NDIA M&S Committee Meeting

April 22, 2009 - Arlington, Virginia

Model Model--Based SE Using SysML Based SE Using SysML Model Model Based SE Using SysML Based SE Using SysML
Part 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S Part 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S
Russell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnis Russell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnis
Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology
Product & Systems Lifecycle Management Center Product & Systems Lifecycle Management Center
www.pslm.gatech.edu www.pslm.gatech.edu p g p g
Part 1 Speaker: Russell Peak Part 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/
Model Model--Based SE Using SysML Based SE Using SysML
Part 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S Part 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S
Abstract
This 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 bil models, 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 tools factory 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/
Citations
RS Peak, CJJ Paredis, LF McGinnis (2009-04) Model-Based SE Using SysMLPart 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 SysMLPart 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/
Contact
Russell.Peak@gatech.edu, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, www.msl.gatech.edu
Collaborat ion Approach
Primary Current Team Primary Current Team
Deere & Co Deere & Co.
Roger Burkhart
Georgia I nst it ut e of Technology (GI T) Georgia I nst it ut e of Technology (GI T)
Russell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnis, & co.
ll b Leveraging collaborat ions in
PSLM Cent er SysML Focus Area (see next slide)
L kh d M i Lockheed Mart in
Sandy Friedent hal
Page 3
Vendor collaborat ion
GIT Product & Systems Lifecycle Management Center GIT Product & Systems Lifecycle Management Center
Leveraging Related Efforts Leveraging Related Efforts
www.pslm.gatech.edu www.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
Contents Contents
Phase 1 Overview and Results
From August 2007 to August 2008 From August, 2007 to August, 2008
Phase 2 Progress
From August, 2008 to August, 2009
5
Cont ent s
Problem Descript ion Problem Descript ion
Challenge Team Obj ect ives
Charact erist ics of Mechat ronic Syst ems y
Technical Approach
Techniques and Test beds
Deliverables & Out comes
Collaborat ion Approach pp
Page 6
MBSE Challenge Team Obj ect ives
Phase 1: 2007-2008 Phase 1: 2007 2008
Overall Obj ect ives
Define & demonst rat e capabilit ies for
d d d li & i l i i bili (MSI ) advanced modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI )
Phase 1 Scope
Domain: Mechat ronics Domain: Mechat ronics
Capabilit ies: Met hodologies, t ools, requirement s,
and pract ical applicat ions
MSI subset : Connect ing syst em specificat ion & design models MSI subset : Connect ing syst em specificat ion & design models
wit h mult iple engineering analysis & dynamic simulat ion models
Test & demonst rat e how SysML facilit at es effect ive MSI
Page 7
Not e: The obj ect ives t o dat e are primarily based on proj ect s in t he GI T PSLM Cent er sponsored by indust ry and
government see backup slides.
MBSE Challenge Team Obj ect ives
Phase 1: 2007-2008 Phase 1: 2007 2008
S ifi Obj t i Specific Obj ect ives
1. Define modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod
2. Define SysML and t ool requirement s t o support MSI
1. Provide feedback t o vendors and OMG SysML 1.1 revision t ask force
3 Demonst rat e MSI met hod wit h 3+ engineering analysis 3. Demonst rat e MSI met hod wit h 3+ engineering analysis
and dynamic simulat ion model t ypes
1. I nclude represent at ive building block library: fluid power
2 I nclude hybrid discret e/ cont inuous syst ems 2. I nclude hybrid discret e/ cont inuous syst ems
described by different ial algebraic equat ions (DAEs)
4. Develop roadmap beyond Phase 1
Page 8
Interoperability Method Objectives for MBSE Interoperability Method Objectives for MBSE

Primary Impacts

g

e
m
o
r
y

i
f
a
c
t



d
u
c
e
d


m
e

d
u
c
e
d


o
s
t

d
u
c
e
d


s
k

c
r
e
a
s
e
d

d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
c
r
e
a
s
e
d

o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e

M
e
c
r
e
a
s
e
d

A
r
t
i
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e


Enabling Capabilities R
e
T
i
m
R
e
C
o
R
e
R
i
s
I
n
c
U
n
I
n
c
C
o
I
n
c
P
e
Increased Knowledge
Capture & Completeness

Increased

Modularity & Reusability

Increased
Traceability

Reduced

Manual Re-Creation

Increased
Automation

Reduced
Modeling Effort

9
Modeling Effort
Increased
Analysis Intensity

Mechat ronics Archit ect ure
Software
Functions
Operating Modes
Modules, Libraries
Messages
Mechanical System
Ki ti & D i
Interface
Di l
p g
State Machines
Control Systems
...
g
Protocols
Code
...
Kinematics & Dynamics
Powertrain
Thermal
Fluids
Electric Power
Actuators
Sensors
Electronic
Control Unit
(ECU)
Displays
User Controls
Haptics
Remote Links
...
Electronics
...
Communications Bus
F db k C t l L
Page 10
Feedback Control Loop
Cont ent s
Problem Descript ion Problem Descript ion
Charact erist ics of Mechat ronic Syst ems
Challenge Team Obj ect ives g j
Technical Approach
Techniques and Test beds
Deliverables & Out comes
Collaborat ion Approach pp
Page 11
Overall Technical Approach pp
Technique Development
Federat ed syst em model framework t echnology
A.k.a. collect ive product model
Modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod Modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod
Graph t ransformat ion t echnology
et c et c.
Test bed I mplement at ions & Execut ion
I t erat ion I t erat ion
Page 12
Technical ApproachSubset pp
St andards-based framework t echnology
Federat ed syst em models Federat ed syst em models
Ut ilize SysML where appropriat e (esp. paramet rics)
Modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod Modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod
Harmonize, generalize, ext end new & exist ing work
COBs, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ... , , , , , ,
Test beds
Develop and t est t echniques it erat ively p q y
I mplement t est cases for verificat ion & validat ion
Produce reference examples
Page 13
Produce open resources
(e.g., SysML-based fluid power libraries)
Example Federated System Model Example Federated System Model
Logical composition of models based on various Logical composition of models based on various
ontologies/schemas (from native tools, standards, in ontologies/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
PDM
Thermal 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 URen, NASA-JPL
Model Model--Centric Framework Centric Framework
Produce, Merge, Enrich, Consume Produce, Merge, Enrich, Consume
P d T l
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/journals/2004-jcise-peak/ (where collective product model ~ federated system model)
Tool A
1
Producer Tools
(Primary Authoring)
Tool A
n
...
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 Model
M t B ildi Bl k
Enricher 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 B
j
Enricher Tools
(Secondary Authoring)
Consumer Tools
15
p
Local customizations
Modeling technologies:
Express, UML, SysML,
COBs, OWL, XML,
Tool C
k
Consumer Tools
(e.g., Solvers)
Technical ApproachSubset pp
St andards-based framework t echnology
Federat ed syst em models Federat ed syst em models
Ut ilize SysML where appropriat e (esp. paramet rics)
Modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod Modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod
Harmonize, generalize, ext end new & exist ing work
COBs/ SysML, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ... / y , , , , , ,
Test beds
Develop and t est t echniques it erat ively p q y
I mplement t est cases for verificat ion & validat ion
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/
function function
definition
use
Page 17
3. Requirements 4. Parametrics
Model vs. Diagrams Model vs. Diagrams
Reality
- Envisioned or actual
Model
- Computer-oriented
- Master repository
Diagrams
- Human-oriented
- Subset views Master 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 Status SysML Technology Status
www.omgsysml.org www.omgsysml.org
Spec v1.0: 2007-09 v1.1: 2008-11 v1.2: WIP
v2.x: RFI preparation workshop - 2008-12
http // 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 SysML
Level 1: Intra Level 1: Intra- -Template Diversity Template Diversity
soi: Linkage
par [cbam] LinkagePlaneStressModel [Definition view]
ts1
B
sleeve1
B
ts2
ds2
ds1
sleeve2
L
shaft
Leff
us
rib1 rib2
red = idealized parameter
CAE model
effectiveLength:
deformationModel:
LinkagePlaneStressAbb
rs1:
ws1:
ts1:
l:
sleeve1:
width:
outerRadius:
wallThickness:
l 2
Mechanical
CAD 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. 2007Part 2]
Wiring Together Diverse Models via SysML Wiring Together Diverse Models via SysML
Level 2: Inter Level 2: Inter--Template Diversity (per MIM 0.1) Template Diversity (per MIM 0.1)
Naval Systems-of-Systems (SoS) PanoramaAn Envisioned Complex Model Interoperability Problem Enabled by SysML/MIM/COBs
Paramet ric associat ivit y
Tool & nat ive model associat ivit y
Composit ion relat ionship ( re-usage)
L
e
g
e
n
d
Paramet ric associat ivit y
Tool & nat ive model associat ivit y
Composit ion relat ionship ( re-usage)
L
e
g
e
n
d
c1 Simulation Templates d0 Simulation e0 Solver a0 Descriptive
c2. Optimization Templates c0. Context-Specific Models
Based on HMX 0.1
2008-02-20
c1. Simulation Templates
(of diverse behavior & fidelity)
ECAD & MCAD Tools
Evacuation
Mgt.
d0. Simulation
Building Blocks
Tribon, CATIA, NX, Cadence, ...
e0. Solver
Resources
a0. Descriptive
Resources
Evacuation Codes
Egress, Exodus,
CFD
Flotherm Fluent
General Math
Mathematica,
Maple, Matlab
,

2D
Propeller
Hydro
Systems & Software Tools

Flotherm, Fluent,
3D

Hydro-
dynamics
Systems & Software Tools
DOORS, E+
MagicDraw,
Studio,
Eclipse,
Damaged
Stability
FEA
Abaqus, Ansys,
Patran, Nastran,
Operation Mgt. Systems

21
Libraries & Databases
Classification Codes, Materials,
Personnel, Procedures,
b0. Federated
Descriptive Models
Navigation
Accuracy
Discrete Event
Arena, Quest,
Technical ApproachSubset pp
St andards-based framework t echnology
Federat ed syst em models Federat ed syst em models
Ut ilize SysML where appropriat e (esp. paramet rics)
Modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod Modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod
Harmonize, generalize, ext end new & exist ing work
COBs, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ... , , , , , ,
Test beds
Develop and t est t echniques it erat ively p q y
I mplement t est cases for verificat ion & validat ion
Produce reference examples
Page 22
Produce open resources
(e.g., SysML-based fluid power libraries)
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysML
O ti l
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
System Model
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
Factory
Model
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
Mathematica
Reliability
Model
Optimization
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Production
Model
Excel
Cost Model
Dymola
Dig Cycle
Model
23
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1) Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)
Opt imizat ion Model
Obj t i
NX
ModelCent er
c0. Cont ext -Speci f i c
Si mul at i on Model s
e0. Sol ver Resour ces
a0. Descr i pt i ve Resources
(Aut horing Tools, ...)
d0. Si mul at i on Bui l di ng Bl ock
Li brar i es
Solid
Cost
Concept s
Opt imizat ion
Concept s
Reliabilit y
Not es
Reliabilit y
M d l
Cost
Model
Obj ect ive
Funct ion
Excel
ModelCent er Solid
Mechanics
Queuing
Concept s
Fluid
Mechanics
Reliabilit y
Concept s
b0 Feder at ed
Excel
Model
Federat ed Excavat or Model
Mat hemat ica
Dig Cycle
Model
b0. Feder at ed
Descr i pt i ve Model s
Hydraulics Operat ions
Dymola
RSD/ E+
MagicDraw
Ext ensional
Linkage Model
Plane St ress
Linkage Model
Boom
Linkages
y
Subsyst em
p
Req. &
Obj ect ives
Dig Sit e
Dump Trucks
Legend
MM1 Queuing
Ansys
Fact oryCAD
Federat ed Fact ory Model
Dig Sit e
Dump Trucks
Req. &
Obj ect ives
Excavat or
MBOM
24
eM-Plant /
Fact ory Flow
Discret e Event
Assy Model
MM1 Queuing
Assy Model
Fact oryCAD
Assembly Lines
Work Cells
AGVs
Buffers
Machines
2008-02-20
Demo Scenario Demo 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. production
Ch 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 Testbed Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysML
O ti l
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
System Model
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
Factory
Model
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
Mathematica
Reliability
Model
Optimization
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Production
Model
Excel
Cost Model
Dymola
Dig Cycle
Model
26
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
Earth Earth--Moving Enterprise Moving Enterprise
SysML package diagram (pkg) SysML package diagram (pkg)
27
Excavator Model Tree Excavator Model Tree
Summary View (mostly unexpanded) in MagicDraw SysML Tool Summary View (mostly unexpanded) in MagicDraw SysML Tool
28
Excavator Operational Domain Excavator Operational Domain
Top Top--Level Context Diagram in SysML Level Context Diagram in SysML
29
Excavator Operational Domain Excavator Operational Domain
First Level of Detail First Level of Detailbdd (SysML block definition diagram) bdd (SysML block definition diagram)
30
Excavator Operational Domain Excavator Operational Domain
First Level of Detail First Level of Detailibd (SysML internal block diagram) ibd (SysML internal block diagram)
31
Excavator Operational Domain Excavator Operational Domain
Top Top--Level Use Cases Level Use Cases
32
Excavator Dig Cycle Excavator Dig Cycle
Activity Diagram Activity Diagram
33
Excavator Requirements & Objectives Excavator Requirements & Objectives
req req -- SysML Requirements Diagram SysML Requirements Diagram
34
System Objective Function System Objective FunctionExcavator Excavator
Context: Operational Enterprise Context: Operational Enterprise

= = =
+ =
n
j i j i
j i ij
n
i
i i
moe moe k moe k f
, ; 1 , 1

Mathematical
Form
SysML Parametrics SysML Parametrics
Form
35
Excavator Test Case Excavator Test Case
Selected System Breakdowns Selected System Breakdowns
36
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysML
O ti l
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
System Model
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
Factory
Model
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
Mathematica
Reliability
Model
Optimization
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Production
Model
Excel
Cost Model
Dymola
Dig Cycle
Model
37
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
Hydraulic Circuit Diagram Hydraulic Circuit Diagram
Pressure Pressure--Compensated, Load Compensated, Load--Sensing Excavator Sensing ExcavatorISO 1219 notation ISO 1219 notation
Mechanical
Interface
Mechanical
Interface
Mechanical
Interface
Interface Interface
LS
Mechanical
Interface
38
SysML Schematic (ibd) SysML Schematic (ibd) Basic View Basic View
Pressure Pressure--Compensated, Load Compensated, Load--Sensing Excavator Sensing Excavator
39
SysML Schematic (ibd) SysML Schematic (ibd) Detailed View Detailed View
Pressure Pressure--Compensated, Load Compensated, Load--Sensing Excavator Sensing Excavator
40
Hydraulics Subsystem Simulation Model Hydraulics Subsystem Simulation Model
bdd bdd
41
Excavator Case Study Excavator Case Study
Native Tool Models: Modelica Native Tool Models: Modelica
c c B B
SwingFl...
BoomCyl... BoomCyl... ArmCylB... ArmCylR... BucketC... BucketC...
b
4
y
{
0
,
.
2
1
.
.
.
a
b
b4x
r={-.92...
a b
b3
r={4.22,1.3...
a b
cyl2f
m=
bB...
l
1
_
l
b2_l
r={2.85,1.18,...
a b
Arm1
r={0.49...
a b
cyl3f
=
5
0
b
B
.
.
.
Arm... Buc... Boo...
c... c...
c...
B... B...
Hydraulics Model
SwingMotor
B
BoomCylR
B
BucketCyl
B
ArmCyl
B
m
C
y
l
L
BoomCyl
swingComma...
BoomCyl...
C
a
r
r
i
a
g
e
r
=
{
-
0
.
1
6
4
,
1
.
.
.
.
a
b
Boom
r={7.11,0,0}
a b
b2_r
r={2.85,1....
a b
b
1
_
r
{
.
6
5
5
,
.
.
.
.
a
b
r
=
{
a
c
y
l
1
.
.
.
m=...
bC...
m=...
b
1
_
l
r
=
{
.
6
5
5
,
.
.
.
.
a
b
c
y
Arm
r={3.654,...
a b
m
=
.
.
.
b
A
r
m
JointR...
n_a={...
Arm2
r={2.97,0....
a b
m
b
B
p
1
0
r
=
{
.
5
2
.
.
.
n={...
Ar...
n={...
Bu...
n={...
Bo...
c...
bra B B B
B
o
o
m
BoomCyl...
boomCommand
Mechanical model of complete...
B
a
s
e
r
=
{
.
.
.
n
=
{
0
,
.
.
.
S
w
i
n
.
.
.
r
=
{ a
Boo...
brake S...
c... c...
f
r
a
m
e
_
.
.
.
bra...
Multi-Body System Dynamics Model
B
T P
LS
B
T P
LS
B
T P
LS
B
T P
LS
B
T P
LS
armCommand
(linkages, ...)
max
ma...
max1
ma...
max2
ma...
max3
ma...
B
pclsPump
circuitTank
a
c
c
u
m
u
l
a
t
o
r
constantSpeed
bucketCommand
hydraulics
Dig Cycle
42
world
x
y
environment
p_amb = 101325
T_amb = 288.15
Simulation Simulation
in Dymola in Dymola Simulation Simulation yy
Modelica Modelica
Lexical Representation Lexical Representation
( t ( t t d f S ML) t d f S ML)
Results Results
(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 Testbed Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysML
O ti l
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
System Model
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
Factory
Model
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
Mathematica
Reliability
Model
Optimization
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Production
Model
Excel
Cost Model
Dymola
Dig Cycle
Model
44
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
Recurring Problem: Recurring Problem:
Maintaining Multiple Views Maintaining Multiple Views
Multiple
stakeholders stakeholders
with different
views and tools views and tools
Models of
different system
Aspect
A
Model s
different system
aspects
Different views Different views
are not
independent
Aspect
B
Model s
Syst em
Desi gn
45 45
p
Model
Approach: Model Transformation Approach: Model Transformation
1. Define meta-models
2. Define a model transformation
Create graphs of correspondence between meta-
models
Define 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 l T f ti S ifi ti
refers to refers to
Source Metamodel Target Metamodel
conforms to conforms to
Transformation Specification
executes
46 46
Source Model Target Model Transformation Engine
reads writes
(Czarnecki, K., & Hellen, S., 2006)
Capturing Domain Specific Knowledge Capturing Domain Specific Knowledge
in Graph Transformations* in Graph Transformations* pp
Requirements &
Objectives
SysML

Hydraulic_Subsystem Schematic [Block] ibd [ ]
valve : 4port3wayServoValve
portP : FlowPort
portT : FlowPort
pump : FDpump
discharge : FlowPort
suction : FlowPort
housing : FlowPort
inputShaft : FlowPort
tank-to-pump : Line
pump-to-valve : Line
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
system
alternative
Topology Generation*
System
Alternatives
MAsCoMs SysML
cylA : FlowPort
cylB : FlowPort
p p
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
valve-to-cylP1 : Line
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
valve-to-filter : Line
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
filter-to-tank : Line
b : FlowPort
tank : Tank
return : FlowPort
sump : FlowPort
System Behavior
S ML
Model Composition*
actuator : Double-ActingCylinder
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
housing : FlowPort
rod : FlowPort
valve-to-cylP2 : Line
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
filter : Filter
in : FlowPort
out : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
a : FlowPort
b : FlowPort
y
Models
SysML
Model Translation*
a : FlowPort rod : FlowPort
hydraulics
world
y
Dig
Cycle
Arm
Boom
Swing
Bucket
Traj
behavior
model
simulation
configuration
Executable
Simulations
Dymola
Simulation Configuration*
x model
47 47
Design
Optimization
ModelCenter
Simulation Configuration
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysML
O ti l
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
System Model
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
Factory
Model
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
Mathematica
Reliability
Model
Optimization
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Production
Model
Excel
Cost Model
Dymola
Dig Cycle
Model
48
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
Wrap Dynamic Simulation as Wrap Dynamic Simulation as
ModelCenter Model in SysML ModelCenter Model in SysML yy
Fully qualified name points to
ModelCenter model
Stereotypes define
input/output causality p p y
49
DOE Model in SysML DOE Model in SysML
LatinHyperCube sampler
Reference
Property
Model
50 50
Automatic Export to Automatic Export to
and Execution in ModelCenter and Execution in ModelCenter
51 51
Application in Case Study: Application in Case Study:
Optimization under uncertainty with kriging model Optimization under uncertainty with kriging model p y g g p y g g
optimizer
Latin Hypercube +
K i i f Kriging 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 g
response surface to
reduce
computational cost
SysML Model SysML Model
Optimization under uncertainty with kriging model Optimization under uncertainty with kriging model
53 53
Pl t V i bl (M d l tilit tilit )
Trade Study Optimization Results Trade Study Optimization Results
0.8386
0.74458
0.65057
0.55655
0.46254
0.36852
0.27451
0.18049
0.08648
-0.00754
Plot Variable: response (Model.utility.utility)
0.82
0.8
0.78
0.76
0.74
0.72
0.7
0.68
0.66
0.64
0.62
0.6
0.58
0 56
Auto-generated
optimization model in
ModelCenter
Design space
visualized in
ModelCenter
u
t
ilit
y
0.56
0.54
0.52
0.5
0.48
0.46
0.44
0.42
0.4
0.38
0.36
0.34
0.32
0.3
0.28
0.26
0.24
0.22
0.2
0.18
0.16
0.14
boomSize
0.116
0.115
0.114
0.113
0.112
0.111
0.11
0.109
0.108
0.107
0.106
0.105
0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
-3.95517e-016
0.145 0.144 0.144 0.143 0.143 0.142 0.142 0.141 0.141 0.14 0.14 0.139 0.139 0.138 0.138 0.137 0.137 0.136 0.136 0.135 0 135 0 134
0.12
0.119
0.118
0.117 armSize
0.135 0.134 0.134 0.133 0.133 0.132 0.132 0.131 0.131 0.13 0.13 0.129 0.129 0.128 0.128 0.127 0.127 0.126 0.126 0.125 0.125

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 SysML
Part 2: Integrating Mfg Design and Simulation
55
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysML
O ti l
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
System Model
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
Factory
Model
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
Mathematica
Reliability
Model
Optimization
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Production
Model
Excel
Cost Model
Dymola
Dig Cycle
Model
56
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysML
O ti l
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
System Model
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
Factory
Model
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
Mathematica
Reliability
Model
Optimization
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Production
Model
Excel
Cost Model
Dymola
Dig Cycle
Model
57
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
MCAD MCAD--SysML Interface Scenarios SysML Interface Scenarios
UGS/Siemens NX UGS/Siemens NX
RSD/E+ RSD/E+
SysML Model
SysML Model Import
User SysML Model
Manipulation Manipulation
ts1
B
sleeve1
B
ts2
ds2
ds1
sleeve2
L
shaft
Leff
us
rib1 rib2
red = ideali zed parameter
deformationModel:
undeformedLength:
totalElongation:
effectiveLength: in = 5.00
soi: FlapLinkage_XYZ-510
par [cbam] LinkageExtensionalModel_800240 [Instance view: state 1.0 - unsolved]
Model Changes
Propagate to CAD Tool
Parametrics
Execution
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
Engineering
Analysis Models
* = work-in-process
Georgia Tech Georgia Tech XaiTools XaiTools

MCAD Native Model and Tool UIs MCAD Native Model and Tool UIs
UGS/Siemens NX UGS/Siemens NX
59
MCAD Model (Subset) in SysML MCAD Model (Subset) in SysML
RSD/E+ RSD/E+
60
Interfacing Spreadsheets Interfacing Spreadsheets
with SysML Parametrics with SysML Parametrics
61
Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Excavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed
Tool Categories View Tool Categories View
SysML Tools
No Magic / SysML
O ti l
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
RSA/E+ / SysML
Excavator
System Model
Operational
Scenario
Excavator
Executable
Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools
Factory
Model
Traditional
Simulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
Traditional
Descriptive Tools
Interface & Transformation Tools
(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
ModelCenter
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator
Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Ansys
FEA Model
Mathematica
Reliability
Model
Optimization
Model
Factory
Layout Model
Excel
Production
Model
Excel
Cost Model
Dymola
Dig Cycle
Model
62
Ramps
eM-Plant
Factory
Simulation
2008-02-25a
UAV System Design Problem: LittleEye UAV System Design Problem: LittleEye
Network Network- -Centric Warfare Context Centric Warfare Context SysML/DoDAF Model SysML/DoDAF Model
63
Source: No Magic Inc. and InterCAX LLC
Road Scanner System Problem Road Scanner System Problem
LittleEye UAV Squadron LittleEye UAV Squadron
64
LittleEye SysML Model LittleEye SysML Model
Various Diagram Views Various Diagram Views
65
Solving LittleEye SysML Parametrics Solving LittleEye SysML Parametrics
ParaMagic Browser Views ParaMagic Browser Views
Next Next--generation object generation object--oriented spreadsheet oriented spreadsheet- -like capabilities. like capabilities.
Instance 1 - Before Solving Instance 1 - After Solving
66
Enabling Executable SysML Parametrics Enabling Executable SysML Parametrics
Commercialization by InterCAX LLC in Georgia Tech VentureLab incubator program Commercialization 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

T
o
o
l
k
i
t

Next-
Generation
Spreadsheet
COB Services (constraint graph manager, including COTS solver access via web services)
Parametrics plugin COB API
Execution via
API messages
or exchange files
X
a
i
T
o
o
l
s

S
y
s
M
L
Composable Objects (COBs)
e
W
o
r
k

X
X
a
i
T
o
o
l
s

F
r
a
m
e
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)
... TL
EA
FL
L A + = A o
Productionizing/Deploying GIT Productionizing/Deploying GIT XaiTools XaiTools

Technology for Executing SysML Parametrics Technology for Executing SysML Parametrics
Vendor SysML
Tool
Prototype by
GIT
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 Peaks 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 Services XaiTools Web Services (XWS) (XWS)
S1: General Multi S1: General Multi- -Solver Setup Solver Setup
Client Machines Server Machines
XaiTools
Cli
Rich Client
Apache Tomcat
Servlet Container
XaiTools Web Services
S
W
e
b

S
Client
(e.g. ParaMagic)
I
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
Apache Tomcat
XaiTools Ansys
Solver Server
XaiTools Ansys
Solver Server
XaiTools Math.
S l S
XaiTools Solver
SOAP Servers
W
e
b

S
HTTP/XML
Wrapped Data
SysML-based
COB models
S
O
A
P
e
r
v
e
r
Ansys Patran
I
n
t
e
r
n
e
Solver Server
Solver Server
Wrappers
FEA Solvers
S
e
r
v
e
r
Mathematica
Ansys, Patran,
Abaqus, ...
e
t
/
I
n
t
r
a
n
e
t
Math Solvers
.
.
.
Engineering
S i B
69
athematica
t
Service Bureau
Solver Access via Solver Access via XaiTools Web Services XaiTools Web Services (XWS) (XWS)
S2: ParaMagic S2: 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 Tomcat
Servlet Container
XaiTools Web Services
S
ParaMagic
I
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
Apache Tomcat
XaiTools Solver
SOAP Server
W
e
b

S
HTTP/XML
Wrapped Data
SysML-based
COB models
S
O
A
P
I
n
t
e
r
n
e
Wrappers
Math Solver
S
e
r
v
e
r
MagicDraw
SysML Tool
e
t
/
I
n
t
r
a
n
e
t
Mathematica
Network Server
network increment(s)
...
70
t
Broadly Applicable Technology Broadly Applicable Technology
Examples of Executable SysML Parametrics Examples 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
definition Satellite [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
e4
e3
r2 : PowerBalance
p
p2 p3
power power power power
e9
e6
e8
e7
r2 : PowerBalance
{p = p1 + p2 + p3}
p1
reqVerifierMass :
MarginOfSafetyBlock
allowable
r3 : CtrlPwrEqn
{pwrctrl = 0.2 * mass}
mass
t l
e12
determined
allowable
mos
pwrctrl
e12
e11
72
Financial Projections SysML Model Financial Projections SysML Model
Various Diagram Views Various Diagram Views
73
Using a Spectrum of Modeling Technologies Using a Spectrum of Modeling Technologies
Spectrum
Mental 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, ...
Cont ent s
Problem Descript ion Problem Descript ion
Charact erist ics of Mechat ronic Syst ems
Challenge Team Obj ect ives g j
Technical Approach
Techniques and Test beds
Deliverables & Out comes
Collaborat ion Approach pp
Page 75
Deliverables & Out comes
Phase 1 (Aug 2008) Phase 1 (Aug 2008)
Solut ion and support ing models
Excavat or t est case models t est suit es Excavat or t est case models, t est suit es,
MBSE pract ices used
Modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI ) met hod,
Model int erchange capabilit ies
Test s bet ween SysML t ools, CAD/ CAE t ools,
MBSE met rics/ value MBSE met rics/ value
See Benefit s slide wit h candidat e met rics
MBSE findings, issues, & recommendat ions g , ,
I ssue submissions t o OMG and vendors, publicat ions,
Training mat erial
E l t t i l
Page 76
Examples, t ut orials,
Plan forward (Phase 2 and beyond)
Primary Public Report ing Venues
Call for Part icipat ion @ I S07
Jun 26 2007 in San Diego Jun 26, 2007 in San Diego
Phase 1 St at us Updat e @ I W08 MBSE Workshop # 2
Jan 25, 2008 in Albuquerque
Ph 1 St t U d t @ F t i W k h Phase 1 St at us Updat e @ Front iers Workshop
May 14, 2008 in At lant a
Phase 1 St at us Updat e @ I S08
Jun 15-19, 2008 in Ut recht
Phase 1 Final Report & Archive of Models
Aug 2008 [ propriet ary deliverable]
May 2009 (est imat e) via websit e [ public version]
Phase 2 St at us Updat es @ I W09, et c.
Misc. report s/ updat es/ publicat ions @ various venues
Page 77
Misc. report s/ updat es/ publicat ions @ various venues
OMG meet ings, NDI A, societ y & vendor conferences, ...
Contents Contents
Phase 1 Overview and Results
From August 2007 to August 2008 From August, 2007 to August, 2008
Phase 2 Progress
From August, 2008 to August, 2009
78
MBSE Challenge Team Obj ect ives
Phase 2: 2008-2009
Overall Obj ect ives
Phase 2: 2008 2009
Refine & ext end beyond Phase 1 capabilit ies
for modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y (MSI )
Phase 2 Scope [ new aspect s]
Domains: Primary: Mechat ronics (expanded excavat or t est bed)
Secondary: Ot hers t o demo reusabilit y y y
Capabilit ies: Met hodologies, t ools, requirement s,
and pract ical applicat ions (MI M v2, ...)
MSI subset : Connect ing syst em specificat ion & design models
wit h mult iple engineering analysis
Deployment : Product ionizing t echniques & t ools
t o enable ubiquit ous pract ice
Page 79
Advance & demo how SysML facilit at es effect ive MSI
MBSE Challenge Team Obj ect ives
Phase 2: 2008-2009 Phase 2: 2008 2009
Specific Obj ect ives Specific Obj ect ives
1. Ext end modeling & simulat ion int eroperabilit y met hod: MI M 2.0
1. Generalizat ions: graph t ransformat ions, variable t opology, reusabilit y, Ge e a at o s g ap t a s o at o s, a ab e t opo ogy, eusab t y,
paramet rics 2.x, t rade st udy support , inconsist ency mgt ., E/ MBOM
ext ensions, met hod workflow, ...
2. Specializat ions: soft ware, closed-loop cont rol, elect ronics, ...
3. I nt erfaces t o new t ools: Mat lab/ Simulink, ECAD, Arena, ...
2. Refine SysML and t ool requirement s t o support MI M 2.0
1 Provide feedback t o vendors and OMG SysML 1 2/ 2 x t ask forces 1. Provide feedback t o vendors and OMG SysML 1.2/ 2.x t ask forces
3. Demonst rat e ext ensions in updat ed t est bed
4. Define deployment plan and init iat e execut ion
Page 80
4. Define deployment plan and init iat e execut ion
5. Refine roadmap beyond Phase 2
PhD Dissertation Defense
G.W.Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta GA USA Atlanta, GA, USA
Nov 3, 2008 * MRDC 4211
Knowledge Composition Methodology for
Effective Analysis Problem Formulation in
Simulation-based Design
Manas Bajaj j j
manas.bajaj@gatech.edu
Georgia Tech
Engineering Information Systems Lab
www.eislab.gatech.edu
Systems Realization Lab
Copyright 1993-2008 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.
Systems Realization Lab
www.srl.gatech.edu
Abstract Abstract
In 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 y
brittle 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 KCMovercomes these gaps by providing: (1) formal representation of analysis knowledge as simulation 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 templatesVTMB 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 d component chip packages demonstrate its effectivenesshandling 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 )
82
Copyright 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 Templates Effective 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 transformations
Meta models for design and behavior model abstractions Meta-models for design and behavior model abstractions
Libraries of ABBs, transformation patterns, and rules
83
Copyright 1993-2008 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.
SysML Parametrics SysML Parametrics
Flattened Graphs Flattened Graphs
[3]
pp
[1]
[4]
[2]
[4]
84
Examples Examples
SysML Parametrics Flattened Graphs SysML Parametrics Flattened Graphs
1. Spring systems (with animation)
2 Road scanning s stem 2. Road scanning system
using LittleEye UAVs
3. Flap linkage mechanical design
4. Multi-year business financial model
For further information on these examples, see backup slide below entitled For 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 Parametrics SysML ParametricsSuggested 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 Visualization SysML Parametrics Graph Visualization
[in collaboration with InterCAX [in collaboration with InterCAXA. Scott Fall 2008 internship] A. Scott Fall 2008 internship]
Flattened graph [aka COB constraint graph]
Flattened graph ~ graph among value types Flattened graph ~ graph among value types
Block encapsulation not shown
Purpose p
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: 2009 Status Update: 2009--Feb Feb--17 17
Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab www.msl.gatech.edu www.msl.gatech.edu
Russell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael Qin Russell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael Qin
Background & Objectives
Russell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael Qin Russell 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 Education Institute for Personal Robots in Education
(IPRE) (IPRE) http://www.roboteducation.org/ http://www.roboteducation.org/
88
Background Background
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)
Objectives ObjectivesBig Picture Big 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: 2009 Status Update: 2009--Feb Feb--17 17
Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab www.msl.gatech.edu www.msl.gatech.edu
Russell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael Qin Russell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael Qin
Background & Objectives
Russell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael Qin Russell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael Qin
Background & Objectives
Operational Control Using SysML Activities
Demonstration
Status & Next Steps
91
Scribbler / Myro Demo Scribbler / Myro Demo
Executable 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 Demo Scribbler / Myro Demo
Executable 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 -- Unmanned Unmanned
Mission: Pick up 10 kg of rocks at two specified locations Mission: Pick up 10 kg of rocks at two specified locations
WP4
StopatTarget
TaskX:Pickuprocks
10kilos
10minutes
Reportalldataattributes
TaskXWP4toWP5
H di 200 d
WP5
Stop
Report all data
WP1
WP3
Task4:WP3toWP4
Reportalldataattributes
Heading:200degrees
Time:50minutes
Reportalldata
Time:000minutes
Task1:TravelWP1toWP2
Power=500units
PowerRate:1unitperminute
(travelingandatstops)
Rover Weight = 100 kg
WP2
StopatTarget
Task2:Pickuprocks
10 kil
Heading:300degrees
Time:40minutes
RoverWeight=100kg
Reportalldataattributes
Heading:120degreesfor
Time:30minutes
10kilos
10minutes
Task3:WP2toWP3
Heading:060degrees
Time:60minutes
Report All Data attributes
94
ReportAllDataattributes
Cont ent s
Problem Descript ion Problem Descript ion
Charact erist ics of Mechat ronic Syst ems
Challenge Team Obj ect ives g j
Technical Approach
Techniques and Test beds
Deliverables & Out comes
Summary & Collaborat ion Approach y pp
Page 95
SE Practices for Describing Systems SE Practices for Describing Systems
Past / Now Past / Now
Now / Future Now / Future
Specifications
Interface requirements
System design
Analysis & trade-off
Test plans Test 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 Systems
Requirements
Definition;
Validate
to User
D
e
c
o
m
p
o
D
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

Systems
Design
Systems
Integration
Definition;
System Concepts
System Spec.;
Verification Plan
Sys. Integration;
Sys. Verification
to User
Requirements
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

i
t
i
o
n
I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
i
o
n
V
e
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
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 SysML Benefits of SysML--based Approach based Approach

Primary Impacts

n
g

e
m
o
r
y

t
i
f
a
c
t





Enabling Capabilities R
e
d
u
c
e
d


T
i
m
e

R
e
d
u
c
e
d


C
o
s
t

R
e
d
u
c
e
d


R
i
s
k

n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d

U
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d

C
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e

M
e
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
d

A
r
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
Precision Knowledge Precision Knowledge
for the for the
Model Model--Based Enterprise Based Enterprise
Enabling Capabilities R T R C R R I
n
U I
n
C I
n
P
Increased Knowledge
Capture & Completeness

Increased
Modularity & Reusability

pp
y y
Increased
Traceability

Reduced
Manual Re-Creation

Increased Increased
Automation

Reduced
Modeling Effort

Increased

98
Analysis Intensity

MBSE Challenge
Model I nt eroperabilit y Team Model I nt eroperabilit y Team
Open Call for Part icipat ion
Syst ems engineering drivers in commercial set t ings
I ncreased syst em complexit y
Cross-disciplinary communicat ion/ coordinat ion Cross disciplinary communicat ion/ coordinat ion
Enhancement possibilit ies based on int erest
Sponsoring ot her demonst rat ions and t est beds
Developing shared models and libraries
et c.
Primary cont act s Primary cont act s
Russell Peak [ Russell.Peak @gat ech.edu]
Sandy Friedent hal [ sanford.friedent hal @lmco.com]
R B kh t [ B kh t R M@J h D ]
Page 99
Roger Burkhart [ Burkhart RogerM@JohnDeere.com]
Addit ional Resources Addit ional Resources
SysML Parametrics SysML Parametrics Suggested Starting Points Suggested Starting Points
Introductory Papers/Tutorials
Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysMLPart 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 SysMLPart 2: Celebrating 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.]
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: 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/ 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 Peaks 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/SysML MBX/SysML--Related Efforts at Georgia Tech Related 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)
TRWAutomotive: DAI/FEA (steering wheel systems )
102
TRW Automotive: DAI/FEA (steering wheel systems ... )
Selected GIT MBX/SysML Selected GIT MBX/SysML--Related Publications Related Publications
Some 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 SysMLMechatronics/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 design 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 SysMLPart 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 SysMLPart 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 SysML Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML
Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report
Abstract
This 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 X
1
(MBX) i goal is to enable advanced model-based systems engineering (MBSE) in particular and model-based X
1
(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 Challenge Interoperability Team in the INCOSE MBSE Challenge.
Citation
Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Paredis CJJ, McGinnis LF (2008) Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis
Using SysMLMechatronics/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
Simulation Simulation--Based Design Using SysML Based Design Using SysML
Part 1: A Parametrics Primer
OMG 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 d introduce 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 capabilities engineering 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 p
properties 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
Citation
Peak 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 & Objectives 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
E i d t h l i t f i i d t i d t i it id tifi th t j h ll 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 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 The Composable Object (COB) Knowledge Representation: Enabling Advanced Collaborative Engineering Environments
(CEEs). http://eislab.gatech.edu/projects/nasa-ngcobs/
106
Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysML Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysML
Applications to CAD Applications to CAD--FEA Interoperability 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
ifi l ith t ti t ti li L h t j i thi j t d i l t i il 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 SysMLs 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 SysMLa
graphical modeling language based on UML2 for specifying, designing, analyzing, and verifying complex systems.
S k Bi k h 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 p g y y p p y p
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.
107
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/