Advertisement

Comparative Study of Model-Based and Multi-Domain System Engineering Approaches for Industrial Settings

  • Anjelika Votintseva
  • Petra Witschel
  • Nikolaus Regnat
  • Philipp Emanuel Stelzig
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7349)

Abstract

A typical approach for the development of multi-domain systems often carries the risk of high non-conformance costs and time-consuming re-engineering due to the lack of interoperability between different domains. In its research project “Mechatronic Design”, the Siemens AG develops an integrated, model-based and simulation-focused process to perform a frontloading engineering approach for multi-domain systems.

The paper presents two use cases from this project as two implementation approaches to system modeling and simulation being synchronized at early design phases. Both use cases utilize the standardized system modeling language SysML and the multi-domain simulation language Modelica. One use case evaluates the standardized OMG SysML4Modelica profile for transformation between SysML and Modelica. The other use case uses a Modelica independent and proprietary profile aiming at more flexible usage. For both approaches, advantages and disadvantages are identified and compared. Depending on the project objectives, the general suitability of the approaches is also judged.

Keywords

model-based system engineering simulation multi-domain systems SysML Modelica comparative study industrial use cases 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE): Systems Engineering Vision 2020, Document No. INCOSE-TP-2004-004-02, Version 2.03 (2007), http://www.incose.org/ProductsPubs/pdf/SEVision2020_20071003_v2_03.pdf
  2. 2.
    Object Management Group: OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysML), V.1.2, OMG formal specification formal/2010-06-02 (June 2010), http://www.sysml.org/docs/specs/OMGSysML-v1.2-10-06-02.pdf
  3. 3.
    Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language: Superstructure, V.2.3, formal/2010-05-05 (2010), http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/2.3/
  4. 4.
    Fritzson, P.A.: Principles of object-oriented modeling and simulation with Modelica 2.1. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schamai, W., Fritzson, P.: Paredis, C., Pop, P.: Towards Unified System Modeling and Simulation with ModelicaML: Modeling of Executable Behavior Using Graphical Notations. In: Proc. of the 7th Modelica Conference, Como, Italy, September 20-22 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Paredis, C., et al.: An Overview of the SysML-Modelica Transformation Specification. In: Proc. of the 20th Anniversary INCOSE Int. Symp., Chicago, IL, July 12-15 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thramboulidis, K.: Model Integrated Mechatronics – Towards a new paradigm in the development of manufacturing systems. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics 1(1) (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Enge-Rosenblatt, O., et al.: Functional Digital Mock-Up and the Functional Mock-up Interface – Two Complementary Approaches for a Comprehensive Investigation of Heterogeneous Systems. In: Proc. of the 8th Int. Modelica Conference (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Votintseva, A., Witschel, P., Goedecke, A.: Analysis of a Complex System for Electrical Mobility Using a Model-Based Engineering Approach Focusing on Simulation. Procedia Computer Science 6, 57–62 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anjelika Votintseva
    • 1
  • Petra Witschel
    • 1
  • Nikolaus Regnat
    • 1
  • Philipp Emanuel Stelzig
    • 1
  1. 1.Siemens AGMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations