[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [plcs] Updated slides on AP239ed2
See below Regards Rob -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rob Bodington Eurostep Limited Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com Phone: +44 (0)1452 810 960 Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401 Skype: rbodington Eurostep Limited. Registered in England and Wales No.03049099 Registered Office: Cwttir Lane, St. Asaph, Denbighshire LL17 0LQ. -----Original Message----- From: Tim Turner [mailto:TJT@lsc.co.uk] Sent: 06 March 2009 15:52 To: David Price; plcs@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: Rob Bodington Subject: RE: [plcs] Updated slides on AP239ed2 Thanks Dave, I agree about the distinction. The last mention I heard about the idea, Rob was going to discuss with AP233 (i.e. you - I guess) about the issue & to report back. However, I didn't make all the telecon's while out of the country lately. We have previously mapped this concept to Product, & it looks like this is in the module too, so that is fine. On the behaviour front, maintenance guys may not need it, but PLCS is not scoped just for them. Clearly those putting the support solutions together in the first place & those carrying out the analysis (that then define the maintenance tasks) need to be able to define the expected behaviour of a 'System'. I presume that behaviour can be defined in terms of the possible 'functions' and/or 'states' that the System can be in (predicted, of course). When the actual product (or system) doesn't behave as predicted, then this would be a feeedback to correct the behaviour model & thus the maintenance tasks required to support it in that configuration. LCIA has such a set of requirements. If this gets more of an airing at the SEDS meeting then that's fine, but since there is a module that already exists & we currently have the opportunity to include this information explicitly in AP239, I think it should be in. [RBN] Do you mean System or Behaviour? Regards, Tim >-----Original Message----- >From: David Price [mailto:david.price@eurostep.com] >Sent: 06 March 2009 04:41 >To: plcs@lists.oasis-open.org >Cc: Tim Turner; Rob Bodington >Subject: Re: [plcs] Updated slides on AP239ed2 > >The rationale for System in the modules themselves is based on >the Systems Engineering discipline and its distinction between >Systems and other configuration controlled items (i.e. a >System or System of Systems is not a Part). Here's a link to >the biggest industry group in the area and their definition of >systems engineering: > >http://www.incose.org/practice/fellowsconsensus.aspx > >There are related ISO standards for SE processes: > >http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=27166 > >Using a breakdown for these requirements didn't make sense >because a breakdown is an alternative structure of an original >"thing" (i.e. a change controlled view), but what SEs are >building is the original "thing", not a view of it. > >Cheers, >David > >P.S. WRT behavior not in AP239, I think one reason is that >asset maintenance people don't repair or maintain the >behaviour of a system so don't need that info or get it >through a tech doc or similar. Not sure about that though. >Either way, if you have a usage scenario where behaviour >information needs to be exchanged, just use AP233 in >conjunction with AP239 as the aim is to support 100 percent >interop between the two. > > >On Thursday 05 March 2009 20:51:02 Tim Turner wrote: >> Rob, >> >> I appreciate the update to the slides. Since the telecon was >cancelled >> today I would like to raise two points; >> >> 1. Could I suggest that you add a slide to inform about the things >> that have been discussed and rejected (or that remain as low >priority >> & hence unlikely to be included in AP239ed2). >> >> In particular I think it worth stating that explicit subtypes for >> various concepts (e.g. Failure, Failure mode, Failure mode effect, >> Fault, Symptom, Behaviour etc.). This gives visibility that >they have >> at least been discussed with the relevant (current) conclusions as >> presented. >> >> 2. On another note, I (& maybe others) could still do with a better >> understanding of the reasoning behind the need for System and its >> relationship to System_breakdown. In my mind, its inclusion would be >> another reason to also include behaviour such that the behaviour of >> the system can be specified (under certain stimulus). >> >> Regards, >> Tim >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: Rob Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com] >> Sent: 03 March 2009 11:59 >> To: plcs@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: [plcs] Updated slides on AP239ed2 >> >> >> >> Hi >> >> Here are an updated set of slides reporting on the status of >> AP239 edition2 that were presented at the last PLCS TC telecom. >> >> These replace ISO 10303-239ed2_v005.ppt that was sent by Chris >> >> * From: "Kreiler, Christopher G" >> <Chris.Kreiler@ManTech.com> >> * To: <plcs@lists.oasis-open.org> >> * Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 10:40:47 -0500 >> >> Regards >> Rob >> >> >> >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -- >> -------- >> Rob Bodington >> Eurostep Limited >> Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com <http://www.eurostep.com/> >> http://www.share-a-space.com <http://www.share-a-space.com/> >> Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com >> <mailto:Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com> >> Phone: +44 (0)1452 810 960 >> Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401 >> Skype: rbodington >> >> Eurostep Limited. Registered in England and Wales No.03049099 >> >> Registered Office: Cwttir Lane, St. Asaph, Denbighshire >LL17 0LQ. >> >> >> >> >> DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED*** >The information >> in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is >> intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message >by anyone else >> is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any >disclosure, >> copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or >omission taken by >> you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please >> immediately contact the sender if you have received this >message in error. >> This e-mail originates from LSC Group Ltd. Registered in >England & Wales No >> 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, >Devonport, Plymouth, >> PL1 4SG, having a place of business at Lincoln House, >Wellington Crescent, >> Fradley Park, Lichfield, Staffordshire WS13 8RZ and at >Catherine House, 40a >> St Thomas Street, Weymouth, Dorset DT4 8EH. VAT number: GB >655 1330 55. >> >> Please consider whether it is necessary to print this e-mail > > > >-- >Mobile +44 7788 561308 UK +44 2087473900 Skype +1 336 283 0606 > >Eurostep Limited. Registered in England and Wales No.03049099 >Registered >Office: Cwttir Lane, St. Asaph, Denbighshire LL17 0LQ > DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED*** The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. This e-mail originates from LSC Group Ltd. Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1 4SG, having a place of business at Lincoln House, Wellington Crescent, Fradley Park, Lichfield, Staffordshire WS13 8RZ and at Catherine House, 40a St Thomas Street, Weymouth, Dorset DT4 8EH. VAT number: GB 655 1330 55. Please consider whether it is necessary to print this e-mail
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]