A key point in this blog series is that multiple engineering software tools play a role in model-based mission engineering. In our example in Figure 1, we posit that CONOPS might begin in a specialized requirements management tool and progress might be tracked in a project management tool. We use Syndeia, the interoperability platform from Intercax to create and manage inter-model connections of three types

• Stakeholder Requirement in Jama Connect (Jama Software) – Capability in Cameo Enterprise Architect (CATIA No Magic).
• System Requirement in Jama Connect (Jama Software) – Operational Activity in Cameo Enterprise Architect (CATIA No Magic).
• Task in JIRA (Atlassian) – Service Function in Cameo Enterprise Architect (CATIA No Magic).

Syndeia can create such connections in three ways

• Model transformation from Cameo to Jama or JIRA
• Model transformation from JIRA or Jama to Cameo
• Reference connection created between pre-existing elements in the three tools

In each case, a persistent, configuration-managed connection is made part of the graph. This allows us to record the traceability as the mission model evolves over time.

Figure 2 Graph analysis, UAF – Jama connections, including earlier version of updated connection with dashed outline

If we ask for connections from System Requirements in Jama to Operational Activities in UAF, our graph shows three examples, Jama in gray, UAF in red. If I change one of the system requirements in Jama, a comparison across this connection in Syndeia indicates the availability of a new version of the requirement. If the connection is updated, re-running the same query now shows two connections, both to the new version and to the earlier version, where earlier versions are indicated graphically by the dashed lines in Figure 2. The query could be modified to show only the active connections at a particular moment of time.

Figure 3 Simplified schema showing searchable pattern in red outline

The Gremlin graph query language allows us to make a more detailed query, looking for the pattern, Jama Stakeholder Requirement to UAF Capability to Service Specification to Service Function to JIRA Task. This seeks a chain of four connections over three different tools, as illustrated in Figure 3. This allows the user to check impact analysis across the entire Digital Thread, for example, the effect of a change in Stakeholder Requirement on the UAF Service Functions that support that requirement.

Figure 4 Pattern match: Stakeholder Requirement – Capability – Service Specification – Service Function - Task

The resulting graph analysis in Figure 4 shows one Stakeholder Requirement in Jama (gray) connected to six Tasks in JIRA (green) via  extended chains of connection through the UAF model.

Figure 5 Pattern match: Stakeholder Requirement – Capability – Service Specification – Service Function – (NOT) Task

Conceivably, it might be more interesting to ask which Service Functions aren’t connected to a Task, in order to monitor the progress of the model-building effort. In our example, the graph query in Figure 5 returns one chain not ending in a green JIRA node.

Summary

In the four blog posts in this series, we have explored the application of modern MBSE tools to mission engineering. In Part 1, we laid out the example and a simplified schema for its Digital Thread. In Part 2, we applied graph analysis to the core UAF model and extended it to the related SysML model in Part 3. In Part 4, the architecture models were integrated with specialized domain models in requirements and project management developed in the mission profile.

In summary, mission engineering is poised to take full advantage of the digital transformation pursued by organizations both within the defense community and in other areas. The hard work remains to define and deploy the practices that must be implemented and to reconfigure the IT barriers between organizations and disciplines.  But many of the tools we need are already available, matured in systems engineering, software development and even social networking.

Related Posts:

• Integrated Model-Based Mission Engineering | Part 1
• Integrated Model-Based Mission Engineering | Part 2
• Integrated Model-Based Mission Engineering | Part 3
• Integrated Model-Based Mission Engineering | Part 4 (this post)