Transcript Assembly planning - Context, Representation, Methods, Tools

Integrated subsystem design Auto-generating EASY5 models from CAD data
Raju Mattikalli
Brian Ummel
Bruce Fritchman
Boeing Mathematics and Computing Technology
Overview
•
•
•
•
•
•
Integrated design - information flow
Subsystem design process today
KIRTS
KIRTS-EASY5 proof of concept
Lessons learnt
Conclusions, future work
Information flow during design
Preliminary
Design
Detailed
Design
Functional
Analysis
• Gaps exists
• Tool integration is required
• Need to improve product representation
Integrated design
Requirements • Manage change
• Maintain consistency
• Represent system in intermediate states
• Support different views
• Capture product variations
• Concurrent product/process development
Our context - System (tubing) design
The process today
• PD
–
–
–
–
Architecture
Functional requirements + interfaces
Schematic
Analysis, get component requirements
• ID
– Schematic <==> component catalog
– Analysis <==> vendor software
– Refine analysis
The process today (contd.)
• DD
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Physical components for nodes
Place components in 3D
Determine interfaces
Schematic lines to spaghetti tubes
Route tubes
Break tubes
Finalize schematic, rerun simulation
The tools
• IDM - preliminary design
– architecture, layout, schematic, sizing
• EASY5 - functional analysis
– performance
• CATIA - corporate CAD, PDM tool
• KIRTS - detailed design
– generative geometry
• SPARTS, ESDS, CPIMS, Enovia
Filling the gaps
EASY5
- connectivity
- flow direction
- parameters
- analysis
XML
IDM (PD)
- connectivity
Schematic (KIRTS)
- tube size, c-line
- flow reqds
- flight condn
- connectivity
- logical ports
- EASY5 types
- mapping to geom
CATIA
KIRTS
- geometry
- assembly str
Build a proof of concept
EASY5
- connectivity
- flow direction
- parameters
- analysis
XML
Schematic
- connectivity
- logical ports
- EASY5 types
- mapping to geom
• Automatic EASY5 model
from KIRTS
– Input to KIRTS
• equipment geometry
• equip. names, types
• connectivity
KIRTS
- geometry
- assembly str – KIRTS generates tubes
– Output from KIRTS
• EASY5 XML of schematics
– Functional model in EASY5
KIRTS: Aircraft Systems Design
In context design generation
 Rich design representations
 Find errors and inconsistencies
 Explore and evaluate design alternatives

KIRTS approach
• Rich, integrated design representations
• Logical reasoning about design representations
• Design rules that operate on the design
representations
• Grammars for generating languages of designs
Integrating CAD and Function
• CAD Representation
–
–
–
–
Solid Models
Parts & Assemblies
Ports / Interfaces
Part Classifications
• Schematics
– Connectivity
– System Hierarchy
• Simulation Models
KIRTS context
KIRTS Schematic
• Component names, types, ports
• Connectivity
• Currently specified in prolog
– connect_ schem(FilterU, 'Outlet', Line3U, '1')
– connect_schem(ReliefValveU, 'Inlet', Line3U, '2')
Relate schematic to geometry
• Many-many mapping
• Need to maintain consistency
• Change propagation
Implement connectivity
• Generate tubes automatically
• Map tubes to schematic
Generate EASY5 XML
• Produced from schematic
• Geometric parameters obtained from KIRTS
• Other attributes also represented in KIRTS
Integrated representation
XML file read into EASY5 produces….
EASY5 Model
A typical EASY5 component (Pipe)
INPUT
Quantity
W
TF
P
PD
TR
DH
LEN
RFC
HI
HO
EFX
QIN
MTW
...
Port
#
1
1
2
2
2
Description
Mass inlet
Temp
Pressure O.
Pres. Rate
Temp
Hy. dia.
Length
Roughness
Heat Coeff.
Heat Coeff.
Flux
Int. heat
Therm. M.
OUTPUT
Units
Quantity
Kg/m
C
bar
bar/sec
C
cm
cm
cm
W/m2/C
W/m2/C
W/cm2
W
J/C
Q
W
TF
P
PD
TR
PF
TW
SQW
SSS
QF
REY
FRC
...
Port
#
2
2
2
1
1
1
Description
Mass inlet
Temp
Pressure O.
Pres. Rate
Temp
Hy. dia.
Length
Roughness
Heat Coeff.
Heat Coeff.
Flux
Int. heat
Therm. M.
Units
Kg/m
C
bar
bar/sec
C
cm
cm
cm
W/m2/C
W/m2/C
W/cm2
W
J/C
Library data
•
•
•
•
Need to develop interfaces to library data
Company has a variety of standards libraries
Need a single library standard
Geometry, ports, analysis parameters,
compatibility, preferred standards, inventory
• SPARTS, ISDS, PSDS, DMAPS, Enovia, ...
Advantages
• Greatly simplifies generation of EASY5 model
– connectivity
– parameters
• Better control over scope of analysis
– specific geometric contexts
– specific spatial context
– specific system
Lessons learned
• Schematic is unifying concept
• However granularity of schematic differs
• Initial challenges
– Management of ports---multiple semantics
– Schematic to geometry link
– Source of parameter values for analysis
Need better integration
Want --• Simulation based design
• Numerically optimize design parameters
• Integrate with PD
Produce better design early in design process
Conclusion
• Significant benefits from CAD integration
– simplifies generation of EASY5 model
– control scope of analysis
– more simulation during design
• But...we need better, integrated representations
• Towards simulation based optimal system design