Organizations that manage inland waterway infrastructure (IWI), are rapidly introducing cyber-physical technologies or will do so in the next decade. We argue that you should design your technical management the way you want your overall CPW-system design to be.
The cyber-physical waterway
In cyber-physical systems, physical and software components are deeply intertwined, each operating on different spatial and temporal scales, exhibiting multiple and distinct behavioral modalities, and interacting with each other in a myriad of ways that change with context. (US National Science Foundation).
Some interrelated and overlapping terms that are used around the world are; smart-technologies or Industry 4.0 technology.
The cyber-physical waterway (CPW) is a waterway where for example:
- Infrastructure is connected with different communication networks such as fiber-networks and wireless networks (GPRS, VHF, RF, …)
- level sensor data is used to predict water levels and to automatically adjust weirs in the whole area in the most optimized mode
- bridge, locks and weirs are remotely operated
- traffic flows are optimized based on tracking and tracing of vessels and all other relevant information
- infrastructure is continually monitored to allow for predictive maintenance
- safety is guaranteed by smart safety devices
The technology applied in the CPW differs fundamentally with classic waterway technology on two levels: the component level and the system level.
Characteristics on a component level
Traditionally, IWI comprises of steel or concrete structures and electrical and electromechanical components. The components used to implement a CPW are IT-related such as embedded computers, software and network components. As such, they inherently have IT-related characteristics.
Traditional IWI components |
Cyper-Physical Waterway components |
Slow technological development |
Fast technological development |
Long product life cycles (>10 years) |
Short product life cycles (<10 years) |
Compatibility forms not a big issue |
Compatibility issues supplier depended |
Knowledge largely supplier independent |
Knowledge largely supplier depended |
Knowledge relatively easily codifiable |
Knowledge difficult to codify |
Wide variety of possible contractors |
Specialized contractors |
Characteristics on a system level
Traditionally, IWI is analyzed by decomposing the infrastructure in a physical bounded component-breakdown structure. The waterway is comprised of several locks and bridges, which in their turn are comprised of several structural elements and a drive system, with an engine and brakes, with brake-pads and so on.
The characteristics and behavior of traditional IWI on a system level is straightforward. Only a few important minimal specifications are needed to describe the waterway: maximum width and length of the vessels, underpass height and depth of the waterway. The design of the lock or bridge itself may vary almost freely. A failure of one component, usually has only a local effect.
To analyze the CPW, a system perspective is more suited. Several components are networked with components that are located outside the physical boundary of the object. Each sub-system has a role to play and provides a service to the other sub-systems and combined they achieve a higher goal then just the services added. You can distinguish a CCTV-system, an access-control-system, a dynamic traffic sign-system, an IP-based radio communication-system etc.
A CPW is a so called “complex” system. The sub-systems have multiple interactions, they vary over time, the effect of a change in one area often has an unpredicted effect on other systems.
Managing complexity
A complex system that isn’t well designed and managed, becomes very vulnerable. A single failure or change can result in failure of the whole system.
There is not one perfect way to manage the CPW but not all ways are equally effective. Managing a CPW, means managing complexity. The preferred way to manage complexity, is to reduce it. Reducing complexity can be done on a technical level and on an organizational level.
Managing complexity on a technical level
Reducing complexity on a technical level can be done by:
- Modular design
- Clearly identifying and defining interfaces between (sub)systems
- Using minimal specifications for the services and interfaces between (sub)systems
- Creating multipurpose, open in between-layers
- Utilizing open widely used technical standards
- Separating functions/services
- If unavoidable, proprietary brand based standardization
To summarize, we need to design the system to allow for continous, fast and easy updates, upgrades, adaptions, modifications, … in contrast with building something that will last unaltered for 100 years.
Managing complexity on an organizational level
The most frequent form of technical management of IWI uses an organizational structure based on two dimensions: by geographical location and by technological phase; construction and maintenance. This is rational for classic IWI. Coordination between geograpical location is easy, because of the very limited minimal waterway specifications. Coordination between technological phases is relatively easy aswell, because of supplier independency, ease of codification, long life cycles etc.
Given the characteristics of the CPW-system and its components, this strategy becomes problematic. Wether a CPW-component of a sub-system is placed locally or 100km further away, it should always be up to date and compatibel.
Therefore, for cyber-physical systems, organizational structure should be at least partely aligned with a divison into subsystems. Furthermore, procurement strategy for a subsystem should comprise and integrate implementation and maintenance.
Conclusion
Waterways are rapidly evolving towards complex systems. If not well managed, complex systems are vulnerable systems.
For successful technical management of the CPW, it does not suffice to optimize technology, nor does it suffice to optimize organization. Only by combining and syncing technology and organization strategy and adapting for specific technological characteristics, an effective and efficient CPW is possible.
Overall, we apply, expand and interprete Conway’s Law (1968, Conway): "Any organization that designs a system will inevitably produce a design whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure."
In conclusion; design your technical management the way you want your overall CPW-system design to be.