SysML Overview


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

SysML Overview

  1. 1. SysML Overview Conrad Bock NIST [email_address] SysML Submission Team
  2. 2. Topics <ul><li>Background </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Motivation/Why UML? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>INCOSE/OMG </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SysML Collaborators </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Overview </li></ul><ul><ul><li>UML for SE Requirements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>UML Reuse </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Diagram Examples </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>AP233 Alignment </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. Background
  4. 4. Motivation <ul><li>Systems Engineers need a standard language for analyzing, specifying, designing, verifying and validating systems </li></ul><ul><li>Many different modeling techniques </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Behavior diagrams, IDEF0, N2 charts, … </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Lack broad-based standard that supports general purpose systems modeling needs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>satisfies broad set of modeling requirements (behavior, structure, performance, …) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>integrates with other disciplines (SW, HW, ..) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>scalable </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>adaptable to different SE domains </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>supported by multiple tools </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Why UML for SE ? <ul><li>De facto standard for software engineering </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tools and training are widely available, mature </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Extensible and adaptable to support SE requirements </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Not just for software modeling. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wide lifecycle, including logical specifications and deployment. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Behavior models with virtual machines. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>More than pictures: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Includes a repository model/API and </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>… and XML interchange. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>OMG standardization process supports UML customization for specific domains (e.g., systems engineering) </li></ul>
  6. 6. INCOSE/OMG Joint Initiative <ul><li>OMG Systems Engineering Domain Special Interest Group chartered by INCOSE-OMG initiative in 2001 </li></ul><ul><li>Extend UML for specifying, designing, and verifying complex systems </li></ul><ul><li>Provide capability for rigorous transfer of specifications among tools used by systems, software and hardware engineers </li></ul><ul><li>Bridge the semantic gap, the professional engineering discipline gap, and the training gap that exists between systems engineering and software engineering </li></ul><ul><li>Create a semantic bridge between ISO 10303-233 standard and ISO/IEC 19501 UML standard </li></ul>
  7. 7. SE DSIG Tasks <ul><li>Drafted UML for SE RFI, issued by OMG in 2002 to validate SE usage and limitations </li></ul><ul><li>Supported development of SE concept model </li></ul><ul><li>Collaborated with UML 2 submission teams </li></ul><ul><li>Performed detailed requirements analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Drafted UML for SE Request for Proposal, issued by the OMG in March 2003 (ad/03-03-41) </li></ul><ul><li>Extensive coordination with OMG, INCOSE, and ISO AP233 WG </li></ul>
  8. 8. SysML Collaborators <ul><li>Partnership of modeling tool users, vendors, and government agencies. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>O rganized in May 2003 to respond to UML for Systems Engineering RFP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Industry </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, BAE SYSTEMS, Motorola, Deere & Company, Eurostep, American Systems, Astrium Space, Israel Aircraft Industries,, THALES </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Government </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>DoD/OSD, NASA/JPL, NIST </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tool Vendors </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>IBM/Rational, Telelogic, Vitech, Artisan, I-Logix, Popkin, Project Technology, Gentleware, Ceira, PivotPoint Technology, 3SL, EmbeddedPlus </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Liaisons </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>AP233, CCSDS, EAST, INCOSE, Rosetta </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Stakeholder Review & Feedback Process <ul><li>SysML Development </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Writing initial submission 5-12/04 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>INCOSE review 1/04 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Initial submission to OMG 2/04 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>INCOSE review 5/04 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Extensive coordination with UML 2 FTF </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Revised submission 10/04 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Publications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>INCOSE Symposium 2003, 2004 papers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>INCOSE Insight article </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>INCOSE Journal article </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Product Development Journal article </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Initial vendor prototypes were favorably received during MDSD WG demo at INCOSE Symposium, 7/05 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Artisan, EmbeddedPlus, I-Logix, Telelogic </li></ul></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Internal Process <ul><li>Applying systematic approach to language development </li></ul><ul><ul><li>requirements analysis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>language architecture & design </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>verification & validation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>requirements traceability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reviews with stakeholders </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Partnership collaboration mechanisms </li></ul><ul><ul><li>weekly telecons </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>monthly physical meetings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>intranet, web site, and mailing lists </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. SysML Overview
  12. 12. OMG RFP Summary <ul><li>Structure </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g., system hierarchy, interconnection </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Behavior </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g., function-based behavior, state-based behavior </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Properties </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g., parametric models, time property </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Requirements </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g., requirements hierarchy, traceability </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Verification </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g., test cases, verification results </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Other </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g., trade studies, spatial relationships </li></ul></ul>RFP = Request for Proposals
  13. 13. UML 2 Reuse <ul><li>Identify UML 2 subset needed to support the UML for SE RFP requirements and evaluation criteria </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reduce tool implementation requirements for SE vendors </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reduce training requirements for SE’s </li></ul></ul><ul><li>SysML complements UML 2 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Two languages can be used together by teams that include both software and system engineers </li></ul></ul>
  14. 14. UML 2 Reuse
  15. 15. SysML Diagram Taxonomy SysML Diagram Structure Diagram Behavior Diagram Use Case Diagram Activity Diagram Assembly Diagram Sequence Diagram Interaction Overview Diagram State Machine Diagram Timing Diagram Parametric Diagram Requirement Diagram Class Diagram Modified from UML 2 New diagram type As-is from UML 2 Diagram category As of v0.90
  16. 16. Assemblies wa : WheelAssembly abs : ABSControlSystem mc : MasterCylinder Car h : Hub c : Caliper r : Rotor : Mechanical Feedback Port s : Sensor cu: Control Unit mv: ModulatorValve Command Port : Mechanical : Mechanical : Mechanical : Hydraulic : Hydraulic : Electronic
  17. 17. Activities « runToDisable » Driving « runToDisable » Braking « runToDisable » Monitoring Traction {stream} {stream} {stream} {stream} Turn Key To On {rate= continuous} {rate = continuous, intermittent} Brake Pressure Modulation Frequency « controlOperator » « runToCompletion » Enable on Brake Pressure > 0 «requirement» Traction “ Slip no more than 1% of any meter travelled.” «satisfy» «satisfy» Bock, C., “UML 2 Activity Model Support for Systems Engineering Functional Flow Diagrams” INCOSE Journal, 6:4 (2003) & “SysML and UML 2 Support for Activity Modeling” to appear.
  18. 18. Parametrics «property» Car.minStoppingDistance «parametricRelation» F = ma «parametricRelation» C f = F resistive / F normal «property» Car.mass «property» Earth.gravity m a «property» Car.tire.cFriction C f F resistive F normal F «parametricRelation» F = ma m a F «parametricRelation» d stop = - ½ v 2 / a d stop v a «property» Car.speed
  19. 19. Allocation « runToDisable » Braking « runToDisable » Monitoring Traction « ControlOperator » « runToCompletion » Enable on Brake Pressure > 0 «allocate» «allocate» «allocate» «allocate» «allocate» wa : WheelAssembly abs : ABSControlSystem mc : MasterCylinder Car h : Hub c : Caliper r : Rotor : Mechanical Feedback Port s : Sensor cu: Control Unit mv: ModulatorValve Command Port : Mechanical : Mechanical : Mechanical : Hydraulic : Hydraulic : Electronic
  20. 20. Requirements «requirement» Transportation Safety Requirement 1 “ Vehicle shall have less than 10 deaths per 100 million km / yr” «document» Transportation Safety «trace» «design» Small Scale Vehicle One to ten passengers, distances typically less than 1000 km per trip. «design» Dry Land Vehicle «requirement» Traction “ Slip no more than 1 % of any meter travelled.” «design» Wheel «trace» «requirement» Stopping Distance “ Less than half the length of the vehicle per 10 km/h. «satisfy» «satisfy» «satisfy» «design» Car «trace» «satisfy» «requirement» Wheel Rotation on Curves “ Slip no more than 1 % of any 360 O rotation.” «trace» «design» Differential «design» Axle «satisfy» «satisfy» «satisfy»
  21. 21. ISO 10303 (STEP) / AP233 <ul><li>Data interchange protocol for Systems Engineering data </li></ul><ul><li>Tool independent format </li></ul><ul><li>Captures concepts of different tools involved in SE process </li></ul><ul><li>Defined based on the ISO 10303 modeling environment </li></ul><ul><li>Captures versioning information of data elements </li></ul><ul><ul><li>enables configuration control </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. SysML and AP233 Alignment AP233 NEUTRAL DATA EXCHANGE FORMAT SysML Modeling Tools Electrical CAE Mechanical CAD SW Dev Environment Systems Engineering Engineering Analysis Testing Tools Planning Tools Algorithm Design
  23. 23. Conclusion <ul><li>SE DSIG established as joint INCOSE/OMG initiative to </li></ul><ul><ul><li>extend UML to support SE </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>align with AP233 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Broad collaboration established to respond to RFP </li></ul><ul><ul><li>includes wide range of contributors from industry, tool vendors and government agencies </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>multiple stakeholder reviews </li></ul></ul><ul><li>SysML approach architecturally extends UML 2 Superstructure </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reuses a subset of UML 2 “out of the box” </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Changes to UML 2 include: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>enhancements to composite structure and activity diagrams </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>two new diagram types (requirements and parametrics) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>other changes include allocation relationships and auxiliary constructs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Alignment with ISO AP233 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Working towards adoption of SysML v1.0 in Q1 2006 </li></ul><ul><li>Latest draft specification: </li></ul><ul><ul><li> </li></ul></ul>