Search This Blog

Showing posts with label verification matrix. Show all posts
Showing posts with label verification matrix. Show all posts

Friday, July 15, 2011

Summarize Verification Results in a Compliance Matrix

9.2.5 Compliance Matrix – The data resulting from the actions summarized in the verification matrix for verifying that the system meets all requirements are collected in a compliance matrix. The compliance matrix shows performance for each requirement. It flows performance from the lowest levels of the system hierarchy up to top levels. It identifies the source of the performance data and shows if the design is meeting all requirements. The bottom up flow of performance provides early indication of non-compliant system performance and facilitates defining mitigation plans if problems are identified during verification actions. An example compliance matrix for the switch module is shown in Figure 9-3.



 Figure 9-3 An example Compliance Matrix for the simple switch function illustrated in Figure 9-1.
Note that the requirements half of the compliance matrix is identical to the requirements half of the verification matrix. The compliance matrix is easily generated by adding new columns to the verification matrix. Results that are non-compliant, such as the switching force, or marginally compliant, such as the on resistance, can be flagged by adding color to one of the value, margin or compliant columns or with notes in the comments column.
In summary, the arrows labeled verification in Figure 6-4 from functional analysis to requirements analysis, from design to functional analysis and from design to requirements analysis relate to the iteration that the systems engineers do to ensure the design is complete and accurate and that all “shall” requirements are verified in system integration and system test. This iteration is necessary so that for each requirement a verification method is identified, any necessary test equipment, test software and data analysis software is defined in time to have validated test equipment, test procedures and test data analysis software ready when needed for system integration and test.
9.3 Systems Engineering Support to Integration, Test and Production
Manufacturing personnel and test personnel may have primary responsibility for integration, test and production however; systems engineers must provide support to these tasks. Problem resolution typically involves both design and systems engineers and perhaps other specialty engineers depending on the problem to be solved. Systems engineers are needed whenever circumstances require changes in parts or processes to ensure system performance isn’t compromised.

Friday, July 8, 2011

Methods for Verifying System Performance

9.2 Verifying that System Requirements are Met
The first phase of verifying system requirements is a formal engineering process that starts with requirements analysis and ends when the system is accepted by its customer.  During the system integration and testing steps must be taken to verify that the system satisfies every “shall” statement in the requirements. These shall statement requirements are collected in a document called the Verification Matrix. The results of the integration and testing of these requirements are documented in a Compliance Matrix. The integration and testing is defined and planned in a System Integration and Test Plan. Related documentation includes the Test Architecture Definition, hardware and software Test Plans & Procedures and Test Data Analysis Plans.
The roles of systems engineers in verification include:
  • Developing the optimum test strategy and methodology and incorporating it into the design as it is developed
  • Developing the top level System Integration and Test Plan
  • Developing the hierarchy of Integration and Test Plans from component level to system level
  • Documenting all key system and subsystem level tests
  • Defining system and subsystem level test equipment needed and developing test architecture designs
  • Developing the Test Data Analysis Plans
  • Analyzing test data
  • Ensuring that all shall requirements are verified and documented in the Compliance Matrix.
Good systems engineering practice requires that requirements verification takes place in parallel with requirements definition. The decision to define a requirement with a “shall” or “may” or “should” statement involves deciding if the requirement must be verified and if so how the requirement will be verified. This means that the requirements verification matrix should be developed in parallel with the system requirements documentation and reviewed when the system requirements are reviewed, e.g. at peer reviews and at a formal System Requirements Review (SRR).
9.2.1 Verification Matrix – The verification matrix is documentation that defines for each requirement the verification method, the level and type of unit for which the verification is to be performed and any special conditions for the verification. Modern requirements management tools facilitate developing the verification matrix. If such tools are not used then the verification matrix can be developed using standard spreadsheet tools.
There are standard verification methods used by systems engineers. These methods are:
  1. Analysis -Verifies conformance to required performance by the use of analysis based on verified analytical tools, modeling or simulations that predict the performance of the design with calculated data or data from lower level component or subsystem testing. Used when physical hardware and/or software is not available or not cost effective.
  2. Inspection - Visually verifies form, fit and configuration of the hardware and of software. Often involves measurement tools for measuring dimensions, mass and physical characteristics.
  3. Demonstration - Verifies the required operability of hardware and software without the aid of test devices. If test devices should be required they are selected so as to not contribute to the results of the demonstration.
  4. Test - Verifies conformance to required performance, physical characteristics and design construction features by techniques using test equipment or test devices. Intended to be a detailed quantification of performance.
  5. Similarity - Verifies requirement satisfaction based on certified usage of similar components under identical or harsher operating conditions.
  6. Design – Used when compliance is obvious from the design, e.g. “The system shall have two modes, standby and operation”.
  7. Simulation – Compliance applies to a finished data product after calibration or processing with system algorithms. May be only way to demonstrate compliance.
The DoD SEF defines only the first four of the methods listed above. Many experienced systems engineers find these four too restrictive and also use the other three methods listed. To illustrate a verification matrix with an example consider the function Switch Power. This function might be decomposed as shown in Figure 9-1.

Figure 9-1 A function Switch Power might be decomposed into four sub functions.
An example verification matrix for the functions shown in Figure 9-1 is shown in Figure 9-2. In this example the switch power function is assumed to be implemented in a switch module and that both an engineering model and a manufacturing prototype are constructed and tested. In this example no verification of the switch module itself is specified for production models. Verification of the module performance for production modules is assumed to be included in other system level tests.
It’s not important whether the verification matrix is generated automatically from requirements management software or by copy and paste from a requirements spreadsheet. What is important is to not to have to reenter requirements from the requirements document to the verification matrix as this opens the door for simple typing mistakes.

Figure 9-2 An example verification matrix for a switch module.