How Do MBSE and Traditional Systems Engineering Differ?

As designs become more complex, engineers need to evolve how they approach projects.

In the past, teams relied on traditional systems engineering (TSE) methods. This document-centric approach uses specifications and diagrams to manage complex system lifecycles. However, this approach is no longer effective due to the volume of data used today, the speed of development, and the increasing complexity.

Instead, engineers are shifting to model-based systems engineering (MBSE), which uses an interconnected digital model to exchange information. With MBSE, a central repository holds all requirements and creates a single source of truth, ensuring that all documentation remains in sync. Manufacturers in the automotive, aerospace, defense, and other industries are embracing MBSE for product development and refreshing product features in a streamlined manner.

In this article, we examine the key differences between these two engineering strategies and the pros and cons of each.

Traditional Systems Engineering: Pros and Cons

Engineers have been using a TSE approach for years, so it is a familiar and trusted process. However, significant challenges must be overcome. Sticking with TSE results in more manual, time-consuming work that can delay the time to market.

Pros

• Well-established
• Detailed documentation
• Lower initial investment

Cons

• Can create inconsistencies
• Difficulty managing interdependencies
• Limited ability to conduct simulations

Model-Based Systems Engineering: Pros and Cons

MBSE leverages modern technology to do much of the heavy lifting and avoid data silos that are trapped in a series of documents that may or may not be up to date. With MBSE, documentation and data are always in sync in real time.

Pros

• Enhanced consistency across designs
• Easier to analyze, verify, and run simulations
• Can often reuse system components

Cons

• Steeper initial learning curve and costs
• Uses specialized tools and software
• Requires cultural shift from TSE

One of the biggest challenges of shifting to an MBSE model is this cultural shift. Engineers have to adapt to new ways of project design and development, and organizations may need to invest in change management strategies to make an effective transition.

Key Differences between TSE and MBSE

Going beyond the pros and cons, let’s break down the key differences between TSE and MBSE.

Approach to System Representation

• TSE: Document-centric
• MBSE: Model-centric

Information Management

• TSE: Separate documents and diagrams
• MBSE: Integrated model repository

Traceability

• TSE: Manual cross-referencing
• MBSE: Automated traceability through model relationships

Collaboration

• TSE: Sequential, siloed work
• MBSE: Concurrent, collaborative environment

Adaptability to Changes

• TSE: Time-consuming manual updates
• MBSE: Rapid propagation of changes through the model

Consistency

• TSE: Challenging to maintain across documents
• MBSE: Inherently maintained through a centralized model

Reusability

• TSE: Limited; often requires manual recreation
• MBSE: High; models and components can be easily reused

Validation and Verification

• TSE: Often performed late in the development cycle
• MBSE: Can be performed continuously throughout the development

Stakeholder Communication

• TSE: Relies on static documents and presentations
• MBSE: Interactive model demonstrations and simulations

Cost and Time Efficiency

• TSE: Can be time-consuming and costly for complex systems
• MBSE: More efficient for complex systems, especially in the long term

Tool Integration

• TSE: Often relies on disparate tools
• MBSE: Integrated toolsets that work with the central model

Requirements Management

• TSE: Typically managed in separate documents
• MBSE: Integrated with the system model

Simulation and Analysis

• TSE: Often performed separately from the design
• MBSE: Can be directly linked to and performed on the model

Adopting MBSE to Reduce Risks, Time, and Costs

The goal of changing from TSE to MBSE is to move from document-centric to data-centric, leveraging a connected information model throughout the product lifecycle. When done effectively, there are significant benefits.

Mitigating Risks

MBSE produces an open representation of relationships and dependencies within a system. This is especially helpful when working in an architecture with integrated components. With a central repository and a single source of truth, you can avoid breaking relationships. You also get an earlier identification of design flaws, enabling you to develop solutions sooner.

Since everyone is working from the same data, the quality and accuracy of the data are improved, reducing the risk of errors or inconsistencies.

Time Savings

Automated document generation and error detection significantly decrease time to market. Rapid iteration and simulations can leverage automation to further accelerate that speed. Fast, integrated learning cycles coupled with design thinking and user-centered design can ensure product viability and usability in less time.

Cost Reductions

Time savings translate to cost reductions in several ways. With a more streamlined data flow, you can improve resource allocation while increasing collaboration. Reducing defects before production avoids unnecessary rework and redesign.

In the long term, products require less maintenance. Since MBSE streamlines production across the product lifecycle, updates and refreshes are also easier, reducing costs for continuous integration and deployment in DevOps.

MBSE Requires Leadership Commitment

People often default to the familiar. Without a leadership commitment from the top of an organization, a transition to an MBSE engineering approach may not be effective. Leaders need to:

• Explain the vision for MBSE adoption
• Allocate the necessary tools, resources, and budget
• Require training/upskilling as necessary
• Set timelines and expectations for the transition

While explaining the vision seems simple, there is often a misunderstanding of what MBSE is about and its goals. In one study, only 22% of those involved in the systems engineering process could cite a clear definition, potentially leading to a lack of adoption and buy-in.

Integrating Model-Based System Engineering Solutions

Making the switch to MBSE requires expertise. You need an experienced engineering, technical, software, and cybersecurity partner to help guide you through the process.

The Sumaria team believes that rapid defense development relies on innovative MBSE solutions. By integrating advanced analytics AI, MBSE helps facilitate systems development from concept to operation, assisting decision-makers in making sound future investments and ensuring national safety.

Sumaria Systems is a reliable and trusted industry partner that uses a series of services, including advisory, assistance, and advanced analytics AI, to convert documents into integrated and interconnected digital models. With over forty years of experience, numerous ISO and CMMI Level 3 certifications, and a clean compliance record with UTD registrations in SAM.gov, Sumaria is a trusted option for government contract awards, with no history of suspension or debarment. Contact Sumaria during your next program to get support for the nation's vital missions with the highest degree of responsiveness, effectiveness, and efficiency.