Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-7nlkj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-28T06:25:36.786Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Specifying Process Activities for Multi-Domain Matrix Analysis Using a Structured Textual Format

Part of: Design Methods and Tools

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

S.C.M. Knippenberg ,
L.F.P. Etman ,
T. Wilschut  and
J.A. van de Mortel-Fronczak

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.

This paper proposes a method to automatically generate a multi-domain matrix (MDM) from textual activity specifications. The format for specifying these activities is based on a structured grammar derived from natural language and consists of two types of activities: goal activities and transformation activities. A goal activity describes the purpose of an action performed by an actor for the benefit of another actor in the system. A transformation activity describes an activity from the viewpoint of a single actor, who receives, generates, and outputs information or artifacts. If one describes activities using these two types of activity specifications, dependencies can be automatically derived between actors, activities, and parameters of the system and visualized in an MDM. Thus the generated MDM presents an organization DSM (actors), a process DSM (activities), and a parameter DSM (flows of information or objects), as well as the mapping matrices coupling the different domains. An illustrative house construction example demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed activity specification format. The method may provide an outcome in understanding and managing complex systems.

Keywords

Design methodologyDesign structure matrixMulti-domain matrixProcess modellingSystems Engineering (SE)
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 1613 - 1622
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) 2019

References

Browning, T. R. (2016), “Design structure matrix extensions and innovations: a survey and new opportunities”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 63 No. 1, pp. 27–52. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2015.2491283Google Scholar
Chinosi, M., Trombetta, A. (2012), “BPMN: An introduction to the standard”, Computer Standards & Interfaces, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 124–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2011.06.002Google Scholar
Dori, D. (2002), Object-Process Methodology: A Holistic Systems Paradigm, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, Germany.Google Scholar
Dori, D., Reinhartz-Berger, I., Sturm, A. (2003), “Developing Complex Systems with Object-Process Methodology Using OPCAT”, 22nd International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Chicago, IL, USA, 13-16 October 2003, Conceptual Modeling - ER 2003, pp. 570–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39648-2_46Google Scholar
Dori, D., Reinhartz-Berger, I., Sturm, A. (2003), “OPCAT - A Bimodal Case Tool for Object-Process Based System Development”, 5th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2003), Angers, France 22-26 April 2003, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, pp. 286–291.Google Scholar
Dori, D. (2016), Model-Based Systems Engineering with OPM and SysML, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3295-5Google Scholar
Eppinger, S. D., Whitney, D. E., Smith, R. P., Gebala, D. A. (1994), “A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01588087Google Scholar
Eppinger, S. D., Browning, T. R. (2012), Design structure matrix methods and applications, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.Google Scholar
Lee, W., Ma, S., Lee, S., Law, P., Chang, T. (2015), “Extending the Multiple Domain Matrix by Using Business Process Model and Notation for Business Process Analysis”, 2015 IEEE 12th International Conference on e-Business Engineering, Beijing, China 23-25 October 2015, Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 12th International Conference on e-Business Engineering, pp. 311–318. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEBE.2015.60Google Scholar
Maurer, M. S. (2007), Structural awareness in complex product design, Verlag Dr. Hut, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
Sharon, A., De Weck, O. L., Dori, D. (2009), “Is There a Complete Project Plan? A Model-Based Project Planning Approach”, INCOSE International Symposium, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 96–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2334-5837.2009.tb00940.xGoogle Scholar
Sharon, Am., Dori, D., De Weck, O. L. (2009), “Model-based design structure matrix: deriving a DSM from an object-process model”, Second International Symposium on Engineering Systems, Cambridge, MA, USA, 15–17 June 2009, MIT ESD and CESUN, pp 1–12.Google Scholar
Steward, D. V. (1965), “Partitioning and Tearing Systems of Equations”, Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Series B: Numerical Analysis, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 3445–3465. https://doi.org/10.1137/0702028Google Scholar
Steward, D. V. (1981), “The design structure system: a method for managing the design of complex systems”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. EM-28 No. 3, pp. 71–74. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.1981.6448589Google Scholar
Van Beek, T. J., Erden, M. S., Tomiyama, T. (2010), “Modular design of mechatronic systems with function modeling”,Mechatronics, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 850–863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechatronics.2010.02.002Google Scholar
Vaneman, W. K. (2016), “Enhancing Model-Based Systems Engineering with the Lifecycle Modeling Language”, 2016 Annual IEEE Systems Conference (SysCon), Orlando, FL, USA, 18-21 April 2016, Proceedings of the 10th Annual IEEE Systems Conference, pp. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/SYSCON.2016.7490581Google Scholar
Wilschut, T., Etman, L. F. P., Rooda, J. E., Adan, I. J. B. F. (2017), “Multi-level flow-based Markov clustering for design structure matrices”, Journal of Mechanical Design: Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 139 No. 12, p. 121402. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4037626Google Scholar
Wilschut, T., Etman, L. F. P., Rooda, J. E., Vogel, J. A. (2018), “Generation of a function-component-parameter multi-domain matrix from structured textual function specifications”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 531–546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-018-0284-9Google Scholar