Dr. Christof Ebert, Walter Bernet, Dr. Ulrich Bodenhausen ......Topology of Modern Passenger Car...

V1.0 | 2017-03-29

Dr. Christof Ebert, Walter Bernet, Dr. Ulrich Bodenhausen, VectorFrank Kirschke-Biller, Ford

Agile Systems Engineering

© 2017. Vector Consulting Services GmbH. All rights reserved. Any distribution or copying is subject to prior written approval by Vector. V1.0 | 2017-03-29

FordWelcome

62 plants worldwide

200 markets

203,000 employees, 53,000 in Europe

$136 billion revenues, $ 29 billion in Europe

6.3 million vehicle units, 1.4 million in Europe

$ 5.5 billion expenses for engineering, research and development

2/37


Frank Kirschke-Biller is leading global core software processes at Ford. Since 2000, he has been with Ford on different leadership positions in the area of Infotainment, Electrical Integration incl. Electrical Architecture, Networks, Diagnostics and Software Development.Before we was leading the department of sensor and system technology at imech, a startup in the area of mechatronics.Frank Kirschke-Biller graduated in electrical engineering at the University of Duisburg.

Frank Kirschke-BillerWelcome

[email protected] www.ford.com

3/37


…supports clients worldwide

…improves product development and product strategy, IT and provides interim management

…is as Vector Group globally present with over 1800 employees and 400 Mio. € sales

…offers with the Vector Group a portfolio of tools, software components and services

…is growing and thus continuously hiring

www.vector.com/consulting

Vector Consulting ServicesWelcome

Railway

IT & Finance

Automotive

Aerospace

DigitalTransformation

Medical

4/37


Christof EBERTWelcome

[email protected] @christofebertwww.vector.com/consulting

Christof Ebert is managing director at Vector Consulting Services.

He supports clients to improve product strategy and product development and to manage organizational changes.

Prior to that, he held senior management positions for ten years at Alcatel, with global responsibility for software / systems technology.

A trusted advisor for companies around the world, member of industry boards, and professor at the University of Stuttgart and Sorbonne in Paris, Dr. Ebert authored several books.

5/37


Welcome

Challenges

Systems Engineering

Ford Case Study

Summary and Benefits

Agenda

6/37


Industry Challenges 2017Challenges

Innovative Products

Others

Connectivity

Distributed Development

Efficiencyand Cost

Digital Transformation

Governance and Compliance

ComplexityManagement

Securityand Safety

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Cost remains biggest short-term challenge across all industries. Connectivity and Digital Transformation evolve as a major challenge.

Mid

-ter

m c

halle

nges

Short-term challenges

Vector Client Survey 2017. Details: www.vector.com/trends. Horizontal axis shows short-term challenges; vertical axis shows mid-term challenges. Sum > 100% due to 3 answers per question. Strong validity with >4% response rate of 1500 recipients from different industries worldwide.

7/37


Challenge: ComplexityChallenges

First Electric Harness of Volkswagen Beetle “Käfer”

Topology of Modern Passenger Car

Need: Evolution to complex functionality demands high-performant fault-tolerant 3-tier architectures (sensor/actor, centralized middleware, cloud)

8/37


Challenge: ConnectivityChallenges

4G LTE

OBD DSRC

SuppliersOEM

Public Clouds

Service Provider

ITS Operator

Need: Growing connectivity both on system-level as well as external services require consistent dependency management, hardening etc.

9/37


Challenge: Digital TransformationChallenges

Need: Evolve systems-level digital transformation – rather than SW/IT alone

System-of-systems inapplicationdomain

SingleEmbeddedSub-system

EmbeddedSystems build from multiple embeddedsub-systems

HW SW DataSpecificengineeringdisciplines

Mech

Domain dataanalysis andmanagement

Sub-System BHW SW Data

Sub-system

A

System1

System2

System3

LifecycleMgmt.

New Bus. Processes

Adaptability,Self-x

Data Fusion

Sub-system

B

Sub-system

C

1st Generation:HW only

2nd Generation:HW and SW

3rd Generation:Isolated networks of 2nd

generation

4th Generation:Complex embedded systems build form sub-systems

5th Generation:Integrated life-cyclemanagement of networked assets

6th Generation:> Internet of things (IoT) > network-centric> exponential business model

0th Generation:Mechanical

10/37


Challenge: Interdependencies

SWHW

Components:- Requirements- Architecture

Srv

Subsystems:- Requirements- Architecture

System- Requirements- Architecture

SystemTest

SubystemTest

ComponentTest

Need: Complex systems demand alignment of software/IT, hardware and services

Challenges

11/37


Challenge: Heterogeneity

Need: System level optimization and collaborative environments

Challenges

Components

Networks

Signals

Functions

Harness

Fusing

PowerSupply

Topology

… … … …

Local Optimization Loop(s) Local Optimization Loop(s)

Function & Network Design Process Design Process1000s of

Inconsistent

Documents

! !

12/37


Challenges

Challenge: Security

Devices

1980 2000 2020

Need: Harden systems against cyber security threats

InfrastructureSystems

13/37


Challenge: Collaboration

One Location Several Locations

One Engineering Discipline

Several Engineering Disciplines

Need: Substantial effort and competences for coordinating distributed engineering across locations and disciplines

Challenges

14/37


Welcome

Challenges

Systems Engineering

Ford Case Study


Agenda

15/37


Vector Lean SAfE for Agile Systems EngineeringSystems Engineering

High

HighLow

ComplianceConsistency

Agility, Flexibility, Continuity

Source: Ebert, Requirements Engineering, 2017

Vector Lean SAfE

16/37


4 Solutions for Agile Systems EngineeringSystems Engineering

Collaborationand Cooperation

Agile Techniques

Modeling andSimulation

Quality andEfficiency

17/37


Solution 1: Agile TechniquesSystems Engineering

n: Sprint Number Synchronize all domains on defined milestones

September October November December

Agile Software Development in sprints

12

34

56

Hardware Development

Milestone

Mechanical Development

38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 1 2 352

Increment 1

18/37


Solution 2: Modeling and SimulationSystems Engineering

SystemRequirements

Logical SystemArchitecture

ComponentArchitecture

SimulationImplementation

PowerMirrorCtrl

Type: PowerMirrorCtrl

SwitchMatrix

Type: SwitchMatrix

PowerMirrorPass

Type: PowerMirr...

PowerMirrorDriver

Type: PowerMirr...

PowerManagement

Type: PowerMan...

x+:pm_pass_x+

y+:pm_pass_y+

y-:pm_pass_y-

x-:pm_pass_x-

y+:pm_driv_y+

x+:pm_driv_x+

y-:pm_driv_y-

x-:pm_driv_x-

y:PM_y

x:PM_x

sel:PM_selection

def12:KeyIn

sel:PM_selection

x:PM_x

y:PM_y x+:pm_pass_x+

y+:pm_pass_y+

y-:pm_pass_y-

x-:pm_pass_x-

y+:pm_driv_y+

x+:pm_driv_x+

y-:pm_driv_y-

x-:pm_driv_x-

KeyIn:KeyIn Assembly Net

Assembly Net

Body Ctrl

Driver Door CtrlPass Door Ctrl

Gateway

SwtichMatrix

PassengerMirror DriverMirror

BatMng

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

DoorLIN:LIN

Ground

PowerSupply

- cv2:4w -KA_Pass Door Ctrl _0

-

-

CANPT:CANC

19/37


Solution 3: Collaboration and CooperationSystems Engineering

Legend

SW Lead Team 1SW Lead Team 2Technical Lead Testing

Team MemberHardware LeadMechanical Lead

Chief Technical Lead

Kanban Board

Testing Team

HW TeamSW Team 2SW Team 1 Mechanical Team

Scrum of Scrums

Location 1 Location 1

Location 1Location 2

Location 2 Location 3

20/37


Solution 4: Quality and EfficiencySystems Engineering

Commonality processes, methods, tools Organizational & cooperation pattern

Integrationand Test

Requirements Architecture & Design

System

requirements

System

architecture

SWarchitecture

HWrequirements

HWarchitecture

SWrequirements

HSI

spec.HSI

Incremental integration, continuous deployment

System Level

Technology-specific

21/37


Welcome

Challenges

Systems Engineering

Ford Case Study


Agenda

22/37


Systems Engineering Throughout the Life-CycleSystems Engineering

SW and System engineering requires comprehensive PLM solution 23/37


Information ModelFord Case Study

Logical functions necessary to implement the featuresTranslating customer requirements to implementation independent engineering requirements.

Use: Enable efficient reuse of specifications across ECUs and carlines (Core)

Feature from a customer perspectiveTranslating customer wants and market needs to stable, consistent and complete feature requirements

Use: Discussion/negotiation with customer representatives (e.g. marketing)

Allocated logical functions (platform / ECU) • Technical interfaces of components (e.g. ECUs) are determined• Component behavior is enhanced/refined by technical requirements

(implementer)

Use: • Consistency of x-ECU interfaces enable interoperability • Efficient data exchange with supplier

The 3 abstraction layers close the gap between Vehicle Attributes and the Component Specification

Responsible: Feature/Function Owner

Depending Business Model• If SW is written by Ford, QPIP scope extends to SW

specification details

Feature Level Requirements

Function Level Requirements

Attribute Requirements

SW Require-ments

HW Require-ments

Scope of EESE RE project

Mechanical Require-

ments

Component Level

Requirements

24/37


Requirements StructureFord Case Study

Defined structure for gathering individual requirements (e.g. Feature Document)

Actors Vehicle Occupant Pre-conditions The Driver Profiles feature is set to Off (ie enhanced memory feature is turned Off).

Scenario Description

The User accesses the Driver Profiles HMI from the touchscreen and chooses to enable the Driver Profiles feature (set to On).

The system sets the Driver Profile feature to ON and indicates this to the user Post-conditions The Driver Profiles feature is now set to ON and a new profile can be created. List of Exception Use Cases

Interfaces Personalization Interface

Supporting specifications/Artifacts

(Models, Use Cases, Explanatory text paragraphs)

Requirement

Specification(a container with a defined structure to hold requirements and supporting information)

25/37


Improving Quality and Collaboration with Good DocumentationFord Case Study

Combine text and graphics

REQ-199754/A-Opt-In Create Driver Profile

Enhanced Memory shall require a user to Opt-in before enabling this feature and creating first Driver Profile. Without the opt-in step the user cannot create any Driver Profiles and the vehicle will operate as it does normally without separate Driver Profiles for different drivers. (Example from Feature Document without attributes table)

ENMEM-REQ-199754/A-Opt-In Enhanced Memory Feature to Create Driver Profile

Creation of Driver Profiles is only allowed in state Create (refer to figure 3). The vehicle will operate as it does normally without separate Driver Profiles for different drivers.

Figure –Operation Modes

26/37


Example: System Level RequirementsFord Case Study

Purpose: Complete understanding of feature by using scenarios and other modeling techniques

Driving scenarios technique has been developed in pilot projects.

27/37


Consistent Documentation and Tool SupportFord Case Study

Feature Level Requirements

Component Level

Requirements

Function Level Requirements

ECU2

ECU1

ECU3

F1 F2F3 F5F4

Attribute Requirements

SW Requirements

HW Requirements

Feature Document(per feature)

ECU FunctionalSpecification

Feature Implementation Specification (per Feature)

InterfaceSpec

InterfaceSpecPlatform

specific Concepts

Features

Feat 2Feat 3

Feat 1

Fnc1

Fnc 3

Fnc2

Fnc4

ECU EngineeringSpecification (per ECU)

Function Specification

Ext. InterfaceSpec

Aggregated Feature Specification (AFS, Ex-SRD)

QPIP RE work stream defines 1 template per abstraction level (on component level 2) to Master complexity Apply consistent RE processes and methods across domains

28/37


Ownership: Self-organization reduces collaboration effort significantly compared to classic project management approach.

Transparency of project status is significantly improved.

Velocity and quality are improved. Management and teams recognize and value improvements and agile team spirit.

Improved design speed and reuse.

Product complexity is better managed and controlled.

Architectural complexity control.

Benefits – Examples from Ford ProjectsFord Case Study

29/37


Welcome

Challenges

Systems Engineering

Ford Case Study


Agenda

30/37


Evolution towards Systems EngineeringSummary and Benefits

Inefficiency Isolated unconnected processes Inconsistent handlingOverheads and rework

SD DD Impl UT Int

Fragmented tasks

Organically grown tools

PDM, CM, defects,documents, etc.

Configurations

ERP, Wikis, File systems

Collaboration

Project mgmt

CAD, Code,modelling

Design

Traditional

Project mgmtRequirements

Efficiency Agile and consistent process Improved quality and cycle time Employee motivation

Perspectives

Processes

People

Agile

31/37


Requirements and Systems Engineering for Complex SystemsSummary and Benefits

Success factors Implement Lean Agile for Systems Engineering. Agree transformation goals and validate during pilot phase

(i.e., usefulness, usage) Apply professional change management

(e.g., power users on board, meaningful piloting, parallel coaching, training, support, continuous improvement)

Integrate improvements and necessary cost directly in the annual budgets of product lines

Benefits Consistent Requirements and Systems Engineering:

Requirements consistency, impact analysis, functional safety support and variant management

Efficiency improvement: Effort reduction through more reuse, rework reduction by less defects in specs, change handling efficiency by less inconsistencies during changes

People motivation:Less rework, more ownership

32/37


Fast Evolution of Systems EngineeringSummary and Benefits

2000-2015E/E architecture of car

Vehicle

Architecture driving factors: Conway’s law: OEM, OEM <-> tier-1 In-car functional domains Narrow-scope cost optimization Interconnect technology No systems engineering

2017: Pattern for E/E architecture of cars

Network Service I

Network Service II

Asset Mgmt.

5G

5G C2C, C2x

Vehicle

Architecture driving factors: Network-factor based business models Autonomous driving Functional integrity Safety and security Electrical propulsion

33/37


Benchmarking the BenefitsSummary and Benefits

Assumptions: Average E/E engineering in globally distributed sites Introduction without further parallel change initiatives Engineering, supplier and management processes and IT architecture are optimized towards

business processes

EBIT potentials (conservative)

CurrentEBIT

EBIT Potential

>10%

5%

2%

3%

Currentresults

Shortened cycle time

Reduced cost

Improved quality

Improvementpotentials

Time to release Rework Schedule adherence Reuse

Less corrections, Changes, Variants

Release criteria Less defect numbers, Corrections in field

34/37


Collaboration effort: In several automotive system development projects the collaboration

effort has been reduced by over 20%.

Reliability of results and project transparency: Citation from a customer: “I simply open the Kanban Board of the

Scrum of Scrums meeting. If I see no progress after 3 days, I know the team has a problem. But I do not see this often.”

Significant improvement in velocity and product quality. Customers, management and teams recognize and value improvements and agile team spirit. Citation of a customer’s customer, 2 weeks after start of sprint working

mode: “Now we see progress!”

Young software engineers consider up to date methods as selection criterion for their employer – also in automotive industry.

Benefits – Vector Examples across IndustriesSummary and Benefits

Introduce agile systems engineering before complexity gets overwhelming.

With support and careful implementation, risk is low.35/37


Thursday, 29. June 2017 Vector Campus in Stuttgart Free admission: www.vector.com/forum

Gerhard Mack, Vodafone Deutschland, COO: "Innovative Services for Connectivity and Mobility"

Ralph Behrens, Bosch, Manager Software-Architecture: "Connectivity Services: Business models and Engineering"

Dr. Ulrich Bodenhausen, Vector, Manager: "Enabling Connectivity: Spezification, Integration and Convergence"

Frank Kirschke-Biller, Ford, Manager Central Software and Systems Engineering: "Systems Engineering and Security requirements for Connectivity“

Dr. Matthias Traub, BMW, Chief Architect: "Innovative E/E system architecture as enabler for networked mobility"

Dr. Haim Amir, Essence, CEO: "Connectivity for innovative IoT solutions"

Visit us at Vector Forum 2017Summary and Benefits

36/37

Your questions are welcome!

Passion. Partner. Value.

Vector Consulting Services

Tel +49 711 80670-0 www.vector.com/consultingFax +49 711 80670-444 [email protected]


Date post:	21-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times