Developing a Design/Simulation Framework

Developing a Design/Simulation Framework
A Workshop with CPDA's Design and Simulation Council April 6, 2005  Atlanta, Georgia Achieving Fine-Grained CAE-CAE Associativity via Analyzable Product Model (APM)-based Idealizations Topic Area: Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Synopsis: This talk overviews a simulation template methodology based on analyzable product models (APMs) that combine design information from multiple sources, add idealization knowledge, and bridge semantic gaps to enable advanced DAI. 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.

Topic Area: Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI)
Abstract 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.

Speaker Biography Russell S. Peak Senior Researcher
PLM Center of Excellence Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT) Dr. Peak joined the GIT research faculty in 1996 to create and lead a design-analysis interoperability thrust area. Prior experience includes phone design at Bell Laboratories and design-analysis integration exploration as a Visiting Researcher at Hitachi in Japan. Russell focuses on knowledge representations that enable complex system interoperability and simulation automation. He originated constrained 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 presentation highlights analyzable product models (APMs) as a key MRA component. He teaches this and related material within short courses and graduate courses. Russell has served as principal investigator on numerous research projects with sponsors including Boeing, DoD, IBM, NASA, NIST, Rockwell Collins, Shinko (Japan). He chairs the ASME CIE Engineering Information Management Technical Committee and is the GIT General Chair for the 2005 NASA-ESA Workshop on Product Data Exchange. He represents GIT on the Technical Advisory Committee of PDES Inc., an international consortium developing engineering interoperability techniques. He is also Research Director at InterCAX LLC. Dr. Peak received all his degrees in the GIT School of Mechanical Engineering (1984, 1985, 1993).

Nomenclature

Presentation Overview
Characterizing design-analysis integration (DAI) challenges Technique and application highlights Multi-representation architecture (MRA), analyzable product models (APMs), ... Summary and mapping to CPDA CAE Data Model Recent & current MRA-based work using APMs Model-based design (simulation template-driven design) Complex idealizations enabled by rich stds.-based product models Diverse-idealization many-body challenge problem

Outline Characterizing design-analysis integration (DAI) challenges
Technique and application highlights Multi-representation architecture (MRA), analyzable product models (APMs), ... Circuit board examples Flap link examples (benchmark tutorial) Plus: usage of emerging SysML parametric capabilities Summary and mapping to CPDA CAE Data Model Recent & current MRA-based work using APMs Model-based design (simulation template-driven design) CATIA v5-based airframe example Complex idealizations enabled by rich stds.-based product models Circuit board warpage using ISO (STEP AP210) Diverse-idealization many-body challenge problem Chip packages & circuit assembly warpage analysis Rich product models + complex & diverse idealizations + advanced meshing

An Introduction to X-Analysis Integration (XAI) Short Course Outline
Part 1: Constrained Objects (COBs) Primer Nomenclature Part 2: Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) Primer Analysis Integration Challenges Overview of COB-based XAI Part 3: Example Applications Airframe Structural Analysis (Boeing) Chip Package Thermal Analysis (Shinko) Circuit Board Thermomechanical Analysis (DoD, JPL/NASA, NIST) - Warpage Summary Part 4: Advanced Topics & Current Research  See Background Info. slides Highlights in next slides See:

Design  Analysis Analysis  Analysis
Design-Analysis Interoperability Challenges Decomposing and characterizing the DAI problem ... Idealizations & Heterogeneous Transformations Dimensions of Diversity Information Disciplines & Behaviors Fidelity Feature Levels CAD/CAE Methods & Tools, … Multi-Directional Associativity: Design  Analysis Analysis  Analysis

Analysis Integration Challenges: Heterogeneous Transformations
Homogeneous Transformation Design Model A Mentor Graphics Cadence STEP AP210 Design Model B Heterogeneous Transformation Mentor Graphics Ansys STEP AP210 AP209 ?? Design Model A Analysis Model A

Analysis Integration Challenges: Information Diversity
“Analyzable” Description Environmental Conditions “Manufacturable” Description Specification Semantics STEP AP220 STEP AP210 “PWB should have low bow & twist” “Warpage < 7.5% when board is cooled from lamination to 25oC” lamination temperature = 200oC Idealizations

Multi-Fidelity Idealizations Behavior-dependent Idealized Geometries; Same Dimension
Thermal Resistance Idealized Geometry (3D) FEA Model Common Design Model Thermal Stress Idealized Geometry (3D) FEA Model

Analysis Models (MCAE) Behavior = Deformation 3D Continuum/Brick Model
Multi-Fidelity Idealizations Same Behavior; Idealized Geometries of Varying Dimension Design Model (MCAD) Analysis Models (MCAE) Behavior = Deformation 1D Beam/Stick Model flap support assembly inboard beam 3D Continuum/Brick Model

Reusable Multi-Fidelity Geometric Idealizations: Bounding Shapes
Analysis Models Solder Joint Deformation Multiple Uses 2-D bounding box Design Model PWA Cooling Multi-Fidelity Idealizations Solder Joint Deformation 3-D bounding box Multiple Uses PWA Cooling

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

COB = constrained object
Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Panorama Flap Link Benchmark Tutorial - COB-based Constraint Schematic COB = constrained object

Complex System Representation & Simulation Interoperability Naval Systems of Systems (SoS) Scenarios (Notional) Utilizes generalized MRA terminology (preliminary)

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 Warpage XaiTools PWA-B 1D, 2D Laminates DB Materials DB PTH Deformation & Fatigue** 1D, 2D ‡ AP210 Ed2 WD8 * = Item not yet available in toolkit (all others have working examples) ** = Item available via U-Engineer.com

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

Other Model Abstractions (Patterns)
Frame of Reference CAD-CAE Model Representation & Interoperability R&D ~ Present Design Models Analysis Models Design Models Analysis Models Other Model Abstractions (Patterns) Resulting techniques to date: Architecture with new model abstractions (patterns) Enables modular, reusable building blocks Supports diversity: Product domains and physical behaviors CAD/E methods and tools Supports multiple levels of fidelity

Frame of Reference (cont
Frame of Reference (cont.) CAD-CAE Model Representation & Interoperability R&D Key Capabilities Idealization & Associativity Relations Design Models Other Model Abstractions (Patterns) Analysis Models Represent design-analysis model associativity as tool-independent knowledge Provide methodology Capture analysis idealization knowledge Create highly automated analysis templates Support product design

Frame of Reference (cont
Frame of Reference (cont.) CAD-CAE Model Representation & Interoperability R&D Mapping to a Conceptual Architecture Idealization & Associativity Relations Design Models Other Model Abstractions (Patterns) Analysis Models Product- Specific Product- Independent Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA)

Printed Wiring Board/Assembly (PWA/PWB)
A Basic Solder Joint Deformation Template Informal Associativity Diagram FEA Model Printed Wiring Board/Assembly (PWA/PWB)

Multi-Representation Architecture for Design-Analysis Integration

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 Continuum ABBs Extensional Rod Material Model ABB 1D Linear Elastic Model modular re-usage Torsional Rod

1D Linear Elastic Model ABB SysML parametric definition (WIP draft)
par : 1D Linear Elastic Model g = t G «paramConstraint» t g shearstress r5 shearstrain shearmodulus youngsmodulus G E «paramConstraint» n r1 E poissonsratio G = 2 ( 1 + n ) a cte «paramConstraint» r4 e D T thermalstrain t temperaturechange e = a D T s t e = elasticstrain e e E e «paramConstraint» «paramConstraint» strain e s stress r3 r2 e = e + e e t Implemented in RtS by Alan Moore

Extensional Rod ABB SysML parametric definition (WIP draft)
includes usage of 1D Linear Elastic Model «paramConstraint» materialModel : 1D Linear Elastic Model e T D E s a t r1 r2 r3 r4 temperature referenceTemperature force area undeformedlength start end totalelongation length r11 strain = / - =| | stress temperaturechange par : Extensional Rod Implemented in RtS by Alan Moore

Multi-Representation Architecture for Design-Analysis Integration

Analyzable Product Models (APMs)
Provide advanced access to design data needed by diverse analyses. Design Applications Analysis Applications Add reusable multifidelity idealizations Combine information Solid Modeler FEA-Based Analysis ... Materials Database Formula- Based Analysis Fasteners Database Analyzable Product Model (APM) Support multi-directionality

Analysis Models (MCAE) Behavior = Deformation 3D Continuum/Brick Model
Multi-Fidelity Idealizations Same Behavior; Idealized Geometries of Varying Dimension Design Model (MCAD) Analysis Models (MCAE) Behavior = Deformation 1D Beam/Stick Model flap support assembly inboard beam 3D Continuum/Brick Model

Flap Link Geometric Model (with idealizations)
28b

Flap Linkage Example Manufacturable Product Model (MPM) = Design Description
Extended Constraint Graph Product Attribute Ri Product Relation Constrained Object (COB) Structure (template)

Flap Linkage Example Analyzable Product Model (APM) = MPM Subset + Idealizations
Extended Constraint Graph 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 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)

Flap Link APM SysML (~UML) class diagram (WIP draft)

Concurrent Multi-Fidelity Cross-Section Representations
MULTI_LEVEL_COB cross_section; design : filleted_tapered_I_section; tapered : tapered_I_section; basic : basic_I_section; RELATIONS PRODUCT_IDEALIZATION_RELATIONS pir8 : "<basic.total_height> == <design.total_height>"; pir9 : "<basic.flange_width> == <design.flange_width>"; pir10 : "<basic.flange_thickness> == <design.flange_base_thickness>"; pir11 : "<basic.web_thickness> == <design.web_thickness>"; pir12 : "<tapered.total_height> == <design.total_height>"; pir13 : "<tapered.flange_width> == <design.flange_width>"; pir14 : "<tapered.flange_base_thickness> == <design.flange_base_thickness>"; pir15 : "<tapered.flange_taper_thickness> == <design.flange_taper_thickness>"; pir16 : "<tapered.flange_taper_angle> == <design.flange_taper_angle>"; pir17 : "<tapered.web_thickness> == <design.web_thickness>"; END_MULTI_LEVEL_COB; Detailed Design Cross-Section Idealized Cross-Sections Associativity Relations between Cross-Section Fidelities

Flap Link APM Implementation in CATIA v5
Design-Idealization Relation Design Model Idealized Model

Flap link APM implemented in CATIA v5

COB-based Constraint Schematic for Multi-Fidelity CAD-CAE Interoperability Flap Link Benchmark Example

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

Test Case Flap Linkage: Analysis Template Reuse of APM
Linkage Extensional Model (CBAM) 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) 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 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 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 (CBAM) 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

X-Analysis Integration Techniques for CAD-CAE Interoperability http://eislab.gatech.edu/research/
a. Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) b. Explicit Design-Analysis Associativity c. Analysis Module Creation Methodology This is a one-slide overview of our X-Analysis Integration Techniques for CAD-CAE Interoperability work. Motivation Linking design and analysis models is profoundly different than typical data integration tasks in that it requires multidirectional heterogeneous transformations - transforming one or more types of information (e.g., design geometry and materials) into a different type of information (e.g., an idealized finite element model) and vice-versa. Today such idealization transformations are usually not articulated in any form, much less captured as computable CAD-CAE associativity (Figure 5a), thus seriously limiting automation and knowledge capture. The integration challenge is further complicated in that a given type of product can have numerous types of analysis models that vary in discipline, resolution, application, and fidelity [Peak 1993; Peak et al. 1998]. We believe this diversity makes the gap between design and analysis too large for a single-span integration bridge. a. Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) The multi-representation architecture (MRA) (portion a) of this slide) is the conceptual foundation of an X-analysis integration (XAI) [1] methodology based on object-oriented patterns that naturally exist in engineering analysis processes. It is particularly aimed at design-analysis integration in CAD/CAE environments with high diversity (e.g., diversity of parts, analysis discipline, analysis idealization fidelity, design tools, and analysis tools) and where explicit design-analysis associativity is important (e.g., for automation, knowledge capture, and auditing). In this context, analysis means simulating the physical behavior of a part or system (e.g., determining the stress in a circuit board solder joint). The MRA has been conceived with intermediate representations as stepping stones to achieve the flexibility and modularity dictated by the above needs. Employing an object-oriented approach, these intermediate representations are naturally groupings of concepts that occur between traditional design and analysis models. The MRA is particularly aimed at capturing reusable analysis knowledge at the preliminary and detailed design stages. In the MRA conceptual architecture, solution method models (SMMs) are object-oriented wrappers around detailed solution tools that obtain analysis results in a highly automated manner. They support white box reuse of existing tools (e.g., FEA tools and in-house codes) within an integrated framework (Figure 6, Figure 9). Analysis building blocks (ABBs) represent analytical engineering concepts as semantically rich objects independent of solution method and product domain. ABBs generate SMMs based on solution technique-specific considerations such as symmetry and mesh density. Analyzable product models (APMs) represent design-oriented details, providing a common stepping stone to multiple design tools and supporting multi-fidelity analysis idealizations [Tamburini, 1999]. Finally, context-based analysis models (CBAMs) explicitly represent the fine-grained associativity between a design model and its diverse analysis models (i.e., between ABBs and APMs). CBAMs are also known as analysis modules and analysis templates. This list summarizes these representations (starred items are implemented as COBs per below): Analysis building blocks (ABBs) * · Represent analysis concepts as reusable, modular, adaptable objects Analyzable product models (APMs) * · Include multi-fidelity idealizations and multi-source design data coordination Context-based analysis models (CBAMs), a.k.a. analysis modules and analysis templates* · Contain explicit associativity relations with design models and other analyses Solution method modules (SMMs) · Support black box reuse of existing tools (e.g., FEA tools and in-house codes) · Support for design synthesis (sizing) and design verification (analysis) b. Explicit Design-Analysis Associativity The right side of b. illustrates these concepts via a solder joint analysis example [Peak et al. 1998]. Due to the coefficient of thermal expansion mismatch between the printing wiring board (PWB) and component, the solder joint deforms under thermal loads. The goal of this analysis model is to compute the resulting strain in order to estimate solder joint fatigue life. The left side shows design-related details of APM entities: the cross-section of a component, a PWB, solder joints, and epoxy. The assembly of these entities is another APM entity, a PWA component occurrence, c. On the right, the ABB is a generic analysis system, Plane Strain Bodies System, that can be used in analyses for multiple types of products. The CBAM, Solder Joint Plane Strain Model, contains associativity linkages, i, which indicate how the APM design entities are idealized as homogeneous plane strain bodies in the ABB. For example, linkage 1 explicitly specifies that the height of ABB body1, h1, equals the total height of the component, hc (a geometric idealization, 1, of the detailed APM component entity). Linkage 2 similarly specifies the material model for body1. While the top half of b) shows this design-analysis associativity informally, the lower one is a constraint schematic - a structured information model that specifies all associativity linkages. As constrained objects, these product-specific analysis models also have underlying lexical forms. Implementation of MRA concepts as COBs Constrained objects (COBs) (lower half of b) support the MRA to address the specific needs of engineering analysis integration for simulation-based engineering (SBE), including virtual prototyping, knowledge-based engineering (KBE), and CAD-CAE interoperability. The capabilities of this representation include: · Various information modeling forms: computable lexical forms (including STEP EXPRESS) and graphical forms to aid both computer automation and human comprehension · Object constructs: sub/supertypes, inheritance, basic aggregates, and multi-fidelity objects · Multi-directionality (I/O change) · Wrapping external programs as white box relations XaiTools FrameWork™ is a second-generation Java-based toolkit for XAI that supports constrained objects (COBs) for implementation of MRA concepts. The current tool architecture (Figure 4) supports: · Integration with representative CORBA-based analysis tools: FEA (Ansys) and general math (Mathematica) · Integration with representative design tools: geometric CAD (CATIA), electrical CAD (via STEP AP210), and libraries (e.g., materials and fasteners) · COB navigation/browsing tools and basic editing tools · COB-based analysis module libraries · Usage of Mathematica as the primary constraint solver c. Analysis Module Creation Methodology The MRA ubiquitization process (Figure 1) is a knowledge capture technique for transforming physical behavior research and design standards into catalogs of ready-to-use analysis modules [Peak et al. 1999a]. Working with designers, analysts identify commonly needed analyses and implement them as CBAM templates. Ubiquitous analysis then involves the regular usage of such analysis module instances to support product design. Example industrial applications include PWA-B thermomechanical analysis, electronic packaging thermal resistance analysis and thermomechanical analysis, and airframe structural analysis. Product domain-specific applications such as XaiTools PWA-B™ and XaiTools ChipPackage™ have been built upon this general-purpose foundation. End Notes [1] X = design, manufacture, sustainment, and other lifecycle phases. Contact us or see for further information including toolkits and short courses.

Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) Summary Characteristics of Component Representations
Solution Method Models (SMMs) Packages solution tool inputs, outputs, and control as integrated objects Automates solution tool access and results retrieval via tool agents and wrappers Analysis Building Blocks (ABBs) Represents analysis concepts using object and constraint graph techniques Acts as a semantically rich 'pre-preprocessor' and 'post-postprocessor' model. ABB instances create SMM instances based on solution method considerations and receive results after automated solution tool execution

Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) Summary Characteristics of Component Representations (cont.)
Analyzable Product Models (APMs) Represent design aspects of products and enables connections with design tools Support idealizations usable in numerous analysis models Have possibly many associated CBAMs Context-Based Analysis Models (CBAMs) Contain linkages explicitly representing design-analysis associativity, indicating usage of APM idealizations Create analysis models from ABBs and automatically connects them to APM attributes Represent common analysis models as automated, predefined templates Support interaction of analysis models of varying complexity and solution method Enable parametric design studies via multi-directional input/output (in some cases)

Idealization & Associativity Relations
Preliminary Characterization of CAD-CAE Interoperability Problem Estimated quantities for all structural analyses for one complex system Idealization & Associativity Relations Design Models Other Model Abstractions (Patterns) Analysis Models O(10K) relevant parts O(1K) template types and O(10K) template instances O(100) building blocks O(100) tools

associativity gap = computer-insensible relation  ~1M gaps
Preliminary Characterization of CAD-CAE Interoperability Problem Estimated quantities for all structural analyses for one complex system (continued) CAD-CAE associativity relations are represented as APM-ABB relations, APMFABB , inside CBAMs O(10K) template instances containing O(1M) associativity relations associativity gap = computer-insensible relation  ~1M gaps

Multi-Representation
A Preliminary Mapping ... Source: Michel Vrinat (Feb Draft) A CAE Data Model for Simulation Frameworks CPDA Notional CAE Data Model Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA)

Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) Summary Overall Characteristics
Addresses information-intensive nature of CAD-CAE integration Breaks design-analysis integration gap into smaller subproblems (patterns) Flexibly supports different design & analysis methods & tools Based on modular, reusable information building blocks Defines methodology for creating specialized, highly automated analysis tools to support product design Represents analysis intent as tool-independent knowledge

Self-Test: Consider impact of removing a representation
Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) Summary Overall Characteristics (cont.) Multiple representations required by: Many:Many cardinality Reusability & modularity Self-Test: Consider impact of removing a representation Similar to “software design patterns” for CAD-CAE domain Identifies patterns between CAD and CAE (including new types of objects) Captures explicit associativity Other needs: conditions, requirements, next-higher analysis Distinctive CAD-CAE associativity needs Multi-fidelity, multi-directional capabilities

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)

Lug Template Applied to an Airframe Analysis Problem CBAM constraint schematic - instance view
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.

Explicit Capture of Idealizations (part-specific template adaptation in bike frame case)
Idealized Features in CAE Model G2 Detailed Features/Parameters Tagged in CAD Model (CATIA) zf yf te yf yf xf zf xf cavity3.base.minimum_thickness b xf cavity3.width, w3 zf cavity 3 yf rib9 xf G1 rib8 Tension Fitting Analysis = t8,t 9 rib8.thickness rib9.thickness Often missing in today’s process Gi - Relations between idealized CAE parameters and detailed CAD parameters G1 : b = cavity3.inner_width + rib8.thickness/2 + rib9.thickness/2 G2 : te = cavity3.base.minimum_thickness

Bike Frame APM Constraint Schematic Bulkhead Fitting Portion (partial)
bulkhead assy attach, point fitting bike_frame end_pad width, b Idealized features (std. APM template) base hole wall thickness, te cavity 3 base min_thickness ... inner_width G2 Detailed design features G1 rib 8 thickness, t8 rib 9 thickness, t9 Idealization Relations - Reuse from standard APM fitting template or adapt for part feature-specific cases (as here)

Appendix B: Required Standard Analysis Methods (continued)
Common Structures Workstation (CSW) Request for Information June 2000, The Boeing Company. Appendix B: Required Standard Analysis Methods Available (by permission) at:

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

Target Situation: Design driven by idealized analysis features
Design Model (in CATIA v5) Idealized Features (to scale in CATIA v5) Idealized bulkhead attach point fitting Idealized rear spar attach point fitting Idealized diagonal brace lug joint

Design Starter Template in CATIA v5 slanted cavity with analysis template-based idealized channel fitting

Outboard beam APM

STEP AP210 (ISO 10303-210) Domain: Electronics Design
~950 standardized concepts (many applicable to other domains) Development investment: O(100 man-years) over ~10 years Product Enclosure External Interfaces Printed Circuit Assemblies (PCAs/PWAs) Die/Chip Package Packaged Part Interconnect Assembly Printed Circuit Substrate (PCBs/PWBs) Configuration Controlled Design of Electronic Assemblies, their Interconnection and Packaging Adapted from version by Tom Thurman, Rockwell-Collins

STEP AP210 Models Requirements Models Component / Part Models
Functional Models Design Constraints Interface Allocation Analysis Support Package Material Product Properties “White Box”/ “Black Box” Pin Mapping Functional Unit Interface Declaration Network Listing Simulation Models Signals Assembly Models Interconnect Models User View Design View Component Placement Material product Complex Assemblies with Multiple Interconnect User View Design View Bare Board Design Layout templates Layers planar non-planar conductive non-conductive Configuration Mgmt Identification Authority Effectivity Control Net Change GD & T Model Datum Reference Frame Tolerances 5

Rich Features in AP210: PWB layout AP210 STEP-Book Viewer - www.lksoft.com

Rich Features in AP210: Via/Plated Through Hole
Z-dimension details …

Rich Features in AP210: PCB Assembly: 3D & 2D STEP-Book AP210 Browser - www.lksoft.com
PDES Inc. EM Pilot Test Case: Cable Order Wire (COW) Board

Rich Features in AP210: Electrical Component
The 3D shape is generated from these “smart features” which have electrical functional knowledge. Thus, the AP210-based model is much richer than a typical 3D MCAD package model. 210 can also support the detailed design of a package itself (its insides, including electrical functions and physical behaviors).

3D Mechatronics via AP210 JMID-210

IDA-STEP Electronics: AP210 Interfaces

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 Warpage XaiTools PWA-B 1D, 2D Laminates DB Materials DB PTH Deformation & Fatigue** 1D, 2D ‡ AP210 Ed2 WD8 * = Item not yet available in toolkit (all others have working examples) ** = Item available via U-Engineer.com

Automating Complex Idealizations via AP210
Design Model - AP210 Simulation Template Analytical Model width length Top conductive layer APM CBAM ABB System … Top view showing “effective property” grid regions across top idealized layer Effective material properties idealization … thickness Cross-section view showing “effective property” grid region across each idealized layer Each grid region: multi-layer shell (a 2.5D analytical continuum) Idealization grid Solver Model SMM - FEA Mesh Model

Initial Validation Results
Simulation Results Click on icon for animation (deflection vs. temperature change) Physical Measurements in TherMoiré oven chamber Experimental Results SMM - FEA Mesh Model 0 C

Diverse-Idealization Many-Body Challenge Problem: Automated PCA warpage analysis rich product models + complex idealizations + advanced meshing PCB = printed circuit board (bare board) PCA = printed circuit assembly = PCB plus components and so on

Flexible High Diversity Design-Analysis Integration Electronic Packaging Examples: Chip Packages/Mounting Shinko Electric Project: Phase 1 (production usage) Design Tools Modular, Reusable Template Libraries Analysis Modules (CBAMs) of Diverse Behavior & Fidelity Prelim/APM Design Tool Analysis Tools XaiTools ChipPackage XaiTools ChipPackage General Math Mathematica FEA Ansys Thermal Resistance Analyzable Product Model 3D PWB DB XaiTools Materials DB* Thermal Stress EBGA, PBGA, QFP Basic 3D** Basic Documentation Automation Authoring MS Excel ** = Demonstration module

Example Chip Package Products Source: www.shinko.co.jp
Quad Flat Packs (QFPs) Plastic Ball Grid Array (PBGA) Packages Wafer Level Package (WLP) Glass-to-Metal Seals System-in-Package (SIP)

Example Chip Package Idealizations (PBGA)
Idealization for solder-joint/thermal ball Idealization for thermal via Courtesy of Shinko - see [Koo, 2000]

COB-based Analysis Template Typical Highly Automated Results
constrained object Analysis Module Tool Auto-Created FEA Inputs (for Mesh Model) FEA Temperature Distribution Thermal Resistance vs. Air Flow Velocity

Chip Package Thermal Resistance Analysis Template (FEA-based CBAM)

Chip Package Thermomechanical Analysis Case
Reducing days to hours; Increasing simulation intensity Decomposition ABB Model consisting 182 Input bodies RMM consisting 9056 Decomposed bodies FEA SMM

Technique Summary Tool-independent model interoperability
Application focus: simulation template methodology Multi-representation architecture (MRA) (including analyzable product models (APMs): Addresses fundamental gaps: Idealizations & CAD-CAE associativity: multi-fidelity, multi-directional, fine-grained Based on information & knowledge theory Structured, flexible, and extensible Improved quality, cost, time: Capture engineering knowledge in a reusable form Reduce information inconsistencies Increase analysis intensity & effectiveness Reducing modeling cycle time by 75% (production usage)

GIT PLM Center of Excellence http://www.marc.gatech.edu/plm/
Sample technique focus areas Composable objects Knowledge graphs, template methods, next-gen SysML, ... Simulation knowledge methodologies Model-based design, templates, design-analysis interoperability, ... Standards-based engineering frameworks Multi-language rich product models (STEP, XML, UML, OWL, ...), ... Sample application focus areas Mechatronics & systems of systems (SoS) Electronics, microsystems, space systems, E/MCAD-CASE interop.,... Factory design & simulation Semiconductor fabs, ...

For Further Information ...
Contact: Web site: Publications, project overviews, tools, etc. See: X-Analysis Integration (XAI) Central XaiTools™ home page: Prototype ESB: U-Engineer.com See “Internet-based Engineering Service Bureaus (ESB) Techniques” at Internet-based self-serve analysis Analysis module catalog for electronic packaging Highly automated front-ends to general FEA & math tools

Developing a Design/Simulation Framework

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Developing a Design/Simulation Framework"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Developing a Design/Simulation Framework

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Developing a Design/Simulation Framework"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback