Literature Review

Y. Wang et al.[1]Feature-based parametric modeling has advanced in the last 15 years and
rapidly become the mainstream of mechanical design. In current feature-based parametric design
systems, the reusability principle is not fully supported as it was expected. Unpredictability and
ambiguity of models often happen during design modification within one system as well as
among different systems. This reference deficiency significantly reduces the power of featurebased parametric modeling, where geometry re-evaluation generates unexpected shapes. A
semantic id scheme based oncontinuity of geometry is developed to solve the problem of naming
persistency and to improve interoperability of CAD feature modeling. topological id possess
geometric and topological semantics The geometric ids possess construct relations of surfaces,
curves, and points. Additional geometry information(orientation and gradient) This semantic id
scheme provides a stable and efficient reference structure.
T.-S. Seo et al.[2] Data interoperability between computer-aided design systems remains a major
obstacle in the information integration and exchange in a collaborative engineering environment.
The use of CAD data exchange standards causes the loss of design intent such as construction
history, features, parameters,and constraints, whereas existing research on feature-based data
exchange only focuses on class-level feature definitions and does not support instance-level
verification, which causes ambiguity in dataexchange. In this paper, a hybrid ontology approach
is proposed to allow for the full exchange of both feature definition semantics and geometric
construction data. three-branch hybrid CAD feature model that includes feature operation
information at the boundary representation level is constructed. Instance-level feature
informationin the form of the base ontology is then translated to local ontologies of individual
CAD systems during the rule-based mapping and verification process. While ontology has been
regarded as a powerful tool to solveinteroperability for heterogeneous data this paper emphasizes
a CADfeature ontology should be based on well established, understandable,and fundamental
nomenclature while retaining necessaryfreedom to model the wide variety of features available
in different CAD systems.The dynamic mappingapproach does not require the library of the
source systemduring the data exchange process, therefore companies’ proprietary feature
information is protected without the need of sharing.
M. Li, S. Gao et al.[3] Current parametric modeling systems suffer from the persistent naming
problem, which is responsible for the unpredictable, sometimes stunning, behavior of such
systems when re-evaluating a model, even after simple editing operations. This paper claims that
the problem is an inherent difficulty of the approaches taken by current parametric modeling
systems, in which various persistent naming schemes end up solving only a fraction of the

Alternative approaches to define a parametric model based on persistent parametric entities can. it is argued that the rationale behind such schemes should itself be revised. Luo [5] Feature is a set of geometrical entities associate with specific shape and attributes. every time a reference to a face is required in a parametric definition. Zhang. which can always be consistently referred to.Different from the visualization-based approaches.formalization and characteristics of designintent of feature-based CAD models and theinformation exchange mode in detail. so that a real-time synchronization can be achieved with a standard network bandwidth. standards for CAD data exchange among different CAD system were restrict to the exchange of puregeometrical information. X. Since only the commands but not the product data are transferred. it proposes the use of the names of persistent feature faces. in fact. It provides persistent entities in the parametric definition domain. feature. parameterization and constraints. An approach to mappingdesign intent information among CAD system ispresented. eliminate the flaws of using references to non-persistent geometric model entities. the product models are allowed to be constructed and modified from various sites together in the proposed collaborative designplatform.One such approach is described here. Until recently.[4] This paper presents an integration-based solution for developing a real-time collaborative (co-design) platform on heterogeneous computer-aided design (CAD) systems. and then the received NMC is converted into corresponding SMOs on every other site. Instead. A feature isconsidered to contain rich semantic and shape information relate to descriptions of part. instead of the names of boundary faces. Y.problem. Bidarra et al. feature. Most CAD systems use feature-based modeling to carry out solid design at present. instantaneously. Every operation given by a user on one site is translated into a NMC and transmitted to all the other sites through the network. parameterization and constraints high-level information. Our approach is based on a mechanism for the translation between system modeling operations (SMOs) and neutral modeling commands (NMCs). which isthe real cause of the problem. This paper discusses thecontents. Modern feature-based CAD system can represent design intent with construction history. The problems ofrepresenting and exchanging the information of designintent are also discussed. . Basically. Feature based CAD system can represent design intent with construction history. which is able to take full advantage of parametric modeling. R. the data size under transmission is greatly reduced.

and then apply these methods to transfer the product data from the source ontology to the target one. This paper presents a semantic approach that uses ontologies to share knowledge related to product data in CAD/CAE applications and for integrating the design evaluation information that these applications individually provide. Semantic interoperability of product information refers to automating the exchange of meaning associated with the data. P. Successfulsemantic interoperability will form the basis of seamless communicationand thereby enable better integration of productdevelopment systems. This research is motivated by the problems in enabling such semantic interoperability. Zhan. Here we design ontologies for representing product design and analysis.[6] toward product developmentin a collaborative environment has resulted in the use of varioussoftware tools to enhance the product design. U. Jayaram et al. also coined as OADE. overthe lifecycle of the product. A prototype implementation has been created using technologies such as OWL (representation language) and PROTÉGÉ (ontology editor) to demonstrate the approach for integrating product design and assembly simulation analysis applications.L. Formal descriptionlogic (DAML+OIL) is used to encode the PSRL. create formal ontology mapping methods. instantiate a source ontology with the product data. Our overall approach is the ontology-based adaptive design evaluation.A standards-based approach is used to develop a ProductSemantic Representation Language (PSRL).[7]Product lifecycle management (PLM) activities involve the creation and central management of all product data. Thesemantic equivalence matrix enables resolution of ambiguitiescreated due to differences in syntaxes and meanings associatedwith terminologies in different application domains. along with the technologies used to access this information and knowledge. During these activities. Patil. Mathematicallogic and corresponding reasoning is used to determine semanticequivalences between an application ontology and the PSRL. This requires ameaningful representation and exchange of product data semanticsacross different application domains. This paper proposesan ontology-based framework to enable such semantic interoperability. D. . the product data generated in CAD/CAE applications regularly needs to be exchanged and shared between various applications. This paper reports a piece of our ongoing work in the area of knowledge representation and ontology mapping methods. among information resources throughout the product development. Dutta et al.

considering the characteristics of aviation products information. and constraints. Mehrdad Safaieh. A shared base ontology is used to convey the most fundamental elements of CAD systems for geometry and topology. parameters. which causes ambiguity in data exchange. From these points it is very important to develop Semantic Information System. the lack of standardisation for representing part geometry and semantics of manufacturing operations leads to the necessity for existence of a unique part programme for each machine. the dissertation defined and developed a new kind of information system Semantic Information System. Based on the current needs. Tessier in [8] Data interoperability between computer-aided design (CAD) systems remains a major obstacle in the information integration and exchange in a collaborative engineering environment. Aydin Nassehi n et al.S. Instance-level feature information in the form of the base ontology is then translated to local ontologies of individual CAD systems during the rule-based mapping and verification process. a hybrid ontology approach is proposed to allow for the full exchange of both feature definition semantics and geometric construction data. whereas existing research on featurebased data exchange only focuses on class-level feature definitions and does not support instance-level verification. A three-branch hybrid CAD feature model that includes feature operation information at the boundary representation level is constructed. This wasteful activity can be eliminated if users are given the ability to write an NC program for a specific machine and robustly convert the program to syntax suitable for another . Generating multiple programmes for producing the same part is not a value adding activity and is very time consuming.[9] In the traditional information system researching area. In this paper. The use of CAD data exchange standards causes the loss of design intent such as construction history.M. Based the ontology technology. syntactic and structural to semantic. as the core of the interoperability of information system will shift from systematic. features. The semantic interoperability is the core problem of information system interoperability. this paper mainly focuses on the method of designing extraction rules and the general design scheme of Webmodel aviation products information under the guidance of ontology. Zhang Danpinga.Wang Youyuana et al. the isomorphic information processing and distributed information processing are becoming the hot spot.[10] In CNC part programmes. which is to both maximize flexibility and minimize information loss. The key element to solve these kinds of problems is to improve the interoperability of information system.

Sharing product information must precede for the integration. would enable for parts manufactured on old CNC machines using legacy code to be manufactured on new CNC machines by automatically converting the programmes. for instance. i. However. This. to figure out the advantages of inference ontologies in a PLM context and to synthesize major existing inference models in terms of methodology and structuration. However. To achieve interoperability..[11] Enterprises are subject to cope with frequently changing business environment. We first suggest 4-layered ontology architecture for an integrated value chain.e. Every NC programme is written based on various categories of information such as: cutting tool specifications. because most of the participants have different business experience and business domains. and methodologies which are increasingly employed in Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) applications. [12] proposes a literature review of related to ontologies in the area of product lifecycle management. Because product ontologies have the feature of evolving through product lifecycle. Heekwon Chae a et al. Extending this ontology architecture. Thomas Paviot et al. Jeongsoo Lee a. . The goals of this paper are to explore the field of such applications. it only focuses on inference ontologies. this paper proposes several research perspectives. cross-technology interoperability. Using a product ontology. ontologies that enable reasoning. process planning knowledge and machine tool information. each enterprise can have semantic interoperability across each other for collaborative works. enterprises should integrate value chains such as supply chain and design chain. Semantic technologies that have arisen with web development have brought out new tools. This paper presents an approach for cross-technology interoperability by refining high-level process information (i. geometric features on the part and embedded manufacturing resource data) from NC programmes. we suggest product ontology architecture through the investigation of generic ontology architecture. concepts.CNC machine with a different structure. interoperability of product information among enterprises should be guaranteed for collaboration.e. the proposed product ontology architecture reflects this evolving feature to guarantee semantic interoperability Virginie Fortineau . we develop product ontology architecture which facilitates building product ontologies that are referred to all related participants inbound and outbound of the enterprise for collaboration. Finally. models expressed in the Web Ontology Language (OWL).

with the specific semantics about a particular domain to be embedded within the usage of the models for that domain.*. This case study deals with data integration and interoperability problems. [13] The Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) concept holds the promise of seamlessly integrating all the information produced throughout all phases of a product’s life cycle to everyone in an organization at every managerial and technical level. Andrew U. Middle of Life (MOL) including usage and maintenance and End of Life (EOL) including recycling. As such. In this work we are focusing on Closed-Loop Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) models. The new model facilitates several of the OWL-DL capabilities. its physical and functional decompositions. S. and the relationships among these concepts. the Open Assembly Model (OAM). Sudarsan. Furthermore. Fenves et al. Beginning of Life (BOL) including design and manufacturing. We describe a product informationmodeling framework that we believe can support the full range of PLM information needs. Frank b et al. PLM systems are tools that implement the PLM concept. Dimitris Kiritsis [14] There is a tendency both in converting existing models into ontologies and in creating new models. along with key suppliers and customers. in which a significant number of reasoning capabilities is implemented. while maintaining previously achieved characteristics. An ontology model of a Product Data and Knowledge Management Semantic Object Model for PLM has been developed. These are abstract models with general semantics. CPM represents the product’s function. with loosely coupled geo-services is a new approach for using GIS services in environmental modeling. the Design-Analysis Integration model (DAIM) and the Product Family Evolution Model (PFEM). a case study is presented based on application scenarios on the automotive industry.[15] Service-oriented architecture in a distributed computing environment. An initial effort of developing the model into an ontology using Web Ontology Language-Description Logic (OWL-DL) is described in detail and the background and the motives for converting existing PLM models to ontologies is provided. The framework is based on the NIST Core Product Model (CPM) and its extensions.J. disposalor other options.R. Aristeidis Matsokis . they need the capability to serve up the information referred to above. form and behavior. and they need to ensure the cohesion and traceability of product data. The messages exchanged must follow a set of . with the aim of implementing ontology advantages and features into themodel. Gholam Reza Fallahi a.

with respect to the semantics expressed by the original representation languages. This work defines the reasoning rules to classify related learning objects to enhance the powerful deductive reasoning capabilities of the system.standard protocols which support syntactic interoperability. Somjit Arch-int [16] There is an increasing demand for sharing learning resources between existing learning resource systems to support reusability. exchangeability. but do not address application semantics. we construct homogeneous representations of these resources in a pivot format. GIS and environmental models are linked with distributed computing architectures based on loosely coupled geo-services. Firstly. this research proposes conflict detection and resolution techniques for both semantic and structural conflicts. Thirdly. especially the measurement units used. This article proposes a layer-based ontology with additional layers for describing geoservices. mappings are established between concepts of these standardised resources and stored in a so-called articulation ontology. an approach for ranking those mappings is suggested in order to best fit users’ needs. namely OWL DL. This research proposes a Semantic Ontology Mapping for Interoperability of Learning Resource Systems. The mapping results as well as the work to be done are discussed The growing use of the Web for collaborative and distributed work. Secondly. This approach is currently being implemented in the Semantic Resources “Interoperabilisation” and Linking System (SRILS). These ontologies have introduced the problems of semantic and structural heterogeneity. and adaptability. The Semantic Bridge Ontology has been proposed as a core component for generating mapping rules to reconcile terms defined in local ontologies into terms defined in the target common ontology. The layer-based structure is the building block for discovering geoservices that support semantic interoperability in GIS and environmental modeling. An upper ontology adds new general concepts to an existing ontology in order to achieve an agreement between geo-service developers and environmental modelers. The paper gives an ontology of measurements for describing the input and output of field-based geo-services and a core ontology of geoservices containing the domain concepts. To enable semantic ontology mapping. Ngamnij Arch-int . The learning resources need to be annotated with ontologies into learning objects that use different metadata standards. .[17] This paper presents a three-step approach to enhance interoperability between heterogeneous semantic resources. Lionel M´edini et al. Catarina Ferreira Da Silva.

for exchanging product information. Parisa Ghodous et al. Regarding CAD models. semantically. features. M.associated to the standardisation of the languages and tools related to the Semantic Web. and more. are limited to the process of geometrical data. H. most of the current CAD systems provide feature-based design for the construction of solid models and to carry. Samer Abdul-Ghafour . STEP does not provide a sound basis to reason with knowledge. have led to the availability of multiple terminological and syntactical resources in numerous professional domains using the Internet. meaning of terms are context dependent and mismatch in entities supported in two. Moreover. In this work.existing solutions and standards. Dassisti b et al. This knowledge includes many concepts such as design history. Exchanging the semantics/meaning associated with shape data enables manipulation of and reasoning with the shape model at higher levels of abstraction. The work described in this paper is part of our approach based on the development of OWL ontologies to preserve semantics associated with product data. Ravi Kumar Gupta* . It is based on the postulate that an ontological . Gurumoorthy [19] The paper addresses the problem of exchanging product semantics along with other product information such as shape. where semantics assigned to product model are completely lost during the translation process. constraints. inter-relationships between entities in the shape and other data important for downstream applications such as manufacturing. Using a single product model across the product lifecycle is beneficial from the point of view of maintaining integrity of the data and avoiding the effort in creating multiple models. component structure. different representations for a shape.[18] A major issue in product development is the exchange and sharing of product knowledge among many actors. These are: different terms referring to same shape. Unfortunately. its use in other systems/domains leads to construction of new models.wewill focus on the semantic integration of these ontologies by defining axioms and rules. As the product model does not support semantics.B. The semantics associated with shape data can convey design intent. such as STEP.parameters. The paper first identifies different types of semantic interoperability problems arising during exchange of product models in product development. product information throughout its life cycle. Panetto a.[20] This paper proposes an approach for facilitating systems interoperability in a manufacturing environment.

The matter of this approach is to formalise all those technical data and concepts contributing to the definition of a Product Ontology. embedded into the product itself and making it interoperable with applications. mainly depending on the scopes from which they have been collected and used: misunderstandings or loss of information might occur in these processes. Product/process information is usually stored. . appropriately storing all its technical data based on a common model.model of a product may be considered as a facilitator for interoperating all application software that share information during the physical product lifecycle.The number of applications involved in manufacturing enterprises may in fact refer to the knowledge that must be embedded in it. thus minimising loss of semantics. processed and communicated in different ways by ICT applications.