Innovation day 2012 16. koenraad rombaut & michiel de paepe - verhaert - model based design; added value & case study destecs'
•
1 like•1,627 views
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (7)
Similar to Innovation day 2012 16. koenraad rombaut & michiel de paepe - verhaert - model based design; added value & case study destecs'
Similar to Innovation day 2012 16. koenraad rombaut & michiel de paepe - verhaert - model based design; added value & case study destecs' (20)
More from Verhaert Masters in Innovation
More from Verhaert Masters in Innovation (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Innovation day 2012 16. koenraad rombaut & michiel de paepe - verhaert - model based design; added value & case study destecs'
- 1. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 2 DESTECS - DREDGING EXCAVATOR - VERHAERT CASE STUDY MODEL BASED DESIGN FOR EMBEDDED CONTROL SYSTEMS CONFIDENTIAL Koenraad Rombaut, Michiel de Paepe Applied physics & systems Koenraad.rombaut@verhaert.com, michiel.depaepe@verhaert.com
- 2. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 3 Model Based Design in general: • What ? • Why ? • How ? A model based design case study: • Case study • Models • Conclusions & demonstration Content
- 3. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 4 What ? Model driven engineering ? Model based development ? Build model Plant / Process Product design Design Concepts Verification Implement Product code Testing ModelspaceCodespace Model = system + control + environment + stimuli Multi-domain = control + system behaviour Coupling / transformations models design requirements design implementation test scenario
- 4. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 5 Why ? Why ? • Cheaper & faster • Higher reliability • Better definition When ? • Complex processes / designs Complex control strategies • High reliability • Early validation • Fast developments • Changing requirements Outputs: • design inputs • insights • derisk
- 5. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 6 Why : definition Communication between disciplines, with customer & subcontractors, over project phases Re-use of subsystems Safety factor for (sw) budget & schedule Needs Requirements Specs Design Implementation Documentation Needs (what do we want) vs. specifications (how do we define) Specifying new (innovating) products and subsystems Changing requirements
- 6. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 7 Why simulation : early validation Benefits • More and faster iterations • Parallel hw & sw development • Multiple off-nominal and fault testing (non feasible tests) • Early full system validation and risk mitigation without hw • Less real-life testing (= the poor man’s approach) • More optimal system design by sw-physics co-simulation • Improved communication & design specification => time & cost reduction Traditional: • sequential = lengthy • validation on hw = late Model based: • Parallel = fast • validation on model = early Device Requirements System Design Subsystem requirements Detailled Design Functional Test Component Test Device Validation System Verfication
- 7. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 8 Why early: cost vs. freedom • Design & test freedom • Unlimited measurements in simulation • Lots of risks • Cost (project, build, measurement, change) • Real world representation • Number of people involved Lab model Field model Virtual model Risk/Effort Time
- 8. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 9 Re-use proven tools from high reliability domains? • Space, aeronautics, nuclear, automotive, chemical plants • Domain specific tools • Tool cost not an issue • Long learning curve, less flexibility Need for a new toolchain • affordable • flexible, scalable for generic developments • easy learning (graphical ?) • open (no vendor lock-in) • automatic transformations How ?
- 9. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 10 How: examples Multi domain tools: • Matlab/Simulink + SimMech+StateFlow + RTW + AutoSar • Dymola / Modelica • LabView • SysML / Raphsody Some research projects • Modelisar: Modelica + Autosar • Destecs: co-sim CT + DE • Deploy: B for dependable sw
- 10. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 11 How : Modelisar / Autosar ? Application sw Hardware standardized HW-specific Customer needs Adaptive Cruise Control Lane Departure Warning Advanced Front Lighting System Using standards Communication Stack OSEK Diagnostics CAN, FlexRay Autosar = Automotive hw interface Modelica = Plant modelling
- 11. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 12 Case study : excavator with Destecs Complex • manual operations • => inherent fault tolerant design • 3D dynamic motion, digging map & boundaries • unknown soil conditions • multidomain: hydraulics, mechanics, sw Well known case • Manual operator as a reference • Scalable & testable Destecs differentiators: • discrete event (sw) & continuous time (physics) • fault injection & error checking • open
- 12. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 13 Model Based Design in general: • What ? • Why ? • How ? A model based design case study: • Case study introduction • Models • Scale model • Continuous time model • Discrete event model • Conclusions & demonstration Content
- 13. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 14 DESTECS inspiration • Inspiration • Use collaborative multidisciplinary design of Embedded Systems • Rapid construction and evaluation of system models • Evaluated on industrial applications • Need because of Embedded Systems • More demanding functional & non-functional requirements • Reliability, Fault Tolerance • Increasingly distributed • More design possibilities, and faults • Communication between physics and control
- 14. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 15 DESTECS approach • Methods and Open tools • Model-based approach for collaborative design of ECS • Co-simulation • Different tools, reflecting relevant aspects of design • Rapid, consistent analysis & comparison of models • Advances needed in • Continuous time modeling • Discrete event modeling • Fault modeling and fault tolerance • Open tool frameworks
- 15. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 16 Dredging • Dredging = Underwater excavation • No visual • Introducing semi automated control
- 17. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 18 Actuators Full scale Hydraulic pistons vs. Scale model Electric linear actuators 12V full speed out 0V no movement -12V full speed retract
- 18. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 19 Sensors Incremental encoders 2 shifted square waves Step and direction information Driving step counter (up and down) 1 index pulse / revolution Absolute positioning
- 20. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 21 3D Model • STL-files for visualisation • Mass & Inertia • Dimmensions
- 23. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 24 Operator • Joystick inputs (from CSV files) • Pressing buttons • Power on • Start/Stop • Manual/Assisted mode
- 24. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 25 Safety unit • Redundant system • In normal circumstances, no action • Overrules controller at controller failure Software bug, unforeseen situation, hardware failure • If triggered, 3 actions: Trigger emergency state on controller Overrule output and thereby stop all motion Cut off power to the motors (unimplemented, slows down CT)
- 26. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 27 Operation modes Direct mode Assisted mode
- 27. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 28 Assisted mode Boom encoder Stick encoder Bucket encoder X-joystick Y-joystick Scoop-joystick Kinematics Inverse kinematics Angular velocities: Boom, Stick, Bucket Actuator velocities: Boom, Stick, Bucket Boom linear actuator Stick linear actuator Bucket linear actuator
- 28. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 29 Conclusions • Ability to implement large level of complexity at both sides: Physics and Controller • Currently it’s an academic tool, not mature. • Steep learning curve, only for large and complex projects
- 29. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 30 Excavator : current practice Mechanics • 3D CAD System design • requirements doc • architecture doc • design specs doc Electronics • schematic Hydraulics • 1D model control sw • C-code Detailed design Build & Integration Final product • Test & verification sensor actuator
- 30. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 31 20sim • continuous time • multi-disciplinary • graphical • open libraries with validated components • from high level to detailed Co-Sim IF • version tracking • co-sim solver • design space exploration • fault injection VDM++ • discrete event • inherent condition checking • formal • graphical (via UML) • support for sw methods • C-code generation Excavator : with DESTECS
- 31. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 32 CONFIDENTIAL Time for a demonstration
- 33. CONFIDENTIAL 26.10.2012 Slide 34 VERHAERT MASTERS IN INNOVATION® Headquarters Hogenakkerhoekstraat 21 9150 Kruibeke (B) tel +32 (0)3 250 19 00 fax +32 (0)3 254 10 08 ezine@verhaert.com More at www.verhaert.com VERHAERT MASTERS IN INNOVATION® Netherlands European Space Innovation Centre Kapteynstraat 1 2201 BB Noordwijk (NL) Tel: +31 (0)633 666 828 willard.vanderheijden@verhaert.com More at www.verhaert.com VERHAERT MASTERS IN INNOVATION® helps companies and governments to innovate. We design products and systems for organizations looking for new ways to provide value for their customers. We are a leading integrated product innovation center; creating technology platforms, developing new products and business in parallel, hence facilitating new-growth strategies for our clients.
Editor's Notes
- ask background of public: sw or non-sw
- models are used in most development for analysis model based = tight coupling between model and design during implementation, models are often not kept uptodate, because cost is higher than benefit. Cost is high because keeping them aligned (updating info in 2 places) often has to be done manually = labour intensive, error prone ! for good abstract modelling, languages need to be domain specific UML = general purpose, has not proven to be succesfull, on the contrary, some succesfull examples have been realised with domain specific modelling languages First: Put your process and your design in a model Second: Verify your design against your requirements by simulation Next: do some iterations if needed Finally: Implement your proven design Explicit modelling Using most appropriate modelling languages (formalisms) Automating transformations (for analysis, for simulation, for code synthesis, for testing) Example: inverted pendulum / Segway, complex processes / designs, reliability Modelling: requirements design implemenation test scenario
- Cartoon: communication, validation, conflict between physics and software Cartoon: everybody knows, everybody laughs because everybody recognises => real problem (“give me something with 2 ropes where I can sit on, you know ? Yes, I know”) First show cartoon and ask some questions, then show rest of slide Communication: between customer & contractor + between disciplines
- Testing = the poor man’s approach
- ask public
- Segway : model based control algorithms (Matlab / Simulink), but approval for public road use is hard to get
- ask background of public: sw or non-sw
- The Vienna Development Method (VDM) is one of the longest-established Formal Methods for the development of computer-based systems. Computing systems may be modeled in VDM-SL at a higher level of abstraction than is achievable using programming languages, allowing the analysis of designs and identification of key features, including defects, at an early stage of system development. Models that have been validated can be transformed into detailed system designs through a refinement process. The language has a formal semantics, enabling proof of the properties of models to a high level of assurance. It also has an executable subset, so that models may be analyzed by testing and can be executed through graphical user interfaces, so that models can be evaluated by experts who are not necessarily familiar with the modeling language itself.
- a lot of paper docs