lgi2p etzcr / c.cornu / 16/06/2010urtado/slides/cornu_16_06_2010.pdf · 2010-08-30 · presentation...

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

1

Journée annuelle de présentation des travaux des doctorants du

LGI2P

Clémentine Cornu

16th June, 2010

EUROCOPTER UNCLASSIFIED

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

2

Presentation Content

1. Thesis question

2. Current work achieved

3. Conclusion and Outlook

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

27/0

5/20

10

1. Thesis question 2. Current work achieved 3. Conclusion & Outlook

1. Thesis question

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


4

Thesis statement

How to deploy System Engineering processes

in a multi cultural and multi sites industry,

in a multi‐disciplinary context,

dealing with different factors like interoperability

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


Meaning of « to deploy » for this study

• Definition– To put in place an organization and a way of working which meet the

applicable standards within the company

• Stages– Background analysis– Definition & implementation of the deployment process

– Definition of the deployment methodology

– Definition of processes to deploy – Implementation of the deployment

– Deployment control & Continuous improvement– Decommissioning of the deployment process

5

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


System Engineering (SE) Overview

Companies’ needs: phasing outCustomer dissatisfaction

Origins of a product lack of profitability

Cost and deadlines overruns…

Origins: lack of systems’ control• Needs not sufficiently expressed / listened

• Lifecycle not considered entirely• Resources not available at the right time

• Miscommunication• …

6

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


System Engineering Overview

SE definition “General methodological approach that includes all the appropriate activities to design, develop and test a system which both provides an economical and competitive solution to the needs of a customer and also satisfies all stakeholders.”

SE Stakes

7

• Better complexity control • Better match between products needs/quality

• Better cost control • Better anticipation of problems and risks

• Better respect of deadlines • Better multi‐disciplinary and multi‐actors cooperation

• Shorter development time • Increasing the satisfaction of all stakeholders

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


System Engineering

System Engineering Overview

Realization : business engineering

NeedsEnd

product

System integration

Tailored from

an AFIS pattern

To qualifythe systemTo qualifythe system

To verifythe integration

To verifythe integration

To assemblyTo assembly

To getthe components

To getthe components

To developpTo developp To manufactureTo manufacture To reuseTo reuse To buyTo buy

To analyze & definethe need

To analyze & definethe need

To define technicalrequirements

To define technicalrequirements

To design organicarchitecture

To design organicarchitecture

To design functionnalarchitecture

To design functionnalarchitecture

To verify & validate& optimize

To verify & validate& optimize

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


Interoperability Overview

Interoperability definition

“Aptitude and capacity of the entities to interact in a harmonious and efficient way without having to call into question whole or part of their behavior or their structure”

[Pingaud 2009]

9

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


Interoperability barriers & SE processes deployment

10

Interoperability barriers

Tailored from EIF Framework [Chen 2006]

processprocess

service

business

data

service

business

data

INTEROPERABILITYprocess

business

service

data

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


Entreprise

Dynamic environment

SE processSE processSE processSE process

Eurocopter Interoperability interpretation

11

Customer

Certification authorities

Other stakeholders

SE processesSE processes

SESE

Realization

Integration

actorsactors

methods

toolstools

methods

System of interest

……

INTEROPERABILITY MATTERS

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


Deployment difficulties• What does the company have to

deploy ? • How to practically deploy the SE

process ?

• How to make the design office staff adhere to the SE approach ?

Interoperability difficultiesHow to make the elements to deploy be interoperable

– Between them

– With the actual organization within Eurocopter

12

How to get over the obstacles which prevent the SE deployment within the company ?

Eurocopter question

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


• SE processes definitions/specifications

• SE process deployment rules considering and improving its interoperability

• Company interoperability maturity model

13

Thesis expected deliverables

Methodological guide DemonstratorWorkflow engine for the deployment of 2 processes

• Requirements Management

• Configuration Control

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0



State of the Art in System Engineering applied to Avionics

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0


Improvement of the analysis of [Sheard et al. 1998]

• MIL‐STD‐499B

• IEEE 1220

• EIA/IS 632

• EIA 632

• ISO/IEC 15288

• ISO/IEC TR 19760



• Découvrir et comprendre l'IS

• INCOSE SE Handbook

• NASA SE Handbook

• BNAE RG.Aéro 000 77

• BNAE RG.Aéro 000 40

• ECSS‐E‐ST‐10C

• Guide for ITS

15

Comparison of System Engineering definitive texts

Updated

WideScope

Businessspecific

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0


Improvement of the analysis of [Sheard et al. 1998]

• Scope

• Level of abstraction

• System Life Cycle

• SEMP Guidance

• Definition of system

• Definition of System Engineering

16


GlobalSystem EngineeringRelationships / Compatibility with other System engineering documents

Project level

Project managementSystem life cycleSystem Life Cycle StagesProject reviewsSystem engineering process by project phase

System Engineering processlevel

System Engineering processesRelationships between System Engineering processesRecommendations/Tips for each System Engineering processSystem Engineering processes inputsSystem Engineering processes outcomesSystem Engineering processes actorsSystem Engineering processes controlsSystem Engineering processes enablers

System Engineering processes activity level

Relationships between System Engineering processes activitiesDetail information about System Engineering processes activities

System Engineering processes activities task level

Detail information about System Engineering processes activities tasks

Document level

Indications about System Engineering planSystem Engineering plan templateIndications about other documents Documents to provide for reviews

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0


Improvement of the analysis of [Sheard et al. 1998]SWOT Analysis

17


Strengths Weaknesses

Opportunities Threats

Highlights the cons of each document

Highlights what may be risky for Eurocopter in each document

Highlights the pros of each document

Highlights what may be useful for Eurocopter and thus create a competitive advantage in each document

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0


Improvement of the analysis of [Sheard et al. 1998]SWOT Analysis

18


ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0


Relevancy of the SWOT analysis for the deployment

19


Strengths Weaknesses

Opportunities Threats

to define, control & manage the process

to develop the Eurocopterabilities to create and take advantage of its competitive advantage

to define, control & manage the process

to adapt / to develop the Eurocopter abilities to adapt to these threats

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0



SWOT analysis objectives – To identify those abilities (competitive advantage/adaptation)– To identify the derived requirements for the Eurocopter organization – To characterize how interoperability may allow to better meet these

requirements or may influence compliance with these requirements?

In the knowledge that– Dynamic & Multi‐disciplinary environment– Open processes (new tools, …)

Study continuation– Definition of SE process deployment rules and requirements– Definition of a maturity model for each organization level concerned

by the deployment

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0



State of the Art in Interoperability

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0


22

Reference documents (to be continued)

Standards

– Technical standards about specific components or computer languages

– No normative document explaining how to improve interoperability within companies

European Projects deliverables

– IDEAS

– INTEROP‐NoE

– ATHENA

– ABILITIES

– FUSION

– GENESIS

– Commius

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0


23

Reference documents (upcoming studies)

Interoperability Frameworks

“An interoperability framework can be defined as a set of standards and guidelines that describes the way in which organisations have agreed, or should agree, to interact with each other.” [ATHENA 2007a]

Name Reference

IDEAS interoperability Framework [IDEAS 2003]

European Interoperability Framework [IDABC 2004] & [IDABC 2008]

INTEROP‐NOE European Interoperability Framework [INTEROP‐NOE 2007]

ATHENA Interoperability Framework [ATHENA 2007a]

ATHENA Business Interoperability Framework [ATHENA 2007b]

E‐Health Interoperability Frameworks [NEHTA 2007]

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /1

6/06

/201

0


24

Reference documents (upcoming studies)

Interoperability Maturity Models

“The purpose of a maturity model of the CMMI type is to improve the efficiency of the company by identifying, analysing and optimising the processes ruling the work.” [AFIS 2002 – Sheet n°1]

Comparison made in [Guédria et al. 2008]

Name Reference

SPICE [ISO 2004]

LISI [C4ISR 1998]

OIM [Clark et al. 1999]

LCIM [Tolk et al. 2003]

EIMM [ATHENA 2007c]

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


3. Conclusion and Outlook

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10


Outlook : Deployment guide

• Definition & explanations of the Eurocopter’s strategy

• Taking stock– Stakeholders

– Organization

– Tools

– Data and models

• Formalization– Deployment requirements

– Cartography of the SE processes to deploy

– Process used to manage the deployment

• Company Interoperability Maturity Model

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

27/0

5/20

10

Thank you for your attention !

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

27/0

5/20

10

Extra slides

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

Automatisation cognitive

• Automatisation– « Suppression totale ou partielle de l'intervention humaine dans l'exécution

de tâches diverses » [Larousse]

• Cognitive– « Qui se rapporte à la faculté de connaître » [Larousse]

• Ma compréhension– Suppression totale ou partielle de l'intervention humaine dans l'exécution

de tâches liées à la connaissance, au raisonnement

– Identifier les tâches de raisonnement répétitives et supporter ainsi l’utilisateur dans leur exécution en les anticipant, en les formalisant, en les simplifiant, en en les outillant et en supprimant celles qui sont inutiles

29

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

Automatisation cognitive

• Contribution de ma thèse à l’automatisation cognitive– Les processus d’IS, de part leur nature, vise à « automatiser » les tâches de

conception en y apposant un cadre, des méthodes, … Or cette thèse vise non seulement à les définir mais aussi à apporter des solutions viables pour les déployer. Elle contribue donc à l’automatisation cognitive.

– Sans interopérabilité, ces processus fonctionneront « en mode dégradé » ou non optimal. La prise en compte de l’interopérabilité sert donc encore l’automatisation cognitive.

– Enfin, le workflow sur lequel doit aboutir la thèse est un outil concret d’automatisation cognitive

30

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

27/0

5/20

10

Appendixes

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

32

References

• [AFIS 2001] Fanmuy, G., Levy, G., Foisseau, J., Lamothe, P., Hermans, B., De Chazelles, P. and Choveau, E. "Recommandations pour l'élaboration d'un référentiel d'exigences techniques", Association Française d'Ingénierie Système (AFIS), 2001.

• [AFIS 2002] "Sheet No. 1 : Maturity Model", Association Française d’Ingénierie Système, 2002• [AFIS 2009]Meinadier, J.‐P. "Découvrir et comprendre l'ingénierie système ‐ Version expérimentale ‐

Version 3", Association Française d'Ingénierie Système (AFIS), 2009.

• [ATHENA 2007a] "Deliverable D.A4.2 ‐ Specification of Interoperability Framework and Profiles, Guidelines and Best Practices", ATHENA, 2007.

• [ATHENA 2007b] "Deliverable D.B3.1 ‐ Business Interoperability Framework", ATHENA, 2007.

• [ATHENA 2007c] "Deliverable D.A1.4 ‐ Framework for the Establishment and Management Methodology", ATHENA, 2005.

• [BNAE 1999] "RG AERO 000 40 A ‐ General recommendation for the programme management specification", Bureau de normalisation de l'aéronautique et de l'espace (BNAE), 1999.

• [BNAE 2005] "RG AERO 000 77 ‐ Programme management ‐ Guide for the management of Systems Engineering", Bureau de normalisation de l'aéronautique et de l'espace (BNAE), 2005.

• [C4ISR 1998] "Final Report", C4ISR Architecture Working Group, 1998.• [Chen 2006] Chen, D. "Enterprise Interoperability Framework"'Proceedings of Enterprise Modelling and

Ontologies for Interoperability, EMOI‐Interop', 2006.

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

33

References

• [Clark et al. 1999] Clark, T. and Jones, R. "Organisational Interoperability Maturity Model for C2"'1999 Command and Control Research Technology Symposium. United States Naval War College, Newport', 1999.

• [DoD 1994] "MIL‐STD‐498, Software Development and Documentation", Department of Defense (DoD), 1994.

• [ECSS 2009] "ECSS‐E‐ST‐10C ‐ Space engineering ‐ System engineering general requirements", European Cooperation on Space Standardization(ECSS), 2009.

• [EIA 1994] "EIA/IS 632, Interim Standard: Systems Engineering", Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA), 1994.

• [EIA 2003] "ANSI/EIA‐632:2003 ‐ Processes for Engineering a System", Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA), 2003.

• [Guedria et al. 2008] Guedria, W., Naudet, Y. and Chen, D. "Interoperability Maturity Models ‐ Survey and Comparison," On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2008 Workshops, 2008

• [IDABC 2004] "European Interoperability Framework for pan‐European eGovernment services ‐ Version 1.0", Interoperable Delivery of European eGovernment Services to public Administrations, Businesses and Citizens (IDABC), 2004.

• [IDABC 2008] "Draft document as basis for EIF 2.0", Interoperable Delivery of European eGovernmentServices to public Administrations, Businesses and Citizens (IDABC), 2008.

• [IDEAS 2003] "Delivrable D.1.1 ‐ State of the Art (introduction)", IDEAS, 2003.

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

34

References

• [IEEE 2005] "IEEE 1220:2005, Standard for application and Management of the Systems Engineering Process", Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 2005.

• [INCOSE 2010] "Systems Engineering Handbook ‐ A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities ‐version 3.2", International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE), 2010.

• [INTEROP‐NOE 2007] “Deliverable DI.3_‐ Enterprise Interoperability Framework and knowledge corpus”

• [ISO 2002] "ISO/IEC 15288:2002, Systems engineering ‐ System life cycle processes", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2002.

• [ISO 2003] "ISO/IEC TR 19760:2003 ‐ Systems engineering ‐ A guide for the application of ISO/IEC 15288 (System life cycle processes)", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2003.

• [ISO 2004] “ISO/IEC 15504:2004 ‐‐ Information technology ‐‐ Process assessment, ", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2002.

• [ISO 2008] "ISO/IEC TR 90005:2008 ‐ Systems engineering ‐ Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001 to system life cycle processes", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2008.

• [ISO 2009] "ISO/IEC TR 24766:2009 ‐ Technologies de l'information ‐‐ Ingénierie des systèmes et du logiciel ‐‐ Guide pour les capacités d'outil d'ingénierie des exigences", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2009.

• [NASA 2007] Shishko, R. and Chamberlain, R. "Nasa Systems Engineering Handbook", Technical report, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 2007.

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

35

References

• [NEHTA 2007] "Interoperability Framework v2.0", Technical report, National E‐Health Transition Authority Limited (NEHTA), 2007.

• [Pingaud 2009] Pingaud, H. "Rationalité du développement de l’interopérabilité dans les organisations"'8ème congrès international de Génie Industriel, CIGI09', 2009.

• [Sheard et al. 1998] Sheard, S. and Lake, J. "Systems engineering standards and models compared"'Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Systems Engineering, Vancouver, Canada', 1998

• [Tolk et al. 2003] Tolk, A. and Muguira, J. A. "The Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model"'2003 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop, Orlando, Florida', 2003.

• [USDT 2009] "Systems Engineering Guidebook for Intelligent Transportation Systems", California Department of Transportation, 2009.

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

Pictures references

Pictures have been picked from internet :

– http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/its‐the‐friday‐puzzle‐9/

– http://www.marketingwords.com/images/question_mark_dead.jpg

– http://www.crystalxp.net/forum/fr/entraide‐graphique/Tux‐Mascottes‐amp‐Personnages/sujet_14189_1.htm

– The rest of the pictures come from http://www.icons‐gallery.com/

36

ETZ

CR

/ C

.CO

RN

U /

16/0

6/20

10

About the author

Clémentine Cornu is a PhD student on a CIFRE contract with Eurocopter at the the Mines ParisTech research center for computer science (CRI).

Her work is under the supervision of Vincent CHAPURLAT (LGI2P, Ecole des Mines d’Alès) and François IRIGOIN (CRI, Mines ParisTech)

Contact : Clementine (dot) Cornu (at) Eurocopter (dot) com

37