Advertisement

Research in Engineering Design

, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp 333–356 | Cite as

Multidisciplinary design methodology for mechatronic systems based on interface model

  • Chen Zheng
  • Peter Hehenberger
  • Julien Le Duigou
  • Matthieu Bricogne
  • Benoît Eynard
Original Paper

Abstract

Mechatronic system is considered as the resulting integration of electrical/electronic system, mechanical parts and information processing. Therefore, to enable a systematic design process of mechatronic systems with a high-level integration, the so-called multidisciplinary integrated design is required. However, neither academia nor industry has yet provided an effective solution, which can fully support the whole design process to achieve such multidisciplinary integrated design. In order to organise the design activities from different disciplines and to aid the designers to achieve the multidisciplinary integrated design, the authors propose a design methodology based on a multidisciplinary interface model. In line with the systems engineering practices, an extended V-model is used as the macro-level process in the proposed design methodology. It starts with identification of requirements on the entire system and ends with a user-validated system. The hierarchical design model is adopted as the micro-level process. It supports the specific design phases where individual designers can structure design sub-tasks and proceed and react in unforeseen situations. To ensure the consistency and traceability between the two levels, the multidisciplinary interface model is proposed. This design methodology is demonstrated by studying the design process of a quadrotor.

Keywords

Mechatronic design Design methodology Multidisciplinary integration Interface modelling 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was in part supported by the Linz Center of Mechatronics (LCM) within the framework of the Austrian COMET-K2 program and the Labex MS2T (supported by the French Government, through the program “Investments for the future” managed by the National Agency for Research—Reference ANR-11-IDEX-0004-02) at the Université de Technologie de Compiègne.

References

  1. Abramovici M, Bellalouna F (2007) Integration and complexity management within the mechatronics product development. Advances in life cycle engineering for sustainable manufacturing businesses, 14th CIRP Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, 11–13 June 2007, pp 113–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abramovici M, Bellalouna F (2008) Service oriented architecture for the integration of domain-specific PLM systems within the mechatronic product development. 7th international symposium on tools and methods of competitive engineering (TMCE 2008), Izmir, Turkey, pp 941–953Google Scholar
  3. Alvarez Cabrera AA, Foeken MJ, Tekin OA et al (2010) Towards automation of control software: a review of challenges in mechatronic design. Mechatronics 20:876–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbieri G, Fantuzzi C, Borsari R (2014) A model-based design methodology for the development of mechatronic systems. Mechatronics 24:833–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bathelt J, Jonsson A, Bacs C, et al (2005) Applying the new VDI Design Guideline 2206 on mechatronic systems controlled by a PLC. International conference on engineering design (ICED 05), Melbourne, Australia. 15–18 August 2005Google Scholar
  6. Blanchard BS (2012) System engineering management. Wiley, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  7. Blyler J (2004) Interface management. Instrum Meas Mag 7:32–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boehm BW (1981) Software engineering economics. Prentice Hall, New JerseyMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Boehm BW (1988) A spiral model of software development and enhancement. Computer 21:61–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brezina T, Hadas Z, Vetiska J (2011) Using of co-simulation ADAMS-SIMULINK for development of mechatronic systems. 14th international symposium MECHATRONIKA, Trenín, SlovakiaGoogle Scholar
  11. Bricogne M, Rivest L, Troussier N, Eynard B (2014) Concurrent versioning principles for collaboration: towards PLM for hardware and software data management. Int J Prod Lifecycle Manag 7:17–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cao Y, Liu Y, Paredis CJJ (2011) System-level model integration of design and simulation for mechatronic systems based on SysML. Mechatronics 21:1063–1075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carryer JE, Ohline RM, Kenny TW (2011) Introduction to mechatronic design. Prentice Hall, BostonGoogle Scholar
  14. Department of Transportation (2007) Systems engineering for intelligent transportation systems. Springer Science+Business Media, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  15. Dorfman M (1990) System and software requirements engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press Tutorial. IEEE CS Press, Los Alamitos, pp 7–22Google Scholar
  16. Fenves S, Foufou S, Bock C, Sriram RD (2006) CPM: a core model for product data. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 8:1–14Google Scholar
  17. Fisher J (1998) Model-based systems engineering: a new paradigm. Incose Insight 1:3–16Google Scholar
  18. Forsberg K, Mooz H (1999) System engineering for faster, cheaper, better. Proceedings of the 9th annual international symposium of the INCOSE1998, Brighton, UKGoogle Scholar
  19. Fosse E, Delp CL (2013) Systems engineering interfaces: a model based approach. 2013 IEEE aerospace conference, Big Sky, USAGoogle Scholar
  20. Fotso AB, Wasgint R, Achim R (2012) State of the art for mechatronic design concepts. 8th IEEE/ASME international conference on mechatronic and embedded systems and applications. Suzhou, China. 8–10 July 2012, pp 232–240Google Scholar
  21. Gausemeier J, Moehringer S (2003) New Guideline VDI 2206—A flexible procedure model for the design of mechatronic systems. 14th international conference on engineering design, Stockholm, Sweden, 19–21 August 2003Google Scholar
  22. Gausemeier J, Frank U, Donoth J, Kahl S (2009) Specification technique for the description of self-optimizing mechatronic systems. Res Eng Des 20:201–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gausemeier J, Dumitrescu R, Kahl S, Nordsiek D (2011) Integrative development of product and production system for mechatronic products. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 27:772–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gautam N, Singh N (2008) Lean product development: maximizing the customer perceived value through design change (redesign). Int J Prod Econ 114:313–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hadas Z, Singule V, Vechet S, Ondrusek C (2010) Development of energy harvesting sources for remote applications as mechatronic systems. 14th international power electronics and motion control conference, Ohrid, Macedonia, pp 13–19Google Scholar
  26. Hamraz B, Caldwell NHM, Ridgman TW, Clarkson PJ (2014) FBS Linkage ontology and technique to support engineering change management. Res Eng Des 26:3–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hazelrigg GA (1996) Systems engineering: an approach to information-based design. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  28. Hehenberger P (2014) Perspectives on hierarchical modeling in mechatronic design. Adv Eng Inform 28:188–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hehenberger P, Poltschak F, Zeman K, Amrhein W (2010) Hierarchical design models in the mechatronic product development process of synchronous machines. Mechatronics 20:864–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hoffman D (1990) On criteria for module interfaces. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 16:527–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hofmann D, Kopp M, Bertsche B (2010) Development in mechatronics—enhancing reliability by means of a sustainable use of information. 2010 IEEE/ASME international conference on advanced intelligent mechatronics, Montréal, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  32. ISO (1994) Overview and fundamental principles. ISO, GenevaMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. ISO10303-233 (2012) Industrial automation systems and integration—Product data representation and exchange—Part 233: application protocol: systems engineering. International organization for standardization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  34. Jansen S, Welp EG (2005) Model-based design of actuation concepts: a support for domain allocation in mechatronics. International conference on engineering design (ICED 05), Melbourne, Australia, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  35. Kerzhner AA, Paredis CJJ (2012) A SysML-based language for modeling system-level architecture selection decisions. ASME 2012 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
  36. Kleiner S, Kramer C (2013) Model based design with systems engineering based on RFLP using V6. Proceedings of the 23rd CIRP Design Conference, Bochum, Germany. 11–13 March, pp 93–102Google Scholar
  37. Kolberg E, Reich Y, Levin I (2014) Designing winning robots by careful design of their development process. Res Eng Des 25:157–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Komoto H, Tomiyama T (2011) Multi-disciplinary system decomposition of complex mechatronics systems. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 60:191–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Komoto H, Tomiyama T (2012) A framework for computer-aided conceptual design and its application to system architecting of mechatronics products. Comput Des 44:931–946Google Scholar
  40. Le Duigou J, Bernard A, Perry N (2011) Framework for product lifecycle management integration in small and medium enterprises networks. Comput Aided Des Appl 8:531–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lefèvre J, Charles S, Bosch-Mauchand M, et al (2012) Towards multidisciplinary modeling and simulation: Interoperability issues and challenges for mechatronic engineering. Proceedings of TMCE 2012, Karlsruhe, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  42. Li Q, Zhang WJ, Chen L (2001) Design for control-a concurrent engineering approach for mechatronic systems design. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 6:161–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lock M (2009) Executive dashboards: the key to unlocking double digit profit growth. Aberdeen, ScotlandGoogle Scholar
  44. Nattermann R, Anderl R (2013) The W-model—using systems engineering for adaptronics. Proc Comput Sci 16:937–946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Noël F, Roucoules L (2008) The PPO design model with respect to digital enterprise technologies among product life cycle. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 21:139–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nowak P, Rose B, Saint-Marc L, et al (2004) Towards a design process model enabling the integration of product, process and organisation. 5th international conference on integrated design and manufacturing in mechanical engineering (IDMME’04), Bath, UK, pp 91–103Google Scholar
  47. Object Management Group (2009) Systems modeling language specification. http://www.omg.org/spec/SysML/1.2/PDF/
  48. Pahl G, Beitz W (1988) Engineering design: a systematic approach, 1st edn. The Design Council, LondonGoogle Scholar
  49. Pandikow A, Herzog E, Törne A (2000) Integrating systems and software engineering concepts in AP-233. Proceedings of the 2000 INCOSE Symposium, INCOSE, pp 831–837Google Scholar
  50. Penas O, Plateaux R, Choley J-Y et al (2011) Conception mécatronique—vers un processus continu de conception mécatronique intégrée. Techniques de l'ingénieur BM 8(020):1–23Google Scholar
  51. Pratt MJ (2001) Introduction to ISO 10303—the STEP standard for product data exchange. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 1:102–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Qamar A, Paredis CJJ (2012) Dependency modelling and model management in mechatronic. Proceedings of the ASME 2012 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference (IDETC/CIE 2012), Chicago, USAGoogle Scholar
  53. Sellgren U, Törngren M, Malvius D, Biehl M (2009) PLM for Mechatronics integration. International conference on product lifecycle management, Bath, UK, 6–8 July 2009Google Scholar
  54. Seyff N, Maiden N, Karlsen K et al (2009) Exploring how to use scenarios to discover requirements. Requir Eng 14:91–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shetty D, Kolk RA (2010) Mechatronics system design, SI version. Cengage Learning, BostonGoogle Scholar
  56. Stone R, Wood K (2000) Development of a functional basis for design. J Mech Des 122:359–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tomiyama T, Gu P, Jin Y et al (2009) Design methodologies: industrial and educational applications. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 58:543–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tomizuka M (2002) Mechatronics: from the 20th to 21st century. Control Eng Pract 10:877–886CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Torry-Smith JM, Mortensen NH, Achiche S (2013) A proposal for a classification of product-related dependencies in development of mechatronic products. Res Eng Des 25:53–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Umeda Y, Takeda H, Tomiyama T, Yoshikawa H (1990) Function, behaviour, and structure. Applications of artificial intelligence in engineering V. Computational Mechanics Publications, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 177–193Google Scholar
  61. Umeda Y, Ishii M, Yoshioka M et al (1996) Supporting conceptual design based on the function-behavior-state modeler. Artif Intell Eng Des Anal Manuf 10:275–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Van Beek TJ, Erden MS, Tomiyama T (2010) Modular design of mechatronic systems with function modeling. Mechatronics 20:850–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vasić VS, Lazarević MP (2008) Standard industrial guideline for mechatronic product design. FME Trans 36:103–108Google Scholar
  64. VDI 2206 (2003) Design handbook 2206. Design methodology for mechatronic systems. VDI Publishing Group, DüsseldorfGoogle Scholar
  65. Weber C (2005) CPM/PDD—An extended theoretical approach to modelling products and product development processes. 2nd German Israeli symposium on advances in methods and systems for development of products and processes, Stuttgart, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  66. Weber C (2014) Modelling products and product development based on characteristics and properties. An anthology of theories and models of design. Springer, London, pp 327–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zha XF, Fenves SJ, Sriram RD (2005) A feature-based approach to embedded system hardware and software co-design. ASME design engineering technical conference, Long BeachGoogle Scholar
  68. Zheng C, Bricogne M, Le Duigou J, Eynard B (2014) Survey on mechatronic engineering: a focus on design methods and product models. Adv Eng Inform 28:241–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zheng C, Le Duigou J, Bricogne M, Eynard B (2015a) Multidisciplinary interface modelling: a case study on the design of 3D measurement system. 12th international conference on product lifecycle management, Doha, QatarGoogle Scholar
  70. Zheng C, Le Duigou J, Bricogne M, Eynard B (2015b) Design process for complex systems engineering based on interface model. Incose Insight 18:22–24Google Scholar
  71. Zheng C, Le Duigou J, Bricogne M, Eynard B (2016) Multidisciplinary interface model for design of mechatronic systems. Comput Ind 76:24–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Systems EngineeringUniversité de Technologie de Compiègne, Sorbonne UniversitésCompiègne CedexFrance
  2. 2.Institute of Mechatronic Design and ProductionJohannes Kepler UniversityLinzAustria

Personalised recommendations