Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T15:17:17.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Investigation of advantages of models and the modelling process by introducing a model evaluation concept

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

Thomas Schumacher  and
David Inkermann
Thomas Schumacher*
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Clausthal, Germany
David Inkermann
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Clausthal, Germany
*
schumacher@imw.tu-clausthal.de

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Within Model-based Systems Engineering different kinds of model will be created to support the execution of engineering activites. This contribution introduces an evaluation concept which focuses on the model informativity and its usefulness within the modelling process. Thereby, it shall be investigated which advantages the integration of model elements based on different levels of abstraction and a reduction of model formalisation enables. For the model creation the analogue modelling method will be applied, which uses physical (tangible) model elements.

Keywords

model-based systems engineering (MBSE)design modelsmodel evaluationanalogue modelling method
Type
Systems Engineering and Design
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 4: DESIGN 2024 , May 2024 , pp. 2735 - 2744
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2024.

References

Andreasen, M.M. (1994), “Modelling—The Language of the Designer”, Journal of Engineering Design, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 103–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544829408907876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albers, A., Bursac, N., Urbanec, J., Lüdcke, R. and Rachenkova, G. (2014), Knowledge Management in Product Generation Development – an empirical study. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.5104.4643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buur, J. and Andreasen, M.M. (1989), “Design models in mechatronic product development”, Design Studies, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(89)90033-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelman, J., Grosskopf, A., Weske, M. and Leifer, L. (2009), “Tangible Business Process Modeling: A New Approach”, in International Conference on Engineering Design.Google Scholar
Friedenthal, S. (2014), A Practical Guide to SysML: The Systems Modeling Language, The MK / OMG Press, 3rd ed., Elsevier Science, San Francisco. ISBN: 978-0128002025Google Scholar
ISO/IEC/IEEE (2015), Systems and software engineering - System life cycle processes No. 15288, Düsseldorf.Google Scholar
Luebbe, A. (2011), Tangible Business Process Modeling: Design and Evaluation of a Process Model Elicitation Technique.Google Scholar
Luebbe, A. and Weske, M. (2012), “Determining the Effect of Tangible Business Process Modeling”, in Plattner, H., Meinel, C. and Leifer, L. (Eds.), Design Thinking Research, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 241–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21643-5_14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mordecai, Y. and Dori, D. (2016), “Towards a Quantitative Framework for Evaluating the Expressive Power of Conceptual System Models”, INCOSE International Symposium, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-5837.2016.00144.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
OMG (2009), Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN), 1.2th ed.Google Scholar
Reich, Y. (1995), “Measuring the value of knowledge”, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1995.1002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reich, Y. (2002), “Synthesis and theory of knowledge: general design theory as a theory of knowledge, and its implication to design”, in Chakrabarti, A. (Ed.), Engineering Design Synthesis, Springer, London, pp. 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3717-7_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumacher, T. and Inkermann, D. (2022), “Heterogeneous models to Support Interdisciplinary Engineering - Mapping Model Elements of SysML and CAD”, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 109, pp. 653–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2022.05.309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumacher, T. and Inkermann, D. (2023), “Model Inconsistencies and Solution Approaches to Maintain Consistency in Model-based Systems Engineering”, in Michler, O. (Ed.), ICONS 2023: The Eighteenth International Conference on Systems April 24th-28th, 2023, Venice, Italy, IARIA, Wilmington, DE, pp. 23–28. ISBN: 978-1-68558-037-7Google Scholar
Schumacher, T., Kaczmarek, D., Inkermann, D. and Lohrengel, A. (2022), “Fostering Model Consistency in Interdisciplinary Engineering by Linking SysML and CAD-Models”, in 2022 IEEE International Symposium on Systems Engineering (ISSE), 24.10.2022 - 26.10.2022, Vienna, Austria, IEEE, pp. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSE54508.2022.10005327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walden, D.D., Roedler, G.J., Forsberg, K., Hamelin, R.D. and Shortell, T.M. (Eds.) (2015), Systems engineering handbook: A guide for system life cycle processes and activities, Fourth Edition, Wiley, Hoboken, N.J. ISBN: 9781118999400Google Scholar