Frontiers Workshop
May 14, 2008  Atlanta
Digging up Dirt on SysML for
Modeling & Simulation Interoperability
Russell Peak and Chris Paredis
Georgia Tech
May 14, 2008
Frontiers Workshop  Atlanta
Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE)
Challenge Team Status Update
Mechatronics /
Modeling & Simulation Interoperability
Team Leaders
Russell Peak, Roger Burkhart, Sandy Friedenthal,
Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnis
Portions are Copyright © 2008 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.
Permission to reproduce and distribute without changes for non-commercial purposes (including internal corporate usage) is hereby granted provided this notice and a proper citation are included.
Collaboration Approach
Primary Current Team
• Deere & Co.
– Roger Burkhart
• Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT)
– Russell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnis, & co.
– Leveraging collaborations in
PSLM Center SysML Focus Area (see next slide)
• Lockheed Martin
– Sandy Friedenthal
Page 3
Contents
• Problem Description
– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systems
– Challenge Team Objectives
• Technical Approach
– Techniques and Testbeds
• Expected Deliverables & Outcomes
• Collaboration Approach
Page 5
Mechatronics Architecture
Software
Interface
• Displays
• User Controls
• Haptics
• Remote Links
• ...
• Functions
• Operating Modes
• State Machines
• Control Systems
• ...
• Modules, Libraries
• Messages
• Protocols
• Code
• ...
Actuators
Electronic
Control Unit
(ECU)
Sensors
Communications Bus
“Mechanical System”
• Kinematics & Dynamics
• Powertrain
• Thermal
• Fluids
• Electric Power
• ...
Electronics
Feedback Control Loop
Page 7
Mechatronics Product Categories
From Tamburini & Deren, PLM World ‘06
MBSE Challenge Team Objectives
Phase 1: 2007-2008
Overall Objectives
• Define & demonstrate capabilities
to achieve modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI)
• Phase 1 Scope
– Domain: Mechatronics
– Capabilities: Methodologies, tools, requirements,
and practical applications
– MSI subset: Connecting system specification & design models
with multiple engineering analysis & dynamic simulation models
• Test & demonstrate how SysML facilitates effective MSI
Objectives to date primarily based on projects in GIT PSLM Center
sponsored by industry and government—see backup slides.
Page 9
MBSE Challenge Team Objectives
Phase 1: 2007-2008
Specific Objectives
1. Define modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method
2. Define SysML and analysis tool requirements to support MSI
1. Provide feedback to vendors and OMG SysML 1.1 revision task force
3. Demonstrate MSI method with 3+ engineering analysis
and dynamic simulation model types
1. Include representative building block library: fluid power
2. Include hybrid discrete/continuous systems
described by differential algebraic equations (DAEs)
4. Develop roadmap beyond Phase 1
Page 10
Contents
• Problem Description
– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systems
– Challenge Team Objectives
• Technical Approach
– Techniques and Testbeds
• Expected Deliverables & Outcomes
• Collaboration Approach
Page 11
Overall Technical Approach
• Technique Development
– “Federated system model” framework technology
• A.k.a. collective product model
– Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method
– Graph transformation technology
– etc.
• Testbed Implementations & Execution
• Iteration
Page 12
Technical Approach—Subset
• Standards-based framework technology
– Federated system models
– Utilize SysML where appropriate (esp. parametrics)
• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method
– Harmonize, generalize, extend new & existing work
– COBs, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ...
• Testbeds
–
–
–
–
Develop and test techniques iteratively
Implement test cases for verification & validation
Produce reference examples
Produce open resources
(e.g., SysML-based fluid power libraries)
Page 13
Example Federated System Model
Logical composition of models based on various
ontologies/schemas (from native tools, standards, in-house)
P ro p u ls io n
F lu id D yn a m ic s
•
S ta n d a rd :
• S ta n d a rd :
CFD
• S o ftw a re • S ta tu s : In D e v e lo p m e n t
• B o e in g ,
S T E P -P R P
• S o ftw a re :• S ta tu s : In D e v e lo p m e n t
• ESA, EADS
E le c tric a l E n g in e e rin g
C a b lin g
•
•
S ta n d a rd :
AP210
• S o ftw a re M e n to r G ra p h ics
• S ta tu s : P ro to typ e d
• R o ckw e ll, B o e in g
S ta n d a rd :
AP212
• S o ftw a re M e n to rG ra p h ics
• S ta tu s : P ro to typ e d
• D a im le r-C h rysle r, P ro S T E P
S o ftw a re E n g in e e rin g
O p tic s
•
S ta n d a rd :
•
N O D IF
• S o ftw a re - T B D
• M in o lta , O lym p u s
S tru c tu ra l A n a lys is
•
S ta n d a rd :
•
M e c h a n ic a l E n g in ee rin g
AP209
S ta n d a rd :
S ta n d a rd :: U M L - (A P 2 3 3 in te rfa c e In
D e v e lo pm e n t)
• S o ftw a re : R a tio n a l R o se , A rgo , A ll-T o g e th e r
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• In d u stry-w id e
AP203, AP214
• S o ftw a re P ro -E , C a d d s, S o lidW o rks,
A u to C a d , S D R C ID E A S , U n ig ra p h ics,
o th e rs
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• A e ro sp a ce In d u stry W id e , A u to m o tiv e
In d u stry
S ys te m s E n g in e e rin g
•
PDM
T h e rm a l R a d ia tio n A n a lys is
S ta n d a rd :
•
S T E P -T A S
• S o ftw a re : T h e rm a l D e skto p , T R A S Y S
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• E S A /E S T E C , N A S A /JP L & L a n g e ly
S p a ce cra ft D e v e lo p m e n t
M a c h in in g
• S ta n d a rd ::
S T E P -N C /A P 2 2 4
•S o ftw a re :: G ib b s,
•S ta tu s :: In D e v e lo p m e n t / P ro to typ e d
•S T E P -T o o ls, B o e in g
Adapted from 2001-12-16 - Jim U’Ren, NASA-JPL
AP233
• S o ftw a re : S ta te m a te , D o o rs, M a trix -X ,
S la te , C o re , R T M
• S ta tu s : In d e v e lo p m e n t / P ro to typ e d
• BAE SYSTEM S, EAD S, N ASA
• S o ftw a re : M S C P a tra n , T h e rm a l
D e skto p
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• L o ckh e e d M a rtin , E le ctric B o a t
•
S ta n d a rd :
In s p e c tio n
•
S ta n d a rd :
AP219
• S o ftw a re : T e ch n o m a tics , B ro w n ,
e S h a rp
• S ta tu s : In D e v e lo p m e n t
• N IS T , C A T IA , B o e in g , C h rysle r, A IA G
S ta n d a rd :
S T E P P D M S c h em a /A P 2 3 2
• S o ftw a re : M e ta P h a se , W in dch ill, In syn c
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• L o ckh e e d M a rtin , E A D S , B A E S Y S T E M S ,
R a yth e o n
L ife -C yc le M a n a g em e n t
•
S ta n d a rd :
PLC S
• S o ftw a re : S A P
• S ta tu s : In D e v e lo p m e n t
• B A E S Y S T E M S , B o e in g , E u ro ste p
14
Model-Centric Framework
Produce, Merge, Enrich, Consume
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/journals/2004-jcise-peak/ (where “collective product model”  “federated system model”)
Producer Tools
(Primary Authoring)
Tool A1
...
Tool An
P ro p u ls io n
F lu id D yn a m ic s
•
S ta n d a rd :
• S ta n d a rd :
CFD
• S o ftw a re • S ta tu s : In D e v e lo p m e n t
• B o e in g ,
S T E P -P R P
• S o ftw a re :• S ta tu s : In D e v e lo p m e n t
• ESA, EADS
E le c tric a l E n g in e e rin g
C a b lin g
•
•
S ta n d a rd :
AP210
• S o ftw a re M e n to r G ra p h ics
• S ta tu s : P ro to typ e d
• R o ckw e ll, B o e in g
S ta n d a rd :
AP212
• S o ftw a re M e n to rG ra p h ics
• S ta tu s : P ro to typ e d
• D a im le r-C h rysle r, P ro S T E P
S o ftw a re E n g in e e rin g
O p tic s
•
S ta n d a rd :
S tru c tu ra l A n a lys is
•
S ta n d a rd :
•
M e c h a n ic a l E n g in ee rin g
•
N O D IF
• S o ftw a re - T B D
• M in o lta , O lym p u s
AP209
S ta n d a rd :
S ta n d a rd :: U M L - (A P 2 3 3 in te rfa c e In
D e v e lo pm e n t)
• S o ftw a re : R a tio n a l R o se , A rgo , A ll-T o g e th e r
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• In d u stry-w id e
AP203, AP214
• S o ftw a re P ro -E , C a d d s, S o lidW o rks,
A u to C a d , S D R C ID E A S , U n ig ra p h ics,
o th e rs
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• A e ro sp a ce In d u stry W id e , A u to m o tiv e
In d u stry
S ys te m s E n g in e e rin g
•
S ta n d a rd :
•
S T E P -T A S
• S o ftw a re : T h e rm a l D e skto p , T R A S Y S
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• E S A /E S T E C , N A S A /JP L & L a n g e ly
S p a ce cra ft D e v e lo p m e n t
M a c h in in g
• S ta n d a rd ::
S T E P -N C /A P 2 2 4
•S o ftw a re :: G ib b s,
•S ta tu s :: In D e v e lo p m e n t / P ro to typ e d
•S T E P -T o o ls, B o e in g
Enricher Tools
(Secondary Authoring)
AP233
PDM
T h e rm a l R a d ia tio n A n a lys is
•
S ta n d a rd :
• S o ftw a re : S ta te m a te , D o o rs, M a trix -X ,
S la te , C o re , R T M
• S ta tu s : In d e v e lo p m e n t / P ro to typ e d
• BAE SYSTEM S, EAD S, N ASA
• S o ftw a re : M S C P a tra n , T h e rm a l
D e skto p
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• L o ckh e e d M a rtin , E le ctric B o a t
In s p e c tio n
•
S ta n d a rd :
AP219
• S o ftw a re : T e ch n o m a tics , B ro w n ,
e S h a rp
• S ta tu s : In D e v e lo p m e n t
• N IS T , C A T IA , B o e in g , C h rysle r, A IA G
S ta n d a rd :
S T E P P D M S c h em a /A P 2 3 2
• S o ftw a re : M e ta P h a se , W in dch ill, In syn c
• S ta tu s : In P ro d u ctio n
• L o ckh e e d M a rtin , E A D S , B A E S Y S T E M S ,
R a yth e o n
L ife -C yc le M a n a g em e n t
•
S ta n d a rd :
PLC S
• S o ftw a re : S A P
• S ta tu s : In D e v e lo p m e n t
• B A E S Y S T E M S , B o e in g , E u ro ste p
Federated System Model
Tool Bj
Consumer Tools
(e.g., Solvers)
Tool Ck
Meta-Building Blocks:
• Information models & meta-models
• International standards
• Industry specs
• Corporate standards
• Local customizations
• Modeling technologies:
• Express, UML, SysML,
COBs, OWL, XML, …
15
Technical Approach—Subset
• Standards-based framework technology
– Federated system models
– Utilize SysML where appropriate (esp. parametrics)
• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method
– Harmonize, generalize, extend new & existing work
– COBs/SysML, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ...
• Testbeds
–
–
–
–
Develop and test techniques iteratively
Implement test cases for verification & validation
Produce reference examples
Produce open resources
(e.g., SysML-based fluid power libraries)
Page 17
The Four Pillars of SysML
1. Structure
2. Behavior
interaction
state
machine
activity/
function
definition
use
3. Requirements
4. Parametrics
Page 18
“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysML
Level 1: Intra-Template Diversity
par [cbam] LinkagePlaneStressModel [Definition view]
L
B
s
ts1
ts2
red = idealized parameter
rib1
ds1
shaft
rib2
sleeve1
sleeve2
B
soi: Linkage
ds2
Leff
effectiveLength:
deformationModel:
LinkagePlaneStressAbb
sleeve1:
width:
Mechanical
CAD model
CAE model
(FEA)
l:
wallThickness:
ws1:
outerRadius:
ts1:
rs1:
sleeve2:
ws2:
width:
ts2:
wallThickness:
rs2:
outerRadius:
tf:
wf:
shaft:
tw:
ex:
criticalCrossSection:
uxMax:
nuxy:
basicIsection:
sxMax:
force:
flangeThickness:
flangeWidth:
webThickness:
condition: Condition
material:
reaction:
name:
mechanicalBehaviorModels:
description:
sxMosModel:
MarginOfSafetyModel
linearElastic:
youngsModulus:
determined:
allowable:
marginOfSafety:
poissonsRatio:
yieldStress:
Symbolic
math models
uxMosModel:
MarginOfSafetyModel
determined:
allowableInterAxisLengthChange:
allowable:
marginOfSafety:
[Peak et. al 2007]
19
“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysML
Level 2: Inter-Template Diversity (per HMX 0.1)
Naval Systems-of-Systems (SoS) Panorama—An Envisioned Complex Model Interoperability Problem Enabled by SysML/COBs/HMX
c2. Optimization Templates
a0. Descriptive
Resources
d0. Simulation
Building Blocks
ECAD & MCAD Tools
Tribon, CATIA, NX, Cadence, ...
c0. Context-Specific Models
c1. Simulation Templates
(of diverse behavior & fidelity)
2D
General Math
Mathematica,
Maple, Matlab,…
…
CFD
Flotherm, Fluent, …
3D
…
Damaged
Stability
Classification Codes, Materials,
Personnel, Procedures, …
e0. Solver
Resources
Evacuation Codes
Egress, Exodus, …
Operation Mgt. Systems
Libraries & Databases
Parametric associativity
Tool & native model associativity
Composition relationship (re-usage)
Evacuation
Mgt.
Propeller
Hydrodynamics
Systems & Software Tools
DOORS, E+
MagicDraw,
Studio,
Eclipse, …
Legend
Based on HMX 0.1
2008-02-20
b0. Federated
Descriptive Models
Navigation
Accuracy
FEA
Abaqus, Ansys,
Patran, Nastran, …
Discrete Event
Arena, Quest, …
21
Technical Approach—Subset
• Standards-based framework technology
– Federated system models
– Utilize SysML where appropriate (esp. parametrics)
• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method
– Harmonize, generalize, extend new & existing work
– COBs, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ...
• Testbeds
–
–
–
–
Develop and test techniques iteratively
Implement test cases for verification & validation
Produce reference examples
Produce open resources
(e.g., SysML-based fluid power libraries)
Page 22
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
RSA/E+ / SysML
Factory
Model
No Magic / SysML
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
System Model
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Optimization
Model
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
Mathematica
FEA Model
Reliability
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Dymola
Cost Model
Dig Cycle
Model
Excel
Production
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
23
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per HMX 0.1)
MCAD Tools
NX
d0. Simulation Building Block
Libraries
Cost
Concepts
Optimization
Concepts
Reliability
Concepts
Solid
Mechanics
Queuing
Concepts
Fluid
Mechanics
Data Mgt. Tools
c0. Context-Specific
Simulation Models
Excavator Sys-Level Models
Optimization Model
Objective
Function
Cost
Model
Excel
b0. Federated
Descriptive Models
Excavator Domain Models
e0. Solver Resources
Optimizers
ModelCenter
Generic Math Solvers
Reliability
Model
Excel
Dig Cycle
Model
Mathematica
Federated Excavator Model
System & Req Tools
RSD/E+
...
MagicDraw
Operations
Req. &
Objectives
Boom Linkage Models
Boom
Extensional
Linkage Model
Linkages
Dump Trucks
Sys Dynamics Solvers
Stress/Deformation Models
Plane Stress
Linkage Model
Dymola
FEA Solvers
Ansys
Factory Domain Models
Federated Factory Model
Factory CAD Tools
FactoryCAD
Req. &
Objectives
Excavator
MBOM
Assembly Lines
AGVs
Buffers
Work Cells
Machines
Boom Mfg. Assembly Models
Assembly Process Models
MM1 Queuing
Assy Model
Discrete Event
Assy Model
Discrete Event Solvers
(Specialized)
eM-Plant /
Factory Flow
Legend
Tool & native model interface (via XaiTools, APIs, ...)
Parametric or algorithmic relationship (XaiTools, VIATRA, ...)
Composition relationship (usage)
Native model relationship (via tool interface, stds., ...)
Dig Site
Hydraulics
Subsystem
Notes
1) The pattern names and identifiers used here conform to HMX 0.1 — a method
under development for generalized system-simulation interoperability (SSI).
2) All models shown are SysML models unless otherwise noted.
3) Infrastructure and middleware tools are also present (but not shown) --e.g.,
PLM, CM, parametric graph managers (XaiTools etc.), repositories, etc.
a0. Descriptive Resources
(Authoring Tools, ...)
2008-02-20
24
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View
[WIP models]
RSA/E+ / SysML
Factory
Model
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysML
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
System Model
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Optimization
Model
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
Mathematica
FEA Model
Reliability
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Dymola
Cost Model
Dig Cycle
Model
Excel
Production
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
26
Excavator Test Case
Top-Level System Breakdown
27
Excavator Operational Domain
Top-Level Context Model
28
Excavator Operational Domain
Top-Level Use Cases
29
Excavator Dig Cycle
Activity Diagram
30
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
RSA/E+ / SysML
Factory
Model
No Magic / SysML
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
System Model
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Optimization
Model
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
Mathematica
FEA Model
Reliability
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Dymola
Cost Model
Dig Cycle
Model
Excel
Production
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
31
Hydraulic Circuit Diagram
Pressure-Compensated, Load-Sensing Excavator—ISO 1219 notation
Mechanical
Interface
Mechanical
Interface
Mechanical
Interface
Engineering
Schematic
Mechanical
Interface
LS
34
SysML Schematic (ibd) — Basic View
Pressure-Compensated, Load-Sensing Excavator
Mechanical
Interface
Mechanical
Interface
Mechanical
Interface
Engineering
Schematic
Mechanical
Interface
LS
35
SysML Schematic (ibd) — Detailed View
Pressure-Compensated, Load-Sensing Excavator
ibd [Block] Simple Excavator [Hydraulic System Hxx]
Ref: Doc
Exx
[Electrical
System]
Ref: Doc Mxx
[Mechanical
System]
: Diesel Engine
pn: Cummins242
ElecJunction.a
MechJunction.b
FluidJunction.c
MechJunction.s
A1: Actuator
A2: Actuator
M1: Motor
pn: DBL21
MechJunction.r
FluidJunction.a
FluidJunction.b
pn: DBL21
MechJunction.r
FluidJunction.a
FluidJunction.b
pn: DBL21
MechJunction.r
FluidJunction.a
FluidJunction.b
A1: Servo Valve 5/3
A2: Servo Valve 5/3
M1: Servo Valve 5/3
pn: sv1
pn: sv1
pn: sv1
FluidJunction.5
FluidJunction.4
FluidJunction.2
FluidJunction.1
FluidJunction.3
: Pressure Relief Valve
FluidJunction.1
FluidJunction.2
FluidJunction.5
FluidJunction.4
FluidJunction.2
FluidJunction.1
FluidJunction.3
FluidJunction.5
FluidJunction.4
FluidJunction.2
FluidJunction.1
FluidJunction.3
: Air Separator
pn: AS1
FluidJunction
: FD Pump
A1: Check Valve
A2: Check Valve
M1: Check Valve
pn: CHK1
FluidJunction.2
FluidJunction.1
pn: CHK1
FluidJunction.2
FluidJunction.1
pn: CHK1
FluidJunction.2
FluidJunction.1
pn: AXD
FluidJunction.p
FluidJunction.t
MechJunction.s
pn: TNK-2
: Vented Reservoir
FluidJunction.t
FluidJunction.t
Vendor
or Inhouse
PN
Can use a
specific name for
usage in the
schematic, if like
parts exist
2B: Rubber Hose
Mechanical
Interface
: Heat Exchanger
pn: HXB-3
FluidJunction.h
FluidJunction.c
: Thermostatic Control
Valve
pn: STAT3A
FluidJunction.1
FluidJunction.2
Mechanical
Interface
Engineering
Schematic
FluidJunction.b : Filter
pn: Hose1
FluidJunction
FluidJunction
Mechanical
Interface
pn: Fil1b5
FluidJunction.a
Mechanical
Interface
LS
36
Excavator Case Study
ArmCylR... BucketC...
c...
BucketC...
c...
a b1_l b
r={.655,....
Carriage
b
a
r={-0.164,1....
BucketCyl
sw ingComma...
B
B
bra...
B
bC...
m=...
Base
r={...
n={0,...
in...
Sw
ArmCyl
B
BoomCylL
a Arm b
r={3.654,...
aArm2 b
r={2.97,0....
n={...
Bu...
n_a={...
JointR...
Boo...
S...
brake
boomCommand
Mechanical model of complete...
frame_...
BoomCyl...
BoomCylR
Buc...
m=...
BoomCyl...
cyl3f
p10
r={.52...
Sw ingMotor
n={...
Ar...
bArm
n={...
Bo...
m=...
Boom
a
b
r={7.11,0,0}
b2_r
a
b
r={2.85,1....
aArm1b
r={0.49...
a b4y b
r={0,.21...
BoomCyl...
ArmCylB...
cyl1...
ab1_r b
r={.655,....
BoomCyl...
Sw ingFl...
r={-.92...
a b3 b
r={2.85,1.18,... r={4.22,1.3...
a
b
b b2_l a
cyl2f b4x
bB...
Boo...
Arm...
cyl1_l
Hydraulics Model
B...
B...
m=50
c...
c...
bB...
Native Tool Models: Modelica
c...
c...
Multi-Body System Dynamics Model
(linkages, ...)
armCommand
LS B
P
T
LS B
P
LS B
T
P
T
LS B
P
T
LS B
P
accumulator
constantSpeed
max
ma...
max2
ma...
ma...
max3
ma...
circuitTank
pclsPump
bucketCommand
Dig Cycle
hydraulics
B
max1
T
environment
y
world
p_amb = 101325
T_amb = 288.15
x
37
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
RSA/E+ / SysML
Factory
Model
No Magic / SysML
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
System Model
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Optimization
Model
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
Mathematica
FEA Model
Reliability
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Dymola
Cost Model
Dig Cycle
Model
Excel
Production
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
40
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Environment
GIT Testbed: MSI Pattern View (Interoperability Panorama per HMX 0.1)
MCAD Tools
NX
d0. Simulation Building Block
Libraries
Cost
Concepts
Optimization
Concepts
Reliability
Concepts
Solid
Mechanics
Queuing
Concepts
Fluid
Mechanics
Data Mgt. Tools
c0. Context-Specific
Simulation Models
Excavator Sys-Level Models
Optimization Model
Objective
Function
Cost
Model
Excel
b0. Federated
Descriptive Models
Excavator Domain Models
e0. Solver Resources
Optimizers
ModelCenter
Generic Math Solvers
Reliability
Model
Excel
Dig Cycle
Model
Mathematica
Federated Excavator Model
System & Req Tools
RSD/E+
...
MagicDraw
Operations
Req. &
Objectives
Boom Linkage Models
Boom
Extensional
Linkage Model
Linkages
Dump Trucks
Sys Dynamics Solvers
Stress/Deformation Models
Plane Stress
Linkage Model
Dymola
FEA Solvers
Ansys
Factory Domain Models
Federated Factory Model
Factory CAD Tools
FactoryCAD
Req. &
Objectives
Excavator
MBOM
Assembly Lines
AGVs
Buffers
Work Cells
Machines
Boom Mfg. Assembly Models
Assembly Process Models
MM1 Queuing
Assy Model
Discrete Event
Assy Model
Discrete Event Solvers
(Specialized)
eM-Plant /
Factory Flow
Legend
Tool & native model interface (via XaiTools, APIs, ...)
Parametric or algorithmic relationship (XaiTools, VIATRA, ...)
Composition relationship (usage)
Native model relationship (via tool interface, stds., ...)
Dig Site
Hydraulics
Subsystem
Notes
1) The pattern names and identifiers used here conform to HMX 0.1 — a method
under development for generalized system-simulation interoperability (SSI).
2) All models shown are SysML models unless otherwise noted.
3) Infrastructure and middleware tools are also present (but not shown) --e.g.,
PLM, CM, parametric graph managers (XaiTools etc.), repositories, etc.
a0. Descriptive Resources
(Authoring Tools, ...)
2008-02-20
41
Factory & Manufacturing Process
Modeling & Simulation Using SysML
[McGinnis et al. 2007]
SysML State Diagram
SysML Sequence
Diagram
XML Parser
Discrete Event Simulation
42
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
RSA/E+ / SysML
Factory
Model
No Magic / SysML
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
System Model
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Optimization
Model
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
Mathematica
FEA Model
Reliability
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Dymola
Cost Model
Dig Cycle
Model
Excel
Production
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
45
MCAD-SysML Interface Scenarios
UGS/Siemens NX
RSD/E+
SysML Model
SysML Model Import
User SysML Model
Manipulation
par [cbam] LinkagePlaneStressModel [Definition view]
L
B
s
ts1
ts2
red = idealized parameter
rib1
ds1
shaft
rib2
sleeve1
sleeve2
B
soi: Linkage
ds2
Leff
effectiveLength:
deformationModel:
LinkagePlaneStressAbb
sleeve1:
width:
l:
wallThickness:
ws1:
outerRadius:
ts1:
rs1:
sleeve2:
par [cbam] LinkageExtensionalModel_800240 [Instance view: state 1.0 - unsolved]
width:
ts2:
soi: FlapLinkage_XYZ-510
wallThickness:
outerRadius:
tf:
totalElongation:
area:
tw:
criticalCrossSection:
length:
ex:
criticalCrossSection:
basic:
uxMax:
nuxy:
basicIsection:
area:
in^2 = 1.125
materialModel:
sxMax:
force:
normalStress:
flangeThickness:
youngsModulus:
totalStrain:
flangeWidth:
material: Steel1020HR
condition:
name:
= “1020 hot-rolled steel”
webThickness:
mechanicalBehaviorModels:
condition: Condition
reaction:
lbs = 10000
description:
= “flaps mid position”
force:
linearElastic:
material:
Model Changes
Propagate to CAD Tool
undeformedLength:
wf:
shaft:
Parametrics
Execution
deformationModel:
rs2:
effectiveLength: in = 5.00
shaft:
Simulation
Execution*
ws2:
name:
youngsModulus:
description:
psi = 30e6
mechanicalBehaviorModels:
linearElastic:
youngsModulus:
reaction:
stressMosModel:
determined:
yieldStress:
psi = 18000
sxMosModel:
MarginOfSafetyModel
allowable:
marginOfSafety:
=?
allowable:
determined:
marginOfSafety:
poissonsRatio:
yieldStress:
uxMosModel:
MarginOfSafetyModel
determined:
allowableInterAxisLengthChange:
allowable:
marginOfSafety:
XaiTools COB Services
Georgia Tech XaiTools™
Engineering
Analysis Models
* = work-in-process
46
MCAD Native Model and Tool UIs
UGS/Siemens NX
47
MCAD Model (Subset) in SysML
RSD/E+
48
Interfacing Spreadsheets
with SysML Parametrics
49
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
RSA/E+ / SysML
Factory
Model
No Magic / SysML
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
System Model
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Optimization
Model
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
Mathematica
FEA Model
Reliability
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Dymola
Cost Model
Dig Cycle
Model
Excel
Production
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
50
Enabling Executable SysML Parametrics
Commercialization by InterCAX LLC in Georgia Tech VentureLab incubator program
Advanced technology for graph management and solver access via web services.
COB Solving & Browsing
Plugins Prototyped by GIT
(to SysML vendor tools)
1) Artisan Studio [2/06]
2) EmbeddedPlus [3/07]
3) NoMagic [12/07]
NextGeneration
Spreadsheet
Parametrics plugin
COB Services (constraint graph manager, including COTS solver access via web services)
Composable Objects (COBs)
...
Native Tools Models
COTS =
commercial-off-the-shelf
(typically readily available)
...
Ansys
(FEA Solver)
L 
...
FL
EA
   TL
Mathematica
(Math Solver)
XaiTools FrameWork™
2008-05 Status
- Examples working from
IS07 Parts 1 & 2 papers
- Multiple new tutorials:
UAVs, finances, insurance
claims, comm systems, ...
- Commercialization
beta releases soon
COB API
Execution via
API messages
or exchange files
XaiTools SysML Toolkit™
SysML Authoring Tools
Traditional COTS or
in-house solvers
58
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
RSA/E+ / SysML
Factory
Model
No Magic / SysML
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
System Model
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Optimization
Model
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
Mathematica
FEA Model
Reliability
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Dymola
Cost Model
Dig Cycle
Model
Excel
Production
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
59
Recurring Problem:
Maintaining Multiple Views
• Multiple
stakeholders
with different
views and tools
• Models of
different system
aspects
• Different views
are not
independent
System
Design
Model
Aspect
A
Models
Aspect
B
Models
60
Approach: Graph Transformations
• Recent developments in Model-Driven
Engineering
• Tools for Model and Graph Transformations
– Viatra
– GME/GReAT
– Fujaba
– MOFLON
– MoTMoT
– Kermeta
61
Capture Knowledge in
Domain-Specific Modeling Languages
Example:
Modelica meta-model
for continuous dynamics
modelicaImport
composition
extends
class
type
modelicaConnector
modelicaType
component
modelicaPackage
unitAssn
equation
eqnAssn
modelicaUnit
componentRef
size
modelicaParameter
arraySize
connectClause
initialEquation
62
Example: Integrating SysML and Modelica
• Create meta-models
• Create graphs of correspondence between
meta-models
– The Triple Graph Grammar (TGG)
• Define transformation rules from SysML to
Modelica and vice-versa
• Enables execution of SysML CD models
• Enables integration of abstracted Modelica
models into SysML
63
Transformations with the Triple Graph Grammar
Correspondence Metamodel
SysML Graph Patterns
Modelica Graph Patterns
blockR
block
classR
block2class
blockR
block
class
connectorR
block2connector
connector
type
endAssn
part
connector
partR
part
componentR
part2component
connectorR
connector
component
connectClauseR
connector2connectClause
connectClause
64
Transformations with the Triple Graph Grammar
1. Import SysML model
2. Search for precondition patterns
SysML Continuous
Dynamics Model
3. Create correspondence entities
Transformation Environment
SysML
Graph
Model
SysML
Correspondence
Relation
Correspondence
Model
Modelica
Correspondence
Relation
4. Create Modelica entities and relations
5. Create correspondence relations
6. Export Modelica model
Modelica
Graph
Model
Modelica
Analysis
Model
65
Implementation in RSD/Eclipse
• Created Java
software that …
– Queries Embedded
Plus (E+) SysML CD
model
– Transforms model in
VIATRA2 framework
– Generates Modelica
code & simulates in
Dymola
Embedded Plus SysML
Modeling Environment
Dymola / MDT
Simulation
Results
SysML Simulation
Model
Load/Simulate
Modelica
Model
Simulation
Characteristics
SysML
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Modelica
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Import SysML Model
Export Modelica Model
VIATRA Transformation Framework
SysML2Modelica
Graph Transformation
Machine
VIATRA
SysML
Representation
SysML-Modelica
Correspondence
Model
VIATRA
Modelica
Representation
66
Implementation in RSD/Eclipse
• Created Java
software that …
– Queries Embedded
Plus (E+) SysML CD
model
– Transforms model in
VIATRA framework
– Generates Modelica
code & simulates in
Dymola
Embedded Plus SysML
Modeling Environment
Dymola / MDT
Simulation
Results
SysML Simulation
Model
Load/Simulate
Modelica
Model
Simulation
Characteristics
SysML
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Modelica
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Import SysML Model
Export Modelica Model
VIATRA Transformation Framework
SysML2Modelica
Graph Transformation
Machine
VIATRA
SysML
Representation
SysML-Modelica
Correspondence
Model
VIATRA
Modelica
Representation
67
Implementation in RSD/Eclipse
• Created Java
software that …
– Queries Embedded
Plus (E+) SysML CD
model
– Transforms model in
VIATRA framework
– Generates Modelica
code & simulates in
Dymola
Embedded Plus SysML
Modeling Environment
Dymola / MDT
Simulation
Results
SysML Simulation
Model
Load/Simulate
Modelica
Model
Simulation
Characteristics
SysML
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Modelica
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Import SysML Model
Export Modelica Model
VIATRA Transformation Framework
SysML2Modelica
Graph Transformation
Machine
VIATRA
SysML
Representation
SysML-Modelica
Correspondence
Model
VIATRA
Modelica
Representation
68
Implementation in RSD/Eclipse
• Created Java
software that …
– Queries Embedded
Plus (E+) SysML CD
model
– Transforms model in
VIATRA framework
– Generates Modelica
code & simulates in
Dymola
Embedded Plus SysML
Modeling Environment
Dymola / MDT
Simulation
Results
SysML Simulation
Model
Load/Simulate
Modelica
Model
Simulation
Characteristics
SysML
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Modelica
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Import SysML Model
Export Modelica Model
VIATRA Transformation Framework
SysML2Modelica
Graph Transformation
Machine
VIATRA
SysML
Representation
SysML-Modelica
Correspondence
Model
VIATRA
Modelica
Representation
70
Implementation in RSD/Eclipse
• Created Java
software that …
– Queries Embedded
Plus (E+) SysML CD
model
– Transforms model in
VIATRA framework
– Generates Modelica
code & simulates in
Dymola
Embedded Plus SysML
Modeling Environment
Dymola / MDT
Simulation
Results
SysML Simulation
Model
Load/Simulate
Modelica
Model
Simulation
Characteristics
SysML
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Modelica
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Import SysML Model
Export Modelica Model
VIATRA Transformation Framework
SysML2Modelica
Graph Transformation
Machine
VIATRA
SysML
Representation
SysML-Modelica
Correspondence
Model
VIATRA
Modelica
Representation
71
Implementation in RSD/Eclipse
• Created Java
software that …
– Queries Embedded
Plus (E+) SysML CD
model
– Transforms model in
VIATRA framework
– Generates Modelica
code & simulates in
Dymola
Embedded Plus SysML
Modeling Environment
Dymola / MDT
Simulation
Results
SysML Simulation
Model
Load/Simulate
Modelica
Model
Simulation
Characteristics
SysML
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Modelica
Continuous
Dynamics Model
Import SysML Model
Export Modelica Model
VIATRA Transformation Framework
SysML2Modelica
Graph Transformation
Machine
VIATRA
SysML
Representation
SysML-Modelica
Correspondence
Model
VIATRA
Modelica
Representation
72
Capturing Domain Specific Knowledge
in Graph Transformations
Requirements &
Objectives
system
alternative
SysML
ibd [Block] Hydraulic_Subsystem[ Schematic ]
pump : FDpump
discharge : FlowPort
inputShaft : FlowPort
pump-to-valve : Line
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
housing : FlowPort
valve : 4port3wayServoValve
suction : FlowPort
portP : FlowPort
portT : FlowPort
tank-to-pump : Line
Topology Generation using Graph Transf
a : FlowPort
cylB : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
cylA : FlowPort
tank : Tank
System
Alternatives
sump : FlowPort
valve-to-cylP1 : Line
MAsCoMs SysML
return : FlowPort
a : FlowPort
valve-to-filter : Line
filter-to-tank : Line
b : FlowPort
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
valve-to-cylP2 : Line
a : FlowPort
a : FlowPort
Model Composition using Graph Transf
filter : Filter
b : FlowPort
in : FlowPort
out : FlowPort
actuator : Double-ActingCylinder
System Behavior
SysML
Models
Model Translation using Graph Transf
Executable
Simulations
housing : FlowPort
Dig
Cycle
Traj
rod : FlowPort
Sw ing
Boom
b : FlowPort
a : FlowPort
hydraulics
Arm
Bucket
behavior
model
y
simulation
configuration
world
x
Dymola
Simulation Configuration using Graph Transf
Design
Optimization
ModelCenter
73
Graph Transformations for Systems Design
• Capture complex knowledge
– Language mappings
– Abstractions and idealizations
– Analysis patterns
– Synthesis patterns
– Workflow
• Intuitive graphical formalism
• Powerful tools are maturing
74
Contents
• Problem Description
– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systems
– Challenge Team Objectives
• Technical Approach
– Techniques and Testbeds
• Expected Deliverables & Outcomes
• Collaboration Approach
Page 75
Expected Deliverables &
Outcomes—Phase 1
• Solution and supporting models
– Excavator test case models, test suites, …
• MBSE practices used
– Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method, …
• Model interchange capabilities
– Tests between SysML tools, CAD/CAE tools, …
• MBSE metrics/value
– See next slide (candidate metrics)
• MBSE findings, issues, & recommendations
– Issue submissions to OMG and vendors, publications, …
• Training material
– Examples, tutorials, …
• Plan forward
Page 76
Integrated System Design and Analysis Models
Primary Impacts
Enabling Capabilities
Increased Knowledge
Capture & Completeness
Increased
Modularity & Reusability
Increased
Traceability
Reduced
Manual Re-Creation
Increased
& Data Entry Errors
Automation
Reduced
Modeling Effort
Increased
Analysis Intensity
Reduced
Time
Reduced
Cost
Reduced
Risk
Increased
Understanding
Increased
Corporate Memory
Increased Artifact
Performance
Anticipated Benefits of SysML-based Template Approach
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Precision Information
for the
Model-Based Enterprise
■
■
77
Contents
• Problem Description
– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systems
– Challenge Team Objectives
• Technical Approach
– Techniques and Testbeds
• Expected Deliverables & Outcomes
• Collaboration Approach
Page 79
MBSE Challenge—Mechatronics
Open “Call for Participation”
• Systems engineering drivers in commercial settings
– Increased system complexity
– Cross-disciplinary communication/coordination
• Enhancement possibilities based on interest
– Demonstration examples and testbeds
– Shared models and libraries
– Interoperability of tools & frameworks
• Contacts
– Russell Peak [Russell.Peak @ gatech.edu]
– Roger Burkhart [BurkhartRogerM @ JohnDeere.com]
– Sandy Friedenthal [sanford.friedenthal @ lmco.com]
Page 80
Backup Slides
SysML-Related Efforts at Georgia Tech
• SysML Focus Area web page
– http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/
– Includes links to publications, applications,
projects, examples, etc.
• Selected projects
–
–
–
–
–
Deere: System dynamics (fluid power, ...)
Lockheed: System design & analysis integration
NASA: Enabling technology (SysML, ...)
NIST: Design-analysis interoperability (DAI)
TRW Automotive: DAI/FEA (steering wheel systems ... )
82
Selected GIT SysML-Related Publications
• McGinnis, Leon F., "IC Factory Design: The Next Generation," e-Manufacturing Symposium, Taipei, Taiwan, June 13, 2007. [Presents the concept of
model-based fab design, and how SysML can enable integrated simulation]
• Kwon, Ky Sang, and Leon F. McGinnis, "SysML-based Simulation Framework for Semiconductor Manufacturing," IEEE CASE Conference,
Scottsdale, AZ, September 22-25, 2007. [Presents some technical details on the use of SysML to create formal generic models (user libraries) of fab
structure, and how these formal models can be combined with currently available data sources to automatically generate simulation models.]
• Huang, Edward, Ramamurthy, Randeep, and Leon F. McGinnis, "System and Simulation Modeling Using SysML," 2007 Winter Simulation
Conference, Washington, DC. [Presents some technical details on the use of SysML to create formal generic models (user libraries) of fab structure,
and how these formal models can be combined with currently available data sources to automatically generate simulation models.]
• McGinnis, Leon F., Edward Huang, Ky Sang Kwon, Randeep Ramamurthy, Kan Wu, "Real CAD for Facilities," 2007 IERC, Nashville, TN. [Presents
concept of using FactoryCAD as a layout authoring tool and integrating it, via SysML with eM-Plant for automated fab simulation model generation.]
• T.A. Johnson, J.M. Jobe, C.J.J. Paredis, and R. Burkhart "Modeling Continuous System Dynamics in SysML," in Proceedings of the 2007 ASME
International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, paper no. IMECE2007-42754, Seattle, WA, November 11-15, 2007. [Describes how
continuous dynamics models can be represented in SysML. The approach is based on the continuous dynamics language Modelica.]
• T.A. Johnson, C.J.J. Paredis, and R. Burkhart "Integrating Models and Simulations of Continuous Dynamics into SysML," in Proceedings of the 6th
International Modelica Conference, March 3-4, 2008. [Describes how continuous dynamics models and simulations can be used in the context of
engineering systems design within SysML. The design of a car suspension modeled as a mass-spring-damper system is used as an illustration.]
• C.J.J. Paredis "Research in Systems Design: Designing the Design Process," IDETC/CIE 2007, Computers and Information in Engineering
Conference -- Workshop on Model-Based Systems Development, Las Vegas, NV, September 4, 2007. [Presents relationship between SysML and the
multi-aspect component model method.]
• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML—Part 1: A Parametrics Primer.
INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego. [Provides tutorial-like introduction to SysML parametrics.]
• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML—Part 2: Celebrating Diversity by
Example. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego. [Provides tutorial-like introduction on using SysML for modeling & simulation, including the MRA
method for creating parametric simulation templates that are connected to design models.]
• Peak RS (2007) Leveraging Templates & Processes with SysML. Invited Presentation. Developing a Design/Simulation Framework: A Workshop with
CPDA's Design and Simulation Council, Atlanta. http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/ [Includes applications to automotive
steering wheel systems and FEA simulation templates.]
• Bajaj M, Peak RS, Paredis CJJ (2007) Knowledge Composition for Efficient Analysis Problem Formulation, Part 1: Motivation and Requirements.
DETC2007-35049, Proc ASME CIE Intl Conf, Las Vegas. [Introduces the knowledge composition method (KCM), which addresses design-simulation
integration for variable topology problems.]
• Bajaj M, Peak RS, Paredis CJJ (2007) Knowledge Composition for Efficient Analysis Problem Formulation, Part 2: Approach and Analysis MetaModel. DETC2007-35050, Proc ASME CIE Intl Conf, Las Vegas. [Elaborates on the KCM approach, including work towards next-generation
analysis/simulation building blocks (ABBs/SBBs).]
83
Composable Objects (COB) Requirements & Objectives
Abstract
This document formulates a vision for advanced collaborative engineering environments (CEEs) to aid in the design,
simulation and configuration management of complex engineering systems. Based on inputs from experienced Systems
Engineers and technologists from various industries and government agencies, it identifies the current major challenges
and pain points of Collaborative Engineering. Each of these challenges and pain points are mapped into desired
capabilities of an envisioned CEE System that will address them.
Next, we present a CEE methodology that embodies these capabilities. We overview work done to date by GIT on the
composable object (COB) knowledge representation as a basis for next-generation CEE systems. This methodology
leverages the multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates, the user-oriented SysML standard for
system modeling, and standards like STEP AP233 (ISO 10303-233) for enhanced interoperability. Finally, we present
COB representation requirements in the context of this CEE methodology. In this current project and subsequent phases
we are striving to fulfill these requirements as we develop next-generation COB capabilities.
Citation
DR Tamburini, RS Peak, CJ Paredis, et al. (2005) Composable Objects (COB) Requirements & Objectives v1.0.
Technical Report, Georgia Tech, Atlanta. http://eislab.gatech.edu/projects/nasa-ngcobs/.
Associated Project
The Composable Object (COB) Knowledge Representation: Enabling Advanced Collaborative Engineering Environments
(CEEs). http://eislab.gatech.edu/projects/nasa-ngcobs/.
84
Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysML
Applications to CAD-FEA Interoperability
Abstract
SysML holds the promise of leveraging generic templates and processes across design and simulation. Russell Peak
joins us to give an update on the latest efforts at Georgia Tech to apply this approach in various domains, including
specific examples with a top-tier automotive supplier. Learn how you too may join this project and implement a similar
effort within your own company to enhance modularity and reusability through a unified method that links diverse models.
Russell will also highlight SysML’s parametrics capabilities and usage for physics-based analysis, including integrated
CAD-CAE and simulation-based requirements verification. Go to www.omgsysml.org for background on SysML—a
graphical modeling language based on UML2 for specifying, designing, analyzing, and verifying complex systems.
Speaker Biosketch
Russell S. Peak focuses on knowledge representations that enable complex system interoperability and simulation
automation. He originated composable objects (COBs), the multi-representation architecture (MRA) for CAD-CAE
interoperability, and context-based analysis models (CBAMs)—a simulation template knowledge pattern that explicitly
captures design-analysis associativity. This work has provided the conceptual foundation for SysML parametrics and its
validation.
He teaches this and related material, and is principal investigator on numerous research projects with sponsors
including Boeing, DoD, IBM, NASA, NIST, Rockwell Collins, Shinko Electric, and TRW Automotive. Dr. Peak joined the
GIT research faculty in 1996 to create and lead a design-analysis interoperability thrust area. Prior experience includes
business phone design at Bell Laboratories and design-analysis integration exploration as a Visiting Researcher at
Hitachi in Japan.
Citation
RS Peak (2007) Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysML: Applications to CAD-FEA Interoperability.
Developing a Design/Simulation Framework, CPDA Workshop, Atlanta.
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/
85
Mechatronics Definition
“The synergistic combination of mechanical, electronic, and
software engineering” (Wikipedia)
System
Modeling
Mechanics
Electronics
Sensors
Electromechanics
CAD/CAM
Control
Circuits
Mechatronics
Digital Control
Simulation
Software
Control
Micro-controllers
From Tamburini & Deren, PLM World ’06
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2006-plm-world-tamburini/
Page 86
Mechatronics—Open Technology
for Modeling & Frameworks
Systems
Mechanics
• SysML
• STEP AP233
• Open Modelica
• Domain-specific models
• MCAD/CAE
• STEP AP203/214/209 ...
• Part & subsystem models
...
Software
• UML 2
• Real-time middleware
• Communication protocols
• Programming languages & libraries
• Code generators
• IDEs (Eclipse, ...)
...
...
Electronics
• ECAD/CAE
• STEP AP210
• Component models
...
Not shown: Cross-cutting infrastructure (PLM, CM, ...)
Page 87
Modelica Multi-Discipline Models
Page 88
Descargar

Document