Coupling Architecture Framework and Operation Research: the Case of NAF with Cost and Delay Driven Multi-Criteria Scheduling

Brisacier-Porchon, Lorraine; Hammami, Omar

doi:10.1109/sose55472.2022.9812650

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The representations to guide product lines choices could be framed in architecture frameworks, such as NATO Architecture Framework (NAF) [24], but it lacks of validation principles [2] which means that there will be difficulties to design the model itself and to introduce automated variations in it. Furthermore, the system to be built does not necessarily require all representations.…”

Section: B Architecture Framework: a Necessary And Sufficient Set Of ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the system to be built does not necessarily require all representations. For example, Figure 2 presents a subset of views from the NAF 3.1 constellation in Figure 1 that was necessary and sufficient to building [2]. But to the best of our knowledge, the necessary set of views to design is not standardized with respect to the category of product.…”

Section: B Architecture Framework: a Necessary And Sufficient Set Of ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The number of disciplines and their interactions as architecture trade-offs that are required to build an unmanned ground vehicle are a sample of complexity itself. If the systems act together as system of systems and this capability is the quality objective of the systems on the ground, a costs and development time are constraints to achieve the capabilities [2]. This article proposes a method to select a product line of robots that would fit system of system defence scenario.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Tackling Optimization and System-Driven Engineering in Coupling Physical Constraints with MBSE: The Case of a Mobile Autonomous Line of Products

Brisacier-Porchon,

Hammami

2024

Conference on Systems Engineering Research Series

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main goal of product line engineering is to build complex system architecture at the best quality, cost, resource ratio. The return on investment in terms of assessment is however not trivial, as systems to build rise in complexity. Moreover, the perspective of system of systems engineering that set up both historic and new systems in capabilities, and the introduction of more and more autonomous systems in architectures makes the anticipation of return on investment impossible to achieve without computer assistance. The necessary tools to assess as precisely as possible also involve a wide exploration of possibilities in an ever-changing context. The absence of mechanical or multi physical aspects in SysML-based tools, either in its version 1.3 or 2.0, makes it inefficient in representing or simulating robotic systems or system of system engineering. This article explains the benefits of tackling a classic Multi-Objective Knapsack Problem (MOKP) to the UGV product line items selection using a seamless system architecting toolchain. The association of MBSE (Model-based System Engineering), OR (Operation Research) and MBD (Model Based design) that generated various designs is presented. Our results in system engineering in UGV presents a Pareto Front of trade-offs that can count as numerous possibilities that sole MBSE or separate MBD simulation could not have represented as the best in the sense of . The simultaneous variations in both hardware and mechanical design show was entirely automated using standard tools with no redesign. This shows that seamless automations should pave the future of system engineering tools. With Operation research and Systems engineering tackling methods, our model upscale to real systems will shape System-Driven Engineering that will require new skills in system validation and verification and simulation analytics.

show abstract

Section: B Architecture Framework: a Necessary And Sufficient Set Of ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Architecture Framework: a Necessary And Sufficient Set Of ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tackling Optimization and System-Driven Engineering in Coupling Physical Constraints with MBSE: The Case of a Mobile Autonomous Line of Products

Brisacier-Porchon,

Hammami

2024

Conference on Systems Engineering Research Series

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our works have previously been introduced in Ref. 14, which contained our early experiments in system‐driven engineering, and this publication makes it more significant as it details the algorithm and NAF views that were used, as well as the results over a larger set of iterations than in 2022.…”

Section: Introductonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defense program quality‐cost‐delay optimization: architecture framework, a bridge between program management and system engineering

Brisacier‐Porchon,

Hammami

2023

Systems Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Military program management and system engineering re quire the expression of costs and delay trade‐off with respect to system architecture. If architecture frameworks (AF) such as NATO (NAF) were designed to fill this common need, their current state is essentially descriptive. As it turns out, building defense systems architectures using those frameworks in a properly anticipated cost/delay budget envelope would require to have all system engineering already solved, because the architecture frameworks are designed to provide an explicit representation of the operational domain that can be used in analysis, for articulation of issues and requirements, as support to planning, and as a means of solution design and validation, among other things. Thus Quality‐Resource‐Time <Q,R,T> optimality in a regularly evolving environment cannot be represented in acceptable delay without automated optimization assistance. Our contribution in this article explores coupling architecture framework with operation research (OR) models to enable computer assisted design and evaluation of heterogeneous views in NATO Architecture Framework (NAF). Our illustrative example is a Linear Programming based bridge between program management and system engineering to anticipate <Q,R,T> optimal trade‐offs. This article presents promising results, with which we hope to show how OR and AF will be indivisible in architecture evaluation process.

show abstract

Identification and listing of operation research problems in the framework of heterogeneous robotic swarms in System-of-Systems: a path for consistent research targets

Brisacier-Porchon,

Hammami

2024

2024 19th Annual System of Systems Engineering Conference (SoSE)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coupling Architecture Framework and Operation Research: the Case of NAF with Cost and Delay Driven Multi-Criteria Scheduling

Cited by 3 publications

References 22 publications

Tackling Optimization and System-Driven Engineering in Coupling Physical Constraints with MBSE: The Case of a Mobile Autonomous Line of Products

Tackling Optimization and System-Driven Engineering in Coupling Physical Constraints with MBSE: The Case of a Mobile Autonomous Line of Products

Defense program quality‐cost‐delay optimization: architecture framework, a bridge between program management and system engineering

Identification and listing of operation research problems in the framework of heterogeneous robotic swarms in System-of-Systems: a path for consistent research targets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About