The objective of the Physical Architecture in defining the “real” concrete components that comprise the system. To start the Physical level based on the Logical level, Capella proposes transitions similar to those that we used when we went from the Operational Analysis to the System Analysis, then from the System Analysis to the Logical Architecture. Thus, it can be created as many Physical Functions as Logical Functions, by also keeping the Functional Exchanges and Functional Chains.
MBSE with Arcadia method step-by-step System Analysis.pdfHelder Castro
The Operational Analysis described is the previous article, MBSE with Arcadia method step-by-step: Operational Analysis [1], involves defining and creating a domain model, independently of the future system to be realized. The principle is to create a level of abstraction from the system under study in order to focus on the needs of the different stakeholders.
The System Analysis level, on the other hand, is where the System-of-Interest (SoI) to be defined emerges. The following questions for the system definition needs to be answered:
• What must the system do?
• What are the external interfaces to the system?
In order to answer the first question, the expected behaviour is modelled as Functions.
Capella Days 2021 | Introduction to CAPELLA/ARCADIA and NASA Systems Engineer...Obeo
The NASA System Engineering (SE) handbook aims to provide general guidance and information on systems engineering, as it should be applied throughout NASA. The handbook introduces 3 common technical processes. One of these, is the System Design Process, describing the stakeholders expectations, requirements definition, logical decomposition and design solution definition. The 4 activities can be supported by a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach. To do so, an appropriate method and tool is necessary as the one provided by the ARChitecture Analysis & Design Integrated Approach.
ARCADIA, with its modeler CAPELLA, is a MBSE solution supporting system modeling activities. Based on 4 architectural layers, which are Operational Analysis, System Analysis, Logical and Physical Architecture, it is a structured architecture engineering method for defining and validating multi-domain systems.
This talk will present an educational overview of the ARCADIA methodology and System Design Process from the NASA SE, by introducing MBSE artefacts for space system.
The HUBBLE Space Telescope (HST) is a Cassegrain reflector telescope. Orbiting above the earth, HST elaborates a clear view of the universe free from the blurring and absorbing effects of the atmosphere. In order to illustrate the journey throughout CAPELLA, the HST will be introduced, as example, based on public information available.
Introduction to Capella and Arcadia with a Simple SystemObeo
Discover both Capella and Arcadia with an example of product design
Learn how to build a toy catapult system thanks to the Arcadia method and the Capella open MBSE tool.
In this Webinar, We:
- Distinguish between systems engineering, which is concerned with the entire design-build-test-deploy cycle of systems development, and systems architecture, which is concerned
with system concept development and architectural design.
- Contrast the System Modeling Language, SysML,
appropriate for systems engineering, with the more focused tool, Capella, and its associated methodology, Arcadia,
which is more appropriate for systems architecture development.
- Provide an overview of the attractive features of Capella,
from the point of view of initiating modelers into the language of systems architecture and briefly demonstrate our longer free public tutorial.
This webinar was driven by Professor Peter L. Jackson
Pr. Jackson is Head, Engineering Systems and Design Pillar at Singapore University of Technology and Design. He served as the Director of the Cornell University Systems Engineering Program and led the introduction of its online Master of Engineering degree program in systems engineering ranked in the top eight such programs by US News and World Report. He published over thirty articles and is the author of an introductory text on systems engineering, 'Getting Design Right: A Systems Approach'. He is a celebrated instructor of industrial engineering and the creator of dozens of experiential learning games and tools.
Is your system robust to the loss of one or more functions? Does your system require interaction with other systems to operate safely?
Does the design and operational concept of the system include contingency means? Do these contingency means correctly mitigate the risks?
These and other similar considerations are becoming more important with the emergence of autonomous systems and complex systems of systems. The introduction of digital tools and in particular model-based systems engineering allows to capture the complexity of these products starting from the operational analysis and supporting the process throughout the whole product life cycle.
With ATICA, system architects and designers will be able to analyze safety implications starting from the conceptual needs and mission description; modeling risks associated to the system, assessing the probability of occurrence and severity, and deciding upon the needs of contingency and mitigation means. ATICA enriches the Arcadia framework and provides safety analysis capabilities for each step of the system definition, design, and verification process.
In this webinar, we will address an example with an autonomous vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) vehicle, conceived for operation in urban environments (urban air mobility). We will present the operational description and system architecture, and we will conduct the Functional Hazard Analysis (FHA) directly from Capella and aligned with the normative standards in force in the aeronautic industry (ARP-4761 / ED-135).
Finally, we will introduce safety analysis covering the logical and physical architecture levels, showcasing the use of Capella, Arcadia and ATICA for Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) and Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA).
***
Pablo López Negro
Chief Innovation Officer at Anzen Engineering
Pablo López Negro is the product owner of ATICA MBSA. He has been involved in the aerospace industry for nearly 10 years. Started as guidance, navigation and control engineer where he first discovered model-based / model-driven approaches and Capella. Then he evolved towards a system engineering position before becoming MBSE specialist and designer/developer of MBSE frameworks in Anzen.
The article will explore the Arcadia Operational Analysis layer to capture stakeholder (e.g., users, environment, other systems) and business needs, a reasoned step-by-step activities and artefacts (i.e., diagrams) that can be produced to help during the stakeholders elicitation process helping to explore needs and identify gaps in the analysis; the full MBSE with Arcadia step-by-step is not described in this article, but it has extended to all Arcadia layers (i.e., System Analysis, Logical and Physical Architecture) and it can be used in projects for defining and guiding in the initial project activities and artefacts to be produced from the model.
The Operational Analysis as mentioned in the previous article, aims at capturing what the user of the system needs to accomplish, hence, the Operational Analysis normally starts by identifying who the users (i.e., Operational Entities and/or Operational Actors) of the future system are, and any containment relationship between them.
A common need in system architecture design is to verify that if the architect is correct and can satisfy its requirements.
Execution of system architect model means to interact with state machines to test system’s control logic. It can verify if the logical sequences of functions and interfaces in different scenarios are desired.
However, only sequence itself is not enough to verify its consequence or output. So we need each function to do what it is supposed to do during model execution to verify its output, and that is what we called “simulation”.
This presentation introduced how to embed Python or MATLAB® codes inside functions to do “simulation” within Capella.
Architecture frameworks provide an approach to describing systems and the presentation of these elements and relationships to deliver the stakeholder needs. Essentially, frameworks provide templates for our engineering artefacts.
The design of a framework must accommodate a level of freedom in its usage; specific enough to answer the majority of stakeholder concerns whilst generic enough to allow for differences between projects. This balancing act often results in framework design being more generic to allow for a wider audience. Having an untailored framework, which is more ‘open’, can lead to creating inconsistent viewpoints.
Arcadia is one such framework as implemented through the Capella tool. The framework provides 4 perspectives/levels for product definition:
- The Operational Analysis, where the user needs are considered. Note: no concept of the System at this level.
- The System Analysis, where we define the contribution and scope of the System as a ‘black box’, identifying external interfaces, and top-level system functions.
- The Logical Architecture, where we break the System down into logical ‘blocks’ and decompose the functionality.
- The Physical Architecture, in which we define a (candidate) physical architecture, further decompose the functions, and deploy this functionality to the physical sub-systems, hardware, software and/or firmware.
In this talk, we acknowledge the strengths of the Arcadia framework, and the benefits it brings, whilst considering the need to tailor the generic viewpoints. We will provide examples of how we have adopted the generic Arcadia framework and further specified some of the viewpoints to meet the needs of our stakeholders. We will discuss future work looking at how we can translate these specialisations across other areas of the model. Finally, we will provide some suggestions and advice on tailoring views to meet your own needs and ensuring stakeholder engagement with the model.
MBSE with Arcadia method step-by-step Operational Analysis.pdfHelder Castro
The article will explore the Arcadia Operational Analysis layer to capture stakeholder (e.g., users, environment, other systems) and business needs, a reasoned step-by-step activities and artefacts (i.e., diagrams) that can be produced to help during the stakeholders elicitation process helping to explore needs and identify gaps in the analysis; the full MBSE with Arcadia step-by-step is not described in this article, but it has extended to all Arcadia layers (i.e., System Analysis, Logical and Physical Architecture) and it can be used in projects for defining and guiding in the initial project activities and artefacts to be produced from the model.
The Operational Analysis as mentioned in the previous article, aims at capturing what the user of the system needs to accomplish, hence, the Operational Analysis normally starts by identifying who the users (i.e., Operational Entities and/or Operational Actors) of the future system are, and any containment relationship between them.
MBSE with Arcadia method step-by-step System Analysis.pdfHelder Castro
The Operational Analysis described is the previous article, MBSE with Arcadia method step-by-step: Operational Analysis [1], involves defining and creating a domain model, independently of the future system to be realized. The principle is to create a level of abstraction from the system under study in order to focus on the needs of the different stakeholders.
The System Analysis level, on the other hand, is where the System-of-Interest (SoI) to be defined emerges. The following questions for the system definition needs to be answered:
• What must the system do?
• What are the external interfaces to the system?
In order to answer the first question, the expected behaviour is modelled as Functions.
Capella Days 2021 | Introduction to CAPELLA/ARCADIA and NASA Systems Engineer...Obeo
The NASA System Engineering (SE) handbook aims to provide general guidance and information on systems engineering, as it should be applied throughout NASA. The handbook introduces 3 common technical processes. One of these, is the System Design Process, describing the stakeholders expectations, requirements definition, logical decomposition and design solution definition. The 4 activities can be supported by a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach. To do so, an appropriate method and tool is necessary as the one provided by the ARChitecture Analysis & Design Integrated Approach.
ARCADIA, with its modeler CAPELLA, is a MBSE solution supporting system modeling activities. Based on 4 architectural layers, which are Operational Analysis, System Analysis, Logical and Physical Architecture, it is a structured architecture engineering method for defining and validating multi-domain systems.
This talk will present an educational overview of the ARCADIA methodology and System Design Process from the NASA SE, by introducing MBSE artefacts for space system.
The HUBBLE Space Telescope (HST) is a Cassegrain reflector telescope. Orbiting above the earth, HST elaborates a clear view of the universe free from the blurring and absorbing effects of the atmosphere. In order to illustrate the journey throughout CAPELLA, the HST will be introduced, as example, based on public information available.
Introduction to Capella and Arcadia with a Simple SystemObeo
Discover both Capella and Arcadia with an example of product design
Learn how to build a toy catapult system thanks to the Arcadia method and the Capella open MBSE tool.
In this Webinar, We:
- Distinguish between systems engineering, which is concerned with the entire design-build-test-deploy cycle of systems development, and systems architecture, which is concerned
with system concept development and architectural design.
- Contrast the System Modeling Language, SysML,
appropriate for systems engineering, with the more focused tool, Capella, and its associated methodology, Arcadia,
which is more appropriate for systems architecture development.
- Provide an overview of the attractive features of Capella,
from the point of view of initiating modelers into the language of systems architecture and briefly demonstrate our longer free public tutorial.
This webinar was driven by Professor Peter L. Jackson
Pr. Jackson is Head, Engineering Systems and Design Pillar at Singapore University of Technology and Design. He served as the Director of the Cornell University Systems Engineering Program and led the introduction of its online Master of Engineering degree program in systems engineering ranked in the top eight such programs by US News and World Report. He published over thirty articles and is the author of an introductory text on systems engineering, 'Getting Design Right: A Systems Approach'. He is a celebrated instructor of industrial engineering and the creator of dozens of experiential learning games and tools.
Is your system robust to the loss of one or more functions? Does your system require interaction with other systems to operate safely?
Does the design and operational concept of the system include contingency means? Do these contingency means correctly mitigate the risks?
These and other similar considerations are becoming more important with the emergence of autonomous systems and complex systems of systems. The introduction of digital tools and in particular model-based systems engineering allows to capture the complexity of these products starting from the operational analysis and supporting the process throughout the whole product life cycle.
With ATICA, system architects and designers will be able to analyze safety implications starting from the conceptual needs and mission description; modeling risks associated to the system, assessing the probability of occurrence and severity, and deciding upon the needs of contingency and mitigation means. ATICA enriches the Arcadia framework and provides safety analysis capabilities for each step of the system definition, design, and verification process.
In this webinar, we will address an example with an autonomous vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) vehicle, conceived for operation in urban environments (urban air mobility). We will present the operational description and system architecture, and we will conduct the Functional Hazard Analysis (FHA) directly from Capella and aligned with the normative standards in force in the aeronautic industry (ARP-4761 / ED-135).
Finally, we will introduce safety analysis covering the logical and physical architecture levels, showcasing the use of Capella, Arcadia and ATICA for Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) and Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA).
***
Pablo López Negro
Chief Innovation Officer at Anzen Engineering
Pablo López Negro is the product owner of ATICA MBSA. He has been involved in the aerospace industry for nearly 10 years. Started as guidance, navigation and control engineer where he first discovered model-based / model-driven approaches and Capella. Then he evolved towards a system engineering position before becoming MBSE specialist and designer/developer of MBSE frameworks in Anzen.
The article will explore the Arcadia Operational Analysis layer to capture stakeholder (e.g., users, environment, other systems) and business needs, a reasoned step-by-step activities and artefacts (i.e., diagrams) that can be produced to help during the stakeholders elicitation process helping to explore needs and identify gaps in the analysis; the full MBSE with Arcadia step-by-step is not described in this article, but it has extended to all Arcadia layers (i.e., System Analysis, Logical and Physical Architecture) and it can be used in projects for defining and guiding in the initial project activities and artefacts to be produced from the model.
The Operational Analysis as mentioned in the previous article, aims at capturing what the user of the system needs to accomplish, hence, the Operational Analysis normally starts by identifying who the users (i.e., Operational Entities and/or Operational Actors) of the future system are, and any containment relationship between them.
A common need in system architecture design is to verify that if the architect is correct and can satisfy its requirements.
Execution of system architect model means to interact with state machines to test system’s control logic. It can verify if the logical sequences of functions and interfaces in different scenarios are desired.
However, only sequence itself is not enough to verify its consequence or output. So we need each function to do what it is supposed to do during model execution to verify its output, and that is what we called “simulation”.
This presentation introduced how to embed Python or MATLAB® codes inside functions to do “simulation” within Capella.
Architecture frameworks provide an approach to describing systems and the presentation of these elements and relationships to deliver the stakeholder needs. Essentially, frameworks provide templates for our engineering artefacts.
The design of a framework must accommodate a level of freedom in its usage; specific enough to answer the majority of stakeholder concerns whilst generic enough to allow for differences between projects. This balancing act often results in framework design being more generic to allow for a wider audience. Having an untailored framework, which is more ‘open’, can lead to creating inconsistent viewpoints.
Arcadia is one such framework as implemented through the Capella tool. The framework provides 4 perspectives/levels for product definition:
- The Operational Analysis, where the user needs are considered. Note: no concept of the System at this level.
- The System Analysis, where we define the contribution and scope of the System as a ‘black box’, identifying external interfaces, and top-level system functions.
- The Logical Architecture, where we break the System down into logical ‘blocks’ and decompose the functionality.
- The Physical Architecture, in which we define a (candidate) physical architecture, further decompose the functions, and deploy this functionality to the physical sub-systems, hardware, software and/or firmware.
In this talk, we acknowledge the strengths of the Arcadia framework, and the benefits it brings, whilst considering the need to tailor the generic viewpoints. We will provide examples of how we have adopted the generic Arcadia framework and further specified some of the viewpoints to meet the needs of our stakeholders. We will discuss future work looking at how we can translate these specialisations across other areas of the model. Finally, we will provide some suggestions and advice on tailoring views to meet your own needs and ensuring stakeholder engagement with the model.
MBSE with Arcadia method step-by-step Operational Analysis.pdfHelder Castro
The article will explore the Arcadia Operational Analysis layer to capture stakeholder (e.g., users, environment, other systems) and business needs, a reasoned step-by-step activities and artefacts (i.e., diagrams) that can be produced to help during the stakeholders elicitation process helping to explore needs and identify gaps in the analysis; the full MBSE with Arcadia step-by-step is not described in this article, but it has extended to all Arcadia layers (i.e., System Analysis, Logical and Physical Architecture) and it can be used in projects for defining and guiding in the initial project activities and artefacts to be produced from the model.
The Operational Analysis as mentioned in the previous article, aims at capturing what the user of the system needs to accomplish, hence, the Operational Analysis normally starts by identifying who the users (i.e., Operational Entities and/or Operational Actors) of the future system are, and any containment relationship between them.
CapellaDays2022 | Saratech | Interface Control Document Generation and Linkag...Obeo
Generation of Interface Control Documents (ICDs) using a model-based method has a number of advantages over text-based approaches. This paper describes the Python-based software that was written to automatically generate different versions of an ICD from a structure model in Capella. One use case for this approach is checking parts changes captured in the Engineering Bill of Materials (EBOM) using a PLM tool. We demonstrate an automated workflow that links changes in the EBOM to a request to vet the change against the ICD. This presentation will discuss our rationale, approach, results, and lessons learned.
CapellaDays2022 | NavalGroup | Closing the gap between traditional engineerin...Obeo
Closing the gap between traditional engineering and digital-native model-based driven engineering requires helping engineers to embrace new techniques. Naval Group decided to tackle the following issues: lack of interoperability with other systems, lack of bridge between functional definitions in PID schemas and MBSE physical layers, lack of documenting cross-layers relationships for a specific object's type.
System of Systems modeling comes with a tough decision for practitioners using traditional SysML V1 tools. Do I go with SysML V1, or do I look at Unified Architecture Framework? Capella eliminates that challenge with one notation that can be used for both.
By Tony Komar (Siemens)
Tony Komar has been practicing and supporting systems engineering for over 35 years.
Today he is a key contributor to the development and deployment of model-based system engineering products for Siemens Digital Industries Software.
Simplifying MBSE Tasks with Capella and MapleMBSEObeo
Discover how to use Excel-based interfaces to collaborate on Capella models
MapleMBSE 2020.1 adds support for Capella. Organizations using Capella can now edit models within MapleMBSE, allowing them to simplify MBSE tasks and increase engagement with MBSE processes at their company.
During this webinar, you will see how to work with a Capella systems model using MapleMBSE
The demonstration will highlight how all stakeholders can collaborate through the systems model using task-specific, Excel-based interfaces found in MapleMBSE.
Capella Days 2021 | A STEP towards Model-based: Case Study covering Conceptua...Obeo
STEP (Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production) is a £220M project aiming to develop a conceptual design for a First of a Kind (FOAK) commercially viable Fusion Power Plant by 2024.
Designing a power plant at this scale comes with immense challenges: Systems engineering approach is relatively new to the industry, where the industry has been heavily research based and engineering processes are not fully in place. UKAEA, the organisation running the STEP project, is applying Model-Based Systems Engineering using the Capella tool.
The focus of our approach in managing the complexity of the system is to perform system analysis and logical architecture analysis, to generate engineering artefacts from the model. Through NGO (Needs, Goals, Objectives) analysis key system capabilities were realised to functional chains, which forms the basis for further refinement of the Logical Architecture. The differentiation between logical and physical architectures has ensured that the design stays at the logical space and the team focuses on defining the problem space. This approach has improved interface management process, by creating model-based interface documents, using the model as ‘single source of truth’ to achieve consistency. The architecture definition activities allowed early formalisation of the textual requirements, to drive detailed engineering design in the next phase.
Adopting Capella comes with challenges - one of which stems from the unique characteristic of the concept phase – the need to generate architectural variants and evaluating them. The framework and the language are limited in performing variant modelling, a topic UKAEA plans to investigate further. Another challenge was that middle-out approach was favoured for STEP whereas Arcadia method prefers the top-down approach.
Throughout this journey, adopting Capella with its use-friendly interfaces has allowed us to better engage with the programme in the MBSE approach and indoctrinate better SE practices.
Connecting Textual Requirements with Capella Models Obeo
SES ENGINEERING Studio: Achieving the perfect equilibrium between Textual Requirements and Models in Capella enhanced by Automatic Interoperability, Quality & Traceability operations
The importance of models is imperative in any Systems Engineering project. However, truth is not exclusively found within models. The need to describe external contracts, regulations, or non-functional requirements, for instance, can be more efficiently satisfied by using textual specifications. In order to achieve the desired “Common Source of Truth”, model and textual requirements must be connected and coexist, desirable enhanced by the automatization of the consistency checking, automatically modifying one side when changes are produced on the other end...
Within The REUSE Company, we have realised how crucial it is to facilitate this connection and provide Systems Engineers with the tools required for applying SE across the entire process as seamlessly as possible. This solution is the SES ENGINEERING Studio, and within this webinar, the following capabilities will be shown:
- The SES ENGINEERING Studio offers the capability to assess consistency between textual requirements and Capella models.
- Automatic generation of Capella models from Textual Requirements inside an RMS (Requirements Management System). This also involves the possibility to complete the exact opposite operation, generating textual requirements from Capella models.
- Seamless traceability management between textual requirements (in any RMS) and model elements in Capella; This includes the possibility to automatically suggest traces based on the semantic content of the textual requirement.
- If the preferred option is to maintain these textual requirements inside Capella, we offer the possibility to provide a round-trip process between any RMS and Requirements Viewpoint within Capella; thus, allowing that modification at either end, to be synchronized.
- Automatic quality assessment of Capella models following a number of pre-established rules or allowing the users to define tailored rules.
- Automatic interoperability between SysML and Arcadia models.
Presented by José Pereira and José Fuentes (The Reuse Company)
Nowadays, we are surrounded by system of systems, autonomous systems, interconnected systems or distributed heterogeneous systems with an increase in architecture complexity.
Keeping these systems operational is a challenge as the number of potential failures which may affect their availability also increases drastically. In order to optimize availability, maintenance activities have to be designed within the design phase of the system.
Whatever the implementation choice, detection, diagnostic or prevention of failures require tests.
The goal for autonomous systems also pushes towards embedded detection and prevention capabilities and thus arguing and decision making between system engineers and maintenance engineers to share solutions in their respective activities.
In this presentation, we talk about the ability of a system designed with Capella to be tested, including in the maintenance phase. This means to interconnect several kinds of models representing different perspectives: System Design (MBSE), RAMS Analysis (Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety) and Testability.
We present how a MBSE approach with Capella can be used to initiate a testability study performed with the eXpress tool from DSI International.
[Capella Days 2020] Innovating with MBSE – Medical Device ExampleObeo
by Tony Komar (Siemens)
Sustained innovation is the goal of many development organizations. Sustaining innovation is depicted on an Innovation as matrix as the result of a well-defined problem, and a well-defined domain definition. An example will be presented how an MBSE tool, based on open-source tool Capella, can enhance both the problem definition and domain definition of a ventilator. It will show how the MBSE tool enhanced the understanding of the problem, and how that understanding can lead to an innovative solution.
Scripting with Python to interact with Capella modelObeo
Scripting with Python to interact with Capella model
Have you ever wanted to easily extract engineering data from your Capella model? Have you ever wanted to easily modify your Capella model and import information into it to update it?
This webinar presents a prototype Capella Add-on that will address several example use cases
- Read information from a Capella model and export to Excel, with queries
- Update information in a Capella model
- Add elements in a Capella model
This new Capella add-on uses a common scripting language, not dedicated to Capella: Python.
- It offers the capacity to use sample scripts addressing basic need and to build its own scripts, with libraries for common add-ons (Requirement, PVMT)
- It’s easy to share, to use, has high customization capabilities
support of Capella and Team for Capella, wide compatibility with Capella versions
It is presented by :
- Sophie Plazanet (Thales Group) - MBSE Specialist
Master of Engineering & Master of Research in Advanced Systems & Robotics – Arts & Métiers ParisTech
- Arnaud Dieumegard (Obeo) - Eclipse Modeling Consultant
Ph.D. in Reliability for Systems and Software - INP Toulouse
To illustrate the examples, you'll find the videos on this playlist: https://bit.ly/capella_webinar_211216_playlist
Strategies and Tools for Model Reuse with CapellaObeo
How to manage libraries and building blocks?
Reusing models or parts of models with Capella
is not only conceptually appealing, it is a real productivity enabler.
But it is also a true challenge!
Technical solutions initially dedicated to simple duplication
and synchronisation of model parts have recently evolved
and now enable multiple, classical use cases of reusing models.
In this webinar, we will illustrate:
How the Capella technology of replicable elements (aka REC/RPL) both enables
flexible design workflows (including instance-driven modeling) and
makes possible the modeling of architectures by assembly of building blocks.
How Yuzu leverages Capella to help manage the life-cycle
of building blocks and model assets, their dependencies,
their versioning, their publication, etc.
Modeling & Simulation of CubeSat-based Missions'Concept of OperationsObeo
Discover how Arcadia/Capella is used to model and simulate concept of operations scenarios for CubeSat-based missions. During this webinar, Danilo Pallamin de Almeida, who worked as a Space Systems Engineer for the NanosatC-BR2 mission at INPE, the Brazilian Institute for Space Research, will present how CubeSat-based missions have been modeled with Capella.
The model describing an initial architecture mission and concept of operations (CONOPS) is used to generate a script that configures a satellite simulator with the corresponding mission parameters.
You will see how it allows the INPE to:
- run concept of operations scenarios simulations,
- use the results for power/data-budget analyses and trade studies
CapellaDays2022 | ThermoFisher - ESI TNO | A method for quantitative evaluati...Obeo
Development of high-tech systems is a complex task done by diverse specialists distributed across the globe. Reference architectures including a clear functional breakdowns can support them and support their decisions. This presentation proposes an approach to improve the development of advanced electron microscopes by using Capella as an authoritative source of information. To support design decisions, a Capella AddOn has been developed to obtain quantitative information, such as throughput numbers, for a particular workflow. First, we will illustrate how functional and system decompositions can be captured and serve as company-wide architecting assets to inform design decisions. Next, we will outline how simulating Capella models can bring valuable insights to modelers. During a demo, we’ll simulate Capella’s Functional chains using the open-source simulation tool POOSL (https://github.com/eclipse/poosl) , and visualize results using the freely available TRACE4CPS tool (https://www.eclipse.org/trace4cps/). Re-using functions from the reference architecture allows us reason about design aspects such as the relation between throughput and design choices about function allocation and parallelism.
***
The open-source code of the solution is available at https://github.com/TNO/capella-workflow-dse
CapellaDays2022 | Politecnico di Milano | Interplanetary Space Mission as a r...Obeo
Systems engineering is an iterative approach traditionally applied one-way, from the definition of the user needs to the implementation of a solution that satisfies certain requirements and is constrained by cost and schedule. This presentation instead aims at exploring the educational benefits of applying the opposite practice, thus retrieving system and subsystem level requirements based on a solution already implemented and taking advantage of the MBSE possibilities to realize a model of the system according to the ARCADIA method and systems engineering approach, using the Capella MBSE Tool. This reverse-engineering process has been applied to a renowned Space mission, the ESA Mars Express satellite, whose goal is to investigate all aspects of the martian environment, including the subsurface, surface and atmosphere of the planet, in order to search for evidence of extinct or extant life. The uppermost goal of this project is to demonstrate the benefits for university students at a Master's level keen on systems engineering in implementing the Capella tool to retrieve the system architecture and the operational processes in a "reversed" strategy. In this work, students have been compelled to apply systems engineering processes to justify the design choices and exploit the already well-known missions and capabilities to build the architecture and functional chains as a starting point for the reverse engineering of the identified subsystems. The results prove it is possible, and also recommendable time-wise, to teach Space engineering and Systems engineering students by using this inverse approach, rather than the canonic one in which students have to design a whole mission from scratch.
CapellaDays2022 | Thales | Stairway to heaven: Climbing the very first stepsObeo
We MBSE enthusiasts love to imagine or witness sophisticated model-based engineering practices. We dream or in the best cases take advantage of digital continuity, automation, large-scale consistency, integration of disciplines, and end-to-end impact analyses.
However, not all of our architect and engineer fellows are in a situation in which they can appreciate sophistication of engineering practices the same way as we do. Entangled in everyday problems and facing the pressure to deliver, they perceive the introduction of model-based practices as an additional risk for a benefit that too often appears intangible.
Reaching the top of the stairs requires climbing the very first steps. This talk focuses on one of the most challenging aspects of MBSE deployment: lowering the height of the first steps. Paired with a pragmatic and incremental change management strategy, Capella and its add-ons are precious helpers.
Capella Days 2021 | Enhancing CubeSat design through ARCADIA and Capella: a c...Obeo
The new space economy asks for an overall improvement of systems engineering practices due to aggressive development time and complex systems design, implementation and operation by a number of players who grow with mission complexity. The talk proposes a critical analysis of a Model-Based Systems Engineering approach using ARCADIA and the Capella tool, applied to real CubeSat mission, with the aim of showing potentials and lacks.
Firstly, the way requirements are managed and traced using the Requirements Viewpoint is presented, highlighting the necessity of having a dedicated diagram for the trees generation; a solution to that is proposed in order to easily trace backwards requirements whenever needed. Following the ARCADIA method, the approach begins with the high-level objectives definition through the Operational Analysis, moving to a first internal functional analysis exploiting the second level of Capella, the System Analysis. The Logical Architecture is then developed introducing the concept of subsystem, leading to big decisions which will drive the successive Physical Architecture. The latter opens the road to all CubeSat components modeling using the concept of Node Physical Component, together with physical interfaces definition. Great use of all Capella concepts is done, such as Functional Chains, Control Functions, Replicas, Basic Mass and Price Viewpoints etc.
As the approach has been applied to a real space project, Phases and Modes have also been modeled exploiting respectively Scenario Diagrams, also used to define mission Concept of Operations, and State Machine Diagrams. Some thoughts oriented toward an improvement of the Modes management will be discussed. Lastly, ARCADIA and Capella do not provide a proper way of dealing with Assembly, Integration, Verification and Testing activities within the same architectural model, therefore an innovative approach is proposed and discussed to include such aspects in the model.
In the last three years CILAS has been tailoring and applying the Arcadia methodology to several international projects related to complex optronics products development. Even though the implementation is not yet thorough and systemic within the company, CILAS is already reaping benefits of this approach on several fronts (e.g. communication, identification of optimization opportunities, knowledge capitalization etc). All in all Arcadia is a powerful methodology that significantly helps CILAS reinforcing its core skills and meeting its objectives in very challenging sectors.
STPA Analysis of Automotive Safety Using Arcadia and CapellaDavid Hetherington
This presentation demonstrates the use of the Arcadia methodology and the open source Capella tool to implement a STPA-based analysis technique that augments the conventional HARA, HAZOP. The STPA approach extends the conventional methods to include a holistic perspective considering hardware, software, humans, and control failures in a balanced manner.
Delivered by David Hetherington and Pascal Roques at the ERTS 2022 conference in Toulouse, France on 1 June 2022.
Discover how MBSE is used on the Brazilian CubeSat development program.
With two nano satellites already in operation (NANOSATC-BR1 and NANOSATC-BR2), the Brazilian National Institute for Space Research (INPE-MCTI) is currently in the conceptual phase of a third mission (NANOSATC-BR3).
Giulia Herdies from the Federal University of Santa Maria in Brazil, will present how the Capella tool and the Arcadia method are used in the second phase of the project, to develop the concept of this mission.
During this webinar, she explains:
-Why the use of MBSE is vital for development of the conceptual phase, by allowing a global understanding of the mission by all involved.
-How stakeholders' needs and project restrictions were broken down within the operational, functional and physical aspects, which resulted in a preliminary definition of a viable concept solution.
Capella Days 2021 | An example of model-centric engineering environment with ...Obeo
Today a number of EU railway operators are on a journey to define what the future of railway operations should look like. In Germany, DB AG works within the sector initiative Digitale Schiene Deutschland. Next to the implementation of ETCS/DSTW technology in the first stage, the initiatives aims in the second stage to improve the performance, quality and efficiency of the railway system by higher degrees of automation in traffic management, train driving and infrastructure operation. This requires implementation of new technologies like artificial intelligence, localization and perception sensors, cloud computing and 5G connectivity.
Improving MBSE maturity with open-source tool Capella Obeo
MBSE aims at transitioning the Systems Engineering practice from a document-centric approach to a model-centric approach. It is envisioned to be the next shift enhancing significantly our systems engineering capacities, in order to cope with the steadily growing systems' complexity. Although MBSE has been a trending topic over the last few years, its adoption among systems engineers is still growing slowly.
In this presentation, Stephane Lacrampe will introduced some of the challenges in MBSE adoption and explained how the Arcadia method and the Capella tool are enablers for accelerating MBSE adoption among the systems engineering community.
MBSE with Arcadia method step-by-step Logical Architecture.pdfHelder Castro
The principle of the Logical Architecture (LA), commonly called logical architecture, starts to “open the box” by implementing the big decisions of the solution, in terms of principles of construction, and ways to fulfil the expectations of stakeholders; it is then formalized by means of a decomposition into abstract structural elements called Logical Components, and principles of behaviour and interaction between one another, in response to the previous needs.
The definition of the LA consists mainly of a comparison between the needs expressed in previous perspectives, a functional analysis describing the system behaviour chosen to satisfy requirements, and a structural analysis intended to identify the Logical Components that will constitute the system, taking the chosen constraints and structuring principles into account.
The LA is therefore a first general vision, moderately detailed, somehow an abstraction, of what the architecture of the system will be.
Its definition is deliberately maintained at a quite coarse-grained level of detail, just enough to be able to make major decisions for guiding the design, nothing more.
In addition to the identification of the major “imposed” factors constraining the definition of the architecture, the major design decisions structuring it must also be defined and formalized.
Any design detail or accuracy that does not influence the construction or choice decisions of the LA is not justified and will be described later in the physical architecture.
The important rule to comply with is to force ourselves to exclude all technological considerations or implementation choices. This will be the very objective of the Physical Architecture to define the “true” concrete components, which will constitute the System.
Excluding all technological considerations as a design choice will not however prevent us from beginning to take the Non-Functional Constraints into account; Operating Safety, Performance, etc., requirements can thus lead us to group the Functions together in different Components.
Logical Architecture must be stable throughout the whole duration of the project. This will probably not be the case for Physical Architecture, especially if the System must have a long lifespan, due to the technological novelties that will occur and the new Physical Components that may cause large parts of the architecture to be called into question.
Main activities:
Define high-level architectural drivers and build the component-based system structuring.
Define the behavioural principles.
Trade-off analysis and select best compromise architecture.
CapellaDays2022 | Saratech | Interface Control Document Generation and Linkag...Obeo
Generation of Interface Control Documents (ICDs) using a model-based method has a number of advantages over text-based approaches. This paper describes the Python-based software that was written to automatically generate different versions of an ICD from a structure model in Capella. One use case for this approach is checking parts changes captured in the Engineering Bill of Materials (EBOM) using a PLM tool. We demonstrate an automated workflow that links changes in the EBOM to a request to vet the change against the ICD. This presentation will discuss our rationale, approach, results, and lessons learned.
CapellaDays2022 | NavalGroup | Closing the gap between traditional engineerin...Obeo
Closing the gap between traditional engineering and digital-native model-based driven engineering requires helping engineers to embrace new techniques. Naval Group decided to tackle the following issues: lack of interoperability with other systems, lack of bridge between functional definitions in PID schemas and MBSE physical layers, lack of documenting cross-layers relationships for a specific object's type.
System of Systems modeling comes with a tough decision for practitioners using traditional SysML V1 tools. Do I go with SysML V1, or do I look at Unified Architecture Framework? Capella eliminates that challenge with one notation that can be used for both.
By Tony Komar (Siemens)
Tony Komar has been practicing and supporting systems engineering for over 35 years.
Today he is a key contributor to the development and deployment of model-based system engineering products for Siemens Digital Industries Software.
Simplifying MBSE Tasks with Capella and MapleMBSEObeo
Discover how to use Excel-based interfaces to collaborate on Capella models
MapleMBSE 2020.1 adds support for Capella. Organizations using Capella can now edit models within MapleMBSE, allowing them to simplify MBSE tasks and increase engagement with MBSE processes at their company.
During this webinar, you will see how to work with a Capella systems model using MapleMBSE
The demonstration will highlight how all stakeholders can collaborate through the systems model using task-specific, Excel-based interfaces found in MapleMBSE.
Capella Days 2021 | A STEP towards Model-based: Case Study covering Conceptua...Obeo
STEP (Spherical Tokamak for Energy Production) is a £220M project aiming to develop a conceptual design for a First of a Kind (FOAK) commercially viable Fusion Power Plant by 2024.
Designing a power plant at this scale comes with immense challenges: Systems engineering approach is relatively new to the industry, where the industry has been heavily research based and engineering processes are not fully in place. UKAEA, the organisation running the STEP project, is applying Model-Based Systems Engineering using the Capella tool.
The focus of our approach in managing the complexity of the system is to perform system analysis and logical architecture analysis, to generate engineering artefacts from the model. Through NGO (Needs, Goals, Objectives) analysis key system capabilities were realised to functional chains, which forms the basis for further refinement of the Logical Architecture. The differentiation between logical and physical architectures has ensured that the design stays at the logical space and the team focuses on defining the problem space. This approach has improved interface management process, by creating model-based interface documents, using the model as ‘single source of truth’ to achieve consistency. The architecture definition activities allowed early formalisation of the textual requirements, to drive detailed engineering design in the next phase.
Adopting Capella comes with challenges - one of which stems from the unique characteristic of the concept phase – the need to generate architectural variants and evaluating them. The framework and the language are limited in performing variant modelling, a topic UKAEA plans to investigate further. Another challenge was that middle-out approach was favoured for STEP whereas Arcadia method prefers the top-down approach.
Throughout this journey, adopting Capella with its use-friendly interfaces has allowed us to better engage with the programme in the MBSE approach and indoctrinate better SE practices.
Connecting Textual Requirements with Capella Models Obeo
SES ENGINEERING Studio: Achieving the perfect equilibrium between Textual Requirements and Models in Capella enhanced by Automatic Interoperability, Quality & Traceability operations
The importance of models is imperative in any Systems Engineering project. However, truth is not exclusively found within models. The need to describe external contracts, regulations, or non-functional requirements, for instance, can be more efficiently satisfied by using textual specifications. In order to achieve the desired “Common Source of Truth”, model and textual requirements must be connected and coexist, desirable enhanced by the automatization of the consistency checking, automatically modifying one side when changes are produced on the other end...
Within The REUSE Company, we have realised how crucial it is to facilitate this connection and provide Systems Engineers with the tools required for applying SE across the entire process as seamlessly as possible. This solution is the SES ENGINEERING Studio, and within this webinar, the following capabilities will be shown:
- The SES ENGINEERING Studio offers the capability to assess consistency between textual requirements and Capella models.
- Automatic generation of Capella models from Textual Requirements inside an RMS (Requirements Management System). This also involves the possibility to complete the exact opposite operation, generating textual requirements from Capella models.
- Seamless traceability management between textual requirements (in any RMS) and model elements in Capella; This includes the possibility to automatically suggest traces based on the semantic content of the textual requirement.
- If the preferred option is to maintain these textual requirements inside Capella, we offer the possibility to provide a round-trip process between any RMS and Requirements Viewpoint within Capella; thus, allowing that modification at either end, to be synchronized.
- Automatic quality assessment of Capella models following a number of pre-established rules or allowing the users to define tailored rules.
- Automatic interoperability between SysML and Arcadia models.
Presented by José Pereira and José Fuentes (The Reuse Company)
Nowadays, we are surrounded by system of systems, autonomous systems, interconnected systems or distributed heterogeneous systems with an increase in architecture complexity.
Keeping these systems operational is a challenge as the number of potential failures which may affect their availability also increases drastically. In order to optimize availability, maintenance activities have to be designed within the design phase of the system.
Whatever the implementation choice, detection, diagnostic or prevention of failures require tests.
The goal for autonomous systems also pushes towards embedded detection and prevention capabilities and thus arguing and decision making between system engineers and maintenance engineers to share solutions in their respective activities.
In this presentation, we talk about the ability of a system designed with Capella to be tested, including in the maintenance phase. This means to interconnect several kinds of models representing different perspectives: System Design (MBSE), RAMS Analysis (Reliability, Availability, Maintainability and Safety) and Testability.
We present how a MBSE approach with Capella can be used to initiate a testability study performed with the eXpress tool from DSI International.
[Capella Days 2020] Innovating with MBSE – Medical Device ExampleObeo
by Tony Komar (Siemens)
Sustained innovation is the goal of many development organizations. Sustaining innovation is depicted on an Innovation as matrix as the result of a well-defined problem, and a well-defined domain definition. An example will be presented how an MBSE tool, based on open-source tool Capella, can enhance both the problem definition and domain definition of a ventilator. It will show how the MBSE tool enhanced the understanding of the problem, and how that understanding can lead to an innovative solution.
Scripting with Python to interact with Capella modelObeo
Scripting with Python to interact with Capella model
Have you ever wanted to easily extract engineering data from your Capella model? Have you ever wanted to easily modify your Capella model and import information into it to update it?
This webinar presents a prototype Capella Add-on that will address several example use cases
- Read information from a Capella model and export to Excel, with queries
- Update information in a Capella model
- Add elements in a Capella model
This new Capella add-on uses a common scripting language, not dedicated to Capella: Python.
- It offers the capacity to use sample scripts addressing basic need and to build its own scripts, with libraries for common add-ons (Requirement, PVMT)
- It’s easy to share, to use, has high customization capabilities
support of Capella and Team for Capella, wide compatibility with Capella versions
It is presented by :
- Sophie Plazanet (Thales Group) - MBSE Specialist
Master of Engineering & Master of Research in Advanced Systems & Robotics – Arts & Métiers ParisTech
- Arnaud Dieumegard (Obeo) - Eclipse Modeling Consultant
Ph.D. in Reliability for Systems and Software - INP Toulouse
To illustrate the examples, you'll find the videos on this playlist: https://bit.ly/capella_webinar_211216_playlist
Strategies and Tools for Model Reuse with CapellaObeo
How to manage libraries and building blocks?
Reusing models or parts of models with Capella
is not only conceptually appealing, it is a real productivity enabler.
But it is also a true challenge!
Technical solutions initially dedicated to simple duplication
and synchronisation of model parts have recently evolved
and now enable multiple, classical use cases of reusing models.
In this webinar, we will illustrate:
How the Capella technology of replicable elements (aka REC/RPL) both enables
flexible design workflows (including instance-driven modeling) and
makes possible the modeling of architectures by assembly of building blocks.
How Yuzu leverages Capella to help manage the life-cycle
of building blocks and model assets, their dependencies,
their versioning, their publication, etc.
Modeling & Simulation of CubeSat-based Missions'Concept of OperationsObeo
Discover how Arcadia/Capella is used to model and simulate concept of operations scenarios for CubeSat-based missions. During this webinar, Danilo Pallamin de Almeida, who worked as a Space Systems Engineer for the NanosatC-BR2 mission at INPE, the Brazilian Institute for Space Research, will present how CubeSat-based missions have been modeled with Capella.
The model describing an initial architecture mission and concept of operations (CONOPS) is used to generate a script that configures a satellite simulator with the corresponding mission parameters.
You will see how it allows the INPE to:
- run concept of operations scenarios simulations,
- use the results for power/data-budget analyses and trade studies
CapellaDays2022 | ThermoFisher - ESI TNO | A method for quantitative evaluati...Obeo
Development of high-tech systems is a complex task done by diverse specialists distributed across the globe. Reference architectures including a clear functional breakdowns can support them and support their decisions. This presentation proposes an approach to improve the development of advanced electron microscopes by using Capella as an authoritative source of information. To support design decisions, a Capella AddOn has been developed to obtain quantitative information, such as throughput numbers, for a particular workflow. First, we will illustrate how functional and system decompositions can be captured and serve as company-wide architecting assets to inform design decisions. Next, we will outline how simulating Capella models can bring valuable insights to modelers. During a demo, we’ll simulate Capella’s Functional chains using the open-source simulation tool POOSL (https://github.com/eclipse/poosl) , and visualize results using the freely available TRACE4CPS tool (https://www.eclipse.org/trace4cps/). Re-using functions from the reference architecture allows us reason about design aspects such as the relation between throughput and design choices about function allocation and parallelism.
***
The open-source code of the solution is available at https://github.com/TNO/capella-workflow-dse
CapellaDays2022 | Politecnico di Milano | Interplanetary Space Mission as a r...Obeo
Systems engineering is an iterative approach traditionally applied one-way, from the definition of the user needs to the implementation of a solution that satisfies certain requirements and is constrained by cost and schedule. This presentation instead aims at exploring the educational benefits of applying the opposite practice, thus retrieving system and subsystem level requirements based on a solution already implemented and taking advantage of the MBSE possibilities to realize a model of the system according to the ARCADIA method and systems engineering approach, using the Capella MBSE Tool. This reverse-engineering process has been applied to a renowned Space mission, the ESA Mars Express satellite, whose goal is to investigate all aspects of the martian environment, including the subsurface, surface and atmosphere of the planet, in order to search for evidence of extinct or extant life. The uppermost goal of this project is to demonstrate the benefits for university students at a Master's level keen on systems engineering in implementing the Capella tool to retrieve the system architecture and the operational processes in a "reversed" strategy. In this work, students have been compelled to apply systems engineering processes to justify the design choices and exploit the already well-known missions and capabilities to build the architecture and functional chains as a starting point for the reverse engineering of the identified subsystems. The results prove it is possible, and also recommendable time-wise, to teach Space engineering and Systems engineering students by using this inverse approach, rather than the canonic one in which students have to design a whole mission from scratch.
CapellaDays2022 | Thales | Stairway to heaven: Climbing the very first stepsObeo
We MBSE enthusiasts love to imagine or witness sophisticated model-based engineering practices. We dream or in the best cases take advantage of digital continuity, automation, large-scale consistency, integration of disciplines, and end-to-end impact analyses.
However, not all of our architect and engineer fellows are in a situation in which they can appreciate sophistication of engineering practices the same way as we do. Entangled in everyday problems and facing the pressure to deliver, they perceive the introduction of model-based practices as an additional risk for a benefit that too often appears intangible.
Reaching the top of the stairs requires climbing the very first steps. This talk focuses on one of the most challenging aspects of MBSE deployment: lowering the height of the first steps. Paired with a pragmatic and incremental change management strategy, Capella and its add-ons are precious helpers.
Capella Days 2021 | Enhancing CubeSat design through ARCADIA and Capella: a c...Obeo
The new space economy asks for an overall improvement of systems engineering practices due to aggressive development time and complex systems design, implementation and operation by a number of players who grow with mission complexity. The talk proposes a critical analysis of a Model-Based Systems Engineering approach using ARCADIA and the Capella tool, applied to real CubeSat mission, with the aim of showing potentials and lacks.
Firstly, the way requirements are managed and traced using the Requirements Viewpoint is presented, highlighting the necessity of having a dedicated diagram for the trees generation; a solution to that is proposed in order to easily trace backwards requirements whenever needed. Following the ARCADIA method, the approach begins with the high-level objectives definition through the Operational Analysis, moving to a first internal functional analysis exploiting the second level of Capella, the System Analysis. The Logical Architecture is then developed introducing the concept of subsystem, leading to big decisions which will drive the successive Physical Architecture. The latter opens the road to all CubeSat components modeling using the concept of Node Physical Component, together with physical interfaces definition. Great use of all Capella concepts is done, such as Functional Chains, Control Functions, Replicas, Basic Mass and Price Viewpoints etc.
As the approach has been applied to a real space project, Phases and Modes have also been modeled exploiting respectively Scenario Diagrams, also used to define mission Concept of Operations, and State Machine Diagrams. Some thoughts oriented toward an improvement of the Modes management will be discussed. Lastly, ARCADIA and Capella do not provide a proper way of dealing with Assembly, Integration, Verification and Testing activities within the same architectural model, therefore an innovative approach is proposed and discussed to include such aspects in the model.
In the last three years CILAS has been tailoring and applying the Arcadia methodology to several international projects related to complex optronics products development. Even though the implementation is not yet thorough and systemic within the company, CILAS is already reaping benefits of this approach on several fronts (e.g. communication, identification of optimization opportunities, knowledge capitalization etc). All in all Arcadia is a powerful methodology that significantly helps CILAS reinforcing its core skills and meeting its objectives in very challenging sectors.
STPA Analysis of Automotive Safety Using Arcadia and CapellaDavid Hetherington
This presentation demonstrates the use of the Arcadia methodology and the open source Capella tool to implement a STPA-based analysis technique that augments the conventional HARA, HAZOP. The STPA approach extends the conventional methods to include a holistic perspective considering hardware, software, humans, and control failures in a balanced manner.
Delivered by David Hetherington and Pascal Roques at the ERTS 2022 conference in Toulouse, France on 1 June 2022.
Discover how MBSE is used on the Brazilian CubeSat development program.
With two nano satellites already in operation (NANOSATC-BR1 and NANOSATC-BR2), the Brazilian National Institute for Space Research (INPE-MCTI) is currently in the conceptual phase of a third mission (NANOSATC-BR3).
Giulia Herdies from the Federal University of Santa Maria in Brazil, will present how the Capella tool and the Arcadia method are used in the second phase of the project, to develop the concept of this mission.
During this webinar, she explains:
-Why the use of MBSE is vital for development of the conceptual phase, by allowing a global understanding of the mission by all involved.
-How stakeholders' needs and project restrictions were broken down within the operational, functional and physical aspects, which resulted in a preliminary definition of a viable concept solution.
Capella Days 2021 | An example of model-centric engineering environment with ...Obeo
Today a number of EU railway operators are on a journey to define what the future of railway operations should look like. In Germany, DB AG works within the sector initiative Digitale Schiene Deutschland. Next to the implementation of ETCS/DSTW technology in the first stage, the initiatives aims in the second stage to improve the performance, quality and efficiency of the railway system by higher degrees of automation in traffic management, train driving and infrastructure operation. This requires implementation of new technologies like artificial intelligence, localization and perception sensors, cloud computing and 5G connectivity.
Improving MBSE maturity with open-source tool Capella Obeo
MBSE aims at transitioning the Systems Engineering practice from a document-centric approach to a model-centric approach. It is envisioned to be the next shift enhancing significantly our systems engineering capacities, in order to cope with the steadily growing systems' complexity. Although MBSE has been a trending topic over the last few years, its adoption among systems engineers is still growing slowly.
In this presentation, Stephane Lacrampe will introduced some of the challenges in MBSE adoption and explained how the Arcadia method and the Capella tool are enablers for accelerating MBSE adoption among the systems engineering community.
MBSE with Arcadia method step-by-step Logical Architecture.pdfHelder Castro
The principle of the Logical Architecture (LA), commonly called logical architecture, starts to “open the box” by implementing the big decisions of the solution, in terms of principles of construction, and ways to fulfil the expectations of stakeholders; it is then formalized by means of a decomposition into abstract structural elements called Logical Components, and principles of behaviour and interaction between one another, in response to the previous needs.
The definition of the LA consists mainly of a comparison between the needs expressed in previous perspectives, a functional analysis describing the system behaviour chosen to satisfy requirements, and a structural analysis intended to identify the Logical Components that will constitute the system, taking the chosen constraints and structuring principles into account.
The LA is therefore a first general vision, moderately detailed, somehow an abstraction, of what the architecture of the system will be.
Its definition is deliberately maintained at a quite coarse-grained level of detail, just enough to be able to make major decisions for guiding the design, nothing more.
In addition to the identification of the major “imposed” factors constraining the definition of the architecture, the major design decisions structuring it must also be defined and formalized.
Any design detail or accuracy that does not influence the construction or choice decisions of the LA is not justified and will be described later in the physical architecture.
The important rule to comply with is to force ourselves to exclude all technological considerations or implementation choices. This will be the very objective of the Physical Architecture to define the “true” concrete components, which will constitute the System.
Excluding all technological considerations as a design choice will not however prevent us from beginning to take the Non-Functional Constraints into account; Operating Safety, Performance, etc., requirements can thus lead us to group the Functions together in different Components.
Logical Architecture must be stable throughout the whole duration of the project. This will probably not be the case for Physical Architecture, especially if the System must have a long lifespan, due to the technological novelties that will occur and the new Physical Components that may cause large parts of the architecture to be called into question.
Main activities:
Define high-level architectural drivers and build the component-based system structuring.
Define the behavioural principles.
Trade-off analysis and select best compromise architecture.
FAST stands for “FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS SYSTEMS TECHNIQUE”
The FAST technique has long been used in Value Engineering to analyze costs. Function Analysis System Technique (FAST) is a tool that has mainstay of the value management profession since its introduction In 1965.
1. Use Case Diagramsa. DescribeIt is a representation of a u.docxjackiewalcutt
1. Use Case Diagrams
a. Describe
It is a representation of a user's interaction with the system and depicting the specifications of a use case. A use case diagram can portray the different types of users of a system and the various ways that they interact with the system.
b. The Best Use
It shows the interaction between the system and entities external to the system. These external entities are referred to as actors. Actors represent roles which may include human users, external hardware or other systems. An actor is usually drawn as a named stick figure, or alternatively as a class rectangle with the «actor» keyword.
2. Sequence Diagrams
a. Describe
Unified Modeling Language Sequence Diagram is an interaction diagram that describes the flow of messages events and actions. Also, it shows the order of how these processes operate with each other. Sequence diagram also shows the time sequence in the system’s processes.
b. The Best Use
UML sequence diagrams are typically used in analysis and design phase to document and understand the logical flow of the system. Also, it shows how the objects interact with each other. The most important feature of the sequence diagram is that it shows the time of these interacted objects
3. Deployment Diagrams
a. Describe
Deployment diagrams are used to visualize the topology of the physical components of a system where the software components are deployed.
So deployment diagrams are used to describe the static deployment view of a system. Deployment diagrams consist of nodes and their relationships. Deployment diagrams are used for describing the hardware components where software components are deployed. Deployment diagrams are used to model the configuration of run-time processing elements and the software components, processes, and objects that live on them.
b. The Best Use
· To model the hardware topology of a system.
· To model embedded system.
· To model hardware details for a client/server system.
· To model hardware details of a distributed application.
· Forward and reverse engineering.
4. Communication Diagrams
a. Describe
A communication diagram is a type of UML interaction diagram that illustrates the flow of messages between the objects in an interaction. You can add and modify lifelines, message pathways, and messages in communication diagrams.
b. The Best Use
Communication diagrams show a lot of the same information as sequence diagrams, but because of how the information is presented, some of it is easier to find in one diagram than the other. Communication diagrams show which elements each one interacts with better, but sequence diagrams show the order in which the interactions take place more clearly5. Activity Diagrams:
a. Describe
Unified Modeling Language Activity Diagram describes the active parts of a system. Also, Activity Diagram represents the transition between each system operation. Activity diagram consist of four major elements that should be identified in order to create the dia ...
Title of the ProjectbyStudent NameThis is an Engineeri.docxherthalearmont
Title of the Project
by
Student Name
This is an Engineering project submitted to the Gannon University graduate faculty in
partial fulfillment for the degree Master of Science in Engineering.
Major Subject: Electrical Engineering
Approved:
Advising Professor in Charge of Major Work
Chairperson of Major Department
Gannon University
Erie, Pennsylvania 16541
Month, Year
Acknowledgements
The writer thanks mentors, colleagues, lists the individuals or institutions that supported the research, and gives credit to works cited in the text for which permission to reproduce has be granted. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS appears centered at the top of the page.
Abstract
Give a 60-100 word abstract/executive summary of the project here.The abstract briefly summarizes the thesis and the contents of the paper. ABSTRACT appears centered at the top of the page.
Table of Contents
51.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Scope
6
1.2
Background
6
1.3
Summary
6
1.4
Road Map to the report
6
2.
REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS
7
2.1
System Overview
7
2.2
Application Constraints and Dependencies
7
2.3
Specific Requirements
7
2.4
Interfaces
7
2.5
Summary
8
SYSTEM DESIGN
9
3.1
Top Level Design
9
3.2
Product Flow
9
Interface
9
3.4
Description
9
3.5
Initialization
10
3.6
Interface Design
10
3.7
Functional Design
11
3.8
Summary
11
4.
FUNCTIONAL TESTING
12
4.1
Interface Functionality Test
12
4.2
XYZ Functionality Test
12
4.3
Summary
12
5.
SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND VALIDATION
13
5.1
General Assumptions
13
5.2
Helpful Information
13
5.3
Test Facilities
13
5.4
Special Equipment
13
5.5
Test Procedure
13
5.6
Overall Test Summary
13
5.7
Summary
13
6.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
14
7.
REFERENCES
14
8.
APPENDIX
14
A Quality Functional Deployment (QFD)
14
B Sample Format of Output
14
C Data Dictionary for Key Terms
14
D Screen Snapshots (if applicable)
14
E Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)
14
List of Symbols
AC
: Alternating Current
FTR
: Formal Technical Review
GE
: General Electric
GETS
: General Electric Transportation Systems
GUI
: Graphical user interface
Mph
: Unit of speed in miles per hour
List of Figures
3Figure 1: Top-Level Interface Diagram
Figure 2: Top-Level Structure Description
3
Figure 3: State Machine
5
List of TABLES
6Table 1. XYZ Test Results
Table 2. Test Procedure 365
7
Table 3. Test Summary
7
INTRODUCTION
Introduce the project succinctly. Chapter 1 is usually the introduction. Sections should include the objectives of the project, the design criteria, the constraints, and the background material leading up to the current project.
NOTE: Your goal is to communicate your work in writing: in a clear, well-structured, readable manner. E.g., the chapter titles are only strongly suggested. Please adapt them as is appropriate. If they are not applicable to your project, rename them. Add chapters as necessary. Please work with your advisor to develop an appropriate organization for your report.
1.1 Scope
Define scope of the problem clearly.
...
Version 1.0Pocket Campus TourArchitectureDesign Document.docxjessiehampson
Version: 1.0
Pocket Campus Tour
Architecture/Design Document
Table of Contents
31Introduction
42Design Goals
43System Behavior
54Logical View
54.1High-Level Design (Architecture)
64.2Mid-Level Design
84.3Detailed Class Design
115Process View
126Development View
127Physical View
128Use Case View
Change History
Version: 0.3
Modifier: Eddie Burris
Date: 4/5/2006
Description of Change: Added sequence diagrams for self-directed mode.
______________________________________________________
Version: 0.2
Modifier: Eddie Burris
Date: 3/20/2006
Description of Change: Added process view and use case view. Also added sequence diagram to logical view.
______________________________________________________
Version: 0.1
Modifier: Eddie Burris
Date: 3/15/2006
Description of Change: Initial rough draft. Contains logical view (high-level modules only) and development view.
______________________________________________________
1 Introduction
This document describes the architecture and design for the Pocket Campus Tour application being developed for the University of Missouri—Kansas City (UMKC). Pocket Campus Tour is a PDA application that turns a GPS enabled PDA into a personal tour guide providing audio commentary on the buildings and notable structures on the UMKC campus. Pocket Campus Tour has a roaming mode that requires zero computer skills. Visitors simply carry the device with them as they stroll the campus and it provides audio commentary relevant to the visitor’s current location. For those who can’t or don’t want to stroll the campus, the application also offers a self-directed mode where the same position-dependent audio commentary is available from an interactive onscreen campus map.
The purpose of this document is to describe the architecture and design of the Pocket Campus Tour application in a way that addresses the interests and concerns of all major stakeholders. For this application the major stakeholders are:
· Users and the customer – they want assurances that the architecture will provide for system functionality and exhibit desirable non-functional quality requirements such as usability, reliability, etc.
· Developers – they want an architecture that will minimize complexity and development effort.
· Project Manager – the project manager is responsible for assigning tasks and coordinating development work. He or she wants an architecture that divides the system into components of roughly equal size and complexity that can be developed simultaneously with minimal dependencies. For this to happen, the modules need well-defined interfaces. Also, because most individuals specialize in a particular skill or technology, modules should be designed around specific expertise. For example, all UI logic might be encapsulated in one module. Another might have all logic related to GPS coordinates.
· Maintenance Programmers – they want assurance that the system will be easy to evolve and maintain on into the future.
The archite ...
Dear students get fully solved assignments
Send your semester & Specialization name to our mail id :
“ help.mbaassignments@gmail.com ”
or
Call us at : 08263069601
Courier management system project report.pdfKamal Acharya
It is now-a-days very important for the people to send or receive articles like imported furniture, electronic items, gifts, business goods and the like. People depend vastly on different transport systems which mostly use the manual way of receiving and delivering the articles. There is no way to track the articles till they are received and there is no way to let the customer know what happened in transit, once he booked some articles. In such a situation, we need a system which completely computerizes the cargo activities including time to time tracking of the articles sent. This need is fulfilled by Courier Management System software which is online software for the cargo management people that enables them to receive the goods from a source and send them to a required destination and track their status from time to time.
Explore the innovative world of trenchless pipe repair with our comprehensive guide, "The Benefits and Techniques of Trenchless Pipe Repair." This document delves into the modern methods of repairing underground pipes without the need for extensive excavation, highlighting the numerous advantages and the latest techniques used in the industry.
Learn about the cost savings, reduced environmental impact, and minimal disruption associated with trenchless technology. Discover detailed explanations of popular techniques such as pipe bursting, cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) lining, and directional drilling. Understand how these methods can be applied to various types of infrastructure, from residential plumbing to large-scale municipal systems.
Ideal for homeowners, contractors, engineers, and anyone interested in modern plumbing solutions, this guide provides valuable insights into why trenchless pipe repair is becoming the preferred choice for pipe rehabilitation. Stay informed about the latest advancements and best practices in the field.
Immunizing Image Classifiers Against Localized Adversary Attacksgerogepatton
This paper addresses the vulnerability of deep learning models, particularly convolutional neural networks
(CNN)s, to adversarial attacks and presents a proactive training technique designed to counter them. We
introduce a novel volumization algorithm, which transforms 2D images into 3D volumetric representations.
When combined with 3D convolution and deep curriculum learning optimization (CLO), itsignificantly improves
the immunity of models against localized universal attacks by up to 40%. We evaluate our proposed approach
using contemporary CNN architectures and the modified Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR-10
and CIFAR-100) and ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge (ILSVRC12) datasets, showcasing
accuracy improvements over previous techniques. The results indicate that the combination of the volumetric
input and curriculum learning holds significant promise for mitigating adversarial attacks without necessitating
adversary training.
Democratizing Fuzzing at Scale by Abhishek Aryaabh.arya
Presented at NUS: Fuzzing and Software Security Summer School 2024
This keynote talks about the democratization of fuzzing at scale, highlighting the collaboration between open source communities, academia, and industry to advance the field of fuzzing. It delves into the history of fuzzing, the development of scalable fuzzing platforms, and the empowerment of community-driven research. The talk will further discuss recent advancements leveraging AI/ML and offer insights into the future evolution of the fuzzing landscape.
Industrial Training at Shahjalal Fertilizer Company Limited (SFCL)MdTanvirMahtab2
This presentation is about the working procedure of Shahjalal Fertilizer Company Limited (SFCL). A Govt. owned Company of Bangladesh Chemical Industries Corporation under Ministry of Industries.
Overview of the fundamental roles in Hydropower generation and the components involved in wider Electrical Engineering.
This paper presents the design and construction of hydroelectric dams from the hydrologist’s survey of the valley before construction, all aspects and involved disciplines, fluid dynamics, structural engineering, generation and mains frequency regulation to the very transmission of power through the network in the United Kingdom.
Author: Robbie Edward Sayers
Collaborators and co editors: Charlie Sims and Connor Healey.
(C) 2024 Robbie E. Sayers
Event Management System Vb Net Project Report.pdfKamal Acharya
In present era, the scopes of information technology growing with a very fast .We do not see any are untouched from this industry. The scope of information technology has become wider includes: Business and industry. Household Business, Communication, Education, Entertainment, Science, Medicine, Engineering, Distance Learning, Weather Forecasting. Carrier Searching and so on.
My project named “Event Management System” is software that store and maintained all events coordinated in college. It also helpful to print related reports. My project will help to record the events coordinated by faculties with their Name, Event subject, date & details in an efficient & effective ways.
In my system we have to make a system by which a user can record all events coordinated by a particular faculty. In our proposed system some more featured are added which differs it from the existing system such as security.
Hybrid optimization of pumped hydro system and solar- Engr. Abdul-Azeez.pdffxintegritypublishin
Advancements in technology unveil a myriad of electrical and electronic breakthroughs geared towards efficiently harnessing limited resources to meet human energy demands. The optimization of hybrid solar PV panels and pumped hydro energy supply systems plays a pivotal role in utilizing natural resources effectively. This initiative not only benefits humanity but also fosters environmental sustainability. The study investigated the design optimization of these hybrid systems, focusing on understanding solar radiation patterns, identifying geographical influences on solar radiation, formulating a mathematical model for system optimization, and determining the optimal configuration of PV panels and pumped hydro storage. Through a comparative analysis approach and eight weeks of data collection, the study addressed key research questions related to solar radiation patterns and optimal system design. The findings highlighted regions with heightened solar radiation levels, showcasing substantial potential for power generation and emphasizing the system's efficiency. Optimizing system design significantly boosted power generation, promoted renewable energy utilization, and enhanced energy storage capacity. The study underscored the benefits of optimizing hybrid solar PV panels and pumped hydro energy supply systems for sustainable energy usage. Optimizing the design of solar PV panels and pumped hydro energy supply systems as examined across diverse climatic conditions in a developing country, not only enhances power generation but also improves the integration of renewable energy sources and boosts energy storage capacities, particularly beneficial for less economically prosperous regions. Additionally, the study provides valuable insights for advancing energy research in economically viable areas. Recommendations included conducting site-specific assessments, utilizing advanced modeling tools, implementing regular maintenance protocols, and enhancing communication among system components.
Saudi Arabia stands as a titan in the global energy landscape, renowned for its abundant oil and gas resources. It's the largest exporter of petroleum and holds some of the world's most significant reserves. Let's delve into the top 10 oil and gas projects shaping Saudi Arabia's energy future in 2024.
COLLEGE BUS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM PROJECT REPORT.pdfKamal Acharya
The College Bus Management system is completely developed by Visual Basic .NET Version. The application is connect with most secured database language MS SQL Server. The application is develop by using best combination of front-end and back-end languages. The application is totally design like flat user interface. This flat user interface is more attractive user interface in 2017. The application is gives more important to the system functionality. The application is to manage the student’s details, driver’s details, bus details, bus route details, bus fees details and more. The application has only one unit for admin. The admin can manage the entire application. The admin can login into the application by using username and password of the admin. The application is develop for big and small colleges. It is more user friendly for non-computer person. Even they can easily learn how to manage the application within hours. The application is more secure by the admin. The system will give an effective output for the VB.Net and SQL Server given as input to the system. The compiled java program given as input to the system, after scanning the program will generate different reports. The application generates the report for users. The admin can view and download the report of the data. The application deliver the excel format reports. Because, excel formatted reports is very easy to understand the income and expense of the college bus. This application is mainly develop for windows operating system users. In 2017, 73% of people enterprises are using windows operating system. So the application will easily install for all the windows operating system users. The application-developed size is very low. The application consumes very low space in disk. Therefore, the user can allocate very minimum local disk space for this application.
3. 3
1. Introduction
The previous Logical Architecture [1] started by “opening the black box” in order to identify the
structural elements called Logical Components, as well as their properties and relations. The
important rule followed is to ensure that it was excluded all technological considerations or
implementation choices on this level. This is exactly the objective of the Physical Architecture in
defining the “real” concrete components that comprise the system. To start the Physical level based
on the Logical level, Capella proposes transitions similar to those that we used when we went from
the Operational Analysis to the System Analysis, then from the System Analysis to the Logical
Architecture. Thus, it can be created as many Physical Functions as Logical Functions, by also keeping
the Functional Exchanges and Functional Chains.
Main activities performed at Physical Architecture:
• Define final architecture and functions breakdown.
• Deploy behavioural components.
• Consider reuse of existing model elements.
2. Physical Architecture (PA)
“How the system will be built”.
This perspective defines the finalized architecture of the system, as it should be completed and
integrated. It adds the functions required by the implementation and technical choices and reveals
the behavioural components that perform these functions. These behavioural components are then
implemented using host implementation components that offer them the necessary material
resource.
2.1. Physical Architecture concepts
In the section below, it will be described the main Physical Architecture concepts.
4. 4
Figure 2.1: Physical Architecture main concepts
3. Physical Architecture artefacts and activities matrix
Below are captured the main activities to be performed when defining the high-level Logical
Architecture.
Let’s recall that the Capella tool automatically creates a Realization Link between each Logical element
(Function, Functional Exchange, Functional Chain) and the Source System element. Also recall that the
transitions are iterative and incremental and that noticed that a System Function is missing when
working on the Logical level, it must be absolutely added to the System level and apply the transition
again.
Step Matrix Diagram Output Step description
Step 1 PA1 CRB Capabilities Realization at Physical Architecture layer
Step 2
PA3
PFBD Define Physical Functions
Step 3 PDFB Define Physical Functional Exchanges
Step 4
PA4
PCBD Define behavioural and Physical Nodes
Step 5 PAB
Allocate Functions to Behavioural Nodes and deploy
Physical Nodes Components
Step 6 PA2
PFCD
FS
ES
Describe Capability Realizations with Functional
Chains and Scenarios
Table 3.1: Physical Architecture activities and artefacts
3.1. Capabilities Realization at Physical Architecture
One of the first activities to perform when moving to the Physical Architecture is to carry on the
work performed at the Logical Architecture level. Hence, transitions of the Logical Capabilities
Realization can be performed by Capella from the Activity Explorer. Create the diagram Contextual
5. 5
Realization Blank (CRB) and verify that all Physical Actors are involved in at least one Capability
Realization.
Activities:
• Verify that all actors are involved with at least one Capability Realization.
Modelling tips:
• Transition Logical Capabilities Realization.
Figure 3.1: [CRB] Physical Capability Realization Blank
3.2. Define Physical Functions
When Logical Functions are transitioned it can be further refined in new Physical Functions; refined
functions can be grouped under related functionality (e.g., monitor or control functions group).
Let’s recall when modelling activities are performed in the model it is quite often for a modeler to add
new functions in other diagrams, for example, Physical Architecture Blank (LAB) diagram. As a good
modelling practice the Physical Functions Breakdown Diagram (PFBD) should be revisited and
organised and defined functions involvement, if needed.
As mentioned at Logical Architecture, it is a good practice to change the colour of the transitioned
Logical Functions from green to white in the (PFBD). This can help the modeler to visually identify what
functions are related to the Logical Architecture layer and considered to be further refined.
Activities:
• Refine, where needed, Logical Functions in Physical Functions.
• Identify containments (hierarchy).
Modelling tips:
• Transition of Logical Functions.
• Similar approach applied in the LFBD to the PFBD, change the transitioned logical functions
background to white, it will help to identify which functions were captured at logical layer and
transitioned to the physical layer.
• Update this diagram when new functions added during the logical architecture design.
6. 6
Figure 3.2: [PFBD] Physical Functions Breakdown Diagram
3.3. Define Physical Functional Exchanges
When functions have been identified, functional exchanges can be defined between “leaf” functions.
Remember, that only leaf functions should have Functional Exchanges and later allocated to a
Behavioural Physical Component.
Recall when a Logical Function is refined in new Physical child Functions, Functional Ports belonging
to the Logical Functions should be delegated.
Activities:
• Identify Functional Exchanges between Physical Functions.
• Diagrams can be created and focused in one aspect of the behaviour, for example to describe
a capability realization.
Modelling tips:
• Logical functions can be refined in more detail at physical layer. Do not forget to delegate (i.e.,
move) function ports from a transitioned system function to the correspondent physical
decomposed child function.
7. 7
Figure 3.3: [PDFB] Logical Dataflow Blank
3.4. Define Behavioural and Physical Nodes
As described before in the Arcadia method section there are two types of Physical Components in
Arcadia:
• Node Physical Components, which may contain other Node Components.
• Behaviour Physical Components, which will be deployed on the Node Physical Components.
A Behaviour Physical Component is a component of the System, responsible for performing some of
the Functions assigned to the system, by interacting with other Behaviour Components and with that
of the external Actors. A Node Physical Component is a component that hosts a certain number of
Behaviour Components, by providing them with the resources required for them to operate and
interact with their environment. A Behaviour Component is hosted by one single Node Physical
Component.
At logical layer it was strongly advised to exclude all technological consideration or implementation
choice. At Physical Architecture layer, technological considerations should be considered.
Refine the Logical Components into Behavioural Physical Components and identify parent – child
components hierarchy relationship, in addition identify and capture Node Physical Components.
As a good modelling approach revisit the Physical Component Breakdown Diagram (PCBD) and ensure
this diagram is still correct and consistent. That is, during modelling activities new Behavioural and
Node Physical Components can be created in different diagrams (e.g., PAB diagram) and new
components involvement may need to be verified for consistency.
Activities:
• Identify and define Behavioural Physical Nodes
• Identify and define Node Physical Component.
Modelling tips:
• Transition of Logical Components.
• Revisit the (LCBD) diagram to ensure correctness.
Figure 3.4: [PCBD] Physical Components Breakdown Diagram
8. 8
3.5. Allocate Functions to Behavioural Nodes and deploy Physical Nodes
Components
When Physical Functions and components have been identified and captured, functions can be
allocated to the relevant Behavioural Physical Component. To allocate functions to Behavioural
Physical Components a Physical Architecture Blank (PAB) diagram can be created and perform the
task.
During the elaboration of this diagram, new physical functions can be identified and captured as this
diagram provides functions allocated to Behavioural Physical Component, hence, functions are now
captured in context. Hence, the verification process described above still applies when new functions
and components are captured in a PAB diagram.
The PAB diagram allows to create Behavioural Physical Component exchange between Behavioural
Components that implements Functional Exchanges.
The Physical Architecture Blank (PAB) diagram also allows to define Physical Link and Physical Path.
Physical Links provides the means to transport Component Exchanges and connect different Node
Physical Components. The
Activities:
• Allocate Physical Functions to Behavioural Nodes Components.
• Define Behavioural Physical Components Exchange.
• Deploy Behavioural Physical Components in Physical Nodes Components.
• Allocate Functional Ports to Behavioural Physical Component Port.
• Behavioural Physical Component Ports to Node Physical Component Port.
• Define Physical Path.
Modelling tips:
• As a good approach re-visit the diagrams that capture functions (PFBD) and components
(PCBD) breakdown and verify if diagrams are still correct and consistent.
Figure 3.5: [PAB] Physical Architecture Blank
9. 9
3.6. Describe Capability Realizations with Functional Chains and Scenarios
Similarly, Logical Architecture, a Capability Realization can be described by Functional Chains and
scenarios.
Activities:
• Identify functions involved in a functional chain that describes a Capability Realization.
• Create Functional and Entity Scenarios that describe a Capability Realization.
Modelling tips:
• When a Functional Chain is created, it can be transitioned and created a Functional Scenario.
• A Functional Scenario can then be transitioned and created an Entity Scenario.
• Transitioned functional chains might need to be “reconstructed” as the Physical Functions
were decomposed at Physical Architecture and Functional Chains might have turned as
invalid.
Figure 3.6: Physical Functional Chain and Scenarios definition
3.7. Physical Architecture traceability flow
Similarly, to Logical Architecture, in the figure below the model elements traceability and diagrams
relationship is captured:
• A Physical Capability Realization can be described by Functional Chain and/or
Functional/Entity Scenarios.
• A Functional/Entity Scenario and Functional Chains involve Physical Functions.
• Physical Functions are allocated to Behavioural Component and Actors.
• Behavioural Component are deployed in Physical Nodes.
Again, the presented flow of diagrams shows a reasoned step-by-step choice in terms of activities and
diagrams. Arcadia and this guide do not impose any order on the diagram’s elaboration, both are
flexible and can be elaborated in any sequence. It is the modeler choice and project needs that may
drive the architecture design.
11. 14
Conclusion
The above Arcadia Physical Architecture guided step-by-step method, describes a reasoned step-by-
step choice in terms of activities and diagrams. It can be seen in several of its diagrams traceability
that is provided and inherent in the model.
As described, the principle of the Physical Architecture defines the finalized architecture of the system,
as it should be completed and integrated. It adds the functions required by the implementation and
technical choices and reveals the behavioural components that perform these functions. These
behavioural components are then implemented using host implementation components that offer
them the necessary material resource.
It was provided in this article and in the previous articles that forms the Arcadia method, activities and
expected artefacts as outcome of each of them. Some Capella tool modelling tips that should be
followed to promote correctness of the model and some transitions that help and accelerate the
modelling effort.
References and further reading of the previous articles can be found below.
12. 15
Bibliography
[1] H. Castro, “MBSE with Arcadia method step-by-step: Physical Architecture,” 2023. [Online].
Available: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mbse-arcadia-method-step-by-step-logical-
architecture-helder-castro/.