Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “SysML”

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 109 records · Page 6

NASA Quality Assurance in an MBSE world

Over the past decade or so, the emergence of Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) has demonstrated its desirability and value in terms of 1) being a single source of truth, 2) unambiguous definitions and relationships, and 3) after representation, the ability to explore/extract any sets of data on demand. While much work has been done in showing the value to the system engineering discipline in these areas, how does that value translate to the Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) world? This paper provides a vision of a very desirable future of NASA S&MA after it is fully integrated into the MBSE framework. We explore the impact and consequences of the MBSE Value items discussed above and how they impact the disciplines of quality assurance, reliability and maintainability, system safety, and software assurance. We provide insight into how the MBSE modeling tools can be used to define S&MA processes (ideally as a result of Use Case [1] elaboration of processes represented in MagicDraw®), produce S&MA products (ViewEditor output of various items), and represent S&MA disciplines (S&MA inside of MagicDraw). We also provide insight into the degree to which some elements can be directly integrated into a SysML® model and when, as often happens, an interface to some external source must be provided. The desirability of this future is part of the reason for the NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance’s (OSMA) recent creation of a Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA) Program [2] and the MBMA annual workshops. We briefly summarize the efforts to date to generate S&MA Use Cases for eventual deployment into pilot and project efforts. Even simple use of the SysML modeling tools can be used to capture quality assurance tasks and integrate them with the systems engineering and produce products that are easy to use by quality practitioners that are unfamiliar with these methods. We anticipate finding opportunities to pilot and implement various Quality Assurance (QA) Use Cases in FY20. The MBMA Program is focused on implementation; the NASA Office of the Chief Engineer's Community of Practice, as well as the SmallSat communities, are very interested in the integration of S&MA. Finally, as projects move forward utilizing whatever efficiency increases they can find in a cost-constrained environment, the S&MA community cannot be caught unawares and needs to continue preparing for the ever-growing implementation of MBSE across NASA and our government and commercial partners.

Evans, John W

A Model-Based Framework for NASA Science Mission Formulation

This paper details an effort to implement NASA systems engineering standards and practices using a Digital System Model (DSM), which we also refer to as the system architecture model (SAM). Creating a SAM at the beginning of a design effort helps systems engineer identify errors, inconsistencies, and miscommunications as early as possible. Such issues can then be resolved before it becomes costly and requires significant rework to do so. A pre-formulation SAM also enables advanced trade studies at the earliest stage of concept development. This results in “win-wins” where architecture changes can reduce cost without decreasing effectiveness, or increase effectiveness without increasing cost. SAMs also streamline the creation of project documentation and facilitate superior dialogue between science, engineering, and management stakeholders. Common artifacts such as Master Equipment Lists (MELs), Science Traceability Matrices (STMs), and Mission Traceability Matrices (MTMs), can be automatically maintained through requirements and structural models in the SAM. Key performance parameters (and changes to them) can be tied to simulations in the SAM, allowing far more rapid and extensive trade space exploration. As will be shown in this work, these advantages have been realized for the first time in an actual NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) pre-phase A and phase A concept study. Modelbased design tools have been developed in a general, modular manner to maximize reuse on future programs. Focus is placed on structural and requirements architecture modeling. Data is ingested into the SAM from existing discipline model outputs (e.g. MS Excel spreadsheets) and used to update a SysML structural model. A mission requirements model is created within the SAM, containing mission specific as well as standard GSFC mission requirements. With the linked requirements model and structural model, automated compliance checking will be performed as mission parameters evolve without the need for discipline engineers to work directly with the SAM in SysML.

MBSE

Developing Concepts of Operations Using Multi-Step Tool Techniques With Large Language Models

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Air Mobility Pathfinders (AMP) project is developing and evaluating concepts of operations (ConOps) for safe, secure, and scalable Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations. The AMP project’s Operational Concepts, Architecture, and Requirements Integration (OCARI) Team is using a Model Based System Engineering (MBSE) approach for integration, interoperability, and traceability of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) ecosystems centered around urban air taxi services. The team’s goal is to define structures and behaviors needed for system feasibility, readiness, and interoperability, establish a UAM knowledge base, and trace and validate assumptions and requirements relevant to AAM. NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) is spearheading an innovative digital engineering approach to integrate, communicate, and facilitate the research of multi-modal transportation systems. The Knowledge-based Digital Platform (KbDP) is a concept being developed that ties the workflows of Project Managers (PM), Principal Investigators (PI), and System Engineers together across organizational boundaries. It does so through the management of an information database defined by mathematical, data science, and system engineering principles. Machine Learning (ML) algorithms play a key role in this concept by extracting meaningful knowledge from relational and graph databases, document repositories, and system artifacts, which the human user leverages to greatly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their research. Recent advancements in the field of Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically models trained for tool use, such as Command-R , now allow for the reliable implementation of single-step and multi-step tool-centric systems. These techniques provide the LLM with a set of tools, in our case Python functions, that can be called on to answer a much wider range of questions compared to LLMs implemented using a traditional single-source or Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) approach. Through this method, the LLM can pull information from multiple data sources, such as relational or graph databases, document repositories, application programming interfaces (APIs), and SysML artifacts depending on the user’s question. The LLM can also output the information in a variety of different formats, using output generation tools, such as CSV, UML, or SysML artifacts. Additionally, tools can be assigned roles and can work together to provide answers to queries in an “agent” like approach, similar to that implemented by Microsoft’s AutoGen framework where different agents can converse with each other to accomplish tasks. Previously, our team developed a chatbot system with “agent like” functionality in the form of different “modes” the user could select from a user interface (UI), this architecture can be seen on the left in figure 1. Three different modes were implemented, the first mode allowed the LLM to utilize the structures and algorithms within a graph database to trace UAM requirements. The second mode gave the LLM access to a vector search capable of providing relevant information from thousands of document pages related to UAM ConOps and requirements. The third mode served as a general assistant where users could enter open-ended questions and custom prompts to utilize the LLM for different use-cases. This system improved the process surrounding generating and analyzing information related to UAM requirements, however, the implementation provided a clunky user experience. Users were required to know what mode to select within the UI in advance before entering their question to the selected tool. Moreover, the different tools were isolated from each other, they lacked bidirectional links that would allow for tools to collaborate to generate better responses. Our team is working on a new architecture, seen on the right in the below figure, with the goal to address many of the UX shortcomings of our original system while improving the accuracy and depth of responses from the LLM. This new system will automatically select the appropriate tool to use based off the user’s question. Each tool will be capable of calling on any of the other tools available to the LLM, resulting in a collaborative pipeline where tools can pass data between other tools until enough data is received to generate an answer to the user’s question. Using a locally deployed, open-source, LLM, the NASA OCARI team, in collaboration with Collins Aerospace, will implement a prototype application that will bridge knowledge across multiple sources to assist System Engineers (SEs) with requirements discovery and tracing, research question and use case identification, and assumption validation. Such a system will also allow SEs to more easily, and intuitively, explore the AAM ecosystem, ultimately improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the SE's research and decision-making processes surrounding ConOps development and validation. In this session, our team will provide a video demonstration of our new prototype architecture in action. We will also present an overview of our prototype system architecture and talk about its advantages over traditional LLM deployments along with how those advantages can provide additional value to the field of System Engineering.

systems engineering

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)

Creating Systems Engineering Products with Executable Models in a Model-Based Engineering Environment

Applying systems engineering across the life-cycle results in a number of products built from interdependent sources of information using different kinds of system level analysis. This paper focuses on leveraging the Executable System Engineering Method (ESEM) which automates requirements verification (e.g. power and mass budget margins and duration analysis of operational modes) using executable SysML models. The particular value proposition is to integrate requirements, and executable behavior and performance models for certain types of system level analysis. The models are created with modeling patterns that involve structural, behavioral and parametric diagrams, and are managed by an open source Model Based Engineering Environment (named OpenMBEE). This paper demonstrates how the ESEM is applied in conjunction with OpenMBEE to create key engineering products (e.g. operational concept document) for the Alignment and Phasing System (APS) within the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) project, which is under development by the TMT International Observatory (TIO).

MBSE

Decision Space Modeling: Trade Space Ontology

As the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) works to develop a crewed Moon to Mars Architecture, it is dealing with a large decision space consisting of the overlay of human exploration architectures for both the Moon and for Mars. Efforts are underway to enable reasoning, analysis, and deliberation on this decision space. A critical first step is to develop a model of the decision space, which will then allow for various methods and techniques to be applied in support of the larger architecture decision-making process. The Trade Space Ontology consists of a set of terminologies and relations (an ontology) and a MagicDraw resource that enables documentation of decisions and alternatives. It also provides a means by which decisions and alternatives can be traced to other Systems Engineering artifacts. For documenting alternatives, the Trade Space Ontology adapts the Morphological Matrix methodology to The Systems Modeling Language (SysML) through a profile; custom diagrams are also implemented to simplify the profile's use. With the profile and custom diagrams, system architects can specify options for architecture attributes, as well as compatibility between them, in a compact visual format. While the approach shares similarities to a trade tree, the emphasis at this stage is less on enumerating specific combinations of options and instead on specifying the options and their compatibility. Enumeration of alternatives is performed by an external analysis that operates on an output file from a model constructed using the Trade Space Ontology. For decisions, the Trade Space Ontology provides a way to model generic precedence relationships as well as documenting inputs and outputs. These may include what alternatives, criteria, and rationale are understood to be relevant for each decision. Importantly, the decision-making side of the Trade Space Ontology is defined at a more general level, such that it can be adapted to the specific terms in use by projects and programs at NASA. However, this adaptability also means that less capability is provided ``out-of-the-box'' from installation. Currently the resource includes plugin functionality to enumerate paths through generic precedence relationships between decisions and to export these paths to a spreadsheet. Custom dependency stereotypes are included in the profile to indicate the cross-cutting relationships between the trade space and the architecture decisions, providing a means to map which parts of the trade space enumerate alternatives for a decision, and to identify how the output of a decision may modify the trade space through pruning or down-selection. While the motivating use case for this resource is in human exploration architectures, the broad applicability of the Morphological Matrix methodology indicates that the Trade Space Ontology should also be useful for other activities and tasks at the agency.

Trade Tree

NASA Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) MBSE Initiatives

NASA’s Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP) program is developing several MagicDraw SysML models to support the development of high performance Nuclear Thermal Rocket Engines (NTRE). Currently, the Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) project is aiming to perform the first ever flight demonstration of an NTRE, and NASA is developing a DRACO Insight Project Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) model to capture, define, analyze, and report on the flight and ground test system architecture, functional behavior, requirements, risks, and lessons learned. Additional models are in work for engine component trade trees, fault detection sensor coverage analysis using a Goal Function Tree (GFT) plugin, stakeholder engagement, and technology maturation projects. The GFT plugin is the Galois, Inc. Failure Recovery Instruction Generation using Automata derived from Traditional Engineering models (FRIGATE) tool. A new capability for Jira to MagicDraw data sharing using the OpenPDM collaboration platform is under development with partner Victory Solutions, Inc. to enhance risk impact analysis.

Space Nuclear Propulsion (SNP)

AUTOMATIC GENERATION OF EVENT TREES AND FAULT TREES: A MODEL-BASED APPROACH

In the past few decades, increasing complexity in modern engineering systems has been driven by the integration of a large number of components and by the fact that the system operations involve many disciplines (e.g., thermal-hydraulics, plant operations, cyber-security). Current safety/reliability modeling approaches to such systems are labor intensive, difficult to learn, and rely heavily on simplistic Boolean logic to depict failure propagation and accident progression. While these methods serve well for simple systems (i.e., linear causal systems with limited small inter- and intra-system interactions), their results are difficult to verify when modeling complex systems (typically performed through the extensive use of modeling assumptions). The development of new methods is addressed to meet these challenges through a model-based system engineering (MBSE) lens. Under MBSE philosophy, every aspect of the system (form or function) is represented by a model that completely characterizes its architecture or behavior. MBSE approach greatly improves the management of design, analysis and verification of complex systems. An integration of Dynamic Probabilistic Risk Assessment (DPRA) methods with MBSE models is proposed to perform safety/reliability analyses of engineering systems. In particular, MBSE representation of the system (performed using Systems Modeling Language [SysML]) is coupled with DPRA methods to automatically generate event trees and fault trees.

97 - MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING

Experimental Applications of Automatic Test Markup Language (ATML)

The authors describe challenging use-cases for Automatic Test Markup Language (ATML), and evaluate solutions. The first case uses ATML Test Results to deliver active features to support test procedure development and test flow, and bridging mixed software development environments. The second case examines adding attributes to Systems Modelling Language (SysML) to create a linkage for deriving information from a model to fill in an ATML document set. Both cases are outside the original concept of operations for ATML but are typical when integrating large heterogeneous systems with modular contributions from multiple disciplines.

Lansdowne, Chatwin A.

NASA Integrated Network Monitor and Control Software Architecture

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space Communications and Navigation office (SCaN) has commissioned a series of trade studies to define a new architecture intended to integrate the three existing networks that it operates, the Deep Space Network (DSN), Space Network (SN), and Near Earth Network (NEN), into one integrated network that offers users a set of common, standardized, services and interfaces. The integrated monitor and control architecture utilizes common software and common operator interfaces that can be deployed at all three network elements. This software uses state-of-the-art concepts such as a pool of re-programmable equipment that acts like a configurable software radio, distributed hierarchical control, and centralized management of the whole SCaN integrated network. For this trade space study a model-based approach using SysML was adopted to describe and analyze several possible options for the integrated network monitor and control architecture. This model was used to refine the design and to drive the costing of the four different software options. This trade study modeled the three existing self standing network elements at point of departure, and then described how to integrate them using variations of new and existing monitor and control system components for the different proposed deployments under consideration. This paper will describe the trade space explored, the selected system architecture, the modeling and trade study methods, and some observations on useful approaches to implementing such model based trade space representation and analysis.

Next Generation Uplink

Early Formulation Model-centric Engineering on NASA's Europa Mission Concept Study

The proposed Jupiter Europa Orbiter and Jupiter Ganymede Orbiter missions were formulated using current state-of-the-art MBSE facilities: - JPL's TeamX, Rapid Mission Architecting - ESA's Concurrent Design Facility - APL's ACE Concurrent Engineering Facility. When JEO became an official "pre-project" in Sep 2010, we had already developed a strong partnership with JPL's Integrated Model Centric Engineering (IMCE) initiative; decided to apply Architecting and SysML-based MBSE from the beginning, begun laying these foundations to support work in Phase A. Release of Planetary Science Decadal Survey and FY12 President's Budget in March 2011 changed the landscape. JEO reverted to being a pre-phase A study. A conscious choice was made to continue application of MBSE on the Europa Study, refocused for early formulation. This presentation describes the approach, results, and lessons.

early formulation

Goal-Function Tree Modeling for Systems Engineering and Fault Management

The draft NASA Fault Management (FM) Handbook (2012) states that Fault Management (FM) is a "part of systems engineering", and that it "demands a system-level perspective" (NASAHDBK- 1002, 7). What, exactly, is the relationship between systems engineering and FM? To NASA, systems engineering (SE) is "the art and science of developing an operable system capable of meeting requirements within often opposed constraints" (NASA/SP-2007-6105, 3). Systems engineering starts with the elucidation and development of requirements, which set the goals that the system is to achieve. To achieve these goals, the systems engineer typically defines functions, and the functions in turn are the basis for design trades to determine the best means to perform the functions. System Health Management (SHM), by contrast, defines "the capabilities of a system that preserve the system's ability to function as intended" (Johnson et al., 2011, 3). Fault Management, in turn, is the operational subset of SHM, which detects current or future failures, and takes operational measures to prevent or respond to these failures. Failure, in turn, is the "unacceptable performance of intended function." (Johnson 2011, 605) Thus the relationship of SE to FM is that SE defines the functions and the design to perform those functions to meet system goals and requirements, while FM detects the inability to perform those functions and takes action. SHM and FM are in essence "the dark side" of SE. For every function to be performed (SE), there is the possibility that it is not successfully performed (SHM); FM defines the means to operationally detect and respond to this lack of success. We can also describe this in terms of goals: for every goal to be achieved, there is the possibility that it is not achieved; FM defines the means to operationally detect and respond to this inability to achieve the goal. This brief description of relationships between SE, SHM, and FM provide hints to a modeling approach to provide formal connectivity between the nominal (SE), and off-nominal (SHM and FM) aspects of functions and designs. This paper describes a formal modeling approach to the initial phases of the development process that integrates the nominal and off-nominal perspectives in a model that unites SE goals and functions of with the failure to achieve goals and functions (SHM/FM). This methodology and corresponding model, known as a Goal-Function Tree (GFT), provides a means to represent, decompose, and elaborate system goals and functions in a rigorous manner that connects directly to design through use of state variables that translate natural language requirements and goals into logical-physical state language. The state variable-based approach also provides the means to directly connect FM to the design, by specifying the range in which state variables must be controlled to achieve goals, and conversely, the failures that exist if system behavior go out-of-range. This in turn allows for the systems engineers and SHM/FM engineers to determine which state variables to monitor, and what action(s) to take should the system fail to achieve that goal. In sum, the GFT representation provides a unified approach to early-phase SE and FM development. This representation and methodology has been successfully developed and implemented using Systems Modeling Language (SysML) on the NASA Space Launch System (SLS) Program. It enabled early design trade studies of failure detection coverage to ensure complete detection coverage of all crew-threatening failures. The representation maps directly both to FM algorithm designs, and to failure scenario definitions needed for design analysis and testing. The GFT representation provided the basis for mapping of abort triggers into scenarios, both needed for initial, and successful quantitative analyses of abort effectiveness (detection and response to crew-threatening events).

Patterson, Jonathan D.

Model-based Systems Engineering: Creation and Implementation of Model Validation Rules for MOS 2.0

Model-based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is an emerging modeling application that is used to enhance the system development process. MBSE allows for the centralization of project and system information that would otherwise be stored in extraneous locations, yielding better communication, expedited document generation and increased knowledge capture. Based on MBSE concepts and the employment of the Systems Modeling Language (SysML), extremely large and complex systems can be modeled from conceptual design through all system lifecycles. The Operations Revitalization Initiative (OpsRev) seeks to leverage MBSE to modernize the aging Advanced Multi-Mission Operations Systems (AMMOS) into the Mission Operations System 2.0 (MOS 2.0). The MOS 2.0 will be delivered in a series of conceptual and design models and documents built using the modeling tool MagicDraw. To ensure model completeness and cohesiveness, it is imperative that the MOS 2.0 models adhere to the specifications, patterns and profiles of the Mission Service Architecture Framework, thus leading to the use of validation rules. This paper outlines the process by which validation rules are identified, designed, implemented and tested. Ultimately, these rules provide the ability to maintain model correctness and synchronization in a simple, quick and effective manner, thus allowing the continuation of project and system progress.

Model-based Systems Engineering (MBSE)

Applying Modeling Tools to Ground System Procedures

As part of a long-term effort to revitalize the Ground Systems (GS) Engineering Section practices, Systems Modeling Language (SysML) and Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) have been used to model existing GS products and the procedures GS engineers use to produce them.

modeling

Automated Generation of Fault Management Artifacts from a Simple System Model

Our understanding of off-nominal behavior - failure modes and fault propagation - in complex systems is often based purely on engineering intuition; specific cases are assessed in an ad hoc fashion as a (fallible) fault management engineer sees fit. This work is an attempt to provide a more rigorous approach to this understanding and assessment by automating the creation of a fault management artifact, the Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) through querying a representation of the system in a SysML model. This work builds off the previous development of an off-nominal behavior model for the upcoming Soil Moisture Active-Passive (SMAP) mission at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. We further developed the previous system model to more fully incorporate the ideas of State Analysis, and it was restructured in an organizational hierarchy that models the system as layers of control systems while also incorporating the concept of "design authority". We present software that was developed to traverse the elements and relationships in this model to automatically construct an FMEA spreadsheet. We further discuss extending this model to automatically generate other typical fault management artifacts, such as Fault Trees, to efficiently portray system behavior, and depend less on the intuition of fault management engineers to ensure complete examination of off-nominal behavior.

Spinup and Orient

A UML Profile for State Analysis

State Analysis is a systems engineering methodology for the specification and design of control systems, developed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The methodology emphasizes an analysis of the system under control in terms of States and their properties and behaviors and their effects on each other, a clear separation of the control system from the controlled system, cognizance in the control system of the controlled system's State, goal-based control built on constraining the controlled system's States, and disciplined techniques for State discovery and characterization. State Analysis (SA) introduces two key diagram types: State Effects and Goal Network diagrams. The team at JPL developed a tool for performing State Analysis. The tool includes a drawing capability, backed by a database that supports the diagram types and the organization of the elements of the SA models. But the tool does not support the usual activities of software engineering and design - a disadvantage, since systems to which State Analysis can be applied tend to be very software-intensive. This motivated the work described in this paper: the development of a preliminary Unified Modeling Language (UML) profile for State Analysis. Having this profile would enable systems engineers to specify a system using the methods and graphical language of State Analysis, which is easily linked with a larger system model in SysML (Systems Modeling Language), while also giving software engineers engaged in implementing the specified control system immediate access to and use of the SA model, in the same language, UML, used for other software design. That is, a State Analysis profile would serve as a shared modeling bridge between system and software models for the behavior aspects of the system. This paper begins with an overview of State Analysis and its underpinnings, followed by an overview of the mapping of SA constructs to the UML metamodel. It then delves into the details of these mappings and the constraints associated with them. Finally, we give an example of the use of the profile for expressing an example SA model.

Murray, Alex

SIM Lite: Ground Alignment of the Instrument

We present the start of the ground alignment plan for the SIM Lite Instrument. We outline the integration and alignment of the individual benches on which all the optics are mounted, and then the alignment of the benches to form the Science and Guide interferometers. The Instrument has a guide interferometer with only a 40 arc-seconds field of regard, and 200 arc-seconds of alignment adjustability. This requires each sides of the interferometer to be aligned to a fraction of that, while at the same time be orthogonal to the baseline defined by the External Metrology Truss. The baselines of the Science and Guide interferometers must also be aligned to be parallel. The start of these alignment plans is captured in a SysML Instrument System model, in the form of activity diagrams. These activity diagrams are then related to the hardware design and requirements. We finish with future plans for the alignment and integration activities and requirements.

Alignment plan

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.