{"title":"A cross‐sectorial review of industrial best practices and case histories on Industry 4.0 technologies","authors":"F. G. Galizia, M. Bortolini, F. Calabrese","doi":"10.1002/sys.21697","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21697","url":null,"abstract":"Industry 4.0 (I4.0) was introduced in 2011, and its advanced enablers strongly affect industrial practices. In the current literature, while several papers offer general reviews on the topic, contributions exploring the evidences coming from the implementation of I4.0 in multi‐sector Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and large enterprises are few and expected. To address this gap, a comprehensive review of the main I4.0 enabling technologies is conducted, focusing on implementation experiences in companies belonging to different sectors. Forty (40) real case studies are analyzed and compared. The results show that 63% of the identified applications involve large enterprises in the transport sector, that is, automotive, aeronautics, and railway, adopting a structured set of enabling technologies. SMEs engaged in I4.0 projects primarily belong to the mechanical engineering sector, and 37% of such projects deals with the preliminary feasibility analysis of introducing a single enabling technology. Conclusions and trends guide researchers and practitioners in understanding the implementation level of I4.0 technologies.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43625903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Decision making for multi‐objective problems: Mean and median metrics","authors":"M. Efatmaneshnik, N. Chitsaz, Li Qiao","doi":"10.1002/sys.21690","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21690","url":null,"abstract":"When dealing with problems with more than two objectives, sophisticated multi‐objective optimization algorithms might be needed. Pareto optimization, which is based on the concept of dominated and non‐dominated solutions, is the most widely utilized method when comparing solutions within a multi‐objective setting. However, in the context of optimization, where three or more objectives are involved, the effectiveness of Pareto dominance approaches to drive the solutions to convergence is significantly compromised as more and more solutions tend to be non‐dominated by each other. This in turn reduces the selection pressure, especially for algorithms that rely on evolving a population of solutions such as evolutionary algorithms, particle swarm optimization, differential evolution, etc. The size of the non‐dominated set of trade‐off solutions can be quite large, rendering the decision‐making process difficult if not impossible. The size of the non‐dominated solution set increases exponentially with an increase in the number of objectives. This paper aims to expand a framework for coping with many/multi‐objective and multidisciplinary optimization problems through the introduction of a min‐max metric that behaves like a median measure that can locate the center of a data set. We compare this metric to the Chebyshev norm L_∞ metric that behaves like a mean measure in locating the center of a data set. The median metric is introduced in this paper for the first time, and unlike the mean metric is independent of the data normalization method. These metrics advocate balanced, natural, and minimum compromise solutions about all objectives. We also demonstrate and compare the behavior of the two metrics for a Tradespace case study involving more than 1200 CubeSat design alternatives identifying a manageable set of potential solutions for decision‐makers.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42817017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
B. Horváth, V. Molnár, Bence Graics, Á. Hajdu, I. Ráth, Á. Horváth, R. Karban, G. Trancho, Zoltán Micskei
{"title":"Pragmatic verification and validation of industrial executable SysML models","authors":"B. Horváth, V. Molnár, Bence Graics, Á. Hajdu, I. Ráth, Á. Horváth, R. Karban, G. Trancho, Zoltán Micskei","doi":"10.1002/sys.21679","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21679","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, Model‐Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) practices have been applied in various industries to design, simulate and verify complex systems. The verification and validation (V&V) of such systems engineering models are crucial to develop high‐quality systems. However, this is a challenging problem due to the complexity of the models and semantic differences in how different tools interpret the models, which can undermine the validity of the obtained results if they go undiscovered. To address these issues, we propose (i) a subset of the SysML language for which the practical semantic integrity of tools can be achieved and (ii) a cloud‐based V&V framework for this subset, lifting verification to an industrial scale. We demonstrate the feasibility of our approach on an industrial‐scale model from the aerospace domain and summarize the lessons learned during transitioning formal verification tools to an industrial context.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45602732","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Machine learning approaches for improving integration of advanced sensors on legacy aircraft","authors":"Zachary Dennis, T. Holzer","doi":"10.1002/sys.21689","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21689","url":null,"abstract":"Rapid integration of advanced sensors onto legacy military aircraft is critical for maintaining technological advantage in warfighting domains. Integration of these sensors is accomplished through upgrade programs that often fail during integration due to defect discovery and interoperability issues. Existing Department of Defense initiatives related to open architectures have improved sensor integration but have not eliminated the need for custom interface software to account for behavioral disparities across different sensors. The subject research proposes that reinforcement machine learning algorithms can be applied to aircraft sensor interfaces during integration and verifies effectiveness by training and testing Greedy, Q‐Learning, Deep Q‐Learning, Double Deep Q‐Learning, and Instance‐Based Learning algorithms against modeled Global Positioning System (GPS), Optical, Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR), and Infrared sensor functions. The results are useful to open architecture standards management groups, sensor vendors, and systems and software engineers who are developing strategies and designs to accelerate subsystem integration timelines by reducing failures discovered during integration.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45429560","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Effects of differential risk attitudes in collaborative systems design","authors":"Alkim Z. Avsar, P. Grogan","doi":"10.1002/sys.21687","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21687","url":null,"abstract":"Collaboration enables multiple actors with different objectives to work together and achieve a goal beyond individual capabilities. However, strategic uncertainty from partners' actions introduces a potential for losses under failed collaboration relative to pursuing an independent system. The fundamental tradeoff between high‐value but uncertain outcomes from collaborative systems and lower‐value but more certain outcomes for independent systems induces a bistability strategic dynamic. Actors exhibit different risk attitudes that impact decisions under uncertainty which complicate shared understanding of collaborative dynamics. This paper investigates how risk attitudes affect design and strategy decisions in collaborative systems through the lens of game theory. First, an analytical model studies the effect of differential risk attitudes in a two‐actor problem with stag‐hunting strategic dynamics formulated as single‐ and bi‐level games. Next, a simulation model pairs actors with different risk attitudes in a 29‐game tournament based on a prior behavioral experiment. Results show that outcomes collaborative design problems change based on the risk attitudes of both actors. Results also emphasize that considering conservative lower‐level design options facilitates collaboration by providing risk‐averse actors with a safer solution. By accepting that decision‐making actors are not all risk‐neutral, future work seeks to develop new design methods to strengthen the adoption of efficient collaborative solutions.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48341290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sharon Shoshany-Tavory, E. Peleg, A. Zonnenshain, G. Yudilevitch
{"title":"Model‐based‐systems‐engineering for conceptual design: An integrative approach","authors":"Sharon Shoshany-Tavory, E. Peleg, A. Zonnenshain, G. Yudilevitch","doi":"10.1002/sys.21688","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21688","url":null,"abstract":"Conceptual‐Design is an early development phase, where innovation and creativeness shape the future system/product. Model‐Based‐Conceptual‐Design (MBCD) attempts to use best‐practices of Model‐Based‐Systems‐Engineering (MBSE) to gain the envisioned benefits of model connectivity. Using MBSE supporting tools can transform Conceptual‐Design into a digital‐engineered process but may impede creativity and innovation. Concurrently, the design domain offers specific methods and tools for innovative Conceptual‐Design. In the current study, we explore an existing Conceptual‐Design framework and offer MBSE interpretation and tools extensions needed for its digital implementation. Through such exploration we highlight MBCD specific insights and discuss modeling‐innovation interrelations. The implementation was accomplished using a domain‐specific enabling software package on top of a market‐accepted UML/SysML platform, extending the language definitions, where appropriate. The framework guided extensions allow generation of innovative bottom‐up alternatives, solution integration, and solutions’ comparison. The use of modeling is shown to offer clearer process definition, specific methods assistance, and alternative ranking—both manually and automatically. Consequently, MBCD is accomplished, which supports innovation, while being digitally connected to full‐scale‐development models and the organizational assets at large. Through integration into the orderly Systems‐Engineering process, traceability is maintained, and repeated iterations are supported, where conceptual decisions may be revisited. Additionally, through the introduction of an assets’ catalog, cross‐organizational knowledge sharing is accomplished. The paper presents samples of the extensions, using a simplified example of technology design for Future Firefighting. The value of incorporating Conceptual‐Design specific methodology and tools is evaluated through feedback from multiple domain experts. Discussion and future research directions are offered.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41872027","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A model for measuring multi‐concern assurance of critical infrastructure control systems","authors":"Aleksandra Scalco, S. Simske","doi":"10.1002/sys.21684","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21684","url":null,"abstract":"Digital transformation of engineering practice, paradigms, processes, and workforce engender agreement uncertainty among professionals, particularly in the critical industry control system field. Control systems are susceptible to cyber‐mediated changes that can uniquely affect the control of the physical world from data‐centric information systems. Change to the system can be introduced by any proposed or forced alteration that affects the acceptability, suitability, feasibility, or resiliency to perform its intended mission, either positively or negatively. The potential impact of the cybersecurity threat on control systems is difficult to quantify. Agreement among professionals about decision authority and Command and Control (C2) over this threat is even more challenging to quantify. Understanding what cybersecurity entails still needs to be widely understood by the critical infrastructure control system workforce, and the control system assets are not widely understood by the Information Technology (IT) workforce. This research introduces a model and methodology for measuring multi‐concern assurance through the statistical uncertainty analysis of Likert semantic differential scales. The model addresses agreement in priority, the lack of which means there might be competing aims, competing spending, and competing focus on different aspects of the cybersecurity governance or policy as examples. The outcome identifies where different types of professionals do not agree about cybersecurity readiness and best practices for critical infrastructure control systems.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45024876","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
João Barata, Jorge C. S. Cardoso, Paulo Rupino Cunha
{"title":"Mass customization and mass personalization meet at the crossroads of Industry 4.0: A case of augmented digital engineering","authors":"João Barata, Jorge C. S. Cardoso, Paulo Rupino Cunha","doi":"10.1002/sys.21682","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21682","url":null,"abstract":"After mass production and then mass customization, the time is almost ripe for mass personalization. The goal is to offer unique products designed for the needs of each customer. However, production in larger series of products also has its advantages, and the promise of “lot size one” is still far from being the norm in several sectors of the economy. As a result of an action research project in a small household ceramic producer, this paper explores the potential of a hybrid strategy. Augmented digital engineering is adopted to (1) ensure customer participation along the entire product design lifecycle, (2) maintain the benefits of modularization and low cost, (3) minimize the waste of time and materials during product design, and (4) seek a minimum trade‐off between customer desires and engineering strategy. For theory, our work describes Industry 4.0 technology's role in achieving individual customer interaction and value co‐creation in hybrid strategies of mass customization and mass personalization. For practice, we present an example of technological architecture to implement augmented digital engineering in Industry 4.0, accessible to scenarios of hand‐intensive work and creative design processes.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43994790","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Teaching undergraduate students to think like real‐world systems engineers: A technology‐based hybrid learning approach","authors":"R. Ghannam, C. Chan","doi":"10.1002/sys.21683","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21683","url":null,"abstract":"A hybrid teaching approach that relied on combining Project Based Learning with Team Based Learning was developed in an engineering module during the past 5 years. Our motivation was to expose students to real‐world authentic engineering problems and to steer them away from the classical banking approach, with a view to developing their systems engineering skills via collaborative learning. Our third year module was called Team Design and Project Skills and was concerned with 320 students dividing themselves in teams to develop a smart electronics system. We reveal module design details and discuss the effectiveness of our teaching approach via analysis of student grades during the past 5 years, as well as data from surveys that were completed by 68 students. 64% of surveyed students agreed that the module helped broaden their perspective in electronic systems design. Moreover, 84% recognized that this module was a valuable component in their degree programme. Adopting this approach in an engineering curriculum enabled students to integrate knowledge in areas that included control systems, image processing, embedded systems, sensors, as well as team working, decision making, trouble shooting and project planning.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42456495","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}