[ecop-poct] Re: Updated PO v0.5
- From: Bernhard Schätz <schaetz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ecop-poct@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 12:41:42 +0200
Hi Jouni,
I made slight modifications.
>
> 2010 the evaluator complained " the relationship to AUTOSAR is not made
> explicit"
>
> The rationale behind ECO PREMISES is partly similar to the motivations of
> AUTOSAR (Automotive Open System Architecture) in car industry: reuse of
> solutions, flexibility of product development and management, improved
> product quality.
However, AUTOSAR targets only the on-board architecture, has limited support
for non-functional properties (incl. safety), and only provides a reference
architecture for the base services (e.g., flashing, diagnosis). In contrast,
the ECO PREMSIS platform combines on-board/off-board architectures, a
high-level references architecture including support for collaboration
services, and explicitly addresses non-functional aspects.
Best regards!!
>
> Jouni Mattila
> Professor in Machine Automation, Dr. Tech.
> TUT/IHA
> Korkeakoulunkatu 6
> P.O. Box 589
> FI-33101 Tampere, Finland
> Mobile +358-40-8490244
> Fax +358-3-31152240
> Email: jouni.mattila@xxxxxx
> www.iha.tut.fi
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Bernhard Schätz
> Sent: 31. maaliskuuta 2011 13:16
> To: ecop-poct@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ecop-poct] Re: Updated PO v0.5
>
> Hi Jouni,
>
> here is the promised text.Please extend/change ad libitum:
>
> While previous projects (incl. SOCRADES, eSONIA, iFEST, POLLUX) adressed the
> use of SOA approaches for embedded systems, none of them addressed the
> specifics of interconnected mobile work machines. ECO PREMISIS will build on
> these approaches to enable a new generation of mobile work machines. So,
> while SOCRADES mainly targets a SOA-only approach in the field of enterprise
> integration in automation, ECO PREMSIS uses a layered reference architecture
> including components and services, and applies this approach to mobile work
> machines. Furthermore, while eSONIA is providing models and tools for SOA in
> a factory environment, including diagnosis and maintenance, it is limited to
> automation and does not deal with the specifics of mobile collaboration.
> Similarly, while iFEST provides a generic tool chain framework, ECO PREMISIS
> will use such frameworks to specifically provide tool support based on the
> ECO PREMISIS reference architecture. In contrast to POLLUX, ECO PREMSIS is
> not limited to electrical vehicles and also addresses inter-vehicle
> collaboration.
>
>
> Am 31.03.2011 um 11:32 schrieb Mattila Jouni:
>
>> Dear Bernhard,
>>
>> thanks, for SODA and SOCRATES .. ??? SODA is very old. TUT was in it
>> too (not me/us) .
>>
>> I found
>>
>> FTPOnline Don't Let SODA Ruin Your SOA Retrieved on July 6, 2007
>>
>> Can someone write please 2-3 sentences about socrates and soda for reference
>> for section 2?
>>
>> Thank you,
>> -J
>>
>> Jouni Mattila
>> Professor in Machine Automation, Dr. Tech.
>> TUT/IHA
>> Korkeakoulunkatu 6
>> P.O. Box 589
>> FI-33101 Tampere, Finland
>> Mobile +358-40-8490244
>> Fax +358-3-31152240
>> Email: jouni.mattila@xxxxxx
>> www.iha.tut.fi
>>
>> From: ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bernhard Schätz
>> Sent: 31. maaliskuuta 2011 12:28
>> To: ecop-poct@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [ecop-poct] Re: Updated PO v0.5
>>
>> Dear Jouni,
>>
>> as you said, impact is supposed to go to section 4.
>>
>> The POC are very good to define measurable and verifiable objectives! Good
>> job!!
>>
>> One comment: In Demo #3, I would use the term "autonomous motion control"
>> vs. "robotic motion control", but then this is a matter of taste.
>>
>> I'll go through section 2 immediately.
>>
>> Best regards!
>>
>>
>> Am 31.03.2011 um 11:07 schrieb Mattila Jouni:
>>
>>
>> Thanks, I actually removed impact "talk" from section 2 since I thought it
>> supposed go in section 4 (only) ok no problem thanks.
>>
>> Please check out section 2 (actually 2.1 concept and objectives is about
>> ready) ..
>>
>> Since concept and objectives should be stated in "measurable and
>> verified form" I wrote a list of tentative demos (POC) .
>>
>> I don't think these are very binding, however, pls let me know if you agree
>> on these or not for this PO stage . ?
>>
>> Are these the "most" critical ones in terms of S&T to demonstrate?
>> (attached and below)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -J
>>
>>
>>
>> The ECO PREMISES project is led by the four world market leader OEM's. With
>> their key role the mobile working machine domain requirements for set of use
>> cases are elicited, analyzed and validated, a domain model is build and
>> general reference architecture requirements are mapped out. In addition,
>> requirements for model-driven design process and tool chain are mapped out
>> for ECO PREMISES design approach development. After S&T phase, the developed
>> ECO PREMISES concept will be validated by developing 3-4 industrial scale
>> proof-of-concept (POC) OEM machine demonstrations. These POC's demonstrate
>> (roughly):
>>
>> 1. Demo #1: Inter-machine and intra-machine communication via MSB and
>> SOA broker (e.g. fleet management)
>> 2. Demo #2: Architectural separation of hard real-time functionality
>> from the service-based functionality so that the critical real-time behavior
>> is not affected while preserving system-level predictability and appropriate
>> levels of safety. (e.g. performance of SOA vs. domain requirements)
>> 3. Demo #3: Advanced machine functionality demonstration with software
>> configurable level of intelligence (e.g. robotic motion control vs. manual
>> control or maintenance at different levels)
>> 4. Demo #4: Model-based development and tool chain demonstration vs.
>> product-line management (software variability management)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jouni Mattila
>> Professor in Machine Automation, Dr. Tech.
>> TUT/IHA
>> Korkeakoulunkatu 6
>> P.O. Box 589
>> FI-33101 Tampere, Finland
>> Mobile +358-40-8490244
>> Fax +358-3-31152240
>> Email: jouni.mattila@xxxxxx
>> www.iha.tut.fi
>>
>> From: ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bernhard Schätz
>> Sent: 31. maaliskuuta 2011 11:38
>> To: ecop-poct@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: [ecop-poct] Re: Updated PO v0.5
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> one short comment, which might be helpful for section 2 and 4:
>> In the AWP (Annual work Program) for all three subprogrammes (ASP5, ASP1,
>> ASP4) objectives and expected impacts are listed.
>> It helps to support the reviewers in finding keywords in the corresponding
>> text of these sections.
>>
>> Here is an example for ASP 1:
>>
>> In section 2, you might want to consider to prominently place
>> objectives, e.g., by printing them in italic; e.g.,
>> - contribution to a European Standard Reference Technology Platform,
>> definition of a model-based compositional develoment process including
>> safety and security aspects, design and prototype implementation of a
>> multi-domain embedded systems architecture addressing networking,
>> security, robustness, diagnosis and maintenance services
>>
>> In Section 4, you might want to do the same for the expected impacts
>> required in this section, e.g.,
>> - reduce time to market; increase the quality and reliability of products
>> and services while providing novel functionalities; contribute to
>> architectures that reduce cost and effort of qualification and certification
>> processes.
>>
>> So, while all this already is in the content of these sections, sometimes it
>> helps just to repeat some of the keywords and make them stand out.
>>
>> Best regards!!
>>
>>
>> Am 31.03.2011 um 10:16 schrieb Olli Vistbacka:
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Updated PO attached.
>>
>> It's almost complete information wise.
>>
>> TODO:
>> - Section 2 condensing
>> - Section 4 improvement, some material is available (e.g. impact
>> statements from Bernhard and FAGOR, listed standards, )
>> - Abstract improving?
>> - getting missing information
>>
>> I have understood that section 2 is under editing in TUT. Am I correct?
>> Is somebody working on the Section 4? Pandeli?
>>
>> --
>> Olli Vistbacka
>> Project Manager, M.Sc. (Eng.)
>>
>> Phone +358 40 569 1043
>> olli.vistbacka@xxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.hermia.fi/in_english/
>>
>> <ECO_PREMISES_PO_v0.5.docx>
>>
>> Bernhard Schätz, fortiss GmbH, email: schaetz@xxxxxxxxxxx Tel. +49
>> (0)89 360 35 22 27 Fax. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 50 Guerickestr. 25, 80805
>> München, Germany
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <ECO PREMISES PO v0 4-comments_fortiss_joma.docx>
>>
>> Bernhard Schätz, fortiss GmbH, email: schaetz@xxxxxxxxxxx Tel. +49
>> (0)89 360 35 22 27 Fax. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 50 Guerickestr. 25, 80805
>> München, Germany
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Bernhard Schätz, fortiss GmbH, email: schaetz@xxxxxxxxxxx Tel. +49 (0)89 360
> 35 22 27 Fax. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 50 Guerickestr. 25, 80805 München, Germany
>
>
>
>
>
>
Bernhard Schätz, fortiss GmbH, email: schaetz@xxxxxxxxxxx
Tel. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 27 Fax. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 50
Guerickestr. 25, 80805 München, Germany
Other related posts:
