A Structured, Model-Based Systems Engineering Methodology for Operations System Design

Two widely accepted techniques for lowering the cost and risk of developing systems are (1) the use of a defined systems engineering (SE) process or methodology and (2) the reuse of existing (previously built) system components. The first technique is represented, for example, in materials published by NASA (e.g., NASA Systems Engineering Handbook) or by professional societies such as INCOSE (International Council on Systems Engineering). Well-formed SE techniques provide value by establishing the proper scope of the system (e.g., requirements), and by identifying and resolving problems relatively early in project lifecycles, when fixes are less expensive. The second technique (reuse) is applied most commonly to hardware and software; it seeks to avoid replicating design and implementation costs while also reducing risk by placing proven capabilities into operational use. In this paper, we outline a methodology combining these two techniques and extending reuse beyond hardware and software to foundational aspects of a Mission Operation System’s (MOS) design. We describe the system design artifacts that result (e.g., requirements, design documentation), as well as the reusable patterns and elements of the design, and their interrelationships. This approach is enabled by model-based systems engineering (MBSE) techniques and tools and is currently available in SysML form as a plug-in to MagicDraw. Additionally, usage of a rigorous MBSE approach allows for training materials and tutorials to be packaged within the overall model itself. The results of such an approach include decreased cost and risk during the design phase, improved ability of the MOS development team to investigate trade spaces and identify impacts to important flight-ground trade studies. Such results extend into decreased costs and risk in later phases due to improved design, decreased need for late fixes or development of "glue-ware" or scripts to fill unanticipated gaps in functionality, and improved ability to identify and plan testing and other validation activities. Finally, lower operational costs can be expected, both due to improved quality of the MOS, increased ease of maintaining updated knowledge of system configuration, and the fact that training and procedural materials are also updated at the same time as accepted system changes.