DOCSLIB.ORG

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Provenance of the MBSE Ontology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Provenance of the MBSE Ontology Chapter 1.3 - MBSE Concepts ‘Death by Mau-Mau!’ Traditional joke 1 INTRODUCTION This chapter discusses the main systems engineering concepts that were introduced briefly in Chapter 1.1. Understanding the concepts is essential for a number of different reasons, some of which are obvious and some of which are more subtle: - Clearly, by not understanding the basic concepts, actually performing any work in the world of systems engineering is going to be very difficult, to the point of impossible. The only way to succeed whilst not understanding the concepts is through pure chance. This is not a good approach! - In order to address the “three evils” of systems engineering, understanding is crucial. It is one of the basic evils and, as was discussed previously, drives the other two evils. - The basic approach that is advocated in this book for model-based systems engineering is that of: ‘Ontology, Framework and Views’. The concepts needed for MBSE are defined in the so-called MBSE Ontology which forms the cornerstone of any model-based systems engineering exercise. Understanding the concepts is, therefore, essential, and these concepts will be defined using the MBSE Ontology. This Ontology will then be used throughout the rest of this book for all of the examples, approaches and applications of MBSE. 1.1 Provenance of the MBSE Ontology The MBSE Ontology itself is based on a number of best-practice sources that are used throughout the world of systems engineering. The problem with trying to define the MBSE Ontology is that there is no single definitive set of terms for MBSE, therefore a number of sources were considered. The list of information sources is not intended to be exhaustive but is intended to represent a good cross-section of current thought on MBSE. Each of the information sources has its own strengths and weaknesses and, therefore, the approach was to take a consensus of terms wherever possible and where not possible, to give priority to information sources that specialise in a specific area of MBSE. Examples of these information sources include: - ‘ISO 15288 - systems and software engineering life cycle processes’ [ISO15288 2008]. This standard is the most widely-used systems engineering standard in the world. The standard itself is now considered to be quite mature as its first version was published in 2002 and its current version was published in 2008. The standard considers four main areas of processes that ISO suggests should exist in any organisation: technical, project, organisational and agreement. The emphasis of the standard focuses on the technical and project process areas, rather than the organisational and agreement process areas. Indeed, this standard is considered to be particularly weak in depth for both of these areas. Having said that, however, ISO 15288 is an excellent start point for any systems engineering endeavour Page 1 of 42 and should always be considered when looking for good systems engineering source information. - ‘INCOSE systems engineering handbook’ [INCOSE 2011]. The International Council on Systems Engineering produces a best-practice guide for systems engineering in the form of a handbook. The handbook itself is based directly on ISO 15288 and, therefore, uses many of the same concepts and terminology. The INCOSE handbook expands greatly on all of the processes in ISO 15288 and also discusses different techniques and approaches to systems engineering. The handbook also has a rich appendix with many examples and case studies of applying systems engineering best practice. - ‘CMMI - Capability Maturity Model Integrated’ [CMMI 2010]. The CMMI comprises a suite of documents that allow any given set of processes to be assessed in terms of its capability and maturity. The CMMI has an excellent pedigree and is the result of a colossal volume of work. The CMMI is particularly strong when concerned with processes, but rather weaker in other areas, such as architecture. - ‘DoD - systems engineering guide for systems of systems’ [DoD 2008]. This set of guidelines represents current best practice in the US Department of Defense (sp). This is a particularly valuable source of information as there is a dearth of good, accepted knowledge concerning systems of systems since it is a relatively new area. - ‘ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 Systems and software engineering — Architecture description’ [ISO42010 2011]. This is an evolution of ‘IEEE 1471 - Architectures for software-intensive systems’ [IEEE 2000] and, bearing in mind the history of IEEE 1471, this is now a mature standard. This is an excellent information source for architectures, architecture descriptions and architecture frameworks. - Various architectural frameworks, including Zachman [Zachman 1987] [Zachman 2008], MODAF [MODAF 2010], DoDAF [DoDAF 2010], NAF [NAF 2007] and TRAK [TRAK 2012]. Architectural frameworks are widely used in today’s industry and provide a good source of information for architectures, architecture descriptions and architectural frameworks. Also, other useful knowledge sources include common notations for frameworks, such as the Unified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM) [UPDM 2011] and development processes, such as The Open Group Architectural Framework (TOGAF) [TOGAF 2012]] - Various competency frameworks, including UKSPEC [UKSPEC 2012], the INCOSE systems engineering competencies framework [INCOSE 2012], SFIA [SFIA 2012], APM [APM 2012] and APMP [2012]. Competency frameworks are widely-used in today’s industry in order to demonstrate the ability of people in an organisation. - Various modelling notations, including SysML [SysML 2010] [Holt & Perry 2008], UML [UML 2011] [Holt2004], SOAML [SOAML 2009], BPMN [BPMN 2012] etc. There are a number of different modelling notations that may be used for MBSE. This book is concerned with the use of SysML. However, there are some concepts and definitions that are used in other notation that may be of value to the MBSE ontology. Page 2 of 42 - Various best-practice books. In terms of methodologies and approaches, then there are a number of books that contain valuable knowledge concerning performing MBSE. [Holt 2005] [Holt et al 2011] [Holt & Perry 2010] [Dickerson2009] - Various papers and other publications such as [Maier 1998] [Lewis 2009] etc. For each of the main concepts that will be used in the MBSE Ontology, a number of source references will be discussed. The references chosen will vary, depending on the nature of the key concept. For example, CMMI focuses mainly on processes and is therefore an excellent source reference for the Process concept, whereas it does not even mention Systems of Systems and is, therefore, not a good reference for that concept. 1.2 The Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK) There is an excellent project that is concerned with creating a body of knowledge for systems engineering, known as SEBoK [SEBoK 2012]. This project began in 2009 as part of the larger Body of Knowledge to Advance Systems Engineering (BKCASE) project [BKCASE 2009] with the goal of creating a systems engineering body of knowledge (SEBoK). There were 70 contributors to the project and one of the goals was to provide a comprehensive set of key references and resources that are relevant to systems engineering and systems engineers. Released as version 1.0 in 2012, the SEBoK brings together a set of definitions and terms and provides discussion points around them. The goal of SEBoK was not to develop a definite set of terms, but to highlight best practice and to point out differences between them. It can be plainly seen that there are obvious parallels with this chapter, but with a few notable differences: - The main focus in this book is specifically model-based systems engineering rather than systems engineering - The aim of the MBSE Ontology presented in this chapter is, just like SEBoK, to identify any differences of opinion between source references. Unlike SEBoK, however, the MBSE Ontology resolves these discrepancies by making a judgement call and going as far as providing a single definition for each concept, whilst maintaining a mapping back to the source references. - All of the analysis of source concepts and terms in this book were performed using modelling techniques. Both the SEBoK and this chapter of the book use many of the same references and, therefore, there is not a graphical representation of SEBoK shown for each of the concepts, as the SEBoK definitions are based directly on source references. Thus, to avoid repetition, the reference to SEBoK is provided once here and not in each section. The SEBoK contains an excellent glossary where the source references for each term can be found. Page 3 of 42 1.3 Disagreements with the MBSE Ontology This chapter is intended to define the set of concepts and terms that will be used in this book. They are all based on best-practice definitions but, inevitably, different people in different organisations will disagree with some of the concepts and terms here. The idea of a single Ontology that will be directly and exactly applicable to every organisation can only exist in a utopian world and is simply not realistic in real life. It should be remembered, however, that disagreeing with what is presented here is fine, bearing in mind the following points: - Disagreeing with terms. It is perfectly natural to disagree with the actual terms that are being used. People working in different organisations, in different industries and even in the same organisation will often use different words to describe the same concept. This is not a problem as long as people are aware of the different terms being used. This is the same as two people speaking two different languages – it does not mean that they cannot communicate, but does mean that there is a requirement for translation between them. The use of an Ontology is an excellent mechanism to achieve this translation. - Disagreeing with concepts – wrong definition. In some cases there may a concept that is used in the MBSE Ontology which is considered to be completely wrong.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transport Network Architecture
    T MU AM 06011 TI Technical Information Transport Network Architecture Version0 1. Issued date: 29 March 2017 © State of NSW through Transport for NSW 2017 Superseded by T MU AM 06011 v2.0, 11/07/2017 TI T MU AM 06011 TI Transport Network Architecture Version 1.0 Issued date: 29 March 2017 Important message This document is one of a set of standards developed solely and specifically for use on Transport Assets (as defined in the Asset Standards Authority Charter). It is not suitable for any other purpose. The copyright and any other intellectual property in this document will at all times remain the property of the State of New South Wales (Transport for NSW). You must not use or adapt this document or rely upon it in any way unless you are providing products or services to a NSW Government agency and that agency has expressly authorised you in writing to do so. If this document forms part of a contract with, or is a condition of approval by a NSW Government agency, use of the document is subject to the terms of the contract or approval. To be clear, the content of this document is not licensed under any Creative Commons Licence. This document may contain third party material. The inclusion of third party material is for illustrative purposes only and does not represent an endorsement by NSW Government of any third party product or service. If you use this document or rely upon it without authorisation under these terms, the State of New South Wales (including Transport for NSW) and its personnel does not accept any liability to you or any other person for any loss, damage, costs and expenses that you or anyone else may suffer or incur from your use and reliance on the content contained in this document.
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Bibliography for ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010
    An Annotated Bibliography for ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 version 4.4.b October 15, 2020 Introduction An annotated bibliography of papers, reports and books on topics pertaining to ISO/IEC/- IEEE 42010:2011 (revision of the former IEEE Std 1471:2000). Originally prepared for ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 WG42, the Architecture Working Group of the Systems and Software Engineering Subcommittee of ISO. Currently the bibliography is undergoing a major up- date as ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010 is being revised. The current draft is a work-in-progress; it has many new entries, but these are not necessarily complete. The bibliography includes 1) items which were inspirations for the Standard; 2) items citing or about the Standard or its development; and 3) items inspired by or built upon the Standard and its concepts. Note: with version 4.x, we switch to producing the bibliography using the biblatex package. There may be errors. Please send corrections and additions to [email protected]. References 12th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA 2015), 4–7 May 2015, Montr´eal,Qu´ebec,Canada. IEEE Computer Society, Apr. 2015. A. Anwar et al. “A Formal Approach to Model Composition Applied to VUML”. In: 2011 16th IEEE International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems. Keywords: graph grammars, process algebra, model composition, MBSE. Apr. 2011, pp. 188–197. DOI: 10.1109/ICECCS.2011.26. Annotations: -. 1 Abstract: Several approaches adopted by the software engineering community rely on the principle of multi-modeling which allows to separate concerns and to model a sys- tem as a set of less complex sub-models.
    [Show full text]
  • An Architecture Framework Modification Supporting the Acquisition Stakeholders
    University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Engineering and Information Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences - Papers: Part A Sciences 1-1-2014 An Architecture Framework Modification Supporting the Acquisition Stakeholders Farid Shirvani University of Wollongong, [email protected] Mahmoud Efatmaneshnik University of Wollongong, [email protected] Allan P. Campbell University of Wollongong, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/eispapers Part of the Engineering Commons, and the Science and Technology Studies Commons Recommended Citation Shirvani, Farid; Efatmaneshnik, Mahmoud; and Campbell, Allan P., "An Architecture Framework Modification Supporting the Acquisition Stakeholders" (2014). Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences - Papers: Part A. 6473. https://ro.uow.edu.au/eispapers/6473 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] An Architecture Framework Modification Supporting the Acquisition Stakeholders Abstract Architectural modeling is gaining support for urban system development to help governments, local agencies and large enterprises acquire, maintain and develop complex infrastructure. This paper proposes a modification ot TRAK (The Rail Architecture frameworK) to make it more suitable for acquisition of the general class of urban infrastructure systems. In this paper four of the main system stakeholders, namely acquirer, developer, investor and regulator are chosen and their concerns are identified. In order to identify the gaps, the procurement viewpoints of TRAK are investigated and analyzed to show their inefficiencies in expressing acquisition scenarios and addressing the concerns of those stakeholders. The first main gap is the lack of equirr ement traceability as there is no viewpoints showing the flow of equirr ements from acquirer to developers.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Engineering Governance for Large Infrastructure Projects
    Multi-Level and Transnational Governance Issues Improving Engineering Governance for Large Infrastructure Projects William Scott1, Gary Arabian2, Peter Campbell1 and Richard Fullalove2 1SMART Infrastructure Facility, University of Wollongong, Australia 2Asset Standards Authority, Transport for New South Wales, Australia ABSTRACT The increased complexity of modern infrastructure projects together with the desire of governments to provide improved services to their citizens gives rise to the need for much better engineering governance capability and the ability to model system and user behaviour to ensure the desired increased level of service. Modelling all aspects of planned systems through the use of standardised architecture framework models that can be developed to provide the necessary insight across all aspects and levels of concern for the system(s) is an excellent approach for achieving this. This paper describes the initial phase of development of such a toolset for the Asset Standards Authority (ASA) of Transport for New South Wales (TfNSW) that will be used to ensure coordinated development activities between all divisions in the department, as well as with Planning NSW and the private sector providers for system design, implementation, maintenance and operation. The initial development described here particularly focuses on existing, current and future heavy rail projects, but continuing work is under way to extend and generalise the model so that it applies to all rail transport modes (rapid transit metro and light rail) and eventually to include all other TfNSW transport modes — buses, walkways, ferries, cycle ways, and roads. Furthermore, this paper details how the use of a metamodel for the architecture framework provides the rigour and abstraction necessary to allow this generalisation within the same model structure.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Birmingham Whole System Railway Modelling
    School of Electronic, Electrical and System Engineering University of Birmingham Whole System Railway Modelling A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Author: Garry Patrick Greenland Supervisor(s): Professor Clive Roberts and Dr. Stuart Hillmansen Date: 16th April 2019 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is under a Creative Commons Attribution- NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0) licence. You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits. Notices: You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation. No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material. Whole System Railway Modelling Preliminaries Garry Patrick Greenland Abstract There has been a general view articulated within the railway industry that there needs to be greater systems thinking and systems engineering applied to major projects within the industry (Network Rail, 2013 and Rail Safety and Standards Board, 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • December 2019 INFORMATION SYSTEMS ISSN: 1946-1836 APPLIED RESEARCH
    JOURNAL OF Volume 12, Issue 3 December 2019 INFORMATION SYSTEMS ISSN: 1946-1836 APPLIED RESEARCH In this issue: 4. Where We are with Enterprise Architecture Leila Halawi, Embry Riddle Aeronautical University Richard McCarthy, Quinnipiac University James Farah, Jacksonville University 14. Dangers of Distracted Driving by Mobile Phone Users: An Experimental Approach Hoon S. Choi, Appalachian State University Jason Xiong, Appalachian State University B. Dawn Medlin, Appalachian State University 24. Changes in the Information Technology Field: A Survey of Current Technologies and Future Importance Jeffrey Cummings, University of North Carolina Wilmington Thomas Janicki, University of North Carolina Wilmington Journal of Information Systems Applied Research 12 (3) ISSN: 1946-1836 December 2019 The Journal of Information Systems Applied Research (JISAR) is a double-blind peer reviewed academic journal published by ISCAP, Information Systems and Computing Academic Professionals. Publishing frequency is three issues a year. The first date of publication was December 1, 2008. JISAR is published online (http://jisar.org) in connection with CONISAR, the Conference on Information Systems Applied Research, which is also double-blind peer reviewed. Our sister publication, the Proceedings of CONISAR, features all papers, panels, workshops, and presentations from the conference. (http://conisar.org) The journal acceptance review process involves a minimum of three double-blind peer reviews, where both the reviewer is not aware of the identities of the authors and the authors are not aware of the identities of the reviewers. The initial reviews happen before the conference. At that point papers are divided into award papers (top 15%), other journal papers (top 30%), unsettled papers, and non-journal papers.
    [Show full text]
  • Syen-043.Pdf
    Project Performance International http://www.ppi-int.com/newsletter/SyEN-035.php SYSTEMS ENGINEERING NEWSLETTER brought to you by Project Performance International (PPI) SyEN 43 – April 19, 2012 Dear Colleague, SyEN is an independent free newsletter containing informative reading for the technical project professional, with scores of news and other items summarizing developments in the field, including related industry, month by month. This newsletter and a newsletter archive are also available at www.ppi- int.com. Systems engineering can be thought of as the problem-independent, and solution/technology-independent, principles and methods related to the successful engineering of systems, to meet stakeholder requirements and maximize value delivered to stakeholders in accordance with their values. If you are presently receiving this newsletter from an associate, you may receive the newsletter directly in future by signing up for this free service of PPI, using the form at www.ppi-int.com. If you do not wish to receive future SE eNewsletters, please reply to the notifying e-mail with "Remove" in the subject line, from the same email address. Your removal will be confirmed, by email. We hope that you find this newsletter to be informative and useful. Please tell us what you think. Email to: [email protected]. WHAT’S INSIDE: Quotations to Open On Read More… Feature Article: An Affordable Systems Verification Activity Read More… Systems Engineering News • Requirements Engineering and Business Analysis: State of Practice Study • Fujitsu Establishes
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Enterprise Architecture Frameworks for the Digital Age: the Digital Diamond Framework and EA Tool
    International Journal on Advances in Software, vol 12 no 1 & 2, year 2019, http://www.iariajournals.org/software/ 125 Rethinking Enterprise Architecture Frameworks for the Digital Age: The Digital Diamond Framework and EA Tool Roy Oberhauser Computer Science Dept. Aalen University Aalen, Germany email: [email protected] Abstract - Enterprise Architecture (EA) Frameworks (EAFs) 1) A major digital transformation of their industry [4]. have attempted to support comprehensive and cohesive While the digitalization rate (digital score) may vary across modeling and documentation of the enterprise. However, these industries and economies, it is nevertheless impacting EAFs were not conceived for today’s rapidly digitalized business strategies and necessarily EA. As big data, data enterprises and the associated IT complexity. A digitally-centric analytics, business intelligence, and machine learning make EAF is needed, freed from the past restrictive EAF paradigms inroads into enterprises, improved decision-making and embracing the new potential in a data-centric world. This capabilities at all levels and across organizational entities paper proposes an alternative EAF that is digital, holistic, and 2 empowers employees with new insights and assistance and digitally sustainable - the Digital Diamond Framework. D F is additional automation. designed for responsive and agile enterprises, for aligning 2) Agility is restructuring internal people-centric business plans and initiatives with the actual enterprise state, and addressing the needs of EA for digitized structure, order, enterprise management, processes, and projects to modeling, and documentation. The feasibility of D2F is continuously flexible and responsive business forms, demonstrated with a prototype implementation of an EA tool accelerating product and service delivery and improving that applies its principles, showing how the framework can be efficiency (e.g., Scrum, DevOps, BizDevOps).
    [Show full text]
  • Case Study: a Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Framework for Characterising Transportation Systems Over the Full Life Cycle William R
    University of Wollongong Research Online SMART Infrastructure Facility - Papers Faculty of Engineering and Information Sciences 2016 Case Study: A Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Framework for Characterising Transportation Systems Over the Full Life Cycle William R. Scott University of Wollongong, [email protected] Richard Fullalove Transport for New South Wales Gary Arabian Transport for New South Wales Allan P. Campbell University of Wollongong, [email protected] Publication Details Scott, W., Fullalove, R., Arabian, G. & Campbell, P. (2016). Case Study: A Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Framework for Characterising Transportation Systems Over the Full Life Cycle. INCOSE International Symposium, 26 (1), 916-932. Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Case Study: A Model Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Framework for Characterising Transportation Systems Over the Full Life Cycle Abstract Development of transport infrastructure has significant challenges including acquisition lag, phased evolution, multiple disparate stakeholders and environment-specific issues. The Asset Standards Authority (ASA) at TfNSW is introducing MBSE to address these challenges. Instrumental to the introduction is the development of a framework that structures the available data and provides guidance and traceability between the data sets. This framework combines the enterprise-level drivers with the lower level drivers such as standards to outline a generic conceptual design for a transport system. This conceptual design is then used to guide future system development. The outcome is future project information based on greater, enduring understanding of the transport system. Keywords systems, model, study:, case, full, transportation, characterising, framework, (mbse), engineering, over, cycle, life Disciplines Engineering | Physical Sciences and Mathematics Publication Details Scott, W., Fullalove, R., Arabian, G.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Role: Serve As the Primary Client Lead and Advisor in Interfacing with Senior-Level EA Clients, Helping to Shape the Vision
    Job description mapping of I/T capabilities to business needs. defining the relationships, flows and implementation of business processes/activities/functions, information), applications, data and technology in the enterprise and the transitional process necessary for implementing technology in response to changing business needs. the technical team lead and the client-facing technical visionary. As the technical lead, the Solutions Architect partners with Program/Project Management Leader, guides and executes the technical delivery strategy during deployment. In role of the visionary, the architect supports pre-sales and follow-on strategies by working with functional leadership, partners and the client to define valuable solutions leveraging IBM SOA Products & Frameworks. Responsibilities: * Provide technical leadership to consulting project teams, leading architecture workshops and also include project work at customer sites. * Design and develop innovative solutions to customer requirements using our IBM WebSphere Dynamic BPM Platform (including Fabric) and Telecom Operations Content Pack. This WILL require hands-on knowledge with the product stack. * Strong knowledge of the telecommunications industry, various standards, competitor products, benchmarks and compatibility. * Provide consultative leadership to clients and prospects * Participate in the pre-sales process to understand customer business, technical objectives and product requirements, in order to develop effective solutions. * Assist Program Manager with the definition of tasks, deliverables and standard estimates. * Help to document best practices in developing and deploying IBM SOA/BPM solutions, and feed them into our knowledge base for reuse by customers and partners. * Mentor and recruit technical consulting staff. * Participate in customer requirements gathering, design review, acceptance testing and deployment processes, and produce quality deliverables accordingly.
    [Show full text]
  • Syen #019: News in the Field of Systems Engineering | Project Performance International 30/04/10 8:49 AM
    SyEN #019: News in the Field of Systems Engineering | Project Performance International 30/04/10 8:49 AM Project Performance International Systems Engineering Newsletter (SyEN) SyEN #019 - April 29, 2010 Brought to you by Project Performance International http://www.ppi-int.com/newsletter/SyEN-019.php Dear Colleague, SyEN is an independent free newsletter containing informative reading for the technical project professional, with scores of news and other items summarizing developments in the field, including related industry, month by month. This newsletter and a newsletter archive are also available at www.ppi-int.com. Systems engineering can be thought of as the problem-independent, and solution/technology-independent, principles and methods related to the successful engineering of systems, to meet stakeholder requirements and maximize value delivered to stakeholders in accordance with their values. If you are presently receiving this newsletter from an associate, you may receive the newsletter directly in future by signing up for this free service of PPI, using the form at www.ppi-int.com. If you do not wish to receive future SE eNewsletters, please reply to this e-mail with "Remove" in the subject line, from the same email address. Your removal will be confirmed, by email. We hope that you find this newsletter to be informative and useful. Please tell us what you think. Email to: [email protected]. What's Inside: READ ALL A Quotation to Open On Featured Article A Method for the Determination of an Optimum Set of Verification Requirements ... READ MORE Systems Engineering News NASA Conducts Systems Engineering Student Competition Annual Systems Engineering Conference 2010 (ASEC10) - “Systems Engineering: Adding Value in Challenging Times” New! Online Library Exclusively for IIBA Members The StaMina Competition IT Systems Engineer Named Best U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Cite the Sebok 9 Bkcase Wiki:Copyright 10
    Guide to the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK), version 2.2 Part 4 Please note that this is a PDF extraction of the content from www.sebokwiki.org Guide to the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge, Part 4 version 2.1 PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 15:17:52 EDT Contents Articles Front Matter 1 Letter from the Editor 1 BKCASE Governance and Editorial Board 2 Acknowledgements and Release History 7 Cite the SEBoK 9 Bkcase Wiki:Copyright 10 Part 4: Applications of Systems Engineering 11 Knowledge Area: Product Systems Engineering 12 Product Systems Engineering 12 Product Systems Engineering Background 21 Product as a System Fundamentals 29 Business Activities Related to Product Systems Engineering 36 Product Systems Engineering Key Aspects 40 Product Systems Engineering Special Activities 51 Knowledge Area: Service Systems Engineering 58 Service Systems Engineering 58 Service Systems Background 63 Fundamentals of Services 69 Properties of Services 76 Scope of Service Systems Engineering 80 Value of Service Systems Engineering 85 Service Systems Engineering Stages 91 Knowledge Area: Enterprise Systems Engineering 98 Enterprise Systems Engineering 98 Enterprise Systems Engineering Background 105 The Enterprise as a System 114 Related Business Activities 122 Enterprise Systems Engineering Key Concepts 130 Enterprise Systems Engineering Process Activities 136 Enterprise Capability Management 145 Knowledge Area: Systems of Systems
    [Show full text]