Two%20Case%20Studies - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Two%20Case%20Studies

Description:

Command Center Processing and Display System Replacement ... Primary missile warning system. Main installation : Cheyenne Mountain ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:281
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 23
Provided by: richardle9
Learn more at: http://sce.uhcl.edu
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Two%20Case%20Studies


1
Two Case Studies
  • CCPDS-R, TRW
  • How Microsoft Builds Software
  • Different development environments
  • Software development life cycle
  • Software project management techniques

2
CCPDS-R Case Study
  • Command Center Processing and Display System
    Replacement
  • TRW Space and Defense in Redondo Beach, CA
  • Customer U.S. Air Force
  • Focus Common Subsystem
  • Mission critical software

3
Common Subsystem
  • Primary missile warning system
  • Main installation Cheyenne Mountain
  • Backup system Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska
  • 48-month software development schedule
  • 355,000 SLOC
  • Ada design implementation language
  • 6 builds were required
  • Completed successfully, on time within budget to
    customer satisfaction

4
CCPDS-R Acquisition
  • Concept definition (CD), 12-month schedule
  • 5 major bidders, 2 contracts awarded
  • Full-scale development (FSD)
  • 1 contract awarded to TRW
  • Contract award based on performance in Software
    Engineering Exercise

5
Concept Definition (CD)
  • Vision
  • Analyze and specify the project requirements
  • Define and develop the top-level architecture
  • Plan FSD phase software development activities
  • Configure the process and development environment
  • Establish trust and win-win relationships among
    the stakeholders
  • Software engineering exercise

6
Process Overview for FSD
  • Standard DOD life cycle after contract award
  • Software requirements review (SRR)
  • Interim preliminary design review (IPDR)
  • Preliminary design review (PDR)
  • Critical design review (CDR)
  • Final qualification test (FQT)

7
Incremental Design Process
  • Individual milestones within a build
  • Preliminary design walkthrough
  • Critical design walkthrough
  • Code walkthrough
  • Turnover review

8
Incremental Test Process
  • Stand-alone test
  • Build integration test establish a stable,
    reliable baseline
  • Reliability test
  • Engineering string test
  • Final qualification test

9
IPDR Demonstration
  • Demonstrate defined capabilities at NORAD
  • Capabilities well understood by the customer and
    TRW
  • 37 evaluation criteria
  • Results were apt to change requirements, plans
    and designs
  • 31 satisfactory, 6 were not met
  • Required redesign and re-demonstration

10
Metrics
  • Build Progress ( coded) vs time
  • Requirements verified vs time
  • Cumulative SLOC vs time
  • Average hours per software change order (SCO)
  • Mean time between failure (MTBF) vs total test
    hours
  • Cumulative SLOC vs budget

11
People factors
  • Core team concept
  • Leverage skills of a few experts across the
    entire team
  • Avoid attrition
  • Profit sharing of award fees

12
Microsoft Case Study
  • High volume, mass market software
  • Redmond, Washington
  • Excel, Word, Windows 95, Windows NT, etc.
  • Respond to events in the marketplace
  • Highly flexible, entrepreneurial company

13
Microsoft Competitive Strategy
  • Identify mass markets quickly
  • Introduce products that are good enough
  • Improve products by incrementally evolving their
    features
  • Sell multiple product versions and upgrades
  • Sell globally

14
Product Development Philosophy
  • Utilize small parallel teams (3 to 8 developers)
  • Teams evolve features and products incrementally
  • Occasionally introduce new concepts and
    technologies
  • Synchronize changes frequently so product
    components work together
  • Structured hacker-like approach

15
Synch-and-Stabilize
  • Continually synchronize what developers are doing
    as individuals and team members
  • Stabilize the product in increments
  • Daily build
  • Continual testing
  • Testers work in parallel with developers (1 to 1)
  • Fix defect immediately if checked in code
    breaks the daily build

16
Big Picture Procedures
  • Teams work at single physical site
  • Common development languages (C and C)
  • Common coding styles
  • Standardized development tools
  • Teams must communicate, debate design ideas, and
    resolve problems face to face

17
Synch-and-StabilizeDevelopment Approach
  • Planning Phase
  • Development Phase
  • Stabilization Phase

18
Planning Phase
  • Vision statement
  • Product managers define goals for a new product
    based on market research
  • Specification document written up by Program
    manager
  • During development, feature set in specification
    document may change by 30 or more
  • Schedule and feature team formation

19
Development Phase
  • Developers design, code, and debug
  • Testers pair with developers for continuous
    testing
  • 3 major milestones
  • Milestone 1 first 1/3 of features (most
    critical and shared components)
  • Milestone 2 second third of features
  • Milestone 3 final third of features (least
    critical)

20
Stabilization Phase
  • Internal testing
  • External testing (beta sites and users)
  • Release preparation

21
Principles Developing and Shipping Products
  • Work in parallel teams but synch up and debug
    daily
  • Always have a product you can ship, with versions
    for different platforms and markets
  • Speak a common language on a single development
    site
  • Continuously test the product as you build it
  • Use metric data to determine milestone completion
    and product release

22
Conclusions
  • Stakeholders and type of software being developed
    effect the software development life cycle
  • CCPDS-R - more externally controlled process
  • Microsoft market driven internally controlled
    process geared towards customer satisfaction and
    market share
  • Both cases illustrate extensive use of modern
    software project management techniques
  • Both cases show level 3 (defined) of CMM
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com