How to Architect Family of Complex Space Systems and Networks?

Architecting Families of Complex Space Systems and Networks NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Systems Engineering Seminar 10.07.08 Kul Bhasin NASA Glenn Research Center Phone: 216.433.3676 Email: Kul.B.Bhasin@nasa.gov

SCaN “As-Is” Architecture Development Team Architecture Team Lead Network Technical Points of Contact Kul Bhasin Cont. T. Pham DSN Network Architecture Leads Stan Rubin NISN Abhijit Biswas DSN Peter Shames DSN James Bowen DSN Chris Spinolo NISN Wesley Eddy NISN Wallace Tai DSN Eric Knoblock GN Mike Phillips SN DoDAF and RASDS Architecture Jeffrey Gilbert Network Technical Points of Contact Chuck Putt C. Chang DSN Angela Culley NISN IT Support Larry Kiser SN Lee A. Jackson Stephen Levitski GN Sherry L. Peck-Breen A. Operchuck NISN NASA Glenn Logistics and Technical Information Division (LTID) Support 2

Lunar Communication and Navigation Systems (LCNS) Development Team Team Lead Navigation Space Segment Kul Bhasin / Ron Miller Mike Mesarch Mark Flanegan Mike Moreau Operational View Brian Kennedy Lunar Surface Segment Kul Bhasin Joe Connolly Mike Cauley Kar-Ming Cheung Doug Hoder David Irimies Networking Views Chuck Sheehe Tony Hackenberg Loren Clare Alan Downey John Hudiburg Rich Slywczak Afroz Zaman David Lassiter Kul Bhasin Kue Chun Tom Sartwell Steve Gnepp Joe Warner Jonathon Gal-Edd Chuck Putt Jeff Hayden Document Development Technical View Ruth Scina Systems View Loren Clare Paulette Ziegfeld Kul Bhasin Steve Gnepp Charles Putt SCWAG Participants Chuck Sheehe Ground Segment Jim Shier Joe Connolly Jonathan Gal-Edd Erica Lieb Jonathon Gal-Edd Tom Sartwell Jeff Hayden 3

SCaN Cx-Orion Architecture Development Team Architecture Team Lead Operational Views Special Contributors Kul Bhasin Chuck Putt Tony Hackenberg Mike Phillips Karen Richon Communications Architecture Tom Sartwell William Walsh David Miller Jeff Hayden IT Support Network Architecture Systems Views Paulette Ziegfeld, Loren Clare Abi Biswas Editorial Alan Jeffries Jeff Hayden Jeffrey Gilbert, Graphics Esther Jennings Jeff Hayden, Graphics Steve Gnepp Technical Views Harry Shaw David Miller Chris Spinolo Shirley Tseng Traceability David Miller Navigation Architecture Ajithamol Painumkal Brian Kennedy Mike Maher 4

Presentation Overview • Families of Systems and Networks: Evolutions and Trends • Systems and Networks Architecting • Systems Architecture Approach • Systems Architecture Products 5

Families of Systems and Networks: Evolutions and Trends 6

Evolution of Space Communications Systems • Clear objectives, • Increased complexity; Unproven • Increase in inter-dependent interfaces; • Central owner / stakeholder, technologies, • Increase in number and types of systems, • Requirements-driven • High cost of service, • Protocols, approach, • Undefined users and customers; • Software use and operational and • Standard system • Inability to integrate multiple Managerial Independence; engineering processes . space and ground systems. • Increase in system and operational complexity. 7

Space Communications NoN Evolution Single Links Multiple Distinct Networks Supplementing with Manual Management Terrestrial Networks and Little Interoperability Integrated, Interoperable Networks With Automated Management 8

Customers: • Constellation Lunar Surface Systems GEO Optical • Constellation Orion / Altair Relay • Lunar Science Missions Lunar Earth-Based Relay Ground Satellite Station Link from Relay to Science on Farside Cx Orion Science EVA Crew Site LCT 2 Pressurized Rover Science EVA Crew Cx Altair Site Pressurized Robotic Rover Rover Robotic LCT 1 Rover Habitat

Customers: SCaN µwave • Constellation Lunar Surface Systems SCaN Optical • Constellation Orion / Altair GEO Optical Relay • Lunar Science Missions Lunar Earth-Based Relay Ground Satellite Station Link from Relay to Science on Farside Cx Orion Science EVA Crew Site LCT 2 Pressurized Rover Science EVA Crew Cx Altair Site Pressurized Robotic Rover Rover Robotic LCT 1 Rover Habitat

SCaN µwave Protocol stacks and common standards enable the network SCaN Optical IP LNK LNK DTN PHY PHY DTN CONV CONV CONV CONV IP IP IP IP LINK LINK LINK LINK PHY PHY PHY PHY APP APP TRAN TRAN IP IP LNK LNK IP LINK LINK PHY PHY PHY APP PHY IP DTN APP LNK LNK LNK TRAN PHY PHY PHY APP IP IP DTN LINK LNK LNK LNK PHY PHY PHY PHY DTN IP CONV CONV DTN LNK LNK CONV CONV IP IP PHY PHY IP IP APP LINK LINK LINK LINK DTN PHY PHY IP PHY PHY CONV LNK LNK IP PHY PHY LNK PHY

Autonomous Earth Observing System of Systems and Network of Networks 14

Autonomous Space Communications Technology (ASCoT) Architecture Application Data/Query Reserve Publish, Subscribe, Receive Fail/OK Reserve Compute Path QoS based Reservation Path PLS Routing Management/Scheduling Reservation Link Data/Query Information Make Reservation Information Receive Forwarding Reservation Link Database Buffers Queues Database Reservation Updates Data/Query Receive Data/Query Send PLS Send/Receive Transport (UDP, TCP) MAC Layer TCeMA, Tx Power, Network (IP) Antenna Point/Track, Node Discovery, Data Link Framing and Coding (CCSDS, HDLC, DVB, ATM) Node Direction/Range, Data Synchronization, Physical Layer (Modulated S and Ka-Band) Data Multiplexing

Challenges • System Engineering processes increasingly demand architecture when complex systems are being interfaced in a space environment. However, architecting remains misunderstood. • Academic/normative approaches are still emerging, as a result, the arch for complex systems is being developed “on the fly” (during program development process) • Base systems are becoming more complex in terms of their numbers (System of Systems, Network of Networks). 2 levels of complexity. 16

Introduction to Systems and Networks Architecting 17

Characteristics of Families of Systems and Networks* • Large Scale Programs and Systems – As a result, many times, single integrated architecture is infeasible • Diverse Ownership/Management – Individual systems might be owned by different agencies/organizations • Interfaces with Legacy and Future Systems – Evolutionary development – New systems must work with legacy systems, and be designed to integrate with future systems • Changing Operations Concepts – Families of systems and networks configuration must be flexible to accommodate changes – System and network management capabilities must support adaptability – Emergent, non-linear properties create changes from original goals • Criticality of Software – Systems are integrated via cooperative and distributed software – Software is used to implement much of the system behavior and functionality • Networks are Enablers and Serve as Infrastructure – Development phase – Operations phase – Support self-organization of systems and reduce operational burden *Some of this material is adapted from Anna Warner’s INCOSE Los Angeles Chapter Meeting Presentation, September 2008 18

Why Architecting for Families of Systems and Networks? • Who uses it? – Large projects/programs and organizations: military, aerospace, government, enterprises, etc. • Who needs it? – Managers – understand overall system, requirements, operations concepts, acquisition needs – Engineers – understand how systems interact, provide common language and understanding of architecture across diverse teams tackling different focus areas • What is it? – Top-down, comprehensive, collaborative, multidisciplinary, iterative, and concurrent technical processes • When is it used in the overall systems engineering process? – Concept Studies / Concept & Technology Development (Pre-Phase A / Phase A) – Develop CONOPS and identify key relationships, capabilities, and needs for acquisition and development; establish baseline for cooperation – Preliminary Design & Technology Completion through System Assembly (Phase B through Phase D) – Maintain common baseline for interoperability and provide common concepts across individual system projects – Operations & Sustainment (Phase E) – Determine state of SoS and evaluate acquisition plans, capability gaps, etc.; serve as baseline for building future architectures 19

Systems of Systems Engineering Framework For Each Increment Demonstrate Assess Capabilities Capabilities in and Requirements Operation Define Architectures With Validate Needed Capabilities Capabilities Identify Trade Studies Integrate SoS and Alternatives Determine System Systems of Assess System Performance Parameters Performance Systems and Verification Plans Engineering Identify Important System Integrate and Specifications Verify Systems Coordinate development, production, and testing Services / Project Systems Engineering SYSTEM 1 (Requiring SYSTEM 2 V diagrams Modification) (New or Early in SYSTEM 3 20 Development) (In Production)

Systems Architecture Approach Architecture Development Process Architecture Framework Architecture Development Methods 21

Six-Step Static Architecture Development Process (DoDAF 1.5) 1 Determine Intended Use of the Architecture 2 3 4 5 6 Determine Collect, organize, Conduct Document Determine data analysis in scope of correlate, Results IAW required to and store support of Architecture Architecture support Architecture Architecture data Framework Architecture objectives 22

Dynamic Architecture Process Used By the NASA Architecture Team Infrastructure Drivers (New Capabilities) and Mission Customers Subject Matter Experts Subject Matter Experts Concepts of Concepts of Operations Generate and Integrate Generate and Integrate Operations Architecture Products Architecture Products Architecture Initialize Architecture Initialize Architecture Description Development Task, Development Task, Document Define Objectives, Define Objectives, Continuous Re-evaluation Continuous Re-evaluation Requirements Requirements Issues and Gaps Assumptions Assumptions Trade Data Data Communications Communications Navigation Navigation Network Network Trade Architecture Architecture Architecture Architecture Architecture Architecture Studies Studies 23

SCaN System Architecture Engineering SCaN Program System/Operation Services Architecture Levels Architecture Level 1: “Should-Be” Architectures Service Oriented SCaN Office Architecture Transition Process (SOA) Models, “To Be” Architectures • Network Integration Simulation, & Level 2: • Orion • Lunar Emulation • More (?) SCaN Program NoN and SoS Capabilities “As-Is” Architectures Level 3: Testbeds including: SCaN • Real Systems • Modules Service Catalog Networks • Components Network System • Services Architectures • Simulations (SN,DSN,GN) 24

Architecture Roadmapping for the Transition Process • Process – Collects strategic levels of information; examples include Program’s Customer Drivers and Plans – Concern with longer timeframes than short-term project plans – Divide up the timeframe into segments based on budgetary and visionary goals – Develop multi-layered approach which shows the inter-dependencies among Drivers, Program/Project Milestones, Operational and Development Capability Plans, and Enablers – Clearly show the “Pull” of the program goals and customer requirements to technology developers – Clearly show the “Push” of the emerging and relevant technology capabilities 25

Architecture Frameworks A Systems Architecture Framework specifies how to organize and present the fundamental organization of a system. – By analogy, a Framework is the drawings or blueprints you would have to produce for a building. Some Examples: The Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) Ver 1.5. The Zachman Framework. Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems (RASDS) from CCSDS. 26

Architecture Views/Viewpoints: Definition • Architecture Views – A view is a representation of a whole system from the perspective of a related set of concerns – [alternate definition… Representations of the overall architecture that are meaningful to one or more stakeholders in the system] – Each view corresponds to exactly one viewpoint • Architecture Viewpoints – A viewpoint defines the perspective from which a view is taken • A view is what you see. A viewpoint is the vantage point or perspective that determines what you see – A viewpoint provides a framework or pattern for constructing views – Each viewpoint is specified by: • Viewpoint name • The stakeholders addressed by the viewpoint • The stakeholder concerns to be addressed by the viewpoint • The viewpoint language, modeling techniques, or analytical methods used • The source, if any, of the viewpoint (e.g., author, literature citation) 27

DoDAF 1.5 Overview – Views 28

Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems* • RASDS (Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems) is described by the CCSDS Systems Architecture Working Group specifically for space systems. Viewpoints Business Concerns Enterprise Organizational perspective Computational Concerns Functional Functional composition Data Concerns Information Relationships and transformations Physical Concerns Connectivity Node & Link perspective Protocol Concerns Communications Communications stack perspective *Peter Shames, Jet Propulsion Laboratory 29

Zachman Framework Views and Viewpoints 30

Architecture Frameworks Used by NASA Architecture Teams Frameworks Views Systems — Department Operational of Defense — Architecture Technical — Framework All View Reference Communications — Architecture Enterprise for Space Data — Systems Service Zachman Business Framework NASA Network and Architecture Navigation Teams Combined View/Viewpoints Used 31

Architecture Development Method 32

Systems Architecture Engineering Components* Architecture Work perform Architecture Workers Units Architecture Architecture Teams Architecture Work Products Engineering membership Tasks Architecture create Representations Architecture and produce Engineers update Diagrams, ADDs, Models Communications, use Networking, SCaN describe Network SMEs use Architecture Architectures Engineering Techniques As-Is, To-Be, Tools Should-Be Architecture CORE, Cradle, etc. Frameworks *adapted from: Donald Firesmith (CMU Software Engineering Institute) Method Framework for Engineering System Architectures (MFESA)

Relationships Among Perspectives With the Model Architecture * Enterprise Schedule ConOps View Capability View View Roadmaps & Gaps Architecture Model Operational System Technical All Views Views Views Views Business View Navigation Views Networking Mission Plans Views Service Communication Views Views * Varies from program to program 34

SCaN Architecture Representation Method View Diagram Representation 35

How to Architect Family of Complex Space Systems and Networks?

by KBB_2009

Accessibility

Upload Details

Usage Rights

2 Embeds 11

Statistics

How to Architect Family of Complex Space Systems and Networks? Presentation Transcript

http://www.linkedin.com	10
http://www.slideshare.net	1