1 / 18

Analyzing System of Systems for Integration

Analyzing System of Systems for Integration. W. Clifton Baldwin. Bio. W. Clifton Baldwin PhD Candidate in Systems Engineering at Stevens Institute of Technology Graduate Student in the Systomics Laboratory http://www.systomicslab.com/ Senior Systems Engineer at the FAA WJHTC CSEP – INCOSE

camila
Download Presentation

Analyzing System of Systems for Integration

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Analyzing System of Systems for Integration W. Clifton Baldwin

  2. Bio • W. Clifton Baldwin • PhD Candidate in Systems Engineering at Stevens Institute of Technology • Graduate Student in the Systomics Laboratory • http://www.systomicslab.com/ • Senior Systems Engineer at the FAA WJHTC • CSEP – INCOSE • PMP – PMI

  3. Problem Domain • Integration of a System of Systems (SoS) • The Science of Togetherness

  4. Traditional System – Definition • “complexes of elements in interaction to which certain system laws can be applied” (Bertalanffy 1951, 307) • “a set of interrelated elements” (Ackoff 1971, 662) • “a set of interrelated components working together toward some common objective or purpose” (Blanchard and Fabrycky 1998, 2) • “an aggregation of end products and enabling products to achieve a given purpose” (EIA 1999, 68) • “consists of many subsystems and is capable of performing a wide range of functions to address an operational need or mission” (Shenhar 2001, 399) • “a combination of interacting elements organized to achieve one or more stated purposes" - INCOSE Handbook (Haskins 2007, sec. 1.5)

  5. Traditional System – Definition • A set of elements acting and interacting to achieve some common goal(s)

  6. SoS – Definition • a compilation of distributed, complex component systems (Kotov 1997, 1) • heterogeneous systems integrated for the purpose of working effectively together (Carlock and Fenton 2001) • autonomous and diverse component systems interacting for a global goal (Keating et al. 2003, 41) • multiple, independent systems that interact for the purpose of a global goal (Crossley 2004) • the different systems within a SoS can achieve results together that they would not be able to do alone (Krygiel 1999, 33), INCOSE Handbook (Haskins 2007, 2.2) • “collection of systems functioning together to achieve a common purpose” (Shenhar and Sauser 2009, 126).

  7. SoS – Definition • A type of system composed of traditional systems and distinguished by the dynamic properties of autonomy, belonging, connectivity, diversity, and emergence (Boardman and Sauser 2006)

  8. Autonomy in a SoS • the union of different individual systems forms a new SoS with a different function than any one of the individual systems (Kang and Mavris 2005). • each individual system has its own purpose beside the SoS (Lane and Boehm 2008, 82) • the ability to complete one’s own goals within limits and without the control of another entity

  9. Belonging in a SoS • Colloquially, belonging implies possession or acceptance as a member • Derived from the SoS descriptions: • synergism (Bar-Yam 2004, 9; Lane and Valerdi 2007, 301; Manthorpe 1996, 309) • interdependent (DAU 2006, 100) • interoperable (Lane and Valerdi 2007, 301) • effectively working together (Carlock and Fenton 2001, 245) • the contribution of the parts to the capabilities of the whole (DAU 2006, 100) • functioning together for a common purpose (Shenhar 2001, 399)

  10. Belonging in a SoS • Belonging is the acceptance ability and need to make a valued contribution to the goal(s) of another entity

  11. Connectivity in a SoS • Derived from the SoS descriptions: • geographically distributed (Maier 1998) • distributed (Kotov 1997, 1) • dependent on linkages (DeLaurentis and Callaway 2004, 831) • connected (DAU 2006, 100; Haskins 2007, 2.2; Krygiel 1999, 32 • connections are self-organizing and adaptive (Bar-Yam 2004, 9) • connections are dynamic or possess evolutionary development (Maier 1998, 269) • The capability to form connections as needed to benefit the entity

  12. Diversity in a SoS • Diverse or heterogeneous systems • Varied capabilities of a system • Preserved in part by multiple system actions

  13. Why? • We want to model SoS in order to develop integration strategies • 1) Do the proposed characteristics model a SoS? • If the answer is yes, then 2) Can altering the input govern the SoS integration?

  14. Model Foundation • Let set Si represent a system, which contains subsets of system actions Ai, system goals Gi, and other elements such as connectors Ci • Si = {Ai, Ci, Gi} • Let S* represent a system of systems, where traditional systems interact for a global goal • S* = {S1, … Sn, G*}, G*  , n>1

  15. How? • Mathematically model SoS characteristics • Simulate the model • Validate simulation against biological SoS • Extrapolate findings to technical SoS

  16. Example – Birds

  17. Questions

  18. Backup Example – E. Coli

More Related