2.1.1 Putting Chaos under Control: on how Modeling should Support Design

Moneva, Hristina; Hamberg, Roelof; Punter, Teade; Vissers, J.M.H.

doi:10.1002/j.2334-5837.2010.tb01063.x

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A model and, thus, a modeling language, should only be used to cover those aspects of a system that are relevant for a particular purpose. Yet, as observed in (Moneva et al 2010), in current industrial practice, multiple formalisms are used sometimes even to describe the same aspects of a system or to solve one single problem. At system level, model-based approaches usually rely on model transformations to cope with different formalisms, with inherent limitations on the number of supported formalisms, on their applicability to a single domain or on the flexibility of such solutions.…”

Section: Some Attempts To Master Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the methodological side, surveys on MBSE (Estefan 2008, Moneva et al 2010, Seidner 2006) provide a clear vision of the multiple processes, methods and languages available to systems engineers. Almost all of the methodologies presented in these surveys, however, propose solutions stemming both from the software, real-time systems domains and from the SE domain with a scope that is not always clear-cut.…”

Section: Some Attempts To Master Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

10.1.1 A Commonsense‐Driven Architecture Framework. Part 1: A Car Manufacturer's (naïve) Take on MBSE

Góngora

Dauron

Gaudré

2012

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper tells a short story on our journey in "Model-based-land" and on our quest of Systems Engineering maturity. It presents an overview of our impressions on the MBSE landscape and of the approach that we have adopted on MBSE, and gives a brief overview of the first results of this approach. This paper is the first part of a three-fold communication on current initiatives at Renault aiming at improving the efficiency of product development and mastering the complexity of automotive systems. These initiatives concern the development of MBSE and, in particular, the definition of an automotive architecture framework.

show abstract

Section: Some Attempts To Master Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Some Attempts To Master Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

10.1.1 A Commonsense‐Driven Architecture Framework. Part 1: A Car Manufacturer's (naïve) Take on MBSE

Góngora

Dauron

Gaudré

2012

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This versioning as a required capability was concluded at the end of the research period, and so remained an unresolved issue. Versioning of the integrated shared models can probably best be done on a basis of important design decisions, as argued in [Moneva et al, 2009]. At the moment of writing this thesis, cooperation with the Embedded Systems Innovation by TNO (ESI) is underway to look into this idea, however, it remains out of scope of this thesis.…”

Section: Required Capabilities To Model Design Workflowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consistency, integration, and reuse in multi-disciplinary design processes: through an architecture modeling framework

Woestenenk¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work has been published using L A T E X 2 ε and the Twentethesis documentclass.Duurt even, maar dan heb je ook wat... SummaryThe development of modern (mechatronic) systems demands close cooperation between experts from multiple engineering disciplines. These disciplines each speak their own engineering language and can even have conflicting views of what the system is. This leads to a complex situation that impedes the communication between these experts, as well as the integration of design and analysis tools.The main 'pressures' in improving multi disciplinary design are the improvement of system performance, time-to-market and cost. This can be improved by facilitating communication between stakeholders, modeling architectural concerns and other important design information, and facilitating capturing and reusing design knowledge across disciplines. These pressures, however, cannot be subject to direct scientific research, as experiments cannot be easily realized: We cannot let multiple companies perform multiple design processes to compare methods that aim to improve the pressures. Instead, the pressures are 'transformed' in the issues of consistency, integration and reuse, which can be evaluated through case studies. As such, the hypothesis for this thesis is: The consistency, integration and reusability of multi-disciplinary design processes can be improved by facilitating communication between stakeholders, modeling architectural concerns and other important design information, and facilitating capturing and reusing design knowledge across disciplines.To help this communication, multiple stakeholders need to have a shared model to: share design decisions, create common understanding of the design process, share deliverables (workflow), and keep this shared information consistent. In such a model, stakeholders can make their own views to create models for their aspects of the system. The information in these views can be connected to other views, and even reused by copying or referencing. This facilitates the stakeholder gathering the information from multiple sources to do his job, or allow exposing his concerns so he can influence activities performed by experts of other disciplines.The argument of this thesis is: there is a lack of a common language that can describe both the system architecture and information flows in the design process. Such a language should enable us to model the shared information between the designers and their models and the tools that they use. There is no unifying modeling language to exchange information across disciplines, across design process phases and across levels of granularity. This means we lack the means to make a model of all design aspects, especially the ones that cut across the design disciplines. We lack the means to model how information from the mono disciplinary design tasks is handed over to subsequent design tasks. And we lack the means VIII to provide a big picture of how mono disciplinary design information is connected to the abstract system wide ...

show abstract

A customized design framework for the model-based development of engine control systems

Hüfner

Sonntag

Engell

et al. 2013

IECON 2013 - 39th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

2.1.1 Putting Chaos under Control: on how Modeling should Support Design

Cited by 3 publications

References 14 publications

10.1.1 A Commonsense‐Driven Architecture Framework. Part 1: A Car Manufacturer's (naïve) Take on MBSE

10.1.1 A Commonsense‐Driven Architecture Framework. Part 1: A Car Manufacturer's (naïve) Take on MBSE

Consistency, integration, and reuse in multi-disciplinary design processes: through an architecture modeling framework

A customized design framework for the model-based development of engine control systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About