1 research topics & initial mapping plm focus areas git activities plm center of excellence ...

18
1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence http://www.marc.gatech.edu/plm/ Georgia Institute of Technology Document Contacts: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] February 5, 2004

Upload: irene-booker

Post on 13-Jan-2016

222 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

1

Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas GIT Activities

PLM Center of Excellencehttp://www.marc.gatech.edu/plm/Georgia Institute of Technology

Document Contacts:[email protected]@me.gatech.edu

[email protected]@marc.gatech.edu

February 5, 2004

Page 2: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

2

Sample GIT PLM-Related Activities

PLM

Marketing/SalesCollaboration

Customer Requirements

DesignConceptDevelopment

Production& Testing

Maintenance& Support

PortfolioPlanning

Design Collaboration

Manufacturing Collaboration

Services Collaboration

Customer Feedback

Partners Other Enterprise Locations

Suppliers

Market Planning

Design Definition

Design Change Management

Component Management

PLM Collaborative Foundation

Cu

sto

mer

s

Cu

sto

mer

s

Sales & Distribution

B2B integration

MarketingStrategy

DesignRepositories

Change Mgt. in Product Model

Databases

Virtual Factories

Robust Design Simulation

Collaborative Design Optimization

Aircraft Lifecycle Support Product Family

Design

Collaborative Visualization

Environments

Standards for Systems Engineering

Lean Principles

Composable Simulations

Design-Analysis Integration

Strategic Design

Factory Information

Systems

Source: IBM PLM definition slide at PDES Inc. Board Mtg. 2003-11

Engineering Knowledge

RepresentationDesign-Supply ChainProcess Integration

IE: McGinnis

CoC: Rossignac

AE: Mavris

MARC: Dugenske

Arch: Eastman

ME: Fulton

MARC: Peak

Mgt: Malhotra

ME: Paredis

AE: Schrage

ME: Mistree

Page 3: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

3

PLM Focus Areas Addressing Top Industry Pain Points

Man

age

Man

age

Op

erat

ion

s O

per

atio

ns

& S

yste

ms

& S

yste

ms

Red

esig

n

Red

esig

n

Pro

cess

esP

roce

sses

Inst

all S

W

Inst

all S

W

and

an

d

Sys

tem

sS

yste

ms

PLM Integration / Collaboration Framework & Asset Portfolio

• Build integration tools assets and processes

Component, PlatformAsset Commonality

• Reuse parts and systems across products

Extended Enterprise Product Change Management

• Integrate changes across value chain

Product DevelopmentInfrastructure Outsourcing

• Manage & maintain PLM applications and infrastructure

Product Innovation Management

• Manage balanced product development investment portfolio

Virtual Product Innovation

• Design & test products, production, services online

Service After Sales

• Support products after sales

Business Process Outsourcing

• Outsource design of products and subsystems

ConceptConceptDevelopmentDevelopment

ProductionProduction& Testing& Testing

MaintenanceMaintenance& Support& Support

PortfolioPortfolioPlanningPlanning

DesignDesignSales & Sales &

DistributionDistribution

Source: IBM slides at PDES Inc. Board Mtg. 2003-11

Page 4: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

4

Mapping PLM Focus Areas GIT Activities - p1

Product Innovation Management Strategic design (Mistree) IPPD and PLM integration (Schrage, Hart) Marketing strategies over the product life-cycle (Malhotra)

Component, Platform and Asset Commonality Product family design (Rosen, Mistree) Design repositories (Paredis, Eastman ) Domain-oriented product access and management (Eastman) Lean principles (Schrage) Adoption and continued use of products and technologies (Malhotra)

Extended Enterprise Product Change Management Course: Interactive Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design

(Fulton, Sitaraman, Dennis) Course: Intro to PLM (Schrage, Hart) Engineering knowledge representation & info. systems (Peak, Fulton) Change management in product model databases (Eastman)

(and related faculty)

Page 5: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

5

Mapping PLM Focus Areas GIT Activities - p2

Virtual Product Introduction Course: Design and Engineering Database Management

(Fulton, Eastman, Peak) Course: Modeling and Simulation in Design (Paredis, Peak) Design-analysis integration (Peak) Standards for systems engineering (Peak, Paredis) Decision-based design (Mistree, Allen) Designing open processes (Mistree) Composable simulations (Paredis) Virtual factories (McGinnis, Bodner) Factory information Systems (Dugenske) Robust design simulation (Mavris) Collaborative visualization environments (Mavris) Collaborative design optimization (Olds and Braun) Visualization and human computer interaction (Rossignac)

Page 6: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

6

Mapping PLM Focus Areas GIT Activities - p3

Service after Sales Aircraft lifecycle support (Schrage)

Manage Operations & Systems Course: Aerospace Systems Engineering (Schrage) Domain specific parametric tool specification and

procurement (Eastman) Integrating design chain processes with supply chain

processes (Mistree) Standards-based engineering frameworks (Peak)

Page 7: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

7

Quad Charts for Sample Research Topics

PLM Center of Excellencehttp://www.marc.gatech.edu/plm/Georgia Institute of Technology

Page 8: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

8

Next-Gen. PLM with Fine-Grained Interoperability

Domain

Abs

trac

tion

Leve

l

Req

uire

men

ts

Str

uctu

res

Ele

ctro

nics

Hum

an

Inte

ract

ion

Systems Engineering

Models of varied abstractions and domains

Legend

Model interfaces:Associativities among domain-specific models & system-level models

Dev

elop

men

t Pro

cess

Fine-grained models: Information objects Parametric relations

After Bajaj, Peak, & Waterbury2003-09

Customer Needs /Acquisitions…

Page 9: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

Hierarchic Market Space Definition and Exploration

Student: Christopher Williams Faculty: Farrokh Mistree, Janet K. Allen

Objectives Contributions & Benefits

Background Resources, Status, Publications, etc.

• To develop formal, mathematically correct, and rigorous principles for designing product architectures that facilitate the production of customized products.

• Determine an optimal arrangement of product variety techniques that link all points in the market space in order to satisfy any customer demand so that cost is minimized.

Sequencing modes of managing product variety• How can a designer synthesize multiple modes of managing product variety in

order to realize a customized product?• How does the designer select which mode to use first? What sequence will

provide the most affordable coverage of the market space at a high quality?Dealing with non-uniform demand• How does the arrangement of the hierarchy change as demand is non-uniform?• Can this question be answered without using varying sized constructs?• Will this affect the sequencing of the modes of managing product variety?

• Provision of manufacturing firms an efficient (through rigorous and systematic methodology) foundation for realizing customized products, thus enhancing the responsiveness of manufacturing organizations to changes in the market or demands for customization.

Williams, C. B., Panchal, J., Rosen, D. W., 2003, “A General Decision-Making Method for the Rapid Manufacturing of Customized Parts,” accepted by the 23rd Conference on Computers and Information in Engineering, ASME, September 2-6, Chicago, Illinois.

Carone, M. J., Williams, C.B., Allen, J. K., and Mistree, F., 2003, “An Application of Constructal Theory in the Multi-Objective Design of Product Platforms,” accepted by the 15th International Conference on Design Theory and Methodology, ASME, September 2-6, Chicago, Illinois.

Hernandez, G., Williams, C. B., Allen, J.K., Mistree, F., “Design of Platforms for Customizable Products as a Problem of Access in a Geometric Space,” Journal of Mechanical Design, Submitted.

Hernandez, G., Allen, J.K., and Mistree, F. 2002, “Design of Hierarchic Platforms for Customizable Products,” ASME Design Automation Conference, Montreal, Canada, DETC2002/DAC-34095.

Hernandez, Gabriel, 2001, “Platform Design for Customizable Products as a Problem of Access in a Geometric Space,” Ph.D. Dissertation, George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.

Constructal Theory• The hierarchic structures (tree networks) that we observe in natural and

artificial systems are the “fingerprint” of the minimization of flow resistance between a finite volume and one point.

• An access problem can be solved through the optimization of the shape of the smallest, inner-most space elements and the hierarchic assembly of these elements into larger “constructs” until covering the entire geometric space.

• The abstraction of a space of customization as a geometric space in need of access optimization, allows a designer to effectively develop a product architecture for customized products.

Scholarship

Industry

V [m3]

10 30

10

30

P [MPa]20

30

V [m3]

P1

20 3010

10

V1

P2P [MPa]

V3

L

R

Th Ts

S 3 S 4 S 5 S 6

S 2

T im e , C o m p le x ity , E v o lu tio n

H1

L1

P(x,y).V0

V1

D1

S1

y

xE

The Smallest Area, S1

• SRL Knowledge Base• X-DPR, iSIGHT, Matlab, Concurrent Versioning System (CVS)

• Nearing completion of MS Research• Adaptation to the development of a process family• Consideration of non-uniform demand, risk and uncertainty

Status

Resources

Publications

Page 10: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

Strategic Design

Student: Matthew Chamberlain Faculty: Farrokh Mistree

Contributions & BenefitsScholarship• Effective tools for creating representations of n-dimensional market spaces and

design capabilities• Systematic approaches for designing families of products that can evolve and

accommodate change and innovation and a systematic tool for choosing between multiple available approaches

• Methods for forecasting and characterizing the impact of innovation on a feasible space in a manner meaningful to the design process

Industry• Computing, information, and decision frameworks for coordinating distributed

decision makers carrying out strategic design• Methods for linking market and design capability forecasts to design decisions

and plans for product portfolios

Tasks• Strategic product planning techniques for forecasting dynamic requirements and

technological capabilities and for assessing the potential impact of innovation on complex products and processes.

• Product variety design techniques for leveraging and adapting existing products.• Decision support techniques that are formal, rigorous, and flexible, and account for

uncertainty• Coordination mechanisms for multiple agents in product development activities• Flexible computing and information infrastructures for effective distributed design

Resources• One student.

Publications• Seepersad, C. C., F. S. Cowan, M. K. Chamberlain and F. Mistree, 2002,

"Strategic Design: Leveraging and Innovation for a Changing Marketplace," Engineering Design Conference, King's College, London, pp. 3-20.

• Chamberlain, M. K., 2002, “A Step Towards Web-Based Strategic Design,” MS Thesis, G.W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.

BackgroundStrategic Design is a comprehensive approach for designing products and processes that efficiently and effectively accommodate…

•changing markets and associated customer requirements•technological innovations

… In a collaborative, distributed environment

Property A

Pro

pert

y B

x

AvailableTechnology

Future Technology

Expanded Technology

Property A

Pro

pert

y B

x

AvailableTechnology

Future Technology

Expanded Technology

Objectives• To establish a method for allowing distributed designers to collaborate

on the design of products while taking into account:•Changes in market trends•Changes in the capabilities of existing technologies•New or evolving technologies

• To develop a number of new techniques that would be parts of a strategic design method, including:

•N-dimensional market visualization techniques•Innovation modeling and early technology impact forecasting methods

• To develop a plan for coordinating the many disparate methods that would make up strategic design as well as a logic for choosing between different modes of managing product variety

Page 11: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

Objectives Contributions & Benefits

Background Collaboration Needed

References

Development of• A method for Integrated Design of Products and Design Processes• Computational model of design processes in the form of a design equation• Quantitative metrics for openness of products and processes• Method for synthesizing design processes• Application to design of materials

• Means for improvement of design processes• Systematic method for configuring design chains• Design knowledge reuse in an organization• Tools for modeling and reconfiguring design processes• A new dimension to the design information management and reuse

Design Equation: K = T (I)

Scope

Pro

ce

ss

De

tail

Bottom up

Top down

Design process at various levels

[1] B. A. Bras, "Designing Design Processes for Decision-Based Concurrent Engineering," presented at CERC's First Workshop on Product Development, Process Modeling and Characterization, Morgantown, West-Virginia, 1992.[2] F. Mistree, W. F. Smith, B. Bras, J. K. Allen, and D. Muster, "Decision-Based Design: A Contemporary Paradigm for Ship Design," in Transactions, Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, vol. 98. Jersey City, New Jersey, 1990, pp. 565-597.[3] D. Muster and F. Mistree, "The Decision Support Problem Technique in Engineering Design," International Journal of Applied Engineering Education, vol. 4, pp. 23-33, 1988.

Decision Based Design

Decision Support Problem (DSP) Technique

2 PhD StudentsStudent 1: Development of method for Integrated Design of Products and Design ProcessesStudent 2: Application of the method to design of materials

Student: Jitesh H. Panchal Faculty: Farrokh Mistree, Janet K. Allen

Design Process, Information, and Knowledge Management in Distributed, Collaborative Design

Page 12: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

A Decision Support Framework (DSF) for Distributed Collaborative Design and Manufacture

(DCDM)Student: Marco Gero Fernández Faculty : Farrokh Mistree and Janet K. Allen

Objectives Contributions & Benefits

Background

Resources, Status, Publications, etc.

• Develop and commercialize a Decision Support Framework (DSF) for Distributed Collaborative Design and Manufacture (DCDM), where decision support refers to the cumulative means of modeling, structuring, and negotiation solutions to decisions and any of their interactions.

• Provide a consistent mechanism for supporting designers in their capacity as decision-makers. The fundamental goals are to (1) manage the design process, (2) facilitate the collaboration of stakeholders, and (3) effectively share information.

• Effectively structure design processes and properly reflect decision critical information and any dependencies.

• This research will expand upon a substantial knowledge base in Decision Based Design, design theory, and decision theory that has evolved in the Systems Realization Laboratory (SRL) since its establishment in 1992.

• It is the nature and types of decisions, implemented that determine the progress of a design

• Decisions in all stages of engineering design depend on scientific, factual information as well as empirical, experience-based knowledge, designer preferences, and uncertainty.

• There is a need to propagate decision-critical, up-to-date information alongside design knowledge for both sequential and concurrent design tasks, particularly for dependent and interdependent decisions that cannot be made in isolation.

• Emphasis is placed on development of theory, creation of domain independent constructs for characterizing and modeling decisions, and formalization of interactions among distributed design agents via digital interfaces

• Development of logic for design process reconfiguration and investigation of strategic decision-making/resource allocation

• Facilitation of strategic decision-making from a systems perspective and enhancement of design process reconfiguration with regard to flexibility, efficiency, and effectiveness.

• Enablement of companies to trace errors to their origins within a given design chain and allow for remediation through dynamic design modification and/or process reconfiguration

Fundamental Assertions

Designer #1 Designer #2 Designer #3 Designer #4

ELECTRICALENGINEERING

THERMALENGINEERING

LedgerResource $Activity $Total $

LedgerResource $Activity $Total $

STRUCTURALENGINEERING

ECONOMICS+- i

C

L

R

V

k

T1 T2Q

h

w

Designer #1 Designer #2 Designer #3 Designer #4Designer #1 Designer #2 Designer #3 Designer #4

ELECTRICALENGINEERING

THERMALENGINEERING

LedgerResource $Activity $Total $

LedgerResource $Activity $Total $

STRUCTURALENGINEERING

ECONOMICS+- i

C

L

R

V

k

T1 T2Q

h

w

ELECTRICALENGINEERING

THERMALENGINEERING

LedgerResource $Activity $Total $

LedgerResource $Activity $Total $

LedgerResource $Activity $Total $

LedgerResource $Activity $Total $

STRUCTURALENGINEERING

ECONOMICS+- i

C

L

R

V+- i

C

L

R

V+- i

C

L

R

V

k

T1 T2Q

k

T1 T2Q

h

w

h

w

• SRL Knowledge Base• X-DPR, iSIGHT, Web Board, Concurrent Versioning System (CVS)

• Completion of MS Research, Development of Decision Constructs and Information Model required for DSF

• Active consideration/infusion of Risk and Uncertainty into decision-making

Fernández, M.G., D.W. Rosen, J.K. Allen, and F. Mistree (2002). “A Decision Support Framework for Distributed Collaborative Design and Manufacture”. 9th AIAA/ISSMO Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization, Atlanta, GA, AIAA-4881.Others available upon request.

Publications

Status

Resources

Scholarship

Industry

The Role of Decisions throughout the Design Process…

The Role of Decisions throughout the Design Process…

The Strategic Reduction of Design Freedom through Decisions…

The Strategic Reduction of Design Freedom through Decisions…

Page 13: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

15 Students Faculty: Wayne Book, Mark Allen, Imme Ebert-Uphoff, Ari Glezer, David Rosen, Jarek Rossignac

Background

Define state-of-the-art in haptics (force-based) computer interaction. Greatly impact distributed collaboration when shape must be

communicated. Potentially, impact the ability for visually impaired people to interact

with computers. Significantly impact technology in hydraulics, controls, kinematics,

manufacturing, and human-computer interface areas.

Contributions & BenefitsObjectives Develop an interactive, 3-D haptic computer input/output device.

Specifically, the device will enable:• Shape input through a “sculpting” interaction mode• Shape display of a computer model (e.g. CAD model)• Stiffness (“feel”) display of shapes with various material

properties. Demonstrate the digital clay device on a variety of mechanical and

architectural shape design applications, distributed collaboration, and dynamic simulations.

Hydraulics will be used for actuation and sensing. A formable skin will comprises the bulk and shape of the “clay”

device. The skin will have inflatable bladders to enable the skin to change shape and to sense user forces.

Stereolithography used to fabricate skin and clay structure. MEMS technologies will be utilized to fabricate array of pressure

sensors and valves in device backplane. Human-computer interface studies will determine appropriate

methods of interaction with clay devices.

Collaboration Needed 1 student to develop digital clay prototypes and test them in

mechanical design applications. Materials and supplies to construct digital clay prototypes.

References Bosscher, P. and Ebert-Uphoff, I., “Digital Clay: Architecture Designs for Shape-

Generating Mechanisms,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Conference, 2003. Rosen, D.W., Nguyen, A., and Wang, H., “On the Geometry of Low Degree-of-

Freedom Digital Clay Human-Computer Interface Devices,” Proceedings ASME CIE Conference, paper DETC2003-48295, Chicago, Sept. 2-6, 2003.

Zhu, H. and Book, W.J. “Control Concepts for Digital Clay,” 7th Annual International Symposium on Robot Control: SyRoCo 2003, Sept. 1-3, 2003, Wroclaw, Poland.

Supported by 5 year NSF grant.

Digital Clay for Shape Input and Display

Page 14: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

Constrained Objects: A Knowledge Representation for Design, Analysis, and Systems Engineering Interoperability

Students: Manas Bajaj, Injoong Kim, Greg Mocko Faculty: Russell Peak

Approach & StatusApproach

Extend and apply the constrained object (COB) representation and related methodology based on positive results to date

Expand within international efforts like the OMG UML for Systems Engineering work to broaden applicability and impact

Status Current generation capabilities have been successfully

demonstrated in diverse environments (circuit boards, electronic chip packages, airframes) with sponsors including NASA, Rockwell Collins, Shinko (a major supplier to Intel), and Boeing.

Templates for chip package thermal analysis are in production usage at Shinko with over 75% reduction in modeling effort (deformation/stress templates are soon to follow)

Objectives Develop better methods of capturing engineering knowledge that :

Are independent of vendor-specific CAD/CAE/SE tools Support both easy-to-use human-sensible views and robust computer-sensible formulations in a unified manner Handle a diversity of product domains, simulation disciplines, solution methods, and leverage disparate vendor tools

Apply these capabilities in a variety of sponsor-relevant test scenarios: Proposed candidates are templates and custom capabilities for design, analysis, and systems engineering

Contributions & BenefitsTo Scholarship Develop richer understanding of modeling

(including idealizations and multiple levels of abstraction) and representation methods

To Industry Better designs via increased analysis intensity Increased automation and model consistency Increased modularity and reusability Increased corporate memory

via better knowledge capture

Additional Information:

1. http://eislab.gatech.edu/projects/

2. Response to OMG UML for Systems Engineering RFI:http://eislab.gatech.edu/tmp/omg-se-33e/

3. Characterizing Fine-Grained Associativity Gaps: A Preliminary Study of CAD-E Model Interoperabilityhttp://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/conferences/2003-asme-detc-cie-peak/

Collaboration Needed Support for 1-3 students

depending on project scope Sponsor involvement to

provide domain knowledge and facilitate pilot usage

d i a g o n a l b r a c e l u g j o i n tj = t o p

0 . 7 5 0 0 i n

0 . 3 5 i n

0 . 7 5 0 0 i n

1 . 6 0 0 0 i n

2

0 . 7 4 3 3

1 4 . 6 8 6 K

2 . 4 0

4 . 3 1 7 K

8 . 6 3 3 K

k = n o r m

M a x . t o r q u e b r a k e s e t t i n gd e t e n t 3 0 , 2 = 3 . 5 º

7 0 5 0 - T 7 4 5 2 , M S 7 - 2 1 4

6 7 K s i

L 2 9 - 3 0 0

O u t b o a r d T E F l a p , S u p p o r t N o 2 ;I n b o a r d B e a m , 1 2 3 L 4 5 6 7

D i a g o n a l B r a c e L u g J o i n t

P r o g r a m

P a r t

F e a t u r e

L u g J o i n tA x i a l U l t i m a t e S t r e n g t h M o d e l

T e m p l a t e

j = t o p l u gk = n o r m a l d i a m e t e r ( 1 o f 4 )

D a t a s e t

m a t e r i a l

d e f o r m a t i o n m o d e l

m a x a l l o w a b l e u l t i m a t e s t r e s s , F t u L

e f f e c t i v e w i d t h , W

a n a l y s i s c o n t e x t

o b j e c t i v e

m o d e ( u l t i m a t e s t a t i c s t r e n g t h )

c o n d i t i o n

e s t i m a t e d a x i a l u l t i m a t e s t r e n g t h

M a r g i n o f S a f e t y( > c a s e )

a l l o w a b l e

a c t u a l

M S

n o r m a l d i a m e t e r , D n o r m

t h i c k n e s s , t

e d g e m a r g i n , e

P l u g j o i n t

s i z e , n

l u g s

l u g j h o l e

d i a m e t e r s

p r o d u c t s t r u c t u r e ( l u g j o i n t )

r 1

n

P jointlug

L [ j : 1 , n ]

P l u g

L [ k ]D k

o v e r s i z e d i a m e t e r , D o v e rD

P a x uW

e

t

F t u a x

K a x u

L u g A x i a l U l t i m a t eS t r e n g t h M o d e l

D M 6 6 3 0

S o l u t i o n T o o l I n t e r a c t i o n

B o u n d a r y C o n d i t i o n O b j e c t s( l i n k s t o o t h e r a n a l y s e s )

C A D - C A E A s s o c i a t i v i t y ( i d e a l i z a t i o n u s a g e )

M a t e r i a l M o d e l s

M o d e l - b a s e d D o c u m e n t a t i o n

G e o m e t r y

P KW

DD t Fa x u a x u t u a x ( )1

R e q u i r e m e n t s

Constrained Object (COB) Formulations

COB-based Airframe Analysis Template

Chip Package Stress Analysis Template

Cu(0.15)BT-Resin (0.135)

0.56

(Air)

(0.135)

Al Fin (1.5)Adhesive(0.05)

Subsystem-S

Object Relationship Diagram-S

COB StructureDefinition Language

(COS)

I/O Table-S

Constraint Graph-S

Constraint Schematic-S

STEPExpress

Express-GXML UML

Page 15: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

Composable Simulations: Model Archiving and Reuse for Systems DesignStudents: Rich Malak, Tarun Rathnam, Steve Rekuc Faculty: Chris Paredis

Approach & StatusApproach Semantically rich product representations in OWL (Web

Ontology Language); combined with object-oriented simulation models in Modelica

Define and populate a repository of components and models to demonstrate reuse and composition

Investigate the compatibility, composability, and accuracy of models and model configurations.

Status We have demonstrated the concept of composable

simulations for satellite systems (with Lockheed-Martin) and for transportation systems (with Bombardier).

We have implemented an initial software prototype, COINSIDE: Composition in Simulation and Design.

Shaft-PulleyInteraction

Pulley

Bolt_4

Component Configuration

Mo

del

s

PulleyACMotor

Wire_1Wire_2Wire_1

Bolt_1

Bolt_3

Bolt_2

ShaftPort

BeltPort

Pulley

Stator Port

RotorPort

110V ACPort

AC MotorBeltPort

Stator Port

Co

nfi

gu

rati

on

Shaft-PulleyInteraction

Pulley

Bolt_4

Component Configuration

Mo

del

s

PulleyACMotor

Wire_1Wire_2Wire_1

Bolt_1

Bolt_3

Bolt_2

ShaftPort

BeltPort

Pulley

Stator Port

RotorPort

110V ACPort

AC MotorBeltPort

Stator Port

Co

nfi

gu

rati

on

Objectives Develop integrated representations for multi-disciplinary products

and their corresponding behavioral models

Develop algorithms for reusing and composing simulation models of individual components into models for entire systems

Characterize the validity and accuracy of simulation models at multiple levels of abstraction

Support the seamless transition between models at multiple levels of abstraction while progressing through the design process

Contributions & BenefitsTo Scholarship Develop understanding of the relationship between configuration of

components and configuration of simulation models Create ontology for ports (locations of intended interaction) and artifacts Develop understanding of validity and accuracy of models to enable reuseTo Industry Faster and broader exploration of design space Capture history of design exploration and analyses Save resources by reusing validated simulation models

Additional InfoC.J.J. Paredis, A. Diaz-Calderon, R. Sinha, and P.K. Khosla, "Composable Models for Simulation-Based Design", Engineering with Computers. Vol. 17, pp. 112-128, 2001. (http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~paredis/pubs/EWC01.pdf)

Collaboration Needed Support for 1-2 students

depending on scope of study

Engineering support to provide application domain knowledge for example study.

COINSIDE framework:Composition in Simulation and Design

Composition of port-based objectsallows for automatic composition of thecorresponding simulation andCAD models

http://srl.marc.gatech.edu/people/paredis/

Page 16: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

Students: Jin-Young Choi, Nan Li Faculty: Leon McGinnis

Approach & StatusApproach

Use HLA to support distributed simulation, using legacy models where necessary

Develop general purpose simulation models for warehouses and transportation

Develop supply chain manager modelsStatus

First generation distributed simulation demonstrated, using factory models at SimTech, and warehouse and transportation models at Georgia Tech

Ongoing development of generic warehouse, transportation and supply chain manager models

Objectives Develop distributed simulation testbed for analyzing global supply

chains, including factories, warehouses, transportation

Use the distributed simulation testbed to investigate alternative designs, planning methods, and supply chain management methods

Contributions & BenefitsTo Scholarship

Testbed for evaluating proposed supply chain planning/management methods

To Industry Tools that permit collaboration between supply chain partners to

analyze/design the supply chain without revealing proprietary data

Additional InfoThis project has been conducted in collaboration with SimTech, the Singapore Institute for Manufacturing Technology

Collaboration Needed Demonstration case study

Development and evaluation of specific supply chain planning and/or management methods

Integrating existing legacy models to permit supply chain analysis

School of Industrial and Systems Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA 30332-0205 http:/ / factory.isye.gatech.edu

Supply Chain Design and Analysis Testbed

Page 17: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

Students: 5 PhD students Faculty: L. McGinnis, C. Zhou, S. Reveliotis

Approach & StatusApproach

Object oriented Separation of process and control Explicit material handling Java, HLA

Status Third generation toolkit Currently testing against Sematech 300mm model

Objectives Develop a new generation of factory modeling tools that:

Support high fidelity description of factory resources and operations

Are based on concepts that map one-to-one with factory entities

Enable abstraction to support more aggregate models and analyses

Demonstrate new tools in semiconductor wafer fabs

ContributionsTo Scholarship

Comprehensive reference model for semiconductor fabrication operations

Testbed for exploring alternative factory designs, alternative scheduling and control methods

To Industry Testbed for evaluating proposed factory designs or factory planning and

control strategies

Additional Infohttp://factory.isye.gatech.edu/vfl/research/hifive.php

For interim status report, presentations, and demonstrations

Collaboration Needed Demonstration case studies of specific fabs

Evaluation of through-stocker versus point-to-point AMHS

Linking factory operations models with “real” factory control software to create a “virtual” factory

Runtime InfrastructureInterface

Lot ReleaseController

InterBay MHSController

Bay 1Controller

IntraBay MHSController

Distributed Simulation ModelDistributed Simulation Models

SimulationExecution Architecture

IntegratedAnimator

Database

Virtual operational data set

Fab model

Fab DesignerScheduler

DesignFab model

Fab Design Architecture

Fab Model,Equipment Lib,Product Lib,Operation Data Set Output

Analyzeroperational data set

Data Analysis Architecture

Federates

Federa

tion

Runtime InfrastructureInterface

Lot ReleaseController

InterBay MHSController

Bay 1Controller

IntraBay MHSController

Distributed Simulation ModelDistributed Simulation Models

SimulationExecution Architecture

IntegratedAnimator

Database

Virtual operational data set

Fab model

Fab DesignerScheduler

DesignFab model

Fab Design Architecture

Fab Model,Equipment Lib,Product Lib,Operation Data Set Output

Analyzeroperational data set

Data Analysis Architecture

Federates

Federa

tion

School of Industrial and Systems Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA 30332-0205 http:/ / factory.isye.gatech.edu

High Fidelity Factory Modeling

Page 18: 1 Research Topics & Initial Mapping PLM Focus Areas  GIT Activities PLM Center of Excellence  Georgia Institute of Technology

18

GIT Contacts & Departments

AbbreviationsAE School of Aerospace EngineeringCoA College of ArchitectureCoC College of ComputingCoM College of ManagementCoE College of Engineering CEE School of Civil and Environmental EngineeringECE School of Electrical and Computing EngineeringECS Engineering Computing Services (campus CAx services - under GIT CoE)ISyE School of Industrial and Systems EngineeringMARC Manufacturing Research CenterME School of Mechanical Engineering (includes Nuclear and Health Physics)OIP Office of Interdisciplinary ProgramsPTFE School of Polymer, Textile & Fiber Engineering

ASDL Aerospace Systems Design LabCBAR Center for Board Assembly ResearchEIS Lab Engineering Information Systems LabFIS Group Factory Information Systems GroupMISL MARC Information Systems LabPLMCC Product Lifecycle Management Center of CompetencePLM CoE Product Lifecycle Management Center of ExcellenceRPMI Rapid Prototyping & Manufacturing InstituteSRL Systems Realization Lab

GIT Organization Chartshttp://www.provost.gatech.edu/flowchart.html

Be aware that CoE has two meanings above: Center of Excellence and College of Engineering

Unit Dept. First Name Last Name Titles

Admin - Dr. Charles Liotta Vice Provost for Research and Dean of Graduate Studies

OIP MARC Dr. Steve Danyluk MARC Director, Prof. and Bryan Chair in ME

OIP MARC Mr. Andy Dugenske Senior ResearcherOIP MARC Dr. Russell Peak Senior Researcher

CoA - Dr. Chuck Eastman Director, PhD Program and Professor

CoC GVU Dr. Jarek Rossignac Professor

CoE - Dr. Narl Davidson Associate DeanCoE ECS Mr. Tord Dennis Research Engineer ICoE ECS Ms. Sandra Pierotti Manager, ECS

CoE AE Mr. Pete Hart Research Engineer ICoE AE Dr. Dimitri Mavris ProfessorCoE AE Dr. Dan Schrage Professor

CoE ISyE Dr. Leon McGinnis Professor

CoE ME Dr. Bob Fulton ProfessorCoE ME Dr. Farrokh Mistree ProfessorCoE ME Dr. Chris Paredis Assistant ProfessorCoE ME Dr. Dave Rosen ProfessorCoE ME Dr. Suresh Sitaraman Associate Professor

CoM - Dr. Naresh Malhotra Regents Professor