Concept Model for SESAR

SESAR Concept ValidationEUROCONTROL Mid-Term Work Programme

European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation

Ros Eveleigh MTV

EUROCONTROL Brétigny

6 juin 2008

Structure

� The context

� The Theory

� Applying the process model

� Pros and Cons

� What next

Objectives

� Understand the methodology used to describe SESAR

concept for EP3 validation

� Hear something about system modelling/definition

methods

� Opportunity to input your views on modelling concepts

� Look to future modelling for SESAR

Structure

� The context

� The Theory

� Applying the process model

� Pros and Cons

� What next

SESAR

� Puts a strong User focus into the ATM developments

� Sets Performance Targets

� 3 x capacity, 10 x safety, 0.5 x cost, 0.9 x environment

� Quality of service KPIs

� Agreed a User focused concept

� Proposed an R&D work programme to 2013

Episode 3

� EC funded project, 20+ partners

� Direct support to SESAR

� Previously initial validation of SESAR 2020 Concept

� Now initial exploration

� Using discipline of validation

� Outputs

� How to validate a performance-based concept

� Mature & detail understanding of concept

� Research community

� Wider stakeholder community

Approach to Validation

� Components for successful validation, need to know

� What you are validating

� The concept

� What concept should deliver

� Performance targets

� How to validate it

� E-OCVM

� What is available on the SESAR Concept

� CONOPS

� Operational Improvements

� Roles and Responsibilities

SESAR CONOPS

� High level principles (D3)� Business Trajectory

� System Wide Information Management (SWIM)

� Network Management� Airports fully integrated into ATM system

� Airborne Separation Assistance Systems� Sequencing & Merging applications leading to Self Separation

� Aims at Target Concept 2025+, not 2020 concept

� Some political positioning

� Varying levels of detail

Operational Improvements

� Views concept in terms of how it changes

� 10 Lines of Change� Information Management, Managing the Network, New

Separation Modes etc

� Operational Improvements (OI)

� 183 OI steps

� Describes improvements from 2008 to 2025+

� Fragmented view, range of deployment times

� Varying levels of detail

Requirement of Concept Description

� Present business/operational view

� Facilitate agreement between operational and technical experts

� Describe concept at a single time period i.e. 2020

� Description must be

� Comprehensive, cover full scope

� Coherent

� Consolidated

� Appropriate level of detail

� SESAR documentation as it stands is not suitable

Detailed Operational Descriptions

EP3 response to validation need for concept description

� Detailed Operational Descriptions (DODs)

� Single reference source for all EP3 exercises

� DODs updated in accordance with exercise results

� DODs need structure & methodology to ensure they are

support validation

� Start with a sound model of the system

ATM Model and DODs

SESAR ConOps (2.2.2)

SESAR Concept of Operations

WP2.2.2/D3

DLT-0612-222-01-14 Draft

DOCUMENT CONTENT & PURPOSE: Draft 14 reflecting outcome of WP222 W/shop 24/25 May 2007 focussing only on “showstopper” comments VALIDATION Name Date

Content Integration Team James

DERISSON

R-Level Henning

HARTMANN

O-Level Christian

VERLOHREN

Quality Manager

APPROVAL Name Date

R-Level, Content Integration Team, Project Director (for multi-stage task deliverable only)

SESAR Concept of Operations

Level-1

Level-2 Level-2 Level-2

ATM Model

Structure

� The context

� The Theory

� Applying the process model

� Pros and Cons

� What next

Existing Approaches 1

� ICAO Invariant Processes

� Airspace Org & Mgt, Traffic Synchronisation, Separation Management,

Airspace User Operations, Airport Operations …

� Complete system description

� Invariant Processes aligned with OCD

� OCD one input to SESAR – with other ideas

� But - SESAR Concept has

� Trajectory not airspace focus

� Integration of User Operations

� Need fresh start

Existing Work 2

� Overall ATM/CNS Target Architecture (OATA) Work

� Builds on EUROCONTROL Operational Concept Document

� Unified Modelling Language (UML)

� Operational system described through

� Actors

� Operational Scenarios

� Use Cases

� But –

� Needs to be updated

� Focuses on architecture

Back to Basics 1

� System Engineering Approach

� Focus on processes

� Where process model fits

Back to Basics 2

� Available Tools & Methods

� IDEF (Integrated Computer Aided Manufacturing (ICAM)

DEFinition)

� Dates from 70’s

� Unified Modelling Language

� Object-oriented world

� BPMN (Business Process Modelling Notation)

� Business world

IDEF

� IDEF Family of Methods

� ‘A structured approach to Enterprise Modelling and Analysis’

� Knowledge Based Systems Inc (2006)

� Promoted by US Air Force in 80’s

� IDEF0 – functional model

� IDEF1 – information model

� IDEF2 – dynamics model

� IDEF3 Process Flow and Object State Description Capture

Method + ….

IDEF0 functional modelling

� Based on SADT

� Structured Analysis Design Technique

� Developed by SofTech in 70’s

� IDEF0 – functional modelling

� Decisions, actions and activities

� Organising system analysis

� Scope system analysis needs

� Representation and relationships of activities

� Graphical Modelling language (syntax, semantics)

� Methodology for developing models

� Method of successive breakdown

SADT diagram

Process

Controls

Resources (Actors)

OutputsInputs

SADT Diagrams – advantages

� As a function modelling language� Comprehensive and expressive,

� Suitable for many applications

� Coherent and simple language

� Rigorous and precise expression

� Enhances communication,

� easy to learn

� Well tested and proven

� Many years of use

� Used within Brétigny for Airport Airside Modelling work

� Easy to generate diagrams

� many commercial products

UML Use Cases

� Capture functional requirements

� Describe how to achieve a goal or task

� Formalised structure, guidelines for use produced by OATA

� Describe what the system shall do for the actor to achieve a

particular goal

� Do not use implementation-specific language.

� Are at an appropriate level of detail.

� Do not include detail regarding user interfaces etc

� Significant documentation overhead

� Appropriate for design phase of system development

UML Narrative Scenarios

� Describes how actors (including human) interact with the system

� Methodology and guidelines developed by OATA

� Scenarios are free text narrative of interactions with aspects of the

system

� Use cases can be identified in the scenario

� Good to communicate with experts

� Heavy documentation overhead

� Difficult to demonstrate completeness

Business Process Modelling Notation

� Standardised in 2006

� Graphical notation for drawing business processes in a

work flow

� Flow Objects

� Connecting Objects

� Swimlanes

� Artefacts

� Powerful but complex

Business Process Modelling Notation

Decision

� SADT allows hierarchical breakdown

� Can demonstrate completeness

� Simple diagrams

� Easy to learn and communicate

� SADT for structuring documents

� Use cases and Scenarios support development phase

� Agreed EUROCONTROL methodology for documentation

� Use Cases and Scenarios for detailing concept

Process versus Function …

� SADT supports a functional description of system

� We have developed a process-based description of ATM

system

� Why?

� Pragmatism

� Operational experts understand processes not functions

� Use of SADT diagrams with processes has worked

Structure

� The context

� Technical background

� Applying the process model

� Pros and Cons

� What next

Methodology 1

� Start with SADT – ensures complete description

� Perform hierarchical breakdown of processes

� Maintain reference of SESAR CONOPS & OIs

� Stop where process is meaningful to a reader

� Identify Use Cases

� Develop scenarios – aiding transition to design

� Identify Use Cases

� Cross check Use Cases

Methodology

Use Case Use Case Use Case Use Case Use Case Use Case

Process

Process Process

Process Process

Whole Flight Scenario

Scenario Scenario

Scenario Transverse Scenario

SESAR CONOPS

SADT Phase

� Hierarchical breakdown across 2 axes using SADT

diagrams

� SESAR Planning Layers

� Long Term Planning (More than 6 months)

� Medium/Short Term Planning (~6 months to ~2 hrs pre-flight)

� Execution

� Operating Context

� Network – co-ordination across ECAC ANSPs

� Airport

� Terminal Area – dense traffic around a constrained resource

� En route

Hierarchical Breakdown Axes

Hierarchical Breakdown Axes

Medium/Short Term PlanningLong Term Planning Execution

OIOI OIOI

CONOPS

CONOPS CONOPS CONOPS

OICONOPSOICONOPS OI OI

Hierarchical Breakdown Axes

Medium/Short Term PlanningLong Term Planning Execution

CONOPS CONOPS CONOPS

CONOPS

The Process Model

ATM Process Model: Facts and figures

� 93 Elementary Processes in ATM model

� 188 Use Cases identified

� Developed by a team of 7 people

� Initial development over 3 months

� External reviewers included

� NATS, DSNA, AENA, DFS, Airbus

Challenges in development of model 1

� Maturity of concept� Detail available in SESAR material

� Obtaining information from experts� Potential different views

� Where to stop breakdown?� When you can write use cases – that is when you can describe

elementary interactions between actors and systems

� Time to write the Use Cases

� Trade-off between levels of detail� For safety/validation analysis versus

� For communication with operational experts

Challenges in development of model 2

� Allocating ‘concept elements’ of SESAR as process or flow� Queue management – a single process

� Trajectory management – a set of processes through a flight

� Representation of SWIM, not a process but an enabler

� Allocation of processes against operational context

� Not possible to allocate all of OIs to model easily� Some fall across flight phases and operating contexts

� Not a pure functional decomposition, should not consider time relationship� Repetitions of same function in different phases

� Not possible to be generic across all timeframes� Had to fix on a single deployment time, 2020

Use Case and Scenario Phase

� Just starting

� High level end to end scenario of a single flight

� Detailed scenarios for EP3 exercises

� Hyperlinks to end to end scenario

� Scenarios related to single flight

� Scenarios related to multiple flights in different flight phases

� To be started

� Analysis of scenarios to identify Use Cases

Structure

� The context

� Technical background

� Applying the process model

� Pros and Cons

� What next

Pros

� Supported production of the Detailed Operational Descriptions

� Facilitated development with multiple authors

� Identifying potential overlaps between DODs

� Easy to identify actors, functions, processes, generate glossary

� Audit of concept, missing actors

� Never a question by writers of why ATM Process Model is needed

� Value to safety case

� Safety team could use model and DODs to make a quick start to analyse the

concept

Cons

� Safety analysis developing further system models

� Model does not explain data

� What is the Reference Business Trajectory?

� Limited feedback on Process Model from outside parties

� Representing non-functional requirements

� Type of performance. Interoperability

� Model has not been successfully used for analysis

� Should we make more effort here?

� The context

� Technical background

� Applying the process model

� Pros and Cons

� What next ?

What next?

� SESAR Implementation will use Enterprise Architecture

Framework (AF)

� Looking at

� Department Of Defence AF, Ministry of Defence, NATO AF

� DODAF, MODAF, NAF

� Objective to ensure consistency across Enterprise

Architecture

� Many different modelling tools

What next?

� Architecture Framework scope - MODAF

� All Views

� Strategic Views

� Operational Views

� System Views

� Technical Standards Views

� Acquisition Views

� Service Orientated Views

Conclusions

� SESAR Concept Detailing work needed to be structured

� SADT modelling was successfully applied in this role

� Some uncertainty on how to take SADT model forward

� Develop/analyse existing model

� Develop new models e.g. for safety

� Models will be with us for some time to come …