Work presented at this Conference previously proposed the Producing System (or enabling system) as a mechanism for organizing and managing the enabling resources in the development of a Product System (Alias, required system, system‐of‐interest, intervention system, end product, operational system, etc.). It presented the producing system as separate from, but closely related to, the product system. Specifically, the relationship was equated to that of a parent: child (producing system: product system) relationship.(Paul and Yerace 2004) This paper explores current practices regarding the identification and processing of systems that interact with, or have some form of involvement in the life cycle of, the product system. The primary focus is, of course, the interrelationship between the product system and the enabling resources or producing system; however, studies have identified diverse interactions with competing systems, context systems, collaborating systems, containing systems, and others. This paper identifies the similarities and differences among the various perspectives. Finally, the paper expands on these concepts by introducing the Systems Project as a family of up to four closely related systems whose interactions are focused on the life cycle (birth to death) of the product system. Specifically, the Systems Project is a framework for packaging and conducting all of the systems engineering activities associated with developing/managing the product system, the producing system, the Existing System (if there is one in place, if applicable [I/A]), and the Maintenance and Support System through the life cycle of the product system.
Having observed different terminology, emphases, and concepts being used by writers from various disciplines to define "system," this analyst hypothesized that an analysis of these definitions will identify diversity in the current uses and applications of the word "system," and provide a basis for a definition that is applicable to the engineering community.This analysis involved a preliminary review of definitions of "system" from a wide variety of sources, and selecting a set which seemed to apply to engineering work for more detailed analysis. Fourteen definitions, which satisfy this criterion, are discussed in this paper. While varying extensively in terminology, level of details, applicability, and scope, these definitions of "system" are remarkably consistent in conveying some fundamental concepts, such as: wholeness, order, interrelationships among parts, and purpose.
This paper discusses the importance of the enabling resources (otherwise identified as enabling capacity or enabling capabilities) to the successful development of systems. It proposes the Producing System as a mechanism for planning, acquiring, deploying and managing these enabling resources as a system of interest, in addition to the delivered or required system, in the system development process.
This paper discusses the evolution of an innovative curriculum in Systems and Computer Science being offered by a department within the School of Engineering, Howard University. It presents key concepts and principles of systems engineering. It discusses how the merger of systems engineering and computer science addresses some of the deficiencies identified by critics of current engineering education, and prepares students to meet the engineering and computer science needs for the 21 st Century. This paper discusses the values of the Department of Systems and Computer Science (SCS), including the measures selected for judging the effectiveness of the curriculum. It identifies some pockets of success and areas of weakness based on preliminary analyses of a small sample of data. 1. Institutions of higher learning teach computer courses in one or more of four general areas: (1) computer engineering programs are typically offered by computer engineering or electrical engineering departments and are accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, Incorporated (ABET); (2) computer science programs are offered by computer science, electrical engineering, mathematics or general science departments, and these programs are Page 2.382.1 accredited by the Computing Science Accreditation Board, Incorporated (CSAB); (3) management information systems and interdisciplinary computing programs are generally offered by business and liberal arts departments, the resulting degrees can be either a Bachelor of Science (BS) or a Bachelor of Arts (BA), often not accredited by either ABET or CSAB; and (4) a few institutions offer programs in both computer science and computer engineering, and are jointly accredited by CSAB and ABET. Accreditation ensures that these degree programs satisfy some established criteria. These criteria are comprehensive and cover: program design, intent, faculty, curriculum, laboratory and computing resources, students, and institutional support. Also, the CSAB criteria, which the SCS Department is more familiar with, have been carefully established to permit the expression of an institution's individual qualities and ideals. 1 This flexibility allows programs like SCS's with significant offerings in a complimentary discipline, as well as programs with vastly different titles to be accredited by CSAB. 2.1. The SCS Curriculum The 24 courses listed below form the core of the current curriculum. Distributed over a four year period, six of these courses (bold and italics) are systems engineering courses, or are considered to have significant systems engineering content. Two other courses (Engineering Economic System Design and Introduction to Operations Research) may be taken as technical electives. In addition, systems engineering principles, practices, and skills are integrated to the extent possible into all courses in the curriculum. The bias of the program in favor of computer science reflects the relative strengths of the programs at the time of merger and the decision to seek accredita...
In response to concerns within the field of systems engineering about the overuse and possible misuse of the term ‘systems‘, this paper presents an in‐depth analysis of current schemes for classifying systems and proposes a scheme of nine classes that is simple, intuitive, and focuses on man‐made systems. The author's expectation is that individuals who are interested in the field of systems will communicate more effectively by qualifying systems and speaking of specific types of systems instead of speaking of systems in general. This can also be a first step in a process of developing methodologies and tools that are targeted to the different types of systems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.