Course Introduction

EMIS 7307

1

Course Introduction

IS IS NOT A management course. Deeply technical course.

A lecture with examples plus opportunities to learn from fellow students.

A cookbook of answers.

Led by a successful manager sharing valuable lessons learned.

Led by a ‘know it all’.

Providing a customer perspective. Ignorant of contractor perspective. Providing hands-on, real-life experiences. Deeply theoretical.

Providing resources and ideas for developing solutions to tough problems.

In denial.

EMIS 7307

2

Background

• Highlights (which hopefully will give useful insights to course topics):

• Much of career has been backwards!– Started with reverse engineering included basic

science and now am technical support to acquisition programs.

EMIS 7307

3

Background

• Analyzed Soviet missile telemetry to determine guidance law of ICBMs. – Goal - assess accuracy.– Telemetry from their test program.

• RF signal containing sampled engineering parameters.

– They made many launches.• Would there be so many today? Why/ why not?

EMIS 7307

4

Background

• Test director for AAR-34 improvement program– F-111 tail mounted IR detector of aircraft and AAMs.

– Numerous false alarms rendered it useless in Vietnam.

– Contractor/PO needed to test improvements.• Safety issues (reason not done right originally).

• Once safety resolved, 20+ sensors piggy-backed.

• Fired 120 missiles (Would that happen today?).

Missile protection on F-111

Infrared sensor

EMIS 7307

In Viet Nam

Jungle with ponds

Sun Glint

Sun- glint

To the F111 warning sensor, it looked like an enemy missile or aircraft!

EMIS 7307

Dispense chaff and flares!EMIS 7307

What to do?

• Improvement program…a sensor redesign

• Improvements need to be tested

• Took improved sensor to White Sands Missile Range (WSMR) New Mexico for testing

EMIS 7307

WSMR

What else was tested here?

EMIS 7307

Fired 120 missiles at the sensor

Falcons, Sidewinders including…

EMIS 7307

10 Soviet Atolls

In 1958 a Sidewinder was fired from a Taiwanese F-86 Sabre aircraft. It lodged without exploding in a Chinese MiG-17. It was transferred to the Soviets who made the Atoll based on it.

EMIS 7307

WSMR

Over 20 sensors “piggy-backed” on these missile firings test!Over 100 people at the test site.

EMIS 7307

A day in my life

• Fly to WSMR test control station

• Helicopter to test site

• Fly back to control station

• Supervise test

• Return to home base

• Look at data, and get reports of results

Extreme excitement and satisfaction!

EMIS 7307

EMIS 7307

14

Background • SGEMP experimenter.

– Basic research.– Info for spacecraft design using vacuum tank and

idealized models of spacecraft shapes.– Note sometimes only the gov’t can afford to get the

needed engineering info, market dependent.• Unless security issues, info is freely available.

• AFOTEC operations analyst.– Operational test planning.– From the very beginning!

EMIS 7307

15

Background

• Director of GPS user equipment test program.– Gathered data for the Air Force to use in it’s

Milestone 2 (B) decision.– Instrument approaches, bombing, surveying etc.– Doubter’s chair.– Circular error probable (CEP).

In the 1970s…

• GPS did not exist

• Military navigation done with – Compass– Map– Star sighting with a sextant – Time of signal to go to a known place and back

• Both accuracy and not being detected were big issues

Could GPS be the answer?

• Satellites send signals containing the satellite’s position.

• A receiver receiving three or more satellite’s signals can calculate its own position without being detected.

• The questions were…– Would it work?– How to find out?

• The answer was…– A test program!

The test setup

• A few satellites were launched, and a few pretend satellites were installed, on the ground, at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona.

• Whenever the satellites passed overhead, a test could be conducted.

• The idea was to see if a variety of possible users would find GPS useful.

Some of the GPS users

2000-pound dumb bomb

Used GPS to position the airplanefor bomb drop

Repeatedly impacted in a small area

Doubter’s chair

You know the rest of the story

This is GPS now.

Based on this test program, the Pentagon decided to build the GPS.

EMIS 7307

24

Background

• System engineer for equipment for a spacecraft’s handling and testing.– So big only the shuttle could launch it.– Extreme reliability.– Needed testing in space environment. – Think about the difference in the test

requirements compared to GPS user’s equipment.

EMIS 7307

25

Background

• I&T manager for “special” program.– Involved from the beginning.– Major contributor to specification.

• “If you can’t readily imagine a verification technique it’s not a good specification!”

– System Integration lab is a crummy place to find interface issues caused by poor communication during the design process. Sources of poor com?

• However, the fully assembled, ultimate system, is a much worse place!!

EMIS 7307

26

Background • Contracting Officers Representative (COR) for “special”

program.– Good system engineers are very hard to find.– Engineers revert to their roots.

• Therefore perhaps best if roots are SE?

– Even with the best of intentions there is never enough time for testing.

• Design issues eat into test time and the delivery date doesn’t change.

• Decision? Bad (or untried) system vs. late system!

– Integrated test and product teams work well.

EMIS 7307

27

Overview and Chapter 1

Government Perspective Contractor Perspective

Buyer SellerBang for the buck Maximum profitQuick response Meet contractWant sources to be therewhen needed

Eliminate competition

The contractor isn’t openabout test results

The gov’t jumps toconclusions too quickly

Contractor is a crook Government wantssomething for nothing

Defend nation Defend nation

• Goal is to appreciate and understand the different perspectives!

EMIS 7307

28

Overview and Chapter 1

• I&T are integral and essential aspects of systems engineering. As such a foundational understanding of SE is essential to the understanding of the subject.

• We are going to survey the process of systems engineering, however:– Always thinking about the effect on I&T and T&E– Bottom line: These so-called “tail-end” functions aren’t

really - thinking, planning and occasionally executing are from the beginning.

EMIS 7307

29

Overview

• Notion of integration and interoperability getting blurred.– Integration implies within a system.

– Interoperability implies between systems.

– With systems of systems becoming more common the difference in the words shrinks.

• Interoperability is a user driven requirement.– Especially in the defense and banking industries.

Integration vs. Interoperability

EMIS 7307

30

Overview

What does it mean to integrate.– Data and data storage have a shared

understanding.– Control: single string of control.– Presentation to the user - seamless and “feels”

like it’s designed by one person.

EMIS 7307

31

Overview

• Integration– Property of a relationship i.e. 2 or more entities.– Done well - a users perspective.– Done easily - an engineers perspective.

EMIS 7307

32

Overview

• Interoperability– Much more than data and data exchange.– More will be required shortly after completion.– When a component evolves the interoperability

of the whole must be maintained.

• Can’t the same be said within a system?– If so what’s the difference in the two words?– Interoperability = cooperation = integration

EMIS 7307

33

Chapter 1

• Design Integration– The process that results in a design that appropriately

includes the suitability (“ilities”) factors and assures that the various components of a system will work together synergistically and cooperatively.

• I&T– A process of assembly of hardware and/or software

components to create a system. The checking of the results (during the build-up) and fixing of problems is included.

EMIS 7307

34

Chapter 1

• Test– A form of verification that that gets data which

can be used to demonstrate whether a certain parameter meets or could potentially meet it’s requirement.

• Evaluation– The process of using data to determine whether a

requirement has been met. May suggest areas to “fix” to bring the system into compliance.

EMIS 7307

35

Chapter 1

• What are systems?

• Why are they so complex?

• How do we handle complexity?

• What is a “systems” approach?

• What is a bottoms-up vs. top-down design approach?

EMIS 7307

36

Chapter 1

• What is ‘driving’ the need for more and better SE? See Fig 1.4

– Market (Changing requirements, competition etc)• Deliver now- fix it later

– Complexity (Systems full of what were formerly systems, world-wide suppliers and customers)

• How do we deal with complexity? – Subsystems

• What process becomes harder with more complexity? I&T

Fig. 1.4EMIS 7307

37

EMIS 7307

38

Chapter 1

• What historically bad practices does SE attempt to change? Why? M.E.s? E.E.s?

• What is the most expensive time in a systems life cycle for making changes?– Later is almost always significantly worse.

Fig 1.5 and1.8.

• Look at Fig 1.7. What are the most often forgotten aspects of a system?

Fig 1.5

EMIS 7307

39

Fig. 1.8

EMIS 7307

40

Fig. 1.7EMIS 7307

41

EMIS 7307

42

Chapter 1

• Look at Fig 1.2. Do you include these items when thinking of a system?

• System life cycle.– From idea, to creation, to use, to disposal!– All phases contain consideration for SE!– Surprisingly all phases require I&T

consideration too!

Fig. 1.2EMIS 7307

43

EMIS 7307

44

Chapter 1

• System engineering identifying qualities.– Top down - viewing system as a whole.– Life cycle view.– “Complete” effort to identify system

requirements “up-front”.– Interdisciplinary team approach.

EMIS 7307

45

Chapter 1

• Note the three perspectives in Fig 1.18. – Parallels from both sides of the V.

Note Figure 1.19. – Although says for software I believe it’s really

a system diagram i.e. substitute design engineering in place of software engineering.

– Note how I&T considerations apply to every block.

Fig.1.18EMIS 7307

46

Fig. 1.19EMIS 7307

47

EMIS 7307

48

Chapter 1

• DOD 5000 version of Fig 1.26.

Fig. 1.26EMIS 7307

49

EMIS 7307

50

Chapter 1

• Evolutionary development DOD.

EMIS 7307

51

Chapter 1

• Why evolutionary development?– Complexity– Changing technology

• Improvements

• Obsolescence

• What are the implications to I&T?– Anticipation!

EMIS 7307

52

Chapter 1

• Should SE be the overall program management?

• SE management responsibilities.– Communication with the customer.

– Develop the SEMP.

– Develop the TEMP.

– Plan/schedule design reviews.

– Conduct ongoing performance assessment and validation.

EMIS 7307

53

Chapter 1

• Why is system I&T so important yet so underrated?

• How/why has increasing complexity increased the need for more/better SE especially in the form of I&T competence?

EMIS 7307

54

Chapter 1

• What are some key enablers to successful I&T?– Good interface definitions.– Good configuration management.– Well written i.e. verifiable specifications.– Enough time planned into program for adequate

and early testing.

EMIS 7307

55

Chapter 1

• Let’s look at some of the questions at the end of Chapter 1.

EMIS 7307

56

Projects

• Each study group will ‘develop’ a system.• System to be selected by the group from list (next slide) or approved by

Bell.• I’m your customer.• You will define all the steps and documents.

– Define and selectively develop program schedule, system, documents.– Emphasis is on all integration aspects and appropriate testing along

the way to customer acceptance• Each group will develop an A Spec, SEMP and TEMP • Each group will make a presentation (1 hour).

– Every member presents – Each presentation is a portion of a major design or test review.

EMIS 7307

57

Instructions

• Develop ‘mini’(10 pages each): A Spec with section 4, SEMP, and Integration &Test Plan or Master Test Plan– Define subsystems and their performance requirements

– Include engineering organization with roles and responsibilities• Use IPTs

– Summarize written documents for a Powerpoint classroom presentation of which everyone presents an approximately equal portion

• For the remaining information you need to know to do your project... ask Bell.– If no answer in two days, make and document your assumptions then

continue.

EMIS 7307

58

Systems for Projects

• Select one or suggest one to Bell for approval– Automobile– Airplane– Distributed computing– Train– Spacecraft– Health monitoring

EMIS 7307

59


• Automobile:– Seats 5 -220 lb, 6’5’’ adults.– 0-60 mph in 6 sec.– Accelerates as quickly as it stops.– Has auto-steer and auto-trip capability:

• New capability that uses GPS and obstruction sensing to navigate safely from place to place.

– 2 years to IOC.

EMIS 7307

60


• Airplane– Must host surveillance equipment (provided by another

vendor)

– Accommodates aircrew and 5 sensor operators• Delivered with operator USI subsystems installed

– Must fly from unimproved airfields

– Used by all military services

– All weather flying

– 4 years to IOC, if modified

– 6 years to IOC, if new aircraft

EMIS 7307

61


• Distributed computing– World -wide interconnected users– Business data processing – Scientific data analysis– Includes all communication, computing and

data storage.– 2 years to IOC

EMIS 7307

62


• Passenger train– Magnetically levitated– 220 mph normal cruise– Less than 80dB noise at 15 feet from train– May use modified version of existing cars for

passengers– Include first 100 miles of ‘track’ from DFW to

Waco – 3 years to IOC

EMIS 7307

63


• Spacecraft– Mercury mapper– Both IR and radar– Directed subcontractors for the sensors– 3 year on-station life– Uses existing ground stations – 3 years to launch from shuttle in orbit

EMIS 7307

64


• Health monitoring– Used to monitor ambulatory patients from their homes.

– Realtime notification of physicians of out of tolerance parameters (50)

– Directed subcontractors for the sensors

– 5 years between mandatory service

– Automatic instructions to patient i.e. not just an alarm

– 2 years to competitor’s ‘roll-out’

Documents

Course Introduction