Development of a concurrent engineering tutorial as part of the “ESA_Lab@” initiative

As part of the “ESA_Lab@" initiative, a Concurrent Engineering facility has been constructed at the Mechanical Engineering department of Technical University Darmstadt. Concurrent Engineering is a well-proven concept for designing complex space systems and missions in the pre-phase 0/A mission phase. The Concurrent Engineering methodology and processes are enabled by a multidisciplinary team and specific infrastructure in terms of both hardware and software, which generate an effective and time efficient design management system. The university’s “Concurrent Engineering Lab” provides an environment for both researchers and students to explore and apply the Concurrent Engineering approach in areas such as (model-based) systems engineering, Industry 4.0/ Space 4.0, and space traffic management. Furthermore, collaboration with the European Space Operations Centre – also located in Darmstadt – regarding the application of Concurrent Engineering for Ground Segment & Operations has been started. The first addition to the university’s curriculum centered around the Concurrent Engineering Lab will be a “Concurrent Engineering Tutorial”, an opportunity to introduce the Concurrent Engineering methods and tools via hands-on experience to students of the newly established master’s degree program “Aerospace Engineering”. “Tutorials” are elective block courses of the degree program which offer practical learning experiences in many different fields, awarding 4 credit points upon successful completion. Building on the lectures "Fundamentals of Space Systems" and "Space Systems and Space Operations", the week-long “Concurrent Engineering Tutorial” will challenge students to use their acquired knowledge to develop a preliminary design for a predefined CubeSat mission. This Tutorial will not only provide a closer understanding of the individual subsystems of the space segment of a mission, the Concurrent Engineering process and the relevant software “COMET” by RHEA Group but will also create a synergy with a student association of the university, as one of their projects is the development of a CubeSat. This paper describes the background and approach to the development of the Tutorial, in particular the structure of the re-usable model architecture in “COMET”, which was specifically derived and implemented for this purpose and validated via a pilot stud

Interoperability between Cooperative Design Modeller and a CAD System: Software Integration versus Data Exchange

The data exchange between Computer-Aided Design (CAD) systems is a crucial issue in concurrent engineering and collaborative design. The paper presents research works and techniques dealing with the interoperability of a Cooperative Design Modeller (CoDeMo), aiming at the integration of product lifecycle knowledge, and a commercial CAD system (CATIA V5). Two kinds of approaches are implemented in the considered case of CAD interoperability for exchanging geometric data, respectively: one is based on a traditional static interface, in which STEP AP203 standard is used; the other is based on a dynamic interface, in which Application Programming Interfaces (API) of the targeted CAD system is adopted. Both approaches should enhance the communication, exchange and sharing of product data between CAD systems for improving concurrent engineering. A comparison between these two approaches is made to show their particular advantages and disadvantages. The development of a translator between the both CAD systems based on each approach has been carried out and evaluated on an assembly case

Interoperability between Cooperative Design Modeller and a CAD System: Software Integration versus Data Exchange

International audienceThe data exchange between Computer-Aided Design (CAD) systems is a crucial issue in concurrent engineering and collaborative design. The paper presents research works and techniques dealing with the interoperability of a Cooperative Design Modeller (CoDeMo), aiming at the integration of product lifecycle knowledge, and a commercial CAD system (CATIA V5). Two kinds of approaches are implemented in the considered case of CAD interoperability for exchanging geometric data, respectively: one is based on a traditional static interface, in which STEP AP203 standard is used; the other is based on a dynamic interface, in which Application Programming Interfaces (API) of the targeted CAD system is adopted. Both approaches should enhance the communication, exchange and sharing of product data between CAD systems for improving concurrent engineering. A comparison between these two approaches is made to show their particular advantages and disadvantages. The development of a translator between the both CAD systems based on each approach has been carried out and evaluated on an assembly case

Knowledge creation and visualisation by using trade-off curves to enable set-based concurrent engineering

The increased international competition forces companies to sustain and improve market share through the production of a high quality product in a cost effective manner and in a shorter time. Set‑based concurrent engineering (SBCE), which is a core element of lean product development approach, has got the potential to decrease time‑to‑market as well as enhance product innovation to be produced in good quality and cost effective manner. A knowledge‑based environment is one of the important requ irements for a successful SBCE implementation. One way to provide this environment is the use of trade‑off curves (ToC). ToC is a tool to create and visualise knowledge in the way to understand the relationships between various conflicting design parame ters to each other. This paper presents an overview of different types of ToCs and the role of knowledge‑based ToCs in SBCE by employing an extensive literature review and industrial field study. It then proposes a process of generating and using knowledg e‑based ToCs in order to create and visualise knowledge to enable the following key SBCE activities: (1) Identify the feasible design space, (2) Generate set of conceptual design solutions, (3) Compare design solutions, (4) Narrow down the design sets, (5) Achieve final optimal design solution. Finally a hypothetical example of a car seat structure is presented in order to provide a better understanding of using ToCs. This example shows that ToCs are effective tools to be used as a knowledge sou rce at the early stages of product development process

Assembly-oriented design in automotive engineering

To be competitive on the global market, carmakers have cut lead times in passenger car development to the bone. At the same time both the product complexity and the customer\u27s demands with regard to quality are continuously rising. Various new strategies and tools are currently being explored to cope with these challenges: simultaneous/concurrent engineering, front-loaded development, and knowledge-/feature-based parametric design to name just a few. Current design processes in automotive engineering as well as the engineering IT systems deployed to support them are largely single part oriented. Assembly design is seen as a process step following sequentially after part design, and assembly information is not managed in the same quality and quantity as part information. Assembly-oriented design (AOD) is an approach which breaks with these traditional paradigms of part orientation. Focusing on a parallelisation of assembly design and part design as well as on an integrated and consistent information management for assembly information right from the beginning, AOD strives to realise significant benefits throughout the product life-cycle. The objective of this paper is to elaborate on this approach with a focus on the special situation in automotive engineering

Mechatronics Design of Ball and Beam System: Education and Research

The key element in mechatronics design is the concurrent synergetic integration, modeling, simulation, analysis and optimization of multidisciplinary knowledge through the design process from the very start of the design process. Mechatronics engineer is expected to design engineering systems with synergy and integration toward constrains like higher performance, speed, precision, efficiency, lower costs and functionality. This paper proposes the conception and development of ball and beam system based on mechatronics design approach. A complete overall system and subsystems selection, modeling, simulation, analysis, and integration are presented. The proposed mechatronics design and models were created and verified using MATLAB /Simulink software and are intended for research purposes, as well as, application in educational process. Keywords- Mechatronics, Mechatronics design approach, Ball and beam, modeling/simulation

Synchronous communication in PLM environments using annotated CAD models

The connection of resources, data, and knowledge through communication technology plays a vital role in current collaborative design methodologies and Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) systems, as these elements act as channels for information and meaning. Despite significant advances in the area of PLM, most communication tools are used as separate services that are disconnected from existing development environments. Consequently, during a communication session, the specific elements being discussed are usually not linked to the context of the discussion, which may result in important information getting lost or becoming difficult to access. In this paper, we present a method to add synchronous communication functionality to a PLM system based on annotated information embedded in the CAD model. This approach provides users a communication channel that is built directly into the CAD interface and is valuable when individuals need to be contacted regarding the annotated aspects of a CAD model. We present the architecture of a new system and its integration with existing PLM systems, and describe the implementation details of an annotation-based video conferencing module for a commercial CAD application.This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness and the FEDER Funds, through the ANNOTA project (Ref. TIN2013-46036-C3-1-R).Camba, JD.; Contero, M.; Salvador Herranz, GM.; Plumed, R. (2016). Synchronous communication in PLM environments using annotated CAD models. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering. 25(2):142-158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11518-016-5305-5S142158252Abrahamson, S., Wallace, D., Senin, N. & Sferro, P. (2000). Integrated design in a service marketplace. Computer-Aided Design, 32(2):97–107.Ahmed, S. (2005). Encouraging reuse of design knowledge: a method to index knowledge. Design Studies, 26:565–592.Alavi, M. & Tiwana, A (2002). Knowledge integration in virtual teams: the potential role of KMS. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53:1029–1037.Ameri, F. & Dutta, D. (2005). Product lifecycle management: closing the knowledge loops. Computer-Aided Design and Applications, 2(5):577–590.Anderson, A.H., Smallwood, L., MacDonald, R., Mullin, J., Fleming, A. & O'Malley, C. (2000). Video data and video links in mediated communication: what do users value? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 52(1):165–187.Arias, E., Eden, H., Fischer, G., Gorman, A. & Scharff, E. (2000). Transcending the individual human mind–creating shared understanding through collaborative design. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 7(1): 84–113.Barley, W.C., Leonardi, P.M., & Bailey, D.E. (2012). Engineering objects for collaboration: strategies of ambiguity and clarity at knowledge boundaries. Human Communication Research, 38:280–308.Boujut, J.F. & Dugdale, J. (2006). Design of a 3D annotation tool for supporting evaluation activities in engineering design. Cooperative Systems Design, COOP 6:1–8.Camba, J., Contero, M., Johnson, M. & Company, P. (2014). Extended 3D annotations as a new mechanism to explicitly communicate geometric design intent and increase CAD model reusability. Computer-Aided Design, 57:61–73.Camba, J., Contero, M. & Salvador-Herranz, G. (2014). Speak with the annotator: promoting interaction in a knowledge-based CAD environment built on the extended annotation concept. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 18th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), 196–201.Chudoba, K.M., Wynn, E., Lu, M. & Watson-Manheim, M.B. (2005). How virtual are we? Measuring virtuality and understanding its impact in a global organization. Information Systems Journal, 15(4):279–306.Danesi, F., Gardan, N. & Gardan, Y. (2006). Collaborative Design: from Concept to Application. Geometric Modeling and Imaging—New Trends, 90–96.Durstewitz, M., Kiefner, B., Kueke, R., Putkonen, H., Repo, P. & Tuikka, T. (2002). Virtual collaboration environment for aircraft design. Proceedings of the IEEE 6th International Conference on Information Visualisation, 502–507.Fisher, D., Brush, A.J., Gleave, E. & Smith, M.A. (2006). Revisiting Whittaker and Sidner’s email overload ten years later. Proceedings of the 2006 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. ACM, BanffFonseca, M.J., Henriques, E., Silva, N., Cardoso, T. & Jorge, J.A. (2006). A collaborative CAD conference tool to support mobile engineering. Rapid Product Development (RPD’06), Marinha Grande, Portugal.Frechette, S.P. (2011). Model based enterprise for manufacturing. Proceedings of the 44th CIRP International Conference on Manufacturing Systems.Fu, W.X., Bian, J. & Xu, Y.M. (2013). A video conferencing system for collaborative engineering design. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 344:246–252.Fuh, J.Y.H. & Li, W.D. (2005). Advances in collaborative CAD: the-state-of-the art. Computer-Aided Design, 37:571–581.Fussell, S.R., Kraut, R.E. & Siegel, J. (2000). Coordination of communication: effects of shared visual context on collaborative work. Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 21–30.Gajewska, H., Kistler, J., Manasse, M.S. & Redell, D. (1994). Argo: a system for distributed collaboration. Proceedings of the ACM Second International Conference on Multimedia, San Francisco, CA, USA. 433–440.Gantz, J., Reinsel, D., Chute, C., Schlichting, W., Mcarthur, J., Minton, S., Xheneti, I., Toncheva, A. & Manfrediz, A. (2007). The expanding digital universe: a forecast of worldwide information growth through 2010. IDC, Massachusetts.Gowan, Jr. J.A. & Downs, J.M. (1994). Video conferencing human-machine interface: a field study. Information and Management, 27(6):341–356.Gupta, A., Mattarelli, E., Seshasai, S. & Broschak, J. (2009). Use of collaborative technologies and knowledge sharing in co-located and distributed teams: towards the 24-h knowledge factory. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 18:147–161.Hickson, I. (2009). The Web Socket Protocol IETF, Standards Track.Hong, J., Toye, G. & Leifer, L.J. (1996). Engineering design notebook for sharing and reuse. Computers in Industry, 29:27–35.Isaacs, E.A. & Tang, J.C. (1994). What video can and cannot do for collaboration: a case study. Multimedia Systems, 2(2):63–73.Karsenty, L. (1999). Cooperative work and shared visual context: an empirical study of comprehension problems in side-by-side and remote help dialogues. Human Computer Interaction, 14(3): 283–315.Lahti, H., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Collaboration patterns in computer supported collaborative designing. Design Studies, 25:351–371.Leenders, R.T.A., Van Engelen, J.M. & Kratzer, J. (2003). Virtuality, communication, and new product team creativity: a social network perspective. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 20(1):69–92.Levitt, R.E., Jin, Y. & Dym, C.L. (1991). Knowledge-based support for management of concurrent, multidisciplinary design. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering, Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 5(2):77–95.Li, C., McMahon, C. & Newnes, L. (2009). Annotation in product lifecycle management: a review of approaches. Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, DETC2009. Vol. 2. New York: ASME, 797–806.Li, W.D., Lu, W.F., Fuh, J.Y. & Wong, Y.S. (2005). Collaborative computer-aided design-research and development status. Computer-Aided Design, 37(9):931–940.Londono, F., Cleetus, K.J., Nichols, D.M., Iyer, S., Karandikar, H.M., Reddy, S.M., Potnis, S.M., Massey, B., Reddy, A. & Ganti, V. (1992). Coordinating a virtual team. CERC-TR-RN-92-005, Concurrent Engineering Research Centre, West Virginia University, West Virginia.Lubell, J., Chen, K., Horst, J., Frechette, S., & Huang, P. (2012). Model based enterprise/technical data package summit report. NIST Technical Note, 1753.May, A. & Carter, C. (2001). A case study of virtual team working in the European automotive industry. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 27(3):171–186.Olson, J.S., Olson, G.M. & Meader, D.K. (1995). What mix of video and audio is useful for small groups doing remote real-time design work? Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM Press, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.Ping-Hung, H., Mishra, C.S. & Gobeli, D.H. (2003). The return on R&D versus capital expenditures in pharmaceutical and chemical industries. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50:141–150.Sharma, A. (2005). Collaborative product innovation: integrating elements of CPI via PLM framework. Computer-Aided Design, 37(13):1425–1434.Shum, S.J.B., Selvin, A.M., Sierhuis, M., Conklin, J., Haley, C.B. & Nuseibeh, B. (2006). Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from Gibis and Qoc. Rationale Management in Software Engineering, 111–132.Siltanen, P. & Valli, S. (2013). Web-based 3D Mediated Communication in Manufacturing Industry. Concurrent Engineering Approaches for Sustainable Product Development in a Multidisciplinary Environment, 1181–1192. Springer London.Stark, J. (2011). Product Lifecycle Management. 1–16. Springer London.Tavcar, J., Potocnik, U. & Duhovnik, J. (2013). PLM used as a backbone for concurrent engineering in supply chain. Concurrent Engineering Approaches for Sustainable Product Development in a Multi-Disciplinary Environment, 681–692.Tay, F.E.H. & Ming, C. (2001). A shared multi-media design environment for concurrent engineering over the internet. Concurrent Engineering, 9(1):55–63.Tay, F.E.H. & Roy, A. (2003). CyberCAD: a collaborative approach in 3D-CAD technology in a multimedia-supported environment. Computers in Industry, 52(2):127–145.Toussaint, J. & Cheng, K. (2002). Design agility and manufacturing responsiveness on the web. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 13(5):328–339.Tsoi, K.N. & Rahman, S.M. (1996). Media-on-demand multimedia electronic mail: a tool for collaboration on the web. Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing.Upton, D.M. & Mcafee, A. (1999). The Real Virtual Factory. Harvard Business School Press, 69–89.Vila, C., Estruch, A., Siller, H.R., Abellán, J.V. & Romero, F. (2007). Workflow methodology for collaborative design and manufacturing. Cooperative Design, Visualization, and Engineering 42–49, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.Wasiak, J., Hicks, B., Newnes, L., Dong, A., & Burrow, L. (2010). Understanding engineering email: the development of a taxonomy for identifying and classifying engineering work. Research in Engineering Design, 21(1):43–64.Wasko, M.M. & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 29:35–57.Yang, Q.Z., Zhang, Y., Miao, C.Y. & Shen, Z.Q. (2008). Semantic annotation of digital engineering resources for multidisciplinary design collaboration. ASME 2008 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, 617–624. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.You, C.F. & Chao, S.N. (2006). Multilayer architecture in collaborative environment. Concurrent Engineering Research and Applications, 14(4):273–281.Yuan, Y.C., Fulk, J., Monge, P.R. & Contractor, N. (2010). Expertise directory development, shared task interdependence, and strength of communication network ties as multilevel predictors of expertise exchange in transactive memory work groups. Communication Research, 37: 20–47

An investigation on skeleton-based top-down modelling approaches of complex industrial product

In industry, today's approach to assembly design is still largely based on a bottom-up approach which, in contrast with the most advanced top-down techniques, is unfit to deal with very large and complex products. The reason for this lies in the high number of relationships to be established between parts and in the lack of a high-level control of the assembly design. This makes the management of design changes a labor-intensive process and the capture of design intent difficult to achieve. The paper, referring to the most advanced research fields of Concurrent Engineering and Knowledge-Based Engineering, focuses on a top-down modelling approach based on skeleton, which constitutes the most natural but still scarcely exploited way to attain a high reactivity to design modifications. Through the application of suitable methodologies, such as that one for a SKeLeton geometry-based Assembly Context Definition (SKL-ACD), the skeleton is also able to capture and codify assembly process engineering information since the early phases of the product development process. With the purpose of promoting the knowledge of these skeleton-based modelling techniques, that have a great relevance for training professional, technical and mechanical engineers, this paper implements the SKL-ACD methodology to an industrial case study in order to identify, with a unique and repeatable workflow, the reference geometrical entities and the mutual relationships to embed into the product skeleton. The skeleton types and the related fields of use are also described, placing particular emphasis on problems or shortcomings still not resolved, especially in consideration of the need to assist the designer in defining the impact of a parameter on assembly modification and in avoiding loops while defining formulas. A new tool, in the form of a multilayer graph, is finally proposed that is able to display and differentiate clearly the formulas, the design parameters and the impact of their modification on skeleton entities and members of the assembly

A concurrent approach to automated manufacturing process planning

textWith the increasing demand of fast-paced and hybrid manufacturing processes in modern industry, it is desirable to expedite the iterations between design and manufacturing through intelligent computational techniques. In this research, we propose a concurrent approach of this kind to streamline the design and manufacturing processes. With this approach, a CAD design is automatically analyzed in terms of its manufacturability in the early design stage. If the part is manufacturable, a set of process plans optimized in time, cost, fixture quality and tolerance satisfaction are reported in real time. If the part is not manufacturable, the potential design changes are provided for better manufacturing. In the approach, the geometric information of 3D models and the empirical knowledge in manufacturing processes, fixtures, and tolerances are combined and encapsulated into a graph-grammar based reasoning. The reasoning systematically extracts meaningful manufacturing details that later constitute complete process plans for any given solid model. The plans are then evaluated and optimized using a specially designed multi-objective best first search technique. The complete approach enables a concurrent and efficient manufacturability analysis tool that closely resembles real manufacturing planning practice. Numerous case studies with real engineering parts are presented to characterize the novelty and contributions of this approach. The optimality of the suggested plans is verified through computational comparisons, and the practicality of the plans is validated with hands-on implementations on the shop floor.Mechanical Engineerin

A knowledge-level model for concurrent design.

The concurrent approach to engineering design, concurrent design, implies that expert knowledge regarding a number of different downstream life-cycle perspectives (such as assembly, manufacture, maintainability etc) should all be considered at the design stage of a product's life-cycle. Extensive and valuable work has been done in developing computer aids to both the design and concurrent design processes. However, a criticism of such tools is that their development has been driven by computational considerations and that the tools are not based on a generally accepted model of the design process. Different models of design have been developed that fall into a number of paradigms, including cognitive and knowledge-level models. However, while there is no generally accepted cognitive model describing the way designers and design teams think, the concept of the knowledge-level has enabled a more pragmatic approach to be taken to the development of models of problem-solving activity.Different researchers have developed knowledge-level models for the design process, particularly as part of the CommonKADS methodology (one of the principal knowledge-based system development methodologies currently in use). These design models have significantly extended design thinking in this area. However, the models do not explicitly support the concurrent design process. I have developed top-down knowledge-level models of the concurrent design process by analysis of published research and discussions with academics. However some researchers have criticised models for design that are not based on analysis of 'real-life' design. Hence I wished to validate my top-down models by analysing how concurrent design actually occurs in a real-life industrial setting.Analysing concurrent design activity is a complex process and there are no definitive methodological guidelines as to the 'right way' to do it. Therefore I have developed and utilised a novel method of knowledge elicitation and analysis to develop 'bottom-up' models for concurrent design. This is based on a number of different approaches and was done in collaboration with a number of different design teams and organisations who are engaged in the concurrent design of mechanically based products.My resulting knowledge-level models are an original contribution to knowledge. They suggest that the concurrent design process consists of a number of discrete sub-tasks of propose, critique and negotiate. These models have been instantiated as generic model templates, using the modelling formalisms specified by CommonYADS. These models have been implemented on a software tool, the CommonKADS workbench, in order to provide support for developers of computer-based systems for concurrent design