2014 IEEE 17th International Symposium on Object/Component-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing
Combining Model-Based Systems Engineering,
Simulation and Domain Engineering in the
development of Industrial Automation Systems
Industrial Case Study
Ismael Scheeren
General Electric do Brasil Ltda
Electrical Engineering Department
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS
Porto Alegre, Brazil
ismael.scheeren@ufrgs.br
Abstract—Due to increasing complexity, the design of
Industrial Automation Systems are becoming more challenging.
In that sense, efforts have been driven to develop Model-Based
Systems Engineering tools and methods. Despite recent progress,
there are still doubts in terms of the practical use and benefits.
The main concerns are related to integration among tools and
exchange of information between multidisciplinary artifacts. This
paper compares Document-Centric Engineering (CAx tools) and
Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) in light of Industrial
Automation Systems using a real domain. Therefore, a MBSE
compliant method was developed and tested. Commercial tools
such as the Eclipse platform and the ModelicaML language were
used to perform abstract modeling while COMOS® from
Siemens® was used to develop the multidisciplinary artifacts for
project documentation. A Java application was developed to
integrate component information between the selected
environments. The OpenModelica Compiler was integrated to the
platform to allow system and component behavior simulation.
Tests have shown that the tools involved on this investigation still
need further development concerning maturity and exchange of
information from abstract models down to domain specific
models. On the other hand, MBSE has proven to be an important
tool to match different team approaches and concerns, improving
team communication using conceptual-wide and abstract
symbols. Connecting abstract ModelicaML models to a
simulation environment using Modelica led to a better
understanding of systems behavior prior to realization and
provided an analysis environment for early detection of project
errors and operational failures.
Keywords—Industrial Systems Engineering; Model-Based
Systems Engineering; Modelica; COMOS®.
I. INTRODUCTION
With the increasing complexity of automation systems, the
use of the so called ¨Document-Centric Systems Engineering¨
that are still common practice in several industrial sectors are
becoming unfeasible. It is common sense that after the advent
of computer networks and the increasing computing power of
state-of-the-art processors, new systems should be connected to
1555-0885/14 $31.00 © 2014 IEEE
DOI 10.1109/ISORC.2014.64
Carlos Eduardo Pereira
Electrical Engineering Department
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS
Porto Alegre, Brazil
cpereira@ece.ufrgs.br
each other in order to give users more flexibility and reliability.
This also holds for Systems Engineering, in particular for
Industrial Automation Systems. On the other hand, a systems
development framework that connects different domain
artifacts and handles different disciplines interfaces would give
the industry the ability to solve industrial problems in a faster
and cheaper way.
Object Oriented Architecture and Modeling approaches
gave scientists and engineers more tools and ways of thinking
complex and connected systems. However, there is still a lot of
work to do when the goal is to deliver a completely integrated
and interconnected systems modeling solution. Today`s state-
of-the-art tools do not adequately support physical and abstract
models to widely interact to each other and exchange
information in a multidisciplinary way. Models generated by
the various disciplines involved (e. g. mechanical, electrical
and software) in constructing a new industrial automation
system are usually not properly integrated with each other,
leading to system inconsistencies that can have severe and
costly consequences when discovered only in the
implementation phase or even during system operation. While
different engineering teams focus on designing and
implementing their part of the system using specific tools for
each discipline, it becomes hard to integrate information while
translating all approaches into one single model.
There are also open points when the models become ready
to be realized. As there is a large number of different
proprietary implementation platforms available in the market, it
becomes hard to have real code generated automatically (for
example to a plant PLC) and parameters linked directly to
electrical and mechanical artifacts inside proprietary software
solutions [1]. Even if the model was extensively simulated and
checked before implementation, the manual integration is error
prone because of the heterogeneous nature of all platforms
involved during development.
Within this context and trying to address points stated
above, this paper assesses an integrated system engineering
40
methodology, which relies on concepts from model-based
systems engineering, domain engineering and cyber-physical
systems and compares it with a document-centric approach on
an industrial case study. The paper is structured as follows:
section II introduces the theoretical background of the concepts
used in the proposed methodology, while session 3 describes
the tools and languages used in the development of the
approach. The proposed method is described in section 4 and
the industrial case study that has been used for validation is
presented on section 5. Finally, section 6 presents the
conclusions and signals some future work directions.
II. BACKGROUND
Several efforts have been made over the past years to
overcome the counterproductive aspects of designing systems
with a document-centric and discipline independent approach.
In this section, the most prominent approaches are shortly
presented.
A. Model-Based Systems Engineering
According to [2], MBSE is a Systems Engineering
paradigm that emphasizes the application of rigorous visual
modeling principles and best practices to Systems Engineering
activities throughout the System Development Life Cycle
(SDLC). Some authors refer to this paradigm as Model-Driven
System Design (MDSD). While subtleties exist between
MDSD and MBSE [3], in this paper the term MBSE defined by
INCOSE [4] will be used.
MBSE is a more comprehensive concept than the Object
Management Group`s (OMG) Model-Driven Architecture
because besides encompassing an architectural view of
engineering it also drives the process and analysis of the
system within the environment.
Being derived from Computer Science concepts, MBSE
formalizes a modelling approach to support system
requirements, design, analysis, verification and validation
activities running through all development and life cycle
phases [4]. MBSE also aims to support complex and large
systems in which many different disciplines, such as
mechanical, electrical, and computing engineering, are
involved.
MBSE clearly separates each domain by providing specific
semantics, but several problems remain when implementing a
full MBSE approach. First, because heterogeneous notations
coming from different models can lead to inconsistencies.
Despite tools being able to deal with this issue, designers can
break the notation during model manipulation [5]. And
secondly, after finalizing the design process of an Industrial
Automation System, there is still a separation between
modelling tools and implementation environments.
B. Domain Engineering
Domain Engineering applied to Industrial Automation
Systems relies on the fact that engineered solutions have lots of
commonly used artifacts that can be reused in different
projects. This approach is intended to build a multidisciplinary
artifact repository, which can provide to engineers ways of
41
storing knowledge and reusing these information in future
projects [6, 7, 8].
Connection between multiple artifacts can be represented as
objects or ports and can enhance information exchange. Also
the ability to represent artifacts in multiple views can drive
multidisciplinary report generation.
The methodology proposed by [7] establishes a way to
create a Domain Repository where the system artifacts are
stored for future reuse. The ability to store knowledge that can
be applied to different applications is supported by this
approach.
A main barrier to this approach is having a compliant tool
available [9]. Additionally, granularity issues of stored artifacts
may affect usability of objects on upcoming project [10].
C. Cyber-Physical Systems
The term Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) designates
¨integrations of computation and physical processes, where
embedded computers and networks monitor and control the
physical processes, usually with feedback loops where physical
processes affect computations and vice versa.¨ [11]. Such
definition fits very nicely the case of industrial automation
systems, where industrial controllers, sensors and actuators are
used to influence physical processes.
The main challenges come directly from record physical
data using sensors and affect physical processes using actuators
[12]. The evaluation of recorded data, and actively or reactively
interaction both with the physical and digital world introduce
real time aspects to this approach. In order to comply with a
connected world, CPS devices are intended to be connected
and integrated into a global network via digital communication.
Using Object Oriented techniques to virtually represent
Industrial Automation System objects can enhance the
simulation capability once the logical or virtual objects can be
described as counterparts of physical objects. But according to
[13], the role of CPS as a cross-sectional technology and
driving force of innovation initiative is still not sufficiently
perceived by industry. Main problems rely on lacking of cross
industry standardization and the manufacturers of individual
components being inadequately networked or completely
isolated. Often, there is a dependency on individual suppliers.
Heterogeneity and isolated solutions prevail, as a result of
shortage of qualified engineers.
III. TOOLS AND LANGUAGES
A. Modelica
According to [14], Modelica is a freely available, object-
oriented language for modelling of large, complex, and
heterogeneous physical systems and is being tested for CPS
development [15].
Being classified as an equation-based object-oriented
mathematical modelling [16], Modelica is flexible because
enables engineers to design a model with different discipline
objects. A model consists of a composition of objects, with a
model being the outermost aggregator. This can be a physical,
mechanical, control, electrical, or electronic system or any
combination of these.
On the other hand, while the industrial automation models
are complex and an executable model that is able to emulate
electro-mechanical and physical systems is expensive to
construct, the Modelica language can serve as an inexpensive
simulation environment. The Modelica application software
compiles an executable that can compute the development of
object properties from initial values as a function of time. The
associated Modelica model can be used to check the
correctness of parameter values and requirements of systems
[17].
The simulation capability can be extended further by
specifying the expected behavior of a component within the
future environment. Also, it may simulate changes during
operation phase, which can avoid system crash before the
modification actually takes place. This means that the
implementation platform can hold a physical model of every
component and perform run-time simulation of behavior under
different conditions.
Besides the well-known simulation capability, Modelica
offers the definition of connectors so the objects modelled can
interact with the outside world. The language extensibility is
also shown by the ModelicaML which is a UML compliant
extension that enables transformation between models [18].
Fig. 1. Proposed approach.
The following project phases and tools are adopted in the
proposed approach:
x System Level Requirements: ModelicaML/Eclipse
environment are used to analyze system requirements,
42
B. COMOS
COMOS is a proprietary software package developed by
Siemens for Plant Lifecycle Management (PLM). It supports
earlier design phases as well as commissioning and
maintenance. It has Object Oriented capabilities and complies
with the Domain Engineering approach, where the artifacts can
be stored for future reuse [19].
COMOS can represent system objects as multidisciplinary
components. It is possible to represent an object with different
view – mechanical (mainly pipes), electrical and software. This
capability enhances the reporting power, e. g. if one object is
replaced all reports or views are automatically updated.
But COMOS still has limitations when dealing with
mechanical components as for now it can only store
documentation for this particular discipline. On the other hand,
it works well interacting software and electrical artifacts since
COMOS can connect them through objects called Connectors.
IV. METHODOLOGY AND FRAMEWORK
This section describes an integrated approach for
developing industrial automation systems, which combines
domain engineering, model-based systems engineering and
concepts of cyber-physical systems. The proposed approach
follows a V-Model as described in Fig. 1.
allowing a reuse of previously modelled automation
components and systems;
 x High Level Design: In this phase the main architecture
and technology is defined. System level simulation if
required is done using Modelica;
x Component Detailed Design: model component level
details using ModelicaML;
x Simulation and Validation: system and object models
are translated from ModelicaML to Modelica code in
order to simulate behavior. During simulation, system
and component properties can be adjusted to reach
requirements.
x Update Domain Repository: once single components
have been detailed, the artifacts are generated in the
Domain Repository inside COMOS by an application
written in Java using standard COMOS base blocks.
x Model objects and Repository artifacts synchronization:
always when a model component is adjusted to fit
Abstract Level
Realization Level
Drawings/Reports for
manufacturing
Fig. 2. Multiple Views of an industrial component.
43
system requirements, the Domain Repository is updated
using the Java synchronization tool.
x Documents for Manufacturing: Documents for
production purpose are generated out of the Domain
Repository in order to realize system physically and
logically.
The framework for integrated industrial automation system
engineering was centered on Eclipse. The ModelicaML
environment proposed by [18] served as the abstract level
modeling tool. OpenModelica Compiler was linked to Eclipse
to perform simulation. A Java tool was developed to
synchronize model object properties to COMOS Domain
Repository artifacts. COMOS reports´ capabilities can be used
to extract drawings and schemes for manufacturing purpose.
The different views and tools used for developing an industrial
automation system are depicted on Fig. 2.

V. VALIDATION
This section describes an industrial case study that was
used to validate the methodology under consideration and to
compare it with a document centric approach.
In the scope of ultrasonic nondestructive testing, special
machines are required, which include a water circulation
system (WCS), whose goal is to provide the required medium
for sound coupling with the material under investigation. A
Fig. 3. OpenModelica Water Circulation System (WCS) model.
44
WCS is a simple but complete Industrial Automation System
which is composed by different disciplines (refer to Fig. 3).
This system is part of the product portfolio of General Electric
Inspection Technologies GmbH (GEIT) and was modelled to
validate the approach.
As the input and output of GEIT document-centric
engineering method and the methodology under investigation
are the same, this system can be used for analysis and
validation. Both approaches are represented in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. Comparison between methodology approaches.
While simulating the pump behavior for example, the
mechanical engineer can accurately define constraints in terms
of the pump rotation limits. This will be imported to COMOS
as a property of the pump mechanical artifact, providing the
electrical or control engineers the required information to
establish the control rules.
Additionally, COMOS objects are also intended to provide
the simulation environment with constraints. For example, if a
frequency inverter controls a shaft rotation and it has some
45
constraints while running in low frequency, this can also be a
useful information for mechanical engineers modelling and
simulating their part of the Industrial Automation System.
This ¨multi-direction¨ constraints and parameters
interchange will give the integrated Systems Engineering
approach (refer to Fig. 5) a way to improve communication
between interdisciplinary teams and avoiding future
inconsistencies at late stages, i. e. during admittance test or
commissioning phase.
Fig. 5. Objects interaction between tools.
If when running a simulation engineers detect, for instance,
that the main pump cannot meet specified system requirements,
the pump size can be modified until it reaches the specified
flow rate and pressure. While replacing the main pump for a
different size, the new constraints will be synchronized to
COMOS repository, where reports for project realization can
be extracted.
The time spent on replacing components and adjusting
system variables during the experiments were reduced by a
factor of 3 when compared to the document centric approach.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Tests have shown that Industrial Automation Projects
driven by models can meet expectations on cost and the use of
appropriate tools for integrating models, code and physical
components requirements, from the early design stages up to
implementation, can substantially help overcome the
challenges introduced by complexity. Additionally, the
parameterization and constraints of mechanical and electrical
components directed to COMOS by the model can provide
good results in preventing implementation errors.
46
The simulation platform provided by the Equation-based
Object Oriented Technology from Modelica can offer
significant benefits once the simulation model is widely linked
to the modelling framework. The methodology and platform
presented showed an increased number of engineering hours
spent on system modeling and simulation activities, where
engineers’ creativity and formal knowledge is required, instead
of hours used for tedious document manipulation.
However, there are still some gaps related to the integration
of the modelling framework and COMOS. First of all, the
generated code from application models is not fully consistent
with the COMOS specification, leading to errors that were not
captured during simulation. Also, the toolchain required
adaptation of existing Modelica models and development of a
completely new COMOS interface.
Efforts needed for developing analysis and simulation
models should not be underestimated while deciding to migrate
from document-centric engineering to model-based systems
engineering. The increased time to develop system models can
still be a restrictive factor compared to the Document-Centric
approach.
 The continuous improvement and storage of artifacts
modeled by this approach supported by the simulation software
would help designers to build better systems but also support
the overall engineering process. COMOS has also features that
help maintenance personnel deciding whether to keep or
replace some component by tracking its behavior inside the
application. This could be extended by using the simulation
environment provided by Modelica to give the user more
information about the system behavior in future operation, in
case a component parameter needs to be changed.
REFERENCES
[1] K. Kernschmidt, G. Barbieri, C. Fantuzzi, B. Vogel-Heuser.
Possibilities and challenges of an integrated development using
a combined SysML-model and corresponding domain specific
models. Available under:
<http://www.arscontrol.org/publications/2013-KerBarFanVog-
MIM.pdf>. 2013.
[2] S. Kentt. Model driven engineering. Integrated Formal Methods.
Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Vol. 2335, pp. 286-298, 2002.
[3] J. A. Estefan. Survey of Model-Based Systems Engineering
(MBSE) methodologies. Incose MBSE focus group 25, 2007.
[4] International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE).
Systems Engineering Vision 2020. INCOSE-TP-2004-004-02
Version 2. 2007.
[5] M. Perrotin, J. Delange, S. Bennani. Towards a Model-Driven
Engineering Software Development Framework. Available
under: http://julien.gunnm.org/data/publications/article-dpb12-
avicps12.pdf.
[6] C. Maga, N. Jazdi. An approach for modeling variants of
industrial automation systems. IEEE International Conference
on Automation Quality and Testing Robotics (AQTR), 2010.
Vol. 1. 2010.
[7] C. Maga, N. Jazdi. Concept of a domain repository for industrial
automation. Proceedings of the First International Workshop on
Domain Engineering. 2009.
47
[8] C. Maga, N. Jazdi. Interdisciplinary modularization in product
line engineering: A case study. IEEE International Conference
on Automation Quality and Testing Robotics (AQTR). 2012.
[9] C. Maga, N. Jazdi, P. Goehner. Requirements on engineering
tools for increasing reuse in industrial automation. IEEE 16th
Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation
(ETFA), 2011.
[10] N. Jazdi, C. Maga, P. Goehner. Reusable models in industrial
automation: experiences in defining appropriate levels of
granularity. Proc. of the 18th IFAC World Congress. 2011.
[11] E. Lee. ¨Cyber Physical Systems: Design Challenges
11th IEEE Symposium on Object Oriented Real-Time
Distributed Computing (ISORC), pp. 363-369, 2008.
[12] W. Wolf. Cyber-Physical Systems. Available under:
<http://www.jiafuwan.net/download/cyber_physical_systems.pd
f>. 2009.
[13] acatech-National Academy of Science and Engineering. Cyber-
Physical Systems: driving force for innovation in mobility,
health, energy and production. Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
2011.
[14] Modelica Association. A Unified Object-Oriented Language for
Systems Modeling. Language Specification. Version 3.3. 2012.
Available under:
https://www.modelica.org/documents/ModelicaSpec33.pdf
[15] T. Junjie, Z. Jianjun, D. Jianwan, C. Liping, X. Gang, G. Bin, Y.
Mengfei. Cyber-Physical Systems modeling method based on
Modelica. IEEE 6th Conference on Software Security and
Reliability Companion. 2012.
[16] P. Fritzson, D. Broman, F. Cellier. Equation-Based Object-
Oriented Languages and Tools. Object-Oriented Technology.
ECOOP 2008 Workshop Reader. Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
2009.
[17] P. Fritzson. Principles of object-oriented modeling and
simulation with Modelica 2.1. Wiley.com, 2010.
[18] W. Schamai, P. Fritzson, C. Paredis, A. Pop. Towards unified
system modeling and simulation with ModelicaML: modeling of
executable behavior using graphical notations. Proceedings 7th
Modelica Conference, Como, Italy. 2009.
[19] SIEMENS. COMOS Platform Getting Started. 2012.