No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
AN APPROACH FOR SEMI-AUTOMATIC REDESIGN OF MECHATRONIC PRODUCTS BY MULTIDISCIPLINARY OPTIMISATION
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 July 2021
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.
Mechatronic products are widely spread today, but their development still is a challenge. In addition, with the trend of individualisation, not only one solution must be designed but multiple configurations are needed to fulfil customer-specific requirements. To reduce cost and development time, usually existing products are adapted for this purpose. Even though a lot of knowledge is already available through the previous product version, because of multiple disciplines that must be considered in mechatronic systems, even redesign processes are complex. To support the adaption of mechatronic products to changed requirements, an approach to systematically reuse the knowledge available from previous product versions is proposed in this contribution. Through multidisciplinary behaviour optimisation, the solution space is reduced to build an adapted product meeting the new requirements. The approach is explained in detail and illustrated with the example of an electric window regulator and the results are discussed thoroughly.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Creative Commons
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), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Ahmad, N., Wynn, D.C. and Clarkson, P.J. (2013), “Change impact on a product and its redesign process: A tool for knowledge capture and reuse”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 219–244. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-012-0139-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashhab, M.S., Breitsprecher, T. and Wartzack, S. (2014), “Neural network based modeling and optimization of deep drawing - Extrusion combined process”, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 77–84. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10845-012-0676-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casner, D., Renaud, J. and Knittel, D. (2012), “Computer-aided design of mechatronic systems using multiobjective optimization and object-oriented languages”, ASME 2012 11th Biennial Conference on Engineering Systems Design and Analysis, ESDA 2012, pp. 301–310. https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/ESDA2012-82212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dohr, F., Eisenbart, B., Huwig, C., Blessing, L. and Vielhaber, M. (2014), “Software support for the consistent transition from requirements to functional modeling to system simulation”, 10th Biannual NordDesign Conference, NordDesign 2014, pp. 775–784. ISBN 978-190467058-2.Google Scholar
Dworschak, F., Zirngibl, C., Schleich, B. and Wartzack, S. (2019), “Konzept für den MBSE-Einsatz zur automatisierten Individualisierung von komplexen Produkten”, 30th Symposium Design for X, DFX 2019, pp. 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrlenspiel, K. and Meerkamm, H. (2017), Integrierte Produktentwicklung, Carl Hanser Verlag, München. ISBN 978-3-446-44908-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fricke, E. and Schulz, A.P. (2005), “Design for changeability (DfC): Principles to enable changes in systems throughout their entire lifecycle”, Systems Engineering, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 342–359. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sys.20039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gamage, L.B., De Silva, C.W. and Campos, R. (2012), “Design evolution of mechatronic systems through modeling, on-line monitoring, and evolutionary optimization”, Mechatronics, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 83–94. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mechatronics.2011.11.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gero, J.S. (1990), “Design prototypes. A knowledge representation schema for design”, AI Magazine, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 26–36. ISSN 07384602.Google Scholar
Gero, J.S. and Kannengiesser, U. (2004), “The situated function-behaviour-structure framework”, Design Studies, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 373–391. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2003.10.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koh, E.C.Y., Caldwell, N.H.M. and Clarkson, P.J. (2012), “A method to assess the effects of engineering change propagation”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 329–351. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00163-012-0131-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Köhler, C., Conrad, J., Wanke, S. and Weber, C. (2008), “A matrix representation of the CPM/PDD approach as a means for change impact analysis”, 10th International Design Conference, DESIGN 2008, pp. 167–174. ISBN 978-953631389-1Google Scholar
Lasi, H., Fettke, P., Kemper, H.-G., Feld, T. and Hoffmann, M. (2014), “Industry 4.0”, Business and Information Systems Engineering, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 239–242. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12599-014-0334-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naefe, P. and Luderich, J. (2016), Konstruktionsmethodik für die Praxis, Springer Fachmedien, Wiesbaden. ISBN 978-3-658-13871-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ollinger, G.A. and Stahovich, T.F. (2004), “RedesignIT – A model-based tool for managing design changes”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 126 No. 2, pp. 208–216. https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.1666888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldusen, J. and Grote, K.-H. (2007), Pahl/Beitz Konstruktionslehre, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. ISBN-13 978-3-540-34060-7.Google Scholar
Rahimi, F., Genf, L., Wikander, J. and Frede, D. (2017), “Early phase design-optimization of mechatronic systems”, 5th International Conference on Control, Mechatronics and Automation, ICCMA 2017, pp. 42–49. https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3149827.3149838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ropohl, G. (2009), Allgemeine Technologie, Universitätsverlag Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe. ISBN 978-3-86644-374-7.Google Scholar
Tarkian, M., Persson, J., Ölvander, J. and Feng, X. (2012), “Multidisciplinary design optimization of modular industrial robots by utilizing high level CAD templates”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 134 No.12. https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4007697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tian, F. and Voskuijl, M. (2015), “Automated generation of multiphysics simulation models to support multidisciplinary design optimization”, Advanced Engineering Informatics, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 1110–1125. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2015.07.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torry-Smith, J.M., Qamar, A., Achiche, S., Wikander, J., Mortensen, N.H. and During, C. (2013), “Challenges in Designing Mechatronic Systems”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 135 No. 1. https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4007929.Google Scholar
VDI 2206 (2004), Design methodology for mechatronic systems, Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin.Google Scholar
VDI 2221 Part 1 (2019), Design of technical products and systems – Model of product design, Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin.Google Scholar
VDI 2222 Blatt 1 (1997), Methodic development of Solution principles, Beuth Verlag GmbH, Berlin.Google Scholar
Weber, C. and Deubel, T. (2003), “New theory-based concepts for PDM and PLM”, 14th International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED 2003. ISBN 1904670008.Google Scholar
You have
Access
Open access