H2020-AHTOOLS Use Case 3 Functional Design
0 likes282 views
The document discusses a framework for improving the reuse of hardware models through automatic traceability between descriptive and analytical models in systems engineering. It outlines the need for a common representation and interoperable access model that integrates various tools and technologies, while also addressing key challenges like vendor lock-in and data consistency. The proposed approach involves a knowledge-centric systems engineering framework that aims to streamline processes and enhance collaboration across engineering teams.
![www.arrowhead.eu
Some references
[1] Jose María Álvarez Rodríguez, Roy Mendieta, Jose Luis de la Vara, Anabel
Fraga, Juan Lloréns: Enabling System Artefact Exchange and Selection
through a Linked Data Layer. J. UCS 24(11): 1536-1560 (2018)
[2] Jose María Álvarez Rodríguez, Valentin Moreno, Juan Lloréns: Formal
ontologies and data shapes within the Software Engineering development
lifecycle. SEKE 2019: 64-93
32](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/ahtools-uc3-milan-virtual20200429-200430070557/85/H2020-AHTOOLS-Use-Case-3-Functional-Design-32-320.jpg)
H2020-AHTOOLS Use Case 3 Functional Design
- 1. Automatic traceability between descriptive and analytical models UC3-Functional design Prof. Jose María Alvarez Rodríguez (UC3M, speaker) Roy Mendieta (REUSE) Eduardo Cibrián (UC3M) Ainhoa Aristimuno (ULMA)
- 2. www.arrowhead.eu Context 2 As So that… I want to… Reuse of existing hardware artefacts -Recovery traces (fine-grained) -Assess hardware design quality -Refactor hardware designs Hardware Engineer Access, search and trace hardware models I am using different tools: IBM Doors, Altium Designer, Altium Vault, MSExcel, IBM Rhapsody and others…
- 3. www.arrowhead.eu The question 3 Is it possible to: -improve the degree of reuse of any hardware model and -deliver added-value services through a common representation and an interoperable access model?
- 5. www.arrowhead.eu Lifecycle processes 5 Mats Berglund (Ericsson) http://www.ices.kth.se/upload/events/13/84404189f85d41a6a7d1cafd0db4ee80.p df Source: http://beyondplm.com/2014/07/22/plm-implementations-nuts-and-bolts-of-data-silos/
- 6. www.arrowhead.eu Traceability definition: ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765:2017 IEEE Systems and Software Engineering Vocabulary 6
- 7. www.arrowhead.eu Traceability definition: ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765:2017 7
- 8. www.arrowhead.eu Some common needs… 8 A knowledge model to drive the development lifecycle.Knowledge Naming Ad-hoc integration Discovery Collaborati on Vendor Lock-in A common vocabulary to standardize the naming of any system artefact. Integration of different tools. A method to automatically discovery and manage traces. An engineering environment to ensure quality, save costs and enable team collaboration. A method to avoid the vendor lock-in ensuring compatibility in terms of models, formats, access protocols, etc.
- 9. www.arrowhead.eu …more common needs… 9 • Common data model (vocabulary) • Language Data representation • Check integrity Data consistency & conformity • Methods to ease reuse As a service • Standardized formats and access protocols Data exchange (and sharing) • Semantics Data interpretation 01 02 03 04 05
- 11. www.arrowhead.eu Conceptual approach: Knowledge-Centric Systems Engineering 11
- 12. www.arrowhead.eu 12 Conceptual approach: Internet of Tools Figure based on the OSLC architecture
- 13. www.arrowhead.eu KCSE Framework: building blocks 13 KnowledgeManagement (OSLC-inspired) Resource Shape System Representation Language Data representation & consistency System Knowledge Base Domain Ontology Data consistency & interpretation System Assets Store Domain artifacts Data exchange Metadata Contents Delegated Operations Functionality As a Service Interface As a Service
- 14. www.arrowhead.eu Resource shape: System Representation Language 14
- 15. www.arrowhead.eu Domain ontology layers 15 Taxonomy Semantic relationships Controlled vocabulary Domain vocabulary Patterns Templates built on top of the domain vocabulary and semantic relationships. E.g. requirements, design, etc. Inference Generation of new knowledge Consistency …
- 16. www.arrowhead.eu Example: Smart authoring (REUSE) 16
- 17. www.arrowhead.eu System assets generation 17 Input artefact Tool k Transformation rules SKB SRL (industrial knowledge graph) Linked Data Text SysML Altium Modelica Simulink …
- 18. www.arrowhead.eu KCSE framework implementation 18 Tool k Step 5 Common Services KCSE Provider (.Net, Java) HTTP & RDF KCSE Client & Provider (.Net) CAKE (.Net) KM SAS & SKB (.Net) KCSE adapter (.Net, Java, XSLT)
- 19. www.arrowhead.eu KCSE framework implementation (real effort) 19 Tool k Step 5 Common Services KCSE Provider (.Net, Java) HTTP & RDF KCSE Client & Provider (.Net) CAKE (.Net) KM SAS & SKB (.Net) KCSE adapter (.Net, Java, XSLT)
- 20. Application to the UC3 20
- 21. www.arrowhead.eu Context 21 As So that… I want to… Reuse of existing hardware artefacts -Recovery traces -Assess hardware design quality -Refactor hardware designs Hardware Engineer Access, search and trace hardware models I am using different tools: IBM Doors, Altium Designer, Altium Vault, MSExcel, IBM Rhapsody and others…
- 22. www.arrowhead.eu UC-EP Enginering process (based on ISO 15288) 22 System Requirements Definition Architecture Definition Design Definition Implementation Verification and validation (and Measurement process) Information Management
- 23. www.arrowhead.eu Mapping to AHT-EP 23 UC-EP Enginering process AHT-EP System Requirements Definition Requirements Architecture Definition Functional Design Design definition Functional Design Implementation Procurement & engineering, Training & education Verification & Validation (Measurement process) Procurement & engineering, Deployment & Commissioning Information Management Not available
- 24. www.arrowhead.eu AHP Toolchain KCSE Framework (aka OSLC KM) 24 Traceability Manager System Artefact Reuser (knowledgeManager) Repository (knowledgeManager) OSLC KM IBM Doors IBM Rhapsody Altium Designer OSLC KMOSLC KM OSLC KM OSLC KM Quality Manager (Verification Studio) OSLC KM Communication Bus (HTTP REST)
- 25. www.arrowhead.eu Technological solution 25 Data representation • SRL representation of requirements , descriptive and analytical/physical models. Connected tools: sources • IBM Doors (requirements) • IBM Rhapsody (descriptive models) • Altium (physical/analytical models) Traceability Studio: implementation • Function on top of the Traceability Studio • KnowledgeManager (domain ontology) Traceability • Automation of the trace recovery process (content level) and documentation. • Support to other lifecycle processes.
- 26. www.arrowhead.eu Demo I: Trace recovery and documentation 26
- 27. www.arrowhead.eu Demo II: Trace recovery between models 27
- 28. www.arrowhead.eu Interoperability evaluation (progress) x) a connector or integration already exists but it is not based in standards in both senses (data and communication model) and R) a new standard-based connector is required to properly implement the use case. 28 Source/Target tool IBM Doors IBM Rhapsody Requirement Authoring tool Verification Studio Traceability Studio KnowledgeManager Altium designer IBM Doors x x x R R IBM Rhapsody x x, R R Requirements Authoring tool x x, R x x x Verification Studio x x, R x x x R Traceability Studio x R x x x R KnowledgeManager R R x x x R Altium designer R R R R R
- 29. www.arrowhead.eu Interoperability evaluation (II): before & after 29 Aspect Description Standardized Communication protocol FILE Yes Data format (syntax) Native No Data interpretation (semantics) Native for each connector No Security access Native (login/pass) ? Secure communication No No Aspect Description Standardized (Open API spec. and OSLC) Communication protocol FILE/HTTP/H TTPS Yes Data format (syntax) JSON/RDF /XML Yes Data interpretation (semantics) Shape SRL Yes Security access OAUTH Not implemented Secure communication HTTPS Not implemented
- 30. www.arrowhead.eu Engineering costs (realistic evaluation) Before 3 connectors required • 1 unit of connection (file) • 5 units of interpretation (read and write operations, semantics of data is embedded in the programs) 6 units of resources After 1 connector is required • 1 unit of connection (service) • 3 units of SRL shape creation (semantics of data is published as a schema) 4 unit of resources Reduction of engineering costs: (6-4) / 6 = 2/6 = 33%
- 31. www.arrowhead.eu Conclusions & Next Steps • Altium connector not fully developed (official SDK under development) • Traceability scenario (fine-grained granularity) ready to be validated with real data from the UC • Data ready but configuration (ontology) still missing • Focus on the reuse scenario • Interoperability evaluation (many models) • Connection through the Arrowhead Framework 31
- 32. www.arrowhead.eu Some references [1] Jose María Álvarez Rodríguez, Roy Mendieta, Jose Luis de la Vara, Anabel Fraga, Juan Lloréns: Enabling System Artefact Exchange and Selection through a Linked Data Layer. J. UCS 24(11): 1536-1560 (2018) [2] Jose María Álvarez Rodríguez, Valentin Moreno, Juan Lloréns: Formal ontologies and data shapes within the Software Engineering development lifecycle. SEKE 2019: 64-93 32
- 33. Automatic traceability between descriptive and analytical models UC3-Functional design Prof. Jose María Alvarez Rodríguez (UC3M, speaker) Roy Mendieta (REUSE) Eduardo Cibrián (UC3M) Ainhoa Aristimuno (ULMA)