MBSE Using SysML Part 1 Peak
Click here to load reader
-
Upload
scientificstuff -
Category
Documents
-
view
254 -
download
2
Transcript of MBSE Using SysML Part 1 Peak
NDIA M&S Committee Meeting April 22, 2009 Arlington, Virginia
ModelModel--Based SE Using SysMLBased SE Using SysMLModelModel Based SE Using SysMLBased SE Using SysMLPart 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&SPart 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S
Russell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnisRussell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnisGeorgia Institute of TechnologyGeorgia Institute of Technology
Product & Systems Lifecycle Management CenterProduct & Systems Lifecycle Management Centerwww.pslm.gatech.eduwww.pslm.gatech.edup gp g
Part 1 Speaker: Russell PeakPart 1 Speaker: Russell Peak
Standard Edition - v1
Note: This is the 99-slide ”standard edition” presentation. A 187-slide “extended edition” with additional context material is available here: http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/
ModelModel--Based SE Using SysMLBased SE Using SysMLPart 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&SPart 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S
AbstractThis presentation highlights Phase 1 results from a modeling & simulation effort that integrates design and assessment using SysML. An excavator testbed illustrates interconnecting simulation models with associated diverse system
d l d i d l d f t i d l W th i Ph 2 k i i l di bilmodels, design models, and manufacturing models. We then overview Phase 2 work-in-process including a mobile robotics testbed and associated SysML-driven operations demonstration.
The overall goal is to enable advanced model-based systems engineering (MBSE) in particular and model-based X (MBX) [1] in general. Our method employs SysML as the primary technology to achieve multi-level multi-fidelity interoperability, while at the same time leveraging conventional modeling & simulation tools including mechanical CAD, factory CAD spreadsheets math solvers finite element analysis (FEA) discrete event solvers and optimization toolsfactory CAD, spreadsheets, math solvers, finite element analysis (FEA), discrete event solvers, and optimization tools.
This Part 1 presentation overviews the project context and several specific components. Part 2 focuses on manufacturing aspects including factory design, process planning, and throughput simulation.
This work is sponsored by several organizations including Lockheed and Deere and is part of the Modeling & Simulation Interoperability Team [2] in the INCOSE MBSE Challenge (with applications to mechatronics as an example domain).)
[1] The X in MBX includes engineering (MBE), manufacturing (MBM), and potentially other scopes and contexts such as model-based enterprises (MBE). [2] http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/
CitationsRS Peak, CJJ Paredis, LF McGinnis (2009-04) Model-Based SE Using SysML—Part 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S. NDIA M&S Committee Meeting, Arlington, Virginia. http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/
LF McGinnis (2009-04) Model-Based SE Using SysML—Part 2: Integrating Manufacturing Design and Simulation. NDIA M&S C itt M ti A li t Vi i i htt // l t h d / j t /i b i/
2
NDIA M&S Committee Meeting, Arlington, Virginia. http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/
[email protected], Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, www.msl.gatech.edu
Collaboration ApproachPrimary Current TeamPrimary Current Team
• Deere & Co• Deere & Co.– Roger Burkhart
Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT)• Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT)– Russell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnis, & co.
ll b– Leveraging collaborations in PSLM Center SysML Focus Area (see next slide)
L kh d M i• Lockheed Martin– Sandy Friedenthal
Page 3
• Vendor collaboration
GIT Product & Systems Lifecycle Management CenterGIT Product & Systems Lifecycle Management CenterLeveraging Related EffortsLeveraging Related Efforts www.pslm.gatech.eduwww.pslm.gatech.edu
• SysML-related projects:– Deere, Lockheed, Boeing, NASA, NIST, TRW Automotive, ...
• Other efforts based at GIT:• Other efforts based at GIT:– NSF Center for Compact & Efficient Fluid Power– SysML course development
• For Professional Masters in SE program continuing ed short courses• For Professional Masters in SE program, continuing ed. short courses, ...– Other groups & labs– Vendor collaboration (tool licenses, support, ...)
• Consortia & other GIT involvements:• Consortia & other GIT involvements:– INCOSE Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) effort – NIST SE Tool Interoperability Plug-Fest
OMG (SysML )– OMG (SysML, ...)– PDES Inc. (APs 210, 233, ...)
• Commercialization efforts:V t L b t h d b d i ff (I t CAX)
4
– www.VentureLab.gatech.edu-based spin-off company (InterCAX): Productionizing tools for executable SysML parametrics
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Overview and ResultsFrom August 2007 to August 2008– From August, 2007 to August, 2008
• Phase 2 Progress– From August, 2008 to August, 2009
5
Contents
• Problem DescriptionProblem Description– Challenge Team Objectives– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systemsy
• Technical Approach– Techniques and Testbeds
• Deliverables & Outcomes• Collaboration Approachpp
Page 6
MBSE Challenge Team ObjectivesPhase 1: 2007-2008Phase 1: 2007 2008
Overall Objectives
• Define & demonstrate capabilities for d d d li & i l i i bili (MSI)advanced modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI)
• Phase 1 Scope– Domain: MechatronicsDomain: Mechatronics– Capabilities: Methodologies, tools, requirements,
and practical applications – MSI subset: Connecting system specification & design modelsMSI subset: Connecting system specification & design models
with multiple engineering analysis & dynamic simulation models
• Test & demonstrate how SysML facilitates effective MSI
Page 7
Note: The objectives to date are primarily based on projects in the GIT PSLM Center sponsored by industry and government—see backup slides.
MBSE Challenge Team ObjectivesPhase 1: 2007-2008Phase 1: 2007 2008
S ifi Obj tiSpecific Objectives
1. Define modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method2. Define SysML and 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 analysis3. Demonstrate MSI method with 3+ engineering analysis and dynamic simulation model types1. Include representative building block library: fluid power 2 Include hybrid discrete/continuous systems2. Include hybrid discrete/continuous systems
described by differential algebraic equations (DAEs)
4. Develop roadmap beyond Phase 1
Page 8
Interoperability Method Objectives for MBSEInteroperability Method Objectives for MBSE
Primary Impacts
g emor
y ifa
ct
duce
d
me du
ced
os
t duce
d
sk
crea
sed
ders
tand
ing
crea
sed
orpo
rate
Me
crea
sed
Arti
rform
ance
Enabling Capabilities R
eTi
mR
eC
oR
eR
i sIn
cU
nIn
cC
oIn
cP
e
Increased Knowledge Capture & Completeness
■ ■ ■ ■
Increased ■ ■ ■ ■ ■Modularity & Reusability
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Increased Traceability
■ ■ ■
Reduced ■ ■ ■Manual Re-Creation
■ ■ ■
Increased Automation
■ ■ ■
Reduced Modeling Effort
■ ■
9
Modeling EffortIncreased Analysis Intensity
■ ■
Mechatronics ArchitectureSoftware
• Functions• Operating Modes
• Modules, Libraries• Messages
“Mechanical System”Ki ti & D i
InterfaceDi l
p g• State Machines• Control Systems• ...
g• Protocols• Code• ...
• Kinematics & Dynamics• Powertrain• Thermal• Fluids• Electric Power
Actuators
Sensors
ElectronicControl Unit
(ECU)
• Displays• User Controls• Haptics• Remote Links• ...
Electronics
• ...Communications Bus
F db k C t l L
Page 10
Feedback Control Loop
Contents
• Problem DescriptionProblem Description– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systems– Challenge Team Objectivesg j
• Technical Approach– Techniques and Testbeds
• Deliverables & Outcomes• Collaboration Approachpp
Page 11
Overall Technical Approachpp
• Technique Development– “Federated system model” framework technology
• A.k.a. collective product model
Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Graph transformation technology– etcetc.
• Testbed Implementations & Execution• Iteration• Iteration
Page 12
Technical Approach—Subsetpp• Standards-based framework technology
Federated system models– Federated system models– Utilize SysML where appropriate (esp. parametrics)
• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Harmonize, generalize, extend new & existing work– COBs, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ..., , , , , ,
• Testbeds– Develop and test techniques iterativelyp q y– Implement test cases for verification & validation– Produce reference examples
Page 13
– Produce open resources (e.g., SysML-based fluid power libraries)
Example Federated System ModelExample Federated System ModelLogical composition of models based on various Logical composition of models based on various ontologies/schemas (from native tools, standards, inontologies/schemas (from native tools, standards, in--house)house)g ( , ,g ( , , ))
Electrical Engineering• Standard: AP210• Software Mentor Graphics• Status: Prototyped
R k ll B i
Cabling• Standard: AP212• Software MentorGraphics• Status: Prototyped
D i l Ch l P STEP
Fluid Dynamics• Standard: CFD• Software
Propulsion• Standard: STEP-PRP• Software:-
Mechanical Engineering• Standard: AP203, AP214
• Rockwell, Boeing • Daimler-Chrysler, ProSTEP
Software Engineering• Standard::UML - (AP233 interface In Development)• Software:Rational Rose, Argo, All-Together
• Software -• Status: In Development• Boeing,
Optics• Standard: NODIF
• Status: In Development• ESA, EADS
• Software Pro-E, Cadds, SolidWorks, AutoCad, SDRC IDEAS, Unigraphics, others• Status: In Production• Aerospace Industry Wide, Automotive Industry
Structural Analysis• Standard: AP209
• Status: In Production• Industry-wide
Systems Engineering• Standard: AP233
• Software - TBD• Minolta, Olympus
• Software: MSC Patran, Thermal Desktop• Status: In Production• Lockheed Martin, Electric Boat
Thermal Radiation Analysis
• Software: Statemate, Doors, Matrix-X, Slate, Core, RTM• Status: In development / Prototyped• BAE SYSTEMS, EADS, NASA
PDMThermal Radiation Analysis• Standard: STEP-TAS• Software: Thermal Desktop, TRASYS• Status: In Production• ESA/ESTEC, NASA/JPL & Langely
Machining Inspection
• Standard: STEP PDM Schema/AP232• Software: MetaPhase, Windchill, Insync• Status: In Production • Lockheed Martin, EADS, BAE SYSTEMS, Raytheon
Spacecraft Development
14
Machining• Standard:: STEP-NC/AP224•Software:: Gibbs, •Status:: In Development / Prototyped•STEP-Tools, Boeing
Inspection• Standard: AP219• Software: Technomatics, Brown, eSharp • Status: In Development• NIST, CATIA, Boeing, Chrysler, AIAG
Life-Cycle Management• Standard: PLCS• Software: SAP• Status: In Development• BAE SYSTEMS, Boeing, Eurostep
Adapted from 2001-12-16 - Jim U’Ren, NASA-JPL
ModelModel--Centric FrameworkCentric FrameworkProduce, Merge, Enrich, ConsumeProduce, Merge, Enrich, Consume
P d T l
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/journals/2004-jcise-peak/ (where “collective product model” “federated system model”)
Tool A1Producer Tools(Primary Authoring) Tool An...
Mechanical Engineering• Standard: AP203, AP214• Software Pro-E, Cadds, SolidWorks, AutoCad, SDRC IDEAS, Unigraphics, others• Status: In Production• Aerospace Industry Wide, Automotive Industry
Electrical Engineering• Standard: AP210• Software Mentor Graphics• Status: Prototyped• Rockwell, Boeing
Cabling• Standard: AP212• Software MentorGraphics• Status: Prototyped• Daimler-Chrysler, ProSTEP
Structural Analysis• Standard: AP209
S ft MSC P t Th l
Software Engineering• Standard::UML - (AP233 interface In Development)• Software:Rational Rose, Argo, All-Together• Status: In Production• Industry-wide
Systems Engineering• Standard: AP233• Software: Statemate Doors Matrix X
Fluid Dynamics• Standard: CFD• Software -• Status: In Development• Boeing,
Optics• Standard: NODIF• Software - TBD• Minolta, Olympus
Propulsion• Standard: STEP-PRP• Software:-• Status: In Development• ESA, EADS
Federated System ModelM t B ildi Bl kEnricher Tools
• Software: MSC Patran, Thermal Desktop• Status: In Production• Lockheed Martin, Electric Boat
Thermal Radiation Analysis• Standard: STEP-TAS• Software: Thermal Desktop, TRASYS• Status: In Production• ESA/ESTEC, NASA/JPL & Langely
Machining• Standard:: STEP-NC/AP224•Software:: Gibbs, •Status:: In Development / Prototyped•STEP-Tools, Boeing
Inspection• Standard: AP219• Software: Technomatics, Brown, eSharp • Status: In Development• NIST, CATIA, Boeing, Chrysler, AIAG
• Software: Statemate, Doors, Matrix-X, Slate, Core, RTM• Status: In development / Prototyped• BAE SYSTEMS, EADS, NASA
PDM• Standard: STEP PDM Schema/AP232• Software: MetaPhase, Windchill, Insync• Status: In Production • Lockheed Martin, EADS, BAE SYSTEMS, Raytheon
Life-Cycle Management• Standard: PLCS• Software: SAP• Status: In Development• BAE SYSTEMS, Boeing, Eurostep
Spacecraft Development
Meta-Building Blocks:• Information models & meta-models
• International standards• Industry specs• Corporate standards
Tool Bj
Enricher Tools(Secondary Authoring)
Consumer Tools
15
p• Local customizations
• Modeling technologies:• Express, UML, SysML, COBs, OWL, XML, …
Tool Ck
Consumer Tools(e.g., Solvers)
Technical Approach—Subsetpp• Standards-based framework technology
Federated system models– Federated system models– Utilize SysML where appropriate (esp. parametrics)
• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Harmonize, generalize, extend new & existing work– COBs/SysML, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, .../ y , , , , , ,
• Testbeds– Develop and test techniques iterativelyp q y– Implement test cases for verification & validation– Produce reference examples
Page 16
– Produce open resources (e.g., SysML-based fluid power libraries)
The Four Pillars of SysML
interaction
1. Structure 2. Behavior
state machine
activity/functionfunction
definition use
Page 173. Requirements 4. Parametrics
Model vs. DiagramsModel vs. Diagrams
Reality- Envisioned or actual
Model- Computer-oriented- Master repository
Diagrams- Human-oriented
- Subset viewsMaster repository- Complete for intended scope
Subset views
18
Tools- Authoring, viewing, executing, ...
Acknowledgements: Selected portions from Friedenthal et al. 2008 and MagicDraw samples.
SysML Technology StatusSysML Technology Statuswww.omgsysml.orgwww.omgsysml.org
• Spec v1.0: 2007-09 v1.1: 2008-11 v1.2: WIPv2.x: RFI preparation workshop - 2008-12http // omg org/spec/S sML/http://www.omg.org/spec/SysML/
• Vendor support• Learning infrastructure• Learning infrastructure
– Books, vendor courses, academic courses,INCOSE/OMG tutorial, public examples, etc., p p ,
• Growing production usage– http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/events/frontiers2008/– OMG SysML Info Days – 2008-12
• Overall status: Healthy and growing
19
“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysML“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysMLLevel 1: IntraLevel 1: Intra--Template DiversityTemplate Diversity
soi: Linkage
par [cbam] LinkagePlaneStressModel [Definition view]
ts1
Bsleeve1
B
ts2
ds2
ds1
sleeve2
L
shaft
Leff
s
rib1 rib2
red = idealized parameter
CAE modeleffectiveLength:
deformationModel: LinkagePlaneStressAbb
rs1:
ws1:
ts1:
l:
sleeve1:
width:
outerRadius:
wallThickness:
l 2
MechanicalCAD model
CAE model (FEA)
criticalCrossSection:
shaft:
ws2:
ts2:
tf:
rs2:
wf:
tw:
ex:
sleeve2:
width:
outerRadius:
wallThickness:
basicIsection:
flangeThickness:
webThickness:
nuxy:
force:
uxMax:
sxMax:
flangeWidth:
condition: Condition
sxMosModel: MarginOfSafetyModel
allowable:
marginOfSafety:
determined:
mechanicalBehaviorModels:
material:
name:
linearElastic:
youngsModulus:
condition: Condition
description:
reaction:
Symbolic math models
20
yieldStress:
allowableInterAxisLengthChange:
uxMosModel: MarginOfSafetyModel
allowable:
marginOfSafety:
determined:
poissonsRatio: math models
[Peak et al. 2007—Part 2]
“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysML“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysMLLevel 2: InterLevel 2: Inter--Template Diversity (per MIM 0.1)Template Diversity (per MIM 0.1)Naval Systems-of-Systems (SoS) Panorama—An Envisioned Complex Model Interoperability Problem Enabled by SysML/MIM/COBs
Parametric associativityTool & native model associativityComposition relationship (re-usage)
Legend
Parametric associativityTool & native model associativityComposition relationship (re-usage)
Legend
c1 Simulation Templatesd0 Simulation e0 Solvera0 Descriptive
c2. Optimization Templates c0. Context-Specific ModelsBased on HMX 0.12008-02-20
c1. Simulation Templates(of diverse behavior & fidelity)
ECAD & MCAD Tools EvacuationMgt.
d0. Simulation Building Blocks
Tribon, CATIA, NX, Cadence, ...
e0. SolverResources
a0. DescriptiveResources
Evacuation CodesEgress, Exodus, …
CFDFlotherm Fluent
General MathMathematica,
Maple, Matlab,…2D
PropellerHydroSystems & Software Tools
…
Flotherm, Fluent, …
3D
…
Hydro-dynamics
Systems & Software ToolsDOORS, E+MagicDraw, Studio, Eclipse, …
DamagedStability
FEAAbaqus, Ansys,
Patran, Nastran, …
Operation Mgt. Systems
…
21
Libraries & DatabasesClassification Codes, Materials, Personnel, Procedures, …
b0. Federated Descriptive Models
NavigationAccuracy Discrete Event
Arena, Quest, …
Technical Approach—Subsetpp• Standards-based framework technology
Federated system models– Federated system models– Utilize SysML where appropriate (esp. parametrics)
• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Harmonize, generalize, extend new & existing work– COBs, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ..., , , , , ,
• Testbeds– Develop and test techniques iterativelyp q y– Implement test cases for verification & validation– Produce reference examples
Page 22
– Produce open resources (e.g., SysML-based fluid power libraries)
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedTool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysMLO ti l
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
ExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
FactoryModel
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenterNX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
OptimizationModel
Factory Layout Model
ExcelProduction
Model
Excel
Cost Model
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
23
RampseM-Plant
FactorySimulation
2008-02-25a
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedInteroperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)
Optimization ModelObj ti
NXModelCenter
c0. Context-SpecificSimulation Models e0. Solver Resourcesa0. Descriptive Resources
(Authoring Tools, ...)d0. Simulation Building Block
Libraries
Solid
CostConcepts
OptimizationConcepts
Reliability
Notes
Reliability M d l
Cost Model
ObjectiveFunction
Excel
ModelCenterSolid Mechanics
Queuing Concepts
Fluid Mechanics
Reliability Concepts
b0 Federated
Excel
Model
Federated Excavator Model
MathematicaDig Cycle Model
b0. Federated Descriptive Models
Hydraulics Operations
Dymola
RSD/E+
MagicDrawExtensional
Linkage Model
Plane Stress Linkage Model
Boom
Linkages
ySubsystem
p
Req. & Objectives
Dig Site Dump Trucks
Legend
MM1 Queuing
Ansys
FactoryCAD
Federated Factory Model
Dig Site Dump Trucks
Req. & Objectives
Excavator MBOM
24
eM-Plant / Factory Flow
Discrete EventAssy Model
MM1 Queuing Assy Model
FactoryCADAssembly Lines
Work CellsAGVs
Buffers Machines
2008-02-20
Demo ScenarioDemo Scenario
• New market-driven targets:20% increase in dig rate (dirt volume / time)– 20% increase in dig rate (dirt volume / time)
– 15% increase in mfg. productionCh k if i ti d i i ffi i t b• Check if existing design is sufficient by re-running SysML-enabled simulations
• If not, explore re-design trade space– Changes in bucket size, hydraulics, ...
• Re-do V&V using simulations on new design• Explore manufacturing impact
25
Explore manufacturing impact– Factory re-design and simulation
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedTool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysMLO ti l
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
ExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
FactoryModel
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenterNX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
OptimizationModel
Factory Layout Model
ExcelProduction
Model
Excel
Cost Model
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
26
RampseM-Plant
FactorySimulation
2008-02-25a
EarthEarth--Moving EnterpriseMoving EnterpriseSysML package diagram (pkg)SysML package diagram (pkg)
27
Excavator Model TreeExcavator Model TreeSummary View (mostly unexpanded) in MagicDraw SysML ToolSummary View (mostly unexpanded) in MagicDraw SysML Tool
28
Excavator Operational DomainExcavator Operational DomainTopTop--Level Context Diagram in SysMLLevel Context Diagram in SysML
29
Excavator Operational DomainExcavator Operational DomainFirst Level of DetailFirst Level of Detail——bdd (SysML block definition diagram)bdd (SysML block definition diagram)
30
Excavator Operational DomainExcavator Operational DomainFirst Level of DetailFirst Level of Detail——ibd (SysML internal block diagram)ibd (SysML internal block diagram)
31
Excavator Operational DomainExcavator Operational DomainTopTop--Level Use CasesLevel Use Cases
32
Excavator Dig CycleExcavator Dig CycleActivity DiagramActivity Diagram
33
Excavator Requirements & ObjectivesExcavator Requirements & Objectivesreq req -- SysML Requirements DiagramSysML Requirements Diagram
34
System Objective FunctionSystem Objective Function——ExcavatorExcavatorContext: Operational EnterpriseContext: Operational Enterprise
n
jijijiij
n
iii moemoekmoekf
,;1,1 Mathematical
Form
SysML ParametricsSysML Parametrics Form
35
Excavator Test CaseExcavator Test CaseSelected System BreakdownsSelected System Breakdowns
36
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedTool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysMLO ti l
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
ExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
FactoryModel
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenterNX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
OptimizationModel
Factory Layout Model
ExcelProduction
Model
Excel
Cost Model
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
37
RampseM-Plant
FactorySimulation
2008-02-25a
Hydraulic Circuit DiagramHydraulic Circuit DiagramPressurePressure--Compensated, LoadCompensated, Load--Sensing ExcavatorSensing Excavator——ISO 1219 notationISO 1219 notation
Mechanical Interface
Mechanical Interface
Mechanical InterfaceInterface Interface
LSMechanical Interface
38
SysML Schematic (ibd) SysML Schematic (ibd) —— Basic ViewBasic ViewPressurePressure--Compensated, LoadCompensated, Load--Sensing ExcavatorSensing Excavator
39
SysML Schematic (ibd) SysML Schematic (ibd) —— Detailed ViewDetailed ViewPressurePressure--Compensated, LoadCompensated, Load--Sensing ExcavatorSensing Excavator
40
Hydraulics Subsystem Simulation ModelHydraulics Subsystem Simulation Modelbddbdd
41
Excavator Case StudyExcavator Case StudyNative Tool Models: ModelicaNative Tool Models: Modelica
c c BB
Sw ingFl... BoomCyl... BoomCyl...ArmCylB... ArmCylR... BucketC... BucketC...b4y
{0,.21...
a
bb4xr={-.92...ab
b3r={4.22,1.3...a b
cyl2f
m=
bB...l1_l
b2_lr={2.85,1.18,...ab
Arm1r={0.49...a b
cyl3f
=50
bB...
Arm... Buc...Boo...
c...c...
c...
B...B...
Hydraulics Model
Sw ingMotor
B
BoomCylR
B
BucketCyl
B
ArmCyl
BmCylL
BoomCyl
sw ingComma...
BoomCyl...
Carriage
r={-0.164,1....
a
b
Boomr={7.11,0,0}a b
b2_rr={2.85,1....a b
b1_r
{.655,....
a
b
r={a
cyl1...
m=...
bC...
m=...
b1_l
r={.655,....
a
b
cy Armr={3.654,...
a bm=...
bArm
JointR...n_a={...Arm2
r={2.97,0....a b
mbB
p10
r={.52...
n={...Ar... n={...Bu...n={...Bo...
c...
braB BBBoomBoomCyl...
boomCommand
Mechanical model of complete...
Base
r={... n={0,...
Swin...
r={a
Boo...
brakeS...c...c...
frame_...
bra...
Multi-Body System Dynamics Model
B
TP
LSB
TP
LSB
TP
LSB
TP
LSB
TP
LS
armCommand
(linkages, ...)
maxma...
max1ma...
max2ma... max3
ma...B
pclsPumpcircuitTank
accumulator
constantSpeed bucketCommand
hydraulicsDig Cycle
42
world
x
y
environment
p_amb = 101325T_amb = 288.15
SimulationSimulationin Dymolain Dymola SimulationSimulationyy
ModelicaModelicaLexical RepresentationLexical Representation( t( t t d f S ML)t d f S ML)
ResultsResults
(auto(auto--generated from SysML)generated from SysML)
[Johnson 2008[Johnson 2008 -- Masters Thesis]Masters Thesis]
43
[Johnson, 2008 [Johnson, 2008 Masters Thesis]Masters Thesis]
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedTool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysMLO ti l
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
ExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
FactoryModel
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenterNX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
OptimizationModel
Factory Layout Model
ExcelProduction
Model
Excel
Cost Model
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
44
RampseM-Plant
FactorySimulation
2008-02-25a
Recurring Problem:Recurring Problem:Maintaining Multiple ViewsMaintaining Multiple Views
• Multiple stakeholdersstakeholders with different views and toolsviews and tools
• Models of different system
Aspect A
Models different system aspects
• Different viewsDifferent views are not independent
Aspect B
Models SystemDesign
4545
pModel
Approach: Model TransformationApproach: Model Transformation
1. Define meta-models2. Define a model transformation
– Create graphs of correspondence between meta-modelsDefine transformation rules from SysML to Modelica– Define transformation rules from SysML to Modelica and vice-versa
– Triple Graph Grammar (TGG)3. Compile rules (MOFLON) and load as plug-in
S M t d l T t M t d lT f ti S ifi tirefers to refers to
Source Metamodel Target Metamodel
conforms to conforms to
Transformation Specification
executes
4646
Source Model Target ModelTransformation Enginereads writes
(Czarnecki, K., & Hellen, S., 2006)
Capturing Domain Specific KnowledgeCapturing Domain Specific Knowledgein Graph Transformations*in Graph Transformations*pp
Requirements & Objectives
SysML
Hydraulic_Subsystem Schematic[Block] ibd [ ]
valve : 4port3wayServoValve
portP : FlowPort
portT : FlowPort
pump : FDpumpdischarge : FlowPort
suction : FlowPort
housing : FlowPort
inputShaft : FlowPort
tank-to-pump : Line
pump-to-valve : Line
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
systemalternative
Topology Generation*
System Alternatives MAsCoMs SysML
cylA : FlowPort
cylB : FlowPort
p p
a : FlowPortb : FlowPort
valve-to-cylP1 : Linea : FlowPort
b : FlowPortvalve-to-filter : Line
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPortfilter-to-tank : Line
b : FlowPort
tank : Tank
return : FlowPort
sump : FlowPort
System Behavior S ML
Model Composition*actuator : Double-ActingCylinder
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPorthousing : FlowPort
rod : FlowPort
valve-to-cylP2 : Linea : FlowPort
b : FlowPortfilter : Filterin : FlowPort
out : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
yModels SysML
Model Translation*
a : FlowPortrod : FlowPort
hydraulics
worldy
Dig Cycle
Arm
Boom
Sw ing
BucketTraj
behaviormodel
simulationconfiguration
Executable Simulations
Dymola
Simulation Configuration*
xmodel
4747
Design Optimization ModelCenter
Simulation Configuration
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedTool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysMLO ti l
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
ExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
FactoryModel
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenterNX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
OptimizationModel
Factory Layout Model
ExcelProduction
Model
Excel
Cost Model
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
48
RampseM-Plant
FactorySimulation
2008-02-25a
Wrap Dynamic Simulation asWrap Dynamic Simulation asModelCenter Model in SysMLModelCenter Model in SysMLyy
Fully qualified name points to ModelCenter model
Stereotypes defineinput/output causalityp p y
49
DOE Model in SysMLDOE Model in SysML
LatinHyperCube sampler
Reference Property
Model
5050
Automatic Export to Automatic Export to and Execution in ModelCenterand Execution in ModelCenter
5151
Application in Case Study:Application in Case Study:Optimization under uncertainty with kriging modelOptimization under uncertainty with kriging modelp y g gp y g g
optimizer
Latin Hypercube + K i i fKriging response surface
• Optimization under uncertainty
• LatinHyperCube sampler used to predict expected value
Objectives:• Maximize Efficiency• Minimize Cost
value• Kriging model used
in conjunction with sampler to generate
Design variables:• bore diameters
52
p gresponse surface to reduce computational cost
SysML ModelSysML ModelOptimization under uncertainty with kriging modelOptimization under uncertainty with kriging model
5353
Pl t V i bl (M d l tilit tilit )
Trade Study Optimization ResultsTrade Study Optimization Results0.8386
0.744580.650570.556550.462540.368520.274510.180490.08648
-0.00754
Plot Variable: response (Model.utility.utility)
0.820.8
0.780.760.740.720.7
0.680.660.640.620.6
0.580 56
Auto-generated optimization model in ModelCenter
Design space visualized in ModelCenter
utili
ty
0.560.540.52
0.50.480.460.440.420.4
0.380.360.340.32
0.30.280.260.240.220.2
0.180.160.14
boomSize
0.116
0.115
0.114
0.113
0.112
0.111
0.11
0.109
0.108
0.1070.106
0.105
0.120.1
0.080.060.040.02
-3.95517e-016
0.1450.1440.1440.1430.1430.1420.1420.1410.1410.140.140.1390.1390.1380.1380.1370.1370.1360.1360.1350 1350 134
0.12
0.119
0.118
0.117 armSize0.1350.1340.1340.1330.1330.1320.1320.1310.1310.130.130.1290.1290.1280.1280.1270.1270.1260.1260.1250.125
Design optimization model in SysML with auto-updated results
54
See Part 2 talk by Leon McGinnis ...See Part 2 talk by Leon McGinnis ...
Model-Based SE Using SysMLPart 2: Integrating Mfg Design and Simulation
55
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedTool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysMLO ti l
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
ExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
FactoryModel
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenterNX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
OptimizationModel
Factory Layout Model
ExcelProduction
Model
Excel
Cost Model
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
56
RampseM-Plant
FactorySimulation
2008-02-25a
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedTool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysMLO ti l
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
ExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
FactoryModel
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenterNX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
OptimizationModel
Factory Layout Model
ExcelProduction
Model
Excel
Cost Model
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
57
RampseM-Plant
FactorySimulation
2008-02-25a
MCADMCAD--SysML Interface ScenariosSysML Interface ScenariosUGS/Siemens NXUGS/Siemens NX
RSD/E+RSD/E+
SysML Model
SysML Model ImportUser SysML Model
ManipulationManipulation
ts1
Bsleeve1
B
ts2
ds2
ds1
sleeve2
L
shaft
Leff
s
rib1 rib2
red = idealized parameter
deformationModel:
undeformedLength:
totalElongation:
effectiveLength: in = 5.00
soi: FlapLinkage_XYZ-510
par [cbam] LinkageExtensionalModel_800240 [Instance view: state 1.0 - unsolved]
Model ChangesPropagate to CAD Tool
ParametricsExecution
Simulation Execution*
materialModel:
normalStress:
totalStrain:
youngsModulus:
area:
totalElongation:
length:
stressMosModel:
allowable:marginOfSafety:
= ?
determined:
criticalCrossSection:
shaft:
condition:
description:= “flaps mid position”mechanicalBehaviorModels:
material: Steel1020HR
basic:
area:in^2 = 1.125
yieldStress:psi = 18000
name:= “1020 hot-rolled steel”
linearElastic:
youngsModulus:psi = 30e6
force:reaction:
lbs = 10000
58
XaiTools COB Services EngineeringAnalysis Models
* = work-in-processGeorgia Tech Georgia Tech XaiToolsXaiTools™™
MCAD Native Model and Tool UIsMCAD Native Model and Tool UIsUGS/Siemens NXUGS/Siemens NX
59
MCAD Model (Subset) in SysMLMCAD Model (Subset) in SysML RSD/E+RSD/E+
60
Interfacing Spreadsheets Interfacing Spreadsheets with SysML Parametricswith SysML Parametrics
61
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedTool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysMLO ti l
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
ExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
FactoryModel
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenterNX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
OptimizationModel
Factory Layout Model
ExcelProduction
Model
Excel
Cost Model
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
62
RampseM-Plant
FactorySimulation
2008-02-25a
UAV System Design Problem: LittleEyeUAV System Design Problem: LittleEyeNetworkNetwork--Centric Warfare Context Centric Warfare Context —— SysML/DoDAF ModelSysML/DoDAF Model
63Source: No Magic Inc. and InterCAX LLC
Road Scanner System ProblemRoad Scanner System ProblemLittleEye UAV Squadron LittleEye UAV Squadron
64
LittleEye SysML ModelLittleEye SysML ModelVarious Diagram ViewsVarious Diagram Views
65
Solving LittleEye SysML ParametricsSolving LittleEye SysML ParametricsParaMagic Browser ViewsParaMagic Browser Views
NextNext--generation objectgeneration object--oriented spreadsheetoriented spreadsheet--like capabilities.like capabilities.
Instance 1 - Before Solving Instance 1 - After Solving
66
Enabling Executable SysML ParametricsEnabling Executable SysML ParametricsCommercialization by InterCAX LLC in Georgia Tech VentureLab incubator programCommercialization by InterCAX LLC in Georgia Tech VentureLab incubator program
SysML Authoring Tools COB Solving & Browsing
Advanced technology for graph management and solver access via web services.
y g g g
Plugins Prototyped by GIT(to SysML vendor tools)1) Artisan Studio [2/06]2) EmbeddedPlus [3/07]3) NoMagic [12/07]
L To
olki
t™Next-Generation
Spreadsheet
COB Services (constraint graph manager, including COTS solver access via web services)
Parametrics plugin COB APIExecution via API messages
or exchange files
Xai
Tool
s S
ysM
L
Composable Objects (COBs)
eWor
k™X
Xai
Tool
s Fr
ame
Native Tools Models
...
...COTS =
commercial-off-the-shelf(typically readily available)
67
X
Ansys(FEA Solver)
Traditional COTS or in-house solvers
Mathematica(Math Solver)
... TLEAFLL
Productionizing/Deploying GIT Productionizing/Deploying GIT XaiToolsXaiTools™™
Technology for Executing SysML ParametricsTechnology for Executing SysML Parametrics
Vendor SysMLTool
Prototype byGIT
Product by InterCAX LLC
www.InterCAX.com
Artisan Studio Yes <tbd>
EmbeddedPlus E+ SysML / RSA Yes <tbd>
No Magic MagicDraw Yes ParaMagic™ 15.5 (Jul 21, 2008 release)
T l l i /IBM Rh d /T <tbd> <tbd>Telelogic/IBM Rhapsody/Tau <tbd> <tbd>
Sparx Systems Enterprise Arch. <tbd> <tbd>
n/a XMI import/export Yes <tbd>
Others <tbd> Others <tbd> <tbd> <tbd>
68
Others <tbd> Others <tbd> <tbd> <tbd>
[1] Full disclosure: InterCAX LLC is a spin-off company originally created to commercialize technology from RS Peak’s GIT group. GIT has licensed technology to InterCAX and has an equity stake in the company. RS Peak is one of several business partners in InterCAX. Commercialization of the SysML/composable object aspects has been fostered by the GIT VentureLab incubator program (www.venturelab.gatech.edu) via an InterCAX VentureLab project initiated October 2007.
Solver Access via Solver Access via XaiTools Web ServicesXaiTools Web Services (XWS)(XWS)S1: General MultiS1: General Multi--Solver SetupSolver Setup
Client Machines Server Machines
XaiToolsCli
Rich Client
Apache TomcatServlet Container
XaiTools Web Services
S
Web S
Client(e.g. ParaMagic)
Internet
Apache Tomcat
XaiTools AnsysSolver Server
XaiTools AnsysSolver Server
XaiTools Math.S l S
XaiTools Solver
SOAP ServersWeb S
HTTP/XMLWrapped Data
SysML-basedCOB models
SO
AP
erver
Ansys Patran
Interne
Solver ServerSolver ServerWrappers
FEA Solvers
Server
Mathematica
Ansys, Patran, Abaqus, ...
et/IntranetMath Solvers ...
Engineering S i B
69
athematicatService Bureau
Solver Access via Solver Access via XaiTools Web ServicesXaiTools Web Services (XWS)(XWS)S2: ParaMagicS2: ParaMagic--Mathematica Setup (current product = XWS 2.2)Mathematica Setup (current product = XWS 2.2)
Client Machines(End Users 1...n) Server Machine @ Company X
P M i
Rich Client
Apache TomcatServlet Container
XaiTools Web Services
S
ParaMagic Internet
Apache Tomcat
XaiTools Solver SOAP Server
Web S
HTTP/XMLWrapped Data
SysML-basedCOB models
SO
AP
Interne
Wrappers
Math Solver
ServerMagicDraw
SysML Tool
et/Intranet
MathematicaNetwork Server
network increment(s)...
70
t
Broadly Applicable TechnologyBroadly Applicable TechnologyExamples of Executable SysML ParametricsExamples of Executable SysML Parametrics
• Road scanning system using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAVs)
• Space systems orbit planning• Energy systems•• ...• Mechanical part design and analysis (FEA)• ...• Insurance claims processing
and website capacity model• Financial model for small businesses• Banking service levels model
71
• ...
Satellite Tutorial Highlights: SimpleSat Satellite Tutorial Highlights: SimpleSat definitionSatellite[Block] par [ ]
r1 : MassBalance{m = m1 +m2 + m3 + m4}
m
m1 m2 m3 m4
mass e1
propulsionSubSys : PropulsionSystem
mass
powerSubSys : PowerSystem
mass
instruments : Instruments
mass
controllerSubSys : ControlSystem
mass
e10
e5
e2
e4e3
r2 : PowerBalancepp2 p3
power powerpower power
e9e6
e8
e7
r2 : PowerBalance{p = p1 + p2 + p3}p1
reqVerifierMass : MarginOfSafetyBlock
allowable
r3 : CtrlPwrEqn{pwrctrl = 0.2 * mass}
mass
t le12
determined
allowablemos
pwrctrle12
e11
72
Financial Projections SysML ModelFinancial Projections SysML ModelVarious Diagram ViewsVarious Diagram Views
73
Using a Spectrum of Modeling TechnologiesUsing a Spectrum of Modeling Technologies
• SpectrumMental calculations– Mental calculations
– Back-of-envelope hand calculations S d h t– Spreadsheets
– ...S ML ( ith t bl t i )– SysML (with executable parametrics)
– ...• Varying characteristics
– Quickness, flexibility, structure, modularity,
74
reusability, self-validation/constraints, ...
Contents
• Problem DescriptionProblem Description– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systems– Challenge Team Objectivesg j
• Technical Approach– Techniques and Testbeds
• Deliverables & Outcomes• Collaboration Approachpp
Page 75
Deliverables & Outcomes Phase 1 (Aug 2008)Phase 1 (Aug 2008)
• Solution and supporting models– Excavator test case models test suitesExcavator 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• MBSE metrics/value– See “Benefits” slide with candidate metrics
• MBSE findings, issues, & recommendations g , ,– Issue submissions to OMG and vendors, publications, …
• Training materialE l t t i l
Page 76
– Examples, tutorials, …
• Plan forward (Phase 2 and beyond)
Primary Public Reporting Venues
• Call for Participation @ IS’07Jun 26 2007 in San Diego– Jun 26, 2007 in San Diego
• Phase 1 Status Update @ IW’08 MBSE Workshop #2– Jan 25, 2008 in Albuquerque
Ph 1 St t U d t @ F ti W k h• Phase 1 Status Update @ Frontiers Workshop– May 14, 2008 in Atlanta
• Phase 1 Status Update @ IS’08 – Jun 15-19, 2008 in Utrecht
• Phase 1 Final Report & Archive of Models– Aug 2008 [proprietary deliverable]– May 2009 (estimate) via website [public version]
• Phase 2 Status Updates @ IW’09, etc.• Misc. reports/updates/publications @ various venues
Page 77
Misc. reports/updates/publications @ various venues– OMG meetings, NDIA, society & vendor conferences, ...
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Overview and ResultsFrom August 2007 to August 2008– From August, 2007 to August, 2008
• Phase 2 Progress– From August, 2008 to August, 2009
78
MBSE Challenge Team ObjectivesPhase 2: 2008-2009
Overall Objectives
Phase 2: 2008 2009
• Refine & extend beyond Phase 1 capabilities for modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI)
• Phase 2 Scope [new aspects]– Domains: Primary: Mechatronics (expanded excavator testbed)
Secondary: Others to demo reusabilityy y– Capabilities: Methodologies, tools, requirements,
and practical applications (MIM v2, ...)– MSI subset: Connecting system specification & design models
with multiple engineering analysis – Deployment: Productionizing techniques & tools
to enable ubiquitous practice
Page 79
• Advance & demo how SysML facilitates effective MSI
MBSE Challenge Team ObjectivesPhase 2: 2008-2009Phase 2: 2008 2009
Specific ObjectivesSpecific Objectives
1. Extend modeling & simulation interoperability method: MIM 2.01. Generalizations: graph transformations, variable topology, reusability, Ge e a at o s g ap t a s o at o s, a ab e topo ogy, eusab ty,
parametrics 2.x, trade study support, inconsistency mgt., E/MBOM extensions, method workflow, ...
2. Specializations: software, closed-loop control, electronics, ...3. Interfaces to new tools: Matlab/Simulink, ECAD, Arena, ...
2. Refine SysML and tool requirements to support MIM 2.01 Provide feedback to vendors and OMG SysML 1 2/2 x task forces1. Provide feedback to vendors and OMG SysML 1.2/2.x task forces
3. Demonstrate extensions in updated testbed4. Define deployment plan and initiate execution
Page 80
4. Define deployment plan and initiate execution5. Refine roadmap beyond Phase 2
PhD Dissertation DefenseG.W.Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering
Georgia Institute of TechnologyAtlanta GA USAAtlanta, GA, USA
Nov 3, 2008 * MRDC 4211
Knowledge Composition Methodology for Effective Analysis Problem Formulation in Simulation-based DesignManas Bajajj [email protected] Tech
Engineering Information Systems Labwww.eislab.gatech.eduSystems Realization Lab
Copyright © 1993-2008 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.
Systems Realization Labwww.srl.gatech.edu
AbstractAbstractIn simulation-based design, a key challenge is to formulate and solve analysis problems efficiently to evaluate a
large variety of design alternatives. The solution of analysis problems has benefited from advancements in commercial off-the-shelf math solvers and computational capabilities. However, the formulation of analysis problems is often a costly and laborious process. Traditional simulation templates used for representing analysis problems are typically y p p p g y p yp ybrittle with respect to variations in artifact topology and the idealization decisions taken by analysts. These templates often require manual updates and “re-wiring” of the analysis knowledge embodied in them. This makes the use of traditional simulation templates ineffective for multi-disciplinary design and optimization problems.
Based on these issues, this dissertation defines a special class of problems known as variable topology multi-body (VTMB) problems that characterizes the types of variations seen in design-analysis interoperability. This research thus primarily answers the following question:primarily answers the following question:
How can we improve the effectiveness of the analysis problem formulation process for VTMB problems?The knowledge composition methodology (KCM) presented in this dissertation answers this question by addressing
the following research gaps: (1) the lack of formalization of the knowledge used by analysts in formulating simulation templates, and (2) the inability to leverage this knowledge to define model composition methods for formulating simulation templates KCM overcomes these gaps by providing: (1) formal representation of analysis knowledge assimulation templates. KCM overcomes these gaps by providing: (1) formal representation of analysis knowledge as modular, reusable, analyst-intelligible building blocks, (2) graph transformation-based methods to automatically compose simulation templates from these building blocks based on analyst idealization decisions, and (3) meta-models for representing advanced simulation templates—VTMB design models, analysis models, and the idealization relationships between them.
Applications of the KCM to thermo-mechanical analysis of multi-stratum printed wiring boards and multi-hi k d i ff i h dli VTMB d id li i i i d h dcomponent chip packages demonstrate its effectiveness—handling VTMB and idealization variations, and enhanced
computational efficiency (from several hours in existing methods to few minutes). In addition to enhancing the effectiveness of analysis problem formulation, the KCM is envisioned to provide a foundational approach to model formulation for generalized variable topology problems.
M i NIST (R S i F B d t l )
82Copyright © 1993-2008 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.
Main sponsor: NIST (Ray, Sriram, Fenves, Brady, et al.)
Research Contributions (Bajaj, 2008)Effective Formulation of Complex Simulation TemplatesEffective Formulation of Complex Simulation Templates
Primary Capabilities Variations in system design topology Variations in system design topology Variations in idealization intent Efficiency Efficiency
– 90%+ faster– Reusable analysis building blocks (ABBs)– Automated composition from building blocks
» Formal approach based on graph transformationsMeta models for design and behavior model abstractions– Meta-models for design and behavior model abstractions
– Libraries of ABBs, transformation patterns, and rules
83Copyright © 1993-2008 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.
SysML Parametrics SysML Parametrics Flattened GraphsFlattened Graphs
[3]
pp[1]
[4][2]
[4]
84
ExamplesExamplesSysML Parametrics Flattened GraphsSysML Parametrics Flattened Graphs
1. Spring systems (with animation)2 Road scanning s stem2. Road scanning system
using LittleEye UAVs3. Flap linkage mechanical design4. Multi-year business financial model
For further information on these examples, see backup slide below entitledFor further information on these examples, see backup slide below entitled“SysML Parametrics“SysML Parametrics Suggested Starting Points” for these references:Suggested Starting Points” for these references:SysML ParametricsSysML Parametrics——Suggested Starting Points for these references:Suggested Starting Points for these references:-- Examples 1 and 3: Peak et al. 2007 (IS07 Parts 1 and 2)Examples 1 and 3: Peak et al. 2007 (IS07 Parts 1 and 2)-- Examples 2 and 4: Zwemer and Bajaj 2008 (Frontiers Workshop)Examples 2 and 4: Zwemer and Bajaj 2008 (Frontiers Workshop)
85
SysML Parametrics Graph VisualizationSysML Parametrics Graph Visualization[in collaboration with InterCAX[in collaboration with InterCAX——A. Scott Fall 2008 internship]A. Scott Fall 2008 internship]
• Flattened graph [aka COB constraint graph]– Flattened graph graph among value typesFlattened graph graph among value types – Block encapsulation not shown
• Purposep– Alternative way to understand / interact with a given model
• Primitive connections/relationships, structure, complexity, ...
– Enables visual/intuitive model comparisons– Possible additional SysML view of models
Stat s• Status– Prototype plugin that leverages ygraph toolkit
Auto generates flattened graph from MagicDraw
86
– Auto-generates flattened graph from MagicDraw– Construction animation and static final view
SysML and Mobile Robotic Systems: SysML and Mobile Robotic Systems: A Research Testbed and Educational Platform A Research Testbed and Educational Platform Status Update: 2009Status Update: 2009--FebFeb--1717Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab –– www.msl.gatech.eduwww.msl.gatech.eduRussell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael QinRussell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael Qin
• Background & Objectives
Russell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael QinRussell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael Qin
• Background & Objectives • Operational Control Using SysML Activities
– Demonstration• Status & Next Steps
87
Institute for Personal Robots in EducationInstitute for Personal Robots in Education(IPRE) (IPRE) —— http://www.roboteducation.org/http://www.roboteducation.org/
88
BackgroundBackground
• Leveraging Institute for Personal Robots in Education (IPRE) — http://www.roboteducation.org/Education (IPRE) http://www.roboteducation.org/
– Multi-university/corporation educational environment– Ex. Used in intro comp sci course @ GIT (CS1301)
• Key elements– Mobile robots: IPRE Scribbler, Roomba, SRV-1
• Sensors, cameras, Bluetooth, firmware, PCB ECAD, ...
– Mobile robotics s/w platform: Myro (Python)• Primitive operations ... image processing, intro ~AI, ...
– Domain context• Multi-unit systems, command & control, reusability, ...
• Low-cost and open (non-proprietary)
89
Low cost and open (non proprietary)
ObjectivesObjectives——Big PictureBig Picture• Research & demonstration testbed
• Achieve Phase 2 objectives (INCOSE MBSE MSI Team)
– System run-time operation aided by SysML– Embedded software / firmware
• Hardware-software relations, real-time factors, ...– Executable SysML across multiple constructs
• Activities, parametrics, state machines ...– Misc: instance levels, versioning/config mgt.
• SysML education platform– Usage in hands-on courses
90
(industry short courses, university courses, ...)– Model it and run it!
SysML and Mobile Robotic Systems: SysML and Mobile Robotic Systems: A Research Testbed and Educational Platform A Research Testbed and Educational Platform Status Update: 2009Status Update: 2009--FebFeb--1717Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab –– www.msl.gatech.eduwww.msl.gatech.eduRussell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael QinRussell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael Qin
• Background & Objectives
Russell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael QinRussell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael Qin
• Background & Objectives • Operational Control Using SysML Activities
– Demonstration• Status & Next Steps
91
Scribbler / Myro DemoScribbler / Myro DemoExecutable SysML Activity Model [1 Executable SysML Activity Model [1 -- original]original]
from myro import *initialize("com29")
forward(1, 1)turnRight(1 4)
Resulting python script
turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)( , )stop()
92
Scribbler / Myro DemoScribbler / Myro DemoExecutable SysML Activity Model [2 Executable SysML Activity Model [2 -- after live update]after live update]
from myro import *initialize("com29")
senses()beep(1 440)beep(1, 440)forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)beep(1, 440)turnRight(1, .4)
Resulting python script
g ( , )forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)stop()
93
Representative Broader Usage (Sanitized)Representative Broader Usage (Sanitized)Excursion 456 on Moon: Rover Excursion 456 on Moon: Rover -- UnmannedUnmannedMission: Pick up 10 kg of rocks at two specified locationsMission: Pick up 10 kg of rocks at two specified locations
WP 4Stop at Target Task X: Pick up rocks
10 kilos10 minutes
Report all data attributesTask X WP 4 to WP 5H di 200 d
WP 5StopReport all data
WP 1
WP 3Task 4: WP 3 to WP 4Report all data attributes
Heading: 200 degreesTime: 50 minutes
Report all data
Time: 000 minutesTask 1: Travel WP 1 to WP 2Power = 500 unitsPower Rate: 1 unit per minute(traveling and at stops)Rover Weight = 100 kg
WP 2Stop at TargetTask 2: Pick up rocks
10 kil
Heading: 300 degreesTime: 40 minutes
Rover Weight = 100 kgReport all dataattributes Heading: 120 degrees forTime: 30 minutes
‐ 10 kilos‐ 10 minutes
Task 3: WP 2 to WP 3Heading: 060 degreesTime: 60 minutesReport All Data attributes
94
Report All Data attributes
Contents
• Problem DescriptionProblem Description– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systems– Challenge Team Objectivesg j
• Technical Approach– Techniques and Testbeds
• Deliverables & Outcomes• Summary & Collaboration Approachy pp
Page 95
SE Practices for Describing SystemsSE Practices for Describing Systems
Past / NowPast / Now Now / FutureNow / Future
• Specifications• Interface requirements• System design• Analysis & trade-off• Test plansTest plans
96
Moving from Document-centric to Model-centric
Revision by GIT; Original Source: OMG SysML Tutorial (June 2008). Reprinted with permission. Copyright © 2006-2008 by Object Management Group.
What you can do with a SysML model ...What you can do with a SysML model ...• Describe requirements, system structure, & allocations• Generate and/or link to simulations & verify requirements• Support system trade studies• Link to domain models & analyses: S/W, M/ECAD, ...
I e do the Vee and more (e g support system operation)• I.e., do the Vee and more ... (e.g., support system operation)
Systems SystemsRequirements Definition;
Validateto User
Decompo
Definiti on an
d
SystemsDesign
SystemsIntegration
Definition; System Concepts
System Spec.; Verification Plan
Sys. Integration; Sys. Verification
to UserRequirements
position and
ition
Integ
ratio
nVe
rifica
tion
Allocate Specs;Allocate Verification
Assemble Subsys;Subsys. Verification
97
Design Engineering
Time"Vee" model by Forsberg and Mooz, 1992
Modeling & Simulation Interoperability for MBSE Modeling & Simulation Interoperability for MBSE Benefits of SysMLBenefits of SysML--based Approachbased Approach
Primary Impacts
ng
emor
y tif
act
Enabling Capabilities R
educ
ed
Tim
e R
educ
ed
Cos
t R
educ
ed
Ris
k nc
reas
ed
Und
erst
andi
nnc
reas
ed
Cor
pora
te M
enc
reas
ed A
rP
erfo
rman
ce Precision KnowledgePrecision Knowledgefor thefor the
ModelModel--Based EnterpriseBased EnterpriseEnabling Capabilities R T R C R R In U In C In P
Increased Knowledge Capture & Completeness
■ ■ ■ ■
Increased Modularity & Reusability
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
pp
y yIncreased Traceability
■ ■ ■
Reduced Manual Re-Creation
■ ■ ■
IncreasedIncreased Automation
■ ■ ■
Reduced Modeling Effort
■ ■
Increased ■ ■
98
Analysis Intensity ■ ■
MBSE Challenge Model Interoperability TeamModel Interoperability Team Open “Call for Participation”
• Systems engineering drivers in commercial settings– Increased system complexity– Cross-disciplinary communication/coordinationCross disciplinary communication/coordination
• Enhancement possibilities based on interest– Sponsoring other demonstrations and testbeds– Developing shared models and libraries– etc.
• Primary contactsPrimary contacts– Russell Peak [[email protected]]– Sandy Friedenthal [sanford.friedenthal@ lmco.com]
R B kh t [B kh tR M@J h D ]
Page 99
– Roger Burkhart [[email protected]]
Additional ResourcesAdditional Resources
SysML ParametricsSysML Parametrics——Suggested Starting PointsSuggested Starting PointsIntroductory Papers/Tutorials• 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.]http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-incose-is-1-peak-primer/
• Peak RS Burkhart RM Friedenthal SA Wilson MW Bajaj M Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML—Part 2: CelebratingPeak 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.]http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-incose-is-2-peak-diversity/
Example Applications• Peak RS Burkhart RM Friedenthal SA Paredis CJJ McGinnis LF (2008) Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Paredis CJJ, McGinnis LF (2008) Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML—
Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report. Presentation to INCOSE MBSE Challenge Team, Utrecht, Holland. [Overviews modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) methodology progress in the context of an excavator testbed.]http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/seminars-etc/2008-06-incose-is-mbse-mechatronics-msi-peak/
• Peak RS (2007) Leveraging Templates & Processes with SysML. Invited Presentation. Developing a Design/Simulation Framework: AWorkshop with CPDA's Design and Simulation Council, Atlanta. [Includes applications to automotive steering wheel systems and FEA simulation templates ] http://eislab gatech edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/simulation templates.] http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007 cpda dsfw peak/
Commercial Tools and Other Examples/Tutorials• ParaMagic™ plugin for MagicDraw®. Developed by InterCAX LLC (a Georgia Tech spin-off) [1]. Available at www.MagicDraw.com. • Zwemer DA and Bajaj M (2008) SysML Parametrics and Progress Towards Multi-Solvers and Next-Generation Object-Oriented
Spreadsheets. Frontiers in Design & Simulation Workshop, Georgia Tech PSLM Center, Atlanta. [Highlights techniques for executing SysML t i b d th P M i ™ l i f M i D ® I l d UAV d fi i l t l ]parametrics based on the ParaMagic™ plugin for MagicDraw®. Includes UAV and financial systems examples.]
http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/events/frontiers/
See slides below for additional references and resources.
101
[1] Full disclosure: InterCAX LLC is a spin-off company originally created to commercialize technology from RS Peak’s GIT group. GIT has licensed technology to InterCAX and has an equity stake in the company. RS Peak is one of several business partners in InterCAX. Commercialization of the SysML/composable object aspects is being fostered by the GIT VentureLab incubator program (www.venturelab.gatech.edu) via an InterCAX VentureLab project initiated October 2007.
MBX/SysMLMBX/SysML--Related Efforts at Georgia TechRelated Efforts at Georgia Tech
• SysML Focus Area web page– http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/– Includes links to publications, applications,
projects, examples, courses, commercialization, etc.– Frontiers 2008 workshop on MBSE/MBX, SysML, ...
• Selected projects– Deere: System dynamics (fluid power, ...)– Lockheed: System design & analysis integration
NASA Enabling technolog (S sML )– NASA: Enabling technology (SysML, ...)– NIST: Design-analysis interoperability (DAI)– TRW Automotive: DAI/FEA (steering wheel systems )
102
TRW Automotive: DAI/FEA (steering wheel systems ... )
Selected GIT MBX/SysMLSelected GIT MBX/SysML--Related PublicationsRelated PublicationsSome references are available online at Some references are available online at http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/. See additional slides for selected abstracts.. See additional slides for selected abstracts.
• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Paredis CJJ, McGinnis LF (2008) Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML—Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report. Presentation to INCOSE MBSE Challenge Team, Utrecht, Holland. [Overviews modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) methodology progress in the context of an excavator testbed.] http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/seminars-etc/2008-06-incose-is-mbse-mechatronics-msi-peak/
• 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• 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 designModelica 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. [Includes applications to automotive steering wheel systems and FEA simulation templates.]http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/
• Bajaj M, Peak RS, Paredis CJJ (2007) Knowledge Composition for Efficient Analysis Problem Formulation, Part 1: Motivation and Requirements. DETC2007-35049,
103
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 Meta-Model. 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).]
Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysMLIntegrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML——Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status ReportMechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report
AbstractThis presentation overviews work-in-progress experiences and lessons learned from an excavator testbed that interconnects simulation models with associated diverse system models, design models, and manufacturing models. The
l i t bl d d d l b d t i i (MBSE) i ti l d d l b d X1 (MBX) igoal is to enable advanced model-based systems engineering (MBSE) in particular and model-based X1 (MBX) in general. Our method employs SysML as the primary technology to achieve multi-level multi-fidelity interoperability, while at the same time leveraging conventional modeling & simulation tools including mechanical CAD, factory CAD, spreadsheets, math solvers, finite element analysis (FEA), discrete event solvers, and optimization tools. This work is currently sponsored by several organizations (including Deere and Lockheed) and is part of the Mechatronics & Interoperability Team in the INCOSE MBSE ChallengeInteroperability Team in the INCOSE MBSE Challenge.
CitationPeak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Paredis CJJ, McGinnis LF (2008) Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML—Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report. Presentation to INCOSE MBSE Challenge Team, Utrecht, Holland. http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/seminars-etc/2008-06-incose-is-mbse-mechatronics-msi-peak/, p g p p
[1] The X in MBX includes engineering (MBE), manufacturing (MBM), and potentially other scopes and contexts such as model-based enterprises (MBE).
104
SimulationSimulation--Based Design Using SysMLBased Design Using SysML
Part 1: A Parametrics PrimerOMG SysML™ is a modeling language for specifying, analyzing, designing, and verifying complex systems. It is a general-purpose graphical modeling language with computer-sensible semantics. This Part 1 paper and its Part 2 companion show how SysML supports simulation-based design (SBD) via
Part 2: Celebrating Diversity by Example These two companion papers present foundational principles of parametrics in OMG SysML™ and their application to simulation-based design. Parametrics capabilities have been included in SysML to support integrating engineering analysis with system requirements, behavior, and
tutorial-like examples. Our target audience is end users wanting to learn about SysML parametrics in general and its applications to engineering design and analysis in particular. We include background on the development of SysML parametrics that may also be useful for other stakeholders (e.g, vendors and researchers).
In Part 1 we walk through models of simple objects that progressively i t d S ML t i t T h d t di b
structure models. This Part 2 paper walks through SysML models for a benchmark tutorial on analysis templates utilizing an airframe system component called a flap linkage. This example highlights how engineering analysis models, such as stress models, are captured in SysML, and then executed by external tools including math solvers and finite element analysis solvers.
W i th lti t ti hit t (MRA) th d dintroduce SysML parametrics concepts. To enhance understanding by comparison and contrast, we present corresponding models based on composable objects (COBs). The COB knowledge representation has provided a conceptual foundation for SysML parametrics, including executability and validation. We end with sample analysis building blocks (ABBs) from mechanics of materials showing how SysML captures engineering knowledge in a reusable form Part 2 employs these ABBs in a
We summarize the multi-representation architecture (MRA) method and how its simulation knowledge patterns support computing environments having a diversity of analysis fidelities, physical behaviors, solution methods, and CAD/CAE tools. SysML and composable object (COB) techniques described in Part 1 together provide the MRA with graphical modeling languages, executable parametrics, and reusable, modular, multi-directional capabilitiesengineering knowledge in a reusable form. Part 2 employs these ABBs in a
high diversity mechanical example that integrates computer-aided design and engineering analysis (CAD/CAE).
The object and constraint graph concepts embodied in SysML parametrics and COBs provide modular analysis capabilities based on multi-directional constraints. These concepts and capabilities provide a semantically rich way to organize and reuse the complex relations and
directional capabilities. We also demonstrate additional SysML modeling concepts, including
packages, building block libraries, and requirements-verification-simulation interrelationships. Results indicate that SysML offers significant promise as a unifying language for a variety of models-from top-level system models to discipline-specific leaf-level models.
y y g pproperties that characterize SBD models. Representing relations as non-causal constraints, which generally accept any valid combination of inputs and outputs, enhances modeling flexibility and expressiveness. We envision SysML becoming a unifying representation of domain-specific engineering analysis models that include fine-grain associativity with other domain- and system-level models, ultimately providing fundamental
biliti f t ti t lif l t
CitationPeak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego.
105
capabilities for next-generation systems lifecycle management. San Diego. Part 1: A Parametrics Primer
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-incose-is-1-peak-primer/Part 2: Celebrating Diversity by Example
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-incose-is-2-peak-diversity/
Composable Objects (COB) Requirements & ObjectivesComposable Objects (COB) Requirements & Objectives
AbstractThis 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 E i d t h l i t f i i d t i d t i it id tifi th t j h llEngineers 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 forleverages 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.
CitationDR 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 ProjectThe Composable Object (COB) Knowledge Representation: Enabling Advanced Collaborative Engineering EnvironmentsThe Composable Object (COB) Knowledge Representation: Enabling Advanced Collaborative Engineering Environments (CEEs). http://eislab.gatech.edu/projects/nasa-ngcobs/
106
Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysMLLeveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysMLApplications to CADApplications to CAD--FEA InteroperabilityFEA Interoperability
AbstractSysML 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
ifi l ith t ti t ti li L h t j i thi j t d i l t i ilspecific 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.
S k Bi k hSpeaker BiosketchRussell 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 p g y y p p y pvalidation.
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.
CitationRS Peak (2007) Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysML: Applications to CAD-FEA Interoperability. Developing a Design/Simulation Framework, CPDA Workshop, Atlanta.
107
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/