New Products from NASA’s Software Architecture Review Board

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 1 NASA Earth Science Data Systems (ESDS) Software Reuse Working Group CEOS WIGSS-22 Annapolis, MD September.
Advertisements

Achieve Benefit from IT Projects. Aim This presentation is prepared to support and give a general overview of the ‘How to Achieve Benefits from IT Projects’
G O D D A R D S P A C E F L I G H T C E N T E R Code 300 Overview Codes 323: Mission Assurance Branch Name:Joe Hall Title: Associate Branch Head Office:Mission.
Campus Improvement Plans
<<Date>><<SDLC Phase>>
SMC Evaluation Programme. Overview Context Evaluation Programme –Stakeholders –SMC advice Conclusions.
Evaluating a Software Architecture By Desalegn Bekele.
Monday, June 01, 2015 Aligning Business Strategy with IT Architecture Board & Governance- Key to Running IT as Business.
Jairus Hihn Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology Domain-Oriented Modeling, Estimation and Improvement for Aerospace November 2,
Software Testing and Quality Assurance
The Architecture Design Process
The Software Product Life Cycle. Views of the Software Product Life Cycle  Management  Software engineering  Engineering design  Architectural design.
Purpose of the Standards
NASA Space Launch System (SLS) Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Analysis Processes within Enterprise Architecture (EA) September 11, 2013.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration SAS08_Classify_Defects_Nikora1 Software Reliability Techniques Applied to Constellation Allen P. Nikora,
Coaching for School Improvement: A Guide for Coaches and Their Supervisors An Overview and Brief Tour Karen Laba Indistar® Summit September 2, 2010.
Software Architecture premaster course 1.  Israa Mosatafa Islam  Neveen Adel Mohamed  Omnia Ibrahim Ahmed  Dr Hany Ammar 2.
INCOSE 1 st reactions. One other area that struck me has the sheer number of levels of proficiency—in ours we are going with 5 and the first one is limited.
LSU 07/07/2004Communication1 Communication & Documentation Project Management Unit – Lecture 8.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Buck Crenshaw, Program Element Manager, NASA-Wide.
Process: A Generic View
SAS_08_AADL_Exec_Gluch MAC-T IVV Model-Based Software Assurance with the SAE Architecture Analysis & Design Language (AADL) California Institute.
Annual SERC Research Review, October 5-6, By Jennifer Bayuk Annual SERC Research Review October 5-6, 2011 University of Maryland Marriott Inn and.
Professional Certificate – Managing Public Accounts Committees Ian “Ren” Rennie.
These courseware materials are to be used in conjunction with Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach, 6/e and are provided with permission by.
IT PMB: Executive Oversight and Decision Authority for Application and Infrastructure Projects at NASA Larry Sweet Chair, IT PMB JSC CIO August 2010.
Chapter 2 Process: A Generic View
Software Requirements Engineering CSE 305 Lecture-2.
A Comparison of 42 Local, National, and International HIA Guidelines Andrew L. Dannenberg, MD, MPH Katherine Hebert, MCRP Arthur M. Wendel, MD, MPH Sarah.
UNWTO-IFTTA Interactive Discussion Forum on Tourism Legislation Patrice TEDJINI, Head, UNWTO Documentation Resources & Archives UNWTO-IFTTA Interactive.
Requirements Specification for Lab3 COP4331 and EEL4884 OO Processes for Software Development © Dr. David A. Workman School of Computer Science University.
March 26-28, 2013 SINGAPORE CDIO Asian Regional Meeting and Workshop on Engineering Education and Policies for Regional Leaders Programme Evaluation (CDIO.
© 2012 xtUML.org Bill Chown – Mentor Graphics Model Driven Engineering.
These courseware materials are to be used in conjunction with Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach, 6/e and are provided with permission by.
SAS ‘05 Reducing Software Security Risk through an Integrated Approach David P. Gilliam, John D. Powell Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute.
Aerospace Engineering™ Overview. What is Project Lead the Way? Focus on learning through Rigor Relevance Retention Integration Motivation.
Rational Unified Process Fundamentals Module 5: Implementing RUP.
The Conceptual Framework: What It Is and How It Works Linda Bradley, James Madison University Monica Minor, NCATE April 2008.
Systems Engineering Simulation Modeling Maintenance Analysis Availability Research Repair Testing Training Copyright © 2009, David Emery & D&S Consultants,
1 EMS Fundamentals An Introduction to the EMS Process Roadmap AASHTO EMS Workshop.
ST5 PDR June 19-20, 2001 NMP 2-1 EW M ILLENNIUM P ROGRA NNMM Program Overview Dr. Christopher Stevens Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of.
MODEL-BASED SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURES.  Models of software are used in an increasing number of projects to handle the complexity of application domains.
Overview of RUP Lunch and Learn. Overview of RUP © 2008 Cardinal Solutions Group 2 Welcome  Introductions  What is your experience with RUP  What is.
Safety and Mission Assurance Directorate, Goddard Space Flight Center Supply Chain Management Panel Session: NASA Supplier Assessments: Processes, Results.
Fundamentals of Governance: Parliament and Government Understanding and Demonstrating Assessment Criteria Facilitator: Tony Cash.
John D. McGregor Architecture Evaluation
John N. Lavis, MD, PhD Professor and Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Transfer and Exchange McMaster University Program in Policy Decision-Making McMaster.
SRR and PDR Charter & Review Team Linda Pacini (GSFC) Review Chair.
SAS_05_Contingency_Lutz_Tal1 Contingency Software in Autonomous Systems Robyn Lutz, JPL/Caltech & ISU Doron Tal, USRA at NASA Ames Ann Patterson-Hine,
Export Compliance Laboratory Outreach Practices Rachel Skinner Office of Export Compliance Jet Propulsion Laboratory
CI R1 LCO Review Panel Preliminary Report. General Comments –Provide clear definition of the goals of the phase (e.g. inception), the scope, etc. in order.
1 SAS ‘04 Reducing Software Security Risk through an Integrated Approach David P. Gilliam and John D. Powell.
Summary of the Submission of the United States On the development of a five-year programme of work on the scientific, technical and socio-economic aspects.
A Framework for Assessing Needs Across Multiple States, Stakeholders, and Topic Areas Stephanie Wilkerson & Mary Styers REL Appalachia American Evaluation.
Ontology in MBSE How ontologies fit into MBSE The benefits and challenges.
IPDA Architecture Project International Planetary Data Alliance IPDA Architecture Project Report.
February 2, PM ET. Since the Summit… WE LISTENED…. Here’s what’s happening….. Curriculum Working Group is hard at work …… Why we are having these.
Model Based Engineering Environment Christopher Delp NASA/Caltech Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
NASA Model-Based Systems Engineering Pathfinder 2016 Summary and Path Forward Karen J. Weiland, Ph.D. Jon Holladay, NASA Systems Engineering Technical.
Data Architecture World Class Operations - Impact Workshop.
cFS Workshop Introduction
NASA Data Quality Working Group (DQWG) Update
Overview – Guide to Developing Safety Improvement Plan
Overview of System Engineering
Overview – Guide to Developing Safety Improvement Plan
By Jeff Burklo, Director
Chapter # 5 Supporting Quality Devices
<Your Team # > Your Team Name Here
Bridging the ITSM Information Gap
Jeff Dutton/NASA COR August 26, 2019
Presentation transcript:

New Products from NASA’s Software Architecture Review Board Lorraine Fesq Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology Flight Software Workshop October 27-29, 2015 Johns Hopkins University/Applied Physics Laboratory Annapolis, MD Copyright 2015 California Institute of Technology. Government sponsorship acknowledged. The research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Mission & Charter of SARB SARB was established by NASA OCE in April 2009 Mission: Manage flight software complexity through better software architecture Charter Provide constructive feedback to flight projects in the formative stages of software architecting Focus on architectural improvements to reduce and/or better manage complexity in requirements, design, implementation, verification, and operations Spread best architectural practices, principles, and patterns across flight software centers Contribute to NASA Lessons Learned

NASA Software Architecture Reviews Objectives Manage and/or reduce flight software complexity through better software architecture Help improve mission software reliability and save costs Plan Prepare introductory document, review process, review checklist, documentation recommendations, and sample problem statement Educate team on process Practice on flown missions Conduct real reviews Approach Create a NASA-wide software architecture review board (SARB) Engage with flight projects in the formative stages of software architecture

SARB Team Members (as of October 2015) Name Expertise / Position Affiliation Michael Aguilar Sponsor and NESC Software Discipline Expert, NASA Technical Fellow in Software NESC Dan Dvorak SARB co-Lead, Integrated Model-Centric Engineering (IMCE) team JPL Lorraine Fesq SARB co-Lead, Fault Management Community of Practice Lead, 3101 Ken Costello Aerospace and Software engineer, IV&V Program Chief Architect IV&V Michael Madden Chief Scientist, Simulation Development and Analysis Branch LaRC Darrel Raines Orion Flight Software System Manager JSC John Weir FSW Lead for Space Launch System (and formerly, Ares I) MSFC Kathryn Weiss Senior Flight Software Engineer, JPL Flight Software Product Line Cognizant Engineer Jonathan Wilmot Software architect, Flight Software Branch GSFC

SARB Community of Practice Page https://nen.nasa.gov/web/sarb

SARB Documents Located on “Preparation for Review” page on SARB CoP Contextually Driven Architecture Reviews (outreach) Project Problem Statement template Preparing for a Software Architecture Review Reference Architecture Questions Architecture Review Checklist Scope of Architectural Concerns Quality Attributes Table https://nen.nasa.gov/web/sarb/preparation

Recommended Contents for Software Architecture Descriptions SARB advises starting with the SEI Template for a SW ADD, in conjunction with the following to address concerns/characteristics specific to the NASA FSW domain Architecture Terminology Mission Overview Context Diagram, Context Description Architectural Drivers Critical Resources & Margins Stakeholders & Concerns Quality Attribute Analysis Measures of Performance Architectural Decisions & Rationale Architectural Alternatives (Trade Studies) Multiple Views Diagrams and Legends Architectural Frameworks Heritage Analysis/Software Reuse Assumptions & Limitations Architectural Patterns, Principles, Invariants, Rules Fault Management Non-Concerns References SEI Template for Software Architecture Documentation Full document available at https://nen.nasa.gov/web/software/sarb/guidelines

SARB Documents Located on “Preparation for Review” page on SARB CoP Contextually Driven Architecture Reviews (outreach) Project Problem Statement template Preparing for a Software Architecture Review Reference Architecture Questions Architecture Review Checklist Scope of Architectural Concerns Quality Attributes Table https://nen.nasa.gov/web/sarb/preparation

Quality Attributes Table The Quality Attribute Table contains software architecture quality attributes that are relevant to the mission-critical real-time embedded systems. Full document available at https://nen.nasa.gov/web/software/sarb/preparation

Quality Attributes Table – excerpt

Quality Attributes Table Use Cases The QA Table has at least three primary use cases Use by a software architect and project team to evaluate the priorities of each QA for a specific project. Use during development – Developers implementing the architecture need to be mindful of the “Tactic to achieve”, “Evidence of/verification”, “Project Prioritization”, and “Project intended variation” columns for each attribute during the design and coding process Use in the review process to evaluate a software architecture with respect to each QA in the Table and the priorities established by the project Full document available at https://nen.nasa.gov/web/software/sarb/preparation

SARB is a NASA-provided resource SARB is available to NASA projects “Free of charge” for reviews Review feedback is provided to project only – handled confidentially/discreetly Encourage your project to conduct a software architecture review before PDR After PDR, it’s hard to make any substantive changes Inquire about a review at https://nen.nasa.gov/web/software/sarb or email Lorraine.M.Fesq@jpl.nasa.gov