版权说明:本文档由用户提供并上传,收益归属内容提供方,若内容存在侵权,请进行举报或认领
文档简介
1、CCPDS-R A Case StudyAn objective case study is a true indicator of a mature organization and a mature project process. The software industry needs more case studies like CCPDS-RThe metrics histories were all derived directly from the artifacts of the projects process. These data were used to manage
2、the project and were embraced by practitioners, managers, and stakeholdersCCPDS-R was one of the pioneering projects that practiced many modern management approachesCCPDS-R A Case StudyA detailed case study of a successful software projectSuccessful means on budget, on schedule, and satisfactory to
3、the customerCommand Center Processing and Display System-Replacement projectFor the U.S. Air Force, from 1987 to 1994, by TRW, Ca.Including system engineering, hardware procurement, and software development, each consuming about 1/3 of the total costThe software effort included the development of th
4、ree distinct software systems totaling more than one million source lines of code, and each consuming about 1/3The case focusing on the initial software developmentCommon Subsystem, about 355,000 source lines, producing a reusable architecture, a mature process, and an integrated environment for oth
5、er two subsystemsCCPDS-R A Case StudyCD: Concept Definition FSD: Full-Scale Development like inception phaseCCPDS-R A Case StudyA very large software development activityUsing Ada languageThe purpose of the SE exercise be to demonstrate that the contractors proposed software process, Ada environment
6、, and software team were in place, were mature, and were demonstrableConduct a mock design review with the customer 23 days after receipt of a simple twospecification of a “missile warning simulator” TRWs CCPDS-R team won (12 people for 23 days)CCPDS-R A Case StudyThe following results were produced
7、 with the proposed software development plan:CCPDS-R A Case StudyTRW proposing an architecture-first, demonstration-based approachMore than 20% bid higher than that of their competitorThe best value and lowest riskSuccessful performance on the SE exerciseAbility to demonstrate their process under re
8、alistic conditionsCCPDS-R A Case StudyThe primary responsibilities of the CD phase team:CCPDS-R A Case StudyThe six computer software configuration items(CSCIs) of the Common Subsystem softwareCCPDS-R A Case StudyCCPDS-R A Case StudyCCPDS-R A Case StudyIn the CCPDS-R definition of an architecture, t
9、he view of the Software Architecture Skeleton(SAS) included the followingCCPDS-R A Case StudyTwo important aspects of SAS verification and assessment: compilation and executionThe SAS provides the forum for integration and architecture evolution. It is important to construct the SAS early and to evo
10、lve it into a stable baselineCCPDS-R installed its first SAS baseline (after three informal iterations) around month 13,just before the PDR milestoneAll subsequent change was performed via rigorous configuration controlThe SAS was useful in assessing the volatility in the overall software interfaces
11、 and captured the conceptual architecture of the Common SubsystemCCPDS-R A Case StudyCCPDS-R A Case StudyThe software architecture stability with Common Subsystem SAS evolution From a macroprocess view, the initial milestones focused on achieving a baseline architecture. The PDR baseline required th
12、ree major architecture iterations, the conclusions of which coincided with the milestones for the software requirements review (SRR), interim PDR (IPDR), and PDR:The SRR demonstration: initial feasibility of the foundation components, and basic use cases of initialization and interprocess communicat
13、ionsThe IPDR demonstration: the feasibility of the architectural infrastructure under the riskiest use cases, including the following:The PDR demonstration: adequate achievement of the peak load scenarios and the other primary use cases within a full-scale architectural infrastructure, including the
14、 other critical-thread componentsThe CDR demonstration updated the architecture baseline to represent the equivalent of an alpha test capability for the complete architectural infrastructure and the critical-thread scenarios. This was a usable system in that it provided a set of complete use cases s
15、ufficient for the user to perform a subset of the mission.A peak data load missile warning scenario of a mass raid from the Soviet UnionA peak control load scenario of a system failover and recovery from the primary thread of processing to a backup thread of processing with no loss of dataCCPDS-R A
16、Case Study Process OverviewBuild 0. This build comprised the foundation components necessary to build a software architecture skeleton. The intertask/interprocess communications, generic task and process executives, and common error reporting components were included. This build was also the conclus
17、ion of the research and development project executed in parallel with the CD (inception) phase. These NAS components were the cornerstone of the architectural framework and were built to be reusable across all three CCPDS-R sub-systems. They represented very complex, high-risk components with string
18、ent performance, reliability, and reusability demands. The Details of the Build ContentBuild 1. This build was essentially the architecture. It included a complete set of instantiated tasks (300), processes (70), interconnections (1,000), states, and state transitions for the structural solution of
19、the CCPDS-R software architecture. To achieve a cycling architecture, this build also added all the NAS components for initialization, state management (reconfiguration), and instrumentation. A trivial user interface and the capability to inject test scenarios into the architecture were added to sup
20、port the initial demonstration. Upon completion of build 1, only a few critical use cases were demonstrable: initializing the architecture, injecting a scenario to drive the data flow through the system, and orchestrating reconfigurations such as primary thread switchover to backup thread.The Detail
21、s of the Build ContentBuild 2. This was the first build of mission-critical components and achieved the initial capability to execute real mission scenarios. The three primary risks inherent in the mission scenarios were the timeliness of the display database distribution, the performance (resource
22、consumption and accuracy) of the missile warning radar algorithms, and the performance of the user interface for several complex displays. Upon completion of build 2, several mission-oriented use cases could be executed, including the worst-case data processing thread and the worst-case control proc
23、essing thread (primary-to-backup switchover).The Details of the Build ContentBuild 3. This build contained the largest volume of code, including display format definitions, global type definitions, and representation specifications needed for validation of external interface transactions. Although t
24、he code was voluminous, much of it was produced automatically in a cook-book manner by constructing code generation tools. The remaining components allocated to build 3 included the external communications interface protocol handling, the completed user-system interface for the mission operators, th
25、e user-system interface for the computer support positions, the system services for mission reconfigurations, database resets, off-line data reduction, and the nuclear detonation algorithms. Although initially planned as one large build, this increment was later split into two more manageable releas
26、es, builds 3-1 and 3-2.The Details of the Build ContentBuild 4. This build provided the final installment of missile warning algorithms for satellite early warning systems, the final installment of mission management and mission status displays, and the final installment of external communications i
27、nterface processing.Build 5. In the middle of the Common Subsystem schedule, build 5 was added to coincide with a particular external interface (being built on a separate contract), the schedule for which had slipped so that it was not going to be available during its originally planned build (build
28、 4). Consequently, the external interface was scheduled into an entirely new build.The Details of the Build ContentThe individual milestones within a build : preliminary design walkthrough(PDW) critical design walkthrough (CDW) turnover review (TOR) CCPDS-R A Case Study Process OverviewCCPDS-R A Cas
29、e Study Process OverviewPreliminary Design Walkthroughs Initial prototyping and design work was concluded with a PDW and a basic capability demonstration. The walkthrough focused on the structural attributes of the components within the build. The basic agenda was tailored for each build, but it gen
30、erally included the following topics for each CSCI:Overview: CSCI overview, interfaces, components, and metricsComponents: walkthrough of each major component, showing its source code interface, allocated system requirements specification (SRS) requirements, current metrics, operational concept for
31、key usage scenarios, standalone test plan, and erroneous conditions and responsesDemonstration: focused on exercising the control interfaces across the components within the integrated architectureCCPDS-R A Case Study Process OverviewCritical Design Walkthroughs A builds design work was concluded wi
32、th a CDW and a capability demonstration that exposed the key performance parameters of components within the build. While the PDW focused on the declarative view of the design, the CDW focused on the completeness of the components and the behavioral perspective of operating within the allocated perf
33、ormance requirements. The basic agenda was tailored for each build, but it generally included the following topics for each CSCI:CSCI overview: interfaces, components, and metrics; summary of changes since PDW; disposition of all PDW action items; build integration test scenariosComponents: walkthro
34、ugh of each major component, showing its source code interface, allocated SRS requirements, current metrics, operational concept for key usage scenarios, stand-alone test plan, and erroneous conditions and responsesDemonstration: focused on exercising the critical performance threadsCCPDS-R A Case S
35、tudy Process OverviewCode WalkthroughsDetailed code walkthroughs were also used to disseminate projectwide expertise and ensure the development of self-documenting source code. Some authors generated source code that demonstrated excellent levels of readability worthy of being assessed as self-docum
36、enting. The CSCI managers and the software chief engineer coordinated the need for code walkthroughs and their allocation among various authors to meet the following objectives: Better dissemination of self-documenting source code style Identification of coding issues not easily caught by compilers
37、and source code analysis tools: Object naming, coding style, and commenting style: Does it promote readability? Unnecessarily complex objects or methods: Are there simpler approaches. Reuse: Is custom software being built where reusable components exist? Potential performance issues: Are there poten
38、tially inefficient implementations? Reduction of the amount of source code needed for review in the larger design walkthroughs Exposure of inexperienced personnel to the products of experts and vice versaCCPDS-R A Case Study Process OverviewTurnover ReviewsTurnover reviews were not really reviews; t
39、hey were typically a one-month activity during which components were completed with stand-alone testing and turned over for configuration control, build integration testing, and engineering string testing.COMPONENT EVOLUTION CCPDS-R used Ada as a uniform life-cycle format for design evolution. This uniformity allowed for software development progress metrics to be extracted directly from the evolving sou
温馨提示
- 1. 本站所有资源如无特殊说明,都需要本地电脑安装OFFICE2007和PDF阅读器。图纸软件为CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.压缩文件请下载最新的WinRAR软件解压。
- 2. 本站的文档不包含任何第三方提供的附件图纸等,如果需要附件,请联系上传者。文件的所有权益归上传用户所有。
- 3. 本站RAR压缩包中若带图纸,网页内容里面会有图纸预览,若没有图纸预览就没有图纸。
- 4. 未经权益所有人同意不得将文件中的内容挪作商业或盈利用途。
- 5. 人人文库网仅提供信息存储空间,仅对用户上传内容的表现方式做保护处理,对用户上传分享的文档内容本身不做任何修改或编辑,并不能对任何下载内容负责。
- 6. 下载文件中如有侵权或不适当内容,请与我们联系,我们立即纠正。
- 7. 本站不保证下载资源的准确性、安全性和完整性, 同时也不承担用户因使用这些下载资源对自己和他人造成任何形式的伤害或损失。
最新文档
- 核燃料元件及组件项目可行性报告
- 混凝土工程雨季施工技术措施
- 中学“课内比教学”活动方案
- 学校海航班学生淘汰分流与补充规定
- 临时保安服务合同
- 保定市顺平县2023年九年级上学期《语文》期中试题和参考答案
- ZRO2陶瓷轴承球相关行业投资规划报告
- 第二章 粒子的模型与符号【单元测试·提升卷】(原卷版)-2023-2024学年八年级科学下册单元速记·巧练(浙教版)
- 比较级和最高级
- 第4章 直线与角(压轴必刷30题11种题型专项训练)(解析版)
- 中医与诊断-学做自己的医生智慧树知到期末考试答案2024年
- 2024年陕西秦农农村商业银行股份有限公司招聘笔试参考题库含答案解析
- 控辍保学学生劝返家长控辍保学承诺书
- SMEC未交验电梯使用协议书
- 民间非营利组织会计报表样表
- 刹车片材料基本知识、摩擦材料和发展方向
- 风险评估记录表
- [汇编]内分泌科应急预案
- 二年级带小括号四则混合运算1000题(经典实用)
- 功德最殊胜佛号
- 长沙中小学违规征订教辅材料问题专项整治自查表
评论
0/150
提交评论