DARP Workshop
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 9

DARP Workshop System of Systems Safety Cases Parallel Session 18 th & 19 th April 2007 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 103 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

DARP Workshop System of Systems Safety Cases Parallel Session 18 th & 19 th April 2007. Ringmaster / Professional Passenger…. Dr Dai Morris Director Analysis, Experimentation & Simulation, UK MoD. Background. MoD CSA’s DSAC NEC Architecture Workshop

Download Presentation

DARP Workshop System of Systems Safety Cases Parallel Session 18 th & 19 th April 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Darp workshop system of systems safety cases parallel session 18 th 19 th april 2007

DARP WorkshopSystem of Systems Safety CasesParallel Session 18th & 19th April 2007

Ringmaster / Professional Passenger….

Dr Dai Morris

Director Analysis, Experimentation & Simulation, UK MoD


Background

Background

  • MoD CSA’s DSAC NEC Architecture Workshop

    • Noted safety assessment is an integral part of the ‘NEC solution’

    • Asked DAES ‘to form a view of how to develop a Safety Case for the wider [NEC] system of systems’

  • The Challenge Set:

    • What is currently being done by others that we can utilise now?

      • Or needs to be better utilised now

    • What problems are currently being considered for fixing by others in the near future?

      • And how do we remain engaged

    • What is left to be done?

      • With compelling reasons why MoD should undertake this?

    • How do we (I?) disseminate and progress findings


Agenda

Agenda

  • ‘Background Reading

    • Summary Intro

    • Some ‘starter for 10’ questions

    • NECTISE Presentation by Tim Kelly, University of York

    • Failure Analysis Presentation by Paul Caseley, DSTL

  • Focus on

    • Who in MoD should own the NEC Safety issue

    • If we can’t do a SoS Safety Case, what ‘next best’

    • What is different between NEC SoS and other SoS


Nectise presentation summary

NECTISE Presentation Summary

  • (Words directly from Tim Kelly, University of York)

  • Reality = Platform safety cases will be produced separately (at different times, by different organisations)

  • Need an acceptance process that considers (better) the possible operational context(s)

  • Need to certify ‘safe’ collaborations ahead of time

  • Focus on equipment safety cases must be broadened for SoS

    • E.g. arguments of safe (operational) use (operational doctrine) essential


Conclusions 1

Conclusions (1)

  • What is different between NEC SoS and other SoS

    • NEC SoS lacks a clear boundary definition?

      • Unlike, perhaps, a Carrier Group

    • More dynamic and less stable?

      • Nodes reconfiguring ‘on the fly’

    • Tempo

      • Potential rapid feedback and emergence of behaviour

    • A whole new class of possibilities for emergent behaviour


The sos safety case domain

The SoS safety case ‘domain’

Now?

Incremental Certification

Level of planned change in systems / components of SoS

Level of ad-hoc / non-engineered immediate federation of system components & boundary uncertainty

Need for a new approach to safety management to generate a ‘case for safety’


Conclusions 2

Conclusions (2)

  • Who (in MoD?) should own the NEC Safety issue

    • Distributed Problem

      • DE&S for equipment; FLC for training…

    • Pose CBM (NEC) Management Board the question?

      • Need a single integrating point

        • Responsible for interfaces and interstitial issues

        • With additional specific responsibilities for each DLoD owner

      • May assist the security problem as well?


Conclusions 3

Conclusions (3)

  • If we can’t do a SoS Safety Case, what's ‘next best’

    • Do we have a regulator?

    • Don’t yet have an owner?

    • But do have a need to discharge (and demonstrate that we are discharging) our duty of care responsibility

  • “Safety Management System” to focus on:

    • Predictive

      • Defining, managing and scrutiny of safety arguments

      • But any resulting “Safety Case” may not look ‘traditional’

        • Process, organisation based argument?

      • ‘Traffic Light’ process not unlike wider command assessment of risk

        • Scenario based concept?

    • ‘In process’

      • Real time monitoring of Provenance of Data

      • In live ops as well as training / mission rehearsal

    • Identifying lessons

      • Ensure the capture of all relevant (emergent) behaviour

      • Provenance of Data also important here


  • Questions

    Questions


  • Login