SMART Seminar Series: Railway Systems Complexity and Management

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

Determinants of Railway
System Complexity and
their Management

Dr. Felix Schmid
The University of Birmingham, in Association with
Armitage, Harris, McKechnie, Perrow, Qurashi, Reason

Determinants of Railway System Complexity and their Management

Typical Railways?

UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 2 University of Wollongong, 2012-22-23 BIRMINGHAM


Overview of Presentation
• What are determinants? A definition:
– Determinants are factors or issues that have the potential to
influence a decision, situation or context:
– Determinants are normally co-acting, i.e., there is rarely ever
a single determinant.
• A railway complexity case study;
• Review of railways’ natural characteristics;
• Managing the complexity of the railway system;
• A high-speed rail example of complexity management;
• Conclusion and discussion.
UNIVERSITYOF


Background to Complexity Case Study
• Birmingham, Manchester, Sheffield and Felix Schmid;
• A rather basic case study:
– The night of Friday, 7 January 2005 is dark and stormy;
– In the morning of Saturday, 8 January 2005, the storm is still
raging;
– John Hebblethwaite (not his real name) is rostered to take
the 05:11 from Sheffield to Manchester Airport and back…
– It is his first day at work after 6 months of sick leave;
– Events take a rather unpleasant turn for many;
– Case study lessons for the parties involved.
• The railway’s relationship with its competitors.
UNIVERSITYOF


Geography of Britain
Scotland
West Coast Main Line (WCML)
Glasgow Edinburgh

Carlisle

Blackpool Preston
Liverpool
Holyhead Sheffield
Crewe Manchester
WalesBirmingham
Fishguard
England
Rugby
Cardiff Bristol
LONDON

Penzance
UNIVERSITYOF


Current Roles of Felix Schmid
• Designer and director of MSc in Railway Systems
Engineering at University of Sheffield (1994-2008);
• Professor of Railway Systems Integration, University
of Birmingham (since 2005);
– Director of Education, Birmingham Centre for Railway
Research and Education;
– Leader of railway systems engineering courses for industry;
– Visiting lecturer at École Nationale des Ponts.
• Research in railway control systems & human factors;
• Expert on CrossRail’s systems engineering panel;
• Consultant to MWH and Crossrail for track systems.
UNIVERSITYOF


The World’s Most Wonderful Commute

Stockport
Sheffield M.
Chinley R2

R1 Chesterfield

UNIVERSITYOF


A Functional View of Railways
A fun
Standards more ctional re
usefu prese
Rules and
l than ntatio
Regulations
based a com n is
Laws analy pone
sis nt
Transport People
or Goods by Rail Transport Units Achieved (TUA)
Demand for
Transport by Transport Quality Achieved (TQA)
Railway
Transport Value Achieved (TVA)

/
rney ry
e jou cessa
es, th a ne
Funds
s
Resources &
o st ca ity is t valu
e
Equipment
In m rt activ eren
People
po o inh
trans and of n
evil UNIVERSITYOF


A ‘normal’ Train Journey to Work?
• Friday, January, 7 January
2005, 22.10: Forecast of
severe gales for Saturday;
• 8 January 2005: Leave home
at 06.35 to cycle to station –
in record time thanks to
strong following wind!
• Board 07:18 train to travel to
work in Sheffield, the former
home of the MSc in Railway
Systems Engineering;
• No problems apparent – train A Class 158 2-car Diesel Multiple Unit
leaves on time. waits to leave Piccadilly
UNIVERSITYOF


A Class 323 Train of Northern Rail
• ‘Northern Rail’ is franchise;
• Modern type of suburban
train found in Manchester
and West Midlands area;
• Largely used on regional APEX

commuter routes; FRAME

• 3-car electric multiple unit UPPER ARM PANTOGRAPH
HEAD

(25kV) powered by 3-phase CONTROL
ROD
induction motors;
KNUCKLE

LOWER

• Just one single arm high-
ARM
RAISING
CYLINDER

speed pantograph with low
AIR FEED INSULATOR
4th BAR

contact force;
• ‘My’ train is diesel multiple
unit of Class 158, built
around 1990, still quite new.
AIR
UNIVERSITYOF
EQUIPMENT

Slide No: 10 University of Wollongong, 2012-22-23INSULATORS
BASE & BIRMINGHAM


Determinant: Railway Diversity

The Number of distinct and
different sub-activities that are
performed within an integrated UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 11 system of tasks Wollongong, 2012-22-23
University of (McKechnie). BIRMINGHAM


Range of Railway Subsystems

Electrification & Traction &
Vehicle
Power Supplies Braking
Operations Management Structures
Systems

Maintenance System
Bogie
Communi- VCS
Systems
Control
cations &
Axles & Wheels
Signalling
Systems
CIS Rail ATP Rail

Sleepers & Ballast
Station Systems
Substructure System

CIS: Customer Information Systems / VCS: Vehicle Control Systems
UNIVERSITYOF


Customer and Passenger Needs Diversity

UNIVERSITYOF


Subsystem and Component Diversity
• Types of Subsystems:
– Switches and crossings;
– Electrification equipment;
– Power supplies & substations;
VH – Train control and signalling;
– Rolling stock and traction.
H • Component variety:
– Steel and concrete structures;
M – Microprocessors;
– Sensors and effectors;
L – Thyristors, GTOs, IGBTs;
–

Williams, ORR, 2006
Precision mechanical systems;
– Electrical machines.
• Issue raised by McKechnie
as ‘heterogeneïty’.
UNIVERSITYOF

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

Railway are Diverse or
Heterogenous Systems


158 motors to Stockport and all is well
& some nice OHLE too!

A useful facing crossover!
UNIVERSITYOF


On Time in Stockport, depart after 60 s

Stockport Viaduct
on Normal Route

Edgeley Side of
UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 17 University of Wollongong, 2012-22-23
Stockport
BIRMINGHAM


Determinant: Railway Dispersion

Extent to which assets, resources and
people required for correct operation
of system are distributed over a large UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 18 area / along corridors (Schmid)
University of Wollongong, 2012-22-23 BIRMINGHAM


Dispersion and Linearity
• Linear infrastructures:
– 10 m wide and 1000s km long;
– Great impacts on environment;
– Environmental impact varies.
• Distributed assets:
– Assets difficult to reach;
– Assets difficult to maintain;
– Assets difficult to control.
• Dispersed staff:
– Supervision vs. management;
– Management only long term;
– Supervision must be strong;
– Fast decision taking locally.
• Issue raised by Schmid.

UNIVERSITYOF


Major Structures to cope with Linearity

UNIVERSITYOF


Classic Example of Dispersion Issue

VH

H

M

L

UNIVERSITYOF

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

Railways are Long and
Thin – they are Dispersed


Turn off towards Buxton and Sheffield

1997

1967
2008

2004

1850 to 1895 UNIVERSITYOF


A Difficult Issue: Asset Life Diversity

The extent to which assets of
widely differing ages must
work together to achieve the UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 24 purpose of a system (Schmid).


Asset Life Diversity: 1 day to 200 Years
• Long life railway assets:
– Cuttings, embankments;
– Culverts, bridges, viaducts,
flyovers, dive-unders, tunnels;
– Stations, offices, depots.
VH
• Medium life railway assets:
H – Tracks, rails and signals;
– Locos, carriages, ferries;
M – Wagons, track machines,
• Short lived railway assets:
L – Ticket machines, ticket gates;
– Computers, cars and trucks;
– Staff uniforms and hand-tools.
• Issue raised by Armitage.

UNIVERSITYOF

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

We are using Assets that
were created between just
5 and 160 Years ago

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

We are still on our
winter journey from
Manchester to Sheffield


In Theory, it’s only 6 Mins to Chinley
‘Slow’ Route from New Mills
joins from left, ‘stopper’ waiting

… and ‘stopper’ still waiting

UNIVERSITYOF


Sadly, that’s not what happened on the
stormy Saturday, 8 January 2005

A Level Crossing

Woodsmoor
Station
There are 7500 of UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 29 BIRMINGHAM
these in Britain
University of Wollongong, 2012-22-23


Determinant: Nature of Interactions

Way in which subsystems and
activities relate to each other
during normal and disturbed UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 30
operations of Wollongong, 2012-22-23
University (after Perrow) BIRMINGHAM


‘Complex’ Interactions (Perrow)
• Linear Interactions:
– Segregated subsystems;
– Easy substitutions;
– Few feedback loops;
– Single purpose, separate controls;
– Direct information;
– Extensive understanding.
• ‘Complex’ interactions:
– Parts and units not in a production
sequence are close together;
– Unfamiliar or unintended
feedback loops;
– Indirect or inferential information
sources;
– Limited understanding of some
processes.

UNIVERSITYOF


Life is not always easy for railways…

UNIVERSITYOF


Linear vs. ‘Complex’ Interactions
• Railway interactions:
– Train sequences;
– Conflicts at junctions;
– Passenger behaviour;
C – Staff behaviour;
– Trespass and vandalism.
• Maintenance activities:
– Rolling stock and track;
N – Structures and stations.
• System control:
– Management of nodes;
– Staff allocation to duties;
L – Rolling stock schedules.
• Issue raised by Perrow.

UNIVERSITYOF


The Train stops at Woodsmoor at 07:34

Woodsmoor
Sheffield M.
Chinley R2

R1 Chesterfield

UNIVERSITYOF


… and conductor provides information
• We are stuck behind a Class 323 without a pantograph:
– Branch of a tree had broken off and was foul of OHLE;
– First electric train of the morning (in the dark) hit branch;
– Pantograph and branch combine to break droppers;
– Pantograph disintegrates – no power.
• Class 158 is hemmed-in, in both directions:
– Class 323 ahead without power is unable to move;
– Level crossing behind train only strikes-in in one direction;
– The cross-overs of Hazel Grove are beyond the 323.
• Access is near impossible due to housing and gardens.
UNIVERSITYOF


Let’s Look at the Situation in Detail

Rather than here, at Hazel Grove
Failed
Train
Here

Platform at Woodsmoor

UNIVERSITYOF


Many Subsystems and Interfaces

Electrification & Traction &
Vehicle
Power Supplies Braking Structures
Third Parties

Operations Management
Systems

Maintenance System
Bogies
Communi- VCS
Systems
Control
cations &
Axles & Wheels
Signalling
Systems
CIS Rail ATP Rail

Sleepers & Ballast
Station Systems
Substructure System

CIS: Customer Information Systems / VCS: Vehicle Control Systems
UNIVERSITYOF


Interfaces: Strength of System Coupling

Extent to which two components or
activities must be linked to achieve an
UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 38 appropriate performance (after Perrow).


Loose Coupling vs. Tight Coupling
• Loose Coupling (process and technical):
– Processing delays possible;
– Sequence & order can be changed;
– Alternative methods available;
– Slack in resources possible;
– Buffers and redundancies are fortuitously always available.
• Tight Coupling (process and technical):
– Time-dependent behaviour, i.e., delays in processing not possible;
– Invariant sequencing;
– Only one method to achieve goal;
– Little slack available;
– Buffers and redundancies must be designed in as part of the system.
• Issue raised by Perrow.

UNIVERSITYOF


Tightly Coupled Mechanical Systems
• Wheel and rail interface:
– Steel on steel stiffness;
– Motion control by conicity;
– Traction and braking with
small contact area;
– Track held by ballast.
• Pantograph and overhead:
– Overhead relative to rails;
– Low contact force limits wear;
• Switches and crossings:
– Accurate mechanisms needed;
– Must be locked for trains.

UNIVERSITYOF


Railways are Tightly Coupled Systems
• Single degree of freedom of movement of rolling stock
requires infrastructure with variable geometry;
• Limited adhesion requires train control and signalling;
T
• Stiffness of wheel / rail interface requires accurate
infrastructure and high quality maintenance;
• Linear (distributed) nature of the railway infrastructure
propagates failures and is open to environmental
L
influences;
• Need for reliable timetabled operation and good
resource management;
• Interface and interaction management is essential.
UNIVERSITYOF


Charles Perrow 1999
• “[S]ystems are not linear or complex, strictly speaking,
only their interactions are. Even here we must recall
that linear systems have very few complex
interactions, while complex ones have more linear
ones, but complex interactions are still few in number”

• This is often referred to as ‘Interactive Complexity’:
– Do we prefer linear or complex systems?
– Do we prefer loose or tight coupling?
• Unfortunately, some systems have to be interactively
complex and tightly coupled by their nature!
UNIVERSITYOF


System Dimensions and Industries
Interaction / Coupling Chart

Tight Coupling
dams nuclear
power railways >> plant
grids DNA
nuclear
weapons

Linear
Interaction Complex
Interaction

assembly-line
production mining
R&D firms
simple-goal
agencies Loose
Coupling
UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 43 Adapted from Perrow,University of Wollongong, 2012-22-23
1999:97 BIRMINGHAM

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

After 20 minutes, Felix
‘jumps ship’, illegally


There was another Route to Sheffield…

R3
Sheffield M.
Chinley R2

R1 Chesterfield

UNIVERSITYOF

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

But the Driver’s Route
Knowledge had Lapsed,
due to the Sickness Leave


Consequences of just a few Mistakes
• Consequences for the passengers on the Class 158:
– 07:18 should have arrived in Sheffield at 08:09 but, instead,
reaches South Yorkshire at 10:53;
– Felix arrives in Sheffield at 10:10 on the 09:18 and is in the
University 10 minutes before his lecture;
– Most passengers have had to wait for 150 minutes without
decent information – coming from an airport;
– Passengers bound elsewhere have missed connections;
– Railway has lost a lot of goodwill.
• Network Rail and TOC B share ca. £100,000 cost of
delay penalties – both had made serious mistakes.
UNIVERSITY
Slide No: 47
… but Felix has acquired a really excellent case-study!
OF


Case Study Lessons I
• Accumulation of minor mistakes and failures can lead
to a collapse in any tightly coupled (transport) system:
– Single degree of freedom of motion of rolling stock:
• Railway requires points;
– Limited adhesion and thus inability to drive by line of sight:
• Railway requires signalling and formal (level) crossings;
– Stiff interface requiring highly performing maintenance:
• Minimise scale of infrastructure to limit cost;
– Linear nature of railway increases management difficulty:
• Reduces ability to control and intervene;
– Operational characteristics require adherence to timetable.
• Organisational structure of system affects outcomes.
UNIVERSITYOF


Case Study Lessons II
• Impact of natural characteristics of rail mode of
transport:
– Route learning failure (driver should not have resumed work
without it);
– Train design failure (two pantographs would have
minimised knock-on delays);
– Control and supervision failure (better management and
early intervention);
– Infrastructure and signalling inadequacies (no capability for
reversal or overtaking of failed train);
– (Environmental) unpredictability not factored in.
• The railway does not forgive mistakes!
UNIVERSITYOF


Determinant: Railway Variability

Extent to which tasks must
depart from a constantly
recurring simple pattern UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 50 (McKechnie).


Not enough Variability to cause Trouble
Photograph Courtesy Keeping Track Image Library

UNIVERSITYOF


Too much Variability to cause Trouble?
Photographs Courtesy North Sout Railway

UNIVERSITYOF


External and Internal Variability
• External variability:
– Operational impact of weather;
– Demand variation;
– Economic cycle impact;
VH – Stakeholder vacillation;
– Subsidy regime variation;
H – Impact of connecting services;
– Third party behaviour.
M • Internal variability:
– Variable passenger behaviour;
L – Variable staff performance;
– Variable wheel-rail adhesion;
– Spontaneous system failures;
• Issue raised by McKechnie.

UNIVERSITYOF

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

Railways Operate in a
Highly Variable
Environment

Physically, Operationally and
Organisationally


And here it is: The Butterfly of Railway Complexity

Le Papillon de la Complexité
Ferroviaire
Der Komplexitätsschmetterling UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 55 University of Wollongong, 2012-22-23
des Systems Bahn BIRMINGHAM

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

A Slightly Different
Perspective


Regulations and Standards Issue
• Tools to control complexity?
• Intricate legal framework:

!
RS
E – Interoperability regulations;

EA
– Technical Specifications for
Interoperability;

5Y
VH
– Road traffic regulations;

R
– National health and safety law;

TE
H
– European rail safety law.

AF
M • Intricate standards system:

TE
– CEN Standards;

DA
L – UIC ‘standards’;

OF
– National regulations;
– Internal standards.
T
• Issue raised by Qurashi. OU

UNIVERSITYOF

Five Dimensions of Complexity
Variability Ve
ry ?
McKechnie S hor
t
gh
y Hi Sh
ort
r
Ve
Water gh Me
Hi diu
Rail m
Nuclear m
diu

Very High
Me Hig

Medium
h
w

High
Low
Lo
Regulations Diversity
Various
& Standards

Low
High
Very High

Medium
Excessive!

Qureshi
Low Low

um
Medi
Me
diu
m h
Hig
Hig
h h
ry Hig
Ve
Ver
yH
igh
Dispersion Interdependence
Schmid UNIVERSITYOF
Perrow and McKechnie


What Core Issue have we forgotten?

b le
s ha
P eri
RY
e VE
ar
ay
ilw
Ra
f the
c ts o
du
Pr o
The

UNIVERSITYOF

Six Dimensions of Complexity Determinants of Railway System Complexity and their Management
Variability Ve
ry Product Life
McKechnie Sh
ort Harris
gh
y Hi Sh
ort
r
Ve
Water gh Me
Hi di um
Rail
Nuclear m
diu

Very High
Me Hig

Medium
h
w

High
Low
Lo
Regulations Diversity
Various
& Standards

Low
High
Very High

Medium
Excessive!

Qurashi
Low Low

um
Medi
Me
diu
m h
Hig
Hig
h h
ry Hig
Ve
Ver
yH
igh
Dispersion Interdependence
Schmid UNIVERSITYOF
Perrow and McKechnie


Summary of Complexity Determinants
• Level of Variability:
– Affects extent to which tasks must depart from simple recurring patterns.
• Level of Diversity (heterogeneity):
– Relates to number of distinct and different sub-activities that must be
performed within an integrated system of tasks;
– Affects extent to which assets and processes exist beyond normal
planning and management horizons.
• Level of Interdependence (tight coupling / intensive interactions):
– Extent to which performance of a system, as a whole, is reliant on and
facilitated by exchanges of information to co-ordinate individual tasks.
• Level of Dispersion and Linearity:
– Extent to which assets, resources and people contributing to correct
operation of system are distributed over a large area / along corridors.
• Regulations and Standards:
– Extent to which activities are regulated by governments and other
bodies. UNIVERSITYOF


Physical Characteristics of Rail Mode
Characteristic → Motion restricted to single Low coefficient of friction Stiff interface between wheels Distributed linear infra-
↓ Aspects degree of freedom along track between wheels and rails and rails structure subsystem
Strengths G • No steering required; • Low rolling resistance; • Low energy dissipation; • Product reaches customer;
• Predictable motion; • Low rolling surfaces wear; • High tonnages / period; • Production process controll-
• Narrow swept path; • Efficient propulsion; • Low forces in track bed; able throughout system;
• Linked consists (trains); • High speed operation; • Predictable motion; • External events rarely affect
• High standard of safety. • Energy efficiency. • Smooth operations; all of system;
• Potentially long track life. • Part opening of new
systems.
E • Track-based power supply. • Energy recovery potential. • Low wheel-rail damping. • Multiple feeder options.
Weaknesses G • Guidance function cost; • Limited braking rate; • Stiff rolling interface; • Environmental impact
• High route blockage risk; • Low acceleration rate; • Low inherent damping; affects linear strips of
• Low network flexibility; • Seasonal adhesion variation; • Noise & vibration issues terrain;
• Complex route changes; • Line of sight inadequate; • Cost of track & structures; • Remote management of
• No collision avoidance. • Low rolling surface wear. • Cost of inspection. local problems difficult.
E • Complex electrification; • Risk of slip and slide; • High impact environment • Voltage drop along route;
• Limited design options. • Torque control required. for traction drives. • Many supply points needed.
Technical G • Variable geometry elements; • Signalling system; • Load rack design; • Provision of redundancy;
requirements • Train position detection; • Adhesion control; • Testing & inspection; • Protective features (tunnels,
• Locking of route elements; • Artificial wear required; • Accurate maintenance; galleries, fences etc.).
• Junctions & stations. • Regular maintenance. • Regular maintenance.
Operational G • Timetabling & planning; • Path allocation to trains; • Strong procedures. • Scheduling of services;
requirements • Strict rulebook for all staff. • Stringent safety rules. • Several layers of control.
Management G • Rigorous selection of staff; • Simulation of individual • Maintenance management; • Delegated authority;
tools • Modelling of train services. train behaviour. • Technical understanding. • Strong supervision.
Training G • Responsibility; • Environmental awareness; • Strong engineering skills; • Rule based behaviour;
• Staff competence. • Safety ethos. • Safety ethos. • Adaptive behaviour.
UNIVERSITYOF


Railways have Strong Competitors

Constraints / Controls
Timetable, Management Systems

Road Transport
Demand Transport
Product

Profit?
Transport Rail Transport Transport Goods
Demand Demand & People by Rail Service
Quality
Air Transport
Demand
Mechanisms / Processors
Waterways People, Rolling Stock, Infrastructure,
Demand Power, Supplies, Finance

UNIVERSITYOF


How can we Design better Systems?
• Understand better the purpose of systems:
– Identify stakeholder requirements;
– Make stakeholder requirements measurable.
• Understand better the functions that satisfy purpose:
– Identify system functionality and architecture;
– Identify necessary subsystems and their functions.
• Understand better the interfaces between subsystems:
– Identify links and relationships between functions.
• Understand fully the interactions between subsystems:
– Define limits to the interactions;
– Monitor the interactions.
UNIVERSITYOF

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

It’s a Complex System:
Let’s apply (Railway)
Systems Engineering


Rail Systems Engineering & Integration
• Railway Systems Engineering and Integration (RSEI) is
concerned with:
– Managing the people, resources and processes required to conceive,
design, build, operate, maintain, renew, close and decommission
railways of all types;
– Respecting the limits and constraints imposed by the natural physical,
organisational and operational characteristics of the rail mode, in an
effective and efficient manner;
– Satisfying the system’s stakeholders and environmental concerns.
• RSEI is not just about technologies, components, interfaces,
know-how and processes;
• RSEI is about developing people to carry out their tasks better
and more effectively, while respecting the constraints of a
highly complex technical and organisational system.
• ‘Integration’ goes beyond systems engineering…
UNIVERSITYOF


History of Systems Engineering
© Brian Halliday, Network Rail

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Products Software Projects
UNIVERSITYOF


Systems Engineering Responsibilities
• Requirements Management:
– Requirements elicitation and requirements management;
– Definition of system and subsystem specifications.
• Performance and Technical Risk:
– Modelling of operational performance;
– Evaluation of robustness of technical options.
• Cost and Capability:
– Development of optimised system options;
– Human, equipment and operations integration.
• Quality Systems Design:
– Creation of quality management systems.
• Configuration Management:
– Provision and control of asset information;
– Development of configuration management systems.
UNIVERSITYOF

Typical Systems Engineering VEE Process
Conceive and Concept of Operation Need for a New
Select Solution Function / System

Capture Stakeholder Commission into
Requirements Service Operation

Develop System Define Validation Plan Test Whole System
Specification Functionality
De
fin

n
tio
it
ion

da
Design and Develop Define Test Plans Integrate System
,D

li
Va
System Architecture Components
eco

&
mp

ing
osi t

st
Te
i on

Develop Components Test Test Components

n,
&

tio
and Subsystems Plans and Subsystems
Ve

ra
ri

teg
fi c

In
a ti
on

Source or Produce
System Components

UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 69 Project Time Line

Typical Systems Engineering VEE Process
Conceive and Concept of Operation Requirement
Select Solution Satisfied

Capture Stakeholder Commission into
Requirements Service Operation

Develop System Define Validation Plan Test Whole System
Specification Functionality
De
fin

n
tio
it
ion

da
Design and Develop Define Test Plans Integrate System
,D

li
Va
System Architecture Components
eco

&
mp

ing
osi t

st
Te
i on

Develop Components Test Test Components

n,
&

tio
and Subsystems Plans and Subsystems
Ve

ra
ri

teg
fi c

In
a ti
on

Source or Produce
System Components

UNIVERSITYOF
Slide No: 70 Project Time Line


Purpose of VEE Process in SE&I
• Ensures structured approach to projects;
• Assists robust requirements capture and maintenance;
• Ensures clear staging of projects:
– Allows establishment of stage gates;
– Allows monitoring of time line;
– Encourages closing out of issues;
– Encourages management of prevarication.
• Encourages thinking ahead to later stages;
• Ensures robust verification and validation;
• Assists robust configuration management:
– Reduction of modification effort and rework.
UNIVERSITYOF


Why do projects fail?

Other
23% Lack of User Input
13%

Incomplete
Require- 12%
Technology ments
Changing
11% 48%
12%
Unrealistic Time Unrealistic
4% 6%
Inadequate Unclear
Resources 5%
6% Lack of Executive
Support
8% Standish CHAOS report, 1995, http://standishgroup.com/visitor/chaos.htm

UNIVERSITYOF


What goes wrong?
50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
Incorrect facts Omissions Inconsistency Ambiguity Misallocation

Leffingwell, http://www.rational.com/media/whitepapers/roi1.pdf
UNIVERSITYOF


How much does it cost to fix?
250
200
200
Relative Cost to Fix

150

100
50

50
20
1 5 10

0
Requirements Design Build Test Commissioning Operation

Lifecycle Phase when Error Discovered

Leffingwell, http://www.rational.com/media/whitepapers/roi1.pdf UNIVERSITYOF


Conclusion
• Natural characteristics of rail mode are constraining;
• Railways are fundamentally different from other
modes of transport and service industries;
• Rail mode is inherently complex:
– Technologically, organisationally and operationally;
– Project delivery and safety management.
• Stakeholders often have conflicting requirements and
contradictory agendas;
• VEE project life-cycle can be helpful in major projects
but requires strong PM who imposes stop criteria!
UNIVERSITYOF

UNIVERSITYOF
BIRMINGHAM

Railways perform well
when they observe a robust
and efficient timetable

SMART Seminar Series: Railway Systems Complexity and Management

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to SMART Seminar Series: Railway Systems Complexity and Management (20)

More from SMART Infrastructure Facility (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

SMART Seminar Series: Railway Systems Complexity and Management