The 3+1 SysML View-Model in Model Integrated Mechatronics

Kleanthis Thramboulidis

.

DOI: 10.4236/jsea.2010.32014                

Abstract

Software is becoming the driving force in today’s mechatronic systems. It does not only realize a significant part of their functionality but it is also used to realize their most competitive advantages. However, the traditional development process is wholly inappropriate for the development of these systems that impose a tighter coupling of software with electronics and mechanics. In this paper, a synergistic integration of the constituent parts of mechatronic systems, i.e. mechanical, electronic and software is proposed though the 3+1 SysML view-model. SysML is used to specify the cen-tral view-model of the mechatronic system while the other three views are for the different disciplines involved. The widely used in software engineering V-model is extended to address the requirements set by the 3+1 SysML view-model and the Model Integrated Mechatronics (MIM) paradigm. A SysML profile is described to facilitate the application of the proposed view-model in the development of mechatronic systems.

Keywords

Systems Engineering, System Modeling, Mechatronic Component, Model Driven Development, Model In-tegrated Mechatronics, SysML Profile, V-Model, IEC61499

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	G. Rzevski, “On conceptual design of intelligent mecha-tronic systems,” Mechatronics, 2003.
[2]	W. Schafer and H. Wehrheim, “The challenges of build-ing advanced mechatronic systems,” Future of Software Engineering, International Conference on Software Engi-neering, IEEE Computer Society, 2007.
[3]	Philipp Limbourg, “Dependability modelling under un-certainty: An imprecise probabilistic approach,” Springer, 2008.
[4]	K. Thramboulidis, “Model integrated mechatronics: To-wards a new paradigm in the development of manufac-turing systems,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Infor-matics, Vol. 1, No. 1, February 2005.
[5]	OMG, “OMG Systems Modeling Language (OMG SysML?),” V1.0, September 2007.
[6]	GD250, “Lifecycle process model ‘V-Model’,” Available online: http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/gd-pa/vmodel/ vm1. htm#application
[7]	K. Thramboulidis, G. Doukas, and G. Koumoutsos, “A SOA-based embedded systems development environment for industrial automation,” EURASIP Journal on Embed-ded Systems, Article ID 312671, pp. 15, 2008.
[8]	K. Thramboulidis, “Challenges in the development of mechatronic systems: The mechatronic component,” 13th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technolo-gies and Factory Automation (ETFA), Hamburg, Ger-many, September 2008.
[9]	OMG, “Unified modeling language: Superstructure,” version 2.1.1, formal/2007-02-03.
[10]	M. Habib, “Mechatronics,” IEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine, Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer 2007.
[11]	S. Burmester, H. Giese, and M. Tichy, “Model-driven development of reconfigurable mechatronic systems with mechatronic ‘UML’ in model driven architecture,” Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, Vol. 3599, 2005.
[12]	K. Knorr, A. Lapp, P. Torre Flores, J. Schirmer, D. Kraft J. Petersen, M. Bourhaleb, and T. Bertram “A process model for distributed development of networked mecha-tronic components in motor vehicles,” Proceedings of the IEEE Joint International Conference on Requirements Engineering (RE’02), 2002
[13]	R. Nordmann, “Use of mechatronic components in rotat-ing machinery,” Book: Vibration Problems ICOVP 2005, Springer Netherlands, Vol. 111, January 20, 2007.
[14]	J. El-khoury, O. Redell, and M. Torngren, “A tool integra-tion platform for multi-disciplinary development,” Pro-ceedings of the 2005 31st EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, 2005.
[15]	G. Doukas and K. Thramboulidis, “A real-time Linux based framework for model-driven engineering in control and automation,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Elec-tronics (forthcoming).
[16]	G. Pahl, W. Beitz, J. Feldhusen, and K. H. Grote, “Engi-neering design: A systematic approach,” Third Edition, Springer-Verlag London, 2007.
[17]	R. Eckert, W. Mansel, and G. Specht, “Model transfer among CASE tools in systems engineering,” Systems En-gineering, Vol. 8, No 1, pp. 41–50, March 2005.
[18]	P. Kruchten, “The 4+1 view model of architecture,” IEEE Software, Vol. 12, No. 6, pp. 42–50, November 1995.
[19]	OMG, “SysML and AP233 mapping activity,” OMG SysML portal, http://www.omgwiki.org/OMGSysML/ doku. php?id=sysml-ap233:mapping_between_sysml_and_ap233.
[20]	L. Constantine, “Activity modeling: Toward a pragmatic integration of activity theory with usage-centered design,” Technical Paper, Available on-line: http://www. foru se. com/ articles/activitymodeling.pdf
[21]	“The workpartner mobile service robot,” http://automa- tion.tkk.fi/