[MBSE 2021] ESA MBSE Evolution: From ESA SysML Toolbox to ...
Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Challenge Modeling & Simulation Interoperability (MSI) Team...
-
Upload
beatrice-johnston -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
1
Transcript of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Challenge Modeling & Simulation Interoperability (MSI) Team...
Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) Challenge
Modeling & Simulation Interoperability (MSI) Team Status Update
... with Applications to Mechatronics, Other Cyber-Physical Systems, and Beyond ...
INCOSE IW10Feb 5, 2010
Phoenix
PresenterRussell Peak - Georgia Tech
Other Team LeadersChris Paredis, Leon McGinnis,
Sandy Friedenthal, Roger Burkhart, Manas Bajaj
Portions are Copyright © 2010 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.Permission to reproduce and distribute without changes for non-commercial purposes (including internal corporate usage) is hereby granted provided this notice and a proper citation are included.
v2.0
Page 2
Collaboration ApproachPrimary Current Team Leadership
• Deere & Co.– Roger Burkhart
• Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT)– Russell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnis, & co.– Leveraging collaborations in PSLM Center
SysML Focus Area (www.pslm.gatech.edu)
• InterCAX– Manas Bajaj
• Lockheed Martin– Sandy Friedenthal
• Vendor Support
3
Georgia Tech Project TeamGeorgia Tech Project TeamCumulative list of people involved to date [18 total]Cumulative list of people involved to date [18 total]
• Project Leadership [3]– R Peak (MARC), C Paredis (ME), L McGinnis (ISyE)
• Other Researchers/Professionals [3]– S Cimtalay, M Wilson, V Ustun
• Student Research Assistants—Graduated [5]– Undergrad: B Wilson– Masters: J Jobe, T Johnson, A Kerzhner – PhD: M Bajaj (joined InterCAX LLC)
• Student Research Assistants—In-process [8]– Undergrad: B Aikens, M Qin, A Scott (InterCAX intern)– Masters: J Bankston, A Shah– PhD: E Huang, A Kerzhner (JPL intern), K Kwon
4
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Synopsis (8/2007-7/2008)• Phase 2 Highlights (8/2008-Present)
Addressing key needs per Phase 1 experiences:– Education– Research & Development– Productionization / Commercialization– Applications
• Summary• Elaborations on Selected Topics• Related Resources
Page 5
MBSE Challenge Team Objectives
Phase 1: 2007-2008
Overall Objectives
• Define & demonstrate capabilities for advanced modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI)
• Phase 1 Scope – Domain: Mechatronics– Capabilities: Methodologies, tools, requirements,
and practical applications – MSI subset: Connecting system specification & design models
with multiple engineering analysis & dynamic simulation models
• Test & demonstrate how SysML facilitates effective MSI
Note: The objectives to date are primarily based on projects in the GIT PSLM Center sponsored by industry and government—see backup slides.
6SysML and MBSE: A Quick-Start CourseCopyright © Georgia Tech and InterCAX. All Rights Reserved.
definition use
The 4 Pillars of SysMLAutomotive Anti-Lock Braking System Example
1. Structure 2. Behavior
3. Requirements
sd ABS_ActivationSequence [Sequence Diagram]
d1:TractionDetector
m1:BrakeModulator
detTrkLos()
modBrkFrc()
sendSignal()
modBrkFrc(traction_signal:boolean)
sendAck()
interaction
state machine
stm TireTraction [State Diagram]
Gripping Slipping
LossOfTraction
RegainTractionactivity/function
4. Parametrics
7
Interoperability Method ObjectivesInteroperability Method Objectives
Primary Impacts
Enabling Capabilities R
ed
uce
d
Tim
e
Re
du
ced
C
ost
R
ed
uce
d
Ris
k In
crea
sed
U
nd
ers
tan
din
g
Incr
ease
d
Co
rpo
rate
Mem
ory
In
crea
sed
Art
ifact
P
erf
orm
an
ce
Increased Knowledge Capture & Completeness
■ ■ ■ ■
Increased Modularity & Reusability
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Increased Traceability
■ ■ ■
Reduced Manual Re-Creation & Data Entry Errors
■ ■ ■
Increased Automation
■ ■ ■
Reduced Modeling Effort
■ ■
Increased Analysis Intensity
■ ■
8
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Tool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
No Magic / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Factory Layout Model
Excel
ProductionRamps
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
Excel
Cost Model
eM-PlantFactory
Simulation
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
2008-02-25a
OptimizationModel
RSA/E+ / SysML
FactoryModel
9
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)
Excavator Domain Models
MCAD Tools
Generic Math Solvers
Sys Dynamics Solvers
Excavator Sys-Level Models
Reliability Model
Cost Model
Optimization Model
ObjectiveFunction
Dymola
Federated Excavator Model
Boom Mfg. Assembly Models
System & Req Tools
RSD/E+
MagicDraw
NX
Mathematica
Optimizers
Excel
ModelCenter
Discrete Event Solvers (Specialized)
eM-Plant / Factory Flow
c0. Context-SpecificSimulation Models
e0. Solver Resourcesa0. Descriptive Resources
(Authoring Tools, ...)d0. Simulation Building Block
Libraries
Solid Mechanics
Queuing Concepts
Fluid Mechanics
CostConcepts
OptimizationConcepts
Reliability Concepts
Assembly Process Models
Discrete EventAssy Model
Dig Cycle Model
MM1 Queuing Assy Model
Boom Linkage Models
Stress/Deformation Models
Extensional Linkage Model
Plane Stress Linkage Model FEA Solvers
Ansys
Factory CAD Tools
FactoryCAD
b0. Federated Descriptive Models
Boom
Linkages
Hydraulics Subsystem
Factory Domain Models
Federated Factory Model
Operations
Req. & Objectives
...
Dig Site Dump Trucks
Data Mgt. Tools
Excel
Assembly Lines
Work CellsAGVs
Buffers Machines
Req. & Objectives
Excavator MBOM
2008-02-20
Tool & native m
odel interface (via XaiTools, A
PIs, ...)1) The pattern nam
es and identifiers used here conform to H
MX 0.1 —
a method
under development for generalized system
-simulation interoperability (SSI).
2) All m
odels shown are SysM
L models unless otherw
ise noted.3) Infrastructure and m
iddleware tools are also present (but not show
n) --e.g., PLM
, CM
, parametric graph m
anagers (XaiTools etc.), repositories, etc.
Com
position relationship (usage)N
ative model relationship (via tool interface, stds., ...)
Parametric or algorithm
ic relationship (XaiTools, VIA
TRA, ...)
Notes
Legend
10
AbstractThis talk overviews Phase 1 experiences and lessons learned from an excavator testbed that interconnects simulation models with associated diverse system models, design models, and manufacturing models. The 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. This work is sponsored by several organizations including Deere and Lockheed 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/
CitationRS Peak, CJJ Paredis, LF McGinnis, DA Zwemer (2008-12) Simulation & Analysis Using SysML—Experiences Applying SysML in an Excavator Testbed and More. OMG SysML Information Days, Burlingame CA.http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/seminars-etc/2008-12-omg-sysml-info-days-peak/
[email protected], Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, www.msl.gatech.edu
Simulation & Analysis Using SysMLSimulation & Analysis Using SysMLExperiences Applying SysML in an Excavator Testbed and MoreExperiences Applying SysML in an Excavator Testbed and More
Dec 2008: Final Phase 1 Overview Presentation
11
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Synopsis (8/2007-7/2008)• Phase 2 Highlights (8/2008-Present)
Addressing key needs per Phase 1 experiences:– Education– Research & Development– Productionization / Commercialization– Applications
• Summary
12SysML and MBSE: A Quick-Start CourseCopyright © Georgia Tech and InterCAX. All Rights Reserved.
Curriculum History & Formats OfferedStatistics as of Feb 2010 — www.pslm.gatech.edu/courses
Full-semester Georgia Tech course– ISYE 8813: Fall 2007, 2008, 2009 (~60 students total)
Industry short courses– Multiple [offerings,~students] since Aug 2008
» SysML 101 [8,~160]; SysML 102 (hands-on) [6,~110]» Onsite at industry locations » In Atlanta at the Georgia Tech Global Learning Center
– Collaborative development & delivery with InterCAX LLC Professional Masters course
– Professional Masters in Applied Systems Engineeringwww.pmase.gatech.edu
– ASE 6005 SysML course starting Summer 2010
13SysML and MBSE: A Quick-Start CourseCopyright © Georgia Tech and InterCAX. All Rights Reserved.
Industry Short Course Contents (p1/2)SysML 101: Tool-Independent Concepts Focus
module topic
Course Context000.01 Introduction and course overview
SysML 101: Essentials for Understanding SysML Models101.01 MBSE context & motivation101.02 SysML introduction & overview; Course examples overview101.03 Structure concepts: block basics (bdd), instances; packages (pkg)101.04 Structure concepts: block internals, ports, flows (ibd)101.05 Upfront concepts: use cases (uc); requirements (req)101.06 Behavior concepts: activities, actions (act)101.07 Behavior concepts: interactions/sequences (seq); state machines (stm)101.08 Structure concepts: block parametrics (par)101.09 Cross-cutting SysML concepts, methods, and processes101.99 Wrapup — SysML 101
14SysML and MBSE: A Quick-Start CourseCopyright © Georgia Tech and InterCAX. All Rights Reserved.
module topic
SysML 102: Essentials for Creating SysML Models (Hands-On for Tool Users)102.01 User workstation setup102.02 Tool familiarity introduction - how to browse existing models, etc.102.03 Structure concepts: block basics (bdd), instances; packages (pkg)102.04 Structure concepts: block internals, ports, flows (ibd)102.05 Upfront concepts: use cases (uc); requirements (req)102.06 Behavior concepts: activities, actions (act) (w/ Myro rover team excercise)102.07 Behavior concepts: interactions/sequences (seq); state machines (stm)102.08 Structure concepts: block parametrics (par)102.09 Cross-cutting SysML concepts, methods, and processes102.10 MBSE processes: model-based document/report generation (Velocity, etc.)102.11 MBSE processes: model repositories / Teamwork Server introduction for users102.99 Wrapup — SysML 102
Approximate structure for each main concept module in SysML 102:Spiral 1: How to implement basic concepts from SysML 101 in MagicDrawSpiral 1: Corresponding student exercise Spiral 1: Corresponding Q/ASpiral 2: How to implement other concepts (from SysML 101 and more)Spiral 2: Corresponding student exercise Spiral 2: Corresponding Q/A
Industry Short Course Contents (p2/2)SysML 102: Hands-on Execution-Oriented Focus
15
Mobile Robot ExerciseMobile Robot ExerciseExecutable SysML Activity Model [after live update]Executable SysML Activity Model [after live update]
from myro import *initialize("com29")
senses()beep(1, 440)forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)beep(1, 440)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)stop()
Resulting python script
16SysML and MBSE: A Quick-Start CourseCopyright © Georgia Tech and InterCAX. All Rights Reserved.
SysML Activities Exercise @ JPLTeam Contest Using MyroMagic Plugin & Scribbler Rovers
17
Mobile Robot ExerciseMobile Robot ExerciseExecutable SysML Activity Model with Sensors & Decision Nodes Executable SysML Activity Model with Sensors & Decision Nodes
decision nodeguard condition (with sensor reading)
18SysML and MBSE: A Quick-Start CourseCopyright © Georgia Tech and InterCAX. All Rights Reserved.
Mobile Robot Context (a cyber-physical system)
19SysML and MBSE: A Quick-Start CourseCopyright © Georgia Tech and InterCAX. All Rights Reserved.
Auto-Generated Structured Python Scripts
New format generated by BuzzToys MyroMagic v0.3.1 — a MagicDraw plugin by GIT.
20
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Synopsis (8/2007-7/2008)• Phase 2 Highlights (8/2008-Present)
Addressing key needs per Phase 1 experiences:– Education– Research & Development– Productionization / Commercialization– Applications
• Summary
21
Phase 2: Research & Development ThrustsPhase 2: Research & Development Thrusts
• SysML-Modelica mapping
• “Model DNA” signatures – parametric graph visualization, debugging, ...
• System-E/MCAD/CAE interoperability
• Design-mfg interoperability; mfg simulation
• Others (not shown here)– Graph transformations– Etc.
22
SysML-Modelica Transformation Specification
(OMG ADTF Meeting, Long Beach, 12/9/2009)
Chris ParedisGeorgia Tech
On behalf of the SysML-Modelica Working Group22
The following slides are excerpts from this presentation:
23
What is Modelica?• State-of-the-art Modeling Language
for System Dynamics– Differential Algebraic Equations (DAE)– Discrete Events
• Formal, object-oriented language• Ports represent energy flow (undirected) or
signal flow (directed)• Acausal, equation-based, declarative• Multi-domain modeling• Standardized by the Modelica Association
23
24
Modelica: Standard Library
24
mot
or to
rque
25
Working Group Focus and Scope• Objective:
– Leverage the strengths of both SysML and Modelica by integrating them to create a more expressive and formal MBSE language.
– Define a formal Transformation Specification: a SysML4Modelica profile and a mapping between Modelica and the profile
• Scope:– Cover the Modelica constructs needed for the
Modelica Standard Library to be used in SysML– Generate corresponding SysML constructs that fit
within the profiling mechanism25
26
Simple Example
26
ma
ss
1
m=1
sp
rin
g1
fixed1
ModelicaModel
SysML4ModelicaAnalytical Model
SysML Descriptive Modelin Analysis Context
2727
Modelica
For
mal
, B
idire
ctio
nal
Tra
nsfo
rmat
ion
SysML4Modelica
28
Current Status
• Draft of Transformation Specification Part I — Introduction Part II — SysML4Modelica profile Part III — Modelica meta-model Part IV — SysML-Modelica mapping,
a bidirectional mapping between the SysML4Modelica profile and the Modelica meta-model
Annex A – Robotic Sample Problem
28
29
SysML-Modelica Summary• Objective:
– Leverage the strengths of both SysML and Modelica by integrating them to create a more expressive and formal MBSE language.
Descriptive Modeling in SysML+
Formal Equation-Based Modeling forAnalyses and Trade Studies in Modelica
• Next Steps:– Open source reference implementations– Submit RFC for vote at March OMG meeting
29http://www.omgwiki.org/OMGSysML/doku.php?
id=sysml-modelica:sysml_and_modelica_integration
30
Phase 2: Research & Development ThrustsPhase 2: Research & Development Thrusts
• SysML-Modelica mapping
• “Model DNA” signatures – parametric graph visualization, debugging, ...
• System-E/MCAD/CAE interoperability
• Design-mfg interoperability; mfg simulation
• Etc.
31
““Model DNA” Signatures Using SysML ParametricsModel DNA” Signatures Using SysML ParametricsPanorama Tool by Andy Scott (Undergrad Research Asst.) and Russell Peak (Director, Modeling & Simulation Lab)Panorama Tool by Andy Scott (Undergrad Research Asst.) and Russell Peak (Director, Modeling & Simulation Lab)
b. Mini Snowman
a. Snowman
c. Snowflake
d. Mouse
g. Robot
f. ?
e. CactusTest: Match the actual model titles (below) to their “DNA signatures” with imagined titles (left).
_____ 1. South Florida water mgt. (hydrology) model
_____ 2. 2-spring physics model
_____ 3. 3-year company financial model
_____ 4. UAV road scanning system model
_____ 5. Car gas mileage model
_____ 6. Airframe mechanical part model
_____ 7. Design verification model (automated test for two Item 6. designs)
[see answers at the end of this presentation]
www.msl.gatech.edu
32SysML and MBSE: A Quick-Start CourseCopyright © Georgia Tech and InterCAX. All Rights Reserved.
Satellite Tutorial Highlights: SimpleSat SysML par view and ParaMagic tool for execution
definitionSatellite[Block] par [ ]
r2 : PowerBalance{p = p1 + p2 + p3}
p
p1
p2 p3
r1 : MassBalance{m = m1 +m2 + m3 + m4}
m
m1 m2 m3 m4
propulsionSubSys : PropulsionSystem
power
mass
powerSubSys : PowerSystem
power
mass
instruments : Instruments
power
mass
controllerSubSys : ControlSystem
power
mass
reqVerifierMass : MarginOfSafetyBlock
determined
allowable
mos
r3 : CtrlPwrEqn{pwrctrl = 0.2 * mass}
mass
pwrctrl
mass
e12
e10
e11
e5
e9
e2
e6
e1
e4e3
e8
e7
“Object-Oriented Spreadsheet” plus more ...
33SysML and MBSE: A Quick-Start CourseCopyright © Georgia Tech and InterCAX. All Rights Reserved.
Satellite Tutorial Highlights: SimpleSatTwo views of same model: par and flattened graph
definitionSatellite[Block] par [ ]
r2 : PowerBalance{p = p1 + p2 + p3}
p
p1
p2 p3
r1 : MassBalance{m = m1 +m2 + m3 + m4}
m
m1 m2 m3 m4
propulsionSubSys : PropulsionSystem
power
mass
powerSubSys : PowerSystem
power
mass
instruments : Instruments
power
mass
controllerSubSys : ControlSystem
power
mass
reqVerifierMass : MarginOfSafetyBlock
determined
allowable
mos
r3 : CtrlPwrEqn{pwrctrl = 0.2 * mass}
mass
pwrctrl
mass
e12
e10
e11
e5
e9
e2
e6
e1
e4e3
e8
e7
Model DNA signature(a.k.a. flattened graph)
auto-generated from SysML model
par (SysML parametrics view)
34
Model DNA Signature ExampleModel DNA Signature ExampleParametrics Model for an Analysis Tool Test SuiteParametrics Model for an Analysis Tool Test Suite
35
Phase 2: Research & Development ThrustsPhase 2: Research & Development Thrusts
• SysML-Modelica mapping
• “Model DNA” signatures – parametric graph visualization, debugging, ...
• System-E/MCAD/CAE interoperability
• Design-mfg interoperability; mfg simulation
• Etc.See also “Elaborations on Selected Topics” after Summary
36Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Emerging Tools: Connecting a System Model to Domain Models via SysML
Title: Composable Mission Framework for Rapid End-to-End Mission Design and Simulation
Principal Investigator: Dr. Manas Bajaj, InterCAX LLC
Phase 1: Jan – Jul, 2009 [NASA SBIR-08-1-S4.02-9130] — NASA SBIR project
Technical Abstract: The innovation proposed here is the Composable Mission Framework (CMF)—a model-based software framework that shall enable seamless continuity of mission design and simulation from early stage advanced studies to detailed mission design and development. The uniqueness of our approach lies in using an open standard for systems modeling and design (SysML) to wrap mission models including the mission development process thus providing a coherent map of mission knowledge. InterCAX's Composable Object technology provides the backend wrapping, model management, and simulation orchestration capabilities to the visual SysML-based mission model at the front end.
The Composable Object technology has already demonstrated the ability to power SysML-based models with math simulation capabilities for early design stages. ParaMagic is a commercially available tool being used by early adopters of SysML at JPL. The Composable Object technology has also demonstrated the ability to associate detailed design and simulation models such as those created in CAD and FEA tools. However, a big gap exists in the SysML-based world for conceptual system design and the detailed system design-based world. If the detailed system design and simulation models could be wrapped as SysML objects and the simulations and workflows orchestrated by the Composable Object technology, it will cover the entire gamut of complex system modeling and analysis world from trade studies and optimization to project scheduling.
The key objective of Phase 1 is to wrap both conceptual and detailed system design and simulation models as SysML objects which has not been done before, and to demonstrate continuity of mission concepts from simple to detailed implementation.
37Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
System Design & Analysis Integrating and Executing Diverse Models
SystemSystem
Sub-system 1Sub-system 1 Sub-system 2Sub-system 2 Sub-system nSub-system n
…
Comp 11Comp 11 Comp1mComp1m…
System model in SysMLExternal tools and models
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
See also “Elaborations on Selected Topics” after Summary
38Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Connecting system model and domain models
MCAD
ECAD
PCA = printed circuit assembly
PCB = printed circuit board(bare substrate w/ metal traces ...)
BGA = ball grid array (a type of electronic component)
39Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
“System Model”- “X Domain Model” IntegrationEx. for X = Mechanical CAD
Systems Engineering Domain Design Domain
System Model
Component ZSystem Model
Property a1Property a2 a2 =
b1+b2
Step 1a Create a system model (e.g. with MagicDraw SysML)Step 1b Create a CAD domain model (e.g. with Siemens NX)Step 2 Import the CAD model into SysML as a CAD Model blockStep 3 Connect (map) the CAD model to the system model using SysML parametricsStep 4 Control an auto-synch process: updates in CAD model ↔ updates in system model
MagicDraw SysML
Component ZCAD DesignParameter b1Parameter b2Parameter b3
Component ZCAD ModelProperty b1Property b2Property b3
NX MCAD
40Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
ParaMagic is used to execute the resulting total model. It computes system-level cost & weight from all nested subsystem-level & component-level models (originating from MCAD / ECAD /… tools), and it verifies related requirements.
Weight requirement satisfied
Cost requirement not satisfied
41
Phase 2: Research & Development ThrustsPhase 2: Research & Development Thrusts
• SysML-Modelica mapping
• “Model DNA” signatures – parametric graph visualization, debugging, ...
• System-E/MCAD/CAE interoperability
• Design-mfg interoperability; mfg simulation
• Etc.
42
Integrating Mfg Design and Simulation Integrating Mfg Design and Simulation L McGinnis et al. — http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/L McGinnis et al. — http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/
43
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Tool Categories ViewTool Categories View
SysML Tools
TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools
ModelCenter
TraditionalDescriptive Tools
No Magic / SysML
ExcavatorSystem Model
OperationalScenario
NX / MCAD Tool
Excavator Boom Model
FactoryCAD
Factory Layout Model
Excel
ProductionRamps
RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavatorExecutable Scenario
Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)
Ansys
FEA Model
MathematicaReliability
Model
Excel
Cost Model
eM-PlantFactory
Simulation
DymolaDig Cycle
Model
2008-02-25a
OptimizationModel
RSA/E+ / SysML
FactoryModel
44
Excavator Modeling & Simulation EnvironmentExcavator Modeling & Simulation Environment Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)
Excavator Domain Models
MCAD Tools
Generic Math Solvers
Sys Dynamics Solvers
Excavator Sys-Level Models
Reliability Model
Cost Model
Optimization Model
ObjectiveFunction
Dymola
Federated Excavator Model
Boom Mfg. Assembly Models
System & Req Tools
RSD/E+
MagicDraw
NX
Mathematica
Optimizers
Excel
ModelCenter
Discrete Event Solvers (Specialized)
eM-Plant / Factory Flow
c0. Context-SpecificSimulation Models
e0. Solver Resourcesa0. Descriptive Resources
(Authoring Tools, ...)d0. Simulation Building Block
Libraries
Solid Mechanics
Queuing Concepts
Fluid Mechanics
CostConcepts
OptimizationConcepts
Reliability Concepts
Assembly Process Models
Discrete EventAssy Model
Dig Cycle Model
MM1 Queuing Assy Model
Boom Linkage Models
Stress/Deformation Models
Extensional Linkage Model
Plane Stress Linkage Model FEA Solvers
Ansys
Factory CAD Tools
FactoryCAD
b0. Federated Descriptive Models
Boom
Linkages
Hydraulics Subsystem
Factory Domain Models
Federated Factory Model
Operations
Req. & Objectives
...
Dig Site Dump Trucks
Data Mgt. Tools
Excel
Assembly Lines
Work CellsAGVs
Buffers Machines
Req. & Objectives
Excavator MBOM
2008-02-20
Tool & native m
odel interface (via XaiTools, A
PIs, ...)1) The pattern nam
es and identifiers used here conform to H
MX 0.1 —
a method
under development for generalized system
-simulation interoperability (SSI).
2) All m
odels shown are SysM
L models unless otherw
ise noted.3) Infrastructure and m
iddleware tools are also present (but not show
n) --e.g., PLM
, CM
, parametric graph m
anagers (XaiTools etc.), repositories, etc.
Com
position relationship (usage)N
ative model relationship (via tool interface, stds., ...)
Parametric or algorithm
ic relationship (XaiTools, VIA
TRA, ...)
Notes
Legend
45
Manufacturing Model InterdependenciesManufacturing Model Interdependencies
46
Detailed Process PlanningDetailed Process Planning
47
On Demand SimulationOn Demand Simulation
On-Line Off-Line
User Modeler
COTSAuthoring
Tools
DescriptiveModel
Libraries
FormalDescriptive
ModelInstance
COTSSolver
AnalyticModel
Libraries
ModelTranslator
FormalAnalyticModel
Instance
Results
User
“On demand” simulation puts simulation methodology in the hands of the “problem owners”
48
eM-Plant SimulationeM-Plant Simulation
49
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Synopsis (8/2007-7/2008)• Phase 2 Highlights (8/2008-Present)
Addressing key needs per Phase 1 experiences:– Education– Research & Development– Productionization / Commercialization– Applications
• Summary
50
Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation Testbed Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)
Excavator Domain Models
MCAD Tools
Generic Math Solvers
Sys Dynamics Solvers
Excavator Sys-Level Models
Reliability Model
Cost Model
Optimization Model
ObjectiveFunction
Dymola
Federated Excavator Model
Boom Mfg. Assembly Models
System & Req Tools
RSD/E+
MagicDraw
NX
Mathematica
Optimizers
Excel
ModelCenter
Discrete Event Solvers (Specialized)
eM-Plant / Factory Flow
c0. Context-SpecificSimulation Models
e0. Solver Resourcesa0. Descriptive Resources
(Authoring Tools, ...)d0. Simulation Building Block
Libraries
Solid Mechanics
Queuing Concepts
Fluid Mechanics
CostConcepts
OptimizationConcepts
Reliability Concepts
Assembly Process Models
Discrete EventAssy Model
Dig Cycle Model
MM1 Queuing Assy Model
Boom Linkage Models
Stress/Deformation Models
Extensional Linkage Model
Plane Stress Linkage Model FEA Solvers
Ansys
Factory CAD Tools
FactoryCAD
b0. Federated Descriptive Models
Boom
Linkages
Hydraulics Subsystem
Factory Domain Models
Federated Factory Model
Operations
Req. & Objectives
...
Dig Site Dump Trucks
Data Mgt. Tools
Excel
Assembly Lines
Work CellsAGVs
Buffers Machines
Req. & Objectives
Excavator MBOM
2008-02-20
Tool & native m
odel interface (via XaiTools, A
PIs, ...)1) The pattern nam
es and identifiers used here conform to H
MX 0.1 —
a method
under development for generalized system
-simulation interoperability (SSI).
2) All m
odels shown are SysM
L models unless otherw
ise noted.3) Infrastructure and m
iddleware tools are also present (but not show
n) --e.g., PLM
, CM
, parametric graph m
anagers (XaiTools etc.), repositories, etc.
Com
position relationship (usage)N
ative model relationship (via tool interface, stds., ...)
Parametric or algorithm
ic relationship (XaiTools, VIA
TRA, ...)
Notes
Legend
51
Productionizing/Deploying GIT Productionizing/Deploying GIT XaiToolsXaiTools™™ Technology for Executing SysML ParametricsTechnology for Executing SysML Parametrics
Vendor SysMLTool
Prototype byGIT
Product by InterCAX LLC
Artisan Studio Yes Yes (2009-4Q beta)
EmbeddedPlus E+ SysML / RSA Yes <tbd>
No Magic MagicDraw Yes ParaMagic™
(Jul 21, 2008 release)
Telelogic/IBM Rhapsody — Melody™ (2010-1Q release)
Sparx Systems Enterprise Arch. <tbd> <tbd>
n/a XMI import/export Yes <tbd>
Others <tbd> Others <tbd> <tbd> <tbd>
www.InterCAX.com
[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.
52
Products & ServicesProducts & Services
53
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Synopsis (8/2007-7/2008)• Phase 2 Highlights (8/2008-Present)
Addressing key needs per Phase 1 experiences:– Education– Research & Development– Productionization / Commercialization– Applications
• Summary
54
Broadly Applicable TechnologyBroadly Applicable TechnologyExamples of Executable SysML ParametricsExamples of Executable SysML Parametrics
• Road scanning system using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAVs)• UAV-based missile interceptor system trade study• Space systems (tutorials): orbit planning; mass/cost roll-ups• Space systems (studies/pilots): FireSat (INCOSE SSWG), ...• Space systems (actuals): science merit function, ...• Environmentally-conscious energy systems / smart grid• Manufacturing “green-ness” / sustainability assessments• Regional water management systems (e.g. South Florida)
...• Mechanical part design and analysis (FEA)
...• Wind turbine supply chain management• Insurance claims processing and website capacity model• Financial model for small businesses• Banking service levels model
...
~Next-generationobject-orientedspreadsheets
(and more)
55Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Supply Chain Modelfor Global Supply Chain Management & OptimizationSupplChain_BDD1SupplyChain[Package] bdd [ ]
«block»System
«block»Company
«block»SKU
«block»Customer
«block»WarehousePart
«block»ProductionSite
«block»SitePartSupply
«block»Supplier
«block»Warehouse
«block»SupplierPart
«block»SiteProductDemand
«block»SitePartDemand
«block»TransportMode
«block»Model_BoM
«block»SiteProductSupply
-SupPart 1..*-Part 1..*
-BoM 1..*
-SPtS
1..*-WHPart 1..*
-Prodn 1..*-WH 1..*
-SPrD 1..*
-SPrD1 1..*
-Cust_Prodn
-SPrS 1..*
-SPtS1 1..*-Part_BoM 1..*
-Cust 1..*-Xport 1..*-Cmpy -Sup 1..*
-SPrD -MB1
- Generic (shown)- Wind turbine-specifics (not shown)
Sources: [email protected] and Georgia Tech
56Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Supply Chain Model – SysML Parametrics Connect to Optimization Models, Compute Value-at-Risk
Factory Factory[Block] par [ ]
UnitsNeeded : Real [1..*]
ProdValue : USD(000)
ProdVAR : USD(000)
Model : Product [1..*]
«constraint»DS2 : DollarSum
{high = sum(low)}high : USD(000)
low : USD(000)
«constraint»DS1 : DollarSum
{high = sum(low)}
high : USD(000)low : USD(000)
«constraint»US9 : UnitSum
{high = sum(low)}
high : Real
low : Real [1..*]
PartTransportCosts : USD(000)
PartCOGSCosts : USD(000)
ProjParts : Inventory [1..*]
«constraint»USC8 : UnitSumComplex
{high = sum(low)}
high : Real [1..*]
low : Real [1..*]
«constraint»DS11 : DollarSum
{high = sum(low)}
high : USD(000)
low : USD(000)
«constraint»DS10 : DollarSum
{high = sum(low)}
high : USD(000)low : USD(000)
ProjTransCost : USD(000)
ProjPartsCost : USD(000)
ProjValue : USD(000)
ProjVAR : USD(000)
ProjectWTG : RealWTG : Real [1..*]
e4
e1
e12
e3
e2
e7
e5
e11
e18
e10
e6 e17
Ex. Given 100’s of product orders and sourcing plans for the next 12 months, what percent of my business is at-risk if Supplier X does not deliver, or if Part Y becomes obsolete?
57
Broadly Applicable TechnologyBroadly Applicable TechnologyExamples of Executable SysML ParametricsExamples of Executable SysML Parametrics
• Road scanning system using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAVs)• UAV-based missile interceptor system trade study• Space systems (tutorials): orbit planning; mass/cost roll-ups• Space systems (studies/pilots): FireSat (INCOSE SSWG), ...• Space systems (actuals): science merit function, ...• Environmentally-conscious energy systems / smart grid• Manufacturing “green-ness” / sustainability assessments• Regional water management systems (e.g. South Florida)
...• Mechanical part design and analysis (FEA)
...• Wind turbine supply chain management• Insurance claims processing and website capacity model• Financial model for small businesses• Banking service levels model
...
~Next-generationobject-orientedspreadsheets
(and more)
58
Regional Water Mgt. System: Hydrology ModelRegional Water Mgt. System: Hydrology Model
[SystemB_v2h_rsp.mdzip]
Sources:www.sfwmd.gov and
59
Regional Water Mgt. System: Hydrology ModelRegional Water Mgt. System: Hydrology Model[[SystemB_v2h.mdzipSystemB_v2h.mdzip]]Model DNA signature (flattened graph “panorama” view)
(auto-generated from SysML parametrics model)
60
Broadly Applicable TechnologyBroadly Applicable TechnologyExamples of Executable SysML ParametricsExamples of Executable SysML Parametrics
• Road scanning system using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAVs)• UAV-based missile interceptor system trade study• Space systems (tutorials): orbit planning; mass/cost roll-ups• Space systems (studies/pilots): FireSat (INCOSE SSWG), ...• Space systems (actuals): science merit function, ...• Environmentally-conscious energy systems / smart grid• Manufacturing “green-ness” / sustainability assessments• Regional water management systems (e.g. South Florida)
...• Mechanical part design and analysis (FEA)
...• Wind turbine supply chain management• Insurance claims processing and website capacity model• Financial model for small businesses• Banking service levels model
...
~Next-generationobject-orientedspreadsheets
(and more)
61
61
Aluminum Cast and Machined ComponentsMore Room for Internal PartsFewer Manufacturing OperationsHeavier
Rolled, Bent, Stamped Sheet MetalLess Room for Internal PartsMore Manufacturing OperationsLighter
Source: Bras, Romaniw, et al. 10/2009www.sdm.gatech.edu
F-86 wing section test caseF-86 wing section test case
Using SysML to Evaluate Sustainability Metrics Using SysML to Evaluate Sustainability Metrics (similar to Other Metrics: Design Flexibility, ...)(similar to Other Metrics: Design Flexibility, ...)
62
12/21/09 62Source: Bras, Romaniw, et al. 10/2009
www.sdm.gatech.edu
“Object-Oriented Spreadsheet”
plus more ...
F-86 Wing Section Test Case in SysML ParametricsF-86 Wing Section Test Case in SysML ParametricsComparing Sustainability Metrics for Design AlternativesComparing Sustainability Metrics for Design Alternatives
63
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Synopsis (8/2007-7/2008)• Phase 2 Highlights (8/2008-Present)
Addressing key needs per Phase 1 experiences:– Education– Research & Development– Productionization / Commercialization– Applications
• Summary• Elaborations on Selected Topics• Related Resources
64
Modeling & Simulation Interoperability Modeling & Simulation Interoperability Benefits of SysML-based ApproachBenefits of SysML-based Approach
Primary Impacts
Enabling Capabilities R
ed
uced
T
ime
Re
duc
ed
Co
st
Re
duc
ed
Ris
k In
crea
sed
U
nd
erst
an
din
g In
crea
sed
C
orp
ora
te M
emo
ry
Incr
ease
d A
rtifa
ct
Pe
rfor
ma
nce
Increased Knowledge Capture & Completeness
■ ■ ■ ■
Increased Modularity & Reusability
■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Increased Traceability
■ ■ ■
Reduced Manual Re-Creation & Data Entry Errors
■ ■ ■
Increased Automation
■ ■ ■
Reduced Modeling Effort
■ ■
Increased Analysis Intensity
■ ■
Precision KnowledgePrecision Knowledgefor thefor the
Model-Based EnterpriseModel-Based Enterprise
Page 65
MBSE Challenge TeamMechatronics / Model
Interoperability Open “Call for Participation”
• Systems engineering drivers in commercial settings– Increased system complexity– Cross-disciplinary communication/coordination
• Enhancement possibilities based on interest– Other demonstration examples and testbeds– Interoperability testing between SysML tools– Shared models and libraries
• Primary contacts– Russell Peak [Russell.Peak @ gatech.edu]– Sandy Friedenthal [sanford.friedenthal @ lmco.com]– Roger Burkhart [BurkhartRogerM @ JohnDeere.com]
66
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Synopsis (8/2007-7/2008)• Phase 2 Highlights (8/2008-Present)
Addressing key needs per Phase 1 experiences:– Education– Research & Development– Productionization / Commercialization– Applications
• Summary• Elaborations on Selected Topics• Related Resources
67
Phase 2: Research & Development ThrustsPhase 2: Research & Development Thrusts
• SysML-Modelica mapping
• “Model DNA” signatures – parametric graph visualization, debugging, ...
• System-E/MCAD/CAE interoperability
• etc.Elaborated in next slides ...
68Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
System Design & Analysis Integrating and Executing Diverse Models
SystemSystem
Sub-system 1Sub-system 1 Sub-system 2Sub-system 2 Sub-system nSub-system n
…
Comp 11Comp 11 Comp1mComp1m…
System model in SysMLExternal tools and models
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
69Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
System model of a Mini Satellite with a electronic comp (BGA)Author: System Engr.
PCA = printed circuit assembly
PCB = printed circuit board(bare substrate w/ metal traces ...)
BGA = ball grid array (a type of electronic component)
70Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Mini Satellite must satisfy weight and cost requirements
71Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
System Design & Analysis Integrating and Executing Diverse Models
SystemSystem
Sub-system 1Sub-system 1 Sub-system 2Sub-system 2 Sub-system nSub-system n
…
Comp 11Comp 11 Comp1mComp1m…
System model in SysMLExternal tools and models
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
72Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Mechanical CAD Model of BGA(top view – mold, chip, heat sink comps)
CAD (Siemens NX) model of the BGA assemblyAuthor: Mechanical Design Engineer
73Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Mechanical CAD Model of BGA(bottom view - ~200 solder balls)
CAD (Siemens NX) model of the BGA assemblyAuthor: Mechanical Design Engineer
74Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Challenges
The system engineer needs to propagate component requirements (e.g. weight, height) from the system model (SysML) to mechanical design model (NX)
The CAD engineer needs to propagate component properties (NX) to system model (SysML) to verify the design in system context (repeated as the design progresses)
The system engineer and mechanical engineer need to “map”/connect component properties in NX model and component properties in SysML model.
75Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
“System Model”- “X Domain Model” IntegrationEx. for X = Mechanical CAD
Systems Engineering Domain Design Domain
System Model
Component ZSystem Model
Property a1Property a2 a2 =
b1+b2
Step 1a Create a system model (e.g. with MagicDraw SysML)Step 1b Create a CAD domain model (e.g. with Siemens NX)Step 2 Import the CAD model into SysML as a CAD Model blockStep 3 Connect (map) the CAD model to the system model using SysML parametricsStep 4 Control an auto-synch process: updates in CAD model ↔ updates in system model
MagicDraw SysML
Component ZCAD DesignParameter b1Parameter b2Parameter b3
Component ZCAD ModelProperty b1Property b2Property b3
NX MCAD
76Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
SysML model of the BGA assembly automatically generated from NX model
77Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
The mapping (non-directed connections) between the BGA component in the Mini Satellite system model (SysML) and the MCAD NX model (now exposed in SysML) can now be specified by the user ... (the starting point shown here) ...
78Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
The resulting system model - MCAD model connections (as specified by the user in a SysML parametrics diagram) are shown here. This parametric diagram is executable and is an integral aspect of the overall system model.
79Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
ParaMagic is used to execute the resulting total model. It computes system-level cost & weight from all nested subsystem-level & component-level models (originating from MCAD / ECAD / ... tools), and it verifies related requirements.
Weight requirement satisfied
Cost requirement not satisfied
80Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
System Design & Analysis Integrating and Executing Diverse Models
SystemSystem
Sub-system 1Sub-system 1 Sub-system 2Sub-system 2 Sub-system nSub-system n
…
Comp 11Comp 11 Comp1mComp1m…
System model in SysMLExternal tools and models
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
81Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
STEP AP210 (IS0 10303-210)Design Standard for Electromechanical Products
STEP AP210 model (ISO 10303-210)
STEP AP210 model (ISO 10303-210)
Board Station(Mentor Graphics)
CR5000(Zuken)
VISULA(Zuken)
Allegro(Cadence)
ECAD Tools
Enterprise Databases
Part libraries
Material libraries
www.ap210.orgwww.wikistep.orgwww.lksoft.com
Design Integrators(LKSoft - an InterCAX partner)
SysMLSysML……
Prototyped in SBIR Phase 1 project
STEP AP210 Facts- O(100 man-yrs) in development- 1000+ concepts- Edition 1 released in 2001- Edition 2 releasing soon (2010)- In-production at Rockwell Collins, Boeing, NASA, …
82Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
SysML Schema derived from STEP AP210(9 high-level SE-related concepts)
83Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
AP210-based ECAD Model (I-501)(PCA with a 9-stratum PCB and 4 comps)
Layout of electrical features on layersLayout of electrical features on layers
IDA-STEP (LKSoft)www.ida-step.net
IDA-STEP (LKSoft)www.ida-step.net
84Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
AP210-based ECAD Model (I-501) (PCB Stackup showing 9 stratums)
Stackup of PCB stratums
Stackup of PCB stratums
85Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
SysML Instance Model Auto-generated from I-501 AP210 Model
9 PCB stratums9 PCB stratums
4 components4 components
Printed Circuit AssemblyPrinted Circuit Assembly
Printed Circuit BoardPrinted Circuit Board
86Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
eCAD model in SysML
(key system-level entities and properties)
System Design & Analysis Integrating and Executing Diverse Models
SystemSystem
Sub-system 1Sub-system 1 Sub-system 2Sub-system 2 Sub-system nSub-system n
…
Comp 11Comp 11 Comp1mComp1m…
System model in SysMLExternal tools and models
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 1m1 - Design
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 11 – Behavior 1Comp 11 – Behavior 1
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
Comp 1m1 – Behavior i
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD model in SysML
(assembly structure, properties, constraints)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
mCAD models(NX, Pro/E, CATIA,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
eCAD models(Board Station, CR5000,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
CAE models(FEA, CFD,…)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
Other simulation models(STK, DEVS, …)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
FEA models in SysML
(analysis conditions & results)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
Mapping Relationships (Parametrics)
87Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
FireSat System Model(PCA and PCB components)
88Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Printed Circuit Assembly – Testbed Model
PCA
Packaged components
PCB
89Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Requirements, Design/CAD, and Analysis/CAE
Electronic Artifacts - PCA, PCB, Packaged parts Must satisfy requirements Analysis/CAE models defined for verifying requirements
90Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
PCA CAD Model in NX [~2000 bodies](top view – 6 BGA assembly components)
91Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
PCA CAD Model in NX [~2000 bodies] (bottom view – 4 BGA assembly components)
92Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
PCA Model in SysML (schema)(auto-generated from NX CAD model)
Printed Circuit AssemblyPrinted Circuit Assembly
Printed Circuit BoardPrinted Circuit Board10 BGA assembly
components10 BGA assembly
components
~2000 BGA solder ball features
~2000 BGA solder ball features
93Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
PCA Model in SysML (instance)(auto-generated from NX CAD model)
Printed Circuit AssemblyPrinted Circuit Assembly
Printed Circuit BoardPrinted Circuit Board10 BGA assembly
components10 BGA assembly
components
94Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Printed Circuit Board – Behavior Models
95Copyright InterCAX – All rights reserved
Interfaces to External Tools/Models
Similar approaches can be used for other externally defined models, such as STK models and CAE models (e.g. finite element analysis model, CFD model, etc.)
Interfaces prototyped for this SBIR Phase 1 project:- MagicDraw - NX plugin (mechanical CAD tool)- MagicDraw - AP210 plugin (electrical CAD standard)- ABAQUS/ANSYS finite element analysis tool
Existing commercial interfaces used:- Matlab/Simulink, Excel, Mathematica (in ParaMagic) - AP210 interfaces to major ECAD tools (www.lksoft.com)
96
ContentsContents
• Phase 1 Synopsis (8/2007-7/2008)• Phase 2 Highlights (8/2008-Present)
Addressing key needs per Phase 1 experiences:– Education– Research & Development– Productionization / Commercialization– Applications
• Summary• Elaborations on Selected Topics• Related Resources
97
SysML Parametrics—Suggested Starting PointsSysML Parametrics—Suggested Starting Points
Introductory 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: 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—
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/
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 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.
[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.
98
MBX/SysML-Related Efforts at Georgia TechMBX/SysML-Related Efforts at Georgia Tech
• SysML Focus Area web page– http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/ – Includes links to publications, applications,
projects, examples, courses, commercialization, etc.– Frontiers 2008 workshop on MBSE/MBX, SysML, ...
• Selected projects– Deere: System dynamics (fluid power, ...)– Lockheed: System design & analysis integration – NASA: Enabling technology (SysML, ...)– NIST: Design-analysis interoperability (DAI)– TRW Automotive: DAI/FEA (steering wheel systems ... )
99
Selected GIT MBX/SysML-Related PublicationsSelected GIT MBX/SysML-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 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, September 22-25, 2007. [Presents some technical details on the use of SysML to create formal generic models (user libraries) of fab structure, and how these formal models can be combined with currently available data sources to automatically generate simulation models.]
• Huang, Edward, Ramamurthy, Randeep, and Leon F. McGinnis, "System and Simulation Modeling Using SysML," 2007 Winter Simulation Conference, Washington, DC. [Presents some technical details on the use of SysML to create formal generic models (user libraries) of fab structure, and how these formal models can be combined with currently available data sources to automatically generate simulation models.]
• McGinnis, Leon F., Edward Huang, Ky Sang Kwon, Randeep Ramamurthy, Kan Wu, "Real CAD for Facilities," 2007 IERC, Nashville, TN. [Presents concept of using FactoryCAD as a layout authoring tool and integrating it, via SysML with eM-Plant for automated fab simulation model generation.]
• T.A. Johnson, J.M. Jobe, C.J.J. Paredis, and R. Burkhart "Modeling Continuous System Dynamics in SysML," in Proceedings of the 2007 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, paper no. IMECE2007-42754, Seattle, WA, November 11-15, 2007. [Describes how continuous dynamics models can be represented in SysML. The approach is based on the continuous dynamics language Modelica.]
• T.A. Johnson, C.J.J. Paredis, and R. Burkhart "Integrating Models and Simulations of Continuous Dynamics into SysML," in Proceedings of the 6th International Modelica Conference, March 3-4, 2008. [Describes how continuous dynamics models and simulations can be used in the context of engineering systems design within SysML. The design of a car suspension modeled as a mass-spring-damper system is used as an illustration.]
• C.J.J. Paredis "Research in Systems Design: Designing the Design Process," IDETC/CIE 2007, Computers and Information in Engineering Conference -- Workshop on Model-Based Systems Development, Las Vegas, NV, September 4, 2007. [Presents relationship between SysML and the multi-aspect component model method.]
• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML—Part 1: A Parametrics Primer. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego. [Provides tutorial-like introduction to SysML parametrics.]
• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML—Part 2: Celebrating Diversity by Example. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego. [Provides tutorial-like introduction on using SysML for modeling & simulation, including the MRA method for creating parametric simulation templates that are connected to design models.]
• Peak RS (2007) Leveraging Templates & Processes with SysML. Invited Presentation. Developing a Design/Simulation Framework: A Workshop with CPDA's Design and Simulation Council, Atlanta. [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, 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).]
100
Publications (cont.)Publications (cont.)
• Shah AA, Schaefer D, Paredis CJJ (2009) Enabling Multi-View Modeling with SysML Profiles and Model Transformations. International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management, Bath, UK.
• Kerzhner AA, Paredis CJJ (2009) Using Domain Specific Languages to Capture Design Synthesis Knowledge for Model-Based Systems Engineering. Proceedings of the ASME 2009 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, San Diego, CA, DETC2009-87286.
• J.M. Jobe, T.A. Johnson and C.J.J. Paredis, “Multi-Aspect Component Models: A Framework for Model Reuse in SysML,” in Proceedings of IDETC/CIE 2008, paper no. DETC2008–49339, Brooklyn, NY, 2008.
• W. Schamai, P. Fritzson, C. Paredis and A. Pop, "Towards Unified System Modeling and Simulation with ModelicaML: Modeling of Executable Behavior Using Graphical Notations," Proceedings of the 7th International Modelica Conference, pp. 612-621, Como, Italy, 20-22 September, 2009.
101
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 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.
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/
[1] The X in MBX includes engineering (MBE), manufacturing (MBM), and potentially other scopes and contexts such as model-based enterprises (MBE).
Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML—Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML—Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status ReportMechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report
102
Simulation-Based Design Using SysMLSimulation-Based 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 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 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 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 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 capabilities for next-generation systems lifecycle management.
CitationPeak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, 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/
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 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.
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.
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.
103
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 Engineers and technologists from various industries and government agencies, it identifies the current major challenges and pain points of Collaborative Engineering. Each of these challenges and pain points are mapped into desired capabilities of an envisioned CEE System that will address them.
Next, we present a CEE methodology that embodies these capabilities. We overview work done to date by GIT on the composable object (COB) knowledge representation as a basis for next-generation CEE systems. This methodology leverages the multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates, the user-oriented SysML standard for system modeling, and standards like STEP AP233 (ISO 10303-233) for enhanced interoperability. Finally, we present COB representation requirements in the context of this CEE methodology. In this current project and subsequent phases we are striving to fulfill these requirements as we develop next-generation COB capabilities.
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 Project
The Composable Object (COB) Knowledge Representation: Enabling Advanced Collaborative Engineering Environments (CEEs). http://eislab.gatech.edu/projects/nasa-ngcobs/
Composable Objects (COB) Requirements & ObjectivesComposable Objects (COB) Requirements & Objectives
104
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 specific examples with a top-tier automotive supplier. Learn how you too may join this project and implement a similar effort within your own company to enhance modularity and reusability through a unified method that links diverse models. Russell will also highlight SysML’s parametrics capabilities and usage for physics-based analysis, including integrated CAD-CAE and simulation-based requirements verification. Go to www.omgsysml.org for background on SysML—a graphical modeling language based on UML2 for specifying, designing, analyzing, and verifying complex systems.
Speaker 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 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.
CitationRS Peak (2007) Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysML: Applications to CAD-FEA Interoperability. Developing a Design/Simulation Framework, CPDA Workshop, Atlanta.
http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/
Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysMLLeveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysML Applications to CAD-FEA InteroperabilityApplications to CAD-FEA Interoperability
105
Managing “Model DNA” Using SysML ParametricsManaging “Model DNA” Using SysML ParametricsPanorama Tool by Andy Scott (Undergrad Research Asst.) and Russell Peak (Director, Modeling & Simulation Lab)Panorama Tool by Andy Scott (Undergrad Research Asst.) and Russell Peak (Director, Modeling & Simulation Lab)
b. Mini Snowman
a. Snowman
c. Snowflake
d. Mouse
g. Robot
f. ?
e. CactusTest: Match the actual model titles (below) to their “DNA signatures” with imagined titles (left).
__g__ 1. South Florida water mgt. (hydrology) model
__a__ 2. 2-spring physics model
__e__ 3. 3-year company financial model
__c__ 4. UAV road scanning system model
__b__ 5. Car gas mileage model
__d__ 6. Airframe mechanical part model
__f __ 7. Design verification model (automated test for two Item 6. designs)
[answers shown above]
www.msl.gatech.edu