bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
5.5.1 Systems Engineering a Systems Engineering Innovation Center
Authors: Jackson Tony , Doggart Tim , Siemieniuch Carys , Woodhead Mike 
Published: November 2014

AbstractIn common with many other companies, BAE SYSTEMS is undergoing significant change to focus on the challenges inherent in emerging classes of complex systems. This led to the concept of an integrated Systems Engineering research and training center, the ‘Systems Engineering Innovation Center‘, founded in partnership with Loughborough University and one of the UK Government's Regional Development Agencies. The Center will expand to encompass wider academic and industrial partnerships which will ultimately span industrial sectors and academic disciplines. This paper describes the Systems Engineering approach to the setting up of this center and describes a number of lessons learned in its development.
3.6.1 Extending UML™ from Software to Systems
Authors: Friedenthal Sanford A. , Burkhart Roger 
Published: November 2014

AbstractINCOSE and the Object Management Group (OMG) are collaborating on an initiative to extend the Unified Modeling Language (UML) to provide a general‐purpose systems modeling language to support analysis, specification, design, and verification of complex systems. This language will be a key enabler for transitioning the practice of systems engineering from a document‐centric to a model‐centric approach. Many different applications of UML to systems engineering have been demonstrated and published, and are in active use by various groups, but a standardized extension of UML for systems engineering is not currently available. This paper provides the background, motivation, and approach of this critical initiative to develop a standardized extension of UML for systems engineering, and highlights some of the early results to establish the requirements for the modeling language. Additional information can be found on the OMG Systems Engineering Domain Special Interest Group (SE DSIG) web site at http://syseng.omg.org.
5.6.1 Systems Engineering Education Development (SEED) Case Study
Authors: Bagg Thomas C. , Granata Raymond L. , Brumfield Mark D. , Casey Carolyn A. , Jamison Donald E. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe Systems Engineering Education Development (SEED) Program was initiated to help the Goddard Space Flight Center resolve a Systems Engineering skill shortage. The chronology of events and the experiences of the pilot program are outlined to describe the development of the present program. The program goals are included in order to give a focus on what the developers saw as the program drivers. Lessons learned from a pilot program were incorporated into the present program. The sponsors of the program are constantly learning from past efforts and looking for continuous improvement. We list several future ideas for improvement and change.
5.6.3 Developing Capacity for Engineering Systems Thinking in a Project‐Based Learning Environment
Authors: Frank Moti , Elata David , Lavy Ilana 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper presents a qualitative study of students' capacity for systems engineering thinking as it develops during a Problem‐Based Learning (PBL) introductory course. This course is given to Mechanical Engineering freshmen and aims to provide a broad view of the field and of the process of engineering design. Data was collected in semi‐structured interviews with the students, the teacher, and the teacher assistant, and by classroom observations. Analysis of the collected data shows that through PBL, in which the students are exposed to synthesis processes and design procedures, they develop their capacity for engineering systems thinking. Furthermore, through experience they become aware of the importance of the top‐down approach and of the process of optimization in systems engineering.
5.6.4 A Video Approach to Knowledge Management
Authors: Wilke Martin , Finkel Stephan , Zender Joe , Schwehm Gerhard 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe scientific exploration of our Solar System often requires scientific missions that span a period of sometimes two decades. During this period, a spacecraft and instrumentation is designed, built, flown wide into the Solar System, operated, the data analyzed and archived. The preservation of human expertise and all further needed information is a challenge for all teams involved in these missions. For the International Rosetta Mission a Video Approach was proposed, designed and is currently implemented. The authors present the overall Rosetta knowledge management approach, in particular the design and implementation of the Video Approach. It is shown that this approach is well suited as a complementary approach to the standard knowledge management implementations and can refresh and preserve additional knowledge. Sometimes this video approach is the only way within the time and cost framework of the teams involved to preserve significant parts of their expertise.
6.6.1 An Integrated Engineering and Economic Model Proposal for Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion Technology
Authors: Tompkins Robin H , Rezachek David , Briggs Mike 
Published: November 2014

AbstractOcean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) techniques represent a unique opportunity to exploit solar energy from a source available 24 hours a day 365 days a year, can compete economically with conventional fossil fuel power plants, use minimal consumables, and produce virtually no harmful emissions. Large‐scale commercial and industrial adoption of OTEC will be realized only if a clear economic advantage can be demonstrated based on accurate and complete economic modeling. Determination of optimal system designs require application of multivariate system optimization techniques to define the “best” OTEC plant including non‐traditional economic activities that an OTEC plant supports with minor or no additional capitalization or operational costs. Non‐traditional activates that must be considered include sale of cold water effluent to agriculture/aquaculture users, industrial facilities for cooling, and fresh water production. OTEC's low/no emissions also allows sale of emission credits. This paper presents a proposal for modeling OTEC technology using system optimization techniques to define appropriate OTEC plant capacity combined with integrated non‐traditional economic activities to better understand the benefits and costs of OTEC power plants.
7.6.2 Connected Requirements: …liberating requirements so they can influence design
Authors: Sampson Mark E 
Published: November 2014

AbstractCustomer Requirements are important because that is what the customer will buy. Many organizations have learned the hard lesson of producing a product that doesn't meet customer needs–Ford's Edsel, Motorola's Iridium Satellite Phones, and others quickly come to mind. Given their importance its not uncommon for organizations to use a variety of means/methods to keep up with them–including documents, databases, and tracing tools. The problem is that even though the requirements are captured somewhere, they don't go anywhere and thus they have no influence over the design of the product. Teamcenter Requirements is after solving this problem by integrating or connecting the requirements into the development process so that requirements show up where the decisions are being made so they can have an influence over the design as the design decisions are being made. This presentation will cover the basics of Teamcenter Requirements as well as demonstrate the benefits of integrating requirements with the entire product life cycle.
7.6.4 World Class Intelligence Analysis
Authors: BeVier John L. , Calimer Colleen A. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper describes how combining certain aspects of systems re‐engineering with intelligence analysis creates a hybrid methodology resulting in a major transformation of the intelligence analysis discipline. The world and technology have changed over the years and now actionable intelligence must be provided in a collaborative environment prior to and during crises. Analysis of today's intelligence complexities demands a move away from analytic thinking to systems thinking. By introducing the concept of a “system” into the process of intelligence analysis, analysts are empowered to create and use systems models. These system models comprise all of the systems necessary for world‐class intelligence analysis – to include systems‐of‐systems of target, customer, and analyst. To the degree that these models are sufficiently accurate, the analyst can apply logic and judgment to produce projections of the future. Therefore, a continuing close customer‐analyst collaborative relationship enables professional determination of the most likely consequences of alternative customer operations.
1.7.1 Risk Management Capability Maturity Quantitative Assessment Tool
Authors: Shoults John 
Published: November 2014

AbstractA checklist and questionnaire based risk management capability assessment method is developed that gives quantitative scores directly linked to the goals and practices of the Capability Maturity Model Integration™ (CMMI) model. Direct and indirect artifact objective evidence is enumerated and scored against a benchmark model using the checklist. Affirmation data is collected using the questionnaire and categorized into culture, process, experience, and application per the Project Management Institute‐International Council on Systems Engineering (PMI‐INCOSE) risk management maturity level development model.
4.7.2 Systems Engineering in Science & Technology
Authors: Zittel Randy C. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractSystems Engineering has proven itself as the essential foundation of US military acquisition for over 40 years and is spreading across the world in its application to military and commercial development programs alike. It has generally not been applied to the development of advanced technology across the US military. From an increasing body of knowledge, this is now being addressed in the US Department of Defense with the formalization of systems engineering in science & technology, which has resulted in codifying techniques, tools and best practices. Through the application of the Integrated Product and Process Development teaming process and established systems engineering practices, increasing examples of success have proven the need to establish systems engineering as the formal approach in advanced technology development. The US DoD has documented this approach sufficiently to establish mandatory education for all advanced development managers to change the research and development culture and accelerate the use of systems engineering in advanced technology development throughout its research activities. This paper describes this emerging systems engineering approach as demonstrated in US Army, Navy and Air Force programs.
1.8.4 Probabilistic Risk/Reliability Analysis (PRA) Using a Simulation Approach
Authors: Miller Ian , Kossik Rick , Nutt Mark W. , Hill Ralph S. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractProbabilistic risk/reliability (PRA) analyses for engineered systems are conventionally based on fault‐tree methods. These methods are mature and efficient, and are well suited to systems consisting of interacting components with known, low probabilities of failure. Even complex systems, such as nuclear power plants or aircraft, are modeled by the careful application of these approaches.However, for systems that may evolve in complex and nonlinear ways, and where the performance of components may be a sensitive function of the history of their working environments, fault‐tree methods can be very demanding. This paper proposes an alternative method of evaluating such systems, based on probabilistic time‐based simulation using intelligent software objects to represent the components of such systems. Using a Monte Carlo approach, simulation models can be constructed from relatively simple interacting objects that capture the essential behavior of the components that they represent. Such models are capable of reflecting the complex behaviors of the systems that they represent in a natural and realistic way.
4.8.3 Developing Performance Measures for New Technologies
Authors: Mirchandani Chandru 
Published: November 2014

AbstractTo justify the research of new technologies is often fraught with a sense of foreboding. This is because the technology under evaluation is “new” in terms of use. The classical theory of reliability states that historical information on a process or system improves the reliability of the process or system. The Bayesian camp prefers to state it as the decrease in the degree of uncertainty in the success of the process or system. To assist a system development team to decide when, if at all, how and what new technology should be used in their new development is non‐trivial. However, if the performance measures are stated early and very concisely, this methodology can be used to provide a relative table of merit. This paper describes one aspect of technology selection and illustrates how the process can be used to select the technology of choice.
5.8.2 How does AP233 support a Systems Engineering process (e.g. ANSI/EIA‐632)?
Authors: Johnson Julian , Bailey Ian 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe development of the Systems Engineering data standard AP233 was initiated and pursued by the work of the SEDRES and SEDRES‐2 projects during 1996 through 2001. Subsequently Modular‐AP233 has been under development, building on the experience of the SEDRES/AP233 data model, and extending the scope with additional Systems Engineering concepts. This document explains how a data standard such as AP233 provides support to a practical systems engineering process, in at least two ways, firstly by providing clarity to systems engineering concepts and secondly by enabling practical support to interoperability of systems engineering support tools. The support is illustrated primarily in the context of ANSI/EIA 632.
5.8.4 The Boeing Standard Systems Engineering Approach To Systems Architecting and Its Application To The V‐22 Osprey
Authors: Bruff Robert S , Dagli Cihan H 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThis paper describes the Boeing standard systems engineering approach, or process, to systems architecting and its application for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) and Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) phases of the V‐22 program. It is applicable to both MV‐22 (the Marine baseline configuration) and CV‐22 (the Special Operations Forces (SOF) configuration). (This is a joint program under the overall direction of Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR).) It details the integration effort of design engineering, specialty engineering, test engineering, supportability and manufacturing engineering to meet cost, technical performance and schedule objectives. It defines the systems engineering management process for design, development, test and evaluation tasks required to progress from an operational need to deployment of a well architected and subsequently successful operation of the V‐22 system by the customer.
1.1.3 A Quantitative Methodology for the Optimal Selection of Design Margins in Complex Systems
Authors: Snape Simon , Sen Pratyush , Whittle Steve 
Published: November 2014

AbstractDesign margins are the additional performance capability incorporated into a system to compensate for uncertainties. It is common place for uncertainties to be allowed for by introducing design margins based on experience. However, there is currently great interest within industry in applying robust and probabilistic methods, as the arbitrary selection of design margins is inappropriate in today's design ‐ to ‐ cost environment.With this in mind, this paper presents a novel quantitative methodology developed to estimate and select design margins in an optimal and robust manner. Particular attention is given to design margins in a performance context, i.e. design margins intended to improve the probability of a system/process performing to requirements.Furthermore the link between Design Margins and Critical Design Features (a sub‐set of top level product attributes / requirements that are agreed as being critical to project success) is explained and an approach to determine and manage both is introduced.
1.2.1 Introducing new technical and methodological requirements in avionics systems safety engineering
Authors: CAPIRCIO Patrice 
Published: November 2014

AbstractAvionics safety is under facing new technical and methodological challenges.After a description of the actual safety process required by airworthiness regulation, the main new technical concerns to deal with are presented, one of the most important being software errors. THALES AVIONICS is under implementing a new safety engineering process providing a way to cope with these new technical requirements and fully compliant with new methodological ones such as ISO 9001 V2000 and CMM‐I.As a conclusion, a brief identification of the other challenges being expected in the near future is given and the capability of the THALES AVIONICS process to deal with is stated.
1.5.3 Is SE Evolving Fast Enough?
Authors: Ring Jack 
Published: November 2014

AbstractAttendees were polled at the end of the INCOSE 2002 panel session, “Is SE Evolving Fast Enough? This paper reports the questions and attendee responses as well as the author's interpretations of the responses. Two important conclusions are; 1) SE is not evolving fast enough and 2) key opportunities for evolving the practice of SE are not being pursued. This poll should be considered only a quick look at the issue. The purpose of this paper is to motivate INCOSE to conduct a more comprehensive survey of SE practitioners regarding the issue.
2.4.2 NASA Systems Engineering Capability Pre‐Assessment Plan
Authors: Andary James F. , Kapurch Stephen J. , Chun Peggy A. , Ernst Eric W. , Gauntner Daniel J. , Kerns Robert V. , Lake Jerome (Jerry) G. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractOver the past several years, several events [Ref 1] have led NASA to re‐examine how it engineers systems. As a result, NASA initiated a Systems Engineering Excellence Initiative in 2001, and established a Systems Engineering Working Group (SEWG) to form and implement a common framework for engineering systems within NASA1.The common framework is based on the development and sustainment of a state‐of‐the‐art level of competence in systems engineering, measurable in three specific areas; Concepts and Processes; Knowledge and Skill of Workforce; and Tools and Methodologies. The framework must also include a method of providing continuous assessment and improvement.Cursory review led a SEWG sub‐group (The Assessment Subgroup) to conclude that utilization of a recognized maturity model, such as the Software Engineering Institute's (SEI) Capability Maturity Model Integrated (CMMI®), would provide the means for ensuring continuous assessment and improvement of the framework.Prior to launching a CMMI® assessment of systems engineering at all ten NASA Centers (estimated to cost in excess of $500,000), the Assessment Subgroup proposed to conduct a pre‐CMMI® assessment (hereafter referred to as a pre‐assessment) to evaluate the current level of competence of systems engineering throughout the Agency, and determine whether or not CMMI® should be implemented.
2.6.1 The Schedule as Independent Variable (SAIV) Process for Acquisition of Software‐Intensive Systems
Authors: Boehm Barry , Brown Winsor , Huang LiGuo , Port Daniel N. 
Published: November 2014

AbstractMany system acquisitions do not achieve on‐time delivery because of delays in software development. This paper presents a highly successful approach for on‐time delivery of software‐intensive systems: the Schedule As Independent Variable (SAIV) process. The SAIV process involves prioritization of desired features; scoping a Core Capability of top‐priority features easily achievable within the available schedule; architecting for ease of dropping or adding borderline‐priority features; monitoring progress with respect to plans; and adding or dropping borderline‐priority features to meet the schedule target. The paper summarizes experiences and discusses critical success factors in applying the SAIV acquisition process across a range from small in‐house e‐services projects to very large Government systems of systems.
3.3.3 Designing sustainable processes using environmental and economic assessment
Authors: Krajnc Damjan , Glavič Peter 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe paper presents a systematic approach to the problem of sustainable process synthesis of large‐scale chemical processes with respect to the resource usage and other environmental considerations. The process design is composed of three main steps, i.e. simulation step, conceptual design step (extended Pinch design method, determination of promising modifications, their assessment regarding sustainability, selection of the most promising modification) and rigorous design step (structural and parameter optimization). The ecological considerations are combined with the economic assessment of process design using indicators of process sustainability. Environmental impact of process design is quantified by a set of sustainable process indicators (specific energy and water consumption, global warming potential, acidification potential, etc.). With suitable weightings, a composite index of process sustainability is defined and served as an objective function for the assessment of process modifications. A simplified ammonia production is presented to demonstrate the potential of the approach assisting in arriving at environmentally friendly and economically favorable process design.
4.1.2 Extending UML to Support a Systems Modeling Language
Authors: Friedenthal Sanford A. , Kobryn Cris 
Published: November 2014

AbstractThe International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) and the Object Management Group (OMG) are collaborating on an initiative to extend the Unified Modeling Language™ (UML™) to provide a general‐purpose systems modeling language. The language will support the specification, analysis, design, verification and validation of complex systems that include software‐intensive, information‐intensive, and physical systems. To achieve this goal, the OMG issued a UML for Systems Engineering Request for Proposal (UML for SE RFP) in March 2003. The modeling language that satisfies the requirements of this RFP will be a key enabler for transitioning the practice of systems engineering from a document‐centric to a model‐centric approach. This paper describes the technical approach and language features of the Systems Modeling Language (SysML), which is being proposed in response to the UML for SE RFP.
4.2.2 The Difference ‐ On the Use of Pattern‐Based Requirements
Authors: Kaffenberger Ruediger 
Published: November 2014

AbstractIt is common knowledge that a complete and correct set of requirements is the key prerequisite for a successful development project. But the size of the projects, their complexity, budget constraints, and short time to market prevent good requirements engineering. An additional obstacle is human nature: People are not able to express their needs in a way that this information is sufficient as foundation of a complete set of requirements. With the conventional requirements engineering methods, the problem of missing, ambiguous, or misleading requirements can not be solved. This paper suggests the intensive use of patterns as the more successful way to specify system requirements. In an object oriented environment patterns are found and applied much easier than in an environment where the functional view prevails. Thus a shift to object oriented requirements engineering and systems engineering is required.