MBSE Using SysML Part 1 Peak

NDIA M&S Committee Meeting April 22, 2009 Arlington, Virginia

ModelModel--Based SE Using SysMLBased SE Using SysMLModelModel Based SE Using SysMLBased SE Using SysMLPart 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&SPart 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S

Russell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnisRussell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnisGeorgia Institute of TechnologyGeorgia Institute of Technology

Product & Systems Lifecycle Management CenterProduct & Systems Lifecycle Management Centerwww.pslm.gatech.eduwww.pslm.gatech.edup gp g

Part 1 Speaker: Russell PeakPart 1 Speaker: Russell Peak

Standard Edition - v1

Note: This is the 99-slide ”standard edition” presentation. A 187-slide “extended edition” with additional context material is available here: http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/

ModelModel--Based SE Using SysMLBased SE Using SysMLPart 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&SPart 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S

AbstractThis presentation highlights Phase 1 results from a modeling & simulation effort that integrates design and assessment using SysML. An excavator testbed illustrates interconnecting simulation models with associated diverse system

d l d i d l d f t i d l W th i Ph 2 k i i l di bilmodels, design models, and manufacturing models. We then overview Phase 2 work-in-process including a mobile robotics testbed and associated SysML-driven operations demonstration.

The overall goal is to enable advanced model-based systems engineering (MBSE) in particular and model-based X (MBX) [1] in general. Our method employs SysML as the primary technology to achieve multi-level multi-fidelity interoperability, while at the same time leveraging conventional modeling & simulation tools including mechanical CAD, factory CAD spreadsheets math solvers finite element analysis (FEA) discrete event solvers and optimization toolsfactory CAD, spreadsheets, math solvers, finite element analysis (FEA), discrete event solvers, and optimization tools.

This Part 1 presentation overviews the project context and several specific components. Part 2 focuses on manufacturing aspects including factory design, process planning, and throughput simulation.

This work is sponsored by several organizations including Lockheed and Deere and is part of the Modeling & Simulation Interoperability Team [2] in the INCOSE MBSE Challenge (with applications to mechatronics as an example domain).)

[1] The X in MBX includes engineering (MBE), manufacturing (MBM), and potentially other scopes and contexts such as model-based enterprises (MBE). [2] http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/

CitationsRS Peak, CJJ Paredis, LF McGinnis (2009-04) Model-Based SE Using SysML—Part 1: Integrating Design and Assessment M&S. NDIA M&S Committee Meeting, Arlington, Virginia. http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/

LF McGinnis (2009-04) Model-Based SE Using SysML—Part 2: Integrating Manufacturing Design and Simulation. NDIA M&S C itt M ti A li t Vi i i htt // l t h d / j t /i b i/

2

NDIA M&S Committee Meeting, Arlington, Virginia. http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/projects/incose-mbse-msi/

[email protected], Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, www.msl.gatech.edu

Collaboration ApproachPrimary Current TeamPrimary Current Team

• Deere & Co• Deere & Co.– Roger Burkhart

Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT)• Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT)– Russell Peak, Chris Paredis, Leon McGinnis, & co.

ll b– Leveraging collaborations in PSLM Center SysML Focus Area (see next slide)

L kh d M i• Lockheed Martin– Sandy Friedenthal

Page 3

• Vendor collaboration

GIT Product & Systems Lifecycle Management CenterGIT Product & Systems Lifecycle Management CenterLeveraging Related EffortsLeveraging Related Efforts www.pslm.gatech.eduwww.pslm.gatech.edu

• SysML-related projects:– Deere, Lockheed, Boeing, NASA, NIST, TRW Automotive, ...

• Other efforts based at GIT:• Other efforts based at GIT:– NSF Center for Compact & Efficient Fluid Power– SysML course development

• For Professional Masters in SE program continuing ed short courses• For Professional Masters in SE program, continuing ed. short courses, ...– Other groups & labs– Vendor collaboration (tool licenses, support, ...)

• Consortia & other GIT involvements:• Consortia & other GIT involvements:– INCOSE Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) effort – NIST SE Tool Interoperability Plug-Fest

OMG (SysML )– OMG (SysML, ...)– PDES Inc. (APs 210, 233, ...)

• Commercialization efforts:V t L b t h d b d i ff (I t CAX)

4

– www.VentureLab.gatech.edu-based spin-off company (InterCAX): Productionizing tools for executable SysML parametrics

ContentsContents

• Phase 1 Overview and ResultsFrom August 2007 to August 2008– From August, 2007 to August, 2008

• Phase 2 Progress– From August, 2008 to August, 2009

5

Contents

• Problem DescriptionProblem Description– Challenge Team Objectives– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systemsy

• Technical Approach– Techniques and Testbeds

• Deliverables & Outcomes• Collaboration Approachpp

Page 6

MBSE Challenge Team ObjectivesPhase 1: 2007-2008Phase 1: 2007 2008

Overall Objectives

• Define & demonstrate capabilities for d d d li & i l i i bili (MSI)advanced modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI)

• Phase 1 Scope– Domain: MechatronicsDomain: Mechatronics– Capabilities: Methodologies, tools, requirements,

and practical applications – MSI subset: Connecting system specification & design modelsMSI subset: Connecting system specification & design models

with multiple engineering analysis & dynamic simulation models

• Test & demonstrate how SysML facilitates effective MSI

Page 7

Note: The objectives to date are primarily based on projects in the GIT PSLM Center sponsored by industry and government—see backup slides.


S ifi Obj tiSpecific Objectives

1. Define modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method2. Define SysML and tool requirements to support MSI

1. Provide feedback to vendors and OMG SysML 1.1 revision task force

3 Demonstrate MSI method with 3+ engineering analysis3. Demonstrate MSI method with 3+ engineering analysis and dynamic simulation model types1. Include representative building block library: fluid power 2 Include hybrid discrete/continuous systems2. Include hybrid discrete/continuous systems

described by differential algebraic equations (DAEs)

4. Develop roadmap beyond Phase 1

Page 8

Interoperability Method Objectives for MBSEInteroperability Method Objectives for MBSE

Primary Impacts

g emor

y ifa

ct

duce

d

me du

ced

os

t duce

d

sk

crea

sed

ders

tand

ing

crea

sed

orpo

rate

Me

crea

sed

Arti

rform

ance

Enabling Capabilities R

eTi

mR

eC

oR

eR

i sIn

cU

nIn

cC

oIn

cP

e

Increased Knowledge Capture & Completeness

■ ■ ■ ■

Increased ■ ■ ■ ■ ■Modularity & Reusability

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

Increased Traceability

■ ■ ■

Reduced ■ ■ ■Manual Re-Creation

■ ■ ■

Increased Automation

■ ■ ■

Reduced Modeling Effort

■ ■

9

Modeling EffortIncreased Analysis Intensity

■ ■

Mechatronics ArchitectureSoftware

• Functions• Operating Modes

• Modules, Libraries• Messages

“Mechanical System”Ki ti & D i

InterfaceDi l

p g• State Machines• Control Systems• ...

g• Protocols• Code• ...

• Kinematics & Dynamics• Powertrain• Thermal• Fluids• Electric Power

Actuators

Sensors

ElectronicControl Unit

(ECU)

• Displays• User Controls• Haptics• Remote Links• ...

Electronics

• ...Communications Bus

F db k C t l L

Page 10

Feedback Control Loop

Contents

• Problem DescriptionProblem Description– Characteristics of Mechatronic Systems– Challenge Team Objectivesg j



Page 11

Overall Technical Approachpp

• Technique Development– “Federated system model” framework technology

• A.k.a. collective product model

Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Graph transformation technology– etcetc.

• Testbed Implementations & Execution• Iteration• Iteration

Page 12

Technical Approach—Subsetpp• Standards-based framework technology

Federated system models– Federated system models– Utilize SysML where appropriate (esp. parametrics)

• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Harmonize, generalize, extend new & existing work– COBs, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ..., , , , , ,

• Testbeds– Develop and test techniques iterativelyp q y– Implement test cases for verification & validation– Produce reference examples

Page 13

– Produce open resources (e.g., SysML-based fluid power libraries)

Example Federated System ModelExample Federated System ModelLogical composition of models based on various Logical composition of models based on various ontologies/schemas (from native tools, standards, inontologies/schemas (from native tools, standards, in--house)house)g ( , ,g ( , , ))

Electrical Engineering• Standard: AP210• Software Mentor Graphics• Status: Prototyped

R k ll B i

Cabling• Standard: AP212• Software MentorGraphics• Status: Prototyped

D i l Ch l P STEP

Fluid Dynamics• Standard: CFD• Software

Propulsion• Standard: STEP-PRP• Software:-

Mechanical Engineering• Standard: AP203, AP214

• Rockwell, Boeing • Daimler-Chrysler, ProSTEP

Software Engineering• Standard::UML - (AP233 interface In Development)• Software:Rational Rose, Argo, All-Together

• Software -• Status: In Development• Boeing,

Optics• Standard: NODIF

• Status: In Development• ESA, EADS

• Software Pro-E, Cadds, SolidWorks, AutoCad, SDRC IDEAS, Unigraphics, others• Status: In Production• Aerospace Industry Wide, Automotive Industry

Structural Analysis• Standard: AP209

• Status: In Production• Industry-wide

Systems Engineering• Standard: AP233

• Software - TBD• Minolta, Olympus

• Software: MSC Patran, Thermal Desktop• Status: In Production• Lockheed Martin, Electric Boat

Thermal Radiation Analysis

• Software: Statemate, Doors, Matrix-X, Slate, Core, RTM• Status: In development / Prototyped• BAE SYSTEMS, EADS, NASA

PDMThermal Radiation Analysis• Standard: STEP-TAS• Software: Thermal Desktop, TRASYS• Status: In Production• ESA/ESTEC, NASA/JPL & Langely

Machining Inspection

• Standard: STEP PDM Schema/AP232• Software: MetaPhase, Windchill, Insync• Status: In Production • Lockheed Martin, EADS, BAE SYSTEMS, Raytheon

Spacecraft Development

14

Machining• Standard:: STEP-NC/AP224•Software:: Gibbs, •Status:: In Development / Prototyped•STEP-Tools, Boeing

Inspection• Standard: AP219• Software: Technomatics, Brown, eSharp • Status: In Development• NIST, CATIA, Boeing, Chrysler, AIAG

Life-Cycle Management• Standard: PLCS• Software: SAP• Status: In Development• BAE SYSTEMS, Boeing, Eurostep

Adapted from 2001-12-16 - Jim U’Ren, NASA-JPL

ModelModel--Centric FrameworkCentric FrameworkProduce, Merge, Enrich, ConsumeProduce, Merge, Enrich, Consume

P d T l

http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/journals/2004-jcise-peak/ (where “collective product model” “federated system model”)

Tool A1Producer Tools(Primary Authoring) Tool An...

Mechanical Engineering• Standard: AP203, AP214• Software Pro-E, Cadds, SolidWorks, AutoCad, SDRC IDEAS, Unigraphics, others• Status: In Production• Aerospace Industry Wide, Automotive Industry

Electrical Engineering• Standard: AP210• Software Mentor Graphics• Status: Prototyped• Rockwell, Boeing

Cabling• Standard: AP212• Software MentorGraphics• Status: Prototyped• Daimler-Chrysler, ProSTEP

Structural Analysis• Standard: AP209

S ft MSC P t Th l

Software Engineering• Standard::UML - (AP233 interface In Development)• Software:Rational Rose, Argo, All-Together• Status: In Production• Industry-wide

Systems Engineering• Standard: AP233• Software: Statemate Doors Matrix X

Fluid Dynamics• Standard: CFD• Software -• Status: In Development• Boeing,

Optics• Standard: NODIF• Software - TBD• Minolta, Olympus

Propulsion• Standard: STEP-PRP• Software:-• Status: In Development• ESA, EADS

Federated System ModelM t B ildi Bl kEnricher Tools

• Software: MSC Patran, Thermal Desktop• Status: In Production• Lockheed Martin, Electric Boat

Thermal Radiation Analysis• Standard: STEP-TAS• Software: Thermal Desktop, TRASYS• Status: In Production• ESA/ESTEC, NASA/JPL & Langely

Machining• Standard:: STEP-NC/AP224•Software:: Gibbs, •Status:: In Development / Prototyped•STEP-Tools, Boeing

Inspection• Standard: AP219• Software: Technomatics, Brown, eSharp • Status: In Development• NIST, CATIA, Boeing, Chrysler, AIAG

• Software: Statemate, Doors, Matrix-X, Slate, Core, RTM• Status: In development / Prototyped• BAE SYSTEMS, EADS, NASA

PDM• Standard: STEP PDM Schema/AP232• Software: MetaPhase, Windchill, Insync• Status: In Production • Lockheed Martin, EADS, BAE SYSTEMS, Raytheon

Life-Cycle Management• Standard: PLCS• Software: SAP• Status: In Development• BAE SYSTEMS, Boeing, Eurostep

Spacecraft Development

Meta-Building Blocks:• Information models & meta-models

• International standards• Industry specs• Corporate standards

Tool Bj

Enricher Tools(Secondary Authoring)

Consumer Tools

15

p• Local customizations

• Modeling technologies:• Express, UML, SysML, COBs, OWL, XML, …

Tool Ck

Consumer Tools(e.g., Solvers)



• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Harmonize, generalize, extend new & existing work– COBs/SysML, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, .../ y , , , , , ,


Page 16


The Four Pillars of SysML

interaction

1. Structure 2. Behavior

state machine

activity/functionfunction

definition use

Page 173. Requirements 4. Parametrics

Model vs. DiagramsModel vs. Diagrams

Reality- Envisioned or actual

Model- Computer-oriented- Master repository

Diagrams- Human-oriented

- Subset viewsMaster repository- Complete for intended scope

Subset views

18

Tools- Authoring, viewing, executing, ...

Acknowledgements: Selected portions from Friedenthal et al. 2008 and MagicDraw samples.

SysML Technology StatusSysML Technology Statuswww.omgsysml.orgwww.omgsysml.org

• Spec v1.0: 2007-09 v1.1: 2008-11 v1.2: WIPv2.x: RFI preparation workshop - 2008-12http // omg org/spec/S sML/http://www.omg.org/spec/SysML/

• Vendor support• Learning infrastructure• Learning infrastructure

– Books, vendor courses, academic courses,INCOSE/OMG tutorial, public examples, etc., p p ,

• Growing production usage– http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/events/frontiers2008/– OMG SysML Info Days – 2008-12

• Overall status: Healthy and growing

19

“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysML“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysMLLevel 1: IntraLevel 1: Intra--Template DiversityTemplate Diversity

soi: Linkage

par [cbam] LinkagePlaneStressModel [Definition view]

ts1

Bsleeve1

B

ts2

ds2

ds1

sleeve2

L

shaft

Leff

s

rib1 rib2

red = idealized parameter

CAE modeleffectiveLength:

deformationModel: LinkagePlaneStressAbb

rs1:

ws1:

ts1:

l:

sleeve1:

width:

outerRadius:

wallThickness:

l 2

MechanicalCAD model

CAE model (FEA)

criticalCrossSection:

shaft:

ws2:

ts2:

tf:

rs2:

wf:

tw:

ex:

sleeve2:

width:

outerRadius:

wallThickness:

basicIsection:

flangeThickness:

webThickness:

nuxy:

force:

uxMax:

sxMax:

flangeWidth:

condition: Condition

sxMosModel: MarginOfSafetyModel

allowable:

marginOfSafety:

determined:

mechanicalBehaviorModels:

material:

name:

linearElastic:

youngsModulus:

condition: Condition

description:

reaction:

Symbolic math models

20

yieldStress:

allowableInterAxisLengthChange:

uxMosModel: MarginOfSafetyModel

allowable:

marginOfSafety:

determined:

poissonsRatio: math models

[Peak et al. 2007—Part 2]

“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysML“Wiring Together” Diverse Models via SysMLLevel 2: InterLevel 2: Inter--Template Diversity (per MIM 0.1)Template Diversity (per MIM 0.1)Naval Systems-of-Systems (SoS) Panorama—An Envisioned Complex Model Interoperability Problem Enabled by SysML/MIM/COBs

Parametric associativityTool & native model associativityComposition relationship (re-usage)

Legend

Parametric associativityTool & native model associativityComposition relationship (re-usage)

Legend

c1 Simulation Templatesd0 Simulation e0 Solvera0 Descriptive

c2. Optimization Templates c0. Context-Specific ModelsBased on HMX 0.12008-02-20

c1. Simulation Templates(of diverse behavior & fidelity)

ECAD & MCAD Tools EvacuationMgt.

d0. Simulation Building Blocks

Tribon, CATIA, NX, Cadence, ...

e0. SolverResources

a0. DescriptiveResources

Evacuation CodesEgress, Exodus, …

CFDFlotherm Fluent

General MathMathematica,

Maple, Matlab,…2D

PropellerHydroSystems & Software Tools

…

Flotherm, Fluent, …

3D

…

Hydro-dynamics

Systems & Software ToolsDOORS, E+MagicDraw, Studio, Eclipse, …

DamagedStability

FEAAbaqus, Ansys,

Patran, Nastran, …

Operation Mgt. Systems

…

21

Libraries & DatabasesClassification Codes, Materials, Personnel, Procedures, …

b0. Federated Descriptive Models

NavigationAccuracy Discrete Event

Arena, Quest, …



• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method• Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method– Harmonize, generalize, extend new & existing work– COBs, CPM, KCM, MACM, MRA, OOSEM, ..., , , , , ,


Page 22


Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedTool Categories ViewTool Categories View

SysML Tools

No Magic / SysMLO ti l

RSA/E+ / SysMLExcavator

RSA/E+ / SysML

ExcavatorSystem Model

OperationalScenario

ExcavatorExecutable Scenario

Interface & Transformation Tools

FactoryModel

TraditionalSimulation & Analysis Tools

ModelCenter

TraditionalDescriptive Tools

Interface & Transformation Tools(VIATRA, XaiTools, ...)

ModelCenterNX / MCAD Tool

Excavator Boom Model

FactoryCAD

Ansys

FEA Model

MathematicaReliability

Model

OptimizationModel

Factory Layout Model

ExcelProduction

Model

Excel

Cost Model

DymolaDig Cycle

Model

23

RampseM-Plant

FactorySimulation

2008-02-25a

Excavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedExcavator Modeling & Simulation TestbedInteroperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)Interoperability Patterns View (MSI Panorama per MIM 0.1)

Optimization ModelObj ti

NXModelCenter

c0. Context-SpecificSimulation Models e0. Solver Resourcesa0. Descriptive Resources

(Authoring Tools, ...)d0. Simulation Building Block

Libraries

Solid

CostConcepts

OptimizationConcepts

Reliability

Notes

Reliability M d l

Cost Model

ObjectiveFunction

Excel

ModelCenterSolid Mechanics

Queuing Concepts

Fluid Mechanics

Reliability Concepts

b0 Federated

Excel

Model

Federated Excavator Model

MathematicaDig Cycle Model

b0. Federated Descriptive Models

Hydraulics Operations

Dymola

RSD/E+

MagicDrawExtensional

Linkage Model

Plane Stress Linkage Model

Boom

Linkages

ySubsystem

p

Req. & Objectives

Dig Site Dump Trucks

Legend

MM1 Queuing

Ansys

FactoryCAD

Federated Factory Model

Dig Site Dump Trucks

Req. & Objectives

Excavator MBOM

24

eM-Plant / Factory Flow

Discrete EventAssy Model

MM1 Queuing Assy Model

FactoryCADAssembly Lines

Work CellsAGVs

Buffers Machines

2008-02-20

Demo ScenarioDemo Scenario

• New market-driven targets:20% increase in dig rate (dirt volume / time)– 20% increase in dig rate (dirt volume / time)

– 15% increase in mfg. productionCh k if i ti d i i ffi i t b• Check if existing design is sufficient by re-running SysML-enabled simulations

• If not, explore re-design trade space– Changes in bucket size, hydraulics, ...

• Re-do V&V using simulations on new design• Explore manufacturing impact

25

Explore manufacturing impact– Factory re-design and simulation


SysML Tools



RSA/E+ / SysML


OperationalScenario



FactoryModel


ModelCenter





FactoryCAD

Ansys

FEA Model


Model

OptimizationModel


ExcelProduction

Model

Excel

Cost Model

DymolaDig Cycle

Model

26

RampseM-Plant

FactorySimulation

2008-02-25a

EarthEarth--Moving EnterpriseMoving EnterpriseSysML package diagram (pkg)SysML package diagram (pkg)

27

Excavator Model TreeExcavator Model TreeSummary View (mostly unexpanded) in MagicDraw SysML ToolSummary View (mostly unexpanded) in MagicDraw SysML Tool

28

Excavator Operational DomainExcavator Operational DomainTopTop--Level Context Diagram in SysMLLevel Context Diagram in SysML

29

Excavator Operational DomainExcavator Operational DomainFirst Level of DetailFirst Level of Detail——bdd (SysML block definition diagram)bdd (SysML block definition diagram)

30

Excavator Operational DomainExcavator Operational DomainFirst Level of DetailFirst Level of Detail——ibd (SysML internal block diagram)ibd (SysML internal block diagram)

31

Excavator Operational DomainExcavator Operational DomainTopTop--Level Use CasesLevel Use Cases

32

Excavator Dig CycleExcavator Dig CycleActivity DiagramActivity Diagram

33

Excavator Requirements & ObjectivesExcavator Requirements & Objectivesreq req -- SysML Requirements DiagramSysML Requirements Diagram

34

System Objective FunctionSystem Objective Function——ExcavatorExcavatorContext: Operational EnterpriseContext: Operational Enterprise

n

jijijiij

n

iii moemoekmoekf

,;1,1 Mathematical

Form

SysML ParametricsSysML Parametrics Form

35

Excavator Test CaseExcavator Test CaseSelected System BreakdownsSelected System Breakdowns

36


SysML Tools



RSA/E+ / SysML


OperationalScenario



FactoryModel


ModelCenter





FactoryCAD

Ansys

FEA Model


Model

OptimizationModel


ExcelProduction

Model

Excel

Cost Model

DymolaDig Cycle

Model

37

RampseM-Plant

FactorySimulation

2008-02-25a

Hydraulic Circuit DiagramHydraulic Circuit DiagramPressurePressure--Compensated, LoadCompensated, Load--Sensing ExcavatorSensing Excavator——ISO 1219 notationISO 1219 notation

Mechanical Interface

Mechanical Interface

Mechanical InterfaceInterface Interface

LSMechanical Interface

38

SysML Schematic (ibd) SysML Schematic (ibd) —— Basic ViewBasic ViewPressurePressure--Compensated, LoadCompensated, Load--Sensing ExcavatorSensing Excavator

39

SysML Schematic (ibd) SysML Schematic (ibd) —— Detailed ViewDetailed ViewPressurePressure--Compensated, LoadCompensated, Load--Sensing ExcavatorSensing Excavator

40

Hydraulics Subsystem Simulation ModelHydraulics Subsystem Simulation Modelbddbdd

41

Excavator Case StudyExcavator Case StudyNative Tool Models: ModelicaNative Tool Models: Modelica

c c BB

Sw ingFl... BoomCyl... BoomCyl...ArmCylB... ArmCylR... BucketC... BucketC...b4y

{0,.21...

a

bb4xr={-.92...ab

b3r={4.22,1.3...a b

cyl2f

m=

bB...l1_l

b2_lr={2.85,1.18,...ab

Arm1r={0.49...a b

cyl3f

=50

bB...

Arm... Buc...Boo...

c...c...

c...

B...B...

Hydraulics Model

Sw ingMotor

B

BoomCylR

B

BucketCyl

B

ArmCyl

BmCylL

BoomCyl

sw ingComma...

BoomCyl...

Carriage

r={-0.164,1....

a

b

Boomr={7.11,0,0}a b

b2_rr={2.85,1....a b

b1_r

{.655,....

a

b

r={a

cyl1...

m=...

bC...

m=...

b1_l

r={.655,....

a

b

cy Armr={3.654,...

a bm=...

bArm

JointR...n_a={...Arm2

r={2.97,0....a b

mbB

p10

r={.52...

n={...Ar... n={...Bu...n={...Bo...

c...

braB BBBoomBoomCyl...

boomCommand

Mechanical model of complete...

Base

r={... n={0,...

Swin...

r={a

Boo...

brakeS...c...c...

frame_...

bra...

Multi-Body System Dynamics Model

B

TP

LSB

TP

LSB

TP

LSB

TP

LSB

TP

LS

armCommand

(linkages, ...)

maxma...

max1ma...

max2ma... max3

ma...B

pclsPumpcircuitTank

accumulator

constantSpeed bucketCommand

hydraulicsDig Cycle

42

world

x

y

environment

p_amb = 101325T_amb = 288.15

SimulationSimulationin Dymolain Dymola SimulationSimulationyy

ModelicaModelicaLexical RepresentationLexical Representation( t( t t d f S ML)t d f S ML)

ResultsResults

(auto(auto--generated from SysML)generated from SysML)

[Johnson 2008[Johnson 2008 -- Masters Thesis]Masters Thesis]

43

[Johnson, 2008 [Johnson, 2008 Masters Thesis]Masters Thesis]


SysML Tools



RSA/E+ / SysML


OperationalScenario



FactoryModel


ModelCenter





FactoryCAD

Ansys

FEA Model


Model

OptimizationModel


ExcelProduction

Model

Excel

Cost Model

DymolaDig Cycle

Model

44

RampseM-Plant

FactorySimulation

2008-02-25a

Recurring Problem:Recurring Problem:Maintaining Multiple ViewsMaintaining Multiple Views

• Multiple stakeholdersstakeholders with different views and toolsviews and tools

• Models of different system

Aspect A

Models different system aspects

• Different viewsDifferent views are not independent

Aspect B

Models SystemDesign

4545

pModel

Approach: Model TransformationApproach: Model Transformation

1. Define meta-models2. Define a model transformation

– Create graphs of correspondence between meta-modelsDefine transformation rules from SysML to Modelica– Define transformation rules from SysML to Modelica and vice-versa

– Triple Graph Grammar (TGG)3. Compile rules (MOFLON) and load as plug-in

S M t d l T t M t d lT f ti S ifi tirefers to refers to

Source Metamodel Target Metamodel

conforms to conforms to

Transformation Specification

executes

4646

Source Model Target ModelTransformation Enginereads writes

(Czarnecki, K., & Hellen, S., 2006)

Capturing Domain Specific KnowledgeCapturing Domain Specific Knowledgein Graph Transformations*in Graph Transformations*pp

Requirements & Objectives

SysML

Hydraulic_Subsystem Schematic[Block] ibd [ ]

valve : 4port3wayServoValve

portP : FlowPort

portT : FlowPort

pump : FDpumpdischarge : FlowPort

suction : FlowPort

housing : FlowPort

inputShaft : FlowPort

tank-to-pump : Line

pump-to-valve : Line

a : FlowPort

b : FlowPort

systemalternative

Topology Generation*

System Alternatives MAsCoMs SysML

cylA : FlowPort

cylB : FlowPort

p p

a : FlowPortb : FlowPort

valve-to-cylP1 : Linea : FlowPort

b : FlowPortvalve-to-filter : Line

a : FlowPort

b : FlowPortfilter-to-tank : Line

b : FlowPort

tank : Tank

return : FlowPort

sump : FlowPort

System Behavior S ML

Model Composition*actuator : Double-ActingCylinder

a : FlowPort

b : FlowPorthousing : FlowPort

rod : FlowPort

valve-to-cylP2 : Linea : FlowPort

b : FlowPortfilter : Filterin : FlowPort

out : FlowPort

b : FlowPort

a : FlowPort

b : FlowPort

yModels SysML

Model Translation*

a : FlowPortrod : FlowPort

hydraulics

worldy

Dig Cycle

Arm

Boom

Sw ing

BucketTraj

behaviormodel

simulationconfiguration

Executable Simulations

Dymola

Simulation Configuration*

xmodel

4747

Design Optimization ModelCenter

Simulation Configuration


SysML Tools



RSA/E+ / SysML


OperationalScenario



FactoryModel


ModelCenter





FactoryCAD

Ansys

FEA Model


Model

OptimizationModel


ExcelProduction

Model

Excel

Cost Model

DymolaDig Cycle

Model

48

RampseM-Plant

FactorySimulation

2008-02-25a

Wrap Dynamic Simulation asWrap Dynamic Simulation asModelCenter Model in SysMLModelCenter Model in SysMLyy

Fully qualified name points to ModelCenter model

Stereotypes defineinput/output causalityp p y

49

DOE Model in SysMLDOE Model in SysML

LatinHyperCube sampler

Reference Property

Model

5050

Automatic Export to Automatic Export to and Execution in ModelCenterand Execution in ModelCenter

5151

Application in Case Study:Application in Case Study:Optimization under uncertainty with kriging modelOptimization under uncertainty with kriging modelp y g gp y g g

optimizer

Latin Hypercube + K i i fKriging response surface

• Optimization under uncertainty

• LatinHyperCube sampler used to predict expected value

Objectives:• Maximize Efficiency• Minimize Cost

value• Kriging model used

in conjunction with sampler to generate

Design variables:• bore diameters

52

p gresponse surface to reduce computational cost

SysML ModelSysML ModelOptimization under uncertainty with kriging modelOptimization under uncertainty with kriging model

5353

Pl t V i bl (M d l tilit tilit )

Trade Study Optimization ResultsTrade Study Optimization Results0.8386

0.744580.650570.556550.462540.368520.274510.180490.08648

-0.00754

Plot Variable: response (Model.utility.utility)

0.820.8

0.780.760.740.720.7

0.680.660.640.620.6

0.580 56

Auto-generated optimization model in ModelCenter

Design space visualized in ModelCenter

utili

ty

0.560.540.52

0.50.480.460.440.420.4

0.380.360.340.32

0.30.280.260.240.220.2

0.180.160.14

boomSize

0.116

0.115

0.114

0.113

0.112

0.111

0.11

0.109

0.108

0.1070.106

0.105

0.120.1

0.080.060.040.02

-3.95517e-016

0.1450.1440.1440.1430.1430.1420.1420.1410.1410.140.140.1390.1390.1380.1380.1370.1370.1360.1360.1350 1350 134

0.12

0.119

0.118

0.117 armSize0.1350.1340.1340.1330.1330.1320.1320.1310.1310.130.130.1290.1290.1280.1280.1270.1270.1260.1260.1250.125

Design optimization model in SysML with auto-updated results

54

See Part 2 talk by Leon McGinnis ...See Part 2 talk by Leon McGinnis ...

Model-Based SE Using SysMLPart 2: Integrating Mfg Design and Simulation

55


SysML Tools



RSA/E+ / SysML


OperationalScenario



FactoryModel


ModelCenter





FactoryCAD

Ansys

FEA Model


Model

OptimizationModel


ExcelProduction

Model

Excel

Cost Model

DymolaDig Cycle

Model

56

RampseM-Plant

FactorySimulation

2008-02-25a


SysML Tools



RSA/E+ / SysML


OperationalScenario



FactoryModel


ModelCenter





FactoryCAD

Ansys

FEA Model


Model

OptimizationModel


ExcelProduction

Model

Excel

Cost Model

DymolaDig Cycle

Model

57

RampseM-Plant

FactorySimulation

2008-02-25a

MCADMCAD--SysML Interface ScenariosSysML Interface ScenariosUGS/Siemens NXUGS/Siemens NX

RSD/E+RSD/E+

SysML Model

SysML Model ImportUser SysML Model

ManipulationManipulation

ts1

Bsleeve1

B

ts2

ds2

ds1

sleeve2

L

shaft

Leff

s

rib1 rib2

red = idealized parameter

deformationModel:

undeformedLength:

totalElongation:

effectiveLength: in = 5.00

soi: FlapLinkage_XYZ-510

par [cbam] LinkageExtensionalModel_800240 [Instance view: state 1.0 - unsolved]

Model ChangesPropagate to CAD Tool

ParametricsExecution

Simulation Execution*

materialModel:

normalStress:

totalStrain:

youngsModulus:

area:

totalElongation:

length:

stressMosModel:

allowable:marginOfSafety:

= ?

determined:

criticalCrossSection:

shaft:

condition:

description:= “flaps mid position”mechanicalBehaviorModels:

material: Steel1020HR

basic:

area:in^2 = 1.125

yieldStress:psi = 18000

name:= “1020 hot-rolled steel”

linearElastic:

youngsModulus:psi = 30e6

force:reaction:

lbs = 10000

58

XaiTools COB Services EngineeringAnalysis Models

* = work-in-processGeorgia Tech Georgia Tech XaiToolsXaiTools™™

MCAD Native Model and Tool UIsMCAD Native Model and Tool UIsUGS/Siemens NXUGS/Siemens NX

59

MCAD Model (Subset) in SysMLMCAD Model (Subset) in SysML RSD/E+RSD/E+

60

Interfacing Spreadsheets Interfacing Spreadsheets with SysML Parametricswith SysML Parametrics

61


SysML Tools



RSA/E+ / SysML


OperationalScenario



FactoryModel


ModelCenter





FactoryCAD

Ansys

FEA Model


Model

OptimizationModel


ExcelProduction

Model

Excel

Cost Model

DymolaDig Cycle

Model

62

RampseM-Plant

FactorySimulation

2008-02-25a

UAV System Design Problem: LittleEyeUAV System Design Problem: LittleEyeNetworkNetwork--Centric Warfare Context Centric Warfare Context —— SysML/DoDAF ModelSysML/DoDAF Model

63Source: No Magic Inc. and InterCAX LLC

Road Scanner System ProblemRoad Scanner System ProblemLittleEye UAV Squadron LittleEye UAV Squadron

64

LittleEye SysML ModelLittleEye SysML ModelVarious Diagram ViewsVarious Diagram Views

65

Solving LittleEye SysML ParametricsSolving LittleEye SysML ParametricsParaMagic Browser ViewsParaMagic Browser Views

NextNext--generation objectgeneration object--oriented spreadsheetoriented spreadsheet--like capabilities.like capabilities.

Instance 1 - Before Solving Instance 1 - After Solving

66

Enabling Executable SysML ParametricsEnabling Executable SysML ParametricsCommercialization by InterCAX LLC in Georgia Tech VentureLab incubator programCommercialization by InterCAX LLC in Georgia Tech VentureLab incubator program

SysML Authoring Tools COB Solving & Browsing

Advanced technology for graph management and solver access via web services.

y g g g

Plugins Prototyped by GIT(to SysML vendor tools)1) Artisan Studio [2/06]2) EmbeddedPlus [3/07]3) NoMagic [12/07]

L To

olki

t™Next-Generation

Spreadsheet

COB Services (constraint graph manager, including COTS solver access via web services)

Parametrics plugin COB APIExecution via API messages

or exchange files

Xai

Tool

s S

ysM

L

Composable Objects (COBs)

eWor

k™X

Xai

Tool

s Fr

ame

Native Tools Models

...

...COTS =

commercial-off-the-shelf(typically readily available)

67

X

Ansys(FEA Solver)

Traditional COTS or in-house solvers

Mathematica(Math Solver)

... TLEAFLL

Productionizing/Deploying GIT Productionizing/Deploying GIT XaiToolsXaiTools™™

Technology for Executing SysML ParametricsTechnology for Executing SysML Parametrics

Vendor SysMLTool

Prototype byGIT

Product by InterCAX LLC

www.InterCAX.com

Artisan Studio Yes <tbd>

EmbeddedPlus E+ SysML / RSA Yes <tbd>

No Magic MagicDraw Yes ParaMagic™ 15.5 (Jul 21, 2008 release)

T l l i /IBM Rh d /T <tbd> <tbd>Telelogic/IBM Rhapsody/Tau <tbd> <tbd>

Sparx Systems Enterprise Arch. <tbd> <tbd>

n/a XMI import/export Yes <tbd>

Others <tbd> Others <tbd> <tbd> <tbd>

68

Others <tbd> Others <tbd> <tbd> <tbd>

[1] Full disclosure: InterCAX LLC is a spin-off company originally created to commercialize technology from RS Peak’s GIT group. GIT has licensed technology to InterCAX and has an equity stake in the company. RS Peak is one of several business partners in InterCAX. Commercialization of the SysML/composable object aspects has been fostered by the GIT VentureLab incubator program (www.venturelab.gatech.edu) via an InterCAX VentureLab project initiated October 2007.

Solver Access via Solver Access via XaiTools Web ServicesXaiTools Web Services (XWS)(XWS)S1: General MultiS1: General Multi--Solver SetupSolver Setup

Client Machines Server Machines

XaiToolsCli

Rich Client

Apache TomcatServlet Container

XaiTools Web Services

S

Web S

Client(e.g. ParaMagic)

Internet

Apache Tomcat

XaiTools AnsysSolver Server

XaiTools AnsysSolver Server

XaiTools Math.S l S

XaiTools Solver

SOAP ServersWeb S

HTTP/XMLWrapped Data

SysML-basedCOB models

SO

AP

erver

Ansys Patran

Interne

Solver ServerSolver ServerWrappers

FEA Solvers

Server

Mathematica

Ansys, Patran, Abaqus, ...

et/IntranetMath Solvers ...

Engineering S i B

69

athematicatService Bureau

Solver Access via Solver Access via XaiTools Web ServicesXaiTools Web Services (XWS)(XWS)S2: ParaMagicS2: ParaMagic--Mathematica Setup (current product = XWS 2.2)Mathematica Setup (current product = XWS 2.2)

Client Machines(End Users 1...n) Server Machine @ Company X

P M i

Rich Client

Apache TomcatServlet Container

XaiTools Web Services

S

ParaMagic Internet

Apache Tomcat

XaiTools Solver SOAP Server

Web S

HTTP/XMLWrapped Data

SysML-basedCOB models

SO

AP

Interne

Wrappers

Math Solver

ServerMagicDraw

SysML Tool

et/Intranet

MathematicaNetwork Server

network increment(s)...

70

t

Broadly Applicable TechnologyBroadly Applicable TechnologyExamples of Executable SysML ParametricsExamples of Executable SysML Parametrics

• Road scanning system using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAVs)

• Space systems orbit planning• Energy systems•• ...• Mechanical part design and analysis (FEA)• ...• Insurance claims processing

and website capacity model• Financial model for small businesses• Banking service levels model

71

• ...

Satellite Tutorial Highlights: SimpleSat Satellite Tutorial Highlights: SimpleSat definitionSatellite[Block] par [ ]

r1 : MassBalance{m = m1 +m2 + m3 + m4}

m

m1 m2 m3 m4

mass e1

propulsionSubSys : PropulsionSystem

mass

powerSubSys : PowerSystem

mass

instruments : Instruments

mass

controllerSubSys : ControlSystem

mass

e10

e5

e2

e4e3

r2 : PowerBalancepp2 p3

power powerpower power

e9e6

e8

e7

r2 : PowerBalance{p = p1 + p2 + p3}p1

reqVerifierMass : MarginOfSafetyBlock

allowable

r3 : CtrlPwrEqn{pwrctrl = 0.2 * mass}

mass

t le12

determined

allowablemos

pwrctrle12

e11

72

Financial Projections SysML ModelFinancial Projections SysML ModelVarious Diagram ViewsVarious Diagram Views

73

Using a Spectrum of Modeling TechnologiesUsing a Spectrum of Modeling Technologies

• SpectrumMental calculations– Mental calculations

– Back-of-envelope hand calculations S d h t– Spreadsheets

– ...S ML ( ith t bl t i )– SysML (with executable parametrics)

– ...• Varying characteristics

– Quickness, flexibility, structure, modularity,

74

reusability, self-validation/constraints, ...

Contents




Page 75

Deliverables & Outcomes Phase 1 (Aug 2008)Phase 1 (Aug 2008)

• Solution and supporting models– Excavator test case models test suitesExcavator test case models, test suites, …

• MBSE practices used– Modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) method, …

• Model interchange capabilities– Tests between SysML tools, CAD/CAE tools, …

• MBSE metrics/value• MBSE metrics/value– See “Benefits” slide with candidate metrics

• MBSE findings, issues, & recommendations g , ,– Issue submissions to OMG and vendors, publications, …

• Training materialE l t t i l

Page 76

– Examples, tutorials, …

• Plan forward (Phase 2 and beyond)

Primary Public Reporting Venues

• Call for Participation @ IS’07Jun 26 2007 in San Diego– Jun 26, 2007 in San Diego

• Phase 1 Status Update @ IW’08 MBSE Workshop #2– Jan 25, 2008 in Albuquerque

Ph 1 St t U d t @ F ti W k h• Phase 1 Status Update @ Frontiers Workshop– May 14, 2008 in Atlanta

• Phase 1 Status Update @ IS’08 – Jun 15-19, 2008 in Utrecht

• Phase 1 Final Report & Archive of Models– Aug 2008 [proprietary deliverable]– May 2009 (estimate) via website [public version]

• Phase 2 Status Updates @ IW’09, etc.• Misc. reports/updates/publications @ various venues

Page 77

Misc. reports/updates/publications @ various venues– OMG meetings, NDIA, society & vendor conferences, ...

ContentsContents

• Phase 1 Overview and ResultsFrom August 2007 to August 2008– From August, 2007 to August, 2008

• Phase 2 Progress– From August, 2008 to August, 2009

78

MBSE Challenge Team ObjectivesPhase 2: 2008-2009

Overall Objectives

Phase 2: 2008 2009

• Refine & extend beyond Phase 1 capabilities for modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI)

• Phase 2 Scope [new aspects]– Domains: Primary: Mechatronics (expanded excavator testbed)

Secondary: Others to demo reusabilityy y– Capabilities: Methodologies, tools, requirements,

and practical applications (MIM v2, ...)– MSI subset: Connecting system specification & design models

with multiple engineering analysis – Deployment: Productionizing techniques & tools

to enable ubiquitous practice

Page 79

• Advance & demo how SysML facilitates effective MSI


Specific ObjectivesSpecific Objectives

1. Extend modeling & simulation interoperability method: MIM 2.01. Generalizations: graph transformations, variable topology, reusability, Ge e a at o s g ap t a s o at o s, a ab e topo ogy, eusab ty,

parametrics 2.x, trade study support, inconsistency mgt., E/MBOM extensions, method workflow, ...

2. Specializations: software, closed-loop control, electronics, ...3. Interfaces to new tools: Matlab/Simulink, ECAD, Arena, ...

2. Refine SysML and tool requirements to support MIM 2.01 Provide feedback to vendors and OMG SysML 1 2/2 x task forces1. Provide feedback to vendors and OMG SysML 1.2/2.x task forces

3. Demonstrate extensions in updated testbed4. Define deployment plan and initiate execution

Page 80

4. Define deployment plan and initiate execution5. Refine roadmap beyond Phase 2

PhD Dissertation DefenseG.W.Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering

Georgia Institute of TechnologyAtlanta GA USAAtlanta, GA, USA

Nov 3, 2008 * MRDC 4211

Knowledge Composition Methodology for Effective Analysis Problem Formulation in Simulation-based DesignManas Bajajj [email protected] Tech

Engineering Information Systems Labwww.eislab.gatech.eduSystems Realization Lab

Copyright © 1993-2008 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.

Systems Realization Labwww.srl.gatech.edu

AbstractAbstractIn simulation-based design, a key challenge is to formulate and solve analysis problems efficiently to evaluate a

large variety of design alternatives. The solution of analysis problems has benefited from advancements in commercial off-the-shelf math solvers and computational capabilities. However, the formulation of analysis problems is often a costly and laborious process. Traditional simulation templates used for representing analysis problems are typically y p p p g y p yp ybrittle with respect to variations in artifact topology and the idealization decisions taken by analysts. These templates often require manual updates and “re-wiring” of the analysis knowledge embodied in them. This makes the use of traditional simulation templates ineffective for multi-disciplinary design and optimization problems.

Based on these issues, this dissertation defines a special class of problems known as variable topology multi-body (VTMB) problems that characterizes the types of variations seen in design-analysis interoperability. This research thus primarily answers the following question:primarily answers the following question:

How can we improve the effectiveness of the analysis problem formulation process for VTMB problems?The knowledge composition methodology (KCM) presented in this dissertation answers this question by addressing

the following research gaps: (1) the lack of formalization of the knowledge used by analysts in formulating simulation templates, and (2) the inability to leverage this knowledge to define model composition methods for formulating simulation templates KCM overcomes these gaps by providing: (1) formal representation of analysis knowledge assimulation templates. KCM overcomes these gaps by providing: (1) formal representation of analysis knowledge as modular, reusable, analyst-intelligible building blocks, (2) graph transformation-based methods to automatically compose simulation templates from these building blocks based on analyst idealization decisions, and (3) meta-models for representing advanced simulation templates—VTMB design models, analysis models, and the idealization relationships between them.

Applications of the KCM to thermo-mechanical analysis of multi-stratum printed wiring boards and multi-hi k d i ff i h dli VTMB d id li i i i d h dcomponent chip packages demonstrate its effectiveness—handling VTMB and idealization variations, and enhanced

computational efficiency (from several hours in existing methods to few minutes). In addition to enhancing the effectiveness of analysis problem formulation, the KCM is envisioned to provide a foundational approach to model formulation for generalized variable topology problems.

M i NIST (R S i F B d t l )

82Copyright © 1993-2008 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.

Main sponsor: NIST (Ray, Sriram, Fenves, Brady, et al.)

Research Contributions (Bajaj, 2008)Effective Formulation of Complex Simulation TemplatesEffective Formulation of Complex Simulation Templates

Primary Capabilities Variations in system design topology Variations in system design topology Variations in idealization intent Efficiency Efficiency

– 90%+ faster– Reusable analysis building blocks (ABBs)– Automated composition from building blocks

» Formal approach based on graph transformationsMeta models for design and behavior model abstractions– Meta-models for design and behavior model abstractions

– Libraries of ABBs, transformation patterns, and rules

83Copyright © 1993-2008 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0415 USA. All Rights Reserved.

SysML Parametrics SysML Parametrics Flattened GraphsFlattened Graphs

[3]

pp[1]

[4][2]

[4]

84

ExamplesExamplesSysML Parametrics Flattened GraphsSysML Parametrics Flattened Graphs

1. Spring systems (with animation)2 Road scanning s stem2. Road scanning system

using LittleEye UAVs3. Flap linkage mechanical design4. Multi-year business financial model

For further information on these examples, see backup slide below entitledFor further information on these examples, see backup slide below entitled“SysML Parametrics“SysML Parametrics Suggested Starting Points” for these references:Suggested Starting Points” for these references:SysML ParametricsSysML Parametrics——Suggested Starting Points for these references:Suggested Starting Points for these references:-- Examples 1 and 3: Peak et al. 2007 (IS07 Parts 1 and 2)Examples 1 and 3: Peak et al. 2007 (IS07 Parts 1 and 2)-- Examples 2 and 4: Zwemer and Bajaj 2008 (Frontiers Workshop)Examples 2 and 4: Zwemer and Bajaj 2008 (Frontiers Workshop)

85

SysML Parametrics Graph VisualizationSysML Parametrics Graph Visualization[in collaboration with InterCAX[in collaboration with InterCAX——A. Scott Fall 2008 internship]A. Scott Fall 2008 internship]

• Flattened graph [aka COB constraint graph]– Flattened graph graph among value typesFlattened graph graph among value types – Block encapsulation not shown

• Purposep– Alternative way to understand / interact with a given model

• Primitive connections/relationships, structure, complexity, ...

– Enables visual/intuitive model comparisons– Possible additional SysML view of models

Stat s• Status– Prototype plugin that leverages ygraph toolkit

Auto generates flattened graph from MagicDraw

86

– Auto-generates flattened graph from MagicDraw– Construction animation and static final view

SysML and Mobile Robotic Systems: SysML and Mobile Robotic Systems: A Research Testbed and Educational Platform A Research Testbed and Educational Platform Status Update: 2009Status Update: 2009--FebFeb--1717Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab –– www.msl.gatech.eduwww.msl.gatech.eduRussell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael QinRussell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael Qin

• Background & Objectives

Russell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael QinRussell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael Qin

• Background & Objectives • Operational Control Using SysML Activities

– Demonstration• Status & Next Steps

87

Institute for Personal Robots in EducationInstitute for Personal Robots in Education(IPRE) (IPRE) —— http://www.roboteducation.org/http://www.roboteducation.org/

88

BackgroundBackground

• Leveraging Institute for Personal Robots in Education (IPRE) — http://www.roboteducation.org/Education (IPRE) http://www.roboteducation.org/

– Multi-university/corporation educational environment– Ex. Used in intro comp sci course @ GIT (CS1301)

• Key elements– Mobile robots: IPRE Scribbler, Roomba, SRV-1

• Sensors, cameras, Bluetooth, firmware, PCB ECAD, ...

– Mobile robotics s/w platform: Myro (Python)• Primitive operations ... image processing, intro ~AI, ...

– Domain context• Multi-unit systems, command & control, reusability, ...

• Low-cost and open (non-proprietary)

89

Low cost and open (non proprietary)

ObjectivesObjectives——Big PictureBig Picture• Research & demonstration testbed

• Achieve Phase 2 objectives (INCOSE MBSE MSI Team)

– System run-time operation aided by SysML– Embedded software / firmware

• Hardware-software relations, real-time factors, ...– Executable SysML across multiple constructs

• Activities, parametrics, state machines ...– Misc: instance levels, versioning/config mgt.

• SysML education platform– Usage in hands-on courses

90

(industry short courses, university courses, ...)– Model it and run it!

SysML and Mobile Robotic Systems: SysML and Mobile Robotic Systems: A Research Testbed and Educational Platform A Research Testbed and Educational Platform Status Update: 2009Status Update: 2009--FebFeb--1717Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab Georgia Tech Modeling & Simulation Lab –– www.msl.gatech.eduwww.msl.gatech.eduRussell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael QinRussell Peak (PI) Bennett Wilson Brian Aikens Michael Qin

• Background & Objectives

Russell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael QinRussell Peak (PI), Bennett Wilson, Brian Aikens, Michael Qin

• Background & Objectives • Operational Control Using SysML Activities

– Demonstration• Status & Next Steps

91

Scribbler / Myro DemoScribbler / Myro DemoExecutable SysML Activity Model [1 Executable SysML Activity Model [1 -- original]original]

from myro import *initialize("com29")

forward(1, 1)turnRight(1 4)

Resulting python script

turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)( , )stop()

92

Scribbler / Myro DemoScribbler / Myro DemoExecutable SysML Activity Model [2 Executable SysML Activity Model [2 -- after live update]after live update]

from myro import *initialize("com29")

senses()beep(1 440)beep(1, 440)forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)beep(1, 440)turnRight(1, .4)

Resulting python script

g ( , )forward(1, 1)turnRight(1, .4)forward(1, 1)stop()

93

Representative Broader Usage (Sanitized)Representative Broader Usage (Sanitized)Excursion 456 on Moon: Rover Excursion 456 on Moon: Rover -- UnmannedUnmannedMission: Pick up 10 kg of rocks at two specified locationsMission: Pick up 10 kg of rocks at two specified locations

WP 4Stop at Target Task X: Pick up rocks

10 kilos10 minutes

Report all data attributesTask X WP 4 to WP 5H di 200 d

WP 5StopReport all data

WP 1

WP 3Task 4: WP 3 to WP 4Report all data attributes

Heading: 200 degreesTime: 50 minutes

Report all data

Time: 000 minutesTask 1: Travel WP 1 to WP 2Power = 500 unitsPower Rate: 1 unit per minute(traveling and at stops)Rover Weight = 100 kg

WP 2Stop at TargetTask 2: Pick up rocks

10 kil

Heading: 300 degreesTime: 40 minutes

Rover Weight = 100 kgReport all dataattributes Heading: 120 degrees forTime: 30 minutes

‐ 10 kilos‐ 10 minutes

Task 3: WP 2 to WP 3Heading: 060 degreesTime: 60 minutesReport All Data attributes

94

Report All Data attributes

Contents



• Deliverables & Outcomes• Summary & Collaboration Approachy pp

Page 95

SE Practices for Describing SystemsSE Practices for Describing Systems

Past / NowPast / Now Now / FutureNow / Future

• Specifications• Interface requirements• System design• Analysis & trade-off• Test plansTest plans

96

Moving from Document-centric to Model-centric

Revision by GIT; Original Source: OMG SysML Tutorial (June 2008). Reprinted with permission. Copyright © 2006-2008 by Object Management Group.

What you can do with a SysML model ...What you can do with a SysML model ...• Describe requirements, system structure, & allocations• Generate and/or link to simulations & verify requirements• Support system trade studies• Link to domain models & analyses: S/W, M/ECAD, ...

I e do the Vee and more (e g support system operation)• I.e., do the Vee and more ... (e.g., support system operation)

Systems SystemsRequirements Definition;

Validateto User

Decompo

Definiti on an

d

SystemsDesign

SystemsIntegration

Definition; System Concepts

System Spec.; Verification Plan

Sys. Integration; Sys. Verification

to UserRequirements

position and

ition

Integ

ratio

nVe

rifica

tion

Allocate Specs;Allocate Verification

Assemble Subsys;Subsys. Verification

97

Design Engineering

Time"Vee" model by Forsberg and Mooz, 1992

Modeling & Simulation Interoperability for MBSE Modeling & Simulation Interoperability for MBSE Benefits of SysMLBenefits of SysML--based Approachbased Approach

Primary Impacts

ng

emor

y tif

act

Enabling Capabilities R

educ

ed

Tim

e R

educ

ed

Cos

t R

educ

ed

Ris

k nc

reas

ed

Und

erst

andi

nnc

reas

ed

Cor

pora

te M

enc

reas

ed A

rP

erfo

rman

ce Precision KnowledgePrecision Knowledgefor thefor the

ModelModel--Based EnterpriseBased EnterpriseEnabling Capabilities R T R C R R In U In C In P

Increased Knowledge Capture & Completeness

■ ■ ■ ■

Increased Modularity & Reusability

■ ■ ■ ■ ■

pp

y yIncreased Traceability

■ ■ ■

Reduced Manual Re-Creation

■ ■ ■

IncreasedIncreased Automation

■ ■ ■

Reduced Modeling Effort

■ ■

Increased ■ ■

98

Analysis Intensity ■ ■

MBSE Challenge Model Interoperability TeamModel Interoperability Team Open “Call for Participation”

• Systems engineering drivers in commercial settings– Increased system complexity– Cross-disciplinary communication/coordinationCross disciplinary communication/coordination

• Enhancement possibilities based on interest– Sponsoring other demonstrations and testbeds– Developing shared models and libraries– etc.

• Primary contactsPrimary contacts– Russell Peak [[email protected]]– Sandy Friedenthal [sanford.friedenthal@ lmco.com]

R B kh t [B kh tR M@J h D ]

Page 99

– Roger Burkhart [[email protected]]

Additional ResourcesAdditional Resources

SysML ParametricsSysML Parametrics——Suggested Starting PointsSuggested Starting PointsIntroductory Papers/Tutorials• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML—Part 1: A Parametrics

Primer. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego. [Provides tutorial-like introduction to SysML parametrics.]http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-incose-is-1-peak-primer/

• Peak RS Burkhart RM Friedenthal SA Wilson MW Bajaj M Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML—Part 2: CelebratingPeak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation Based Design Using SysML Part 2: Celebrating Diversity by Example. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego. [Provides tutorial-like introduction on using SysML for modeling & simulation, including the MRA method for creating parametric simulation templates that are connected to design models.]http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-incose-is-2-peak-diversity/

Example Applications• Peak RS Burkhart RM Friedenthal SA Paredis CJJ McGinnis LF (2008) Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Paredis CJJ, McGinnis LF (2008) Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML—

Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report. Presentation to INCOSE MBSE Challenge Team, Utrecht, Holland. [Overviews modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) methodology progress in the context of an excavator testbed.]http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/seminars-etc/2008-06-incose-is-mbse-mechatronics-msi-peak/

• Peak RS (2007) Leveraging Templates & Processes with SysML. Invited Presentation. Developing a Design/Simulation Framework: AWorkshop with CPDA's Design and Simulation Council, Atlanta. [Includes applications to automotive steering wheel systems and FEA simulation templates ] http://eislab gatech edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/simulation templates.] http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007 cpda dsfw peak/

Commercial Tools and Other Examples/Tutorials• ParaMagic™ plugin for MagicDraw®. Developed by InterCAX LLC (a Georgia Tech spin-off) [1]. Available at www.MagicDraw.com. • Zwemer DA and Bajaj M (2008) SysML Parametrics and Progress Towards Multi-Solvers and Next-Generation Object-Oriented

Spreadsheets. Frontiers in Design & Simulation Workshop, Georgia Tech PSLM Center, Atlanta. [Highlights techniques for executing SysML t i b d th P M i ™ l i f M i D ® I l d UAV d fi i l t l ]parametrics based on the ParaMagic™ plugin for MagicDraw®. Includes UAV and financial systems examples.]

http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/events/frontiers/

See slides below for additional references and resources.

101

[1] Full disclosure: InterCAX LLC is a spin-off company originally created to commercialize technology from RS Peak’s GIT group. GIT has licensed technology to InterCAX and has an equity stake in the company. RS Peak is one of several business partners in InterCAX. Commercialization of the SysML/composable object aspects is being fostered by the GIT VentureLab incubator program (www.venturelab.gatech.edu) via an InterCAX VentureLab project initiated October 2007.

MBX/SysMLMBX/SysML--Related Efforts at Georgia TechRelated Efforts at Georgia Tech

• SysML Focus Area web page– http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/– Includes links to publications, applications,

projects, examples, courses, commercialization, etc.– Frontiers 2008 workshop on MBSE/MBX, SysML, ...

• Selected projects– Deere: System dynamics (fluid power, ...)– Lockheed: System design & analysis integration

NASA Enabling technolog (S sML )– NASA: Enabling technology (SysML, ...)– NIST: Design-analysis interoperability (DAI)– TRW Automotive: DAI/FEA (steering wheel systems )

102

TRW Automotive: DAI/FEA (steering wheel systems ... )

Selected GIT MBX/SysMLSelected GIT MBX/SysML--Related PublicationsRelated PublicationsSome references are available online at Some references are available online at http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/http://www.pslm.gatech.edu/topics/sysml/. See additional slides for selected abstracts.. See additional slides for selected abstracts.

• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Paredis CJJ, McGinnis LF (2008) Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML—Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report. Presentation to INCOSE MBSE Challenge Team, Utrecht, Holland. [Overviews modeling & simulation interoperability (MSI) methodology progress in the context of an excavator testbed.] http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/seminars-etc/2008-06-incose-is-mbse-mechatronics-msi-peak/

• McGinnis, Leon F., "IC Factory Design: The Next Generation," e-Manufacturing Symposium, Taipei, Taiwan, June 13, 2007. [Presents the concept of model-based fab design, and how SysML can enable integrated simulation.]

• Kwon Ky Sang and Leon F McGinnis "SysML based Simulation Framework for Semiconductor Manufacturing " IEEE CASE Conference Scottsdale AZ• Kwon, Ky Sang, and Leon F. McGinnis, SysML-based Simulation Framework for Semiconductor Manufacturing, IEEE CASE Conference, Scottsdale, AZ, September 22-25, 2007. [Presents some technical details on the use of SysML to create formal generic models (user libraries) of fab structure, and how these formal models can be combined with currently available data sources to automatically generate simulation models.]

• Huang, Edward, Ramamurthy, Randeep, and Leon F. McGinnis, "System and Simulation Modeling Using SysML," 2007 Winter Simulation Conference, Washington, DC. [Presents some technical details on the use of SysML to create formal generic models (user libraries) of fab structure, and how these formal models can be combined with currently available data sources to automatically generate simulation models.]

• McGinnis, Leon F., Edward Huang, Ky Sang Kwon, Randeep Ramamurthy, Kan Wu, "Real CAD for Facilities," 2007 IERC, Nashville, TN. [Presents concept of using FactoryCAD as a layout authoring tool and integrating it, via SysML with eM-Plant for automated fab simulation model generation.]

• T.A. Johnson, J.M. Jobe, C.J.J. Paredis, and R. Burkhart "Modeling Continuous System Dynamics in SysML," in Proceedings of the 2007 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, paper no. IMECE2007-42754, Seattle, WA, November 11-15, 2007. [Describes how continuous dynamics models can be represented in SysML. The approach is based on the continuous dynamics language Modelica.]

• T.A. Johnson, C.J.J. Paredis, and R. Burkhart "Integrating Models and Simulations of Continuous Dynamics into SysML," in Proceedings of the 6th International Modelica Conference March 3-4 2008 [Describes how continuous dynamics models and simulations can be used in the context of engineering systems designModelica Conference, March 3 4, 2008. [Describes how continuous dynamics models and simulations can be used in the context of engineering systems design within SysML. The design of a car suspension modeled as a mass-spring-damper system is used as an illustration.]

• C.J.J. Paredis "Research in Systems Design: Designing the Design Process," IDETC/CIE 2007, Computers and Information in Engineering Conference -- Workshop on Model-Based Systems Development, Las Vegas, NV, September 4, 2007. [Presents relationship between SysML and the multi-aspect component model method.]

• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML—Part 1: A Parametrics Primer. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego. [Provides tutorial-like introduction to SysML parametrics.]

• Peak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML—Part 2: Celebrating Diversity by Example. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego. [Provides tutorial-like introduction on using SysML for modeling & simulation, including the MRA method for creating parametric simulation templates that are connected to design models.]

• Peak RS (2007) Leveraging Templates & Processes with SysML. Invited Presentation. Developing a Design/Simulation Framework: A Workshop with CPDA's Design and Simulation Council, Atlanta. [Includes applications to automotive steering wheel systems and FEA simulation templates.]http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/

• Bajaj M, Peak RS, Paredis CJJ (2007) Knowledge Composition for Efficient Analysis Problem Formulation, Part 1: Motivation and Requirements. DETC2007-35049,

103

Bajaj M, Peak RS, Paredis CJJ (2007) Knowledge Composition for Efficient Analysis Problem Formulation, Part 1: Motivation and Requirements. DETC2007 35049, Proc ASME CIE Intl Conf, Las Vegas. [Introduces the knowledge composition method (KCM), which addresses design-simulation integration for variable topology problems.]

• Bajaj M, Peak RS, Paredis CJJ (2007) Knowledge Composition for Efficient Analysis Problem Formulation, Part 2: Approach and Analysis Meta-Model. DETC2007-35050, Proc ASME CIE Intl Conf, Las Vegas. [Elaborates on the KCM approach, including work towards next-generation analysis/simulation building blocks (ABBs/SBBs).]

Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysMLIntegrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML——Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status ReportMechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report

AbstractThis presentation overviews work-in-progress experiences and lessons learned from an excavator testbed that interconnects simulation models with associated diverse system models, design models, and manufacturing models. The

l i t bl d d d l b d t i i (MBSE) i ti l d d l b d X1 (MBX) igoal is to enable advanced model-based systems engineering (MBSE) in particular and model-based X1 (MBX) in general. Our method employs SysML as the primary technology to achieve multi-level multi-fidelity interoperability, while at the same time leveraging conventional modeling & simulation tools including mechanical CAD, factory CAD, spreadsheets, math solvers, finite element analysis (FEA), discrete event solvers, and optimization tools. This work is currently sponsored by several organizations (including Deere and Lockheed) and is part of the Mechatronics & Interoperability Team in the INCOSE MBSE ChallengeInteroperability Team in the INCOSE MBSE Challenge.

CitationPeak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Paredis CJJ, McGinnis LF (2008) Integrating Design with Simulation & Analysis Using SysML—Mechatronics/Interoperability Team Status Report. Presentation to INCOSE MBSE Challenge Team, Utrecht, Holland. http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/seminars-etc/2008-06-incose-is-mbse-mechatronics-msi-peak/, p g p p

[1] The X in MBX includes engineering (MBE), manufacturing (MBM), and potentially other scopes and contexts such as model-based enterprises (MBE).

104

SimulationSimulation--Based Design Using SysMLBased Design Using SysML

Part 1: A Parametrics PrimerOMG SysML™ is a modeling language for specifying, analyzing, designing, and verifying complex systems. It is a general-purpose graphical modeling language with computer-sensible semantics. This Part 1 paper and its Part 2 companion show how SysML supports simulation-based design (SBD) via

Part 2: Celebrating Diversity by Example These two companion papers present foundational principles of parametrics in OMG SysML™ and their application to simulation-based design. Parametrics capabilities have been included in SysML to support integrating engineering analysis with system requirements, behavior, and

tutorial-like examples. Our target audience is end users wanting to learn about SysML parametrics in general and its applications to engineering design and analysis in particular. We include background on the development of SysML parametrics that may also be useful for other stakeholders (e.g, vendors and researchers).

In Part 1 we walk through models of simple objects that progressively i t d S ML t i t T h d t di b

structure models. This Part 2 paper walks through SysML models for a benchmark tutorial on analysis templates utilizing an airframe system component called a flap linkage. This example highlights how engineering analysis models, such as stress models, are captured in SysML, and then executed by external tools including math solvers and finite element analysis solvers.

W i th lti t ti hit t (MRA) th d dintroduce SysML parametrics concepts. To enhance understanding by comparison and contrast, we present corresponding models based on composable objects (COBs). The COB knowledge representation has provided a conceptual foundation for SysML parametrics, including executability and validation. We end with sample analysis building blocks (ABBs) from mechanics of materials showing how SysML captures engineering knowledge in a reusable form Part 2 employs these ABBs in a

We summarize the multi-representation architecture (MRA) method and how its simulation knowledge patterns support computing environments having a diversity of analysis fidelities, physical behaviors, solution methods, and CAD/CAE tools. SysML and composable object (COB) techniques described in Part 1 together provide the MRA with graphical modeling languages, executable parametrics, and reusable, modular, multi-directional capabilitiesengineering knowledge in a reusable form. Part 2 employs these ABBs in a

high diversity mechanical example that integrates computer-aided design and engineering analysis (CAD/CAE).

The object and constraint graph concepts embodied in SysML parametrics and COBs provide modular analysis capabilities based on multi-directional constraints. These concepts and capabilities provide a semantically rich way to organize and reuse the complex relations and

directional capabilities. We also demonstrate additional SysML modeling concepts, including

packages, building block libraries, and requirements-verification-simulation interrelationships. Results indicate that SysML offers significant promise as a unifying language for a variety of models-from top-level system models to discipline-specific leaf-level models.

y y g pproperties that characterize SBD models. Representing relations as non-causal constraints, which generally accept any valid combination of inputs and outputs, enhances modeling flexibility and expressiveness. We envision SysML becoming a unifying representation of domain-specific engineering analysis models that include fine-grain associativity with other domain- and system-level models, ultimately providing fundamental

biliti f t ti t lif l t

CitationPeak RS, Burkhart RM, Friedenthal SA, Wilson MW, Bajaj M, Kim I (2007) Simulation-Based Design Using SysML. INCOSE Intl. Symposium, San Diego.

105

capabilities for next-generation systems lifecycle management. San Diego. Part 1: A Parametrics Primer

http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-incose-is-1-peak-primer/Part 2: Celebrating Diversity by Example

http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-incose-is-2-peak-diversity/

Composable Objects (COB) Requirements & ObjectivesComposable Objects (COB) Requirements & Objectives

AbstractThis document formulates a vision for advanced collaborative engineering environments (CEEs) to aid in the design, simulation and configuration management of complex engineering systems. Based on inputs from experienced Systems E i d t h l i t f i i d t i d t i it id tifi th t j h llEngineers and technologists from various industries and government agencies, it identifies the current major challenges and pain points of Collaborative Engineering. Each of these challenges and pain points are mapped into desired capabilities of an envisioned CEE System that will address them.Next, we present a CEE methodology that embodies these capabilities. We overview work done to date by GIT on the composable object (COB) knowledge representation as a basis for next-generation CEE systems. This methodology leverages the multi representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates the user oriented SysML standard forleverages the multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates, the user-oriented SysML standard for system modeling, and standards like STEP AP233 (ISO 10303-233) for enhanced interoperability. Finally, we present COB representation requirements in the context of this CEE methodology. In this current project and subsequent phases we are striving to fulfill these requirements as we develop next-generation COB capabilities.

CitationDR Tamburini, RS Peak, CJ Paredis, et al. (2005) Composable Objects (COB) Requirements & Objectives v1.0. Technical Report, Georgia Tech, Atlanta. http://eislab.gatech.edu/projects/nasa-ngcobs/

Associated ProjectThe Composable Object (COB) Knowledge Representation: Enabling Advanced Collaborative Engineering EnvironmentsThe Composable Object (COB) Knowledge Representation: Enabling Advanced Collaborative Engineering Environments (CEEs). http://eislab.gatech.edu/projects/nasa-ngcobs/

106

Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysMLLeveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysMLApplications to CADApplications to CAD--FEA InteroperabilityFEA Interoperability

AbstractSysML holds the promise of leveraging generic templates and processes across design and simulation. Russell Peak joins us to give an update on the latest efforts at Georgia Tech to apply this approach in various domains, including

ifi l ith t ti t ti li L h t j i thi j t d i l t i ilspecific examples with a top-tier automotive supplier. Learn how you too may join this project and implement a similar effort within your own company to enhance modularity and reusability through a unified method that links diverse models. Russell will also highlight SysML’s parametrics capabilities and usage for physics-based analysis, including integrated CAD-CAE and simulation-based requirements verification. Go to www.omgsysml.org for background on SysML—a graphical modeling language based on UML2 for specifying, designing, analyzing, and verifying complex systems.

S k Bi k hSpeaker BiosketchRussell S. Peak focuses on knowledge representations that enable complex system interoperability and simulation automation. He originated composable objects (COBs), the multi-representation architecture (MRA) for CAD-CAE interoperability, and context-based analysis models (CBAMs)—a simulation template knowledge pattern that explicitly captures design-analysis associativity. This work has provided the conceptual foundation for SysML parametrics and its p g y y p p y pvalidation.

He teaches this and related material, and is principal investigator on numerous research projects with sponsors including Boeing, DoD, IBM, NASA, NIST, Rockwell Collins, Shinko Electric, and TRW Automotive. Dr. Peak joined the GIT research faculty in 1996 to create and lead a design-analysis interoperability thrust area. Prior experience includes business phone design at Bell Laboratories and design-analysis integration exploration as a Visiting Researcher at Hitachi in Japan.

CitationRS Peak (2007) Leveraging Simulation Templates & Processes with SysML: Applications to CAD-FEA Interoperability. Developing a Design/Simulation Framework, CPDA Workshop, Atlanta.

107

http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2007-cpda-dsfw-peak/

Documents

MBSE Using SysML Part 1 Peak