1. Thesis question - Ecole des Mines d`Alès

ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
Journée annuelle
de présentation
des travaux des
doctorants du
LGI2P
Presentation Content
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
16th June, 2010
EUROCOPTER UNCLASSIFIED
1
3. Conclusion and Outlook
2
Clémentine Cornu
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 27/05/2010
1. Thesis question
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Thesis statement
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
How to deploy System Engineering processes
in a multi cultural and multi sites industry, in a multi‐disciplinary context,
dealing with different factors like interoperability
1. Thesis question
4
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Meaning of « to deploy » for this study
• Definition
– To put in place an organization and a way of working which meet the applicable standards within the company
• Stages
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Background analysis
Definition & implementation of the deployment process Definition of the deployment methodology Definition of processes to deploy Implementation of the deployment
Deployment control & Continuous improvement
Decommissioning of the deployment process 1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook 5
System Engineering (SE) Overview
Companies’ needs: phasing out
Æ Customer dissatisfaction
Æ Origins of a product lack of profitability
Æ Cost and deadlines overruns
Æ…
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
Origins: lack of systems’ control
•
•
•
•
•
Needs not sufficiently expressed / listened
Lifecycle not considered entirely
Resources not available at the right time
Miscommunication
…
1. Thesis question
6
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook System Engineering Overview
SE definition “General methodological approach that includes all the appropriate activities to design, develop and test a system which both provides an economical and competitive solution to the needs of a customer and also satisfies all stakeholders.”
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
SE Stakes
• Better complexity control
• Better match between products needs/quality
• Better cost control
• Better anticipation of problems and risks
• Better respect of deadlines
• Better multi‐disciplinary and multi‐actors cooperation
• Shorter development time
• Increasing the satisfaction of all stakeholders
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook 7
System Engineering Overview
End
product
Needs
To analyze & define
the need
To qualify
the system
To define technical
requirements
To verify
the integration
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
To verify & validate
& optimize
To design organic
architecture
To assembly
To design functionnal
architecture
To get
the components System Engineering
To developp
System integration
To manufacture
To reuse
Realization : business engineering
To buy
Tailored from
an AFIS pattern
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Interoperability Overview
Interoperability definition
“Aptitude and capacity of the entities to interact in a harmonious and efficient way without having to call into question whole or part of their behavior or their structure”
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
[Pingaud 2009]
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook 9
Interoperability barriers & SE processes deployment
Interoperability barriers
bus
ines
s
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
ss
ine
us
bbusiness
ss
ce
pro
process
ce
rvi
se
service
pro
c
INTEROPERABILITY
ser
ess
vice
dat
a
ta
da
data
Tailored from
EIF Framework
[Chen 2006]
1. Thesis question
10
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Eurocopter Interoperability interpretation
Integration
SE
Customer
Realization
Other
stakeholders
Entreprise
Certification
authorities
Dynamic environment
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
SE processes
actors
System of
interest
actors
tools
tools
methods
INTEROPERABILITY
MATTERS
methods
…
SE process
1. Thesis question
…
SE process
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook 11
Eurocopter question
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
How to get over the obstacles which prevent the SE deployment within the company ? Deployment difficulties
Interoperability difficulties
• What does the company have to deploy ? • How to practically deploy the SE process ? • How to make the design office staff adhere to the SE approach ? How to make the elements to deploy be interoperable 1. Thesis question
12
– Between them – With the actual organization within Eurocopter
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Thesis expected deliverables
Methodological guide • SE processes definitions/specifications
Demonstrator
Workflow engine for the deployment of 2 processes
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
• SE process deployment rules considering and improving its interoperability
•
Requirements Management
•
Configuration Control
• Company interoperability maturity model
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook 13
ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
2. Current work
achieved
State of the Art in System Engineering applied to Avionics
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Comparison of System Engineering definitive texts Improvement of the analysis of [Sheard et al. 1998]
ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MIL‐STD‐499B
IEEE 1220
EIA/IS 632
EIA 632
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO/IEC TR 19760
ISO/IEC TR 90005
ISO/IEC TR 24766
Découvrir et comprendre l'IS
INCOSE SE Handbook
NASA SE Handbook
BNAE RG.Aéro 000 77
BNAE RG.Aéro 000 40
ECSS‐E‐ST‐10C
Guide for ITS
Wide
Scope
Business
specific
Updated
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook 15
Comparison of System Engineering definitive texts Improvement of the analysis of [Sheard et al. 1998]
System Engineering
Relationships / Compatibility with other System engineering documents
Project management
System life cycle
Project level
System Life Cycle Stages
Project reviews
System engineering process by project phase
System Engineering processes
Relationships between System Engineering processes
Recommendations/Tips for each System Engineering process
System Engineering process System Engineering processes inputs
level
System Engineering processes outcomes
System Engineering processes actors
System Engineering processes controls
System Engineering processes enablers
System Engineering Relationships between System Engineering processes activities
processes activity level Detail information about System Engineering processes activities
System Engineering Detail information about System Engineering processes activities tasks
processes activities task level Indications about System Engineering plan
System Engineering plan template
Document level
Indications about other documents Documents to provide for reviews
ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
Global
•
•
•
•
•
•
Scope Level of abstraction
System Life Cycle SEMP Guidance Definition of system Definition of System Engineering
1. Thesis question
16
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Comparison of System Engineering definitive texts Improvement of the analysis of [Sheard et al. 1998]
SWOT Analysis
Strengths
ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
Highlights the pros of each document Opportunities
Highlights what may be useful for Eurocopter and thus create a competitive advantage in each document
1. Thesis question
Weaknesses
Highlights the cons of each document Threats
Highlights what may be risky for Eurocopter in each document
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook 17
Comparison of System Engineering definitive texts Improvement of the analysis of [Sheard et al. 1998]
ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
SWOT Analysis
1. Thesis question
18
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Comparison of System Engineering definitive texts ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
Relevancy of the SWOT analysis for the deployment
Strengths
Weaknesses
to define, control & manage
the process
to define, control & manage
the process
Opportunities
Threats
to develop the Eurocopter
abilities to create and take
advantage of its
competitive advantage
to adapt / to develop the
Eurocopter abilities to
adapt to these threats
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook 19
Comparison of System Engineering definitive texts SWOT analysis objectives – To identify those abilities (competitive advantage/adaptation)
– To identify the derived requirements for the Eurocopter organization – To characterize how interoperability may allow to better meet these requirements or may influence compliance with these requirements? ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
In the knowledge that
– Dynamic & Multi‐disciplinary environment
– Open processes (new tools, …)
Study continuation
– Definition of SE process deployment rules and requirements
– Definition of a maturity model for each organization level concerned by the deployment
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
2. Current work
achieved
State of the Art in Interoperability
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Reference documents (to be continued)
Standards European Projects deliverables
ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
– Technical standards about specific components or computer languages
– IDEAS
– INTEROP‐NoE
– ATHENA
– No normative document explaining how to improve interoperability within companies
– ABILITIES
– FUSION
– GENESIS
– Commius
1. Thesis question
22
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook Reference documents (upcoming studies)
Interoperability Frameworks ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
“An interoperability framework can be defined as a set of standards and guidelines that describes the way in which organisations have agreed, or should agree, to interact with each other.”
[ATHENA 2007a]
Name
Reference
IDEAS interoperability Framework [IDEAS 2003] European Interoperability Framework [IDABC 2004] & [IDABC 2008]
INTEROP‐NOE European Interoperability Framework [INTEROP‐NOE 2007]
ATHENA Interoperability Framework [ATHENA 2007a]
ATHENA Business Interoperability Framework [ATHENA 2007b]
E‐Health Interoperability Frameworks [NEHTA 2007]
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook 23
Reference documents (upcoming studies)
Interoperability Maturity Models
ETZCR / C.CORNU /16/06/2010
“The purpose of a maturity model of the CMMI type is to improve the efficiency of the company by identifying, analysing and optimising the processes ruling the work.”
[AFIS 2002 – Sheet n°1]
Name
Reference
SPICE [ISO 2004]
LISI
[C4ISR 1998]
OIM
[Clark et al. 1999]
LCIM
[Tolk et al. 2003]
EIMM
[ATHENA 2007c]
1. Thesis question
24
Comparison made in [Guédria et al. 2008]
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
3. Conclusion and
Outlook
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook
Outlook : Deployment guide
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
• Definition & explanations of the Eurocopter’s strategy
• Taking stock
–
–
–
–
Stakeholders
Organization Tools
Data and models
• Formalization
– Deployment requirements
– Cartography of the SE processes to deploy
– Process used to manage the deployment
• Company Interoperability Maturity Model
1. Thesis question
2. Current work achieved
3. Conclusion & Outlook ETZCR / C.CORNU / 27/05/2010
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 27/05/2010
Thank you for your
attention !
Extra slides
Automatisation cognitive
•
Automatisation
–
•
Cognitive
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
–
•
« Suppression totale ou partielle de l'intervention humaine dans l'exécution de tâches diverses » [Larousse]
« Qui se rapporte à la faculté de connaître » [Larousse]
Ma compréhension
–
–
Suppression totale ou partielle de l'intervention humaine dans l'exécution de tâches liées à la connaissance, au raisonnement
ÆIdentifier les tâches de raisonnement répétitives et supporter ainsi l’utilisateur dans leur exécution en les anticipant, en les formalisant, en les simplifiant, en en les outillant et en supprimant celles qui sont inutiles
29
Automatisation cognitive
• Contribution de ma thèse à l’automatisation cognitive
– Les processus d’IS, de part leur nature, vise à « automatiser » les tâches de conception en y apposant un cadre, des méthodes, … Or cette thèse vise non seulement à les définir mais aussi à apporter des solutions viables pour les déployer. Elle contribue donc à l’automatisation cognitive. ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
– Sans interopérabilité, ces processus fonctionneront « en mode dégradé » ou non optimal. La prise en compte de l’interopérabilité sert donc encore l’automatisation cognitive. – Enfin, le workflow sur lequel doit aboutir la thèse est un outil concret d’automatisation cognitive
30
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 27/05/2010
Appendixes
References
•
•
•
•
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
•
•
•
•
•
•
32
[AFIS 2001] Fanmuy, G., Levy, G., Foisseau, J., Lamothe, P., Hermans, B., De Chazelles, P. and Choveau, E. "Recommandations pour l'élaboration d'un référentiel d'exigences techniques", Association Française d'Ingénierie Système (AFIS), 2001.
[AFIS 2002] "Sheet No. 1 : Maturity Model", Association Française d’Ingénierie Système, 2002
[AFIS 2009] Meinadier, J.‐P. "Découvrir et comprendre l'ingénierie système ‐ Version expérimentale ‐
Version 3", Association Française d'Ingénierie Système (AFIS), 2009.
[ATHENA 2007a] "Deliverable D.A4.2 ‐ Specification of Interoperability Framework and Profiles, Guidelines and Best Practices", ATHENA, 2007.
[ATHENA 2007b] "Deliverable D.B3.1 ‐ Business Interoperability Framework", ATHENA, 2007.
[ATHENA 2007c] "Deliverable D.A1.4 ‐ Framework for the Establishment and Management Methodology", ATHENA, 2005.
[BNAE 1999] "RG AERO 000 40 A ‐ General recommendation for the programme management specification", Bureau de normalisation de l'aéronautique et de l'espace (BNAE), 1999.
[BNAE 2005] "RG AERO 000 77 ‐ Programme management ‐ Guide for the management of Systems Engineering", Bureau de normalisation de l'aéronautique et de l'espace (BNAE), 2005.
[C4ISR 1998] "Final Report", C4ISR Architecture Working Group, 1998.
[Chen 2006] Chen, D. "Enterprise Interoperability Framework"'Proceedings of Enterprise Modelling and Ontologies for Interoperability, EMOI‐Interop', 2006.
References
•
•
•
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
•
•
•
•
•
•
[Clark et al. 1999] Clark, T. and Jones, R. "Organisational Interoperability Maturity Model for C2"'1999 Command and Control Research Technology Symposium. United States Naval War College, Newport', 1999.
[DoD 1994] "MIL‐STD‐498, Software Development and Documentation", Department of Defense (DoD), 1994.
[ECSS 2009] "ECSS‐E‐ST‐10C ‐ Space engineering ‐ System engineering general requirements", European Cooperation on Space Standardization(ECSS), 2009.
[EIA 1994] "EIA/IS 632, Interim Standard: Systems Engineering", Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA), 1994.
[EIA 2003] "ANSI/EIA‐632:2003 ‐ Processes for Engineering a System", Electronic Industries Alliance (EIA), 2003.
[Guedria et al. 2008] Guedria, W., Naudet, Y. and Chen, D. "Interoperability Maturity Models ‐ Survey and Comparison," On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2008 Workshops, 2008
[IDABC 2004] "European Interoperability Framework for pan‐European eGovernment services ‐ Version 1.0", Interoperable Delivery of European eGovernment Services to public Administrations, Businesses and Citizens (IDABC), 2004.
[IDABC 2008] "Draft document as basis for EIF 2.0", Interoperable Delivery of European eGovernment
Services to public Administrations, Businesses and Citizens (IDABC), 2008.
[IDEAS 2003] "Delivrable D.1.1 ‐ State of the Art (introduction)", IDEAS, 2003.
33
References
•
•
•
•
•
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
•
•
•
•
34
[IEEE 2005] "IEEE 1220:2005, Standard for application and Management of the Systems Engineering Process", Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 2005.
[INCOSE 2010] "Systems Engineering Handbook ‐ A Guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities ‐
version 3.2", International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE), 2010.
[INTEROP‐NOE 2007] “Deliverable DI.3_‐ Enterprise Interoperability Framework and knowledge corpus”
[ISO 2002] "ISO/IEC 15288:2002, Systems engineering ‐ System life cycle processes", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2002.
[ISO 2003] "ISO/IEC TR 19760:2003 ‐ Systems engineering ‐ A guide for the application of ISO/IEC 15288 (System life cycle processes)", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2003.
[ISO 2004] “ISO/IEC 15504:2004 ‐‐ Information technology ‐‐ Process assessment, ", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2002.
[ISO 2008] "ISO/IEC TR 90005:2008 ‐ Systems engineering ‐ Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001 to system life cycle processes", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2008.
[ISO 2009] "ISO/IEC TR 24766:2009 ‐ Technologies de l'information ‐‐ Ingénierie des systèmes et du logiciel ‐‐ Guide pour les capacités d'outil d'ingénierie des exigences", International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2009.
[NASA 2007] Shishko, R. and Chamberlain, R. "Nasa Systems Engineering Handbook", Technical report, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 2007.
References
•
•
•
•
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
•
[NEHTA 2007] "Interoperability Framework v2.0", Technical report, National E‐Health Transition Authority Limited (NEHTA), 2007.
[Pingaud 2009] Pingaud, H. "Rationalité du développement de l’interopérabilité dans les organisations"'8ème congrès international de Génie Industriel, CIGI09', 2009.
[Sheard et al. 1998] Sheard, S. and Lake, J. "Systems engineering standards and models compared"'Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Systems Engineering, Vancouver, Canada', 1998
[Tolk et al. 2003] Tolk, A. and Muguira, J. A. "The Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model"'2003 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop, Orlando, Florida', 2003.
[USDT 2009] "Systems Engineering Guidebook for Intelligent Transportation Systems", California Department of Transportation, 2009.
35
Pictures references
Pictures have been picked from internet : – http://richardwiseman.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/its‐the‐friday‐puzzle‐9/
– http://www.marketingwords.com/images/question_mark_dead.jpg
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
– http://www.crystalxp.net/forum/fr/entraide‐graphique/Tux‐Mascottes‐amp‐
Personnages/sujet_14189_1.htm
– The rest of the pictures come from http://www.icons‐gallery.com/
36
About the author
ETZCR / C.CORNU / 16/06/2010
Clémentine Cornu is a PhD student on a CIFRE contract with Eurocopter at the the Mines ParisTech research center for computer science (CRI).
Her work is under the supervision of Vincent CHAPURLAT (LGI2P, Ecole des Mines d’Alès) and François IRIGOIN (CRI, Mines ParisTech)
Contact : Clementine (dot) Cornu (at) Eurocopter (dot) com
37