elements towards next-generation knowledge representations and product modeling techniques...
TRANSCRIPT
Elements towards Next-Generation Knowledge Representations and Product Modeling Techniques
[email protected]://itimes.marc.gatech.edu/
http://eislab.gatech.edu/projects/
Planning Meeting for Product, Lifecycle Management, and Systems Engineering Models
May 20, 2003NIST • Gaithersburg MD (via telecon)
2
Contents
Multiple views in a knowledge representation Declarative thinking Object graph view of model interoperability
– Some factors for comparing knowledge representations Leveraging multiple standards Managing computing environments
via systems engineering methods Elevated terminology & thinking
See backup slides for other examples & references
Purpose: Help identify comparison factorsand encourage thinking about next-generation needs
3
Contents Multiple views in a knowledge representation
– Human-sensible & computer-sensible– Graphical, lexical, application-oriented
Declarative thinking – Multi-directional (non-causal)– With derivable lower-level procedural approaches
Object graph view of model interoperability Leveraging multiple standards Managing computing environments
via systems engineering methods Elevated terminology & thinking
Examples from Constrained
Objects (COBs)& CAD-CAE Integration
4
Triangle
dh
Ab
Triangle
dh
Ab
COB Structure: Graphical Forms
Tutorial: Triangle Primitive
v a r i a b l e s u b v a r i a b l es u b s y s t e m
e q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n
r e l a t i o n
s
a b
dc
a
b
d
c
e
a . das
r 1r 1 ( a , b , s . c )
e = f
s u b v a r i a b l e s . b
[ 1 . 2 ]
[ 1 . 1 ]o p t i o n 1 . 1
ff = s . d
o p t i o n 1 . 2
f = g
o p t i o n c a t e g o r y 1
gcbe
r 2
h o f c o b t y p e h
wL [ j : 1 , n ]
w j
a g g r e g a t e c . we l e m e n t w j
Basic Constraint Schematic-S Notation
c. Constraint Schematic-Sa. Shape Schematic-S
2222
1
:
21:
hbdr
bhAr
b. Relations-S
d. Subsystem-S(for reuse by other COBs)
h
b
Ad
base, br1
r2
bhA 21
height, h
222 hbd
area, A
diagonal, d
Aside: This is a “usage view” in AP210 terminology (vs. the above “design views”)
5
COB Structure (cont.): Lexical Form Tutorial: Triangle Primitive
for reference: c. Constraint Schematic-S
e. Lexical COB Structure (COS)
COB triangle SUBTYPE_OF geometric_shape; base, b : REAL; height, h : REAL; diagonal, d : REAL; area, A : REAL;RELATIONS r1 : "<area> == 0.5 * <base> * <height>"; r2 : "<diagonal>**2 == <base>**2 + <height>**2";END_COB;
base, br1
r2
bhA 21
height, h
222 hbd
area, A
diagonal, d
6
3 in22 in
3 in
base, br1
r2
bhA 21
height, h
222 hbd
area, A
diagonal, d3.60 in
200 lbs
30e6 psiResult b = 30e6 psi (output or intermediate variable)
Result c = 200 lbs (result of primary interest)
X
Relation r1 is suspended X r1
100 lbs Input a = 100 lbs
Equality relation is suspended
a
b
c
Example COB InstanceTutorial: Triangle Primitive
Constraint Schematic-I Lexical COB Instance (COI)
state 1.0 (unsolved):INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2.0; height : 3.0; area : ?; diagonal : ?;END_INSTANCE;
state 1.1 (solved):INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2.0; height : 3.0; area : 3.0; diagonal : 3.60;END_INSTANCE;Basic Constraint Schematic-I Notation
example 1, state 1.1
example 1, state 2.1
. . .state 2.1 (solved):INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2.0; height : 9.0; area : 9.0; diagonal : 9.22;END_INSTANCE;
9 in22 in
9 in
base, br1
r2
bhA 21
height, h
222 hbd
area, A
diagonal, d9.22 in
7
Multi-Directional I/O (non-causal)Tutorial: Triangle Primitive
Constraint Schematic-I Lexical COB Instance (COI)
state 2.1 (solved):INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2.0; height : 9.0; area : 9.0; diagonal : 9.22;END_INSTANCE;
state 3.0 (unsolved):INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2.0; height : ?; area : 6.0; diagonal : ?;END_INSTANCE;
state 3.1 (solved):INSTANCE_OF triangle; base : 2.0; height : 6.0; area : 6.0; diagonal : 6.32;END_INSTANCE;
6 in22 in
6 in
base, br1
r2
bhA 21
height, h
222 hbd
area, A
diagonal, d6.32 in
example 1, state 2.1
9 in22 in
9 in
base, br1
r2
bhA 21
height, h
222 hbd
area, A
diagonal, d9.22 in
example 1, state 3.1
8
TriangularPrism
Vh
b
l
COBs as Building Blocks Tutorial: Triangular Prism COB Structure
c. Constraint Schematic-Sa. Shape Schematic-S
b. Relations-S
d. Subsystem-S(for reuse by other COBs)
T ria n g le
dh
Ab
T ria n g le
dh
Ab
le n g th , l vo lu m e , Vr1
AlV
c ro s s -s e c tio nh
b
V l
AlVr :1
e. Lexical COB Structure (COS)
COB triangular_prism SUBTYPE_OF geometric_shape; length, l : REAL; cross-section : triangle; volume, V : REAL;RELATIONS r1 : "<volume> == <cross-section.area> * <length>";END_COB;
9
200 lbs
30e6 psiResult b = 30e6 psi (output or intermediate variable)
Result c = 200 lbs (result of primary interest)
X
Relation r1 is suspended X r1
100 lbs Input a = 100 lbs
Equality relation is suspended
a
b
c
Example COB InstanceTutorial: Triangular Prism
Constraint Schematic-I Lexical COB Instance (COI)
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;
Basic Constraint Schematic-I Notation
example 1, state 1.1
Triangle
dh
Ab
Triangle
dh
Ab
length, l volume, Vr1
AlV
cross-section
3 in2
2 in
3 in
15 in35 in
10
COB Modeling Languages & Views
COB InstanceDefinition Language
(COI)
Constraint Graph-I
Constraint Schematic-I
STEPPart 21
200 lbs
30e6 psi
100 lbs 20.2 in
R101
R101
100 lbs
30e6 psi 200 lbs
20.2 in
StructureLevel(Template)
InstanceLevel
Subsystem-S
Object Relationship Diagram-S
COB StructureDefinition Language
(COS)
I/O Table-S
Constraint Graph-S
Constraint Schematic-S
STEPExpress
Express-GXML UML
Subsystem-S
Object Relationship Diagram-S
COB StructureDefinition Language
(COS)
I/O Table-S
Constraint Graph-S
Constraint Schematic-S
STEPExpress
Express-GXML UML
11
Contents Multiple views in a knowledge representation Declarative thinking Object graph view of model interoperability
– Include connections with lower-level models & COTS tools– Facilitate solution management & reasoning control– Some factors for comparing knowledge representations
Leveraging multiple standards Managing computing environments
via systems engineering methods Elevated terminology & thinking
Examples from Constrained
Objects (COBs)& CAD-CAE Integration
12
Constrained Object Panorama for Multi-Fidelity CAD-CAE Interoperability
Flap Link Benchmark Example
Material Model ABB:
Continuum ABBs:
E
One D LinearElastic Model
T
G
et
material model
polar moment of inertia, J
radius, r
undeformed length, Lo
twist,
theta start, 1
theta end, 2
r1
12
r3
0L
r
J
rTr
torque, Tr
x
TT
G, r, , ,J
Lo
y
material model
temperature, T
reference temperature, To
force, F
area, A
undeformed length, Lo
total elongation,L
length, L
start, x1
end, x2
E
One D LinearElastic Model
(no shear)
T
et
r1
12 xxL
r2
oLLL
r4
A
F
edb.r1
oTTT
r3
L
L
x
FF
E, A,
LLo
T, ,
yL
Torsional Rod
Extensional Rod
temperature change,T
cte,
youngs modulus, E
stress,
shear modulus, G
poissons ratio,
shear stress, shear strain,
thermal strain, t
elastic strain, estrain,
r2
r1)1(2
EG
r3
r4Tt
Ee
r5
G
te
1D Linear Elastic Model
material
effective length, Leff
linear elastic model
Lo
Extensional Rod(isothermal)
F
L
A
L
E
x2
x1
youngs modulus, E
cross section area, A
al1
al3
al2
linkage
mode: shaft tension
condition reaction
allowable stress
stress mos model
Margin of Safety(> case)
allowable
actual
MS
Analysis Modules of Diverse Behavior & Fidelity
(CBAMs) MCAD Tools
Materials LibrariesIn-House, ...
FEA Ansys
Abaqus*
CATIA Elfini*
MSC Nastran*
MSC Patran*
...
General MathMathematica
Matlab*
MathCAD*
...
Analyzable Product Model(APM)
Extension
Torsion
1D
1D
Analysis Building Blocks(ABBs)
CATIA, I-DEAS* Pro/E* , UG *, ...
Analysis Tools(via SMMs)
Design Tools
2D
flap_link
critical_section
critical_simple
t2f
wf
tw
hw
t1f
area
effective_length
critical_detailed
stress_strain_model linear_elastic
E
cte area
wf
tw
hw
tf
sleeve_1
b
h
t
b
h
t
sleeve_2
shaft
rib_1
material
rib_2
w
t
r
x
name
t2f
wf
tw
t1f
cross_section
w
t
r
x
R3
R2
R1
R8
R9
R10
6R
R7
R12
11R
1R
2
3
4
5
R
R
R
R
name
linear_elastic_model
wf
tw
tf
inter_axis_length
sleeve_2
shaft
material
linkage
sleeve_1
w
t
r
E
cross_section:basic
w
t
rL
ws1
ts1
rs2
ws2
ts2
rs2
wf
tw
tf
E
deformation model
x,max
ParameterizedFEA Model
stress mos model
Margin of Safety(> case)
allowable
actual
MS
ux mos model
Margin of Safety(> case)
allowable
actual
MS
mode: tensionux,max
Fcondition reaction
allowable inter axis length change
allowable stress
ts1
B
sleeve1
B ts2
ds2
ds1
sleeve2
L
shaft
Leff
s
rib1 rib2
material
effective length, Leff
deformation model
linear elastic model
Lo
Torsional Rod
G
J
r
2
1
shear modulus, G
cross section:effective ring polar moment of inertia, J
al1
al3
al2a
linkage
mode: shaft torsion
condition reactionT
outer radius, ro al2b
stress mos model
allowable stress
twist mos model
Margin of Safety(> case)
allowable
actual
MS
Margin of Safety(> case)
allowable
actual
MS
allowabletwist
Flap Link Extensional Model
Flap Link Plane Strain Model
Flap Link Torsional Model* = Item not yet available in toolkit (all others have working examples)
Parts LibrariesIn-House*, ...
LegendTool AssociativityObject Re-use
13
Analysis Tools
0.4375 in
0.5240 in
0.0000 in
2.440 in
1.267 in
0.307 in
0.5 in
0.310 in
2.088 in
1.770 in
67000 psi
65000 psi
57000 psi
52000 psi
39000 psi
0.067 in/in
0.030 in/in
5960 Ibs
1
10000000 psi
9.17
5.11
9.77
rear spar fitting attach point
BLE7K18
2G7T12U (Detent 0, Fairing Condition 1)
L29 -300
Outboard TE Flap, Support No 2;Inboard Beam, 123L4567
Bulkhead Fitting Joint
Program
Part
Feature
Channel FittingStatic Strength Analysis
Template
1 of 1Dataset
strength model
r1
e
b
h
tb
te
Pu
Ftu
E
r2
r0
a
FtuLT
Fty
FtyLT
epuLT
tw
MSwall
epu
jm
MSepb
MSeps
Channel FittingStatic Strength Analysis
Fsu
IAS FunctionRef D6-81766
end pad
base
material
wall
analysis context
mode: (ultimate static strength)
condition:
heuristic: overall fitting factor, Jm
bolt
fitting
headradius, r1
hole radius, ro
width, b
eccentricity, e
thickness, teheight, h
radius, r2
thickness, tb
hole
thickness, twangled height, a
max allowable ultimate stress,
allowable ultimate long transverse stress,
max allowable yield stress,
max allowable long transverse stress,
max allowable shear stress,
plastic ultimate strain,
plastic ultimate strain long transverse,
young modulus of elasticity,
load, Pu
Ftu
Fty
FtyLT
Fsu
epu
epuLT
E
FtuLT
product structure (channel fitting joint)
Flexible High Diversity Design-Analysis Integration Phases 1-3 Airframe Examples:
“Bike Frame” / Flap Support Inboard Beam
Analysis Modules (CBAMs) of Diverse Feature:Mode, & Fidelity
Design Tools
Materials DBFEA
Elfini*MATDB-like
Analyzable Product Model
XaiTools
XaiTools
Fitting:Bending/Shear
3D
1.5D
Modular, ReusableTemplate Libraries
MCAD ToolsCATIA v4, v5
Lug:Axial/Oblique; Ultimate/Shear
1.5D
Assembly:Ultimate/
FailSafe/Fatigue*
* = Item not yet available in toolkit (all others have working examples)
diagonal brace lug jointj = top
0.7500 in
0.35 in
0.7500 in
1.6000 in
2
0.7433
14.686 K
2.40
4.317 K
8.633 K
k = norm
Max. torque brake settingdetent 30, 2=3.5º
7050-T7452, MS 7-214
67 Ksi
L29 -300
Outboard TE Flap, Support No 2;Inboard Beam, 123L4567
Diagonal Brace Lug Joint
Program
Part
Feature
Lug JointAxial Ultimate Strength Model
Template
j = top lugk = normal diameter (1 of 4)
Dataset
material
deformation model
max allowable ultimate stress, FtuL
effective width, W
analysis context
objective
mode (ultimate static strength)
condition
estimated axial ultimate strength
Margin of Safety(> case)
allowable
actual
MS
normal diameter, Dnorm
thickness, t
edge margin, e
Plug joint
size,n
lugs
lugj hole
diameters
product structure (lug joint)
r1
n
P jointlug
L [ j:1,n ]
Plug
L [ k]Dk
oversize diameter, Dover
D
PaxuW
e
t
Ftuax
Kaxu
Lug Axial UltimateStrength Model
BDM 6630
Fasteners DB
FASTDB-like
General Math Mathematica
In-HouseCodes
Image API(CATGEO);
VBScript
14
Usage of a COB-based Analysis TemplateCAD-CAE Interoperability during Lug Strength Analysis
diagonal brace lug jointj = top
0.7500 in
0.35 in
0.7500 in
1.6000 in
2
0.7433
14.686 K
2.40
4.317 K
8.633 K
k = norm
Max. torque brake settingdetent 30, 2=3.5º
7050-T7452, MS 7-214
67 Ksi
L29 -300
Outboard TE Flap, Support No 2;Inboard Beam, 123L4567
Diagonal Brace Lug Joint
Program
Part
Feature
Lug JointAxial Ultimate Strength Model
Template
j = top lugk = normal diameter (1 of 4)
Dataset
material
deformation model
max allowable ultimate stress, FtuL
effective width, W
analysis context
objective
mode (ultimate static strength)
condition
estimated axial ultimate strength
Margin of Safety(> case)
allowable
actual
MS
normal diameter, Dnorm
thickness, t
edge margin, e
Plug joint
size,n
lugs
lugj hole
diameters
product structure (lug joint)
r1
n
P jointlug
L [ j:1,n ]
Plug
L [ k]Dk
oversize diameter, DoverD
PaxuW
e
t
Ftuax
Kaxu
Lug Axial UltimateStrength Model
DM 6630
Solution Tool Interaction
Boundary Condition Objects(links to other analyses)
CAD-CAE Associativity (idealization usage)
Material Models
Model-based Documentation
Geometry
P KW
DDtFaxu axu tuax ( )1
Requirements
15
Convergence of Representations
Database Techniques(data structure, storage …)
Software Development(algorithms …)
Artificial Intelligence& Knowledge-Based Techniques
(structure combined with algorithms/relations/behavior)
EER
STEP Express
ER
UML
Flow Charts
OMT
Objects
Rules
Constraint graphs
Constrained Object - likeRepresentations
COBs, OCL, ...
16
Contents Multiple views in a knowledge representation Declarative thinking Object graph view of model interoperability
– Include connections with lower-level models & COTS tools– Facilitate solution management & reasoning control– Some factors for comparing knowledge representations
Leveraging multiple standards Managing computing environments
via systems engineering methods Elevated terminology & thinking
17
Dimensions of AssociativitySome Knowledge Representation Comparison Factors
Operand representation: a, b– Type: numeric, logical, string, …, general object– Human-sensible vs. computer-sensible
» Computer-sensible: Flattened vs. object/feature-oriented– Other facets: security, units, uncertainty, maturity, version history,
(un)known/withheld, … Relation representation: r1, r2
– Relation type: Math formula, geometric constraint, computable algorithm, computer system (e.g., FEA tool), higher order constraint, arbitrary human process, ...
Associativity = Relations among objects
a aaYaX ..
r1System X
System Y
b).(. 2 bZraX
r2 System Z
electricalcircuitsanalogy
18
Dimensions of Associativity (cont.)
Relation representation (continued)– Explicit vs. implicit vs. unrecognized vs. unknown – Human-sensible vs. computer-sensible
» Computer-sensible: Dumb string vs. smart string vs. object/feature-oriented relation
– Level: instance, template (schema, structure), adaptable template– Other facets: priority, (in)active, plus similar facets as operands
Relation directionality– Uni-directional vs. multi-directional
vs. iteratively multi-directional Relation duration
– Continuous (“live”) vs. event-controlled Relation granularity
– Coarse vs. fine (macro vs. micro)
a aaYaX ..
r1System X
System Y
b).(. 2 bZraX
r2 System Z
Associativity graph type– Declarative vs. procedural– Cyclic vs. acyclic– Variable vs. fixed topology
19
Contents Multiple views in a knowledge representation Declarative thinking Object graph view of model interoperability Leveraging multiple standards Managing computing environments
via systems engineering methods– Including versioning & configuration mgt.
of meta-models, standards, and tools Elevated terminology & thinking
20
Tool-Product Model Schema Relationships in aStandards-Based Engineering Framework
XaiToolsPWA-B
Eagle
LKSoft, …Gap-FillingTools
XaiToolsPWA-B
EPM, LKSoft, STI, …
Traditional Tools Mentor
Graphics
STEP-Book AP210,SDAI-Edit,
STI AP210 Viewer, ...
Instance Browser/EditorPWB Stackup Tool,…
ElectricalCAD Tools
pgef
EngineeringFramework Tool
AP210
Doors
Slate
Systems EngineeringTools
Pro/E
CATIA
MechanicalCAD Tools
…
AP203, AP214 AP233
Smart Product ModelBuilding Blocks • Models & meta-models
• International standards• Industry specs• Corporate standards• Local customizations
• Modeling technologies:• Express, UML, XML, COBs, …
AP210 AP2xx
21
Primary Technologies for Schema-based Engineering Frameworks
Based on Engineering Framework Interest Group (EFWIG) emails from [email protected] (dated July 13, 2002 wrt PGPDM directions) and David Leal (dated November 26, 2002).
22
Contents Multiple views in a knowledge representation Declarative thinking Object graph view of model interoperability Leveraging multiple standards Managing computing environments
via systems engineering methods Elevated terminology & thinking
23
Needed Shifts in Engineering Thinking
Math-based models of physical behavior
Learn mathematics as a modeling language
Information models of physical objects
– Includes math-based models of physical behavior, but in their richer context
Learn information representation as another type of modeling language
Traditional Viewpoint
Note: Information models have their roots in modern mathematics (e.g. set theory).
Information/Knowledge-basedModeling Viewpoint
24
Needed Shifts in Engineering Thinking (cont.)
Tool usage
Data / files
Data exchange
Translators Single tools Drawings &
documents Calculations
Model creation & interaction (using tools) - knowledge capture
Information models &knowledge representations (objects)
Model connection, associativity, interoperability (often via equality relations)
Interfaces Integrated submodels Views (submodels)
connected to their richer models Usage of model operations
Traditional Computing Viewpoint
Objects (having structure and operations) that are interrelated.
Information/Knowledge-basedModeling Viewpoint
25
Summary
Multiple views in a knowledge representation Declarative thinking Object graph view of model interoperability
– Some factors for comparing knowledge representations Leveraging multiple standards Managing computing environments
via systems engineering methods Elevated terminology & thinking
See backup slides for other examples & references
Purpose: Help identify comparison factorsand encourage thinking about next-generation needs
Other Slides for Reference
27
Ar1
b
h
state 1 (relation usage)f :=: new instance of r1(b,h,A);
state 2 (value change)h := 9;status: A := 3;
A=3b=2
h=9intent
Procedural vs. Declarative Knowledge Representations
h
b
A = 1/2 bh
Procedural RepresentationTraditional programming: C, C++, Java, ...
function definition: areaarea(base,height) return (0.5 * base * height);
Declarative RepresentationMath solvers: Maple, Mathematica, ...
relation definition: r1r1(base,height,area): area :=: 0.5 * base * height;
state 3 (I/O change)A := 6;status: h := 9;
A=6b=2
h=9
intent ?
How does one compute h given A, b ?
A=3area
b=2
h=3
state 1 (function usage)b := 2, h := 3;A := area(b,h);status: A := 3;
A=9area
b=2
h=9
A := area(b,h);status’: A := 9;
A=6r1
b=2
h=6
state 3 (I/O change)h :=: ?, A :=: 6;status: h :=: 6
A=9r1
b=2
h=9
state 2 (value change)h :=: 9;status: A :=: 9
AA=3r1
b=2
h=3 b :=: 2, h :=: 3, A :=: ?;status: A :=: 3
Constrained Objects: A Knowledge Representation for Design, Analysis, and Systems Engineering Interoperability
Students: Manas Bajaj, Injoong Kim, Greg Mocko Faculty: Russell Peak
Approach and Status Approach:
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
ContributionsTo 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/
Resources 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
Russell.P
eak@m
arc.gatech.edu -- 2003-05-12
29
COB-based Libraries ofAnalysis Building Blocks (ABBs)
Material Model ABB
Continuum ABBs
modularre-usage
E
O n e D L in e a rE la s t i c M o d e l
T
G
e
t
m a t e r i a l m o d e l
p o la r m o m e n t o f i n e r t i a , J
r a d iu s , r
u n d e f o r m e d l e n g t h , L o
t w i s t ,
t h e t a s t a r t , 1
t h e t a e n d , 2
r 1
12
r 3
0L
r
J
rT r
t o r q u e , T r
x
TT
G , r , , ,J
L o
y
m ateria l m odel
tem perature, T
reference tem perature, T o
force, F
area, A
undeform ed length, L o
to ta l e longation,L
length, L
start, x1
end, x2
E
O ne D LinearE lastic M odel
(no shear)
T
e
t
r1
12 xxL
r2
oLLL
r4
A
F
edb.r1
oTTT
r3
L
L
x
FF
E , A ,
LL o
T , ,
yL
Torsional Rod
Extensional Rod
temperature change,T
cte,
youngs modulus, E
stress,
shear modulus, G
poissons ratio,
shear stress, shear strain,
thermal strain, telastic strain, e
strain,
r2
r1)1(2
EG
r3
r4Tt
Ee
r5
G
te
1D Linear Elastic Model
30
Flap Link ExampleParametric Design Description
ts1
A
Sleeve 1
A ts2
ds2
ds1
Sleeve 2
L
Shaft
b
h
t
b
h
t
sleeve_2
shaft
rib_1
material
flap_link
sleeve_1
rib_2
w
t
r
x
name
R3
R2
t2f
wf
tw
t1f
cross_section
w
t
r
x
R1
COB flap_link SUBTYPE_OF part; part_number : STRING; inter_axis_length, L : REAL; sleeve1 : sleeve; sleeve2 : sleeve; shaft : tapered_beam; rib1 : rib; rib2 : rib;RELATIONS PRODUCT_RELATIONS pr2 : "<inter_axis_length> == <sleeve2.origin.y> -
<sleeve1.origin.y>"; pr3 : "<rib1.height> == (<sleeve1.width> -
<shaft.cross_section.design.web_thickness>)/2"; pr4 : "<rib2.height> == (<sleeve2.width> -
<shaft.cross_section.design.web_thickness>)/2";...
END_COB;
Extended Constraint Graph
COB Structure (COS)
31
L
ws1
ts1
rs2
ws2
ts2
rs2
wf
tw
tf
E
name
linear_elastic_model
wf
tw
tf
inter_axis_length
sleeve_2
shaft
material
linkage
sleeve_1
w
t
r
E
cross_section:basic
w
t
r
x,max
r1
mode: tension
ux,max
Fcondition reaction
Representing External Tools as COB RelationsParametric FEA Model
ts1
rs1
L
rs2
ts2tf
ws2ws1
wf
tw
F
L L
x
y
L C
Plane Stress Bodies
),,,...,,,,(),( 1111max,max, FErstswsLru xx
FEA Tool
32
Constrained Object (COB) RepresentationCurrent Technical Capabilities - Generation 2
Capabilities & features:– Various forms: computable lexical forms, graphical forms, etc.
» Enables both computer automation and human comprehension– Sub/supertypes, basic aggregates, multi-fidelity objects– Multi-directionality (I/O changes)– Reuses external programs as white box relations– Advanced associativity added to COTS frameworks & wrappers
Analysis module/template applications (XAI/MRA): – Analysis template languages– Product model idealizations– Explicit associativity relations with design models & other analyses– White box reuse of existing tools (e.g., FEA, in-house codes)– Reusable, adaptable analysis building blocks
– Synthesis (sizing) and verification (analysis)
33
Constrained Objects (cont.) Representation Characteristics & Advantages - Gen. 2
Overall characteristics– Declarative knowledge representation (non-causal)– Combining object & constraint graph techniques– COBs = (STEP EXPRESS subset) +
(constraint graph concepts & views)
Advantages over traditional analysis representations– Greater solution control– Richer semantics
(e.g., equations wrapped in engineering context)– Unified views of diverse capabilities (tool-independent)– Capture of reusable knowledge – Enhanced development of complex analysis models
Toolkit status (XaiTools v0.4)– Basic framework, single user-oriented, file-based
34
An Introduction to X-Analysis Integration (XAI) Short Course Outline
Part 1: Constrained Objects (COBs) Primer– Nomenclature
Part 2: Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA) Primer – Analysis Integration Challenges – Overview of COB-based XAI– Ubiquitization Methodology
Part 3: Example Applications» Airframe Structural Analysis (Boeing)» Circuit Board Thermomechanical Analysis
(DoD: ProAM; JPL/NASA)» Chip Package Thermal Analysis (Shinko)
– Summary
Part 4: Advanced Topics & Current Research
35
Techniques for Complex System Representation & Model Interoperability (CAD-CAE)
http://eislab.gatech.edu/research/
a. Multi-Representation Architecture (MRA)
1 Solution Method Model
ABB SMM
2 Analysis Building Block
4 Context-Based Analysis Model3
SMMABB
APM ABB
CBAM
APM
Design Tools Solution Tools
Printed Wiring Assembly (PWA)
Solder Joint
Component
PWB
body3body2
body1
body4
T0
Printed Wiring Board (PWB)
SolderJoint
Component
AnalyzableProduct Model
b. Explicit Design-Analysis Associativity
c. Analysis Module Creation Methodology
I n f o r m a l A s s o c i a t i v i t y D i a g r a m
C o n s t r a i n e d O b j e c t - b a s e d A n a l y s i s M o d u l eC o n s t r a i n t S c h e m a t i c V i e w
P l a n e S t r a i n B o d i e s S y s t e m
P W A C o m p o n e n t O c c u r r e n c e
CL
1
m a t e r i a l ,E( , )g e o m e t r y
b o d y
p l a n e s t r a i n b o d y , i = 1 . . . 4P W B
S o l d e rJ o i n t
E p o x y
C o m p o n e n tb a s e : A l u m i n a
c o r e : F R 4
S o l d e r J o i n t P l a n e S t r a i n M o d e l
t o t a l h e i g h t , h
l i n e a r - e l a s t i c m o d e l
A P M A B B
3 A P M 4 C B A M
2 A B Bc
4b o d y 3b o d y
2b o d y
1h oT
p r i m a r y s t r u c t u r a l m a t e r i a l
ii
i
1 S M M
D e s i g n M o d e l A n a l y s i s M o d e l
A B B S M M
s o l d e rs o l d e r j o i n t
p w b
c o m p o n e n t
1 . 2 5
d e f o r m a t i o n m o d e l
t o t a l h e i g h t
d e t a i l e d s h a p e
r e c t a n g l e
[ 1 . 2 ]
[ 1 . 1 ]
a v e r a g e
[ 2 . 2 ]
[ 2 . 1 ]
cT c
T s
i n t e r - s o l d e r j o i n t d i s t a n c ea p p r o x i m a t e m a x i m u m
s j
L s
p r i m a r y s t r u c t u r a l m a t e r i a l
t o t a l t h i c k n e s s
l i n e a r - e l a s t i c m o d e l
P l a n e S t r a i n
g e o m e t r y m o d e l 3
a
s t r e s s - s t r a i nm o d e l 1
s t r e s s - s t r a i nm o d e l 2
s t r e s s - s t r a i nm o d e l 3
B o d i e s S y s t e m
x y , e x t r e m e , 3
T 2
L 1
T 1
T 0
L 2
h 1
h 2
T 3
T s j
h s
h c
L c
x y , e x t r e m e , s jb i l i n e a r - e l a s t o p l a s t i c m o d e l
l i n e a r - e l a s t i c m o d e l
p r i m a r y s t r u c t u r a l m a t e r i a l l i n e a r - e l a s t i c m o d e l
c o m p o n e n to c c u r r e n c e
s o l d e r j o i n ts h e a r s t r a i nr a n g e
[ 1 . 2 ]
[ 1 . 1 ]l e n g t h 2 +
3 A P M 2 A B B 4 C B A M
F i n e - G r a i n e d A s s o c i a t i v i t y
ProductModel Selected Module
Analysis Module Catalogs
MCAD
ECAD
Analysis Procedures
CommercialAnalysis Tools
Ansys
Abaqus
Solder Joint Deformation Model
Idealization/Defeaturization
CommercialDesign Tools
PWB
Solder Joint
Component
APM CBAM ABB SMM
Ubiquitous Analysis(Module Usage)
Ubiquitization(Module Creation)
CAE
Physical Behavior Research,Know-How, Design Handbooks, ...
36
Circuit Board Design-Analysis IntegrationElectronic Packaging Examples: PWA/B
Analysis Modules (CBAMs) of Diverse Mode & Fidelity
Design Tools
Laminates DB
FEA Ansys
General MathMathematica
Analyzable Product Model
XaiToolsPWA-B
XaiToolsPWA-B
Solder JointDeformation*
PTHDeformation & Fatigue**
1D,2D
1D,2D,3D
Modular, ReusableTemplate Libraries
ECAD Tools Mentor Graphics,
Accel*
temperature change,T
material model
temperature, T
reference temperature, To
cte,
youngs modulus, E
force, F
area, A stress,
undeformed length, Lo
strain,
total elongation,L
length, L
start, x1
end, x2
mv6
mv5
smv1
mv1mv4
E
One D LinearElastic Model(no shear)
T
et
thermal strain, t
elastic strain, emv3
mv2
x
FF
E, A,
LLo
T, ,
yL
r1
12 xxL
r2
oLLL
r4
A
F
sr1
oTTT
r3L
L
m a t e r i a l
e f f e c t i v e l e n g t h , L e f f
d e f o r m a t i o n m o d e l
l i n e a r e l a s t i c m o d e l
L o
T o r s i o n a l R o d
G
J
r
2
1
s h e a r m o d u l u s , G
c r o s s s e c t i o n :e f f e c t i v e r i n g p o l a r m o m e n t o f i n e r t i a , J
a l 1
a l 3
a l 2 a
l i n k a g e
m o d e : s h a f t t o r s i o n
c o n d i t i o n r e a c t i o n
t s 1
A
S l e e v e 1
A t s 2
d s 2
d s 1
S l e e v e 2
L
S h a f t
L e f f
s
T
o u t e r r a d i u s , r o a l 2 b
s t r e s s m o s m o d e l
a l l o w a b l e s t r e s s
t w i s t m o s m o d e l
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
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
a l l o w a b l et w i s t Analysis Tools
PWBWarpage
1D,2D
Materials DB
PWB Stackup ToolXaiTools PWA-B
STEP AP210‡ GenCAM**,
PDIF*
37
Iterative Design & Analysis PWB Stackup Design & Warpage Analysis
AnalyzableProduct Model
PWB Stackup Design Tool
1 Oz. Cu
1 Oz. Cu
1 Oz. Cu
1 Oz. Cu
2 Oz. Cu
2 Oz. CuTetra GF
Tetra GF
3 x 1080
3 x 1080
2 x 2116
2D Plane Strain Model
b L T
t
2
Detailed FEA Check
bi i i
i
w y
t w/ 2
1D Thermal Bending Model
LayupRe-design
PWB Warpage Modules
Quick Formula-based Check
38
total_thicknesspwa
layup layers[0]
layers[1]
layers[2]
TOTAL
CU1T
CU2T
POLYT
PREPREGT
TETRA1T
EXCU
ALPXCU
EXEPGL
ALPXEGL
TO
deformation model
ParameterizedFEA Model
ux mos model
Margin of Safety(> case)
allowable
actual
MS
UX
condition
UY
SX
associated_pwb
nominal_thickness
prepregs[0] nominal_thickness
top_copper_layer nominal_thickness
related_core nominal_thickness
prepregs[0] nominal_thicknesslayers[3]
primary_structure_material linear_elastic_model E
cte
primary_structure_material linear_elastic_model E
cte
reference temperature
temperatureDELTAT
APM ABB
SMM
PWB Warpage Modulesa.k.a. CBAMs: COB-based analysis templates
deformation model
Thermal Bending Beam
L
b
T
Treference
t
T
total diagonalassociated_pwb
total thickness
coefficient of thermal bending
al1
al2
al6
al3
t
TLb
2
warpage
wrapage mos model
allowable
MSactual
Marginof Safety
associated condition
al5
al4
temperature
reference temperature
pwa
APM
ABBPWB Thermal Bending Model
(1D formula-based CBAM)
PWB Plane Strain Model (2D FEA-based CBAM)
APMUsage of Rich Product Models
39
Example Chip Package Products Source: www.shinko.co.jp
Plastic Ball Grid Array (PBGA) Packages Quad Flat Packs (QFPs)
Wafer Level Package (WLP)System-in-Package (SIP)
Glass-to-Metal Seals
40
Flexible High Diversity Design-Analysis Integration
Electronic Packaging Examples: Chip Packages/Mounting Shinko Electric Project: Phase 1 (production usage)
EBGA, PBGA, QFP
CuGround
PKG
Chip
Analysis Modules (CBAMs) of Diverse Behavior & Fidelity
FEAAnsys
General MathMathematica
Analyzable Product Model
XaiTools
XaiToolsChipPackage
ThermalResistance
3D
Modular, ReusableTemplate Librariestemperature change,T
material model
temperature, T
reference temperature, To
cte,
youngs modulus, E
force, F
area, A stress,
undeformed length, Lo
strain,
total elongation,L
length, L
start, x1
end, x2
mv6
mv5
smv1
mv1mv4
E
One D LinearElastic Model(no shear)
T
et
thermal strain, t
elastic strain, emv3
mv2
x
FF
E, A,
LLo
T, ,
yL
r1
12 xxL
r2
oLLL
r4
A
F
sr1
oTTT
r3L
L
m a t e r i a l
e f f e c t i v e l e n g t h , L e f f
d e f o r m a t i o n m o d e l
l i n e a r e l a s t i c m o d e l
L o
T o r s i o n a l R o d
G
J
r
2
1
s h e a r m o d u l u s , G
c r o s s s e c t i o n :e f f e c t i v e r i n g p o l a r m o m e n t o f i n e r t i a , J
a l 1
a l 3
a l 2 a
l i n k a g e
m o d e : s h a f t t o r s i o n
c o n d i t i o n r e a c t i o n
t s 1
A
S l e e v e 1
A t s 2
d s 2
d s 1
S l e e v e 2
L
S h a f t
L e f f
s
T
o u t e r r a d i u s , r o a l 2 b
s t r e s s m o s m o d e l
a l l o w a b l e s t r e s s
t w i s t m o s m o d e l
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
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
a l l o w a b l et w i s t Analysis Tools
Design Tools
PWB DB
Materials DB*
Prelim/APM Design ToolXaiTools ChipPackage
ThermalStress
Basic3D**
** = Demonstration module
BasicDocumentation
AutomationAuthoringMS Excel
41
Typical Issues: Knowledge Representation,Inter-Model Associativity (Model Interoperability)
CAD Modelbulkhead assembly attach point
CAE Model channel fitting analysis
materialproperties
idealizedanalysis
geometry
analysisresults
detaileddesigngeometry
No explicit
fine-grained
CAD-CAE
associativity
inconsisten
cy littleautomationlittleknowledge capture
42
Analysis Tools
0.4375 in
0.5240 in
0.0000 in
2.440 in
1.267 in
0.307 in
0.5 in
0.310 in
2.088 in
1.770 in
67000 psi
65000 psi
57000 psi
52000 psi
39000 psi
0.067 in/in
0.030 in/in
5960 Ibs
1
10000000 psi
9.17
5.11
9.77
rear spar fitting attach point
BLE7K18
2G7T12U (Detent 0, Fairing Condition 1)
L29 -300
Outboard TE Flap, Support No 2;Inboard Beam, 123L4567
Bulkhead Fitting Joint
Program
Part
Feature
Channel FittingStatic Strength Analysis
Template
1 of 1Dataset
strength model
r1
e
b
h
tb
te
Pu
Ftu
E
r2
r0
a
FtuLT
Fty
FtyLT
epuLT
tw
MSwall
epu
jm
MSepb
MSeps
Channel FittingStatic Strength Analysis
Fsu
IAS FunctionRef D6-81766
end pad
base
material
wall
analysis context
mode: (ultimate static strength)
condition:
heuristic: overall fitting factor, Jm
bolt
fitting
headradius, r1
hole radius, ro
width, b
eccentricity, e
thickness, teheight, h
radius, r2
thickness, tb
hole
thickness, twangled height, a
max allowable ultimate stress,
allowable ultimate long transverse stress,
max allowable yield stress,
max allowable long transverse stress,
max allowable shear stress,
plastic ultimate strain,
plastic ultimate strain long transverse,
young modulus of elasticity,
load, Pu
Ftu
Fty
FtyLT
Fsu
epu
epuLT
E
FtuLT
product structure (channel fitting joint)
Flexible High Diversity Design-Analysis Integration Phases 1-3 Airframe Examples:
“Bike Frame” / Flap Support Inboard Beam
Analysis Modules (CBAMs) of Diverse Feature:Mode, & Fidelity
Design Tools
Materials DBFEA
Elfini*MATDB-like
Analyzable Product Model
XaiTools
XaiTools
Fitting:Bending/Shear
3D
1.5D
Modular, ReusableTemplate Libraries
MCAD ToolsCATIA v4, v5
Lug:Axial/Oblique; Ultimate/Shear
1.5D
Assembly:Ultimate/
FailSafe/Fatigue*
* = Item not yet available in toolkit (all others have working examples)
diagonal brace lug jointj = top
0.7500 in
0.35 in
0.7500 in
1.6000 in
2
0.7433
14.686 K
2.40
4.317 K
8.633 K
k = norm
Max. torque brake settingdetent 30, 2=3.5º
7050-T7452, MS 7-214
67 Ksi
L29 -300
Outboard TE Flap, Support No 2;Inboard Beam, 123L4567
Diagonal Brace Lug Joint
Program
Part
Feature
Lug JointAxial Ultimate Strength Model
Template
j = top lugk = normal diameter (1 of 4)
Dataset
material
deformation model
max allowable ultimate stress, FtuL
effective width, W
analysis context
objective
mode (ultimate static strength)
condition
estimated axial ultimate strength
Margin of Safety(> case)
allowable
actual
MS
normal diameter, Dnorm
thickness, t
edge margin, e
Plug joint
size,n
lugs
lugj hole
diameters
product structure (lug joint)
r1
n
P jointlug
L [ j:1,n ]
Plug
L [ k]Dk
oversize diameter, Dover
D
PaxuW
e
t
Ftuax
Kaxu
Lug Axial UltimateStrength Model
BDM 6630
Fasteners DB
FASTDB-like
General Math Mathematica
In-HouseCodes
Image API(CATGEO);
VBScript
43
Explicit Capture of Idealizations (part-specific template adaptation in bike frame case)
DetailedFeatures/ParametersTagged in CAD Model (CATIA)
zf
xf
cavity3.base.minimum_thickness
yf
xf
rib8
cavity 3
rib9
= t8,t 9
rib8.thicknessrib9.thickness
cavity3.width, w3
zf
yf
xf
zfxf
yf
i - Relations between idealized CAE parameters and detailed CAD parameters1 : b = cavity3.inner_width + rib8.thickness/2 + rib9.thickness/2
2 : te = cavity3.base.minimum_thickness
Idealized Features in CAE Model
Tension Fitting Analysis
yf
Often missing in
today’s process
2
1
te
b
44
Today’s Fitting Catalog Documentation from DM 6-81766 Design Manual
Channel Fitting End Pad Bending Analysis
AngleFitting
BathtubFitting
ChannelFitting
Categories of Idealized FittingsCalculation Steps
45
Modular Fitting TemplatesObject-Oriented Hierarchy of Analysis Building Blocks (ABBs)
Fitting Casing Body
Channel Fitting Casing Body*
Bathtub Fitting Casing Body
Angle FittingCasing Body
Fitting System ABB
Fitting Wall ABBFitting End Pad ABB
Fitting Bolt Body*
Open Wall FittingCasing Body
Fitting End Pad Bending ABB Fitting End Pad
Shear ABB*
Open Wall Fitting End Pad Bending ABB
Channel FittingEnd Pad Bending ABB*
e
se
tr
Pf
02
3 )2( b 1 teKC
21
e
be
ht
PCf
21 1 KKC
),,,( 011 erRrfK
),(2 we ttfK
),,( 13 hbrfK
baR
2
dfRe
),min( wbwaw ttt
bolt
load
Fitting Washer Body
Specialized Analysis Body
P
ABB
Specialized Analysis System
washercasing
* = Working Examples
ABB: - independent of specific products - usable on many designs
46
r1
sefactual shear stress,bolt.head.radius, r0
end_pad.thickness, te
load, P e
setr
Pf
02
Channel Fitting System ABBs
End Pad Bending Analysis
End Pad Shear Analysis
e n d _ p a d .e cce n tr ic ity , e
e n d _ p a d .w id th , b
b o lt.h o le .ra d iu s , r1
r2 r3
r1
h
r1
h
be n d _ p a d .h e ig h t, h3K
befa c tu a l b e n d in g s tre ss ,
ch a n n e l f itt in g fa c to r,
D M 6 -8 1 7 6 6 F ig u re 3 .3
b a se .th ickn e ss , tb
e n d _ p a d .th ickn e ss , te
lo a d , P
23 )2(e
bbeht
PteKf
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.41
1.5
2
2.5
3
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
ABB = analysis building block
47
“Bike Frame” Bulkhead Fitting Analysis TemplateUsing Constrained Object (COB) Knowledge/Info Representation
0.4375 in
0.5240 in
0.0000 in
2.440 in
1.267 in
0.307 in
0.5 in
0.310 in
2.088 in
1.770 in
67000 psi
65000 psi
57000 psi
52000 psi
39000 psi
0.067 in/in
0.030 in/in
5960 Ibs
1
10000000 psi
9.17
5.11
9.77
bulkhead fitting attach point
LE7K18
2G7T12U (Detent 0, Fairing Condition 1)
L29 -300
Outboard TE Flap, Support No 2;Inboard Beam, 123L4567
Bulkhead Fitting Joint
Program
Part
Feature
Channel FittingStatic Strength Analysis
Template
1 of 1Dataset
strength model
r1
e
b
h
tb
te
Pu
Ftu
E
r2
r0
a
FtuLT
Fty
FtyLT
epuLT
tw
MSwall
epu
jm
MSepb
MSeps
Channel FittingStatic Strength Analysis
Fsu
IAS FunctionRef DM 6-81766
end pad
base
material
wall
analysis context
mode: (ultimate static strength)
condition:
heuristic: overall fitting factor, Jm
bolt
fitting
headradius, r1
hole radius, ro
width, b
eccentricity, e
thickness, teheight, h
radius, r2
thickness, tb
hole
thickness, twangled height, a
max allowable ultimate stress,
allowable ultimate long transverse stress,
max allowable yield stress,
max allowable long transverse stress,
max allowable shear stress,
plastic ultimate strain,
plastic ultimate strain long transverse,
young modulus of elasticity,
load, Pu
Ftu
Fty
FtyLT
Fsu
epu
epuLT
E
FtuLT
product structure (channel fitting joint)
e
se
tr
Pf
02
21
e
be
ht
PCf
),,( 13 hbrfK
48
Bike Frame Bulkhead Fitting AnalysisCOB-based Analysis Template - in XaiTools
Detailed CAD datafrom CATIA
Idealized analysis features in APM
Explicit multi-directional associativity between detailed CAD data & idealized analysis features
Modular generic analysis templates(ABBs)
Library data for materials & fasteners
Focus Point ofCAD-CAE Integration
Object-oriented spreadsheet
49
Cost of Associativity GapsReference: http://eislab.gatech.edu/pubs/reports/EL004/
Categories of Gap Costs• Associativity time & labor - Manual maintenance - Little re-use - Lost knowledge• Inconsistencies• Limited analysis usage - Fewer parts analyzed - Fewer iterations per part• “Wrong” values - Too conservative: Extra part costs and performance inefficiencies - Too loose: Re-work, failures, law suits
e
se
tr
Pf
02
21
e
be
ht
PCf
),,( 13 hbrfK
Analysis Model(with Idealized Features)
Detailed Design Model
Channel Fitting Analysis
idealizations
No explicit
fine-grained
CAD-CAE
associativity
000,000,10$gap
$10 gaps000,000,1
gaps000,000,1analysis
variables 10
part
analyses 10parts 000,10
OOO
OOOO
Initial Cost Estimate per Complex Product (only for manual maintenance costs of structural analysis problems)
50
Information Capture Gaps:Content Coverage and Semantics
Existing Tools
Tool A1 Tool An...
“dumb” information capture(only human-sensible,I.e., not computer-sensible)
LegendContent
Coverage Gaps
ContentSemantic Gaps
Smart Product ModelBuilding Blocks • Models & meta-models
• International standards• Industry specs• Corporate standards• Local customizations
• Modeling technologies:• Express, UML, XML, COBs, …
Example “dumb” figures
51
Summary Tool independent model interoperability
– Application focus: analysis template methodology
Multi-representation architecture (MRA) & constrained objects (COBs):– Addresses fundamental gaps:
» Idealizations & CAD-CAE associativity: multi-fidelity, multi-directional, fine-grained
– Based on information & knowledge theory– Structured, flexible, and extensible
Improved quality, cost, time:– Capture engineering knowledge in a reusable form – Reduce information inconsistencies– Increase analysis intensity & effectiveness
» Reducing modeling cycle time by 75% (production usage)
52
For Further Information ...
Contact: [email protected]
Web site: http://eislab.gatech.edu/– Publications, project overviews, tools, etc.– See: X-Analysis Integration (XAI) Central
http://eislab.gatech.edu/research/XAI_Central.doc
– Engineering Framework Interest Group (EFWIG)http://eislab.gatech.edu/efwig/
XaiTools™ home page: http://eislab.gatech.edu/tools/XaiTools/
Pilot commercial ESB: http://www.u-engineer.com/– Internet-based self-serve analysis– Analysis module catalog for electronic packaging– Highly automated front-ends to general FEA & math tools