WIXLIB

UNCLASSIFIEDAn Analysis of SE and MBSE Concepts to SupportDefence Capability AcquisitionMeredith HueDefence Systems Integration Technical AdvisoryJoint and Operations Analysis DivisionDefence Science and Technology OrganisationDSTO-TR-3039ABSTRACTSystem modelling has been an enduring method of enquiry supporting systems analysis anddesign synthesis in systems engineering for decades. New generation systems modelling toolsprovide sophisticated modelling capability, coined Model-based Systems Engineering(MBSE). The underpinning fundamentals of systems engineering and MBSE are scrutinised inthe context of the current Defence capability development process and enterprise architectureinitiatives. The capabilities, relevance, and utility of new generation MBSE tools andmethodologies are then examined, contrasting Defence and industry perspectives to revealpotential implications for Defence. Potential benefits to Defence are highlighted together withpotential issues of concern. Related aspects of software engineering, enterprise engineeringenterprise architecting and operations research are also clarified to assist unravelling some ofthe complexities and interdependencies between the respective professional disciplines.RELEASE LIMITATIONApproved for Public ReleaseUNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIEDPublished byDefence Systems Integration Technical AdvisoryJoint and Operations Analysis DivisionDSTO Defence Science and Technology OrganisationPO Box 1500Edinburgh, South Australia 5111 AustraliaTelephone: 1300 333 362Fax: (08) 7389 6537 Commonwealth of Australia 2014AR- 016-126September 2014APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASEUNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIEDAn Analysis of SE and MBSE Concepts to SupportDefence Capability AcquisitionExecutive SummaryModel-based systems engineering (MBSE) is proffered by modelling tool vendors toprovide improved ability to cope with the more onerous demands of engineering thelarger scale and more complex capability systems aspired to by Defence.The underpinning fundamentals of systems engineering and MBSE are scrutinised inthis report in the context of the current Defence capability development process andenterprise architecture initiatives. The capabilities, relevance, and utility of nextgeneration system modelling tools and methodologies are examined, contrastingDefence and industry perspectives to reveal potential implications for Defence.It is evident there are multiple overlapping MBSE perspectives, somewhat similar, butwith different problem foci and different problem solving approaches. If no commonagreement can be achieved, these differences in perspective can introduce considerableambiguity within the Defence stakeholder community; this can potentially exacerbaterather than resolve the problems at hand.MBSE tool vendors posit that MBSE methodologies can offer improved flexibility,consistency and traceability, and facilitate easier upgrade of the associated informationset. However, adoption of an effective MBSE approach by Defence would entail aDefence-wide methodological change to the capability development and acquisitionprocesses. This has the potential for significant and widespread impact, spanningcorporate management processes, engineering technical processes, governance and thetool environment within Defence. This change would have an inevitable impact onresourcing, staffing levels, staff skill-sets, training and support requirements.Analysis in this report has also revealed a major divide between Defence, as thecustomer, and industry as the supplier, in terms of mindsets, skill sets, scale ofendeavour, process requirements, constraints, and responsibilities. The methods ofenquiry and utility of MBSE tools for Defence and industry will therefore differmarkedly between the two mindsets and the differing responsibilities.The differing utility of systems engineering expertise as perceived by Defence andindustry is also a major differentiator. Due to the distributed responsibilities within theoverall Defence capability lifecycle, Defence does not have a unified systemsengineering approach, which has the potential to decouple the capability developmentprocess from the traditional systems engineering approach. This in turn introducesadditional challenges, and can negate other efforts towards achieving the desireddecision outcomes.Defence faces a number of challenges in developing and applying sufficient systemsengineering knowledge and experience both at the high-end platform and the Systemof Systems engineering levels to effect any major improvement to capability acquisitionUNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIEDoutcomes. The current approach to capability development does not explicitly definethe role of the systems engineer, instead, relying on process description in the DefenceCapability Development Handbook to drive the capability development andacquisition process. Process governance relies on extensive scrutiny by numerousstakeholders from many perspectives, however, there is no independent scrutiny froma systems engineering perspective to ensure the systems engineering precepts arepreserved.The need to undertake systems analysis is inherent but not explicitly acknowledgedwithin Defence. Of particular import, the capability development and acquisitionprocess is document-centric and governance-oriented. Early capability definitionactivities are centred on development of the documentation and satisfying governancerequirements rather than following a traditional systems engineering process.Finally, it is important to distinguish between the concept of a methodology that isfacilitated by a tool environment and the analytical capability of a tool modellingenvironment. Established MBSE methodologies such as the Rational Unified Processfor Systems Engineering (RUP SE) and the Object-Oriented Systems EngineeringMethodology (OOSEM) are modelling language dependent and implementationfocused, and thus may offer potential cost savings and efficiencies in industry.However, they do not address the problem space posed to Defence. These establishedmethodologies are therefore not necessarily suited for adoption in the Defence context.Notwithstanding, MBSE tools can provide a powerful analytic capability, particularlyto investigate capability and project interdependencies and propagation of capabilitysystem properties. This is contingent on the system models being set up correctly, usedby knowledgeable practitioners, and the results are used within the correct context.From a Defence enterprise architecture perspective, the new generation MBSE toolsprovide a useful means to create Defence Architecture Framework (DAF) artefactsusing templates. The MBSE tools are evolving to support future developments of theUK MODAF and US DoDAF towards a common Unified Architecture Framework,embracing data-centric system modelling concepts. The latest AUSDAF2 view-basedorientation does not provide a pathway towards supporting MBSE data-orientedconstructs, nor the Unified Architecture Framework.A separate study is recommended to investigate these issues further, including: The implications to Australian Defence capability development and acquisitionand Defence enterprise architecture initiatives of the Unified ArchitectureFramework proposed developments; The feasibility and selection criteria for different information elements forincorporation in an enterprise-wide repository, and associated knowledgemanagement process support requirements; and Provision of formal methodology guidance to leverage the potential of newgeneration MBSE tools to achieve improved Defence capability acquisition andintegration outcomes.UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIEDAuthorMeredith HueDefence Systems Integration Technical AdvisoryJoint and Operations Analysis DivisionMeredith is responsible for providing advice on defence systemsintegration principles and practices targeting systemic problems inDefence, and working with projects to address specific systemintegration issues. A former Chief Engineer, she has over 35 yearsexperience in both industry and Defence as a Systems Engineeringpractitioner, in the areas of real-time systems, combat systems andmilitary communications. Specific interests include Systems,Systems of Systems, Enterprise Architecting and SystemsArchitecting methodologies supporting capability development,including modelling and analysis of C4ISR architectures.UNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIEDThis page is intentionally blankUNCLASSIFIED

UNCLASSIFIEDDSTO-TR-3039Contents1. INTRODUCTION . 11.1 Report Impetus . 11.2 Scope . 22. CONCEPTS OF METHODOLOGY AND THE SE DEVELOPMENTENVIRONMENT . 32.1 Significance of Methodology . 32.2 Significance of Scale . 53. SYSTEM MODELLING CONCEPTS. 83.1 Modelling Concepts in Engineering . 83.2 Modelling vs. Simulation . 93.3 What is a Model? . 103.3.1Real World Models . 103.3.2Conceptual Models . 113.3.3Decision Modelling . 143.3.4Information Model . 143.3.5Meta-modelling. 153.3.6Architecture Modelling . 163.3.7SW Architecture Modelling . 193.3.8Reference Models . 223.3.9Reference Architectures . 253.3.10Design Patterns . 253.3.10.1 Software Design Patterns . 253.3.10.2 SoS Design Patterns. 273.3.11Model Reuse . 283.4 Programming Language Concepts . 303.4.1Imperative Programming Language Paradigm . 303.4.2Object-Oriented Programming Language Paradigm . 303.5 Modelling Language Concepts. 323.5.1Language Concepts . 323.5.2Architecture Description Languages . 374. SYSTEMS APPROACH TO PROBLEM SOLVING . 454.1 Systems Analysis and Design Concept . 454.2 Structured Analysis and Design Paradigm . 474.2.1General Principles . 474.2.2Structured Analysis and Design Technique . 484.2.3Structured Systems Analysis and Design Method . 494.3 Object-Oriented Analysis and Design Paradigm . 504.4 Service-Oriented Analysis and Design Paradigm . 514.5 Service-Oriented Modelling and Architecture (SOMA) . 52UNCLASSIFIED

DSTO-TR-3039UNCLASSIFIED5. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING CONCEPTS . 545.1 What is Systems Thinking? . 545.2 What is a System? . 555.3 What is Systems Engineering? . 565.3.1Systems Engineering Origins and Purpose . 565.3.2Basic Notions of SE Process . 595.3.3Engineering Management Planning and Control Basics . 615.3.4Basic Activities and Responsibilities. 625.3.5Documentation in Systems Engineering . 675.3.6Formalisation of Systems Engineering as a Discipline. 675.3.7Contemporary Systems Engineering . 725.4 The Systems Engineering Process . 745.5 The System Life Cycle . 815.6 The Significance of System Architecture in SE . 845.7 Notions of System Hierarchy. 845.8 System of Interest and Systems of Systems. 885.9 Systems Integration and SoS Integration. 945.10 Human Systems Integration . 966. DEFENCE NOTIONS OF A SYSTEM . 986.1 The Capability System . 986.2 The Materiel System . 1006.3 Major Systems . 1006.4 Project vs. System Context . 1016.4.1Specification Considerations. 1016.4.2Life Cycle Considerations . 1026.5 Defence vs. INCOSE System Definition . 1027. CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS CONTEXT . 1037.1 Defence Capability Life Cycle Model. 1037.2 Defence Capability Planning Guidance . 1037.3 Defence Capability Life Cycle Responsibilities . 1038. DEFENCE VS. INDUSTRY SE PERSPECTIVE. 1088.1 Legal and Political Process Influences . 1088.2 Sourcing Defence Requirements . 1098.3 Sourcing Industry-based Requirements. 1138.4 Adaptability to Change. 1139. ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE CONCEPTS . 11810. DEFENCE ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE CONTEXT . 12110.1 Defence Architecture Framework . 12110.2 Integrated Defence Architecture . 12511. MBSE ORIGINS AND CONCEPTS. 131