CTCT‐‐6.2: Comparator   [V&V Building Blocks]6.2: Comparator   [V&V Building Blocks]Automated checks on deltas (a vs. b) and expected equalitiesAutomated checks on deltas (a vs. b) and expected equalities

Primary Impacts

Enabling Capabilities R

ed

uce

d

Tim

e

Re

du

ced

C

ost

R

ed

uce

d

Ris

k In

crea

sed

U

nd

ers

tan

din

g

Incr

ease

d

Co

rpo

rate

Mem

ory

In

crea

sed

Art

ifact

P

erf

orm

ance

Increased Knowledge Capture & Completeness

■ ■ ■ ■

Increased Modularity & Reusability

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Increased Traceability

■ ■ ■

Reduced Manual Re-Creation

■ ■ ■

Increased Automation

■ ■ ■

Reduced Modeling Effort

■ ■

Increased Analysis Intensity

■ ■

enterprise MOEs (measures of effectiveness)

methods/tools MOPs (measures of performance)

SERC Sponsor Research Review, November 13, 2012

RT21: VV&A Shortfalls for 

Modeling & SimulationAn MBSE/SysML‐based Approach

Russell Peak, Selcuk Cimtalay, Miyako Wilson, et al.

Objectives Example Capabilities

Approach

Contact

Capabilities & Impacts

•

Demonstrate how to address verification, validation & accreditation 

(VV&A) gaps by applying SysML and MBSE technology

•

Show in particular how V&V can be more embedded and automated 

throughout the system lifecycle

Russell S. Peak, PhD

Senior Researcher   

MBSE Branch Chief

Aerospace Systems Design Lab

www.asdl.gatech.edu

Georgia Institute of Technology 

270 Ferst Drive NW, Weber 123

Atlanta, Georgia 30332‐0150 

office +1‐404‐894‐7572 

Russell.Peak@gatech.edu

•

Apply known modeling & simulation (M&S) patterns 

and develop new patterns where needed

•

Demonstrate approach “quick look”‐style by extending 

existing testbeds and examples

•

Provide basis for developing DoD‐specific testbeds 

and deploying technology for DoD programs in future

About SysML & MBSE

•

SysML is the Systems Modeling 

Language (www.omgsysml.org), 

which has been called “the new 

global language of 350K+ systems 

engineers”

(amazon.com)

•

MBSE is model‐based systems 

engineering (vs. document‐based)

id VV&A Concept Example(s)

Higher-level concepts – round2CT-12 Verification of external core solvers via auto-generated native test models

12.1 Core math solvers: Mathematica, OpenModelica, Matlab SMT Unit test cases (to verify new solver releases, etc.);XaiTools production test suite (~150 models)

CT-13 Automated verification of external simulation/analysis models/tools via wrapping13.1 System dynamics: Matlab/Simulink HomeHeatingSystem13.2 Finite element analysis (FEA): Ansys LinkageSystems

CT-14 Automated verification of external design/descriptive models/tools via wrapping14.1 Spreadsheets: Excel Excavator manufacturing cost estimator 14.2 CAD: NX (MCAD); Expedition, etc., via AP210 (ECAD) Vehicle, MiniSatellite electronics (as recorded demos)14.3 System mission design (and LVC sims): STK Satellite orbit & ground station comm. sys. design

CT-15 Automated verification tests on physical systems 15.1 Activity-based test scripts with mobile robotics Rover functionality scenarios (sensors, camera, ...)

Higher-level concepts – round3CT-16 MIM: an architecture for M&S patternsCT-17 Other concept extensions (which can be demonstrated using similar capabilities as above)

17.1 Auto-generating documents from SysML models to support VV&A (for V&V traceability & status, accreditation reports, ...)17.2 Managing accreditation workflows and artifacts17.3 Aiding M&S validation via test results data capture and comparator usage17.4 Capturing SME validation criteria for future automated re-validation usage17.5 Managing simulation data flow and data pedigree (e.g., for sim inputs/outputs)17.6 Managing models & simulations themselves as systems using SysML (with requirements, structure, behavior, etc.)

Object1target location

rt1= 30”(anywhere on this circle)

Object2target location

rt2 = 30”(anywhere on this circle)

Object1start location

Object2start location

60 deg, 14”

45 deg, 12”

ra1 = ?ra2 = ?

Object2end location

Object1end location

id VV&A Concept Example(s)

Core embedded V&V conceptsCT-1 Language-level integrity: automated units consistency MagicDraw SysML detecting units mismatchCT-2 Language-level integrity: automated equation checking ParaMagic detecting wrong parameter nameCT-3 Language-level integrity: other examples Model integrity (e.g., multiplicity checking);

propagating name updates; instance updates; etc.CT-4 Augmented language-level integrity: ensuring best practices, etc. Model checking suites in MagicDraw and ParaMagic CT-5 Leveraging built-in checking by solvers / external tools as

wrapped in a SysML context Mathematica detecting overconstrained system of equations, etc.

Higher-level concepts – round1CT-6 V&V building blocks Margin block and comparator blockCT-7 Automated requirements verification FireSat, SimpleSat, etc. (parametrics, margin, ...)CT-8 Embedded unit tests LinkageSystems, build block libraries, ...CT-9 Automated roll-up of embedded unit tests (basic multi-level test) LinkageSystems, HomeHeatingSystemCT-10 Automated roll-up of embedded multi-level tests Combining above, ...CT-11 “DNA signatures” - user interaction with model for intuitive visual

inspection to aid model comprehension, V&V, debugging, etc.LinkageSystems, FireSat/NGDMC, etc. (and above)

Main Test Cases (for Project Activities 2 and 3)- Mobile robotics (IPRE Scribbler h/w with Myro software platform) - Excavator test bed with linkage systems - Satellite-to-ground station communication link simulation - FireSat / NGDMC satellite- Short course tutorials (vehicle fuel system, space satellite, ...) - Home heating system

...

Tool & native m

odel interface (via XaiTools, APIs, ...)1) The pattern nam

es and identifiers used here conform to H

MX 0.1 —

a method

under development for generalized system

-simulation interoperability (SSI).

2) All models show

n are SysML m

odels unless otherwise noted.

3) Infrastructure and middlew

are tools are also present (but not shown) --e.g.,

PLM, CM

, parametric graph m

anagers (XaiTools etc.), repositories, etc.Com

position relationship (usage)N

ative model relationship (via tool interface, stds., ...)

Parametric or algorithm

ic relationship (XaiTools, VIATRA

, ...)

CTCT‐‐8.1a: Unit Test/Verification Pattern8.1a: Unit Test/Verification PatternVerifying SysML model: Linkage SystemsVerifying SysML model: Linkage Systems

(UT) unit test pattern: DNA signature view (CT-11)

(TPj) seven (7) verificationtest probes wired

onto system designfor automated verification

(EUT) system design model being verified

CT-11: validation usage: - Are disconnected graphs ok in this context? - Are any other expected relations (equations) missing? - And so on ...

Concepts & Patterns Demonstrated

definitiondefinition useuse

The 4 Pillars of SysMLAutomotive Anti-Lock Braking System Example

1. Structure 2. Behavior

3. Requirements

sd ABS_ActivationSequence [Sequence Diagram]

d1:TractionDetector

m1:BrakeModulator

detTrkLos()

modBrkFrc()

sendSignal()

modBrkFrc(traction_signal:boolean)

sendAck()

interaction

sd ABS_ActivationSequence [Sequence Diagram]

d1:TractionDetector

m1:BrakeModulator

detTrkLos()

modBrkFrc()

sendSignal()

modBrkFrc(traction_signal:boolean)

sendAck()

interaction

state machine

stm TireTraction [State Diagram]

Gripping Slipping

LossOfTraction

RegainTraction

state machine

stm TireTraction [State Diagram]

Gripping Slipping

LossOfTraction

RegainTraction

activity/functionactivity/function

4. Parametrics