WHY: Rethinking the Way We Approach Industrial Systems

When we talk about applying Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) methodologies, we often associate it with product development. This has been MBSE’s primary application field, delivering remarkable benefits to complex product designs. But here’s the question: What about the development of the industrial network system itself?

Imagine this scenario: You, as an aircraft OEM are tasked with developing the industrial network system for a new program with freshly defined requirements and strategic goals. This involves mastering complex tasks like designing the supply chain, planning transportation between suppliers and production sites, managing all interactions, setting the right requirements for your suppliers, and establishing manufacturing processes.

Sounds like a lot, right? The challenge is that the current approach often jumps straight into solution design for insdutrial network system without pausing to:
🔍 Fully understand and translate high-level strategic enterprise or program goals into clear, actionable requirements for the industrial network system

This rush often results in:
❌ Premature Focus on Solution Implementation
❌ Late Discovery of Misalignment with Strategic Goals
❌ Inadequate Integration of High-Level Requirements
❌ Delayed Assessment of Resource and Supply Chain Suitability

Clearly, this approach leaves gaps that are costly to fix later.

✨ So, what’s the solution?
We need a new framework of thinking for approaching the development of industrial system network.

WHAT: Defining the new Approach

 What if we shifted our thinking? 💡 What if we treated the industrial network system itself—encompassing supply chains, transportation systems, production systems, and all their interactions—as the system of interest? By applying MBSE methodologies, we could throughly understand the requirements, specify, and analyze the industrial network system from the enterprise level down to the supply chain and production site level, before jumping into detailed solution modeling.

What do we need for this shift?
Not much! With our CATIA Magic solutions, we already have all the tools we need. 🛠️💡

Our Approach at a Glance

As a Persian saying reminds us, “If the first brick is laid crooked, the wall will remain crooked all the way to the heavens”. So, we first zoom out a little and capture the enterprise level to ensure that the industrial network system is fully aligned with enterprise and program strategies. 🎯 To achieve this, we use the Unified Architecture Framework (UAF) integrated into Magic Systems of Systems Architect.

Next, we leverage our MagicGrid methodology iteratively to analyze and specify the industrial network system at various abstraction levels, starting from the supply chain down to the final assembly system.

 A Word of Caution ⚠️

It’s important to recognize that simply copying MBSE methodologies from product development does not guarantee success when applied to industrial network system development. Why? Because industrial systems clearly come with their own unique complexities and challenges.

This work takes that into account, adapting these methodologies to address the specific needs of industrial systems. By doing so, we ensure that MBSE is not just applied, but applied effectively.

Now, let’s dive into the HOW and see how this all comes together! 🚀

HOW: Implementing MBSE Across All Levels of Industrial Network System Development

Step 1: Enterprise Strategy Analysis for the Industrial Network System

In this first step, we dive into analyzing the entire OEM enterprise through three key perspectives: strategic, operational, and resource viewpoints, leveraging the Unified Architecture Framework (UAF) 🛠️ The primary goal? To ensure that the future industrial network system is perfectly aligned with the enterprise’s strategic framework 🎯

This requires more than just surface-level insights—it demands a holistic understanding of the industrial network system as a vital part of the entire enterprise, seamlessly interconnected with all other stakeholders. 🌐 By doing this, we establish a solid foundation for a system that is not only functional but also strategically aligned 🚀 To achieve this, we need a holistic understanding of the industrial network system as an integral part of the entire enterprise, interconnected with all other stakeholders.

Steps 2 & 3: Specifying the Industrial Network System

In the next step, we shift our focus to specifying the industrial network system. The requirements derived from our enterprise-level specifications serve as the foundation for this phase. 

Following our MagicGrid methodology, we start with the Problem Domain by specifying high-level use cases and modeling the system structure and architecture of the industrial network system. 🛠️ Based on functional analyses and architecture definitions, we refine the input requirements into more specific ones for the industrial system—these refined requirements become the starting point for the Solution Domain.

In the Solution Domain, we start specifying the behavior of different subsystems within the industrial network system (e.g., transport systems, suppliers, final assembly system, etc.). The goal of this high-level behavior modeling is not to create detailed behavior models but to gain a preliminary understanding of key criteria such as production rate, lead time, and costs. Gaining this early insight into system behavior is essential for guiding the OEM's decision-making process for the new program.
At this stage, we can conduct various analyses to assess production rates, stock status, and overall system performance 📊 By analyzing the behavior of the existing supply chain, we can verify whether the current setup can meet the requirements of the new program. We take it further by developing alternative solutions for the subsystems of the industrial network system by changing transportation methods or altering time- and cost-related parameters for suppliers, creating a range of potential solutions for evaluation. By integrating these subsystem configurations, we build complete alternative solutions for the entire industrial network system, enabling us to identify the most effective option based on data-driven insights ✅

Steps 4 & 5: Specifying and Simulating the Final Assembly Line System

 After thoroughly specifying the industrial network system in alignment with the strategic framework—and capturing its system architecture and behavior—the OEM can now take the next step: defining the corresponding requirements for the subsystems of the industrial network system. This ensures that these requirements are not only aligned with the big picture but also fully integrated into the overall strategic vision, providing confidence that every subsystem contributes to the overarching goals of the new program 🎯 From this point forward, suppliers take responsibility for specifying their systems in a way that ensures these OEM-defined requirements are fully met ✅

In our storyline, we now shift focus to the Final Assembly Line, which falls directly under the OEM’s responsibility. It’s worth emphasizing that at this stage, the behavior modeling of the FAL is not meant to be a detailed representation of every process step. Instead, the goal is to capture the system behavior in a way that allows OEM to evaluate it against key cost- and time-related criteria, such as production rate and lead time, which are critical for decision-making during the early stages of development 💡 
Here, we will assess the performance of the existing assembly process, which uses 4 Automated Guided Vehicles (AGVs), to determine whether the current solution can meet the newly derived requirements for FAL in relation to the new program. From there, we will go a step further and begin developing alternative solutions, such as configurations using 6 or 8 AGVs🚛🤖 We will then conduct trade analyses to compare these potential alternatives with the current solution. By doing so, we can evaluate different solution scenarios and identify the most viable option, supporting the OEM in making informed decisions for the new setup of the FAL for the new program

Outlook: What Comes Next?

After fully leveraging the early-stage system specification and analysis capabilities enabled by MBSE, it’s time to move on to manufacturing-specific modeling and simulation in DELMIA. 🏭✨ This step allows us to explore a broader range of factors and validate the performance of the developed solutions in greater detail. 

Conclusion

🔔 Strategic Alignment 🎯: An integrated MBSE approach ensures that the industrial system is aligned with the enterprise strategy, connecting all levels of the organization to overarching goals

💡 Informed Decision-Making 🧠: Early-stage assessments of supply chains and manufacturing facilities enable informed decisions, supporting the justification of new programs before launch

⚙️ Simulation-Driven Trade-Off Analysis 🔄: Exploring different scenarios and configurations early allows for optimal solutions to be identified without committing excessive resources

✅ Supplier Requirements: Setting clear requirements for suppliers from the start ensures alignment with program needs, reducing risks and delays.

📈 Producibility Analysis 💰: Conducting on-target and on-budget producibility analysis early ensures efficient and cost-effective production processes

THANKS !

Thanks to the contributors of this practice: @TK @SP @Gauthier FANMUY @BT @UA @RL