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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2016

Towards a Reference Architecture for Model-Based Engineering Environments

A key aspect of adopting model-based systems engineering as a practice in an organization is the design and development, and adoption of corresponding processes and tools that support the model-based paradigm. In an effort to enable the unified implementation of such processes and tools, this paper introduces a reference architecture model that serves as a specification for a model-based engineering environment. Current systems engineering practices, products, processes and technologies are used as input for continuously refining the architecture model. In the paper, we introduce and report on the current status of this reference architecture model, and present the methodology applied in developing the reference architecture. We conclude that while there are a very large number of domain- or application-specific processes requiring specialized behavior, these can be reduced through abstraction to a small set of core functions that need to be supported by a realization of a model-based engineering environment. Only very few organization-domain- or application-specific aspects require specialized consideration.

Herzig, Sebastian J. I.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Model Based Mission Assurance: Emerging Opportunities for Robotic Systems

The emergence of Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) in a Model Based Engineering framework has created new opportunities to improve effectiveness and efficiencies across the assurance functions. The MBSE environment supports not only system architecture development, but provides for support of Systems Safety, Reliability and Risk Analysis concurrently in the same framework. Linking to detailed design will further improve assurance capabilities to support failures avoidance and mitigation in flight systems. This also is leading new assurance functions including model assurance and management of uncertainty in the modeling environment. Further, the assurance cases, a structured hierarchal argument or model, are emerging as a basis for supporting a comprehensive viewpoint in which to support Model Based Mission Assurance (MBMA).

Mission Assurance↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate System Security Engineering Approaches

System security engineering (SSE) is a set of formal engineering methods and is considered a subset of systems engineering. It is a relatively new development in systems engineering with the initial NIST (National Institute of Standards) standard published in November of 2016 with updates in 2018, and 2022. The guiding principles in our methodology are based in NIST Special Publication 800-160 Vol. 1 “Systems Security Engineering: Considerations For A Multidisciplinary Approach In The Engineering Of Trustworthy Secure Systems” and integrate methodologies from common IT (Information Technology) threat modeling approaches utilizing MBSE (Model-Based Systems Engineering). The presentation will discuss how our teams utilize SSE and MBSE (Model-Based Systems Engineering) to develop secure architectures for systems under development in our NASA aeronautics research environment. This includes the activities to develop Protection Needs (PN) that, in turn result in security requirements in the design context and policies for the future state operational context for system protection. The process of applying SSE to analyze project architectures and ConOps (Concept of Operations) is intended to ensure the transferred research is both secure and securable in a “real-world” setting.

Systems Security Engineering↗
NASA NTRS2021

Model-Based SMA Initiative Phase 1 Report: Reliability Tips Excerpt

The emergence of model-based engineering, with Model- Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) leading the way, is transforming design and analysis methodologies. [7] The recognized benefits to systems development include moving from document-centric information systems and document-centric project communication to a model-centric environment in which control of design changes in the life cycles is facilitated. In addition, a “single source of truth” about the system, that is up-to-date in all respects of the design, becomes the authoritative source of data and information about the system. This promotes consistency and efficiency in regard to integration of the system elements as the design emerges and thereby may further optimize the designs. Therefore Reliability Engineers (REs) supporting NASA missions must be integrated into model-based engineering, using these recommended modeling techniques, to ensure the outputs of their analyses are relevant and value-needed to the design, development, and operational processes for failure risk assessment and communication.

Nancy J. Lindsey↗
NASA NTRS2010

Re-Engineering Complex Legacy Systems at NASA

The Flight Production Process (FPP) Re-engineering project has established a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) methodology and the technological infrastructure for the design and development of a reference, product-line architecture as well as an integrated workflow model for the Mission Operations System (MOS) for human space exploration missions at NASA Johnson Space Center. The design and architectural artifacts have been developed based on the expertise and knowledge of numerous Subject Matter Experts (SMEs). The technological infrastructure developed by the FPP Re-engineering project has enabled the structured collection and integration of this knowledge and further provides simulation and analysis capabilities for optimization purposes. A key strength of this strategy has been the judicious combination of COTS products with custom coding. The lean management approach that has led to the success of this project is based on having a strong vision for the whole lifecycle of the project and its progress over time, a goal-based design and development approach, a small team of highly specialized people in areas that are critical to the project, and an interactive approach for infusing new technologies into existing processes. This project, which has had a relatively small amount of funding, is on the cutting edge with respect to the utilization of model-based design and systems engineering. An overarching challenge that was overcome by this project was to convince upper management of the needs and merits of giving up more conventional design methodologies (such as paper-based documents and unwieldy and unstructured flow diagrams and schedules) in favor of advanced model-based systems engineering approaches.

Ruszkowski, James↗
NASA NTRS2012

A Model-Based Approach to Engineering Behavior of Complex Aerospace Systems

One of the most challenging yet poorly defined aspects of engineering a complex aerospace system is behavior engineering, including definition, specification, design, implementation, and verification and validation of the system's behaviors. This is especially true for behaviors of highly autonomous and intelligent systems. Behavior engineering is more of an art than a science. As a process it is generally ad-hoc, poorly specified, and inconsistently applied from one project to the next. It uses largely informal representations, and results in system behavior being documented in a wide variety of disparate documents. To address this problem, JPL has undertaken a pilot project to apply its institutional capabilities in Model-Based Systems Engineering to the challenge of specifying complex spacecraft system behavior. This paper describes the results of the work in progress on this project. In particular, we discuss our approach to modeling spacecraft behavior including 1) requirements and design flowdown from system-level to subsystem-level, 2) patterns for behavior decomposition, 3) allocation of behaviors to physical elements in the system, and 4) patterns for capturing V&V activities associated with behavioral requirements. We provide examples of interesting behavior specification patterns, and discuss findings from the pilot project.

SysML↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

How ExMC Communicates a System Model to Non-Modelers

NASA’s Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element adopted Systems Engineering (SE) principles and Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) tools to capture the system functions, system architecture, requirements, interfaces, and clinical capabilities for a future exploration medical system. There are many different stakeholders who may use the information in the model: systems engineers, clinicians (physicians, nurses, and pharmacists), scientists, and mission planners. Many of these stakeholders have neither access to MBSE modeling tools nor experience with SE modeling techniques. The challenge faced by ExMC SE team was how to present the content in the model to non-modelers in a way they would understand the content with limited training in MBSE and without using the modeling tool. ExMC SE team created a Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) report that shows key model content and is accessible to anyone with a browser. When creating the HTML report, the ExMC SE received stakeholder feedback on what content they wanted and how to display this content. Incorporating this feedback, the report arranges the content in a way that directs readers through the SE process taken to derive the requirements and helps them to understand the fundamental steps in an SE approach. The report includes links to source information (e.g., NASA documentation that describes levels of care) and other SE products (e.g., Concept of Operations). These links were provided to aid in the understanding of how the team created this content through a methodical SE approach. This presentation outlines the process used to develop the model, the data chosen to share with stakeholders, many of the model elements used in the report, the review process stakeholders followed, the comments received from the stakeholders, and the lessons ExMC learned through producing this HTML report.

J. Cohen↗
NASA NTRS2013

Modeling Complex Cross-Systems Software Interfaces Using SysML

The complex flight and ground systems for NASA human space exploration are designed, built, operated and managed as separate programs and projects. However, each system relies on one or more of the other systems in order to accomplish specific mission objectives, creating a complex, tightly coupled architecture. Thus, there is a fundamental need to understand how each system interacts with the other. To determine if a model-based system engineering approach could be utilized to assist with understanding the complex system interactions, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) sponsored a task to develop an approach for performing cross-system behavior modeling. This paper presents the results of applying Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) principles using the System Modeling Language (SysML) to define cross-system behaviors and how they map to crosssystem software interfaces documented in system-level Interface Control Documents (ICDs).

Earth orbit↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Developing a Medical System Foundation for Level of Care IV: Short-Duration Lunar Orbit

The Human Research Program (HRP) Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element has developed a Medical System Foundation for Level of Care IV, as defined by NASA’s space flight human-system standards, for short-duration lunar orbit missions by employing a systems engineering approach using model-based systems engineering tools. This Foundation includes a concept of operations, medical system architecture, associated functional and non-functional requirements and rationales, and medical conditions, capabilities, and resources. Collectively, these serve as a starting point (“Foundation”) for a medical system that meets the Level of Care IV requirement. The Foundation also includes traces to the current versions of NASA standards documents and lower (e.g., sub-system) and higher (e.g., vehicle system) level requirements. Stakeholders can use the Foundation to analyze the traces between medical capabilities, medical conditions, medical resources, and requirements; identify medical system interfaces with other vehicle systems/subsystems; and as a basis for performing trades on risks vs. medical system mass and volume allocation. To facilitate communication of the Foundation to stakeholders who do not have access to the modeling tools used, an HTML representation of the Foundation was created. This discussion will focus on the processes through which the Medical System Foundation was developed, how the Foundation builds a bridge between the medical and engineering domains and facilitates communication between these communities, and how these processes can be applied more broadly to a crew health and performance system and other system domains.

S. Lumpkins↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

What Has ExMC Systems Engineering Been Up To Since Last IWS?

Long duration Lunar and Martian missions will change the way NASA currently practices medicine. The missions will require more autonomous capability compared to current low Earth orbit operations. For the medical system, lack of consumable resupply, evacuation opportunities, and real-time ground support are key drivers toward greater autonomy. Recognition of the limited mission and vehicle resources available to carry out exploration missions motivates the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) Element’s approach to enabling the necessary autonomy. This element promotes human health and performance in space by advancing medical systems design and risk-informed decision-making for long-duration deep-space exploration missions (LDEMs). ExMC is using system engineering processes and Model-Based System Engineering (MBSE) tools to identify the user needs and requirements of LDEM medical systems. The MBSE approach to medical system design offers a paradigm shift toward greater integration between the vehicle and the medical system, and directly supports the transition of Earth-reliant International Space Station operations to the Earth-independent operations envisioned for LDEMs. This talk will provide a high-level overview of what the ExMC SE team has accomplished since the last IWS, an introduction to upcoming SE talks, and the ongoing systems engineering work.

K. McGuire↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A PPE Use Case on Configuration Management Approach for MBSE

Systems engineers worldwide have been working to implement Model-based Systems Engineering (MBSE) environments, tools, and methodologies. MBSE is a formalized application of modeling to support systems engineering, including requirements, design, analysis, verification, and validation activities over the project’s lifecycle[1]; MBSE captures the system data into a digital environment. Significant benefits of MBSE includes a reduction in the time in performing systems engineering activities and an improvement higher fidelity data production. As more Systems Engineers are using MBSE, the models it produces are becoming the source of truth for Systems Engineering artifacts. As we move towards using these models as the source of truth, a more rigorous Configuration Management (CM) infrastructure is needed. Many of the MBSE tools provide CM options but utilizing them efficiently and effectively can be challenging. More rigorous methods and tools are needed to assist with keeping track of changes in the model, making sure inadvertent changes to baseline data did not occur, visibility of changes in the different model versions, and the impacts of changes to the models. System engineers and configuration management personnel from the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) project at NASA Glenn Research Center have been working to develop a modeling construct that allows models to be the source of truth and maintain a configuration managed baseline. This paper presents a process that leverages the existing CM tools and describes how PPE used this process to manage changes more rigorously. It will describe the process behind building the model architecture that utilizes the MBSE tool capabilities and the configuration management process. It will contain some of the advantages and disadvantages of the architecture that the PPE project had settled upon utilizing, as well as some enhanced capabilities that the PPE MBSE team has developed.

MBSE↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

System Safety Analysis of Complex NASA Systems with Model-Based Engineering (REV B)

The emergence of model-based engineering is transforming design and analysis methodologies. A recognized benefit of model-based engineering is the existence of a “single source of truth” about the system that becomes the authoritative source of data and information for designers, analysts, and developers. This promotes consistency and efficiency as the design emerges and can be used to further optimize the design. Integrating System Safety Engineers to the “single source of truth” will ensure that the outputs of their assessments and analyses are relevant to the design as it evolves. Use of an integrated system model enables near immediate evaluation of a design change as well as development of operational processes for risk assessment and communication. Such models can enable efficient and timely analysis of system hazards (e.g., hazard fault tree analysis and procedure simulations) and produce complete, accurate, and more consistent products (e.g., hazard reports and safety requirement evaluations). Therefore, an agency-sponsored team at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) recently completed a System Safety Study of modeling and testing capabilities as part of a Model-Based Safety and Mission Assurance Initiative (MBSMAI). Using an existing model developed for reliability analyses, GSFC modeling and system safety experts performed system safety analysis/modeling and produced safety products. The team evaluated model-based feasibility to support System Safety Engineering, developed safety analysis modeling processes, and identified tool capability advancement/development needs. These study results indicate model-based engineering is valid and useable for System Safety Engineering for NASA if adequate modeling processes and environment are established.

NASA↗
NASA NTRS2020

Model Checking as a Service: Towards Pragmatic Hidden Formal Methods

Executable models can be used to support all engineering activities in Model-Based Systems Engineering. Testing and simulation of such models can provide early feedback about design choices. How-ever, in today’s complex systems failures could arise due to subtle errors that are hard to find without checking all possible execution paths. Formal methods, and especially model checking can uncover such subtle errors, yet their usage in practice is limited due to the specialized expertise and high computing power required. There-fore we created an automated, cloud-based environment that can verify complex reachability properties on SysML State Machines using hidden model checkers. The approach and the prototype is illustrated using an example from the aerospace domain.

Karban, Robert↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

System Safety Analysis of Complex NASA Systems with Model-Based Engineering

The emergence of model-based engineering is transforming design and analysis methodologies [5]. A recognized benefit of model-based engineering is the existence of a “single source of truth” about the system that becomes the authoritative source of data and information for designers, analysts, and developers. This promotes consistency and efficiency as the design emerges and can be used to further optimize the design. Integrating System Safety Engineers to the “single source of truth” will ensure that the outputs of their assessments and analyses are relevant to the design as it evolves. Use of an integrated system model enables near immediate evaluation of a design change as well as development of operational processes for risk assessment and communication. Such models can enable efficient and timely analysis of system hazards (e.g., hazard fault tree analysis and procedure simulations) and produce complete, accurate, and more consistent products (e.g., hazard reports and safety requirement evaluations). Therefore, an agency-sponsored team at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) recently completed a System Safety Study of modeling and testing capabilities as part of a Model-Based Safety and Mission Assurance Initiative (MBSMAI). Using an existing model developed for reliability analyses [1], GSFC modeling and system safety experts performed system safety analysis/modeling and produced safety products. The team evaluated model-based feasibility to support System Safety Engineering, developed safety analysis modeling processes, and identified tool capability advancement/development needs. These study results indicate model-based engineering is valid and useable for System

NASA↗
NASA NTRS2018

Using Maxwell's Demon to Tame the "Devil in the Details" that are Encountered During System Development

Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is the formalized application of modeling to support system requirements, design, analysis, verification and validation activities beginning in the conceptual design phase and continuing throughout development and later life cycle phases . This presentation will discuss the value proposition that MBSE has for Systems Engineering, and the associated culture change needed to adopt it.

Model Based Systems Engineering↗
NASA NTRS2011

Dynamic Gate Product and Artifact Generation from System Models

Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) is gaining acceptance as a way to formalize systems engineering practice through the use of models. The traditional method of producing and managing a plethora of disjointed documents and presentations ("Power-Point Engineering") has proven both costly and limiting as a means to manage the complex and sophisticated specifications of modern space systems. We have developed a tool and method to produce sophisticated artifacts as views and by-products of integrated models, allowing us to minimize the practice of "Power-Point Engineering" from model-based projects and demonstrate the ability of MBSE to work within and supersede traditional engineering practices. This paper describes how we have created and successfully used model-based document generation techniques to extract paper artifacts from complex SysML and UML models in support of successful project reviews. Use of formal SysML and UML models for architecture and system design enables production of review documents, textual artifacts, and analyses that are consistent with one-another and require virtually no labor-intensive maintenance across small-scale design changes and multiple authors. This effort thus enables approaches that focus more on rigorous engineering work and less on "PowerPoint engineering" and production of paper-based documents or their "office-productivity" file equivalents.

engineering paradigm↗
NASA NTRS2016

Effect of Satellite Formations and Imaging Modes on Global Albedo Estimation

We confirm the applicability of using small satellite formation flight for multi-angular earth observation to retrieve global, narrow band, narrow field-of-view albedo. The value of formation flight is assessed using a coupled systems engineering and science evaluation model, driven by Model Based Systems Engineering and Observing System Simulation Experiments. Albedo errors are calculated against bi-directional reflectance data obtained from NASA airborne campaigns made by the Cloud Absorption Radiometer for the seven major surface types, binned using MODIS' land cover map - water, forest, cropland, grassland, snow, desert and cities. A full tradespace of architectures with three to eight satellites, maintainable orbits and imaging modes (collective payload pointing strategies) are assessed. For an arbitrary 4-sat formation, changing the reference, nadir-pointing satellite dynamically reduces the average albedo error to 0.003, from 0.006 found in the static reference case. Tracking pre-selected waypoints with all the satellites reduces the average error further to 0.001, allows better polar imaging and continued operations even with a broken formation. An albedo error of 0.001 translates to 1.36 W/sq m or 0.4% in Earth's outgoing radiation error. Estimation errors are found to be independent of the satellites' altitude and inclination, if the nadir-looking is changed dynamically. The formation satellites are restricted to differ in only right ascension of planes and mean anomalies within slotted bounds. Three satellites in some specific formations show average albedo errors of less than 2% with respect to airborne, ground data and seven satellites in any slotted formation outperform the monolithic error of 3.6%. In fact, the maximum possible albedo error, purely based on angular sampling, of 12% for monoliths is outperformed by a five-satellite formation in any slotted arrangement and an eight satellite formation can bring that error down four fold to 3%. More than 70% ground spot overlap between the satellites is possible with 0.5deg of pointing accuracy, 2 Km of GPS accuracy and commands uplinked once a day. The formations can be maintained at less than 1 m/s of monthly (Delta)V per satellite.

BRDF↗