Knowledge Capture, Cross Boundary Communication and Early Validation with Dynamic A3 Architectures

Vickram Singh, Gerrit Muller
2013 INCOSE International Symposium  
Understanding and extracting systems information is a time consuming, demanding and expensive process. Complicating factors are cross-boundary communication methods and tools. We combine an informal and formal systems engineering method; Lean manufacturing principles and Model Based systems Engineering (MBSE) resulting in Dynamic A3 architecture. Dynamic A3 Architecture is a hierarchy of overviews from super-system to sub-system that the reader can navigate through active links. We applied the
more » ... ethod to a lube oil system of a gas turbine package. We found that Dynamic A3 Architecture can ease internal and cross boundary communication, train new employees, facilitate knowledge capture, and share common understanding of the "system of interest". A functional sequence diagram, which is a hybrid of a state and functional diagram, can assist in early validation of process applications. Figure 1 : Main systems and components in a KG2-3G gas turbine package with the enclosure removed Lube oil system: The research was performed on a lube oil system of a KG2-3G gas turbine package ( Figure 2 ). Most typical representations used by engineers to show the lube oil system are 3D drawings, and Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&ID) (see Figure 2 ). The lube oil system is designed to provide the KG2-3G gas turbine engine with clean and cooled lubrication oil, at correct modulated pressure. This includes pre-lubrication, prior to start-up and cooling-down sequence following a normal stop or shutdown. The main components are positioned in proximity of the reduction gearbox, with the exception of the lube oil cooler that is usually externally mounted. The main challenge of this subsystem is to ensure sufficient oil pressure to the gearbox and turbine at two critical states; start-up and shutdown. Current way of working: In process applications, the most common communication tool is a P&ID (Figure 2 -Right) . It gives an overview of the physical process layout and operator feedback loops. The major issue with this kind of a diagram is that it lacks the functional view and the sequence in which the desired system is supposed to operate. Figure 2: Lube oil system of a KG2-3G gas turbine package Left: 3D model; Right: Piping and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) Why trying a new approach? We analyzed symptoms of degraded performance, determined a problem statement, and transformed this into a goal as shown (Figure 3 ).We observed that main communication means in Dresser-Rand are 3D models, 2D drawings, and piping/instrumentations diagrams. These models and diagrams are not only common to Dresser-Rand in particular, but also to most of the engineering companies. They represent a good visualization of the physical view but not the functional part; how does the system work, and quantified relations. Symptoms that we observed are that less experienced engineers need a
doi:10.1002/j.2334-5837.2013.tb03005.x fatcat:gidcmwkc2fffrmowi5igupjj7e