Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

The objective of this capstone project was to build a simulated system using the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System/Defense Acquisition System (JCIDS/DAS) process to gain insight into JCIDS/DAS as it relates to unmanned robotics systems. JCIDS and DAS are the Department of Defense’s procedures and guidelines for acquiring military programs. Using JCIDS/DAS and system engineering (SE) methodology, the team developed a radiological clearance system (RCS) and an unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) using LEGO MINSTORMS. The UGV was named the Threat Exposure and Clearing Hardware Manipulated Autonomously or Networked (TECHMAN). The team researched UGVs, software platforms and the JCIDS /DAS regulations to tailor an SE approach in designing and building the TECHMAN robot, starting with the mission needs and requirements followed by system architecture development. The team tested and evaluated two TECHMAN systems. One system was teleoperated and the other was autonomous. The team compared the test results and other system attributes of the two platforms. The knowledge gained from the project results was used to provide insight into the JCIDS/DAS process with regard to procurement of robotics systems.

NASA is currently developing the next generation crewed spacecraft and launch vehicle for exploration beyond earth orbit including returning to the Moon and making the transit to Mars. Managing the design integration of major hardware elements of a space transportation system is critical for overcoming both the technical and programmatic challenges in taking a complex system from concept to space operations. An established method of accomplishing this is formal interface management. In this paper we set forth an argument that the interface management process implemented by NASA between the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) and the Space Launch System (SLS) achieves the Level 3 tier of the EIA 731.1 System Engineering Capability Model (SECM) for Generic Practices. We describe the relevant NASA systems and associated organizations, and define the EIA SECM Level 3 Generic Practices. We then provide evidence for our compliance with those practices. This evidence includes discussions of: NASA Systems Engineering Interface (SE) Management standard process and best practices; the tailoring of that process for implementation on the Orion to SLS interface; changes made over time to improve the tailored process, and; the opportunities to take the resulting lessons learned and propose improvements to our institutional processes and best practices. We compare this evidence against the practices to form the rationale for the declared SECM maturity level.

The systems engineering process is well established and well understood. While this statement could be argued in the light of the many systems engineering guidelines and that have been developed, comparative review of these respective descriptions reveal that they differ primarily in the number of discrete steps or other nuances, and are at their core essentially common. Likewise, the systems engineering textbooks differ primarily in the context for application of systems engineering or in the utilization of evolved tools and techniques, not in the basic method. Thus, failures in systems engineering cannot credibly be attributed to implementation of the wrong systems engineering process among alternatives. However, numerous systems failures can be attributed to deficient implementation of the systems engineering process. What may clearly be perceived as a system engineering deficiency in retrospect can appear to be a well considered system engineering efficiency in real time - an efficiency taken to reduce cost or meet a schedule, or more often both. Typically these efficiencies are grounded on apparently solid rationale, such as reuse of heritage hardware or software. Over time, unintended consequences of a systems engineering process deficiency may begin to be realized, and unfortunately often the consequence is system failure. This paper describes several actual cases of system failures that resulted from deficiencies in their systems engineering process implementation, including the Ariane 5 and the Hubble Space Telescope.

This document provides the results of an evaluation of the levels of conformance of the Cleanroom Software Engineering (CSE) process with the Capability Maturity Model (SW-CMM) for Software, v1.1, Goals. The Goals for each SW-CMM level and KPA are listed and the level of conformance is indicated as outlined in the following descriptions: High - CSE addresses the goal to a very high degree; Medium - CSE addresses the goal to a partial degree; Low - CSE addresses the goal in a very minimal fashion; and None - CSE does not address the goal to any degree.

This research project defines the interdependent relationship between a weapon system's mission capabilities, operations and support costs, operational utility rate, and their impacts on overall mission effectiveness of an operational combat unit. By analyzing the sub-elements of both operational effectiveness and operational suitability it can be shown how operational effectiveness is a dependent element of operation suitability. Additionally, it will be demonstrated how support costs influence the operational suitability parameters of a weapon system, which then impacts a combat unit's overall mission effectiveness. Since support costs have such a critical relationship to operational suitability factors, the project also defines the current relationships between Service Cost and the Test and Evaluation communities to question whether there is the requisite level of integration of effort between the two organizations to accurately assess weapon system costs and capabilities prior to production.

The Government Accounting Office (GAO) has stated that insufficient attention is given to Human Factors Engineering (HFE) in the design of systems during the Weapons Acquisition Cycle (WAC). According to GAO these inadequacies have adversely impacted our military capabilities and wasted lives and millions of dollars. A myriad of handbooks, manuals and standards exist which provide detailed guidelines, criteria, and test plans for conducting HF T + E (Test and Evaluation) which remain because their technological level is beyond the average user. The need for basic training in HFE has been clearly identified. A cost effective vehicle to bridge this gap in conceptual knowledge has been developed in the form of an HFE Self-Paced Course. The conclusions provided in this study are intended to encourage further course development through incorporation of the recommendations outlined. Ultimately, this would lead to its validation and implementation into the instructional system of the military.

This technical report describes the Integrated Systems and Software Engineering Process (ISSEP) created by the Software Productivity Consortium (the Consortium). ISSEP's purpose is to enable improvement of the overall systems development process allowing systems and software engineers to more efficiently perform their work. The ISSEP model accomplishes this goal by defining a set of management and technical activities, and most importantly, defining the mechanisms to coordinate and control the development effort. The ISSEP model integrates the set of management and technical development activities, incorporates risk management activities, and complies with major systems and software engineering standards. The ISSEP model provides a balanced process that equally emphasizes the management and technical perspectives. Management activities provide the control necessary for developing a system. The technical activities define both the systems and software development activities. A balanced approach ensures that management is provided the technical expertise necessary for decision making and that the engineers are provided the plans and procedures for meeting customer, user, and organizational expectations. The ISSEP model focuses on information flow and identification of critical systems and software engineering process interfaces. The information flow defines the coordination and communication mechanisms necessary for a successful system/software delivery. The ISSEP model defines the minimum set of required interfaces between management and technical activities, among management activities, and among the set of technical activities. These interfaces either provide the necessary information to perform an activity or provide feedback information necessary to identify and mitigate risk.

This technical report describes the Integrated Systems and Software Engineering Process (ISSEP) created by the Software Productivity Consortium (the Consortium). ISSEP's purpose is to enable improvement of the overall systems development process allowing systems and software engineers to more efficiently perform their work. The ISSEP model accomplishes this goal by defining a set of management and technical activities, and most importantly, defining the mechanisms to coordinate and control the development effort. The ISSEP model integrates the set of management and technical development activities, incorporates risk management activities, and complies with major systems and software engineering standards. The ISSEP model provides a balanced process that equally emphasizes the management and technical perspectives. Management activities provide the control necessary for developing a system. The technical activities define both the systems and software development activities. A balanced approach ensures that management is provided the technical expertise necessary for decision making and that the engineers are provided the plans and procedures for meeting customer, user, and organizational expectations. The ISSEP model focuses on information flow and identification of critical systems and software engineering process interfaces. The information flow defines the coordination and communication mechanisms necessary for a successful system/software delivery. The ISSEP model defines the minimum set of required interfaces between management and technical activities, among management activities, and among the set of technical activities. These interfaces either provide the necessary information to perform an activity or provide feedback information necessary to identify and mitigate risk.

ADA140011

Today's systems are increasingly threatened by unanticipated change arising from volatility in user requirements, Information Technology (IT) refresh rates, and responses to security vulnerabilities. With the rapidly changing world of IT, long static development cycles of a Software Intensive System (SIS), a system in which software represents the largest segment in one or more of the following criteria: system development cost, system development risk, system functionality, or development time [1] may doom the system before development begins.

Today's systems are increasingly threatened by unanticipated change arising from volatility in user requirements, Information Technology (IT) refresh rates, and responses to security vulnerabilities. With the rapidly changing world of IT, long static development cycles of a Software Intensive System (SIS), a system in which software represents the largest segment in one or more of the following criteria: system development cost, system development risk, system functionality, or development time [1] may doom the system before development begins.

The application of systems engineering methodologies to the creative process provides opportunities to improve the creative capabilities of individuals and organizations. Through creativity and systems engineering research, the creative process is equated to the systems engineering process. This allows creativity itself to be defined as a system. Defining creativity as a system permits the analysis of the creative process and the construction of a systems engineering based process model for creativity. Process based creativity theories are decomposed and reformulated into a process flow that acknowledges the iterative and recursive nature of the creative process. The derived process flow is then integrated with systems engineering process elements to construct a process model for creativity. The production of a systems engineering derived process model for creativity allows future opportunities to improve that process model by incorporating new creativity research and/or additional influences on creativity, increasing the fidelity of the model. The proposed process model also invites future research into the efficacy of the model. Through the use of systems engineering, creativity research may be incorporated and refined to build an evolving process model for creativity.

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI(Service Mark)) models have evolved the Capability Maturity Model (CMM(registered)) concept, established by the Capability Maturity Model for Software (SW-CMM), to a new level that enables the continued growth and expansion of the CMM concept to multiple disciplines. Like the SW-CMM, EIA/IS 731, IPD-CMM, SA-CMM, and other process improvement models, CMMI models are tools that help organizations improve their processes. This CMMI model is designed to help organizations improve their product and service development, acquisition, and maintenance processes. Concepts covered by this model include systems engineering, software engineering, integrated product and process development, and supplier sourcing as well as traditional CMM concepts such as process management and project management. Each CMMI model is designed to be used in concert with other CMMI models, making it easier for organizations to pursue enterprise-wide process improvement at their own pace. This CMMI model has a staged representation, which focuses on measuring process improvement using maturity levels. Maturity levels apply to process-improvement achievement across the organizational unit using the model.

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI(Service Mark)) models have evolved the Capability Maturity Model (CMM(registered)) concept, established by the Capability Maturity Model for Software (SW-CMM), to a new level that enables the continued growth and expansion of the CMM concept to multiple disciplines. Like the SW-CMM, EIA/IS 731, IPD-CMM, SA-CMM, and other process improvement models, CMMI models are tools that help organizations improve their processes. This CMMI model is designed to help organizations improve their product and service development, acquisition, and maintenance processes. Concepts covered by this model include systems engineering, software engineering, integrated product and process development, and supplier sourcing as well as traditional CMM concepts such as process management and project management. Each CMMI model is designed to be used in concert with other CMMI models, making it easier for organizations to pursue enterprise-wide process improvement at their own pace. This CMMI model has a staged representation, which focuses on measuring process improvement using maturity levels. Maturity levels apply to process-improvement achievement across the organizational unit using the model.

Cleanroom provides software developers with the basis for developing software under statistical quality control. Software is functionally verified and certified, not tested, using sampling techniques, thus permitting software developers to assert a mean time to failure (MTTF) for the software modules they develop. Under the STARS Contract, the IBM STARS team developed a process manual to assist software development organizations in adopting and installing the Cleanroom Engineering Software Development Process. This manual describes the process and verification activities required for performing a Cleanroom Engineering effort from the standpoint of specifiers, developers, certifiers, and managers. The manual was developed to support process improvement programs directed at improving software quality and development productivity by incorporating some or all of the Cleanroom Engineering software development technologies into their current software development process and practices.

A collaboration between the SEI and NAVAIR-Team Process Integration (TPI(SM))-is currently underway. The TPI effort leverages the PSP and TSP research and body of practice. This article discusses the progress and performance through a pilot project with the AV-8B Systems Engineering team as well as others within NAVAIR that have utilized TPI in non-software domains. This article will share lessons and experiences with other industry/government organizations interested in applying the TSP in a non-software setting. The early results suggest some encouraging trends.

A collaboration between the SEI and NAVAIR-Team Process Integration (TPI(SM))-is currently underway. The TPI effort leverages the PSP and TSP research and body of practice. This article discusses the progress and performance through a pilot project with the AV-8B Systems Engineering team as well as others within NAVAIR that have utilized TPI in non-software domains. This article will share lessons and experiences with other industry/government organizations interested in applying the TSP in a non-software setting. The early results suggest some encouraging trends.

A collaboration between the SEI and NAVAIR-Team Process Integration (TPI(SM))-is currently underway. The TPI effort leverages the PSP and TSP research and body of practice. This article discusses the progress and performance through a pilot project with the AV-8B Systems Engineering team as well as others within NAVAIR that have utilized TPI in non-software domains. This article will share lessons and experiences with other industry/government organizations interested in applying the TSP in a non-software setting. The early results suggest some encouraging trends.

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI(Service Mark) models have evolved the Capability Maturity Model (CMM(registered)) concept, established by the Capability Maturity Model for Software (SW-CMM), to a new level that enables the continued growth and expansion of the CMM concept to multiple disciplines. Like the SW-CMM, EIA/IS 731, IPD-CMM, SA-CMM, and other process improvement models, CMMI models are tools that help organizations improve their processes. This CMMI model is designed to help organizations improve their product and service development, acquisition, and maintenance processes. Concepts covered by this model include systems engineering, software engineering, integrated product and process development, and supplier sourcing as well as traditional CMM concepts such as process management and project management. Each CMMI model is designed to be used in concert with other CMMI models, making it easier for organizations to pursue enterprise-wide process improvement at their own pace. This CMMI model has a continuous representation, which focuses on measuring process improvement using capability levels. Capability levels apply to process-improvement achievement within individual process areas such as configuration management or verification.

The ontologies of systems are developed in the paper. The proposed ontologies envelop various aspects of system engineering, including capturing requirements and specifications, architectural modelling, creation of a work plan, testing, validation and verification of systems. The feature of approach is development of the ontological model of system engineering process. Practical implementation of the proposed approach in the OpenCookbook tool is considered. 

The ontologies of systems are developed in the paper. The proposed ontologies envelop various aspects of system engineering, including capturing requirements and specifications, architectural modelling, creation of a work plan, testing, validation and verification of systems. The feature of approach is development of the ontological model of system engineering process. Practical implementation of the proposed approach in the OpenCookbook tool is considered. 

Building upon the purpose, theoretical approach, and use of a Goal-Function Tree (GFT) being presented by Dr. Stephen B. Johnson, described in a related Infotech 2013 ISHM abstract titled "Goal-Function Tree Modeling for Systems Engineering and Fault Management", this paper will describe the core framework used to implement the GFTbased systems engineering process using the Systems Modeling Language (SysML). These two papers are ideally accepted and presented together in the same Infotech session. Statement of problem: SysML, as a tool, is currently not capable of implementing the theoretical approach described within the "Goal-Function Tree Modeling for Systems Engineering and Fault Management" paper cited above. More generally, SysML's current capabilities to model functional decompositions in the rigorous manner required in the GFT approach are limited. The GFT is a new Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach to the development of goals and requirements, functions, and its linkage to design. As a growing standard for systems engineering, it is important to develop methods to implement GFT in SysML. Proposed Method of Solution: Many of the central concepts of the SysML language are needed to implement a GFT for large complex systems. In the implementation of those central concepts, the following will be described in detail: changes to the nominal SysML process, model view definitions and examples, diagram definitions and examples, and detailed SysML construct and stereotype definitions.

This thesis uses systems engineering principles and an evolutionary process model to develop a parts harvesting procedure for the Mine Countermeasure (MCM-1) class ships. This procedure will facilitate harvesting required components from a decommissioning MCM-1 class ship that will be refurbished for reuse on the remaining in-service ships. These harvested components are critical to ensuring MCM-1 ships can conduct mine countermeasure operations by having required repair parts to keep the systems functioning as designed. Additionally, the harvested components will help the ship class meet expected service life. Parts harvesting is required to keep the ships operational due to various system(s)’ single point failure design, installed equipment material low-permeability requirements, and limited overall part demand for the mine countermeasure unique systems. The parts harvesting process developed is executable, cost-effective and critical to ensuring the MCM-1 class ships are materially able to operate as designed. Various systems engineering tools are utilized in the parts harvesting procedure to assess the ship as an overall system, determine critical components, establish sparing requirements, and minimize cost for repair parts. The procedure includes identification of components to harvest, funding and execution of harvesting operations, warehousing, refurbishment of harvested components, disposal, and measuring procedure effectiveness.

The United States Naval Academy (USNA) does not possess an effective management plan for the acquisition of the 44-foot Navy sail training craft (STC), which has led to cost overruns and late deliveries. A review of the past acquisitions of the Mark I and Mark II STC revealed a possible effective solution is a stakeholder management plan. This capstone project answers the question of how the USNA might utilize the systems engineering process to develop an effective internal stakeholder management strategy that generates effective and actionable requirements for the acquisition of the next-generation STC while preserving a predictable and timely acquisitions process. Utilizing tools and techniques developed by data collection, this research found the essential elements to a successful stakeholder management plan are to identify, analyze, engage, and monitor stakeholders. These essential elements integrated with techniques used in corporate America, such as managing for stakeholders and the stakeholder circle, can reduce friction and issues within the STC program for the USNA. Identified avenues for future research are utilizing the systems engineering process for the development of structural stakeholder management elements, improving stakeholder management requirements elicitation, and developing stakeholder management plan validation methods.

No abstract available

Testing has long been recognized as a critical component of spacecraft development activities - yet many major systems failures may have been prevented with more rigorous testing programs. The question is why is more testing not being conducted? Given unlimited resources, more testing would likely be included in a spacecraft development program. Striking the right balance between too much testing and not enough has been a long-term challenge for many industries. The objective of this paper is to discuss some of the barriers, enablers, and best practices for developing and sustaining a strong test program and testing team. This paper will also explore the testing decision factors used by managers; the varying attitudes toward testing; methods to develop strong test engineers; and the influence of behavior, culture and processes on testing programs. KEY WORDS: Risk, Integration and Test, Validation, Verification, Test Program Development

Building upon the purpose, theoretical approach, and use of a Goal-Function Tree (GFT) being presented by Dr. Stephen B. Johnson, described in a related Infotech 2013 ISHM abstract titled "Goal-Function Tree Modeling for Systems Engineering and Fault Management", this paper will describe the core framework used to implement the GFTbased systems engineering process using the Systems Modeling Language (SysML). These two papers are ideally accepted and presented together in the same Infotech session. Statement of problem: SysML, as a tool, is currently not capable of implementing the theoretical approach described within the "Goal-Function Tree Modeling for Systems Engineering and Fault Management" paper cited above. More generally, SysML's current capabilities to model functional decompositions in the rigorous manner required in the GFT approach are limited. The GFT is a new Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach to the development of goals and requirements, functions, and its linkage to design. As a growing standard for systems engineering, it is important to develop methods to implement GFT in SysML. Proposed Method of Solution: Many of the central concepts of the SysML language are needed to implement a GFT for large complex systems. In the implementation of those central concepts, the following will be described in detail: changes to the nominal SysML process, model view definitions and examples, diagram definitions and examples, and detailed SysML construct and stereotype definitions.

This paper is organized into four parts. In the Gestation Phase, I describe the process of starting a new mission and establishing its rough boundaries. Next I show how the scientific experiments are selected. Then we enter the Preliminary Design Phase, where we incorporate the scientist's instruments into the systems engineering process. Finally, I show how the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) assures NASA management and the scientists that the scientific requirements have been incorporated into the systems engineering process to everyone's satisfaction.

The past several decades have seen the rise of large, highly interactive systems that are on the forward edge of technology. As a result of this growth and the increased usage of digital systems (computers and software), the concept of systems engineering has gained increasing attention. Some of this attention is no doubt due to large program failures which possibly could have been avoided, or at least mitigated, through the use of systems engineering principles. The complexity of modern day weapon systems requires conscious application of systems engineering concepts to ensure producible, operable and supportable systems that satisfy mission requirements. Although many authors have traced the roots of systems engineering to earlier dates, the initial formalization of the systems engineering process for military development began to surface in the mid-1950s on the ballistic missile programs. These early ballistic missile development programs marked the emergence of engineering discipline 'specialists' which has since continued to grow. Each of these specialties not only has a need to take data from the overall development process, but also to supply data, in the form of requirements and analysis results, to the process. A number of technical instructions, military standards and specifications, and manuals were developed as a result of these development programs. In particular, MILSTD-499 was issued in 1969 to assist both government and contractor personnel in defining the systems engineering effort in support of defense acquisition programs. This standard was updated to MIL-STD499A in 1974, and formed the foundation for current application of systems engineering principles to military development programs.

The essential elements of the design process consist of the mission definition phase that provides the system requirements, the conceptual design, the preliminary design and finally the detailed design. Mission definition is performed largely by operations analysts in conjunction with the customer. The result of their study is handed off to the systems engineers for documentation as the systems requirements. The document that provides these requirements is the basis for the further design work of the design engineers at the Lockheed-Georgia Company. The design phase actually begins with conceptual design, which is generally conducted by a small group of engineers using multidisciplinary design programs. Because of the complexity of the design problem, the analyses are relatively simple and generally dependent on parametric analyses of the configuration. The result of this phase is a baseline configuration from which preliminary design may be initiated.

The essential elements of the design process consist of the mission definition phase that provides the system requirements, the conceptual design, the preliminary design and finally the detailed design. Mission definition is performed largely by operations analysts in conjunction with the customer. The result of their study is handed off to the systems engineers for documentation as the systems requirements. The document that provides these requirements is the basis for the further design work of the design engineers at the Lockheed-Georgia Company. The design phase actually begins with conceptual design, which is generally conducted by a small group of engineers using multidisciplinary design programs. Because of the complexity of the design problem, the analyses are relatively simple and generally dependent on parametric analyses of the configuration. The result of this phase is a baseline configuration from which preliminary design may be initiated.

The purpose of this report is to communicate status, progress, lessons learned, and results on a joint collaboration between the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) and Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR). The collaboration is referred to as Team Software Process Integration (TSPI). This report describes the progress and performance of extending the Team Software Process (TSP) to systems engineering as a pilot project with the AV8B Systems Engineering Team. Early results of applying TSPI suggest some encouraging trends. The motivation for assembling this report is to share lessons and experiences with other industry and government organizations interested in applying TSP in a non-software setting. The TSPI effort leverages the SEI Personal Software ProcessSM (PSPSM) and Team Software ProcessSM (TSPSM) research and body of practice. Projects that have adopted these methods have shown a dramatic increase in product quality as well as increased fidelity to their schedule and effort estimates. The methods are supported by a doctrine that trains and sustains performance and quality improvement in organizations.

This report provides guidance on how human engineering practices can be better incorporated into systems engineering processes. The intended audience includes developers, engineers, and integrators who want to produce systems that will have greater capability through better consideration of all users. Four major impact areas for coordination of human engineering and systems engineering activities are discussed, and details of relevant interactions throughout the system development process have been identified. Information is provided linking the different actions to steps in different documented systems engineering standards and processes.

The Government Accounting OFfice (GAO) has stated that insufficient attention is given to Human Factors Engineering (HFE) in the design of systems during the Weapons Acquisition Cycle (WAC). According to GAO these inadequacies have adversely impacted our military capabilities and wasted lives and millions of dollars. A myriad of handbooks, manuals and standards exist which provide detailed guidelines, criteria and test plans for conducting HF T&E which remain unused because their technological level is beyond the average user. The need for basic training in HFE has been clearly identified. A cost effective vehicle to bridge this gap in conceptual knowledge has been developed in the form of an HFE Self-Paced Course. As coordinated with the course's sponsor, an internal review and trial run were conducted, via this thesis, to assess its potential effectiveness. According to the results, this course has proven its capability to provide the stimuli necessary for the transfer of basic knowledge and skills in HF T&E. Additionally, the value of the job tasks identified in the course's terminal objectives were substantiated. The conclusions provided in this study are intended to encourage further course development through incorporation of the recommendations outlined. Ultimately, this would lead to its validation and implementation into the instructional system of the military. Implementation of such a basic course could be a major step toward increased integration of HF T&E during the WAC.

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI(Service Mark)) models have evolved the Capability Maturity Model (CMM(registered)) concept, established by the Capability Maturity Model for Software (SW-CMM), to a new level that enables the continued growth and expansion of the CMM concept to multiple disciplines. Like the SW-CMM, EIA/IS 731, IPD-CMM, and other process improvement models, CMMI models are tools that help organizations improve their processes. This CMMI model is designed to help organizations improve their product and service development, acquisition, and maintenance processes. Concepts covered by this model include systems engineering, software engineering, and integrated product and process development as well as traditional CMM concepts such as process management and project management. Each CMMI model is designed to be used in concert with other CMMI models, making it easier for organizations to pursue enterprise-wide process improvement at their own pace. This CMMI model has a staged representation, which focuses on measuring process improvement using maturity levels. Maturity levels apply to process-improvement achievement across the organizational unit using the model.

This thesis describes a functional framework for developing strategic assessment at the Combatant Command level, specifically European Command. The framework establishes a functional architecture based on derived requirements and objectives according to the systems engineering process described by Dennis Buede. This thesis describes the current methodology for developing theater plans based on the national strategies established by the President, Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In addition, it provides an analysis of the system stakeholders in order to define the purpose and utility of a strategic assessment from various perspectives. Based on this analysis, the requirements and functions of the system are decomposed and arranged according to a hierarchy via Vitech's CORE 8 University Edition. Finally, the developed model is tested against a notional scenario that assesses a fictional exercise according to the derived functional model, in order to demonstrate the methodology used to relate activities to strategic goals. This thesis defines the framework for conducting strategic assessments and leveraging them to maximize the impact of U.S. activities.

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

This item represents a case in PACER, the U.S. Government's website for federal case data. If you wish to see the entire case, please consult PACER directly.

This slide presentation reviews the importance of Risk Informed Design (RID) as an important feature of the systems engineering process. RID is based on the principle that risk is a design commodity such as mass, volume, cost or power. It also reviews Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) as it is used in the product life cycle in the development of NASA's Constellation Program.

The following key processes, models, and frameworks are synergistic and when used together provide for efficiency and effectiveness of systems engineering and software acquisition and development: Systems Engineering Technical Review (SETR) Acquisition framework, Basic Systems Engineering, IEEE/EIA 12207 Software life cycle processes, Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI(registered)) Best Practices framework.

The open system approach is both a technical approach to systems engineering and a preferred business strategy that is becoming widely applied by commercial manufacturers of large complex systems. It has the attention of DoD management who have mandated its use by DoD weapon systems developers. Why? Because without such a change in system development practice, DoD risks being unable to meet the technology needs of the warfighter in the year 2000 and beyond to maintain continued superior combat capability affordably! Open systems designs in both new and legacy weapon systems provide an opportunity towards this end; however, to achieve good open systems designs first demands that a disciplined systems engineering approach be taken to defining the appropriate elements in the system to be opened. This paper discusses the need for a rigorous systems engineering process which incorporates open systems concepts and principles where resulting system designs more readily accommodate changing technology to achieve cost, schedule, and performance benefits by promoting multiple sources of supply and technology insertion.

The main objective in systems engineering is to devise a coherent total system design capable of achieving the stated requirements. Requirements should be rigid. However, they should be continuously challenged, rechallenged and/or validated. The systems engineer must specify every requirement in order to design, document, implement and conduct the mission. Each and every requirement must be logically considered, traceable and evaluated through various analysis and trade studies in a total systems design. Margins must be determined to be realistic as well as adequate. The systems engineer must also continuously close the loop and verify system performance against the requirements. The fundamental role of the systems engineer, however, is to engineer, not manage. Yet, in large, complex missions, where more than one systems engineer is required, someone needs to manage the systems engineers, and we call them 'systems managers.' Systems engineering management is an overview function which plans, guides, monitors and controls the technical execution of a project as implemented by the systems engineers. As the project moves on through Phases A and B into Phase C/D, the systems engineering tasks become a small portion of the total effort. The systems management role increases since discipline subsystem engineers are conducting analyses and reviewing test data for final review and acceptance by the systems managers.

The U.S. Army s mission reflects a strong impetus to provide flexible and adaptable ground vehicles that are rapidly fieldable. Emerging manufacturing technology, such as three-dimensional (3D) printing, is making mass customization possible in commercial industry. If the Army could produce tailored military ground vehicles that incorporate mission-specific tactics, it would outperform generic systems. To produce such systems, a new systems engineering (SE) process should be developed. Virtual environments are central to the proposed SE/2025 process because they provide a sandbox where soldiers and engineers might directly collaborate to codevelop tactics and technologies simultaneously. The authors intent is to describe how ground vehicle systems might be developed in 2025 as well as to describe current efforts underway to shape the future. In the past, the United States Army has been able to anticipate capability gaps and needs based on a relatively static threat, but that model has disintegrated over the past two decades (United States Army, 2013). Figure 1 illustrates pictorially the range and complexity of the current defense landscape. Constantly shifting mission requirements will likely remain the norm in the foreseeable future. As such, combatant commanders will need ground vehicles, including robots that are flexible, adaptable, and rapidly deployable. Additionally, some of the most promising future warfighting technologies, such as robotics, computing, and advanced communications, will be readily available for non-State actors and nations to purchase from the global commercial market. To maintain a military advantage, the United States needs to develop a process that enables the lucid and rapid production of mission-tailored platforms that do not rely solely on cutting-edge technology. Just as radar stealth and drones were game changers in the past, the acquisition process itself could become a game-changing technology in the future.

This thesis proposes a system of systems (SoS) engineering and integration (SoSE and I) process and provides a use case for a network transport analysis that is tailored to an information technology (IT) network. The purpose of the process is to identify the capabilities required for the transport and provide a framework for analysis, test, and implementation to ensure that the network IT system supports the user requirements for the overall SoS. The thesis then details a Navy use case through the steps of the proposed process and provides example steps and criteria for the assessment. Prior research on SoS architectures was leveraged in developing the proposed process and tailored to support IT network challenges. The thesis makes recommendations to prioritize capabilities, to implement capability-based quality of service (QoS), to have a detailed understanding of applications for the correlation of application to capability, to continuously monitor IT networks to ensure satisfactory performance with new applications or user behavior, and to ensure governance is applied through the process to ensure oversight of design and tradeoff decisions for network throughput analyses.

A layered architecture is fundamental to the megaprogramming approach being followed by the Air Force/STARS Demonstration Project, as engineers develop the Space Command and Control Architectural Infrastructure application for NORAD and USSPACECOM. This layering strategy also applies to the Software Engineering Environment (SEE) being used to support the application development. This paper focuses on one particular SEE layer: a layer that leverages one of an organization's most valued assets - its process - and uses it as a basis for SEE integration. The activity to produce and use the PSE has yielded useful lessons learned which can guide other organizations as they pursue their own process-driven SEEs.

This document provides the results of an evaluation of the levels of conformance of the Cleanroom Software Engineering (C SE) process with the Capability Maturity Model (SW-CMM) for Software, vl.1, Goals. The Goals for each SW-CMM level and KPA are listed and the level of conformance is indicated as outlined in the following descriptions: High - CSE addresses the goal to a very high degree. Medium - CSE addresses the goal to a partial degree. Low - CSE addresses the goal in a very minimal fashion. None - CSE does not address the goal to any degree.

The United States Air Force is continually researching ways to reduce costs associated with aircraft maintenance and improve operational safety. This study focuses on creating a systems engineering process to develop an Integrated Structural Health Monitoring System (ISHMS). The overarching process was then applied to design a conceptual ISHMS for a real-world scenario involving the F-15. Sensor selection, integration and testing were explored in detail using frequency response methods to detect structural damage. Testing was accomplished using a simplified structural specimen with Monitoring & Evaluation Technology Integration System (METIS) disk nodes attached at various locations. Two different METIS disk operation modes were utilized; pulse-echo and pitch-catch. Simulated and actual damage were introduced to the specimen allowing comparison between baseline and damaged tests. Comparative analysis validated the capabilities of frequency response sensors to detect damage. This analysis demonstrates that structural health monitoring systems using frequency response methods may be promising in the aerospace sector.

The United States Air Force is continually researching ways to reduce costs associated with aircraft maintenance and improve operational safety. This study focuses on creating a systems engineering process to develop an Integrated Structural Health Monitoring System (ISHMS). The overarching process was then applied to design a conceptual ISHMS for a real-world scenario involving the F-15. Sensor selection, integration and testing were explored in detail using frequency response methods to detect structural damage. Testing was accomplished using a simplified structural specimen with Monitoring & Evaluation Technology Integration System (METIS) disk nodes attached at various locations. Two different METIS disk operation modes were utilized; pulse-echo and pitch-catch. Simulated and actual damage were introduced to the specimen allowing comparison between baseline and damaged tests. Comparative analysis validated the capabilities of frequency response sensors to detect damage. This analysis demonstrates that structural health monitoring systems using frequency response methods may be promising in the aerospace sector.