Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Model Based Systems Engineering”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

Model-Based Systems Engineering for Capturing Mission Architecture System Processes with an Application Case Study - Orion Flight Test 1

Model-based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is an emerging methodology that can be leveraged to enhance many system development processes. MBSE allows for the centralization of an architecture description that would otherwise be stored in various locations and formats, thus simplifying communication among the project stakeholders, inducing commonality in representation, and expediting report generation. This paper outlines the MBSE approach taken to capture the processes of two different, but related, architectures by employing the Systems Modeling Language (SysML) as a standard for architecture description and the modeling tool MagicDraw. The overarching goal of this study was to demonstrate the effectiveness of MBSE as a means of capturing and designing a mission systems architecture. The first portion of the project focused on capturing the necessary system engineering activities that occur when designing, developing, and deploying a mission systems architecture for a space mission. The second part applies activities from the first to an application problem - the system engineering of the Orion Flight Test 1 (OFT-1) End-to-End Information System (EEIS). By modeling the activities required to create a space mission architecture and then implementing those activities in an application problem, the utility of MBSE as an approach to systems engineering can be demonstrated.

Orion Flight Test 1 (OFT-1)↗
NASA NTRS2017

Mars 2020 Model Based Systems Engineering Pilot

The pilot study is led by the Integration Engineering group in NASA's Launch Services Program (LSP). The Integration Engineering (IE) group is responsible for managing the interfaces between the spacecraft and launch vehicle. This pilot investigates the utility of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) with respect to managing and verifying interface requirements. The main objectives of the pilot are to model several key aspects of the Mars 2020 integrated operations and interface requirements based on the design and verification artifacts from Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) and to demonstrate how MBSE could be used by LSP to gain further insight on the interface between the spacecraft and launch vehicle as well as to enhance how LSP manages the launch service. The method used to accomplish this pilot started through familiarization of SysML, MagicDraw, and the Mars 2020 and MSL systems through books, tutorials, and NASA documentation. MSL was chosen as the focus of the model since its processes and verifications translate easily to the Mars 2020 mission. The study was further focused by modeling specialized systems and processes within MSL in order to demonstrate the utility of MBSE for the rest of the mission. The systems chosen were the In-Flight Disconnect (IFD) system and the Mass Properties process. The IFD was chosen as a system of focus since it is an interface between the spacecraft and launch vehicle which can demonstrate the usefulness of MBSE from a system perspective. The Mass Properties process was chosen as a process of focus since the verifications for mass properties occur throughout the lifecycle and can demonstrate the usefulness of MBSE from a multi-discipline perspective. Several iterations of both perspectives have been modeled and evaluated. While the pilot study will continue for another 2 weeks, pros and cons of using MBSE for LSP IE have been identified. A pro of using MBSE includes an integrated view of the disciplines, requirements, and verifications leading up to launch. The model allows IE to understand the relationships between disciplines throughout test activities and verifications. Additionally, the relationships between disciplines and integration tasks are generally consistent. The model allows for the generic relationships and tasks to be captured and used throughout multiple mission models should LSP further pursue MBSE. A con of MBSE is the amount of time it takes upfront to understand MBSE and create a useful model. The upfront time it takes to create a useful model is heavily discussed in MBSE literature and is a consistent con throughout the known applications of MBSE. The need to understand SysML and the software chosen also poses the possibility of a "bottleneck" or one person being the sole MBSE user for the working group. The utility of MBSE will continue to be evaluated through the remainder of the study. In conclusion, the original objectives of the pilot study were to use artifacts from MSL to model key aspects of Mars 2020 and demonstrate how MBSE could be used by LSP to gain insight into the spacecraft and launch vehicle interfaces. Progress has been made in modeling and identifying the utility of MBSE to LSP IE and will continue to be made until the pilot study's conclusion in mid-August. The results of this study will produce initial models, modeling instructions and examples, and a summary of MBSE's utility for future use by LSP.

Dukes, Alexandra Marie↗
NASA NTRS2016

Model Based Mission Assurance in a Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Framework: State-of-the-Art Assessment

This report explores the current state of the art of Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) in projects that have shifted towards Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). Its goal is to provide insight into how NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) should respond to this shift. In MBSE, systems engineering information is organized and represented in models: rigorous computer-based representations, which collectively make many activities easier to perform, less error prone, and scalable. S&MA practices must shift accordingly. The “Objective Structure Hierarchies” recently developed by OSMA provide the framework for understanding this shift. Although the objectives themselves will remain constant, S&MA practices (activities, processes, tools) to achieve them are subject to change. This report presents insights derived from literature studies and interviews. The literature studies gleaned assurance implications from reports of space-related applications of MBSE. The interviews with knowledgeable S&MA and MBSE personnel discovered concerns and ideas for how assurance may adapt. Preliminary findings and observations are presented on the state of practice of S&MA with respect to MBSE, how it is already changing, and how it is likely to change further. Finally, recommendations are provided on how to foster the evolution of S&MA to best fit with MBSE.

Aerospace engineering↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lean Model-Based Systems Engineering on the NASA High-Density Vertiplex Subproject

The High Density Vertiplex (HDV) subproject of NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) project adopted Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE)in July of 2020, prior to subproject formulation. A small and lean team of HDV Systems Engineers(SE) are utilizing MagicDraw to execute NASA SE processes via MBSE. The SEs learned how to use MagicDraw from scratch and HDV is the first project for which the SEs have utilized MagicDraw. This paper will demonstrate project technical execution via MBSE, utilizing the digital elements built into the SysML (Systems Modeling Language). SysML provides a model-centric means of carrying out the NASA SE common technical processes by providing tools for complete system modeling, including requirements and interface management and design capture. The authors also leverage and extend SysML to perform other SE tasks, such as Verification and Validation (V&V)tracking. MBSE has two main purposes for HDV: 1) documenting the subproject’s logical architecture for distribution outside of the subproject, 2) capturing the subproject’s physical architecture in a single-source-of-truth for use by the subproject’s members. This paper details the challenges, lessons learned, and solutions that were encountered in implementing MBSE in the first iteration on a multi-iteration, full-lifecycle design, build, fly project.

Demetrios Katsaduros↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lean Model-Based Systems Engineering on the NASA High-Density Vertiplex Subproject

The High Density Vertiplex (HDV) subproject of NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) project adopted Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) in July of 2020, prior to subproject formulation. A small and lean team of HDV Systems Engineers (SE) are utilizing MagicDraw to execute NASA SE processes via MBSE. The SEs learned how to use MagicDraw from scratch and HDV is the first project for which the SEs have utilized MagicDraw. This presentation will demonstrate project technical execution via MBSE, utilizing the digital elements built into the SysML (Systems Modeling Language). SysML provides a model-centric means of carrying out the NASA SE common technical processes by providing tools for complete system modeling, including requirements and interface management and design capture. The authors also leverage and extend SysML to perform other SE tasks, such as Verification and Validation (V&V) tracking. MBSE has two main purposes for HDV: 1) documenting the subproject’s logical architecture for distribution outside of the subproject, 2) capturing the subproject’s physical architecture in a single-source-of-truth for use by the subproject’s members. This presentation details the challenges, lessons learned, and solutions that were encountered in implementing MBSE in the first iteration on a multi-iteration, full-lifecycle design, build, fly project.

systems engineering↗
NASA NTRS2015

Model-Based Systems Engineering in Concurrent Engineering Centers

Concurrent Engineering Centers (CECs) are specialized facilities with a goal of generating and maturing engineering designs by enabling rapid design iterations. This is accomplished by co-locating a team of experts (either physically or virtually) in a room with a narrow design goal and a limited timeline of a week or less. The systems engineer uses a model of the system to capture the relevant interfaces and manage the overall architecture. A single model that integrates other design information and modeling allows the entire team to visualize the concurrent activity and identify conflicts more efficiently, potentially resulting in a systems model that will continue to be used throughout the project lifecycle. Performing systems engineering using such a system model is the definition of model-based systems engineering (MBSE); therefore, CECs evolving their approach to incorporate advances in MBSE are more successful in reducing time and cost needed to meet study goals. This paper surveys space mission CECs that are in the middle of this evolution, and the authors share their experiences in order to promote discussion within the community.

MODEL↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Model-Based Systems Engineering Evaluation of the Evolution to an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System

In 2018, as result of a recommendation from the National Academies, NASA began to prototype an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System(IASMS). The purpose of the IASMS is to enable innovative aviation operations and greater heterogeneity of the overall National Airspace (NAS) by automating much of the safety monitoring, assessment, and risk and hazard mitigation functionspresent in today’s Safety Management Systems (SMS). NASA has worked together with early industry collaborators to understand how such a system might work and has published several early Concepts of Operation (ConOps) and other technical memoranda that illustrate the primary considerations for selected aviation domains. The shift from an SMS to an IASMS is predicated on several assumptions, including: 1.) automating safety functions will decrease the amount of time necessary for risk and hazard identification and analysis, making it more likely that safety concerns are understood ‘in-time’ to mitigate them, and 2.) an IASMS will allow easier tailoring of safety management processes to the particular risks and hazards inherent to that aviation operation. In this paper, we begin to validate these assumptions through the use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE).

In-time Aviation Safety Management System↗
NASA NTRS2015

Analyzing Cyber Security Threats on Cyber-Physical Systems Using Model-Based Systems Engineering

The spectre of cyber attacks on aerospace systems can no longer be ignored given that many of the components and vulnerabilities that have been successfully exploited by the adversary on other infrastructures are the same as those deployed and used within the aerospace environment. An important consideration with respect to the mission/safety critical infrastructure supporting space operations is that an appropriate defensive response to an attack invariably involves the need for high precision and accuracy, because an incorrect response can trigger unacceptable losses involving lives and/or significant financial damage. A highly precise defensive response, considering the typical complexity of aerospace environments, requires a detailed and well-founded understanding of the underlying system where the goal of the defensive response is to preserve critical mission objectives in the presence of adversarial activity. In this paper, a structured approach for modeling aerospace systems is described. The approach includes physical elements, network topology, software applications, system functions, and usage scenarios. We leverage Model-Based Systems Engineering methodology by utilizing the Object Management Group's Systems Modeling Language to represent the system being analyzed and also utilize model transformations to change relevant aspects of the model into specialized analyses. A novel visualization approach is utilized to visualize the entire model as a three-dimensional graph, allowing easier interaction with subject matter experts. The model provides a unifying structure for analyzing the impact of a particular attack or a particular type of attack. Two different example analysis types are demonstrated in this paper: a graph-based propagation analysis based on edge labels, and a graph-based propagation analysis based on node labels.

MBSE↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Model-Based Systems Engineering Evaluation of the Evolution to an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System

In 2018, as result of a recommendation from the National Academies, NASA began to prototype an In-Time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS). The purpose of the IASMS is to enable innovative aviation operations and greater heterogeneity of the overall National Airspace (NAS) by automating much of the safety monitoring, assessment, and risk and hazard mitigation function present in today’s Safety Management Systems (SMS). NASA has worked together with early industry collaborators to understand how such a system might work and has published several early Concepts of Operation (ConOps) and other technical memoranda that illustrate the primary considerations for selected aviation domains. The shift from an SMS to an IASMS is predicated on several assumptions, including: 1.) automating safety functions will decrease the amount of time necessary for risk and hazard identification and analysis, making it more likely that safety concerns are understood ‘in-time’ to mitigate them, and 2.) an IASMS will allow easier tailoring of safety management processes to the particular risks and hazards inherent to that aviation operation. In this paper, we begin to validate these assumptions through the use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE).

IASMS↗
NASA NTRS2015

Model-Based Systems Engineering in Concurrent Engineering Centers

Concurrent Engineering Centers (CECs) are specialized facilities with a goal of generating and maturing engineering designs by enabling rapid design iterations. This is accomplished by co-locating a team of experts (either physically or virtually) in a room with a focused design goal and a limited timeline of a week or less. The systems engineer uses a model of the system to capture the relevant interfaces and manage the overall architecture. A single model that integrates other design information and modeling allows the entire team to visualize the concurrent activity and identify conflicts more efficiently, potentially resulting in a systems model that will continue to be used throughout the project lifecycle. Performing systems engineering using such a system model is the definition of model-based systems engineering (MBSE); therefore, CECs evolving their approach to incorporate advances in MBSE are more successful in reducing time and cost needed to meet study goals. This paper surveys space mission CECs that are in the middle of this evolution, and the authors share their experiences in order to promote discussion within the community.

systems engineering↗
NASA NTRS2015

Model-Based Systems Engineering in Concurrent Engineering Centers

Concurrent Engineering Centers (CECs) are specialized facilities with a goal of generating and maturing engineering designs by enabling rapid design iterations. This is accomplished by co-locating a team of experts (either physically or virtually) in a room with a narrow design goal and a limited timeline of a week or less. The systems engineer uses a model of the system to capture the relevant interfaces and manage the overall architecture. A single model that integrates other design information and modeling allows the entire team to visualize the concurrent activity and identify conflicts more efficiently, potentially resulting in a systems model that will continue to be used throughout the project lifecycle. Performing systems engineering using such a system model is the definition of model-based systems engineering (MBSE); therefore, CECs evolving their approach to incorporate advances in MBSE are more successful in reducing time and cost needed to meet study goals. This paper surveys space mission CECs that are in the middle of this evolution, and the authors share their experiences in order to promote discussion within the community.

Iwata, Curtis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Implementing Artificial Thinking Autonomy with Model-Based System Engineering

Complex autonomous systems capable of successfully operating independently under ‘known unknowns’ and harsh conditions require paradigm innovation in modern development strategies. In the field of autonomy, developing a system-of-systems which can ostensibly think for itself in the face of ‘unknown unknowns’ is still a field of ongoing research. Maturing the systems architecting and modeling methodologies for developing henceforth named Thinking Autonomous Systems, which are verified with digital mission simulation, can potentially usher in the next generation of artificial intelligence for space exploration. The concept presented in this paper incorporates multiple Model-Based Systems Engineering and simulation methodologies combined as a new paradigm to design a novel, biomimetic thinking autonomy strategy. Anachronistic concepts from classical Kantian philosophy will be leveraged to inspire architectural designs that could be used for complex distributed systems in deep space. To accomplish this, digital transformation of a document-based implementation plan for Thinking Autonomous Systems, generated by experienced NASA software engineers, is implemented for NASA’s Platform for Autonomous Systems by creating descriptive and executable software models in SysML to prototype real-time operating capabilities. This conceptual implementation has been developed by incorporating model-based digital simulations to theorize how a cyberphysical thinking system would achieve specific strategies without crew reliance, while simultaneously being resilient to all operating conditions and remaining functional when devoid of ground communication. Additionally, ensuring that an autonomous system framework is an ethical Artificial Intelligence requires careful consideration of system behavior and accountability, human factors for teaming with a thinking autonomous system, and comparison to other modern approaches used for implementing true autonomy. This paper presents the first steps in formalizing the metacognition required for instantiating a truly Thinking Autonomous System; the approach described symphonizes autonomy characteristics from classical philosophical into a unified software architecture describing human thought. In the future, the foundational models described in this paper can be further leveraged to help advance research into thinking autonomy requirements for future deep space missions as well as for current near-term applications, i.e., living aboard crewed spacecraft like a NASA Gateway cislunar habitat.

Artificial Thought↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of Model-Based Systems Engineering Efforts to Evolve the Airspace Research Roadmap

NASA’s Air Traffic Management-Exploration (ATM-X) UAM Airspace Subproject is conducting research that evolves UAM airspace towards a highly automated and operationally flexible system of the future. The complexity of UAM airspace evolution requires a plan to effectively organize, integrate, and communicate NASA’s research and development. The planning tool, called the UAM airspace research roadmap, or just roadmap, is key to the execution of NASA’s UAM airspace research over the next ten years. Implemented through Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) methodology, the roadmap will help to prioritize and coordinate research efforts, and to integrate results that build towards NASA’s research goals of evolving UAM airspace for integration of UAM operations into the National Airspace System (NAS). This paper presents an overview of on-going MBSE efforts to meet these overarching goals.

Model-Based Systems Engineering↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Overview of Model-Based Systems Engineering Efforts to Evolve the Airspace Research Roadmap

NASA’s Air Traffic Management-Exploration (ATM-X) UAM Airspace Subproject is conducting research that evolves UAM airspace towards a highly automated and operationally flexible system of the future. The complexity of UAM airspace evolution requires a plan to effectively organize, integrate, and communicate NASA’s research and development. The planning tool, called the UAM airspace research roadmap, or just roadmap, is key to the execution of NASA’s UAM airspace research over the next ten years. Implemented through Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) methodology, the roadmap will help to prioritize and coordinate research efforts, and to integrate results that build towards NASA’s research goals of evolving UAM airspace for integration of UAM operations into the National Airspace System (NAS). This paper presents an overview of on-going MBSE efforts to meet these overarching goals. Note: Included mp4 video of presentation included in record, runtime 9 mins 57 secs.

Model-Based Systems Engineering↗
NASA NTRS2012

Model Based Systems Engineering on the Europa Mission Concept Study

At the start of 2011, the proposed Jupiter Europa Orbiter (JEO) mission was staffing up in expectation of becoming an official project later in the year for a launch in 2020. A unique aspect of the pre-project work was a strong emphasis and investment on the foundations of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE). As so often happens in this business, plans changed: NASA's budget and science priorities were released and together fundamentally changed the course of JEO. As a result, it returned to being a study task whose objective is to propose more affordable ways to accomplish the science. As part of this transition, the question arose as to whether it could continue to afford the investment in MBSE. In short, the MBSE infusion has survived and is providing clear value to the study effort. By leveraging the existing infrastructure and a modest additional investment, striking advances in the capture and analysis of designs using MBSE were achieved. In the process, the need to remain relevant in the new environment has brought about a wave of innovation and progress. The effort has reaffirmed the importance of architecting. It has successfully harnessed the synergistic relationship of architecting to system modeling. We have found that MBSE can provide greater agility than traditional methods. We have also found that a diverse 'ecosystem' of modeling tools and languages (SysML, Mathematica, even Excel) is not only viable, but an important enabler of agility and adaptability. This paper will describe the successful application of MBSE in the dynamic environment of early mission formulation, the significant results produced and lessons learned in the process.

Bayer, Todd J.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Model-Based Systems Engineering Approach to Managing Mass Margin

When designing a flight system from concept through implementation, one of the fundamental systems engineering tasks ismanaging the mass margin and a mass equipment list (MEL) of the flight system. While generating a MEL and computing a mass margin is conceptually a trivial task, maintaining consistent and correct MELs and mass margins can be challenging due to the current practices of maintaining duplicate information in various forms, such as diagrams and tables, and in various media, such as files and emails. We have overcome this challenge through a model-based systems engineering (MBSE) approach within which we allow only a single-source-of-truth. In this paper we describe the modeling patternsused to capture the single-source-of-truth and the views that have been developed for the Europa Habitability Mission (EHM) project, a mission concept study, at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).

cloud comu↗
NASA NTRS2019

Method for Tracking and Communicating Aggregate Risk Through the Use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Tools

Large, complex projects can identify a significant number and variety of risks, throughout the project life cycle. These risks are analyzed, mitigated, closed or accepted as independent uncertainties. Once closed or accepted, it is easy for projects to lose awareness of their impact. In reality, each of these risks contributes some amount to the overall risk posture of the project. The ability to track and effectively communicate this aggregate risk has represented a challenge to project management. There have been previous attempts to create a schema to communicate the aggregate effect of risks, without notable success. Most of these attempts have centered on some additive metric derived from the scoring of likelihood and consequence values. This, in and of itself, is a logical approach, but all too often the scores were then aggregated to a level where all context was lost. One weakness has been a lack of attempt to create linkages or logical groups of the risks upon which useful aggregation could then occur. The overall move to model-based (systems) engineering (MBSE) has opened up a vast frontier of opportunities to better integrate all project data. MBSE provides an underlying layer that links data items to each other. Objectives link to requirements, which then link to functions, functions to physical architecture items, and so on, as far down as projects want to model. While it started with a focus on modeling requirements based on things like use cases, efforts are now underway to integrate safety and mission assurance (S&MA) information and analyses, such as risks. This effort, called Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA), is yielding models that are more useful and are a more accurate representations of the systems. MBSE models, with this ability to link related items, provide a new means of tracking and communicating aggregate risks. In the proposed method, risks are added into the models as distinct items, having attributes that communicate a scoring derived from the likelihood and consequence values as charted on the standard NASA 5x5 risk matrix. Like earlier efforts, each box in the 5x5 has an associated scoring, which may include both a current score and potential post-mitigation/control score. The risk items are then linked to elements of the model, such as system objectives/goals, requirements, functions, or physical architecture items, with "Risk to" relationships. These risks will then be communicated by use of reports generated from the model, detailing all risks and/or hazards linked to model elements. These reports can include aggregate impacts, including a current scoring and potential future state scoring based on the planned mitigations and/or controls. These reports will show all risks, open, accepted, and closed, linked to project objectives or requirements. When run as part of an upcoming risk acceptance discussion, these reports will serve to remind the team of all previous risks that relate to the effected portion of the system. When included as part of periodic program or project reviews, risk reviews, and safety reviews, this method can improve the overall understanding of the system's true risk posture. This proposed method takes full advantage of the advances that modern modeling techniques provide, with a minimal investment of additional time. Utilizing the model environment also enables a near constant access to current state of aggregate risks.

model based mission assurance↗