in the
geometry can be quickly identified using this technique. This technology
has the potential of providing a solid foundation for part search and
change control applications for PDM. This could enable the development
of advanced PDM tools built not just on searching databases for text
attributes, but on discovering the changes made to the CAD model
geometry itself.

As design data moves from the OEM through the supply chain in to and out
of disparate supplier CAD/CAM/CAE software, subtle and sometimes
undetected changes can occur altering the design geometry. These changes
can be undesirable, affecting quality of the manufactured product.
Validation tools can be a critical component of successful OEM master
data exchange with supply chain partners. Examples from an Aerospace
perspective will highlight applications for CAD Data Exchange Validation
and Design Change Validation.

[[]{#PaoloVercesi .anchor}Back to programme](#PaoloVercesiTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 09:30

**Performance-Related Issues in Inter-Organizational Design
Optimization**

Paolo Vercesi (Esteco, Italy), Alberto Bartoli (DEEI - University of
Trieste, Italy)

Thanks to technologies able to simplifying the integration among remote
programs hosted by different organizations, engineering and scientific
communities are embodying service oriented architectures to aggregate,
share and distribute their computing resources to process and manage
large data sets, and to execute simulations through Internet. Web
service, for example, allow an organization to expose the functionality
of its internal systems on the Internet and to make it discoverable and
accessible in a controlled manner.

Such a technological advance may enable novel applications also in the
area of design optimization. Current design optimization systems are
usually confined within the boundary of a single organization or
department. Modern engineering products, on the other hand, are
assembled out of components developed by several organizations.
Composing services from the involved organizations, a workflow
describing the composite product can be created. Such composite service
can then be used by a inter-organizational design optimization system.

The design trade-offs that have been implicitly incorporated within
local environments, may have to be reconsidered when deploying these
systems on a global scale on the Internet. For example: i) node-to-node
links may vary their service quality in an unpredictable manner; ii)
third party nodes retains full control over their resources including,
e.g., the right to decrease the resource amount temporarily and
unpredictably.

From the point of view of the system as a whole, one would like to
maximize the performance, i.e. throughput the number of candidate design
evaluations performed per unit of time. From the point of view of a
participant organization, however, one would like to minimize the cost
associated with each evaluation. This cost can be an obstacle to the
adoption of this distributed paradigm, because organizations
participating in the composite service share they resources (e.g. CPU,
link bandwidth and software licenses) with other, potentially unknown,
organizations. Minimizing such cost while keeping performance delivered
to clients at an acceptable level can be a powerful factor for
encouraging organizations to indeed share their services.

The scheduling of workflows in such a multi-organization, multi-tiered
and geographically dispersed environment have strong impacts on
performance. We investigate some of the fundamental performance and cost
related issues involved in such a novel scenario. We propose an adaptive
admission control to be deployed at the workflow engine level that
limits the number of concurrent jobs. Our proposal can be implemented
very simply: it handles the service as black-boxes, and it does not
require any hook from the participating organizations.

We evaluated our technique in a broad range of scenarios, by means of
simulation. Experimental results suggest that it can provide significant
benefits guaranteeing good throughput and low costs.

[[]{#AndyChinn .anchor}Back to programme](#AndyChinnTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 10:00

**STEP Based Interoperability Across Space and Time**

Andy Chinn (TranscenData Europe Limited, UK), Doug Cheney (ITI
TranscenData, USA)

CAD Interoperability problems continue to cost industry many billions of
euros. Challenges caused by incompatible CAD modellers, formats and
processes are the root cause. New approaches are brought to market on a
regular basis and success stories are plentiful. But tough challenges
remain.

The STEP (ISO 10303) standard has become widely adopted as a neutral
data exchange format and has been helping companies share product
information for over 20 years. AP203 Edition 2 is approved and in early
use, and proving to be a valuable enhancement. STEP is prominent in the
aerospace industry where mission critical considerations exist over and
above those of basic interoperability.

In key areas such as supplier integration, file validation and certified
data delivery, users are striving to improve the quality of the STEP
delivery process across today\'s \"Space\" continuum, to internal
departments and applications, their customers and suppliers.

In addition, particularly in the aerospace and defence industries, users
need to ensure effective interoperability across the \"Time\" continuum
with fully validated STEP files for long term archival.

It is always difficult to predict the success of future processes and
interoperability based on a file exported today, but achieving a greater
level of success today will mean more chance of getting it right in the
future.

To achieve robust and reliable interoperability, a number of key
questions need to be addressed:

-   How can you verify that the 3D geometry in the STEP file sent to
    suppliers will import successfully into their system, without the
    need for rework or remodelling and the risk of unwanted design
    deviations?

-   How can you verify that the 3D geometry in the STEP file sent to
    suppliers is free from issues that impact downstream analysis and
    manufacturing processes?

-   How can you validate that the geometry in the STEP file is an
    accurate representation of the source CAD model?

-   How can you validate the integrity and accuracy of the STEP file?

-   Can you guarantee that the STEP file sent for long term archival
    will be retrievable and usable in 50 years?

One of the keys to future interoperability is self validating STEP
files. STEP already provides basic mass property information via
Geometric Validation Property data, but is this enough to give full
confidence? Missions are not sent into space without critical system
redundancy and the same should be true for STEP validation data.
Additional validation data is essential as back-up and the basis for
intelligent future decisions.

Is geometry validation sufficient? Surely important assembly data and
Product Manufacturing Information (PMI) associated with the STEP model
also needs to be verified and validated.

The presentation will explore the issues surrounding effective STEP
based interoperability, drawing on experience of our own solution
development and examples from practical implementations of STEP based
customer applications.

[[]{#IanBailey .anchor}Back to programme](#IanBaileyTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 11:00

**Formal Ontology as an Enabler for Exchanging Military Systems
Architectures**

Ian Bailey (Model Futures, UK)

Systems Engineering efforts. Often, these frameworks will also define a
meta-model for enterprise architecture (e.g. CADM for DoDAF, M3 for
MODAF, etc.). These meta-models define the allowable elements (systems,
human roles, processes, states, etc.), and the relationships between
them. The meta-models are used to configure repositories and the
structure of data exchange files (usually XML). The meta-models tend to
be national standards - i.e. they are rarely used outside their country
of origin. As a result, exchanging architectural data between nations is
usually a case of sending screenshots or paper documents which have to
be re-entered into the receiving party\'s systems.

In 2005, the defence departments of Australia, Canada, the UK and the
USA set up a project to develop a common metamodel for their
architecture frameworks. Called the IDEAS Group (International Defence
Enterprise Architecture Specification), it was quickly joined by NATO
and the Swedish Armed Forces as observers. The group initially set out
to develop a data model and XML format by analysing the entities of each
nation\'s meta-model. This proved much harder than anticipated - there
was a clear need for a methodology for analysing and comparing the
meta-models. The group chose the BORO (business objects re-engineering
ontology) and set about the process of analysis. As a result, the IDEAS
Model has been developed as a very formal, philosophical ontology - in
the terms of the ontologist, it is an extensional, 4D ontology.

The IDEAS Group successfully demonstrated exchange of process model data
in 2007 using an XML encoding (based on RDF) of the IDEAS Model.
Casualty evacuation procedures were exchanged from Sparx EA to
Telelogic\'s System Architect then round-tripped back to Sparx. This
presentation outlines the BORO method and the IDEAS model itself. It
explains the difference between an \"enterprise ontology\" and the type
of ontology typically used by the AI and Semantic Web community for
reasoning. In addition, the presentation discusses how the US and UK
have begun to find fringe benefits from IDEAS, using the ontology as the
basis for their own conceptual models, and in the case of the UK using
IDEAS as the basis for a country-code de-confliction engine.

[[]{#LeoBreebaart .anchor}Back to programme](#LeoBreebaartTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 11:30

**The MECA Project -- Using an OWL/RDF Knowledge Base to ensure Data
Portability for Space Mission Operations**

Leo Breebaart (Science & Technology BV, Netherlands), A. Olmedo Soler
(OK-Systems, Spain), A. Bos (Science & Technology BV, Netherlands), Uwe
Brauer (Astrium Space Transportation, Germany), M. Neerincx, N. Smets
(TNO-D&S, Netherlands)

This article describes the authors\' experiences with a pragmatic,
ontology-based approach to data portability and knowledge sharing, used
in the first Mission Execution Crew Assistant (MECA) Proof-of-concept
demonstrator software.

MECA is an ESA research project that aims to boost the cognitive
capacities of human-machine teams during planetary exploration missions
in order to allow them to cope autonomously with unexpected, complex and
potentially hazardous situations.

MECA provides crew support software acting in a ubiquitous computing
environment as an electronic partner, helping the crew to assess a
situation, to determine a suitable course of problem-solving actions,
and to safeguard the astronauts from failures. The technologies
developed for MECA should in principle also be applicable to flight
control centres.

To achieve a high level of autonomy, the MECA software must have a
semantically rich view of the world in which it operates. It must have
an understanding of high level mission objects (such as goals,
resources, actors, tasks, procedures, plans and schedules) but also of
lower-level system information (such as vehicles, payloads, instruments,
sensors, actuators, processors, telemetry, test results, and fault
diagnoses).

In order to assist the human astronaut optimally, MECA must also be
aware of human issues such as trust, task load, stress levels, and other
cognitive aspects of human-computer interfacing. Following the general
objective of human-machine partnership, a major part of the information
should be easily shared (i.e. understood) by both human and machine
actors.

For the MECA-2007 Proof of Concept demonstrator, the MECA team used a
distributed RDF knowledge base, containing heterogeneous data described
by various OWL ontologies. The common semantic world view provided by
the RDF data made it possible and even easy for the software to be aware
of and reason about connections between concepts and data that are not
normally considered interoperable. It was also instrumental in
implementing parts of MECA as semantic web services, facilitating the
sharing of knowledge among heterogeneous agents.

This article describes the approach taken in MECA and our experiences
during development and testing, discusses the pros and cons of the
OWL/RDF approach, and gives an outlook on further applications of these
techniques in the space operations domain.

[[]{#HensonGraves .anchor}Back to programme](#HensonGravesTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 12:00

**Using Ontological Methods For Product Development Planning and
Execution**

Henson Graves (Lockheed Martin Aeronautics, USA)

**CANCELLED!!**

Successful product development requires the capability to plan what work
products (real and digital) need to be produced for each program event.
To assess progress, one must be able to discover and access the actual
produced work products and check that they have sufficient quality, as
well as check that the entire collection is consistent. A critical issue
is how to describe the information content of a work product in a way
that stakeholders can recognize, identify, and assess the content. Where
the number of work products is small, on the order of a few hundred,
this task can be managed by simple tools such as a spread sheet. Where
the product has hundreds of subsystems made up of thousands of
assemblies and parts, and each component requires the production of many
work products, such as requirements, design, and test conditions, then a
more formal approach may be required to enable identification, access,
discovery, and assessment.

The goal is to provide terminology and taxonomies for creating the work
product descriptions needed for planning and assessment. The work
product descriptions function as top level requirements which can be
used in work product assessment. The descriptions are designed to
address the product consumer's needs . The approach is to develop a
conceptual model (ontology) of product development processes and
products. For example, describing the content of a work product requires
the capability to identify what component it is about, what quality or
characteristic of the product it is in reference to, and what method was
used to produce it. The analysis uses the foundation ontology, DOLCE as
the starting point. This work builds on work by several authors who have
advocated the development of an information management ontology. The
information management ontologies extend or replace traditional metadata
specifications. The result is an ontology, expressed in the language OWL
1.1, that provides a work product description terminology. The ontology
can be used by an information system to provide services beyond
traditional data management services.

[[]{#OnnoPaap .anchor}Back to programme](#OnnoPaapTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 12:30

**ISO 15926 update**

Onno Paap (Fluor Corporation, Netherlands)

ISO 15926 is the leading interoperability standard for the Oil, Gas,
Chemical and Power facilities industries. This standard has gained
considerable momentum over the last two years with support from leading
owner operators, EPC contractors, and key software suppliers. Come and
learn about the challenges that we all face in deploying
interoperability and what is so different about ISO 15926. Gain an
understanding as to why so many companies recognize this standard to be
critical for their future success and why leaders throughout the
industry are engaging and participating in acceleration and deployment
projects. In this presentation, we will cover the broad industry
implications of ISO 15926 and the specific activates and deliverables
that are in-progress and planned for the future.

[[]{#PhilippeNachtergaele .anchor}Back to
programme](#PhilippeNachtergaeleTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 14:00

**OOFELIE Data Exchange for CAE Multiphysics Numerical Simulation in
FSI, Optics & Concurrent Design**

Philippe Nachtergaele, P. De Vincenzo, I. Klapka, J.M. Vaassen (Open
Engineering, Belgium)

As technologies are in constant evolution, engineer\'s needs in terms of
numerical simulation are permanently growing, especially in
multidisciplinary designs. However, historical codes have shown their
limits and reveal to be unable to combine efficiently several physical
fields simultaneously. This fact is particularly highlighted when
optimisation or control is involved in the design flow of critical
components of spatial equipments.

OOFELIE® constitutes a new generation of multi-physics CAE software
designed to take into account, in the same analysis, multiple physical
fields in a strongly coupled formulation and to combine multiple methods
in a single computation scheme. Thanks to its open architecture, based
on Object-Oriented Programming (OOP), and its relevant interfacing
capabilities, the OOFELIE® framework was efficiently used to develop
innovative solutions in the expanding domain of Fluid-Structure
Interaction (FSI), Optics and Concurrent design where data exchanges
between several applications is a key feature.

FSI problems impose the deformation of a structure by fluid forces that
deform the fluid domain itself, resulting in a two-ways interaction.
Fluid capabilities have been added to the structure ones of OOFELIE® by
coupling it with the CFD code FIN™/Hexa, developed at Numeca
International (staggered approach: each solver responsible for its
domain). This implies exchange of information (displacement, force\...)
at the fluid-structure interfaces in two ways: through non-conform
meshes (the fluid one is finer than the structure one) and through
solvers (by MPI communications).

For a growing number of optical instruments, the need for high
dimensional stability, accuracy and predictable performances raises the
standards for the design of optical devices. An integrated numerical
simulation tool was developed to allow analysing the coupled interaction
between the optical behaviour and its structural medium due to
mechanical or thermal solicitations. The resulting application enables
the dialogue between OOFELIE® and the optical simulation software
ZEMAX®, offering the ability to exchange the geometry of optical
surfaces and associated results between the applications, mainly through
direct in-memory dialog.

In the Concurrent Design Facility (CDF) of ESA, a multidisciplinary team
of experts works in a concurrent way and in real time to produce the
initial conception of space instruments and to review industrial
concepts. In order to introduce pre-computed and parameterized
multi-physics reduced models in the data exchange procedure implemented
in the CDF, a dedicated interface was implemented in the Microsoft
Excel® environment that drives the multi-physics solver OOFELIE that was
integrated as a Python module to take benefit of Python\'s COM
capabilities.

In this paper, detailed information about the communication schemes and
resolution strategies available within OOFLIE® are provided.
Applications of those technologies are also presented.

[[]{#MathieuMarache .anchor}Back to programme](#MathieuMaracheTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 14:30

**Expressik LightCpp Project - C++ Open Source SDK for STEP data
management**

Mathieu Marache, Eric Lebègue (CSTB, France)

In the scope of the IITAS project, for industrial implementation of
STEP-TAS protocols, CSTB develops a C++ SDK for STEP data
reading/parsing, writing and management.

This SDK is based on the expressik toolkit developed by the University
of Manchester, for which CSTB has developed an optimised LightCpp C++
source code generator compliant with the STEP-TAS protocol and the IFC
(Industry Foundation Classes) one, used in the construction sector.

This presentation will present the status of this implementation and the
validation effort which has been made in the scope on the IITAS
(Industrial Implementation of STEP-TAS) project.

It will also open the discussion for opportunity of creating and
launching a real Open Source project for expressik and associated SDK.

[[]{#LotharKlein .anchor}Back to programme](#LotharKleinTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 15:00

**A Component Oriented Software Architecture for Cross STEP-AP
Implementations**

Lothar Klein (LKSoft, Germany)

IDA-STEP v4 is an Eclipse/Java based software component architecture for
standardised industrial product data. By using the JSDAI API it is
possible to process STEP files (SIO 10303) for all STEP APs and make the
data available for GUI operations including enhanced functionality such
as build in undo/redo for rich editors. Leveraging the STEP modular
architecture by the eXended Integrated Model (XIM) traditional and
modern modular APs are combined in a single model, including bridging
between the ARM and AIM/MIM world. We will show how this tool can be
used for mechanical 3D, PDM, electronics and PLCS applications and how
it can be extended by customers for their specific needs.

[[]{#MichelKlein .anchor}Back to programme](#MichelKleinTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 16:00

**Tailoring Standards for Space Projects**

Michel Klein, Rafeal Lorza-Pitt, Thomas Deak, Joel Asquier (ESA/ESTEC,
Netherlands), P. Smith (Optimus Consulting, UK)

Usage of standards within projects ensures availability of a consistent
set of requirements drawn from past experience of a design community.
For example the ECSS standards wrt the space community. However, being
of generic nature, whatever streamlined they might be, the standards
will always need some adaptation (tailoring) to the specifics of the
project.

Any such change needs to be justified. The rationale of the change is an
element of design knowledge, as such worth to be saved.

Information on tailoring performed by the users of standards might also,
if properly available, allow to improve the standards.

Flexibillity to the type of project documentation is also needed,
whereby for example the tailored standard is integrated in the project
documentation (e.g. as a system requirements document). Traceability of
the project documentation to the standard is then the issue.

Finally, the end set of tailored requirements must be manageable by
current requirements management tools.

The presentation shows a tailoring tool prototype for the presently
published ECSS standards responding to above identified needs.

[[]{#MichaelKoller .anchor}Back to programme](#MichaelKollerTOC)

Wednesday 26 March at 16:30

**Effective Exchange of Telemetry and Command Definitions using XTCE**

Michael Koller, Mario Merri (ESA/ESOC, Germany), K. Rice (NASA/GSFC,
USA)

Under the scope of the Object Management Group (OMG) Space Domain Task
Force, representatives from Boeing, ESA, Lockheed Martin and NASA
proposed the XML Telemetric and Command Exchange (XTCE) as format for
exchanging mission core telemetry and command definitions; it became an
OMG standard in 2006. In 2007, due to the large interest raised by the
potential user community, the Spacecraft Monitoring & Control working
group (SM&C) of the Consultative Committee for Space Data System (CCSDS)
adopted XTCE as a CCSDS standard, thus extending its user base to many
other space agencies such as ASI, BSNC, CNES, CSA, DLR, FSA, INPE, and
JAXA. The very successful cooperation of all involved parties is making
XTCE a powerful and comprehensive standard to define an exchange format
for telemetry and command definitions.

Throughout the complete lifecycle of a space mission, telemetry and
command definitions need to be exchanged among various organisations and
systems. For instance, a spacecraft manufacturer provides telemetry and
command definitions to the organisation responsible for operating the
spacecraft, where this information is augmented with additional
operational data and used to interpret telemetry and encoding commands
to operate the actual spacecraft.

In the absence of standardised telemetry and command descriptive
formats, these definitions require the development of dedicated
converters between the various proprietary formats, editors and systems.
On the contrary, many ground system components will be able to benefit
from a standardised telemetry and command description format. Similarly,
the exchange with external parties can heavily benefit from a
well-defined and widely acknowledged data exchange format. It is obvious
that a common format for data exchange will help to reduce
incompatibilities and conversion errors with tangible economic and
programmatic advantages. If missions require additional and proprietary
features not covered by XTCE, it can implement them by appropriately
extending XTCE. This is facilitated by the use of XML as underline
technology of XTCE.

XTCE's focus is mainly on the format of the data while its semantics has
to be agreed on a case-by-case basis. For this reason, in order to help
the user community, the CCSDS is currently working on the definition of
recommended practices in support of a systematic use of XTCE for mission
based on CCSDS packet telemetry and telecommand.

This paper briefly introduces XTCE, provides some examples of missions
that are currently using XTCE, discusses the lesson learned from them
and provides the look forward for XTCE.

References

\[1\] XML Telemetric and Command Exchange. Green Book, CCSDS 660.0-G-1,
July 2006,

<http://public.ccsds.org/publications/archive/660x0g1.pdf>

\[2\] XML Telemetric and Command Exchange. Blue Book, CCSDS 660.0-B-1,
October 2007,

<http://public.ccsds.org/publications/archive/660x0b1.pdf>

[[]{#JeanChevallier .anchor}Back to programme](#JeanChevallierTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 09:00

**Systems Requirements and Product Lifecycle Management**

Jean Chevallier (Jean Chevallier SARL, France), L. Cohen, A. Lapeyre
(Magellium, France)

While system\'s requirements are probably the most important information
of a system and consequently the most exchanged information, it is
amazing that this information do not take place in Product Lifecycle
management.

To our point of view, system's requirements should constitute the
starting point of PLM. They are the representation of the user\'s need
and of the context within it shall be satisfied. A product technical
specification shall be established under the customer\'s responsability
and is part of the agreement between customer and supplier.

System\'s requirement shall be captured, validated and justified and
they are used by system engineering as the starting point to identify
possible concepts and to evaluate these.They shall be allocated,
organised in terms of sub-systems, lower level elements following the
customer/supplier net and shall be verifiable. Requirements are used by
system engineers to design the system and to manage the project.

During the development, requirements, their sources and justifications
are the reference for the evaluation of the impact of a change, of a
non-conformance. System engineering shall control and maintain sets of
requirements, functional and technical specifications for the system and
its lower level elements. To ensure the consistency of the requirements
at system level, at lower levels as well as amongst levels elements,
\"specifications\" shall be exchanged and structure. Functional and
technical specifications of the system and of its different elements are
used by the exploitation and the entity in charge of the disposal to
ensure the availability of the system, in terms of spare's management
and non-conformance evaluations.

Moreover, different actors are involved in this requirements lifecycle:
users, stakeholders, customers, suppliers, system engineers,
exploitation, configuration management. Thus the caracterisation of
these requirements has to be defined in accordance with these different
use.

If the ISO 21 351 \"functional and technical specifications\" and its
ECSS version, the ECSS E 10 Part 6, propose a set of rules for the
establishment of specifications and to express technical requirements,
it is not enough to facilitate the exchange of the relevant datas needed
by the different use.

On these bases, a tooled approach named SpecRight has been developped.
As the main objectives of SpecRight focuse on the capture, the
justification, the identification and the structure of technical
requirements and product\'s Specifications, SpecRight is the first step
of PLM by structuring needed informations at the origin of a project.

As it could be used for the establishment of the specifications of each
element constituting a system, it could propose a common exchangeable
structure. All information produced with SpecRight can be easily
exported to traceability or PLM dedicated tools and softwares.

[[]{#AxelBerres .anchor}Back to programme](#AxelBerresTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 09:30

**Simulation-based System Engineering in the Virtual Satellite Project**

Axel Berres, Olaf Maibaum (DLR -- German Aerospace Center, Germany)

The development of complex space systems requires the collaboration of
specialists in a variety of disciplines. The main challenge of the
\"concurrent engineering\" approach is to keep a consistent view of the
system and to organize the data exchange between the specialists
appropriately. One way to achieve system model consistency is to use a
shared SysML model. Each specialist accesses the model via a
discipline-specific view.

Unfortunately, SysML tools neither support the reuse of available system
components or component assemblies, nor do they provide sufficient
support for the data exchange among the different disciplines. To close
this gap, the German Aerospace Center (DLR) in 2007 initiated the
\"Virtual Satellite\" project.

At the heart of the project a system component repository keeps SysML
models of system components, together with related metainformation. This
includes ports of the components and information from past space
projects, such as parameterizations and configurations. In addition,
complex models of entire spacecraft configurations can be stored in the
repository.

As a first step in the development of a new spacecraft model, the system
engineer browses the repository in search of an existing SysML model
that fits the intended configuration as closely as possible. Components
can be deleted and others can be added as required. Each component model
provides views for all engineering disciplines, with ports describing
the discipline-specific input/output data. In a second step, for each
engineering discipline the corresponding specialist uses a SysML tool to
connect the open ports between components and thus completes the logical
view of the system.

Together with the SysML models and metadata, the repository contains
static and dynamic simulation models for each component. Based on the
SysML model of a complete space system, and using the simulation models
of its components, an automatic transformation tool generates an
executable simulation code which can be used to analyze the space system
in mission scenarios.

The dynamic simulation provided by the Virtual Satellite will be used to
optimize the system design for new space missions at the DLR Concurrent
Engineering Facility (CEF). The CEF closely follows the concept of
ESA\'s Concurrent Design Facility (CDF). In a CEF session the team of
specialists determines optimal system parameters for all disciplines.
The set of all those parameters is represented by the Integrated Design
Model (IDM) which is generated automatically from the Virtual Satellite
system model.

The Virtual Satellite approach will improve the system development
process in two ways: By collecting system models and metadata of earlier
design studies, the repository makes the knowledge collected in those
studies available for all future missions. By applying dynamic
simulation early in the development process to validate the given
constraints, system discrepancies will be detected early, thus saving
costs and time.

[[]{#JeanLucLeGal .anchor}Back to programme](#JeanLucLeGalTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 10:00

**Axes of Progress Engaged at CNES to Improve Capacity of Collaboration
with Partners between Concurrent Design Facilities**

Jean-Luc Le Gal, Thierry Warrot (CNES, France), M. Joubert (Spacebel,
France), E. Haardt (XI Ingénierie, France)

At CNES Toulouse, PASO (Plateau d\'Architecture des Systèmes Orbitaux)
is the office in charge of mission feasibility studies for orbital
projects. The organization is based on a transversal structure composed
of a dedicated engineering team and a number of specialists in various
disciplines. PASO uses a Concurrent Design Facility where mission and
technical constraints are shared and to achieve optimal trade-offs. The
facility allows for optimal collaboration, not only in CNES but equally
with ESA, industries and laboratories.

The presentation will give an overview of axes of progress engaged at
CNES to improve the use of Concurrent Design Facilities by exchanging
and sharing information with partners.

-   The first axis aims to allow exchange of IDM models between
    different teams. An approach based on modular XML standard is
    proposed and offers high flexibility to exchange a dedicated
    workbook or a completed \"data_exchange\" file, and to edit the
    data.

Furthermore, to promote the use of the IDM process, a training
application is developed and allows a \"player\" to be

immersed in the simulation of an integrated session.

-   The second axis of progress is dedicated to the visualisation of the
    spacecraft's attitude during a mission\'s phase as a communication
    channel between different specialists. An add-on for the free
    software Celestia© has been developed to ease the geometrical
    simulation. Celestia© manages to integrate orbits and attitude data
    as produced by CNES mission analysis software, CAD satellite models,
    simulated models, light sources of our universe and viewpoints of
    the operator, into dynamic real-time 3D displays.

Finally, new MMI (Man Machine Interaction) concepts are tested for
improved 3D model manipulations in the Concurrent Design Facility.

[[]{#HaraldEisenmann .anchor}Back to programme](#HaraldEisenmannTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 11:00

**Space System Reference Model -- Integration and Collaboration Platform
for the Engineering Domains in the Space Industry**

Harald Eisenmann (Astrium Satellites, Germany), Matthias Grau (PROSTEP
AG, Germany), Niklas Lindman, Hans Peter de Koning (ESA/ESTEC,
Netherlands)

The processes to develop and operate space systems such as satellites is
very complex and involves many different engineering domains and
collaborating partners. This leads today to a landscape that is
characterized by islands of engineering tools that are used throughout
the space system life cycle including:

-   Mechanical Engineering

-   Operational Engineering

-   Thermal Engineering

-   Electrical Engineering

-   Attitude and Orbit Control Engineering

-   Assembly, Integration & Test

on system level.

The tools are very well designed for their domain. They typically have
their own, proprietary data stores (databases, files) and formats and
often do not support efficient data exchange with other tools or even
domains. Each of the engineering data stores represents only a fragment
of the overall information and is typically valid for specific stages in
the process. There is currently no mechanism to organize and structure
information of the different domains during the space system life cycle
as a whole that fits the requirements of this industry.

Based on current PLM and PDM solutions current collaboration is limited
to documents. Discipline-independent data management is hardly to
achieve.

Current S/W engineering paradigms including Model-Driven-Architecture
(MDA) and Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) enable the development of
solutions dedicated for specific problems. In particular a domain
independent -- but also implementation independent - data definition is
important elements to develop a space system engineering database
together with an integration platform that allows straightforward
adoption of different tools and databases and the consistent management
of the related information in a global, system engineering related
context.

In continuing the paper presented at the PDE Workshop 2007 this paper
aims to present the solution developed as part of the SSRM project
initiated by ESA in 2007. It shows the demonstration scenarios as
identified in the course of the project and the related use cases as
well as ECSS E-TM-10-23 model subset. In addition, the services
implemented for the SSRM integration platform necessary to support the
scenarios are discussed. The integration infrastructure is presented
including the

-   application server environment

-   SSRM Database

-   SSRM Tools

-   System Engineering Control GUI

and the internal and external data flows.

Special focus is put on the generation of the APIs as well as data
structures. In this respect the target formats (XSD, Hibernate, Java
POJOs) are mentioned in detail and the transformation approaches and
tools are discussed. The paper concludes with a summary of what has been
achieved in the SSRM project and gives an outlook of future development
directions and activities.

[[]{#ArneTon .anchor}Back to programme](#ArneTonTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 11:30

**The ESA OCDS Project - Enhancing the Concurrent Design Concept**

Arne Tøn (Jotne EPM Technology, Norway), R. Richardson (Dayscha
Consulting, Ireland), A. Relvas (Critical Software, Portugal), T.
Christiansen (Det Norske Veritas, Norway), Jochen Haenisch (Jotne EPM
Technology, Norway), C. Coutinho (Critical Software, Portugal)

We will present the status of the ESA Open Concurrent Design Server
(OCDS) Project. The presentation begins with a brief overview of the
Concurrent Design Facility (CDF) concept as it is today at ESTEC and the
benefits of the concurrent design approach. The OCDS project is then
introduced with its goals to share CDF data in a central database and in
a standard data representation (particularly ISO 10303). In the OCDS
solution clients and server communicate via web services. These
enhancements will allow the CDF to integrate remotely located actors &
design centers that use heterogeneous applications and data
representations for various types of space mission design concepts.

Topics to be discussed include:

-   Concurrent Engineering in Phase 0

-   The ESA CDF

-   The server based CDF; OCDS

-   Informal Information model (SEIM - agree with customer how they see
    the world)

-   Reference data (SERDL - agree on what terms to describe their view
    of the world)

-   Relation to ECSS40 working group

-   The roles of standards: ISO 10303-P11 (EXPRESS - data definition
    language) ISO10303 AP239 (PLCS - data exchange and access), ISO
    12006-3 (Reference Data definition)

-   The service based architecture - connect \"anything\" to
    \"anything\", add new \"subscribers\" and \"providers\"

-   The implementation - Excel® based clients, domain specific tools ,
    multiple servers etc

-   How standards will help us going into later phases

[[]{#MarkusLitz .anchor}Back to programme](#MarkusLitzTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 12:00

**Software Tools and Data Formats for Data Exchange in Airplane
Predesign.**

Markus Litz, Holger Cornelsen, Hans-Peter Kersken (DLR -- German
Aerospace Center, Germany)

Nowadays, during the predesign phase of new airplane configurations many
different technical disciplines are involved, forexample aerodynamics,
structure mechanics, flight dynamic, and propulsion technology.

There exist strong dependencies between the individual technical
disciplines, so that optimization in each single discipline only will
inevitably fail to yield a global optimum. Therefore it is necessary to
consider the overall system in order to evaluate the potential of new
technologies realistically.

We present a software solution which enable stand-alone applications to
cooperate in a multidiscipline simulation environment to allow for a
global optimization process. To this end, an XML-based common data
format taylored to the requirements of airplane configuration for data
exchange has been defined and a set of libraries for the processing of
this data format have been implemented to enable the stand-alone tools
to communicate with each other using this format. The data format
permits the parametric representations of the geometry of airplane parts
and a library to perform geometrical computations based on this
representation has been developed. An automated optimization process has
been set-up by integrating the separate application\'s into a simulation
framework.

[[]{#UdoHering .anchor}Back to programme](#UdoHeringTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 12:30

**GlobalX - A Fast, Secure and Reliable Collaboration Platform for Data
Exchange via Internet**

Udo Hering (PROSTEP AG, Germany)

The process to develop and operate space systems such as satellites is
very complex and involves many collaborating partners. The global
cooperation and data sharing with partners makes high demands on the
data communication. The various security needs of the participating
partners have to be brought into line.

-   To encourage the development cycles shorten, they require ever
    shorter intervals huge amounts of data and information with partners
    around the globe are exchanged.

-   The collaboration platform must be standards-based, so as to
    integrate in existing infrastructures.

-   A scaling must increasing communications volume and new requirements
    easily possible.

In contrast to many traditional collaboration platforms, where the focus
is mainly on the online collaboration in product development, the
web-based data exchange platform GlobalX is optimized for asynchronous
exchange of large amounts of data, as they occur today in the
communication between the prime manufacturer and its suppliers in
vehicle and aircraft industry.

A particularly important requirement for a Web-based data exchange
platform is, that both, the interactive upload or download of data, as
well as the automated processing in batch mode is allowed.

In addition to the complete documentation of the exchange process, multi
level encryption mechanisms and the support of automated exchange
processes are the key strengths of GlobalX. The support of open
standards and easy integration into the appropriate back-end systems
guarantee a quick achievable and long lasting benefits.

An essential prerequisite for the secure exchange of data is the
possibility of access to the data on a particular rules, roles and
rights management for groups and persons. Specific usage rights, read,
edit, copy or print assign are required.

As a basis for the authorization of the persons awarding of digital
signatures and encryption a public-key infrastructure architecture is
implemented. It allows a scalable, personal or role encryption on the
platform stored data, which only the recipient can decrypt it again. In
contrast to conventional encryption methods as we know them from
electronic payments, not only the communications session is protected
against eavesdropping, but it also ensures that only the person or group
of persons to receive the information is entitled to open and read this
or work with it.

GlobalX therefore meets all requirements with respect to the security,
coordination and control of collaboration processes with the focus
offline data exchange. The system supports secure and atomized data
exchange processes with partners and suppliers either as a complement to
integration solutions addressing online collaboration scenarios, such as
OpenPDM® or SSRM Engineering Database (see SSRM paper) and/or directly
to/from the databases of the involved PLM/PDM systems.

[[]{#HansPeterdeKoning1 .anchor}Back to
programme](#HansPeterdeKoning1TOC)

Thursday 27 March at 14:00

**Report on Model Based Systems Engineering Initiative in INCOSE
including usage of SysML**

Hans Peter de Koning (ESA/ESTEC, Netherlands)

Within INCOSE (the International Council on Systems Engineering,
[http://www.incose.org](http://www.incose.org/)) an initiative has been
started on Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). In the INCOSE Vision
2020 document MBSE is defined as follows:

\"Model-based systems engineering (MBSE) is the formalized application
of modeling to support system requirements, design, analysis,
verification and validation, beginning in the conceptual design phase
and continuing throughout development and later life cycle phases. MBSE
is expected to play an increasing role in the practice of systems
engineering over the next several years. MBSE is part of a long-term
trend towards model-centric approaches that has evolved in other
engineering disciplines, including mechanical, electrical and software.
In particular, MBSE is expected to replace the document-centric approach
that has been practiced by systems engineers in years past and to become
fully integrated into the systems engineering process.\"

In September 2007 SysML v1.0 has been adopted as an OMG Available
Specification ([http://www.omgsysml.org](http://www.omgsysml.org/)).
SysML is a UML profile for Systems Engineering \-- actually a subset of
UML v2.0 with some extensions \-- that provides for the first time a
standardized graphical representation of combined hardware/software
systems. SysML is now gaining support in many modelling tools, many of
UML and Requirements Engineering origin.

This presentation will report on the INCOSE activities started in 2007
in this area, in particular on the so-called \"MBSE Grand Challenges\".
These are example systems engineering problems that are worked out by
various teams in order to develop examples, a body of knowledge and
validate the SysML standard in practical situations. Currently the
following Grand Challenge teams are active:

-   Highway Maintenance

-   Urban Transportation

-   Intelligent Enterprises

-   Space Systems

-   Avionics Systems and Software Integration

-   GEOSS Architecture Modeling (GEOSS = Global Earth Observation System
    of Systems)

-   Mechatronics

-   INCOSE Enterprise Model

[[]{#HughUnangst .anchor}Back to programme](#HughUnangstTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 14:30

**Architecture Alternatives Analysis for the Generation of Visualization
Data**

Hugh Unangst (Boeing, USA)

An architecture alternatives analysis for selection of a next-generation
architecture for the generation of visualization data for the Boeing
enterprise is presented. A responsive, modular, and robust architecture
for extracting source CAD data from the PDM environment, translating
these CAD data to visualization format, and delivery of the
visualization data to the end user and downstream business processes, is
crucial to support any digital product definition value stream.

The development of this new architecture is driven by dramatic changes
in the architecture configuration for product definition, CAD authoring
and CAD data management. The process of architecture definition and
selection for the generation of visualization data is described as an
architecture alternatives analysis that was conducted during late 2007.

The architecture alternatives analysis is prefaced by an overview of the
legacy architecture for the generation of visualization data within
Boeing. This legacy architecture is confronted by dramatic changes in
the CAD authoring and data management architecture configuration. These
changes are embodied in the new two-tier PDM architecture for CAD data
authoring, CAD data management, and business process control. This new
architecture imposes a demanding set of requirements for extraction of
source CAD data from the source CAD PDM, translation to visualization
format, and delivery of visualization data to multiple destinations.

The response to this new landscape of requirements is to create a set of
candidate architectures for the generation and distribution of
visualization format data. These candidates are analyzed by an
exhaustive enumeration and resolution of technical issues and comparing
relative performance to the requirements and use cases representing the
new CAD architecture configuration. The focus is on the discussion of
the creation of the alternatives and the analysis of their relative
merits.

[[]{#ZoranPetrovic .anchor}Back to programme](#ZoranPetrovicTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 15:00

**A Sustainable Solution for Repeatable CAE Workflows through Management
and Exchange of Product Data using Open Standards**

Zoran Petrovic (Siemens PLM Software, Germany), Guy Wills (Siemens PLM
Software, UK), S.A. Seitanis (BETA CAE Systems S. A., Greece)

New product development is creating an increasing need for complex
simulation and analysis; this in turn is generating significant and
increasing amounts of diverse data. The evolution of CAD tools also has
lead to designers being able to develop a larger number of component
variations in short times. This adds another level of complexity for the
analyst, \"Am I working on the correct version of the design for my
analysis?\". Today\'s loose management of this CAE data leads to
errorprone procedures that can delay critical decisions. The increasing
use of un-managed data-exchange and data-sharing technologies brings
further challenges to the CAE engineer. Finally the computer power
available to the CAE engineer continues to grow exponentially, allowing
for more analyze to be completed, and more optimization and robust
design simulations. All these challenges can be summarized as follows: -
How to improve CAE productivity and make CAE efficient enough to
identify deficiencies to impact the design decisions, and provide
potential design improvements.

Thus it becomes apparent that modern aerospace industry requires
high-end tools to assist analysts in the build-up of repeatable process
workflows that capture proven practices and techniques used in the wide
range of disciplines. This will reduce the potential for errors, ensure
the data is the right data for the right analysis, and provide a
solution to the productivity and efficiency challenge.

This paper will show two well established software tools: Teamcenter (a
leading Product Lifecycle Management solution) and ANSA (a leading FE
pre-processor) to showcase a solution that provides a repeatable process
using the open PLMXML language to facilitate the product data exchange.

[[]{#TheoJansen .anchor}Back to programme](#TheoJansenTOC)

Thursday 27 March at 16:00

**Special invited keynote on out-of-the-box thinking**

Theo Jansen (strandbeest.com, Netherlands)

Surpise!

[[]{#AlainFagot .anchor}Back to programme](#AlainFagotTOC)

Friday 28 March at 09:00

**ESATAP - Post processing of large thermal result datasets using
STEP-TAS/STEP-NRF HDF5 implementation**

Alain Fagot, François Brunetti (DOREA, France)

ESATAP is a flexible post-processing tool for STEP-TAS/STEP-NRF thermal
results data files.

ESATAP thermal datasets are handled through a Python STEP-TAS SDK that
uses HDF5 as a dataset repository. HDF5 is public domain Hierarchical
Data Format version 5 developed by the US National Center for Super

ESATAP HDF5 inputs are created thanks to a new ESATAN interface (DMPTAS)
that generates STEP-TAS datasets in HDF5 format.

This presentation shows the current capabilities of ESATAP to handle
large thermal results datasets.

References:

[http://www.esatap.com](http://www.esatap.com/)

<http://hdf.ncsa.uiuc.edu/HDF5/index.html>

[[]{#GeorgSiebes .anchor}Back to programme](#GeorgSiebesTOC)

Friday 28 March at 09:30

**Implementation of STEP-TAS Thermal Model Exchange Standard in Thermal
Desktop**

Georg Siebes (NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory, USA), Tim Panczak (C&R
Technologies, USA)

The idea of using standardized models for the exchange of discipline
specific information originated in the early 80\'s. Since then, many
such models have been developed under the auspices of the International
Standards Organization (ISO). They are commonly known as \"STEP
Models\". In the late 90\'s, the European Space Agency (ESA) started the
development of a STEP standard for thermal models, STEP-TAS, (TAS =
Thermal Analysis for Space). The results of a pilot implementation were
presented at NASA\'s Thermal and Fluids Analysis Workshop (TFAWS) in the
year 2000. Since then STEP-TAS development has been completed. The
standard has been documented, extensively tested, and is now
incorporated into European thermal analysis tools. Recently, STEP-TAS
has been implemented into the US Thermal Desktop tool. This new
capability will greatly simplify thermal model exchange between US and
European analysis tools.

[[]{#HansPeterdeKoning2 .anchor}Back to
programme](#HansPeterdeKoning2TOC)

Friday 28 March at 10:00

**STEP-TAS: Kinematics, Space Mission Aspects and other Developments**

Hans Peter de Koning, Duncan Gibson, Simon Appel, Harrie Rooijackers
(ESA/ESTEC, Netherlands)

The ongoing developments with the STEP-TAS (Thermal Analysis for Space)
standard will be presented. Currently the Space Kinematic Model and the
Space Mission Aspects modules are being implemented in prototype
interfaces and validated.

Also an elaboration of the STEP-NRF data model for Quantities and Units
will be presented. This is a very generic model adhering strictly to ISO
31 (the SI system of quantities and units) and IEC 62007. It is used
also as a basis in other ECSS data exchange standards under development
and to provide feedback for the next upgrade of the SysML standard.

[[]{#PhilippeBridenne .anchor}Back to programme](#PhilippeBridenneTOC)

Friday 28 March at 10:30

**Status of the Current ECAD-MCAD Collaboration Solution**

Philippe Bridenne, Hans-Ulrich Heidbrink (Mentor Graphics, Germany)

Presentation about the ECAD-MCAD collaboration standardisation
activities at ProStep iViP Germany. Explanation of the ProStep
recommendation and status of the development activities at the
participating companies. Example about working usecase might be
included.

[[]{#DEPUIS .anchor}Back to programme](#DEPUISTOC)

Friday 28 March at 11:30

**DEPUIS - Design of Environmentally friendly Products Using Information
Standards - EC project**

**Presentation and Discussion Forum**

Paul van Exel (USPI, Netherlands), Lothar Klein (LKSoft, Germany), Anna
Moreno (ENEA, Italy), Norman Swindells (Ferroday, UK)

This is a 90 minutes mini-session with the following elements.

Introduction of the DEPUIS project: Using international standards for
Environment.

(Paul van Exel)

ISO 10303 -- STEP today and tomorrow. Examples of capabilities.

(Lothar Klein)

ISO 10303-235 Engineering properties relevant for the environment. Demo
of DEPUIS multimedia handbook.

(Norman Swindells)

Brainstorming, discussion and closure.

(Paul van Exel, all)

See [http://www.depuis.enea.it](http://www.depuis.enea.it/) for more
details.

[[]{#CDF .anchor}Back to programme](#CDFTOC)

Friday 28 March at 14:00

**ESTEC Concurrent Design Facility - Visit and Presentation**

Massimo Bandecchi (ESA/ESTEC, Netherlands)

See <http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/CDF/index.html> for details.

The Concurrent Design Facility (CDF) is a state-of-the-art facility
equipped with a network of computers, multimedia devices and software
tools, which allows a team of experts from several disciplines to apply
the concurrent engineering method to the design of future space
missions. It facilitates a fast and effective interaction of all
disciplines involved, ensuring consistent and high-quality results in a
much shorter time.

It is primarily used to assess the technical and financial feasibility
of future space missions and new spacecraft concepts (e.g. internal
pre-phase A or Level-0 assessment studies) providing:

-   new mission concept assessment

-   space system trade-offs and options evaluation

-   new technology validation at system/mission level

as well as:

-   payload instrument conceptual design

-   reviews of industrial phase A studies

-   scientific requirements definition and consolidation

-   anomaly investigation

-   education and training