8c325fa2a665c182726de5b8c39536da.ppt

- Количество слайдов: 88

GIT Product & System Lifecycle Management (PSLM) Center www. pslm. gatech. edu GIT Sys. ML Work Update Part 0: Overview Part 1: Representing Executable Physics-based CAE Models in Sys. ML Russell. [email protected] edu Presenter Diego. [email protected] edu Chris. [email protected] edu Presentation to v. 2005 -12 -28 OMG Systems Engineering Domain-Specific Interest Group (SE DSIG) December 6, 2005 Burlingame, California Copyright © 1992 -2005 by Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Atlanta, Georgia 30332 -0415 USA. All Rights Reserved. Permission to reproduce and distribute without changes for non-commercial purposes (including internal corporate usage) is hereby granted provided this notice and a proper citation are included.

Acknowledgements Sponsors: n n NASA, NIST http: //eislab. gatech. edu/projects/ GIT Team: n Manas Bajaj, Injoong Kim, Raphael Kobi, Chris Paredis, Russell Peak, Diego Tamburini, Miyako Wilson Other Collaborators: n Copyright © 2005 Roger Burkhart (Deere), Alan Moore et al. (Artisan), Sandy Friedenthal (LMCO) 2

Resources GIT Sys. ML resources n Main web w http: //www. pslm. gatech. edu/topics/sysml/ n Presentations w http: //www. marc. gatech. edu/events/pde 2005/presentations/ n See Presentations 1. 1 and 1. 2 (includes webcast video archive) w http: //eislab. gatech. edu/pubs/seminars-etc/2005 -09 -omg-se-dsig-peak/ w http: //eislab. gatech. edu/pubs/seminars-etc/2005 -12 -omg-se-dsig-peak/ n See also videos showing Sys. ML-driven CAE execution (via COB interfaces) n http: //eislab. gatech. edu/tmp/sysml/2005 -12 -06 -burlingame/ Related GIT techniques n Composable objects w http: //eislab. gatech. edu/projects/nasa-ngcobs/ n Multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates and CAD-CAE interoperability w http: //eislab. gatech. edu/research/dai/ Copyright © 2005 3

Part 0: Overview Presentation purpose = overview recent progress: n Validation: executability of Sys. ML parametrics w Usage for Sys. ML-driven CAE execution (math and FEA solvers) w Usage for knowledge capture & usage: relations and intent in design & analysis n Development: further examples Part 1: Representing Executable Physics-based CAE Models in Sys. ML (Peak, Tamburini, et al. ) n See below Part 2: Sys. ML-based Reference Models for Fluid Power Components (Paredis, et al. ) n Copyright © 2005 See GIT_Sys. ML_Part_2_Fluid_Pwr_Ref_Models. ppt 4

Sys. ML-based Examples by GIT = Primary Updates since 9/2005 OMG Meeting Test Cases Introductory tutorials (A) n n Triangle Spring systems Simulation template tutorials (A, B) n n Simulation building blocks Mechanical CAD & CAE: flap link Tool Interfaces A. Math solvers: 1. Mathematica B. Finite element analysis (FEA) solvers: 1. Ansys C. Dynamics solvers: 1. Modelica/Dymola Space systems: Fire. Sat satellite Fluid power & system dynamics (C) -- see Part 2 Electrical/mechanical CAD & CAE Model train (for Mechatronics pilot) Racing bike Copyright © 2005 Note: The Sys. ML notation used in these slides roughly corresponds to Sys. ML draft v 0. 9 plus more recent updates (approximately R. Burkhart blocks inputs as contained in Sys. ML spec v 0. 98 by SST) and experimental variations. We intend to update these examples with the final official notation when v 1. 0 that becomes available. 5

Status of Our Sys. ML Examples - p. 1/2 2005 -12 -06 1. About the Sys. ML notation used in these slides 1. It roughly corresponds to a ~9/2005 form of the blocks-based parametrics & structure approach developed by R. Burkhart et al. 1. 2. 2. This approach was updated & provided to both Sys. ML teams 11/2005 The SST Sys. ML v 0. 98 draft spec adopted this approach, whereas the SP Sys. ML v 1. 0 a draft spec adopted a collaborations-based approach We recently received a Sys. ML tool that corresponds to the v. 0. 98 spec. We hope to update these examples and solver interfaces accordingly in the near future. SST Sys. ML v 0. 98 vs. our current examples: 1. 2. 3. Block properties should be shown as small boxes flush with block boundaries vs. our current overlapping style Bindings between regular blocks and constraint blocks should show their role names (as binding identifiers) vs. our current elision Instances should be underlined vs. our current underlining omission (see also note below about instance causality) Other notes 1. We hope to include the following notation in future versions (they are not required by the current specs, but we believe they will enhance parametric diagram usefulness): 1. 2. Include symbols and subscripts for properties per traditional engineering notation 1. E. g. , spring constant in spring 1: k 1 Include relation expressions in constraint blocks in terms of their bound properties (continued next page) Copyright © 2005 6

Status of Our Sys. ML Examples - p. 2/2 3. Other notes (continued) 1. In these examples we tested the following notation or practices on an experimental basis to see if they might be useful: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 2. We did the following to enable our constraint manager, Xai. Tools, to process Sys. ML parametrics (which provides subsequent solver execution using COTS math and FEA tools): 1. 2. 3. Copyright © 2005 We distinguished parametric diagrams used for defining a block (par-d) vs. those used to capture instances (par-i) of that block. Similar suffixes may be useful for definitional vs. instance use of all Sys. ML diagrams. We have a library of constraint blocks representing specific commonly used expressions (e. g. , a= b+c, a**2=b**2+c**2, etc. ) that can be utilized in composing other blocks. To represent specialized relations, we tried defining a generic “algebraic” constraint block in this library, which can be redefined wherever it is used. In future versions we will likely replace this generic “algebraic” relation with relations defined in the context of the blocks that use them. We implemented equality relations as usages of an explicit “a=b” constraint block. We will likely replace such cases with binding relations in the future. We used a black dot graphical symbol to denote true junctions where equality relations intersect (e. g. , as a shorthand for a set of relations like a=b, a=c, a=d, and a=e). This approach is similar to that used with electrical schematics and a Manhattan routing style. It enables cleaner and more compact diagram layout. We depict instance-level causality in the Triangular Prism example using a double-lined box to indicate the primary desired result (and red italics to indicate other ancillary results). Added stereotypes to denote composable object (COBs) constructs: «git-schema» , «git-use-from» , etc. Added stereotypes to denote the patterns defined in our multi-representation architecture (MRA) approach for CAD-CAE interoperability: «apm» , «cbam» , «abb» , «smm» Handled reference properties (e. g. , flap link material) via ad-hoc associations (this is due to a limitation in Xai. Tools we hope to resolve in the near future). 7

Contents - Part 1 Purpose CAD-CAE simulation template background MCAD-MCAE benchmark example: flap link n n Modularity & reusability Executable Sys. ML parametrics (math, FEA) Summary Recommended prerequisites n n n Copyright © 2005 Triangle tutorial Spring systems tutorial Multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates and CAD-CAE interoperability 8

GIT Sys. ML Involvement - Overall Purpose Collaborate within SE DSIG: composable object (COB) concepts Sys. ML (esp. Sys. ML parametrics) Leverage COB-based simulation template work to demonstrate and verify Sys. ML capabilities n n n CAD-CAE interoperability Systems-of-systems (So. S) knowledge representations. . . For further background and GIT Sys. ML work-to-date: - See SE DSIG minutes/archives - Atlanta - 9/2005 - http: //syseng. omg. org/ - http: //www. pslm. gatech. edu/topics/sysml/ Copyright © 2005 9

Contents - Part 1 Purpose CAD-CAE simulation template background n n Leveraging test cases from existing work See http: //eislab. gatech. edu/research/dai/ MCAD-MCAE benchmark example: flap link Summary Recommended prerequisites (backup slides) n n n Copyright © 2005 Triangle tutorial Spring systems tutorial Multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates and CAD-CAE interoperability 10

Sys. ML-based Examples by GIT Test Cases Introductory tutorials (A) n n Triangle Spring systems 1. Simulation template tutorials (A, B) n n Tool Interfaces A. Math solvers: Simulation building blocks Mechanical CAD & CAE: flap link Mathematica B. Finite element analysis (FEA) solvers: 1. Ansys C. Dynamics solvers: 1. Modelica/Dymola Space systems: Fire. Sat satellite Fluid power & system dynamics (C) -- see Part 2 Electrical/mechanical CAD & CAE Model train (for Mechatronics pilot) Racing bike See slide entitled “Status of Our Sys. ML Examples” regarding spec version used in these examples, and so on. Copyright © 2005 11

COB Structure: Graphical Forms Tutorial: Right Triangle a. Shape Schematic-S COB = composable object c. Constraint Schematic-S Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] b. Relations-S Basic Constraint Schematic-S Notation d. Subsystem-S (for reuse by other COBs) Aside: This is a “usage view” in AP 210 terminology (vs. the above “design views”) © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 12

COB Structure (cont. ): Lexical Form Tutorial: Right Triangle e. Lexical COB Structure (COS) Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] © 1993 -2005 GTRC COB triangle SUBTYPE_OF geometric_shape; base, b : REAL; height, h : REAL; diagonal, d : REAL; area, A : REAL; RELATIONS r 1 : " == 0. 5 *

Right Triangle Implemented using Sys. ML Blocks and Parametrics Sys. ML Parametric Diagram Note: The outmost block should be depicted as a frame (of type par), as in conformant flap_link examples elsewhere in this presentation. © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 14

COBs as Building Blocks Tutorial: Triangular Prism COB Structure a. Shape Schematic-S c. Constraint Schematic-S Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] A b. Relations-S d. Subsystem-S e. Lexical COB Structure (COS) COB triangular_prism SUBTYPE_OF geometric_shape; length, l : REAL; cross-section : triangle; volume, V : REAL; RELATIONS r 1 : "

Triangular Prism Implemented using Sys. ML Blocks and Parametrics Sys. ML Parametric Diagram Note: The outmost block should be depicted as a frame (of type par), as in conformant flap_link examples elsewhere in this presentation. © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 16

Example COB Instance Tutorial: Right Triangle Constraint Schematic-I Lexical COB Instance (COI) example 1, state 1. 1 Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] state 1. 0 (unsolved): INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2. 0; height : 3. 0; area : ? ; diagonal : ? ; END_INSTANCE; example 1, state 2. 1 Basic Constraint Schematic-I Notation state 1. 1 (solved): INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2. 0; height : 3. 0; area : 3. 0; diagonal : 3. 60; END_INSTANCE; . . . state 2. 1 (solved): INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2. 0; height : 9. 0; area : 9. 0; diagonal : 9. 22; END_INSTANCE; © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 17

Multi-Directional I/O Tutorial: Right Triangle Constraint Schematic-I Lexical COB Instance (COI) Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] example 1, state 2. 1 (solved): INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2. 0; height : 9. 0; area : 9. 0; diagonal : 9. 22; END_INSTANCE; example 1, state 3. 1 state 3. 0 (unsolved): INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2. 0; height : ? ; area : 6. 0; diagonal : ? ; END_INSTANCE; Concepts illustrated: - Non-causal COB structure (no predefined I/O direction) - Causality of COB instances and states © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu state 3. 1 (solved): INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2. 0; height : 6. 0; area : 6. 0; diagonal : 6. 32; END_INSTANCE; 18

Example COB Instance Tutorial: Triangular Prism - State 1. 1 (Solved) in Xai. Tools © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 19

Example COB Instance Tutorial: Triangular Prism Constraint Schematic-I Lexical COB Instance (COI) example 1, state 1. 1 (solved) Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] 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): INSTANCE_OF triangular_prism; cross-section. base : 2. 0; cross-section. height : 3. 0; cross-section. area : 3. 0; length : 5. 0; volume : 15. 0; END_INSTANCE; state 1. 0 (unsolved) Sys. ML Parametric Diagram-I state 1. 1 (solved) =3 = 15 Note: The current prototype exports instances with input values for solving. The model is then executed successfully in external solvers. However, the prototype interface for importing resulting solutions is not ready yet; thus, the solved state depicted here inside the Sys. ML tool is an envisioned notation. © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 20

Sys. ML-COB Architecture - Prototype v 0. 1 as of 2005 -12 -06 COB Solving & Browsing Sys. ML-based COB Authoring Artisan Studio Xai. Tools COB export Exchange File COB API Xai. Tools COB Services (constraint graph manager, including COTS solver access) Composable Objects (COBs) . . . Native Tools Models Traditional COTS or in-house solvers © 1993 -2005 GTRC Ansys Mathematica (FEA Solver) (Math Solver) Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 21

Engineering Web Services Engineering Service Bureau Client PCs Host Machines Rich Client Soap Servers Xai. Tools. Ansys Xai. Tools. Math. Xai. Tools. Solver Xai. Tools Server Solver Server Internet/Intranet FEA Solvers Ansys, Patran, Abaqus, . . . Math Solvers . . . HTTP/XML Wrapped Data Web Server SOAP Internet Xai. Tools Servlet container Apache Tomcat Mathematica Status: In prototype & production usage since 1999 (CORBA), 2002 (SOAP), including remote access from AZ, DC, WV, UK, Japan, … © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 22

Sys. ML-COB Architecture - Prototype v 0. 2 Anticipated 2006 -1 Q COB Solving & Browsing Sys. ML-based COB Authoring Artisan Studio Xai. Tools COB in/out Exchange File COB API Xai. Tools COB Services (constraint graph manager, including COTS solver access) Composable Objects (COBs) . . . Native Tools Models Traditional COTS or in-house solvers © 1993 -2005 GTRC Ansys Mathematica (FEA Solver) (Math Solver) Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 23

Envisioned Sys. ML-COB Architecture http: //eislab. gatech. edu/projects/nasa-ngcobs/ - 2005 -10 CMS Management Client Tools COB Authoring COB Configuration Management COB Browsing COB-Enabled End-User Applications COTS Sys. ML Tools Other COB Apps. Sys. ML UI Control COB API Domain-specific Simulation tools COB Tree COB API COB Services (graph mgt, conf. control, meta-solving, persistence, tool access, UI, …) COB API COB SDK UI Components Composable Objects (COBs) Traditional COTS and in-house end-user tools (authoring, viewing, solving, . . ) Tool Native Tools Models Tool © 1993 -2005 GTRC COB Management System (CMS) Standards-based tool wrappers Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 24

Contents - Part 1 Purpose CAD-CAE simulation template background n n Leveraging test cases from existing & new work See http: //eislab. gatech. edu/research/dai/ MCAD-MCAE benchmark example: flap link Summary Recommended prerequisites (see backup slides) n n n Copyright © 2005 Triangle tutorial Spring systems tutorial Multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates and CAD-CAE interoperability 25

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 Composable COB = composable object © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 26

Flexible High Diversity Design-Analysis Integration Phases 1 -3 Airframe Examples: “Bike Frame” / Flap Support Inboard Beam Design Tools Modular, Reusable Template Libraries MCAD Tools CATIA v 4, v 5 Analysis Modules (CBAMs) of Diverse Feature: Mode, & Fidelity Xai. Tools 1. 5 D Image API (CATGEO); VBScript Analyzable Product Model Xai. Tools Lug: Axial/Oblique; Ultimate/Shear Fasteners DB FASTDB-like General Mathematica In-House Codes 1. 5 D Fitting: Bending/Shear Materials DB MATDB-like Analysis Tools 3 D Assembly: Ultimate/ Fail. Safe/Fatigue* FEA Elfini* * = Item not yet available in toolkit (all others have working examples) 27

Fitting Analysis Template Applied to “Bike Frame” Bulkhead COB-based CBAM constraint schematic - instance view 18 associativity relations Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] K 3 = f (r 1, b, h) fbe = fse = C 1 P 2 hte P 2 pr 0 te COB = composable object 28

Lug Template Applied to an Airframe Analysis Problem COB-based CBAM constraint schematic - instance view Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] CAD-CAE Associativity (idealization usage) Geometry Material Models Solution Tool Boundary Condition Objects Interaction (links to other analyses) Model-based Documentation Requirements Legend: Annotations highlight model knowledge capture capabilities. Other notation is COB constraint schematics notation. 29

Generalized MRA Patterns for Systems-of-Systems (So. S) M&S 30

Diversity Demonstrated in Test Cases [based on Peak and Wilson et al. 2001] 31

Test Case Statistics: Overall Test Cases COB Libraries Used # of Entities, Attributes, Relations 32

Test Case Statistics: Flap Link and Associated Building Blocks • Supports reusability • Supports complexity 33

Example COB Reuse as Modular Simulation Building Blocks 34

Contents - Part 1 Purpose CAD-CAE simulation template background n n Leveraging test cases from existing work See http: //eislab. gatech. edu/research/dai/ MCAD-MCAE benchmark example: flap link Summary Recommended prerequisites (backup slides) n n n Copyright © 2005 Triangle tutorial Spring systems tutorial Multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates and CAD-CAE interoperability 35

Sys. ML-based Examples by GIT Test Cases Introductory tutorials (A) n n Triangle Spring systems 1. Simulation template tutorials (A, B) n n Tool Interfaces A. Math solvers: Simulation building blocks Mechanical CAD & CAE: flap link Mathematica B. Finite element analysis (FEA) solvers: 1. Ansys C. Dynamics solvers: 1. Modelica/Dymola Space systems: Fire. Sat satellite Fluid power & system dynamics (C) -- see Part 2 Electrical/mechanical CAD & CAE Model train (for Mechatronics pilot) Racing bike See slide entitled “Status of Our Sys. ML Examples” regarding spec version used in these examples, and so on. Copyright © 2005 36

Flap Link Mechanical Part A simple design. . . a benchmark problem. L B ts 1 ts 2 qs sleeve 1 rib 1 shaft sleeve 2 rib 2 ds 1 ds 2 B red = idealized parameter Leff 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), including: • Diversity in design information source, behavior, fidelity, solution method, solution tool, . . . • Modular, reusable simulation building blocks and fine-grained inter-model associativity See the following for further information (including papers overviewing this example): http: //eislab. gatech. edu/research/dai/ (begin with [Wilson et al. 2001] under Suggested Starting Points) 37

Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Panorama Flap Link Benchmark Tutorial - Composable Object (COB)-based Constraint Schematic Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] 38

Flap Linkage Example Manufacturable Product Model (MPM) = Design Description Extended Constraint Graph Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] Product Attribute Ri COB Structure (COS) Product Relation 39

Flap Linkage Example Analyzable Product Model (APM) = MPM Subset + Idealizations flap_link Extended Constraint Graph effective_length w sleeve_1 Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] t r x w sleeve_2 R 1 t R 1 r Product Attribute cross_section Product Relation wf R 4 t 1 f Idealized Attribute Ri Partial COB Structure (COS) R 3 tw shaft Ri R 2 x effective_length, Leff == inter_axis_length (sleeve 1. hole. cross_section. radius + sleeve 2. hole. cross_section. radius) R 6 R 5 t 2 f critical_section Idealization Relation critical_detailed wf tw rib_1 rib_2 t 2 f R 2 critical_simple h material wf tw R 3 E linear_elastic hw n name stress_strain_model R 8 area b t R 7 t 1 f h t R 11 hw b tf cte R 9 R 10 area R 12 40

Flap Link APM Implementation in CATIA v 5 Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] Design-Idealization Relation Design Model Idealized Model 41

Flap Link APM Sys. ML Block Definition Diagram (bdd) - basic view [1] Note [1]: The term “part” is used here as a regular block name in the traditional engineering sense of part-assembly (i. e. , it is not used here in the UML/Sys. ML meta-entity context of part/class). v. 2005 -12 -19 42

Flap Link APM: Sys. ML Block Definition Diagram (bdd) Implementing COB Concepts in Sys. ML v. 2005 -12 -19 43

See slide entitled “Status of Our Sys. ML Examples” regarding spec version used in these examples, and so on. Flap Link APM: Sys. ML Parametric Diagram (par) Implementing COB Concepts in Sys. ML par-d v. 2005 -12 -19 v. 2005 -12 -17 44

par-i Flap Link APM: Sys. ML Parametric Diagram - Instance (inputs - unsolved state) Solving supported via math tool execution v. 2005 -12 -19 45

Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Panorama Flap Link Benchmark Tutorial - Composable Object (COB)-based Constraint Schematic Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] 46

COB-based Libraries of Analysis Building Blocks (ABBs) Material Model and Continuum ABBs - Constraint Schematic-S Regarding classical COB notation and examples, see References/Backup Slides Continuum ABBs Extensional Rod Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] Material Model ABB 1 D Linear Elastic Model modular re-usage Torsional Rod 47

Libraries of Analysis Building Blocks (ABBs) Material Model & Continuum ABBs - Sys. ML Parametric Diagrams par-d modular re-usage par-d v. 2005 -12 -19 48

Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Panorama Flap Link Benchmark Tutorial - Composable Object (COB)-based Constraint Schematic Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] 49

Flap Link Simulation Templates & Generic Building Blocks Sys. ML Block Definition Diagram (bdd) - basic view 50

Tutorial Example: Flap Link Analysis Template COB-based CBAM - Constraint Schematic (classical view) (1 a) Analysis Template: Flap Link Extensional Model CBAM Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] CAD-CAE Associativity (idealization usage) APM Geometry Material Models ABB SMM ABB Requirements & Objectives Solution Tool Boundary Condition Objects (links to other analyses)* Interaction 51

Analysis Template: Flap Link Extensional Model COB-based CBAM - Sys. ML Parametric Diagram par-d Solving supported via math tool execution v. 2005 -12 -19 52

Analysis Template Instance with Multi-Directional I/O Flap Link Extensional Model - COB Constraint Schematics (classical view) deformation model linkage Flap Link #3 L effective length, eff Extensional Rod (isothermal) al 1 Lo Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] mode: shaft tension critical_cross _section shaft material condition basic 2 1. 125 in area, A al 2 L linear elastic model youngs modulus, al 3 E A 8888 psi steel 30 e 6 psi 10000 lbs E Design Verification - Input: design details - Output: i) idealized design parameters ii) physical response criteria x 2 s F reaction 1. 43 e-3 in DL x 1 5. 0 in e description flaps mid position stress model Margin of Safety 18000 psi (> case) allowable stress actual MS 1. 025 example 1, state 1 deformation model Design Synthesis - Input: desired physical response criteria - Output: i) idealized design parameters (e. g. , for sizing), or ii) detailed design parameters 5. 0 in effective length, Leff linkage Flap Link #3 al 1 0. 555 in 2 1. 125 in 2 shaft material mode: shaft tension condition critical_cross _section linear elastic model reaction 10000 lbs steel basic area, A al 2 X youngs modulus, E al 3 30 e 6 psi Extensional Rod (isothermal) Lo DL x 1 L 3. 00 e-3 in x 2 A E s F e 18000 psi description flaps mid position stress model Margin of Safety (> case) 18000 psi allowable stress allowable actual MS 0. 0 example 1, state 3 53

Flap Link Extensional Model Example COB Instance in Xai. Tools (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) F CAD ocus P oint -CA of E In tegr atio n Explicit multi-directional associativity between design & analysis 54

Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Panorama Flap Link Benchmark Tutorial - Composable Object (COB)-based Constraint Schematic Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] 55

FEA-based Analysis Template: Link Plane Stress Model COB-based CBAM - Constraint Schematic (classical view) Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] Higher fidelity version vs. Link Extensional Model ABB SMM Template 56

FEA-based Analysis Template: Link Plane Stress Model COB-based CBAM - Sys. ML Parametric Diagram (draft layout) Solving supported via math tool and FEA tool execution Note: The outmost block should be depicted as a frame (of type par), as in conformant flap_link examples elsewhere in this presentation. 57

SMM with Parameterized FEA Model Flap Link Plane Stress Model Preprocessor Model Figure ANSYS Prep 7 Template @EX [email protected] = Parameters populated by context ABB !EX, NIUX, L, WS 1, WS 2, RS 1, RS 2, TS 1, TS 2, TW, TF, WF, FORCE. . . /prep 7 ! element type et, 1, plane 42 SMM wrapped inside an ABB subsystem as Sys. ML parametric constraints par-d ! material properties mp, ex, 1, @[email protected] mp, nuxy, 1, @[email protected] ! geometric parameters L = @[email protected] ts 1 = @TS [email protected] rs 1 = @RS [email protected] tf = @[email protected] . . ! elastic modulus ! Poissons ratio ! ! length thickness of sleeve 1 radius of sleeve 1 (rs 1

Design-Analysis Interoperability (DAI) Panorama Flap Link Benchmark Tutorial - Composable Object (COB)-based Constraint Schematic Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] 59

Analysis Template: Flap Link Torsional Model COB-based CBAM - Constraint Schematic (classical view) Diverse Mode (Behavior) vs. Link Extensional Model Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] 60

Analysis Template: Flap Link Torsional Model COB-based CBAM - Sys. ML Parametric Diagram (draft layout) Solving supported via math tool execution Note: The outmost block should be depicted as a frame (of type par), as in conformant flap_link examples elsewhere in this presentation. 61

Modularity and Reusability in Flap Link Benchmark Problem Sys. ML Package Structure 62

Next Steps Update current examples and tool interfaces n Conformance to Sys. ML spec w Sys. ML v 0. 98 (SST) - ~2006 -01 w Sys. ML v 1. 0 - ~2006 -1 Q n Draft recommended practices for Sys. ML-based CAD/CAE and general parametrics usage Expand examples: other system levels, constructs, domains, CAD tools, CAE solvers, . . . Copyright © 2005 63

Summary Completed several test cases on representing executable physics-based CAE models in Sys. ML n Tutorial & benchmark problems w Triangles, analytical springs, flap link n Includes interfaces to representative COTS solvers w General math: Mathematica w FEA: Ansys Leverages composable object (COB) and simulation template techniques n n Copyright © 2005 Usage for knowledge capture & usage MRA for CAD-CAE and systems-of-systems (So. S) w Diverse CAD/CAE tools, behaviors, fidelity, . . . w Modular, reusable simulation building blocks and fine-grained inter-model associativity 64

Copyright © 2005 65

Reference & Backup Slides

Copyright © 2005 67

Contents - Part 1 Purpose CAD-CAE simulation template background MCAD-MCAE benchmark example: flap link n n Modularity & reusability Executable Sys. ML parametrics (math, FEA) Summary Recommended prerequisites n n n Triangle tutorial Spring systems tutorial Multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates and CAD-CAE interoperability [plus see flap link example above and references] Copyright © 2005 68

Frame of Reference CAD-CAE Model Representation & Interoperability R&D ~1992 - Present Design Models Other Models Design. Model Abstractions (Patterns) Analysis Models Resulting techniques to date: u 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 © 1993 -2001 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 69

Frame of Reference (cont. ) CAD-CAE Model Representation & Interoperability R&D Key Capabilities Idealization & Associativity Relations Design Models u u 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 © 1993 -2001 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 70

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) Product. Specific © 1993 -2001 GTRC Analysis Models Product. Independent Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 71

A Basic Solder Joint Deformation Template Informal Associativity Diagram FEA Model Printed Wiring Board/Assembly (PWA/PWB) © 1993 -2001 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 72

http: //eislab. gatech. edu/pubs/conferences/2003 -asme-detc-peak/ Preliminary Characterization of CAD-CAE Interoperability Problem Estimated quantities for all structural analyses of a complex system (airframe) Idealization & Associativity Relations Design Models O(10 K) relevant parts Other Model Abstractions (Patterns) Analysis Models O(10 K) template types and O(100 K) template instances O(100) building blocks O(100) tools © 1993 -2001 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 73

Preliminary Characterization of CAD-CAE Interoperability Problem Estimated quantities for all structural analyses of a complex system (airframe) - cont. CAD-CAE associativity relations are represented as APM-ABB relations, APMFABB , inside CBAMs O(100 K) template instances containing O(1 M) associativity relations associativity gap = computer-insensible relation © 1993 -2001 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu ~1 M gaps 74

Contents - Part 1 Purpose CAD-CAE simulation template background MCAD-MCAE benchmark example: flap link n n Modularity & reusability Executable Sys. ML parametrics (math, FEA) Summary Recommended prerequisites n n n Copyright © 2005 Triangle tutorial Spring systems tutorial Multi-representation architecture (MRA) for simulation templates and CAD-CAE interoperability 75

Sys. ML-based Examples by GIT Test Cases Introductory tutorials (A) n n Triangle Spring systems Simulation template tutorials (A, B) n n Simulation building blocks Mechanical CAD & CAE: flap link Tool Interfaces A. Math solvers: 1. Mathematica B. Finite element analysis (FEA) solvers: 1. Ansys C. Dynamics solvers: 1. Modelica/Dymola Space systems: Fire. Sat satellite Fluid power & system dynamics (C) -- see Part 2 Electrical/mechanical CAD & CAE Model train (for Mechatronics pilot) Racing bike Copyright © 2005 Note: The Sys. ML notation used in these slides roughly corresponds to Sys. ML draft v 0. 9 plus more recent updates (approximately R. Burkhart blocks inputs as contained in Sys. ML spec v 0. 98 by SST) and experimental variations. We intend to update these examples with the final official notation when v 1. 0 that becomes available. 76

COB Structure: Graphical Forms Tutorial: Analytical Spring Primitive a. Shape Schematic-S c. Constraint Schematic-S Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] b. Relations-S Basic Constraint Schematic-S Notation © 1993 -2005 GTRC d. Subsystem-S (for reuse by other COBs) Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 77

Analytical Spring Implemented using Sys. ML Block and Parametrics Sys. ML Parametric Diagram Note: The outmost block should be depicted as a frame (of type par), as in conformant flap_link examples elsewhere in this presentation. © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 78

COB Structure (cont. ): Lexical Form Spring Primitive Constraint Schematic-S Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] © 1993 -2005 GTRC Lexical COB Structure (COS) COB spring SUBTYPE_OF abb; undeformed_length, L_{0} : REAL; spring_constant, k : REAL; start, x_{1} : REAL; end, x_{2} : REAL; length, L : REAL; total_elongation, Δ L : REAL; force, F : REAL; RELATIONS r 1 : "

Example COB Instance Spring Primitive Constraint Schematic-I example 1, state 1. 1 Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] © 1993 -2005 GTRC Lexical COB Instance (COI) state 1. 0 (unsolved): INSTANCE_OF spring; undeformed_length : 20. 0; spring_constant : 5. 0; total_elongation : ? ; force : 10. 0; END_INSTANCE; state 1. 1 (solved): Basic Constraint Schematic-I Notation Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu INSTANCE_OF spring; undeformed_length : 20. 0; spring_constant : 5. 0; start : ? ; end : ? ; length : 22. 0; total_elongation : 2. 0; force : 10. 0; END_INSTANCE; 80

Multi-Directional I/O (non-causal) Spring Primitive Constraint Schematic-I Design Verification Lexical COB Instance (COI) example 1, state 1. 1 Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] state 5. 0 (unsolved): INSTANCE_OF spring; undeformed_length : 20. 0; spring_constant : ? ; start : 10. 0; length : 22. 0; force : 40. 0; END_INSTANCE; Design Synthesis © 1993 -2005 GTRC example 1, state 5. 1 (solved): INSTANCE_OF spring; undeformed_length : 20. 0; spring_constant : 20. 0; start : 10. 0; end : 32. 0; length : 22. 0; total_elongation : 2. 0; force : 40. 0; END_INSTANCE; Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 81

Traditional Mathematical Representation Tutorial: Two Spring System Figure Free Body Diagrams Variables and Relations Kinematic Relations Boundary Conditions Constitutive Relations © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 82

COB Constraint Schematic-S Two Spring System Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] Analysis Primitives with Encapsulated Relations © 1993 -2005 GTRC System-Level Relations (Boundary Conditions) Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 83

Spring System Implemented using Sys. ML Blocks and Parametrics Sys. ML Block Definition Diagram (bdd) Sys. ML Parametric Diagram par-d © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 84

Constraint Graph-S Two Spring System Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] © 1993 -2005 GTRC spring 2 spring 1 Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 85

COB Representation Constraint Schematic-S: Two Spring System Constraint Graph-S Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] Constraint Schematic-S • Encapsulated form (hides details) © 1993 -2005 GTRC Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 86

COBs as Building Blocks Two Spring System Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] Constraint Schematic-S © 1993 -2005 GTRC Lexical COB Structure (COS) COB spring_system SUBTYPE_OF analysis_system; spring 1 : spring; spring 2 : spring; deformation 1, u_{1} : REAL; deformation 2, u_{2} : REAL; load, P : REAL; RELATIONS bc 1 : "

Analysis System Instance Two Spring System Constraint Schematic-I example 2, state 1. 1 Classical COB Notation [Peak, 1993; Tamburini, 1999; Wilson, 2000] © 1993 -2005 GTRC Lexical COB Instance (COI) state 1. 0 (unsolved): INSTANCE_OF spring_system; spring 1. undeformed_length spring 1. spring_constant : spring 2. undeformed_length spring 2. spring_constant : load : 10. 0; deformation 2 : ? ; END_INSTANCE; : 8. 0; 5. 5; : 8. 0; 6. 0; state 1. 1 (solved): INSTANCE_OF spring_system; spring 1. undeformed_length : 8. 0; spring 1. spring_constant : 5. 5; spring 1. start : 0. 0; spring 1. end : 9. 818; spring 1. force : 10. 0; spring 1. total_elongation : 1. 818; spring 1. length : 9. 818; spring 2. undeformed_length : 8. 0; spring 2. spring_constant : 6. 0; spring 2. start : 9. 818; spring 2. force : 10. 0; spring 2. total_elongation : 1. 667; spring 2. length : 9. 667; spring 2. end : 19. 48; load : 10. 0; deformation 1 : 1. 818; deformation 2 : 3. 485; END_INSTANCE; Engineering Information Systems Lab eislab. gatech. edu 88