0
Research Papers

Toward System Architecture Generation and Performances Assessment Under Uncertainty Using Bayesian Networks

[+] Author and Article Information
Marie-Lise Moullec

Laboratoire de Génie Industriel,
Ecole Centrale Paris,
Grande Voie des Vignes,
92295 Châtenay-Malabry, France;
Thales Air Systems,
3 Avenue Charles Lindbergh,
94150 Rungis, France
e-mail: marie-lise.moullec@ecp.fr

Marc Bouissou

Laboratoire de Génie Industriel,
Ecole Centrale Paris,
Grande Voie des Vignes,
92295 Châtenay-Malabry, France;
EDF R&D,
1 Avenue du Général de Gaulle,
92140 Clamart, France
e-mail: marc.bouissou@ecp.fr

Marija Jankovic

e-mail: marija.jankovic@ecp.fr

Jean-Claude Bocquet

e-mail: jean-claude.bocquet@ecp.fr
Laboratoire de Génie Industriel,
Ecole Centrale Paris,
Grande Voie des Vignes,
92295 Châtenay-Malabry, France

François Réquillard

e-mail: francois.requillard@thalesgroup.com

Olivier Maas

e-mail: olivier.maas@thalesgroup.com

Olivier Forgeot

e-mail: olivier.forgeot@thalesgroup.com
Thales Air Systems,
3 Avenue Charles Lindbergh,
94150 Rungis, France

netica is the tool that we have chosen to set up our method, mainly because of the following characteristics: efficient graphical user interface, good and powerful syntax to define deterministic nodes via equations, existence of a programmable interface (see http://www.norsys.com).

Discretization of continuous variables requires particular attention: see Appendix for a detailed explanation of issues related to discretization.

We have experimentally checked the efficiency of this heuristic. However one cannot expect a drastic complexity reduction, whatever the exploration strategy chosen, because the final number of solutions, which are the leaves of the explored tree, is fixed and depends only on the characteristics of the design problem.

Contributed by the Design Automation Committee of ASME for publication in the Journal of Mechanical Design. Manuscript received September 16, 2012; final manuscript received January 11, 2013; published online March 22, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Olivier de Weck.

J. Mech. Des 135(4), 041002 (Mar 22, 2013) (13 pages) Paper No: MD-12-1457; doi: 10.1115/1.4023514 History: Received September 16, 2012; Revised January 11, 2013

Architecture generation and evaluation are critical points in complex system design. Uncertainties concerning component characteristics and their impact onto overall system performance are often not taken into account in early design stages. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian network (BN) approach for system architecture generation and evaluation. A method relying on Bayesian network templates is proposed in order to represent an architecture design problem integrating uncertainties concerning component characteristics and component compatibility. These templates aim at modeling designers' knowledge concerning system architecture. We also propose an algorithm for architecture generation and evaluation related to the Bayesian network model with the objective of generating all possible architectures and filtering them in view to a defined confidence threshold. Within this algorithm, expert estimations on component compatibilities are used to estimate overall architecture uncertainty as a confidence level. The proposed approach is tested and illustrated on a case study of bicycle design. This first case shows how uncertainties concerning component compatibilities and components characteristics impact bicycle architecture generation. The method is, additionally, tested and implemented in the case of a radar antenna cooling system design in industry. Results highlight the relevance of the proposed approach in view to the generated solutions as well as other benefits such as reduced time for architecture generation, and a better overall understanding of the design problem. However, some limitations have been observed and call for enhancements like integration of designer's preferences and identification of possible trade-offs within the architecture. This method enables generation and evaluation of complex system architecture taking into account initial system requirements and designer's knowledge. Its usability and added-value have been verified on a large-scale system implemented in industry.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Crawley, E., Weck De, O., Eppinger, S., Magee, C., Moses, J., Seering, W., Schindall, J., Wallace, D., and Whitney, D., 2004, The Influence of Architecture in Engineering Systems, Abe Dane, ed., Engineering Systems Monograph, Cambridge, MA.
Ulrich, K. T., and Eppinger, S. D., 1995, Product Design and Development, Irwin McGraw-Hill, New York.
Chakrabarti, A., and Bligh, T. P., 1996, “An Approach to Functional Synthesis of Mechanical Design Concepts: Theory, Applications, and Emerging Research Issues,” Artif. Intell. Eng., Des., Anal. Manuf., 10(04), pp. 313–331. [CrossRef]
Hsu, W., and Liu, B., 2000, “Conceptual Design: Issues and Challenges,” Comput.-Aided Des., 32(14), pp. 849–850. [CrossRef]
Dieter, E., 2000, Engineering Design: A Materials and Processing Approach, McGraw-Hill, Singapore.
Bellut, S., 1990, La Compétitivité Par La Maîtrise Des Coûts. Conception À Coût Objectif Et Analyse De La Valeur, AFNOR, Paris.
Whelton, M., Ballard, G., and Tommelein, I. D., 2002, “A Knowledge Management Framework for Project Definition,” ITcon, Vol. 7, pp. 197–212.
Zablit, P., and Zimmer, L., 2001, “Global Aircraft Predesign Based on Constraint Propagation and Interval Analysis,” Proceedings of CEAS 2007, Köln, Germany.
Lindemann, U., Maurer, M., and Braun, T., 2008, Structural Complexity Management: An Approach for the Field of Product Design, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Kreimeyer, M. F., 2009, “A Structural Measurement System for Engineering Design Processes,” Ph.D. thesis, Technical University of Munich, Munich.
Yannou, B., 2001, “Préconception De Produits,” Ph.D. thesis, Ecole Centrale Paris, Paris.
Antonsson, E., and Cagan, J., 2001, Formal Engineering Design Synthesis, Cambridge University Press, UK.
Chakrabarti, A., 2002, Understanding, Approaches and Tools, Springer, London, UK.
Albers, A., Braun, A., Sadowski, E., Wynn, D., Wyatt, D., and Clarkson, J., 2011, “System Architecture Modeling in a Software Tool Based on a Contact and Channel Approach (C&C-a),” J. Mech. Des., 133(10), p. 101006. [CrossRef]
Cagan, J., Campbell, M. I., Finger, S., and Tomiyama, T., 2005, “A Framework for Computational Design Synthesis: Model and Applications,” J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 5(3), pp. 171–181. [CrossRef]
Kurtoglu, T., and Campbell, M. I., 2009, “Automated Synthesis of Electromechanical Design Configurations from Empirical Analysis of Function to Form Mapping,” J. Eng. Des., 20(1), pp. 83–104. [CrossRef]
Bryant, C., Mcadams, D. A., and Stone, R. B., 2005, “A Computational Technique for Concept Generation—DETC2005-85323,” Proceedings of ASME 2005 International Design Engineering Technical Conference, Long Beach, California.
Stone, R. B., and Wood, K. L., 2000, “Development of a Functional Basis for Design,” J. Mech. Des., 122(4), pp. 359–370. [CrossRef]
Gupta, S., and Okudan, G. E., 2008, “Computer-Aided Generation of Modularised Conceptual Designs With Assembly and Variety Considerations,” J. Eng. Des., 19(6), pp. 533–551. [CrossRef]
Helms, B., and Shea, K., 2012, “Computational Synthesis of Product Architectures Based on Object-Oriented Graph Grammars,” J. Mech. Des., 134(2), p. 021008. [CrossRef]
Gero, J. S., and Kannengiesser, U., 2004, “The Situated Function–Behaviour–Structure Framework,” Des. Stud., 25(4), pp. 373–391. [CrossRef]
Albarello, N., and Welcomme, J.-B., 2012, “A Formal Design Synthesis and Optimization Method for Systems Architectures,” Proceedings of 9th International Conference of Modeling, Optimization and Simulation, Bordeaux, France.
Wyatt, D., Wynn, D., Jarrett, J., and Clarkson, P., 2012, “Supporting Product Architecture Design Using Computational Design Synthesis With Network Structure Constraints,” Res. Eng. Des., 23(1), pp. 17–52. [CrossRef]
Rosenstein, D., and Reich, Y., 2011, “Hierarchical Concept Generation by Sos,” Proceedings of ICED 2011, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Matthews, P. C., 2011, “Challenges to Bayesian Decision Support Using Morphological Matrices for Design: Empirical Evidence,” Res. Eng. Des., 22(1), pp. 29–42. [CrossRef]
Kerzhner, A., and Paredis, C., 2009, “Using Domain Specific Languages to Capture Design Synthesis Knowledge for Model-Based Systems Engineering—DETC2009-87286,” Proceedings of ASME 2009 International Design Engineering Technical Conference—IDETC 2009, San Diego, California.
Barton, D. N., Saloranta, T., Moe, S. J., Eggestad, H. O., and Kuikka, S., 2008, “Bayesian Belief Networks as a Meta-Modelling Tool in Integrated River Basin Management—Pros and Cons in Evaluating Nutrient Abatement Decisions Under Uncertainty in a Norwegian River Basin,” Ecologic. Econ., 66(1), pp. 91–104. [CrossRef]
Jensen, F. V., and Nielsen, T. D., 2007, Bayesian Networks and Decision Graphs, Springer, New-York.
Scaravetti, D., 2004, “Formalisation Préalable D'un Problème De Conceptio, Pour L'aide À La Décision En Conception Préliminaire,” Ph.D. thesis, Ecole Nationale Supérieure d'Arts et Métiers, Bordeaux.
Chandrasekaran, B., 1990, “Design Problem Solving: A Task Analysis,” AI Mag., 11(4), pp. 59–71.
Roger, J., 1999, Antennes—Différents types, Techniques de l'ingénieur, T. I. Editions, ed., Paris, France.
Aughenbaugh, J. M., and Paredis, C., 2006, Why Are Intervals and Imprecision Important in Engineering Design?, Savannah, GA.
Moullec, M. L., Jankovic, M., Bouissou, M., and Bocquet, J. C., 2012, “Product Architectures Generation Under Uncertainty: Comparison Between Two Methods – DETC2012-70644,” Proceedings of ASME 2012 International Design Engineering Technical Conference, Chicago, IL.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Global process of the method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

“Chest clinic,” a classical example in the Bayesian networks literature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Product architecture-modeling templates (probabilities are given in %)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Product architecture generation and exploration algorithm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Bayesian Network bicycle architecture model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Bicycle architecture clusters based on global confidence level

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Active antenna description (adapted from Ref. [31])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Interdependencies between variables

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Probability table of node Q

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Modeling process of condition 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

BN network for antenna cooling system design

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Scope of solutions envisaged by experts and our algorithm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Discretization of continuous variables: example Z = X + Y

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In