pde2005 7th NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange (PDE)

pde2005 7th NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange (PDE) The Workshop for Open Product & System Lifecycle Management (PLM/SLiM) April 19-22, 2005 Georgia Tech, Atlanta Experiences Using SysML Parametrics to Represent Constrained Object-based Analysis Templates Russell Peak1,*, Sandy Friedenthal2, Alan Moore3, Roger Burkhart4, Steve Waterbury5, Manas Bajaj1, Injoong Kim1 1. Georgia Institute of Technology * Presenter 2. Lockheed Martin Corporation 3. ARTiSAN Software Tools Inc. 4. Deere & Company 5. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Copyright © 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.

Abstract: Overview (p. 1/2)
Experiences Using SysML Parametrics to Represent Constrained Object-based Analysis Templates == Overview == This presentation overviews a collaborative effort to infuse constrained object (COB) concepts within the emerging SysML standard. SysML is "a new visual modeling language designed by systems engineers for specifying systems of systems"(SoS) [1]. Georgia Tech has developed the COB knowledge representation over the past 12+ years to capture fine-grained relations within and among diverse models. Applications include analysis templates that facilitate interoperability among engineering design and analysis models. In this presentation we show how SysML (and its emerging parametrics capabilities in particular) can represent the flap link analysis template tutorial described below. The SysML Parametric Diagram represents a network of relations among the properties of a system such as F=ma and Total Weight = sum (Part Weights). These diagrams are intended to capture inter-model associativity, including bridging design models with engineering analysis models. This concept-rich test case helps both to evaluate and demonstrate SysML capabilities (e.g., parametric diagram scalability) and to identify aspects needing further development. Envisioned applications include a widely accepted unified representation of domain-specific models and their fine-grained associativity with system models, ultimately resulting in fundamental capabilities for next-generation SoS and product lifecycle management (PLM). Keywords: SysML, UML, parametric diagram, constrained object (COB); constraint graph; constraint schematic, design-analysis integration; CAD-CAE interoperability; multi-representation architecture (MRA); simulation-based design (SBD); multi-fidelity; multi-directional; systems of systems (SoS); product lifecycle management (PLM).

Abstract: Background (p. 2/2)
== Constrained Object (COB) and Analysis Template Background [2, 3] == The variety of engineering design and analysis contexts makes the generalized integration of computer-aided design and engineering (CAD/CAE) a challenging proposition. Transforming a detailed product design into an idealized analysis model can be a time-consuming and complicated process, which typically does not capture idealization and simplification knowledge explicitly. Georgia Tech has developed the multi-representation architecture (MRA) and analyzable product model (APM) techniques to bridge the CAD-CAE gap with stepping stone representations that support design-analysis diversity. These techniques employ constrained objects (COBs) as a generalized underlying representation. The COB representation is based on object and constraint graph concepts to benefit from their modularity and multi-directional capabilities. Object techniques provide a semantically rich way to organize and reuse the complex relations and properties that naturally underlie engineering models. Representing relations as constraints makes COBs flexible because constraints can generally accept any combination of I/O information flows. This multi-directionality enables, for example, design sizing (synthesis) and design verification (analysis) using the same COB-based simulation model. Engineers perform such activities throughout the product lifecycle, with the former being characteristic of early design stages and vice versa. Wilson et al. [2] present basic examples to illustrate COB concepts, including applications to analysis building blocks (ABBs) utilized later in a flap link tutorial example [2]. This flap link tutorial [3] demonstrates an MRA-based design-analysis panorama that supports these capabilities in a unified manner: multiple levels of abstraction and a diversity of physical behaviors, analysis fidelities, and CAD/CAE methods and tools. To validate the COB representation, other work implemented electronic packaging and aerospace test cases in a COB-based toolkit called XaiTools™. In all, these test cases utilize some 260 different types of COBs with some 370 relations, including automated solving using commercial math and finite element analysis tools. Results show that the COB representation makes the MRA reusable, modular, and multi-directional, thus enhancing physical behavior modeling and knowledge capture for a wide variety of design models, analysis models, and engineering computing environments. References: 1 - 2 - 3 -

Georgia Tech COB/DAI-related Nomenclature

Outline Motivation SysML Parametrics Working Group Examples
Knowledge graphs for next-generation PLM/SLiM & education Design & analysis integration SysML Parametrics Working Group Round 1 objectives Examples Mechanical part: flap link & structural analysis Modular library: generic analysis building blocks Electronics assembly: circuit board & thermomechanical analysis Results & Summary

Next-Generation PLM/SLiM Framework with Fine-Grained Interoperability
… Customer/Acquisitions … … Abstraction Level Systems Engineering … Legend Rich models: Information objects Parametric relations Model interfaces: Fine-grained associativity relations among domain-specific models and system-level models … … Development Process … … … Requirements Software Electronics Structures Human Interfaces … Domain Models of varying abstractions and domains After Bajaj, Peak, & Waterbury

Product Development Knowledge Graph Typical Current Issues
Implicit Not Computer- interpretable Not Interoperable Coarse-grained PDM CAD1 CAD2 FEM Process Planning Suppliers Designers R R R R R Different software packages each have their own data-models internal data-models contain relationships Relationships are fine-grained -- we need to go beyond file-based traceability Internal data-model is most often proprietary PDM maintains some relationships between data-models Mostly coarse-grained – assembly consists of multiple part files Analysts Manufacturing R Source: Chris Paredis, 2004

Enhancing Education Using Constraint Graph-based Knowledge Representations [Cowan et al.]
Initial results with high school physics class: Students using constraint graphs did 70% better “I believe that this process will be helpful to others because I have been doing the same thing in my head to organize and understand the different equations and to help me solve the problems successfully.” [student comment] Source: FS Cowan, M Usselman, D Llewellyn, A Gravitt (2003) Utilizing Constraint Graphs in High School Physics. Proc. ASEE Annual Conf. & Expo.

SysML Parametrics Working Group Members
Manas Bajaj (Georgia Tech) Implemented circuit board test case in Artisan RtS tool Roger Burkhart (John Deere) Sandy Friedenthal (Lockheed Martin) – Lead Injoong Kim (Georgia Tech) Implemented mechanical part test case in Artisan RtS tool Alan Moore (Artisan) Russell Peak (Georgia Tech) Stephen Waterbury (NASA)

SysML Parametrics Working Group Objectives & Deliverables - Round 1
Validate scalability and usability of SysML parametric diagram Semantics, notation, interconnection with structural diagrams Show design-analysis interoperability (DAI) via parametric diagrams Connect design models with engineering simulation models Hence fundamental to systems engineering Help validate SysML against GIT constrained object (COB) experience Infuse COB concepts within SysML Broaden audience and usability of such concepts Deliverables Sample problems for SysML Specification and reference material Initial results of validation effort Recommended updates/refinements to SysML parametrics capabilities

Flap Link Mechanical Part A simple design ...
B sleeve1 s2 d sleeve2 L shaft eff q s rib1 rib2 red = idealized parameter Background This simple part provides the basis for a benchmark tutorial for CAD-CAE interoperability and simulation template knowledge representation. This example exercises multiple capabilities relevant to such contexts (many of which are relevant to broader simulation and knowledge representation domains). See the following for further information (including papers overview this example): (begin with [Wilson et al. 2001] under Suggested Starting Points)

Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Panorama Flap Link Benchmark Tutorial - Constrained Object (COB)-based Constraint Schematic c b a

Flap Link APM SysML Assembly Class Diagram (partial)

Flap Linkage Example Analyzable Product Model (APM) = Mfg
Flap Linkage Example Analyzable Product Model (APM) = Mfg. Product Model (MPM) Subset + Idealizations (a COB diagram) flap_link critical_section critical_simple t2f wf tw hw t1f area effective_length critical_detailed stress_strain_model linear_elastic E n cte tf Extended Constraint Graph sleeve_1 b h t sleeve_2 shaft rib_1 material rib_2 w r x name t2f wf tw t1f cross_section R 8 9 10 6 R7 12 11 1 2 3 4 5 R 3 2 1 effective_length, Leff == inter_axis_length - (sleeve1.hole.cross_section.radius + sleeve2.hole.cross_section.radius) Product Attribute Idealized Attribute Ri Idealization Relation Product Relation Partial COB Structure (COS) Regarding COB notation and examples, see “Backup Slides”

Flap Link APM SysML Parametric Diagram (partial)

I Section Library SysML Class Diagram
Used by Flap Link

I Section Library SysML Parametric Diagram

Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Panorama Flap Link Benchmark Tutorial - Constrained Object (COB)-based Constraint Schematic c a b

Analysis Building Blocks (ABBs)
Object representation of product-independent analytical engineering concepts Analysis Primitives Analysis Systems - Primitive building blocks - Containers of ABB "assemblies" Material Models Continua Specialized - Predefined templates s e s e De N Beam x y q(x) Beam Distributed Load Rigid Support Linear- Bilinear Low Cycle Elastic Plastic Fatigue Plane Strain Body Plate Geometry Interconnections Cantilever Beam System Rigid body 1 body 2 Support No-Slip Discrete Elements Analysis Variables General - User-defined systems q(x) Temperature, T Stress, s Mass Spring Damper Distributed Load Strain, e

COB-based Libraries of Analysis Building Blocks (ABBs) Material Model and Continuum ABBs - Constraint Schematic-S Regarding COB notation and examples, see Backup Slides Continuum ABBs Extensional Rod Material Model ABB 1D Linear Elastic Model modular re-usage Torsional Rod

1D Linear Elastic Model ABB SysML definition as an <<assembly>>
Note: this ABB (and other objects in this section) could have been implemented as a <<paramConstraint>>, in which case the intent would be that it is only usable within the dependent context of an assembly object. By implementing it instead as an <<assembly>>, it may be used as an independent object, or optionally in a dependent manner.

Extensional Rod ABB SysML definition as <<assembly>>
Parametric includes usage of 1D Linear Elastic Model as a (dependent) paramConstraint

See References re: MRA/DAI techniques
Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) for Design-Analysis Integration (DAI) See References re: MRA/DAI techniques Product- Specific Product- Independent

Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Panorama Flap Link Benchmark Tutorial - Constrained Object (COB)-based Constraint Schematic c a b

Flap Link and Associated Simulation Templates SysML class diagram (WIP draft)

Test Case Flap Linkage: Analysis Template Reuse of APM
Linkage Extensional Model (CBAM) COB diagrams material effective length, L eff deformation model linear elastic model o Extensional Rod (isothermal) F D s A e E x 2 1 youngs modulus, cross section area, al1 al3 al2 linkage mode: shaft tension condition reaction allowable stress t s1 Sleeve 1 s2 d Sleeve 2 Shaft q stress mos model Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS Flap link (APM) reusable idealizations

Test Case Flap Linkage: Analysis Template Reuse of ABBs
Linkage Extensional Model (CBAM) COB diagrams material effective length, L eff deformation model linear elastic model o Extensional Rod (isothermal) F D s A e E x 2 1 youngs modulus, cross section area, al1 al3 al2 linkage mode: shaft tension condition reaction allowable stress t s1 Sleeve 1 s2 d Sleeve 2 Shaft q stress mos model Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS Extensional Rod (generic ABB) This slide show where “Extensional Rod ABB” is reused in the CBAM modular reusage

Flap Link Simulation Template: Extensional Model SysML parametric diagram (definition) - dot notation view Caveat: materialModel properties would be better exposed as promoted ports on extensional_rod

Flap Link Simulation Template: Extensional Model SysML parametric diagram (definition) - nested part view

Flap Link Simulation Template: Extensional Model SysML parametric diagram (definition) - flattened view

Flap Linkage Instance with Multi-Directional I/O States
material effective length, L eff deformation model linear elastic model o Extensional Rod (isothermal) F D s A e E x 2 1 youngs modulus, shaft critical_cross _section al1 al3 al2 linkage mode: shaft tension condition reaction allowable stress stress mos model Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS description area, basic example 1, state 1 steel 10000 lbs flaps mid position 1.125 in 18000 psi 30e6 psi 1.025 5.0 in 8888 1.43e-3 in Flap Link #3 Design Verification - Input: design details - Output: i) idealized design parameters ii) physical response criteria COB diagrams material effective length, L eff deformation model linear elastic model o Extensional Rod (isothermal) F D s A e E x 2 1 youngs modulus, shaft critical_cross _section al1 al3 al2 linkage mode: shaft tension condition reaction allowable stress stress mos model Margin of Safety (> case) allowable actual MS description area, basic X 3.00e-3 in 1.125 in 5.0 in Flap Link #3 0.0 steel 10000 lbs flaps mid position 18000psi example 1, state 3 30e6 psi 18000 psi 0.555 in2 Design Synthesis - Input: desired physical response criteria - Output: i) idealized design parameters (e.g., for sizing), or ii) detailed design

Flap Link Extensional Model Example COB Instance in XaiTools (object-oriented spreadsheet)
example 1, state 1 Library data for materials Detailed CAD data from CATIA Idealized analysis features in APM Modular generic analysis templates (ABBs) Focus Point of CAD-CAE Integration Explicit multi-directional associativity between design & analysis

Flap Link Extensional Model - Usage: Solved State SysML parametric diagram (instance)

Circuit Board Design-Analysis Integration Electronic Packaging Examples: PWA/B
Pro AM Design Tools Modular, Reusable Template Libraries Analysis Modules (CBAMs) of Diverse Mode & Fidelity ECAD Tools Mentor Graphics, Zuken, … Analysis Tools XaiTools PWA-B General Math Mathematica STEP AP210‡ GenCAM**, PDIF* Solder Joint Deformation* 1D, 2D, 3D FEA Ansys PWB Stackup Tool XaiTools PWA-B Analyzable Product Model PWB Extension XaiTools PWA-B PWB Warpage 1D, 2D Laminates DB Materials DB PTH Deformation & Fatigue** 1D, 2D ‡ AP210 WD48 * = Item not yet available in toolkit (all others have working examples) ** = Item available via U-Engineer.com

PWB Analysis Model Structure

PWB Extensional Rod Model SysML Parametric Diagram
Same generic analysis building block (ABB) used by flap link Parameters from the PWB APM

PWB Warpage Templates a.k.a. CBAMs: COB-based analysis templates
COB diagrams PWB Thermal Bending Model (1D formula-based CBAM) Usage of Rich Product Models APM PWB Plane Strain Model (2D FEA-based CBAM)

PWB 1D Warpage Model SysML Parametric Diagram
PWB APM usage (AP210-based design model) xx - Caveat: pwb should be inside pwb warpage model in one since (need to fix concept)

Thermal Beam Bending Model (git_lib\git_abbs) SysML Parametric Diagram
This ABB is used for the 1D warpage model of the PWB relationship reused (a = b - c)

Recommendations - Round 1 SysML Parametric Working Group
Clarify how parametric diagrams reference corresponding assembly contexts (for analysis models and assembly being analyzed) Differentiate property types: Value properties = basic types (no oids - ex. numbers, strings, etc.) Parts = general types (have oids) Update definitions Assembly – add reference to value properties ParamConstraint – include constraints among parameter values Allow dot notation for both cases: Nested parameters in paramConstraints Nested properties of assemblies Support graphical tree-like notation Aid visualizing nested parts and value properties Ensure structured ports support this Support instance notation (including graph causality) Support promoted ports oid = object identifier (oids give each SysML ‘part’ object a unique identity)

Summary Round 1: Initial Studies - Completed Apr’05
Implemented basic benchmarks for CAD-CAE integration (DAI) Mechanical part: flap link Electronics: circuit board Supporting libraries: generic building blocks Achieved objectives SysML parametric diagram scalability and usability Design-analysis interoperability (DAI) Mutual benefits: SysML  GIT methods

Summary Round 1 (continued)
Benefits to SysML Leverages GIT parametric object experience (1992-present) Provides design-analysis interoperability (DAI) test cases Variety: domains, CAD tools, fidelities, CAE tools,... Systematically exercises numerous constructs Benefits to GIT methods (COBs, DAI, ...) Provides extended modeling constructs Reusable relations, stereotyping, structured ports, ... Broadens & enhances tool support Increases modeling effectiveness (via tools) Tool-aided graphical view creation Automated consistency between views

Next Steps: Round 2 Refine above examples Iterate:
Consistency & approach Iterate: Propose SysML enhancements Test with above examples & extended examples Identify any remaining issues & enhancements Provide feedback ~May’05 to enhance SysML specification v1.0

References www.SysML.org
GIT design-analysis interoperability methods, including constrained objects (COBs): Check here for updated versions of this presentation and related material

Recommended Reference
Achieving Fine-Grained CAE-CAE Associativity via Analyzable Product Model (APM)-based Idealizations Topic Area: Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) This presentation overviews a simulation template methodology based on the analyzable product model (APM) knowledge representation. APMs combine design information from multiple sources, add idealization knowledge, and bridge semantic gaps to enable advanced CAD-CAE interoperability. To understand why generalized design-simulation integration is a challenging proposition, we first review concepts like heterogeneous transformations and multi-fidelity idealizations via industrial examples. Next we describe how an APM is a key component in the multi-representation architecture (MRA) simulation template methodology. In brief, MRA-based templates connect APMs with analysis models in a manner that is reusable, modular, and multi-directional. This approach supports multiple levels of abstraction and enhances physical behavior modeling and knowledge capture for a wide variety of design models, analysis models, and engineering computing environments. Finally, we walk through several design-analysis scenarios including airframe structural analysis and electronics thermal and deformation analysis. Such examples demonstrate how the MRA supports a diversity of physical behaviors, analysis fidelities, and CAD/CAE methods and tools in a unified manner. This holistic approach leverages rich product models and open standards (e.g., STEP AP210 for electronics and AP233/SysML for systems of systems) and provides a foundation for next-generation design/simulation frameworks.

Backup Slides

Flap Link Extensional Model - Usage: Unsolved State SysML assembly diagram (instance)
Caveat: representation of instances may need further work (vs. current “default values within a dummy class” approach)

Constrained Object (COB) Basics

Constrained Object (COB) Modeling Languages Lexical and Graphical Formulations
Structure Level (Template) Instance Level OWL, XML, and UML formulations are envisioned extensions

COB Structure: Graphical Forms Tutorial: Triangle Primitive
a. Shape Schematic-S c. Constraint Schematic-S b. Relations-S Basic Constraint Schematic-S Notation d. Subsystem-S (for reuse by other COBs) Aside: This is a “usage view” in AP210 terminology (vs. the above “design views”)

COBs as Building Blocks Tutorial: Triangular Prism COB Structure
a. Shape Schematic-S c. Constraint Schematic-S b. Relations-S e. Lexical COB Structure (COS) d. Subsystem-S (for reuse by other COBs) COB triangular_prism SUBTYPE_OF geometric_shape; length, l : REAL; cross-section : triangle; volume, V : REAL; RELATIONS r1 : "<volume> == <cross-section.area> * <length>"; END_COB;

Example COB Instance Tutorial: Triangular Prism
Constraint Schematic-I Lexical COB Instance (COI) example 1, state 1.1 state 1.0 (unsolved): INSTANCE_OF triangular_prism; cross-section.base : 2.0; cross-section.height : 3.0; length : 5.0; volume : ?; END_INSTANCE; state 1.1 (solved): cross-section.area : 3.0; volume : 15.0; Basic Constraint Schematic-I Notation

Other Potential Examples and Challenges

Flexible High Diversity Design-Analysis Integration Phases 1-3 Airframe Examples: “Bike Frame” / Flap Support Inboard Beam Design Tools Modular, Reusable Template Libraries Analysis Modules (CBAMs) of Diverse Feature:Mode, & Fidelity MCAD Tools CATIA v4, v5 XaiTools Analysis Tools 1.5D General Math Mathematica In-House Codes Lug: Axial/Oblique; Ultimate/Shear Image API (CATGEO); VBScript Analyzable Product Model XaiTools 1.5D Fitting: Bending/Shear Materials DB FEA Elfini* MATDB-like 3D Assembly: Ultimate/ FailSafe/Fatigue* Fasteners DB FASTDB-like * = Item not yet available in toolkit (all others have working examples)

18 associativity relations
Fitting Analysis Template Applied to “Bike Frame” Bulkhead CBAM constraint schematic - instance view 18 associativity relations ) , ( 1 3 h b r f K = 2 1 e be ht P C f = e se t r P f 2 p =

Bike Frame Bulkhead Fitting Analysis COB-based Analysis Template (CBAM) - in XaiTools
Focus Point of CAD-CAE Integration Detailed CAD data from CATIA Library data for materials & fasteners Idealized analysis features in APM Modular generic analysis templates (ABBs) Explicit multi-directional associativity between detailed CAD data & idealized analysis features

Lug Template Applied to an Airframe Analysis Problem CBAM constraint schematic - instance view
- 10+ sub-property paths (including aggregates - ex. L[m]) Solution Tool Interaction Boundary Condition Objects (links to other analyses) CAD-CAE Associativity (idealization usage) Material Models Model-based Documentation Geometry Requirements Legend: Annotations highlight model knowledge capture capabilities. Other notation is COB constraint schematics notation.

Target Situation: Design Driven by Analysis Simulation-based design (SBD)
Design Model (in CATIA v5) Idealized Analysis Features (to scale in CATIA v5) Idealized bulkhead attach point fitting Idealized rear spar attach point fitting Idealized diagonal brace lug joint

25+ sub-property paths (tree leaves); 15+ relations
Outboard beam APM 25+ sub-property paths (tree leaves); 15+ relations

pde2005 7th NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange (PDE)

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "pde2005 7th NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange (PDE)"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

pde2005 7th NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange (PDE)

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "pde2005 7th NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange (PDE)"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback