Scheme processes about complicated engineering systems are certainly complex on account of the interdependencies among submodules in the same tier and between tiers of a segmented hierarchy. In the design process with decision mode, this effects in communications among groups of design decisions. It is important to extract and represent the knowledge relevant to the decision communications for developing design process with decision mode. There are two critical issues addressed regarding the modeling of communications: decision types and these are made in various tiers. To stress the above two issues, there are several fundamental communication models defined among decisions in this study. Meanwhile, a presented ontology to identify the knowledge connected with these communication models. Critical benefits of the ontology involve that a hierarchical communications between decisions can be extracted, and a decision task-flows with accessible, adaptable, and implementable features for developing more complex systems can be generated. The applicability of the ontology is shown by scheme for an automotive braking troubleshooting service example.
HernandezGAllenJKMistreeF.The compromise decision support problem: modeling the deviation function as in physical programming. Eng Optim2001; 33(4): 445–471.
2.
YazdaniMZaratePKazimieras ZavadskasE, et al. A combined compromise solution (CoCoSo) method for multi-criteria decision-making problems. Manage Decis2019; 57(9): 2501–2519.
3.
LiangJS.A process-based automotive troubleshooting service and knowledge management system in collaborative environment. Robot Comput Integr Manuf2020; 61: 1–17.
LiangJS.The methodology of knowledge acquisition and modeling for troubleshooting in automotive braking system. Robot Comput Integr Manuf2012; 28(1): 24–34.
6.
SunYKirleyMHalgamugeSK.A recursive decomposition method for large scale continuous optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput2018; 22(5): 647–661.
7.
XuCZhangCXuY, et al. A systematic design method for large-scale wireless Ad Hoc network protocol based on optimization decomposition theory. Int J Distrib Sens Netw2015; 2015: 1–9.
RehmanZKiforS.A conceptual architecture of ontology based KM system for failure mode and effects analysis. Int J Comput Commun Control2014; 9(4): 463–470.
10.
KhanAHPorresI.Consistency of UML class, object and statechart diagrams using ontology reasoners. J Vis Lang Comput2015; 26(1): 42–65.
11.
SofticSRosenbergerMDengerA, et al. Semantically based visual tracking of engineering tasks in automotive product lifecycle. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on knowledge management and knowledge technologies, Graz, Austria, 4–6 September 2013, 36, pp.1–4. New York, NY: ACM Digital Library.
12.
TakhomAUsanavasinSSupnithiT, et al. Collaborative ontology development approach for multidisciplinary knowledge: a scenario-based knowledge construction system in life cycle assessment. IEICE Trans Inf Syst2018; E101.D(4): 892–900.
13.
YoungBCheatwoodJPetersonT, et al. Product line engineering meets model based engineering in the defense and automotive industries. In: Proceedings of the 21st international systems and software product line conference, Sevilla, Spain, 25–29 September 2017, vol. A, pp.175–179. New York, NY: ACM Digital Library.
14.
ShojaeefardMHKhalkhaliASarmadiM, et al. Investigation on the optimal simplified model of BIW structure using FEM. Lat Am J Solids Struct2015; 12(10): 1972–1990.
15.
MaCOkaMLijimaK. A numerical simulation for coupling behavior between smoothed particle hydrodynamics and structural finite element method. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on marine structures, 8–10 May 2017, pp.1–8. Centre for Marine Technology and Ocean Engineering: Lisboa, Portugal.
16.
ShangLZhaoGZhaiJ.Topology optimization for coupled acoustic-structural systems under random excitation. Struct Multidiscipl Optim2017; 56: 809–822.
17.
AlyaqoutSFPetersDLPapalambrosPY, et al. Generalized coupling management in complex engineering systems optimization. J Mech Des2011; 133(9): 091005, 1–10.
18.
HerbergALindemannU. A different view on system decomposition: subsystem-centered property evaluation in multiple supersystems. In: Complex systems design & management, Paris, France, 4–6 December 2013, pp.153–165. Munich, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
19.
GebalaDAEppingerSD.Methods for analyzing design procedures. Mishawaka, IN: Palala Press, 2018.
20.
TilleyS.Systems analysis and design. 12th ed.Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2019.
21.
ZhouYM.Designing for complexity: using divisions and hierarchy to manage complex tasks. Organ Sci2013; 24(2): 339–355.
22.
BrowningTR.Design structure matrix extensions and innovations: a survey and new opportunities. IEEE Trans Eng Manag2016; 63(1): 27–52.
DemolyFMonticoloDEynardB, et al. Multiple viewpoint modelling framework enabling integrated product–process design. Int J Interact Des Manuf2010; 4: 269–280.
26.
Mejía-GutiérrezRMarroquínCGiraldo-GomezJDA knowledge management approach through product lifecycle management implementation: an industrial case study. In: PLM 2013: product lifecycle management for society, Nantes, France, 6–10 July 2013, pp.277–286. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlagr.
27.
Le MassonPHatchuelAKokshaginaO, et al. Designing techniques for systemic impact: lessons from C-K theory and matroid structures. Res Eng Des2017; 28(3): 275–298.
28.
Baqar RazaMHarrisonR. Design, development & implementation of ontological knowledge based system for automotive assembly lines. Int J Data Min Knowl Manage Process2011; 1(5): 21–40.
29.
FeldMMüllerC. The automotive ontology: managing knowledge inside the vehicle and sharing it between cars. In: 3rd international conference on automotive user interfaces and interactive vehicular applications, automotive UI 2011, Salzburg, Austria, 30 November–2 December 2011, pp.79–86. New York, NY: ACM Digital Library.
30.
SofticSRosenbergerMZoierM, et al. Ontology based tool for task tracking and decision support in an automotive collaborative working environment. In: Proceedings of the 13th international design conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 19–22 May 2014, pp.1895–1904. Glasgow, UK: Design Society.
31.
FoleyJTCochranDS.Manufacturing system design decomposition: an ontology for data analytics and system design evaluation. Procedia CIRP2017; 60: 175–180.
32.
LiangJS.Generation of automotive troubleshooting configuration system using an ontology-based approach. Comput Ind2012; 63(5): 405–422.
33.
RajpathakDG.An ontology based text mining system for knowledge discovery from the diagnosis data in the automotive domain. Comput Ind2013; 64(5): 565–580.
34.
JamesATGandhiOPDeshmukhSG.Knowledge management of automobile system failures through development of failure knowledge ontology from maintenance experience. J Adv Manage Res2017; 14(4): 425–445.
35.
LiangJS.The service task of automotive troubleshooting process in collaborative environment using knowledge support approach. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2021; 235(2–3): 604–626.
36.
RockwellJGrosseIRKrishnamurtyS, et al. A decision support ontology for collaborative decision making in engineering design. In: 2009international symposium on collaborative technologies and systems, Baltimore, MD, 18–22 May 2009, pp.1–9. New York, NY: IEEE.
37.
Protégé. A free, open-source ontology editor and framework for building intelligent systems, https://protege.stanford.edu/ (2016, accessed 25 September 2020).
AhmedSGohCHAllenJK, et al. Hot forging of automobile steel gear blanks: an exploration of the solution space. Proceedings of the ASME 2014 international design engineering technical conference & computers and information in engineering conference, Buffalo, NY, 17–20 August 2014, pp.1–14. New York, NY: ASME.
