bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
1.2.2 A Specification Format for Reducing the Cost of Change in Safety‐Critical Systems
Authors: Howard Jeffrey 
Published: November 2014

AbstractSafety‐critical systems are costly to change. In all systems, changes must be examined for their impact on existing designs. Conflicts must be resolved and trade‐offs evaluated to ensure that the system still accomplishes its goals. In safety‐critical systems, the additional concerns of system safety must be satisfied: the change must not introduce new hazardous behaviors, be they incorrect actions or correct actions taken at an incorrect time. An improved format for system specifications, called intent specifications, and a component requirements modeling language, called SpecTRM‐RL (SpecTRM Requirements Language) can reduce the cost of evaluating the safety of changes to complex safety‐critical systems. Intent specifications, the SpecTRM‐RL requirements modeling language, and supporting tool automation have been applied in the aerospace, automotive, and medical device industries.
1.3.1 Conflict Oriented Design
Authors: Lochow Tim 
Published: November 2014

AbstractDue to the increasing competition on the transport aircraft market the aircraft manufacturers have to make effective strategic decisions during the product development phase in order to avoid false investments and resultant costs. A central position takes the preliminary design phase. This study of the EADS Corporate Research Center contributes to an increase of effectiveness of the design and technology validation process by integrating core elements of innovative design and quality management methods like TRIZ and FMEA. That way a conflict oriented design concept is formed, which allows the user to analyse interdependencies of conflicts that arise during the design process. Additionally a typology of emerging conflicts and contradictions in the preliminary design process is developed, supported by research results in the field of conflict management and concurrent engineering. For the demonstration of the concept, a prototype of a parametric aircraft configuration tool is used. It supplies functionalities that help focusing on detecting conflicts and contradictions within the concept design or technology validation process.
1.3.3 Deployment of System Engineering to Structural Design Teams within Airbus
Authors: Bourne Matthew 
Published: November 2014

AbstractSystem Engineering though well established in the development of Aircraft Systems and Software within Airbus has not been widely used in structural design. On the A380 project it was decided to deploy System Engineering methodology across both disciplines to add rigor to the design, benefit from exchange of data and try to ensure Maturity at EIS. This paper describes how System engineering principles were simplified as far as possible to allow deployment to teams unaccustomed to their use and how the cascade of requirements has led to a large proportion of non‐functional requirements at the lowest levels.
1.4.1 Teaching Old Dogs New Tricks
Authors: Bardo Robert A. , Brown Phillip J. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractDownsizing, and consolidation of previously independent companies, has produced a clash of cultures in many companies. The problem is exacerbated by “home‐grown” product development cultures that have been around for decades and often fail to adequately integrate new disciplines such as software engineering and systems engineering.Over the years, the pace and complexity of technological development has increased. Mergers have brought together more companies with differing processes. New standards like the Software‐Capability Maturity Model® (SW‐CMM®) and Capability Maturity Model Integration® (CMMI®) have been introduced. All these changes have increased the need for developing and instituting new, integrated, and more repeatable engineering processes. Methods of introducing, and gaining acceptance of, these new processes are becoming very important to the continued competitiveness of many companies.At issue is how best to get a diverse workforce to work together to achieve extraordinary goals.Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control (LMMFC), faced with integrating two former competitors, embarked in 1999 on a course to develop a common product development culture. A primary forcing function was the use of Carnegie Mellon University's Capability Maturity Model‐Integration (CMMI®) standard. The resulting new processes are enabling employees to achieve higher goals – by increasing productivity, maximizing use of information, using proven simplified processes, increasing re‐use, and decreasing re‐work. Results to date indicate a “One Company, One Team” mentality is rapidly becoming the norm at LMMFC.
1.5.2 Factors Influencing SE Practices by 2010
Authors: Ring Jack 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper describes current and probable stochastic shocks that may shape the practice of systems engineering in the near future. This is not about predicting the future but about considering possibilities, ramifications and probabilities. The purpose of this paper is to encourage the reader to add, change, or delete entries that are more pertinent to their respective situations and viewpoints, then to think deeply about the interrelationships of these change factors thus the key alternative scenarios for the reader's future. One general conclusion seems clear – the SE practitioner of 2003 will be largely obsolete in five to seven to ten years unless he/she vigorously engages in multidisciplinary learning both across engineering disciplines and especially outside of engineering.
2.1.2 Predicting the Reliability of a Complex System Using an Artificial Neural Network
Authors: Breitler Alan L. , Sloan Crystal D. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe capability to predict the reliability of complex systems that must be deployed without overly prolonged or expensive testing is of increasing importance to the military test and evaluation community. The presentation of subsystem reliability data to an artificial neural network is a critical factor in the capability of such networks to produce accurate system predictions. By producing a matrix of values corresponding to subsystem reliabilities, using a zero (0) for a nonexistent parallel resource and a one (1) for a nonexistent series subsystem, it was possible to train an artificial neural network to accurately predict the overall system reliability.
2.2.1 Model‐based Safety Analysis of a Flap Control System
Authors: Bretschneider Matthias , Holberg Hans‐Jürgen , Böde Eckard , Brückner Ingo , Peikenkamp Thomas , Spenke Harriet 
Published: November 2014

AbstractFault tree analysis is a widely adopted technique to systematically analyze causes for a given failure of a complex system. Traditionally, a fault tree is constructed top‐down based on knowledge about the structure of the system and the interaction of subsystems. With the increasing system complexity and the accompanying introduction of model‐based development techniques in the industrial process, a substantial amount of this knowledge is laid down in the system models. The main focus of the presented techniques and tools is to automatically exploit this knowledge by extracting a fault tree suitable for FaulTree+ directly from a given design modeled in Statemate. The resulting fault tree is complete wrt. the specified failure, i.e. the analysis considers every possible causal failure combination which is guaranteed by applying model checking techniques. Using an aircraft Flap control system this paper shows how to smoothly integrate the technique into an existing model‐based process.
2.2.2 Complexity and change in the subsea oil production industry
Authors: Piciaccia Luca Abele , Faanes Tore , Lindland Hans Jørgen 
Published: November 2014

AbstractSweeping changes have been experienced throughout the whole of the subsea oil production industry.Space technology has gone subsea, and with it comes the need to properly address the relevant issues.The traditional oil industry, used to measure its tools in multiple of tons and its performance in barrels, has been faced by the challenge of distributed system interfaces and their metrics.This paper describes of how the challenge is being tackled at FMC Kongsberg Subsea (FKS), the Subsea Production System manufacturer with the largest number of system installed in the world.
2.2.3 Towards the Integration of Safety Assessment and Systems Engineering Methods for Rail Transport Systems Development
Authors: Duurland Erwin , Ransijn Gert ‐Jan , Verhoeven Maarten , van Duyne Reinier 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper describes an improved, scenario‐based method for identifying hazards of complex safety‐critical systems and its application to the safety management of a high‐speed rail transportation system.The identifications of hazards is the foundation of safety assessment. If a hazard – any situation that can contribute to an accident ‐ is not identified, one can not take action to eliminate it or to reduce the risks related to it. Organizations creating or introducing changes to safety‐critical systems should make systematic and vigorous attempts to identify any possible hazard.Traditional approaches for systematic identification of hazards include emperical methods like the use of checklists and structured walktroughs as well as creative methods like brainstorming and HAZOPS studies. While emperical methods rely heavily upon knowledge of the past and tend to be less effective for novel systems, creative methods tend to lack systematic rigour. Both categories fail at addressing the hazards associated with functional failure of complex integrated systems.The scenario‐based method introduced in this paper combines the systematic, analytical derivation of hazards from behavior models that specify the operational scenarios for the system of interest with creative team‐based sessions that are structured around the same behavior models of the operational scenarios.An major benefit of this approach is that through the behavior models of the operational scenarios the safety assessment process is directly linked to systems engineering work products. This provides a sound basis for integrated design iteration cycles and reuse of information and thus for improving the quality, lead times and cost of the overall development process.
2.3.2 Tailoring Systems Engineering for UAV platform development
Authors: Doornbos Jaap , Jesse Evert , Wijnhoven Ilze 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper describes how Systems Engineering methods have been applied in the conceptual design study for an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), and the lessons that were learned in this experience. In comparison with traditional aerospace and defense industry, the UAV market is different because of the seemingly endless possibilities of UAV technology, the lack of existing standards and the entrance of new players, which are not traditionally active in aerospace or defense. This makes the application of Systems Engineering for UAV platform developments differ from traditional practice.In the UAV conceptual design study, which is the focus of this paper, all partners had a strong background in aerospace and defense development. The case is discussed as an example, aimed at illustrating the principles of tailoring Systems Engineering for UAV platform development.
3.3.2 Design Concept Evaluation Using System Throughput Model
Authors: Sequeira Gary , Nutt W. Mark 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) is currently developing the technical bases to support the submittal of a license application for construction of a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The Office of Repository Development (ORD) is responsible for developing the design of the repository surface facilities for the handling of spent nuclear fuel and high level nuclear waste. Preliminary design activities are underway to sufficiently develop the repository surface facilities design for inclusion in the license application. The design continues to evolve to meet mission needs and to satisfy both regulatory and program requirements.A system engineering approach is being used in the design process since the repository facilities are dynamically linked by a series of sub‐systems and complex operations. In addition, the repository facility is a major system element of the overall waste management process being developed by the OCRWM. Such an approach includes iterative probabilistic dynamic simulation as an integral part of the design evolution process. A dynamic simulation tool helps to determine if:
the mission and design requirements are complete, robust, and well integrated;
the design solutions under development meets the design requirements and mission goals;
opportunities exist where the system can be improved and/or optimized;
proposed changes to the mission and design requirements have a positive or negative impact on overall system performance and if the design changes may be necessary to satisfy these changes.
This paper will discuss the type of simulation employed to model the waste handling operations. It will then discuss the process being used to develop the Yucca Mountain surface facilities model. The latest simulation model and the results of the simulation and how the data was used in the design evolution process will also be discussed. Since the use of dynamic simulation is iterative and integral to the design effort, future activities will also be summarized. The paper will close discussing lessons learned from applying dynamic simulation to designing complex systems, and will discuss what pitfalls to avoid and recommendations for developing flexibility in system model development.
3.4.1 CENTER FOR SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
Authors: Bausman Karen , Wilson Mark 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe “Systems Engineering” Discipline seems to have has lost its focus within the Air Force. Comments by high level USAF leaders have pointed out that the front end of the Systems Engineering Process has broken down. This has resulted in systems that have high requirements volatility and acquisition failures. In a combined effort, the Air Force Institute of Technology, the Air Force Material Command and the Air Force Space Command have joined forces to establish a Center for Systems Engineering.It has become evident over the last ten years, with Acquisition Reform, the government gave away the “Keeper” role that assured a consistent application of Systems Engineering and no one from industry has stepped up to accept full responsibility. Systems Engineering (SE) is an interdisciplinary engineering management process that evolves and verifies an integrated, life cycle balanced set of system solutions that satisfy customer needs. It is a comprehensive, iterative, multi‐functional, technical management process that includes translating operational requirements into configured systems. It is responsible for integrating the technical inputs of the entire design team, managing interfaces, characterizing and managing technical risk, transitioning technology from the technology base into program specific efforts, and verifying that designs meet operational needs. It is a life cycle activity that demands a concurrent approach to both product and process development. Systems Engineering/Management touches every aspect of our acquisition, operational, sustainment and retirement processes.A national forum on SE identified the need to ensure that a quality systems engineering capability exists. The Center for Systems Engineering (CSE) has been established to do just this job. This CSE serves as the nucleus for the development and accumulation of academic, government and industry SE best practices, processes, metrics and training. It is collaborating with other members of the SE community to develop, publish, continuously refine and advocate systems engineering processes and implementation. The CSE provides consulting and analysis services on SE to all Air Force commands and programs and publish findings as necessary. The CSE manages the identification and collaboration of education and training for all Air Force personnel associated with the systems engineering process. Ultimately we hope to rebuild the systems engineering expertise across all Department of Defense areas.This paper identifies some of the current systems engineering issues/initiatives and challenges with which the CSE is engaged. The approach in this paper provides a logical method of correcting current systems engineering shortfalls and posturing the Air Force, and potentially the Department of Defense, for future success in the management of our weapon/space systems toward meeting the war‐fighters needs.
3.4.2 Deployment of Systems Engineering at PSA Peugeot Citroën
Authors: Lamothe Pascal , Fanmuy Gauthier 
Published: November 2014

AbstractAutomobile product has become today a complex system. Not only does it seek for an optimal trade‐off between many domains such as style, human factors, mechanical, electronic, body structure, software, economy and production products but automobile has also taken advantage of control and information management functions that represent a third of the car price.Automobile is now both the result of the application of existing solutions (re‐use of processes) and the integration of innovating solutions.Moreover while automobile product is becoming more complex, customers move from a demand market to an offer market. Automobile industry offer now creates client needs. This competitive challenge involves obviously the necessity to reduce costs and deadlines while functional and performance requirements are increasing.Resolution of this set of antagonistic requirements can be obtained only by using the most appropriate methodologies. Engineering methodologies now converge towards a large concept called: Systems Engineering.This paper introduces fundamental considerations associated with the deployment of systems engineering in PSA Peugeot Citroën: (1) tailoring a referential of processes for engineering an automobile product based on EIA 632 standard (2) building a training cycle (3) setting up systems engineering tools focused on the engineering requirements processes with DOORS (4) assisting the engineering teams to use methods and tools.We hope this experience about the still ongoing deployment of system engineering in PSA Peugeot Citroën will inspire firms that wish to set up the systems engineering methodology.
3.5.3 Trans‐national distributed Systems Engineering in A400M
Authors: Schulze Sven‐Olaf 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper briefly gives an overview about the Systems Engineering application in a multi‐national and multi‐lingual project. At least 6 nations, Airbus and other companies, are developing in one partnership this new military transport aircraft. Based on the contractual, cost, quality and time constraints the engineers have to design the best possible solution for this aircraft. The aim is to give an overview about the practical experience developing a system in an IPT (integrated project team), a multi cultural environment, different historical experience and knowledge of each partner and to show the added value to work with a defined and agreed view of developing a complex system.
3.6.1 Experience in Teaching the Seamless Integration of Systems Engineering and Project Management
Authors: Mooz Hal , Forsberg Kevin 
Published: November 2014

AbstractProject management and systems engineering are two inseparable disciplines. Yet they are very frequently taught separately and they are usually implemented separately within organizations. PMI and INCOSE usually operate independently, further accentuating the separateness. This leads to a lack of teamwork and collaboration and often causes competition and tension among those that should be working and cooperating seamlessly. To overcome this undesired result in a US Government Agency's technology‐intensive project environment, a training program has been in place for fifteen years that serves as the basis for high‐level project manager certification and presents the disciplines of project management and systems engineering as a single inseparable process. The training has resulted in improved project performance and reduced cost and schedule overruns. Over the years the content has continually been upgraded to remain at the state of the art and to improve the effectiveness of the information transfer. This paper describes the motivation, concept, formulation, execution, and management of this highly effective program.
3.6.3 Towards a shared process for system design and project management
Authors: BARON Claude , Esteve Daniel 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper explores the interest to join system design and project management methods and tools. Our motivation is to prevent the obvious incompatibilities between technical objectives and socio‐economical requirements in the enterprise. What we recommend is to work on a generic unique model based on the classical top down design steps, to which costs models and non‐functional requirements are associated. Project management thus appears as an activity of diagnosis and optimisation, allowing to choose certain realisations between the different possible scenarios and to optimise the management by an allocation of tolerances, which is calculated for each supplier on the base of a global objective. This analysis concludes on the interest of two complementary tools : the evolutionary algorithms to arbitrate the scenarios, and the Monte‐Carlo methods for the allocation of tolerances.
4.4.2 Net‐Centric Dynamic System Model Architecture
Authors: LaCerte Yves 
Published: November 2014

AbstractNet‐Centric weapon systems interoperate on the Global Information Grid to achieve information superiority. In a sensor‐to‐shooter scenario, the chain of events that connect the initiation of a control event to its result is not within a closed space. The chain may incorporate information gathering devices and weapons a thousand miles apart, or any of a myriad of devices in a more local confederated environment. Net‐Centric systems need to consider determinism not only on the control side, but the communications side as well. This paper investigates a Net‐Centric Dynamic System Model architecture in the context of interoperability.
4.5.2 Preparing the World for Complexity: A Systematic Approach
Authors: Klingler Ronald D. , Plowman Catherine M. , Soto Rafael , Turk Robert J. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe increasing level of complexity in most aspects of today's world requires that government, industry, and society, in general, produce integrated systems and products more fully capable of addressing that complexity. Unfortunately, the high degree of fragmentation in our current educational system does not adequately provide graduates with the knowledge and skills necessary to produce integrated systems. This demand for integration has created professional opportunities in the way of new careers, such as systems engineering, but has not yet driven the broader application of systems principles by other professionals. Even today's interdisciplinary teams must possess the ability to visualize the entire system they are working on prior to applying their individual skills toward developing and producing integrated solutions.This paper highlights proposed interventions at all educational levels (i.e., elementary, secondary, and college educational settings, as well as in the workplace) to introduce systems thinking as a more desirable way of performing any professional activity. In particular, the college freshman level has been selected to conduct an initial intervention to test this hypothesis. Systems approaches and principles will be presented and discussed in a formal classroom setting between issuance and evaluation of pre‐ and post‐presentation questionnaire. It is expected that this intervention will result in increased knowledge of system principles and concepts, and an increased understanding of how these principles can be applied by this target audience.