Applied Systems Analysis
Fall 2003
Class Notes 1
Douglas Low
(315) 456-3372 (work) 2 min question
(315) 703-6297 (home) 5 min question
(315) 445-6044 (Lemoyne mailbox) leave message
Problem Areas with the Project
Class Descriptions were non existent
Use case descriptions were terse or non
existent
Verification methods were wrong
Equal effort within teams
example
team
Grading Example
Intro
Problem definition
Organization
System Definition
Team Recommendation
Prototypes
Change
Was 11%
Requirements table
Domain Model
Class descriptions
Use cases
Use case Descriptions
Possible # of points
Penalty points
6%
1
12%
1
12%
1
12%
1
6%
1
10%
Missing requirments?
18% Assigned properly in table?
1
12% Missing classes?
1
0%
All use case identified. All
12% alternatives identified
Summaries for all use
12% cases.
110%
0
0.8
0.2
Due date next Monday 12:00 Noon
Late
Very late
More than one file
-10% < 1 day
0
-20% < 1 week
0
-5%
88%
Grades
88%
104%
88%
92%
86%
95%
0% - not started
75% - late
Average was 89.7 ( not counting the 0%)
Class Descriptions
 Class Descriptions should introduce the reader to the object class
 It should be a paragraph
 It should denote
 What are the responsibilities of the class
 If it is a hardware, software, person, parameter … etc
 If it is a commercial product
 IF it is temporary, permanent
 Part of another class (aggregation composition)
 Anything else that you know about the class/ object
Use Case Descriptions
 Use case descriptions should describe what the use case is doing
and who is doing it.
 It should:
 Indicate the goal of the Use Case. e.g. Indicate the scope and
duration of the use case.
This use case creates a valid order based on customer provided
information. It is executed whenever the customer indicates a desire to
finalize the order.
Since the information is private, this session is done in a secure mode.
The entire process of entering an order is temporary and is aborted if
the customer does not respond within a proper time frame.
All the order and customer information derived from this use case is
stored in a secure server.
The process ends whenever all the information is collected and the
customer indicates finished, the customer cancels the order, or the
process times out from lack of activity.
Requirements Verification Methods
 Most requirements should be tested.
 Test : The system is run in a particular sequence to show the
successful implementation of the requirement. The test must match
the documented expected test results.
 Demonstrate : While similar to test the requirement is shown to be
correct. The result must be obvious. ( visible, audible… ) It must be
difficult to attach a test result.
 Inspect : Static characteristic shown to the customer.
 Analyze : Some type of analysis is performed and documented.
This could be a spreadsheet, simulation… the documentation must
be captured in a formal paper.
Equal Effort Among Members Within Teams
 Next Time
 I will ask each member of a team to rate the other members
within the team
 This will affect the team member’s individual grades.
Trade Study Purpose
Purpose : Trade study is used to
objectively choose between multiple
acceptable candidate solutions
Halloween Party
Trade Study Description
 select the best solution to meet an
identified problem within defined
constraints
?
 Defines a structured analytic framework
for evaluating a set of alternative
concepts, designs, or components
What Costume should I wear?
 Conducted concurrently with other
requirements development and design
activities
 Range from an informal comparison of
alternatives to major efforts using
sophisticated computer tools for
simulation and cost estimation.
Who should I go with?
Trade Study Process
•Define Objectives
•Identify Candidates
•Establish Evaluation Criteria
•Conduct analysis
•Document Results
•Review
Define Objective for Analysis
 Define the objective and purpose
of the analysis
 Determine scope of trade study

Determine level of supporting
analyses

Determine amount of review
and approvals needed

Determine level of
documentation
 Obtain approval with stakeholders
of the objective and ensure that
there is agreement on the purpose
and scope of the analysis
Stakeholders can be:
•Other business
disciplines
•Customer
•Corporate
•Yourself
•Etc.
Define Objective for Analysis - Example
Objective:
Decide where best to eat lunch on a typical
workday.
Purpose:
Get the best value for lunch
Scope:
Where, how, what, how much, with whom
Be sure to get approval of the purpose and scope of the
objective from stakeholders.
Establish Evaluation Criteria and Weights
 Establish an evaluation criteria and weighting
for considering system design alternatives
that includes, as a minimum, cost drivers,
total ownership and life cycle cost,
complexity, technical limitations,
environmental impact, system expansion,
growth, and risk.
 Establish an evaluation criteria and weighting
that is a tailored version of the standard
criteria and weighting
 Review the evaluation criteria to ensure that
they are consistent with the range of
alternatives.
Obtain agreement of decision maker on evaluation criteria and
weights
Weighting
Criteria
Cost
Schedule
Technical Performance
Risk
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Grade
Very Low Cost Impact
Low Cost Impact
Medium Cost Impact
High Cost Impact
Very High Cost Impact
Very Low Schedule Impact
Low Schedule Impact
Medium Schedule Impact
High Schedule Impact
Very High Schedule Impact
Very Low Performance Impact
Low Performance Impact
Medium Performance Impact
High Performance Impact
Very High Performance Cost Impact
Very Low Risk
Low Risk
Medium Risk
High Risk
Very High Risk
Weighting
.25
.25
.25
.25
Tailor criteria and weighting as appropriate.
Ensure weighting is normalized, and grading uses the
same scale (good=low) and range across criteria.
Establish Evaluation Criteria and Weights Example
weights
Cost
0.3
Time Required
0.3
Nutritional Value
0.3
Convenience
0.1
criteria
Most Trade Studies will have items related to Cost,
Schedule, and Performance and Risk as part of their
evaluation criteria. Refer to SYSENG-100 Appendix E
Establish Evaluation Criteria and Weights Example
Grades for
“Time Required”
0 to 15 minutes
Very low impact (1)
15 to 30 minutes
Low impact (2)
30 to 45 minutes
Medium impact (3)
45 to 60 minutes
High impact (4)
Over 60 minutes
Very high impact (5)
Identify Candidate Alternatives
 Generate alternative candidate
solutions.
 Reject unfeasible alternatives
 Document rejected
candidates
 Feedback loop
Option 1
Option 2
.
Option
3
.
.
Option n
Identify Candidate Alternatives - Example
Fast Food
(e.g. McDonald's)
Full Service Restaurant
alternatives
(e.g. Foster's)
Company Cafeteria
Brown Bag
For larger trade studies, it is a good idea to have a formal review
of alternatives and criteria before proceeding with the analysis.
Conduct Analysis of Alternatives
 Develop timelines scenarios for
system operation and user
interaction for each system design
alternative.
 Allocate key requirements to the
hardware and software
components for each of the design
alternative as a part of the
analysis.
 Analyze all candidate alternatives that have been identified.
 Analyze the alternatives using a structured decision making
technique that is appropriate for the analysis.
 Use the evaluation criteria and weighting to select the
recommended alternative (see example).
 Determine the alternative representing the “Best Value” for projects
that have a CAIV requirement.
 Evaluate the failure conditions associated with each of the
alternatives.
 Perform a sensitivity analysis to determine if any factors
inordinately dominate the selection outcome
Conduct Analysis of Alternatives - Example 1
Example:
Timeline Analysis
Full Service Restaurant
drive
order
wait
eat
Fast Food
drive
Use analysis techniques
such as timeline analysis,
CAIV, analysis of possible
failure conditions, etc.
get
Company Cafeteria
get
eat
Brown Bag
eat
eat
drive
pay
drive
Conduct Analysis of Alternatives - Example 2
Another Example:
Data Gathering
McDonald’s Web Site
Conduct Analysis of Alternatives - Example 3
Apply weights to grades
Score
Full Svc Rest
Cafeteria
Brown Bag
Weight
Cost
0.3
Time
0.3
Nutrition
0.3
Convenience
0.1
Fast Food
to find optimum alternative
2
3
4
3
4
4
2
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
3
3.0 3.3 2.2 1.2
Multiply weight
times grade,
and sum across
all criteria, i.e.
.3(1)+.3(1)+.3(1)+.1(3)
=1.2
Document Analysis Results
The report contains the following:
 Document
the rationale for the analysis decisions.
 Document
the decision making technique used for the analysis and
the rationale for its selection.
 Document
the rationale for the selection of the evaluation criteria
and weighting for the analysis.
 Document
alternatives considered and the rationale for not
selecting them as the recommended alternative.
It is recommend to produce the document incrementally in
parallel with the process
Document Analysis Results - Styleguide
1
2
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
4
Introduction
Applicable Documents
Trade Study Analysis
Trade Study Objective
Requirements, Constraints, and Assumptions
Evaluation Criteria, Grading, Weighting and Scoring
Definition of Alternatives
Analysis of Alternatives
Summary of Analysis
Conclusions and Recommendations
Document Analysis Results - Example
TRADE STUDY REPORT
STYLEGUIDE
September 30, 1999
Style-guide
Conventional Restaurant
drive
order
wait
eat
pay
drive
Fast Food
drive
get
eat
drive
Company Cafeteria
get
Trade Study
Report
eat
Brown Bag
Score
Cafeteria
Brown Bag
Weight
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.1
Full Svc Rest
Cost
Time
Nutrition
Convenience
Fast Food
eat
2
2
3
3
4
4
2
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
3
2.4 3.3 2.2 1.2
Review/Approve Analysis Report
 Review the candidate alternatives
to ensure that the appropriate
alternatives have been analyzed. If
all appropriate alternatives have
not been analyzed, then the
analysis of alternatives needs to
be continued
 Review the assumptions to ensure that they are reasonable and valid
for the alternatives being considered.
 Review the selected alternative to ensure it is the best solution based
on the evaluation criteria and weighting.
When to Conduct a Trade Study
Trade Studies are usually conducted to help understand
competing solutions and to select the most optimal solution.
Trade Studies are usually conducted for items significantly
impacting:
• Cost
• Schedule
• High Risk Items
• Performance Objectives
• Architectural Design
802.11g
VRC-99
Grade score Grade score
weight
Configuration
1 - very small
2 - small
3 -Medium
4 - large
5 -very large
1 - very small
Weight of remote
2 - small
equipment
3 -Medium
4 - large
5 -very large
Power consumption of 1 - >20 watts
2 - >40 watts
remote equipment
3 - >60 watts
4 - >80 watts
5 - >100 watts
Size of remote
equipment
Example
Spreadsheet
3
0.07
3
0.07
2
0.04
4
0.09
4
0.13
4
0.13
2%
0.2
2%
0.2
3%
0.3
9%
0.8
10%
0.9
11%
1
RMA
Reliability (MTBF)
Repair-ability (MTBR)
1 - 10 year
2 - 8 years
3 - 6 years
4 - 4 years
5 - 2 years
1 - 5 min
2 - 10 min
3 - 15 min
4 - 20 min
5 - 25 min
Data Transfer
{Technical
Multi-path performance 1 - >40 Mbps
2- < 40 Mbps
3- < 30 Mbps
4- < 20 Mbps
5- < 10 Mbps
Reliable single vehicle 1 - >4 Mbps
Throughput
2- < 4 Mbps
3- < 3 Mbps
4- < 2 Mbps
5- < 1 Mbps
Distance of reliable
1-> 40 miles
operation
2-< 40 miles
3-< 30 miles
4-< 20 miles
5 -< 10 miles
5
0.44
3
0.26
5
0.49
2
0.20
2
0.22
5
0.55
1
0.11
5
0.55
11%
1
1
0.11
4
0.44
11%
1
1
0.11
5
0.55
11%
1
2
0.15
4
0.31
8%
0.7
3
0.16
1
0.05
5%
0.5
3
0.33
1
0.11
11%
1
5
0.27
1
0.05
5%
0.5
Performance} Data Throughput
OTH throughput
1 > 4Mbp
2 < 4Mbp
3 < 3Mbp
4 < 2Mbp
5 < 1Mbp
1 – Very Low {<10$K} Impact
2 – Low {<15$K} Impact
3 – Medium {<30$K} Impact
4 – High {<35$K} Impact
5 – Very High {>35$K} Impact
1 – Very Low {<100$K} Impact
2 – Low {<150$K} Impact
3 – Medium {<300$K} Impact
4 – High {<350$K} Impact
5 – Very High {>350$K} Impact
1 – Very Low (March 03) Impact
Recurring
cost
This cost is the cost of
procurement of
multiple units.
Development
cost
Cost to develop the
software and hardware
environment to operate
the unit.
{Schedule}
Will the equipment be
ready for deployment
in April 03, August 03 2 – Low (April 03) Impact
3 – Medium (June 03)Impact
4 – High (July 03) Impact
5 – Very High (August 03)
Impact
Maturity
1 – Very good maturity
2 – good maturity
3 – Medium maturity
4 – High immaturity
{Risk}
Homework : Due November 3rd
•Divide up your project classes among team members. Create class
descriptions. Divide up your project use cases among team members.
Create / re-do use case descriptions. Divide up requirements among
team members
•Send them to me ( subject: Project updates)
•Add them to your project (don’t send them to me)
•Read Feasibility Analysis (chapter 10) of Whitten
•Do a trade study with 3 – 4 alternative candidates
No class on October 27, 2003