2019
DOI: 10.1002/inst.12274
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Towards a Maturity Assessment Scale for the Systems Engineering Assets Valorization to Facilitate Model‐Based Systems Engineering Adoption

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Functions g and h in (MTS-EP 1) are the mathematical expression of constraints of the problem, issued from specification, system category, and company's system experience from past projects. The flow in Figure 2 matches the representations for adoption of MBSE Methodology sketched in [20], and adds a constraint that is not underlined in Wu's publications, which is the end of the process, when allowed budget or schedule for system conception ends. This is an application of the principles of [21] on UGV system category: the identification of a Pareto Front where the system scale budget and schedule constraints the concept choices.…”
Section: Theoretical Proposition: Optimization Processmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Functions g and h in (MTS-EP 1) are the mathematical expression of constraints of the problem, issued from specification, system category, and company's system experience from past projects. The flow in Figure 2 matches the representations for adoption of MBSE Methodology sketched in [20], and adds a constraint that is not underlined in Wu's publications, which is the end of the process, when allowed budget or schedule for system conception ends. This is an application of the principles of [21] on UGV system category: the identification of a Pareto Front where the system scale budget and schedule constraints the concept choices.…”
Section: Theoretical Proposition: Optimization Processmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Functions g and h in (MTS-EP 1) are the mathematical expression of constraints of the problem, issued from specification, system category, and company's system experience from past projects. The flow in Figure 2 matches the representations for adoption of MBSE Methodology sketched in (Wu et al 2019), and adds a constraint that is not underlined in Wu's publications, which is the end of the process, when allowed budget or schedule for system conception ends. This is an application of the principles of (Wheaton and Madni 2018) on UGV system category: the identification of a Pareto Front where the system scale budget and schedule constraints the concept choices.…”
Section: Theoretical Proposition: Optimization Processmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Functions g and h in (MTS-EP 1) are the mathematical expression of constraints of the problem, issued from specification, system category, and company's system experience from past projects. The flow in Figure 2 matches the representations for adoption of MBSE methodology sketched in Wu et al (2019) and adds a constraint that is not underlined in Wu's publications, which is the end of the process, when allowed budget or schedule for system conception ends. This is an application of the principles of Wheaton and Madni (2018) on UGV system category: the identification of a Pareto front where the system scale budget and schedule constrains the concept choices.…”
Section: Theoretical Proposition: Optimization Processmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Figure 2 : System specification flow proposition inspired of (Wu et al 2019) In this article, x is instantiated by the UGV as it was designed and integrated. We want to put the UGV to a test and evaluate its Quality as a mule system, and evaluate the quality of its specification.…”
Section: Theoretical Proposition: Optimization Processmentioning
confidence: 99%