1

Functional Analysis and Allocation Process (FAA) – Systems Engineering

 2

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 3
2. Process of FAA .................................................................................................................. 3
3. Methods of Functional Analysis ........................................................................................ 5
4. Methods of Functional Allocation...................................................................................... 6
5. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 8
References .................................................................................................................................. 9
 3

No project selected, choose any project and then relate your solution with the project. Also,
single sentence should have minimum 15 words so minimise the usage of short sentences.

1. Introduction

The designing and management of complex systems is dependent on a unique field of

reference. This field is systems engineering. The process of systems engineering has many
classifications out of which the functional analysis and allocation is the most prominent one.
The report is based on a critical discussion on the key processes of FAA. Initially, it is the
evaluation of the procedures and practices of FAA. The proceeding sections of this report are
based on evaluating the methods of functional analysis and functional allocation. It is clear that
in systems engineering projects?? Select any 1 project and then relate the content of complete
task with the project, the techniques and methods tend to vary, so, the report entails the most
widely used methods in systems engineering. The conclusion reflects upon the final verdict
about the overall process of FAA. Provide overview of the selected project.

2. Process of FAA Relate it with project

The basic criteria of the FAA process is to decompose system-level requirements. The
requirements are established initially by considering the customer needs and their interest. The
environmental perspective is also significant in shaping up the system-level requirements.
When the actual functional phase comes into existence, the process demands decomposing of
the system-level requirements. The purpose of the FAA process is to minimize the gap that
exists between the high-level requirements prescribed initially and the constraints that exist in
the system. This process is essential because it reassesses the system requirements and removes
complexity associated with the previous process. Apparently, the importance of this process is
quite a lot (DSIINTL, 2019). As discussed previously, the input of the process of FAA is from
the system requirements and the construction of system requirement is based on customer
needs; so, the input is quite the simplest one. Apart from this, the figure below demonstrates
that the output is a functional architecture and design synthesis. As evident from figure, there
are two important elements namely requirement loop and design loop. The cross-checking
activities related to initial requirement has been influential in managing the system outcomes.
The initial requirements being prescribed might be problematic after assessing the overall
requirement and environment; thus, creation of requirement loop enables the concerned entities
 4

involved in functional analysis to reassess and revise the system requirements. This aspect
helps the system actors to enhance the overall design (Grady, 2010).

Figure 1: Functional Analysis and Allocation

(Source: MIT, 2005)

The supporting processes involved in the FAA process include the block diagrams and the data
flow diagrams etc. These processes help in completing the relevant practices on time. In
addition, the inclusion of Behavioral diagrams in evaluating the position of procedures being
followed cannot be ignored either. There is a presence of multiple stages and in each layer a
new functional element is addressed. In terms of illustration, the two stages that are associated
with FAA are decomposition and allocation.

The stage of decomposition is aligned in a manner that the previous system requirements are
reduced in a meaningful form; while, the allocation stage is effective utilization of resources
and machinery involved in the process. These two stages diversify the outcomes in a manner
that 360-degree realistic outcomes are attained (Graaf and Vromen, 2017). The evaluation of
the functional architecture in a systems approach enables the concerned designers to establish
 5

internal and external interfaces. These interfaces refer to better outcomes. Other than this, the
key feature of the overall process is based on traceability. The system designer is able to
identify the loopholes in the system and act accordingly. The initial review of the system
requirements is a rough sketch of how the system needs to work. With the passage of time and
environmental changes, the human involvement works for the betterment of the functional
analysis as adjustments can be made and an effective strategy towards managing the system
design is evident (Faulconbridge and Ryan, 2014). There is always a systematic approach in
conventional functional analysis and allocation process. The reason is that the traceability
tactics refer to the completion of functional architecture in the first place. Unless and until the
functional architecture is formulated, the design interfaces cannot be applicable. It can be
conferred that FAA is a systematic process (Viola and Carpino, 2019).

3. Methods of Functional Analysis

One of the most highly recognized methods of functional analysis is of functional analysis
diagram. The technological innovation prompted the system engineers to think about an
approach that is suitable and can refer to better pictorial or visual representation of the
functions. As a result, the FAD played a prominent role in this. The reason why FAD is
influential is that the decomposed systems require considerable level of visual representation
and it is possible with the help of FAD. Also, the FAD is also in accordance with the
requirements of 3D graphical models of systems. It becomes easier for system engineers to
interact with the new system. The design interfaces in the latter phase of the FAA process
demand for better visual representation. Thus, the option of FAD has been preferred by many
engineers (Michalakoudis and Childs, 2017). The findings are incoherent with the study of
Vicente (1999) in a way that hierarchical task analysis (HTA) as well as work domain analysis
(WDA) are essential components of functional analysis. These two approaches have been
influential in minimizing the system level requirement and prepare a better solution to manage
the system. The key term of functional behavior is addressed by these two approaches which
are missing in the conventional visual representation. The reason is that in order to handle
complex activities in a system, it is important that the behavioral modeling is carried out in an
effective manner. Still, conversion of complex system requirements to easily understandable
task description cannot be associated with visual diagrams. As a result, the use of these two
key approaches is evident. The comprehensive evaluation of the tasks and functions to be
performed is essential to the long-run interest of the system engineer. On the basis of these two
 6

approaches, it is clear that the nature of engineering design tends to vary from one another;
thus, the choice of functional analysis method is also different. On the contrary, there is no
singular approach towards carrying out the functional analysis.

The research carried out by Gao and Wang (2015) affirms that the systematic approach of Pahl
and Beitz is an important contributor towards the functional analysis methodology. This
approach ensures that problem-solving is managed effectively. The case of rehabilitation
product is highlighted in this scenario and it has been ascertained that function solving is
incomplete without perfection. Perfection is attained by carrying out each task in a systematic
manner. The reason is that the sequence of the functions is vital for systems engineering. Also,
in order to overcome the issues or problems related to a system, the use of behavioral
assessment approach is prominent. The use of this approach is categorized as an important
factor in removal of behavioral problems among the stakeholders that exist in a system. The
uniqueness of this approach is that there are multiple dimensions available for assessment of
the behavioral problems. The system engineer feels free to investigate the activities involved
in a system in a comprehensive manner. This particular approach is recommended because it
can refer to best practice and better alternatives for the design entities in the functional analysis
(Beavers and Iwata, 2013). In the view of Hanley and Iwata (2003), there are many options to
conduct behavioral analysis and it can be generalized in terms of functional analysis. The
reason is that the terminology of topography corresponds to the fact that the presence of natural
and artificial areas in a system cannot be denied. So, it is important that a comprehensive
evaluation is carried out in this regard to ensure that better results are generated. A similar case
is associated with the behavioral problem approach discussed earlier. There is conformance
between the thought process of the two researchers in a way that problem solving is an essential
component of functional analysis and it cannot be avoided. Another key method to be followed
in terms of functional analysis is of functional analysis system technique (FAST). As per this
particular method, a research-based approach is carried out in which the research procedures
are carried out. The complexities of the functional analysis are that development of the system
and decomposing the system at the same time is a difficult job. Without proper research, the
desired outcomes cannot be obtained related to functional analysis (Tan, 2007).

4. Methods of Functional Allocation

According to Wright and Dearden (2009), functional allocation workshop is an important

element of a functional approach. The reason is that collaborative actions are demanded in the
 7

context of FAA process; so, the workshops being carried out are essential in managing the
collaborative practices appropriately. There are chances of human error when it comes to
dealing with functional allocation; so, it important to organize collaborative actions that are
essential for better functional allocation. There are chances of human error when it comes to
task allocation. So, the integration of technology with that of the human can be effectively
managed with the functional allocation method of this particular workshop. Apart from this, in
the past, the role of computer-based interactive work was practiced; however, it has changed
in the recent days and the functional allocation process is managed with the help of
collaborative sessions in the form of workshops to overcome the issues in hand. In negation to
this assessment, Feigh and Pritchett (2013) elaborated that one of the most influential
approaches to functional allocation is of simulation. The reason is that automation with human
entities is essential in order to manage the functional flow in an appropriate manner. The tightly
coupled collaboration practices are preferred in the functional allocation process. The
researcher in this study revealed that simulation creates a positive perception among the
personnel and they feel associated with the system in hand. Moreover, they along with strong
teamwork are capable of recognizing the issues and address them in accordance with the
available resources. In support of this, Kim and Feigh (2013) elaborated that human-
automation function allocation the work goals are achieved in an easier manner. The automated
agents are keen on better functional allocation of the resources. In terms of a specific reference,
the case of air transport flight deck is considered. As per this example, the lack of fidelity in
between humans and the concerned automatic machine is not essential. So, they tend to ensure
that high fidelity is carried out so that the interactive procedures are managed appropriately
and desired outcomes are attained. The functional allocation is incomplete without involvement
of dynamic as well as static simulation options. In a broader context, the involvement of
human-automation function allocation is able to consider the static as well as dynamic
simulation intervention and this is the reason why it has been preferred.

According to Redmill (2007), critical task analysis is an important method in which the
performance of the actors involved in the system process is determined. According to this
analysis method, the human factor is reconsidered and an effective outcome related to
performance of the human is carried out. For this purpose, the operational tasks in the function
are evaluated in a comprehensive manner with higher level of vigilance. However, this case is
evident in the project which project??in which safety hazards are the key for better functions.
The identification of hazards is possible whenever the human performance is evaluated at
 8

functional allocation level. The continuous observation of humans at the design phase refers to
better returns in the system.

5. Conclusion

It has been concluded that the FAA process is decomposition and the system requirements and
the allocation of tasks to the human with the help of technological interventions. These are the
two stages in the entire process namely allocation and allocation. There are various methods
for functional analysis as well as functional allocation; however, the involvement of human at
all layers of functions is important contributor towards an effective system.
 9

References

Beavers, A. and Iwata, B. (2013). Thirty years of research on the functional analysis of problem
behaviour, Journal of Applied Behavioural Analysis, 46 (1). pp 1 – 21.

DSIINTL. (2019). Early Functional Analysis and Allocation in the System Engineering
Process, [Online] Available at <https://www.dsiintl.com/support/publications/article-
index/early-functional-analysis-and-allocation-in-the-system-engineering-process-3/>/
[Accessed on 29th September 2019].

Faulconbridge, I. R. and Ryan, J. M. (2014). Systems Engineering Practice, 1st Edition. Argos
Press.

Feigh, M. and Pritchett, R. (2013). Requirements for Effective Function Allocation: A Critical
Review, Journal of Cognitive engineering and decision making, 1 (1). pp 1 - 12.

Gao, C. and Wang, W. (2015). The application of Function Analysis in development of

rehabilitation product, International Conference on Information Sciences, Machinery,
Materials and Energy.

Graaf, R. and Vromen, M. (2017). Applying systems engineering in the civil engineering
industry: an analysis of systems engineering projects of a Dutch water board, Civil
Engineering and Environmental Systems, 34 (2). pp 144 – 161.

Grady, O. J. (2010). System Requirement Analysis, 1st Edition. Elsevier.

Hanley, P. and Iwata, B. (2003). Functional analysis of problem behavior: A review, Journal
of Applied Behavioural Analysis, 36 (2). pp 147 – 185.

Kim, Y. and Feigh, M. (2013). Modeling Human–Automation Function Allocation, Journal of

Cognitive Engineering and Decision making, 1 (1). pp 1 – 12.

Michalakoudis, I. and Childs, P. (2017). Using functional analysis diagrams to improve product
reliability and cost, Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 9 (1). pp 1 – 11.

MIT. (2005). Systems Engineering Fundamental, [Online] Available at

<https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/aeronautics-and-astronautics/16-885j-aircraft-systems-
 10

engineering-fall-2005/readings/sefguide_01_01.pdf>/ [Accessed on 28th September

2019].

Redmill, F. (2007). Developments in Risk-based Approaches to Safety: Proceedings of the

Fourteenth Safety-citical Systems Symposium, Bristol, UK, 7-9 February 2006, 1st
Edition. Springer.

Tan, S. (2007). Enhanced functional analysis system technique for managing complex
engineering projects, Master Thesis. Missouri University of Science and technology.

Vicente, K. J. (1999). Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy
Computer-Based Work. Mahwah, NJ.

Viola, F. and Carpino, S. (2019). Functional Analysis in Systems Engineering: Methodology

and Applications, Intech Open.

Wright, P. and Dearden, A. (2009). Function allocation: A perspective from studies of work
practice, Thesis. University of York.