Classification of Engineering Models by Physical Effects

IEEE International Symposium on Systems Engineering, pp. 1–8

Abstract

To reduce costs and time for development, virtual product tests are being carried out more and more frequently. Within model-based system engineering approaches, engineering models are used to execute virtual product tests e.g. load, efficiency, thermal calculation, etc. As a consequence, the number of engineering models is growing. In order to carry out virtual product tests fast and efficiently, it is crucial to increase the reuse of created models. By retrieving models, meaningful reuse can be enabled. However, in an existing model landscape, it is often difficult to find a suitable model for certain tests because e.g. the content of the model is not well documented. To find and choose a suitable model, an objective description of engineering models is required. With the help of an objective description of engineering models, physical differences between models can be revealed. For providing an objective description, in literature model assessment and comparison criteria are published. However, criteria are missing the specifically implemented physics within a model. System scope is a part of a classification scheme, which describes the parts of a product that is mapped in a model. We propose to analyse the system scope of an engineering model up to the specific physical effect occurring within the modelled system. Furthermore, each implemented physical effect can be detailed by the modelling fidelity (e. g. analytical equation or differential equation) which is also a part of a classification scheme. By applying this approach to different gear system engineering models, detailed model differences can be revealed and contrasted.

Authors 4

1. Patrick Jagla Aachen Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering

   RWTH Aachen University

   Affiliation as printed

   RWTH University,Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering,Aachen,Germany

   Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering, RWTH University, Aachen, Germany

2. Georg Jacobs Aachen Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering

   RWTH Aachen University

   Affiliation as printed

   RWTH University,Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering,Aachen,Germany

   Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering, RWTH University, Aachen, Germany

3. Gregor Höpfner Aachen Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering

   RWTH Aachen University

   Affiliation as printed

   RWTH University,Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering,Aachen,Germany

   Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering, RWTH University, Aachen, Germany

4. Joerg Berroth Aachen Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering

   RWTH Aachen University

   Affiliation as printed

   RWTH University,Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering,Aachen,Germany

   Institute for Machine Elements and Systems Engineering, RWTH University, Aachen, Germany