See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328782774

METHODOLOGIES FOR MECHATRONIC SYSTEMS DESIGN: ATTRIBUTES AND

POPULARITY

Article · May 2018

CITATIONS READS

0 1,274

5 authors, including:

Powell Mlambo Eugenia R Chiweshe

Chinhoyi University of Technology Chinhoyi University of Technology
8 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION    4 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Humphrey Nkosiyabo Dera

Chinhoyi University of Technology
3 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Design of a Low Cost Mobile Robot for Metal and Gas Detection View project

Design of a Flexible Automated bottle filling Machine View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Powell Mlambo on 08 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Zimbabwe Journal of Science and Technology pp123-133 Vol.12 [2017]
e-ISSN 2409-0360
Zimbabwej.sci.technol
Methodologies for Mechatronic Systems Design: Attributes and
Popularity
aPowell Mlambo, aDoubt Simango, aEugenia Chiweshe, aHumphrey Dera, b Enock
Jonathan
aDepartment
of Mechatronic Engineering
School of Engineering Sciences and Technology
Chinhoyi University of Technology
bSchool of Natural Sciences and Mathematics

Chinhoyi University of Technology

Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT
The number of connected elements in engineering are greatly increasing with problems getting harder, broader, and deeper. These
problems are multidisciplinary thus require an engineering systems approach which is multidisciplinary in nature to solve them. Such
modern multidisciplinary systems are called mechatronics systems. The V-model, its variants and the hierarchical design method has
brought about a number of benefits in the design of complex mechatronic systems and also provide an effective way of presenting
macro level and micro level collaboration. This paper seeks to evaluate and expose the level of adoption of these methodologies as
used in the design of mechatronic systems. A review of the VDI 2206, RFLP method and the hierarchal design method was carried
out. Google scholar was then used to identify publications within the custom range of period 2003 to 2016, where the methods were
adopted. An evaluation of the pros and cons of each method was then carried out in addition to an analysis of the publications. A
statistical presentation of publications where these methods were applied was then presented. Possible reasons were outlined and
explained for the observed trends. In conclusion, a methodology is recommendation that can be best suited in solving some of the
current design challenges.

Keywords: Mechatronics,V-model, VDI 2206, RFLP Method, Hierarchal Design Method.

Received: 16.08.17. Accepted: 21.05.18
1. INTRODUCTION standard in many industries is proving to be
unsuitable for modern mechatronic designs
The demand for innovative products has as it introduces design challenges by
resulted in advancement of information increasing design costs, development
technology and decision making as well as leading-time and high levels of effort without
the synergetic integration of different reaching high product quality (Christoph
fundamental engineering domains (Jürgen Kilger 2014; Zheng et al. 2014). Bradley
and Stefan 2003). Modern products are (2010) in his exploration of mechatronic
mechatronic in nature since they are systems states that some of the reasons for
comprehensive mechanical systems with design failure are due to;
fully integrated electronics, intelligent control
system and information technology.  A misunderstanding of the
Mechatronic engineers are required to relationships between system
design engineering systems characterized technologies particularly software
by high levels of synergy between related and others,
engineering domain and integration with  Problem complexity and
intentions of achieving constrains such as communications between disciplines,
efficiency, higher performance, precision,  An overemphasis on core disciplines.
speed and lower costs by being immediate,
innovative, integrative, conceptual, and The mechatronic system design process
multidisciplinary. The use of the sequential should address these challenges by
design processes which still remains a following an interdisciplinary design
ZJST. Vol. 12 [2017] Powell et al 123-133

procedure, which includes evaluation, supplementing existing guidelines with the

integration, and optimization of the system latest findings of design research(Jürgen and
and its sub-systems and components as a Stefan, 2003). The main elements that are
whole concurrently. The design process presented for the procedural method as a
should also enable all the design discipline part of the new guidelines for the VDI 2206
teams to work in parallel and collaboratively are:
throughout the design and development
process so as to produce an overall optimal  A general cycle of problem solving on
design with no after-thought add-ons the micro-level,
allowed(Farhan 2013). The need for soft  V-shaped model on the macro-level,
control algorithms is also ever increasing in  Macro-cycles according to the
the context of modern interdisciplinary degree of maturity
product development. All this makes it  User-specific process modules for
essential to increase the transparency recurring operation steps.
between domains within the design process
The design process distinguishes between
by expanding the design methodology
the problem solving process of the individual
towards methods that are compatible with
designer (micro-level) which comes from
software engineering. (Eigner et al n.d). To
systems engineering and the generic
meet the requirements for collaboration
process related to design phases and
when designing mechatronic systems, many
corresponding product states (macro-level).
design methods have been developed.
At micro-level the designer is supported in an
These design approaches have been
action-oriented way: alternating between
derived from traditional sequential design,
systematic and associative ways of
concurrent engineering or lean product
proceeding or reacting from unforeseen
development. However many design
situations whilst structuring design sub-
methods still remain poor in support of
tasks. The macro-level aids in survey of the
technology integration and the
total design process: setting of milestones,
multidisciplinary perspectives in mechatronic
planning and controlling the design progress
systems design (Zheng et al., 2014). Of the
etc.
proposed methodologies those based on the
V-model variants have brought about a 2.1. The V-model
number of solutions that are required in the
design of mechatronic systems. This paper The V-model is well established in the
focuses on the design processes based on domain of software engineering which was
the VDI 2206 guidelines, RFLP method and adapted to mechatronics as it clearly adopts
Hierarchal design method as these methods the top-down-approach (system design) and
have attracted much interest within the the bottom-up-approach (system integration)
scientific community (Hofmann et al. 2010) (Nabil and Govardhan, 2010, Farhan 2013,
(Zheng et al. 2014) . Jürgen and Stefan 2003).
It also allows pointing out the need of
permanent verification/validation between
2. THE VDI 2206 GUIDELINES the requirements/specified functions (left
hand side) and the actual (virtual and/or real)
The VDI 2206 represents guidelines for
system (right hand side).
mechatronic systems design worked out by
the committee of the Association of German
Engineers (VDI) in the year 2003. These
guidelines provides a framework for
mechatronic specific design procedures,
methods and tools which are flexible for
adaptation in individual design tasks,
ZJST. Vol. 12 [2017] Powell et al 123-133

specific domains are integrated in to an

overall system analyzing the interrelations.
The “end product” is the result of a macro-
cycle successfully passed through. It does
not exclusively mean the finished product but
an ongoing creation of the future product in
terms of product maturity. Degrees of
maturity are, for example, concept model,
functional model, physical prototype etc. The
introduced v-shaped model on the macro-
level is a generic procedure pattern, however
a complex mechatronic product will normally
not be finished within one macro-cycle but
several passes (macro-cycles) and
increasing product maturity (Vasilije and
Lazarević 2008).
The main phases in the V-model are not
specified in detail as the individual designer
Figure 1- V-model (Vasilije and Lazarević, or team does this. Design procedures, which
2008) occur regularly during the design, can be
described in terms of partly predefined
The requirements define and clarify process module representing procedures
individual design tasks aiming at establishing and methods for different design tasks.
a cross-domain solution and also provide a According to the individual design task the
system test plan for evaluation of the product designer can choose the appropriate
later. The test plan focuses on evaluating process modules meeting his requirements
and validating the functionality specified and adapt them or alternatively, create new
during the requirements gathering. This also ones.
includes an integration test plan for
evaluating the combined elements of the
system. System design defines a cross-
2.2. Evaluation of the VDI 2206
domain solution concept, which describes
the essential physical and logical These guidelines provide a simple and easy
characteristics of the future product. The to use procedure where each phase has
overall function of a system is divided into specific deliverables. It has a high chance of
sub-functions to which suitable working success due to the early development of test
principles and/or solution elements are plans during the development life cycle and
assigned, fulfilling the functions regarding works well for projects where requirements
the overall system context. Domain specific are easily understood. The VDI 2206 has
design allows the solution concept to be been successfully implemented in the design
developed conjointly by the involved of a number of mechatronic systems which
domains and worked out in detail mostly include (Pawel et al. 2009, Marek and Ralf
separately in the concerned domains. The 2008, Vasilije and Lazarević 2008).
described phases are flanked by the
modeling and analysis of the system Studies have shown that the development
characteristics with intentions of process described by the V-model can lead
investigating system properties with the aid to problems when applied in the
of models and computer-aided tools for development of highly integrated systems
simulation. Finally the designs from the within the domain specific development
phase due to the occurrences of deviations
ZJST. Vol. 12 [2017] Powell et al 123-133

from the common solution concept (Roland

and Reiner 2013). There is neither
communication nor analysis of these
deviations for cross domain effects which
results in late detection of the cross-domain
consequences that is detection during the
integration phase. This delay in
communicating or analyzing these effects
calls for additional iterations within the
domain specific development phase
resulting in late integration and finally the
procedure becomes costly and time
inefficient. To tackle these problems
approaches where there is early
consideration of the possible cross-domain
dependencies have to be applied and such
methods are usually based on the concepts
of systems theory. This basically involves
identifying individual components within a
complex system then considers their
relationship to one another. It is also
important to identify additional methods to Figure 2 The RFLP design method
control system and model complexity. There
is also need to focus on how to improve By following this design process the RFLP
collaboration between the different domains allows concurrent engineering to coordinate
during the domain specific design phase and the individual activities and views of
to offer solutions where integration of distributed design teams. The requirement
specialized domain-specific tools is engineering view allows clarification of users’
considered. requirements. In the functional view, the
intended use of the mechatronic system is
defined. In the logical view, the logical
architecture, connections, the behavior
3. RFLP METHOD (discrete behaviors, physics behaviors, and
This method was introduced by Dassault hybrid behaviors) of mechatronic systems
Systèmes in 2008 and developed according will be defined. Finally the physical view
to Model Based System Engineering (MBSE) defines a virtual definition of the real world
view or viewpoint approach (Beckmann- product. The RFLP method is implemented
Dobrev et al. 2015) (Sirin et al. 2015). A in the CATIA System v6 software and so can
viewpoint describes how a set of be considered as a commercial mechatronic
stakeholders perceive a particular interest , design approach. Since this method is
while a view is a fixed package that is said to integrated in the CATIA application it allows
conform to the viewpoint (Sirin et al. 2015). storage, share and exchange of information
The RFLP (Requirements/ Functional/ and data such as sharing MCAD or E-CAD
Logical/ Physical) method is a specific V- data type among engineers of different
model adapted to design of mechatronic disciplines,
system (Zheng et al. 2014). It focuses on the 3.1. Evaluation of the RFLP method
left-hand descending branch of the "V-
model" dividing it into 4 views: Requirement Researchers upheld the provided solutions
engineering view, Functional view, Logical to challenges in the V-model through the
view and Physical view. integration of expert know-how,
interoperability of CAx applications. The
ZJST. Vol. 12 [2017] Powell et al 123-133

RFLP help in formalising the customer

needs , technical requirements and also in
performing global product traceability across
the whole product definition. The method
also provides a means to use multi domain
modeling methods in support of the macro
level collaboration. The integration of
multidisciplinary fields through simulation
applications and the limitation of the number
of design loops improve design time
management and quality of data exchange.
However the integration of the software
domain still remains a challenge (Zheng et al.
2014). Since RFLP is just the descending
side of the V-model, it has been Figure 3-Mechatronic module
overshadowed by the V-model making it (Hehenberger et al. 2010)
difficult to highlight its significance.
This approach meets the modeling challenge
by following a modular design. The
4. HIERARCHICAL DESIGN METHOD interfaces within a modular design should be
The hierarchical design method considers well defined and are shared only with a few
the integration of the mechatronic disciplines other subsystems, which in this case are the
from the very beginning of the design other mechatronic modules. A technical
process. This design method helps in system’s physical behavior is determined by
describing product models and data from the properties of the subsystems and their
different viewpoints. The proposed models internal or external interactions, which
may represent structural knowledge, describe the connection between the
behavioral knowledge or functional elements or represent the connections
knowledge. By following this method, the across the system boundaries respectively.
mechatronic system is broken down into The axiomatic design approach can be
mechatronic modules, which are further applied to minimize the component and
broken into discipline-specific subsystems subsystem dependencies.
with each subsystem characterized by a Classification of design models is based on
model pillar. These models allow the system
the four design stages, which are problem
to have different degrees of detailing and definition, conceptual design, preliminary
views, which in turn translates from a design, and detailed design. A general
hierarchy of models to a hierarchy of design description of these stages is given by Pahl
parameters. Figure 3 shows an example of a and Bates (2006). An interdisciplinary
mechatronic module. definition, description, and presentation of
product information is required for successful
product development.. Solution principles
from different disciplines should be properly
combined and utilized so as to create an
extended and quality principal solution.
Hierarchical models serve as very important
tools for complex design tasks. The
conceptual design phase is where most of
the design aspects such as hierarchy of
parameters and modularity of the design are
analyzed. This phase is where the largest
ZJST. Vol. 12 [2017] Powell et al 123-133

part of the later resulting product structure ad suitable solutions in design by creating
costs is predetermined or even fixed. The discipline-independent functional models of
conceptual design phase is divided into the product. A functional model contains an
functional design, principle design and abstract description of the main goal of a
architectural design. The hierarchical design product by stating its overall function.
method can thus be said to constitute of six Functional models with the addition of a
stages, namely, requirement design, functional basis, provide design teams with a
functional design, principle design, solution to simplify design problems and to
architectural design, preliminary design and make critical decisions early through the
detailed design (Follmer et al. 2011). The realization of modules. Combining sub-
expanded conceptual design phase is of functions from a functional model creates a
great importance since most design aspects modular architecture. Applying concept
are considered here and as a result the generation techniques where the modules
scope for design is limited to merely smaller identify opportunities for function sharing by
changes in the subsequent design stages. components results in a number of
To fully understand the hierarchical design alternative solutions. The created functional
method the problem definition (requirements structure must fulfill the specified
design) and conceptual design (functional requirements. If it is assumed that for
design, principle design and architectural complex technical systems a certain number
design) have to be discussed. of elementary functions exist, then this
functional structure is as a result of
The requirements design stage focuses on cooperation between these elementary
the definition of the initial information related functions. Analysis of the interconnections
to the system and the system subdivision into between functional parameters allows easy
modules. Analyzing the initial requirements structuring of the design procedure reducing
spawn further requirements, and creates a unnecessary iteration loops.
hierarchy of system objectives. Analysis of
the requirements is carried out once they are Principle design focuses on defining a
classified into groups either globally, solution that specifies the operating
cumulatively, specific or interconnected. principles of the system under consideration.
These requirements also contain the The solutions will however be defined very
definition of the system boundaries and the roughly because detailed dimensions are not
expected system behavior. Consequently, available at this stage. The important
the requirements apply to the overall system, properties of a technical system, which
every single subsystem and individual include functions, structure, and behavior,
subsystems. A requirements model and a have to be evaluated. Since systems
method for tracking implementation of the characteristics are drawn from these
requirements is set with high priority properties, they also form the basis for
requirements determined (Hehenberger assessing the system. Simulations can also
2014). The information gained at this stage be used to check whether all requirements
has great influence on the original product have been translated into significant
idea. Requirements should always be re- properties of the principle solution. Selecting
evaluated, properly selected, specified in the principle solution gives the fundamental
detail and finally structured according to the estimations of the significant properties of
relations between them. the system that are defined by the selected
technologies.
Functional modeling provides an abstract
method for understanding and representing The architectural design stage focuses on
an overall product focusing on the flows of combining the solutions that have already
material, energy and signals. The primary been proposed into workable modules. The
task is to support the procedure of finding modules are then arranged within the
ZJST. Vol. 12 [2017] Powell et al 123-133

solution environment with the interfaces design model is thus very effective for the
(connections, ports, geometry, etc.) of the micro level collaboration.
individual modules being defined whilst
putting into consideration the possible 5. TRENDS ON THE ADOPTION THE
alternatives. The interfaces must be such OF DESIGN METHODS
that there is minimum dependency and A survey on the literature where the design
interaction between the modules. methods were cited was also carried out. In
4.1. Evaluation of the Hierarchical order to gather the statistics of the cited
design Method works, google scholar was used to search
out the literature by inputting key words in the
The hierarchical structure allows reflection of search tool bar which included “VDI 2206”,
the nature of the tasks involved at each “hierarchical design + mechatronics”, “RFLP
individual level within the overall system. + mechatronics”. Since the VDI 2206
There is a move away from the detailed guidelines were published in 2003 only
design and operation of the design literature obtained from the period 2003 –
components to the management of the 2016 was used. It should also be noted that
information infrastructures required to the RFLP method was introduced in the year
achieve overall system functionality and 2008. Figure 4 was then generated to show
performance early in the design process. the appearances of the VDI 2206, RFLP
This approach also makes it possible to method and Hierarchical Design Method in
design innovative mechatronic systems with period 2003-2016
high flexibility and speed and that provide
answers to non-routine design questions by 350
relying on a modular design architecture. 300
Modularity allow managing a large number of 250
interfaces and this is important for 200
structuring design knowledge, complexity 150
management, upgrading, evolvability, 100
parallel working of teams, and replacement
50
of parts of the system (Whitfield et al. 2002;
0
Baldwin and Clark 2006; Holmqvist and
Persson 2003). Good modularization is a
requirement from the start of product
development. The ability to decompose a VDI 2206
design task provides the basis to achieving RFLP METHOD
creative design solutions (Komoto and
0.1 X HIERARCHICAL DESIGN METHOD
Tomiyama 2012).
The hierarchical design method also allows Figure 4- Appearances of the VDI 2206,
utilization and proper combination of solution RFLP method and Hierarchical Design
principles from different mechatronic Method in period 2003-2016
domains extending the quality and variety of
the principal solution. There is minimization A relatively increasing trend of the citation of
of the number of iteration loops, which are all methodologies was observed. A total of
prevalent in many design methods. These 15700, 1470, and 65 appearances in
loops are however, time consuming and literature were observed for the hierarchical,
require intense communication across VDI 2206 and RFLP guidelines respectively.
domain boundaries. Though the iteration The literature gathered demonstrates a very
loops cannot be avoided completely, they high popularity of the hierarchical design
are shifted from the mechatronic level down method with the research community with
to the intra-domain level. The hierarchical the least popular being the RFLP method. It
ZJST. Vol. 12 [2017] Powell et al 123-133

was also observed that the period between

2003-2009 an number of design were carried
out using the VDI 2206 design methods,
however thereafter the appearances of the
method were related to solving some of the
challenges it provided. The RFLP method
got the least popularity. Though the method
integrated systems engineering tools and
aimed at minimizing cross domain
communication it still had challenges
between software and other domains thus
very few designs attributed to its application.
This low uptake by designers can also be
attributed to the fact that is just the
descending side of the V-model thus it has
been overshadowed by the V-. As has
already been discussed the general upward
trends in the acceptance of the hierarchical
design method can be attributed in it being a
method which facilitates the design
engineering systems solving problems of
increased complexity and communication Figure 5-Integration of the hierarchal
between domains without an overemphasis design phases into the V-model (Follmer
on core disciplines. The hierarchical design et al., 2011)
methods also shows high acceptance as it
facilitated systems decomposition,
minimizing number of iteration loops and
also provides possibility in the design of low
cost systems which is fundamental in
modern designs.
6. CONCLUSION
The hierarchical design method has been
observed to be a powerful approach in
solving the design challenges of modern
mechatronic systems. Within the research
community it has the greatest popularity in
the design of mechatronic systems.
However the level to which the V-model
defines an integrated design process,
represents concurrent engineering and
unifies domain specific design with macro
level collaboration cannot be ignored. It is
therefore recommend to consider methods
that integrate both design methods so as to
harness the advantages of each individual
method. Such cases has been be observed Figure 6 Macro-level process: an
in the design methods presented by (Follmer extended V-model based on VDI 2206
et al. 2011) and (Zheng et al. 2017) as show (Zheng et al., 2017)
in figure 4 and figure 5 respectively.
ZJST. Vol. 12 [2017] Powell et al 123-133

REFERENCES (AIM), 2010 IEEE/ASME International

Conference on, 2010. IEEE, 1263-1268.
Beckmann-Dobrev, B., Kind, S. & Stark, R. 2015.
Hybrid Simulators for Product Service-Systems–
Jürgen, G. & Stefan, M. New Guideline VDI 2206
Innovation Potential Demonstrated on Urban
– A Flexible Procedure Model for the Design of
Bike Mobility. Procedia CIRP, 36, 78-82.
Mechatronic Systems. 2003 Stockholm.
International Conference on Engineering Design.
Bradley, D. 2010. Mechatronics–More questions
than answers. Mechatronics, 20, 827-841.
Komoto, H. & Tomiyama, T. 2012. A framework
for computer-aided conceptual design and its
Christoph kilger, a. R., rené indefrey 2014. The
application to system architecting of
secret behind mechatronics. Performance, 6, 10.
mechatronics products. Computer-Aided Design,
44, 931-946.
Eigner, M., Ggilz, T. Zafirov, R. Proposal for
Functional Product Decription as Part of a PLM
Marek, S. & Ralf, S. 2008. Mechatronics
Solution in Interdisciplinary Product
engineering on the example of a Multipurpose
Development.
Mobile Robot. Gliwice, Poland.
Farhan, A. S. 2013. A Proposed Approach to
Nabil, M., Ali Munassar & Govardhan, A. 2010. A
Mechatronics Design and Implementation
Comparison Between Five Models Of Software
Education-Oriented Methodology. Innovative
Engineering. IJCSI International Journal of
Systems Design And Engineering, 4, 12-39.
Computer Science Issues, 7, 94-112.
Follmer, M., Hehenberger, P., Punz, S., Rosen, R.
Pawel, z., Marek, S. & RALF, S. Mechatronics
& Zeman, K. Approach for the creation of
Engineering on an example of an innovative
mechatronic system models. DS 68-4:
production vehicle. 2009 Stanford, CA, USA.
Proceedings of the 18th International
International Conference on Engeeniring Design,
Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11),
Stanford Univesity.
Impacting Society through Engineering Design,
Vol. 4: Product and Systems Design,
Roland, N. & Reiner, A. The W-Model Using
Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 15.-19.08. 2011,
Systems Engineering for Adaptronics. 2013
2011.
Atlanta. Science Direct, 937 – 946
Hehenberger, P. 2014. Perspectives on
Sirin, G., Paredis, C. J., Yannou, B., Coatanéa, E. &
hierarchical modeling in mechatronic design.
Landel, E. 2015. A model identity card to support
Advanced Engineering Informatics, 28, 188-197.
simulation model development process in a
collaborative multidisciplinary design
Hehenberger, P., Poltschak, F., Zeman, K. &
environment. IEEE Systems Journal, 9, 1151-
Amrhein, W. 2010. Hierarchical design models in
1162.
the mechatronic product development process
of synchronous machines. Mechatronics, 20,
Vasilije, S. V. & Lazarević, M. P. 2008. Standard
864-875.
Industrial Guideline for Mechatronic Product
Design University of Belgrade Faculty of
Hofmann, D., Kopp, M. & Bertsche, B.
Mechanical Engineering.
Development in Mechatronics—Enhancing
reliability by means of a sustainable use of
Zheng, C., Bricogne, M., Le Duigou, J. & Eynard,
information. Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics
B. 2014. Survey on mechatronic engineering: A
 ZJST. Vol. 12 [2017] Powell et al 123-133

focus on design methods and product models.

Advanced Engineering Informatics, 28, 241-257.

Zheng, C., Hehenberger, P., Le Duigou, J.,

Bricogne, M. & Eynard, B. 2017. Multidisciplinary
design methodology for mechatronic systems
based on interface model. Research in
Engineering Design, 28, 333-356.

View publication stats