System Architecture Design Method Balancing Reliability and Performance
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
The existing methods for designing system architectures are costly and cumbersome, as they often require numerous iterations to satisfy multiple constraints such as functional and non-functional requirements, leading to suboptimal results due to the conflicting nature of these constraints.
Innovation Solution
A method that involves functional and non-functional analysis, modeling, and rule-based construction of system architecture models, allowing for immediate analysis of architectural choices and their impact on all constraints, facilitating a compromise between different design options.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If the architecture is designed to satisfy one non-functional constraint (e.g., integrity and availability), then the system reliability is improved, but the system performance deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies parameter changes by transforming non-functional constraints into quantifiable evaluation parameters with assigned weights. Each constraint (integrity, availability, performance, etc.) is converted into measurable parameters that can be evaluated and optimized simultaneously through mathematical modeling, allowing the system to find optimal parameter combinations that balance reliability and performance.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements preliminary action by conducting functional and non-functional analysis at the earliest stages of architecture design, before detailed architectural decisions are made. The constraint modeling and evaluation framework is established upfront, enabling continuous assessment and adjustment of architectural choices against multiple constraints simultaneously, rather than reacting to constraint violations later in the design process.
2Adaptability or versatility
If the architecture is modified to take into account a second constraint, then the adaptability to multiple constraints is improved, but the design cost increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies universality by creating a unified constraint modeling framework that handles multiple types of constraints (functional, non-functional, performance, reliability, security, etc.) through a single integrated system. The evaluation model can simultaneously assess architecture against diverse constraints using consistent methods, eliminating the need for separate analysis processes for each constraint type and reducing overall design costs.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements feedback through continuous evaluation of the architecture model against defined constraints during the design process. The system provides feedback on constraint satisfaction levels, allowing designers to adjust architectural choices iteratively. This feedback mechanism enables adaptive optimization without requiring costly repeated analyses, as the same evaluation framework is reused throughout the design iterations.
3Adaptability or versatility
If the architecture is modified to satisfy a second constraint, then the adaptability is improved, but the modification becomes complex and may degrade compatibility with the first constraint
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies dimensionality change by introducing a mathematical evaluation dimension that simultaneously considers multiple constraints. Instead of modifying architecture sequentially for each constraint (one-dimensional approach), the system evaluates architectural choices across multiple constraint dimensions concurrently using weighted scoring and optimization algorithms. This allows complex multi-constraint satisfaction to be managed through mathematical relationships rather than complex architectural restructuring.
4Measurement precision
If a detailed simulation model is used to evaluate non-functional constraints, then the measurement precision is improved, but the development cost and time increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies extraction by separating the constraint evaluation function from detailed system simulation. Instead of using comprehensive simulation models that require extensive development and execution time, the system extracts essential constraint characteristics into simplified evaluation rules and metrics. These extracted evaluation criteria can be applied quickly to architecture models without requiring full system simulation, maintaining adequate precision while dramatically reducing evaluation time and computational resources.
Data Source
AI summary
The present invention relates to a method for aiding the design of a system architecture. The method for design of an architecture of a system according to an embodiment of the invention includes at least the following steps: functional and non-functional analysis of a technical requirement with which the system complies; formalization of points of view for analysis of the architecture of the system based on the functional and non-functional analysis; definition of one rule for analysis of the architecture of the system for each analysis point of view; construction of the architecture of the system; and analysis of the architecture according to the rules of analysis. The design of system architectures notably relates to the field of system engineering. The systems to which the present invention is applicable can be hardware systems, software systems, or systems combining both hardware and software. An embodiment of the present invention may be implemented in the framework of the development of an aircraft navigation system.


